U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
PUBLIC AWARENESS GUIDANCE
FOR
INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS
JANUARY 1981
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
OFFICE OF
AIR, NOISE. AND RADIATION
9 (901
SUBJECT: EPA Public Awareness Guidance
for Inspection and Maintenance Programs
FROM : David G. Hawkins, Assistant Administrator yv
for Air, Noise and Radiation (ANR-443) '
MEMO TO: Regional Administrators, Regions I-X
The attached EPA Public Awareness Guidance materials have been prepared
for use by affected states or local agencies during the development and imple-
mentation of the public information element of their I/M programs. This
Guidance has been reviewed by the EPA Regions and representatives of states
with, operating programs. It is also consistent with other Agency public
information guidance.
The I/M public awareness objectives are to achieve a widespread public
understanding that air pollution is a serious problem, that vehicle emissions
are major contributors to this problem, and that I/M is an effective way to
help solve the problem. The Guidance recommends an approach to accomplish
these objectives. It reviews I/M policy and the role of public awareness in
the implementation of I/M. It discusses the phases of I/M implementation from
adoption of enabling legal authority through development and operation of the
program. The Guidance suggests a process that can be used to develop an I/M
Public Awareness plan, and provides much practical information for planning a
media strategy. It also provides samples of major I/M themes that could be
used to promote increased public understanding.
I strongly believe that each state should develop in a timely manner a
comprehensive public awareness plan of action that will accomplish the I/M
program objectives. I/M cannot be successful without a full understanding of
what it is and how it works. The EPA Regional Offices should assist the
states in the preparation and implementation of this plan using these Guidance
materials and by placing high priority on the use of Section 105 air program
grant funds to support this effort. For instance, one positive step that I/M
states could take to develop and implement an effective public awareness
program, would be to assign an I/M public awareness coordinator to be respon-
sible for the action plan and all other I/M public information activities to
insure the program's tasks will be carried out. I hope that the Regional
Offices would encourage this initiative by using the 105 Grant process and the
State/EPA Agreement to provide for the salary of such an individual.
-------
-2-
Present EPA policy requires a public information effort through the SIP
process and as part of each state's I/M program. EPA has proposed as 1982 SIP
policy that affected states should submit their I/M public awareness plan (45
FR 64856, 9/30/80). As with all SIP elements, states must show that
sufficient manpower and financial resources have been committed to carry out
the plan's provisions. The states' public awareness program will be formally
reviewed by EPA as part of the 1982 SIP process. This Guidance is provided to
help states.prepare an adequate plan. EPA and the states should begin certain
public awareness activities now to assure that necessary tasks are being
accomplished prior to I/M start up.
I hope that you will make this Guidance available to all affected states
as quickly as possible. If you have any questions concerning the Public
Awareness Guidance for I/M Programs, please contact me or Tom Cackette, Chief
of the I/M Staff at (FTS) 374-8374.
Attachment
cc: Joan Nicholson, Director, OPA
Inez Artico, OPA
Public Awareness Directors, Regions I-X
I/M Contacts, Regions I-X
Tom Cackette, Chief I/M Staff
-------
-1-
Table of Contents
Public Awareness Guidance
Tor"
Inspection and Maintenance Programs
Page
I. PURPOSE OF GUIDANCE ; 2
II. POLICY AND OBJECTIVES ' 2
III. APPLICABILITY AND FUNDING 3
IV. DISCUSSION.OF I/M PHASES 3
V. PROGRAM ELEMENTS AND PROCEDURES 5
A. Commitment
B. Identification
C. Outreach, Interaction and Responsiveness
. D. Evaluation and Modification
E. Feedback ,and Progress Reporting
VI. APPENDICIES 24
A. Samples
1. I/M Leaflet
2. Public;Survey Ouestignnaire
3. Fact Sheet
4. Press Release
5. Public Service Announcement (pc;A)
6. I/M Demonstration Van Brochure
7. I/M Newsletter
B. References
1. List of EPA I/M auriinvisuals and publications
2. I/M Public Opinion Survey of Operating Programs
3. Table on public information of operating I/M Programs
prepared by Radipn Corporation April 17, 1980
-------
-2-
I. Purpose of Guidance
Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) programs, as well as other air quality control
strategies, have often been initiated with only a modest level of public
awareness and understanding. The result frequently is widespread
misunderstanding, mistrust, and resentment by the public of these regulatory
programs. This is why a well planned Public Awareness Program to foster
public understanding is a necessary element in the development and
implementation of a successful I/M program. Unless the public and responsible
elected officials are kept informed of how I/M operates and how well it is
achieving its goals, I/M programs may never be able to achieve the emission
reduction benefits that are possible and that were committed to by the state.
This guidance draws on the experiences of operating I/M programs as well as on
established public awareness techniques to assist designated state or local
agency officials in carrying out I/M public awareness functions.
II. Policy and Objectives l
Policy - This I/M Public Awareness Guidance reflects and is consistent with
other EPA policy on public information and participation.I The Agency's
policy states that public information and participation will continually be
provided for, encourageo and assisted to the fullest extent possible. With
respect to I/M programs, this guidance applies to agencies responsible for
program development and implementation. Present EPA policy requires a public
information effort through the SIP process and as part of each state's I/M
program. EPA has proposed as 1982 SIP policy that affected states must submit
their I/M public awareness plan. As with all SIP elements, states must show
that sufficient manpower and financial resources have been committed to carry
out the plan's provisions. The state's public awareness program will be
formally reviewed by EPA as part of tne 1982 SIP process. This guidance is
provided to help states prepare an adequate plan. It only makes good sense to
carefully plan and commit necessary resources to carry out such an important
1/M program element. The EPA Regional Offices and states should be working
closely together now, because many needed information activities should be
well underway by 1982.
Objectives - To achieve widespread public awareness and understanding that air
pollution is a serious problem, that vehicle emissions are major contributors
to this problem, and that I/M is an effective way to help solve the problem.
1. Information - Increase the public's awareness of air quality issues,
the rationale and benefits of I/M programs and their relationship to
other attainment strategies.
2. Involvement - Encourage active involvement in the I/M development and
implementation process from a broad range of affected and interested
constituents.
_! EPA/DOT Expanded Guidelines on Public Participation in the June 23, 1978
Federal Register and EPA Proposed Policy on Public Participation in the April
30, 1980 Federal Register. .
-------
-3-
3. Communication - Establish and maintain an effective, continuing
communication program with the affected constituents to foster a
spirit of mutual trust.
III. Applicability and Funding
Applicability - This guidance applies to the state or local agencies
responsible for the development and implementation I/M programs. Although
many tasks of an I/M public awareness program may be carried out by a
contractor or public interest group(s), the designated state or local agency
will be responsible and accountable for the programs overall coordination and
implementation.
Funding - The responsible agencies should allocate sufficient financial
resources for the development and implementation of an I/M public awareness
program. To assist state/local agencies, EPA provides Section 105 and Section
175 funds that can be used for this activity. EPA believes that a state/local
PA coordinator is needed to oversee the development and implementation of an
effective public awareness program. EPA can support such a state/local
initiative through the 105 grant process and the State/EPA Agreement by
providing for the salary of such an individual. However, the responsible
agencies should count on state funds or I/M. fees in the future to help support
the routine public information effort. EPA also encourages 105/175 grantees
to pass-through funds to a broad base of capable, interested and affected
constituency groups who have expertise in public education.
IV. Discussion of I/M Phases
The I/M phases include adoption, development, and operation. Depending on the
program's phase, the message, audience, technique, and timing of public
awareness activities will vary. The discussion on I/M phases which follows,
specifically relates to Public awareness planning. The recommended process
for plan development is outlined in Section V of this Guidance.
Phase 1. Adoption
The first step in getting an I/M program underway is the adoption of enabling
legal authority. To comply with the requirements of the 1977 Amendments to
the Clean Air Act, major urban non-attainment areas that cannot meet the ozone
or carbon monoxide standards by 1982 must have authority to implement and
enforce I/M to have their compliance deadline extended until 1987. An interim
public awareness plan is useful to inform elected officials and citizens about
the nature of the air quality problem, the contribution made by motor vehicle
exhaust emissions, and how I/M can help solve the problem.
For the purpose of actions recommended later in this Guidance, it is assumed
that a state already has legal authority to implement I/M. However, elected
officials must continually be informed about the progress and effectiveness of
I/M programs.
-------
-4-
Phase 2. Development
Once I/M legal authority has been adopted and the state has committed to a
schedule for its implementation, program development must begin. Critical to
the I/M program is the development of a comprehensive public awareness plan of
action. An assessment of public knowledge and attitudes about I/M may be
needed. Two approaches can be taken. The first is a public opinion survey;
the second, a voluntary emission testing demonstration. These approaches can
help determine at what level an education campaign should be initiated and
help identify specific issues on which to focus. Refer to Appendix A.2 for a
sample survey questionnaire. A voluntary program is valuable because it
allows the auto service industry and specifically mechanics to get acquainted
with the emission test and repair procedures. Operating programs indicate
that their success, while largely dependent on an informed public, is also
dependent on well informed and trained mechanics. Additionally a "voluntary"
or "free demonstration" program allows the public and the media an opportunity
to get acquainted with emission testing firsthand.
Groups who have an interest in air quality or I/M should be consulted in the
development of the public awareness plan, and encouraged to participate in
informational activities. A number of groups already exist. American Lung
Association (ALA) chapters across the country are supporting I/M to further
reduce air pollution and its related lung problems. The League of Women
Voters and Sierra Club also have been active supporters in the air quality
efforts. Other groups directly affected by the program (i.e. auto services
industry) should also be involved.
Working with the media during all I/M phases, but particularly during program
development, is most useful to the public awareness effort. Establish and
maintain liaison with local T.V./radio news editors arid editorial board
members of daily and weekly newspapers. To brief reporters on the program,
develop an I/M press kit and hold briefing sessions. Guest appearances on
T.V. and radio talk shows is an effective method of reaching a large portion
of the public, especially during the 3-4 month period before start-up of
mandatory I/M.
Phase 3. Operation
After completion of Phase 2, the public should have a good understanding of
the air quality issues, the need for and benefits of I/M. Prior to start- up,
citizens need to know what to expect of the program and how they will be
affected. A pamphlet can be useful to explain the inspection process. Just
prior to the program's start-up and then continually thereafter, this
information should be distributed extensively via Motor Vehicle Department
registration mailing, as is presently being done in operating programs, or by
using several media modes, such as public service spots, talk shows, press
releases, etc. Consumer "hotlines" are being successfully used in existing
programs in responding to concerns about I/M and related issues. Program
information materials should be updated when necessary.
-------
-5-
V. Program Elements and Procedures
The following outline, along with the materials contained in the Appendix, are
provided as a guide for developing -an I/M public awareness plan. An effective
plan should contain the basic public information elements: commitment;
identification; outreach, interaction and responsiveness; evaluation and
modification; feedback and progress reporting.
A. Commitment
The responsible agency should:
1. Designate an I/M public awareness coordinator. Select the most
capable and available person to develop and implement the plan.
Ideally, someone knowledgeable about air quality issues and
experienced in educating the public and working with the media should
be assigned this task. Assess available resources, talent, technical
expertise, development and implementation capabilities either
in-house, or within other agencies or special interest groups. The
coordinator would be responsible for the action plan and all other
I/M public information activities to insure that the program's tasks
will be carried out.
2. Designation of a task force should be considered to assist in plan
development and implementation. Select representatives from either
the health community, public interest/environmental groups,
business/labor, or some other group, who have an interest in air
quality issues or I/M and can contribute their expertise to the
development, administration and implementation for the best approach
in educating the public.
3. Determine need for contractors or consultants. Through the contract
process and/or on a voluntary basis, if offered, plan to use the
services of interested and capable public interest groups or a
professional public relations consultant. The Lung Association,
League of Women Voters, Sierra Club and other such groups have a long
. history in air quality efforts and are able to effectively educate
the public. A public relations consultant can provide professional
communication advise on the most effective local public information
approach to take, and later assist in developing needed materials. A
consultant or a representative from a public interest group could
also be considered to perform agency coordination and planning
activities should no qualified candidate be available to carry out
the public awareness program.
4. Develop a budget and determine sources and available amounts of
public awareness funding. Refer to Section III, Applicability and
Funding for funding sources. Experience in states with established
I/M programs shows that much can be accomplished with a small budget
by being creative and taking advantage of available I/M materials.
-------
-6-
B. Identification
1. Identify audiences and develop a mailing list. Constituencies
interest in, and potentially affected, by I/M issues and programs
should be identified and inventoried at the beginning of the
process. The mailing list should be updated when necessary, but at a
minimum once a year. The following is a listing of audiences which
should be considered:
State, local government
air pollution control agencies
motor vehicle agencies
state legislators/staff
energy and transportation officials
elected officials/staffs
Auto Related Services
automotive service organizations
dealers associations
garages and service stations associations
auto parts manufacturers and suppliers
emission analyzer manufacturers
gasoline retailers
Organized Auto Owners
auto clubs
sports, recreational groups
Educational Institutions
public schools
junior high schools
vocational schools
community colleges
universities
Public Interest Groups
League of Women Voters
American Lung Association
consumer protection groups
Sierra Club
clean air coalitions/environmental groups
League of Cities
Conference of Mayors
National Association of Counties
National Conference of State Legislators
Civic Groups
Chamber of Commerce
Jaycees
Kiwanis
Urgan League
NAACP
Health Groups
State, County Medical Socities
Public Health Association
Media
newspaper (daily/weekly)
trade press
special press
radio stations
television stations
-------
-7-
Identify general message and style. This is the. focal point of the
plan. Since the goals of air pollution control and I/M affect
different people in different ways, decide on a simple format and
message to coincide with each I/M phase. During the development
phase, the message will vary at particular stages. Tailor your
message to the target audience. The following basic messages with
supporting information are recommended examples:
"Air pollution is harmful to public health and the quality of all our
lives."
The public should understand the various types of pollutants, their
sources and each one's known deleterious effects. They should be
given accurate information about the dramatic short-term consequences
of extreme levels of pollution, as well as the known hazards of
long-term exposure to lower levels of contaminants. Additionally,
the public should be made aware of substantial progress being made in
the improvement of ambient levels of air pollutiNn in our urbanized
areas. This results from major emission reductions of both
stationary and mobile sources. The information program could
highlight the national trends in reducing carbon monoxide and
hydrocarbons as published by the Council on Environmental Quality,
and by using state and local air quality data.
"Cars are major contributors to the air quality problem, especially
when they are not maintained."
The distinction should be made between stationary and mobile sources
since the control options vary greatly depending on the emission
source. Address other transportation control measures which are
being considered in local areas to achieve acceptable air quality
levels. Make it clear that improper vehicle maintenance and
excessive driving create additional pollution. Cars emit three major
polluting gases - carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons (HC), and
nitrogen oxides (NOx). Levels of CO and ozone in the atmosphere
above the minimum health standards can cause severe health problems
among children, the aged, and those with respiratory and heart
ailments. The' primary causes of high vehicle emission levels are
maladjustments, inadequate maintenance, fuel switching and
tampering. (Fuel switching to leaded gasoline will destroy the
catalytic converter, causing vehicles to exceed CO and HC tailpipe
emission standards.) Ninety percent of airborne lead in cities comes
from vehicle exhaust. This causes many serious health problems.
Broadening the public's understanding of the effects of motor vehicle
related air pollution will set the stage for introducing I/M
programs.
"I/M compliments the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) by
assuring compliance of vehicle exhaust emissions and thus control air
pollution."
-------
-8-
I/M works to lower air pollution levels by requiring the periodic
inspection of in-use motor vehicles, and emission related maintenance
for those cars which fail to meet prescribed inspection standards.
The program is proving .to be one of the most cost-effective available
transportation control measures to reduce HC and CO emissions.
Existing operating programs illustrate that I/M is effective in
substantially reducing tailpipe emissions. In Portland, which has
had an I/M program since 1975, vehicles emit 20% less HC and 36% less
CO than similar vehicles in Eugene, Oregon which does not have an I/M
program.
The final justification for I/M as a control strategy has to do with
its role in the overall Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program
(FMVCP). The three main elements of the FMVCP address vehicle design
.(certification), vehicle production (assembly line test) and vehicle
durability (recall). I/M complements these programs by assuring that
proper maintenance is performed. Without I/M the effectiveness of
the FMVCP is greatly reduced.
"I/M is an effective, reasonable program which works and is receiving
public acceptance."
Major benefits are being realized from I/M programs. By sharing this
information with the public, these benefits will act as incentives
for proper car maintenance. Operating programs in several parts of
the country show:
- I/M effectively reduces tailpipe emissions. Results from the
EPA Portland Study indicate that emission reductions
following maintenance of failed cars are 47% for CO and 42%
for HC. Without I/M, the job of controlling automobile
related pollutants is not accomplished.
- I/M effectively reduces tampering with emission control
devices. A recent survey in New Jersey indicates that I/M is
an effective deterrent to tampering; the. tampering rate was
nearly one half that of non-I/M areas..
- I/M effectively promotes energy conservation. In general,
excessive emissions are a consequence of a poorly, or
improperly tuned engine. Proper maintenance to
manufacturer's specifications of vehicles failing the I/M
test can result in 3-4% improved fuel economy.
- I/M effectively protects the investment made in your car.
Since 1968 auto manufacturers have had to meet increasingly
strict emissions standards. Regular and proper maintenance
which is encouraged by I/M is needed to insure the continued
effectiveness of air pollution control devices that are
installed to meet the FMVCP program requirements.
-------
-9-
- I/M effectively protects the consumer. The CAA reauires auto
manufacturers to guarantee emission control equipment for the
useful life of the car -- defined as 50,000 miles or five
years — provided the car is properly maintained to
manufacturer's specifications. With I/M, malfunctioning of
emission control equipment can often be identified, and in
many cases the repair cost will . be done by the
manufacturer. This is especially important for 1981 and
later models which are also covered by the 207(b) emission
performance warranty.
- I/M effectively improves the Quality of life. Improved air
Quality can minimize the cost of health care and lost work
days due to respiratory illness. It can also minimize crop
losses, property damage, and can increase real estate value
and tourist trade.
- I/M consumer costs are reasonable. State experience has
shown that for cars failing the emission test, the average
repair costs have been from $18-$35. Typical maintenance and
repairs involve carburetor adjustments, replacement of air
filters, choke adjustments and replacement of spark plugs.
- I/M benefits the loca.1. economy. New jobs created by initial
construction of inspection facilities in areas opting for a
centralalized program represent a definite boost to the
construction industries. The development, operation and
maintenance of the inspection facilities will provide some
jobs for local -residents. A general increase in the amount
of maintenance performed will also create more jobs in the
repair industry. This last point may be guite significant in
some areas.
- I/M programs have gained acceptance with the public. Public
opinion surveys done in states with operating programs show
that a majority of those polled responded favorably towards
the program. Refer to Appendix B-2 for survey results.
3. Identify available materials. EPA has developed several basic I/M
information materials. States and localities are encouraged to
obtain them by contacting the EPA Regional I/M representative.
Refer to Appendix R.I. for a listing of available materials from
EPA. -Before using any materials be sure to review them, since some
of the information may be outdated or inappropriate for your specific
program.
4. Determine which materials still need to be developed. Given that the
air pollution problems differ from one urban area to another,
information materials will have to be developed on specific local
issues. Leaflets, fact sheets, or newsletters are useful in
informing certain audiences about I/M. Refer to the appendix for
samples: leaflet A-l, fact sheet A-3, newsletter A-7.
-------
-10-
Determine information techniques. The type of techniques will
largely depend on which phase the I/M program is in, the target
audience and available resources. Experience from established
programs show that one of the best techniques is personal visits to
key constituents, especially the media reporters. The following
sample charts may be helpful to focus on the appropriate technique,
and message, depending on the target audience and I/M phase being
implemented. Several suggested techniques are listed beneath each
chart. (Additional techniques are explained on pages 14-16. As
shown in the model. chart, place the technique number within the
section which coincides with the audience and message. For
instance, established programs indicate that emission testing
demonstrations (Technique Key No. 6) are good during the "development
phase" to acquaint the media and general public. Public service
announcements (Technique Key No. 10) and talk show interviews, (Key
No. 11) are best just prior to and during the "operation phase" to
alert the motoring public of I/M. With respect to centralized vs.
decentralized programs, keep in mind that the timing and technique
will differ when informing the auto service industry about mechanic's
training.
-------
-11-
I/M PUBLIC INFORMATION TECHNIQUES
PHASE 2: DEVELOPMENT ~ SAMPLE
AUDIENCES
Elected Officials
Automotive Service
Industry
Public Interest
Groups
Business and
Labor
Media Coverage
General Public
Other
KEY
MESSAGES
Air
Pollution
and Health
Effects
(peri
r r r
Legal I/M Mechanics
Requirements Rationale Training
and Benefits
Ddic briefings o
i °
•M l 1
I
1, 2, 4, 6, 12 i
~\ all messages
/i ^ f. 19 — i
4, 2, 6, 1^,
5, 4, 5, 6, 12,
.1, 3, 4, 5, 6,
- 6. 7, 8, 10,
0 6
"- » u
as reguired)
1-5
1"*
11
Other
1 = Personal visit, phone calls,
correspondence
2 = Pamphlets, fact sheets,
leaflets, etc.
3 = I/M Newsletter
4 = Slide show
5 = Videotape/film
6 = Emission clinics (I/M demos)
7 = Press kit
8 = Press release
9 = Feature article, Q & A column
10 = Public Service Announcement (PSA)
11 = Radio and TV talk shows
12 = Workshop, seminar, public meeting,
briefing
13 = Speaking engagements
14 = Posters, bumper stickers, exhibits,
.displays
-------
-12-
I/M PUBLIC INFORMATION TECHNIQUES
PHASE 2: DEVELOPMENT -- WORK SHEET
AUDIENCES
Elected Officials
Automotive Service
Industry
Public Interest
Groups
Business and
Labor
Media Coverage
General Public
Other
i
Air
Pollution
and Health
Effects
r 1
Legal
Requirements
.
MESSAGES
I/M
Rationale
and Benefits
.
•
•
_ 1
Mechanics
Training
'
Other
.
KEY
1 = Personal visit, phone calls,
correspondence
2 = Pamphlets, fact sheets,
leaflets, etc.
3 = I/M Newsletter
4 = Slide show
5 = Videotape/film
6 = Emission clinics (I/M demos)
7 = Press kit
8 = Press release
9 - Feature article, Q & A column
10 = Public Service Announcement (PSA)
11 = Radio and TV talk shows
12 = Workshop, seminar, public meeting,
briefing
13 = Speaking engagements
14 = Posters, bumper stickers, exhibits,
displays
-------
-13-
I/M PUBLIC INFORMATION TECHNIQUES
PHASE 3: OPERATIONAL ~ SAMPLE
AUDIENCES
Elected Officials
Automotive Service
Industry
Public Interest
13
Groups
Business and
Labor
Media Coverage
General Public
Other
MESSAGES
Air
Pollution
and Health
Effects
Legal I/M
Requirements Rationale
and Benefits
1, 2, 4, 6, 12
die briefings on all messages a
i
1 o /. c. f 10 i
J-» <^»
i
•
^f •*! u> *-*->
3, A, 5, 6, 12,
1 ^ /r R <;
i- 1 , y, a, 5, b,
/r 7 p in 1
0 4T
*•! D
Mechanics
Training
i •»
1"
Other
•
•
•
KEY
1 = Personal visit, phone calls,
correspondence
2 = Pamphlets, fact sheets,
leaflets, etc.
3 = I/M Newsletter
4 = Slide show
5 = Videotape/film
6 = Emission clinics (I/M demos)
7 = Press kit
8 = Press release
9 = Feature article, Q & A column
10 = Public Service Announcement (PSA)
11 = Radio and TV talk shows'
12 = Workshop, seminar, public meeting,
briefing
13 = Speaking engagements
14 = Posters, bumper stickers, exhibits,
displays
-------
-14-
I/M PUBLIC INFORMATION TECHNIQUES
PHASE 3: OPERATIONAL — WORKSHEET
AUDIENCES
Elected Officials
Automotive Service
Industry
Public Interest
Groups
Business and
Labor
Media Coverage
General Public
Other
Air
Pollution
and Health
Effects
•
.
Legal
Requirements
'
MESSAGES
i —
I/M
Rationale
and Benefits
.
i 1
Mechanics
Training
.
Other
KEY
1 = Personal visit, phone calls,
correspondence
2 = Pamphlets, fact sheets,
leaflets, etc.
3 = I/M Newsletter
4 = Slide show
5 = Videotape/film
6 = Emission clinics (I/M demos)
7 = Press kit
8 = Press release
9 = Feature article, 0 & A column
10 = Public Service Announcement (PSA)
11 = Radio and TV talk shows
12 = Workshop, seminar, public meeting,
briefing
13 = Speaking engagements
14 = Posters, bumper stickers, exhibits,
displays
-------
-15-
The following is an elaboration of public information techniques to consider
during each I/M phase. These techniques are in no specific order, however
most are appropriate during the development and operational phases.
0 Contact your district legislators and brief them on progress being
made in developing the program, or on how well it is working once it
is in operation.
0 Arrange workshops, seminars, and public meetings to brief citizens
and other organizations on the air quality status in individual
areas, and the requirements that must be met under the Clean Air
Act. Emphasize I/M and brief the public on the status of existing
and developing programs. Invite appropriate media. Solicit help in
reaching other groups.
0 When meetings cannot be arranged or are infeasible, write to various
groups and include appropriate briefing materials. Follow up by
telephone to see what additional information might be helpful.
0 Develop a leaflet explaining I/M, and encourage other groups, gas
stations and garages to distribute it. (Refer to Appendix A-l for
sample).
0 Regularly include an I/M article in publications or newsletters.
0 Borrow a copy of the ALA/EPA film, "On the Road to Clean Air" and
other available I/M audio-visuals for showing to target audiences.
0 Coordinate with the EPA Regional office or a local emission analyzer
manufacturer to set up a free demonstration testing station in a
shopping mall or urban center. This will give people an opportunity
to have their car inspected for emission levels. Publicize it in
local newspapers, shopping center marquees, billboards, etc. (Refer
to Appendix A-6 for sample brochure).
0 Meet with appropriate legislative staffs or committees and present
facts and views at appropriate times throughout program
implementation.
0 Attend public meetings where I/M or air quality is being discussed,
and present facts and views.
0 With other community groups, sponsor a town meeting, in which
legislators, State and local officials are invited to discuss air
quality problems, I/M as one possible solution, and the status of I/M
program development and effectiveness.
0 Work with a health organization to develop an exhibit on the health
effects of air pollution for display at a county or State fair or
other well-attended events.
-------
-16-
0 Sponsor a poster or bumper sticker contest for school children on the
benefits of I/M programs. Have various groups offer prizes and plan to
exhibit in an area which is accessible to the public.
0 Participate in national, state and local events such as Clean Air Week,
parades, fairs and sports. For instance, one state program ran an I/M
message across the electronic Scoreboard at a local stadium. The
message announced a free T/M emission demonstration taking place in the
parking lot after the .game.
0 Provide high schools with information on proper auto maintenance for
their driver education course.
As mentioned earlier, sound use of the media is critical for achieving program
objectives. Newspapers, radio and television can alert and inform large
numbers of citizens to the need for, the benefits of, the costs of the kind of
I/M prooram that 5s being implemented. In addition to their news and
editorial coverage, commercial and public radio and television stations are
reouired by the Federal Communication Svstem to determine community needs and
make their programming responsive to these needs through public service
announcements (PSAs) and programs. Pecause I/M is mandated by the U.S.
Congress to improve air Quality for the public good, free air time and space
should be reouested. It's been reported from officials of established
programs that free air time has been orovided by most stations just before the
proaram would start. (Refer to Appendix A-5 for sample PSA.) Suggestions
for effective use of the media follows:
0 Invite environmental reporters aoH news editors to an I/M briefing,
provide them with a press kit of specific information and contact people
who can answer Questions. Also provide them with a copy of the I/M demo
videotaoe for broadcast.
0 Invite oress to a voluntary demonstration that is being held in the
vicinity, and provide information on successful programs in other cities
and states.
0 Provide information and background on the local situation to editorial
writers.
0 Develop press releases on the rational for I/M and build upon real
events such as an ozone alert. (Refer to Appendix A-A for sample).
0 Encourage local newspapers to feature a Question box where readers can
write in Questions and exoect an answer.
0 Try to aet the I/M messaaes broadcast on radio stations during the time
when peoole are driving to and from work.
0 Invite reporters to public meetinos and hearings and provide them with a
list of contacts for their future reference, list name, title, phone
number, and area of expertise, similar to a speaker's bureau list. This
can be helpful when a station or newspaper plans on doino a special I/M
proaram.
-------
-17-
0 Suggest a panel discussion of air quality problems and I/M's role in
reducing the problem.
0 Offer T.V. broadcasters the EPA I/M Public Service Announcements, and
the I/M Demo videotape, especially during the summer ozone season.
0 Suggest a call-in show for viewers and listeners at home to ask I/M and
air quality questions of a knowledgeable person. Provide a listing of
qualified speakers.
0 Encourage a documentary or feature on the local air pollution situation
and the role of I/M as one solution in reducing pollution.
Other opportunities to get I/M information to citizens are available through
the trade, special press-professional and technical journals or newspapers,
environmental and other newsletters, and church or civic publications.
Contact the editor and provide him or her with additional information.
6. Determine implementation schedule. The timing, coordination, and
responsibilities of the public awareness effort will largely determine the
success and acceptance of the I/M program. For that reason a viable schedule
is, essential. A sample implementation schedule for centralized and
decentralized programs follows:
-------
-18-
I/M PUBLIC AWARENESS
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE - DECENTRALIZED PROGRAMS — SAMPLE
I/M PROGRAM I/M PROGRAM
ADOPTION DEVELOPMENTAL START UP
OF LAW PHASE 12/31/81
I/M PROGRAM
OPERATIONAL
PHASE
PUBLIC AWARENESS PLANNING PART A & B
A. COMMITMENT (To be accomplished soon
after adoption).
1. Designate responsible agency
2. Designate public awareness coordinator
3. Designate plan development task force
(optional) .
4. Determine need for consultants
5. Determine funding sources
B. IDENTIFICATION (To be completed NLT
4/30/81).
1. Identify target audience and develop
mail list.
2. Identify general message and style
3. Identify available materials
4. Determine materials still needed and
develop materials
5. Determine information techniques
6. Determine implementation schedule
7. Determine consumer response system
PUBLIC AWARENESS IMPLEMENTATION PART C,D & E
Cm ITRFAPW TMTFDAPTTnM QMH DC"<^pnMCT\/FMFQQ
~ (NLT 6 mos. prior to mandatory program
start up) .
1. Initiate and maintain outreach with
constituents
2. Initiate and maintain interaction with
constituents
3. Initiate consumer response system
D EVALUATION AND MODIFICATION (As required)
1. Evaluate effectiveness of the public
awareness plan
2. Modify plan for deficiencies identified
P FFFnRAPk AND PRnPRF1^ RFPnRTTMr
~ (As required).
1. Feedback to constituents
2. Annual progress reports
JFMAMJJASOND
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Xv V Y Y Y Y
X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X
X X
X X
X X
X
y
X
X
JFMAMJJASOND
\
\
-------
-19-
I/M PUBLIC AWARENESS
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE - DECENTRALIZED PROGRAMS ~ WORKSHEET
ADOPTION
OF LAW
DEVELOPMENTAL
PHASE
I/M PROGRAM
START UP OPERATIONAL
12/31/81 PHASE
PUBLIC AWARENESS PLANNING PART A & B
A. COMMITMENT (To be accomplished soon
after adoption) .
1. Designate responsible agency
2. Designate public awareness coordinator
3. Designate plan development task force
(optional) .
4. Determine need for consultants
5. Determine funding sources
B. IDENTIFICATION (To be completed NLT
4/30/81).
1. Identify target audience and develop
mail list.
2. Identify general message and style
3. Identify available materials
4. Determine materials still needed and
develop materials
5. Determine information techniques
6. Determine implementation schedule
7. Determine consumer response system
PUBLIC AWARENESS IMPLEMENTATION PART C,D, & E|
C_. OUTREACH, INTERACTION AND RESPONSIVENESS
(NLT 6 mos. prior to mandatory program
start up) .
1. Initiate and maintain outreach with
constituents
2. Initiate and maintain interaction with
constituents
3. Initiate consumer response system
D. EVALUATION AND MODIFICATION (As required).
1. Evaluate effectiveness of the public
awareness plan
2. Modify plan for deficiencies identified
E. FEEDBACK AND PROGRESS REPORTING
(As required) .
1. Feedback to constituents
2. Annual progress reports
JFMAMOJASOND
JFMAMJJASOND
-------
-20-
I/M PUBLIC AWARENESS
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE - CENTRALIZED PROGRAMS ~ SAMPLE
ADOPTION
OF LAW
I/M PROGRAM
DEVELOPMENTAL START UP OPERATIONAL
PHASE 12/31/82 _ PHASE
'
PUBLIC AWARENESS PLANNING PART A & B
A. COMMITMENT (To be accomplished soon
after adoption) .
1. Designate responsible agency
2. Designate public awareness coordinator
3. Designate plan development task force
(optional).
4. Determine need for consultants
5. Determine funding sources
B. IDENTIFICATION (To be completed NLT
4/30/82).
1. Identify target audience and develop
mail list.
2. Identify general message and style
3. Identify available materials
4. Determine materials still needed and
develop materials
5. Determine information technigues
6. Determine implementation schedule
7. Determine consumer response system
PUBLIC AWARENESS IMPLEMENTATION PART C,D & E
C. OUTREACH, INTERACTION AND RESPONSIVENESS
(NLT 6 mos. prior to mandatory program
start up) .
1. Initiate and maintain outreach with
constituents
2. Initiate and maintain interaction with
constituents
3. Initiate consumer response system
D. EVALUATION AND MODIFICATION (As required)
1. Evaluate effectiveness of the public
awareness plan
2. Modify plan for deficiencies identified
E_. FEEDBACK AND PROGRESS REPORTING
(As required).
1. Feedback to constituents
2. Annual progress reports
JFMAMJJASOND
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X
X X X X X X X
X X
X X
X X
X
X
X
X
JFMAMJJASOND
•v,
\
•^
-------
-21-
I/M PUBLIC AWARENESS
IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE - CENTRALIZED PROGRAMS — WORKSHEET
I/M PROGRAM
ADOPTION DEVELOPMENTAL START UP OPERATIONAL
OF LAW ' PHASE 12/31/82 PHASE
PUBLIC AWARENESS PLANNING PARR A & B
A_. COMMITMENT (To be accomplished soon
after adoption) .
1. Designate responsible agency
2. Designate public awareness coordinator
3. Designate plan development task force
(optional) .
4. Determine need for consultants
5. Determine funding sources
B. IDENTIFICATION (To be completed NLT
4/30/82).
1. Identify target audience and develop
mail list.
2. Identify general message and style
3. Identify available materials
4. Determine materials still needed and
develop materials
5. Determine information techniques
6. Determine implementation schedule
7. Determine consumer response system
PUBLIC AWARENESS IMPLEMENTATION PART C,D & E
C. OUTREACH, INTERACTION AND RESPONSIVENESS
(NLT 6 mos. prior to mandatory program
start up).
1. Initiate and maintain outreach with
constituents
2. Initiate and maintain interaction with
constituents
3. Initiate consumer response system
D. EVALUATION AND MODIFICATION (As required)
1. Evaluate effectiveness of the public
awareness plan
2. Modify plan for deficiencies identified
E. FEEDBACK AND PROGRESS REPORTING
(As required).
1. Feedback to constituents
2. Annual progress reports
JFMAMJJASOND
JFMAMJJASOND
-------
-22-
7. Determine type of consumer response-system to adopt during the operation
of the program. A mechanism to respond to public inquiries during the
operational phase should be adopted. Several mechanisms which are being
used in. operating programs are proving to be effective. One is a
"hotline" telephone system - the other is a "questionnaire" to motorists
as they arrive at the inspection station. A list of frequently asked
questions with answers could be compiled and made available to interested
groups for inclusion in newsletters.
C. Outreach, Interaction and Responsiveness
Based on the two previous elements discussed, "commitment" and
"identification", a developed public awareness plan should now be completed
and ready for implementation.
Outreach should be initiated to all the identified target audiences addressing
appropriate I/M messages and using several of the technique approaches
mentioned earlier. Constituents can productively be informed about the I/M
program only if they receive timely, accurate and understandable information
well in advance of program start-up.
Interaction with affected constituents should follow the outreach effort.
While outreach activities inform and stimulate public interest, interaction
activities such as I/M emission demonstrations, channel this awareness and
interest into exchanges among the affected constituents on program issues.
Response to public concerns should follow interaction activities. The
responsible I/M official should respond in a timely manner to requests for
information by the general public and make their concerns known to the
appropriate agency officials. The consumer response system which has been
decided - whether a "hotline", "questionnaire", or other should be implemented
for use during the operational phase.
D. Evaluation and Modification
Evaluation should be accomplished to determine the effectiveness of the public
awareness plan. The objectives of the awareness program have been
accomplished when there is widespread public understanding of the air quality
problem and the need for I/M. The responsible agency should define the goals,
objectives and evaluation criteria of the public awareness plan at the outset
of the process. These objectives and criteria should be used as the basis for
periodically assessing the effectiveness of the program. EPA suggests that
the responsible agency use the following criteria or questions to evaluate
performance. This evaluation should at a minimum be conducted semi-annually
or even more frequently depending upon the need.
1. Have clear goals, objectives and evaluation criteria of the I/M
public awareness plan been defined? To what degree are they being
met?
2. Have all potentially affected and interested segments of the public
been identified and contacted regarding their role and concerns in
the I/M development and implementation process?
-------
-23-
3. Has timely information on the I/M rationale, the procedures, the
benefits, etc. been provided to affected interests to allow for an
understanding and intelligent comment on the program?
A. Have their concerns been communicated to and understood by the
responsible agency's staff and decisionmakers? Have the staff and
decisionmakers responded to these concerns?
5. Has there been an appropriate commitment of manpower and financial
resources to the public awareness program — including technical and
financial assistance to citizen groups and/or citizen advisory bodies?
6. Have the media and other information techniques been effectively
used, resulting in greater public understanding of the air quality
problem and the effectiveness of I/M?
7. Have section 105/175 funds and other fundings sources been
effectively used to educate, inform and involve the public and local
elected officials?
Modification to the plan should be made on any deficiencies identified.
Continous evaluation of the plan for its effectiveness in accomplishing the
I/M objectives is highly recommended.
E. Feedback and Progress Reporting
Feedback should be provided to affected constituents on the program's
progress, as well as other program issues. For instance, motorists responses
from a hotline or questionnares are useful to determine public acceptance of
I/M. Technical data on the emission reductions being realized can show the
effectiveness of the program. This information will likely be provided by the
responsible agency operating the program and should be disseminated through
news releases, newsletters, leaflets, trade magazines and radio and/or
television interviews and annoucements. It's imperative that the public be
kept informed about the effectiveness of the program so that they can
appreciate the air quality and other benefits being realized as a result of
their participation in the program, and thus support continuation of I/M.
Progress Reporting should be accomplic1"?^ at least annually. The I/M Public
Awareness Plan should be tracked and substantiated for this progress report.
The responsible agency should summarize the public awareness activities
accomplished to date, identify cost of projects, list dates of events and
evaluate the success of these efforts. An outline of upcoming information
activities should also be reported. These progress reports should be made
available to the public in a timely well-pubiisized manner in convenient
locations, to interested and affected constituencies through direct
distribution, and to other governmental agencies concerned with I/M.
-------
-24-
III. Appendices
A. I/M PA Samples;
1. I/M Leaflet
?. Public Survey Questionnaire
"3. Fact Sheet
A. Press Release
5. Public Service Announcement (PSA)
6. I/M Demonstration Van Brochure
7. I/M Newsletter
B. I/M PA Reference;
1. List of EPA I/M audiovisuals and publications.
2. I/M Public Opinion Survey of Operating Programs
3. Table on public information of operating i/M programs - prepared
by Radian Corporation - April 17, 1980
-------
What Will It Cost You?
Most adjustments invlove faults leading to CO
emissions, and relatively minor and inexpensive.
For example, nearly half the failing vehicles in New
Jersey in 1976-77 required only a carburetor
adjustment at $10 or less. 1 /3 needed a minor
tuneup. between $13 an $40. About 16% needed
major work, at $30 to $100.
Rhode Island Emission Standards
Motor vehicles with emissions greater than
the limits below will be tailed:
Year of Manufacture HC ppm CO°/o
1967 or earlier 1600 10
1968-69 800 8
1970-74 600 6
1975 and after 300 3
These initial standards may be revised in time;
New Jersey, first to launch I/M. has lowered
permissible emissions limits.
l-l C/3
s j|
trl til
•a >
f i
m t->
If you have a question - or suggestion -
call the Information Center
331-7664
or Department of Transportation
277-2983
Produced by
Rhode Island Lung Association
What You'll Want to
Know About
inspection/
Maintenance
For Your Car
in cooperation with
R.I. Department of
Environmental Management
:• for
("Cleaner
v air
and
R.I. Department of Transportation
-------
How Serious Is Our Air Pollution?
Rhode Island's motor vehicles are the source of
90°/o of our carbon monoxide (COJ, and 75°/o of
our hydrocarbons (HO. These interact with other
pollutants and form photochemical oxidants or
"smog".
Federal standards for CO, set to protect public
health, were violated in Rhode Island 34 times in
1977. For oxidants - smog - they were exceeded
429 times, sometimes at levels double the stan-
dard.
Serious Health Problems Can Arise
At Levels Only Slighly Above Federal
Standards
CO is an invisible, odorless gas, which causes
oxygen starvation in the system, leading to head-
ache, nausea, and drowsiness. People with cor-
onary problems are most vulnerable.
At levels only slightly above the standard for
oxidants there may be eye, nose, and throat irrita-
tion and chest pain in healthy adults. At these
levels, recorded in Rhode Island, there may be
breathing problems for asthma and bronchitis
patients. As levels increase, some acute res-
piratory symptoms have been noted in exercising
young people, along with impaired athletic per-
formance in'young adults.
The threats to health increase as pollution levels
rise, the number of exposures multiplies, and
exposure time is lengthened:
I/M for Pollution Is Now Part of
Your Regular Rhode Island Auto
Inspection
To reduce automobile pollution and its threat to
public health, our General Assembly passed the
law making annual Inspection/Maintenance
mandatory.
An introductory period in which only inspection
was required ends January 1, 1979. Thereafter,
owners whose cars fail emissions tests must have
the adjustments made, at their own expense, to
bring their vehicles into conformance with tail-
pipe emissions standards.
How I/M Works
Some 800 service stations are licensed by the
Department of Transportation to perform the
emissions and safety tests at a cost of $4. Pass-
ing vehicles will have a sticker applied.
Owners of failed vehicles will get a written report.
They may make their own repairs, or go to a sta-
tion of their choice, but must return to the original
test station or pay a second $4 fee for retesting
at another station to get a sticker. Owners are
allowed 14 days for repairs and retesting, with a
possible penalty of loss of plates for tardiness.
Consumer Protection
It begins at the testing station, where the test-
ers employed must have attended the State-
approved training program. The station must have
a State-approved emission analyzer, and a supply
of calibration gases, a mixture of known concen-
trations used to ensure exact performance of
the analyzer.
You Can Challenge Test Results
Further public protection centers at The Chal-
lenge Station at 1310 Pontiac Ave., Cranston.
This State-run facility will operate 7:30 a.m. to
3:30 p.m. Monday-Friday. Owners who question
results of the initial test may have them verified
here free of charge, by appointment. If the state
mechanics find the car in compliance, they will
approve it with a written report. However, the
owner must return to the original test station
for the sticker, or go to another private station,
at an additional $4 cost, for the sticker.
I/M Makes $ and Sense
Reduced pollution means reduced suffering from
heart, circulatory and lung disorders. Less, pol-
lution means less aggravation of asthma, bron-
chitis, and allergies. Costs of medical treatment
and absenteeism can be reduced.
Improved fuel economy in adjusted vehicles may
go as high as 4% - a savings of about 40 gallons
annually. Optimum savings and performance
result when the car is maintained according to
manufacturer's specifications.
As many as 400 new service station jobs may be
created for Rhode Islanders.
Owners Are Responsible for the
Condition of Their Own Cars
Under I/M, pollution cleanup costs do not fall on
the owner of a clean car. The non-polluting driver
may also be helping to forestall government im-
position of more drastic measures. These can
include gas rationing, parking taxes and bans, and
curtailed city driving.
-------
IS3Z2
\ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105
OFFICE OF
AIR. NOISE AND RADIATION
Sample I/M Questionnaire for Assessing Public Attitudes
1. Do you think air pollution is:
A very serious problem
Somewhat of a problem
Not much of a problem
Not a problem at all
2. What do you think is the major cause of air pollution?
Vehicles
Industry
Airplanes
Smoking
Fires
Dust
3. How much do you think air pollution hurts people's health?
Very much
Somewhat
Not very much
Not at all
4. What effect do you think a motor tune-up has on air pollution?
A great effect
A helpful effect
A slight effect
No effect at all
5. How often do you have your car tuned?
Three times a year
Twice a year
Once a year
Less than once a year
6. Are you aware that your car's exhaust emissions will soon be required to
be tested for air pollution?
Yes
No
SAMPLE A-2
I/M QUESTIONNAIRE
-------
\r
\
\ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105
FACT SHEET
INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS OFFICE OF
AIR. NOISE AND RADIATION
Introduction
Improved air quality has been a much sought-after goal in the United States
for the last three decades. Although efforts to reduce air pollution levels
were initiated in the 1950's and increased during the 1960's, it was not until
1970 that there was strong national legislation in the form of the Clean Air
Act. Amendments to the Act passed by Congress in 1977 greatly increased the
air pollution control efforts required by States and communities, and set new
deadlines to achieve national air quality levels to ensure adequate protection
of the public health and welfare.
The costs of damages from air pollution are extensive in this country. In
health alone, costs are estimated to be over $10 billion a year. As required
by law, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified the major air
pollutants which are harmful to the public health and welfare. In 1971
standards were set which established limits for the concentrations of these
pollutants which can be in the air and still protect the public with an
adequate margin of safety.
Automobiles are major sources of two of the most pervasive of these air
pollutants — carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons. Both are produced by the
incomplete burning of fuels. Carbon monoxide is harmful because it reduces
the oxygen available to the brain and body cells and puts an extra burden on
the heart and lungs. Hydrocarbons themselves are generally not harmful, but
they react with another pollutant, nitrogen oxides, in sunlight to create
smog. The main constituent of smog, ozone, is a severe irritant to all mucous
membranes and its main health effects are on the respiratory system.
The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 call for certain control measures in
urban and other areas where problems with these pollutants are severe and
where the health-related standards will not be achieved by the 1982 deadline
set by Congress. One particular control measure is emissions inspection and
maintenance of motor vehicles. Since such programs will affect a broad
segment of the public, this fact sheet has been developed to answer some of
the most frequently-asked questions.
What is Inspection and Maintenance?
Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) is a program designed to ensure the in-use
effectiveness of the emission control systems that have been built into
American and foreign automobiles. Emission control systems have been required
for all automobiles operated in the United States since 1968, and the
effectiveness of such controls must be certified by EPA in all new cars before
they can be marketed.
Why is I/M Needed?
Automobiles emit major polluting gases which are harmful to the public
health. Although auto manufacturers have been required to meet increasingly
stringent new car emission standards, autos still need maintenance. Tests
SAMPLE A-3
I/M FACT SHEET
-------
have shown that in-use vehicles emit pollutants in amounts that exceed their
certified levels. Sixty percent of one-year cars are found to exceed new car
emission standards. The primary causes of the high emission levels are
maladjustments and inadequate vehicle maintenance.
How does I/M Work?
I/M requires periodic inspection of in-use vehicles and emission-related
repair for those cars which fail to meet prescribed inspection standards. The
motorist brings his or her car to an inspection facility where a probe is
inserted into the tailpipe to measure the hydrocarbon (HC) and carbon monoxide
(CO) emissions. The entire inspection process takes only a few minutes. If
the emissions are above the standards, the car fails and the motorist is told
of the probable causes. He or she must then have the car repaired and return
it for re-inspection.
Where are such inspections performed?
Inspections may be performed by the State or local municipal authority at
inspection stations (known as centralized programs) or by licensed service
stations and garages (decentralized programs). Repair is done at the motor-
ist's choice of repair facilities but in a decentralized program repairs can
be done at the licensed garage. Usually, successful completion of the I/M
test is necessary for renewal of auto registration or a required inspection
sticker.
Do I/M programs exist now? a
Yes. I/M is working in many areas of the country, with more programs
scheduled to begin. There are programs in Arizona, California, Nevada, New
Jersey, Ohio, Oregon and Rhode Island.
Does the public accept I/M?
Yes. Public opinion surveys in four states with operating I/M programs found
that a majority of those polled responded favorably towards I/M programs. For
example, of 600 residents polled in Arizona (Maricopa and Pima Counties), 58%
favored retention of the existing I/M program because they felt air pollution
is a serious health problem; in the California South Coast Air Basin, more
than 67% of 600 residents polled favored annual auto emission inspections;
randon distribution of 3,245 questionaires to New Jersey motorists as they
arrived at the inspection station found 83% favoring continuation of the I/M
program; and in Rhode Island, 85% of the participants considered the I/M
program to be important.
If I/M is required by law in the dirty areas of the country, won't that put an
added tax burden on people who live there?
No, because I/M programs can be self-sustaining. In a centralized program
(inspection station), a State or community can run an I/M system themselves or
can allow a private contractor to build and operate the facilities. In the
latter case the contractor, not the State or local government, is responsible
for the necessary capital investment. Initial and continuing operating costs
are recovered by fees. In a decentralized system, existing garages would pay
-------
for necessary equipment and operating costs through a fee charged to the
motorist.
How much does an inspection cost?
Inspection fees for existing I/M programs range from $2.50 to $11.00 with
$5.00 the most typical fee. These fees cover all the costs of the program,
including the cost of administration, operation, and enforcement.
How much do repairs cost?
The range of average cost of repairs in states with operating I/M programs is
$18-$35 for that minority (15-30%) of cars that do require repair. Data from
the New Jersey and Arizona I/M programs, which have been in existence the
longest, indicate average repairs of $18 and $29 respectively. The majority
of cars required only minor tune-up work to pass the inspecion test. The most
common repairs were carburetor adjustments, spark plug replacement, choke
adjustments, air filter replacement and idle speed adjustment. Some, but
infrequent, higher-cost parts and repairs were needed. In a recent EPA study
in Portland, Oregon repairs averaged $29 with about 50 percent of the vehicles
sampled having maintenance costs of $14 or less and 90 percent having costs of
$70 or less.
Won't I/M cost people with older cars a lot more?
No. Older cars are not expected to meet the same standards as newer models
with .sophisticated emission controls. The pass/fail standards for each model
year are normally set to be within the design capability of the automobile.
In addition, cost limits on repairs may be set to avoid penalizing those
driving older cars which might require more expensive repairs such as ring or
valve jobs. For example, cost limits have been set in California and Arizona.
Is I/M really proving effect in reducing emissions?
Yes. Results show that tailpipe emissions from vehicles undergoing repair are
reduced by 42 percent for hydrocarbons and 47 percent for carbon monoxide.
For the fleet as a whole, including the majority of vehicles which passes the
inspection and requires no repair, emissions were reduced by 20 percent for
hydrocarbons and 36 percent for carbon monoxide.
Is I/M proving effect in improving air quality?
Yes. New Jersey, which has the oldest program, recently studied their carbon
monoxide data and found that I/M and the increasingly stringent new car
emission standards are together responsible for a 28 percent decrease in
carbon monoxide levels. University of Wisconsin statisticians examining the
data found that the improvement in air quality occurred independently of
year-to-year weather patterns and at a time when traffic volume was increasing.
Currently, there are no studies that quantify the effects of I/M on ozone
levels. Ozone reductions are more difficult to measure because of topography,
meteorology, pollutant transport factors and the impact of stationary hydro-
-------
carbon sources. Determining the impact of I/M in concert with other hydro-
carbon control strategies will necessitate more time for collecting ozone
data. However, hydrocarbon reductions have been linked to ozone reductions
over many years in the Los Angeles area. Because it has been shown that it
reduces hydrocarbon emissions from automobiles, I/M is an effective ozone
control strategy.
Identified causes of high levels of hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions
from in-use vehicles are maladjustments and lack of vehicle maintenance. A
recent U.S. General Accounting Office report endorses I/M as the strategy
needed to correct this problem.
With an energy shortage possible, does I/M help fuel economy?
Yes. Various studies show that there is a potential for 3 to 4 percent
improvement in fuel economy when maintenance is performed according to the
manufacturer's specifications. EPA's study of the Oregon I/M program has
indicated that there is no significant fuel economy being realized, but it is
believed that the lack of training specific to proper emission control
maintenance is the cause.
If the new cars are warranteed, will I have to pay for repairs if I fail the
inspection test?
Probably not. The Clean Air Act provides for a five year or 50,000 mile
warranty for defects in material or workmanship on any part, device, or
component that is designed for emission control. In addition, for 1981 and
later model year cars, an emissions performance warranty requires the
manufacturer to repair at no cost to the owner, a car failing an inspection
test, provided it can be shown that the car has received proper maintenance.
This warranty applies for two years or 24,000 miles on all components which
affect emission levels and extends to 50,000 miles for those components
strictly related to emission control (e.g. catalytic converters). It should
be noted, however, that some failures in an inspection program are due to lack
of proper maintenance or to improper adjustments, and as such the warranty
does not apply in these cases.
Will I/M continue to be an effective control strategy in the fact of future
more stringent new car standards?
Yes, although the more stringent standards which will be implemented in 1980
and 1981 will substantially reduce the low-mileage emissions of new vehicles,
these reductions will not be realized throughout the life of the vehicle
unless the car is properly maintained and the emission control system remains
functional. Therefore I/M will serve a continuing need, even as absolute
levels of new vehicle emissions are reduced, by encouraging motorists to
maintain their vehicles.
Inspection/maintenance can also serve as a deterrent to misfueling and tamper-
ing. Use of the catalytic converter as the key element in many manufacturers'
future emission control systems will necessitate the continued use of
lead-free gasoline. Improper fueling with leaded gasoline can cause catalyst
damage and greatly increase emissions.
December 1980
-------
r/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Mobile Source
Air Pollution Control
2565 Plymouth Road
Ann Arbor Ml 48105
Environmental
News
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Tuesday, April 1, 1980
Mat Simoncini
(313) 668-4223
AUTO EMISSION
CONTROL AND
INSPECTION
PROGRAMS
Automobiles are major sources of two of the most pervasive air
pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbons (HC).
Although auto manufacturers have been required to meet increas-
ingly stringent new car emission standards, automobiles still
heed maintenance. Tests have shown that cars emit the CO and
HC pollutants in amounts that exceed their certified levels.
Sixty percent of one-year old cars are found to exceed new car
emission standards. The primary causes of the high emission
levels are maladjustments and inadequate vehicle maintenance.
Auto inspection programs are designed to ensure the effective-
ness of the air emission control systems that have been built
into American and foreign automobiles. Emission control
systems have been required for all automobiles operated in the
United States since 1968, and the effectiveness of such
controls must be certified by EPA in all new cars before they
can be marketed.
(more)
SAMPLE - A-4
I/M PRESS RELEASE
-------
The Clean Air Act Amendments specify that auto emission
inspection and maintenance programs must be implemented by many
urban areas with serious auto pollution problems. The law
states that any urban areas receiving an extension beyond 1982
to meet the clean-up deadlines must have a program in full
operation no later than 1982. This means that major urban
areas over 200,000 populations must move expeditiously to set
up inspection and maintenance programs.
The EPA identified urban areas in 29 states that will need auto
I/M programs to meet the health related air quality standards.
Twenty-four of these states now have programs or have author-
ity. The remaining 5 states are still seeking legal author-
ity. However, the requirement that such auto I/M programs will
be in operation by 1982 necessitates quick action.
Evidence from existing programs in New Jersey, Arizona,
Portland and Nevada, indicates that annual inspection minimizes
costs and maximizes public acceptance while maintaining a high
level of emission reduction.
end
-------
SAMPLE PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT
for use by Radio or Televison
(Originating Office/Agency Name (Date)
and Address Here) (Name)
(Phone)
FOR BROADCAST BEFORE
MIDNIGHT. (Date)
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT - 30 SECONDS
If you drive a poorly tuned car you're fighting a losing battle. You're
losing money because your car is using more gas then it should and you're
losing clean air because cars, especially poorly tuned cars, are one of our
biggest causes of air pollution. Do yourself a favor keep your car running
right. We all need clean air.
end
SAMPLE - A-5
I/M PSA
-------
m
2 s
013
O
O f
pi m
3
O I
>
z
CO
§
O
a:
c
33
Emission
Inspection
Demonstration
&EPA
United States
Environmental
Protection Agency
Emission
Inspection
Demonstration
This demonstration is being con-
ducted to introduce you to automobile
inspection/ maintenance (I/M).
I/M is a program in which motor
vehicles are periodically inspected
and those with high emission levels
maintained or repaired.
The Automotive
Pollutants
Cars emit three major polluting gases
—hydrocarbons (HC), carbon mon-
oxide (CO), and nitrogen oxides (NOx).
CO is a colorless, odorless, poisonous
gas produced by the incomplete
burning of fuels. CO reduces the
oxygen available to the bra in and body
cells, in particular the heart and
lungs. Hydrocarbons and nitrogen
oxides react together in the presence
of sunlight to form photochemical
smog. Ozone, the main constituent of
smog, causes irritation to the eyes
and mucous membranes and aggra-
vates respiratory illness.
High levels of these automotive
pollutants in the air affect all of us and
can be especially bad for children, the
aged, and those with respiratory and
heart ailments. For this reason Con-
gress authorized EPA to set air quality
standards which protect the public
health.
The Auto
and Your
Health
Your car is part of an urgent health
problem—air pollution. In 1978 104
out of 105 major urban areas in
America violated one or more of the
health related air quality standards.
Autos are the major contributor to
unhealthy air. Although your car has
emission control equipment designed
for low pollution levels, the benefits of
these emission controls are often not
realized due to lack of or improper
maintenance.
The Clean
Air Act
In the Clean Air Act Amendments of
1977, Congress singled out inspec--
tion/maintenance (I/M) as a unique
and cost-effective strategy for reduc-
ing the levels of automobile related
pollutants. Urban areas which will not
be able to meet the air quality stan-
dards by 1982 must begin I/M pro-
grams. Thirty states will be beginning
programs in the next few years.
-------
Keeping Your
Car Clean
There are several reasons for exces-
sive automobile pollution:
DEMONSTRATION
Lack of Maintenance
Many owners simply do not give their
cars proper, routine maintenance.
Tampering
Some owners deliberately disable the
emission control systems on their
cars.
Fuel Switching
Some owners deliberately or inad-
vertently poison the catalytic con-
verter used on many cars by using
leaded instead of unleaded gas.
Inspection
Process
The test for excess pollutants is
performed by placing the probe of an
analyzer into the car's exhaust pipe.
The analyzer measures the hydro-
carbon and carbon monoxide emis-
sions while the car is idling.
In a real I/M program, you would
probably receive the notice of the
required test in the mail along with
your annual registration materials.
You would then bring your car to an
official inspection station. The station
might be operated by the state or it
might be a garage or repair facility in
your neighborhood which has been
specifically licensed to conduct in-
spections. At the station your car's
emission levels are measured and
compared to the standards for cars
the same age. The whole testing
process takes about five minutes.
Cars which fail to meet the pollution
standards must be repaired and
returned for a second test. Normally
the needed repairs are simpleadjust-
ments. In existing I/M programs,
most repairs have cost $15.00 or less.
What Your
Car Needs
If an exhaust analyzer shows high
carbon monoxide it may mean—
— dirty air filter
— clogged PCV system
— partially closed choke
— incorrect carburetor adjustment
— poorly adjusted timing
— malfunctioning thermostatic air
control
If the analyzer shows high hydro-
carbons it may mean—
— fouled spark plugs
— faulty spark plug wires ordistrib-
utor cap
— ignition points improperly set
— ignition timing incorrect
— incorrect carburetor adjustment
— vacuum leak
Motor Vehicle
Emission
Laboratory
The Motor Vehicle Emission Labora-
tory in Ann Arbor, Michigan is part of
EPA's Office of Mobile Source Air
Pollution Control. This office is re-
sponsible for reducing the levels of
harmful pollutants emitted by motor
vehicles. Every year the new car
designs are certified by EPA before
they can be sold. Another part of the
job of reducing automotive pollution
is ensuring that cars in actual use are
as clean as they are designed to be.
I/M is an effective program for finding
gross polluters and making sure that
they are fixed. EPA personnel from
Ann Arbor are working closely with
state and local officials to implement
I/M where it is needed.
-------
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments
September, 1979
Why A Newsletter
on Inspection/Maintenance?
Within the next two to three years,
car owners in the Washington and Balti-
n.ore metropolitan areas will be required
to have their vehicles "inspected" for
pollutant emissions and, if necessary,
"maintained" to bring- the vehicle with-
in standards.
"I/M," sometimes called Vehicle
Emissions I/M or VEIM, will affect- a
large group of people and interests:
the entire auto driving public, as well
as the businesses that manufacture,
sell and repair automobiles. Because
of this, the decisions that go into de-
signing and carrying out a successful
I/M program are difficult ones. Deci-
sions have to be made on such things as
the kind of facility that will conduct
vehicle checkups, the kind of testing
equipment used and how it is calibrated,
the emissions standards expected of dif-
ferent aged cars, the kind of mainte-
nance repairs required and their costs,
'and the compatability of multi-state
programs in areas like metropolitan
Washington. These decisions will de-
termine whether the I/M programs are
fair, reliable, inexpensive, and ac-
cepted by the public.
The purpose of this newsletter is
to distribute current information on the
various aspects of I/M, and thereby en-
able public officals, affected business-
es and the public at large to make an
informed assessment of the program.
continued on p. 2
In this Issue:
Regional Update p. 3
Calendar of I/M Events...... p. 5
I/M Around the Country. .p. 6
On the Local Front ; p. 7
Health Effects :.':.. p. 8
No.1
Baltimore
Regions in Maryland,
D.C., Virginia
Where I/M Is Required
Clean Air and the Role
of Emissions I/M
Federal air pollution legislation
enacted since 1968 has focused heavily
on the problem of automobile tailpipe
emissions. This is because autos re-
present a major source of harmful pol-
lutants in many of the larger urban
areas. Two of the most troublesome
pollutants prevalent in U.S. cities—
photochemical oxidants and carbon mono-
xide—stem largely from motor vehicles.
In 1976, an estimated 90 percent of the
carbon monoxide present in the air
•around the Washington Metropolitan
area came from vehicle emissions.
Photochemical oxidants (principally
ozone, formed by a combination of hydro-
carbons and nitrogen oxides in the pres-
ence of sunlight) create what is called
"smog". Humans are affected by high con-
centrations of these pollutants, often
experiencing irritations of mucous mem-
branes of the lungs and other respira-
tory organs. Carbon monoxide limits the
bloood's oxgen-carrying capacity and at
high concentrations, can impair the
body's central nervous syst SAMPLE - A-7
contI/M NEWSLETTER
-------
"(Vehicle emissions) inspection programs offer a comprehensive way to identify and
correct maintenance and other emissions problems. . .(I/M) programs are the answer."
U.S. General Accounting Office, January 1979
Why A Newsletter ?
To accomplish this, each issue of
I/M NEWS will examine the status of cur-
rent legislation in Virginia, Maryland
and the District of Columbia; summarize
important federal and state actions on
I/M; and assess how I/M programs are
faring in other parts of the country.
Regular features will covert such things
as test equipment evaluations, the stat-
us of local mechanic training courses,
and what is known about the impact of
auto emissions on public health.
We hope our readers will find I/M
NEWS a useful way to keep up to date on
I/M and how it affects you. We urge you
continued from page 1
to let us know if our coverage could be
better on certain topics, or your views
on the I/M program proposed for your
state. Letters to the editor will ap-
pear in a regular feature called Read-
er's Forum. Also write us if you know
an individual or organization which
would be interested in receiving the
newsletter or to correct an address.
Write to: I/M NEWS
c/o Metropolitan Washington
Council of Governments
1875 Eye Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006
Clean Air and Emissions I/M
A Shift in Anti-Pollution Legislation
Since 1968, efforts by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to control auto emissions have focused
entirely on new cars: requiring auto
makers to reduce exhaust emissions to
more stringent levels each year. Recent
data, however, indicates that emissions
from new cars are only part of the prob-
lem. 100 million cars now on the road
fail to meet the emission standards for
which they were certified and built.
More than half of the cars built and
tested since 1974 exceed Federal stan-
dards within one year after first sale,
and the emissions continue to increase
as the car gets older.
Tab! ; 1. Causes of Emission Violations
(by percent of total recorded failures)
Maladjusted engine settings...
Deterioration due to pre-
mature parts failure and
illegal use of leaded fuels..
Tampering (i.e. removing or
rendering emissions controls
inoperable
inadequate engine maintenance.
Manufacture design and poor
production practices
.47%
.25%
.18%
. 7%
3%
Source: U.S. EPA
continued from page 1
Thus, despite the progress made in
controlling new car emissions, improper
engine adjustments and neglected mainte-
nance appear to account for most of the
high polluters on the road today. See
Table 1.
The Federal response to this situa-
tion is a new emphasis on improving car
engine maintenance as well as continuing
to require manufacture of cleaner engines.
In the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977,
Congress mandated vehicle emissions "in-
spection and maintenance" (I/M) as a ma-
jor pollution reduction mechanism.
continued
I/M
This newsletter was prepared by the Metropolitan Washington
Council of Governments in cooperation with the Maryland
State Department of Transportation, the Regional Planning
Council of Baltimore, and the Maryland State Department
of Health and Mental Hygiene.
It was funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Printing services were provided by the Maryland Depart-
ment of Transportation.
Articles from.I/M NEWS may be reprinted without permission.
Staff
Caroline Freeman
Nancy Schmitz
Robert Magill
-------
". . .substantial data has been generated demonstrating I/M's potential effective-
ness. . .(and) practicality." Michael P. Walsh, EPA Deputy Administrator
for Mobile Source Air Pollution Control
Clean Air Act Requirements
Under Sections 172(b)(7) and (10)
of the Clean Air Act Amendments, I/M
programs are required in those urban
areas for which a state is unable to
demonstrate attainment of ozone or car-
bon monoxide standards by December 31,
1982. If the state established a sched-
ule for I/M implementation, attainment
deadlines may be extended to no later
than December 31, 1987. Currently, 31
states, encompassing over 40 "nonattain-
ment" areas across the country, must
comply with the I/M requirement. These
•states must show EPA that adequate autho-
rity to implement I/M exists, and then
follow Federal deadlines to initiate I/M
programs. To establish this authority,
states must enact enabling legislation
and .appropriately revise their State Im-
plementation Plans (SIPs).
The penalty for failure of a non-
attainment area to establish I/M by the
required deadline is mandated by law and
can consist of denial of Federal highway,
sewer and air quality grants. However,
EPA has committed itself to work closely
with the states to facilitate I/M imple-
Legislative
Regional J
I/M In Virginia, D.C., and Maryland
Over the next year and a half,
elected officials and technical person-
nel from the transportation and envir-
onmental health agencies of Maryland,
Virginia, and the District of Columbia
will decide how to implement I/M pro-
grams in areas that continue to exceed
CO and ozone standards. Public hearings
are being scheduled and rigorous legis-
lative debate is expected. This is the
first report of a regular feature that
will report on the status of I/M pro-
gram development.
Maryland
The 1979 Maryland.General Assembly
enacted enabling legislation (S.B.751)
authorizing state agencies to develop
and implement a motor vehicle emissions
inspections program in both the Balti-
mentation and to obviate the need to im-
pose sanctions.
Federal Deadlines
The 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments
and related regulations set the follow-
ing deadlines for establishing I/M pro-
grams in nonattainment areas:
• June 30, 1979 - Enabling legislation
authorizing I/M implementation must
be enacted by the state. This date
can be extended to June 30, 1980
for those states whose legislative
calendars do not provide enough
time for passage.
• December 31, 1981 - Implementation
of "decentralized" I/M programs
(franchised or licensed private
garages.)
• December 31,,1982 - Implementation
of "centralized" I/M programs
(state-run or contractor-run).
more Metropolitan area and the Maryland
portion of the metropolitan Washington
area.
The legislation calls for a volun-
tary program to begin by January 1,
1981 and a mandatory program to begin
by January 1, 1982 (see calendar, p. 5).
Registered vehicles in the affected
area would be inspected annually for
emissions. An inspection fee is tenta-,
tively set at a maximum of $7.00, which
would cover one reinspection of vehicles
failing an initial test.
S.B. 751 names the Motor Vehicle
Administration in the Maryland Depart-
ment of Transportation as the lead agen-
cy. The law designates the Maryland De-
partment of Health and Mental Hygiene as
the agency responsible for setting emis-
sions standards.
S.B. 751 permits the state to hire
a private contractor to conduct the
-------
"From the public perspective, the inspection of motor vehicles is essential if the fuel
economy, safety and emission control values built into new cars are not to be lost,
compromised or defeated through consumer use."
—Joan Claybrook, Administrator .
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
state's emissions inspections, provided
this system is. determined to be more
cost-effective and efficient than other
alternatives.
State oft
ficials will be soliciting the public's •
views on the alternative inspection sys-
tems at public meetings and workshops
to be held this fall.
Maryland's Governor Hughes and.the
Secretaries of Transportation and Health
and Mental Hygiene are strongly commit-
ted to meeting the legislative require-
ments and to developing a program that
includes many opportunities for citizen
involvement. State officials intend to
gear the inspection system to optimal
consumer- convenience and protection.
The state's commitment to'a vehicle
emissions inspection program was inclu-
ded in Maryland's revised State Imple-
mentation Plan (SIP) to meet National
Ambient Air Quality Standards;. The revis-
ed SIP was submitted to EPA in January for
consideration.
Virginia
There were originially four urban
nonattainment areas requiring I/M in the
Commonwealth. However, I/M is now re-
quired only in the Richmond and Northern
Virginia (Metro Washington) areas. A
State Air Pollution Study Commission was
formed in the summer of 1978 under Sen-
ate Joint Resolution No. 37 and has
since studied possible I/M program op-
tions suitable to those areas of Virginia.
The State Air Pollution Control
Board sponsored public hearings on I/M
last August in the four original nonat-
tainment areas. Enabling legislation
was then introduced before the General
Assembly. In November, however, Gover-
nor Dalton requested EPA to grant a one-
year extension of the June, 1979 legis-
lative deadline. The Governor contended
the short 1979 State Legislative Session
(30 days) precluded passage of any legis-
lation. EPA agreed to the extension, but
made approval contingent on the General
Assembly's adoption of a joint resolution
confirming Virginia's committment to en-
act such legislation in the 1980 session.
STATUS OF I/f1
JURISDIC-
TION
MARYLAND
VIRGINIA
DISTRICT
OF
COLUMBIA
LEGISLATION
ENABLING LEGISLA-
TION PASSED
5/29/79
MARYLAND SENATE BILL
NO. 751.
DRAFT LEGISLATION
PLANNED FOR 1980
GENERAL ASSEMBLY
ACTION
ENABLING LEGISLATION
PASSED 4/26/77
DC LAW I- 132
SCHEDULE'
JANUARY 1,
1981 FOR -..
VOLUNTARY
JANUARY I,
1982 FOR
MANDATORY
PROGRAM
NOT LATER THAN
JANUARY 1, ,
1982
i.
NOW CONTIN-
GENT ON EQUI-
VALENT I/M
ACTIONS BY
MD. AND VA,
VEHICLES
AFFECTED
CARS, LIGHT
DUTY TRUCKS
UNDER 10,000
LBS.
LIGHT DUTY
VEHICLES
UNDER 7,500
LBS.
CARS, LIGHT
DUTY TRUCKS
UNDER 6,000
LBS.
FREQUENCY
OF
INSPECTION
ANNUAL
.ANNUAL
ANNUAL
PROPOSED
INSPECTION
FEE
$7.00 fWX.
INCLUDING ONE
REINSPECTION
$4,00
YET TO BE
DETERMINED
APPARENT
PREFERRED
FACILITY
INDEPENDENT
CENTRALIZED
CONTRACTOR
STATE-CERTI-
FIED, FRAN-
CHI SED GARAGES
AS PART OF REG
ULAR SAFETY
INSPECTION.
CENTRALIZED
CITY-RUN PRO-
GRAM; PART OF
REGULAR SAFETY
INSPECTION.
TEST METHOD
TO BE USED
YET TO BE DETER-
MINED.
IDLE MODE
IDLE MODE
-------
Senate Joint Resolution No. 118 ful-
filled this requirement. It extends the
Study Commission's terms through Decem-
ber 1, 1979, at which time the commis-
sioners will report their findings to the
Governor and the General Assembly and re-
commend specific I/M legislation.
The Study Commission and the Air
Pollution Control Board have been moving
with increasing momentum to outline the
details, of the state's I/M program. The
Board has decided to ask EPA to exempt
the Richmond area from an I/M require-
ment on the grounds that accelerated
stationary control measures will bring
the area within the 1982 attainment
deadline without I/M. Draft I/M legis-
lation for Northern Virginia is being
prepared.
Thus far, there seems to be a con-
sensus favoring the franchise garage ap-
proach. I/M inspections would be coor-
dinated with the state's existing semi-
annual motor vehicle inspection system,
but I/M would be required only annually.
According to the draft legislation, the
Virginia State Police would have the
lead responsibility for developing the
program. A $50.00 maximum on mainte-
nance repairs required for vehicles to
meet inspection standards is also under
consideration.
District of Columbia
The D.C. City Council enacted D.C.
Law 1-132, "The District of Columbia Ex-
haust Emission Standards Act," in May,
1977. The legislation authorized an-
nual emissions inspection for all regis-
tered vehicles weighing less than 6,000
pounds, to be performed at the District's
existing offical Vehicle Safety Inspec-
tion Stations. As is the case for safe-
ty inspections, emissions I/M will apply
to both U.S. Government and diplomatic
vehicles.
An idle test procedure is specified
and maximum allowable emissions are
scaled according to the age of the vehi-
cle. The law sets the following emissions
standards (see page 6), which are subject
to amendment by the Director of the D.C.
Department of Transportation (DOT).
REGIONAL I/M CALENDAR
As I/M implementation deadlines approach, there will be many I/M-related activities
in the region: hearings for public comments and debate, workshops,'and benchmark legis-
lative decisions. I/M NEWS will continually report upcoming events of interest. Please
report any I/M-related activities your organization would like included in future news-
letter calendars.
."AKYIANU
SEl'l. 'i, -- RLulONAL PUBLIC MEETING - MARYLAND PORTION,
Jij/i. WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN REGION
PLACE: MARYLAND NATIONAL CAPITAL PARKS 7
PLANNING COMMISSION AUDITORIUM
TIME: 7:ju P.H,
-------
Vehicle
Model Year
1967 or older
1968-1970
1971-current
D.C. DOT is the lead agency for
I/M. A work plan has been scheduled
to implement mandatory inspection and
voluntary maintenance no later than
December 31, 1981.
On December 26, 1978, D.C. submit-
ted a revised State Implementation Plan
(SIP) to EPA, which cites D.C. 1-132 as
the required enabling legislation to
implement I/M. However, D.C.'s commit-
ment to I/M is subject to a contingency.
It would not become effective "until
equivalent provisions are adopted by
both the Commonwealth of Virginia and
the State of Maryland for their portions
of the . . .Region" (D.C. Law 1-132,
Section 6.603(g)). Additional qualifi-
ers to D.C.'s I/M commitment are con-
tained in the SIP regarding: availabi-
lity of "final cost estimates," District
Council budget approval," and "changes
in automobile technology that would
make I/M obsolete."
Exhaust Emissions
Standard
CO
HC
6 %
5 %
4 %
700 ppm
400 ppm
300 ppm
EPA has since notified D.C. that
these contingencies must be removed to
gain SIP approval. (See Federal Register,
Vol. 44, No. 124, June 26, 1979). EPA
contends that D.C. 'DOT lacks authority
for full I/M implementation because of
of the 1-132 contingency on I/M programs
in Maryland and Virginia. EPA is also
requesting inclusion in the SIP of a
commitment to the development of I/M
emission standards designed to result
in a 25 percent reduction in hydrocarbon
and carbon monoxide emissions by 1987.
In response, the District is cur^
rently drafting appropriate language to
amend' the contingency clause in D.C. Law
1-132, to be s'Ubmitted to the City Coun-
cil in October. The proposed amendment
commits the District to I/M implementa-
tion no later than December 31, 1981, but
still encourages equivalent I/M actions
by Virginia and Maryland. Necessary SIP
revisions are also being developed for
re-submittal to EPA.
I/M Across the Country: Some Optimism, Some Frustration
The Washington and Baltimore Metro-
politan areas are not alone in starting
up I/M programs. Eight states already
have I/M programs in operation, and con-
siderable variation exists in types of
test facilities, inspection fees and
frequency, and other program elements.
(See comparison table on page 7.)
How smoothly do I/M programs
run? What level of emissions reduction
can be expected? How well does the pub-
lic accept I/M? The accomplishments and
problems of these existing operations
provide useful background information as
I/M programs are being developed in Mary-
land, Virginia and the District of Col-
umbia.
Arizona
Arizona's program appeared jeopard-
ized after its first year when adverse
public reaction led to a repeal I/M pro-
position placed on the State referendum
ballot in 1976. It didn't pass, and the
program has since gained increased public
support—and resulted in a marked improve-
ment in air quality. From I/M data on
vehicles of models in years 1964 to 1975
alone, the state reports an average 25
percent reduction in carbon monoxide (CO)
emissions and 41 percent reduction in
hydrocarbon emissions.
New Jersey
Average repair costs for vehicles
failing an emissions inspection in Ne^
Jersey have been reported as $32.40. A
recent state survey revealed that 85 per-
cent of the motorists would not favor
eliminating I/M there. A recent report
based on seven years of CO data contends
that New Jersey has experienced a 28 per-
cent reduction in CP levels as a result
of I/M in combination with more stringent
new car emissions standards.
California
Last Spring, the former decentra-
lized I/M program conducted at private
garages in Southern California since
1964 was switched to a state-contracted,
centralized system of facilities. The
-------
STATE/GEOGRAPHIC
• COVERAGE
ARIZONA:
MARICOPA (PHOENIX)
AND PIMA (TUSCON)
COUNTIES
CALIFORNIA:
SOUTH COAST AIR
BASIN
ILLINOIS:
CITY OF CHICAGO
OH 1 0 :
CITIES OF CINCIN-
NATI AND NORWOOD
»LW JERSEY:
STATEWIDE
NEVADA:
Cl ARK £ WASHOE
COUNTIES
(LAS VAGAS & RENO)
UKECiON:
POKTLA.NII HETRO-
POLI IAN SERVICE
DISTRICT
iJHOUC ISLAND:
STATEWIDE
TYPE OF SYSTEM^
STATE ADMINISTERED, PRIVATE
. CONTRACTOR OPERATED:
CENTRALIZED; 12 PERMANENT
STATIONS; ONE MOBILE STATION
(TOTAL ^E LANES)
STATE ADMINISTERED, PRIVATE
CONTRACTOR OPERATED;
CENTRALIZED;17 FACILITIES
W TO '!S LANES)
CITY OWNED AND OPERATED;
CENTRAL! ZED; 5 PERMANENT
(2 LANES EACH) , 6 MOBILE
STATIONS (2 LANES EACH)
CITY OWNED AND OPERATED,
CENTRALIZED; ONE STATION,
INCLUDES SAFETY INSPECTION
STATE-OWNED AND OPERATED;
CENTRALIZED, ?! SITES
(Ffi LANES), 1 MOBILE VAN;
CERTIFIED PRIVATE GARAGES
FOR REINSPECTION OF FAILURES;
INCLUDES SAFETY INSPECTION
STATE ADMINISTRATION,
DECENTRALIZED TO LICENSED
SERVICE" STATIONS, GARAGES,
AUTO DEALERS
STATE-OWNED (OR LEASED)
AND OPERATED CENTRALIZED
SYSTEM; 7 PERMANENT
("I LANES) , 2 MOBILE
(?. LANES) STATIONS
STATE CERTIFIED, FRANCHISES
PRIVATE GARAGES, DECENTRAL-
IZED; LINKED TO SAFETY
INSPECTION SYSTEM
nPLF'PIT'.TWI INSPECTION
CTOIOUM f™™
PSft: VOLUNTARY INSPECTION
1/76: MANDATORY INSPECTION
1/77: f MANDATORY MAINTENANCE
ID?'!: TEST PROGRAM (TRIAL
INSPECTION ', SURVEILLANCE )
1970: MANDATORY PROGRAM
107") : MANDATORY BUT NO
ENFORCEMENT
1OT: EPA CHALLENGED,
NO CITY/STATE ACTION
1/75: FULLY MANDATORY, NO
VOLUNTARY PHASE IN
7/7?: MANDATORY INSPECTION/
VOLUNTARY MAINTENANCE
2/7r>: FULLY MANDATORY
197'!: PILOT PROGRAM
1°7T: MANDATORY
K*!l: MANDATORY ANNUAL
l/7-'l: VOLUNTARY PROGRAM
7/75 : FULLY MANDATORY PROGRAM
11/.V77: MANDATORY INSPECTION
VOLUNTARY MAINTENANCE
1/1/71: FULLY MANDATORY PROGRAM
ANNUAL- REQUIRED FOR
VEHICLE REGISTRATION
REQUIRED FOS NEW VEHICLE
REGISTRATION AND CHANGE
OF TITLE (ANNUAL IN 1031)
NO ENFORCEMENT
ANNUAL—REQUIRED FOR
VEHICLE REGISTRATION
ANNUAL— REQUIRED FOR
VEHICLE REGISTRATION
(2-YEAR EXEMPTION FOR
NEW CARS)
ONLY AT CHANGE OF TITLE;
ANNUAL IN 1031
BIENNIAL— REQUIRED FOR
VEHICLE REGISTRATION
ANNUAL
INSPECTION FEE
55.71
(INCLUDES 1 FREE RETEST)
$12.00
NO DIRECT FEE
(PRORATED PORTION
OF VEHICLE REGISTRATION
COVERS PROGRAM)
$1.75
(INCLUDING SAFETY)
52.50 (INCLUDES SAFETY,
TAKEN OUT OF REGISTRATION
FEE)
v.m
55.00
vi.on
Y BASED ON MOST CURRENT IHFOWTION AVAILABLE FROM STATES, f.P" AND MOTOR VEHICLE nANUFACPIRERS ASSOCIATION, SJP INFORfVATION jiERVICE.
A/ ALL SYSTBIS USE IXE .'«1E TEST PROCEDURES..
California Air Resources Board had been
disappointed with the recorded 4.5 per-
cent reduction in motor vehicle emis-
sions resulting from the former I/M sys-
tem, as compared with an expected 40 per-
cent reduction. A state.investigation
of private garages conducting I/M tests
revealed substantial evidence of improper
diagnosis and repair, as well as falsi-
fied permits. Both the Board and the
State Consumer Affairs Department are
optimistic that the new centralized
system will be more effective in re-
ducing emission pollutants, and also
reduce costs for motorists by ensuring
proper diagnosis of necessary repairs.
Next Issue:
Maryland Public Meeting Highlights
Setting Emissions Standards—
Stringency Factors, Failure Rates,
Regional Compatability
Rhode Island
After serious consideration of a
centralized I/M system, Rhode Island
decided to implement a state licensed
private garage program in coordination
with the state's existing safety inspec-
tion program. A limited survey of Rhode
Island motorists, conducted during the
program's voluntary phase, indicated
that 86 percent considered emissions
tests to be important. Many others were
not aware of the requirements and bene-
fits of I/M. Along with increasing pub-
lic awareness, the state is now devising
remedies to correct such program defi-
ciencies as inaccurate gas calibration,
clarification of exempt vehicles, col-
lection and analysis of emissions and
repair data, inspector proficiency test-
ing , and safeguards to ensure mechanics'
competency.
-------
On The Local Front
Several jurisdictions in the three-
state area have already given I/M some
practical exposure:
The Washington Metropolitan Air
Quality Plan for Control of Photochemi-
cal Oxidants and Carbon Monoxide adopted
by the COG Board of Directors on Novem-
ber 29, 1978, identified I/M as a meas-
ure with high potential improvement for
air quality in the region, among those
alternatives considered. In reviewing
the plan, many of COG's 16 member juris-
dictions endorsed I/M program implemen-
tation. •
The Montgomery County Department of
Environmental Protection sponsored demon-
stration I/M tests at shopping center
parking lots during June of 1978.
A 40-hour mechanics training work-
shop for vocational instructors was held
in Northern Virginia during January,
1978, sponsored by the Council of Govern-
ments and EPA. Directed at "training
the trainers,"the workshop utilized emis-
sions repair training modules developed
by Colorado State University. Northern
Virginia Community College is presently
using the workshop's materials in their
automotive technology curriculum.
The Council of Governments' air
quality staff, in October 1977, organ-
ized a cooperative, voluntary I/M pro-
ject with the region's vocational edu-
cation programs. A total of 13 schools
from 6 local school systems were involved
in the month-long effort, reflecting par-
ticipation from the region's three states.
Since 1972, the Fairfax County Air
Pollution Control Division has been con-
ducting a voluntary automobile emissions
testing program each summer. Through an
agreement with EPA1s Mcbile Source En-
forcement Division, the County provides
an emissions analyzer and testing loca-
tion, and EPA provides inspection per-
sonnel. In 1978, 866 cars were tested.
In the District of Columbia, the
D.C. Bureau of Motor Vehicle Services
participated in the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration's Diagnos-
tic Demonstration Program from 1975 to
1977. Under the program, 7,491 vehicles
undergoing regular safety inspections
were given voluntary exhaust emissions
inspections utilizing an idle test mode.
Health Effects
A massive air pollution accident
occurs: a railroad car of chlorine over-
tuns, emitting gas into the air. The
impact is immediate, tangible. People
can quickly see, smell and feel the ef-
fects. Within hours, news of the event
spreads' across the country.
By contrast, the effects of chronic,
low-level exposure to pollutants are far
less easy to determine. Pollution is
hard to see, and the automobile is such
an integral part of people's lives that
it is difficult to be concerned about
auto emissions.
Beginning in the next issue of I/M
NEWS, a regular feature on health effects
will examine current scientific research
for explanations of the impacts of auto-
mobile emissions on the public's health.
Articles will include a discussion of
COG's Air Quality Index (AQI), how it is
measured and what it means in terms of
pollution and health.
Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments
1875 Eye Street.-N.W., Washington. DC 20006
NON-PROFIT ORG
U.S: POSTAGE
PAID
WASHINGTON. D.C
PERMIT NO 42770
-------
\ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
° ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105
September 1980
* OFFICE OF
AIR. NOISE AND RADIATION
INSPECTION/MAINTENANCE (l/M) PUBLIC AWARENESS MATERIALS
FILMS
On the Road to Clean Air - A 17-minute, 16 mm color film covers purpose and
need for I/M programs, the benefits and costs and how a program operates.
Available from your local ALA chapter or from EPA Regional Offices on a
free-loan basis.
Charlie Brown Cleans the Air - A 6 minute, 16 mm color film where Schultz's
popular characters talk about the air pollution problem. Produced by the ALA
with assistance from EPA.
VIDEOTAPES
Implementing an I/M Program - Some Notes for Planner A 30 minute tape
comparing the Portland, Nevada, Phoenix, and New Jersey I/M programs.
EPA and the Automobile - A 30 minute tape interview of Michael Walsh, DAA for
Mobile Source Air Pollution Control and Benjamin Jackson, DAA for Mobile
Source and Noise Enforcement. It discusses how the auto and its maintenance
effects air pollution.
I/M Demonstration and the New Jersey Program - A 8 minute videotape of an EPA
official explaining and demonstrating the I/M process with a test vehicle,
along with a short run-through of the New Jersey I/M program. Designed for
use by T.V. news programs.
T.V. SPOTS
I/M Auto Pollution - Animation - A 30 second, color PSA
I/M Auto Pollution - Computer Graphic - A 30 second, color PSA
SLIDE SHOW
"I/M For Cleaner Air" - a 7 minute color slide show with audio explaining the
basic I/M story, September 1980.
PUBLICATIONS
Information Document on Automobile Emissions Inspection and
Maintenance Programs - EPA-400/2-78-001 (February 1978) a report produced
pursuant to Section 108 of the Clean Air Act which presents substantial
information on all aspects of inspection/maintenance programs.
REFERENCE B-l
LIST OF EPA I/M MATERT«T9
-------
-2-
Motor Vehicle Emission I/M Information Kit - EPA-460/3-78-013 dated September
1978, discusses benefits, costs, training legislation, implementation and
public information for I/M.
Get a Check-up for your Car! - A leaflet on the need for keeping cars well
maintained to cut pollution along with pointers on what can go wrong with your
engine and what to do about it. Available in English and Spanish from your
local ALA chapter or EPA Regional office.
I/M Fact Sheet (MSAPC) - A seven page "Questions and Answers" about I/M
programs.
Do You Own A Car? - A leaflet which explains pollution control systems and
gives the reasons why motorists should not tamper with those devices, January
1978.
Mechanics...A New Law Affects You - A leaflet which explains the anti-
tampering law and its consequences for mechanics. Also available in Spanish,
November 1977.
Measuring Air Quality - A leaflet which explains the new pollutant standards
index for reporting air quality in the mass media, July 1978.
Unleaded Gas...The Way to Go - Describes what fuel switching is and the impact
on air quality, September 1978.
What You Should Know About Your Auto Emission Warranty, June 1979.
So Your Car Failed the Emission Test! - A guide for proper maintenance . for
those who want to do it right.
If You Live in High-Altitude Areas - Denver, Salt Lake City, Albuquerque,
Colorado Springs — for health sake, buy a high-altitude car, December 1979.
Cleaning the Air, EPA's Program for Air Pollution Control - A leaflet, June
1979
Highlights of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 - April 1979
Ozone It's Effects and Control - A booklet, April 1979
NEWSLETTER
"I_/M UPDATE" - published bi-monthly. Available from EPA Regional Offices or
EPA, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
POSTER - A 9 x 12 inch, blue and white poster of a family in a car, with the
words "Tune-up for Clean Air and Save Gas Tool"
-------
-3-
TECHNICAL PAPERS/REPORTS - (Limited copies available for references only)
Effects of Inspection and Maintenance Programs on Fuel Economy - Discusses
possible fuel savings resulting from I/M maintenance procedures, March 1979 -
Revised June 1979.
Questions and Answers Concerning the Technical Details of Inspection and
Maintenance - Includes information on emission reductions, maintenance and
repair costs, and the economic social impact of I/M. There is also a
discussion of implementation aids and obstacles, April 1979.
Reducing Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles - Developments in the In-Use
Strategy, APCA Paper No. 79-7.1, June 25, 1979. (Discusses how I/M comple-
ments the Federal Motor Vehicle Emission Control Program).
Analysis of Oregon's I/M Program, APCA Paper No. 79-7.3, June 25, 1979.
Update on EPA's Portland Study, APCA Paper No. 80-1.2, June 24, 1980.
EPA Report on "Centralized I/M Program Cost Calculation Worksheet", August,
1979.
EPA Report on "Decentralized Private Garage I/M Program Cost Calculation
Worksheet", August, 1979.
"The Need for I/M for Current and Future Motor Vehicles" - SAE Technical Paper
No. 790782, August, 1979. "Exhaust Emissions from In-Use Passenger Cars
Equipped with Three-Way Catalysts" - Technical Report, June 1980. Both are
available by writing to Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc., 400 Common-
wealth Dr., Warrendale, Pennsylvania 15096.
EPA Comments on the American Automobile Association's (AAA) Position on
Motor Vehicles Exhaust Emission Inspection and Maintenance, December, 1979.
Light Duty Vehicle and Light Duty Truck Emission Performance Warranty;
Short Tests and Standards, December 1979.
Analysis of In-House I/M Testing of a Three-Way Chevrolet Citation and a
Three-Way Dodge Aspen, January 1980.
Natural Sources of Ozone: Their Origin and Their Effect on Air Quality
March, 1980.
Analysis of Propane Gain Used as a Screen on the Portland Element III Sample
March, 1980.
A Survey of Operating I/M Programs - prepared by Radian Corp., April 18, 1980.
Exhaust Emissions From In-Use Passenger Cars Equipped With Three-Way Catalysts
June, 1980.
-------
-4-
OTHER
Emission Inspection Demonstration - A leaflet which explains the EPA mobile
van inspection demonstration.
The National Center for Vehicle Emissions Control and Safety - A description
of their training programs and technical assistance projects. Available
through EPA in Ann Arbor, Michigan or the Department of Industrial Sciences,
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado.
These materials are available at EPA Regional Offices or at EPA Ann Arbor,
Michigan - To receive copies, call your I/M Representative:
Region 1, Boston
Peter Hagerty, Air Programs - (617)223-5630
Gail Peterson, Public Information - (617)223-0967
Region 2, New York
Paul Truchan, Air Programs - (212)264-2551
Herman Phillips, Public Information - (212)264-2515
Region 3, Philadelphia
. Chuck Miesse, Air Programs - (215)597-8180
Caroline Pratt, Public Information - (215)597-9826
Region 4, Atlanta
Ron McHenry, Air Programs - (404)881-2864
Gordon Kenna, Public Information - (404)881-3004
Region 5, Chicago
Carl Nash, Air Programs - (312)886-6069
Kent Kozina, Public Information - (312)886-6063
Region 6, Dallas
Ragan Broyles, Air Programs - (214)767-2742
Eddie Lee, Public Information - (214)767-2630
Region 7, Kansas City
Mickey Marshall, Air Programs - (816)374-3791
Rowena Michaels, Public Information (816)374-5894
Region 8, Denver
Dale Wells, Air Programs - (303)327-3711
Nola Cooke, Public Information - (303)327-5927
Region 9, San Francisco
Phil Bobel, Air Programs - (415)556-7288
Steve Drew, Public Information - (415)556-0217
Region 10, Seattle
George Able, Air Programs - (206)442-1226
Bob Jacobson, Public Information - (206)442-1203
Motor Vehicle Emissions Laboratory, Ann Arbor, MI
Mat Simoncini, Public Information Officer - (313)668-4223 FTS 374-8223
Rocco De Pietro, Public Information Specialist - (313)668-4278 FTS 374-8278
-------
'*.
\ UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
UJ
* ANN ARBOR. MICHIGAN 48105
I/M PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY
OF OPERATING PROGRAMS OFFICE OF
: AIR. NOISE AND RADIATION
It's encouraging to report that public opinion surveys in four states with
operating I/M programs found that a majority of those polled responded favor-
ably towards I/M programs.
Arizona:
Q: "Arizona has had an emissions inspection program for cars and trucks for
about three years now. Do you feel the program should be kept or
repealed?"
A: Of 600 residents polled in Arizona (Maricopa and Pima Counties), 58%
favored retention of the existing I/M program because they felt air
pollution is a serious health problem. This survey was conducted in May,
1979, by the Arizona State University Survey/Research Center
California;
Q: "In the near future, everyone may be required to have their cars inspected
for emissions each year. The way you feel now would you tend to oppose or
favor annual emissions inspections?"
A: In the California South Coast Air Basin, more than 67% of 600 residents
polled favored annual auto emission inspections. This survey was
conducted in April, 1979, for the California Air Resources Board.
New Jersey;
Q: "In the past, for economic reasons, there have been recommendations to
eliminate our mandatory vehicle inspection program. Do you agree or
disagree?"
A: Random distribution of 3,245 questionaires to New Jersey motorists as they
arrived at the inspection station found 83% favoring continuation of the
I/M program. This public opinion survey was conducted in February, 1978,
by the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Inspection Study Commission.
Rhode Island;
Q: "Do you think that exhaust emissions tests on automobiles are important?"
A: In Rhode Island, 85% of the participants considered the I/M program to be
important. This survey was conducted during April and May, 1979, by the
Research Corporation of New England for the Rhode Island Lung Association.
These surveys suggest that with a good understanding of the need for and
benefits of the program the public is receptive to I/M.
REFERENCE B-2
I/M PUBLIC OPINION SURVEY
-------
TABLE 1.9 PUBLIC INFORMATION
TYPE OF PROGRAM
Preliminary/
Voluntary Test
Programs
Pamphlets
Use of Challenge
Station or
Laboratory
Telephone Assis-
tance (Consumer
Hot-Lines)
Radio & Television
Ads or Public Ser-
vice Announcements
Other Programs
Manpower
Requirements
NEW JERSEY
1-1/2 year program
Mandatory inspection
Voluntary Maintenance
Developed by EPA
and state
Laboratory is
open by
appointment
DEP Personnel
Answer questions
and refer people
to the labora-
tory
Press releases,
Public van
demonstrations. Pro-
vide customer with
list of repair
facilities
IS hours/week
for diagnostic
technician
CINCINNATI
Distribute EPA
handbook at
first. Cur-
rently distribut
their own
pamphlet
City and County
personnel in-
volved will
answer
questions
Press releases
to improve
relations
None
OREGON
1 year voluntary
program
Developed by
state & EPA.
Reminder with
; registration
forms.
.
Public may call
DEQ. No formal
hot line
Press coverage.
DEQ bulletins,
bumper stickers
Less than 1
person
ARIZONA
1 year mand.
inspection/
voluntary
maintenance
Developed by
state, EPA,
& contractor
Approx. 10
veh/day have
diagnostics
performed at
laboratory
Contractor
maintains toll
free S (watts)
Customers can
call state.
Contractor
placed prime
time ads
(advise to
avoid end of
month)
Press releases,
opinion sur-
veys
1 person -
full time for
diagnostic
technician
CALIFORNIA
Phase I volun-
tary program.
50,000 vehicles
tested
Distribute pam-
phlet describ-
ing program &
repair facll.
Do not encourage
do it yourself
repair
Challenges made
at lanes
Contractor main-
tains toll free
t (watts). Cus-
tomers can also
call B.A.R.
Contractor placed
prime time ads at
beginning of pro-
gram
Press releases.
opinion surveys
ARE - 1 person,
BAR- 9 people
to handle
complaints
NEVADA
Voluntary test-
Ing sponsored
by Lung Assoc.
and DMV
Notices dev't by
DMV. Distribute
EPA pamphlet
Complaints,
diagnosis
DMV number is
well publicized
DMV & county
officials appear
on talk shows
Set-up booth at
county fair
1 person full-
time in labor.
(not all P.I.
work)
RHODE ISLAND
1 year mand.
inspection/
voluntary main-
tenance
Lung Associa-
tion developed
pamphlets with
EPA grant.
Customer may have
vehicle checked
for free after .
garage inspection.
(rarely used)
May call DOT. No
formal DDT hot .line
Lung Assoc. has
hot line (rarely
used)
Chief appeared on
question & answer
shows
Attempts to im-
prove press rela-
tions. Attitidi-
nal survey spon-
sored by EPA Re-
gion 1
1 person in DEM
coordinates public
education programs .
Other responsibility
CT>
cn
H JO
ff> ro
a" HI
I— fl>
(D Hj
O 3
Hj O
0)
3
IP
DO
I
''Prepared by Radian Corporation - April 17, 1980
•o
t-i
O
------- |