<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>Development of Maintenance Priority Index for Urban Road Network</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2579853</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The estimated service life of a pavement is determined by design criteria such as geological considerations, water table movements, structural variations, and existing circumstances such as traffic intensity, drainage, and climate. The analysis of deformations and other variables, which influencing the pavement life, is a difficult task since the events that cause them are unpredictable and random in nature. It is unavoidable yet; these variables have an impact on the quality standards of the road network, resulting in decreased in their usable life. As a result, in order to remedy difficulties, it is important to assess or diagnose the current pavement conditions, both structurally and functionally. As a result, the issue of pavement evaluation, which deals with the mentioned element, is critical for pavement management. The functional testing on road surfaces, as assessed by its strength and durability during its service life, is dependent on several subjective measures of its stiffness and roughness. Structural Evaluation of Pavements is required to measure the structural strength of various layers of pavement. It also helps in evaluating a pavement’s remaining life and the thickness of overlay necessary. In the current study, a maintenance priority index has been developed using functional and structural parameters and also, it has been compared with the already available maintenance priority tools.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 16:55:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2579853</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Practical Retaining Wall and Girder Design for Constrained Areas</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2659364</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A transit maintenance yard has been designed to facilitate the expansion of the public transportation system in Metro Vancouver. The project involves several key yard structures, including a single-span road overpass, retaining walls, and a guideway embankment that have been designed to address and resolve numerous site constraints. The paper will discuss these constraints and their successful resolution, including design rationale and criteria adopted in the detailed design which was completed in March of 2024. The yard is bounded by both existing heavy rail tracks and an underground pipeline to the north, a river to the east and south, and a major road to the west. This necessitates careful planning and design to accommodate the proposed maintenance buildings, utilities, and transit tracks within the limited space. Proximity of the pipeline and river also involved constructability considerations in the design. The road overpass is a 30-meter long single-span prestressed concrete box girder bridge gaining access to the interior of the storage tracks. It features a clear deck width of 7.150 meters, accommodating one lane of oversized tra8ic in each direction for the delivery of transit cars to/from the site, with a raised sidewalk on the south side. The superstructure is supported on MSE wall perched abutments with concrete spread footings founded on granular pads. Box girders were chosen for their benefits in minimizing formwork and field adjustments, particularly in seismic design. Three Retaining Walls (RWs) serve various functions, including retaining access roads and parking lots, providing grade separation for the yard access, future tracks and sidewalk. RW1 is a castin- place concrete cantilever wall, selected for its ability to accommodate buried utilities. RW2 is a reversed cantilever wall, designed to maximize site usage while maintaining grade separation from an existing adjacent roadway. RW3 utilizes top-down excavation and permanent soil anchors to minimize excavation costs. The guideway embankment employs standard precast MSE retaining wall structures to address geometric constraints and mitigate settlements. Miscellaneous other walls, including Lock Block walls, are designed to meet specific site requirements and maintain grade di8erences. The design adheres to the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code CSA S6:19 and the BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure standards. Seismic design considerations are based on site-specific geotechnical reports, with the site classified primarily as Soil Site Class C. The road overpass is assigned to Seismic Performance Category 3, ensuring compliance with performance criteria for single-span bridges.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2026 08:52:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2659364</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Human-induced vibration assessment of a steel arch footbridge with tapered truss cross-section</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2651393</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The serviceability of pedestrian bridges may be affected by the discomfort due to vibrations felt by the users crossing the deck. Design guidelines recommend avoiding critical frequency ranges and provide acceptance criteria for maximum accelerations to assess user discomfort for serviceability conditions. The paper presents selected results from an experimental campaign on a two-hinged steel arch pedestrian bridge, analyzing its dynamic response to both ambient and human-induced vibrations. Activities such as walking, running, and jumping are investigated. In this field, many research works are available in the scientific literature, but the vibration analysis of a steel arch footbridge with tapered truss cross-section is still missing. The first six vibration modes of the bridge are identified using the Frequency Domain Decomposition technique, while damping ratios are estimated through Enhanced Frequency Domain Decomposition. Walking and running tests reveal a small shift in the bridge's forced response frequencies compared to its free response. Jumping tests are analyzed by isolating specific modal responses and estimating modal damping ratios based on free vibration data after the jump. The study also compares the maximum vertical accelerations recorded during these tests with the acceptance limits provided by technical standards. Overall, the paper provides insight into the vibration assessment of a steel arch footbridge with tapered truss cross-section and offers practical indications for field-data interpretation, as well as reference values of natural frequencies, damping ratios and accelerations for this common kind of infrastructures.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2026 10:30:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2651393</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Seismic Screening and Requalification of Marine Oil Terminals in California</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2263781</link>
      <description><![CDATA[There is an infrastructure of marine oil terminals in California, with an average age of over 50 years. Historically, there has been no consideration for the increased seismic risk and the possibility of massive amounts of oil to be spilled in California's ports or in San Francisco Bay. Most of these structures were built with little or no consideration for seismic loading and the current state of repair is generally poor. Additionally, the petroleum pipelines have never been analyzed for the displacement motion associated with the seismic demand. As these structures were inspected above the water line for many years by the California State Lands Commission (CSLC), operators/owners were in no rush to make any improvements. As a result of the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, a federal hazard mitigation grant was given to the CSLC to develop standards to mitigate future damage to port/harbor pile-supported structures. The code was completed in 2006, and is primarily for marine oil terminals, but is generally applicable to port/harbor pile supported wharves or piers. This new set of standards is Section 31F of the California Building Code and is now enforceable. An initial group of 10 "high risk" terminals have submitted their initial audits, documenting the structural condition, above and below the water line, along with plans for seismic rehabilitation. A fitness-for-purpose criterion not only provides inspection results, but also provides a structural assessment, as to whether or not the facility will meet the performance standard of two levels of seismic demand. These initial 10 terminals are in high seismic zones, and the seismic demand for a Level 1 earthquake is 50% probability of excedance in 50 years, and for a Level 2, the standard is a 10% probability of excedance in 50 years. This paper will provide summary results of some of these terminals, providing a general description of how they were modified to meet the seismic criteria, with minimum down-time.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2026 13:53:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2263781</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Environmental Dredging and Site Improvements at Two Coastal Oregon Shipyards</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2171831</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Hart Crowser conducted Remedial Investigations (RI) and Feasibility Studies (FS) at two active shipyards in Coos Bay, Oregon. These shipyards are located in ecologically sensitive estuarine and wetland habitats in Coos Bay, Oregon. RI/FS activities were conducted pursuant to separate Administrative Cleanup Orders issued by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). We were able to avert a Superfund listing and we successfully negotiated the Cleanup Orders with DEQ so that the RI/FS activities were focused to site contaminants; the cleanup decisions were based on appropriate risk based standards; and cleanup could proceed on realistic timelines. Primary sources of contamination include current and past activities attributed to fabrication and repair of fishing vessels, ocean tugs and barges. Waste streams generated by routine site activities include spent sandblast grit, marine antifoulants from hull paints, and petroleum sludge from barge and bilge tank cleaning. Remedial Investigation activities included: delineations and determinations of surface and subsurface sediment quality, and upland soil quality; and ecological and human health risk evaluations for site contaminants of concern. Metals and tributyltin (TBT) were identified as the chemicals of concern in sediments. In upland soils, no human health risk criteria were exceeded; however, copper and nickel were identified as the primary contaminants of concern to ecological receptors. Feasibility Studies identified appropriate remedial action alternatives and source controls to eliminate current ecological risks and prevent future re-contamination of upland soils and estuarine sediments. The selected alternatives for sediments included excavation/dredging of contaminated areas along the marine ways and natural recovery of peripheral areas. Source controls included capping of soils with asphalt; improved stormwater management with filtration vaults; wash water treatment for metal removal using a flocculation system; as well as improved best management practices at the shipyards. These projects enabled the shipyards to remain economically viable and their improved work practices will protect the sensitive habitats surrounding them.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Feb 2026 14:13:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2171831</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Development of Autonomous Truck Mounted Attenuator (ATMA) Deployment Guidelines Considering Traffic and Safety Impacts</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2636014</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Autonomous Truck Mounted Attenuator (ATMA) system represents a specialized application of connected and autonomous vehicle (CAV) technologies, designed to enhance worker safety during roadway maintenance operations. Despite its growing adoption across state agencies, formalized deployment criteria remain absent from national guidelines such as the MUTCD, prompting individual DOTs to define their own standards. This study addresses a critical deployment challenge: identifying the appropriate traffic conditions—i.e., the Operational Design Domain (ODD)—under which ATMA can be safely and effectively used. The research begins by analytically modeling the reduced discharge rate resulting from ATMA-induced moving bottlenecks on multilane highways. Using this as a foundation, microscopic traffic simulation is applied to assess the resulting impacts on vehicle delay and traffic density—key metrics for determining Level of Service (LOS) as per the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Through this modeling framework, a functional relationship is established between Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) and LOS. The approach is validated using high-resolution NGSIM trajectory data, which confirms the model’s ability to accurately reflect capacity reductions caused by slow-moving ATMA vehicles. Sensitivity analyses further reveal that roadway performance is highly influenced by K and D factors, as well as ATMA travel speed. Results suggest that, to maintain LOS at grade C, an AADT threshold of approximately 40,000 vehicles per day provides a practical design guideline.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2025 09:18:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2636014</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Develop Roadway and Parking Design Criteria to Accommodate Automated and Autonomous Vehicles</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2567140</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project assesses how Texas roadway and parking infrastructure should evolve as connected and automated vehicles (CAVs) gain market share, using behavioral-diffusion insights to frame adoption scenarios. Researchers combined literature synthesis with expert questionnaires/interviews, analysis of AV disengagement reports, and PTV Vissim microsimulations of lane and parking layouts under varying CAV penetration. Results show that sight-distance standards, shoulder and clear-zone widths, lane and curb-parking widths, and speed-change-lane lengths are the most sensitive geometric elements, and that platooning permits 10–20 % narrower travel lanes— about 2.4 m (8 ft)—without degrading the level of service. Experts stress that uniform high-contrast pavement markings, lane-by-lane signal heads, and robust digital-map support are prerequisites for machine vision and recommend extended dotted merge lines plus left-turn lane-marking extensions to mitigate localization issues at ramps and intersections. The report advises transportation agencies to update geometric-design and parking manuals to adopt these narrower AV-compatible lanes, strict marking maintenance, and flexible parking footprints, enabling planners to reclaim right-of-way for transit, cycling, and green infrastructure as CAV adoption accelerates.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2025 15:29:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2567140</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Assessment of Repair Quality in Airfield Pavement Restoration Using Surface Profiling Devices</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2562071</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The accurate assessment of repaired airfield pavements, particularly crater repairs in military airbases, is critical for ensuring operational safety and structural integrity. This study evaluates pavement profiling methods and quality criteria, focusing on small-area repairs under 152.4 m (500 ft) in length. Existing standards such as the Tri-Service Pavement Working Group (TSPWG), Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC), and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) guidelines are reviewed for applicability to localized repairs. A full-scale pavement test conducted at Tyndall Air Force Base compared four profiling methods to select the better-performing one for small repair areas: a 3.65 m (12 ft) straightedge, a customized straight bar, a walk-behind profiler, and an inertial profiler. While the inertial profiler excelled in rapid data collection for full-length runways, it lacked the accuracy and repeatability needed for localized repairs. The walk-behind profiler demonstrated superior precision and repeatability, albeit with longer measurement times. Additional data analysis was conducted using arbitrarily created bumps and simulated aircraft responses on them, revealing that current deflection thresholds for repaired areas are overly conservative. The study proposes refined threshold values for bump height and length to better align with realistic operational conditions, enhancing both the accuracy and efficiency of pavement evaluation. Results inform recommendations for revising airfield pavement management guidelines to improve quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) processes for repaired and newly constructed surfaces. These findings contribute to the optimization of profiling tools and methods, addressing gaps in current practices and improving the performance and reliability of airfield pavements in both civilian and military contexts.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2025 14:36:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2562071</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Small craft port design in Slovenia</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2528970</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Slovenia has eleven municipal harbors in Izola, Portorož and Koper, with 1442 berths for various types of pleasure boats on the northern Adriatic coast, which is only 47 kilometers long. However, there are not enough public berths for small boats. Some existing ports do not adhere to the guidelines for marina design, resulting in unconventional port infrastructure, mooring systems, and unused port water areas. There is a need to conduct marine studies for existing and new marinas following the Small Craft Berthing Facilities unified criteria of the US Department of Defense and PIANC Guidelines for Marina Design along with reviewing available standards for floating dock designs. Better planning and adherence to the guidelines will result in adequate maneuvering space for boats, appropriate size and type of pontoons, power, water and sanitary facilities in the marina, parking for boat owners and a docking area for boat maintenance with a sewage treatment system for cleaning dirty boat hulls. Safe mooring systems must be in place, considering the boats’ size and the marina’s location concerning wind, waves, currents, and tides. The logical arrangement of berths following the harbor planning guidelines will positively impact the use of the harbor as it will provide more berths for boats and more security, especially given the changing climate in which tides are rising and sudden storms are becoming more frequent and violent.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2025 11:58:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2528970</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Investigation and Evaluation of a MASH TL-4 Precast Concrete Bridge Railing</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2551111</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recently, a precast concrete bridge railing with unique connection details for barrier-to-deck and barrier-to-barrier interfaces was developed at the Institute of Transportation (InTrans)-Iowa State University (ISU). Successful laboratory experiments led to the current study, in which the primary objectives were to determine if the bridge railing system complied with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) Test-Level 4 (TL-4) impact safety standards through a sequence of stages, including pre-crash simulations and one full-scale crash test with a 10000S single-unit truck (SUT). Initial analyses incorporated LS-DYNA computer simulations emulating MASH TL-4 impacts on two prototype barrier configurations: a single-slope shape and a near-vertical shape. These simulations facilitated the discernment of the bridge rail length, reinforcement details, crashworthiness for passenger vehicles, selection of the single-slope shape for crash testing, and determination of a critical impact point for the 10000S SUT crash test. Subsequent modifications to the single-slope barrier system with inclined bar connections were predicated on these computational findings. A full-scale crash test assessed the bridge railing and the loading to the inclined steel anchor bars under MASH test designation no. 4-12, focusing on its impact safety performance and potential damage to the barrier and bridge deck. In test no. ABCBRM-1, the single-unit truck, was successfully contained and redirected, with the barrier and deck sustaining negligible damage, and all safety performance criteria were within acceptable limits as defined in MASH. The study findings demonstrated that the modified single-slope, precast concrete bridge rail system met the MASH TL-4 impact safety criteria.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2025 17:08:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2551111</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Mechanical Metallurgy on Columbia Gas X100 Experimental Pipe</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2536197</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study evaluates the material properties of an X100 pipeline steel extracted from an experimental transmission pipeline section placed into service in the 1960s. The purpose is to compare these properties with current X100 steel standards. Comprehensive chemical characterization, microstructure analysis, and a series of mechanical tests—including tensile, Charpy impact, and indentation tests—were conducted to assess the long-term stability and reliability of these early high-strength steels. The analysis involved seven different welded sections of the pipeline to account for potential variations within the material and welding procedures. The findings indicate significant differences in chemical composition across the various pipe sections, suggesting that these sections may represent different experimental materials. The base metal predominantly exhibited a bainite-ferrite microstructure, with noticeable variations near the pipe surfaces. Unannealed girth welds demonstrated higher toughness and increased hardness in their heat-affected zones compared to seam welds. While most sections of the vintage X100 steel met the modern tensile property requirements, several sections did not meet the impact toughness criteria. In conclusion, the experimental X100 steel aligns with current tensile property requirements, however the steel fails to meet current toughness related requirements. The observed differences in testing methods between current standards and those published in the 1960s were minor, and therefore not a convincing source for observed property differences considering all sources of uncertainty. The absence of original pre-service mechanical testing data prevents conclusions about time-dependent property changes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Apr 2025 10:18:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2536197</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Road marking visibility for automated vehicles: Machine detectability and maintenance standards</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2517478</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study examines the detectability of road markings by automated vehicle sensors across various environmental conditions, focusing on retroreflectivity (RL) and daytime visibility (Qd). Controlled tests were conducted on different road marking designs, evaluated with cameras and LiDAR sensors in dry, wet, day, and night conditions. Results show that the slope (m) of all the linear models was positive and statistically significant (p-value < 0.05), confirming that these properties are important for sensor based detection. Current road marking maintenance guidelines primarily focus on RL and Qd values, but often overlook the importance of contrast between the markings and the road surface. This study proposes a method for developing new guidelines that integrate contrast-based criteria and consider several environmental conditions as well as sensor capabilities, to enhance road safety for automated systems without imposing unnecessary challenges on road maintenance standards. The framework promotes consistent road marking visibility, efficient maintenance practices, and supports the safe integration of automated vehicles into transport systems, contributing to the alignment of Operational Design Domains (ODD) with real-world Operational Domains (OD).]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2025 11:35:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2517478</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Iowa Granular Road Structural Design Tool</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2509060</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Over 71,000 miles (i.e., over 75%) of county roads in Iowa are granular (unpaved) roads. Iowa granular roads carry low daily traffic volumes (i.e., 10 to 200 vehicles/trucks per day) yet frequently support heavy vehicle (e.g., farm equipment) movements. According to a recent estimate, Iowa’s county road departments spend over $145 million annually on maintenance costs, which predominantly includes over $35 million for blading and over $110 million for resurfacing. In addition, a wide range in granular material quality, supply, and price available in different regions of the state results in significant differences in the level-of-service. Therefore, Iowa county engineers have a specific set of criteria based on their own experiences when designing and managing granular roads. Considering the lack of granular road structural design standards to meet Iowa county engineers’ requirements for current granular road management practices, significant research is needed to develop a comprehensive but practical structural design tool for cost-effective design and construction of local granular road systems in Iowa. The primary objective of this study is to meet such research needs. This will be achieved through the execution of five concurrent research studies: (1) surveys/interviews, forensic investigations, and laboratory tests to identify the best practices for Iowa granular roads around the state; (2) construction, instrumentation, and performance monitoring of field demonstration sites; (3) development of deterioration prediction models subjected to Iowa granular roadways; (4) cost-effectiveness analysis; and (5) development of a structural design tool and additional guidance documents. The outcomes of this research will substantially improve overall performance, save on maintenance and operation costs, and enhance the safety and mobility of Iowa granular roads by addressing key performance indicators (e.g., drainage, cross-slope, aggregate loss, and freeze/thaw susceptibility) through the granular road design procedure.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Feb 2025 18:54:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2509060</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Phase 1: Development of County Bridge Standards for Single Span Concrete Slab Bridges</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2499169</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Nearly 10.5% of all highway bridges in the United States are classified as concrete slab bridges according to the U.S. 2020 National Bridge Inventory (NBI). Concrete slab bridges are typically single spans (20-50 feet) or multiple spans for relatively short stream crossings. The Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) currently has three-span continuous concrete bridge standards (J-series) with lengths between 70-150 feet, but there are no single span concrete slab bridge standards. The objective of this project was to investigate the current practices, need, benefits, economy, constructability, and design criteria for cast-in-place (CIP) single span concrete slab (SSCS) standard bridge plans. A preliminary analysis was conducted to determine slab thickness and reinforcement requirements for various spans and roadway widths to compare costs with other bridge types and concrete box culverts in Iowa. Examples of existing SSCS bridges and a summary of the bridge inventory for bridges less than 70 feet were presented to show the extent of short span bridge design and use in Iowa. Currently, Iowa has a lower inventory of concrete slab bridges (5.1%) compared to other bridge types less than 70 feet in length, such as concrete box culverts (33.1%) and steel stringer bridges (25.0%). The cost analysis shows that SSCS bridges with integral abutments have about the same costs per square foot of deck area (avg. $195/ft²) compared to standard concrete box culverts with 4 foot tall sidewalls (avg. $203/ft²) and steel stringer bridges with integral abutments (avg. $194/ft²) but are less expensive than standard precast box beam bridges with integral abutments (avg. $235/ft²). SSCS bridges with high abutments are less expensive (avg. $294/ft²) than standard concrete box culverts with 12 foot tall sidewalls (avg. $431/ft²) and standard precast box beam bridges with high abutments (avg. $314/ft²). SSCS bridges have several advantages compared to concrete box culverts. Based on a survey submitted to Iowa county engineers, SSCS bridges have less right-of-way requirements, reduced streambed disturbance, and may more easily satisfy Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit requirements. Other advantages identified in the survey include improved hydraulic performance and less siltation/debris. Disadvantages include the need for a guardrail, longer construction, and potential maintenance/durability issues. It is recommended to proceed with final design and development of the SSCS standard bridge plans following the design criteria recommendations provided in this report. The Iowa DOT Bridges and Structures Bureau (BSB) will maintain oversight and updates for the SSCS standard plans. The standards should be published to the BSB website to make them available to the county engineers. Based on the findings, future work is recommended, as outlined at the conclusion of this report.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Feb 2025 09:30:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2499169</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Marine Oil Terminal Engineering and Maintenance Standards (MOTEMS)</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2209148</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A set of engineering standards has been completed for the design and maintenance of marine oil terminals. These "Marine Oil Terminal Engineering and Maintenance Standards (MOTEMS) became regulatory in February 2006. The Standards were developed by the Marine Facilities Division of the California State Lands Commission and include criteria for above and under water inspection, structural (and seismic) rehabilitation, as well as new design, fire, piping, mechanical and electrical systems. These standards address both new terminals or new components as well as existing facilities.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Oct 2024 15:57:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2209148</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>