Progress on bus safety

Wednesday, Nov. 18, 2009 | 2:05 a.m.

Of the dozens of motor coach crashes throughout the country in recent years, one of the more terrible occurred in January 2008. A motor coach traveling at night was descending a dry, rural road in Utah when it struck a guardrail. The bus veered sideways, slipped down a 40-foot embankment and overturned onto drainage rocks — which tore the roof off — before landing on its wheels.

The charter bus’s 52 passengers were returning to Arizona from a Colorado ski trip. Nine were killed and 43 were injured. The National Transportation Safety Board, an independent federal agency, released a report on the accident this year. It found that the “probable cause ... was the driver’s diminished alertness due to inadequate sleep ... The driver’s state of fatigue affected his awareness of his vehicle’s excessive speed and lane position ...”

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood ordered a review of commercial bus safety after receiving this report. Although we wish he had included school buses as well, the review was long overdue. The Associated Press says the safety board has been recommending since 1968 that buses be equipped with better safety features.

On Monday the Obama administration said it would propose new safety requirements for buses. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, part of the Transportation Department, has made several recommendations, including: develop performance requirements for bus roofs by Dec. 31; issue a rule early next year on installation of seat belts; require monitoring devices that can detect when a driver has been at the wheel too long; and prohibit texting by drivers and limit their use of cell phones.

The traffic safety administration also recommends going after bus operators whose companies have been shut down because of safety violations, but who then start new bus companies that have new names.

Past efforts in Congress to pass a federal law based on recommended safety features have been thwarted by bus industry lobbyists, who argue that the cost would outweigh the benefits. The statistics, however, tell another story.