Community Corrections Control Strategies

/in /by

Community Corrections Control Strategies

In Chapter 9 of the text the authors discuss four general types of control strategies used in Community corrections. Chose two of the four types of control strategies and discuss how they work and how effective they are. Give your opinion as to whether they should remain as an option in alternative sentencing.

Instructions for Writing Your Paper

Write a 2 page APA style paper.  Only the body of the paper will count toward the word requirement (title page and references are in addition to the 2 pages)

In your paper, cite at least 2-3 references using the APA style guide format for in-text citation.

Only one reference may be found on the internet. The other references must be found in the Grantham University online library (this includes EBSCO Host and the Gale Criminal Justice Collection).

Required Text:

Clear, T. R., Reisig, M. D., & Cole, G. F. (2016).

American Corrections (11th ed.). 

Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning

ISBN:9781305093300

Analysis of the FTAA Case Study and FTAA After Action Reports

/in /by

part 1

Analysis of the FTAA Case Study and FTAA After Action Reports

Put yourself in the place of Major Warren as he reviews the relevant after action reports associated with the FTAA Conference in Miami, Florida in 2003. Analyze the FTAA case study provided to you in this Module as well as the City of Miami PD After Action Report, the City of Miami Civilian Investigative Panel Report on the Free Trade Area of the Americas Summit Report, the FTAA Independent Review Panel Report from Module 6, and the Audio Visual Presentation (AVP) – FTAA After Action Review from this Module.

Note that these reports provide different perspectives of the FTAA event from different agencies and organizations.

Part 2

Written Assignment Part 2

Your case study analysis essay must follow the following steps:

  • Identify the key issue or issues.
  • Identify the likely root causes of the issues or problems.
  • Determine the viable solutions to address or resolve the issues.
  • Assess the likely ramifications of all your suggested solutions (consider the risks and cost-benefit of each course of action).
  • State your final policy recommendations to the County Manager and to the Board of County Commissioners.

Your narrative should go beyond the obvious and be written at a graduate level. Your paper should be no less than 1,200 words, and no more than 3,000 words, and should include at least two sources in addition to your textbook.

  • 1

     

    FTAA Conference Case Study

    Eloy L. Nuñez, PhD

    The Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) Conference in Miami, Florida, November 2003

    The police departments of the City of Miami and of Miami-Dade County have had their share of

    experience with civil disturbances over the last 40 years. There were the race riots in 1968 (Liberty City

    Riot), 1980 (McDuffie Riot), 1982 (Luis Alvarez Riots), and 1989 (Lozano Riots) in the Liberty City and

    Overtown areas. Then there was the Elian Gonzalez civil disturbance in April 2000.

    In each of these incidents, segments of local minority communities (either African-American or Cuban)

    rioted as the result of some perceived injustice against their ethnic groups. The riots resulted from

    either police shooting young black men, or from the federal government deporting a young Cuban boy

    back to his home in Cuba.

    One incident of civil unrest – the 1980 “McDuffie Riots” was particularly destructive. Three days of

    rioting in Liberty City, Overtown, Brownsville, and Coconut Grove, resulted in 18 deaths and over 180

    serious injuries. The damage caused by the rioting was estimated at $100 million and was thought to

    have caused the permanent loss of over 3,000 jobs in the black communities of Miami. Morale among

    the rank and file of both major police departments in the County were at an all-time low.

    The McDuffie incident is also significant, in that it led to the innovation of the modern Mobile Field

    Force (MFF) model for police response to civil unrest. The “Miami-Dade” model, as it is commonly

    referred to, was actually a co-invention by officers from the City of Miami Police Department (MPD) and

    the Dade County Public Safety Department (now called the Miami-Dade Police Department – MDPD).

    In effect, both police departments had sustained considerable injury and damage, both physically and to

    their reputations as a result of these civil disturbances. Much of the damage resulted from lack of

    aggressive response from the officers who had been shell-shocked from the community’s reaction to the

    killing of Arthur McDuffie, and the resulting not-guilty verdict of the involved officers.

    Ironically, it was during the difficult times of the post-McDuffie period that many innovations, such as

    the Mobile Field Force concept were born. It did not take long before the MFF concept was put to a test

    with the 1982 “Luis Alvarez/Overtown” riots and again in 1989 with the “Lozano” riots. In both cases,

    the field forces worked marvelously, as both civil disturbances were quickly quelled.

    By the time that the Mobile Field Forces were used to quell the Elian Gonzalez disturbances in 2000, the

    MDP and MDPD had become renowned for their innovative crowd control practices. The subsequent

    innovation of Special Event Response Teams (SERT) as an intermediary response to peaceful or

    marginally disobedient crowds further added to the MDPD’s expert standing among national and global

    police departments.

     

     

    2

     

    In 2001, the MDPD hosted a week-long Disorder Management Symposium that was attended by

    commanders and supervisors from departments throughout the United States, as well as a few from

    other nations. The MFF concept (and later the SERT model) has been adopted by police departments

    across the nation as the best way to deal with large and unruly crowds.

    The Free Trade Area of the Americas Conference (FTAA)

    The FTAA agreement between the United States and the majority of Latin American and Caribbean

    nations had come about as the result of global economic meetings between the heads of state of those

    countries during the Summit of the Americas Conference in Miami-Dade in 1984. Like the NAFTA

    agreement before it, the FTAA has drawn a considerable amount of opposition from the anti-

    globalization “fair trade” crowd.

    The violent protests against global economic structures and free trade agreements first came about in

    1999, during the World Trade Organization (WTO) conference in Seattle, Washington. These riots

    caught the authorities by surprise and signaled a shift in the paradigm of police civil disorder

    management. After Seattle, there were several other violent protests by an informal anti-globalization

    alliance of unionists, communists, and anarchists. These included riots in Montreal, Canada; Genoa,

    Italy; Cancun, Mexico; and Washington D.C. Not only were the WTO conferences being targeted, but

    other worldwide economic forums such as the G-8 Conference and the World Economic Forum (WEF)

    were also being singled out by the radical groups.

    The secretariat of the FTAA decided to bring the conference to Miami, Florida in November of 2003.

    High-level delegations from all the participating nations of the Western Hemisphere would be

    converging in Miami for the one-week conference. Being aware that the conference would attract the

    same type of violent protestors seen at Seattle, Montreal, Genoa, and Washington D.C., both the MPD

    and the MDPD commenced preparations for the likelihood of very large crowds and violent protests.

    Early, preliminary planning at the MDPD started as soon as the department became aware of the

    conference. Many of the strategic and tactical concepts that were developed for the FTAA had already

    been conceptualized by a select number of mid-level managers (lieutenants) who had been aware of the

    problems in Seattle, Genoa, and Montreal for several years. It had become obvious, that the Mobile

    Field Force concept that had been born in Miami-Dade would no longer work against this new type of

    radicalized adversaries. So when the chiefs and directors of the two police departments ordered their

    planners to get ready for the FTAA conference, the lieutenants who were assigned the task already had

    a concept in mind.

    Simply stated, the new MDPD strategic concept in response to the Anarchist/anti-globalization

    protestors expected for the FTAA was this:

     Emphasis on the offensive rather than reliance on defense alone (i.e., do not be passive)

     Inside and outside deployment (i.e., do not put all your forces behind a fence)

     Emphasis on unit mobility, rather than the static, linear tactics of the past

     

     

    3

     

     Intelligence driven (know your opponent’s every move ahead of time)

     Proactive enforcement (i.e., strike early and strike hard – don’t wait until things get out of hand)

     Matching up with the adversary: “The right tool for the right job” (There were many different

    types of protestors, and protest behaviors, therefore different types of units were created to

    match up against each type)

     Emphasis on strict unit discipline (to prevent being goaded into a disadvantageous skirmish)

    Of course, the upper-level management and the politicians didn’t know it yet. It would take a

    considerable amount of convincing by the mid-level lieutenants before the command staff would “buy

    into” these new concepts.

    Meanwhile, at the Miami PD, a similar process was taking place among their mid-level managers.

    However, there were some significant differences in the way the two major police departments in the

    area viewed the oncoming event. This became quite obvious to the planners from both agencies when

    they first met for a cup of coffee at a Denny’s Restaurant in Miami Springs (neutral territory). It needs to

    be understood, that there has been tension between the two departments for many years. Differences

    in the approaches of the two departments to the Elian Gonzalez disturbances in 2000 were very obvious,

    with the City of Miami field forces being portrayed on television as an undisciplined force, while the

    County officers were portrayed as being highly disciplined and well trained. Several incidents seemed to

    support this public perception.

    This perception was also shared among the rank and file of both departments. The County looked at the

    City officers as being out of control, poorly supervised, and undisciplined. On the other hand, many City

    officers agreed with this portrayal, but they also disliked the way that the County officers looked down

    on them. After all, it wasn’t their fault that they were poorly organized. It was their command staff that

    was lacking.

    The tension between the departments pervaded all levels, but was at its worst at the mid-level

    management (majors and captains). Typically, these are the ranks where the most headstrong and

    ambitious personality types tend to be in a police organization. It’s at this rank level that most of the

    acrimony between the departments would come to bear during the event.

    The morning of the first meeting at Denny’s revealed some of the early points of contention between

    the main planners of the two departments. The captain who would be the operational commander of

    the mobile field forces coordinated by the City generally viewed the tactical situation as being a

    defensive and static operation that focused on the defense of perimeter fences. By contrast, the captain

    who would be the overall operational commander of the County task forces (field forces, combined with

    SERT teams, CUT teams, and bicycle teams) had supported the recommendations of his lieutenants, who

    favored the mobile and offensive approach.

    Another serious point of contention was discussed during the meeting at Denny’s. Both sides agreed

    with the concept of putting teams of undercover officers within the crowds to provide real-time

    intelligence about the adversaries’ movements. However, according to the City captain, the undercover

     

     

    4

     

    teams would also act as “snatch teams” which would be responsible for making arrests inside the

    crowds.

    To the County captain and his lieutenants, that seemed to be a risky and foolish tactic. The last thing

    they wanted to see was a situation where one of their officers would mistake an armed undercover

    snatch team officer for a bad guy. The chances of a “friendly fire” incident were high in this type of

    situation, despite the City captain’s assurances that the undercover officers would be wearing a distinct

    colored cap to identify themselves. It was obvious to the County lieutenants, that this part of the plan

    was fraught with peril. In the heat of battle, it was too much to ask from a field force officer to make

    the type of critical decision based solely on their ability to recognize the color of a cap.

    Conversely, The County planners wanted to use undercover officers embedded into the crowds,

    exclusively as observers and reporters of movement. These “field intelligence teams” would be armed,

    but would not be allowed to engage in any arrests. Use of their weapons would be strictly limited to

    life-saving situations only. The differences in perspective and strategy between the two departments

    had become obvious from the very beginning. Unfortunately, this meeting would only be the beginning

    of the conflict between the two agencies.

    Miami PD is Designated as the Lead Agency

    Several weeks after the initial meeting at Denny’s, a decision was made at the policy-making (political)

    level of government that the City of Miami PD would be the lead agency for the event. The decision was

    made because the majority of the FTAA-related events were located in Downtown Miami, which is

    mostly City jurisdiction. The jurisdictional map in Downtown Miami; however, is very patchy. The

    American Airlines Arena, the Port of Miami, the Stephen Clark Government Center, the Dade County Jail,

    Jackson Memorial Hospital, and Vizcaya (site of one of the main events) were all County jurisdiction.

    The remainder of the Downtown area is City jurisdiction (although the County shares co-jurisdiction

    there as well).

    The decision to designate the City of Miami PD as the lead agency really rankled the MDPD command

    staff and mid-level managers in charge of planning. This meant that the City PD would be making the

    most critical decisions based on a strategic model that the County planners viewed as being significantly

    flawed. Also, there was a significant size disparity between the two departments. The MDPD had over

    3,500 sworn officers in the entire department, of which 1,500 had been specifically assigned to the FTAA

    mobilization. Meanwhile, the Miami PD only had only 1,500 total sworn personnel in their entire

    department. The commitment of manpower resources by the County was as much as the total number

    of sworn personnel in the City. This was another reason that the County staff was not pleased with the

    decision. It was as if the United States Central Command had subordinated their forces in Afghanistan

    to the command of the Afghan government. To the County staff, this decision made little sense.

    Nevertheless, they were committed to making the plan work, whether they agreed with the plan or not.

    The Event

     

     

    5

     

    By the time that the event week commenced, the incident and operational commanders from both

    departments hardly spoke with each other. Mid level managers stopped going to each others’ meetings

    and communications between the two agencies had nearly come to a halt. The only people that

    seemed to be exempt from the petty squabbling were the lower level rank-and-file sergeants and

    officers, who deal with one another on a daily basis, and cannot afford to have bad relations. After all,

    their lives depend on them backing up each other on a daily basis.

    The City set up their command post and a Joint Operations Command (JOC). The County also set up

    their own incident command post, as well as a Tactical Operations Command (TOC). In all of these, the

    respective departments appointed liaison officers to each others’ facilities. There was also a common

    radio link via a command frequency that the commanders of both departments shared. That was the

    extent of the cooperation and coordination between the two departments throughout the event. Face-

    to-face meetings between the incident commanders from the City and the County during the week of

    the event were rare.

    As the FTAA event week wore on, the relationship between the commanders of the two departments

    became increasingly antagonistic. On several occasions, one agency ordered the other agency’s

    helicopter to leave the airspace over the Downtown area. The other agency retaliated by overriding the

    order through the Miami International Airport control tower.

    There was an incident early in the week, where two separate suspicious packages believed to be bombs

    were discovered within 70 feet of each other near the Government Center. The County Bomb Squad

    that was already on the scene of both suspicious packages was ordered to stand down and not approach

    the second package, because it was technically in City jurisdiction. This unfortunate conflict at the

    command level could have had serious repercussions at the tactical level, if the packages had indeed

    been bombs. It turned out that the first package was a hoax device set by the protestors, while the

    second package was a homeless person’s belongings. This time, the petty conflict between the

    commanders of the two agencies did not harm anyone. However, it was evident to all that problems

    would continue throughout the week.

    Thursday was the most eventful day, as over 10,000 protestors crowded the narrow streets of

    Downtown Miami. Mixed among these 10,000 protestors, were approximately 500 – 600 hardcore

    Anarchists and “Black Bloc” rabble rousers, armed with slingshots, knives, smoke bombs, bricks, and

    anything else you can think of.

    Troubles began early on Thursday, when a crowd of several hundred violent protestors probed the

    northern perimeter of the County area of operations. That crowd worked its way toward the

    Government Center, where they made their best efforts to intimidate and coax the County field forces

    to retaliate against them. The highly disciplined County officers stood their ground and did not allow

    themselves to get goaded into a bad response.

    About a half hour later, the City field forces were taunted by the same group as it moved eastward

    toward the Intercontinental Hotel perimeter fence, where most of the delegates were staying. The City

     

     

    6

     

    officers were pelted with urine, feces, and paint by the protestors. In turn, the City field forces

    responded with less-lethal munitions, including Pepperball and (unfortunately for an innocent

    photographer in the area) with 12 gauge “Super Sock” rounds. Although the Super Sock is considered a

    less-lethal munition, it does not lend itself for use in large-crowd situations, and should never be aimed

    toward someone’s head. In the unfortunate case of the innocent photographer, the Super Sock lodged

    under the skin of the Occipital lobe and he lost one of his eyes as the result of the inappropriate use of a

    less-lethal munition. The City would settle out of court on the resulting civil case several years later.

    Approximately an hour later, the situation became very precarious, as a group of approximately 400 –

    500 Black Bloc and Anarchists unleashed their planned main attack. Several hundred violent protestors

    ran down the narrow streets of Downtown Miami, destroying everything in their path, in a scene

    reminiscent of Seattle in 1999. It was during this main attack that the County’s mobile field forces really

    showed their mettle.

    At the direction of the incident commander, several County field forces chased and dispersed the large

    groups of Black Bloc protestors westbound as planned. Arrests of several pockets of protestors were

    made along the way at several intervals. The plan was being executed exactly as the MDPD lieutenants

    had envisioned several years before. Unfortunately, the City’s decision to deploy most of their field

    forces inside their “hard” perimeter, significantly limited their ability to move aggressively against the

    Anarchists and Black Bloc who were running amok in the Downtown streets outside the perimeter

    fence. The County (and some other agencies’ field forces) took the offensive that ultimately led to the

    successful conclusion of the incident.

    There was another incident on the next (and last) day of the event that involved over 26 arrests at the

    County Jail. However, this incident, which went off relatively well, only involved the County field forces.

    Even after the FTAA was over, the acrimony between the two departments continued. This was evident

    as the incident commanders from each agency testified at the Civilian Review Panel hearings, and later

    in civil depositions resulting from numerous law suits. During the testimony, there was some finger

    pointing between the commanders of the two agencies. However, the majority of the infighting was

    done privately, and was not readily evident to the public.

    Despite all the acrimony, the event turned out fairly well. The strategy and tactics that the County

    lieutenants had formulated several years earlier, worked exactly as expected. The protestors were used

    to being treated with “kid gloves” like in Cancun, Genoa, and Montreal. They never expected the field

    forces in Miami-Dade to be as disciplined, coordinated, and aggressive as they turned out. While Seattle

    resulted in a paradigm shift for police civil disturbance tactics, the FTAA in Miami was a paradigm shift

    for the violent anti-globalization protestors. They were caught off guard, and they’ll have to adjust their

    future tactics accordingly.

     

    References

     

     

    7

     

    Driscoll, A. (2005). The McDuffie Riots 25 Years Later. The Miami Herald. Retrieved on July 30, 2008,

    from http://www.floridacdc.org/articles/050515-1.html

Topic: Statesmanship In The Public Administration Context

/in /by

Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

CHAPTER 1

Personal Action in Public Organizations

 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

1. Defining public administration

2. Understanding the differences between public and business administration

3. Identifying values and conflicts of public administration and the complexity of the work

4. Understanding why one should study public administration

5. Understanding the issues that underlie the intellectual and practical context of public administration

 SUMMARY OVERVIEW

The purpose of Chapter 1 is to introduce students to the complexity of public administration and

the work of the public administrator. Approaching the topic from both a theoretical and practical

point of view, the authors offer a detailed description of the field of public administration. The

chapter includes a definition of public administration along with a brief history of the field, with a

special emphasis on how the values of democracy affect the practice of public administration.

The authors outline the reasons for their view that public administrators are obligated not only to

achieve efficiency and effectiveness but to be responsive to the many stakeholders who help

define the public interest and discuss the concerns that administrators need to keep in mind as

they meet this obligation.

In addition, the chapter explores the differences between public and business administration,

particularly in the areas of ambiguity, decision-making processes, and visibility. Emphasizing the

concept of “publicness,” the authors address the inevitable tension between efficiency and

responsiveness that is central to the work of public administrators and also highlight the

increasing importance of understanding the activities of political and administrative officials in a

global context. A key component of Chapter 1 is a focus on what public and nonprofit managers

actually do, including a discussion about the characteristics of the most effective and responsible

public and nonprofit managers and the kinds of skills the work of public administration requires.

The chapter also includes a discussion about the reasons why various people study public

administration and how the study of public administration can help prepare for administrative

positions. The authors touch on the interaction of government and business and the importance of

public administration in everyday life and emphasize that understanding the world of

administrative action not only is the basis for good scholarship but also for making things happen

in the public service.

Finally, the chapter introduces two major themes that have characterized work in public

organizations and continue to be of great importance—politics and administration and

bureaucracy and democracy—and discusses how these themes manifest in today’s public

administration as the tension between efficiency and responsiveness.

 

 

2 Chapter 1: Personal Action in Public Organizations

Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

 CHAPTER OUTLINE

I. WHAT IS PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION? A. Values of Democracy

 Public Administration in History: THE DEMOCRATIC DREAM

B. Contrasting Business and Public Administration

 Exploring Concepts: PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION IS DIFFERENT FROM

BUSINESS

1. Ambiguity 2. Pluralistic Decision Making 3. Visibility

C. Thinking about Public Administration Today 1. Publicness 2. The Global Context

II. WHAT DO PUBLIC ADMINISTRATORS DO?

A. An Inventory of Public Management Skills

B. Voices of Public Administrators

III. WHY STUDY PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION?

 Exploring Concepts: WHY STUDY PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION?

A. Preparing for Administrative Positions

B. Combining Technical and Managerial Training

C. Interaction of Business and Government

D. Influencing Public Organizations

E. Making Things Happen

 Public Administration in History: PUBLIC SERVICE: A

DISTINGUISHED PROFESSION

IV. ISSUES IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION THEORY AND PRACTICE

A. Politics and Administration 1. Ensuring Accountability

B. Bureaucracy and Democracy

C. Efficiency versus Responsiveness

V. SUMMARY AND ACTION IMPLICATIONS

 KEY TERMS

Autocracy Government by one.

Democracy A political system in which decision-making power is widely shared among

members of the society.

Equality The idea that all persons have an equal claim to life, liberty, and the pursuit of

happiness.

 

 

Chapter 1: Personal Action in Public Organizations 3

Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Individualism The idea that the dignity and integrity of the individual are of supreme

importance.

Liberty The idea that individual citizens of a democracy should have a high degree of self-

determination.

Oligarchy Government by the few.

Policy analysis Process of researching or analyzing public problems to provide policy makers

with specific information about the range of available policy options and advantages and

disadvantages of different approaches.

Policy analysts Persons who provide important information about public programs through

research into the operations and impacts of the programs.

Program managers Persons ranging from the executive level to the supervisory level who are in

charge of particular governmental programs.

Public administration The management of public programs.

Staff managers Persons who support the work of program managers through budgeting and

financial management, personnel and labor relations, and purchasing and procurement.

 WEB LINKS

The following are links to the leading organizations for those in the field of public

administration and nonprofit management:

Academy of Management, Public and Nonprofit Division: (http://division.aomonline.org/pnp/).

Alliance for Nonprofit Management: (www.allianceonline.org).

American Political Science Association: (www.apsanet.org).

American Society for Public Administration: (www.aspanet.org).

Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management: (www.appam.org).

Independent Sector: (www.independentsector.org).

International City Management Association: (www.icma.org).

National Academy of Public Administration: (www.napawash.org).

The National Association of Schools of Public Affairs and Administration: (www.naspaa.org).

The following are links to other helpful sources for both public and non-profit managers:

Chronicle of Philanthropy: (www.philanthropy.com).

Government Executive magazine: (www.govexec.com).

Office of Personnel Management: (www.opm.gov).

The Public Manager: (www.thepublicmanager.org).

U.S. Census Bureau: (www.census.gov/).

U.S. Government Official Web Portal: (www.governing.com).

 

http://division.aomonline.org/pnp/
http://www.allianceonline.org/
http://www.apsanet.org/
http://www.aspanet.org/
http://www.appam.org/
http://www.independentsector.org/
http://www.icma.org/
http://www.napawash.org/
http://www.naspaa.org/
http://www.philanthropy.com/
http://www.govexec.com/
http://www.opm.gov/
http://www.thepublicmanager.org/
http://www.census.gov/
http://www.governing.com/

Legal Aspects of Safety and Health

/in /by

Part 2

(Answer the following question on the page 2 of your word document) Answer the questions below in a few sentences.

1. Where does this type of complaint fit on OSHA’s Priority criteria?

2. What factors could have made this complaint non-formal rather than formal?

3. What steps could you take as the employer to identify the employee who filed the complaint? 4. What factors could result in this complaint being reclassified as a formal complaint?

Save both parts of this assignment in one word document to submit for grading.

Unit II Assignment

Discussion Question

Question 1

Under what conditions can an employee be denied access to the opening conference, walk-around, and closing conference? Your response should be at least 75 words in length.

Question 2

If the OSHA compliance officer requests documents that are not related to a formal complaint, what options do you believe the employer has? Your response should be at least 75 words in length.

Question 3

If OSHA determines that an employer’s response to a non-formal complaint is adequate, what options does the employee filing the non-formal complaint have? Your response should be at least 75 words in length.

Question 4

Can an employee request that an attorney or union representative attend a private conference with the compliance officer? If the union demands to have a representative present, does the employee have to comply? Your response should be at least 75 words in length.

Unit II Assignment

You receive a follow-up call from the area director saying the employee filing the original non-formal complaint has provided additional information about the alleged health situation and submitted a formal complaint using the OSHA-7 form, making the complaint a formal complaint. A few days later, an OSHA compliance officer shows up at your facility to perform a comprehensive inspection. The compliance officer presents the proper credentials, and you verify that the compliance officer is employed by OSHA and assigned to the local office.

During the opening conference, the compliance officer provides you with the formal complaint, alleging that employees are exposed to hazardous concentrations of metal fumes in welding areas of the plant, that you have not performed any air sampling to determine exposure levels, that adequate ventilation is not present in welding areas, and that adequate respiratory protection has not been provided to welders. As a part of the inspection, the compliance officer requests the following documents:

 

 Chemical inventory list;

 

 OSHA 300 logs;

 

 Hazard Communication Program, including training records;

 

 any sampling data that you have;

 

 Respiratory Protection Program, including medical clearance letters and training records;

 

 written hazard assessment for personal protective equipment (PPE) used at the facility;

 

 Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) for the metals you use in the production process and any welding rods/wire used in the welding area; and

 

 any other written programs you have that are required by an OSHA regulation.

 

The compliance officer takes a walk-through tour of the facility, spending extra time in the welding areas. During the walk-through, the compliance officer points out several issues believed to be apparent violations. The issues are as follows:

 

 Heavy haze is present in the welding area.

 

 Individuals wearing half-mask air-purifying respirators have full beards.

 

 Employees are using chemicals that could be injurious to the eyes, and no emergency eyewash is present.

 

 Eyewash is present in another area of the plant that is covered in dust, and there is no indication of recent operation or inspection.

 

 Employees are using chemicals that could be absorbed through the skin and are not using any gloves.

 

 Employees are performing maintenance inside a press with no lock-out/tag-out applied.

 

 No written lock-out/tag-out program is available at the time of the inspection.

 

 Welding operation is performed near flammable materials, and no fire watch present.

 

 There is no record of training for fork truck drivers.

 

 Extension cords are stretched across walkways.

 

 Three containers are present in the plant with no label present on any of the containers.

 

 An employee could not find a SDS for the chemical he or she was using.

 

The compliance officer asks for a private conference room and a list of non-managerial employees. He tells you that he intends to interview four non-managerial employees before leaving for the day. He also states that he will return the next day to collect some air samples at the facility.

You are worried about the number of citations and penalties that you may face. Provide a document summarizing the steps you would take as soon as the compliance officer leaves, and the steps you believe you could have taken during the walk-through that may have resulted in a quick-fix penalty reduction.

Your document must be at least three pages in length, not counting the title or reference pages. You must also include at least one reference using appropriate APA style.

Information about accessing the Blackboard Grading Rubric for this assignment is provided below.

Unit III Assignment

You receive a document (linked below) by certified mail. After reading the document, prepare a response that summarizes the approach you would take to the citations and penalties that have been proposed. Be sure to include the following in your response:

 Steps you are required to take,

 Options available to you,

 Contacts you would make, and

 Documentation necessary to respond to the citations and penalties.

Your response must be a minimum of two pages in length, using at least one reference. All sources must be cited and a reference provide using APA style.  Click here to access the OSHA citation document for this assignment. Information about accessing the Blackboard Grading Rubric for this assignment is provided below.

Unit IV Assignment

Based on the Citation and Notification of Penalty letter you received in Unit III, prepare a document that summarizes at least five actions you would take as soon as possible after you reviewed the letter. For each of the actions, you must state the following:

 

 the exact action,

 

 why you believe the action is required for the citations and penalties,

 

 how you believe the actions will assist in responding to the citations and penalties, and

 

 resources you would use to accomplish the action.

 

You must support your actions with reliable sources. Your response must be a minimum of two pages in length, using at least one reference. All sources must be cited, and a reference must be provided using APA style.

Information about accessing the Blackboard Grading Rubric for this assignment is provided below.

Unit V Assignment

You managed to schedule an informal conference with the area director at the regional OSHA office four days after you receive the Notice of Citations and Penalty. Based on the citations and penalties you received in Unit III, prepare a document that lists the citations and penalties you wish to discuss with the area director.

You should summarize what you are trying to accomplish in regard to each citation/penalty you choose, to include:

 The information you will use to try and accomplish your goal,

 The information you will take with you to the meeting, and

 Who will accompany you to the meeting.

You must support your actions with reliable sources. Your grade will be based on your ability to present a case to your professor (serving as the area director) to reduce either the severity of some citations, or the amount of some penalties. If you simply state that you accept the citations and penalties as written, you will receive a minimal score on the assignment.

Your response must be a minimum of two pages in length, not including the title page and reference page. You must use at least one reference in the paper. All sources must be cited in the text and on the reference page, using APA style.

 

Unit VI Assignment

You fail to reach an informal settlement agreement with the area director. You file a Notice to Contest within the required 15-day period. Your case is assigned to an administrative law judge (ALJ). Prepare a document summarizing the case you will submit to the ALJ. The document should discuss the following at a minimum:

 Which citations and penalties you would contest,

 the reasoning behind each contested citation and/or penalty,

 Documents you would bring to the hearing,

 Individuals you would use at the hearing,

 How the case before the ALJ differs from the informal conference,

 What information will be presented before the ALJ that was not presented in the informal conference, and

 What information you would request from OSHA as part of discovery.

You must support your actions with reliable sources. Your grade will be based on your ability to present a case to your professor, serving as the ALJ, to reduce or vacate either the severity of some citations or the amount of some penalties. If you simply state that you accept the citations and penalties as written, you will receive a minimal score on the assignment.

Your response must be a minimum of two pages in length, using at least one reference. All sources must be cited in the text and on the reference page, using APA style.

Unit VII Assignment

Assume that a fatality occurred at your facility one month prior to the OSHA inspection. Review the citations and penalties that were assessed to your facility, and respond to the following questions:

• Which of the citations could be referred to the U.S. DOJ for criminal proceedings?

• What conditions would have to be met before the citations could be referred for criminal proceedings?

• Which individuals working at your facility could face criminal charges under the Act?

• What would be the maximum prison sentence and fines that any individual would face?

• What would be the maximum fine that the company would face?

• If you were facing criminal charges under the Act, what would be your best defense?

• How could you involve the OSHRC in the criminal case(s)?

Your response must be a minimum of two pages in length, using at least one reference. All sources must be cited in the text and on the reference page, using APA style.

Unit 8- Question Answer

1. Summarize the procedures required to achieve Star status under OSHA’s Voluntary Protection Program (VPP).

2. Describe the role that Challenge Administrators play in the OSHA Challenge voluntary cooperative program.

3. Provide your opinion as to which OSHA voluntary cooperative program would be the most beneficial to a small business that prints business cards and letterhead.

4. Discuss the benefits that OSHA alliances provide to employers and workers in general industry.