The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which was reviewing the method of assessing the impact of an earthquake whose epicenter cannot be identified in advance because the fault does not appear on the surface of the earth, officially decided to introduce a new method with improved accuracy. I did.

As a result, depending on the nuclear power plant, additional countermeasure construction may be required.

In addition to the evaluation of active faults near the site, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is conducting a review to confirm the seismic resistance of nuclear power plants. We have evaluated it with reference to such factors, but accuracy has been an issue.



For this reason, the Regulatory Commission has been considering reviewing the evaluation method, such as increasing the number of past earthquakes to be referred to to around 90, which is about five times the number up to that point.



Then, at the meeting on the 21st, we decided to officially introduce it.



As a result, electric power companies operating nuclear power plants will be required to re-evaluate the shaking of earthquakes whose epicenter cannot be identified using a new evaluation method.



On top of that, if the evaluation result of the shaking exceeds the conventional assumption, it is necessary to pass the examination within 3 years after being examined by the regulatory committee to see if the new assumption and countermeasures are appropriate.



In some cases, additional countermeasure work may be required, which may affect driving.