The ambitious and game-changing federal plan to improve motorcoach safety in the U.S. has won broad support from the industry, despite the prospect of additional costs and new regulations.

Trade groups, safety consultants, operators and others say they like most of what they see in the Motorcoach Safety Action Plan, which contains such measures as mandatory passenger seatbelts, a ban on texting by drivers, and the increased use of high-tech safety systems.

"While the devil is always in the details, it looks like they got it right," said Ken Presley, vice president of the United Motorcoach Association. "We now have two decades of crash studies and we must apply those lessons in a comprehensive approach to prevent future tragedies."

The safety plan was ordered by U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood in April. LaHood asked the agencies within his department to come up with a fresh study of motorcoach safety following several high-profile fatal accidents.

"Our hat is off to Secretary LaHood and his team," said Presley, adding that UMA is eager to continue working with federal regulators and others to make motorcoach travel even safer than it is today.

The American Bus Association praised the report as well, saying it supports many of the proposed initiatives and looks forward to working on the issues with the secretary and the federal agencies.

"ABAs position has always been that safety is our top priority," said Peter J. Pantuso ABA president and chief executive. "Government data show motorcoaches to be the safest form of surface transportation, but we are committed to making the safest even safer."

A smart approach

Steve Kepler, interim executive director of the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance, called the report clear and comprehensive and said he was generally pleased with the initiatives.

"Most pleasing, though, is that it was based on science and that they looked at the data, and thats very important," he said.

The motorcoach industry has been critical of politicians and others for sometimes proposing new safety standards without first developing credible studies to show the need for them.

"Overall, the report is a step in the right direction. Much work will need to be done and many agencies will need to work together for the safety of the public. We look forward to the support of the DOT," said Michelle A. Silvestro, assistant vice president at National Interstate Insurance Co.

Matt Daecher of Daecher Consulting Group, a leading motorcoach industry safety consulting firm, emphasized that based on past accidents and the results of bus crash tests, some of the many regulations proposed in the report certainly are worthwhile.

Operator support

Motorcoach operators, who would bear the brunt of the new expenses and the new regulations, were equally supportive.

"I think it will increase the professionalism of our industry and I am all for everything we can do to raise the level of professionalism," suggested Godfrey LeBron, vice president of Paradise Trailways in Hicksville, N.Y., and chairman of UMA.

Presley suggested that if the safety measures are advanced, they will help set the direction of the industry in improving safety for years to come, noting that the Passenger Carrier Safety Division of the FMCSA currently has a great team with tremendous depth, focus and resolve.

"One thing seems clear to me, the motorcoach in the near future will likely be very different than todays motorcoach, and so will the operating companies," he said. "The business, compliance and execution knowledge to operate a motorcoach company is already increasing significantly and will continue to do so."

Although there was much praise for the steps the government plans to take to improve safety, there also were many concerns.

Kepler said he worries about the regulatory agencies being able to secure the funding to carry out many of the proposals.

"It is critical that they now seek the resources to get it done. They have to make sure the departments have the appropriate level of resources internally to get it done and that the states be given the necessary resources to handle the increased inspections and enforcement," he said.

Costly solutions

Presley said he becomes concerned when he sees expensive technology, such as electronic onboard recording devices, proposed as solutions.

"Hours-of-service monitoring is not near as critical to our industry as fatigue and time management, combined with medically fit drivers," he said. "But I am encouraged this plan recognizes those issues as well."

Daecher expressed some apprehension about the creation of a customer-complaint database.

"Without an obvious way to judge accuracy of such complaints, access to this database must be limited to enforcement and carrier personnel," he added. "Complaints must be properly monitored and registered to remove the possibility and consequences of false reporting if the database is used for any enforcement input."

Although the cost to the industry associated with many of the proposals was not addressed in the report, some in the industry raised the issue.

Dichotomy feared

Daecher warned that the additional cost to carriers that operate by the book will increase the cost gap between them and carriers that operate illegally.

"This cost gap will make it more enticing for carriers to not meet some or all of the regulatory requirements. Therefore, mechanisms to more effectively discover and revoke the operating authority of illegal operators is necessary. To achieve this, additional funding and manpower for enforcement purposes will be necessary," he said.

He noted, too, that cost also could hamper initiatives in the report that call for more emphasis on drivers with sleep disorders.

"The large question which remains is how the cost of meeting any proposed regulations regarding testing and treatment pertaining to sleep disorders is managed between those involved," he said. "Carriers may likely be unwilling to foot the cost of testing due to the transiency of drivers, and many potential or existing drivers would not likely have insurance coverage to pay for such testing."

Kepler said he was disappointed the report did not include incentives to offset some of the costs associated with many of the recommendations.

"We had hoped they would have included seeking tax incentives for the industry to help defray the costs of some of the safety improvements that were suggested," he said. "We would like to see tax credits for coaches, trucks, school buses and even transit buses for installing advanced safety systems. But that was missing."

Silver lining?

LeBron, however, suggested that some of the costly recommendations could prove to be a financial benefit. "We keep putting more computer equipment on board and I think that will save money in the long run," he said. "Onboard recorders, for instance, can help with payroll, human resource issues and insurance claims and that should be a help."

Other suggestions were offered as well.

Pantuso stressed that structural changes to motorcoaches should all be done at one time and not piecemeal. "You cant change the windows one year, the roof design the next year and the emergency egress a year later," he said.

Daecher called for regulators to consider driver age issues. "Age-related risk factors should be considered to further insure older drivers are safe or at least to pinpoint any limitations they may have in driving a motorcoach or other passenger transportation vehicle," he offered.

Silvestro said she would like to see accident event recorders be a part of a rulemaking procedure. "AERs are a tool that not only monitor but can change driver behavior and make them safer drivers," she said.

Despite optimism by many in the industry that federal regulations will move the initiatives quickly and successfully, Daecher hinted that the rulemaking schedule just might be too ambitious for everyone.

"Even if the FMCSA and DOT stick to it, it will be interesting to see if other related agencies involved in the rulemaking process are as diligent," he said.