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.