Recognizing and Minimizing Tort

Recognizing and Minimizing Tort and Regulatory Risk Plan

Harold (Mickey) Walthall

`

Recognizing Tort and Regulatory Risk Plans

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a new report that estimates that nationwide capital investment needs for wastewater and storm water pollution control will be more than $298 billion over the next 20 years. (The environmental protection magazine, 2010). Attributing to the pollution control process and to reduce the cost of investment, EPA enforces stringent rules and enacted several pollution control laws. This essay identifies the legal issues faced by Alumina Inc., a University of Phoenix simulated company and apply the legal principles that will prevent the issues from happening and minimize the tort.

Torts and Regulatory Risks.

Alumina has been reported to be in violation of environmental discharge five years ago. The PAH concentration in the test samples was above the prescribed limit. Alumina corrected the issue promptly. Other than the above incident, Alumina has enjoyed a good environmental regulation compliance record. Kelly Bates a local resident however has accused Alumina of contaminating the waters of Lake Dira with Carcinogenic effluents and has alleged that it is the proximate cause of her daughter’s leukemia.

Unintentional Tort – Negligence and Breach of Duty.

Alumina was reported to be in violation of Clean Water Act since the PAH concentration in the test samples was above the prescribed limit. It failed to exercise care and was responsible for the breach of duty tort.

Unintentional Tort – Actual Cause and Proximate Clause.

There must be a cause and effect relationship and water pollution by Alumina should be the actual cause for the leukemia of Kelly Bates’ daughter. Even though water is contaminated with Carcinogen; Kelly Bates daughter’s illness must be the effect of contamination. If water contamination is not effect of illness, Bates case can be dismissed (Although separate trial...