A firm whose factory was at the centre of a blast that killed nine workers admitted to health and safety officials there was a severe risk of death from gas pipes � but downgraded it to minor injury for their insurance company.

A firm whose factory was at the centre of a blast that killed nine workers admitted to health and safety officials there was a severe risk of death from gas pipes - but downgraded it to minor injury for their insurance company.

Two contrasting risk assessments from October 2001 were produced yesterday at the public inquiry into the ICL factory disaster.

Giving evidence, the firm's chairman Campbell Downie also said he hoped he could be forgiven for the "avoidable omissions" on his company's part which led to the explosion.

The two documents were produced by Andrew Stott, an "unqualified student" who was the son of the managing director Frank Stott.

For the Health and Safety Executive, the propane gas pipes were considered a hazard with the potential of leakage and explosion. On a severity scale of one to six, the risk was graded as six - "death, several".

However, a second assessment document was produced which was prepared and sent to ICL's insurers. In it, gas appliances merited a score of only two - minor injury - on a severity scale.

Inquiry counsel Roy Martin put it to Mr Downie: "You see, it might be suggested that for the benefit of the Health and Safety Executive, who are concerned with safety in the public interest, recognition of a high severity potential was a reasonable thing to do, but when presenting the equivalent assessment to the insurance company, who of course might charge a higher premium if there was a higher severity potential, the severity level was reduced to two, which in the case of the other form is minor injury or injuries."

He added: "I am not aware of any documentary evidence which can answer that query ... but do you have an explanation as to why two risk assessments apparently addressing the same potential hazard have come to a significantly different assessment of the severity potential?"

Mr Downie admitted he could not explain the difference.

The inquiry was also shown a single page "Disaster Recovery Plan" which was found in the remains of the building. It was on paper with the ICL logo and stated measures to be taken in the event of a catastrophe.

They included: "Advise insurers, sell assets, make employees redundant, collect insurance money, split liquid assets between shareholders."

Mr Downie said he was adamant this document was a spoof. He said: "This does not look like any disaster plan that I have ever seen. I cannot even get into the mind of the person who would have produced this."

As he concluded his evidence after two days in the witness box, Mr Downie made his plea for forgiveness.

He said "omissions that should never have occurred" were made by two parties, the Health and Safety Executive and ICL Tech, the ICL subsiduary which ran the factory. "If it is possible in the future to have forgiveness for events that should never have happened, that is my wish."

ICL Plastics and ICL Tech were fined £ 400,000 after admitting health and safety breaches at the High Court in Glasgow last year.

The inquiry into the explosion, which occurred on May 11, 2004, continues.