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.
Related: TSD Panel Offers Necessary Considerations When Selecting Alternative Transportation
Related: January 2025 Magazine Digital Edition
Related: Delaware’s Bryan Named President-Elect of NASDPTS
Related: NAPT Statement Provides Recommendations for Alternative Transportation
