National Academies Press: OpenBook

Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies (2013)

Chapter: Chapter One - Introduction

« Previous: Summary
Page 3
Suggested Citation:"Chapter One - Introduction ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22485.
×
Page 3
Page 4
Suggested Citation:"Chapter One - Introduction ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22485.
×
Page 4
Page 5
Suggested Citation:"Chapter One - Introduction ." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2013. Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22485.
×
Page 5

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

3 the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) and available through the Transportation Safety Institute (TSI), as “Any non-driving activity a person engages in that has the potential to distract him or her from the primary task of driving and increase the risk of crashing.” This definition encompasses any activities, not limited to talking or text- ing on mobile phones, which take an operator’s attention away from operating the vehicle. However, the FTA’s initial efforts to address distracted driving have focused primarily on the newest and most prevalent factor in distracted driving incidents: talking or texting on mobile phones. PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND The objective of this study is to provide public transit agen- cies with information about bus operator distraction policies and outcomes in order to assist them in developing and evalu- ating their own policies and programs to address and prevent distracted driving incidents. The discussion of effective safety practices for address- ing distracted driving begins with an understanding of all of the factors contributing to distracted driving behaviors. Table 1 comes from NHTSA’s National Center for Statis tics and Analysis’ report DOT HS 811 379, Distracted Driving 2009. The table lists attributes of driver distractions from the General Estimates System (GES) of the National Automo- tive Sampling System (NASS). Any effective federal, state, or agency-level plan to prevent distracted driving incidents would have to address most if not all of these factors. These factors can be grouped into three broader categories of driver distractions: visual, manual, and cognitive. Visual distractions refer to incidents when a driver takes his or her eyes off the road for any period of time. Mechanical distrac- tions occur when the driver’s hands have been taken off the wheel to attempt to perform another function or task. Cogni- tive distractions refer to any situation in which a driver is not focusing on driving, but is preoccupied or distracted by con- versation with another occupant of the vehicle or with some- one over a phone, or by external elements such as the weather, the schedule, or pre- or post-driving activities. The fact that texting or emailing while driving could be included in all three categories emphasizes why they are potentially so dangerous. In the initial panel discussion for this project, it was deter- mined that the study would include all sizes and types of pub- In May 2011, a video of a transit bus driver in Rome, Italy, was picked up by a number of major media outlets and popped up all over the Internet. The video clearly showed the driver talk- ing on a hand-held cell phone and using the keypad and screen of a second phone, all while steering only with his elbows. The posting by Italian newspaper La Repubblica Roma went viral within days, and was often accompanied by comic or sarcastic commentary. Two seminal accidents further illuminated the issue of distracted operating behaviors in the United States and spe- cifically in the public transit sector. In September 2008, a Metrolink commuter rail train ran a red signal in Chatsworth, California, and collided with a Union Pacific freight train, which resulted in 25 fatalities and more than 100 injuries. The NTSB concluded that the collision and derailment was caused by the commuter train engineer’s prohibited use of a wireless device while operating the train. The NTSB reported that the engineer failed to respond appropriately to a red signal at Control Point Topanga (1) because he was engaged in text messaging at the time. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Green Line train 3612 struck the rear of a standing westbound train in a tunnel near the underground Government Center station in May 2009. Following the investigation, the NTSB determined that the probable cause was the failure of the pilot operator of the striking train to observe and appropriately respond to the red signal aspect at 744A (2, p. 10) because the operator was engaged in the prohibited use of a wireless device, specifi- cally text messaging, that distracted him from his duties. In 2009, U.S.DOT Secretary Ray LaHood testified before a Senate committee (1, pp. 1–4) that distracted driving had become a deadly epidemic, and that research indicated that without action the problem would only get worse. In the same year, the U.S.DOT held the first summit specifically devoted to the topic of distracted driving and launched a new website, Distraction.gov, to address this epidemic. A Presidential Exec- utive Order (2, pp. 1–3) that went into effect on December 30, 2009, prohibited all federal employees from text messaging when driving government-owned vehicles or when driving privately-owned vehicles while on official government busi- ness. On the Distraction.gov website, the U.S.DOT defines distracted driving as “any activity that could divert a person’s attention away from the primary task of driving.” Within the public transit sector, the FTA has further defined distracted driving in a training course (3, p. 6) developed by chapter one INTRODUCTION

4 lic transit bus operations, including paratransit, fixed route, bus rapid transit, commuter bus, rural, and on-demand. Con- sequently, a variety of agencies, ranging in size from 12,000 operators to those with fewer than 70, was selected for the survey. Specific topics discussed in the initial project confer- ence call included the following: • A broad consensus definition of distraction that includes electronic devices as well as other personal activities (i.e., eating, grooming, reading) and external factors; • Existing and proposed agency policies as well as real- world enforcement efforts and consequences/disciplinary actions associated with violations and evaluative mea- sure to determine the overall effectiveness of the policies; • Behavioral science research that has been conducted specifically focusing on distractions in a bus operator’s environment and the operator’s ability to safely mitigate these distractions; • Employee training and education programs on address- ing distractions; • Programs, technological advancements, and/or policies addressing external factors ranging from dense or erratic pedestrian behaviors in urban areas to deer and other wildlife encounters in rural areas; • Specific measures, including an assessment of operator work areas and duties, to address on-board devices, such as mobile data terminals, radios, destination or stop indi- cators, and visual and audible vehicle status warnings; • Programs and/or research on reversing cultural trends, such as the increasing use of electronic devices when operating vehicles; • Communications and/or education programs for the gen- eral public and transit riders to inform them of the hazards of distracted driving and of interfering with or distracting on-duty bus operators; • Technological applications of signal blocking or phone- disabling software and/or hardware. STUDY METHODOLOGY Information for this synthesis was gathered through a lit erature review, a survey, and the development of case examples. Literature Review As part of the initial review, a literature review was conducted to identify relevant documents and resources. The search revealed a range of documents, including federal documents, state laws and accident statistics, agency regulations, public transit distracted driving incident reports in the media, aca- demic and industry-based studies, recommended practices, and training materials. A complete listing and brief descrip- tion of the materials identified in this process are included in chapter two. Survey A survey questionnaire was developed regarding transit agency policies and practices designed to reduce the number of distracted driving incidents. A draft set of questions was Attribute Examples By other occupant Distracted by occupant in driver’s vehicle; includes conversing with or looking at other occupant By moving object in vehicle Distracted by moving object in driver’s vehicle; includes dropped object, moving pet, insect, cargo While talking or listening to cellular phone Talking or listening on cellular phone While dialing cellular phone Dialing or text messaging on cell phone or any wireless e-mail device Other cellular phone-related (2007 and later) Used when the police report indicated the driver is distracted from the driving task due to cellular phone involvement, but none of the specified codes are applicable (reaching for cellular phone, etc.). This code is also applied when specific details regarding cellular phone distraction/usage are not provided. While adjusting climate controls Adjusting air conditioner or heater While adjusting radio, cassette, or CD Adjusting radio, cassette, or CD in vehicle While using other devices/controls integral to vehicle Adjusting windows, door locks, rear view manual, seat, steering wheel, adjusting seat belts, etc. While using or reaching for device/object brought into vehicle Radar detector, CDs, razors, portable CD player, headphones, cigarette lighter, etc. Distracted by outside person, object, or event Animals on roadside or previous crash; do not use when driver has recognized object/event and driver has taken evasive action. Eating or drinking Eating or drinking or actively related to these actions Smoking-related Smoking or involved in activity related to smoking Distraction/inattention, details unknown Distraction and/or inattention are noted on the PAR but the specifics are unknown. Inattentive or lost in thought Driver is thinking about items other than the driving task (e.g., daydreaming). Other distraction Details regarding the driver’s distraction are known but none of the specified codes are applicable. GES = General Estimates System. TABLE 1 ATTRIBUTES FOR “DRIVER DISTRACTED BY . . . ” IN THE GES DATABASE

5 sub mitted to the panel and, following its input, was final- ized and sent electronically to 39 individuals, representing 35 public tran sit agencies. Thirty-six participants, repre- senting 33 agencies, submitted a completed survey (a 92% response rate). Four of the initial 39 transit systems asked to participate were represented by both a management-level employee from operations, administration, or safety, and an official from the labor union local that represents the bus operators in the agency. As such, the number of participants in the survey and the number of agencies represented in the survey will not be equal. The goal of reaching out to a small sample of labor representatives was to survey their knowledge and perceptions of their respective systems’ rules, policies, and processes. Three of the four systems represented by both manage- ment and labor union officials were ultimately selected as case examples. This decision was based not just on the fact that there were two participants from each of these systems but that the similarity in responses between labor officials and management representatives was greater than 90%, demon- strating an effective process of communicating policies, and to some degree, processes to the workforce. The findings of the survey are discussed in chapter three and the complete survey instrument is presented in Appendix A. Case Examples The case examples highlight New York City Transit (NYCT), Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), and Metro Transit in Minneapolis–St. Paul. Each of these examples presents a more detailed description of the system’s practices in deterring distracted driving. The examples were conducted through phone interviews and a review of agency documents, including their policies pertaining to mobile phone use/possession and other distracted driving factors. ORGANIZATION OF REPORT The report is organized in a way that reflects the three phases of review that were conducted in the study. Specific catego- ries of information or data found within each phase are further broken out in each chapter. Specific charts, tables, and graphs salient to the primary focus of the study are included within the body of the report. Tangential information supporting the objective of the report is presented in appendices. The inten- tion of organizing the review and the report in this manner is to provide the reader with a synthesis of the current practices for deterring distracted driving incidents in the public transit bus sector in a user-friendly format that will initiate and support future in-depth research on the topic.

Next: Chapter Two - Literature Review »
Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Synthesis 108: Transit Bus Operator Distraction Policies is designed to help transit agencies develop policies and programs to address and prevent distracted driving incidents.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!