Text

LLC, Response to NRC Request for Additional Information No. 031 (RAI-10296 R1) on the NuScale Standard Design Approval Application
	ML25017A391
Person / Time
Site:	05200050
Issue date:	01/17/2025
From:	Shaver M; NuScale
To:	; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Document Control Desk
Shared Package
ML25017A390	List: ML25017A391;
References
	RAIO-178453
	Download: ML25017A391 (1)
	v • d • e

RAIO-178453 NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvallis, Oregon 97330 Office 541.360.0500 Fax 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com January 17, 2025 Docket No.52-050 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738

SUBJECT:

NuScale Power, LLC Response to NRC Request for Additional Information No. 031 (RAI-10296 R1) on the NuScale Standard Design Approval Application

REFERENCE:

NRC Letter to NuScale, Request for Additional Information No. 031 (RAI-10296 R1), dated October 30, 2024 The purpose of this letter is to provide the NuScale Power, LLC (NuScale) response to the referenced NRC Request for Additional Information (RAI).

The enclosure to this letter contains the NuScale response to the following RAI question from NRC RAI-10296 R1:

LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47 is the proprietary version of the NuScale Response to NRC RAI No. 031 (RAI-10296 R1, Question LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47). 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. The enclosed affidavit (Enclosure 3) supports this request. Enclosure 1 has also been determined to contain Export Controlled Information. This information must be protected from disclosure per the requirement of 10 CFR § 810. Enclosure 2 is the nonproprietary version of the NuScale response.

This letter makes no regulatory commitments and no revisions to any existing regulatory commitments.

If you have any questions, please contact Amanda Bode at 541-452-7971 or at abode@nuscalepower.com.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on January 17, 2025.

Sincerely, Mark W. Shaver Director, Regulatory Affairs NuScale Power, LLC

RAIO-178453 Page 2 of 2 01/17/2025 NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvallis, Oregon 97330 Office 541.360.0500 Fax 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com Distribution:

Mahmoud Jardaneh, Chief New Reactor Licensing Branch, NRC Getachew Tesfaye, Senior Project Manager, NRC Ricky Vivanco, Project Manager, NRC

NuScale Response to NRC Request for Additional Information RAI-10296 R1, Question LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47, Proprietary Version : NuScale Response to NRC Request for Additional Information RAI-10296 R1, Question LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47, Nonproprietary Version : Affidavit of Mark W. Shaver, AF-178454

RAIO-178453 NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvallis, Oregon 97330 Office 541.360.0500 Fax 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com NuScale Response to NRC Request for Additional Information RAI-10296 R1, Question LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47, Proprietary Version

RAIO-178453 NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvallis, Oregon 97330 Office 541.360.0500 Fax 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com NuScale Response to NRC Request for Additional Information RAI-10296 R1, Question LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47, Nonproprietary Version

Response to Request for Additional Information Docket: 052000050 RAI No.: 10296 Date of RAI Issue: 10/30/2024 NRC Question No.: LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47 Issue Integral and separate effects tests are used to justify the development and applicability of an evaluation model to a given design. Since test facilities are not typically full-scale, distortions exist that can affect local and global elements of the analysis when compared to the full-scale plant. Therefore, a scaling analysis needs to be performed that identifies important non-dimensional parameters related to geometry and key phenomena and scaling distortions and their impact on the code assessment must be identified and evaluated. In accordance with NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan (SRP), Section 15.0.2, the NRC staff performed a review to confirm that scaling analyses for the NuScale LOCA EM were conducted to provide assurance that the experimental data captured from its testing facility (NuScale Integral System Test (NIST) facility) and the models developed will be applicable to the full-scale analysis of the plant transients, and scaling distortions are identified and appropriately addressed in the bias and uncertainty evaluation.

During its review of the scaling methodology described and evaluated in TR-0516-49422-P Sections 8.3 and 8.4, and data assessment reports provided for staff audit, (( 2(a),(c). The staff understands the timing of event is subject to boundary conditions and the identified timing distortion is because the test boundary condition deviated from the original scaled one. However, the decay heat depends on the problem time and significant distortion of event time affects the level of decay NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

heat at limiting figure of merit values. It is unclear to the staff if the uncertainty from this distortion was accounted for, since it does not align with the stated time scaling ratio described in the topical report. (( }} 2(a),(c). Information Requested a) Based on the information above and because the scaling analysis summary in the Extended Passive Cooling LTR references to the LOCA TR for the scaling analysis of the long-term phase, NuScale is requested to i) (( }} 2(a),(c); and ii) (( }} 2(a),(c); b) Update the scaling analysis in the LOCA topical report to account for NIST-2 facility changes and post-test results. (( }} 2(a),(c). If the scaling analysis is documented in a different topical report for a certain component, a reference to that report may be appropriate (e.g., reference to the non-LOCA topical report for the EM and assessment of the decay heat removal system (DHRS)). NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

NuScale Response: Executive Summary In the response to part (a) of this request for additional information (RAI), NuScale provides justification for differences observed in the scaling and distortion analysis between the NuScale Integral System Test Facility (NIST) 2 and the NuScale Power Module (NPM) and justification of synchronicity scaling. ((

}}2(a),(c)

((

}}2(a),(c) The NIST-2 tests simulate large breaks or valve opening events. There are no NIST-1 or NIST-2 tests, or further distortions to analyze, for smaller LOCA conditions.

In response to part (b), NuScale provides alternate justification that an updated NIST-2 distortion analysis is unnecessary to demonstrate that use of the NRELAP5 code in the updated LOCA evaluation model (EM) is applicable and appropriate for analysis of the NPM-20 LOCA events. NuScale applied a rigorous and systematic process, following Regulatory Guide 1.203, Transient and Accident Analysis Methods, to evaluate differences between the NPM-20 design and the NPM-160 design, and impact to the previously approved LOCA EM. These evaluations confirmed consistency in the medium and high-ranked phenomena identified (i.e. no new phenomena were introduced by the design changes), and consistency in the phenomena ranking (i.e. no change in fundamental importance of the phenomena to the physical event progressions). The NRELAP5 model and correlation ranges continue to apply to the NPM-20 range of operating conditions and LOCA transient conditions. No significant changes were NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

made to the NRELAP5 code that affects the previously approved top-down scaling analysis. Top-down scaling and distortion analysis of the NIST-1 tests, NPM-160, and NPM-20 demonstrate that the dominant dimensionless PI groups are consistent between the two designs. Although NuScale could have chosen to justify applicability of the updated LOCA EM based on this scope of information without performing additional NIST-2 testing, NuScale chose to perform additional tests to expand the NRELAP5 validation basis for NPM designs. It is important to note that completion of the post-test scaling and distortion analysis does not change how NuScale evaluates LOCAs (i.e., the methodology for plant analysis specified in TR-0516-49422-P will remain unchanged). ((

}}2(a),(c)

The NRC staffs request for NIST-2 post-test scaling imposes an undue burden, as post-test scaling and distortion analyses are not warranted based on the facts provided in this response. The request for post-test scaling results was not provided in the original A-LOCA.LTR-4 audit request or when NuScale requested NRC staff feedback. The original audit question was responded to by NuScale in April 2023, and the request by the NRC staff for post-test scaling was not received until August 29, 2024. After further clarification of this RAI with NRC staff the week of December 2, NuScale performed post-test scaling analyses for liquid and vapor space break LOCA tests and results are provided below. Summary of the Audit Questions A-LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47 The original audit response for A-LOCA.LTR-4 was posted to the Standard Design Approval Application Audit TR-0516-49422 LOCA electronic reading room (eRR) on April 19, 2023. The original audit response provided engineering documents that evaluate the testing matrix and NRELAP5 pre-test predictions for the NIST-2 facility LOCA tests for the NPM-20. Additional audit questions were generated related to A-LOCA.LTR-4, such as the successfully closed A-LOCA.LTR-9 audit question. On January 3, 2024, the NRC staff identified the audit response status for audit item A-LOCA.LTR-4 as needing markups of TR-0516-49422-P to close the item, but did not provide details on what information was needed and where it was requested to be. On August 7, 2024, the NRC staff identified that while the tie to audit item A-NonLOCA.LTR-3, which was holding the question in an unresolved status, can be broken, the audit item A-LOCA.LTR-4 is a focus item for schedule development, it require a response with a markup. The request for post-test scaling was not received until August 29, 2024. NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

Audit item A-LOCA.LTR-45 was originally responded to by NuScale on May 22, 2024, and a supplemental response was provided by NuScale on August 21, 2024 after receiving NRC staff feedback on July 30, 2024. The original audit response described how the timing difference the NRC staff is concerned with occurs beyond what is analyzed in TR-0516-49422. In the supplemental response, NuScale explained why the different boundary conditions used in the NPM calculations and NIST-2 calculations were appropriate. Audit item A-LOCA.LTR-47 was originally responded to by NuScale on June 4, 2024, and a supplemental response was provided by NuScale on August 21, 2024 after receiving NRC staff feedback on August 6, 2024. The original and supplemental audit responses provided explanations on NuScales position that the NIST-2 leakage was inconsequential for Phase 0 and Phase 1 of the LOCA transient. RAI Question (a Part (i [Related to A-LOCA.LTR-45] ((

}}2(a),(c)

NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

((

}}2(a),(c)

((

}}2(a),(c)

((

}}2(a),(c)

NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c) 2. ((

}}2(a),(c)

NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

((

}}2(a),(c)

((

}}2(a),(c)

NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c) NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c),ECI NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c) NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c),ECI NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

RAI Question (a) Part (ii) [Related to A-LOCA.LTR-47] (( }}2(a),(c) NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c) (( }}2(a),(c) NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c) NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c) ((

}}2(a),(c)

NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

((

}}2(a),(c)

NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c),ECI NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

RAI Question (b) [Related to A-LOCA.LTR-4] (( }}2(a),(c) NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c) I. NPM-160 LOCA EM Precedent NuScale followed the Regulatory Guide 1.203 evaluation model development and assessment process (EMDAP) to develop the NRELAP5 code and LOCA EM for application to the NPM-160 design. The key elements of the EMDAP are: 1. Establishment of EM requirements. This included development of a phenomena identification and ranking table (PIRT) to identify physical phenomena important to a LOCA event progression for the NPM-160 design. 2. Development of code assessment base. NuScale identified existing data and performed separate effects tests (SETs) and integral effects tests (IETs) to populate the NRELAP5 code assessment base. NRELAP5 was assessed against the SETs and IETs to to NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

demonstrate acceptable levels of code to data agreement for phenomena ranges pertinent to NPM-160 LOCA transients. 3. Development of the EM. The NPM-160 LOCA EM applies the NRELAP5 v1.4 code to simulate the LOCA event progressions. Closure relationships were incorporated into NRELAP5 as necessary to simulate the NPM-160 (e.g., models for helical coil steam generator pressure drop and heat transfer were incorporated and choked flow options incorporating the Moody critical flow model were incorporated). 4. Assessment of the EM adequacy. Both bottom-up and top-down adequacy assessments are performed. The bottom-up adequacy assessment evaluated the NRELAP5 model and correlation pedigree and applicability to simulate the physical processes, considered scalability of the models and evaluated the model range of conditions and validated range against the NPM-160 LOCA transient ranges. The top-down adequacy assessment evaluated the capability of NRELAP5 field equations and numeric solutions to represent the important processes and phenomena during the LOCA transients. The top-down adequacy assessment also evaluated distortions between the NIST-1 IETs and the NPM-160 design. The adequacy assessment demonstrated that the NRELAP5 code is capable of predicting the important phenomena that determine the NPM LOCA response. The EM documentation demonstrated that NRELAP5 predicted relevant experimental data from SETs and IETs with reasonable-to-excellent agreement. No additional uncertainty was accounted for in the EM related to distortions between the NPM-160 design and the NIST-1 facility. The NRC staff previously reviewed and approved use of the LOCA EM with the NRELAP5 v1.4 code for application to the NPM-160 LOCA events. In particular, the NRC safety evaluation report for the NPM-160 LOCA EM (ML20044E198) includes the following statements related to the NIST-1 testing, scaling and distortion analyses: The NRC staff concludes that the summary in the LOCA TR accurately described the distortions, which did not invalidate the scaling analysis results. The NRC staff concludes that, because of the size of the NIST-1 facility and its development history, there are scaling distortions. These distortions have been identified by the applicant and its impact on the FOM have been fully assessed and understood. The test results from NIST-1 were not only used to assess NRELAP5 code, but also can be representative for NPM during LOCA and IORVs. NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

The NRC staff recognizes that there is a deficiency of integral test data against which the NRELAP5 code was validated against. And, further, there is only the NIST-1 facility that applies directly to the NPM design, which NuScale successfully compared and benchmarked the NRELAP5 code to. It is evident that the NRELAP5 modeling is capable of reproducing the NIST-1 LOCA results. From this, it is the NRC staffs judgement that it is not unreasonable to expect that NRELAP5 is capable of producing the NPM LOCA results. The NRC staff also reviewed and approved the approach NuScale used to evaluate and address effects of scale-dependent correlations in the code, specifically models for choked flow, counter-current flow limitation, wall film condensation, riser flow regime and 3-D core flow distribution to ensure that the figures of merit are not compromised. II. Evaluation of Design Changes from NPM-160 to NPM-20 NuScale applied a rigorous and systematic process, following a graded approach to the EMDAP, to evaluate differences between the NPM-20 design and NPM-160 design and impact to the LOCA EM applicability. The NPM-160 LOCA PIRT applicability to the NPM-20 design was evaluated considering information from NPM-160 LOCA analyses, the scope of NPM-20 design changes, preliminary NPM-20 LOCA spectrum analyses, and NPM-20 scaling analyses. The PIRT evaluation demonstrated that there are no newly identified phenomena for the NPM-20 design compared to the NPM-160 design. ((

}}2(a),(c)

NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

((

}}2(a),(c) While the phenomena and their rankings are fundamentally consistent, how the SG/DHRS phenomena are treated in the LOCA EM has changed between the EM for the NPM-160 design and the updated EM applied to the NPM-20 design.

((

}}2(a),(c)

In summary, the governing field equations for a LOCA event are unchanged between NPM-20 and NPM-160, and important phenomena present in an NPM-20 LOCA event are consistent with those of NPM-160. III. Evaluation of NRELAP5 Code Version Changes ((

}}2(a),(c)

NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

((

}}2(a),(c)

IV. Top-Down Scaling and Distortion Analysis ((

}}2(a),(c)

Therefore, based on evaluation of the high-ranked phenomena, and the bottom-up assessment of the NRELAP5 code that was previously performed, no scaling compromises in the IETs were identified that require further assessment to assure uncertainties are adequately accounted for. NIST-2 LOCA Testing and Justification that Post-Test Scaling Analysis is Unnecessary ((

}}2(a),(c)

NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

((

}}2(a),(c)

((

}}2(a),(c)

NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

NIST-2 LOCA Post-Test Scaling Justification Confirmation As a result from feedback received during in-person meetings the weeks of December 2, 2024 and December 9, 2024, regarding post-test scaling, NuScale performed the post-test scaling distortion analysis for NIST-2 LOCA tests Run 1 (HP-06) and Run 2 (HP-07). (( }}2(a),(c) Figure 11 through Figure 16 provide the RPV normalized Pi group distributions for HP-06 test. Figure 23 through Figure 28 provide the CNV normalized Pi group distributions for HP-06 test. Figure 35 through Figure 40 provide the RPV normalized Pi group distributions for HP-07 test. Figure 47 through Figure 52 provide the CNV normalized Pi group distributions for HP-07 test. (( }}2(a),(c) Distortion factors are calculated with Equation 1 and are considered to be insignificant if the resultant value is (( }}2(a),(c) (( }}2(a),(c) Figure 17 through Figure 22 provide the RPV distortion factors for HP-06 test. Figure 29 through Figure 34 provide the CNV distortion factors for HP-06 test. Figure 41 through Figure 46 provide NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

the RPV distortion factors for HP-07 test. Figure 53 through Figure 58 provide the CNV distortion factors for HP-07 test. (( }}2(a),(c) Therefore, is it concluded that NRELAP5 is applicable for use in the updated LOCA EM for prediction of the NPM-20 LOCA event progression, based on: the previously approved LOCA EM for the NPM-160 design, the subsequent evaluations comparing the NPM-160 and NPM-20 designs, LOCA phenomena, ranges of conditions, and NRELAP5 code changes, and the additional NRELAP5 assessments against the appropriately scaled and successfully executed NIST-2 LOCA tests. The additional post-test scaling distortion analyses on NIST-2 HP-06 and HP-07 tests provided in this RAI response confirm the conclusion that NIST-2 LOCA-01 data is applicable to the NPM-20 design. NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

(( }}2(a),(c) NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

Conclusion This RAI is focused on scaling and distortion analyses of NIST-2 testing as it applies to the NuScale NPM-20. (( }}2(a),(c) NIST-2 post-test scaling and distortion analysis for the LOCA testing data is not required to justify that NRELAP5 is applicable for use in the updated LOCA EM for prediction of the NPM-20 LOCA event progression and figures of merit. This conclusion was confirmed by post-test scaling and distortion analyses of selected tests. Impact on US460 SDAA: Topical Report TR-0516-49422, Loss-of-Coolant Accident Evaluation Model, has been revised to include details on DHRS heat transfer and is provided in this response. NuScale Nonproprietary NuScale Nonproprietary

Loss-of-Coolant Accident Evaluation Model TR-0516-49422-NP Draft Revision 4 © Copyright 2024 by NuScale Power, LLC 540 8.4.2 Findings from Top-Down Evaluation Results of the adequacy evaluation based on the NIST-1 IETs are summarized in Table 8-19 below. All high-ranked phenomena are included in the table. Where the NIST-1 IETs do not provide information, or provide limited information, regarding NRELAP5 applicability to model the phenomenon an explanation is provided. Areas not covered, or partly covered, by the IETs are addressed by SETs or other means, e.g., sensitivity studies, bounding assumptions, component test data. The NIST-2 IET results are consistent with the NIST-1 IETS. The NIST-2 testing did not uniquely address any high ranked phenomena, nor did the scaling analyses show any necessary re-working of the LOCA PIRT. Audit Question A-LOCA.LTR-45 RAI LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47 High-ranked phenomena for the NPM-20 are consistent with those previously identified and assessed against NIST-1 tests. Although some design changes affect the loss-of-coolant event progression, there are no newly identified phenomena for the NPM-20. High-ranked phenomena were added from some SSCs or phases, but were previously evaluated by validation of NIST-1 testing. There are no significant changes to PIRT phenomena, (( }}2(a),(c) which is addressed in the Non-LOCA Topical Report (Reference 114). In Reference 114, Section 5.3.7.3 provides the applicability of DHRS operation to small break LOCA evaluations and Section 5.3.7.2.2 provides the DHRS scaling analysis between the NPM-20 and the NIST-2 facility. Table 8-19 Applicability Summary for High-Ranked Phenomena (( }}2(a),(c)

RAIO-178453 NuScale Power, LLC 1100 NE Circle Blvd., Suite 200 Corvallis, Oregon 97330 Office 541.360.0500 Fax 541.207.3928 www.nuscalepower.com Affidavit of Mark W. Shaver, AF-178454

AF-178454 Page 1 of 2

NuScale Power, LLC AFFIDAVIT of Mark W. Shaver I, Mark W. Shaver, state as follows: (1) I am the Director of 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 competitors 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 NuScales competitive position and foreclose or reduce the availability of profit-making opportunities. The accompanying Request for Additional Information response reveals distinguishing aspects about the response by which NuScale develops its NuScale Power, LLC Response to NRC Request for Additional Information (RAI No. 10296 R1, Question LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47) on the NuScale Standard Design Approval Application. NuScale has performed significant research and evaluation to develop a basis for this response 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, NuScales 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 NuScales intellectual property, and would deprive NuScale of the opportunity to exercise its competitive advantage to seek an adequate return on its investment. (4) The information sought to be withheld is in the enclosed response to NRC Request for Additional Information RAI 10296 R1, Question LOCA.LTR-4, 45, 47. 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.

AF-178454 Page 2 of 2 (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 NuScales 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 January 17, 2025. Mark W. Shaver}}

ML25017A391

Text

SUBJECT:

REFERENCE:

Navigation menu

Search