## Facts

- Attique Ahmad owned and operated a convenience store and gas station in Conroe, Texas, with underground gasoline storage tanks.
- Ahmad discovered that a high-octane tank had a leak at the top that allowed water to enter and contaminate the gasoline, making the tank’s contents unsellable.
- A tank-testing company determined the tank contained substantial water mixed with gasoline and told Ahmad the tank had to be fully emptied before repair; the company offered to empty it for a fee.
- A company employee testified she warned Ahmad it would be dangerous and illegal for him to empty the tank himself; she testified Ahmad responded, “Well, if I don’t get caught, what then?”
- On January 25, 1994, Ahmad rented a motorized pump, telling the rental store it would be used to remove water from his backyard.
- Witnesses testified they saw Ahmad pumping liquid into the street and discharging gasoline into a manhole.
- The discharged gasoline entered (1) a storm-sewer system that emptied into a creek and (2) a sewer line leading to a municipal sewage-treatment plant, creating an explosion hazard and prompting evacuations.
- Investigators traced the gasoline to the manhole and to Ahmad’s station.
- Ahmad was indicted and tried in federal district court for criminal violations of the Clean Water Act (CWA); a jury convicted him and he was sentenced.
- Ahmad’s defense was that he believed he was pumping and discharging water, not gasoline, and thus did not “knowingly” discharge a pollutant as required for the felony CWA counts.

## Issues

1. Under the CWA felony provision punishing one who “knowingly violates,” must the government prove the defendant knew the critical facts making the conduct unlawful (including the nature of the discharged substance as a pollutant), or is it enough that the defendant intentionally performed the discharge?
2. Did the district court’s jury instructions improperly define “knowingly” in a way that reduced the government’s burden and required reversal?

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit reversed Ahmad’s conviction and sentence and remanded.
- The court held the district court’s jury instructions on the CWA “knowingly violates” requirement were erroneous.
- The instructions permitted conviction based on intentional pumping/discharge alone, without requiring the jury to find Ahmad knew the critical factual circumstances that made the conduct criminal (including that the substance discharged was gasoline/pollutant).
- Because the jury may have convicted under an improper mens rea standard, the instructional error required reversal.

## Legal Principles

- A CWA felony requiring a person to “knowingly violate” the Act demands more than proof of voluntary physical acts; the government must prove knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense.
- “Knowingly” in this context does not require knowledge of the statute’s precise legal requirements, but it does require awareness of critical factual circumstances (such as the pollutant nature of the discharged substance).
- Jury instructions in CWA felony prosecutions must preserve the statutory mens rea by requiring the jury to find the defendant knew the operative facts making the discharge a criminal violation; an act-only instruction improperly dilutes the government’s burden.

## Conclusion

The Fifth Circuit vacated Ahmad’s Clean Water Act felony convictions because the jury was instructed in a manner that allowed conviction without finding that Ahmad knew the essential facts rendering his discharge criminal, and it remanded for further proceedings under a correct mens rea standard.


United States v. Ahmad, 101 F.3d 386 (5th Cir. 1996)