Table 2 – Review of Tokai Mura incident

1 January 2000

Table 2 – Review of Tokai Mura incident
   
QUALITY OF INFORMATION RECEIVED  
Content of information first obtained  
An accident involving a radioactive leak 62%
An occurence of an accident 26%
Someone was exposed to a critical level  
of radiation 20%
There was an accident involving an  
explosion 16%
The credibility of the first information  
Believing in information they first received 63%
Trusted the accuracy of information first  
received 63%
Whose information was most trusted?  
Mayor of Tokai Mura 75%
Nuclear specialists from the Tokai Mura  
facility 43%
Prefecture governor 38%
National government agencies 32%
CONCERNS  
Radioactivity checks  
Did not go to radioactivity checks after  
the accident 51%
Because they were not fellt to be necessary 61%
Because they were too busy 17%
General physical examinations  
Did not go to general physical  
examinations 83%
Because they were not felt to be necessary 61%
Because they were too busy to go 17%
LEADERSHIP IN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT  
Who was a trustworthy person regarding nuclear emergency management?  
Mayor of Tokai Muura 68%
Nuclear specialists from the Tokai Mura  
facility 43%
Atomic energy commission and atomic  
safety commission 22%
Governor of the prefecture 20%
National government agencies 20%



Privacy Policy
We have updated our privacy policy. In the latest update it explains what cookies are and how we use them on our site. To learn more about cookies and their benefits, please view our privacy policy. Please be aware that parts of this site will not function correctly if you disable cookies. By continuing to use this site, you consent to our use of cookies in accordance with our privacy policy unless you have disabled them.