United States v. Gurley

From 1970 to 1975, Gurley Refining Company, Inc., (GRC) re-refined used motor oil. GRC disposed of acidic sludge and spent clay into a pit as part of the process. After GRC discontinued its re-refining operations and stopped disposing of wastes at the pit, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service discovered that contaminated water from the pit had spilled over into nearby fish and waterfowl habitats. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) worked to prevent future spillovers, but that did not remedy the issue. Years later, the EPA listed it on the EPA’s National Priorities List. The site remained contaminated. The EPA brought an action on behalf of the United States (plaintiff) to recover cleanup costs for a hazardous waste site. The district court entered judgment in favor of the EPA imposing liability for past and future costs against GRC; its principal shareholder and president, William Gurley; and an employee, Larry Gurley. Larry Gurley (defendant) was not an officer, manager, or shareholder of GRC. Larry Gurley undertook significant management responsibilities, including negotiations of leases, oversight of construction, and supervision of employees. Larry Gurley had authority for these purposes, and he exercised his authority. The district court found that Larry Gurley personally participated in the disposal of the hazardous substances in question in the pit involved in the litigation and that Larry Gurley had the extensive authority to implement the policies and practices of the corporate entity, which included the disposal of these hazardous substances. On appeal, Larry Gurley argued that his role in the company’s hazardous-waste disposal was too tenuous to make him liable as an operator of a hazardous-waste facility.