New Hampshire
How Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. United States applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Environmental Law (CERCLA/Superfund).
New Hampshire follows the principles established in Burlington Northern by applying a more stringent causation requirement under its state waste laws, particularly in regard to liability under RCRA and state-level environmental statutes. The state emphasizes the need for clear evidence linking the defendant's actions to the contamination.
In New Hampshire, defendants can only be held liable for environmental cleanup costs if they are found to have contributed significantly to the contamination, in line with the 'arranger' liability standard articulated in Burlington Northern.
The court held that the school was liable for remediation costs because it had knowledge of the contaminants on its property and failed to take adequate measures to address them.
The court found that the company was liable for cleanup costs as it was deemed to have arranged for the disposal of hazardous waste.
The court ruled that potential responsible parties can contest liability by proving no substantial contribution to the site contamination.
New Hampshire's approach to liability under state environmental law is more focused on the evidence of significant contribution to contamination compared to the federal standard under CERCLA. While the federal standard allows for broad interpretations of liability, New Hampshire courts tend to require a more thorough investigation into the causal link between actions and environmental harm.
New Hampshire bar exam may include questions related to CERCLA and state environmental statutes, emphasizing the distinct standards of liability and causation defined in both federal and state contexts.