DBA 7420, Organizational Behavior and Comparative Mana.docx

DBA 7420, Organizational Behavior and Comparative
Management 1
Course Learning Outcomes for Unit III
Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:
3. Examine challenges and opportunities in applying
organizational behavior concepts.
3.1 Apply behavioral concepts to organizational challenges and
opportunities.
Course/Unit
Learning Outcomes
Learning Activity
3.1
Unit Lesson
Chapter 1, pp. 17–25
Article: “Introduction to the Brave New Workplace:
Organizational Behavior in
the Electronic Age.”
Unit III Essay

Reading Assignment
Chapter 1: What Is Organizational Behavior?, pp. 17–25
In order to access the following resource, click the link below.
Gephart, R. P. (2002). Introduction to the brave new workplace:
Organizational behavior in the electronic age.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4), 327–344. Retrieved
from
https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?url=http://s
earch.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direc
t=true&db=bsu&AN=7181571&site=eds-live&scope=site
Unit Lesson
Introduction
The world as we know it now is much different than it was 100
or even 50 years ago. Without change, the
world, businesses, and life would become stagnant. Stagnancy is
not where you want to be. The problem
herein is that one cannot expect to get different results, such as
improved productivity, efficiency, or
profitability, if we continue doing the same things we have
always done. Businesses especially want to better
their best. They want to get more with less. They want greater
profits. As the wants continue to grow, the
world continues to evolve. If you do not change, surrounding
businesses will continue to change and evolve,
and you and your organization could be left behind. In this unit,
we will explore a few of the many challenges
faced by any business. While some of those challenges may

pertain to economic pressures, demographics,
diversity, networked organizations, and ethical behaviors, there
are even more. This unit will focus on the
economy, globalization, technological advancements, and social
media. However, any of those challenges
mentioned leads to additional opportunities to be explored. Each
situation presents an opportunity. It is what
you choose to do when faced with those challenges and
opportunities that can make all of the difference.
A Gamut of Challenges
Let us look at the economy and its impact on an organization.
To begin, you need to think of a business as a
dynamic entity that changes and reacts to its environment. In
this sense, all organizations change and adapt
to what the economy is or is not doing, and, because of this,
organizational behaviors change.
Some examples of these changes in behaviors are when the
economy is bad and a company suspends pay
raises or bonuses. When an organization’s profits tank or are
much lower than predicted, the company can
UNIT III STUDY GUIDE
Challenges and Opportunities in
Applying Organizational Behavior
Concepts
earch.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=7181
571&site=eds-live&scope=site
earch.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bsu&AN=7181

Management 2
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
choose to do nothing and ride out the event, which in the long
run may cost the organization’s ability to
expand or grow to the benefit of its workers when the economy
rebounds and the profit margins come back.
The understanding is that doing nothing now may have far
greater impacts on both the standing of the
company and its workers morale than a short-term freeze on
increases or bonuses.
Some examples of changes in behaviors when the economy is
good are items like increases in allocations for
schooling or education, increases in staff and worker positions,
or an overall increase in investing in the
growth of the organization.
Many of the actions you see organizations do are the direct
result of these outside influences. It is not much
different than how we react to the times when money is tight or
when we have some excess income. Do we
not guard our expenses closely when times are tough? Would we
avoid new expenses even if that investment
would put us into a better position to get a better job, like
education? As we examine this more, you will see

that organizations react in a lot of the same ways as we do to
these outside influences.
As organizations expand around the globe, people are put in
situations where they must interact with people
from different cultures, paradigms, time zones, and a host of
other diverse environmental factors (Robbins &
Judge, 2019). While these factors are different among people,
the differences do not make them wrong.
Instead, they are merely different. Organizations must find a
way to operate consistently across these
elements and more to be open to change in order to find an
organizational structure that will work for the new
globalized organization (Rizescu & Tileaga, 2017). One
example of this is the fact that most organizations
have some sort of diversity training where they learn to look at
other cultures and ways of doing things with
less fear of the unknown and more of an understanding of why
people may think or act the way they do. Even
living in different time zones within the United States can result
in people across the country having different
ways of thinking. With globalization and the need to interact
with people from all over the world, both
individuals and organizations need a greater understanding of
each other to communicate and work together
well.
Technological advancements are yet another contributing factor
that can pose a challenge (Gephart, 2002).
Many organizations permit employees to work from home. The
virtual environment enables the employer to
look far beyond the immediate area. Still, might there be
challenges in ensuring employees are meeting the
necessary requirements and taking breaks as appropriate to
avoid burnout? Might there be other challenges?
For instance, employers often monitor email traffic to ensure

proper use of company time and resources. The
speed with which information can be communicated from one
party to another can present yet another
challenge. Once an email is sent, it can be difficult to retrieve it
if corrections are needed. It only takes one
person to see and save the message for it to be sent to others.
Some employers also evaluate the social media presence of job
candidates (Robbins & Judge, 2019). People
are free to say just about anything. People claim it is their right.
Nonetheless, the ramifications for such
actions, especially if posting negative, unethical, or derogatory
comments about individuals within an
organization or the organization itself, can have lasting impacts.
What is an employer to do? Some people
have actually lost their jobs as a result of such actions (Robbins
& Judge, 2019).
Opportunities and Making Ethical Decisions
For each challenge encountered, there is an opportunity to be
found. Although it may seem insurmountable at
the time, we need to ensure we are making not only decisions,
but ethical decisions. Doing so requires three
specific things: moral awareness, moral judgment, and moral
character (Bateman & Snell, 2009).
Moral awareness involves understanding the
issue and its associated ethical implications.
Moral judgment relates to knowing what
possible courses of action are morally
defensible. Moral character involves one’s own
ability to act in an ethical manner despite the
challenges it presents.

Moral
Awareness
Moral
Judgement
Moral
Character
Making ethical decisions requires moral awareness, moral
judgement,
and moral character.
Management 3
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
The decisions we make will influence the ethical climate in
which we conduct our business. Using moral
awareness, moral judgment, and moral character, we can
progress through the ethical decision-making
process. It begins with understanding the various moral
standards in place and defining the actual problem
(Bateman & Snell, 2009). If we do not understand the problem,
then it is not likely that we would truly be able
to identify and implement a feasible solution. As we do this, we

need to recognize all moral impacts. For
instance, which people do these options benefit or harm? Are
people able to exercise their rights? Are
anyone’s rights denied? Addressing these questions will enable
us to understand the scope of the moral
problem (Bateman & Snell, 2009).
Next in the ethical decision-making process, we need to identify
our options. As we consider each alternative,
we must also consider legal requirements to ensure full
compliance and the economic outcomes, including
both costs and potential profits (Bateman & Snell, 2009). Some
of the costs associated with unethical
behavior are obvious such as fines and penalties. Others, like
administrative costs and corrective actions, are
less obvious. There can be huge effects on customers, on
employees, and in government reactions. Being
fully aware of the potential costs can help prevent people from
straying into unethical terrain.
Evaluating your ethical duties requires looking for actions you
would be proud to see widely reported on the
evening news or even be willing to see others take the same
action if you were the victim (Bateman & Snell,
2009). Another way to determine if you might be making an
ethical decision would be to ask yourself if you
would mind if your grandmother heard about your actions on the
television. Might that make a difference
when deciding what to do?
Indeed, making ethical decisions is complex, but reflecting on
all these factors should help you to develop the
most convincing moral solution.
Leading Change

Regardless of the alternative or the most convincing moral
solution selected to resolve a problem, successful
change requires managers to actively lead it (Bateman & Snell,
2009). One suggested method is to use the
Kotter model on leading change. Within this model there are
eight steps that must be completed to lead
change successfully. These steps include:
-based action,
-term wins,
Conclusion
Life and business continue to move forward whether we are
ready for it or not. It is happening, so why not
embrace it? Despite the challenges that we may encounter, much
can be said for the way in which we handle
any situation. By being aware of the challenges, we have ample
opportunity to prepare for how we may react
when faced with those challenges. Using a process for making
ethical decisions and leading the change
effort, we can ensure our organization is postured for many

more future successes.
References
Bateman, T. S., & Snell, S. A. (2009). Management: M start
here. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
Gephart, J. R. P. (2002). Introduction to the brave new
workplace: Organizational behavior in the electronic
age. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(4), 327–344.
Retrieved from
t=true&db=edsbig&AN=edsbig.A86739291&site=eds-
live&scope=site
Management 4
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard
Business School Press.

Rizescu, A., & Tileaga, C. (2017). The effects of globalization
on the transformation of organizational
management. Journal of Defense Resources Management, 8(1),
135–140. Retrieved from
t=true&db=tsh&AN=125259753&site=eds-live&scope=site
Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2019). Organizational behavior.
(18th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
earch.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=tsh&AN=1252
earch.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=tsh&AN=1252
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication
at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306075888
The Flint, Michigan Water Crisis: A Case Study in Regulatory
Failure and
Environmental Injustice
Article in Environmental Justice · August 2016
DOI: 10.1089/env.2016.0014

CITATIONS
29
READS
10,535
3 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on
these related projects:
EPA STAR View project
Chelsea STAR Project View project
Lindsey Butler
Boston University
16 PUBLICATIONS 61 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Madeleine Kangsen Scammell
Boston University
80 PUBLICATIONS 677 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Madeleine
Kangsen Scammell on 26 August 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306075888_The_Flint
_Michigan_Water_Crisis_A_Case_Study_in_Regulatory_Failure
_and_Environmental_Injustice?enrichId=rgreq-
da40605cdc63c150bfcdee444abf3132-
XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzMwNjA3NTg4ODtBUz
ozOTkzMjMxMDkwNTI0MTZAMTQ3MjIxNzQ1Njc4Nw%3D%
3D&el=1_x_2&_esc=publicationCoverPdf
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306075888_The_Flint
_Michigan_Water_Crisis_A_Case_Study_in_Regulatory_Failure
_and_Environmental_Injustice?enrichId=rgreq-
https://www.researchgate.net/project/EPA-
STAR?enrichId=rgreq-da40605cdc63c150bfcdee444abf3132-
https://www.researchgate.net/project/Chelsea-STAR-
Project?enrichId=rgreq-da40605cdc63c150bfcdee444abf3132-
https://www.researchgate.net/?enrichId=rgreq-
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lindsey_Butler5?enrichId=
rgreq-da40605cdc63c150bfcdee444abf3132-

https://www.researchgate.net/institution/Boston_University?enri
chId=rgreq-da40605cdc63c150bfcdee444abf3132-
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Madeleine_Scammell?enri
https://www.researchgate.net/institution/Boston_University?enri

Original Articles
The Flint, Michigan, Water Crisis:
A Case Study in Regulatory Failure
and Environmental Injustice
Lindsey J. Butler, Madeleine K. Scammell, and Eugene B.
Benson
ABSTRACT
The Flint water crisis highlights numerous regulatory failures
related to federal drinking water regulation,
interpretation, and enforcement. The events that unfolded in
Michigan, from the initial utilization of a
corrosive water source to provide Flint’s drinking water to the
inadequate response of numerous reg-
ulators, demonstrate how the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
can be wrongly interpreted, im-
plemented, and weakly enforced, leading to dangerous exposure
to unsafe drinking water. Our objective
is to discuss these regulatory failures in Michigan in 2014–2015
in the context of other reported
incidents of U.S. cities with high levels of lead in drinking
water. Like the people of Flint, many of the
affected residents are living in economically depressed areas
with high rates of racial minorities. The
recurring trend of unsafe drinking water in communities with
this demographic profile qualifies this as

an issue of environmental injustice.
INTRODUCTION
The development of engineered infrastructure todeliver potable
water to societies may have begun as
early as the Neolithic period. Archeologists most recently
discovered that early civilizations dug wells to supply
drinking water to their communities as early as 6500
BC.1 A characteristic of any successful society through-
out history has been its ability to supply potable water to
its citizens. Now, technological advancements allow for
the delivery of water at rapid speeds to millions of people
in dense urban areas. In the United States alone, more
than 286 million people get tap water from a community
water system. Large municipal water suppliers provide
the majority of water to U.S. communities, with only 8%
of community water systems providing the water for 82%
of the U.S. population.2 As the old adage goes, com-
munity water systems are an extremely efficient way to
distribute a health promoting substance to a community
at once. They are also an extremely efficient way to
distribute a poison.
Domestically, one of the greatest public failures of
modern water supply began on April 10, 2014, in Flint,
Michigan.3 In terms of threats posed by environmental
contaminants, lead holds the title of the most well-
established threats to children and pregnant women. Lead
exposure in children may result in anemia, kidney dam-
age, colic, muscle weakness, and brain damage. Exposure
to the fetus during pregnancy can result in fetal death,
premature delivery, low birth weight, and lower intelli-
gence in later childhood.4 In adults exposed to high levels

Lindsey J. Butler is a PhD student at Department of Environ-
mental Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Bos-
ton, Massachusetts. Dr. Madeleine K. Scammell is an assistant
professor at Department of Environmental Health, Boston Uni-
versity School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts. Eugene
B. Benson is an adjunct professor at Department of Environ-
mental Health, Boston University School of Public Health,
Boston, Massachusetts.
1Eli Ashkenazi. ‘‘Ancient Well Reveals Secrets of First Jez-
reel Valley Farmers.’’ Haaretz.com, 9 November 2012.
2Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ‘‘Public Water
Systems j Drinking Water j Healthy Water j CDC.’’ http://
www.cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/public/index.html (Last
accessed on April 26, 2016).
3Matthew Davis, et al. ‘‘Flint Water Advisory Task Force Final
Report.’’ Commissioned by Governor Rick Snyder March 21,
2016.
4‘‘ATSDR—Public Health Statement: Lead.’’ http://www
.atsdr.cdc.gov/phs/phs.asp?id=92&tid=22 (Last accessed on
April 25, 2016).
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
Volume 9, Number 4, 2016
ª Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
DOI: 10.1089/env.2016.0014
93
of lead occupationally, there is increased risk of peripheral
neuropathy, increased blood pressure, and all cause car-

diovascular mortality. The U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services classifies lead and lead compounds as
reasonably anticipated human carcinogens.5
Although the majority of lead exposure to children
comes from the ingestion of lead paint chips and dust, the
CDC estimates that 10%–20% of children’s exposure to
lead is from their drinking water.6
Flint, Michigan: a man-made disaster
Flint, Michigan, has been overburdened with pollution
dating back to the 1930s when the area’s booming auto
industry manufactured batteries, paints, lacquers, enamels,
and gasoline, releasing the by-products of these processes
into the city’s air, water, and soil. The Flint River carried the
toxic effluent of a city that was at one time an industrial
mecca and economic powerhouse.7 Today, the economic
landscape of Flint has changed dramatically. The popula-
tion has dropped to about 100,000 people (from over
200,000 in the 1960s) and 41.6% of those people are living
below the poverty level.8 Over the years, the auto industry
has left Flint, taking with it the city’s economic success. The
economic deprivation of Flint not only gave birth to a
drinking water crisis but also exacerbated its effects.
In an effort to address the severe economic distress of
the city of Flint, the state of Michigan used the Local
Financial and Stability of Choice Act to replace the city’s
government with an Emergency Manager on November
29, 2011.9,10 Emergency managers had been appointed
by the state of Michigan in other cities suffering similar
economic hardship, including Detroit. The law is designed
to safeguard and assure the financial accountability of the
local governments.10 However, the less tangible danger of
such appointed and transient officials is in removing the

sense of accountability held by elected officials. The re-
moval of this accountability led the way for economic-
driven decision making that failed to adequately protect
the interests of the electorate, and public health.
In the months following the switch of water supplies,
the corrosive water caused contamination of lead and
bacteria throughout the water system. As the contami-
nation became known, residents fought to have it miti-
gated and were failed by multiple government agencies.
Further details of the timeline of the crisis and lack of
response are provided supplementary to this article. We
now discuss these particular failures in the context of
similar failures to protect vulnerable populations from
lead in drinking water across the country, and actions to
prevent such failure in the future.
DISCUSSION
Safe Drinking Water Act
The purpose of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)
passed by Congress in 1974 is to protect the nation’s
public drinking water supplies and public health. Under
the SDWA, the United States Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has the authority to set national health-
based standards for contaminants that could appear in
drinking water from both anthropogenic and naturally
occurring sources. Although the SDWA is a federal law
and the EPA establishes mandatory standards for con-
taminants, administration and enforcement of the law
may be carried out by states. States can apply for ‘‘pri-
macy,’’ which gives them the authority to enforce the
SDWA in their state jurisdiction. In their application for
primacy, the state must prove that it can adopt standards

in the state equal or greater than those set by the SDWA
and that it can make sure that community water suppliers
are meeting those standards. Today, every state has
SDWA primacy, with the exception of Wyoming.11
Failure of the SDWA in Flint
On February 3, 2016, the House Committee on
Oversight and Government Reform convened to examine
the federal administration of the SDWA in Flint, Mi-
chigan. They determined that there was failure at every
level of government. The EPA was made aware of the
high levels of lead in Flint drinking water in April 2015
but did not act until January 2016 when fierce media
attention prompted them to act. Under the SDWA, the
EPA must step in and enforce the law when it is brought
to their attention that the primacy state is not adequately
enforcing the law. The Oversight Committee established
that EPA staff member, Miquel del Toral, attempted to
move the EPA to act on their obligation to assert control
over the Flint crisis and the EPA failed to do so in a
timely manner in direct violation of the SDWA.12
Lead and copper rule
Under the SDWA, the EPA sets National Primary
Drinking Water Regulations, which are legally enforceable
5Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ‘‘Lead in
Drinking Water and Human Blood Lead Levels in the United
States.’’ MMWR 2012; 61:2.
6Rebecca Renner. ‘‘Out of Plumb: When Water Treatment
Causes Lead Contamination.’’ Environmental Health Perspec-
tives 117 (2009): A542–A547.

7David Rosner. ‘‘Flint, Michigan: A Century of Environmental
Injustice.’’ American Journal of Public Health 106 (2016): 200–
201.
8U. S. Census Bureau. ‘‘American FactFinder—Community
Facts.’’
http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/community_
facts.xhtml (Last accessed on April 26, 2016).
9‘‘Order No. 3 Emergency Manager City of Flint Genesee
County Michigan City Administartor.’’ April 10, 2015.
10Michigan State Legislature. Local Financial Stability and
Choice Act, PA 436, 2013.
11OW US EPA. ‘‘Overview of the Safe Drinking Water Act.’’
Policies and Guidance. https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/overview-
safe-drinking-water-act (Last accessed on April 27, 2016).
12‘‘Examining Federal Administration of the Safe Drinking
Water Act in Flint, Michigan.’’ United States House Committee
on Oversight and Government Reform, hearing date March 15,
2016. https://oversight.house.gov/hearing/examining-federal-
administration-of-the-safe-drinking-water-act-in-flint-michigan
(Last accessed on April 27, 2016).
94 BUTLER ET AL.
standards that public drinking water suppliers must meet.
There are more than 80 contaminants on the list with a
legally enforced maximum contaminant level (MCL) de-
termined by the EPA to protect public health. They include
microorganisms, disinfectants, disinfection by-products,
inorganic chemicals, organic chemicals, and radionuclides.

The contaminant levels are measured as they are leaving
the treatment plant. There are two exceptions; lead and
copper are regulated by treatment technology that requires
the system to control the corrosiveness of the water. Unlike
the other contaminants, lead and copper are also measured
at the tap in a subsample of homes to monitor contami-
nation of the water by these chemicals that may have oc-
curred as the water moved through the pipe network.13
Before 1991, the MCL for lead in drinking water was
50 ppb, measured as the water entered the distribution sys-
tem network. In 1991, the lead and copper rule (LCR) was
passed to reduce levels of lead and copper in drinking water
and to address that lead and copper likely enter the water
from corrosion of plumbing materials after entering the pipe
network, and hence, it is appropriate to measure these
contaminants at the tap.14 The LCR applies to all commu-
nity water supplies and sets a maximum contaminant goal
for lead in drinking water at 0 and an action level (AL) at
15 ppb. The AL is based on the 90th percentile. If the 90th
percentile level of tap water samples is above 15 ppb, then
actions must be taken to address the lead levels. These ac-
tions include water quality parameter (WQP) monitoring,
corrosion control treatment, source water monitoring/treat-
ment, public education, and lead service line replacement.15
The law states that the community water supply must
take first-draw samples at homes that are at high risk of
lead and/or copper contamination. A first-draw sample
means that the water has been sitting for 6 hours in the
plumbing before turning on the faucet. Homes at high risk
include older homes that may have lead plumbing or are
located in neighborhoods that have historically had high
levels of lead in drinking water. The community water
supply does not have to sample from all of the homes in the
system. The number of samples is determined by the size

of the system. For a system the size of Flint, they likely
would need to sample for lead and copper at 100 homes on
a standard sampling schedule and 50 homes on a reduced
sampling schedule. A supplier qualifies for a reduced
sampling schedule by having written state approval after
having two consecutive 6-month sampling cycles where
the 90th percentile was below the AL of 15 ppb. A system
also has to conduct WQP testing at the tap in addition to
the lead and copper sampling. WQP testing must be done
at the entry point of the pipe network and at 25 taps (for a
large system on a standard schedule) or 10 taps (for a large
system on a reduced schedule). The LCR also states that
within 30 days of acquiring the results, the community
water system must provide the results to the people who
receive their water from the tap sampled, regardless of
whether the system is above or below the AL.3
Failures of the LCR in Flint
On December 31, 2014, the first 6-month round of LCR
sampling in Flint ended. As instructed by the LCR for a
community supplier of its size, Flint Water Treatment
Plant (FWTP) sampled 100 homes. According to the Flint
Water Advisory Task Force (FWATF) final report, the 100
samples were not drawn from the homes that represented
the highest risk of lead and copper contamination. This
was the first violation of the LCR. The 90th percentile lead
level at the end of this sampling round was 6 ppb; well
below the AL of 15 ppb. However, in addition to a flawed
sample selection strategy, appropriate sampling protocols
were not followed at the tap. Under the LCR, the sample
should be a first draw after the water has been stagnant in
the pipes. The Michigan Department of Environmental
Quality (MDEQ) improperly instructs all Michigan com-
munity water suppliers to do a preflush of the tap the night

before the sampling. This interferes with the validity of the
first-draw sample and could explain why samples in that
first 6-month cycle were lower than samples taken at the
same locations on subsequent dates. Preflushing the night
before sampling was the second violation of the LCR.16
The results of the first round of sampling disqualified
the Flint Water Supply from the corrosion control ex-
emption because it failed to achieve the required results.
The law states that they should have implemented cor-
rosion control technology. The MDEQ failed to inform
the FWTP about this part of the legislation and the FWTP
did not implement corrosion controls. The failure to
implement corrosion control was the third and most
egregious violation of the LCR.3
On February 27, 2015, MDEQ staffer Stephen Busch
e-mailed the EPA reporting that the 90th percentile for
the first sampling period was 6 ppb and Flint had an
optimized corrosion control system. This was apparently
dishonest, as Flint was not utilizing any corrosion con-
trols at that point. Criminal charges have since been
brought against Mr. Busch and two others.16,17
Inadequate response and environmental justice
As the House Committee on Oversight and Govern-
ment Reform concluded in their proceedings on the
13OW US EPA. ‘‘Table of Regulated Drinking Water Con-
taminants.’’ Overviews and Factsheets. https://www.epa.gov/
your-drinking-water/table-regulated-drinking-water-
contaminants
14OW US EPA. ‘‘Lead and Copper Rule.’’ Policies and

Guidance. https://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/lead-and-copper-rule
15‘‘Lead and Copper Rule: A Quick Reference Guide’’ (US
EPA).
http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=60001N8P.txt
16Monica Davey and Abby Goodnough. ‘‘Emails Deepen
Criminal Cases in Flint, but Charges May Be Tough to Prove.’’
The New York Times, 24 April, 2016. http://www.nytimes.com/
2016/04/25/us/emails-deepen-criminal-cases-in-flint-but-
charges-
may-be-tough-to-prove.html
17Monica Davey and Richard Pérez-peña. ‘‘Flint Water Crisis
Yields First Criminal Charges.’’ The New York Times, 20
April,
2016, http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/21/us/first-criminal-
charges-are-filed-in-flint-water-crisis.html
REGULATORY FAILURE IN FLINT 95
situation in Flint, government failed the residents of Flint at
every level. During the hearing, Representative Jody Rice
(R-GA) went on record as saying: ‘‘I don’t know Mr.
Chairman, that there’s been more of a catastrophe in gov-
ernment handling of an issue since Hurricane Katrina.’’20
The list of agencies that could have stepped in at some point
and prevented the exposure in Flint homes for over 16
months includes the Emergency Manager, the MDEQ, the
Environmental Protection Agency, the Michigan Depart-
ment of Health and Human Services, the city of Flint, and
the state of Michigan. There were numerous opportunities

for regulatory agencies to do right by the residents of Flint.
Perhaps the most perplexing question as the saga of Flint
unfolded is ‘‘Why did it take so long for action?’’
It can be argued that the birth of this crisis, the inad-
equate government response to the disaster, and the
blatant disregard for the public health were, in part, the
result of the racial and economic characteristics of
Flint.21 The community of Flint is 62.6% people of color,
41.6% of individuals live below the poverty level, 54.5%
of households with a child younger than 5years below the
poverty level, 25.7% of adults older than 18 years have
less than a high school education, and the median income
in 2014 was less than half of the median income for the
United States.8 What role did this play in the crisis?
On January 17, 2016, the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) released a
statement regarding the Flint water crisis, which read, in
part, ‘‘We must hold accountable Michigan’s public of-
ficials who chose to balance the city’s budget at the ex-
pense of the health of the citizens they serve. Even as
children were showing up sick in doctor’s offices with
rashes and cases of hair loss, state environmental officials
and elected leaders refused to see the warning signs.
Would more have been done, and at a much faster pace,
if nearly 40% of Flint residents were not living below the
poverty line? The answer is unequivocally yes.’’22
Communities with lead problems
As media outlets, including the New York Times, the
Washington Post, USA Today, the Guardian, CNN, and
others, conducted investigative reporting of the Flint water
crisis, it became clear that although the narrative of Flint,
Michigan, was dramatic, it was unfortunately not new.

Stories from other cities both past and present highlight
failures of implementation and enforcement of drinking
water regulations and consequential contamination of
drinking water. Many of the impacted communities share
Flint’s racial and economic characteristics.
Evidence of environmental injustice
From 2001 to 2004 in Washington DC, elevated blood
lead levels were tied to widespread lead contamination in
drinking water.23 A well-publicized cover up of the se-
verity of this incident was revealed in 2003 by Professor
Marc Edwards and others.24 Washington DC is 61.5%
minority race and 18.2% of individuals live below the
poverty line.8 In 2005, 10 of the community water sup-
pliers for the city of Columbia, South Carolina, were
found to be out of compliance with the LCR.25 Columbia,
South Carolina, is 48.3% minority race and 24.2% of in-
dividuals live below the poverty line.8 In 2006 in Durham
and Greenville, North Carolina, elevated blood lead levels
in children were traced to lead levels in drinking water of
20 ppb. When a child’s pediatrician recommended the
child’s food stop being prepared in water from the mu-
nicipal water supplier, the child’s lead levels returned to
normal.26 Durham, North Carolina, is 53.6% minority race
and 18.1% of people live below the poverty level.
Greenville, North Carolina, is 43.7% minority race and
30.7% of individuals live below the poverty line.8 In July
2015, residents of Jackson, Mississippi, were warned
about high lead levels in their drinking water, 6 months
after the problem was first discovered.27 Jackson is 81.6%
minority race and 29.9% of individuals live below the
poverty line. In February 2016 in Ithaca, New York, the
public drinking water was shut off at every school in the
city due to the detection of high levels of lead in the

water.28 Ithaca, New York, is 43.7% minority race and
30.7% of individuals live below the poverty line.8
These communities experienced environmental injus-
tice. EPA defines environmental justice as ‘‘the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement of all people re-
gardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with
respect to the development, implementation, and en-
forcement of environmental laws, regulations, and poli-
cies.’’ The EPA goal is ‘‘for all communities and persons
across this nation.to enjoy the same degree of protec-
tion from environmental health hazards and equal access
20‘‘Examining Federal Administration of the Safe Drinking
Water Act in Flint, Michigan.’’
21Mike Ludwig. ‘‘Environmental Justice: What the Candi-
dates Missed in Flint - and the Rest of the Country.’’ Truthout.
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/34552-environmental-
justice-
what-the-candidates-missed-in-flint-michigan-and-the-rest-of-
the-
country (Last accessed on April 25, 2016).
22NAACP. ‘‘NAACP Statement Regarding Flint, Michigan
Water Crisis j Press Room.’’ January 17, 2016. http://www
.naacp.org/press/entry/naacp-statement-regarding-flint-
michigan-
water-crisis1 (Last accessed on April 26, 2016).
23Marc Edwards, Simoni Triantafyllidou, and Dana Best.
‘‘Elevated Blood Lead in Young Children due to Lead-
Contaminated Drinking Water: Washington, DC, 2001–2004.’’
Environmental Science & Technology 43 (2009): 1618–1623.
24Marc Edwards. ‘‘81st Water Science and Technology Board

Meeting’’ (Washington, DC, April 19, 2016).
25Michael Wines and John Schwartz. ‘‘Unsafe Lead Levels in
Tap Water Not Limited to Flint.’’ The New York Times, 8 Feb-
ruary, 2016. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/09/us/regulatory-
gaps-leave-unsafe-lead-levels-in-water-nationwide.html
26Renner. ‘‘Out of Plumb.’’
27Wines and Schwartz. ‘‘Unsafe Lead Levels in Tap Water
Not Limited to Flint.’’
28Geoff Herbert j [email protected] ‘‘Drinking Water
Shut off at Ithaca City Schools after High Lead Levels
Detected.’’
Syracuse.com, 26 February, 2016. http://www.syracuse.com/
news/index.ssf/2016/02/ithaca_schools_drinking_water_lead.ht
ml
96 BUTLER ET AL.
to the decision-making process to have a healthy envi-
ronment in which to live, learn, and work.’’29
The successful implementation and enforcement of
the SDWA, including the LCR, and equal access to the
decision-making process irrespective of race and income
were not achieved in Flint, Michigan. It was not achieved
in Washington, DC, or Columbia, South Carolina, or
Greenville and Durham, North Carolina, or Jackson,
Mississippi, or Ithaca, New York. The failure of these
laws is disproportionately impacting economically de-
pressed communities of color.

Revisions to the LCR
In part, due to the historical inadequacies of the LCR,
the EPA is currently considering long-term revisions.
The primary goals of the revision are to (1) improve the
effectiveness of the corrosion control treatment in re-
ducing exposure to lead and (2) trigger additional actions
that equitably reduce the public’s exposure to lead and
copper when corrosion control treatment alone is not
effective. The EPA has sought input from multiple
stakeholders and formed the National Drinking Water
Advisory Council (NDWAC) LCR Working Group. The
NDWAC recommends that the EPA focus on five key
issues (1) sample site selection criteria, (2) lead sampling
protocols, (3) public education for copper, (4) measures
to ensure optimal corrosion control treatment, and (5)
lead service line replacement.30 In March 2011, the EPA
held a public meeting seeking comment on environ-
mental justice considerations for the proposed revision.31
Many of the proposed revisions could have possibly
prevented the situation that contributed to the Flint water
crisis. However, in addition to improved regulation, it is
important to note that the success of the LCR relies on
enforcement. In cases where state agencies fail to ade-
quately enforce the LCR, the EPA must step in imme-
diately.
CONCLUSION
Lead is a potent neurotoxicant. The long-term effects
of lead exposure to a child can be devastating and irre-
versible. A 2016 survey conducted by the American
Water Works Association estimates that there are 6.1
million lead service lines in use in the U.S. public
drinking water system and between 15 and 22 million

people are getting their water from either a partial or full
lead service line.32 Some lead service lines have been in
the ground for more than 100 years.
Our county’s public water supply infrastructure is
aging and deteriorating and municipal water suppliers are
under resourced to address this problem. In some cities,
like Flint, Michigan, water for drinking, cooking, and
bathing our children is being carried for miles through
pipe networks that are falling apart and leaching lead,
one of the most dangerous chemicals modern science has
been able to characterize.
Legislation to address this problem must be improved,
strengthened, and actively enforced.
In 1797, the poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge penned
the lines, ‘‘Water, water everywhere, nor any drop to
drink.’’33 In Flint, Michigan, 219 years later these words
still rang true. Flint residents were surrounded by water
but had not a drop to drink. As highlighted by the United
Nations Sustainability Goals, access to clean, safe
drinking water is a basic human right.34
What happened in Flint and other cities in recent U.S.
history is a sad disregard for public health and a failure of
the deliverance and protection of the basic right of eq-
uitable access to safe drinking water.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The FWATF, appointed by Michigan Governor Rick
Snyder, published the final report in March 2016, sum-
marizing what happened in Flint, assigning responsibil-
ity, and offering recommendations for the future. The

authors of this article rely heavily on the details provided
in the FWATF report. In addition, authors relied on the
exhaustive investigative reporting on Flint and other
communities impacted by lead in drinking water by
journalists.
AUTHOR DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
No competing financial interests exist.
Address correspondence to:
Lindsey J. Butler
Department of Environmental Health
Boston University School of Public Health
Medical Campus
715 Albany Street, Talbot 4W
Boston, MA 02118
E-mail: [email protected]
29OA US EPA. ‘‘Environmental Justice.’’ Collections and
Lists. https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice (Last accessed
on April 25, 2016).
30OW US EPA. ‘‘National Drinking Water Advisory Council
(NDWAC) Lead and Copper Rule Working Group (LCRWG)
Meetings & Summaries.’’ Announcements and Schedules.
https://www.epa.gov/dwstandardsregulations/national-drinking-
water-advisory-council-ndwac-lead-and-copper-rule-working
31‘‘Federal Register, Volume 76 Issue 31 (Tuesday, February
15, 2011).’’ https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-02-15/
html/2011-3383.htm (Last accessed on April 27, 2016).

32David A. Cornwell, Richard A. Brown, and Steve H. Via.
‘‘National Survey of Lead Service Line Occurrence.’’ Journal -
American Water Works Association 108 (April 1, 2016): E182–
E191.
33Samuel Coleridge. ‘‘Rime of the Ancient Mariner.’’ Poetry
Foundation. http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems-and-poets/
poems/detail/43997
34Florencia Soto Nino. ‘‘Water and Sanitation.’’ United
Nations
Sustainable Development.
http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/
water-and-sanitation/ (Last accessed on April 26, 2016).
REGULATORY FAILURE IN FLINT 97
View publication statsView publication stats
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306075888
Type down 3-4 pages
Topic: Critical reflection on the attached article “The Flint,
Michigan, Water Crisis: A Case Study in Regulatory Failure and
Environmental Injustice”
If you find the article is too short you can skim through the
video on the same topic. Link is below.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=4&v=x7ULFSa
MooA

Reflect on the following questions:
· Why is this issue a public health crisis?
· The Flint water crisis highlights numerous regulatory failures
related to federal drinking water regulation, interpretation, and
enforcement. Describe the policy failures that are discussed in
the attached article discussion this issue.?
· What role does advocacy play in public health?
· Find at least 3 references (peer reviewed journal) that
describes the important of advocacy and empowerment in public
health. . (don’t forget to APA-cite all the journals)
Format:
· Double space
· Times new roman, 12pt
· At least 3 pages (cited work page not included)
· APA refences format

DBA 7420, Organizational Behavior and Comparative Mana.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to DBA 7420, Organizational Behavior and Comparative Mana.docx

Similar to DBA 7420, Organizational Behavior and Comparative Mana.docx (16)

More from ShiraPrater50

More from ShiraPrater50 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

DBA 7420, Organizational Behavior and Comparative Mana.docx