<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>Performance Based Systems for MCSAP Programs</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1976698</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of this project is to provide state Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) personnel with a sufficient understanding of a performance-based system to begin implementing it in their state programs.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 12 Jun 2022 15:24:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1976698</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>An Assessment of the MCSAP's Research and Development Efforts</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1893798</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) provides funds for states to conduct various safety activities including roadside inspections of commercial vehicles and compliance reviews of motor carriers. In addition, the Secretary of Transportation has been directed by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 to allocate no less than $500,000 in each fiscal year to conduct research and development technologies, methodologies, analyses, or information systems that are beneficial to all jurisdictions. As a result of this commitment, a tremendous amount of activity has taken place to benefit various jurisdictions. However, the degree to which this activity has been shared with applicable jurisdictions or been implemented by those jurisdictions has not been evaluated. The current project summarizes these previous activities and reviews them for the betterment of future research activities.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2022 11:45:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1893798</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>An Evaluation of Commercial Vehicle Drivers' and Roadside Safety Inspectors' Opinions Regarding the MCSAP, the Roadside Inspection Process, and Motor Carrier Safety</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1591043</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project evaluated the opinions of commercial vehicle drivers and safety inspectors regarding the roadside inspection process and motor carrier safety. Surveys were developed in cooperation with the Office of Motor Carriers and used to question a representative sample from each of the groups nationwide. Questions in the surveys addressed vehicle and driver roadside inspections; the inspection selection method, fairness, frequency, and location; evaluations of inspectors and drivers; the partnership between the two groups; suggestions for improvement of the roadside inspection process and the partnership; safety; fatigue; sharing the road; and several additional subjects. In addition to a complete analysis detailing the results from each survey as well as in comparison to each other, results from this study also are compared and contrasted with results from a previous study of State administrators of the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program and motor carrier company management.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2019 16:56:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1591043</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Innovative Technology Deployment (ITD) Grant Program, 2017 Annual Report</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1515665</link>
      <description><![CDATA[On December 4, 2015, the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, 2015 (FAST Act) (Pub. L. 114-94) established the Innovative Technology Deployment (ITD) Grant Program, replacing the long-standing Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Deployment Grant Program, effective October 1, 2016. This change consolidated seven agency grants into four, and placed the ITD Grant Program under the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSP) High Priority (HP) program which reduced the burden on States that apply for multiple grants annually. The change also allowed for at least an 85/15 federal funding to State match split where it was previously 50/50, expanding States' access to these critical technology projects. Lastly, the FAST Act removed the annual caps for funding requests, as well as other statutory program requirements, allowing the FMCSA the flexibility to make necessary program changes through policy. This report details ITD funding activities for fiscal year (FY) 2017 and ITD program activities for calendar year 2017.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2018 16:49:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1515665</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Improving Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety in Oregon</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/934645</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study addressed the primary functions of the Oregon Department of Transportation’s(ODOT’s) Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP), which is administered by the Motor Carrier Transportation Division (MCTD). The study first documented Oregon’s MCSAP enforcement performance in relation to its counterparts in other states. Cluster analysis was then employed to identify Oregon’s peer states with respect to MCSAP enforcement performance and a variety of other factors related to the motor carrier travel and safety environments. Structured interviews of peer state MCSAP personnel were then conducted to identify performance-improving strategies and practices that could potentially be implemented in Oregon. The feasibility of implementing these strategies and practices was then assessed against selected criteria.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 16:24:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/934645</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Large Truck Safety: Federal Enforcement Efforts Have Been Stronger Since 2000, but Oversight of State Grants Needs Improvement</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/767937</link>
      <description><![CDATA[About 5,000 people die and more than 120,000 are injured each year from crashes involving large trucks. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has several enforcement programs to improve truck safety and funds similar enforcement programs in states through its Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP). Following concern by Congress and others in 1999 that FMCSA’s enforcement approach was ineffective, the agency committed to take stronger actions. This study reports on how FMCSA’s enforcement approach has changed, how it makes decisions about its enforcement approach, and how it ensures that its grants to states contribute to the agency’s mission of saving lives. FMCSA has made considerable strides in strengthening its enforcement programs and actions. For example, it almost doubled the number of on-site safety reviews (called compliance reviews) at carriers’ bases of operations, from approximately 6,400 in 1998 to 11,300 in 2004. Further, it has increased the average civil penalty by about 75 percent (from $820 to $1,400) over the same period. FMCSA generally maintained its firmer approach to enforcement at a time when it took on the additional responsibilities of conducting homeland security-related reviews of hazardous materials carriers and safety reviews of new carriers. To a large extent, FMCSA follows key effective management practices in making decisions about its enforcement approach. For example, its enforcement approach addresses major risk areas that contribute to (or cause) crashes, and targets its enforcement resources at the motor carriers with the greatest crash risk. FMCSA also has a broad range of enforcement goals and performance measures that it uses to provide direction to—and track the performance of—its enforcement programs. Furthermore, FMCSA is working to obtain additional information on crash risk factors and on the costs and effectiveness of its enforcement programs, as well as alternative approaches that it needs to further refine and set priorities for its programs. However, because FMCSA does not measure the effect that one of its key enforcement tools—civil penalties—has on carriers’ compliance with safety regulations, it lacks the information needed to make sound decisions about any changes to its use of civil penalties. MCSAP is designed to improve safety by employing a performance-based approach; however, FMCSA’s oversight for these grants is inadequate. In reviewing the 61 program goals set by the seven states that received the largest MCSAP grants, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) could not determine whether states substantially met almost two-thirds of these goals due to missing performance information, among other reasons. Further, although FMCSA requires that its various offices periodically review grant activities for adequacy of oversight, few of these reviews are being completed. For example, in the past 3 years, FMCSA’s service centers have assessed only 15 of the agency’s 52 field division offices (29 percent). FMCSA did not conduct these reviews for various reasons, including a curbed oversight role for service centers and markedly reduced headquarters staffing for MCSAP. GAO makes several recommendations to improve FMCSA’s ability to determine the effectiveness of its enforcement approach and strengthen the agency’s oversight of MCSAP, such as measuring the effectiveness of its civil penalties and ensuring that existing planning and oversight mechanisms are carried out.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2005 15:59:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/767937</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD SAFETY RECOMMENDATION, H-02-20</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/730050</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This safety recommendation, addressed to Mr. Stephen Campbell, Executive Director, Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, recommends that the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance include spring brake caging port dust covers as an inspection item during Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program roadside inspections (H-02-20).]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2003 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/730050</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>UNIFORMITY OF ROADSIDE SAFETY INSPECTIONS OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES AND DRIVERS ON THE NATIONAL LEVEL</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/655636</link>
      <description><![CDATA[To examine the issue of roadside inspection uniformity, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) initiated a research project to provide practical information to FMCSA, commercial carriers, Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) agencies, and the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, to guide and improve standardized roadside enforcement of commercial motor vehicle regulations across North America.  This tech brief is based on the project final report, "Uniformity of Roadside Safety Inspections of Commercial Vehicles and Drivers on the National Level:  Summary and Conclusions."  It outlines the project objectives, methodology, findings, recommendations and best practices.  Project researchers found no evidence of a significant problem with the overall uniformity of commercial motor vehicle inspections.  Almost all inspections were performed in compliance with the North American Standard Inspection (NASI) criteria.  Drivers interviewed in the field as well as those participating in the local driver/industry focus group sessions did not identify any significant problems with uniformity or fairness of inspections.  However, there does appear to be a lack of knowledge among drivers about both the levels and practices of roadside safety inspections.  The final report suggests that all agencies involved in the MCSAP work toward enhancing the overall knowledge and awareness of the commercial motor vehicle safety inspection program.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 May 2000 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/655636</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>IMPROVING SAFETY THROUGH PEER EXCHANGES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/503935</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In 1994, the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Office of Motor Carriers began a national peer exchange to help identify the most successful procedures and techniques related to selected specific elements of the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP).  MCSAP is a federal grant program whose purpose is to reduce the numbers and severity of crashes and hazardous-material incidents involving commercial motor vehicles.  State transportation and law enforcement agencies use the grants to enhance their existing motor carrier safety programs through roadside inspections of drivers and vehicles, traffic enforcement, public education and awareness efforts, collection of data, and compliance reviews.  Peer exchange has been used as an effective forum for exchanging information and encouraging creativity through site visits, interviews, and other mechanisms. The third in an ongoing series of national peer exchanges was successfully completed recently.  The subject of the peer exchange was education and technical assistance to motor carriers and commercial vehicle drivers.  The exchange set out to identify best practices for providing effective educational and technical assistance to commercial drivers and motor carriers and to disseminate information on the best practices to states and private industry.  To date, 22 different states have participated in the three national exchanges; site visits in 26 states have been conducted; and 44 federal, state, and industry personnel have participated as delegates or alternates.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 1999 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/503935</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>1996 NATIONAL FLEET SAFETY SURVEY</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/500689</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Approximately 2 million roadside inspections of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) are conducted annually, primarily through the joint Federal and State Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP).  Vehicles and drivers with serious safety problems are placed out-of-service (OOS) and are not allowed to continue operations until the condition is corrected.  Inspections are not conducted randomly; inspectors focus on vehicles that pose safety risks.  While this is a reasonable enforcement strategy, it limits the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA's) ability to use these data to estimate the "true" OOS rate, i.e., the percentage of vehicles and drivers that would be placed OOS if all vehicles were inspected.  To estimate this rate, the FHWA conducted the National Fleet Safety Survey (NFSS) in the summer of 1996, during which a number of States randomly inspected CMVs.  The FHWA decided to take advantage of this unique survey to gather information not regularly obtained during inspections, including data on driver training and experience.  In addition, because of widespread interest in the safety of hazardous material (HM) shipments, vehicles carrying placardable quantities of HM were oversampled, whereby an extra number of HM vehicles was chosen for inspection.  This Analysis Brief presents a summary of the 1996 National Fleet Safety Survey which is fully documented in a separate report (FHWA-MC-98-015).]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 May 1999 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/500689</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>COMMERCIAL MOTOR CARRIERS: DOT IS SHIFTING TO PERFORMANCE-BASED STANDARDS TO ASSESS WHETHER CARRIERS OPERATE SAFELY</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/483843</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The General Accounting Office (GAO) was requested to examine the efficiency and effectiveness of the Office of Motor Carriers' (OMC's) commercial motor vehicle safety programs.  Specifically, GAO was asked to report on the efforts by the OMC and the states to (1) reduce serious accidents by conducting roadside inspections and compliance reviews, (2) better target motor carriers for compliance reviews, and (3) improve the compliance review criteria for assessing and rating a carrier's safety fitness.  To obtain this information, GAO interviewed the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program's coordinators for 16 states that were selected to provide geographical diversity and a range of compliance reviews performed.  GAO also contacted participants in the five-state pilot program of the OMC's new Safety Status Measurement System, which uses accident data and the results of roadside inspections and compliance reviews to identify motor carriers with poor on-the-road performance for compliance reviews.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 May 1998 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/483843</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>INSPECTIONS OF INTERSTATE COMMERCIAL VEHICLES 1994</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/465305</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This document presents aggregate statistics derived from the 1994 Interstate Motor Carrier Inspection Database.  The database was compiled from the records of driver-vehicle inspections conducted during Calendar Year 1994 by State and Federal officials responsible for commercial motor vehicle safety.  The database is maintained by the Office of Motor Carriers (OMC), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).  This publication is intended to be used by individuals and organizations desiring general information on the safety fitness of interstate commercial carriers, as measured by driver-vehicle inspections conducted under the auspices of the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (49 U.S.C. 350 and 355).  In 1994, State and Federal officials conducted 1,976,973 inspections of commercial vehicles engaged in interstate or intrastate commerce.  This report covers the 1,385,131 inspections of vehicles engaged in interstate commerce (70%).  Of these inspections, nearly all were conducted by State personnel; only 0.18% were conducted by Federal personnel.  This report moves from a general discussion of inspection activities and outcomes, to a more detailed assessment of the internal (carrier and vehicle) factors which influence inspection outcomes, and concludes with an examination of the external (environmental) factors which affect these outcomes.  The topics are explored in three chapters, as follows:  (1) 1994 Overview; (2) The Impact of Carrier and Vehicle Attributes; and (3) The Impact of the Inspection Environment.  Within each chapter, data are organized under specific topics.  A glossary of terms and a depiction of common vehicle configurations are presented in the Appendix.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Nov 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/465305</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>PERCEPTIONS OF THE MCSAP: MOTOR CARRIER MANAGEMENT AND STATE ADMINISTRATORS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/460854</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) was created by Congress in 1983 as part of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 to improve motor carrier safety and reduce motor carrier accidents on the nation's roads and highways.  There are three primary groups involved in the program:  (1) the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Office of Motor Carriers; (2) the State agencies responsible for administrating the program; and (3) the motor carrier industry. The general objective of this project was to establish a better understanding of how State agencies responsible for carrying out the program and the motor carrier industry relate to the MCSAP.  Specific objectives were:  (1) Identify how state administrators and motor carrier management perceive the MCSAP; (2) Solicit suggestions for improvement of the MCSAP from these two groups; (3) Determine the degree of partnershipping that the related parties perceive currently exists and what degree they would like among the three groups; and (4) Determine how familiar motor carrier management is with the Intelligent Transportation Systems for Commercial Vehicle Operations (ITS/CVO) concept.  Each group was individually surveyed to obtain the necessary information to successfully achieve these objectives.  The geographic scope of the study was nationwide. To summarize the results, the program is perceived as beneficial by both the motor carrier management and state administrators.  They both feel that more resources should be devoted to the program and managers have a positive perception of the people administering the program.  However, there are several opportunities to improve the program through education, and review of selection processes for both roadside inspection and compliance review.  These actions, if taken, will most likely strengthen an already effective program in the eyes of motor carrier managers and state administrators.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Sep 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/460854</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>UNDERSTANDING THE NEW SURFACE TRANSPORTATION LAW (P.L. 102-240): WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT FEDERAL FUNDING FOR TRANSPORTATION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/362885</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report provides a detailed, comprehensive, and yet easy-to-understand analysis of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-240), and informative descriptions of the Department of Transportation's grant programs.  The information contained in this report was derived from extensive analysis of the Act and Department of Transportation and congressional publications, and from consultations with knowledgeable parties.  The first chapter provides an overview of the law, with particular emphasis on the new planning requirements mandates.  The second, third, and fourth chapters, respectively, describe the programs administered by each of the following agencies:  the Federal Highway Administration, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration.  The fifth chapter contains five program descriptions.  The first outlines several research and development initiatives authorized by the Act. The second program description details the Motor Carrier Safety Grant program.  Administered by the Federal Highway Administration, it is designed to help states reduce the number and severity of accidents and hazardous materials incidents involving commercial motor vehicles.  The third and fourth programs, administered by the Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization, serve to enable disadvantaged businesses to undertake transportation contracts.  The fifth program description is about services and grants offered by the Community Transportation Association of America, a nonprofit organization that supports transportation initiatives to spur economic development in rural areas.  Finally, the sixth chapter of the report contains supplemental information, such as an article on how rural officials may take advantage of new opportunities in the law, and several charts listing state highway and mass transit funding allocations.  An index is provided.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 May 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/362885</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>INTELLIGENT VEHICLE-HIGHWAY SYSTEMS PROGRAM AND COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES. HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, UNITED STATES SENATE, 103RD CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION, OCTOBER 19, 1993</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/386142</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This hearing on the Intelligent Vehicle Highway System (IVHS) Program and commercial motor vehicles reviewed the following issues:  (1) the current status of the implementation by the Federal Highway Administration of the National IVHS Program, with particular attention to the commercial vehicle operations (CVO) component of the program; (2) the appropriate policy goals for the CVO component, including steps necessary to assure the broadest possible participation of both the States and the private sector in this program; (3) a discussion of the potential for IVHS technology to improve highway safety and how the IVHS CVO component can promote most expeditiously the effectiveness of the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program; and (4) an assessment of available and prospective U.S.-owned technologies and processes which can be used in the research, testing, development, and commercialization of IVHS CVO systems. Included are the opening statements of Senators Burns, Exon, Hollings, Hutchison, and Mathews, the testimony and prepared statements of witnesses, and additional material submitted for the record.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 1994 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/386142</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>