Onboard Camera Applications for Buses (2016)

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.

CONTENTS 1 SUMMARY 3 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background, 3 Audience, 3 Study Methodology, 3 Literature Review, 3 Survey, 4 Case Examples, 4 Content, 4 5 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 7 CHAPTER THREE SURVEY RESULTS Respondents, 7 Functions, 7 Technical Capabilities and Integrations, 10 Maintenance, 12 Legal and Labor Relations Issues, 12 Training, 13 Financial Impacts, 13 14 CHAPTER FOUR CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNED Challenges Overcome, 14 Lessons Learned, 14 16 CHAPTER FIVE CASE EXAMPLES Case Example: Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, 16 Case Example: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, 17 21 CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH 23 REFERENCES 24 BIBLIOGRAPHY 25 APPENDIX A SURVEY RESPONSES 70 APPENDIX B LIST OF PARTICIPATING TRANSIT AGENCIES Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.

SUMMARY ONBOARD CAMERA APPLICATIONS FOR BUSES Transit agencies across the country of every size are successfully using onboard camera applications for their buses for safety and security of bus operators and passengers, and they are reaping financial benefits while doing so. This synthesis provides practical examples of the technologies and opportunities currently in operation at large, medium, and small transit agencies across the country. It focuses on their collection of the media images, what they use them for, and how they keep up with the fast advances of surveillance technology. The study was undertaken to explore the current technologies, research, and opportuni- ties, and to provide examples of how surveillance systems are used to improve operations, safety, security, training, and customer satisfaction. Thirty-two transit agencies responded to the electronic survey sent to 40 agencies, yielding an 80% (32/40) response rate. Based on the survey and in-depth interviews after the survey, five agencies were able to provide information for case examples of the details of their programs and their applications. Agencies have gone so far as to say their systems are invaluable. All of the agencies that responded to the electronic survey achieved their goals of improving safety and security, as well as deterring criminal activity and reducing accident claims. Through coordination and support from multiple departments, the entire agency and public can reap the benefits from camera applications. Most important, customers and bus operators feel more secure and safer. Meanwhile, the agencies feel the impact of a reduction in legal claims payouts and decreased workers’ compensation awards so much that they are measuring their return on investment (ROI). In addition to legal and security benefits, training is improving. Agencies use the cam- eras for customer relations and accident prevention. One agency gives an award for acci- dent avoidance based on video from its buses. Although some of the agencies focus cameras at the drivers, the majority do not. They have camera views of the interior and exterior of the buses instead. The common belief is that “more is better”—place as many cameras on the bus as possible with the clearest images possible. The programs do face challenges. Cameras focused on the operators have mixed results. The cameras can provide added security for the drivers from assaults and altercations; how- ever, driver unions are concerned about unnecessarily monitoring bus operators, resulting in unfair discipline and added stress associated with being taped. Labor relations departments around the country have developed policies that have satisfied the unions, although one agency is going to arbitration to settle whether bus operators can be monitored during breaks. As in most transit programs, the greatest challenge is funding. The surveillance equip- ment adds costs to the bus builds, and the technology changes quickly. Even so, all of the agencies reported financial benefits and increased safety.

3 The study focuses on the collection of information from agencies across the country (plus one from Canada) on their actual applications and use of cameras. It does not include comprehensive information on the status of onboard electronic surveillance technologies on buses across the transit industry, as the survey is limited. However, agencies of all sizes from throughout the country participated in the study. Common themes across the reporting agencies have been identified. Since 2001, when TCRP Synthesis 38: Electronic Surveil- lance Technology on Transit Vehicles was published, many transit agencies have adopted new technologies that they believe are better and cheaper than the systems used 15 years ago. Buses are now manufactured with cameras instead of being retrofit. This study does not identify brands of cam- eras and is not intended to promote any brand or contractor; rather, it identifies the type of technology [wireless, digital video recording (DVR), etc.] and the associated applications. AUDIENCE This synthesis is targeted to transit agencies with buses. Transit agencies with rail fleets may find the study useful, as well. STUDY METHODOLOGY To provide a comprehensive synthesis of onboard electronic surveillance technologies on buses, the study consisted of three parts: a literature review, an electronic survey, and the development of case examples to illustrate the applications of cameras on buses. LITERATURE REVIEW The literature review was completed to identify the current applications of onboard electronic surveillance technologies at transit agencies, providing information beyond TCRP Synthesis 38: Electronic Surveillance Technology on Transit Vehicles (2001) and TCRP Synthesis 90: Video Surveillance Uses by Rail Transit Agencies (2011). The review specifically focused on bus operations and those with recent experience, as technology and the quality of images has changed since CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND Transit agencies across the country are increasingly using onboard electronic surveillance technology on buses for the safety and security of passengers and drivers. Evolving tech- nologies have not only recorded incidents but have helped drivers avoid hazards. Also, cameras have afforded many agencies the opportunity to affect cost savings. This synthe- sis, TCRP Project J-7, Synthesis Topic SA-36 Onboard Elec- tronic Surveillance Technologies, documents the current use of electronic surveillance technology by transit agencies on board buses and an exchange of “what’s working.” It identi- fies technologies, research, and opportunities, and provides examples of how surveillance systems are used to improve operations, safety, security, and customer satisfaction. The information gathered includes, but is not limited to, the following: • Functions • Safety and risk benefits • Customer benefits • Technical integration capabilities • Maintenance • Legal issues • Financial impacts • Training and labor issues. This synthesis explores these issues and documents suc- cessful applications. The literature review, survey of selected transit agencies, and detailed case examples and profiles report on the state of the practice, including innovations, les- sons learned, challenges, and gaps in information. It reports transit agencies’ motivations and purposes for installing the cameras and the benefits and outcomes found. Overall, the goals of the agencies were fulfilled with added, unexpected benefits. The case studies augment and expand on the gen- eral survey to provide specific examples of how cameras are used by different agencies. The study presents the information in a manner that will assist transit agencies as they assess current policies and identify actions that have been successful elsewhere. Finally, the study provides agency assessments of what has worked, lessons learned, obstacles overcome, and how they overcame them.

4 to demonstrate various applications of the onboard electronic surveillance technologies. They shared details of their agen- cy’s policies, success stories, and “what’s working.” Agencies were selected based on their responses to the survey so that as many of the report topics as possible would be represented. The case examples describe specific practices and demon- strate the various uses of the technologies. They are scattered throughout the report as case profiles and case examples. Two are highlighted in chapter five: Case Examples. CONTENT The report is organized as follows: Chapter two: Literature Review Chapter three: Survey Results Chapter four: Challenges and Lessons Learned Chapter five: Case Examples Chapter six: Conclusions and Future Research 2001. The results from the literature review also provided insights into the development of the electronic survey and the case studies. The results are summarized in chapter three and an annotated bibliography follows the report. SURVEY With assistance and guidance from the topic panel, 40 U.S. and Canadian transit agencies with experience with cameras on buses were selected to participate in the synthesis survey. Transit agencies with large, medium, and small bus fleets ranging from 16 to more than 5,700 buses were included. Thirty-two of 40 contacted transit agencies completed the survey, for an 80% (32/40) response rate. (Appendix B lists the agencies.) The agencies that were interviewed and com- pleted the electronic survey were eligible to participate in the in-depth interview for a longer case example. The in-depth interviews provided the information for the case examples and case profiles that are scattered throughout the report. CASE EXAMPLES Five of the 32 transit agencies that responded to the survey participated in in-depth interviews to provide case examples