After Fukushima: Managing the consequences of a radiological release

Biosecurity and Bioterrorism

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 228-236

  Fitzgerald, Joe ^a   Wollner, Samuel B ^a   Adalja, Amesh A ^a   Morhard, Ryan ^a   Cicero, Anita ^a   Inglesby, Thomas V ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

POTASSIUM IODIDE; RADIOPROTECTIVE AGENT;

ARTICLE; DISASTER; DISASTER PLANNING; ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH EDUCATION; HEALTH PHYSICS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; JAPAN; MANPOWER; NUCLEAR ACCIDENT; NUCLEAR POWER PLANT; POLICY; RADIATION AND RADIATION RELATED PHENOMENA; RADIATION INJURY; RADIATION MONITORING; RESCUE PERSONNEL; UNITED STATES;

DISASTER PLANNING; DISASTERS; EMERGENCY RESPONDERS; ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION; FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; HEALTH EDUCATION; HEALTH PHYSICS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; JAPAN; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS; POTASSIUM IODIDE; PUBLIC POLICY; RADIATION INJURIES; RADIATION MONITORING; RADIATION-PROTECTIVE AGENTS; RADIOACTIVE HAZARD RELEASE; RADIOLOGIC HEALTH; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84862543814     PISSN: 15387135     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/bsp.2012.0021     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Official: Quake, tsunami could cost Japan S300 billion. CNN 2011. http://articles.cnn.com/2011-03-31/world/japan. disaster.budget-1-tsunami-quake- yen?-s =PM:WORLD. Accessed February 8, 2012.
2. Investigation Committee on the Accidents at Fukushima Nuclear Power Stations of Tokyo Electric Power Company. Executive Summary of the Interim Report. 2011. http:// icanps.go.jp/eng/111226ExecutiveSummary.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
3. Brumfiel G. Directly comparing Fukushima to Chernobyl. Nature News Blog 2011. http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/ 09/directly-comparing-fukushima-t.html. Accessed February 8, 2012.
4. Yasunari TJ, Stohl A, Hayano RS, et al. Cesium-137 deposition and contamination of Japanese soils due to the Fukushima nuclear accident. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011; 108(49):19530-19534.
5. Nuclear Safety Commission of Japan. Concept of areas in which arrangements for emergency preparedness and response for nuclear power plants should be intensively made. 2011. http://www.nsc.go.jp/NSCenglish/geje/ 20111101review-1. pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
6. Ozharovsky A. Sobered by Fukushima lessons, Japan revamps first-response plans, expands evac zones around nuclear power plants-but Russia takes no heed. Bellona Foundation November 21, 2011. http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles- 2011/japan-revamp. Accessed February 8, 2012.
7. 30-km anti-disaster zone proposed for nuclear accidents. Asahi Shimbun October 21, 2011. http://ajw.asahi.com/ article/0311disaster/fukushima/ AJ2011102115389. Accessed February 8, 2012.
8. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG- 0654/FEMA-REP-1, Revision 1. 2011. http://www. nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0654/r1/. Accessed February 8, 2012.
9. Miller C, Cubbage A, Dorman D, Grobe J, Holahan G, Sanfilippo N. Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 21st Century-The Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Daiichi Accident. Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 2011. http:// pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ ML1118/ML111861807.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
10. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Rev.1, Supplement 4. October 2011. http://www.fema.gov/pdf/about/divisions/thd/ FEMA-REP-1%20Rev-1%20Supp- 4%20Oct%202011.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Manual of Protective Action Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents. 1991. http://www.epa.gov/ radiation/docs/er/400-r-92-001. pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
12. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Unit Five: protective actions and protective action guides. In: Manual of Protective Action Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents. 1992. http://training.fema.gov/emiweb/downloads/ 301unt05.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
13. Nordic Nuclear Safety Research. Operational Intervention Levels in a Nuclear Emergency, General Concepts and a Probablistic Approach. 1997. http://www.nks.org/download/pdf/ NKS-Pub/EKO-3-3-97-TR-1.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
14. Institute of Medicine. Distribution and Administration of Potassium Iodide in the Event of a Nuclear Incident. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2004. http:// www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record-id = 10868. Accessed February 14, 2012.
15. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance: Potassium Iodide as a Thyroid Blocking Agent in Radiation Emergencies. December 2011. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/ Guidances/ UCM080542.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
16. Cardis E, Howe G, Ron E, et al. Cancer consequences of the Chernobyl accident: 20 years on. J Radiol Prot 2006;26(2): 127-140. (Pubitemid 43861071)
17. Slovic P. Perception of risk from radiation. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 1996;68(3-4):165-180. (Pubitemid 27010944)
18. Onishi N, Fackler M. Anger in Japan over withheld radiation forecasts. New York Times August 9, 2011. http://www.nytimes. com/2011/08/09/world/asia/ 09japan.html&hp. Accessed November 15, 2011.
19. Argonne National Laboratory. CSEPP Public Affairs Planning Guidance Compendium Workbook. http://www. dis.anl.gov/pubs/54299.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
20. Friedman SM. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima: an analysis of traditional and new media coverage of nuclear accidents and radiation. Bull At Sci 2011;67(5):55-65.
21. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Revisions to the Protective Action Guidance Manual, SECY-11-0078. 2011. http://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/secys/2011/2011- 0078scy.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
22. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Planning guidance for protection and recovery following radiological dispersal device (RDD) and improvised nuclear device (IND) incidents. Fed Regist August 1, 2008;73(149):45029-45048. http://hps.org/hsc/documents/DHS-Final-RDDandINDPAGs. pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
23. Chen SY, Tenforde TS. Optimization approaches to decision making on long-term cleanup and site restoration following a nuclear or radiological terrorism incident. Homeland Security Affairs January 2010;6(1).
24. Board on Radiation Effects Research. Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII Phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006. http:// www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record-id = 11340. Accessed February 14, 2012.
25. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Liberty RadEx: National Tier 2 Full-Scale Radiological Dispersion Device Exercise. April 26-30, 2010. http://www.epa.gov/libertyradex/ Liberty-RadEx.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
26. Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists. The Status of State-level Radiation Emergency Preparedness and Response Capabilities, 2010. October 6, 2010. http://www.cste. org/webpdfs/2010raditionreport.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
27. Health Physics Society. Human Capital Crisis in Radiation Safety. Revised June 2005. http://hps.org/documents/ HumanCapitalCrisis05.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
28. McBurney RE. A Plan for Incorporating Local Volunteer Radiation Professionals into Existing Health Volunteer Programs to Assist in Population Monitoring Conference. Frankfort, KY: Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors; 2011. http://www.crcpd.org/Homeland-Security/RRVC-Final- Report.pdf. Accessed February 8, 2012.
29. Ono Y. Radiation cleanup confounds Japan. Wall Street Journal October 31, 2011. http://online.wsj.com/article/ SB10001424052970204394804577008192502423920.html. Accessed February 8, 2012.