![]() Finally, while many of the EPZs studied were home to large urban populations, others contained significant agricultural assets. Some EPZs also spanned state boundaries, raising issues of cross-jurisdictional emergency preparedness and response. For instance, nine states in the sample had developed plans for stockpiling and distributing potassium iodide (KI) to their constituents in the event of an emergency. ![]() Location-specific challenges, variances in emergency preparedness policies, and the presence of special populations were also considered. Additionally, some states operated county-level health departments while others did not. Eight states were part of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Agreement State Program. For example, two of the states examined had limited or no “home rule” 1 while eight states (including two “commonwealths”) 2 practiced home rule. Sites were chosen to reflect the diversity of approaches to ensuring nuclear preparedness, which in turn depend on variables such as governance structures, demographics, and emergency management policies at the state and local levels ( Figure 1). Therefore, the research team identified a representative sample of 17 EPZs in 43 counties across 10 states. The review offered valuable guidance and insight into the dynamics of existing nuclear emergency management practices, but revealed little about variation in state preparedness practices, best practices, and outstanding gaps. ![]() The research team first conducted an informal review of scholarly literature, government reports, industry whitepapers, and media articles to assess the current state of nuclear emergency preparedness in the US.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |