Abstract Recently a regulatory code for an aseismic design of high-pressure gas facilities became effective by the order of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) in Japan. This order includes details of the aseismic design of vessels whose “factor of importance” are relatively lower than Class A (Class I) items in nuclear power plants. The author develops his idea on an aseismic design method of equipment and piping of nuclear power plants in a Low Seismicity Area (LSA) based on his experience of the new code for petro-chemical industries and oil refinaries pertaining to high pressure gas facilities mentioned above. The definition of LSA is usually the area whose maximum intensity has never exceeded MMI VI or VII. However, there are two types of LSA, one is really such a low seismicity area, and the other type is the area which has the possibility of stronger earthquake occurrence than those mentioned above, even though it is low. One of the typical examples is the area subjected to “New Madrid Earthquake-1812”. The author develops his concept along these two lines. He briefly describes the new code for high-pressure gas facilities in Japan. This code describes the design methodology of both types of aseismic design analysis, that is, rather sophisticated dynamic methods for facilities whose potential hazard is as high as those in a nuclear power plant, such as liquified chlorine gas storage, and simplified dynamic and static methods for most of the equipment and vessels in those plants. One of the features of this code is the use of design formulae and charts to simplify their design procedure as well as the set of specific computer codes by the MITI. These computer codes are prepared by the MITI or approved by the MITI for providing equivalent capability to the practice designated in the MITI order. The author's philosophy for the code of equipment and pipings in LSA is that they must be as simple as possible, and most of the analytical work for the design should be eliminated, or at least limit the use of simplified methods, such as the static seismic coefficient method or the modified seismic coefficient method with a simplified response spectrum. The use of general design criteria or a guideline of structural details may be better than a sophisticated design analysis as a result.