Robert H. "Skip" Myers Jr., who is spearheading the effort as special counsel for NRRA, was involved in the initial passage of the Risk Retention Act in 1981, as well as passage of amendments in 1986.

"We're getting some very welcome, friendly responses up on the hill," he said. "I think what we've discovered is that this strikes a responsive chord because our representatives on the Hill, in the House and the Senate, are getting calls from their constituents saying 'we cannot get this property cover.'"

Amending the Risk Retention Act, Mr. Myers said, would present a "limited but very effective solution," at least in the context of groups that can "band together to provide their own insurance through a risk retention group."

Mr. Myers, a partner with Morris, Manning & Martin, LLP in Washington, D.C., said the purpose of an amendment would be to expand the capability of risk retention groups?incorporated as either association captives or as reciprocal captives?from liability coverage to include all commercial lines except workers' compensation.

"In particular, property cover is very hard to find and expensive, and there are a number of our groups that would like to be able to provide that," he said.

The idea behind a risk retention group, he said, is to be able to "control your destiny better. You can underwrite for the long term, not just for the short term."

Mr. Myers said some members of coalition particularly interested in the ability to write commercial lines include United Educators and the Housing Authority Risk Retention Group.

Another member, the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts, he said, "is a good example of how this would operate. The group already has a structure in place, and an association of commercial property owners who are having difficulty getting property coverage," he explained.

Jon Harkavy, who tracks regulatory and legislative activity for NRRA, said that, "I have yet to see a negative response from anyone."

Mr. Harkavy, also vice president and general counsel, Risk Services, LLC in Arlington, Va., added that, "you have to take into consideration that this is not in a contested arena yet?no one else has weighed in and there have been no other factors yet. But everyone is very positive."

Mr. Harkavy said the NRRA legislative effort has intentionally removed itself from an insurance industry lobbying effort to secure federal backup for catastrophe levels of terrorism insurance claims.

"It's our firm desire and belief that the two should be de-linked as opposed to linked," he explained. "Whether you're for the [terrorism] pool or not, this should not determine how you come out on this issue."

Amendments to the Risk Retention Act, he said, are to provide more flexibility to the consumer.

"If you take a look at the history of the act when it was done in 1981, product liability was the problem," he said, and it was revised in 1986 because of a problem with general liability.

"What we've learned is that we just don't know where the next insurance problem will come from," he said. "All we're looking for is to expand the scope of the act so that you can write anything but personal lines and direct workers' compensation."

NRRA plans to continue laying groundwork. "We're hopeful that Congress, before the end of the session, might seriously consider amending the Risk Retention Act," he said.

Mr. Harkavy said organizations supporting the amendment include the Consumer Federation of America, as well as the Vermont Captive Insurance Association "and other captive associations, including Hawaii."

NRRA announced at its annual conference in March that hard market conditions had created a "favorable environment" for amending the RRA.

A letter to 375 risk retention and purchasing groups generated interest and raised conference registration levels, said Douglas Barnes, executive director for NRRA. The association has 101 members, he said.