ML17321A785

Requests That Proprietary Safety Evaluation for Resistance Temp Detector Operability & Cross Calibr Be Withheld (Ref 10CFR2.790)

ML17321A785
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	08/09/1985
From:	Wiesemann R WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML17321A784	List: ML17321A783 ML17321A785 ML17321A786 ML17321A787
References
CAW-85-053, CAW-85-53, NUDOCS 8508150373
Download: ML17321A785 (10)

Text

Nuclear Technology Olvision Westinghouse Water Reactor Electric Corporation Divisions Box 355 Pittsburgh Pennsylvania15230 August 9, 1985 CAW-85-053 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comnd.ssion Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Westin@ouse Safety Evaluation for RTD Operability and Cross Calibration

Dear Mr. Denton:

The proprietary material for which withholding is being requested in the reference letter by the American Electric Power Service Corporation for the D.

C. Cook Plant Unit 1 is further identified in an affidavit signed by the caner of the proprietary information, Westinghouse Electric Corporation. The affidavit, which accompanies this letter, sets forth the basis on which the information may be withheld from public disclosure by the Coranission and addresses with specificity the considerations listed in paragraph (b)(4) of 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Comtission's regulations.

The proprietary material for which withholding is being requested is of the same technical type as that proprietary material previously sutmitted with Application for Withholding AW-76-60.

Accordingly, this letter authorizes the utilization of the accompanying affidavit by American Electric Power Service Corporation.

Correspondence with respect to the proprietary aspects of the application for withholding or the Westin@ouse affidavit should reference this letter, CAW-85-053, and should be addressed to the mdersigned.

Very truly yours, Ro ra A. Nieaemann, Nanaaer LVT/lsv egulatory & Legislative Affairs Enclosure(s) e cc: E. C. Shcmaker, Esq.

Office of the Executive Legal Director, NRC i BanBAaomrs seo8i'm P, .:.;ADocx

'. o5ooosq pDR s

0 PROPRIETARY INFORMATION NOTICE TRANSYETTED HEREWITH ARE PROPRIETARY AND/OR NON-PROPRIETARY VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS FURNISHED TO THE NRC XN CONNECTION WITH KQUESTS FOR GEhERZC AND/OR KANT SPECIFIC REVIM AND APPROVAL.

IN ORDER TO CONFORM TO THE REQVZRBKNTS OF 10CFR2.790 OF THE COSQSSION'S REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION SO SUBY~~ED TO THE NRCq %E ZNFORNTZON WHICH ZS PROPRIETARY IN %E PROPRIETARY VERSIONS ZS COHTAZHED WITHIN BRACKETS AND WHERE THE PROPRIETARY INFOiPATZON HAS BEEN DELETED XN THE NON-PROPRIETARY VERSIONS M.Y THE BRACKETS REMAIN~ %E

~imNTZOH THAT WAS CONTAINED WITHIN %E BRACKETS IN &E PROPRIETARY VEPSZONS HAVING BEEN DELETED. THE JUSTIFICATION FOR Q.AIMING RiE XNFORYdlTZON SO DESIGNATED AS PROPRIETARY XS INDICATED ZH BOIH VERSIONS BY MEANS OF LCMER CASE LEiiERS (a) THROUGH (g) CONTAINED WITHIN PARENTHESES LOCATED AS A SUPERSCRIPT IS ~

DZATELY FOLL%'ZNG THE BRACKETS EHQ.OSZNG EACH XTEM OF XNFOtuATZON BEING ZDEHTZFIED AS PROPRIETARY OR IN THE e,RGZN OPPOSITE SUCH INFORMATION. THESE LCVER CASE LETTERS REFER TO %E TYPES OF ZNFOiu'ATION WESTINGHOUSE CUSKi'DRILY HOLDS IN CONFIDENCE IDENTIFIED ZN SECTIONS (¹)(if)(a) through (¹)(ii)(E) OF THE AFFZDNZT ACCOMPANYING THIS TRANSYZIYAL PURSUANT K 10CFR2.790(b)(1) ~

..e AW-76-60 AFFIDAVIT ~

CON~i0l>WEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA:

COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY's Before me, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Robert A. Miesemann, who, being by me duly sworn according to law, de-poses and says that he is authorized to execute this Affidavit on behalf of Westinghouse Electric Corporation ("Westinghouse" ) and that the aver-ments of fact set forth in this Affidavit are true and correct to the best of his I;nowledge, information, and belief Robert A. Miesemann, flanager Licensing Programs Sworn to and subscribe3 before me this ~ 'ay of d~'ink'& 1976.

gg fi,86' lNrWe~

Notary Public

~ ~

AM-76-60 (1) 1 am Manager, Ucensing Programs, in the Pressurized Mater" Reactor Systems Division, of hestinghouse Electric Corporation and as such, 1 have been specifically delegated the function of reviewing the proprietary information sought to b withheld from public dis-closure in connection with nuclear power plant licensing or rule-inaking proceedings, and am authorized to apply for its withholding on behalf of the Mestinghouse Mater Reactor Divisions.

(2)  ? am making this Affidavit in conformance with the provisions of 10 CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations and in con-

)unction with the Mestinghouse application for withholdirig ac-companying this Affidavit.

(3) I have persona'i tnoxledga of the criteria and procedures utilized by 1'estinghouse Nuclear Energy Systems in designating information

~

as a trade secret, privileged or as confiden ial comaercial or financial information.

(4) Pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (b)(4) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, the following is furnished for consideration by the Commission in determining whether the in-formation sought to be withheld from public disclosure should be

. withheld.

(i) The information sought to be withheld from public disclosure is. owned and has been held in confidence by Mestinghouse.

(ii) The information is of a type customarily held in confidence by Restinghouse and not customarily disclosed to the public.

Mestinghouse has a rational basis for determining the types o, information customarily held in confidence by it and, in that

. connection, utilizes a system to determine when and whether to hold certain types of information in confidence. The ap-plication of that system and the substance of that system constitutes k'estinghouse policy and provides the rational basis required.

Under that system, information is held in confidence if it falls in one or more of several types', the release of which might result in the loss of an existing or potential com-petitive advantag , as follows:

(a) The information reveals the distinguishing aspects of a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.)

where prevention of its u:e by any of lestinghouse's competitors without license from Mestinghouse constitutes

'a competitive economic advantage over other companies.

(b) It consists of supporting data, including test data.

relative to a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.), the application of which data secures a competitive economic advantage', e.g., by optimization or

- - improved marketability.

(c) Its use by a competitor would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assurance of quality, or licensing a similar product.

(d) It reveals cost or price in,ormation, production cap-acities, budget levels. or commercial trategies of Mestinghouse, its customers or suppliers.

(e) It reveals aspects of past, present, or future hest-inghouse or customer funded development plans and pro-grams of potential commercial value to Hestinghouse.

{ f) It contains pe tentabl e ideas, for which patent pro-tection may be desirable.

(g) It is not the property of Mestinghouse, but must be treated as proprietary by stinghouse according to 1

agreements with the owner.

There are sound policy reasons behind the h'estinghouse system which include the following:

(a) The use of such information by llestinghouse gives Mestinghouse a competitive advantage over its com-petitors. It is, therefore, withheld from disclosure to protect the I/estinghouse competitive position.

e AM-76"60 (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 Mestinghouse 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 total competitive advantage. If competitors acquire components of proprietary infor-mation, any one component may be the key to the entire puzzle, thereby depriving Mestinghouse of a competitive advantage.

(e)

'f Unrestricted disclosure would jeopardize the position prominence of Mestinghouse in the world market, and thereby give a market advantage to the competition in those countries.

(f) The Mestinghouse capacity to invest corporate assets in research and development depends upon the success

- - in obtaining and maintaining a competitive advantage.

(iii) The information is being transmitted to the Conmission in confidence and, under the provisions of 10 CFR Section 2.790, it is to be received in confidence by the Comission.

(iv) The information is not available in public sources to the best of our knowledge and belief.

(v) The proprietary information sought to be withheld in this sub-mittal is that which is appropriately marked in the attach-ment to Westinghouse letter number NS-CE-1296, Eicheldinger to Stolz, dated December 1, 1976, concerning information relating-to HRC review of MChP-G567-P and MCAP-856S entitled, "Improved Thermal Design Procedure," definirg the sensitivity of DhB ratio to various core parameters. The letter and attachment are being submitted in response to the HRC request at the October 29, 1976 NRC/Westinghouse meeting.

This information enables Westinghouse to:

(a) Justify the Westinghouse design.

(b) Assist its customers to obtain licenses.

(c) Neet warranties.

(d) Provide greater operational flexibility to customers assuring them of safe and reliable operation.

(e) Justify increased power capability or operating margin for plants while assuring safe and reliable operation.

~ .

&7M AM-76-60 (f) Optim'ize reactor design and performance while maintaining a high level of fuel integrity.

Further, the information gained fro. the improved thermal design procedure is of significant commercial value as follows:

(a) Mestinghouse uses the information to perform and justify analyses which are sold to customers.

(b) Westinghouse sells analysis services based upon the experience gained and the methods developed..

Public disclosure of this information concerning design pro-cedures is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of )Jestinghouse because competitors could utilize this information to assess and justify their own designs without commensurate expense.

The parametric analyses p rformed and their evaluation represent

~

a considerable amount of highly qualified development effort.

This work was contingent upon a design method development pro-gram which has been underway during the past two years.

Altogether, a substantial amount of money and effort has been expended by lJestinghouse which could only be duplicated by a competitor if he were to invest similar sums of money and pro-vided he had the appropriate talent available.

Further the deponent sayeth not.