ML18239A251

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
LLC Supplemental Response to NRC Request for Additional Information No. 380 (Erai No. 9394) on the NuScale Design Certification Application
ML18239A251
Person / Time
Site: NuScale
Issue date: 08/27/2018
From: Rad Z
NuScale
To:
Document Control Desk, Office of New Reactors
Shared Package
ML18239A250 List:
References
AF-0818-61568, RAIO-0818-61567
Download: ML18239A251 (10)
v • d • e


Text

RAIO-0818-61567 August 27, 2018 Docket No.52-048 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 S NuScale Power, LLC Supplemental Response to NRC Request for Additional Information No. 380 (eRAI No. 9394) on the NuScale Design Certification Application N S 1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Request for Additional Information No. 380 (eRAI No. 9394)," dated March 09, 2018

2. NuScale Power, LLC Response to NRC "Request for Additional Information No. 380 (eRAI No.9394)," dated May 03, 2018 The purpose of this letter is to provide the NuScale Power, LLC (NuScale) supplemental response to the referenced NRC Request for Additional Information (RAI).

The Enclosures to this letter contain NuScale's supplemental response to the following RAI Question from NRC eRAI No. 9394:

18-17 is the proprietary version of the NuScale Supplemental Response to NRC RAI No.

380 (eRAI No. 9394). NuScale requests that the proprietary version be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR § 2.390. The enclosed affidavit (Enclosure 3) supports this request. Enclosure 2 is the nonproprietary version of the NuScale response.

This letter and the enclosed responses make no new regulatory commitments and no revisions to any existing regulatory commitments.

If you have any questions on this response, please contact Carrie Fosaaen at 541-452-7126 or at cfosaaen@nuscalepower.com.

Sincerely, Zackary W. Rad Director, Regulatory Affairs NuScale Power, LLC Distribution: Gregory Cranston, NRC, OWFN-8G9A Samuel Lee, NRC, OWFN-8G9A Prosanta Chowdhury NRC, OWFN-8G9A NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvalis, Oregon 97330, Office: 541.360.0500, Fax: 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com

RAIO-0818-61567 : NuScale Supplemental Response to NRC Request for Additional Information eRAI No. 9394, proprietary : NuScale Supplemental Response to NRC Request for Additional Information eRAI No. 9394, nonproprietary : Affidavit of Zackary W. Rad, AF-0818-61568 NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvalis, Oregon 97330, Office: 541.360.0500, Fax: 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com

RAIO-0818-61567 :

NuScale Supplemental Response to NRC Request for Additional Information eRAI No. 9394, proprietary NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvalis, Oregon 97330, Office: 541.360.0500, Fax: 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com

RAIO-0818-61567 :

NuScale Supplemental Response to NRC Request for Additional Information eRAI No. 9394, nonproprietary NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvalis, Oregon 97330, Office: 541.360.0500, Fax: 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com

Response to Request for Additional Information Docket No.52-048 eRAI No.: 9394 Date of RAI Issue: 03/09/2018 NRC Question No.: 18-17 Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 52.47(a)(8) requires an applicant for a design certification to provide a final safety analysis report (FSAR) that must include the information necessary to demonstrate compliance with any technically relevant portions of the Three Mile Island requirements set forth in 10 CFR 50.34(f), except paragraphs (f)(1)(xii), (f)

(2)(ix), and (f)(3)(v). Section 10 CFR 50.34(f)(2)(iii) requires an applicant to "Provide, for Commission review, a control room design that reflects state-of-the-art human factor principles prior to committing to fabrication or revision of fabricated control room panels and layouts.

Chapter 18, Human Factors Engineering, of NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition, and NUREG-0711, "Human Factors Engineering Program Review Model, identify criteria the staff uses to evaluate whether an applicant meets the regulation. The applicant stated in the FSAR, Tier 2, Section 18.0, "Human Factors Engineering - Overview," that its human factors engineering (HFE) program incorporates accepted HFE standards and guidelines including the applicable guidance provided in NUREG-0711, Revision 3.

NUREG-0711, Section 11.4.4 (4), states, Design Solution Evaluation - The applicant should evaluate design solutions to demonstrate the resolution of that HED and to ensure that new HEDs are not introduced. Generally, the evaluation should use the V&V method that originally detected the HED.

In Section 5.1 of the V&V IP the applicant explains that after an HED has been prioritized, it is routed to the HFE design team, simulator review board, or both as appropriate for resolution.

Please clarify how (i.e. the method by which) design solutions are evaluated to ensure HEDs are resolved and no new HEDs are introduced.

NuScale Response:

This response supplements NuScale's eRAI 9394, Question 18-17 response (ML18123A539).

During an August 7, 2018 teleconference call, staff asked for clarification on how NuScale would test design solutions for a human engineering discrepancy (HED). Based on the NRC NuScale Nonproprietary

feedback, the following statement in Section 5.3 of RP-0914-8543, Human Factors Verification and Validation Implementation Plan (V&V IP) has been removed:

((2(a),(c) Impact on DCA: RP-0914-8543, Human Factors Verification and Validation Implementation Plan has been revised as described in the response above and as shown in the markup provided with this response. NuScale Nonproprietary

Human Factors Verification and Validation Implementation Plan RP-0914-8543-NP Draft Rev. 54 (( 

                                                                                         }}2(a),(c)

Data and data-analysis tools (e.g., equations, measures, spreadsheets, expert opinions, resulting HEDs) are documented for subsequent audit and application during design integration and/or human performance monitoring HFE program elements. Individual HFEITS items are maintained as auditable records in the HFEITS database. 5.3 Design Solution Testing Generally, design solutions will be verified to be acceptable using the same V&V method that originally detected the issue. For example, if an HED-1 is identified during performance of an ISV scenario, a similar scenario would be run to verify the solution was acceptable. Because the impact of design solutions vary widely this general practice may be adjusted using engineering judgment to ensure a thorough and appropriate test is conducted. The following elements are considered when making this judgment:

  • number of procedures affected
  • number of HSIs affected
  • complexity of the condition under which the design solution is used
  • uniqueness of the design solution

© Copyright 20187 by NuScale Power, LLC 36

RAIO-0818-61567 : Affidavit of Zackary W. Rad, AF-0818-61568 NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvalis, Oregon 97330, Office: 541.360.0500, Fax: 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com

NuScale Power, LLC AFFIDAVIT of Zackary W. Rad I, Zackary W. Rad, state as follows:

1. I am the Director, Regulatory Affairs of NuScale Power, LLC (NuScale), and as such, I have been specifically delegated the function of reviewing the information described in this Affidavit that NuScale seeks to have withheld from public disclosure, and am authorized to apply for its withholding on behalf of NuScale.
2. I am knowledgeable of the criteria and procedures used by NuScale in designating information as a trade secret, privileged, or as confidential commercial or financial information. This request to withhold information from public disclosure is driven by one or more of the following:
a. The information requested to be withheld reveals distinguishing aspects of a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.) whose use by NuScale competitors, without a license from NuScale, would constitute a competitive economic disadvantage to NuScale.
b. The information requested to be withheld consists of supporting data, including test data, relative to a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.), and the application of the data secures a competitive economic advantage, as described more fully in paragraph 3 of this Affidavit.
c. Use by a competitor of the information requested to be withheld would reduce the competitor's expenditure of resources, or improve its competitive position, in the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assurance of quality, or licensing of a similar product.
d. The information requested to be withheld reveals cost or price information, production capabilities, budget levels, or commercial strategies of NuScale.
e. The information requested to be withheld consists of patentable ideas.
3. Public disclosure of the information sought to be withheld is likely to cause substantial harm to NuScale's competitive position and foreclose or reduce the availability of profit-making opportunities. The accompanying Request for Additional Information response reveals distinguishing aspects about the method by which NuScale develops its human factors engineering.

NuScale has performed significant research and evaluation to develop a basis for this method and has invested significant resources, including the expenditure of a considerable sum of money. The precise financial value of the information is difficult to quantify, but it is a key element of the design basis for a NuScale plant and, therefore, has substantial value to NuScale. If the information were disclosed to the public, NuScale's competitors would have access to the information without purchasing the right to use it or having been required to undertake a similar expenditure of resources. Such disclosure would constitute a misappropriation of NuScale's intellectual property, and would deprive NuScale of the opportunity to exercise its competitive advantage to seek an adequate return on its investment. AF-0818-61568

4. The information sought to be withheld is in the enclosed response to NRC Request for Additional Information No. 380, eRAI 9394. The enclosure contains the designation "Proprietary" at the top of each page containing proprietary information. The information considered by NuScale to be proprietary is identified within double braces, "(( }}" in the document.
5. The basis for proposing that the information be withheld is that NuScale treats the information as a trade secret, privileged, or as confidential commercial or financial information. NuScale relies upon the exemption from disclosure set forth in the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), 5 USC § 552(b)(4), as well as exemptions applicable to the NRC under 10 CFR §§ 2.390(a)(4) and 9.17(a)(4).
6. Pursuant to the provisions set forth in 10 CFR § 2.390(b)(4), the following is provided for consideration by the Commission in determining whether the information sought to be withheld from public disclosure should be withheld:
a. The information sought to be withheld is owned and has been held in confidence by NuScale.
b. The information is of a sort customarily held in confidence by NuScale and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, consistently has been held in confidence by NuScale.

The procedure for approval of external release of such information typically requires review by the staff manager, project manager, chief technology officer or other equivalent authority, or the manager of the cognizant marketing function (or his delegate), for technical content, competitive effect, and determination of the accuracy of the proprietary designation. Disclosures outside NuScale are limited to regulatory bodies, customers and potential customers and their agents, suppliers, licensees, and others with a legitimate need for the information, and then only in accordance with appropriate regulatory provisions or contractual agreements to maintain confidentiality.

c. The information is being transmitted to and received by the NRC in confidence.
d. No public disclosure of the information has been made, and it is not available in public sources. All disclosures to third parties, including any required transmittals to NRC, have been made, or must be made, pursuant to regulatory provisions or contractual agreements that provide for maintenance of the information in confidence.
e. Public disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of NuScale, taking into account the value of the information to NuScale, the amount of effort and money expended by NuScale in developing the information, and the difficulty others would have in acquiring or duplicating the information. The information sought to be withheld is part of NuScale's technology that provides NuScale with a competitive advantage over other firms in the industry.

NuScale has invested significant human and financial capital in developing this technology and NuScale believes it would be difficult for others to duplicate the technology without access to the information sought to be withheld. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on August 2 , 2018. Zackary W. Rad AF-0818-61568}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML18239A251&oldid=2527320"