ML20039F141
Text
_
k 3
Babcock & Wilcox
,c.e, cene,, con o,co, P.o. Box 1260, t.yrenburg, Va. 245C5 Te:eenoce: (804) 384-5111 May 19, 1977 Docket STN 50-561
.{.
q Mr. Olan D. Parr, Chief eg
[M
$18 1377f Light Water Reactors Branch No. 3 W
Division of Project Management U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ww N, w 5 "i{og", f,,,
Washington, D.C.
20555 G.
Subject:
Request for Withholding Information 'f AthRub1p<W' 1
Disclosure - Amendments 7, 10, 11 and
- ca l j iCs i
Re fe rences :
(1)
Letter, O.
D. Parr to K. E. Suhrke, '.' Request for Withholding Information From Public Dis-closure - B-SAR-205," March 16, 1977.
(2)
Letter, O. D.
Parr to K. E. Suhrke, " Request for Withholding Information From Public Dis-closure - B-SAR-205," April 8, 1977.
(3)
Letter, K. E. Suhrke to R. S.
Boyd, "Trans-mittal of Amendment 7 Proprietary Responses,"
December 15, 1977.
(4)
Letter, K. E. Suhrke to R.
S. Boyd, "Trans-mittal of Amendment 10 Proprietary Responses,"
February 10, 1977.
(5)
Letter, K. E. Suhrke to R. S. Boyd, "Traas-mittal of Proprietary Portion of Amendment 11,"
February 28, 1977.
(6)
Letter, J. H. Taylor to R.
S. Boyd, "Trans-mittal of Prop-ietary Portion of Amendment 13,"
April 15, 1977.
Dear Mr. Parr.
Reference 1 requested additional information justifying the l
proprietary nature of B-SAR Amendments 7 and 10 (References ~ and 4), and Reference 2 requested similar information with regard to Amendment 11 (Reference 5).
Specifically, you requested that the questions provided in Reference 2 be answered with respect to i
proprietary Amendments 7, 10 and 11.
This letter is in response to your request and supplements our previous affidavits.
Since i
the proprietary portion of Amendment 13 also included the same l
type of Vessel Model Flow Test information as Amendments.10 and 11, this response will also cover Amendment 13 (Reference 6).
l l
$30810403 771610033 MADDEN 80-SIS PDR The Babcock & Wilcox Cemeany i Establisned ' 367
's Babcock & Wilcox Mr. Olan D.
Parr Page 2 May 19, 1977 With regard to the material contained in B-SAR Amendments 7, 10, 11, and 13:
B6W has reviewed proprietary Amendment 7 of B-SAR and determined that only the manufa_ curing _toleransAs contained in the rrsnnnw to NRC request 2_21.161. ne.e d _ b e classi_-
flad as. proprietary.
B6W will therefore revise the response to request 221.61 in Amendment 15 to the B-SAR-205 to include all of the information heretofore contained in the proprietary response covered by Reference 3 above, with the exception of manufacturing tolerances and related calculations which would allow such tolerances to be directly determined by inspection.
Amendment 15 to B-SAR will be formally issued by'B6W on or about May 20, 1977.
With respect to the remaining material in Amendments 7, 10, 11, and 13, B6W provides the following information which justi-fies the proprietary nature of this information.
Question 1:
"The amount of resources, both in effort and monies expended to develop the specific information to be withheld."
Res'ponse to Question 1:
36W has expended in excess of six hundred thousand dollars on the Vessel Model Flow Test (VMFT) for the B6W 205 Fuel Assembly Vessel Design.
Work on these tests was initiated in
~
1971 and Licensing activities associated with the VMFT are ongoing.
Manufacturing tolerances associated with nuclear fuel'were-developed from detailed engineering evaluations of fuel-related R6D programs costing in excess of one million dollars.
The engineering eva'luations includee fuel'and cladding integrity considerations, overall costs and design limits and margins.
Question 2:
"The ease or difficulty with which the specific information sought to be withheld could be properly acquired by competitors, taking into account their current capabilities (technical, economic, or t
otherwise).
Respense to Question 2:
Since B6W has taken steps such as requesting the NRC to maintain the information as proprietary, the information cannot be acquired by competitors because the information presented-are i
the unique results of (1) B6W RSD programs aimed at developing an optimum core inlet flow profile and (2) detailed engineering evaluations of the results of fuel-related R6D programs.
l t
L
f Babcock & Wilcox Mr. Olan D.
Parr Page 3 May 19, 1977 Question 3:
"The names of such competitors."
l Response to Question 3:
Competitors in the domestic design of Nuclear Steam Supply Systems include Combustion Engineering, General Electric and Westinghouse.
In addition, there are several foreign manufac-1 turers such as Kraf twerk Union that would benefit from the l
in fo rma t ion.
1 With respect to fuel design, competitors include those listed above plus EXXON.
Question 4:
"The commercial advantage to such competitors should they obtain the specific information sought to be withheld."
Response to Question 4:
With respect to Vessel Model Flow Testing, competitors of B6W could (1) compare their flow distribution information to the B6W data and thus suggest core support assembly' design changes, (2) utili:e the evidence of fuel assembly flow flatten-ing at the fuel assembly exit to confirm crossflow effects I
modeled in core thermal-hydraulic computer codes, and (3) utilize the demonstrated degree of symmetry of radial flow gradients to lessen instrumentation requirements in future vessel model flow testing.
Release of manufacturing tolerance information would allow competitors to more closely determine the relative manufacturing costs of B6W fuel components.
As discussed in item'5, following, such information would provide competitors with a substantial competitive advantage in pricing activities.
Question 5:
"Why is it likely that as a result of your competitors receiving the above advantages, the Babcock 6 Wilcax Company's. competitors position would be substan-tially harmed."
Response to Question 5:
l It is important to note that under the present market conditions, a competitive advantage can be gained or lost based l
on small factors.
A slight competitive edge can make the differ-ence in obtaining or losing a contract award,
~'
t
~
{
~- s Babcock & Wilcox Mr. Olan D. Parr Page 4 Stay 19, 1977 Response to Question 5 (Cont'd.):
The information which B6W has requested to be withheld from public disclosure could provide competitors with a substantial advantage.
Such information could aid competitors in establish-ing a selling price for similar components that is closer to, or less than, the B4W price, or alternatively, allow competitors to more closely estimate the' relative effect of, or need for, changes in design and/or manufacturing methods and related costs with regard to improving their relative degree of competitiveness in the marketplace.
Question 6:
" Nature of the above harm and any other facts that would indicate that disclosure of the specific information sought to be withheld is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of the Babcock 6 Wilcox Company.
Response to Question 6:
B6W is presently negotiating with potential customers for several NSS and Fuel contracts worth hundreds of millionslaf-dollars.
As indicated in the response to Question 5, a slight competitive edge can be the difference in obtaining or losing a contract award.
Failure to receive a contract in today's 'small s
market can result in the loss of millions of dollars through N
~
insufficient throughput in manufacturing facilities.
Question 7:
"Whether the information is available in public-sources."
s ;;
Response to Question 7:
To the best of our knowledge, the specific information identified as proprietary is not available in the~open literature.
Vefy truly yours,
/ //
f' wh% f ',t?pTit
/ James H. Taylor ~
Manager, Licensing JHT:dsf i
i i
a, i
5 l
b y-
\\
c 4 u 195 v.s.uucta An macutAroav couwissioN o egugn NRC DISTRIBUTION sea PART 50 DOCKET M ATERI AL TO:
FROM:
oats or occuutNT 3abcock & Nilcox 5/19/77 L nchburg, Va.
o,7g,ges,vg o
/
Mr. Olan D. Parr 6/8/77 James H. Tavlor At tic a Onotonizao
- ace incursonu Nuusen os coeiss asesivco hC LAf slPIE O R
NAL
' ~ _
04 sc M4 P Tion ENCLOSURE Consists of information regarding request f or withholding information f rom public -
disclosure Andts? 7, 10, 11 and 13.....
?
(4-P)
PLANT NAME:
3SAR RJL 6/8/77 SAFETY FQR ACTION / INFORM ATION r.arypn hASSIC"EDtD:
i Vc SJc//O AnTc-en in.
K E:JLcn:v -
Aw m <nn c.tT-.
r c_
.0 ECT F\\NAGE3:
%'W 3 PROJECT ".ANAGER:
l l
_ l /utiduor., d LIC. ASST.
1/_l,IC. ASST.
I INTERN AL DISTR:0UTICN
>pREGFILE _
l ItEINT.:'AN l
TE2K1CO
(
ENVI"O A"*LYSTE i
SYSTE::'; SAFETY l
PLANT SYSTE"S I _ _ J IT" S AFEn' &
NRC PER
/.I & E / ~7 )
i SCHROEDER I
BENA'10YA DC" TON &
v'_' t Tt' dELD LAT"AR COSSICK & STAFF ENGI"EERING IPPOLITO I
ENVIRO TECM.
MIPC MACOBRY KIRO!Oen ERNST CASE B03UAK BALLARD ltANAUER SIl{WEIL OPERATING REACTORS SPANGLER hARLESS PAULICKI STELLO l
l I
I SITE TECH.
PROJECT MANAGEu.ENT l
REACTOR SAFETY l
OPERATING TECH.
I CA QILL BOYD ROSS EISEN11UT STEPP P. COLLINS NOVAK SH40 I
HULMAN I
110USTON ROSJ._TOCZY BAER
~
T PETERSON CllECK BlTPLER SITE ANALYSIS
_ P.FLT2 CRIMES VOLL[TR i
ilELTEMES AT & I BUNCH I
~50VHOLT SALT 2 MAN J. C'OLLINS I
RUTURG KRECER i
EXTERN AL DISTRIBUTION CONTROL NUMBER l
4 N*
UAla_lAS :
BE009WYEILBT-123-i
=
1ICJ REG V_,,IE ULRU',_ SON (ORNL)
NSIC1 IA_PDR 771610033 ASL3:',/
CONSULTANTS:
un T /?T 6##
LACRS /MYS.JLC1&PtG/lBFJ l
l Nnc F Ohu 19). 246) j
--j i
n l