Oil Essay, Research Paper

James M. CrunkletonWeek Six: Ashland Oil Inc. Case Study JPCrunk @ aol.comExcellent Press Release. Good ethical analysis, but reasonably light on legal analysis. Watch sentence building, reappraisal assignments before submittal. 25 points. Ashland Oil Case Study On Saturday, January 2, 1988 at 5:02pm. a four million gallon storage armored combat vehicle at the Floreffe terminal exterior of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, collapsed while being filled, let go ofing a 3.9 million gallon moving ridge of Diesel fuel. As the fuel gushed, it slammed into an empty armored combat vehicle nearby and surged over containment butchs into the environing belongingss making the first major oil pollution accident for Ashland Oil, Inc. , ( AOI ) in its 64 twelvemonth history. By twilight, about three quarters of a million gallons of oil had spilled into the Monongahela River, endangering the imbibing H2O supply of communities in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia, every bit good as the safety of nearby occupants. In the terminal Ashland was fined 2.5 million dollars and subsequently sued for 30 million dollars. The 1970 National Environmental Policy Act of 1970 makes it federal policy to see the environmental impact of assorted activities. When the undertaking engineers at AOI constructed the storage fuel armored combat vehicle with old steel that wasn & # 8217 ; t decently tested before make fulling it with the Diesel fuel they evidently broke this jurisprudence. Local legal Torahs were besides broken as AOI hadn & # 8217 ; t filed a license to even construct the armored combat vehicle and industry criterions were non followed in the testing of the armored combat vehicle before make fulling. They did register the license petition, they ne’er received the written license, and the license listed & # 8220 ; new & # 8221 ; steel in the armored combat vehicle & # 8217 ; s building. The Clean Water Act requires a license before pollutants can be discharged into navigable Waterss from any point beginning, irrespective of whether the discharge existed prior to the statute law. Condemnable countenances may be imposed if pollutants are discharged without a license. Although this act is specifically for companies that deliberately discharge waste into H2O, the accidental act of dispatching oil in the H2O system due to negligence applies to AOI. As a company AOI had the & # 8220 ; Duty to utilize Reasonable & # 8221 ; , ( usage reasonable? ? ? ? ) in edifice and make fulling a fuel storage armored combat vehicle, understanding the branchings if it in fact didn & # 8217 ; t. The company has the responsibility to utilize sensible attention in the public presentation of their responsibilities. The type of work the company performs determines the extent of the company & # 8217 ; s responsibility of attention. AOI besides had the Duty to Communicate Information, this is one of indispensable facets of the concern community & # 8217 ; s relationship with society, authorities bureaus etc.The responsibility to unwrap information was at issue when AOI ab initio stated that oil hadn & # 8217 ; t reached the & # 8220 ; Mon & # 8221 ; and failure to to the full and truthfully inform media and outside bureaus about the armored combat vehicle in inquiry. Based on my observations of the many misdemeanors by the Ashland Oil Company, the many gaps left by the company and their legal branchings from highly hapless determination devising, cover-up and non-control/follow-up from higher direction, exposed the Ashland Oil Company to over 32 million dollars in legal costs. A cardinal useful attack to this instance would be ; if an industry pollutes the environment, it has caused a defect in the market. The company & # 8217 ; s merchandises no longer reflect the true cost of their production. The consequence is a misallocation of resources, a rise in waste and an inefficient distribution of trade goods. Consequently, society as a whole is harmed in its overall economic public assistance diminutions. Utilitarian therefore, argues that a company should avoid pollution because they should avoid harming society & # 8217 ; s public assistance. Using moralss to this instance from a Utilitarian construct so calls for AOI, since they did pollute and cause harm to society to rectify the state of affairs. The redress for external cost, harmonizing to the useful construct is that the cost of pollution is internalized. AOI implemented this ethical attack as they paid for pipes to the Allegheny River for fresh H2O and the cost of cleansing of the oil spill and judicial proceeding costs. When using the Kantian theory to the AOI instance, it seems rather easy. This theory exemplifies the & # 8221 ; Golden Rule & # 8221 ; on a duty-based criterion. Therefore, you are to move in conformity to the manner you & # 8217 ; vitamin Ds expect others to move toward you. Using a Kantian ethical analysis in mention to the AOI would present inquiries such as: Would I desire oil spilled in

my metropolis due to gross carelessness on my portion? Would I desire everyone covering with me to forbear from identify defects in equipment I was using, like I did with the storage armored combat vehicle? Using a communitarian position, that we have an duty to exert particular attention toward those a peculiar community that we do concern in and that patronizes and supports our concern ; Harmonizing to this position, AOI had an interdependent relationship with the community it did concern in and should hold exercised due attention. Harmonizing to this attention position, the moral undertaking isn’t to follow universal and partial moral rules, but alternatively, to go to and react to the good of peculiar concrete relationships. I think after some internal “cya’s” and their prevarication were weeded out that AOI in fact attempted to implement this ethical rule. Ethically the company did a really hapless occupation ab initio at commanding the information flow from their representatives to outside bureaus. The company did at the same time an first-class occupation at making everything they could to minimise the environmental harm from the spill. Besides, if I’m the CEO, I’m on the scene of this accident until its declaration. Not merely for political intents, but besides for moral and public dealingss intents, This accident must be viewed by all as my figure one precedence. The instance read as though the CEO was fundamentally forced to come to Pittsburgh and see the accident scene firsthand. Ethically talking the company should pay for all amendss due to the accident, be fined by the federal, province and local authoritiess and pay a colony to the community it damaged. The company should besides larn from the incident and take the proper safeguards to guarantee the incident doesn’t occur once more. The grounds that supports my logical thinking for this instance was I followed it in the newspapers to its decision in 1988 as my household and I are from “right down the road” from where the oil spill occurred. The general perceptual experience of the “Mon Valley” was the company didn’t attention because the general country is surrounded by old dilapidated non-working steel Millss and Braddock Mill that is still up and running still pollutes the air. This incident was viewed as merely another environmental calamity in the Mon Valley.

The biggest difference in imperativeness releases A and B are A is skewed toward an ethical revelation and B is skewed toward a legal revelation. There is no existent ethical content in imperativeness release B ; it & # 8217 ; s a & # 8220 ; lawyered & # 8221 ; papers. The legal branchings of what the Chief executive officer is saying closely covered in B. Press release A has more revelation and is in fact more true, yet the legal branchings are more obvious as the CEO admits to the many errors of AOI. Press Release ( Done on the Day of Spill ) I greet you today with a sincere, heartfelt, apology. On behalf of Ashland Oil Company, I wish to apologise for the oil spill that occurred today. I have spent the last 24 hours run intoing with my staff and reexamining the harm done by the spill. I have surveyed the country and have investigated the evident cause of the spill. I know that several inquiries have been raised about the building, proving and usage of this armored combat vehicle, and that preliminary statements made to the imperativeness and others by Ashland Oil co. employees have come into inquiry. I need to state you know that some information given out by our employees was given without full ownership of all the facts. We are presently look intoing the allegations raised in the imperativeness, every bit good as the facts environing the hard-on of this peculiar armored combat vehicle. and we will supply the populace with all the appropriate background information every bit shortly as possible. I want to guarantee you and the people of Pennsylvania and West Virginia that the determinations that led to this spill are too bad. Now, allow me inform you what we are making to clean up this spill and restore H2O. First, we are working around the clock with EPA and assorted exigency clean up crews to clean up the full country affected by the spill. We have ordered fresh H2O supplies to be brought instantly to the occupants of greater Pittsburgh and the affected residential countries in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia. We have opened an exigency Service Center staffed by our forces to supply information, reply inquiries and address concerns about the spill, the killing attempts and extra services available to citizens of the countries. We will make whatever we can to reconstruct the environmental quality of the Monogahela River.