Essay Example - Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response

It covers clean up, corrective, voluntary, and emergency clean-up operations as long as the employer ensures no exposure of hazardous conditions to employees working on site. Clean-up is by government entities, including local, state, and federal, on sites with dangerous waste. There is no requirement for a go-ahead from state and national priority lists or predetermination of the hazardous waste. Correction occurs on recommendation from the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. Clean-up done voluntarily should be a go-ahead from local, state, or federal governments on sites with harmful substances, and they are uncontrolled according to them. RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976) regulations are a requirement for any operation on dangerous sites to move on, and they include any disposal, storage, or treatment.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Applying the above operations requires the following. Code of Federal regulations of title 29 parts 1910 and 1926 are essential before any process begins. The safety of an employee comes first in case there is a conflict. The definitions for the above regulations are as follows. A buddy system is creating groups of employees such that they all look for each other at least one to one at each moment in operation. It is essential in case of an emergency involving an employee. Cleaning up is eliminating harmful substances either by incinerating, containing, neutralizing, or stabilizing them as long as the objective is creating a safe environment for people. Decontamination involves the employees' side, where equipment and any other substances they carry along undergo elimination to prevent future health problems.

Response to emergency means an external party intervenes to neutralize an incident of an uncontrolled site with a harmful substance. Response in areas where employees of the location of toxic substance yet they can control it immediately is not an emergency response. Also, the reaction in an area where safety is still a risk like chemical exposure, explosion, or a fire is not an emergency response in this case. A facility a structure or building or any other containers that hold the harmful substance, but water vessels or manufactured products are not among them. HAZMAT (Hazardous materials response team) are qualified individuals with the task of eliminating to control the hazardous substance and have exposure.

A harmful substance is one with the exposure that is detrimental to an individual's health and safety. Other definitions include the following. It is any of the materials in CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act) in section 103(14). It is a disease-causing or biological agent in that when in contact with a person's body in any form after release to the environment causes physiological changes or death to them or their offspring. It is also any of the substances in the U.S Department of Transportation lists that are harmful.

Oxygen deficiency is less of it than the average percentage in the air, which is 19.5%. The published exposure level is the maximum amount of it as in the NIOSH Recommendations for Occupational Health Standards. Post emergency response is the action after the initial attempt to eliminate and control hazardous substances by employees on site. Site safety and health official is the person with the task of dealing with the health and safety of individuals following all regulations.

September 11, 2001 attacks

The above statute should apply to the September 11, 2001 attacks. The New York Police and firefighters suffer long term effects due to exposure of toxic and carcinogenic substances as a result of the attack. As the statute states that a high-risk site with harmful substances is not subject to emergency response. Their health is more important as the site of attack contains a very high level of toxic substances, and the situation must be put under assessment before further action. The site did affect not only them but also residents around the area. The materials from the attack are on the list of harmful substances, and there is no need of risking employees' health before the site is put under control.

Sovereign immunity

It is the doctrine that gives a government privilege against anyone suing it unless with its consent. It pioneers in Britain as the King does not commit any crime in the Law. Sovereign immunity in the United States applies to state and federal governments except for municipalities. State and federal governments can remove their privilege when they want as in the Federal Tort Claims Act.

There are several considerations on sovereign immunity on a federal government. In the Feres Doctrine, an individual with an injury serving in the military does not have the privilege to sue a national government. In the Westfall Act, an employee who infringes employment cannot sue a federal government that they work.

When a citizen sues their state, a court has to perform a test before further action. The test occurs in four steps, and the first is whether the subject was acting for their gain or upholding the sovereign Law. If it's the latter, then the subject is free to sue the state. The benefit in this standard also refers to actions that a private entity can perform. Next is if the individual is performing a ministerial or discretionary task. If it's the latter, then the state has immunity, and if it is ministerial, then there is none. The third is if the citizen was planning or executing it. If the action is still at the planning stage, then the state has immunity, and if it is at implementation, then it waives it. Finally, if the action is not an infringement, the country has no privilege and if it is an infringement, then the state has none.

Absolute immunity

It is a doctrine that protects public government officials from charges of official actions without a definitive motive. It gives protection to them when they do specific activities within their power and regulations. It applies if they do not show any ill faith when deciding and doing it. It is essential to protect the right of citizens and to avoid further costs. It ensures that public government officials are liable for their actions. The court uses three steps to determine if a public official qualifies for absolute immunity. The first is to determine if the work fits a federal responsibility. If it applies, then the court determines if it is total or qualified. Finally, the court determines the motive of action.

It is essential to protect government officials from charges of damages or other lawsuits relating to their actions. As long as they do not act against their powers, they get immunity. It is also crucial to make sure that they go about their responsibilities without interference.

Qualified immunity

Qualified immunity is a doctorate that requires accountability from public government officials while protecting them from unwarranted lawsuits or any other form of harassment. Such trials are when an individual accuses an official, yet they are performing their job within limits. It applies as long as the official does not implicate a plaintiff's rights. The court only considers the action at the time of occurrence and not the Law governing it during the court hearing. It is useful to prevent officials from incurring unnecessary costs. A court must declare qualified immunity early before the case progresses.

Qualified immunity is only applicable to the individual and not the government. It means the government is not liable for any damages from the official's case. It is mostly useful for police officers, but executive officers now use it more often. Legislators and members of the judiciary do not get this advantage, but they have other forms of immunity. The court performs a test before ruling on qualified immunity. The first step is to determine if the action by the officer fits absolute protection. The response must be within their responsibilities and should be sensitive enough to warrant it. The final step is to determine if the action protects the function of the position that the official holds. Other checks include violation of rights, and if the work is right at the moment, it occurs.

Respondeat superior

It is a doctrine that applies to employers as they receive charges for actions by their agents or employees within their niche of work. A plaintiff can sue both the employer and the employee. The court can rule and spread liabilities between the two of them. Respondeat superior varies from state to state. Each is responsible for creating their own. Due to this, there are different tests to determine the respondeat superior. They include benefits and characteristics test.

Benefits test is where the employee performs the action after regular working hours with the permission of their employer and is set to benefit them too. In this case, the employer is liable for the employee's action. Characteristics test is where the work is a feature of the employee's job. The court rules it as part of the situation, therefore; the employer is accountable for any damages. The court also uses respondeat superior no matter how the employer monitors their employee, and in this case, it is strict liability.

There are exceptions in respondeat superior, and they include the following. An independent contractor working for an employer does not get the respondeat superior treatment. Some rules regulate the use of respondeat excellent on independent contractors, and it is the balancing test as follows. The degree of agreement of work between the agent and employer in what functions to execute. The court assesses the agent's independence of business. The supervision requirements or degree is put into consideration. The provider of the tools useful for the action's identity. The time the work takes. The agent's pay and the time they take to complete it. The form of payment like on part-time or full-time. The agent's regularity of participation in the employer's trade or station. The agent's motives in doing the action. The action that the employer takes against the move.

References

CNN Editorial Research. (2019, November 13). September 11 Terror Attacks Fast Facts. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/27/us/september-11-anniversary-fast-facts/index.html

Cornell. (n.d.). 29 CFR 1910.120 - Hazardous waste operations and emergency response. LII / Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/29/1910.120

Cornell. (n.d.). Qualified immunity. LII / Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/qualified_immunity

Cornell. (n.d.). Respondeat Superior. LII / Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/respondeat_superiorCornell. (n.d.). Sovereign immunity. LII / Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/sovereign_immunity