32 ELR 20363 -- United States v. Pearson

United States v. Pearson

No. 00-30086 (274 F.3d 1225) (UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT December 18, 2001)

ELR Digest

The court affirms an individual's conviction under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for knowingly causing the removal of asbestos-containing materials without complying with the applicable work-practice standards. The court first holds that the district court did not err in instructing the jury that the individual had to have significant and substantial control to be liable as a supervisor. In determining the scope of the authority necessary to meet the definition of supervisor under the CAA, substantial control is the governing criterion. Significant and substantial control means having the ability to direct the manner in which work is performed and the authority to correct problems. However, the supervisor need not possess ultimate control over the work practices, and on any given asbestos abatement project there could be one or more supervisors. The court also holds that although a supervisor can also be an employee, the district court did not err in failing to give the jury that instruction. The court further holds that the district court did not fail to properly define the term owner or operator as it is used in the CAA. Moreover, the district court properly enhanced the individual's sentence based on sufficient facts to support findings that hazardous substances were discharged into the environment, resulting in a substantial likelihood of death or serious bodily injury.

The full text of this decision is available from ELR (18 pp., ELR Order No. L-417).

Counsel for Plaintiff
Helen J. Brunner, Ass't U.S. Attorney
U.S. Attorney's Office
800 5th Ave., Seattle WA 98104
(206) 553-7970

Counsel for Defendant
David B. Adler
Law Offices of David B. Adler
520 E. Denny Way, Seattle WA 98122
(206) 343-5991

[OPINION OMITTED BY PUBLISHER IN ORIGINAL SOURCE]