We are currently proceeding at a fast pace with the design of the plant and its safety assessment. We have reviewed all of the key safety systems and identified some open technical issues that we are currently resolving.
We have adopted a comprehensive, solution-based safety assessment approach. We have determined our target level and criteria for plant safety. First, we assess, based on our own expertise, whether the plant meets our expectations. Then we verify compliance with the statutory requirements. With our own proactive assessment, we want to ensure that we can influence the design of the plant if necessary, so that we will receive a plant that complies with our wishes.
Completion of the fractured bedrock zone evaluation last year was an important milestone for us. We also focused on assessing the detailed solutions of the reactor primary circuit and plant hazard protection, and achieved a great deal more clarity in these respects. On the other hand, we also detected some challenges. We came to the conclusion that significant modifications need to be made in the design of the control building, for the design to be appropriately robust and meet our requirements especially in terms of fire and earthquake safety.
Now there is a clear new direction in the design of the control room building. The plant supplier has presented us with a good plan for how the control room building will be redesigned. The new plan is based on the main requirements, and thus would seem to produce a good result.
This year, critical matters in terms of safety include the resolution of open issues pertaining to the primary circuit and the containment, as well as completing their design. The open issues
will not necessarily cause any modifications of the plant design, but we must continue with the discussions about these matters with the plant supplier and the main designer and perform more studies in order to verify that the solutions are appropriate. Furthermore, safety system assessments and safety and hazard analyses must be completed to the extent that we can finalize our own safety assessment and submit the related documentation to the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority. There are approximately thirty key safety systems. We did not detect any major modification needs during thorough assessments of these systems.
We have also proceeded with the preliminary safety analysis report (PSAR) that is a requirement for plant licensing. A PSAR localization project that was launched by the plant supplier a little over a year ago carries the responsibility for the completion of the licensing documentation. At the beginning of the year, we submitted the first two of a total of fifteen document packages to the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority for assessment. The next batch will also be completed soon. The licensing of the plant is now progressing well.
In accordance with our new approach, we aim together with the plant supplier and the main designer to proactively identify any problems that we may face later on. In addition to safety, we focus on securing the economical viability of the plant and also prepare for the construction and operation of the plant. We have plenty of work to do, but the big picture is clear and we know what must be done. This is the way forward.