Opinion ID: 1749632
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Legislative intent in creating the cumulative potential effects criterion

Text: When the words of a rule are ambiguous, the intent of the rulemakers may be ascertained by considering other evidence. [9] In ascertaining legislative intent, we look to: (1) the occasion and necessity for the law; (2) the circumstances under which it was enacted; (3) the mischief to be remedied; (4) the object to be attained; (5) the former law, if any, including other laws upon the same or similar subjects; (6) the consequences of a particular interpretation; (7) the contemporaneous legislative history; and (8) legislative and administrative interpretations of the statute. Minn.Stat. § 645.16 (2004). Therefore, we turn to the legislative and rulemaking record in an attempt to ascertain the EQB's intent when it created the cumulative potential effects criteria. First, it is useful to consider the legislature's overall intent in passing MEPA and establishing MEPA's system of environmental review. Minn.Stat. §§ 116D.01 and 116D.02 emphasize the legislature's belief that environmentally sustainable policies are desirable and governmental bodies are to consider the environmental effects of their actions. [10] The legislature then specified several environmental goals for governmental action in order to accomplish this purpose. Minn.Stat. § 116D.02. These goals included that the state should fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generations and develop and implement a policy such that growth occurs only in an environmentally acceptable manner. Minn.Stat. § 116D.02, subd. 2(1), (3). But the legislature was also careful to acknowledge that these environmental goals must be balanced with other essential considerations of state policy. Minn.Stat. § 116D.02, subd. 2. To ensure that RGUs would take the foregoing environmental goals into account when making decisions on which projects to approve, the legislature created the EAW and EIS review framework in Minn. Stat. § 116D.04. The EQB then fleshed out the EAW and EIS review procedures in chapter 4410 in accordance with the legislature's goals. [11] As previously noted, under Minn. R. 4410.1000, subp.1, the purpose of the project-specific EAW is to determine on brief review whether a given project could potentially cause significant environmental effects, and Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7, provides the criteria to be used by an RGU when making this determination. Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, subp. 7's project-specific criteria essentially reflect common sense principles, and these principles indicate what the EQB, which created the rules, intended when it required consideration of cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects. After consideration of the legislative history and the purpose of the environmental review rules, we conclude that the point of the cumulative potential effects criterion is to put the proposed project into context. The criteria aims to determine whether the project, which may not individually have the potential to cause significant environmental effects, could have a significant effect when other local projects already in existence or planned for the future are considered. This purpose recognizes the fact that the environment is a dynamic system wherein one action may have an effect on another, or when considered in conjunction with another. Therefore, with the EQB's general intent in creating the cumulative potential effects criterion before us, we proceed to determine what the EQB intended the scope of the cumulative potential effects review to be.