Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content

Stauffer Chem. Co. v. EPA

Citation: 11 ELR 20562
No. No. 80-1879, 647 F.2d 1075/15 ERC 2044/(10th Cir., 05/08/1981) Aff'd

The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals rules that an employee of a private company under contract with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to carry out an inspection program is not an "authorized representative" of the Administrator under § 114(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act and thus has no right of entry upon the premises of an emission source. Although § 114 provides that owner of sources must admit the Administrator "or his authorized representative," the court declines to interpret this term literally to cover non-Agency employees. The legislative history of the Act suggests that Congress did not intended persons other than Agency employees to make administrative inspections, and similar but more explicit statements found in the legislative history of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act confirm this interpretation. Therefore, the district court was correct in enjoining EPA from making an inspection using employees of an independent contractor.

Counsel for Appellants
Peter G. Beeson, Dirk D. Snel; James W. Moorman, Ass't Attorney General
Land and Natural Resources Division
Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 633-3607

Charles Graves, U.S. Attorney
P.O. Box 668, Cheyenne WY 82001
(307) 778-2220 ext. 2126

Counsel for Appellees
Charles F. Lettow, Eric O. Jeffrey
Cleary, Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton
1250 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington DC 20036
(202) 828-3000

Blair J. Trautwein
Hathaway, Speight & Kunz
One Pioneer Center, 25th and Pioneer Sts., Cheyenne WY 82001
(307) 634-7723

Joined by Breitenstein and Logan, JJ.