Centralia Mine No.5

Centralia Mine No. 5

Iris Moore

Strayer University

PAD 500

July 16, 2012

Professor Dr. E. Ann Moore

Based on the case study of Centralia Mine No. 5, there were several issues that related to the study of public administration. This paper will cover four logistical alternatives inspector Scanlan could have addressed. Motivations toward the law, bureaucracy, and public obligation will be discussed. Lastly, I will take a position on two possible paths of actions for inspector Scanlan and defend my beliefs.

Logistical Alternatives

In order to get Scanlan’s findings heard and addressed, I will give four logistical alternatives. First, Inspector Scanlan could have followed up more with the inspection reports that he made. Sure he conducted the inspections, created a proper report and forwarded the information to the appropriate authorities, but did the documents go to the right people? After forwarding these documents for several years and not getting the proper feedback, Scanlan should have thought to follow up with his findings to make certain that the issues were being discussed and rectified.

Secondly, Scanlan could have contacted the media to bring attention to the unfavorable conditions at the mine. After conducting inspections and observing the same violations for years, it was evident that the higher powers were not listening to Scanlan’s recommendations. When Scanlan noticed their behavior, he should have contacted the media and made them aware of the events at the mine. Even if he did not do it directly, there should have been some type of communication to the local media for assistance with the issues facing the mine workers. If the information had been made public, I am certain that the disaster in 1947 may not have occurred.

Thirdly, Scanlan could have met with mine workers and the union 52 representatives to create a safe-rescue and escape strategy. This strategy could have included a mine emergency preparedness system. Scanlan...