Alumian

Running head: ALUMINA’S LIABILITY

Alumina Liable

Alumina Incorporated is not new to fines and complaints from the different compliance agencies. They had an environmental discharge EPA compliance evaluation inspection five years ago and ordered to clean up practices. Previously, Alumina had a good overall environmental regulation compliance record. Kelly Bates a 38 single mother made complaints against the contamination of the water of Lake Dira. However, it went public when her 10 year old daughter discovered she had leukemia. The regulatory risk that is involved in this case is Negligence and Strict Tort Liability. Torts are civil wrongs, actions that are not straight but twisted. A tort is used to refer to someone or someone’s property being damaged. When a tort is committed, the person involved is entitled to collection for damaged.
Ms. Bates practiced negligence, because she was aware of the situation with the water. However, she chose not to move out of an area that was known to have pollution in the water ways. Strict tort liability was also practiced, because companies do have a liability to do the right thing. However, Alumina did have an independent audit done on the water ways that come back acceptable.
The Legal Principles that are involved in this case are as follows: Water Pollution Regulation, Water Quality Act, and Rivers and Harbors Act 1899. The Water Pollution Regulation was first introduced in 1965 and the federal legislation on water quality standards was passed. Water Quality Act is controlled by the federal water pollution control administration. Rivers and Harbors Act 1899, which keeps people from dumping and having discharge run into the rivers that can cause interference with navigation.

Alumina’s liability to Bates is stretching the cause of her daughter’s leukemia, because the water is not the only source of intake from the environment. It is understandable that Ms. Bates wants someone to blame and someone to pay for her...