So, let me get this straight.
"Person" could mean -
an individual human being,
a company,
an industry,
a condo association,
a realty agency that owns an industrial park,
a realty agency that owns rental property,
an association of private residences on a private road,
the US government ... opps, sorry, didn't mean that one!!!
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Action Needed on Waxman/Pallone amendment to Safe Drinking W
Author: [log in to unmask] at internet-mail
Date: 5/15/96 11:41 AM
Representative Waxman (D-CA) and Representative Pallone (D-NJ) are =
expected to introduce an amendment this week at a markup of the House =
Safe Drinking Water Act bill (at this time, no markup has been =
scheduled; however, it is rumored that one is expected). =20
The amendment, termed the "Polluter Pays" or "Ratepayer Protection" =
amendment would allow any public water system to bring lawsuits against =
any person who is found responsible for any pollutant at any level =
present in source water, including recovery for the costs of treatment =
and/or monitoring the pollutant.
Industry groups, including IPC, are very concerned that the broadly =
drafted amendment would make any business, homeowner, farmer, rancher, =
citizen, or institution potentially liable for any activity -- =
intentional or not, that results in, or contributes to, any contaminants =
in source water. For example, anyone could be held liable for =
agricultural or land use activities, runoff from storms, or other =
weather/geographic circumstances, construction or transportation =
activities. =20
This amendment would increase litigation against potentially responsible =
parties, increasing litigation fees and costs for small businesses. =
Issues such as contribution are unresolved. As a result, in cases where =
pollution cannot be traced to one source, liability could be "joint and =
several" meaning that one party can be held liable for pollution caused =
by others.=20
This amendment would not improve drinkng water quality. Rather, it is =
merely a way to shift the costs of water treatment on to industry and =
other entities. It is also likely to increase costs for ratepayers =
since increased litigation will spawn higher rates. =20
We urge you to contact your U.S. Representative today -- by fax or by =
phone and urge him/her to reject the Waxman/Pallone Safe Drinking Water =
Act amendment. Representatives who will be most influential on this =
issue include: Bilirakis (R-FL), Hastert (R-IL), Barton (R-TX), Upton =
(R-MI), Stearns (R-FL), Klug (R-WI), Franks (R-CT), Greenwood (R-PA), =
Burr (R-NC), Bilbray (R-CA), Whitfield (R-KY), Ganske (R-IA), Norwood =
(R-GA), Coburn (R-OK), Brown (D-OH), Lincoln (D-AR), Deutsch (D-FL), =
Stupak (D-MI), Wyden (D-OR), Hall (D-TX), Bryant (D-TX), Towns (D-NY), =
and Studds (D-MA). The number of the Capitol switchboard is (202) =
225-3121. Companies that are located in Waxman and Pallone's =
congressional districts are particularly encouraged to use their =
"constituent clout" to defeat this litigious and unsound amendment.
|
