Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (sp) ◽  
pp. 421-421 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suminao Murakami
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Great East Japan Earthquake ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
Earthquake Disaster ◽  
The People ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Wide Scale ◽  
Social Disaster ◽  
American Society

Concerned experts and others from a wide range of fields are required to take part in studies on “social” disaster phenomena such as earthquakes and typhoons causing drastic human and property damage and leaving subsequent social and economic destruction. In 2006, the Journal of Disaster Research (JDR) decided to be published as an academic journal in English for global society to help expand research beyond a domestic scope. The March 11, 2011, Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster – in the 6th year of the journal’s publication, has made an impact both domestically and globally due to the unprecedented earthquake and tsunami and resulting radiation leakage at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. JDR will annually publish special issues on the Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster beginning in this issue of 2012, for five years, for the purpose of informing, recording and utilizing lessons learned from the disaster. Page charges are in principle free and widespread contributions are welcomed. I have studied disasters from the viewpoint of a planner. Nobody who is active and living in society is irrelevant to wide-scale events related to such disasters, and I still feel that it is important for people from a variety of fields to visit devastated sites, hear from the people experiencing such disasters and make their own standpoints. In American society, for example, disaster measures against earthquakes and other disasters have been studied involving a wide range of experts and others. After the 1995 Great Hanshin Earthquake in Kobe, research groups consisting of wide range of experts came to be formed in Japan and environments developed to produce a multidisciplinary journal such as the JDR. The ultimate goal of planned research is human research. A society is needed in which “human power” can be manifested in all aspects such as reviving reconstruction and rehabilitation. This is because contributions by researchers from widespread fields are anticipated in the future.

scholarly journals Special Issue on the Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster: Part II

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (sp) ◽  
pp. 729-729
Author(s):  
Haruo Hayashi
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Great East Japan Earthquake ◽  
Economic Damage ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Disaster Reduction ◽  
Multidisciplinary Research ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
Earthquake Disaster ◽  
Fukushima Daiichi

The Journal of Disaster Research (JDR), published bimonthly in English since 2006 as a Japan-based academic journal, promotes multidisciplinary research on disaster reduction due to all hazards – natural, unintended and intended. Since the Great East Japan Earthquake disaster on March 11, 2011, we have worked as our duty to provide a forum for all stakeholders and researchers in the world to describe what happened scientifically in terms of human and property damage and in subsequent social and economic damage by this unprecedented occurrence, including the incident involving Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant. As one contribution, JDR is publishing special annual issues for the next five years on the Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster – with NO PAGE CHARGES TO CONTRIBUTORS. This effort began in 2012. The purpose of these special issues is to record, communicate and share the lessons learned from this disaster. In our second special issue, 16 papers were submitted and we are proud to introduce 11 papers touching on different aspects of the Great East Japan Earthquake disaster. We are sure you will find these papers interesting and informative. We also look forward to receiving contributions for the third special issue, which will be published in the summer of 2014.

Special Issue on the Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster: Part IV

2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (sp) ◽  
pp. 709-709
Author(s):  
Katsuki Takiguchi
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Pacific Coast ◽  
Current Issue ◽  
Great East Japan Earthquake ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Earthquake Disaster ◽  
Kanto Earthquake ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Many

The basic policy of the Journal of Disaster Research (JDR), as a multidisciplinary academicjournal, is to cover all types of disasters ? except for war ? through a broad comprehensive perspective. Since its inaugural issue in August 2006, the JDR has been published bimonthly,with six issues a year. 2015 marks the tenth year since the JDRfs first issue. Among the many events happening during this decade is the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster which was induced by the 2011 off the Pacific coast of Tohoku Earthquake.This event had two major features ? that the tsunami accompanying the earthquake caused the main damage and that it triggered a nuclear hazard accident at a nuclear power plant. The 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster was a unprecedented earthquake disaster called catastrophic hazard following two others ? the 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake Disasterthat leveled Tokyo and the 1995 Hanshin Awaji Earthquake Disaster that destroyed parts of Osaka and Kobe. In view of this catastrophic hazardfs scale, the JDR decided to publish special annual issues on the Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster for five years since 2012 in addition to its regularissues. No publication fee was charged to contributors and support was asked from corporations. Papers on the special issues are published mainly online as an e-journal though printed editions are published for archival purposes. The current issue is the fourth of these special issues, and contributors have covered the 2011 disaster from many a wide range of perspectives. 21 papers were submitted and 8 papers are accepted for publication after peer review. The editors are confident that, like the previous three issues, this issue fully measure up to the quality that was expected for the special issue. I wish to express my gratitude to the contributors and reviewers and to thank corporations for their invaluable support.

Expectations for Inservice Testing Programs at New Nuclear Power Plants

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas G. Scarbrough
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Reactor Core ◽  
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Mechanical Equipment ◽  
American Society ◽  
Regulatory Commission ◽  
Safety Systems

In a series of Commission papers, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) described its policy for inservice testing (IST) programs to be developed and implemented at nuclear power plants licensed under 10 CFR Part 52. This paper discusses the expectations for IST programs based on those Commission policy papers as applied in the NRC staff review of combined license (COL) applications for new reactors. For example, the design and qualification of pumps, valves, and dynamic restraints through implementation of American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Standard QME-1-2007, “Qualification of Active Mechanical Equipment Used in Nuclear Power Plants,” as accepted in NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.100 (Revision 3), “Seismic Qualification of Electrical and Active Mechanical Equipment and Functional Qualification of Active Mechanical Equipment for Nuclear Power Plants,” will enable IST activities to assess the operational readiness of those components to perform their intended functions. ASME has updated the Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (OM Code) to improve the IST provisions for pumps, valves, and dynamic restraints that are incorporated by reference in the NRC regulations with applicable conditions. In addition, lessons learned from performance experience and testing of motor-operated valves (MOVs) will be implemented as part of the IST programs together with application of those lessons learned to other power-operated valves (POVs). Licensee programs for the Regulatory Treatment of Non-Safety Systems (RTNSS) will be implemented for components in active nonsafety-related systems that are the first line of defense in new reactors that rely on passive systems to provide reactor core and containment cooling in the event of a plant transient. This paper also discusses the overlapping testing provisions specified in ASME Standard QME-1-2007; plant-specific inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria; the applicable ASME OM Code as incorporated by reference in the NRC regulations; specific license conditions; and Initial Test Programs as described in the final safety analysis report and applicable RGs. Paper published with permission.

scholarly journals Overview of NRC NUREG-1482, Revision 2, Guidelines for Inservice Testing at Nuclear Power Plants: Inservice Testing of Pumps and Valves, and Inservice Examination and Testing of Dynamic Restrains (Snubbers) at Nuclear Power Plants

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gurjendra S. Bedi
Keyword(s):  
Power Plant ◽  
Nuclear Power Plant ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Regulatory Guidance ◽  
American Society ◽  
Regulatory Commission

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff issued Revision 2 to NUREG-1482, “Guidelines for Inservice Testing at Nuclear Power Plant,” to assist the nuclear power plant licensees in establishing a basic understanding of the regulatory basis for pump and valve inservice testing (IST) programs and dynamic restraints (snubbers) inservice examination and testing programs. Since the Revision 1 issuance of NUREG-1482, certain tests and measurements required by earlier editions and addenda of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants (OM Code) have been clarified, updated, revised or eliminated. The revision to NUREG-1482 incorporates and addresses those changes, and includes the IST programs guidelines related to new reactors. The revised guidance incorporates lessons learned and experience gained since the last issue. This paper provides an overview of the contents of the NUREG-1482 and those changes and discusses how they affect NRC guidance on implementing pump and valve inservice testing (IST) programs. For the first time, this revision added dynamic restraint (snubber) inservice examination and testing program guidelines along with pump and valve IST programs. This paper highlights important changes to NUREG-1482, but is not intended to provide a complete record of all changes to the document. The NRC intends to continue to develop and improve its guidance on IST methods through active participation in the ASME OM Code consensus process, interactions with various technical organizations, user groups, and through periodic updates of NRC-published guidance and issuance of generic communications as the need arises. Revision 2 to NUREG-1482 incorporates regulatory guidance applicable to the 2004 Edition including 2005 and 2006 Addenda to the ASME OM Code. Revision 0 and Revision 1 to NUREG-1482 are still valid and may continue to be used by those licensees who have not been required to update their IST program to the 2004 Edition including the 2005 and 2006 Addenda (or later Edition) of the ASME OM Code. The guidance provided in many sections herein may be used for requesting relief from or alternatives to ASME OM Code requirements. However, licensees may also request relief or authorization of an alternative that is not in conformance with the guidance. In evaluating such requested relief or alternatives, the NRC uses the guidelines/recommendations of the NUREG, where applicable. The guidelines and recommendations provided in this NUREG and its Appendix A do not supersede the regulatory requirements specified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 10 CFR 50.55a, “Codes and standards”. Further, this NUREG does not authorize the use of alternatives to, grant relief from, the ASME OM Code requirements for inservice testing of pumps and valves, or inservice examination and testing of dynamic restraints (snubbers), incorporated by reference in 10 CFR 50.55a. Paper published with permission.

BWR Steam Dryer Issues and Lessons Learned Related to Flow Induced Vibration

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chakrapani Basavaraju ◽  
Kamal A. Manoly ◽  
Martin C. Murphy ◽  
William T. Jessup
Keyword(s):  
Pressure Vessel ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Structural Integrity ◽  
Thermal Power ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Flow Induced Vibration ◽  
Safety Function ◽  
Water Reactors ◽  
American Society ◽  
Loose Parts

Steam dryers in Boiling Water Reactors, located in the upper steam dome of the reactor pressure vessel, are not pressure retaining components and are not designed and constructed to the provisions of Section III of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. As such, these components do not correspond to any specific safety class referenced in the Code. Although the steam dryers in BWRs perform no safety function, they must maintain the structural integrity in order to avoid the generation of loose parts that may adversely impact the capability of other plant equipment to perform their safety functions. Therefore guidance from Section III of the ASME Code is utilized in the design and fabrication of replacement dryers as well as for design modifications of the existing dryers for extended power uprates. The majority of licensees of operating nuclear plants are applying for EPU, which generally increases the thermal power output to 20% above the original licensed thermal power. Nuclear power plant components such as steam dryers can be subjected to strong fluctuating loads and can experience unexpected high cycle fatigue due to adverse flow effects while operating at EPU conditions. However, there are some unique challenges related to steam dryer operation at EPU conditions requiring special considerations to prevent fatigue damage from the effects of flow induced vibration. This paper examines the issues and lessons learned related to FIV considerations during EPU reviews of BWR steam dryers.

Inevitability and Choice

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (sp) ◽  
pp. 422-425
Author(s):  
Katsuki Takiguchi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Power Generation ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Great East Japan Earthquake ◽  
Nuclear Power Generation ◽  
Earthquake Disaster ◽  
Starting Point

Touched off by the Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster, methods of utilizing nuclear power generation are now being discussed in various places in Japan. It is a question of what kind of choice should be made. This paper sets the structure of “power” as a starting point and considers “efficiency” and “risk” and then discusses choice and responsibility.

Special Issue on the Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster: Part V

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (sp) ◽  
pp. 769-769
Author(s):  
Katsuki Takiguchi ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Earth Science ◽  
Great East Japan Earthquake ◽  
Radioactive Material ◽  
Disaster Prevention ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
The 2016 Kumamoto Earthquakes ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
Urban Safety

Journal of Disaster Research (JDR) published its first issue in August, 2006. Since then, we have published six issues a year on a bimonthly basis. JDR is an academic journal aimed at bringing a broad, comprehensive discussion to the subject of disasters, and thus contributing to the field of disaster prevention and reduction. Its comprehensive coverage harbors the risk of becoming unfocussed or fostering unsubstantiated conclusions. At JDR, we have dealt with this risk by making most issues special feature issues, and inviting specialists in the relevant fields as guest editors. The Great East Japan Earthquake occurred on March, 2011, five years after our first issue was published. It was a Mw9.0 earthquake that occurred off the Pacific coast of the Tohoku region. The earthquake triggered a tsunami which produced huge casualties, amounting to over 18,000 dead or missing persons. The disaster was accompanied by a nuclear plant accident, an unprecedented event in mankind’s history. The catastrophic accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, operated by Tokyo Electric Company, resulted in core meltdown and the release of radioactive material. At JDR, we considered it our responsibility to publish, apart from our regular issues, special issues on the Great East Japan Earthquake consisting of five yearly issues beginning with the first issue in 2012. This issue, Part 5, is the final issue. We would like to thank all of the authors who submitted articles for the five special issues, the reviewers, and many others who contributed. The special issues project on the Great East Japan Earthquake will be passed down to a special issue on the 2016 Kumamoto earthquakes occurred on April, 2016 in Kumamoto, Japan. Co-Editors: Suminao Murakami (Editor-in-Chief; Representative, Laboratory of Urban Safety Planning, Japan) Haruo Hayashi (Editor-in-Chief; President, National Research Institute for Earth Science and Disaster Prevention, Japan) Hideaki Karaki (President, Foundation of Food Safety and Security, Japan)

Lessons Learned in Implementation of Guidelines for Quantifying Support System Initiating Event Frequencies

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rupert A. Weston ◽  
Ashley J. Mossa
Keyword(s):  
Support System ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Fault Tree ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Pressurized Water ◽  
Common Cause Failures ◽  
Areas Of Concern ◽  
Pilot Implementation ◽  
American Society

The pilot implementation results for Regulatory Guide 1.200 identified four probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) technical elements that required additional guidance. One of these elements involved the use of fault tree technique to quantify the frequencies of support system initiating events (SSIEs). To address this technical element, guidelines were developed by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) to provide a common industry approach for addressing the identification and quantification of SSIEs. The EPRI guidelines were issued as an interim report to allow trial use and pilot implementation by the industry prior to finalizing the guidelines. These interim guidelines provide an industry-consensus approach for addressing areas of concern in the development of support system initiating event models to ensure that the associated supporting requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) PRA Standard for internally initiated events are satisfied. A Pressurized Water Reactor Owners Group (PWROG) pilot implementation of the EPRI interim guidelines was conducted to determine whether the pilot participants have adequately addressed all areas of concern in the development of SSIE models. To determine this, a SSIE model currently used was selected by each of four the pilot participants and subject to detail review to demonstrate whether these models meet the expectations of the EPRI interim guidelines. The EPRI interim guidelines identified the areas of concern to be addressed in using fault tree technique to develop and quantify SSIE models. The guidelines addressed several areas of concern including the treatment of passive failures, the assignment of an appropriate mission time for primary and secondary failures, treatment of common cause failures (CCFs) between running and standby equipment, and consideration of all combinations of CCFs. The PWROG pilot implementation of the interim guidelines summarized the lessons learned and provided feedback to EPRI for consideration in finalizing the guidelines. In addition to the compilation of lessons learned, the PWROG implementation of the EPRI interim guidelines identified existing practices used to develop fault tree models for quantifying SSIE frequencies. Such practices did not necessarily follow a common approach and did not fully meet the expectations of the interim guidelines. Detailed reviews of the SSIE models currently in use at nuclear power plants (NPPs) for the pilot participants demonstrated that the elements of evaluation described in the interim guidelines were not addressed consistently among the PWROG pilot participants. Recommended improvements were identified and incorporated in the SSIE models to meet the expectations of the EPRI interim guidelines. The re-quantification of SSIE frequencies based on the recommended improvements, demonstrated that by not adequately addressing all elements in the evaluation, the SSIE frequency may be under-estimated.

scholarly journals Special Issue on the Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster: Part VI – Thoughts About the Great Disaster Now That Ten Years Have Passed –

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 907-907
Author(s):  
Katsuki Takiguchi ◽  
Haruo Hayashi
Keyword(s):  
Disaster Risk ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Great East Japan Earthquake ◽  
Electronic Format ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Disaster Research ◽  
Academic Journal ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Earthquake Disaster ◽  
Major Disaster

A holistic and comprehensive perspective on society is essential to disaster research. However, at one time, the world did not have any scholarly journals that dealt with disasters from a holistic point of view. This situation gave rise to the Journal of Disaster Research (JDR), the first issue of which was published in August 2006. In principle, six issues are published annually, with special or extra issues also published in some years. The Great East Japan Earthquake struck in March 2011, five years after the first issue of the JDR. Following this incident, we decided to publish a special issue whenever there was a major disaster. All accepted papers and articles were to be published free of charge, in electronic format. So far, eight special issues have been published. Since this year 2021 marks the tenth anniversary of that disaster, we at the JDR have decided to publish a special issue of notes on the Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster. The selected theme is “Thoughts About the Great Disaster Now That Ten Years Have Passed.” As an academic journal dealing comprehensively with disasters and disaster risk reduction, we asked people working in all disaster-related fields to submit, from their unique perspectives, their views or proposals in any area or subject regarding what changes have taken place, what has remained the same, or what is needed in the future. We have the twelve notes presented here in this Special Issue on the Great East Japan Earthquake Disaster: Part VI. We hope that these notes provide seeds for further progress in the field of disaster research. Lastly, the editors would like to thank all contributors who submitted their manuscripts and the reviewers who provided valuable feedback with their constructive comments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document