. .

U-0182

"Z~"} L31-80(09-17)-0/ / / /ND/S PO WER C D A f PA A'V_j m souTs ma sTsuT. otceaum ausois as

September 17, 1980

Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut, DirectorDivision of LicensingOffice of Nuclear Reactor RegulationU.S. Nucl ear Regulatory CommissionWashington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Eisenhut:

Submittal of Proprietary Information for FSARClinton Power Station Units 1 & 2

Docket Nos. 50-461 and 50-462

Illinois Power Company herewith transmits the proprietary informationfor the Clinton Final Safety Analysis Report (CPS-FSAR). Forty (40)copics of the FSAR proprietary material are furnished, and we kindlyrec ues t that this information be withheld from public disclosureanc considered as proprietary to the General Electric Company (GE)pursuant to Section 2.790 of 10CFR Part 2.

The GE proprietary information consists of Initial Core Fuel Designinformation related to the use of gadolinia and Offgas SystemTechnology. Specifically, the foll1 wing CPS-FSAR material is sub-mitted herewith:

a. Initial Core Fuel Design(Figures 4.3-3 through 4.3-6, 4.3-12, 4.3-13, and 4.3-16through 4.3-19)

b. Offgas System Technology(Table 11.3 3 and Figures 11.3-1 and 11.3-2)

It is our position and that of the General Electric Company thatthese documents contain information and are of the type which GEcustomarily maintains in confidence. Attached for your informationis the GE affidavit which attests to the pro 3rietary nature of theFSAR material which we are requesting be witaheld from public disclosure.

Respectfully submitted,

ILLINOIS POWER COMPANY

'-d., e

G. E. WullerSupervisor-LicensingNuclear Station Engineering

GEW:dl

attach.

cc: B. C. Buckley, NRC Clinton Project Manager (w/o att.)H. H. Livermore, NRC Resident Inspector (w/o att.)

8000240 457

.

Gt NERAL ELECTRIC C0MPANY

AFFIDAVIT

1, Glenn G. Sherwood, being duly sworn, depose and state as 'ollows:

1. I am Manager of Safety and Licensing, General Electric Company,and have been delegated the function of reviewing the informationdescribed in paragraph 2 which is sought to be withheld and havebeen authorized to apply for its withholding.

2. The information sought to be withheld consists of the followingfigures as filed with the NRC as part of the Clinton Power StationUnits 1 & 2 - Final Saf ety Analysis Report (CPS-FSAR):

A. Initial Core fuel Design (Figures 4.3-3 thru 4.3-6, 4.3-12,

4.3-13 and 4.3-16 thru 4.3-19).

B. Offgas System Technology (Tables 11.3-3 and Figures 11.3-1and 11.3-2).

3. In designating material as proprietary, General Electric utilizesthe definition of proprietary information and trade secrets setforth in the American Law Institute's Restatement Of Torts,Section 757. This definition provides:

"A trade secret may consist of any formula, pattern, device orcompilation of information which is used in one's business andwhich gives him an opportunity to obtain an advantage overcompetitors who do not know or use it. A substantial.

element of secrecy must exist, so that, except by the use of;mproper means, there would be difficulty in acquiring informa-tion. Some factors to be considered in determining whether.

given information is one's trade secret are: (1) the extent towhich the information is known outside of his business; (2)the extent to which it is known by employees and others involvedin his business; (3) the extent of measures taken by nim toguard the secrecy of the information; (4) the value o# theinformation to him and to his competitors; (b) the amount ofeffort or money expended by him in developing the information;(6) the ease o.' difficulty with which the information could beproperly acquired or duplicated by others."

4. Some examples of categories of information which fit into thedefinition of proprietary inf ormation Are:

GENERAL ELETR C COMVNY

?luPilETARY INFORMCION

.

.

.

.

a. Information that discloses a process, method or apparatuswhere prevention of its use by General Electric's competitorswithout license from General Electric constitutes a competi-tive economic advantage over other companies;

b. Information consisting of supporting data and analyses, includ-ing test data, relative to a process, method or apparatus, theapplication of which provides a competitive economic advantage,e.g., by optimization or improved marketability;

c. Information which if used by a competitor, would reduce hisexpenditure of resources or improve his competitive positionin the design, manufacture, shipment, installation, assuranceof quality or licensing of a similar product;

d. Information which reveals cost or price information, produc-tion capacities, budget levels or commercial strategies ofGeneral Electric, its customers or suppliers;

e. Information which reveals aspects of past, present or futureGeneral Electric customer-f unded development plans and programsof potential commercial value to General Electric;

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

g. Information which General Electric must treat as proprietaryaccording to agreements with other parties.

5. In addition to proprietary tr atment given to material meeting the.

standards enumerated above, General Electric customarily maintainsin confidence preliminary and draft material which has not beensubject to complete proprietary, technical and editorial review.This practice is based on the fact that draft documents often donot appropriately reflect all aspects of a problem, may containtentative conclusions and may contain errors that can be correctedduring normal review and approval procedures. Also, until thefinal document is completed it may not be possible to make anydefinitive determination as to its proprietary nature. GeneralElectric is not generally willing to release such a document to thegeneral public in such a preliminary form. Such documents are,however, on occasion furnished to the NRC staff on a confidentialbasis because it is General Electric's belief tnat it is in thepublic interest for the staf f to be promptly furnished with signifi-cant or potentially significant information. Furnishing the docu-ment on a confidential basis pending completion of General Electric'sinternal review permits early acquaintance of the staff with theinf ormation while protecting General Electric's potential proprie-tary position and permitting General Electric to insure the publicdocuments are technically accurate and correct.

GENERAL ECTRIC COMPANY

PRO?Rl!TARY INFORMATION

.

.

.

6. Initial approval of proprietary treatment of a document. is made bythe Subsection Manager of the originating component, the man mostlikely to be acquainted with the value and sensiti vity of the infor-mation in relation to industry knowledge. Access to such documentswithin the Company is limited on a "need to know" basis and suchdocuments at all times are clearly identified as proprietary.

7. The procedure for approval of external release of such a documentis reviewed by the Section Manager, Project Manager, PrincipalScientist or other equivalent authority, by the Section Manager ofthe cognizant Marketing function (or his delegate) and by the LegalOperation for technical content, competitive ef fect and deter-mination of the accuracy of the proprietary designation in accord-ance with the standards enumerated above. Disclosures outsideGeneral Electric are generally limited to regulatory bodies, customersand potential customers and their agents, suppliers and licenseesonly in accordance with appropriate regulatory provisions or proprie-tary agreements.

8. The document mentioned in paragraph 2 above has been evaluated inaccordance with the above criteria and procedures and has beenfound to contain information which if proprietary and which iscustomarily held in confidence by General Electric.

9. The information in the CPS-fSAR, considered proprietary to GeneralElectric, consists of Initial Core fuel Design information relatedto the use of gadolinia and Offgas System Technology.

10. The inf ormation, to the best of my knowledge and belief, has con-sistently been held in confidence by the General Electric Company,no public disclosure has been made, and it is not available inpublic sources. A'1 disclosures to third parties have been madepursuant to regulatory provisions or proprietary agreements whichprovide for maintenance of the information in confidence.

11. Public disclosure of the information sought to be withheld islikely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position ofthe General Electric Company and deprive or reduce the availa-bility of profit-making opportunities for the following reasons:

A. Initial Core Fuel Design

1. The cost of developing the proprietary information inthe figures mentioned in paragraph 2A abcve is estimatedto be 5600,000.

Extensive modification to lattice computer codes to accountfor gadolinia, and reactor surveillance of gadolinia bear-ing fuel, including gamma-scan of exposed fuel, reactivitymonitoring, etc., have required the expenditure of 5500,000in labor and computer costs. Although we cannot estimatecosts incurred for the other items, they should be included.

GENERAL ELE TR C C0YPMY

PROPRIETARY INFORMAT B

2. The development of gadolinia technology has been inprogress since 1969. This has required:

a. Extensive experimental programs at Vallecitos toconfirm nuclear and material properties.

b. Extensive modification to lattice camputer codesto account for gadolinia.

c. Reactor surveillance of gadolinia bearing fuel.This includes gamma-scan of exposed fuel, reactivitymonitoring, etc.

d. Development of manufacturing techniques and QAprocedures.'

e. Modifications to Manufacturing Facilities.

3. The competitors likely to gain from disclosure of thisinformation are, directly; Exxon, who competes directlywith Gei.eral Electric for reload fuel contracts andGeneral Electric licensees, wno would otherwise purchasethis information from General Electric, and, s irectly;Westinghouse, Babcock and Wilcox, and Combus m Engineering.

4. Competitors in the reload fuel market lack the methods

capability and experience .(hich GE has developed. Knowingthe design information in the figures would allow them toreduce the uncertainty factors included in these reloadfuel bids. This would cause GE to lose its current competi-tive advantage.

5. Availability of this information to competitors wouldenable them to utilize this information without similarexpenditures of effort and money.

6. The information sought to be withheld is not availablein public sources.

B. Offgas System Technology

1. The cost of developing the proprietary information ir theTable and Figures mentioned in paragraph 2B above, as detailedin Table I, exceeds $3,071,000.

2. We believe the difficulty of obtaining information,such as the above represents, is substantial; as ourengineering would have to be duplicated in large part.

GENERL RECTR'C CON 3MY

PROPRIETMY AF0WATION

.

3. Our competitors are CTI-Nuclear, Ebasco, Suntac, CVI,,

Stone and Webster, Air Products & Chemicals, Linde, Airco,AEG*, Hitachi*, Toshiba*

4. Commercial advantages to the competitors include costsavings if the information were f ree, allowing reducedwrite-off, possibly resulting in underbidding GE. Atthe same time the competitor's products could be improvedto incorporate the features which presently provide GEwith a competitive advantage.

5. GE's competitive position as supplier of about 80's of theBWR plant offgas system would be harmed to the extentdescribed above.

6. The nature of the damage would be loss of cost advantagefrom engineering development involved and potential seriousinroads in future sales of GE offgas systems.

7. The information contained in the offgas system drawings andprocess data table is not available f rom commercial sources

and has been protected by GE proprietary stamps and handlingfor some years.

Glenn G. Sherwood, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read theforegoing affidavit and the matters stated therein are true and correct tothe best of his knowledge, information, and belief

s.Executed at San Jose, California, this 21 day of Ognbe r 1979.,

!l 6 thetW od

General Electric Company

STAT [ OF CALIFORNIA )COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ) ss:

il -

Subscribed and sworn bef ore me this.'d day of _ c'[<[s /u" 197ju s - -c<.c.c.c ~ c w m

OFFICIAL SEAL {gppQ sh RUTHE M. KINNAMON

'f) , ,

[ UKQ4 ( c du 717, de w MAwv

~4

b6 >

Qip,, ) recucy ruouc cAuron:LA( NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SAID:

s4mA anu coumyu comm einges uan cs. i9si hvy

. . _

COUNTY AND STATEm cnu w .sa, we c4 on

at/91H

5 tIcates GE licensees who can obtain information from GE, but have toT

pay for it, and are cllowed and do bid in competition with GE under thelicense.

GENERE il_ ECTR COMPANY

?ROPRIETARY N 0RMATION

.

.

.

.

TABLE I

APPROXIMATE EXPENDITURES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT

OF PROPRIETARY OFFGAS SYSTEM INFORMATION IN CPS-FSAR

1, Cost of Offgas System Technology and Development (1968 to 1979)

a. German Licensing Cost and Consultation 5 6,000

b. Design Study (7 man years) 270,000

c. Development Support (18 man years) 780,000

Test Equipment 900,000

d. Design Development, System and Equipment 1,050,000(25 man years)

e. Startup Special Test - Verification ofDesign Performance

Equipment 35,000

Labor 30,000

lotal Approximate Cost $3,071,000

1

GENEillELECTR C COM3AN.

PR'3R :TARY IN:0RMATIJN

TC:at/911