Greyhound had the tools to see this crash coming — but a lack of policy and oversight turned safety tech into a missed opportunity.
I first wrote about truck driver fatigue and the problems that come from disrupting circadian rhythms more than 30 years ago.
Yet driver fatigue is still a problem, as evident in the National Transportation Safety Board’s May meeting discussing results of its investigation into a fatal bus-truck crash at a Highland, Illinois, rest area in 2023.
This is an opinion column reflecting the author’s viewpoint.
In this case, the fatigued driver was behind the wheel of a bus rather than a truck. But the problems are still the same whether you’re hauling freight or transporting passengers.
It was nearly 2 a.m. when the Greyhound bus, westbound on Interstate 70, veered off the interstate onto the exit ramp of the westbound Silver Lake Rest Area. It crashed into three tractor-trailers parked on the ramp’s right shoulder. Three people died.
While the three illegally parked trucks were a factor in the crash (and the lack of truck parking is another thing that is still a problem 30 years later), the NTSB investigation points to a fatigued bus driver as the primary cause.
Bus passengers told investigators the driver had been weaving in and out of his lane in the hours before the crash. He had an irregular work-rest schedule that messed with his circadian rhythms. And apparently, he had been awake for a prolonged time, not having taken advantage of the Greyhound-provided hotel room for his mandated rest period.
NTSB Issues ‘Chilling’ Report on Silver Lake Rest Area Crash
NTSB board member Michael Graham called the language in the report “quite chilling.”
“I want to quote that here,” he said. “‘The likely result of this work/rest variability was constant lack of synchronization between the driver’s work hours and his normal circadian rhythm, making him constantly at risk to the effects of fatigue while on duty.’
“‘Constantly at risk,’” Graham said. “That sounds like an accident waiting to happen. And it was.”
But here’s what struck me: Greyhound had plenty of indications that this driver had recurring safety problems and did not address them.
A paper-based recordkeeping system meant previous warnings to the driver about unsafe driving weren’t readily available and therefore didn’t prompt action from his supervisors.
Investigators found only three entries on the driver’s official record at Greyhound. However, in his paper personnel file, there were 13 written reprimands for various offenses, nine of them for speeding.
Monitoring Risky Driving
The official record also did not include information from the onboard camera system. Greyhound has a driver monitoring system in each bus with an inward- and outward-facing camera to identify risky driver behavior.
While the company had policies prohibiting tampering with the system, it did not have any policies on using the system to improve driver behavior, according to the NTSB. To get the real benefit of these systems, fleets need to use them for driver coaching, incentivizing safe driving, or informing disciplinary action.
In the year before the crash, the bus driver had 71 risky driving “events” on the driver monitoring system. Based on his camera system scores, he was on a list of the company’s worst 20 drivers.
This tragic case underscores a broader truth: Even with clear signs of danger and advanced technology, safety still depends on how that information is used.
The best safety policies in the world don’t matter if you’re not enforcing them. Buying safety technology like dashcams doesn’t matter if you’re not using that data. It’s an investment — and a chance to save lives — wasted.
