10 C.F.R. § 2.204

Demand for information

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

(a) The Commission may issue to a licensee or other person subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission a demand for information for the purpose of determining whether an order under § 2.202 should be issued, or whether other action should be taken, which demand will:

(1) Allege the violations with which the licensee or other person is charged, or the potentially hazardous conditions or other facts deemed to be sufficient ground for issuing the demand; and

(2) Provide that the licensee must, or the other person may, file a written answer to the demand for information under oath or affirmation within twenty (20) days of its date, or such other time as may be specified in the demand for information.

(b) A licensee to whom the Commission has issued a demand for information under this section must respond to the demand by filing a written answer under oath or affirmation; any other person to whom the Commission has issued a demand for information may, in its discretion, respond to the demand by filing a written answer under oath or affirmation. The licensee's answer shall specifically admit or deny each allegation or charge made in the demand for information, and shall set forth the matters of fact and law on which the licensee relies. A person other than a licensee may answer as described above, or by setting forth its reasons why the demand should not have been issued and, if the requested information is not provided, the reasons why it is not provided.

(c) Upon review of the answer filed pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of this section, or if no answer is filed, the Commission may institute a proceeding pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202 to take such action as may be proper.

(d) An answer may consent to the entry of an order pursuant to § 2.202 in substantially the form proposed in the demand for information. Such consent shall constitute a waiver as provided in § 2.202(d).

[56 FR 40685, Aug. 15, 1991]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1979–1991 · leading case: Jeannine Honicker v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n & United States of Am., 590 F.2d 1207 (D.C. Cir. 1979).
Jeannine Honicker v. United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n & United States of Am., 590 F.2d 1207 (D.C. Cir. 1979). “” 10 C.F.R. § 2.204 . 7 . The emergency petition is a 152 page printed work containing numerous charts, discussion, and analysis of scientific data, in addition to a statement of law.”
Shoreham-Wading River Cent. Sch. Dist. v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 931 F.2d 102 (D.C. Cir. 1991). “iate effectiveness of the Confirmatory Order is at issue here, the only future Commission orders relevant are those that might occur between the date of immediate effectiveness and the date of final agency adjudication of the merits of the Confirmatory Order (at which time the…”
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.