Home
Solutions
Products
Pricing
Resources
Request Demo
Start Free
Menu Search Account

LegiStorm

Get LegiStorm App Visit Product Demo Website
» Get LegiStorm App
» Get LegiStorm Pro Free Demo
StateStorm

Weekly Updates

LegiStorm is constantly adding new information on the people, places and reports in our database. In the past week, LegiStorm added:

  • 376 new people
  • 171 new organizations
  • 408 new photos
  • 1234 job history records for people in our database
  • 653 education records for people in our database
  • 1467 contact addresses, emails and URLs (LinkedIn, Facebook, etc.)
  • 3 new people through the revolving door
  • 109 new policy reports
  • 43 new trips to our privately funded travel database
  • 629 new personal financial disclosures
  • 15148 new press releases
  • 11 new town halls
  • 25 new hearings

Caught Our Eye Rss

» More from Caught Our Eye
» More from our DevBlog

Pollution from Cars on the Road: Problems in Monitoring Emission Controls

  Premium   Download PDF Now (29 pages)
Report Type Reports and Testimonies
Report Date Feb. 4, 1977
Report No. CED-77-25
Subject
Summary:

The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) inspection and maintenance (IM) and in-use compliance programs (IUCP) have made little progress in the control of automobile emissions.

EPA does not require most states to include inspection and maintenance programs for on-the-road vehicles. In the 17 states and the District of Columbia where IM programs were to be established, progress has been minimal. State and local governments have been reluctant to promote IM programs, and total funding for such programs has been minimal. Several states have challenged the government's authority to require them to carry out IM programs. Under the 1972 IUCP, 3,000 vehicles were tested at a cost of about $2.1 million. EPA decided that the data from the 1972 program did not support a recall of the five classes of engines that should be considered for recall. The 1972 IUCP program was inadequate because: (1) the program did not fully anticipate data needed to support a recall; (2) EPA did limited monitoring of the contractors' test activities; and (3) a detailed review of test data was not made until all tests were completed.

« Return to search Government Accountability Office reports

HomeAbout Us Contact UsPrivacy PolicyTerms of UseJoin Us
© LegiStorm
LegiStorm
2101 L St. NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20037
(202) 360-4172 / congress@legistorm.com