Facts

Plaintiff California River Watch, a non-profit organization, filed a lawsuit against defendant City of Vacaville claiming that defendant violated 42 U.S.C. Section 6972(a)(1)(B) of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Plaintiff alleged that the public water supply was contaminated with hexavalent chromium which is toxic and a danger to human health.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendant was transporting hexavalent chromium through its potable water system and distributing the water to consumers for public consumption. Plaintiff also contended defendant was discharging hexavalent chromium to surface waters. Plaintiff asserted two general types of RCRA endangerment: one endangerment to human health because Vacaville's customers drink the City's potable water, and a second to the environment when water from the City's potable drinking water system is released into surface waters.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied plaintiff's contentions. Defendants contended that plaintiffs had not shown a redressable injury, that any hexavalent chromium is naturally occurring in local groundwater, that defendant complied with applicable drinking water laws, that defendant's drinking water is not a solid waste subject to RCRA, and that concentrations of hexavalent chromium provided to consumers drinking the water does not present an imminent and substantial endangerment under RCRA.

Result

The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment. Prior to the court's ruling on the motions, the parties entered into a settlement agreement settling River Watch's surface water claim. The court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment on the remaining claim, ruling that defendant's drinking water was not a "solid waste" subject to RCRA. The court ordered the case closed because plaintiff stretched the RCRA statute beyond its application for the remaining claim.