Government Affairs |
 |
July 2, 1999
Docket Clerk
U.S. DOT Central Dockets Office
Room PL-401
400 Seventh Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20590-0001
RE: Docket Number FTA-99-5082
Dear Docket Clerk:
The American Public Transit Association (APTA) is pleased to respond to
the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) May 3, 1999 Federal Register Notice
requesting comments on a proposed amendment to the definition of tripper service in the
Federal Transit Administration’s school bus regulations. We appreciate the
opportunity to present APTA’s views on this matter.
About APTA
APTA is a nonprofit international association of over 1,250 member
organizations including transit systems; planning, design, construction and finance firms;
product and service providers; academic institutions, and state associations and
departments of transportation. APTA members serve the public interest by providing safe,
efficient and economical transit services and products. Over ninety percent of persons
using public transportation in the United States and Canada are served by APTA members.
Overview
The proposed rule seeks to amend and clarify the definition of tripper
service. Currently, 49 CFR Section 605.3 allows FTA to provide "tripper"
service, which is public transit service modified to accommodate the needs of school
students and personnel. FTA’s school bus regulations derive from 49 USC section
5323(f), which prohibits provision of "schoolbus (sic) transportation that
exclusively transports students and school personnel in competition with a private
schoolbus (sic) operator." In its Notice, FTA notes its concern that the
definition of "tripper service" needs clarification, based on reported practices
of its grantees that FTA believes clouds the public’s perception that the tripper
service provided is genuinely open to the public.
Comments
General
APTA’s most important comment on this rulemaking centers on
promoting safety in the transportation of schoolchildren. Indeed, APTA would seem to be in
accord with FTA on this topic. According to FTA’s Strategic Plan, Strategic Goal One
is to:
Promote the public health and safety by working toward the elimination
of transit-related deaths, injuries, property damage and the improvement of personal
security and property protection.
Transportation safety is the focus of intense scrutiny, as it should
be, and as noted above is a key strategic goal of FTA and the Department of
Transportation. The safety of schoolchildren on the nation’s transportation systems
obviously is a concern to regulators, parents, school districts and the general public. We
urge FTA carefully to balance these safety concerns with its legal mandates as it develops
its final policy on this matter. To the extent that certain practices and vehicle features
help enhance safety for schoolchildren without suggesting to the public that the vehicle
is dedicated exclusively to school bus service, these practices and vehicle features
should not be prohibited by FTA’s regulation.
The preamble to the proposed rule suggests that certain practices
intended to enhance children’s safety on buses (for example, use of swing-arm signs
reading "Caution Students") are objectionable. In our view, the existence of
certain child-related safety features on buses should not necessarily suggest
"exclusive use" of the bus by schoolchildren to the public, especially where the
routes and schedules are made available to the public. In this regard, interpretation of
the school bus rule should not be any more restrictive than interpretations of other FTA
rules, such as its charter service regulation, where FTA has held as public transportation
certain services that may appear to be close to exclusive charter service – for
example, service from collector parking lots to special events. Why should tripper
service, whose routes and schedules are publicly available, and whose service is available
on a regular basis to the general public, be considered exclusive to the transport of
schoolchildren simply by virtue of some accommodation of the bus based on local needs and
circumstances?
Some general accommodation of a bus on a case-by-case basis to enhance
safety should not be determinative of whether a bus is providing exclusive transportation
of students. Schoolchildren are members of the public who are carried by public
transportation. Accommodating the needs of this special group should not be treated any
differently from accommodating the needs of other special groups. Transit agencies
regularly set up routes that cater to commuters, skiers, attendees of special events, etc.
Transit agencies also are known to customize buses for certain riders. For example, many
transit agencies put bicycle racks on buses that travel routes where there are bike trails
or provide buses with under-coach storage for routes used by skiers. So why, on routes
known to be used by schoolchildren, should not transit agencies be allowed, based on local
needs and circumstances, to customize their vehicles to provide enhanced safety for their
young riders?
Picking Up & Discharging Students
Similarly, the proposed rule’s preamble seems to suggest that
picking up and discharging schoolchildren on school property is impermissible under the
statute and current regulations. We disagree. Several agencies currently do pick up and
discharge schoolchildren on school property primarily for obvious safety reasons. Such
decisions relating to where schoolchildren should be picked up and discharged should be
decided at the local level, based on local circumstances and conditions. In short, we urge
FTA to clarify in the final rule and its preamble that picking up and discharging
schoolchildren on school property is permissible so long as the general public has access
to that bus route as well.
Again, this situation is analogous to special treatment received by a
number of groups served by public transport. For example, it is not unusual for a bus to
pick up or discharge passengers at a work site to which the general public does not have
ready access. So long as the general public has access to the rest of the route, FTA
considers the service to be public transportation notwithstanding the unique nature of
that one stop. In the school situation, the public does have ready access to school
grounds in most cases.
Waivers
We also encourage FTA to clarify whether waivers to the school bus
requirements, legitimately obtained from FTA or the U.S. DOT, will be honored under this
amendment. Several transit agencies have incurred significant expenses in reliance on
these waivers, so APTA recommends that existing waivers not be adversely affected by the
passage of this regulatory amendment.
Special Signage
Finally, the proposed rule seems to suggest that special signage would
be required to clarify that a stop is "available to the public." This
requirement would be overly burdensome for many transit properties. First, in many
suburban and rural areas, bus stops on all routes are not all specifically marked. This
rule would impose new and unnecessary costs on properties in these areas. Indeed, some of
these areas honor flag stops, a fact generally known to the public in those areas. In
addition, particularly in suburban and rural areas, requiring riders, including
schoolchildren, to walk further on roads with inadequate pedestrian enhancements just so
they may reach a "marked stop" decreases safety for everyone. In short, the stop
should be identified as are all others in the area covered by the transit system.
Conclusion
APTA appreciates the opportunity for an ongoing partnership with FTA to
make the adjustments needed to improve the school bus regulation. Again, we are pleased to
have the opportunity to present these views and stand ready to help FTA implement its
regulations. For further information, please contact Kristin O’Grady at (202)
898-4108, or e-mail address kogrady@apta.com.
Sincerely yours,
William W. Millar
President
WWM/cmb
Some of these pages may include links to documents in the Adobe PDF format. Please download the Adobe PDF reader if you have not already done so.
