<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>TRB Publications Index</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/</link><atom:link href="http://pubsindex.trb.org/common/TRIS Suite/feeds/rss.aspx?tc=NN%3ACsma" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><description></description><language>en-us</language><copyright>Copyright © 2015. 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>Compilation of DOT and FAA Airport Legal Determinations and Opinion Letters as of December 31, 2019</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1855144</link><description><![CDATA[U.S. airports that receive assistance from the federal government are required to comply with a number of obligations imposed by federal law. For example, airport sponsors that accept airport development grants-in-aid (pursuant to the Airport Improvement Program established by the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982) contractually agree to comply with grant assurances governing, inter alia, the use of the airport, the manner in which the airport may be developed, the relationship between the airport sponsor and its aeronautical tenants and users, and the implementation of various federal programs. Likewise, airport sponsors that are the beneficiaries of land transferred pursuant to the Surplus Property Act are required to comply with the applicable deed covenants regarding the uses of such land. Finally, the owners of aeronautical facilities, including airports on which federal funds have been expended, are prohibited from granting certain exclusive rights. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are the primary federal agencies issuing guidance on federal airport compliance matters. This compilation covers the following case specific guidance available from DOT and FAA as of December 31, 2019: Determinations and orders issued by FAA pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 16, Rules of Practice for Federally-Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings; Available records of decision issued by FAA pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Part 13, (investigative proceedings generally initiated before December 16, 1996, concerning compliance matters involving Federally-assisted airports); Substantive decisions and orders issued by DOT pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 47129 (establishing the reasonableness of airport fees imposed on air carriers); and Opinion letters, memoranda, and related documents issued by the DOT General Counsel and FAA Chief Counsel (as of December 31, 2019). The legal matters discussed in these documents include the reasonableness of contractual terms, leasing practices, airport rules and regulations, airport charges imposed on aeronautical users, including airlines, and the standards for determining airport sponsor compliance with other federal obligations. Some of the documents in the collection also discuss procedural matters applicable to particular agency proceedings. This compilation contains 348 documents, including 292 agency determinations (35 Part 13 records of decision and 251 Part 16 determinations and orders) covering 228 distinct administrative cases brought against large and small airports throughout the U.S. The compilation also includes 51 DOT and FAA opinion letters, memoranda, and related documents. In addition to copies of the original agency documents, this compilation also includes a digest of each agency document in the collection. Each digest is comprised of, inter alia, an abstract of the facts and holdings, the name of the affected airport, applicable previous and subsequent histories of the case, and key terms. The digests are indexed and searchable.]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2021 12:52:47 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1855144</guid></item><item><title>Compilation of DOT and FAA Airport Legal Determinations and Opinion Letters</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1757849</link><description><![CDATA[U.S. airports that receive assistance from the federal government are required to comply with a number of obligations imposed by federal law.  This compilation covers legal matters that include the reasonableness of contractual terms, leasing practices, airport rules and regulations, airport charges imposed on aeronautical users, including airlines, and the standards for determining airport sponsor compliance with other federal obligations. Some of these documents discuss procedural matters applicable to particular agency proceedings.]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2020 09:39:37 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1757849</guid></item><item><title>Impacts of the Americans with Disabilities Act on Transit Agency Liability</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1575344</link><description><![CDATA[This digest provides a comprehensive overview of the types of transit agency Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements and legal claims against transit agencies that the ADA as amended has generated. This research presents an assessment of problems in implementing the Act from the perspective of transit operators. Although case law is limited, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has issued extensive regulatory guidance, which transit agencies can draw upon in assessing compliance requirements associated with the Act. Relevant FTA guidance is summarized in detail in this report.]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 26 Dec 2018 09:14:25 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1575344</guid></item><item><title>Compilation of DOT and FAA Airport Legal Determinations and Opinion Letters Through December 2012</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1264435</link><description><![CDATA[Commercial service airports that accept federal grants under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) agree to comply with federal assurances.  The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) adjudicates complaints, brought by the FAA and raised by third parties, relating to the alleged failures by airports to comply with the AIP grant assurances.  It has been difficult for attorneys representing airports to find these relevant cases and their respective decisions or opinions from either DOT General Counsel or FAA Chief Counsel on complaints brought forth.  These decisions and opinions can be found in this digest.  The compilation updates ACRP Legal Research Digest 4:  Compilation of DOT and FAA Airport Legal Determinations and Opinion Letters Through December 31, 2007 and supersedes it by updating it through December 31, 2012.  This CD-ROM includes two robust search engines allowing users to search in a number of different ways, including by keywords, airports, and specific cases.]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 07 Oct 2013 11:13:46 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1264435</guid></item><item><title>Transit Labor 13(c) Employee Protection Digest</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1216860</link><description><![CDATA[This digest  synthesizes the transit 13(c) decisions issued since publication of Selected Studies in Transportation Law (SSTL) Volume 6, Transit Labor 13(c) Decisions (49 U.S.C. 5333(b)). The digest also includes the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Employee Protection Digest—a digest of decisions on employee 13(c) claims decided by DOL hearing officers.]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 10 Oct 2012 16:12:04 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1216860</guid></item><item><title>An Index and Digest of Decisions: Compilation of Airport Law Resources</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1135080</link><description><![CDATA[This compilation is the third publication in an effort to provide airport lawyers the tools to be able to quickly identify relevant legal concepts and case precedents.  It contains a list of judicial decisions with summaries of relevant holdings and links to source documents.  It follows ACRP Legal Research Digest 1, "Compilation of Airport Law Resources" (January 2008) and ACRP Legal Research Digest 4, "Compilation of DOT and FAA Airport Legal Determinations and Opinion Letters Through December 31, 2007" (2008).  It complements the information contained in Digest 4 and provides comparable information to Digest 4 about adjudications that did not involve federal administrative determinations and about subsequent judicial determinations on administrative decisions that were challenged in court.]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:59:08 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/1135080</guid></item><item><title>Traffic Safety: Roundabouts, Trucks, Older Drivers, and Traffic Law Enforcement 2009</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/898564</link><description><![CDATA[These 14 papers are concerned with various aspects of traffic safety.  Specific topics addressed include the following:  roundabouts; truck lane restrictions; sleep apnea and driving performance; the effect of horizontal curvature on truck crashes; roadside tire debris; occupational road safety programs; safety impacts of truck speed limiters; the influence of driver safety programs on older drivers; traffic sign comprehension by an aging society; speed photo-radar enforcement effect on work zone speed; the impact of DWI checkpoint enforcement techniques on traffic operations; and a legal approach to reduce red light running crashes.]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:43:10 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/898564</guid></item><item><title>Compilation of DOT and FAA Airport Legal Determinations and Opinion Letters Through December 31, 2007</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/874560</link><description><![CDATA[This digest is a compilation of U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) airport legal determinations and opinion letters through December 31, 2007.  The compilation, available in a CD format, includes indexes designed to facilitate the search for specific questions and issues.  In total, this compilation contains 221 documents, including 182 agency determinations covering 133 distinct administrative cases brought against large and small airports throughout the U.S.  The compilation also includes 39 DOT and FAA opinion letters, memoranda, and related documents.  This compilation should be helpful to airport managers, attorneys, administrators, operators, planners, compliance officers, financial officers, and all others who might encounter a problem or have a question regarding issues arising under an FAA airport grant.]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:26:57 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/874560</guid></item><item><title>A Survey of State Practices for Protecting Transportation Agencies Against Construction and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Fraud Including Use of Contractor Suspension and Debarment Procedures</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/843854</link><description><![CDATA[This report explores state department of transportation practices involving the areas of highway construction contracting, including false claims, disadvantaged business enterprise fraud, and contractor suspension and debarment.  The report is designed to provide a broad assessment of the magnitude of false claims and disadvantaged business enterprise fraud and the steps that states are taking to detect and protect against such practices.  The report also examines whether states are using the contractor suspension and debarment procedures effectively as a tool for protection from unscrupulous contractors.]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:42:08 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/843854</guid></item><item><title>Report of Committee on Land Acquisition and Control of Highway Access and Adjacent Areas</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/835519</link><description><![CDATA[The most significant development in the field of highway land acquisition and control is an increasing awareness by top highway management of the importance of right-of-way and roadside control.  Today, when wide rights-of-way are considered necessary to provide highways of modern design adequate width to meet ever increasing traffic demands, state highway departments must have the authority to determine these rights-of-way.  This report of the land acquisition committee presents and reviews court cases where the state's authority has been challenged and upheld.]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 17 Sep 2007 11:58:27 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/835519</guid></item><item><title>Drugs and Traffic: A Symposium, June 20-21, 2005, Woods Hole, Massachusetts</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/783019</link><description><![CDATA[The Alcohol, Other Drugs, and Transportation Committee of the Transportation Research Board held a symposium at the Jonsson Conference Center in Woods Hole, Massachusetts on June 20-21, 2005 to discuss the role of drugs in traffic.  This circular provides an overview of the information presented and the discussions among the participants, as well as the background papers prepared for the symposium.  The papers are grouped under the following headings:  Risks Posed by Drugs in Traffic; Effects of Drugs; Medicinal Drugs; Legal Framework for Dealing with Drugs in Traffic; and Enforcement Issues.]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:26:03 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/783019</guid></item><item><title>EFFECTS OF STANDARD ENFORCEMENT ON SAFETY BELT CITATIONS IN MICHIGAN</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/705173</link><description><![CDATA[A study investigated the effects on safety belt citations of the change in police enforcement of Michigan's mandatory safety belt law that went into effect on March 10, 2000.  Safety belt citation records were obtained from Michigan courts for one full year before and one full year after the change from secondary to standard enforcement.  Analysis of the records indicated an overall increase of 9% in safety belt citations and an 8% increase in the number of individuals cited.  No effects from the change to standard enforcement were found for the distribution of safety belt citations by sex, age, and race, overall, or for both day- and nighttime periods.  The proportion of persons receiving multiple safety belt citations in one year remained at 11%, and the average number of citations per cited person remained at 1.1 per year.  Individuals who continued to receive citations after standard enforcement were more likely to be males age 16 to 22.  No effect on the number of child-restraint citations was found.  Changes in the disposition of cases included an increase in the proportion of guilty outcomes and a decrease in the proportion of cases dismissed.]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/705173</guid></item><item><title>REEXAMINATION OF THE LINE BETWEEN GOVERNMENTAL EXERCISE OF THE POLICE POWER AND EMINENT DOMAIN</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/675632</link><description><![CDATA[State highway departments and transportation agencies have a continuing need to keep abreast of operating practices and legal elements of specific problems in highway law.  This report, prepared by Ross D. Netherton, is a new paper, which continues the National Cooperative Highway Research Program's (NCHRP's) policy of keeping departments up-to-date on laws that will affect their operations.  This paper will be incorporated in "Selected Studies in Highway Law" (SSHL), which is currently undergoing a major rewrite and update.  This paper reexamines the issue of where to draw the line between the governmental exercise of police powers, for which the government does not have to compensate the affected property owners, and eminent domain.  Eminent domain involves restricting, denying, destroying, invading, or appropriating the use and value of private property, for which the property owner is entitled to compensation.  The report should be useful to attorneys, legislators, land use specialists, planners, policy officials, transportation administrators, and right of way and zoning officials.  The paper is organized as follows:  (I) Problem Statement; (II) Scope of Report; (III) Judicial Definition and Resolution of the Takings Issue; (IV) Legislative Definition and Resolution of the Takings Issue; (V) Resolution of Takings Issue Cases in Transportation Programs; (VI) Conclusions; Appendix A - State Regulatory Impact Assessment Legislation; Appendix B - State Regulatory Assessment Guidelines; and Appendix C - Selected Checklists and Guidelines for Regulatory Impact Assessment.]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/675632</guid></item><item><title>FIRST-HAND REPORT PREPARED FOR THE THIRTEENTH ANNUAL WORKSHOP ON TRANSPORTATION LAW, MADISON, WISCONSIN, JULY 28 - AUGUST 1, 1974</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/504479</link><description><![CDATA[The contents of this First-Hand Report are as follows: Administrative Procedures; Constitutional Law; Contractors' Claims; Dedication; Eminent Domain; Environmental Law; Explosives; Judicial Review; Prescription; Relocation Assistance; Torts; and Waters.]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 1999 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/504479</guid></item><item><title>SUSPENSION, DEBARMENT AND DISQUALIFICATION OF HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTORS</title><link>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/365464</link><description><![CDATA[This paper examines federal and selected state cases concerning government actions and proceedings relating to suspensions, debarments, or disqualifications of contractors and subcontractors as well as federal and state laws, rules and regulations concerning such actions and proceedings in order to draw together the controlling legal principles on such matters; including the requirements of due process, authority to cause suspensions, debarments or disqualifications, length and effect of such actions, and Administrative Procedure Act requirements relating to such authority.  Some states have failed in their attempts to be more aggressive toward contractors engaging in misconduct.  A clear understanding of why there was failure in those states will assist others in their dealing with contractor misconduct situations.  Discussion of what are the distinguishing features of "protecting a government interest" versus "penal or punitive action" may assist officials who deal with suspension, debarment, or disqualification actions or proceedings.]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 1998 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate><guid>http://pubsindex.trb.org/view/365464</guid></item></channel></rss>