School Transportation News
(STN Podcast E254) Gus, the Talking Safety Bus: Supporting Educational Access & Student Safety 15 April 2025 at 23:10

(STN Podcast E254) Gus, the Talking Safety Bus: Supporting Educational Access & Student Safety

By: Claudia Newton

15 April 2025 at 23:10

Breakdowns of the federal Driving Forward Act’s impact on school bus driver training, new student transportation topics being covered by the National Congress on School Transportation writing committee, and doing what’s best for the children.

Monique Jackson, area manager for Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools in North Carolina, discusses her passion for education access, her children’s book “Gus, the Talking Safety Bus,” and teaching students school bus safety.

Federal Legislation Reintroduced to Permanently Extend ‘Under-the-Hood’ Exemption

School Transportation News

By: Ryan Gray

11 April 2025 at 22:50

Bills in the U.S. House and Senate seek to permanently allow states and local governments to bypass a requirement that school bus driver applicants include engine component identification when performing the pre-trip vehicle inspection skills testing necessary to obtain their commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs).

The National School Transportation Association (NSTA) successfully asked the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) in January 2022 for a three-month waiver of the so-called “under-the-hood” inspection test used to determine a school bus driver’s familiarity with engines and related components for noting potential hazards prior to starting a school bus route.

That particular skills test is mainly designed for long-haul truckers who might need to make minor repairs on the road. That is not the case for school bus drivers. Instead, they normally call dispatch after a breakdown, and a technician with a substitute bus is sent to the scene so school bus driver and students can proceed to school sites or afternoon bus stops.

NSTA Executive Director Curt Macysyn wrote at the time that the engine compartment inspection test presents a “significant obstacle” to applicants getting in their CDL and school bus companies from quickly hiring otherwise qualified drivers to address staff shortages.

FMCSA approved a three-month waiver and followed with two more. NSTA asked for a five-year waiver, but FMCSA responded with two, two-year waivers, the most recent announced in December to run through the end of 2026. NSTA said contractor members have hired 1,200 new school bus driver applicants as a result of the waiver.

Rep. John Carter of Texas, who said he drove school buses while in law school, discussed his recent reintroduction of H.R. 2360, The Driving Forward Act, to make the exemption permanent during a dinner last month at NSTA’s “Bus-in” lobbying event in Washington, D.C. A companion bipartisan bill, S. 1284, was introduced last week by Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas and Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin.

Carter’s first attempt at passing the Driving Forward Act, introduced last April, failed to make it out of the House transportation and infrastructure committee. The legislation seeks to permanently extend the exemption from the “under the hood” engine compartment portion of the pre-trip vehicle inspection skills test required for obtaining CDL. This exemption is expected to make it easier for individuals to become school bus drivers, helping to alleviate the ongoing driver shortage.

In addition to making the skills test exemption permanent, the Driving Forward Act would require participating states to submit annual reports on the number of drivers licensed under the exemption over a six-year period. This data would help demonstrate success in addressing the driver shortage, the bill notes.

During the Capitol Hill Bus-in March 26-27, NSTA said school bus company members held 153 meetings with congressional offices and secured additional support for the Driving Forward Act.

“The path to getting an under-the-hood testing exemption for school bus drivers has been a long journey, but with the introduction of the Driving Forward Act in both the House and Senate, we are poised to achieve final success,” said Macysyn in a statement.

Not a ‘Silver Bullet?’

NSTA said 13 states have adopted the under-the-hood exemption. But some of those states are either no longer utilizing the exemption or questioned if the waiver is worth the effort.

Texas last year switched to the FMCSA’s new voluntary modernized CDL skills test developed by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, which was approved in August 2022. Rather than require driver applicants determine a driver applicant’s ability to identify all under-the-hood engine components, the modernized skills test for the front of any commercial vehicle including a school bus checks fluid levels and for air leaks.

Anthony Shields, director of transportation for San Marcos Consolidated Independent School District near Austin, Texas, said the modernized skills test makes it easier for applicants to test under the hood by utilizing skills cards that don’t provide answers to the applicants but instead “jolt their brains.”

“We didn’t find value in [the under-the-hood exemption], It didn’t really make it simpler,” commented Shields, before adding, ”It’s a good start to make changes for a school-bus-only CDL.”

Another state to adopt the under-the-hood skills test waiver is New York. At a recent meeting with the state DMV, the New York Association for Pupil Transportation shared very few driver candidates were opting for the waiver.

“I know some driver candidates have taken advantage of the waiver, but I don’t believe it is catching on,” commented David Christopher, NYAPT’s executive director. “The issue: It is a temporary license at this point, and it restricts the driver to in-state driving only. We have never believed this would encourage new drivers to the business. Most people who apply to drive a bus have no idea what the pre-trip entails. Therefore, the under-the-hood requirement would not seem to deter them because they are not aware of what is even required.”

He added that school district members have relayed that if new applicants are trained correctly, the under-the-hood portion of the test is not a problem.

In the end, Christopher said NYAPT supports the waiver, but with a caveat.

“If it helps a district get bus drivers, that would be great,” he added. “We don’t think it is the silver bullet that will solve the problem.”

David Johnson, executive director of the Iowa Pupil Transportation Association, also weighed in.

“My understanding is the process the state [Department of Transportation] had to go through to get the waiver was a bit of a nightmare, almost to the point where if they knew it was going to be such a hassle they may not have done it. That’s just my opinion, but that’s how it sounds,” he explained. “I have not heard of any districts that are saying, ‘Hey, this is making it easier to get drivers.’ What I have heard is districts [are] still having the under-the-hood stuff as a part of their in-house training, as they still want them to have that knowledge and check those components. I personally do not agree with the waiver. I think drivers need to know what to be looking for under the hood.”

The post Federal Legislation Reintroduced to Permanently Extend ‘Under-the-Hood’ Exemption appeared first on School Transportation News.

School Transportation News
(STN Podcast E253) Conference Conversations: Tariffs, STN EXPO East Motivation & Minimum Driver Age 8 April 2025 at 23:21

(STN Podcast E253) Conference Conversations: Tariffs, STN EXPO East Motivation & Minimum Driver Age

School Transportation News

By: Claudia Newton

8 April 2025 at 23:21

Tony, Taylor and Ryan cover recent news headlines, analyze federal tariff and funding updates, and recap the action and takeaways from STN EXPO East in Charlotte, North Carolina, last month.

Hear thoughts from Joshua Hinerman, director of transportation for Robertson County Schools in Tennessee, as well as several attendees of STN EXPO East, on the starting ages and appropriate training for school bus drivers.

NASDPTS Publishes Paper Espousing Safety of School Buses Over Alternative Transportation

School Transportation News

By: Ruth Ashmore

23 January 2025 at 00:43

With the increased usage of non-yellow vehicles transporting students, the National Association of State Directors of Pupil Transportation Services (NASDPTS) released a position paper that stated in no uncertain terms, vans and other alternative transportation vehicles should not be used in place of school buses.

“Using vehicles other than school buses compromises student safety and heightens the potential for disastrous crashes with student injuries and fatalities,” stated the guidance issued Wednesday. “Thus, alternative transportation should be avoided except when completely necessary to meet specific students’ school transportation needs and when proper oversight and safety regulations are established.”

Still, NASPDTS recognized that many school districts nationwide are actively using vans and alternative transportation services. NASDPTS said the the purpose of the document is to serve as a guide in response to the “ever-expanding” need for alternative transportation services for student populations and as a resource for districts looking to utilize non- yellow vehicles.

The paper referenced the congressional School Bus Safety Amendments of 1974 [Title II – School Bus Safety of Public Law 93-492] of that resulted in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) issuance of safety standards that applied to all school buses built starting in April 1977. It also created regulations for school bus driver training and licensing to ensure that school buses would be a safer means of transportation than a standard passenger vehicle.

NASPDTS also quoted a 2002 NHTSA research document on School Bus Crashworthiness. “American students are nearly eight times safer riding in a school bus than with their own parents or guardians in cars. The fatality rate for school buses is only 0.2 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT) compared to 1.5 fatalities per 100 million VMT for cars,” the report reads in part.

NASDPTS listed multiple safety features of the yellow school bus, including its high visibility iconic yellow color, compartmentalization of students in padded and high seat backs, large vehicle size that reduces crash forces on passengers, emergency exits, rollover protection, child restraint systems, stop arms, and other FMVSS standards that increase the safety of students onboard the bus.

“According to NHTSA, these standards and regulations are why students are 70 times more likely to get to school safely when taking a school bus instead of a car,” stated the report, noting the safety records of school buses versus other vehicles. “The impressive safety standards indicate that the school bus should always be the first option for transporting students, with every effort to make that form of transportation occur.”

A definition of alternative transportation was “defined as the transportation of students in any vehicle that is not a Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS)-defined school bus, Multifunction School Activity Bus (MFSAB), Commercial Motor Coach, or Transit Bus defined by the Federal Transit administration (FTA).” The position paper noted that the increased demand for these van and passenger car vehicles is due in part to high demand for transporting students protected by McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act and students with disabilities who have individualized education programs, the ever-present driver shortage, and “less stringent” driver and vehicle requirements. To meet this demand, a growing market has emerged.

As also noted by the National Association for Pupil Transportation’s statement on this topic last year, NASDPTS expressed concern about the lack of safety requirements for alternative vehicles as well as the individuals driving them. These concerns include drivers not being required to possess a CDL, which could then enable them to bypass federally required criminal background checks, regular physical fitness examinations, and annual alcohol and drug testing, extensive training, certification and “continuous reviews for disqualifying driving infractions.”

Questions also arise such as are vans being serviced regularly? Are they outfitted with the latest safety equipment? Are they undergoing similar vehicle inspections as school buses?

The guidance for drivers of alternative transportation vehicles included recommended background checks, child protective clearances, emergency training procedures, vetted license and driving history credentials, annual training, drug and alcohol testing, regular physicals to ensure medical fitness to transport students, restriction of use of mobile devices, special training if transporting a student with an Individual Education Plan (IEP). Vehicles themselves should be equipped with signage to identify it as a student transportation vehicle, be regularly inspected to ensure proper functionality and safety and include necessary safety equipment.

Federal laws clarify that a vehicle transporting 11 or more persons, including the driver, is classified as a bus and then as a school bus, “if it is used, or intended for use, in transporting students to and from school or school-related activities.” The paper continued that federal law also prohibits school districts and county and state governments from renting, leasing or purchasing new 11-15 passenger vans that don’t meet FMVSS school bus or multifunction school activity bus standards for the purpose of transporting students to and from school or school related activities.

While the position paper looks to state and local government to regulate the use of a vehicle after its sold, it notes examples of van manufacturers providing written notification to their dealers on the prohibition of selling such vehicles to school districts. In some cases, a federal certification label of “Not School Bus” is affixed. NASDPTS also noted that this regulation does not currently extend to used vans.

The paper continued that vehicle dealers might be ignorant of these regulations or ignore them. Either way, a “non-conforming” full-sized van that has not been built to meet FMVSS school bus safety standards and is involved in a crash could leave the operating school district or transportation company liable for damages and could impact insurance coverage, depending on the policy. NASPDTS also noted that NHTSA has investigated and subsequently fined dealers that it found violated the law and sold vans to school districts, an action NASDPTS said it supports and encourages people to report sale or lease violations.

A letter from NHTSA and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to chief state highway officials on Dec. 2, 2010, included observations on the lack of certain safety features on vans, as well as recommended alerts on safety related hazards to be sent to owners of passenger vans and vehicle inspectors.

“In addition, we would like to take this opportunity to remind all [state] commissioners that pre-primary, elementary and secondary schools should not use 12 or 15-passenger vans for transporting students because they do not provide the same level of safety as school buses meeting NHTSA’s safety standards,” the letter stated.

While NASDPTS recognized that a school bus may not always be the most feasible method of transportation, it emphasized the importance of preventing the use of non-conforming vans through strict state requirements that vans meet school bus structural and safety standards.

The NASDPTS paper included an analysis of state laws regarding the use of alternative vehicles. A survey to all 50 states asked if the state has “school transportation laws regarding the use of 12 and 15- passenger vans for travel to and from school?” Twelve states said no, with the rest saying yes. The survey also asked if there were state laws regarding the use of 12- and 15- passenger vans for travel to and from school-related events, to which 13 states said no.

NASDPTS added that states should “enact regulatory measures to enforce compliance with the revised statutes.” They also noted that school districts are sometimes unaware of these regulations and that a combined effort between “state and local student transportation officials, state associations, insurance companies, van manufacturers, automobile dealers, and rental car companies” to inform districts on laws regarding the purchase of vans to transport students as well as safety liabilities is recommended.

NASDPTS President Mike Stier thanked President-Elect Tyler Bryan and his committee for their extensive work on the paper.

The post NASDPTS Publishes Paper Espousing Safety of School Buses Over Alternative Transportation appeared first on School Transportation News.

Normal view