## Facts

- Mullins & Pritchard, Inc. (Mullins) owned and operated several hydrocarbon-production facilities (oilfield production leases) in Louisiana.
- The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) received complaints about discharges from Mullins’s facilities and conducted inspections.
- During an inspection prompted by a complaint, a DEQ inspector found multiple apparent violations, including illegal discharges associated with oilfield production operations.
- At the time of the inspections, no one representing Mullins was present on site. The inspector testified he therefore could not provide “split samples” to the operator at the time of sampling, even though providing split samples was the usual DEQ practice.
- DEQ initiated administrative enforcement proceedings under the Louisiana Environmental Quality Act (La. R.S. 30:1051 et seq.).
- A DEQ hearing officer found Mullins in violation of multiple regulatory provisions, including DEQ notification requirements.
- The hearing officer also found Mullins failed to properly clean up and dispose of discharged oilfield waste.
- DEQ assessed civil penalties against Mullins for impermissible discharges of oil and other wastes at its oilfield production facilities.
- Mullins sought judicial review in the Louisiana Court of Appeal, raising numerous challenges to the agency action, including a constitutional challenge to La. R.S. 30:2012, which authorizes warrantless inspections of regulated facilities.

## Issues

1. Whether La. R.S. 30:2012, authorizing warrantless inspections by DEQ of facilities subject to environmental regulation, violates constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures as applied to oilfield production operations.
2. Whether DEQ’s findings of environmental violations and failures to notify/clean up were supported by the administrative record, including sampling taken when no operator was present to receive split samples.
3. Whether the civil penalties assessed by DEQ were lawful and should be sustained on judicial review.

## Decision

- The court affirmed DEQ’s administrative action and the imposition of civil penalties.
- The court rejected Mullins’s constitutional challenge and sustained warrantless inspections authorized by La. R.S. 30:2012 within the environmental regulatory scheme.
- The court found no error in DEQ’s determinations that Mullins committed multiple violations, including improper discharges and inadequate cleanup and disposal of oilfield waste.
- The court declined to disturb the hearing officer’s findings and penalty assessment after reviewing the administrative record.

## Legal Principles

- Warrantless administrative inspections may be reasonable under the Fourth Amendment (and parallel state protections) when conducted under a regulatory program governing a pervasively regulated industry and aimed at compliance oversight rather than general criminal investigation.
- On judicial review of agency enforcement, courts generally sustain agency fact findings and sanctions when supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record and within statutory authority.
- The inability to provide split samples at the time of sampling, when no operator representative is present, does not by itself bar reliance on the inspection evidence if the record otherwise supports the violations.
- Civil penalties imposed by an environmental agency will be upheld when authorized by the governing statute and not shown to be arbitrary or without record support.

## Conclusion

The Louisiana Court of Appeal affirmed DEQ’s penalties against Mullins for impermissible oilfield waste discharges and related notification and cleanup violations, and it held that La. R.S. 30:2012 permits constitutionally valid warrantless inspections of regulated oilfield production facilities as part of Louisiana’s environmental compliance program.


In re Mullins & Pritchard, Inc., 549 So. 2d 872 (1989)