05-AUG-1993 17:17
7/8.
Annabet Jones FCO
ESED, FOO
cc. vom Marshall
HKD
fax #270-3387
DAYA BAY CROSS BORDER TALKS: CONFIDENTIALITY
P.01
cc Kevin Sutherland
DTI
You asked for comments on HKD's telex of 30 July.
I am unable to confirm or deny the assertion that too much unassessed or unconfirmed data was released by the US at the time of the TMI accident. However, it is well known that the Russian's were extremely tardy not only in giving information about the Chernobyl accident but only acknowledged that the accident had actually occurred after high radiation levels were detected in Sweden. It must be doubtful whether anyone knows the precise consequences of that delay. Certainly information about numbers of casualties, areas affected or evacuated was difficult to obtain. If what the Chinese said about TMI is true, these are two examples of how not to respond to nuclear accidents.
Perhaps the best line of argument if these cases are raised again is to agree that with hindsight information may have been better managed, but that the events are now history. Arrangements for exchange of information between nuclear powers and bodies such as the International Atomic Energy Agency, the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency and the European Commission are well established and periodically exercised: exercised both as exercises and for real events.
Examples of recent nuclear incidents where information has been circulated internationally include Kalinin (Russia) 1990, Sosnovy Eor (St Petersburg) 1992, 2 very minor incidents at Chernobyl and another at Ignalina (Lithuania) 1992, and Tomsk (Siberia) 1993. In the Russian examples, there was no delay in making information available, and in the case of the Tomsk accident, they invited the IAEA to send a team of experts to assess the situation.
Closer to home, the UK Government has bilateral agreements with France, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands and the former Soviet Union which provide for mutual exchange of information in the event of a nuclear accident. There is also a draft agreement with Ireland. These are in addition to the obligations to do so under the IAEA Conventions and EC Directives.
On the question of confidentiality, every Government will wish to reserve their position. For example, the EC data exchange arrangements specifically require member states to say whether the information which is being provided is confidential between Governments. Clearly, there needs to be some discretion, but the presumption is that information should be as open as possible. In any case, the Chinese have signed the IAEA Conventions on Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident and Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency and would be expected to make appropriate information available.
Page 195Page 196
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.