TOP STORY Surveying Seat Belt Readiness STN ASKS READERS HOW PREPARED THEY ARE FOR NHTSA’S 2011 TYPE A SEAT BELT DEADLINE
By Stephane Babcock When the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) finalized its rule concerning the inclusion of lap/shoul- der belts, the deadline that all Type A buses manufactured on or after Oct. 21 of next year shall include the restraints seemed a much more distant future. But that date is steadily coming upon us, and districts as well as contractors need to be prepared for the federal requirement, along with all the associated costs. In a recent STN survey that included responses from 183 con-
tractor and 301 school district representatives, a majority fell into an “all or nothing” category when it came to experience with the restraints. In all, 42 percent of school districts said they already run between 76 and 100 percent of their Type A buses with the lap/shoulder belts. Meanwhile, 54 percent currently have either little or none of their fleet equipped. Te remaining 4 percent had between 25 and 75 percent equipped. Te contrac- tors closely mirrored these results, as nearly 51 percent reported they have zero to 25 percent of their buses equipped and 43.5 percent with 76 to 100 percent. And, for many, cost is the main issue that stands in the way. “Tat would be a huge expense just for our fleet alone, and for
the safest transportation system in the world which is in a bad position for funding as it is, all for a miniscule potential increase in safety,” wrote Robert Ulrichson, vehicle maintenance supervi- sor for Lufkin (Texas) Independent School District, adding that his main concern is the possibility of requiring restraints in large buses. “Seat belts in them would be a massive expense overall, to fix a safety issue that only exists in the minds of those that do not understand the size and weight of these buses, or the protection of compartmentalization.” And for many who responded to the survey, the inclusion of
seat belts on small buses is being viewed as a “disaster economi- cally” and something that would have a “devastating impact without funding.” Many cited their districts’ current economic hardships and the effect the mandatory inclusion of seat belts would have. “We could not make the adjustment too easily. We have laid
off 40 personnel district-wide including two of our bus mechan- ics already,” commented a transportation director from north central New York. Te fear of trapped students was felt by more than one re-
spondent, with some arguing that students stuck in seat belts in a burning bus would cause “mentally and emotionally unbear- able affects” for the students and school personnel. “Seat belts are a financial burden that no district can afford and will be a hindrance in a crisis situation,” wrote Denitra War-
18 School Transportation News Magazine August 2010 1.4% 2.0%
0-25 Percent 26-50 Percent
51-75 Percent 76-100 Percent
District:
How many of your Type A school buses are currently equipped with seat belts?
Contractor:
How many of your Type A school buses are currently equipped with seat belts?
43.5%
50.8%
4.2% 1.6%
0-25 Percent 26-50 Percent
51-75 Percent 76-100 Percent
42% 54.6%
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60