House Bill 134, sponsored by Delegate David Tavares, would require passenger lap‑shoulder seat belts on large school buses in Maryland. The committee heard proponents point to multiple National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigations finding compartmentalization alone can fail in certain crashes and rollovers, and they urged the legislature to adopt a phased approach with driver protections for compliance.

"Passenger lap‑shoulder belts provide the best protection," Kristen Poland, deputy director of the NTSB Office of Highway Safety, told the committee. Poland, a biomechanical engineer and Maryland resident, said NTSB accident investigations have repeatedly shown that properly worn three‑point belts reduce severe injuries and ejections in rollovers and side‑impact crashes.

The nut graf: supporters emphasized safety evidence and told the committee that several major vehicle manufacturers (witnesses cited Bluebird) now offer seat belts for new buses at no extra cost, while opponents — including school systems and trade associations — warned of retrofit costs on existing fleets and urged funding or phased implementation tied to bus replacement cycles.

Student testimony underscored the bill's urgency: Juliana Nunez, a middle‑school student who rides the bus daily, described being thrown from her seat during separate incidents and urged action. Public‑health and university law‑clinic witnesses framed the measure as an evidence‑based safety upgrade and recommended clarifying statutory language on liability and the sponsor agreed there is a drafting issue to address.

Committee members asked about retrofit possibilities for existing buses, the cost to retrofit versus replace, and how to ensure seat‑belt use without criminalizing bus drivers. Sponsor Tavares said the bill was amended to phase implementation so new bus purchases would meet the standard over a replacement period and to remove criminal liability from drivers for noncompliant students; he also agreed to pursue data on retrofit costs and other technical clarifications with manufacturers and industry.

Ending: The hearing closed with the sponsor noting ongoing work on technical amendments, and with the committee taking testimony from safety experts, student advocates, and industry representatives; no committee vote was taken at the hearing.