NSD-NRC-98-5756, Responds to NRC 980714 & 21 Ltrs Re Request for Withholding Proprietary Info That Was Not Clearly Identified Other than Being Marked W Proprietary Class 2

From kanterella
(Redirected from NSD-NRC-98-5756)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to NRC 980714 & 21 Ltrs Re Request for Withholding Proprietary Info That Was Not Clearly Identified Other than Being Marked W Proprietary Class 2
ML20237C030
Person / Time
Site: 05200003
Issue date: 08/14/1998
From: Mcintyre B
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
To: Quay T
NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NSD-NRC-98-5756, NUDOCS 9808200164
Download: ML20237C030 (3)


Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

O W!,stinghouse Energy Systems Esse pennsvivama 15230-0353 Electric Corporation DCP/NRC1412 NSD-NRC-98-5756 Docket No.: 52-003 August 14,1998 Document Control Desk U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 KITENTION: T. R. Quay

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO NRC LETTERS CONCERNING REQUEST FOR WITilHOLDING l INFORMATION

Reference:

1. Letter, Sebrosky to McIntyre, " Request for withholding proprietary information for Westinghouse AP600 letters dated October 10,1994, March 30,1995, October 3, 1996, and December 18, 1997," dated July 21,1998.
2. Letter, Huffman to McIntyre, " Request for withholhy information from public disclosure for Westinghouse AP600 design lette> A v iJuly 14, 1998.

Dear Mr. Quay:

Reference 1 provided the NRC comments that the Westinghouse letter of October 10,1994, appeared to contain proprietary information that was not clearly identified other than being marked

" Westinghouse Jreprietary Class 2" on the page and also that there was no affidavit included with the letter. The U..socr 10,1*f t1, letter contained errata for WCAP-14135, which is a proprietary report.

In accordance with Westinghouse company policy, each page of a proprietary report has

" Westinghouse Propietary Class 2" on the page header. Specific inforrnation that is proprietary is then irdicated with brackets. It is possible that there will be no information on a page that is marked as being proprietary. In the case of the October 10,1994, letter, none of the errata pages contained Westinghouse proprietary information, thus no affidavit was necessary and the letter can be placed in the NRC public document room.

'I Reference I also provided the NRC comments that the Westinghouse letter of March 30,1995, g appeared to contain proprietary information that was not clearly identified other than being marked

" Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2" and also that there was no aflidavit included with the letter. The March 30,1995, letter contained AP600 main steam line isometric drawings which have the standard Westinghouse title block that contains a standard Westinghouse proprietary statement which should f

have been deleted in this case. The deadweight analysis results had no proprietary markings. These drawings are nonproprietary, thus no affidavit was necessary and the letter can be placed in the NRC public document room.

9808200164 980814 PDR ADOCK 05200003 A PDR l

I E .. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _

l r

DCP/NRCl412 NSD-NRC-98-5756 August 14,1998

% . l Reference 1 further provided the NRC comments that the Westinghouse letter of October 3,1996, appeared to contain proprietary information that was not clearly identified other than being marked )

" Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2" on the page and also that there was no affidavit included with the l letter. The October 3,1996, letter contained pages that were missing from some copies of WCAP-14407, which is a propnetary report. In accordance with Westinghouse company policy, each page of a proprietary report has " Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2" on the page header. Specific information  !

I that is proprietary is then indicated with brackets. It is possible that there will be no information on a page that is marked as being proprietary. In the case of the October 3,1996, letter, none of the l missing pages contained Westinghouse proprietary information, thus no affidavit was necessary and the letter can be placed in the NRC public document room.

Reference I additionally provided the NRC comments that the Westinghouse letter of December 18, 1 1997, appeared to contain proprietary inbrmation that was not clearly identified other than being marked " Westinghouse Proprietary Class 1" on the page and also that there was no affidavit included with the letter. The December 18,1997, Mtter documented NRC agreed to revisions to WCAP-14326, Revision I, WCAP-14812, Revision 1, and WCAP-14845, Revision 2, which are Westinghouse l

proprietary reports. In accordance with Westinghouse company policy, each page of a proprietary report has " Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2" on the page header. Specific information that is proprietary is then indicated with brackets. It is possible that there will be no information on a page that is marked as being proprietary. In the case of the December 18,1997, letter, none of the errata pages contained Westinghouse proprietary information, thus no affidavit was necessary and the letter can be placed in the NRC public document room.

Reference 2 provided the NRC comments that the Westinghouse letter of February 10,1997, appeared to contain proprietary information that was not clearly identified other than being marked

" Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2" and also that there was no affidavit included with the letter. The February 10,1997, letter contained drawings which were intended to assist the staffin their i understanding of the Regulatory Treatment of Nonsafety Related Systems (RTNSS) impkmentation for )

the AP600 and contained the standard Westinghouse drawir.g title block that includes a standard Westinghouse proprietary statement which should have been deleted in this case. These drawings are nonproprietary, thus no affidavit was necessary and the letter can be placed in the NRC public document room.

Reference 2 also provided the NRC comments that the Westinghouse letter of August 18,1997, I appeared to contain proprietary information that was not clearly identified other than being marked

" Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2" on the page and also that there was no affidavit included with the letter. The August 18,1997, letter was issued to correct a printing error in several copies of proprietary report WCAP-14727, Revision 1, that were provided to the staff in advance of the normal mailing to the NRC. WCAP-14727, Revision 1, was provided to the staff by letter DCP/NRC0979, dated August 7,1997, which included affidavit AW-97-1150. In accordance with Westinghouse company policy, each page of a proprietary report has " Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2" on the page header. Specific information that is proprietary is then indicated with brackets. It is possible that there will be no information on a page that is marked as being proprietary. In the case of the August 18,1997, letter, any of the pages which contained proprietary information, would have had that material bracketed and should be covered by affidavit AW-97-ll50, which was dated August 11, 1997.

l I

ne

l 4

. 1 I

DCP/NRCl41' i NSD-NRC-98-5756 August 14,1998 I f

Revision 2 further provided the NRC comments that the Westinghouse letter of November 11,1997, appeared to contain proprietary information that was not clearly identified other than being marked

" Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2" on the page and also that there was no affidavit included with the letter. The November 11,1997, letter contained Revision 3 to WCAP-14776, which is a Westinghouse proprietary report. In accordance with Westinghouse company policy, each page of a proprietary report has " Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2" on the page header. Specific information that is proprietary is then indicated with brackets. It is possible that there will be ao information on a page that is marked as F-ing proprietary. In the case of the November 11,1997, letter it was indicated that "although the change pages contain no bracketed proprietary information, they are marked

' Westinghouse Proprietary'." Since none of the revision pages contained Westinghouse proprietary information, no affidavit was necessary and the letter can be placed in the NRC public document room.

Revision 2 further provided the NRC comments that the Westinghouse letter of March 13, 1998, appeared to contain proprietary information that was not clearly identified other than being marked j

" Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2" on the page and also that there was no affidavit included with the letter. The March 13, 1998, letter contained errata for WCAP-14807, which is a proprietary report. In accordance wit h Westinghouse company policy, each page of a proprietary report has "Westingtm ise

' Proprietary Class 2" on the page header. Specific information that is emprietary is then indicated with )

brackets. It is possible that there will be no information on a page that is marked as being proprietary.

]

In the case of the March 13, 1998, letter, none of the errata pages contained Westinghouse proprietary l information, thus no affidavit was necessary and the letter can be placed in the NRC public document room.

A large number of proprietary evaluations covering the time period February 14,1992 to May 5,1998, base been received over the past several months, the most recent on July 22,1998. These evaluations are being processed. As a result of discussions with NRC management, Westinghouse will provide proper proprietary documentation for the proprietary material supporting the AP600 design certification review by August 21,1998. The responses will be provided as they are developed. It is our understanding that providing the nonproprietary versions of documents will not constrain issuing the AP600 FSER or FDA.

This response addresses the proprietary issues delineated in the references.

dr /#

Brian A. McIntyre, Manager Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing jml ec: J. W. Roe - NRC/NRR/DRPM J. M. Sebrosky - NRC/NRR/DRPM W. C. Huffman - NRC/NRR/DRPM

11. A. Sepp - Westinghouse 1789s apf

_ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _