WASHINGTON - The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has taken a big step toward resolving two long-pending motorcoach safety issues that were the focus of investigations and recommendations by the National Transportation Safety Board.
The FMCSA convened a two-day workshop last month to thrash out whether it should mandate safety briefings for motorcoach passengers and whether it should publish a booklet to educate drivers about the proper use of retarders and engine brakes.
After listening to a cross-section of safety experts at the workshop, the FMCSA tacitly agreed that a rule requiring a passenger safety briefing would be impossible to enforce and therefore not workable, and it would take a different approach in dealing with the retarder and engine brake education issue.
Attendees at the workshop included representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration, the NTSB, coach manufacturers, the FMCSA, the United Motorcoach Association and the American Bus Association, plus safety directors for motorcoach companies.
The FMCSA, UMA and the ABA worked for months researching the two issues and creating the list of attendees who had the necessary experience and expertise to address the issues realistically, said Norman Littler, senior vice president for government and industry relations at UMA.
Following its investigation of a crash that occurred near Stoney Creek, Va., in July 1997, the NTSB issued a recommendation calling for mandatory passenger safety briefings. In the crash, one young passenger drowned and 34 children were hurt, many badly.
The NTSB, in its formal report, identified the lack of a passenger safety briefing as a contributing factor to post-crash confusion among passengers.
The safety board recommended the FMCSA, UMA and ABA work to develop a passenger safety briefing protocol. It also proposed the FMCSA consider making passenger briefings mandatory through a rulemaking.
The group attending the workshop reached a consensus that a rulemaking was neither desirable nor prudent due to the near impossibility of enforcement.
It was the group's recommendation that the best way to deal with the issue is to have the industry create the message and urge a "suggested practices" approach. It also was agreed that industry insurance companies need to take an active role in the delivery of the program if there's to be any hope of success.
The FMCSA will review the results at a future date, and it reserves the right to initiate a rulemaking if it is determined to be warranted.
The second day of the workshop dealt with a recommendation the NTSB developed after its investigation of the December 1999, crash of a tour bus near Canon City, Colo. In that incident, the driver died along with two teenage passengers.
The bus skidded off a steep embankment in icy conditions, rolled at least 1.5 times and came to rest on its roof. During the investigation it was determined the driver had the hydraulic drive-line retarder engaged during the descent even though operation of the retarder in slippery road conditions is not recommended.
The NTSB concluded the driver had not had sufficient training on the proper use of the retarder and recommended that the FMCSA, UMA and the ABA create and disseminate a brochure to carriers on this issue.
After lengthy discussion, the workshop group decided the best way to deal with the issue was to develop a list of topics and suggestions that were necessary to provide the message and have the FMCSA contract the program out to a third party for completion.
Additional meetings involving the FMCSA, UMA and ABA to flesh out and execute the recommendations are expected.