NSD-NRC-98-5766, Provides Summary of 980813 Telcon W/Nrc Re W Explanation of Rationale Which Was Used to Determine What Info Was Considered to Be Proprietary in TR WCAP-14812

Provides Summary of 980813 Telcon W/Nrc Re W Explanation of Rationale Which Was Used to Determine What Info Was Considered to Be Proprietary in TR WCAP-14812

ML20237D257
Person / Time
Site:	05200003
Issue date:	08/20/1998
From:	Mcintyre B WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
To:	Quay T NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NSD-NRC-98-5766, NUDOCS 9808250251
Download: ML20237D257 (3)

Text

____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______ _ __-_ _

l 1

• 3

/

( ^ ' )\

\v Westinghouse Energy Systems Box 355 Psitsbutgh Pennsylvania 15230-0355 Electric Corporation DCP/NRC1423 l NSD-NRC-98-5766 l Docket No.: 52-003 August 20,1998 Document Control Desk I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 ATTENTION: T. R. Quay

SUBJECT:

RATIONALE FOR PROPRIETARY BRACKETING OF WCAP-14812

Reference:

Letter, Scaletti to McIntyre, " Request for withholding proprietary information -

WCAP-14812,' Accident Specification and Phenomena Evaluation for AP600 PCS"', I dated June 19,1998.

Dear Mr. Quay:

The reference sets forth the NRC assessment of the Westinghouse claim for treatment of proprietary information submitted by Westinghouse in letters dated June 9,1997 and April 6,1998, which letters provided Revisions 1 and 2, respectively, of WCAP-14812, " Accident Specification and Phenomena Evaluation for AP600 Passive Containment Cooling System." The NRC assessment was that "much of the information sought to be withheld does not contain trade secrets or proprietary information." One example cited by the NRC was a case where of two nearly identical sentences in the WCAP, one was considered proprietary and the other was not. In addition, the staff indicated the material was used by the staff in the development of the AP600 safety evaluation report and if Westinghouse elected to withdraw these WCAPs, the information would need to be provided in another form.

This issue was discussed during a phone call between Westinghouse and the NRC on August 13, 1998. During that phone call, Westinghouse verbally provided an explanation of the rationale which was used to determine what information was considered to be proprietary in WCAP-14812. An overview of the rationale may be summarized as follows:

The information sought to be withheld from public disclosure is owned and has been held in confidence by Westinghouse.

The information is of a type customarily held in confidence by Westinghouse and not customarily disclosed to the public. Westinghouse has a rational basis for determining the types of information customarily held in conGdence by it and, in that connection, utilizes a

- system to determine when and whether to hold certain types ofinformation in con 6dence.

i i

) The application of that system and the substance of that system constitutes Westinghouse policy and provides the rational basis required. t D^ Q.

,m. s G~

9808250251 980820 PDR ADOCK 05200003 A PDR

)

DCP/NRC1423 NSD-NRC-98-5766 August 20,1998 l Under that system, information is held in confidence if it falls in one or more of several types, the

! release of which might result in the loss of an existing or potential competitive advantage, as follows:

(a) The information reveals the distinguishing aspects of a process (or component, structure, tool, method, etc.), where prevention of its use by any of Westinghouse's competitors without license from Westinghouse constitutes a competitive economic advantage over other companies.  !

(c) Its use 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 a similar product.

Section 4.4 of WCAP-14812 contains a discussion of PIRT ranking (ranking and basis). There is also a discussion of the Westinghouse WGOTHIC evaluation model (how phenomenon is implemented, justification of treatment of phenomenon and treatment of uncertainty and distortions). In summary, Section 4.4 of WCAP-14812 describes:

1

1. PlRT Ranking (e.g., High, Medium, Low). ]

2. Basis for PIRT Ranking (Test Results, Scaling Results, Sensitivity Studies, Expert Review).

3. How Phenomenon is Implemented in Evaluation Model.

4. Justification of Evaluation Model Treatment of Phenomenon (Test Experience, Modeling l Guidance, Sensitivity Studies). l l

5. Evaluation Model Treatment of Uncertainty, Distortions.  !

l In some cases the same information used as the basis for the PIRT ranking was also used 'as justification for the Westinghouse WGOTHIC evaluation model. Such information is in the nearly identical sentences referred to by the staff. In the former context (PIRT ranking and basis ), the information was not deemed proprietary since we do not customarily hold in confidence the basis for the PIRT rankings. In the latter context (how phenomenon is implemented, justification of treatment of phenomenon and treatment of uncertainty and distortions), the information is deemed proprietary, since we customarily hold such information in confidence. Disclosure of such information would revel the justification and basis for the WGOTHIC evaluation model and how we model uncertainties and distortions.

l In essence, items 3 through 5 describe Westinghouse's thought process for creating the WGOTHIC Evaluation Model. This information, taken in total, provides the distinguishing aspects of the process used by Westinghouse to develop the AP600 WGOTHIC Evaluation Model. Disclosure of such distinguishing aspects of the WGOTHIC evaluation model development to a competitor would reduce his expenditure of resources or improve his competitive position in the design, assurance of quality, or licensing a similar product.

m. .e l

l l

I l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

r _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

9

. DCP/NRC1423 NSD-NRC-98-5766 August 20,1998 l This rationale for classifying proprietary information in WCAP-14812, Section 4.4 was implemented consistently.

We therefore believe that the material marked as proprietary in WCAP 14812, Revisions 1 and 2

meets the requirements of 10 CFR2.790(bX4).

~As discussed during our telephone call on August 20,1998, the staff finds this approach acceptable for the subject report.

l lf Brian A. McIntyre, Manager Advanced Plant Safety and Licensing l jml l

cc: J. W. Roe - NRC/NRR/DRPM l J. M. Sebrosky - NRC/NRR/DRPM W. C. Iluffman - NRC/NRR/DRPM II. A. Sepp - Westinghouse .

I I

i I

l 3798a wpf l

I l

L ,

1 L- -- -- - .- _ _ . - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - _