ML17321A786
| ML17321A786 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 08/06/1985 |
| From: | Wiesemann R WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17321A784 | List: |
| References | |
| CAW-85-051, CAW-85-51, NUDOCS 8508150382 | |
| Download: ML17321A786 (12) | |
Text
Westinghouse Water Reactor Electric Corporation Divisions Box 355 Pittsburgh Pennsylvania 15230 0355 August 6, 1985 CAW-85>>051 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cottmission Washington, D.C.
20555
Subject:
Westin@ouse Safety Evaluation for Increased RdF RTD Uncertainty Installation
Reference:
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 infomation may be withheld from public disclosure by the Cottmtission and addresses with specificity the considerations listed in paragraph (b)(4) of 10CFR Section 2.790 of the Comission'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 AN-76-60.
Accordingly, this letter authorizes the utilization of the accompanying affidavit by American Electric Power Service Cbrporation.
Correspondence with respect, to the proprietary aspects of the application for withholding or the Westin@ouse affidavit should reference this letter, CAW-85-051, and should be addressed to the undersigned.
Very truly yours, SSO80b 8SOaiSO~82 SSOOOsaS AOOCV, 0
,p LVT/lsv Enclosure(s)
.~~WC Robert A. Wiesemann, Manager Regulatory 8 Legislative Affairs cc: E.
C.
- Shomaker, Esq.
Office of the Executive Legal Director, NRC
)
PROPRIETARY ZlF01RATZON NOTICE TRANS~~D HEREYXTH ARE PROPRIETARY AND/OR NON-PROPRIETARY VERSIONS OF DOQ3%hTS FVRNISHED TO 1HE NRC ZN CONNECTION WITH REQUESTS FOR GENERIC AND/OR KANT SPECIFIC REVTEW AND APPROVAL.
ZN ORDER TO CONFORM TO %E RG}UIRBKNTS OF 10CFR2.790 OF THE COSQSSION'S REGULATIONS CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF PROPRIETARY Ih70R."tATION SO SUBYZTTED TO THE NRC, THE ZNFOiPJTION WHICH ZS PROPRIETARY ZN THE PROPRIETARY VERSIONS ZS CONTAINED WITHIN BRACKETS AND WHERE THE PROPRIETARY INFORMATION HAS BEEN DELETED IN %E NON-PROPRIETARY VERSIONS M-Y THE BRACKETS REBEGIN~
THE tu'ATION %AT WAS CONTAINED WITHIN THE BRACKETS ZN THE PROPRIETARY VERSIONS HAVING BEEN DH.Ei'ED.
THE JUSTIFICATION FOR Q.AIMING THE ZNFORYJTION SO DESIGNATED AS PROPRIETARY-ZS ZNDICATED IN BOIH VERSZONS BY MEANS OF LAER CASE LEliERS (a) THROUGH (g) CONTAINED WITHIN PARMHESES LOCATED AS h SUPERSCRIPT IK~DIATELYFOLLNING THE BRACKETS EÃQ OSZNG EACH ITEM OF INFORMATION BEING IDENTIFIED AS PROPRIETARY OR IN TEE MARGIN OPPOSITE SUCH INFORMATION.
THESE LWER CASE LHTERS REFER TO WE TYPES OF ZNFORYATION WESTINGHOUSE CUSIQNRILY HOLDS ZN CNFIDENCE IDENTIFIED ZN SECTIONS (4)(ii)(a) through (4)(ii)(g) OF THE AFFIDAVIT ACCOM'ANYING THZS TRANSVAAL PURSUANT TO 10CFR2.790(b)(1)
~
~
~
AW-76-60 AFFIDAVIT.
COYOHWEALTH OF PEHHSYLVAMIA:
COUHTY OF ALLEGHEHY:
ss 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 knowledge, information, and belief Robert A. Wiesemann, hanager Licensing Programs Sworn to and subscribe8 before me this ~
'ay of 8:z.irk&
1976.
I
/
PA>ve>>
Nota ry Pub 1 i c
~
~
A2a 0
AM-76-eo (1) 1 am Manager, Licensing Programs, in the Pressurized Mater" Reactor Systems Divis'ion, of kestinghouse Electric Corporation and as such, J 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-iaking proceedings, and am authorized to apply for its withholding on behalf of the kestinghouse Pater Reactor Divisions.
(2)
I am making this Affidavit in conformance with the provisions of 10 CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations and in con-junction with the 1/estinghouse application for withholding ac-companying this Affidavit.
(3)
I have personal knonledga of the criteria and procedures uti1ized by 1/estinghouse Nuclear Energy Systems in designating information
~as a trade secret, privileged or as confiden~ial comercial 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 Comaission 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 Westinghouse.
(ii)
The information is of a type customarily held in confidence by Mestinghouse 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 ifit 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 1lestinghouse 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 strategies of Westinghouse, its customers or suppliers.
(e) It reveals aspects of past, present, or future West-inghouse or customer furded development plans and pro-grams of potential commercial value to Westinghouse.
(f) It contains patentable id as. for which patent pro-tection may be desirable.
(g) It is not the property of Westinghouse, but must be treated as proprietary by W.stinghouse according to agreements with the owner.
There are sound policy reasons behind the Westinghouse system which include the following:
(a)
The use of such information by l!estinghouse gives Westinghouse a competitive advantage over its com-petitors.
It is~'therefore, withheld from disclosure to protect the Westinghouse competitive position.
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 Mestirighouse 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)
Unrestricted disclosure would jeopardize the position
'f 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.
AW-76-60 (iii)
The information is being transmitted to the Comaission in confidence
- and, under the provisions of 10 CFR Section 2.790, it is to be received in confidence by the Commission.
(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-1298, Eicheldinger to Stolz, dated December 1, 1976, concerning information relating-to NRC review of WChP-G567-P and WCAP-856S entitled, "Improved
. Thermal Design Procedure," defining the sensitivity of DNB ratio to various core parameters.
The letter and attachment, are being submitted in response to the NRC 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)
Meet warranties.
(d)
Provide greater operational flexibilityto custom rs assuring them of safe and reliable operation.
(e)
Justify increased power capability or operating margin for plants while assuring safe and reliable operation.
%7a AM-76-eo (f)
Optimize reactor design and performance while maintaining a high level of fuel integrity.
Further, the information gained from the improved thermal design procedure is of significant coimercial value as follows:
(a)
Mestinghouse uses the information to perform and justify analyses vkich are sold to customers.
(b)
Mestinghouse 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 performed 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 undemay during the past two years.
Altogether, a substantial amount of money and effort has been expended by 1/estinghouse 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.
Attachment 5 to AEP:NRC:0942D REQUEST FOR WITHHOLDING PROPRIETARY INFORMATION ASSOCIATED WITH RdF RTD SAFETY EVALUATION IN ATTACHMENT 5
Attachment 2 to AEP:NRC:0942D PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH RdF RTDs