ML20245F781

Informs That NRC Intends to File Motion Requesting Board to Proceed W/Issuance of Initial Decision in Proceeding Based on Record Before It & NRC 890726 Proposed Findings,If Acosta Proposed Findings or Brief Not Received

ML20245F781
Person / Time
Site:	05508347
Issue date:	08/09/1989
From:	Bordenick B NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
To:	Cotter B, Foreman H, Kline J Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#389-9013 NUDOCS 8908150068
Download: ML20245F781 (2)

Text

h/3

1. 9, UNITED STATES a

o.

![3 f.,

' ,o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 'h..

AUG 0 91999 .gg pg; 10 p310 B. Paul Cotter, Jr., Chairman Dr. Harry Foreman u l Administrative Judge Administrative Dodge}y[u'_ _

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 1564 Burton Avenue U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission St. Paul, MN 55108 Washington, DC 20555 Dr. Jerry R. Kline Administrative Judge Atomic Safety 6nd Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 In the Matter of NMICE P. ACOSTA, JR.

facke ho, 55-08347

Dear Administrative Judges:

As directed by the Licensing Board, the Staff on June 26, 1989 timely filed its " Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in the Form of an Initial Decision". To date the Staff has not received Maurice P.

Acosta, Jr.'s proposed findings of fact and cor.clusions of law as required by the Licensing Board; these findings were due to be filed by July 25, 1989.

The Staff's reply findings were due to be filed on August 9, 1989. In the absence of Mr. Acosta's filing, the Staff of course is unable to prepare reply findings or a reply brief.

On July 31, 1989, Staff counsel contacted counsel for Mr. Acosta to determine if proposed findings or a brief had been filed. Counsel for Mr. Acosta advised that he was still working on the brief and inquired as to when it was due to be filed. Staff counsel replied that the filing should have been made on July 25 and that Mr. Acosta's counsel would have to contact the Licensing Board to seek leave to file the findings or brief out of time.

$taff counsel informed counsel for Mr. Acosta that the Staff would not object to such a request provided that his filing was made by the end of the week, August 4, and the Staff was afforded 15 days from the filing made by Mr. Acosta within which to make a reply filing. At the time of this discussion (July 31) counsel for Mr. Acosta stated that he would mail his filing by the end of the week (August 4).

As noted above, Staff counsel has yet to receive any proposed findings or brief. In the event that, with leave of the Board, Mr. Acosta's counsel late files any proposed findings or brief, Staff counsel take this opportunity to apprise the Licensing Board and counsel for Mr. Acosta that longstanding unavoidable personal commitments will preclude their availability to work on or file reply findings between the period August 22-28, 1989. Accordingly, this may result in a Staff request for an extension of time within which to file reply findings.

8908150068 890009' SECY LICSS 05508347 PDR

} 50

4

. 0 In the event Staff is not in receipt of Mr. Acosta's proposed findings -

or brief by August 14, 1989, and the Board has not granted or, extension of time within to make such a filing, the Staff intends to file a motion requesting the Board to proceed with the issuance of an Initial Decision in this proceeding based on the record before it and the Staff's June 26, 1989, proposed findings. Cf. Detroit Edison Co., (Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2), ALAB-709, ITNRC 17, 21 (1983).

Sincerely, M NfY Bernard M. Bordenick Counsel for Staff cc: Service List

.