In sum, the process contemplated in this article is direct "notification" of an employer in another State of a withholding order without the involvement of initiating or responding tribunals. Therefore, receipt of a copy of a withholding order by facsimile, regular first class mail, registered or certified mail, or any other type of direct notice is sufficient to provide the requisite notice to trigger direct income withholding in the absence of a contest by the employee-obligor.

The 2001 amendments acknowledge that this process is now widely used by not only child support enforcement agencies, but also by private collection agencies or private attorneys acting on behalf of obligees.

Sec. 30. 19-A MRSA §3101-B, as enacted by PL 1997, c. 669, §21, is amended to read:

§3101-B. Employer's compliance with multiple income- withholding

orders

If an employer receives multiple 2 or more income- withholding orders for the same obligor, the employer satisfies the terms of the multiple orders if the employer complies with the laws of the state of the obligor's principal place of employment when establishing the priorities for withholding and allocating income for multiple 2 or more child support obligees.

Uniform Comment

(This is Section 503 of the Uniform Act.)

Consistent with the Act's general problem-solving approach, the employer is directed to deal with multiple income orders for multiple families in the same manner as required by local law for orders of the forum State.

Sec. 31. 19-A MRSA §3101-F, sub-§1, as enacted by PL 1997, c. 669, §21, is amended to read:

1. Contesting the validity or enforcement of an order. An obligor may contest the validity or enforcement of an income- withholding order issued in another state and received directly by an employer in this State by registering the order in a tribunal of this State and filing a contest to that order as provided in subchapter 6, or otherwise contesting the order in