ML20082S505

Forwards Corrected Affidavit Replacing Affidavit Submitted w/830930 Application for Withholding from Public Disclosure Rev 1 to 003-1R-001, Safety Parameter Display Sys..

ML20082S505
Person / Time
Site:	Zimmer
Issue date:	11/30/1983
From:	Williams J CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
LOZ-83-0204, LOZ-83-204, NUDOCS 8312140175
Download: ML20082S505 (7)

Text

_

i

~{ -

THE CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY N a#8 W -

d CINCINN ATI. OHIO 4 5201 November 30, 1983 LOZ-83-0204 J. WILLIAM S, JFe sEN40R VICE PRES DENT NUCLEAR O*ERAYlONS Docket No. 50-358 Mr. Harold Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor RGgulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Denton:

RE: WM. H. ZIMMER NUCLEAR PO'WER STATION - UNIT 1 SAFETY PARAMATER DISPLAY SYSTEM PROPRIETARY MATERIAL REQUEST _

By letter dated September 30, 1983',' pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790, The Cincinnati Gas & Electric Company, on behalf of S. Levy, Inc., made application for the withholding from public disclosure of the document entitled " Safety Parameter Display System for Zimmer Nuclear Power Station Number 1" (00 3-1R-001) , Revision 1, February, 1983. The affidavit that was attached to the letter contained a typographical error.

Enclosed herewith is a corrected affidavit that replaces the previously submitted affidavit on September 30, 1983.

Very truly yours, THE CINCINNATI GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY l

By -

J. WILLIAMS, JR.

SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT State of Ohio )

SS County of Clermont)

Sworn to and subscribed before me this d day of November, 1983.

.hNy/kd h' 0bxamL/

Notary Public

% <. u.>snrEcui&rv ujscu ?-16-2E 8312140175 831130 -

PDR ADOCK 05000358 F PDR .

. I l

~

.St* 8T'**0 5's T*. _ _ _ ,

s d'

Mr.. Harold Denton Director November-30, 1983 ,

LOZ-83-0204 -

Page 2 x N

cc: .WITHOUT PROPRIETARY ENCLOSURE:

John H. Frye III M. Stanley Livingston Frank F.-Hooper-

- Troy B. Conner, Jr.

~ John E.~Dolan

, James P. Fenstermaker Steven.G. Smith William J.;Moran ,

Stephen F Koziar, Jr.

Samuel H. Porter-Gregory C. Ficke T. P. Gwynn Lynne-Bernabe'i, Esc.

John D. Woliver Deborah F. Webb

' ' David K.-Martin

• George E. Pattison Andrew B. Dennison

L.L. Kintner J.G. Keppler T Levy. Systems, Division of S. Levy,_Inc.

1999 South Bascom Ave.

Campbell, CA. 95008 Attn: J.E. Hench T. Fukushima e

I

a -

S. LEVY INCORPORATED AFFIDAVIT I, John E. Hench, being duly sworn, depose and state as follows:

-1. I am Vice President of Levy Systems Division- of S. Levy Incorporated, and have been delegated the function of reviewing the information described in paragraph 2 which is. sought to be withheld and have-been authorized to apply for its withholding.

2. The information sought to be withheld is the document entitled

" Safety Parameter Display System for Zimmer Nuclear Power Station Number I" (003-1R-001), Revision 1, February 1983.

3. In-designating material as proprietary, S. Levy Incorporated utili-zes the definition of proprietary information and trade secrets set forth in the American Law Institute's Restatement of Torts, Section 757. This definition provides:

"A trade secret may. consist of any formula, pattern, device or compilation of information which is used in one's business and which gives him. an opportunity to obtain an advantage over competitors who do not know or use it . . . A substantial ele-ment of secrecy ~must exi st , so that, except by the use of improper means, there- would be difficulty in acquiring information . . . Some factors to be considered in determining whether given information is one's trade secret are: (1)the extent, to which the inforrstion is known outside of his business; (2) the extent to which it is known by employees and others involved in his business; (3) the extent of measures taken by him to guard the secrecy of the information; (4) the value of the information to him and to his competitors; (5) the amount of effort or money expended by him in developing the information; (6) the ease or difficulty with which the infor-mation could be properly acquired or duplicated by others."

4. Some examples of categories of information which fit into the defi-nition of proprietary information are:

a. Information that discloses a process, method, or apparatus where prevention of its use by S. Levy Incorporated's com-petitors without license from S. Levy Incorporated constitutes a competitive economic advantage over other companies;

b. Information consisting of supporting data and analyses, rela-

,. r tive to a process, method. or apparatus, the application of which provides a competitive economic advantage, e.g., by optimization or improved marketability;

c. Information which if- used 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 of a similar product;

d. Information which reveals cost or price information, produc-tion capacities, budget levels or commercial strategies of S. Levy Incorporated, its customers or suppliers;

e. Information which reveals aspects of past, present or future S. Levy Incorporated customer-funded development plans and programs of potential commercial value to S. Levy Incorporated;

f. Information which discloses patentable subject matter for which it.may be desirable to obtain patent protection;

g. Information which S. Levy Incorporated must treat as proprietary according to agreements with other parties.

5. In addition to proprietary treatment given to material meeting the standards enumerated above, S. Levy Incorporated customarily main-tains in confidence preliminary and draft material which has not been subject to complete proprietary, technical and editorial review. This practice is based on the fact that draft documents often do not appropriately reflect all aspects of a problem, may contain tentative conclusions and may contain errors that can be corrected during normal review and approval procedures.- Also, until the final document is completed ' it may not be possible to make any definitive determination as to its proprietary nature.

S. Levy Incorporated is not generally willing to release such a document to the general public in such a preliminary form. Such documents may be on occasion furnished to the NRC staff on a con-fidential basis because it is our belief that it is in the public interest for the staff to be promptly furnished with significant or potentially significant information. Furnishing the document on a confidential basis pending completion of our internal review per-mits early acquaintance of the staff with the information while protecting our potential proprietary position and permitting us to insure the public documents are technically accurate and correct.

6. Approval of proprietary treatment of a document is made by the Vice President of the originating company, the person most likely to be acquainted with the value and sensitivity of the information in

o .

relation to industry knowledge. Access to such documents within the Company is limited on a "need to know" basis and such documents at all times are clearly identified as proprietary.

7. The procedure for approval of external release of such a document is also reviewed by the Vice President of-the originating company and by our legal counsel and the President for technical content, competitive effect and determination of the accuracy of the proprietary designation in accordance with the standards enumerated above. Disclosures outside S. Levy Incorporated are generally limited to regulatory bodies, customers and potential customers only in accordance with appropriate regulatory provisions or proprietary agreements.

8. The document mentioned in paragraph 2 above has been evaluated in accordance with the above criteria and procedures and has been found to contain information which is proprietary and which is customarily held in confidence.by S. Levy Incorporated.

9. The information mentioned in paragraph 2 above has been classified as proprietary because it contains details concerning Levy Systems Division's signal processing algorithms which were developed at considerable expense to S. Levy Incorporated and which are not available to other parties. The information is of a type custo-marily held in confidence by S. Levy Incorporated since it reveals important project features and contains valuable design information which were obtained at considerable expense to S. Levy-Incorporated.

~

10. The .information, to the best of my knowledge and belief, has con-sistently been held in confidence by S. Levy Incorporated, no public disclosure has been made, and it is not available in public sources. All disclosure to third parties have been made pursuant to regulatory provisions for proprietary agreements which provide for maintenance of the information in confidence.

11. Public disclosure of the information sought to be withheld is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of S. Levy Incorporated and deprive or reduce the availability of profit-making opportunities because:

a. Development of the information in the report cost more than

$100,000.

b. The information is a part of the S. Levy Incorporated tech-nological base which is sold in the form of license agreements. The precise value of these analyses is difficult to identify relative to the total value of the license

- ~,

e .

agreement, but it is clearly substantial. The value to S. Levy Incorporated would be lost if this information were disclosed to the public.

c. Competitors in the field market lack the methods capability and experience which S. Levy Incorporated has developed.

Knowing the design information in this report will allow them to reduce uncertainty factors included in their bids. This would cause S. Levy Incorporated to lose its current com-petitive advantage.

d. Research, development, engineering, analytical and other costs and expenses must be included in our SPDS price. The ability of S. Levy Incorporated competitors to utilize such infor-mation without similar expenditure or resources would enable them to sell the Safety Parameter Display System or Emergency Response Facility at prices not reflecting similar expen-ditures.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss:

COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA John E. Hench, being duly sworn, deposes and says:

That he has read the foregoing affidavit and the matters stated therein are true and correct tc the best of his knowledge, information, and belief.

Executed at Campbell, California, this 17th day of October 1983.

Jo E. Hench S. Levy Incorporated Subscribed and sworn before me this 17th day of Octob t r 1983, 8

8 WHIGHimillHMlIGlHiliUlllMlSell!.UMNillF DEBBIE L RIFFEL /

9 r

Notary Public-California __ _

[* p SANTA CLARA COUNTY NOTARY PUBLIC

[1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA

. ..