A written-notice requirement serves both a fourth amendment analogue and a record-keeping function

Evidence

Two, the written-notice provision in your bill, we think is needed. We do not think it is meaningless, for two reasons: One is legal and one is practical. Legally, it is an analogue to that part of the fourth amendment with which this committee is familiar that provides that a search warrant must particularly describe the place and the things to be searched. We think that that notice must refer to section 704, and we rest on the limited language and the limited authorization in section 704 (2). Practically, that notice will serve as a record of the visit, identifying the date and the inspector; and without taking the time to elaborate, I can tell you from experience of some 20 years in the canning industry as counsel for the national association, that can be important. — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process, 477

Categorization

• DEFINE: Explains how an administrative entry notice functions — part of the warrant clause’s particularity requirement, part practical audit trail — useful definition of what a procedural safeguard does.
• XREF: Lends precise content to the book’s running thread about procedural safeguards in administrative inspection. — connects to: Amendment-by-implication doctrine can ratify an agency’s contested interpretation when Congress touches a statute — Henry M. Hart, Jr. and Albert M. Sacks, The Legal Process: Basic Problems in…, 509