Oklahoma § 27A-1-4-115 Waiver of privilege – Unauthorized disclosure -

Oklahoma Statutes

§ 27A-1-4-115 — Waiver of privilege – Unauthorized disclosure -

Oklahoma § 27A-1-4-115

Title 27AEnvironment And Natural Resources

This text of Oklahoma § 27A-1-4-115 (Waiver of privilege – Unauthorized disclosure -) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Okla. Stat. tit. 27A, § 27A-1-4-115 (2026).

Text

Liability.

A.The privilege described by Section 5 of this act does not apply to the extent the privilege is expressly waived by the owner or operator who prepared the audit report or caused the report to be prepared.

B.Disclosure of an audit report or any information generated by an environmental or health and safety audit does not waive the privilege established by Section 5 of this act if the disclosure: 1. Is made to address or correct a matter raised by the environmental or health and safety audit and is made only to: a. a person employed by the owner or operator, including temporary and contract employees, b. a legal representative of the owner or operator, c. an officer or director of the regulated facility or operation or a partner of the owner or operator, d. an independent contr

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Liability. A. The privilege described by Section 5 of this act does not apply to the extent the privilege is expressly waived by the owner or operator who prepared the audit report or caused the report to be prepared. B. Disclosure of an audit report or any information generated by an environmental or health and safety audit does not waive the privilege established by Section 5 of this act if the disclosure: 1. Is made to address or correct a matter raised by the environmental or health and safety audit and is made only to: a. a person employed by the owner or operator, including temporary and contract employees, b. a legal representative of the owner or operator, c. an officer or director of the regulated facility or operation or a partner of the owner or operator, d. an independent contractor retained by the owner or operator, e. a person considering the acquisition of the regulated facility or operation that is the subject of the audit, or f. an employee, temporary employee, contract employee, legal representative, officer, director, partner or independent contractor of a person described in subparagraph e of this paragraph; 2. Is made under the terms of a confidentiality agreement between the person for whom the audit report was prepared or the owner or operator of the audited facility or operation and: a. a partner or potential partner of the owner or operator of the facility or operation, b. a transferee or potential transferee of the facility or operation, c. a lender or potential lender for the facility or operation, d. a governmental official of a state agency, or e. a person engaged in the business of insuring, underwriting or indemnifying the facility or operation; or 3. Is made under a claim of confidentiality to a governmental official or agency by the person for whom the audit report was prepared or by the owner or operator. C. A party to a confidentiality agreement described in paragraph 2 of subsection B of this section who violates that agreement is liable for damages caused by the disclosure and for any other penalties stipulated in the confidentiality agreement. D. Information that is disclosed under paragraph 3 of subsection B of this section is confidential and is not subject to disclosure under Section 24A.1 et seq. of Title 51 of the Oklahoma Statutes. A public entity, public employee or public official who discloses information in violation of this subsection is subject to penalty. It is an affirmative defense to the clerical dissemination of a privileged audit report that the report was not clearly labeled "COMPLIANCE REPORT: PRIVILEGED DOCUMENT" or words of similar import. The lack of labeling may not be raised as a defense if the entity, employee or official knew or had reason to know that the document was a privileged audit report. E. This section may not be construed to circumvent the protections provided by federal or state law for individuals who disclose information to law enforcement authorities.