pece_annotation_1473087943
Andreas_RebmannAnnotation of
The main point was to discuss the controversy between these two, very different, safety and education zones for Nuclear disasters
pece_annotation_1473087902
Andreas_RebmannAnnotation of
In response to
The author used official statements from a variaty of sources.
pece_annotation_1473088415
Andreas_RebmannAnnotation of
In this case, the main point of the article was to be rpepared ahead of time so that the damage during and after the disaster would be minimized. With education for the communities, after a disaster it would be much easier to move and treat people without as much confusion as there might have been.
pece_annotation_1473087794
Andreas_RebmannAnnotation of
"Entergy Corp, which operates Indian Point, said that 10 miles 'provides a robust safety margin' and the Fukushima advisory reflected that area's bigger power complex and the lack of information surrounding that accident."
"...Disaster Accountability Project, a nonprofit organization that monitors disaster-response programs and the author of the report, cited the commission's response to the 2011 nuclear accident in Fukushima, Japan, in which it reccommended that U.S. citizens within 50 miles evacuate."
pece_annotation_1473088327
Andreas_RebmannAnnotation of
Fukishima's emergency response, public and corporate messages on Indian Point, Entergy Corporation
pece_annotation_1473088188
Andreas_RebmannAnnotation of
It addresses concerns over safety of a potential nuclear disaster at Indian Point, as well as how many emergency response districts feel unprepared in education, manpower, and funding for prepartation and response to such an event.
pece_annotation_1473088103
Andreas_RebmannAnnotation of
In response to
Entergy Corporation - Owner of Indian Point Plant, Disaster Accountability Project - Nonprofit disaster response 'auditing' organization, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Steven Peterson - Director of Emergency Management, Ulster County, NY, Dana Smith - Dutchess County comissioner of emergency response