1. (a) Upon board member initiative or upon a party's motion, a board member shall, for good cause or to avoid the appearance of impropriety or lack of impartiality, withdraw from any adjudicative proceeding.
2. (b) Pursuant to Taylor Boren v. Isaac, 143 N.H. 261 (1998), recusal shall occur when an objective, disinterested observer fully informed of the facts would entertain significant doubt about the board member's ability to be impartial or do justice in the case.
3. (c) If recusal is sought by a party, the party shall file a motion to the full board and shall have the burden to show why recusal is warranted.

4. (d) For purposes of this section, good cause shall include the following:

   1. (1) The member has a personal or pecuniary interest in the matter that is immediate, definite and subject to demonstration; or
   2. (2) There is evidence that would cause a reasonable person to conclude the member's impartiality can be questioned.

5. (e) Except where personal bias or prejudice exists, a board member may sit on a case where good cause for recusal exists, provided:

   1. (1) On the record, the board member makes a full disclosure of the facts underlying the good cause;
   2. (2) The other board members conclude the good cause is waivable and the board member can sit impartially;
   3. (3) The parties are given an opportunity outside the board's presence to consider waiver; and
   4. (4) The parties, free of board influence and on the record, waive recusal.

Source. #13226 eff 7-7-21