2009_0518_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

that the MP CA did not authorize the response action(s) taken by the political subdivision or the private person pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 1 l 5 B. o, subd. 6. MERA Minnesota also has a Minnesota nvirom- rental Fights. Act "M RA" ,Flinn. Stat. H 116B.Ol,etseq. This statute allows "civil action in the district court for declaratory or equitable relief in the name of the state of Minnesota against any person, for the protection of the air, water, Land., or other natural resources located within the state, whether publicly or privately owned, from pollution, impairment, ent, or destruction." Minn Stat. § 116 . 0 3. A claim under I I RA depends upon shoving ofactual or threatened pollution, impairment or destruction.. The statute allows injunctive relief, but not damages, and does not provide for recovery of attorneys' fees. Common Law Claims Various common law claims can be. invoked in some circumstances. Typical claims include cl.ai ms for nuisance, trespass., neg.ligence,. strict liability for uItraha ardous activities; contribution. or indemnity. These common law claims do not. materially augment the available claims or remedies and are largely superseded by the statutory claims mentioned above. However, if there is litigation, parties customarily invoke such claims in addition to the statutory claims mentioned above. Statutes of Limitation We have not looked closely enough at the facts to evaluate the application of potential statutes of limitation. However, we do not believe that most available claims would be cut -off. In general, if there is an ongoing imminent and substantial endangerment, RCRA claims will be available, because the statute of limitations will not cut off ongoing claims. CERCLA claims are likewise generally available where the response actions remain incomplete. Claims for a removal action are to be brought within 3 years after completion of the removal action and claims for a. remedial action must be brought within 6 years. after initiation of physical on -site construction of the remedial action. It does not appear, from information we have received, that the Cite has conducted a removal action or initiated a remedial action.. So, the statute of limitations is unlikely to have expired. MERLA claims for cost recovery are probably available. A 1998 . amendment to Minn. Stat. 115.11, specifies: Subdr 2. Action for recovery of costs.. (a) An action for recovery of response costs under section 115 B. o may be commenced any time after costs and expenses have been incurred but must be commenced no later than six years after initiation of physical on -site construction of a response action.." 5