United States v. Carr

David Carr (defendant) was the maintenance foreman at a U.S. Army camp. Carr instructed workers under his supervision to load a truck with old cans of paint and dispose of them in a manmade pit that had filled with water. The workers started throwing paint cans into the water but saw paint leaking from the cans. The workers stopped and advised Carr that paint had leaked into the water. Carr later directed a worker to cover up the paint cans by dumping earth into the pit. Carr was charged with violating § 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) by directing workers to improperly dispose of paint and failing to report the release of hazardous substances to the appropriate federal agency. At trial, the district court instructed the jury that the truck and area of disposal constituted facilities within the meaning of CERCLA and that the jury could find Carr responsible if he had supervisory control or was otherwise in charge of the truck or area, and it was sufficient if he had any authority even if others also exercised control. Carr was convicted and argued on appeal that the district court’s instruction erroneously extended the reporting requirement to lower-level employees and allowed the jury to find him in charge so long as he exercised any control over the disposal of the paint.