1. The United States government and Congress have implemented various legislations in order to hopefully reduce oil spills and aid in the clean up, should an oil spill occur. The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) was signed into legislation in August 1990. The OPA improved the nation's ability to prevent and respond to oil spills by establishing provisions that expand the federal governments's ability, and provide the money and resources necessary, to respond to oil spills. The OPA also created the national Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, which is available to provide up to one billion dollars per spill incident. The OPA also implemented new requirements for contigency planning both by government and industry. The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contigency Plan (NCP) has been expanded into a three-tiered approach: the Federal government is required to direct all public and private response efforts for certain types of spill events; Area Committees -- composed of federal, state, and local government officials -- must develop detailed, location-specific Area Contigency Plans; and owners or operators of vessels and certain facilities that pose a serious threat to the environment must prepare their own Facility Response Plans. Finally, the OPA increased penalties for regulatory noncompliance, broadened the response and enforcement authorities of the Federal government, and preserved State authority to establish law governing oil spill prevention and response. Another legislation that was implemented was the Clean Water Act, formerly known as Federal Water Pollution Control Act, which was emplented in 1948. In 1972 the act was reorganized and expanded, adding ammendments and changing it's name to the Clean Water Act(CWA).... ... middle of paper ... ...stomer service represenative. Also their signs disclaiming liablity for damges to vehicles state that if anyone has any questions or concerns about the car wash to please call their toll free number before utilizing their services, to avoid any damges. As a result, I have found that both of these companies have made individuals aware of the risks and situations that could occur by utilizing each of these different services. If one still chooses to continue with utilizing the dry cleaners or car wash, even after the risks have been brought to their attention, then yes they are accepting responsiblitiy should any damages to their personal property or belongings occur. Works Cited 1. http://www.epa.gov/oem/content/lawsregs/opaover.htm 2. http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-clean-water-act 3. http://water.epa.gov/type/wetlands/protection.cfm
In the case of Kolchek suing to recover for Litisha’s injuries, she can sure under the negligence liability. Every product should be fully tested in every way possible to see if the product functions correctly and will it injure individuals. There should not have been a whole that is not covered. Like stated in our book The Legal Environment of Business, “if a manufacture fails to exercise “due care” to make a product safe, a person who is injured by the product may sue the manufacture for negligence”. Kolchek could sue the manufacture. In this case which is Great Lakes spa. Porter was just a company that was selling the product. Great Lakes spa should have taken the initiative to examine their products throughly before putting it out on the make for individuals to buy. Like in our book The Legal Environment of Business stated, “A manufacture, seller, or lesser is liable for failure to exercise due care to any person who sustains an injury proximately caused by a negligently made (defective) product.”
There is an abundance of oil underneath earth’s crust on land and in the water but getting to that oil can be proven as a challenge and a negative impact on the earth. Many of these oil reservoirs lie in federally protected land or water to minimize the negative impact on the earth. But should those restrictions be removed? Removing the restrictions can allow the US to tap into domestic reserves rather than rely on imported oil from the Middle East and Asia but tapping these reservoirs can also leave behind an impact that is harmful to this planet. “Critics oppose this move for fear that it will cause irreparable harm environmental harm. They point to the April 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico as evidence of the risks associated with offshore drilling” (SIRS).
Most people believe that one man-made natural disaster would teach us to be better, but we have learned that history repeats itself. The Exxon Valdez oil spill (in 1989) and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, or BP oil spill, (in 2010) were both devastating oil spills that shocked the nation. The Exxon Valdez oil spill occurred due to a tanker grounding. The BP oil spill was caused by an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon oil platform. These two oil spills were both disasters and had greater effects in certain categories. In this essay, I will be comparing the cause of both oil spills, the damage/effect of both oil spills, and the cleanup of each oil spill.
The Ocean Ranger The Ocean Ranger was an offshore exploration oil drilling platform that sank in Canadian waters 315 kilometres southeast from St. John's Newfoundland, on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland on February 15, 1982, with 84 crewmembers onboard. The Ocean Ranger was the largest semi-submersible, offshore exploration, oil drilling platform of the day. Built in 1976 by Japan's Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, it operated off the coasts of Alaska, New Jersey, Ireland, and in November 1980 moved to the Grand Banks. Since it was so big, it was considered to have the ability to drill in areas too dangerous for other rigs.
the National Environmental Protection Act, Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Toxic Substances Control Act and the Clean Water Act assist in protecting consumers and organizations”. (p. 1).
...harged for i.e. a warranty must come free of charge with the product. For example, the price of a car includes the manufacturer warranty that comes with it. Insurance products are heavily regulated and have dozens of federal and state regulations and much oversight. This is meant to ensure that such companies treat all insurance customers fairly and that they maintain enough reserves to pay for any potential claims. Although there are some insurance products sold at the F&I dealership (such as Mechanical Breakdown Insurance, GAP Insurance), for the most part they are 'contracts' between the customer and the service provider - in most cases, to reimburse the customer should something untoward happen to an asset of some kind that the customer is purchasing. In fact, the technical term most used for such products is 'Contractual Liability Insurance Program (CLIP)'.
Swift, W.H, . C.J. Touhill, W.L. Templeton, and D.P. Roseman. 1969. Oil spillage prevention, control, and restoration—state of the art and research needs. Washington, D.C.: The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
The Gulf of Mexico oil spill has had an extremely negative effect on the surrounding wildlife and ecosystem. The oil spread across the gulf contaminating any living organism that came into direct or indirect contact with it. The oil cuts off the ability of oxygen from the air to move into the water which directly harms fish and other marine wildlife that require that oxygen. The dispersant that the BP is using to try and break up the oil moves the slick into the entire water column which contaminates the ocean floor which would most likely not have seen any damage if it wasn’t for the use of these dispersants. More than 400 species that live in the Gulf Islands and marshlands are at risk and as of November 2 s...
The improvement of the Clean Air Act by the US Congress prodded the advancement of comparative acts by the neighborhood and state governments of the USA and in addition by the governments of different nations. Neighborhood and state activities were greatly vital since they would make something to fill in the crevices and inconsistencies shown in the first Clean Air Act.... ... middle of paper ... ... The USA would help its districts in making wastewater the CWA would make an uncommon arrangement of elected monetary support as spoke to by development gives, which were consequently adjusted into State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund of 1987. CWA would additionally hold fast to subject suit procurement, an uncommon pollutant exchanging framework that together with Supplemental Environmental Programs would permit the central government to better control the corporate pollutions and build a fine timetable to implement the laws (Crook, 192).
finding new ways to drill for oil and also refine it more efficiently to ensure that
"National Oil Spill Commission Report Released. (Cover story)." Oil Spill Intelligence Report 34.4 (2011): 1-2. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Alabama Virtual Library. 3 Apr. 2011 .
Our Congress created the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in 1969 in order to establish an environmental foundation for mankind. This policy endorses harmony between humans and the vast ecosystems surrounding them. To obtain this goal and provide our future with resources as well, NEPA is separated into two titles. The first title declares the policy in detail while the second title focuses on the Council on Environmental Quality. The CEQ oversees the effectiveness of current methods, the reactions of the environment to those methods, and implements revisions as necessary.
BP spent millions of dollars per day to clean up the oil spill. It was estimated that BP was spending “$6 million a day on fixing the mess (Grant, J.K. 2011). In 2005, an explosion at BP’s Texas City oil refinery killed 15 people and injured more than180 people. The accident cost the firm US $2 billion in damages and lawsuits (Murry, B. 2010). According to the OSHA (United States Occupational safety and Health Administration) Citations 760 and 761 BP was responsible for wilful and flagrant violations of safety standards. It happened intentionally and showing indifference to its employees and are yet to pay the fines from Texas City explosion. CSR review BP Green washing Tulane Law review Dodd-Frank act whose role is to evaluate the company fraudulent claims of CSR (Cherry, M. A., & Sneirson, J. F. 2010). An approximated $134 million BP plans spend to address the damage it caused for the Deepwater Horizon Resource Damage Assessment Trustees that include to restore habitats for ospreys and other birds, protect sea turtles and rebuild fish populations ( Thompson, A. 2010). Explosion of BP refinery in Texas that caused 100 injuries and 15 deaths in 2005.Criminal charges due to spread of 270,000 gallons of crude oil in Alaskan tundra in 2006.Toxic spill of 2,000 gallons of methanol in the oil
The worst imaginable environmental catastrophe that could occur in Maryland has just become a reality. The lifeblood of Southern Maryland's Watermen has been forever affected. The ecosystems of the Patuxtent River and Chesapeake Bay have been irreversibly contaminated. The Three Mile Island and Chernobyl Nuclear Accidents have affected the world ecosystems; but the Chalk Point oil spill has reached us here in Southern Maryland. The ethical considerations with generating electricity from fossil fuels, specifically oil, has a profound impact on us all. We all use electricity to make our lives easier and more productive. By using this electricity have we given our permission for the oil companies free reign in order to provide us with the service we demand?? Are we just as responsible for the oil spill as the corporate leaders who run the companies? As citizens we are in a position to develop and enforce regulations to protect ourselves. Do we also protect the environment; or is the environment just something for us to use? These and many other moral dilemmas exist for modern man.
The Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990 gave the EPA the opportunity to prevent and respond to oil spills. The OPA enforced a trust fund financed by a tax on oil to clean up oil spills when a party would not take responsibility. They also developed Area Contingency Plans to prepare oil spill response on a regional scope.