<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>EVALUATION OF VIOLATION AND CAPTURE OF OVERWEIGHT TRUCKS: A CASE STUDY</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/461453</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report concludes the four phase evaluation of Washington's fee and fine system.  The primary focus of this report is the occurrence and capture of overweight vehicles at three selected evaluation sites in Eastern Washington:  Pasco, Chattaroy, and Cashmere.  Weigh-in-motion data were utilized to determine any changes which occur in truck traffic when weigh stations are open and closed.  Violation rates are estimated between 20% and 22% with capture rates between 20% and 27%, depending on the site.  Violation and capture rates, in addition to truck volume and axle weights, are further calculated for different truck types during all hours of the day.  The analysis also includes seasonal variations in all variables.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Oct 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/461453</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE YEAR'S WORK 1984-85</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/266548</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This publication is dedicated to William Haddon, Jr., M.D., who died on March 4, 1985.  He had served as president of the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) from 1969 and as president of the Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) since 1972.  The publication summarizes the results of the IIHS research efforts in the following areas: teenage driving; young people, drugs and driving; apprehending impaired drivers; driver behavior and risk taking; seat belt use laws; child restraints; vehicle lights; motorcycles; automobile bumpers; trucks and cars; the roadway; crash tests and real-world crashes; and crash injuries and post-crash care.  It also contains major findings during the past year by the HLDI with regard to injury, collision and theft losses.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Dec 1985 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/266548</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>DRIVING WHILE IMPAIRED. DRIVERS, CHARGES AND OUTCOMES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/200956</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report presents the results of an examination of police and court records of all legally impaired drivers charged in 1980 (N=1,531) in 12 RCMP detachments on Vancouver Island.  The following items were examined: driver and vehicle characteristics; charges and outcomes; recidivism; and accident involvement.  From the data it was concluded that the Criminal Justice System is generally effective in dealing with the impaired drivers that are apprehended, but that the level of apprehensions is distressingly low.  To raise the low level of apprehension would require substantial increases in resources allocated to discouraging drinking drivers.  Another approach would be to focus on the 17% of impaired drivers who have a BAC of 140 mg/100 ml or higher and who have a higher likelihood of being involved in accidents.  This could be done by linking sanctions to BAC levels, and would not involve any changes in the Criminal Code.  It is the final recommendation of this paper that further research be conducted on the contribution of BAC level to the probability of being in an accident.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 1984 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/200956</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>STATEMENT (JULY 1, 1980) BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSUMER AFFAIRS, SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE AND TRANSPORTATION. S. 2816, A BILL TO ESTABLISH A COMPREHENSIVE ALCOHOL-TRAFFIC SAFETY PROGRAM IN EACH STATE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/182429</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Ms. Claybrook supports a proposed Senate bill (S. 2816) requiring the establishment of a comprehensive alcohol-traffic safety program in each state to discourage driving while intoxicated. Drunk driving is a major public health and safety problem; in 1979, approximately 25,000 persons died on the highway in motor vehicle accidents involving alcohol. Studies indicate that about 50% of all involved are legally drunk, i.e., with a blood alcohol concentration over 0.1%. The Federal government and states have initiated substantial efforts to improve alcohol safety. From 1967 to 1977, states spent $271 million on programs to enhance apprehension and adjudication systems for drunk drivers. Efforts of police officers and courts are partially thwarted by lack of adequate training and preparedness to deal with the large number of drunk drivers on the road, and lack of close coordination between police and courts to handle and dispose of drunk driving cases expeditiously. Courts and juries rarely apply maximum sanctions for drunk driving allowed under state law because they consider typical penalties (mandatory jail sentences, license revocation, or large fines) too harsh for normal, law abiding citizens. Courts endorse plea bargaining or reduce the charge to a lesser, nonalcoholic offense. People in most states who drive while intoxicated have little or no fear of apprehension. Findings of Alcohol Safety Action Projects indicate that four measures are effective in reducing the drunk driving problem: a coordinated system involving police officers, prosecutors, courts, probation officers, treatment personnel, and government public information officials; streamlined court processing procedures; broad approach to court sanctions by combining punishment with referral to rehabilitation agencies; and strengthened state and local laws to aid enforcement, adjudication, license revocation, and treatment efforts. Provisions in the bill to encourage local enforcement, financial self-sufficiency of drunk driving programs, state-wide driver records, and the substitution of community service for a mandatory jail term are applauded.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1982 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/182429</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCIES IN POLICE TRAFFIC SERVICES PROGRAMS. EVALUATION SUMMARY REPORT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/179108</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Traffic law violations were causative factors in about 90 percent of all motor vehicle crashes. Primary responsibility for deterring traffic law violations and for apprehending violators of these laws rest with State, county and municipal police agencies. Police traffic services address both impact and systems support problems. The principal impact targets of selective enforcement focus on the speeding and drinking drivers, as well as drivers committing other unsafe (unlawful) driving acts. Foremost among effective police traffic services efforts are Selective Traffic Enforcement Programs (STEPs) which consist of enforcement which is proportional to traffic accidents with respect to time and place with heaviest emphasis on accident causative violations. STEPs are directed toward one of three classes of unlawful driving behaviors; speeding, driving under the influence, and other unsafe driving acts; after the behavior and its chronological characteristics have been identified through an examination of accident data. Programs having a significant potential for accident reduction include automated equipment and aircraft enforcement. Programs addressing the areas of training, technology transfer, technical assistance, and data collection are critical to improving the efficiency and reducing the cost of police operations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 30 Oct 1982 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/179108</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>REWARDS FOR UNSAFE DRIVING? A REJOINER TO P.M. HURST</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/181621</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recently, Hurst has argued that attempts to reward safe driving are likely to be futile.  However, he argues that existing punitive systems have within them an implicit reward structure; persons who drive while disqualified are "rewarded" for driving safely (i.e. they avoid apprehension) and, as a consequence of this reinforcement, safe driving becomes habitual.  This paper argues that Hurst's analysis may be based upon an erroneous interpretation of the motivational effects inherent in disqualification.  The behaviour learned while driving under suspension may not be safe driving, but rather proficiency at avoiding apprehension.  Such a proposition has implications for Hurst's formulation inasmuch as the major source of "reward" within the punitive systems consists of satisfaction gained in successfully breaking the law.  This paper discusses some necessary pre-conditions for the implementation of more conventional reward structures.  (A) (TRRL)]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 30 Oct 1982 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/181621</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>POLICE ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES FOR UNSAFE DRIVING ACTIONS. VOLUME I: SUMMARY</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/169028</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This volume presents the major findings of the literature-review, telephone-contact, and site-visit activities that were carried out in the course of this study. It places police enforcement practices in a risk-management context and presents operational definitions of the unsafe driving acts (UDAs) of speeding, following too closely, and driving left of center. The primary focus of this study is the speeding UDA. This review summarizes current police deployment, surveillance and detection, apprehension, and presanctioning/sanctioning practices related to speeding; makes recommendations concerning specific aspects of police procedures directed at speeding; and explores both enforcement and nonenforcement approaches to the management of the speed UDA.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 1982 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/169028</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>POLICE ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES FOR UNSAFE DRIVING ACTIONS. VOLUME II: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/169029</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Literature on police enforcement procedures directed at the unsafe driving actions (UDAs) of speeding, following too closely, and driving left of center was reviewed. Speeding was emphasized in the review. The review presents and discusses literature describing police enforcement procedures for these UDAs, identifies legal factors that influence the use of the procedures by police agencies, considers the effects of the procedures on traffic safety and related variables, and identifies knowledge gaps that need to be filled by future research.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 1982 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/169029</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>POLICE ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES FOR UNSAFE DRIVING ACTIONS. VOLUME III: FIELD STUDIES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/169041</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This volume reports the results of contacts with police enforcement agencies to determine their procedures for enforcing certain unsafe driving actions (UDA). The volume is divided into two parts. In Part One, the results of a series of telephone contacts with thirty-one state, county, and municipal police agencies are described. Part Two presents detailed case studies for UDA enforcement procedures in Washtenaw County, Michigan; Cincinnati, Ohio; Tucson, Arizona; and California (Highway Patrol). The major focus of the procedural studies is the speeding UDA. Procedures for enforcing following too closely and driving left of center were also sought, but it was found that few agencies have specific procedures for enforcing those two UDAs.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jul 1982 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/169041</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF ASAP ENFORCEMENT EFFORTS. VOLUME 4</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/30088</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Final Report recapitulates and summarizes the work of a contract on Review and Analysis of ASAP Enforcement Effort. The major sections of the report are contained in four volumes. Volume 4, Overall Enforcement, addresses the process of enforcement in sequential terms with chapters devoted to detection, apprehension, transport, incarceration, testimony and adjudication.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 1976 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/30088</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>