<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>Predicting U.S. Federal Fleet Electric Vehicle Charging Patterns Using Internal Combustion Engine Vehicle Fueling Transaction Statistics</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2608469</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Utilizing fueling transactions from internal combustion engine vehicles (ICEVs), the authors estimated how frequently midday public charging would be required for U.S. federal fleet battery electric vehicles (BEVs). Fueling transaction summary statistics are more widely available than trip-level telematics data, making this methodology more accessible and transferable to other researchers and fleet managers considering BEV replacements. For example, readers can easily apply a linear model using only the count of back-to-back fueling events at gas stations over 57 straight-line miles apart to predict days exceeding range. This linear regression predicted binned days exceeding 250 miles at 80 % accuracy on a hold-out test set from the same fleet as the training data and 66 % accuracy on a new fleet displaying different driving behaviors. The authors additionally provide linear equations for days exceeding 200 and 300 miles as alternative range estimates to account for differences in BEV range and temperature impacts. Beyond the single-feature linear models which readers can apply, the authors tuned and trained other machine learning models on a variety of fueling transaction statistics including consecutive transaction distances, transaction distance from garage, estimated miles traveled from fuel economy and fuel quantity, and transaction periodicity. Utilizing a subset of 1678 light-duty federal fleet vehicles which contained daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in addition to fueling statistics, the authors determined which fueling transaction statistics were most relevant in predicting driving days exceeding 250 miles (an approximation of BEV rated driving range). In support of the U.S. federal fleet transition to zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs), the authors used these statistics and machine learning models to predict the frequency of BEV midday charging. After training models on the subset with VMT, the authors predicted days exceeding rated range for 112,902 light-duty vehicles operating in similar circumstances in the federal fleet using a Support Vector Regressor (SVR). They then used the projections as part of the ZEV Planning and Charging (ZPAC) tool to identify optimal candidates for BEVs for the federal fleet. An anonymized version of ZPAC is included in the supplementary materials.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Oct 2025 08:47:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2608469</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRB's Subcommittee on Policy Review: A Newcomer With a Busy Schedule</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2608450</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In 1983 the Transportation Research Board (TRB) took steps to ensure the continued credibility of TRB conferences and publications and, at the same time, apply TRB's expertise to questions of national policy. This article briefly explains how this happened and what the outcome has been.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2025 18:52:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2608450</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Introducing Speed Management</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2608182</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The goal of speed management has been to improve public health and safety by reducing speeding-related crashes and the resulting injuries and fatalities. Speeding is a complex issue involving engineering, driver behavior, education, and enforcement. The human body is vulnerable and very susceptible to injury and death when acted upon by even small amounts of energy. Speed management efforts are needed to reduce the impact of harmful speeds and control speeding behavior. Addressing safe speeds in terms of energy management can provide practitioners with additional opportunities to reduce injuries and fatalities by redirecting crash energy in addition to reducing involved speed. This article introduces a special thematic edition of Public Roads, which features best practices from federal, tribal, state, and local agencies to address speed-related crashes and fatalities. It also presents the USDOT multimodal Speed Management Team, composed of National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Federal Highway Administration, and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, which plays a vital role in conducting research, data analysis, and implementing evidenced-based countermeasures to reduce speeding-related crashes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2025 16:50:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2608182</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>U.S. transportation research at a crossroads</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2599572</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Science in the United States has become increasingly politicized, with a wave of recent federal grant terminations and censorship of equity and climate-related work. U.S. transportation research has not been immune. The Transportation Research Board (TRB), a stalwart convener and funder, has canceled research contracts, undertaken a dramatic internal restructuring, and appears poised to censor research presented at its marquee annual meeting. These shifts are significant in part because TRB espouses the values of scientific objectivity, independence, and integrity. Accordingly, TRB has historically funded work identified as needed by the broader research community and has been a home for the free and open exchange of ideas at its conferences, meetings, and events. The authors argue that TRB’s recent actions suggest that it is no longer able to act with scientific integrity. In this commentary, they provide a brief history of TRB and its objectives, discuss its recent actions, and propose paths forward for researchers and practitioners interested in pursuing equity, justice, and climate change-oriented work.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2025 10:23:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2599572</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Gap analysis of Swedish policy : mapping and GAP analysis of Swedish aviation-related climate policy to IATA's net zero CO2 emissions policy roadmaps</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2598645</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report provides a mapping of Swedish policy for CO2 emissions reductions in the aviation sector and a gap analysis comparing the Swedish policy to IATA's policy roadmap.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2025 10:19:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2598645</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Building capacity on informal public transport in African cities : government officials' experiences</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2598616</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In recent decades, efforts by governments and development institutions to address problems in the informal public transport (IPT) industry in Sub-Saharan African cities have focused on a relatively limited set of measures. These measures have typically centred on formalising, replacing or displacing IPT, rather than on working with the industry for improved and better integrated services. There is, however, a need to work across both the formalise-replace-displace and improve-integrate paradigms to effect lasting change. This will require a mindset shift, which can be facilitated by appropriately framed and targeted capacity building initiatives. In the course of 2024, through Codatu's network and with support from the VREF, the authors interviewed 10 government officials working with IPT in the region on their experiences of such capacity building initiatives. During these engagements, the officials were asked to identify IPT-related issues, actions and government capacities to which capacity building initiatives did or were intended to respond. The exchanges then delved into experiences of capacity building initiatives in which they and colleagues in their government units had participated. Their views on opportunities and gaps in the current offer of capacity building activities and resources were also explored.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2025 10:19:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2598616</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Legal Impacts to Airports from State Legalization of Cannabis</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2593739</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The federal government classifies cannabis as an illegal Schedule I substance, which the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency categorizes as having “no currently accepted medical use.” However, many states have legalized cannabis, some for just medical use and some for both medical and recreational adult-use. The difference between the federal government classification and state legalization of cannabis requires a balance for airports located in states where cannabis has been legalized. This digest will be helpful for airports to understand the impacts of state legalization of cannabis on their environment, including employment. The objective of this digest was to provide airports with guidance and analysis on the impacts of the conflict between federal and state laws related to the use of cannabis. The digest includes an appendix that lists each state’s legal cannabis status, and a matrix of each state’s cannabis employment regulations and testing policies.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 30 Aug 2025 16:08:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2593739</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Artificial Intelligence: Generative AI Use and Management at Federal Agencies</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2582394</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recent growth in artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities has spurred a corresponding rise in public interest. Developments in generative AI— which can create text, images, audio, video, and other content when prompted by a user—have revolutionized how the technology can be used in many industries. However, generative AI has risks such as spreading misinformation and presenting national security and environmental risks. The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) was asked to describe federal agencies’ efforts to pursue generative AI. This report is the fourth in a body of work on generative AI. GAO’s objectives included describing selected agencies’ ongoing and planned uses of generative AI and resulting potential benefits as well as describing agencies’ challenges in using and managing generative AI and efforts to address these challenges. GAO selected 12 agencies that publicly reported having generative AI use cases in 2023 or 2024. GAO reviewed AI use case inventories submitted by 11 agencies (the Department of Defense is exempt from the requirement). GAO also analyzed challenges reported by the 12 agencies and categorized those most frequently mentioned. Additionally, GAO interviewed officials from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Office of Science and Technology Policy about their government-wide policies and guidance on generative AI. GAO found that across the 11 selected agencies GAO reviewed with artificial intelligence (AI) inventories, the total number of reported AI use cases nearly doubled from 571 in 2023 to 1,110 in 2024. At the same time, generative AI use cases increased about nine-fold, from 32 to 282.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2025 09:07:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2582394</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Department of Transportation Funding: FY2021-FY2025 Enacted and FY2026 Requested</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2576941</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report provides information on the Trump Administration’s FY2026 budget request for the Department of Transportation (DOT) by operating administration and office in comparison with FY2025 enacted funding. Enacted funding for FY2021-FY2024 is presented for additional context for the funding request. For surface transportation modes, the FY2021-FY2026 time period extends from the end of one authorization law that covered FY2016-FY2021, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (P.L. 114-94) of 2015, as extended, and the subsequent authorization law that covered FY2022-FY2026, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58). For aviation, this time period extends from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254) through the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 (P.L. 118-63). Requested and enacted funding data are primarily derived from DOT’s “budget estimates” documents. Along with funding information, this report describes the workforce of each administration and office in terms of full time equivalent (FTE) employees and the requested level for FY2026. These data are taken from DOT’s budget estimates and generally do not reflect workforce changes that have occurred since January 2025. In many cases, FTEs are likely to be lower than reported.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Aug 2025 09:07:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2576941</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Power of Partnerships</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2572890</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Partnerships amplify the effectiveness of the United States Coast Guard's Research and Development Center (RDC), enabling it to make a disproportionately large impact relative to its size. Each partnership activity offers unique benefits and advantages, contributing to the RDC’s overall success. These activities include memorandums of understanding (MOUs) with governmental and extra-governmental entities, internal Coast Guard partnerships, and cooperative research and development agreements (CRADAs). With a small staff and a massive mission to support all 11 of the service’s statutory missions, RDC scientists accomplish their work through technical expertise, out-of-the box thinking, and close collaborations with partners.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2025 15:10:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2572890</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GAO and OIG Audits: Providing constructive program assessment</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2569811</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The External Coordination Division is located within the United States Coast Guard Office of Budget and Programs. One of this division’s main responsibilities is to assist the Commandant with every aspect of the audit process, serving as the principal point of contact for external governmental agencies. These externally conducted audits provide management with a valuable assessment of Coast Guard programs, activities, and operations. Government Accountability Office (GAO) audits are independent examinations for Congress to determine how effectively, efficiently, and economically the agency under audit has carried out its authorized programs, activities, and operations. Auditors follow the professional standards presented in the Government Auditing Standards, informally known as the Yellow Book. Office of Inspector General (OIG) auditors also follow the professional standards presented in the Yellow Book. External audits of Coast Guard programs, activities, and operations are essential in promoting economy, efficiency, and effectiveness.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2025 16:37:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2569811</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Federal Home-to-Work Electric Vehicle Program Guide</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2563705</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This document is intended to serve as a guide for Federal agencies in developing their own internal program documents regarding government-owned electric vehicles (EVs) used for home-to-work travel. The guide offers suggestions and considerations as agencies build out their own best practices around requirements for home charging government-owned EVs. The guide provides key considerations for agencies, including launching a pilot program to fine tune best practices, conducting a cost-benefit analysis to compare home versus public charging, and exploring cost-effective solutions, such as installing standard outlets instead of dedicated charging stations. The guide underscores the importance of legal and financial considerations, such as verifying agency authority to install home charging infrastructure at an employee’s home, ensuring the availability and appropriateness of using agency funds for home charging infrastructure, and understanding the tax implications of reimbursements.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2025 17:13:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2563705</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>From West Virginia’s Mountain Ridges to Ship Bridges: Certificates of Documentation and the National Vessel Documentation Center</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2563442</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A Certificate of Documentation (COD) is required for vessels weighing at least five net tons and operating in coastwise trade or fishing activities on navigable waters of the United States, or in the Exclusive Economic Zone. CODs are issued by the U.S. Coast Guard National Vessel Documentation Center (NVDC) in Falling Waters, West Virginia. The NVDC processes approximately 350,000 applications per year and issues a variety of documents including CODs, Abstracts of Title (A/Ts), and Certificates of Ownership (COOs). The NVDC also serves as custodian to many historical documents and books, such as the Register of House Flags, Funnel Marks and Night Signals of American Vessels and Foreign Steamship Lines. In addition, the NVDC is charged with reviewing U.S. and foreign ship rebuild requests, wrecked vessel, and new vessel ruling requests. It also issues Bowater Certificates of Compliance, which are special waivers for certain foreign-owned companies, and Oil Spill Response Letters of Qualification. NVDC staff also work with law enforcement and other agencies to provide vessel/owner information and respond to Freedom of Information Act requests.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2025 13:46:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2563442</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Charting the Course to Civilian Nuclear Powered Vessels and Barges</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2557146</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Interest in nuclear-powered vessels and floating nuclear power plants has spread globally in recent years. As maritime and nuclear energy firms work together to deliver conceptual designs into operations, one large unknown remains—the regulatory landscape by which these nuclear maritime assets will be overseen. Currently, there are two authorities with regulatory jurisdiction in the United States, the Coast Guard for vessels or barges, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for nuclear facilities. Both the Coast Guard and the NRC seek to achieve an acceptable level of safety and security in their regulatory domains. Each agency uses a regulatory framework that involves technical reviews of plans and follow-on inspection of activities, as well as the licensing and/or credentialing of individuals performing required safety functions. Titles 10 and 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) show that both agencies use a mixture of deterministic and performance-based rules to achieve safety and security goals. As such, there seem to be no clear structural obstructions that would prevent the Coast Guard and NRC from sharing regulatory responsibility for civilian nuclear facilities located on vessels and/or barges. However, there are several areas where clear requirements do not appear to exist in regulations. These include siting; public participation; security requirements; and operator licensing. Establishing a memorandum of understanding between the Coast Guard and the NRC could help establish a clear boundary of authorities, identify critical rulemaking efforts, and establish procedures for handling related applications.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2025 10:12:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2557146</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Regulation-Writing Process</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2543284</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The informal rulemaking process, also known as notice and comment rulemaking, is typically used by the United States Coast Guard in developing regulations. The process includes the following steps: rulemaking development (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [NPRM]); initial clearance via internal review by the Coast Guard and external review by the Department of Homeland Security and Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs; initial publication by the Federal Register as an NPRM; public comment period; reconciliation of public comments; final clearance via internal review by the Coast Guard and external review by the Department of Homeland Security and Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs; and publication as a final rule by the Federal Register. All stakeholders have input and add value in the creation of a regulation.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2025 09:18:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2543284</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>