Court Opinion

ID: 9462479
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 22:42:08.463321+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:37:36.781958
License: Public Domain

LEVIN H. CAMPBELL, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
I concur in the result, although I am not sure I follow the reasoning of the court in all respects. I find it enough that the Supreme Court’s interpretation in United States v. Standard Oil is the controlling interpretation of the statute today, including, functionally, of the “legislative intent.” Whether it is a revisionist interpretation or not, it is binding upon us. Whatever people may once have thought, § 13 now means what the Court in Standard Oil said. It follows that as the pollutants in question are “refuse” under § 13, the statute applies. And I agree with the court that since § 13 allows administrative permits, those rather than judicially created exceptions would be the congressionally preferred means for excepting special types of refuse as to which an exemption might be in order.
Obviously, different questions arise when one considers the equities of imposing clean-up requirements for actions that may have been undertaken in good faith under an earlier construction of the law. The district court, like ourselves, has shown itself to be well aware of these issues, which will be the subject of future hearings on the question of relief.