Opinion ID: 24837
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Required Level of Fault

Text: 42 As to the fault standard under which such contributions are held actionable, we note that the one circuit that has addressed this specific issue has held that the RCRA imposes strict liability, i.e., liability imposed without regard to the defendant's negligence or intent to harm. Cf. United States v. Northeastern Pharm. & Chem. Co., 810 F.2d 726, 741 (8th Cir. 1986) (stating, in a case arising under § 6973 (see supra note 22), that Congress intended to impose liability without fault or negligence and specifically on past non-negligent off-site generators and transporters); Aceto, 872 F.2d at 1377 (citing Northeastern and stating that § 6973 has been interpreted to impose strict liability). 25 Some other courts have also come to the same conclusion. See, e.g., Zands II, 797 F. Supp. at 809-10. 43 We have no reason to consider here whether strict liability may be a basis for liability under the RCRA. 26 The district court did not hold the City strictly liable for the waste that it generated and that was deposited in the Deepwood and South Loop 12 dumps. In the case of the South Loop 12 dump, the City did not dispute that it used the site as a municipal dump. In the case of the Deepwood dump, the district court found, and we agree, that there is a compelling case on the record that the City's actions were negligent, i.e., that the City failed to exercise due care in selecting or instructing the entity actually conducting the disposal of the City's waste. 27 44