TWO versions of an inquiry report into the controversial explosion at the Castle Peak power station last year, which killed two workers, do exist, China Light and Power (CLP) admitted late last night. But there was nothing sinister about the compiling of the second report, which was not submitted to the coroner, or the actions of CLP investigators, who removed evidence from the scene of the blast, the company said. Yet the second report will not be released to the coroner even if the inquest is reopened, a spokesman said. CLP again slated its former counsel, Michael Ford, and allegations made by him, which form the basis of legal action against CLP in the United States. The company said the circumstances leading to Mr Ford's dismissal part way through the inquest into the two deaths were so serious that the matter had been referred to the Hong Kong Bar Council. Stuart Speiser, the lawyer representing Mr Ford in the US, said from Florida last night: ''Mr Ford stands by all the allegations made in the Texas litigation and all the documents filed, all of which came from CLP and Exxon themselves.'' Mr Ford has launched legal proceedings against CLP and its Castle Peak Power Company (CAPCO) partner, Exxon Energy Ltd, claiming US$125 million in damages for being publicly and humiliatingly sacked when he refused to withhold information from the Coroner's Court. Central to Mr Ford's case is the existence of two reports produced by CAPCO investigators - a ''blue'' report, which he claims contained findings of ''inadequate and improper maintenance and training'' and which was only circulated within the companies; and a ''red'' report, an edited version given to the police and coroner which omitted the findings. Attorney-General Jeremy Mathews has yet to decide if the inquest should be re-opened. It is expected a decision is possible early next week. Last night CLP said the production of ''blue'' and ''red'' reports was a long-standing part of the company procedure and both reports were subject to legal privilege. ''The 'red' report is a statement of the facts as best CLP can determine them,'' it said. ''In this case, CLP waived privilege and provided a copy to the coroner. The 'blue' report canvasses opinion based on the 'red' report. ''The principal objective of the 'blue' report is to avoid a possible recurrence of the incident. CLP considers it an important management tool in maintaining its good safety record. ''The procedure envisages, and CLP promises to its employees, the opportunity to make a candid analysis of what has taken place without fear of internal or external censure for the opinions expressed. Conjecture is encouraged where this may assist. CLP is concerned that the value to the company of this internal procedure should be preserved.'' CLP, which said it had been forced to make a statement to counter Mr Ford's allegations, said its staff's removal of possible evidence was vital to making the site safe and securing electricity as soon as possible. The actions were later accepted by the Fire Services Department, the company said. The company did not disclose why it sacked Mr Ford, but said it had referred the matter to the Hong Kong Bar Council on July 13, before the Texas proceeding were started. CLP said: ''Following Mr Ford's dismissal, there was a dispute over his fees, during the course of which Mr Ford said in a letter to CLP's solicitors: 'Be under no misapprehension that an inquiry into this issue will lead to examination of a multitude ofmatters that neither you nor your clients would want.' '' The company said the fees dispute had been referred to ''the appropriate tribunal'', believed to be a body organised jointly by the Law Society and the Bar Association. Bar Association chairman Jacqueline Leong last night said: ''There has been correspondence between CLP and the Bar in relation to the matter. That is all I can say.'' CLP has filed its own writ seeking to stop Mr Ford disclosing information he obtained while acting for the company. Coroner Warner Banks, who presided over the original inquest at which verdicts of accidental death were returned on Wong Kwong-yu and Yip Ka-pui, and who has recommended that the case be reopened, said CLP's statement did not affect him. ''It doesn't change anything. I made my recommendations to the Attorney-General based on the papers provided to me; I have seen nothing for me to change my mind. ''But the ball is in the Attorney-General's court. It is his decision whether to re-open the inquest, I am completely powerless.'' Meanwhile, CLP admitted it has not paid any compensation to the families of the two engineers who died in the explosion. The law required the families to start legal actions to let the courts decide on the amount of settlement, a CLP spokesman said. He maintained the company would continue to help the two widows and their children financially. But one of the widows claimed CLP had been playing tricks with them and she was worried the family would only get a meagre amount of compensation. Yip Au Lai-chun said CLP had indicated that the rent for her husband's quarters over the next seven years would be deducted from the compensation awarded. ''The company claims they have provided free quarters for me and my children for seven years, but actually it is a ploy trying to confuse the public,'' Mrs Yip said.