ML20151U445

Informs That Westinghouse (DCP/NRC1414) States That WCAP-13957 Is No Longer Considered Proprietary by Westinghouse.Attachments Originally Submitted as Part of File Package # 9402160116

ML20151U445
Person / Time
Site:	05200003
Issue date:	09/02/1998
From:	Huffman B NRC
To:	Ted Carter NRC
Shared Package
ML20151U449	List: ML20151U445 ML20151U487
References
NUDOCS 9809110009
Download: ML20151U445 (1)

Text

. _ . _ _ . . -_ _ _ _ - - _ _ ._. _ _ _ _ - _. .

September 2,1998 TO: Tajuan Carter FROM: Bill Huffma

SUBJECT:

F.edirection of Previously Proprietary Materialinto the Public l

Westinghouse letter (Enclosure 1) dated August 14,1998, DCP/NRC1413 (Accession

1. 9808200168), r,tates that WCAP-13957 (Enclosure 2) is no longer considered proprietary by Westinghouse. Enclosure 2 was originally submitted as a proprietary document (Accession

1. 9402160145) and was part of a file package (Accession #9402160113).

I have removed the Westinghouse proprietary markings from Enclosure 2 so that it can be  !

placed into the public files. I Please place Enclosure 2 onto the AP600 docket and public microfiche and update NUDOCS to I reflect this change.

l If you have any questions please call me at 301-415-1141.

Enclosure 1: Westinghouse Letter DCP/NRC1413 dated 8/14/98 Enclosure 2: WCAP-13957 (Proprietary markings removed) cc w/o enclosures: TRQuay JSebrosky 9809110009 990902 E COS PDR ADOCK 05200003 i A PDR t i\

8 Westinghouse Energy Systems Bm 355 Pittsburgh Pennsylvania 15230-0355 Electric Corporation DCP/NRCl413 NSD-NRC-98-57.,7 Docket No.: 52-003 August 14,1998 Document Control Desk U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 ATTENTION: T. R. Quay

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO NRC LETTERS CONCERNING REQUEST FOR WITHHOLDING INFORMATION

Reference:

1. Letter, Sebrosky to McIntyre, " Request for withholding information from public disclosure for Westinghouse AP600 design letter of October 20,1993," dated June l 18,1998.

2. Letter, Sebrosky to McIntyre, " Request for withholding information from public disclosure for Westinghouse AP600 design letter of January 17,1994," dated June 18,1998.

3. Letter, Sebrosky to McIntyre, " Request for withholding information from public l disclosure for Westinghouse AP600 letters of September 20,1993, January 21, ,

1994, and February 3,1994," dated July 10,1998.

4. Letter, Sebrosky to McIntyre, " Request for withholding proprietary information for Westinghouse letters dated April 18,1995," dated July 15,1998.

5. Letter, Huffman to McIntyre, " Request for withholding information from oublic disclosure of Westinghouse report on AP600 function based task analysis," dated July 17,1998.

Dear Mr. Quay:

Reference 1 provided the NRC assessment of the Westinghouse claim that proprietary information was provided in a letter dated October 20,1993, that contained the response to a staff request for additional information regarding the AP600 probabilistic risk assessment. The NRC assessment was that the material was similar to material that exists in the current (1998) nonproprietary version of the )

l AP600 probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) report, in addition, the staff indicated the material was 1

! used by the staff in the development of the AP600 draft safety evaluation report and therefore should

- remam on the docket. At the time this request for additional information response was provided to the __

na nt l

l l N uc64 M }

'f 108'200 /& '

DCP/NRCl413 NSD-NRC-98-5757 August 14,1998 NRC technical staff, the information was considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse since it contained information that had commercial value to Westinghouse. If this request for additional information response was indeed used by the staffin development of the AP600 draft final safety evaluation report in November 30,1994, then at this time, almost five years later, this information is no longer considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse.

Reference 2 provided the NRC assessment of the Westinghouse claim that proprietary information was provided in a letter dated January 17,1994, that contained the response to a staff request for additional information regarding the AP600 instrumentation and control system. The NRC assessment was that the material was similar to material that exists in the current (1998) nonproprietary version of the AP600 standard safety analysis report. In addition, the staff indicated the material was used by the staff in the development of the AP600 draft safety evaluation report and therefore should remain on the docket. At the time this request for additional information response was provided to the NRC technical staff, the information was considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse since it contained information that had commercial value to Westinghouse. If this request for additional information response was indeed used by the staff in development of the AP600 draft final safety evaluation report in November 30,1994, then at this time, over four years later, this information is no longer considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse.

Reference 3 provided the NRC assessment of the Westinghouse claim that proprietary information was provided in a letter dated September 20,1993, that contained information related to the AP600 PRA

• and WCAP-13795, which provided the PRA uncertainty analysis. The NRC assessment was that the material was similar to material that exists in the current (1998) nonproprietary version of the AP600 I probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) report. In addition, the staffindicated the material was used by the staff in the development of the AP600 draft safety evaluation report and therefore should remain on the docket. At the time this information wa.s provided to the NRC technical staff, it was con'sidered to be proprietary by Westinghouse since it contained information that had commercial value to Westinghouse. If the information transmitted by the Westinghouse September 20,1993, letter was indeed used by the staffin development of the AP600 draft final safety evaluation report in November 30,1994, then at this time, almost five years later, this information is no longer considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse.

Reference 3 also provided the NRC assessment of the Westinghouse claim that proprietary information was provided in a letter dated January 21,1994, that contained WCAP-13913, " Framework for AP600 Severe Accident Management Guidance"(SAMG). The NRC assessment was that the material was similar to material that exists in current (1998) nonproprietary AP600 documents (e.g., WCAP-13914,

" Framework for AP600 Severe Accident Management Guidance"). In addition, the staffindicated the  !

material was used by the staff in the development of the AP600 draft safety evaluation report and therefore should remain on the docket. At the time this Framework for SAMG was provided to the NRC technical staff, the information was considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse since it contained information that had commercial value to Westinghouse. At this time, over four years later,

. this information is no longer considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse.

j

m. ,1 1 1

J

.Q DCP/NRCl413 NSD-NRC-98-5757 August 14,1998 Reference 3 also provided the NRC assessment of the Westinghouse claim that proprietary information was provided in a letter dated February 3,1994, that contained additional copies of WCAP-13913,

" Framework for AP600 Severe Accident Management Guidance" (SAMG). The NRC assessment was that the material was similar to material that exists in current (1998) nonproprietary AP600 documents ,

- (e.g., WCAP-13914, " Framework for AP600 Severe Accident Management Guidance"). In addition, the staffindicated the material was used by the staffin the development of the AP600 draft safety l evaluation report and therefore should remain on the docket. At the time this Framework for SAMG was provided to the NRC technical staff, the information was considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse since it contained information that had commercial value to Westinghouse. At this time, over four years later, this information is no longer considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse.

Reference 4 provided the NRC assessment of the Westinghouse claim that proprietary information was provided in a letter dated April 18,1995, that contained information for a MAAP4/RELAP comparison l for the AP600 in response to a staff request for additional information. The NRC assessment was that the Westinghouse cover letter indicated that Enclosure 2 is a non-proprietary version of Enclosure 3, however, the staff could not find any portion of the enclosures marked as proprietary. The staff assessment further states the conventional bracketed-superscript notation also appears to be missing.

Finally, the NRC assessment states the staff could not determine which part of the material enclosed with the Westinghouse letter was Enclosure 1,2, or 3. It should be noted that the Westinghouse April 18,1995, cover letter states " Enclosures 2 (nonproprietary) and 3 (proprietary) provide the requested information." The letter does not indicate that enclosure 2 was a duplicate of enclosure 3 minus the proprietary information. A cover sheet was provided just prior to each of the enclosures to the Westinghouse letter. The enclosures contained the following: Enclosure 1 provided a copy of the NRC's two-page request for information for the MAAP-RELAP comparison. Enclosure 2 provided the requested information, and was titled " Requested Information for AP600 MAAP4/RELAP Comparison." Under section 4, Initial Conditions, of Enclosure 2 it states the initial conditions information (which was proprietary) is provided in Enclosure 3 of the subject Westinghouse letter.

Finally, Enclosure 3 contained the list of initial conditions. The information provided in Enclosure 3 was labeled as _ Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2 at the top of the page, however, the specific proprietary information was not indicated by the bracketed-superscripted notation. In addition to the initial conditions, a mark-up of AP600 PRA Figure K-1 was provided in Enclosure 3. Again, the information was labeled as Westinghouse Proprietary Class 2 at the top of the page, however, the specific proprietary information was not indicated by the bracketed-superscripted notation. At the time l the information provided in Enclosure 3 of the subject Westinghouse letter was provided to the NRC technicil staff, the information was considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse since it contained information that had commercial value to Westinghouse. At this time, over three years later, this infonnation is no longer considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse.

Reference 5 provided the NRC assessment of the Westinghouse claim that proprietary information was provided in a letter dated February 8,1994, provided a copy of WCAP-13957, "AP600 Reactor  :

Coolant System Mass Inventory: Function Based Risk Analysis." The NRC assessment was that the material was not "information that the staff customarily accepts as proprietary." In addition, the staff

. indicated the material was used by the staff in the development of the AP600 final safety evaluation report and therefore should remain on the docket. At the time this report was prepared, the 3790s wpr

i 4 d

4 DCP/NRCl413 l NSD-NRC-98 5757 August 14,1998 information was considered to be proprietary by Westinghouse since it contained information that had commercial value to Westinghouse and was of the type ofinformation that was customarily held in confidence by Westinghouse. That the material was not information that the staff customarily accepts as proprietary is not relevant to making the proprietary determination. However, in an effort to expedite the issuance of the AP600 Final Safety Evaluation Report and Final Design Approval, Westinghouse agrees to no longer consider this infonnation to be proprietary.

In a telephone call on July 8,1998, the staff informed Westinghouse of a concern related to WCAP-13288 and WCAP-13289, which were associated with the AP600 check valve testing specification. 1 The concern was that the proprietary report had no proprietary information identified and the nonproprietary report had been placed in the public document room. Westinghouse has reviewed these i reports and, at this time, considers none of the information to be proprietary.

This response addresses the proprietary issues delineated in the references.

l A

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

'HTA.' Sepp - W$stinghouse l

3790s wpf