Opinion
No. 126886 (39).
May 12, 2005.
SC: 126886, COA: 244009, Oakland CC: 00-027170-CE
On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 13, 2004 judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is GRANTED. The parties are directed to include among the issues to be briefed: (1) whether the work initiated in 1991 was an "interim response activity" that did not trigger the statute of limitations provision set out in MCL 324.20140(1)(a) rather than a "remedial action" that must first be "approved or selected" by the Department of Environmental Quality; and (2) whether the initiation of work for one release of hazardous substances begins the running of the statute of limitations for any subsequent or unrelated release of hazardous substances. The application for leave to appeal as cross-appellant is DENIED.