The National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services appreciates the opportunity to provide comments on the Head Start Bureau’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) concerning the safe transportation of children participating in Head Start programs. While the State Directors Association realizes that the comment period closed on August 14, 1995, it knows that significant issues were raised by other commenters and that the Head Start Bureau has been involved in extensive discussions with other Federal agencies on those issues. It is hoped that the information provided in this letter will be of assistance to the Head Start Bureau in its final deliberations on the NPRM.

The State Directors Association was founded in 1968, and represents a cross section of individuals and organizations involved in the safe transportation of school children. As the association’s name indicates, individuals with the primary responsibility for school transportation in each state are members. In addition, the school bus manufacturers, many equipment suppliers to the school bus industry or the school bus aftermarket, and a number of state associations whose members include school transportation officials, drivers, trainers, and mechanics also are members of affiliated councils within the association. Based on this diversity in membership, we believe that the State Directors Association provides a unique perspective on school transportation issues and speaks for a large segment of the “school transportation industry.”

In December 1997, the State Directors Association asked each State Director to review the NPRM and provide comments on how the various proposals would impact, either positively or negatively, school bus operations in their respective state. Twenty-three states provided specific comments. Based on those responses, the State Directors Association offers the following comments. Copies of the individual state responses are enclosed for your information.

1. In general, the State Directors Association strongly supports the Head Start Bureau’s proposals to improve the transportation safety of children enrolled in Head Start programs. The safety record of school buses compared to passenger vans that are often used to transport Head Start children should not be overlooked. On average,

13 occupants of school buses are fatally injured each year, while over 1,400 occupants of full- sized vans and minivans are killed each year. There are a number of reasons for this difference, but the most important is the difference in occupant crash protection offered by school buses versus vans of any size.

2. As a result of the passage of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 and the School Bus Safety Amendments of 1974, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation, has issued 34 Federal motor vehicle safety standards which apply to school buses. These standards cover a wide range of components and systems, e.g., brakes, steering, glazing, lights, fuel system integrity, mirrors, heaters/defrosters, compressed natural gas containers, etc., and apply to all types of motor vehicles. Many of these Federal standards have unique requirements for school buses, e.g., outside mirrors to provide the seated driver with a view in front of and along both sides of the bus; amber and red warning lights when the bus is stopped to load or unload passengers; emergency exits; and fuel system integrity. In addition, four of the standards are unique to school buses. These are:

A. “School Bus Rollover Protection,” which specifies the minimum structural strength of buses in rollover-type accidents;

B. “School Bus Body Joint Strength,” which specifies the minimum strength of the joints between panels that comprise the bus body and the body structure;

C. “School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection,” which establishes requirements for school bus seating systems for all sizes of school buses, and provides minimum performance requirements for wheelchair securement/occupant restraint devices and establishes a requirement that wheelchair locations be forward facing; and

D. “School Bus Pedestrian Safety Devices,” which requires school buses be equipped with an automatic stop signal arm on the left side of the bus to help alert motorists that they should stop their vehicles because children are boarding or leaving a stopped school bus.

3. It may be feasible to suggest that some of the Federal requirements for school buses are not necessary for Head Start programs, given the differences between Head Start vehicle operations and school bus operations. For example, flashing lamps and stop signal arms are very important components in providing a safe environment for students that board and de- board school buses at selected locations throughout neighborhoods. However, if

Head Start vehicles pickup and deliver children at their homes where the vehicle can pull into a driveway or off the side of the road in front of the child’s home, there may not be a need to stop traffic through the use of flashing lamps and stop signal arms.

The other school bus Federal standards that deal with occupant crash protection and driver visibility should be required of Head Start vehicles. The State Directors Association believes that children enrolled in Head Start programs should be provided the same level of transportation safety as children enrolled in kindergarten through high school.

4. While the State Directors Association supports the concepts described in the General Provisions, Vehicles, Driver Qualifications, Driver Training, and Trip Routing sections of the NPRM, there are some provisions that are in conflict with existing state laws, regulations, or requirements. For example, only California has a program which requires the school bus driver to leave the school bus to escort children across the street. Many states have laws, regulations, or requirements that strictly prohibit the driver from leaving the bus while students are still on-board.

In addition, a number of the driver qualifications, e.g., 21 years of age or older, and driver training requirements, e.g., 40 hours of training, are more stringent than current school bus driver requirements. This could cause significant increases in recruiting problems and training costs. Also, maximum 1-hour riding times and absolute prohibitions against u-turns and backing up are not always practicable in real-world operations.

A number of the proposals, e.g., the requirement for monitors and specialized equipment for extreme weather, could significantly increase the costs of providing Head Start transportation over the current costs of school bus transportation.

5. The State Directors Association believes that while the NPRM discusses the important aspects of providing safe transportation to children enrolled in Head Start programs, all of the issues related to driver qualifications, driver training, trip routing, monitors, communications equipment, extreme weather equipment, and who the child may be released to at the end of the day should be established in accordance with the individual state requirements. In other words, the Head Start Bureau should require Hear Start programs to meet the state-adopted specifications and requirements for school buses and their operation. This would eliminate the potential disparities between what is already being done in states to provide extremely safe transportation to school-aged children and what is proposed to provide safe transportation to Head Start children. There does not appear to be a logical reason why there should be differences in these requirements.

6. The State Directors Association supports the position that children under the age of 5 should be transported in a child safety restraint system that meets the applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards, and that the child be properly secured into the child safety restraint system. In addition, the child safety restraint system should be secured in the vehicle using devices and anchorages that meet the applicable Federal motor vehicle safety standards.

The enclosed copies of the responses from the individual states elaborate on the above comments. If you would like to discuss these comments further, please call Charles Gauthier, Executive Director of the association, at 703-734-1620.

Sincerely,

(sgn) Terry L. Voy
President
116 Howe Drive
Dover, Delaware 19901
1-800-585-0340

Enclosures