Bay Terrace Transportation

Safe, Dependable Transportation

20 Haven Avenue

Port Washington, NY 11050

Phone: (516) 883-6711

Fax: (516) 883-3544

I am writing in support of Docket No. FTA-2008-0044, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking on FTA\'s School Bus Operations Regulations

I am a business owner on Long Island. My company provides school bus
service for 100 students. I employ 10 workers, most of which are school
bus drivers. We have been in the school transportation business for over
30 years.

Bay Terrace Transportation fully supports FTA's proposed revisions to
the school bus regulation and its efforts to clarify Congress's intent.
Federal funding for public transportation was never intended to support
student transportation. Congress, through its directives to NHTSA and
FMCSA, has made it clear that it considers transportation of students a
specialized service demanding vehicles constructed to higher safety
standards than transit buses and drivers trained to higher safety
standards than transit drivers. In addition, Congress recognized that
federal funding gives transit grantees an unfair advantage over private
school bus operators, an advantage that school districts find hard to
resist.

We applaud FTA's definition of "exclusively" as it refers to school bus
operations. For too long transit agencies have run routes to and from
school that serve no passengers other than students, but because the
agencies claim that they are open to anyone, they are not considered
"exclusive" transportation. This is a sham that everyone involved is
aware of, and we are pleased that FTA proposes to put an end to it.

We also support the elimination of "tripper service." The term has
become an umbrella to cover any service provided for schools, not just
the fare subsidy originally intended. FTA's proposal to allow exemptions
for fare subsidies, additional capacity, and minor route deviations
provides transits with the flexibility they need to accommodate students
as part of the general riding public.

The proposed "Exception" process for transits that believe there is no
private operator able to provide the service is a vast improvement over
the current notice requirement. But we do not think that restricting
responses to private operators already located in the transit service
area is necessary or in the best interests of the school districts. Our
company started as one, small operation in Huntington Station, but we
have grown because we were able to establish new facilities to serve
school districts outside our original community. We now operate in a
number of different locations, providing superior transportation at a
reasonable rate and in conformance with school bus safety standards.
School districts benefit when companies compete; there is no competition
if only the local company is eligible to provide the service.

In looking at a potential new service area, however, we would need more
than thirty days to determine whether we could establish a viable
operation. It generally takes us 90 days to work up a proposal for new
service. We recommend that FTA increase the time period for a response
from private operators to a Request for an Exception from 30 days to 90
days.

Though we agree with most of the NPRM, we object to the proposal to
grandfather indefinitely transit operations where there is no charge to
the school district. That proposal is entirely inconsistent with the
message FTA sends throughout the NPRM: Congress intended that
federally-subsidized transit agencies should not compete with private
school bus operators. Private operators certainly can't compete with
free service, so we are hard-pressed to understand how allowing transits
to continue operating illegal school bus routes simply because the
school district does not directly pay for the service fits into that
message. This grandfather clause, in fact, is in direct conflict with
the rest of the NPRM and with the statute, and should be deleted.

In closing, we would like to make one further point. Transit agencies
that take over school bus routes formerly operated by the school
district engage in school bus operations the same as if they had taken
over routes formerly operated by private companies. The service is no
different; but instead of displacing private operators, they simply
bypass private operators. Under the proposed rule, transits must apply
for an Exception to provide that service. But there are many examples of
this kind of school bus operation occurring now where the transits
contend that because no private operator was involved, the service is
legitimate. We dispute that assertion, and appreciate FTA's efforts to
restrain this activity through the proposed rule.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to comment on the proposal. If
you have any questions, please contact me.

> Sincerely,
>
> ![](media/image1.jpeg){width="2.9715277777777778in"
> height="0.8590277777777777in"}
>
> Kevin Kalberer
>
> Vice President / General Manager