Why was the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant built to withstand an earthquake of 8.2 magnitude and 5.7 meters (19 ft) tsunamis?

“In 1896 many villages along the Japanese coast of Sanriku were celebrating the return of the soldiers from the war against China, when an earthquake of magnitude 8.5 occurred nearly 145 kilometers offshore of Honshu. The direct effects of the five minutes long quake were of minor entity, the epicenter was distant enough to reduce catastrophic movements on the main island and earthquakes were nothing unusual in this region. However 35 minutes after the earthquake the most devastating tsunami experienced until then in modern Japan hit the coast, one of the subsequent waves reached a height of over 30 meters (98 feet). More than 26,000 people were killed and 9.000 buildings destroyed.

In 1933 another very strong tsunami hit the Japanese coast of Sanriku. The earthquake of magnitude 8.4 occurred on March 3rd. This time also the quake caused heavy damage and landslides, it was then followed by a 21 meter (69 feet) high tsunami.”

http://historyofgeology.blogspot.com/2011/03/historic-tsunamis-in-japan.html

What is the exact reason the nuclear power plant designers used 8.2 as an earthquake limit? And 19 feet as the tsunami limit? Far more dangerous events in recent history were well known.

Now get this: In 2005 the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEO) issued a warning asking engineers to “re-examine the potential dangers to nuclear power plants in the wake of the catastrophic earthquake that struck the Indian Ocean in December 2004, triggering a massive tsunami.”

“India’s Kalpakkam nuclear power plant withstood the giant waves, which engulfed its small township, home to India´s center for atomic research. Battered but safe, the plant shut down automatically after detectors tripped it as the water level rose. There was no release of radioactivity. The reactor was restarted 1 January 2005, six days after the catastrophic waves struck India´s east coast.

“There are scores of nuclear power plants operating in coastal areas and some of these may need to take a renewed look at this external hazard,” IAEA Director of Nuclear Power, Mr. Akira Omoto said. “It is also true for plants presently under construction.” It is common for nuclear power plants to be built in coastal areas, drawing the seawater to cool the reactor.

Specialists from around the world will scrutinize the potential impact of natural disasters on nuclear reactors, at the IAEA organized International Workshop on External Flooding Hazards at Nuclear Power Plant Sites.”

http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/2005/tsunami.html

And what happened in Fukushima, Japan?

Answer: Nothing.

Tepco even tried to cover up existing problems leading to a huge scandal in Japan.

Given the Japanese history and the 2004 tsunami experience, I think Tepco’s behavior (and that of the Japanese government) was reckless to say the least. That’s gross negligence. Does anyone disagree? In the US people would file billion-dollar law suits, right?