SBDI BACKGROUNDER
2008-2009 Driver Attendant Refresher #1
Solving the Loading Zone Puzzle
The loading zone has long been recognized as the most risky point in the pupil transportation process. Focusing on the loading zone has been the primary consideration of New York’s school bus safety program since 1977 when the “new” 20-hour Basic Course was introduced and SBDIs began to be trained across the state by the “Charlie and Watts” team. Some of those senior SBDIs are still teaching and are proud to have been a part of the 30 years of life saving training that has reduced New York State fatalities from over 4 students per year from 1960 to 1976 to less that one a year in the past decade even as the number of students transported has more than doubled.
Nationally, the same trend has played out. Statistics gathered by the Kansas State Department of Education (http://www.ksbe.state.ks.us/Default.aspx?tabid=346) for cumulative and annual national reports) demonstrate that the number of children killed in the loading zone has dropped from over 70 a year in the early 1970s to 13.3 fatalities a year for the past 10 years. Both the New York State and national figures are impressive, but still we need to examine them closely to plan the focus of our continued training program.
This year’s PDS is going to take another look at the loading zone, but will not attempt to cover every detail about proper loading and unloading procedure. Rather it will bank on the expertise New York State school bus drivers and attendants already have about these procedures. We will be asking them to analyze case studies and their own behavior to make a continued and strengthened commitment to loading zone safety.
For a detailed look at loading zone procedures, extensive materials exist in the Basic and Advanced Courses as well as in the “Loading and Unloading Safety: NYS Tips, Procedures, and Cautions for School Bus Drivers” that is a part of School Bus Safety is One Bus Stop at a Time (SBSIOBSAAT). The 2005 PDS (pages 63-116) had an extensive examination of Bus Stop Safety and procedures.
The 2007 PDS was dedicated the four NYS loading zone fatalities that occurred from 2004-2006, Mallory Eddy, Amber Sadiq, Chana Friedlander, and Markus Smith. This year, using news accounts, we are going to examine three of these children’s deaths that occurred in the loading zone more closely, along with rear wheel fatalities, using case studies to order to draw bus drivers and attendants into a consideration of how accidents like these can be avoided. Rather than trying to pump them full of facts, we are going to pull out the knowledge they already have in order to encourage them to think analytically, not just in class, but as they negotiate the loading zone.
While this lesson will not focus on the Universal Crossing Signals and Procedures, these are the bedrock of safe loading zones. If there is any weaknesses in the use of these procedures, be sure to use some of the materials listed above to provide remedial instruction in this area. The “How to Cross Safely” poster is an integral part of students and bus staff understanding these procedures and should be in plain sight on every bus as recommended by the State Education Department. In addition to the poster’s message students, drivers, and attendants should use the universal crossing and danger signals.
The current design of crossing posters as well as posters demonstrating the universal signals are available from PTSI. Some vendors are still selling the previous version of the poster which does not show the child checking before they step off the bus (a change that was recommended by an SBDI after attending their PDS many years ago). The Mallory Eddy incident demonstrates the importance of this newer edition. (http://www.dxmarket.com/ptsi/dir/21.html).
Crossing Laws and Regs
While detailed discussion of crossing procedures such as SBSIOBSAAT provide useful guidance, we must be sure that bus drivers and attendants are familiar with the laws and regulations governing loading and unloading as well.
f 15 foot rule (VT 1174b) The driver of the school bus shall keep such bus halted with red signal lights flashing until such passengers are at least fifteen feet from the bus and either off the highway, street or private road, or on a sidewalk.
f 50 foot rule (VT 325.20a) The driver…shall keep such red signal lamps lighted…whenever he has stopped within 50 feet to the rear of a vehicle with such signal lamps lighted.
f 10 foot rule 8 NYCRR (156.3 d4) The driver of a school bus, when discharging pupils who must cross the highway, shall instruct such pupils to cross the highway at a distance of 10 feet in front of the vehicle so as to be in the vision of the driver. (“Shall instruct” has been interpreted to mean every day.)
f $250 (VT1174c) Every person convicted (of passing a stopped school bus) shall: for a first conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not less than 250 dollars.
f 300 feet Not a regulation, but NYSED recommends that drivers activate their amber lights approximately 300 feet from the bus stop.
f Use of yellow and red loading lights (8 NYCRR (156.3 d4) The driver shall also keep such school bus halted with red signal lights flashing until such pupils have reached the opposite side of the highway. (VT 325.20a) The driver…shall keep such red signal lamps lighted whenever passengers are being received or discharged…and shall light all other required signal lamps, as a warning prior to stopping.
In addition to understanding the laws governing loading and unloading, bus drivers and attendants need to know that the surest way for them to create personal liability in a bus accident is for them to move the bus stop without approval from the transportation office. Anything that happens at that new stop, even if the new stop is only across the street, creates personal liability for the bus driver and attendant because they are acting outside the scope of their employment, which is establishing bus routes.
Bus staff who want to move a bus stop often have good intentions, and they might even be moving it because the new stop is safer. While we don’t want drivers and attendants to change stops we DO want them to think about the safety of bus stops and bring any concerns they have to their supervisors. Some bus stop problems are inherent in the stop location and some may be temporary as a result of weather, construction, a traffic accident, or an event that causes a one-time traffic hazard.
Issues that we want our drivers and attendants to be looking for include any view obstructions whether caused by curves, hills, parked vehicles, etc. They need to be aware of places where high speed or high volume traffic and frequent drive-bys must be accounted for in loading and unloading procedures. If stops are near intersections, they need to have considered all the possible directions traffic could be approaching the bus as it arrives and leaves the stop. When family members or neighbors accompany students to the bus stop, they must be accounted for at the stop.
Mallory Eddy’s death identified the need for bus drivers to become critical observers at school bus stops. A bus stop at the bottom of a steep hill means that a vehicle experiencing brake failure could be approaching the bus at any time so checking to be sure all traffic is completely stopped is essential. What if it had been an 80,000 pound tractor trailer instead of a car? Each stop has specific characteristics that a thinking bus driver and attendant can plan for. When a bus driver is lucky enough to have a bus attendant, it means that there are two sets of eyes instead of one. Teamwork between the two should include clear understanding of who is looking where for what.
Bus staff, on occasion, need to make route changes because of an unexpected hazard, but in these cases they should radio in to get approval for the change – to protect the school or company as well as themselves. When all bus staff members become critical observers of bus stops and work cooperatively with their supervisors to maintain safe bus stops, the safety of the operation is multiplied. Looking at these four bus stop issues is designed to encourage bus staff to think critically about these situations so that they will be critical observers of their bus stops as well.
Case Studies
The following pages identify issues relative to four bus stop issues that will provide the content for drivers and attendants to analyze in this refresher. It is really important to remember that the goal of this exercise is to promote thinking and analysis, not to place blame on the drivers, companies, and school districts involved. We are using news articles to provide information for this analysis because they are public content, not the results of accident analysis or investigation that could have any legal impact on the incidents.
We want the drivers and attendants to explore every possibility of what could have gone wrong, what could have been prevented, what circumstances created a setting where this accident was inevitable? If this blame-free environment is created up front, then the drivers and attendants can enter into a critical analysis without feeling as though they are criticizing their fellow bus drivers and attendants.
Rear Wheels
Nationally, in addition to the overall downward trend, the one specific trend that has changed the most is the location where children were struck by their own school bus. While historically only 33% of children have been killed by the rear wheels, 63% of fatalities have been at the rear. This change is not an indication that we are doing something worse at the rear of the bus, but that we are doing a better and better job about the front of the bus. We need to keep our focus on the front of the bus but improve our understanding of rear wheel fatalities.
The following three scenarios, taken from recent national reports, identify the most common causes of rear wheel fatalities, all of which have happened in New York State over the past 20 years.
Slipped under bus when running late. A thirteen-year-old girl missed boarding the bus in the loading/ unloading area at school. When the girl saw the bus leaving, she started chasing the bus. The girl slipped and fell under the right rear dual wheels of the bus.
Returned for dropped object. A six-year-old boy had crossed in front of the bus, but returned to pick up something that he had dropped. The driver did not see the boy run back toward the bus. The boy slid under the left rear dual wheels of the bus.
Off-tracking causes bus to strike pedestrian student. An eight-year-old boy was late getting to his bus. As the bus was making a right-hand turn, the boy turned to the left, running toward the bus. He was struck and killed by the left rear dual wheels.
Object caught in handrail or door and student is dragged by bus. A girl was discharging the bus when her book bag became entangled in the door. The eleven-year-old girl was struck and dragged beneath the right rear wheel of the bus, which killed her.
Rear Wheel fatalities occur when students get or return close to the bus without coming to the attention of the school bus driver. This broadens the traditional focus of the bus driver on the front of the bus and expands it to include the sides. Vehicle and Traffic Law 1174b identified above requires the bus to remain in place until all children are 15 feet away from the bus. Strong emphasis of this law should put an end to rear wheel fatalities as well as fatalities of children running back to the bus.
The phrase, “Rock before you roll” that became a standard part of New York State school bus training after the 1996 PDS, “Safety at the Crossroads” applies not only at intersections but also as the bus leaves the bus stop. Drivers must look in front and along both sides of the bus, moving in their seats to see around view obstructions, and using their mirrors that have been properly adjusted in accordance with FMVSS 111 before they move the bus from the bus stop.
Mallory Eddy
Oneida Dispatch September 14, 2005
The trial began at the Madison County Courthouse in Wampsville just two days before the defendant's 19th birthday. Bennett is accused of criminally negligent homicide for his role in the death of 8-year-old Mallory Eddy, who was struck by Bennett's car as she stepped off a school bus on May 21, 2004.
Bennett was driving his 1989 Ford Tempo on Peterboro Road through the Town of Smithfield when he came upon a stopped school bus. Unable to stop his car, Bennett drove to the right of the bus, striking Eddy as she exited the door onto the shoulder of the road. Bennett told police that the brakes on his car failed.
Central to this question was whether there was oncoming traffic that would have prevented Bennett from driving to the left of the school bus. Witness testimony varied on this question.
Marshall (the bus driver) testified that the bus was stopped in the southbound lane on Peterboro Road between Stockbridge Falls Road and Creek Road at the time of the accident. To the right of the bus there was a guard rail, and Bennett drove his car between the right side of the bus and the guard rail. Marshall also testified that at no point either directly before or after the accident was there any oncoming traffic in the northbound lane. Marshall estimated Bennett's car was traveling 25 to 30 miles per hour when he passed the school bus and hit Eddy.
He told the court he noticed Bennett's car in one of the bus's mirrors only seconds before it struck the girl. He was not able to shut the door in time to prevent her from exiting the bus, but yelled out "Car" to her.