Search

test

...

Editing with Contributor

pece_annotation_1473099535

Jacob Nelson
Annotation of
In response to

The main point of the article is to report a conflict of opinions between the NRC and the Disaster Accountability Project on the safety of the communities surrounding the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant. The NRC and the company running the plant, Entergy, state that those communities within a 10 mile radius are required to have emergency evacuation plans in place should a nuclear emergency occur; those outside this radius, however, are not at as large of risk. The nonprofit, however, cites the NRC's report on the Fukushima disaster, where it recommended the US citizens within 50 miles of the plant should evacuate the area, and suggests that communities within a 50 mile radius of Indian Point have specific nuclear emergency plans at hand and prepared for use. Entergy says that the radius "provides a robust safety margin", and the NRC replies to the Disaster Accountability Project's statement by saying that the incident at Fukushima is not comparable to any nuclear power cite in the US, due to the size and number of reactors in the Fukushima plant.

pece_annotation_1473038038

a_chen
Annotation of
In response to

The convention can be applying to a State that is possibly involving in nuclear activities or might  have any nuclear effects to the surroundings. Or the state that can notify the accidents that in  the other states.   Due to 22 September 2014, there are 119 parties (states) subject to entry into force with 69  states signed the convention (Convention – Latest Status). 

pece_annotation_1473630361

a_chen
Annotation of
In response to

The translation for the system is managed by Transifex (not Ushahidi owned) with monthly plans for localised translation. In the case that the user not comfortable with English might be an issue to work with the system. Especially the reporters from the hard-reach areas with fewer educations. (They might deal with the problem of using technologies.)