## Facts

- A corporate group operated an industrial chlor-alkali chemical plant in Brunswick, Georgia, using mercury cells and employing roughly 150 workers.
- Plant operations generated hazardous wastes, including elemental mercury, mercury-contaminated sludge, hazardous wastewater (including chlorine-contaminated wastewater), and highly caustic wastes.
- Hazardous wastewater was authorized to be stored in holding tanks on cellroom floors, but evidence showed wastewater frequently leaked onto the ground, out of cellrooms, and into a nearby lake; spills also left bleach on cellroom floors.
- Maintenance and plant conditions deteriorated over time despite repeated employee warnings and complaints to senior management.
- OSHA monitoring identified safety hazards from wastewater accumulation and required protective measures.
- Rather than implementing lasting repairs, senior management directed temporary “suppression” measures aimed at preventing visible wastewater flow from the cellrooms; these conditions and actions were communicated among managers.
- Federal prosecutors charged senior officers/managers with conspiracy and substantive environmental offenses arising from improper storage, treatment, and discharge of hazardous waste and pollutants.
- After a jury trial, defendants were convicted on conspiracy and multiple substantive counts and received prison terms and fines; they appealed, challenging trial rulings, instructions, evidentiary decisions, sufficiency of the evidence, and sentencing.

## Issues

1. Whether the jury instructions adequately stated the required knowledge (scienter) elements for the charged environmental offenses.
2. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support conspiracy and substantive convictions, including for violations that continued after certain defendants left supervisory roles.
3. Whether the district court abused its discretion in admitting the government’s environmental expert testimony.
4. Whether corporate bankruptcy or financial constraints negated or mitigated individual criminal responsibility for the violations.
5. Whether employees of a single corporation can form a conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371.
6. Whether the district court erred in applying the Sentencing Guidelines or denying requested downward departures.

## Decision

- The Eleventh Circuit affirmed all convictions and sentences.
- The court held that the jury instructions, taken as a whole, sufficiently conveyed the knowledge requirements for the charged offenses.
- The court found the evidence adequate for a reasonable jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, including as to defendants who had knowingly contributed to violations that continued after changes in supervisory roles.
- The court upheld admission of the government’s expert testimony as reliable and relevant, and rejected additional objections that were untimely or went to weight rather than admissibility.
- The court rejected the argument that corporate bankruptcy or spending constraints immunized individuals from criminal liability for knowing violations.
- The court held that an agreement among employees of the same corporation can constitute a conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371.
- The court found no reversible sentencing error and upheld the Guidelines calculations and denial of downward departures.

## Legal Principles

- For felony environmental offenses requiring “knowing” conduct, jury instructions are sufficient if, in context, they clearly require proof of knowledge rather than mere negligence.
- Individual managers may be criminally liable for environmental violations they knowingly cause or contribute to, even if particular violations persist after they leave certain positions.
- Financial distress or corporate bankruptcy does not excuse knowing noncompliance with environmental criminal statutes where individuals retain decision-making authority over unlawful practices.
- Expert testimony in environmental-crimes prosecutions is reviewed for abuse of discretion; reliability and relevance support admissibility, while credibility and methodology disputes often go to weight.
- Intra-corporate agreements among employees can support federal conspiracy liability under 18 U.S.C. § 371.
- Sentencing challenges fail absent a showing that the district court misapplied the Sentencing Guidelines or otherwise committed reversible error.

## Conclusion

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed environmental-crime convictions and sentences of corporate officers/managers, holding that the knowledge instructions were adequate, the evidence supported findings of knowing participation in ongoing violations, intra-corporate conspiracy liability applied, bankruptcy constraints did not bar individual culpability, expert testimony was properly admitted, and sentencing was free of reversible error.


United States v. Hansen, 262 F.3d 1217 (11th Cir. 2001)