Environmental/Ethical Dilemma Breaches in Ethics.

Environmental/Ethical Dilemma Breaches in Ethics

Today’s ever changing business environment presents us with new and complex ethical issues that bring into question our ability to address and, hopefully, resolve them. The health and welfare of the public and the environment is being weighed against the unethical behaviors of corporations who choose to dump toxic wastes illegally. In our environmental/ethical exercise we are presented with the same basic issue as mentioned above. The Vice President (VP) of Production is asking our environmental consultant for advice on how to dump various toxic production wastes into a holding pond on the company’s property. It may be assumed that this action is being contemplated for the sole purpose of saving money for the company. Provided below is a good definition of ethics that we applied in this exercise to determine the number breaches associated with this decision if it is acted upon.

Ethics traditionally refers to the systematic framework of thought and analysis that deals with questions of right and wrong and the nature of the good and proper life. An ethical act is an action that is consistent within this framework. There are four main breaches in ethics that this dilemma exercise determines from the use of this definition. They are bulleted below for review.

It is unethical behavior for the VP to even consider asking for advice on dumping toxic production wastes because they have an obligation to conduct daily business activities with the highest degree of integrity. Even contemplating this action draws into questions their personal integrity and decision-making skills.
This decision is also unethical because it could unnecessarily apply suffering, damage, and premature death to living beings. Anyone or anything that comes into contact with this toxic waste is unaware of the potential danger it presents.
This decision is a clear breach in ethics to the shareholders of this company. This VP is making a decision on behalf of the shareholders that will affect future company earnings and goodwill. The brand name of the company will also take a hit if future legal action is taken.
If the environmental consultant provides advice to this VP regarding this matter it will be a breach in ethics. The environmental consultant is employed by this company to provide advice and guidance to the management team regarding the proper use and disposal of wastes. Not to give advice on how to dump wastes into the holding pond.

Legal Ramifications

What are the legal ramifications, civil and criminal, resulting from dumping various toxic production wastes into a holding pond on company property?

To answer this question, let us first take a look at what Congress has done to regulate toxic and hazardous waste disposal that pose a threat to our human welfare. We will then better understand the severe penalties imposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for violating specific federal laws that relate to the control of toxic and hazardous chemicals.

This is a preview of the whole essay

To address environmental problems resulting from the use and dumping of toxic chemicals, Congress enacted the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (http//www.epa.gov). Companies that generate toxic waste in their manufacturing processes are required to report to the EPA information that indicates or presents any substantial risk of injury to our health and/or the environment. This law also requires manufacturers to test their chemicals for possible harmful effects. Therefore, if we choose to dump toxic chemicals into our companies holding pond, rather than take steps to prevent this contamination, we are taking the risk of exposing company employees to toxic waste as well as intentionally violating TSCA requirements. This could result in employees of our company being subject to civil and criminal fines and imprisonment.

In 1976, Congress amended the Solid Waste Disposal Act by drafting the Resource Conversation and Recovery Act (RCRA). This act was an effort to ensure companies properly handled and disposed of hazardous and toxic waste using strict guidelines. Under the RCRA, companies that generated hazardous types of wastes have two primary obligations (e-text UOP Page.290):

Determine whether its waste would qualify as hazardous under RCRA
Ensure hazardous or toxic waste is properly transported to a disposal facility that has an EPA permit or license for proper disposal.

This law also gives the EPA investigator rights to enforce record keeping requirements and assess penalties for failure to comply with its strict provisions. Penalties include criminal fines and imprisonment. Between the years of 1983 and 1990, criminal charges were levied against 253 individuals and corporations under the RCRA. By the end of this period, RCRA requirements cost businesses an estimated $20 billion annually.

What specific ramifications are subject to our company if we choose to dump toxic chemicals into our holding pond? According to the U.S. Code (2003) penalties include:

Civil violations

$25K/Day Injunction (retroactive from time of 1st pollution incident)

Criminal Violations

2 Years in Prison (first offense)
$100K/Day
4 Years in Prison (subsequent offenses)

Knowing Endangerment

15 Years in Prison
$250K (personal) $1 Million Corporate

Our company could be assessed a civil action in the US District Court for any past or current violations. This would require compliance immediately or within a specified time period or both, which may include a temporary or permanent injunction. We also face risk of permit suspension or revocation by the Administrator. In assessing such a penalty, the Administrator will take into account the seriousness of the violation and any good faith measures our company has taken to comply with applicable requirements.

If dumping our company’s toxic chemicals made their way into a waterway, such as into an underground water table, we would be in violation of additional federal laws. One of these laws is the Clean Water Act, passed by Congress in 1972 for the purpose of regulating and eliminating water pollution (http://www.epa.gov). A second law is the Safe Water Drinking Act of 1974. It was designed to protect our drinking water from contamination of toxic chemicals and pollutants. A third law is the Ground Water Protection Act designed to protect our ground water from pollutants. All three of these federal laws have strong enforcement provisions, which must be followed by companies that dispose of wastes.

Possible Courses of Action

It is difficult to determine how to proceed when faced with the knowledge that your company may be planning to deliberately pollute the environment. As a citizen of the United States you are legally bound to report any known violations of the law. Moreover, you have a moral duty to preserve the environment and to protect the surrounding community from known toxic substances. Yet, company loyalty is an important value in today’s workplace. It is essential to good business to know that your employees are working to maintain the interests of the firm. You also have a duty to yourself and to your family to ensure financial security. When deciding on a course of action it is important to analyze all of the factors mentioned above and endeavor to minimize the impact of your decision on all effected parties.

Listed below are four potential courses of action, which may be followed when presented with the knowledge that the Vice President of your company is planning on polluting the environment. Each course of action will be explained and the possible repercussions of these actions will be examined.

Speak directly with the Vice President and discuss the pollution issue.
Speak with the Chief Executive Officer of the company.
Notify the State Attorney General and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Contact your Business Ethics Hotline and/or company law department

A wise course of action when faced with this situation would be to speak directly to the company Vice President (VP). It is important to request a private audience when addressing this issue so that both parties feel comfortable with the exchange of information and to ensure that the VP does not feel judged or threatened. Explain to the VP the conversation you overheard and express your concerns for the company. Discuss the potential legal and financial impacts to the company if the pollution were to occur. Let him know that you have the company’s best interests at heart.

Hopefully, the VP will respond positively to your discussion. He may be glad you brought this issue to his attention first, before escalating it to senior management or outside of the company. It may be that he had no illegal intentions in mind when discussing toxic waste disposal with the environmental consultant, he was only on a fact-finding mission for other purposes. Another possibility is that he may not have realized the financial impacts to the company and decide against dumping toxic waste into the holding pond as a result of your timely intervention. These are the positive repercussions of this course of action.

There are many possible negative consequences to discussing the issue of pollution directly with the VP. He may respond angrily to your accusations or feel threatened by the possibility of future charges. He may seek to demote you or move you into another work group so that you are no longer in a position to monitor his actions. Furthermore, he could just decide to terminate your position altogether. You would have very little recourse in the case of termination, as there is no actual proof that illegal dumping has occurred or will occur in the future. It would be difficult to prove a wrongful termination lawsuit.

A second possible course of action would be to escalate the issue directly to the company’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO). The CEO has full authority over his Vice Presidents and has the greatest responsibility towards the company’s best interests. Hopefully, he will take the issue very seriously and begin a campaign to investigate the issue. If he finds that the VP of Production really does intend to dump toxic wastes into the company’s holding pond, the CEO will terminate the VP’s employment. Furthermore, the CEO will be glad that you brought the issue to his attention, proving your loyalty to the firm. Unfortunately, the CEO may also be involved in the scheme to pollute the environment. It may be that the VP is acting at his behest. If this is the case, you may possibly be demoted or fired from your position with little legal recourse.

The third possible course of action to be examined is to notify the appropriate state and federal agencies of the possible pollution. In Phoenix, you can notify the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ). They work in conjunction with the State Attorney General’s office to ensure a clean and healthy environment for Arizona residents. They are responsible for ensuring the standards outlined by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are enforced. It is also possible to file an anonymous complaint directly with the EPA. They have a website that allows you to file a complaint against any known EPA violator. They will contact the appropriate state authorities to pursue the issue.

Hopefully, by notifying the environmental agencies the pollution will be prevented while your anonymity is maintained. ADEQ and the EPA can closely monitor your firm for any possible transgressions and criminally prosecute the company if toxic waste dumping were to occur. They can also issue an injunction against the company demanding they abstain from any polluting activity. Moreover, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) protects your employment if you are accidentally exposed as the whistleblower. Both the Clean Water Act and the Solid Waste Disposal Act contain provisions to prevent termination or demotion as a result of exercising your rights under these acts. The worst possible result of reporting directly to ADEQ or the EPA would be that they ignored your complaint for lack of proof.

Company employees who have been exposed to unethical issues, such as knowledge of potential law violations, can anonymously share their dilemma with a professional ethical advisor. They can answer your questions about moral choices, address your concerns over possible misconduct, openly discuss ethical business issues with you, and will contact the law department of your corporation to attend to company legal matters. This choice of action is the most effective way to ensure immediate and appropriate company action. You can feel comfortable knowing that your job is not at risk and that you have initiated a compliance oversight process to maintain our clean environment and protect our company image.

There are no easy answers when deciding how to prevent your company from performing an immoral and illegal act. All scenarios potentially have negative repercussions. These often serve to keep otherwise diligent citizens from reporting company crime. It is important to analyze all possible courses of action and decide on the path that has the most positive results for the environment with the least impact to your company.