similarity between asbestos claims and hazardous waste claims and holding that continuous trigger theory implicates “each exposure of the environment to a pollutant”); New Castle County v. Continental Cas. Co., 725 F.Supp. 800, 812 (D.Del.1989), rev’d in part and ajfd. in part, 970 F.2d 1267 (3d Cir.l992)(concluding in leachate pollution case that “the entire injurious process may constitute ‘injury’ under the terms of the policies”); Harleysville Mutual Ins. Co., Inc. v. Sussex County, 831 F.Supp. 1111, 1124 (D.Del.1993)(finding “slow leaching of pollutants from a landfill to adjacent property” constitutes a progressive injury requiring use of continuous trigger theory); Northern States Power Co. v. Fidelity and Cas. Co. of New York, 523 N.W.2d 657, 664 (Minn.l994)(<HOLDING>); United States Gypsum Co. v. Admiral Ins. Co.,
holding that continuous trigger will be applicable when environmental contamination claimant is able to show that damage like asbestosis occurred on continuing basis holding groundwater contamination is continuous process in which the property damage is evenly distributed over the period of time from the first contamination to the end of the last triggered policy holding that property damage occurred when mold contamination first manifested holding that coverage was triggered despite applicability of owned property exclusion because government had mandated remediation of the environmental contamination recognizing that coverage could be triggered by need to prevent imminent contamination of groundwater