Share
Explore BrainMass

Disney: Explain the action that management can take to apply the liability limiting rules to the situation

4. Appropriate management response to the situation to limit legal liability.

and

6. Explain the action that management can take to apply the liability limiting rules to the situation.

----------------------

Workplace Application Report

1. Topic / Legal Issue:
Topic: Environmental Law
Issue: One of Disney's employees's violated the environmental laws by unknowingly dumping waste into the public drainage for nearly a week. He had no idea that the water he was dumping had any chemicals. Since the employee unintentionally violated the Clean Water act, is he still liable and did he commit a felony?

2. Why does this topic apply to your workplace? Disney theme parks accumulate a great amount of waste from its customers, products and machinery. It is necessary that the employees understand the importance of discharging waste in the rightful place and the consequences of violating the strict environmental laws.

3. IRAC Analysis
Issue: Did the employee commit a felony even though he unknowingly released the polluted water in the public drains?

Rule- Violation of the Clean Water Act: The EPA can assess civil penalties (unknowingly) of up to $10,000 per day and not more than $25,000 per violation (Cite: West Law p. 834.)

Rule - Knowingly Violate the Act: Those who knowingly violate the act may be subject to criminal penalties ranging from a fine of $2,500 per day and imprisonment for up to one ear to a fine of $1 million and fifteen years' imprisonment. Criminal penalties apply only if a violation was intentional (Cite: West Law p. 834.)

Application: The employee will have to pay the fine for violating the Clean Water Act. Since the employee unintentionally discharged pollutants in the public water system, he will have to pay the civil penalties of up to $25,000.

Conclusion: The employee did not commit a felony because he did not knowingly violate the act, thus is free from criminal penalties. However, he must pay the civil penalties for the violation.

4. Appropriate management response to the situation to limit legal liability.

5. Preventative measures that management can take to limit liability in the future. Give citations for legal rules that may limit liability.
Regulations, for the most part, specify that the best available control technology, or BACTT, be installed. The EPA issues guidelines as to what equipment meets this standard, which essentially requires the most effective pollution-control equipment available (Cite: West Law p. 834.) Existing sources are subject to timetables for installation of BACTT equipment. These sources must immediately install equipment that utilizes the best practical control technology, or BPCT (Cite: West Law p. 834.)

6. Explain the action that management can take to apply the liability limiting rules to the situation.

Attachments

Solution Preview

4. Appropriate management response to the situation to limit legal liability.
Please note the issue:
One of Disney's employee's violated the environmental laws by unknowingly dumping waste into the public drainage for nearly a week. He had no idea that the water he was dumping had any chemicals. The appropriate response of Disney to the situation was that the employee did not know that the waste he was dumping was in violation of section 1311, 1312, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1321 (b)(3), 1328, or 1345 of this act. And that the employee was not in a position to easily know that the waste was toxic.

Please note that the employee can be persecuted under the following section. The prosecutor can claim negligent violations.
§ 1319. Enforcement
c) Criminal penalties
(1) Negligent violations
Any person who-
(B) negligently introduces into a sewer system or into a publicly owned treatment works any pollutant or hazardous substance which such person knew or reasonably should have known could cause personal injury or property damage or, other than in compliance with all applicable Federal, State, or local requirements or permits, which causes such treatment works to violate any effluent limitation or condition in any permit issued to the treatment works under section 1342 of this title by the Administrator or a State;
Please note that Disney should claim that the employee did not know that he was dumping toxics into the drainage.
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $2,500 nor more than $25,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or by both. If a conviction of a person is for a violation committed after a first conviction of such person under this paragraph, punishment shall be by a fine of not more than $50,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment of not more than 2 years, or by both.
First, the Disney management should claim that this was a first time violation and so the employee is not fined on a higher scale. Second, the management should claim that the employee unknowingly dumped the waste into the drainage. Third Disney should claim that the employee 'could not have reasonably have known' that it was toxic waste that he was dumping into the public drainage.

6. Explain the action that management can take to apply the liability limiting rules to the situation.
The management should establish by way of witnesses and other evidence that the employee did not know that substance was toxic. The employee can also help by bringing in evidence and witnesses. This would protect the company from the penalties of knowing violations.
§ 1319. Enforcement
(2) Knowing violations
Any person who-
(A) knowingly violates section 1311, 1312, 1316, 1317, 1318, 1321 (b)(3), 1328, or 1345 of this title, or any permit condition or limitation implementing any of such sections in a permit issued under section 1342 of this ...

Solution Summary

Here is just a sample of what you will find in the solution:

"Please note that Disney should claim that the employee did not know that he was dumping toxics into the drainage.
shall be punished by a fine of not less than $2,500 nor more than $25,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment for..."

$2.19