C.F.R. » Title 10 » CHAPTER I—NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION › PART 2—AGENCY RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE › Subpart J—Procedures Applicable to Proceedings for the Issuance of Licenses for the Receipt of High-Level Radioactive Waste at a Geologic Repository

10 C.F.R. § 2.1006

Privilege

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Subject to the requirements in § 2.1003(a)(4), the traditional discovery privileges recognized in NRC adjudicatory proceedings and the exceptions from disclosure in § 2.390 may be asserted by potential parties, interested States, local governmental bodies, Federally-recognized Indian Tribes, and parties. In addition to Federal agencies, the deliberative process privilege may also be asserted by States, local governmental bodies, and Federally-recognized Indian Tribes.

(b) Any document for which a claim of privilege is asserted, but is denied in whole or in part by the Pre-License Application Presiding Officer or the Presiding Officer, must be provided in electronic form by the party, interested governmental participant, or potential party that asserted the claim to—

(1) The other participants; or

(2) To the Pre-License Application Presiding Officer or to the Presiding Officer, for entry into a Protective Order file, if the Pre-License Application Presiding Officer or the Presiding Officer so directs under §§ 2.1010(b) or 2.1018(c).

(c) Notwithstanding any availability of the deliberative process privilege under paragraph (a) of this section, circulated drafts not otherwise privileged shall be provided for electronic access pursuant to § 2.1003(a).

[63 FR 71738, Dec. 30, 1998; 64 FR 15920, Apr. 2, 1999, as amended at 69 FR 2265, Jan. 14, 2004]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2007–2007 · leading case: Nevada v. United States Dep't of Energy, 517 F. Supp. 2d 1245 (D. Nev. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nevada v. United States Dep't of Energy, 517 F. Supp. 2d 1245 (D. Nev. 2007). · cites it 2× “First, the PAPO Board noted that the deliberative process privilege was waived by regulation for documents that fell within the definition of documentary materials, 10 C.F.R. § 2.1006 (e), and second, the PAPO Board also concluded that the application was not prepared “because…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.