Sec. 3. (a) In resolving an environmental legal action, a court shall allocate the costs of the removal or remedial action in proportion to the acts or omissions of each party, without regard to any theory of joint and several liability, using legal and equitable factors that the court determines are appropriate, including the following:
(1) The degree of care exercised by each party with respect to the release of the hazardous substance or petroleum caused or contributed to by each party.
(2) The amount and characteristics of the hazardous substance or petroleum that was released.
(3) The risks posed by the hazardous substance or petroleum based on the use of the site at the time the hazardous substance or petroleum was released into the environment and the cost effectiveness of the removal or remedial action to address the risks.
(4) Whether a party's acts or omissions violated a federal, state, or local statute, rule, regulation, or ordinance.
(5) The extent to which each party exercised actual and direct managerial control over the site where the hazardous substance or petroleum was released at the time of the release.
(6) Whether an award of reasonable costs, including attorney's fees, to a party involved in the environmental legal action is appropriate.
(7) Other equitable factors, including unjust enrichment, that the court determines are appropriate.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a), if parties have entered into a contract that allocates the costs or responsibility for the removal or remedial action, the terms of the contract control the allocation of costs between the parties to the contract. However, the terms of a contract may not affect the recovery of costs by the state unless the state is a signatory to the contract.