amendments

Public Policy and Administration

Student's Name

Student's ID

University Affiliation

ETHICS

According to the model outlined by Cooper (2017), I have identified that the situation involves water that is being supplied to the public for their consumption, and the ethical issues are that the public being given water that is not safe to use, and also, members of my department lying to the EPA that they are considering an up-to-date corrosion control method while in real sense they are not ("EPA's Origins: Duties Transferred to EPA from Other Federal Agencies | About EPA | US EPA," n.d.). The options and courses of action are either, I join my other department members and abscond my duties to the public, or do something about what they are doing wrong("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.)

. If I don’t do something, the public will suffer. However, if I react, the public will eventually get safe water to use. My resolutions are therefore as described below ("Bureaucratic Malfeasance That Created Flint and Sebring’s Water Crises," n.d.).

The first step to take would be to inform the public that the managers had changed the water source from Lake Huron to the river that runs through the town, with the public informed on this, they can begin being very cautious of the water they are using, and they also can come up and form groups of people to challenge the city managers into telling the public why they shift was done. I would do this either by directly contacting the citizens or anonymously giving them tips on what has been happening so they can decide what they are going to do. Secondly, I would go to the lab myself when the water is being tested. The aim of this is to observe if the water that yields high lead contents is being thrown out so as not to raise too much questions("Snyder: Charges show bureaucrats to blame for Flint water crisis | Michigan Radio," n.d.). If I find out that the water with high lead content is actually being thrown out, I would questions those responsible as to why they are doing this, and inform the public as well.

The best way to get the attention of the city managers and the citizens as well, would be to involve the media houses in the city ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.). I would therefore contact renowned media houses and give them my views under the condition of anonymity. I would become a whistleblower on the actions of the city manager, and urge the media to report the story so the city managers can be questioned as to why they shifted the source of the water, and what they plan to do about the complaints being lobbied by the members of the public concerning the smell and color of the water they are receiving in their taps ("We helped uncover a public health crisis in Flint, but learned there are costs to doing good science," n.d.).

Thirdly, I would contact the Environmental Protection Agency, and express my concerns over the conduct of members of my department ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.). I would also suggest that the Agency performs a routine check of the department, to find out the progress of the up-to-date corrosion control that the department reports to be doing yet is not. The EPA is charged with checking to ensure organization do whatever they can to ensure the safety of the public and the environment ("EPA's Origins: Duties Transferred to EPA from Other Federal Agencies | About EPA | US EPA," n.d.). During the check, the agency would find out that there is no corrosion control being carried out by the department, and this would spark off events that would lead to members of the department who were lying to be held accountable of their actions. Furthermore, I would try to reason with the members of my department, concerning the ethical implications of their actions, and bring to their attention the effects of their actions on the health of the citizens ("Safe Drinking Water," n.d.). I would collect information on the population of the town, and use the data to try and convince members of my department to do the right thing for the good of the entire town.

PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION THEORY

According to Max Weber, a bureaucracy has clearly defined job roles which fall into the hierarchy of command. In Flint, the hierarchy of command lay with the city and state officials such as the mayor at the time Dayne Walling, Michael Prysby – a member of the Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) Office of Drinking Water, Flint’s Emergency Manager – Ed Kurtz, Brad Wurfel – MDEQ’s spokesman, Dan Wyant – MDEQ’s director, and Michigan Governor – Rick Snyder and his chief of staff Dennis Muchmore ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.). There were other independent bodies which tested the water in Flint, and out that it was contaminated or capable of causing a corrosion. Such individuals included Dr. Marc Edwards working with a team from Virginia Tech ("We helped uncover a public health crisis in Flint, but learned there are costs to doing good science," n.d.).

In flint also, rules and regulations of management were evident ("Snyder: Charges show bureaucrats to blame for Flint water crisis | Michigan Radio," n.d.). For instance, flint officials consider the implications of switching their water provider and they have to inform the state treasurer of their plan to switch to Karegnondi Water Authority (KWA) and cannot just switch from Detroit Water and Sewerage Department (DWSD) at will ("Bureaucratic Malfeasance That Created Flint and Sebring’s Water Crises," n.d.). Secondly, MDEQ had to constantly inform the public of the quality of the water, and respond to all allegations brought forward by various sources to challenge the quality of this water ("Judge: Flint residents can sue state over water crisis," n.d.). Before the shift also, the mayor had to inform the members of Flint, so they are not alarmed. MDEQ is also required by the rules to look into and resolve all complaints brought about by the residents concerning the quality of the water, while the media houses are free to report on all news worthy information they come across ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.).

The governor also was bound by the rules and regulations to declare a state of emergency when the lead levels in the water went beyond the safe limits ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.). Rules and regulations are also seen in the fact that after the crisis is over, people are asked to pay for the water even though they need filters in order to drink it ("Flint residents must start paying for water they still can’t drink without a filter - The Washington Post," n.d.). After some time, the water will however be safe again ("Judge: Flint residents can sue state over water crisis," n.d.).

In Flint, there are various departments such as MDEQ, the Office of Drinking Water under MDEQ, KWA, DWSD, and Office of the Governor, the Mayor's office, and even the media departments. All these departments play various roles, aimed at all assisting the town in one way or another. There is an Emergency Department which informs the state treasurer of plans to change the water providers. There is the State Treasurer which is responsible for handling the funds ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.). The offices of the mayor and the governor both communicate with the residents and make major decisions affecting the town. KWA and DWSD are the departments which provide water to the town. MDEQ investigates on the quality of the water that the people are getting, and make the necessary adjustments to ensure the water is safe to use.

In the various agencies, there is an impersonal relationship between the managers and the employees. Various agencies considered were KWA, DWSD, MDEQ, Office of Drinking Water, the Virginia Tech Team, and even the media houses such as MLive. In all these agencies, the element of a personal relationship between the managers and the employees has not been defined. Another feature of the bureaucratic environment is the competence of the employees involved in the case. Such individuals include; Nurse Brian Jones, the Governor Snyder, the governor’s chief of staff Dennis Muchmore, MDEQ spokesman Wurfel, Dr. Marc Edwards of the Virginia Tech team, and Ron – a journalist with MLive among many other employees featured. All these individuals have been depicted as doing their work to the best of their abilities, whether they are doing the right thing or not.

Moreover, the organizations and agencies are all bound by the formal rules, regulations, and procedures. The media cannot report on anything unless it has enough proof and evidence to back their claims. The Virginia Tech team also cannot report on the condition of the water unless it has investigated sufficiently and come to a conclusion, the offices of the mayor and the governor are charged with informing the public of the decisions they come up with, and is their role to ensure the decisions have the best interests of the town at heart ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.). The courts in Flint are also bound by rules and regulations, allowing the residents to sue the officials for leading to the water being contaminated when they claimed it was not a serious issue ("Judge: Flint residents can sue state over water crisis," n.d.).

Of the two theories, Theory X is more probable for this case. The city and state officials knew very well that they did not have a corrosion control plan in place, yet they went ahead and gave the people the water from the river, without properly anticipating all the effects that water could have on the people’s health. In addition, samples of water with a high lead content are being thrown out, while people are being told the water is safe to use while in truth it is not. From the analogy given by Rittel & Webber, Flint, Michigan is not a wicked problem. The safeguards I would propose would be majorly two. Firstly would be the accountability of the officials where the officials would have to justify all their actions before a tribunal or a panel and respond to all the setbacks of their decisions ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.). Secondly, I would propose that all projects be firstly simulated and tested in the presence of representatives of the public so that the projects implemented will not serve the needs of the officials only, but also those of the general public.

LAW

The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, and amended in 1986 and 1996, was put in place to protect the health of the public, by setting the standards for the drinking water that was to be availed to the public ("Safe Drinking Water," n.d.). Enforced by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), this Act outlines the various contaminants which can impact on the quality of the water and goes ahead to provide the safe levels of these contaminants so as to ensure that the water is safe ("EPA's Origins: Duties Transferred to EPA from Other Federal Agencies | About EPA | US EPA," n.d.). Water that does not meet the set guidelines is considered unsafe ("Snyder: Charges show bureaucrats to blame for Flint water crisis | Michigan Radio," n.d.). The Act, through the EPA, looks to ensure water does not contain harmful substances such as lead ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.). One of the contaminants is the total trihalomethanes (TTHM) where one location recorded 99 ug/L, exceeding the set limit of 80 ug/L, therefore making this water contaminated.

Another contaminant is Lead in which results on experiments done by Virginia Tech on household water uncovered that the water had 13, 200 parts per billion of Lead, exceeding the limit of hazardous waste water which is set at 5, 000 parts per billion ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.). The rules here were broken by MDEQ majorly, by their failure to have a plan for corrosion control in the water, and also failing to uncover the fact that too much chlorine in the water was going to case an increase in the levels of TTHM in the water also, making the water unsafe to use ("Bureaucratic Malfeasance That Created Flint and Sebring’s Water Crises," n.d.). In addition, the city and state officials broke the rules of the Safe Drinking Water Act which requires that lead pipes be replaced with lead-free pipes ("Judge: Flint residents can sue state over water crisis," n.d.).

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), was proposed to as to fit the requirements of regulations on the scale of the business, organization, or government jurisdictions which are required to abide by the regulation ("We helped uncover a public health crisis in Flint, but learned there are costs to doing good science," n.d.). Flint town could claim RFA when it was required to replace all lead pipes in the town with lead-free pipes because the town is too poor to do this ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.). However, the implication of this is that, the town continues pumping the river water through the lead pipes and with the elevated levels of chlorine put in the water to deal with cases of bacteria in the water, the pipes are bound to undergo corrosion, causing lead to leech into the water, and causing health problems to children, elderly people, pregnant women, and other members of the town in the long run ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.).

Formal rules required to prevent this crisis should be tied to the RFA as it applies to every situation. For instance, in this case, the RFA could only be activated on the condition that Flint does not use the lead pipes to supply water that has any form of elements that could cause corrosion to the pipes ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.). The RFA could therefore only be invoked on the condition that Flint does not use the river water, meaning it either has to build a pipeline connecting it to KWA before it stops its dealings with DWSD, or, it could require that Flint purifies the river water so that the water will not have any bacteria, the levels of TTHM will be within the allowed limits, and the amount of chlorine in the water will not cause a corrosion of the pipes ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.).

IMPLEMENTATION

Defining the Problem

Failure of the city and state officials to provide the residents of Flint, Michigan, with clean and safe water to use in their homes ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.). Also, the very same officials failed to address the problem as soon as it was brought to their attention and instead kept saying that the problem was not present when it caused a massive health crisis for the residents of Flint, Mich ("Bureaucratic Malfeasance That Created Flint and Sebring’s Water Crises," n.d.).

Assembling Evidence

Research done by Virginia Tech discovers that household water contained 13, 200 parts per billion (ppb) of lead, an excess of 8, 200 ppb over the allowable limit for water to be called hazardous waste ("Snyder: Charges show bureaucrats to blame for Flint water crisis | Michigan Radio," n.d.).

On or about April 24th, MDEQ reports to EPA that the city did not have an up-to-date corrosion control treatment at the Flint Water Treatment Plant ("What Went Wrong In Flint | FiveThirtyEight," n.d.).

Some of the Flint residents voiced concerns over the color and smell of their water ("We helped uncover a public health crisis in Flint, but learned there are costs to doing good science," n.d.).

E. coli and total coliform bacteria are detected in the Flint water, bringing about the need to add more chlorine to the water ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.).

An addition of chlorine into the water sparks a chain reaction that not only causes corrosion of the lead pipes and therefore lead seepage into the water but also increases the amount of TTHM in the water ("Judge: Flint residents can sue state over water crisis," n.d.). The seepage caused elevated lead levels in the blood of children (, n.d.). All this while, the city and state officials, especially from the MDEQ, all unanimously denied the existence of a serious problem with the water and only reacted when it was too late to do so ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.).

Constructing Alternatives

As the city constructs the pipelines connecting it to KWA, it should resolve back to use the water provided by DWSD because the water is safe to use, people trust the source of the water, and it does not cause corrosion in the pipes at a rate like the one seen when using the river water ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.).

It could also help to look for alternative sources of water for the people maybe bringing in water from the neighboring states and distributing it to the people, or come up with better ways of treating the water that is being supplied to the people("One city’s solution to drinking water contamination? Get rid of every lead pipe. - The Washington Post," n.d.).

Selecting the Criteria

The criteria to use to assess the best alternative will be the cost and safety implications of the alternatives, where the safety of the drinking water will be the main priority, followed by the benefit-cost relationship of the alternatives ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.).

Projecting the Outcomes

With the first alternative, the people will be very happy, and they will get quality water flowing through their taps again. Instances of lead contents in the water will be reduced, and the amount of TTHM will also decline ("Judge: Flint residents can sue state over water crisis," n.d.). The water will not be as hard as it was when water from the river was being used, and the water will have a pleasant smell and color ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.).

With the second option, it would be very difficult to satisfy all the water needs of the people. Secondly, the people might not use water whose source they do not know of, and the treatment ways proposed might do more harm than good, like the case of chlorine with the leeching of lead into the water("Safe Drinking Water," n.d.).

Confronting the Trade-Offs

In this case, the first alternative is the dominant one, and therefore it has no tradeoffs.

Deciding

I would decide to go with the first alternative because even though it will be expensive to start, it holds the biggest advantages for the public regarding its ability to provide them with safe drinking water, and also DWSD is a source that the people trust already. In addition, eventually the town might have to change all the lead pipes, and replace them with better pipes ("One city’s solution to drinking water contamination? Get rid of every lead pipe. - The Washington Post," n.d.).

Telling My Story

In this case, I looked into the problem that befell Flint, Michigan, in 2014, concerning the condition of their water. April 2014 was the time when DWSD dropped Flint as a customer, an action that pushed Flint into using river water for their consumption. Eventually, the water became unsafe to use because of high lead levels in the blood of young children, and also other contaminants that led to massive health related cases as a result of using the water ("We helped uncover a public health crisis in Flint, but learned there are costs to doing good science," n.d.). Eventually, the city had to go back into using DWSD, but by this time the damage caused by the river water was extensive, and the president had to declare a state of emergency in Flint, Mich.

RESEARCH METHODS

Research Question

Compared to the Flint water system, is the Detroit water system safer to be used by the residents or not ("Judge: Flint residents can sue state over water crisis," n.d.)?

Variables

The amount of corrosion in the pipes, the amount of lead in the water in terms of parts per billion, the amount of chlorine used in the water, the amount of TTHM found in the water when testing various water samples, color, and smell of the water ("Bureaucratic Malfeasance That Created Flint and Sebring’s Water Crises," n.d.). These are either interval or nominal variables ("One city’s solution to drinking water contamination? Get rid of every lead pipe. - The Washington Post," n.d.).

Research Design

The research design that will best fit this case is descriptive research and a bit of correlational research as well ("Snyder: Charges show bureaucrats to blame for Flint water crisis | Michigan Radio," n.d.).

The Sampling Process

Sampling will be done on a quarterly basis, where water samples are collected from eight different locations along the supply routes of the water ("Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues," n.d.). The samples are tested for lead, chlorine, and TTHM. In addition, the color and smell of the water here will be tested as well. Furthermore, water samples from various homes will be collected, and the conditions of the pipes at random locations inspected as well ("We helped uncover a public health crisis in Flint, but learned there are costs to doing good science," n.d.).

Collection of Data

Data will be collected through various means. People will be interviewed about the kind of water they are getting in their houses, in terms of their experiences using this water ("Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA," n.d.). Then, there will be an observation of the color and smell of the water, as well as the conditions of the pipes used ("One city’s solution to drinking water contamination? Get rid of every lead pipe. - The Washington Post," n.d.). There will also be experimentation, where the components of water samples from various locations will be determined ("Judge: Flint residents can sue state over water crisis," n.d.).

Analysis of the Data

Data will be analyzed by carrying out experiments to determine the levels of contaminants in the water and then properly labeling the water as either safe or unsafe to use.

Why this was not effective

An analysis of the system showed corroded pipes were not properly re-scaled because the people were not willing to use water which they had been informed was contaminated ("Moving Forward after Flint » American Scientist," n.d.).

References

Retrieved from http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.2015.303003

Enforcing Lead Laws and Regulations | Lead | US EPA. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/lead/enforcing-lead-laws-and-regulations

EPA's Origins: Duties Transferred to EPA from Other Federal Agencies | About EPA | US EPA. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://archive.epa.gov/epa/aboutepa/epas-origins-duties-transferred-epa-other-federal-agencies.html

Flint residents must start paying for water they still can’t drink without a filter - The Washington Post. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/02/28/flint-residents-must-start-paying-for-water-they-still-cant-drink-without-a-filter/?utm_term=.795d522b3

Flint Water Study Updates | Up-to-date information on our collaborative research and citizen science work with the residents of Flint, MI in light of reported water quality issues. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://flintwaterstudy.org

Judge: Flint residents can sue state over water crisis. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/michigan/flint-water-crisis/2016/10/27/flint-water-crisis/92839776/

One city’s solution to drinking water contamination? Get rid of every lead pipe. - The Washington Post. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/one-citys-solution-to-drinking-water-contamination-get-rid-of-every-lead-pipe/2016/05/10/480cd842-0814-11e6-bdcb-0133da18418d_story.html

Safe Drinking Water. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://lobby.la.psu.edu/015_Disinfectant_Byproducts/Congressional_Statements/House/H_Waxman_Safe_Drinking_Water.htm

What Went Wrong In Flint | FiveThirtyEight. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-went-wrong-in-flint-water-crisis-michigan/

The Bureaucratic Malfeasance That Created Flint and Sebring’s Water Crises. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://psmag.com/the-bureaucratic-malfeasance-that-created-flint-and-sebring-s-water-crises-3cc6823f3b12?gi=e244f5f09245#.gkk4lwwru

Snyder: Charges show bureaucrats to blame for Flint water crisis | Michigan Radio. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://michiganradio.org/post/snyder-charges-show-bureaucrats-blame-flint-water-crisis#stream/0

We helped uncover a public health crisis in Flint, but learned there are costs to doing good science. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://theconversation.com/we-helped-uncover-a-public-health-crisis-in-flint-but-learned-there-are-costs-to-doing-good-science-54227