Source Freshness Review — Earthquake risk screening
A practical Source Freshness Review workflow for Earthquake risk screening, focused on evidence, timing, change control, exception closure and an auditable decision.
Verified facts relevant to this topic
Purpose of this guide
Source Freshness Review — Earthquake risk screening applies a controlled verification workflow to Earthquake risk screening. The specific objective is to confirm that the source supporting the decision is still current for the signing, payment or closing moment, with an explicit practical freshness threshold for changeable evidence. A fact is operationally reliable only when it is tied to the correct property, party, date and version and another reviewer can reconstruct the decision from retained evidence.
When to use this review
- Before signing, payment, transfer or another irreversible commitment.
- When a previously relied-on document, amount, party or date changes.
- When an exception remains open near a deadline.
- When responsibility moves between people or teams.
- When database information conflicts with a primary document or official source.
- After closing when an obligation or risk continues to change.
Evidence file
- Retain the exact source or document used for the decision.
- Record retrieval or receipt date and reviewer identity.
- Link each version to the correct property, unit and counterparty.
- Preserve prior versions when a document changes.
- Record differences between the database and primary evidence.
- Do not fill missing facts with undocumented estimates.
Consistency tests
- Does every item refer to the same property and unit?
- Are party identities, authority and legal capacity consistent?
- Is the evidence current enough for this decision moment?
- Are amounts, rights, restrictions and dates consistent across records?
- Can each approval and exception be linked to the version it concerns?
- Can another reviewer reproduce the conclusion from the same file?
Official and primary sources
- AFAD — Türkiye Earthquake Hazard Map — 15-08-2026
- AFAD — Türkiye Building Earthquake Code — 15-08-2026
- İBB — Rapid Building Screening — 15-08-2026
Earthquake-risk screening
Use the newest available official record or circular because the status may change.
For the building itself, review age, structural system, alterations and engineering or Riskli Yapı records where relevant.
What earthquake-risk screening proves, and what it does not
This record reviews the freshness of earthquake-screening sources; it does not certify structural safety. The AFAD Türkiye Earthquake Hazard Map provides coordinate-based seismic-hazard parameters such as ground acceleration, and the current map became effective on 1 January 2019. AFAD expressly states that the hazard map is not a building-risk map. Risk requires additional information about exposure, vulnerability, building condition, population and potential losses.
Use the sources in the right order
Start with the correct property coordinates and use the current AFAD application to understand site hazard. Keep the query date and the values or report actually used instead of saving only an old map screenshot. Then separate three layers: regional or coordinate hazard, local ground conditions, and the condition of the particular building. The AFAD interactive application warns that the national hazard maps do not include every local-ground effect such as liquefaction, amplification or differential settlement. Where those matters are material, use current geological, geotechnical or microzonation sources from the competent public authority.
When stronger building-specific evidence is needed
If the decision question is whether the building itself is a Riskli Yapı or requires structural intervention, a map result cannot answer it. Under the 6306 framework, formal risky-building determinations are performed under specified technical rules by institutions or organisations licensed by the Ministry, with a separate administrative record and objection process. Building age and a DASK policy also do not independently prove current seismic performance.
Freshness control
Record the official AFAD source, access date and coordinates. If a licensed-institution list or Riskli Yapı report is relied on, verify that source in its current official system. Reopen screening when the property location changes, a newer local-ground study appears, the building undergoes material structural alteration or a formal risk determination is issued. The file should always show which conclusion comes from site hazard and which comes from building-specific engineering evidence.
FAQ
Does a red area on the AFAD map mean a particular building is unsafe?
No. The map describes seismic hazard at the location, not the structural condition of an individual building.
Is a Riskli Yapı report the same as an ordinary buyer inspection?
No. It is a formal process under Law 6306 with authorised institutions and defined procedures.
When should screening be refreshed?
When the location or source changes, a newer local study is available, or the building has a material structural change.
Evidence and decision plan for Source Freshness Review — Earthquake risk screening
When reviewing “Source Freshness Review — Earthquake risk screening”, the file should confirm that the relied-on rule, registry extract, certificate or other evidence is current enough for the decision date. This makes the article useful at the point of commitment because unresolved facts are separated from verified facts instead of being buried in narrative.
Evidence to assemble
- For “Source Freshness Review — Earthquake risk screening”, match the property and party identifiers in the evidence to the asset and people actually involved; a correct document for the wrong unit or person does not close the check.
- For “Source Freshness Review — Earthquake risk screening”, record issuer, source, issue or retrieval date and version where available, then distinguish an original/current record from a scan, translation, draft, expired copy or superseded version.
- For “Source Freshness Review — Earthquake risk screening”, compare documentary status with the physical, payment or operational reality relevant to the topic and write down every unexplained difference before commitment.
- For “Source Freshness Review — Earthquake risk screening”, convert each unresolved difference into a named condition: evidence required, person responsible, deadline and the consequence if the condition is not satisfied.
Official reference to recheck
The source register for “Source Freshness Review — Earthquake risk screening” includes AFAD — Türkiye Earthquake Hazard Map (https://www.afad.gov.tr/turkiye-deprem-tehlike-haritasi). Use that source for the matters within its authority and recheck it when timing or rules are material; it does not replace a registry, engineering, tax, banking or contractual record that the specific decision separately requires.
Decision boundary
A defensible conclusion on “Source Freshness Review — Earthquake risk screening” records both what was verified and the limits of that verification. If a missing fact could change ownership, legality, safety, cost or payment security, it should block the related commitment until resolved.