Q&A: M


NTSB Champions School Bus Safety WRITTEN BY CLAUDIA NEWTON | CLAUDIA@STNONLINE.COM


ichele Beckjord, senior accident investigator and project manag- er with the National Transpor- tation Safety Board, spoke with


School Transportation News in advance of her presentations to NAPT Summit and NAS- DPTS Annual Conference attendees about the No- vember 2016 Baltimore and Chattanooga crashes. Te NTSB is also investigating last December’s fire that killed a driver and student in Oakland, Iowa. Most recently, it picked up the Oct. 4 Mesquite, Texas crash


and fire that killed a 12-year-old student who was wearing a lap-shoulder belt. “Fire safety of school buses is a big deal,” Beckjord stated. “We want to make sure that we are investigating these two fatal fires that have happened within one year of each other.”


STN: NHTSA is set to study the positive


effect lap/shoulder belts on school buses have on student behavior. Did this have any effect on the recommendation made in May for states to mandate these occupant restraint systems? NTSB: In its 1999 report on bus crash-wor-


thiness, the NTSB recommended that NHT- SA develop performance standards for school bus occupant protection systems. [Ten], once pertinent standards have been developed, require newly manufactured school buses to install systems to retain passengers within the seating compartments throughout the crash sequence, for all accident scenarios. Although NTSB believes NHTSA’s 2008 final rule on school bus passenger seating and crash protection (FMVSS 222) constitutes a safety improvement in school bus occupant protection (by establishing perfor- mance requirements for voluntarily installed lap belts and lap/shoulder belts on large school bus- es), the Board recognizes the final rule failed to require that all newly manufactured buses install occupant protection systems as recommended. As highlighted in our May 2018 Special Inves- tigation Report, states and local school districts that have required or installed lap/shoulder belts in large school buses have reported additional improvements beyond occupant protection— such as reduced driver distraction and improved student behavior. Te Board looks forward to both the states’ implementation of this important safety recommendation, as well as the outcome of the NHTSA study on the indirect additional benefits of lap/shoulder belts for improvement of school transportation safety.


STN:What are some of the most important 12 THE SHOW REPORTER • OCT 26-31, 2018


things that districts and contractors need to do to make sure they’re properly screening and supervising their drivers? How can organizations like NAPT and NASDPTS help? NTSB: Becoming the safest possible trans-


portation provider, whether a school district or contractor, means finding a way to take on the challenge of the bus driver shortage, while also setting a very high bar for expected safe driving behaviors. Tis means not only having a documented and detailed process for handling driver operational complaints, but [having] the procedures in place for taking remedial action when driver safety issues are known. Te NTSB hopes that school districts and contractors alike will use our published reports and safety alerts to lay out the investigative facts and analysis behind why the NTSB has aimed safety recommenda- tions at this already very scrutinized group of drivers, to help spread awareness and achieve continuous improvements in safe driving. NAPT and NASDPTS members have shown steadfast commitment to improving school bus safety. Te organizations, along with promoting the importance of quality hiring and proper driver training, can educate all of their members on the daily oversight that is required to ensure only safe school bus drivers are operating their school buses.


STN: As far as preventive measures go, what


part can be played by technologies that limit school bus speeds and prevent situations where ESC or collision mitigation may be needed? NTSB: As the NTSB’s May 2018 SIR documented, NTSB investigators determined a speed range for the [Chattanooga] accident bus at 45 to 53 mph in a 30-mph zone. Te excessive bus speed as it entered the right curve on Sunset Avenue was the greatest factor in determining the loss of control. A reduction in speed would have moved the bus away from a loss-of-control environment that led to the fatal crash. Te Board supports engineering counter- measures, combined with enforcement and driver education—because all three are proven, effective measures for reducing the likelihood of encountering a speed-induced loss of control situation. In combination with vehicle technol- ogies, including electronic stability control and collision mitigation in school buses, the NTSB also supports increasing both school bus driver education and public awareness that speeding is a national traffic safety issue.


STN: How can other technologies work with


training to improve the quality and safety of student transportation services? NTSB:Technology, such as event data record-


ers (EDRs) capture critical vehicle information about the vehicle and occupants for a brief


period of time (seconds, not minutes) before, during and after a crash. EDRs may record a wide range of data elements, such as whether the brakes were applied, vehicle speed at the time of impact, steering angle, and whether seat belts were being used at the time of the crash. Image/video event recorders—both inward- and forward-facing—show the driver immediately before, during and after an event. Recorders not only help investigators determine the cause of a crash, but perhaps more importantly, they help companies and operators establish effective safety management strategies. Incorporating the data from these technologies is a proactive step toward crash prevention and can result in safer transportation for students.


STN: All three major school bus OEMs offer


ESC and/or collision avoidance as an option. How does the realistic timeline for standardiz- ing this technology line up with how soon the NTSB would like to see it happen? NTSB: We are very encouraged by the school bus manufacturers [that] are making great strides in ensuring the NTSB’s ESC and/or collision avoidance school bus recommendations come to fruition in the near future. Te fact that in July of 2018, at least one national school bus manufacturer (IC Bus) issued a statement that the company will now make ESC and collision mitigation technology standard on [its] school buses by late spring of 2019, was very reassuring. We are motivated to seeing these features as standard equipment built into school buses of- fered for sale starting in 2019. We believe this is a fantastic step toward[s] how quickly the NTSB envisioned the implementation of our safety recommendation.


STN: NTSB also recommended that IC Bus


add event recorders to its buses. How important are post-disaster investigations to making sure these tragic events don’t happen again? NTSB: Looking back through the NTSB’s


over 50 years of accident investigation and safety recommendation history, we know that improve- ments we have advocated for have saved lives. Improving school bus transportation safety is directly linked to the knowledge we gain from the vehicle, the environment and the humans involved. Event recorders can preserve much of this vital information. Te data that crash-hard- ened event recorders could provide post-crash or post-fire can help pinpoint exactly where to focus safety improvements [that are] aimed at not only mitigating the severity of crashes and fires that do occur, but more importantly, to help prevent them in the first place.


STN: Tank you. •


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