This paper confers to the regulatory risks and tort liabilities associated with Alumina and a strategic business plan is also implemented for better management of unfavorable situation. The description of each liability includes the corrective measures, detection and further prevention. During this plan, the tort liability is alleviated through the best course of action which results in beneficial outcome for Alumina.
Risk plan refers to detailed information of all risks involved in a project work and possesses a strategic plan to alleviate part of whole of the involved risks. Generally, a risk plan minimizes the volume of risk and is perceived to be a secured insurance policy against uncertainty (Applied Software Project Management, 2010).
Principle Table and Legal Issues for Simulation of Business Regulation
Scenario
Legal Issue
Legal Principles
Allegation by Bates that EPA standards are not met by Alumina
Negligence
Results in damage due to negligence and conduct of omission
Allegation by Bates that EPA standards are not met by Alumina
Act of Cleaning Water
The regulation of federal law concerning emissions in different sources of water
Allegation by Bates that EPA standards are not met by Alumina
Prudent and Reasonable Person
Measuring conduct through self standards which affects oneself or own family
Defense by Alumina against allegation which mentions non-compliance of EPA standards
Control Technology Maximum Achievable
Emissions controlled through best means. The best available technology is used by Alumina
Information is required to be disclosed under FOLA as per EPA notification
Privilege
Certain statements are protected because of public release which can harm competitive advantage
Information is required to be disclosed as per EPA notification
Act providing Freedom of Information
Public and private parties are allowed to access reports and information related to non-classified government
Bates’ daughter suffered leukemia due to previous EPA violation by Alumina
Negligence
Results in damage due to negligence and conduct of omission
Lawsuit states that Bates daughter suffered leukemia due to EPA violation by Alumina
Adjoining Reason
A predictable need of causation
Defense by Alumina towards Bates’ allegations
Act of Drinking Safe Water
Standard establishing for contaminants through federal laws
A company namely ‘Alumina’ has been centered as the business simulation, on which, actions were taken five years ago due to associated risks and liabilities. Due to recent complaints and previous lawsuits, Alumina has currently faced tort liabilities which compound possible risks over the company. The regulatory risks and tort liabilities claimed on Alumina consists of ‘Assumption of Risk, Negligence, Freedom of Information Act and Defamation. If compared to Alumina’s prior and existing liabilities, the involved risks are quite relevant and much serious as per regulations.
The regulatory risk and tort liability is contended by many organizations in business. It relates to risks which are caused to the people and environment due to non-compliance of EPA standards as per federal regulations. Every effort has been made by organizations to minimize the risk of tort liability through various preventive measures in order to effectively operate all business activities (Minsky, 2005). The case is lodged due to ‘leukemia caused to a young girl’ after which, it was blamed and public accusation was made that local water supply is still polluted by the company. A different case was also lodged five years ago in which, Alumina was found guilty and liable for the caused risks. Following the previous case, the necessary changes were made by the company in maintaining standards as per Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and are now complying with the federal regulations. The current accusation is unfounded by Alumina and believes this action as the defamation against company’s prestige. The defamation is described as the damaging statements and untrue publication about a company or an individual. Although, proper documentation is currently lacking in this case but the people still consider liability towards the company due to prior poor performance five years ago and as such, the central motivator will be the public perception in resolving this issue. Alumina could have decreased this liability by declaring and allowing public awareness that company is complying with the federal regulations in improving and maintaining standards as compared to five years ago. A positive image of the company would have been kept consistent upon taking such preventive measures.
A tort liability refers to the responsibility of compensating injury or harm being caused to a person or property. Torts conclude some categories as intentional wrongdoing, gross negligence and negligence. Liabilities include compensating, pay for damages occurred and reimbursing the charges being borne by the party for the suffered injuries or damages (Office of General Counsel, 2007). An independent investigation was suggested to start on by Diane Richards in the case of Kelly Bate. Upon inquiring the background of Bates, if, any negative information is released to media, then Bates’ case would be constituted as invasion of privacy and a legal action would be initiated considering the ‘countersuit of defamation’ against company. A more diplomatic course and wiser action is chosen by Alumina in order to diminish the risk of report. The implementation was the corrective measure which documented Alumina’s clean record through the publication of counter story to media.
Although, Alumina’s clean record was documented through the media in the form of a counter story, the company is charged for polluting environment is too accused of leukemia being caused to Kelly Bates’ daughter who is a young girl. This case would have prevented by Alumina if the regular studies would have been conducted with the Audit Policy of EPA. The policy of EPA protects environment through provision of various main incentives for regular entities and the human health is also safeguarded in compliance with federal regulations and environmental laws. The assumption of risk is taken by Alumina due to inflicted harm being caused to environment and people in the early periods of business practices. An independent site study is ordered by Alumina for protecting the company which reveals that the levels of PAH are lesser and is hard to be assumed ‘safe’. Since the facts dispute accusation, thus, the based accusation of Bates is ‘blunted’.
Considering the site study response, Bates requests all facts related to Alumina’s business practices and too demands evidence of regulatory compliance related to EPA. Some of the requested information is legally protected to design the competitive nature of business as per the Freedom of Information Act, under exemption 4, yet, Alumina has to disclose all information and failing to provide any requested information, the people and EPA will surely consider the company being liable and guilty for polluting environment and will be seriously charged due to accusation of ‘leukemia being caused to a young girl’. The risk of liability could have reduced by Alumina through publication of ‘edited’ version of report which would support the reputation of company. For proving the company’s standards, enhancing company’s reputation and minimizing the damage, the parts of reports ‘concerning environmental audit’ was released by Alumina to the public and media but the specific information related to aluminum trade was not disclosed as this could negatively affect the trade risk for the company.
At last, it was revealed that the current business practices of Alumina are regulated as per EPA standards and the documented evidence are safe enough to protect the prestige of company. Alumina wisely handles the situation strategically instead of involving itself in lengthy litigation and public arguments which would of course, hamper the reputation of company as the case was entirely publicize through media. Conversely, Alumina has the right to accuse Bates’ for alleging blames towards company without looking into the fact and without documenting proper evidence against Alumina.
References
Applied Software Project Management (2010), Risk Plan, Retrieved on May 23, 2010 from
http://www.stellman-greene.com/aspm/content/view/19/38/
Minsky, S. (2005), Developing Risk Plans, Retrieved on May 23, 2010 from
http://www.ebizq.net/topics/tech_in_biz/features/6021.html
Office of General Counsel (2007), Tort Liability, Retrieved on May 23, 2010 from
http://www.ncsu.edu/general_counsel/legal_topics/tort.php
