ML16341G654

Advises That Topical Rept WCAP-13039, Technical Justification for Eliminating Large Primary Loop Pipe Rupture as Structural Design Basis for Diablo Canyon Units 1 & 2 Will Be Withheld Ref 10CFR2.790,per 920124 Request

ML16341G654
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	08/05/1992
From:	Rood H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Liparulo N WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
References
NUDOCS 9208120144
Download: ML16341G654 (8)

Text

~S REgy

~4 O

Cy 0

C O

I Dp

+n gO

+**++

UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 August 5, 1992 Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323 Nr. Nicholas J. Liparulo, Manager Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Activities Westinghouse Electric Corporation P. 0.

Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230-0355

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR WITHHOLDING INFORMATION FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT UNITS 1

AND 2 (CAM-92-257)

By letter dated January 24, 1992, with affidavit (CAW-92-257) dated February 18,

1992, Westinghouse Electric Corporation requested the following proprietary document be withheld from public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790:

MCAP-13039, "Technical Justification for Eliminating Large Primary Loop Pipe Rupture as the Structural Design Basis for the Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 Nuclear Power Plants" dated November 1991.

Also enclosed is a copy of WCAP-13038, "Technical Justification for Eliminating Large Primary Loop Pipe Rupture as the Structural Design Basis for the Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 Nuclear Power Plants" dated November 1991 (Nonproprietary).

The Westinghouse Electric Company affidavit forwarded with the proprietary document stated that the submitted information should be considered exempt from mandatory public disclosure for the following reasons:

(a)

The use of such information by Westinghouse gives Westinghouse a

competitive advantage over its competitors.

It is, therefore, withheld from disclosure to protect the Westinghouse competitive position.

(b)

It is information which is marketable in many ways.

The extent to which such information is available to competitors diminishes the Mestinghouse ability to sell products and services involving the use of the information.

(c)

Use by our competitor would put Westinghouse at a competitive disadvantage by reducing his expenditure of resources at our expense.

(d)

Each component of proprietary information pertinent to a particular competitive advantage is potentially as valuable as the "9208i20l44 920805 PDR ADOCK 05000275 "P

P.DR.

(<)

gpss,,%pl

August 5, i992 Mr. Nicholas J. Lipar 1 total competitive advantage.

If competitors acquire components of proprietary information, any one component may be the key to the entire puzzle, thereby depriving Westinghouse of a competitive advantage.

(e)

Unrestricted disclosure would jeopardize the position of prominence of Westinghouse in the world market, and thereby give a

market advantage to the competition of those countries.

(f)

The Westinghouse capacity to invest corporate assets in research and development depends upon the success in obtaining and maintaining a competitive advantage.

Therefore, WCAP-13039, "Technical Justification for Eliminating Large Primary Loop Pipe Rupture as the Structural Design Basis for the Diablo Canyon Units 1

and 2 Nuclear Power Plants" marked as proprietary will be withheld from public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(b)(5) and Section 103(b) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.

Withholding from public inspection shall not affect the right, if any, of persons properly and directly concerned to inspect the documents.. If the'need

arises, we may send copies of this information to our consultants working in this area.

We will, of course, ensure that the consultants have signed the appropriate agreements for handling proprietary information.

If the basis for withholding this information from public inspection should change in the future such that the information could then be made available for public inspection, you should promptly notify the NRC.

You should also

'understand that the NRC may have cause to review this determination in the future, for example, if the scope of a Freedom of Information Act request includes your information.

In all review situations, if the NRC makes a

determination adverse to the above, you will be notified in advance of any public disclosure.

Sincerely,

(@gina'igned Bf.

Harry Rood, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate V

Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation We have reviewed your letter and the material based on the requirements and criteria of 10 CFR 2.790

and, on the basis of the affidavit, have determined that the submitted information sought to be withheld contains trade secrets or proprietary commercial information.

cc:

See next page DISTRIBUTION:

LDocket File.

~

MVirgilio MPS i emi en, OGC (15B18)

NRC 5 Local PDRs Tguay PDV p/f PDV r/f DFoster RZimmerman, RV BBoger HRood OFC

,'PDV/LA

,'PDV/PM

',OGC

,'PDV/D NAME

',DFoster

,'HRood

',NPSiemieu+Q

',TQuay DATE I "tl}IP/~S I

/g />>-

t9 /A

,'lt /g/92 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME:

DCWHOLD.LTR

h t

1 f

P

'4 1

Q Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo CC:

NRC Resident Inspector Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.

Box 369 Avila Beach, California 93424 Dr. Richard Ferguson, Energy Chair Sierra Club California 6715 Rocky Canyon Creston, California 93432 Ms. Sandra A. Silver Mothers for Peace 660 Granite Creek Road Santa Cruz, California 95065 Ms. Jacquelyn C. Wheeler 3303 Barranca Court San Luis Obispo, California 93401 Managing Editor The County Telegram Tribune 1321 Johnson Avenue P. 0.

Box 112 San Luis Obispo, California 93406 Chairman San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors Room 370 County Government Center San Luis Obispo, California 93408 Christopher J.

Warner, Esq.

Pacific Gas 5 Electric Company Post Office Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 Mr. Hank Kocol Radiologic Health Branch State Department of Health Services Post Office Box 942732 Sacramento, California 94234 Regional Adminstrator, Region V

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Mr. Peter H. Kaufman Deputy Attorney General State of California 110 West A Street, Suite 700 San Diego, California 92101 Ms. Nancy Culver 192 Luneta Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 Michael M. Strumwasser, Esq.

Special Assistant Attorney General State of California Department of Justice 3580 Wilshire Boulevard, Room 800 Los Angeles, California 90010 Mr. Gregory M. Rueger Nuclear Power Generation, B14A Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Room 1451 P.O.

Box 770000 San Francisco, California 94177

Hr. Nicholas J. Liparulo total competitive advantage.

If competitors acquire components of proprietary information, any one component may be the key to the entire puzzle, thereby depriving Westinghouse of a competitive advantage.

(e)

Unrestricted disclosure would jeopardize the position of prominence of Westinghouse in the wor ld market, and thereby give a

market advantage to the competition of those countries.

(f)

The Westinghouse capacity to invest corporate assets in research and development depends upon the success in obtaining and maintaining a competitive advantage.

We have reviewed your letter and the material based on the requirements and criteria of 10 CFR 2.790 and, on the basis of the affidavit, have determined that the submitted information sought to be withheld contains trade secrets or proprietary commercial information.

Therefore, WCAP-13039, "Technical Justification for Eliminating Large Primary Loop Pipe Rupture as the Structural Design Basis for the Diablo Canyon Units 1

and 2 Nuclear Power Plants" marked as proprietary will be withheld from public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(b)(5) and Section 103(b) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.

Withholding from public inspection shall not affect the right, if any, of persons properly and directly concerned to inspect the documents.

If the need

arises, we may send copies of this information to our consultants working in this area.

We will, of course, ensure that the consultants have signed the appropriate agreements for handling proprietary information.

If the basis for withholding this information from public inspection should change in the future such that the information could then be made available for public inspection, you should promptly notify the NRC.

You should also understand that the NRC may have cause to review this determination in the future, for example, if the scope of a Freedom of Information Act request includes your information.

In all review situations, if the NRC makes a

determination adverse to the above, you will be notified in advance of any public disclosure.

Sincerely, cc:

See next page Harry Rood, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate V

Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

h(

C