I would like to address four points: the genesis of the Environmental Law Institute Study, what the ELI Study says, the important differences between the ELI Study and the §301(e) Report, and some of the policy considerations behind our approach to the problem of compensation of victims of exposure to toxic substances.

First, the genesis of the ELI report, that is, how we became involved with this issue. Our Toxic Substances Program was commissioned in 1979 to examine the adequacy of state law to deal with victims of toxic substances injuries. A report was completed for the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress and was entitled Six Case Studies.¹ It studied the case law of six different states, Texas, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, California, and Alabama, and their treatment of this category of victim. This report provided the background to the debate over the Superfund law in the 1979-1980 session of the Congress.