2.21 Neither Laser nor JLC Ltd sought to prove to the Department the viability of key elements of the design. Nor did they take up the Department's offer, in spring 1998, to send key personnel responsible for the design of environmental control systems to visit the laboratories of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the American equivalent of the NPL. During the visit with Laser, the Department had arranged to meet HDR (at the time, the firm was not advising the Department) which had designed systems at NIST intended to achieve temperature controls more stringent than those specified at the NPL.
2.22 Despite knowing of the Department's design concerns, Serco Group plc looked to JLC Ltd to ensure the viability of key elements of its design. At the time, Serco Group plc had had direct experience of project success in other ventures with John Laing plc and so, in assessing JLC Ltd's ability, relied on its parent company's then good construction record. In spring 1998, Serco Group plc also took comfort from due diligence by the Lenders which did not raise any deal-stopping concerns about the ability of JLC Ltd's design to satisfy the Department's specification.
2.23 None of Laser, its shareholders or its Lenders objected when, in June 1998, and in advance of the award of the contract, JLC Ltd commenced construction of the foundations for the new facilities before detailed designs of the mechanical and electrical systems were available. Consequently, the footprint and, to a large extent, the shell of the new facilities were fixed before machinery requirements were fully understood.