CONFIDENTIAL
177655 MDLIAN 5631
THE CLOCK AND IT DID NOT REPEAT NOT HAVE THE TECHNICAL EXPERTISE TO HANDLE THE EMERGENCY INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE EXCHANGED DURING EMERGENCY TIMES. THEIR PROPOSAL WOULD, THEREFORE, CAUSE UNDUE DELAY AND COULD AFFECT THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION EXCHANGED.
8. WE INSISTED THAT HONG KONG NEEDED TO BE NOTIFIED OF ALL CLASSIFIED ON-SITE EMERGENCY SITUATIONS, STARTING WITH EMERGENCY STANDBYS. WE ACCEPTED THE GUANGDONG'S PROPOSAL TO USE THE INES STANDARD FORMAT AND REPORTING SYSTEM FOR ALL OTHER INCIDENTS ON THE INES SCALE. BUT FOR INCIDENTS WHICH MIGHT CAUSE PUBLIC CONCERN, WE CLEARLY NEEDED TO BE NOTIFIED PROMPTLY, SO THAT THE TWO SIDES COULD TAKE JOINT ACTION TO COUNTER ANY UNFOUNDED RUMOURS. RECOGNISING THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES IN SUPPLYING US WITH DETAILED TECHNICAL PLANT DATA DURING AN EMERGENCY, WE AGREED TO A FEW LIMITED REDUCTIONS IN THE SPECIFIC TYPES OF PLANT DATA WE HAD REQUESTED. WE THEN HANDED OVER TO THE GUANGDONG SIDE A MODIFIED PROPOSAL ALONG THESE LINES.
9. IN RESPONSE, THE GUANGDONG SIDE ALSO PUT FORWARD A "REVISED" PROPOSAL, WHICH WAS, HOWEVER, VIRTUALLY THE SAME AS THEIR FIRST PROPOSAL.
10. BOTH THEIR FIRST PROPOSAL AND THE REVISED PROPOSAL CONTAINED A CONFIDENTIALITY PROVISION TO THE EFFECT THAT RELEASE OF INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RELEVANT CLAUSE IN THE SIGNED CONSENSUS PAPER 3 FOR OFF-SITE SITUATIONS. WHILE WE HAD EXPECTED TO SEE SUCH A PROVISION AND WERE PREPARED TO AGREE TO APPLY THE SAME FORMULA TO ON-SITE ISSUES AS FOR OFF-SITE ISSUES, WE HAD DIFFICULTY WITH A SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO THIS CLAUSE WITHOUT OUR UNILATERAL DECLARATION; THIS WOULD NOT REPEAT NOT GIVE US THE FLEXIBILITY TO RELEASE INFORMATION IF WE JUDGED IT NECESSARY IN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES. HOWEVER, AS THE MAIN ON-SITE ISSUES STILL REMAINED TO BE RESOLVED AND WE HAD NOT GET REACHED THE STAGE OF FINALISING THE TEXT OF THE PAPER, WE DID NOT RAISE THIS MATTER AT THE MEETING.
11. ON THE LAST DAY OF THE MEETING, BOTH SIDES RECOGNISED THAT THERE WERE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES OF VIEWS AND THAT IT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE TO RESOLVE THESE DIFFERENCES AT THE MEETING. THE TWO SIDES AGREED TO ARRANGE A FURTHER MEETING AND TO REVIEW FURTHER THEIR POSITIONS AND CONSIDER NEW PROPOSALS BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING. AFTER SOME HARD BARGAINING, WE SECURED THEIR AGREEMENT TO HOLD THE NEXT ROUND OF EXPERT TALKS ON 25 AND 26 NOVEMBER IN HONG KONG. THIS WAS THE EARLIEST DATE THEY WOULD ACCEPT.
4
PAGE CONFIDENTIAL