Armco Miami Coke Plant Case
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Armco has applied for a variance which would extend a deadline imposed by the EPA for cleaning up its coke manufacturing process. The variance was denied, which means that Armco must now meet the new manufacturing requirements two to three years earlier than it considers feasible. Armco has traditionally taken an active stand in favor of pollution reducing manufacturing methods, and it now finds itself in the untenable position of possibly going on record as being unable to meet the new pollution control standards. The company's previous aggressive approaches to decreasing pollution were, apparently, ignored by the EPA in reaching its decision. At this point, Armco will participate in an adjudication hearing within 30 days where it will appeal the decision on the variance, but it must consider the very real possibility that no relief will be forthcoming.The EPA standards require modification to the manufacturing process which are designed to reduce emissions to 60 micrograms; even with its most aggressive forecasts, and using the technology which the EPA recognizes as state of the art, Armco does not anticipate that it could reduce emissions to below 75 micrograms, and even that could not be achieved in the necessary timeframe. This is the first area of contention with the EPA that needs to be addressed at the adjudication hearing. The American steel industry is well behind the steel industries of other nations when considered from a te
. . .
reduce emissions, but also demonstrating that the company seeks a realistic goal in this regard, Armco can help maintain its stance as an aggressive company when it comes to pollution.
Armco could choose to build a new plant which would meet the 75 microgram goal, use state of the art technology, and which might be available by the EPA's deadline. Such a move would require substantial investment by the company, but it might be able to work with the community to obtain tax relief since this alternative would keep jobs in the area and would help maintain the local economy. This strategy also has long-term appeal in that it would upgrade Armco's facilities from the 1920s to the 1970s and would make the company more competitive in the international market.
Armco can also tie the variance request up in the courts for several years, and possibly gain the time extension it needs in order to make modifications to the plant in question. This alternative has several disadvantages associated with it, the first being the public relations nightmare that it would entail, and the possibly feeling of betrayal that would be passed to its employees. Armco has made much of its attention to pollution reduction, and taking the short-sighted vie
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Alternatives Armco's, War II, Background Armco, Analysis EPA, Germany Japan, adjudication hearing, reduce emissions, art technology, 75 micrograms, 60 micrograms, company able, electric furnace, furnace facilities plant, emissions 60 micrograms, american steel industry, alternative company, competitive position, using technology, electric furnace facilities, 75 micrograms achieved,
Approximate Word count = 1556
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
