Source: Rehab Brief. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, Washington, DC, Vol. XII, No. 10, (1990). A16 A5.0 Restaurants and Cafeterias A4.33.6 Placement of Listening Systems. A distance of 50 ft (15 m) allows a person to distinguish performers' facial expressions. A4.33.7 Types of Listening Systems. An assistive listening system appropriate for an assembly area for a group of persons or where the specific individuals are not known in advance, such as a playhouse, lecture hall or movie theater, may be different from the system appropriate for a particular individual provided as an auxiliary aid or as part of a reasonable accommodation. The appropriate device for an individual is the type that individual can use, whereas the appropriate system for an assem bly area will necessarily be geared toward the "average" or aggregate needs of various individuals. A listening system that can be used from any seat in a seating area is the most flexible way to meet this specification. Earphone jacks with variable volume controls can benefit only people who have slight hearing loss and do not help people who use hearing aids. At the present time, magnetic induction loops are the most feasible type of listening system for people who use hearing aids equipped with T-cous," but people without hearing aids or those with hearing aids not equipped with Inductive pick-ups cannot use them without special receivers. Radio frequency systems can be extremely effective and inexpensive. People without hearing aids can use them, but people with hearing aids need a special receiver to use them as they are presently designed. If hearing aids had a jack to allow a by-pass of microphones, then radio frequency systems would be suitable for people with and without hearing aids. Some listening systems may be subject to interference from other equipment and feedback from hearing aids of people who are using the systems. Such interference can be controlled by careful engineering design that anticipates feedback sources in the surrounding area. Table A2, reprinted from a National Institute of Disability and Rehabilitation Research "Rehab Brief." shows some of the advantages and disadvantages of different types of assistive listening systems. In addition, the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) has published a pamphlet on Assistive Listening Systems which lists demonstration centers across the country where technical assistance can be obtained in selecting and installing appropriate systems. The state of BILLING CODE 4910-43-C New York has also adopted a detailed technical specification which may be useful. A5.0 Restaurants and Cafeterias. A5.1 General. Dining counters (where there is no service) are typically found in small carry-out restaurants, bakeries, or coffee shops and may only be a narrow eating surface attached to a wall. This section requires that where such a dining counter is provided. a portion of the counter shall be at the required accessible height. A7.0 Business and Mercantile. A7.2(3) Assistive Listening Devices. At all sales and service counters, teller windows, box offices, and information kiosks where a physical barrier separates service personnel and customers, it is recommended that at least one permanently installed assistive listening device complying with 4.33 be provided at each location or series. Where assistive listening devices are installed, signage should be provided identifying those stations which are so equipped. A7.3 Check-out Aisles. Section 7.2 refers to counters without aisles; section 7.3 concerns check-out aisles. A counter without an aisle (7.2) can be approached from more than one direction such as in a convenience store. In order to use a check-out aisle (7.3), customers must enter a defined area (an aisle) at a particular point, pay for goods, and exit at a particular point. A10.3 Fixed Facilities and Stations. A10.3.1(7) Route Signs. One means of making control buttons on fare vending machines usable by persons with vision impairments is to raise them above the surrounding surface. Those activated by a mechanical motion are likely to be more detectable. If farecard vending, collection, and adjustment devices are designed to accommodate farecards having one tactually distinctive corner, then a person who has a vision impairment will insert the card with greater ease. Token collection devices that are designed to accommodate tokens which are perforated can allow a person to distinguish more readily between tokens and common coins. Thoughtful placement of accessible gates and fare vending machines in relation to inaccessible devices will make their use and detection easier for all persons with disabilities. A17 APPENDIX B TO PART 37-UMTA Region I, Urban Mass Transportation Ad- Center, Kendall Square, 55 Broadway, Suite 921, Cambridge, MA 02142 Region III, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, 841 Chestnut Street, Suite 714, Philadelphia, PA 19107 Region IV, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, 1720 Peachtree Road NW., Suite 400, Atlanta, GA 30309 Region V, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, 55 East Monroe Street, Room 1415, Chicago, IL 60603 Region VI, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, 819 Taylor Street, Suite 9A32, Ft. Worth, TX 76102 Region VII, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, 6301 Rockville Road, Suite 303, Kansas City, MS 64131 Region VIII, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Federal Office Building, 1961 Stout Street, 5th Floor, Denver, CO 80294 Region IX, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, 211 Main Street, Room 1160, San Francisco, CA 94105 Region X, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, 3142 Federal Building, 915 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98174 APPENDIX C TO PART 37- Certification of Equivalent Service The (name of agency) certifies that its demand responsive service offered to individuals with disabilities, including individuals who use wheelchairs, is equivalent to the level and quality of service offered to individuals without disabilities. Such service, when viewed in its entirety, is provided in the most integrated setting feasible and is equivalent with respect to: (1) Response time; (2) Fares; (3) Geographic service area; (6) Availability of information and reservation capability; and (7) Constraints on capacity or service availability. In accordance with 49 CFR 37.77, public entities operating demand responsive systems for the general public which receive financial assistance under section 18 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act must file this certification with the appropriate state program office before procuring any inaccessible vehicle. Such public entities not receiving UMTA funds shall also file the certification with the appropriate state program office. Such public entities receiving UMTA funds under any other section of the UMT Act must file the certification with the appropriate UMTA regional office. This certification is valid for no longer than one year from its date of filing. (name of authorized official) (title) (signature) MPO Certification of Paratransit Plan The (name of Metropolitan Planning Organization) hereby certifies that it has reviewed the ADA paratransit plan prepared by (name of submitting entity (ies)) as required under 49 CFR part 37. 139(h) and finds it to be in conformance with the transportation plan developed under 49 CFR part 613 and 23 CFR part 450 (the UMTA/ FHWA joint planning regulation). This certification is valid for one year. signature name of authorized official title date Existing Paratransit Service Survey This is to certify that (name of public entity (ies)) has conducted a survey of existing paratransit services as required by 49 CFR 37.137 (a). signature name of authorized official title date Included Service Certification This is to certify that service provided by other entities but included in the ADA paratransit plan submitted by (name of submitting entity (ies)) meets the requirements of 49 CFR part 37, subpart F providing that ADA eligible individuals have access to the service; the service is provided in the manner represented; and, that efforts will be made to coordinate the provision of para. transit service offered by other providers. signature name of authorized official title date Joint Plan Certification I This is to certify that (name of entity covered by joint plan) is committed to providing ADA paratransit service as part of this coordinated plan and in conformance with the requirements of 49 CFR part 37, subpart F. signature name of authorized official title date Joint Plan Certification II This is to certify that (name of entity covered by joint plan) will, in accordance with 49 CFR 37.141, maintain current levels of paratransit service until the coordinated plan goes into effect. signature name of authorized official title date State Certification that Plans have been Received This is to certify that all ADA paratransit plans required under 49 CFR 37.139 have been received by (state DOT) signature name of authorized official title date APPENDIX D TO PART 37-CONstrucTION AND INTERPRETATION OF PROVISIONS OF 49 CFR PART 37 This appendix explains the Department's construction and interpretation of provi sions of 49 CFR part 37. It is intended to be used as definitive guidance concerning the meaning and implementation of these provisions. The appendix is organized on a section-by-section basis. Some sections of the rule are not discussed in the appendix, because they are self-explanatory or we do not currently have interpretive material to provide concerning them. The Department also provides guidance by other means, such as manuals and letters. The Department intends to update this Appendix periodically to include guidance, provided in response to inquiries about specific situations, that is of general relevance or interest. AMENDMENTS TO 49 CFR PART 27 Section 27.67(d) has been revised to reference the Access Board facility guidelines (found in appendix A to part 37) as well as the Uniform Federal Accessibility Standard (UFAS). This change was made to ensure consistency between requirements under section 504 and the ADA. Several caveats relating to the application of UFAS (e.g., that spaces not used by the public or likely to result in the employment of individuals with disabilities would not have to meet the standards) have been deleted. It is the Department's understanding that provisions of the Access Board standards and part 37 make them unnecessary. The Department is aware that there is a transition period between the publication of this rule and the effective date of many of its provisions (e.g., concerning facilities and paratransit services) during which section 504 remains the basic authority for accessibility modifications. In this interval, the Department expects recipients' compliance with section 504 to look forward to compliance with the ADA provisions. That is, if a recipient is making a decision about the shape of its paratransit service between the publication of this rule and January 26, 1992, the decision should be in the direction of service that will help to comply with post-January 1992 requirements. A recipient that severely curtailed its present paratransit service in October, and then asked for a three- or five-year phase-in of service under its paratransit plan, would not be acting consistent with this policy. Likewise, the Department would view with disfavor any attempt by a recipient to accelerate the beginning of the construction, installation or alteration of a facility to before January 26, 1992, to "beat the clock" and avoid the application of this rule's facility standards. The Department would be very reluctant to approve grants, contracts, exemption requests etc., that appear to have this effect. The purpose of the Department's administration of section 504 is to ensure compliance with the national policy stated in the ADA, not to permit avoidance of it. SUBPART A-GENERAL Section 37.3 Definitions The definition of "commuter authority" includes a list of commuter rail operators drawn from a statutory reference in the ADA. It should be noted that this list is not exhaustive. Other commuter rail operators (e.g., in Chicago or San Francisco) would also be encompassed by this definition. The definition of "commuter bus service" is important because the ADA does not require complementary paratransit to be proIvided with respect to commuter bus service operated by public entities. The rationale that may be inferred for the statutory exemption for this kind of service concerns its typical characteristics (e.g., no attempt to comprehensively cover a service area, limited route structure, limited origins and destinations, interface with another mode of transportation, limited purposes of travel). These characteristics can be found in some transportation systems other than bus systems oriented toward work trips. For example, bus service that is used as a dedicated connecter to commuter or intercity rail service, certain airport shuttles, and university bus systems share many or all of these characteristics. As explained further in the discussion of subpart B, the Department has determined that it is appropriate to cover these services with the requirements applicable to commuter bus systems. The definitions of "designated public transportation" and "specified public transportation" exclude transportation by aircraft. Persons interested in matters concerning access to air travel for individuals with disabilities should refer to 14 CFR part 382, the Department's regulation implementing the Air Carrier Access Act. Since the facility requirements of this part refer to facilities involved in the provision of designated or specified public transportation, airport facilities are not covered by this part. DOJ makes clear that public and private airport facilities are covered under its title II and title III regulations, respectively. The examples given in the definition of "facility" all relate to ground transportation. We would point out that, since transportation by passenger vessels is covered by this rule and by DOJ rules, such vessel-related facilities as docks, wharfs, vessel terminals etc. fall under this definition. It is intended that specific requirements for vessels and related facilities will be set forth in future rulemaking. The definitions of "fixed route system" and "demand responsive system" derive directly from the ADA's definitions of these terms. Some systems, like a typical city bus system or a dial-a-ride van system, fit clear ly into one category or the other. Other systems may not so clearly fall into one of the categories. Nevertheless, because how a system is categorized has consequences for the requirements it must meet, entities must determine, on a case-by-case basis, into which category their systems fall. In making this determination, one of the key factors to be considered is whether the individual, in order to use the service, must request the service, typically by making a call. With fixed route service, no action by the individual is needed to initiate public transportation. If an individual is at a bus stop at the time the bus is scheduled to appear, then that individual will be able to access the transportation system. With demand-reponsive service, an additional step must be taken by the individual before he or she can ride the bus, i.e., the individual must make a telephone call. (S. Rept. 101-116 at 54). Other factors, such as the presence or absence of published schedules, or the variation of vehicle intervals in anticipation of differences in usage, are less important in making the distinction between the two types of service. If a service is provided along a given route, and a vehicle will arrive at certain times regardless of whether a passenger actively requests the vehicle, the service in most cases should be regarded as fixed route rather than demand responsive. At the same time, the fact that there is an interaction between a passenger and transportation service does not necessarily make the service demand responsive. For many types of service (e.g., intercity bus, intercity rail) which are clearly fixed route, a passenger has to interact with an agent to buy a ticket. Some services (e.g., certain commuter bus or commuter rail operations) may use flag stops, in which a vehicle along the route does not stop unless a passenger flags the vehicle down. A traveler staying at a hotel usually makes a room reservation before hopping on the hotel shuttle. This kind of interaction does not make an otherwise fixed route service demand responsive. On the other hand, we would regard a system that permits user-initiated deviations from routes or schedules as demandresponsive. For example, if a rural public transit system (e.g., a section 18 recipient) has a few fixed routes, the fixed route portion of its system would be subject to the requirements of subpart F for complementary paratransit service. If the entity changed its system so that it operated as a route-deviation system, we would regard it as a demand responsive system. Such a system would not be subject to complementary paratransit requirements. The definition of "individual with a disability" excludes someone who is currently |