Enforcing the ADA: A Status Report from the Department of Justice

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

Disability Rights Section

Enforcing the ADA:

A Status Report from the Department of Justice

October - December 2002

This Status Report covers the ADA activities of the Department of Justice during the fourth

quarter (October - December) of 2002. This report, previous status reports, and a wide range of

other ADA information are available through the Department’s ADA Home Page on the World

Wide Web (see page 11). The symbol (**) indicates that the document is available on the ADA

Home Page.

INSIDE...

ADA Litigation ............................................... 2

Formal Settlement Agreements................... 4

Other Settlements ......................................... 8

Mediation ...................................................... 9

Technical Assistance .................................... 11

Other Sources of ADA Information ........... 13

How to File Complaints .............................. 14

2002, Issue 4

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

ENFORCEMENT/LITIGATION

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a comprehensive civil rights law for

people with disabilities. The Department of Justice enforces the ADA’s

requirements in three areas --

Title I: Employment practices by units of State and local government

Title II: Programs, services, and activities of State and local government

Title III: Public accommodations and commercial facilities

Through lawsuits and both formal and

informal settlement agreements, the

Department has achieved greater access

for individuals with disabilities in

thousands of cases. Under general rules

governing lawsuits brought by the Federal

Government, the Department of Justice

may not file a lawsuit unless it has first

unsuccessfully attempted to settle the

dispute through negotiations.

A. Litigation

The Department may file lawsuits in

Federal court to enforce the ADA and may

obtain court orders including

compensatory damages and back pay to

remedy discrimination. Under title III the

Department may also obtain civil

penalties of up to $55,000 for the first

violation and $110,000 for any subsequent

violation.

1. Decisions

Title III

District Court Rules AMC’s Stadium-Style

Theaters Discriminate Against Patrons

Who Use Wheelchairs -- The U.S. District

Court for the Central District of California

ruled in U.S. v. AMC Entertainment, Inc., that

the American MultiCinema, Inc., (AMC)

movie theater chain violated the ADA by

providing accessible seating only in the front

rows on the sloped floor of its new stadium-

style movie theaters. The Department sued

the chain for denying equal access to persons

with physical disabilities in over 80 stadium-

style movie theater complexes nationwide.

The court concluded that AMC violated the

ADA by failing to provide its patrons who use

wheelchairs with comparable lines of sight to

the movie screen. The court held that, while

AMC publicizes its stadium-style seating as

providing enhanced, unobstructed lines of

sight, patrons who use wheelchairs are

excluded from the stadium seating section in

the vast majority of AMC’s stadium-style

theaters and instead are left to sit in the few

rows of seating on the sloped-floor closest to

the screen. These seats are less popular, offer

poor views of the screen, and isolate persons

who use wheelchairs from the rest of the

movie audience. Other issues remain before

the court, including how to remedy the line of

sight violations and whether the theaters

contain other ADA violations that do not

involve line of sight issues, such as protruding

objects and the lack of accessible auditorium

ramps and signage.

I. Enforcement

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

ENFORCEMENT/LITIGATION

2. Amicus Briefs

The Department files briefs in selected

ADA cases in which it is not a party in

order to guide courts in interpreting the

ADA.

Title II

** Anderson v. Rochester-Genesee Regional

Transportation Authority -- In response to a

request from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

Second Circuit, the Department filed answers

to questions raised in a lawsuit alleging

violations of the ADA’s paratransit

requirements by the public transit authority in

Rochester, New York. The ADA requires

public transit authorities who operate fixed

route bus systems to provide comparable

paratransit service to individuals with

disabilities who are unable to use fixed route

service. The Department’s response argued

that the ADA regulations require transit

providers to design, fund, and implement their

paratransit programs to meet 100 percent of

the anticipated demand for next-day

paratransit service. It also asserted that, even

if a transit provider meets this obligation, it

will still violate the ADA if actual day-to-day

operations result in a substantial number of

trip denials that are not beyond the control of

the provider. Finally, the Department argued

that the determination of how many denials is

“substantial” is not based on a specific

mathematical formula but rather on a case-by-

case analysis given the transit provider’s

service profile, including population size and

distribution, geography, type of service, and

economic base.

** Barrier Busters v. City of Erie -- The

Department filed an amicus brief in the U.S.

District Court for the Western District of

Pennsylvania in a lawsuit alleging that Erie,

Pennsylvania, has violated the ADA’s curb cut

requirements. The suit alleges that since

1992, when the ADA went into effect, the city

of Erie frequently failed to install curb ramps

when it performed road and sidewalk

construction and alterations. The city

admitted it had not installed “thousands” of

ramps, but argued that claims involving

violations that occurred more than two years

before the lawsuit was filed on June 26, 2002,

were barred because of the statute of

limitations. The Department argued in its

amicus brief that Erie’s consistent practice of

violating the ADA’s curb cut requirement was

a “continuing violation” and that the court

could address all the discriminatory acts

involved, not just those occurring during the

two-year period before the lawsuit.

Radaszewski v. Garner -- The Department

filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the Seventh Circuit arguing that,

even if a court holds that a State agency is

itself protected from suit by Eleventh

Amendment sovereign immunity, the plaintiff

may sue officials of the agency in their official

capacity for an order requiring them to comply

with the ADA. The plaintiff brought suit on

behalf of her son, who is an individual with

disabilities, against the director of the Illinois

Department of Public Aid, in her official

capacity, alleging that a reduction in Medicaid

benefits violated title II of the ADA. Because

of his disabilities, the plaintiff’s son requires

nursing care around the clock. When he

turned 21, Illinois sought to reduce Medicaid

reimbursement funding for in-home nursing

care to such an extent that he would have to be

placed in an institution in order to receive the

care that he requires. The Department’s brief

argued that the district court’s dismissal of the

case should be reversed and that an earlier

decision of the Seventh Circuit preventing

suits against State officials in their official

capacity should be overruled.

Title III

Meineker v. Hoyts Cinemas Corporation--

The Department filed an amicus brief in the

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

in support of a lawsuit brought by two

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

ENFORCEMENT/LITIGATION/FORMAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS

individuals who use wheelchairs alleging that

the location of wheelchair spaces in the Hoyts

Cinemas chain’s stadium-style movie theaters

violates the ADA requirements for comparable

lines of sight and integrated seating. The

wheelchair seating in most Hoyts theaters is in

front of the stadium-style seating and is very

close to the screen. The result is that

wheelchair users in these theaters are forced to

look up at the screen at sharp angles, often

resulting in severe discomfort and distorted

views. In addition, because the wheelchair

spaces are not located in the stadium-style

portion of the theater, wheelchair users are

segregated from most other patrons. The U.S.

District Court for the Northern District of New

York held that the comparable line of sight

regulation requires an analysis of viewing

angles and not just whether the sight line is

obstructed. The court concluded, however,

that Hoyts complied with the ADA because

the accessible seating, while not in the

stadium part of the theater, was still far

enough back to provide comparable sight lines

and integrated seating. On appeal the

Department argued in its amicus brief that

Hoyts wheelchair seating did not comply with

the ADA because the ADA requires

wheelchair users to be provided lines of sight

within the range of viewing angles offered to

most patrons of the cinema and seating that is

integrated into the elevated, stadium portion of

the auditorium.

** Barker v. Emory University -- The

Department filed an amicus brief in the U.S.

District Court for the Northern District of

Georgia arguing that campus housing is

covered by the ADA. The plaintiffs, a student

at the Emory University School of Law and a

disability rights advocacy group, sued Emory

claiming that a number of facilities on its

campus are inaccessible, including a new

student apartment complex owned and

operated by the university. Emory asked the

court to dismiss the case, arguing that the

apartment complex and other dormitories on

campus are not covered by title III of the ADA

because they are “strictly residential.” The

Department’s amicus brief argued that the

apartment complex and other dormitories on

campus are covered by title III as places of

public accommodation because they are

facilities, privileges, advantages and

accommodations of a “place of education.”

B. Formal Settlement

Agreements

The Department sometimes resolves

cases without filing a lawsuit by means of

formal written settlement agreements.

Title II

** More Project Civic Access Agreements --

The Department has signed two additional

agreements under the Department’s Project

Civic Access initiative, a wide-ranging effort

to ensure that cities, counties, towns, and

villages comply with the ADA. Project Civic

Access is dedicated to removing barriers to all

aspects of civic life, including courthouses,

libraries, polling places, police stations, and

parks. The new agreements cover --

Bismarck, North Dakota; and

Burlington, Vermont

Fifty-two agreements have been signed to

date. They require communities, depending

on local circumstances, to --

• Improve access to programs at city and

town halls, police and fire stations,

sheriff’s departments, courthouses, health

care delivery centers, childcare centers,

teen and senior activities centers,

convention centers, animal shelters,

libraries, baseball stadiums, golf course

clubhouses, and parks (including ice

skating rinks, skateboard rinks, public

pools, playgrounds, ball fields and

bleachers, and band shells);

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

ENFORCEMENT/FORMAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS

• Alter polling places and provide curbside

or absentee balloting;

• Upgrade 9-1-1 emergency services for

people who use TTY’s;

• Install assistive listening systems in

legislative chambers, courtrooms, and

municipal auditoriums; and

• Provide delivery systems and time frames

for providing auxiliary aids, including

sign language interpreters and materials in

Braille, large print, or on cassette tapes.

New Hanover Regional Medical Center,

New Hanover, North Carolina --The

Department reached an agreement with the

New Hanover Regional Medical Center

resolving a complaint that the Center’s

hospital did not have an operating TTY for

public use in its facility. The Center agreed to

provide TTY’s in public area telephone banks,

areas adjacent to the emergency department,

and on request in patient rooms. The Center

also agreed to post signs indicating the

location of available TTY’s for members of

the public who are deaf or hard of hearing and

to pay $2,500 to the complainant.

Red Bank, New Jersey -- The Department

entered into an agreement with the Borough

of Red Bank requiring it to ensure the

accessibility of its programs in a wide range

of facilities, including a library, senior center,

parks, parking lots, and municipal offices.

Red Bank also agreed to provide effective

communication, including appropriate

auxiliary aids and services, implement an

ADA grievance procedure, and publish a

notice informing the public of its ADA rights.

Guernsey County, Ohio -- The Department

of Justice reached an agreement with

Guernsey County, Ohio, to ensure that county

programs, services, and activities are

accessible to persons with disabilities. The

county agreed to make physical changes to a

wide range of facilities, including the law

enforcement center, the county fairgrounds,

the engineer’s office building, the county

courthouse, the water department, the dog

pound, and the human services and health

buildings. In addition, the settlement requires

Guernsey County to ensure compliance of its

new senior citizens center with the new

construction requirements of the ADA

Standards for Accessible Design. The county

also agreed to adopt policies and procedures

for providing accessibility and

accommodations in the county court system

and establish an ADA grievance procedure.

Laramie, Wyoming -- The Department

entered into a settlement agreement with

Laramie, Wyoming, to ensure that persons

who use wheelchairs are provided the same

level of access to the city’s “Skate Park” (used

by skateboarders) as the general public. The

city agreed to provide an accessible route from

the street and the parking lot to the park.

Essex County, New Jersey -- The Department

entered into an agreement with Essex County,

New Jersey, resolving a complaint alleging

that the county courthouse complex is not

accessible to people with mobility

impairments. The county agreed to provide

accessible parking, signage, public telephones,

interior doors, and toilet rooms. The

agreement also requires the county to provide

five designated accessible courtrooms with

designated accessible seating and access to

jury and witness boxes. In addition, the

county agreed to make universal lift keys

available to the public at each public entrance

to provide independent operation of platform

lifts; implement procedures to allow

individuals with mobility impairments who are

visiting inmates housed at the detention center

to utilize an alternate accessible visitation

room; and provide signage indicating the

location of accessible courtrooms and

courtrooms equipped with assistive listening

devices.

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

ENFORCEMENT/FORMAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS

** Quincy, Massachusetts -- The Department

reached an agreement with Quincy,

Massachusetts, to improve accessibility at a

wide range of municipal facilities, including

city hall, libraries, community and health

centers, police headquarters, and

administrative offices at a commercial mall.

The city agreed to make physical

modifications so that parking, entrances,

public telephones, restrooms, service and

concession counters, drinking fountains, park

picnic tables and ball fields, and police

holding cells are accessible; install an assistive

listening system in the police training

academy; establish procedures and sources for

providing auxiliary aids and services to ensure

effective communication; adopt

and publicize an ADA grievance

procedure; and provide

directional signage and

information about the city’s

accessible entrances, programs,

services, and activities.

Department of Parks and Recreation,

Indianapolis, Indiana -- The U.S. Attorney’s

Office for the Southern District of Indiana

entered into an agreement with the

Indianapolis Department of Parks and

Recreation resolving a complaint filed by a

golfer who alleged that the city’s Eagle Creek

Golf Course violated the ADA because of an

inadequate number of accessible parking

spaces, inaccessible features in its clubhouse,

and the failure to provide an accessible golf

cart. In order to ensure program accessibility,

the city, which owns and operates 13 public

courses, agreed to purchase and provide two

different models of individual golf carts that

permit a golfer to play from a seated position.

These carts will be available at any of the city

courses upon advance request and will be

rented for the same price as a regular golf cart.

The city also agreed to monitor demand for

the accessible carts and, if at the end of the

2003 golfing season the number of requests

exceeds supply, the city will purchase

additional carts. In addition, the city modified

parking lots at all 13 city-owned courses to

provide accessible parking, and at Eagle Creek

agreed to install appropriate signage in the

snack bar area and train snack bar staff on

their ADA obligations.

Superior Court, Windsor County, Vermont --

The Department entered into a settlement

agreement with Windsor County Superior

Court resolving a complaint by a deaf

individual that he lost his case because the

court did not provide a sign language

interpreter at a hearing. The court agreed to

implement a policy on ensuring effective

communication, including providing

appropriate auxiliary aids and services, and to

train its personnel on the

requirements of the policy. The

court will also publish a notice on

hearing notices, jury summons,

witness subpoenas, and other

documents explaining how to

request accommodations.

Mayfield Village, Ohio -- The Department

entered an agreement requiring Mayfield

Village, Ohio, to make the programs, services,

and activities conducted at its community

building accessible to people with disabilities.

The village agreed to install accessible

parking spaces with appropriate signage and

provide accessible entrances and toilet rooms

at the building.

Sheriff’s Office, Walton County, Georgia --

The Department reached an agreement with

the Walton County Sheriff’s Office resolving a

complaint alleging a failure to provide a sign

language interpreter for communicating with a

deaf individual arrested and held in jail. The

settlement requires the sheriff’s office to

implement a policy for providing appropriate

auxiliary aids and services when necessary to

ensure effective communication with inmates,

detainees, arrestees, and members of the

public.

Formal

Settlement

Agreements

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

ENFORCEMENT/FORMAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS

Mason Municipal Court, Warren County,

Ohio -- The Department entered an agreement

with the Mason Municipal Court resolving a

complaint by a criminal defendant alleging

difficulties in obtaining a free oral interpreter

at trial. The court agreed to establish a policy

for providing appropriate auxiliary aids to

ensure effective communication with people

who are deaf or hard of hearing and to train its

staff on implementing the policy.

Title III

Days Inn, Mountain City, Tennessee -- Days

Inn of Mountain City, Tennessee, agreed to

remove barriers in four guestrooms to ensure

that they are fully accessible to people with

mobility impairments and to people who are

deaf or hard of hearing. The hotel also will

maintain a TTY at the facility’s front desk and

train employees on TTY etiquette and the

availability and proper installation of TTY’s,

portable visual alarms, and visual notification

devices for guest rooms.

New Hampshire Speedway, Loudon, New

Hampshire -- The U.S. Attorney’s Office for

the District of New Hampshire reached a

settlement agreement to improve accessibility

at the New Hampshire Speedway. The

Speedway hosts several motorcycle and auto

races each year, including two annual

NASCAR-sponsored events that each draw

more than 100,000 persons to the track. As a

result of the U.S. Attorney’s compliance

review and settlement, New Hampshire

Speedway, Inc., has installed the appropriate

number of accessible parking spaces, provided

accessible shuttles from remote parking lots,

lowered 11 concession stand counters,

extensively modified 11 restrooms to be more

accessible, and provided wheelchair seating

locations equal to one percent of total seating

in altered grandstand areas.

Cock and Bull Restaurant, Lahaska,

Pennsylvania -- An individual with multiple

sclerosis who uses a service animal for

balance and mobility assistance complained

that the Cock and Bull Restaurant required her

to leave the restaurant because of her service

animal. The restaurant agreed to adopt a

policy allowing customers to be accompanied

by service animals. It also agreed to post the

new policy in a conspicuous place in the

restaurant, provide annual ADA training to its

employees, and update its employee handbook

to include a section on service animals. In

addition the restaurant agreed to pay the

complainant $2,500 in damages.

Tracy’s Hair and Sun Stop, Lewisburg,

Tennessee -- The Department entered into a

settlement agreement with Tracy’s Hair and

Sun Stop, a newly constructed and altered

beauty shop and tanning salon, to correct

violations of the ADA’s Standards for

Accessible Design. The settlement requires

the salon to provide a van-accessible parking

space close to the entrance, install a ramp and

modify the doorway to make the entrance

accessible, and provide an accessible unisex

toilet room.

Hughes Research Laboratories, Malibu,

California -- The Department entered into a

settlement agreement with the Hughes

Research Laboratories in order to ensure

compliance with the alterations and new

construction requirements of the ADA

Standards for Accessible Design. Hughes

agreed to modify two newly constructed

facilities to make certain exterior elements

accessible, including parking, curb ramps,

ramps, and platform lifts. Hughes will also

modify interior elements to be accessible,

including signage at permanent rooms, visual

and audible alarms, toilet rooms, toilet stalls,

dispensers, hand rails, public telephones,

drinking fountains, door hardware, doorway

clear opening width, and maneuvering space

at doorways.

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

ENFORCEMENT/OTHER SETTLEMENTS

C. Other Settlements

The Department resolves numerous

cases without litigation or a formal

settlement agreement. In some instances,

the public accommodation, commercial

facility, or State or local government

promptly agrees to take the necessary

actions to achieve compliance. In others,

extensive negotiations are required.

Following are some examples of what has

been accomplished through informal

settlements.

Title II

An individual who uses a wheelchair

complained that a Washington municipality

failed to provide program accessibility when it

refused to remove architectural barriers to

public parking facilities. The city installed

accessible parking spaces and an accessible

route.

An individual with severe attention deficit-

hyperactivity disorder and bipolar disorder

complained that an Idaho county sheriff’s

department failed to provide effective

communication, resulting in an undeserved

arrest. The sheriff’s department agreed to

train its supervisors and managers on the ADA

and adopted a policy on effective

communication for people with sensory

disabilities.

A deaf individual complained that a California

city police department did not provide a TTY

for public use although public voice

telephones were available. The police

department installed TTY’s for public use in

its jail and public lobbies.

A wheelchair user complained that a Texas

city police department building was not

accessible. The police department completed

construction on a new police department

building with accessible parking spaces,

accessible routes of travel, accessible

entrances, a unisex public restroom, accessible

service counters, accessible door hardware,

and appropriate signage throughout the

building.

A deaf individual complained that an Illinois

county court failed to provide her with a sign

language interpreter and that some of the

court’s interpreters were not qualified. The

court hired a full-time sign language

interpreter who also provides ADA training to

court employees. The court established a

roster of other qualified interpreters to provide

services on an as-needed basis.

Title III

An Ohio couple complained that a nationally

recognized suites-only hotel lacked an

adequate number of accessible guestrooms,

accessible parking spaces, and had no policy

for making and holding accessible

reservations. The hotel modified its

reservations policy, added accessible parking

spaces and guestrooms, provided the

complainants with a free weekend stay,

refunded charges from an earlier visit, and

issued a letter of apology.

An individual with multiple sclerosis

complained that a Florida restaurant denied

him access because of his service animal. The

restaurant agreed to post signs welcoming

individuals with disabilities and their service

animals.

An individual who uses a wheelchair

complained that a Washington, D.C.,

radiology practice failed to provide adequate

assistance to help her transfer from her

wheelchair to an examination table. The

practice purchased an additional height-

adjustable examination table and designated

three lead medical assistants as ADA patient

advocates to help patients with mobility

disabilities receive services as quickly and

efficiently as possible.

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

ENFORCEMENT/OTHER SETTLEMENTS/MEDIATION

A California resident with paraplegia

complained that a large insurance company

denied him a supplemental life insurance

policy because of his disability. The insurance

company agreed to provide the supplemental

coverage.

A deaf individual complained that a Texas

hospital did not ensure effective

communication for persons who are deaf or

hard of hearing. The hospital entered into a

new contract for sign language interpreting

services, purchased six new TTY’s, changed

the hospital patient guide to inform patients

and their companions of the services available

to persons with hearing and speech

impairments, and updated its policies on

providing auxiliary aids and services in order

to ensure effective communication.

II. Mediation

Under a contract with the

Department of Justice, The Key Bridge

Foundation receives referrals of

complaints under titles II and III for

mediation by professional mediators who

have been trained in the legal

requirements of the ADA. An increasing

number of people with disabilities and

disability rights organizations are

specifically requesting the Department to

refer their complaints to mediation. More

than 450 professional mediators are

available nationwide to mediate ADA

cases. Over 75 percent of the cases in

which mediation has been completed

have been successfully resolved.

Following are recent examples of results

reached through mediation.

 In Pennsylvania, an individual with a

disability complained that police cars were

being parked overnight in accessible

spaces in the police station parking lot.

The town council agreed to fine police

officers or municipal workers who

inappropriately used accessible parking

spots and apologized to the complainant.

 A father of a child with multiple

disabilities complained that a Virginia

barber refused to cut his son’s hair

because of his disabilities. The owner of

the barber shop dismissed the barber

involved, placed the manager on an unpaid

leave of absence, and required the

manager to attend a customer relations

course at a local community college. The

owner also agreed to pay the child’s father

$5,000.

 In Pennsylvania, a wheelchair user

complained that a building owner refused

to construct a ramp to provide access to a

dental office in the building. The owner

constructed the ramp.

 In Florida, an individual with a respiratory

disability complained that a hospital that

offered outpatient physical therapy and

other medical services did not have

enough accessible parking spaces. When

the complaint was initiated, the hospital

had 27 accessible parking spaces, and

added 18 more prior to the mediation. The

hospital agreed to construct an additional

19 accessible parking spaces.

 An individual with a disability that limits

his ability to travel complained that a New

Jersey county refused to change its

requirement that he appear in person at the

county seat to be sworn in as a notary

public. The county agreed to modify its

policy so that, upon request, the county

clerk will make arrangements necessary to

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

MEDIATION

provide access to the oath administration

process. In this case, the county agreed to

send a deputy to the complainant’s town to

administer the oath.

 In California, a parent of an adolescent

with Down Syndrome alleged that an

entertainment facility refused to modify its

ticketing policy that required persons with

lottery-awarded wristbands to proceed

unaccompanied to the ticket window to

purchase their one allotted ticket. The

arena modified its policy to allow persons

with disabilities to be accompanied if

needed. It also agreed to post the policy

change on its web site and in its handout

materials and to train its staff on the

requirements of the ADA. In addition the

arena apologized to the parent, provided

four complimentary tickets to each of four

upcoming events, and made a donation of

$500 to a charitable organization identified

by the parent.

 In Mississippi, a person with a mobility

disability complained that she was unable

to reach the courtroom at her local

courthouse because the elevator was not

working, the only available access to the

second floor was by two flights of stairs,

and courthouse staff would not assist her.

Court officials agreed to schedule the

work needed to repair the elevator and, in

the meantime, to provide an accessible

courtroom on the first floor upon request

and to require staff to help people with

disabilities reach the appropriate

courtroom.

 A person with a mobility disability

complained that the entrance to a

Mississippi discount department store was

blocked with shopping carts and that there

was no way for a wheelchair user to get

through the store because merchandise

crowded the aisles. The store agreed to

keep the aisles clear of merchandise and to

maintain a clear path of travel on

sidewalks around the store and at its

entrance.

 In California, a person with a mobility

impairment complained that a hotel and

conference center failed to provide the

accessible room she had previously

reserved. The hotel joined a national

reservation system that eliminates the

double booking of accessible rooms. The

hotel also trained its staff on the ADA,

developed an emergency evacuation plan

for guests with disabilities, and agreed to

make its guest transportation services

accessible. The complainant was

reimbursed $809 and received $2,500 in

cash and $2,500 in gift certificates from

the hotel. The hotel also paid $694 to

another guest traveling with the

complainant.

 In Pennsylvania, a wheelchair user

complained that a small taxi company

stopped providing him with rides, telling

him his manual wheelchair was too heavy

for the driver to stow in the trunk. The

taxi service agreed to make reasonable

policy modifications to provide accessible

service to wheelchair users and made a

special arrangement for one employee

who, due to a disability, could not lift the

chair in question into the trunk. This

employee could easily fold and roll the

chair into the back seat of the taxi and

secure it with a seat belt. The complainant

agreed this was a workable resolution of

his complaint.

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

III. Technical Assistance

The ADA requires the Department of

Justice to provide technical assistance to

businesses, State and local governments,

and individuals with rights or

responsibilities under the law. The

Department provides education and

technical assistance through a variety of

means to encourage voluntary

compliance. Our activities include

providing direct technical assistance and

guidance to the public through our ADA

Information Line, ADA Home Page, and Fax

on Demand, developing and disseminating

technical assistance materials to the

public, undertaking outreach initiatives,

and coordinating ADA technical assistance

governmentwide.

ADA Home Page -- ada.gov

The ADA Home Page is operated by the

Department on the Internet’s World Wide Web

at ada.gov. The home page provides

information about --

 the toll-free ADA Information Line,

 the Department’s ADA enforcement

activities,

 the ADA technical assistance program,

 certification of State and local building

codes,

 proposed changes in ADA regulations

and requirements, and

 the ADA mediation program.

The home page also provides direct access to --

 electronic versions of the ADA

Standards for Accessible Design,

including illustrations and

hyperlinked cross-references,

 ADA regulations and technical

assistance materials (which may be

viewed online or downloaded for

later use),

 on-line ordering of the ADA

Technical Assistance CD-ROM,

 Freedom of Information Act

(FOIA) ADA materials, including

technical assistance letters, and

 links to the Department’s press

releases and Internet home pages

of other Federal agencies that

contain ADA information.

ADA Information Line

The Department of Justice operates a toll-

free ADA Information Line to provide

information and publications to the public

about the requirements of the ADA.

Automated service, which allows callers

to listen to recorded information and to

order publications for delivery by mail or

fax, is available 24 hours a day, seven

days a week. ADA specialists are

available on Monday, Tuesday,

Wednesday, and Friday from 9:30 a.m.

until 5:30 p.m. and on Thursday from

12:30 p.m. until 5:30 p.m. (Eastern Time)

to answer questions about the ADA’s

requirements and how they apply to

specific situations. Spanish language

service is also available.

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

To obtain general ADA information, get

answers to technical questions, order free

ADA materials, or ask about filing a

complaint, please call:

800-514-0301 (voice)

800-514-0383 (TTY)

ADA Fax On Demand

The ADA Information Line Fax Delivery

Service allows the public to obtain free ADA

information by fax 24 hours a day, seven days

a week. By calling the number above and

following the directions, callers can select

from among 34 different ADA technical

assistance publications and receive the

information, usually within minutes, directly

on their fax machines or computer fax/

modems. A list of available documents and

their code numbers may also be ordered

through the ADA Information Line.

Publications and Documents

Copies of the Department’s ADA regulations

and publications, including the Technical

Assistance Manuals for titles II and III, can be

obtained by calling the ADA Information

Line, visiting the ADA Home Page, or writing

to the address listed below. All materials are

available in standard print as well as large

print, Braille, audiotape, or computer disk for

persons with disabilities.

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Disability Rights Section - NYAV

Washington, D.C. 20530

Some publications are available in foreign

languages. For further information please call

the ADA Information Line.

Copies of the legal documents and settlement

agreements mentioned in this publication can

be obtained by writing to --

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

FOIA Branch, NALC Room 311

Washington, D.C. 20530

Fax: 202-514-6195

Currently, the FOI/PA Branch maintains

approximately 10,000 pages of ADA material.

The records are available at a cost of $0.10

per page (first 100 pages free). Please make

your requests as specific as possible in order

to minimize your costs.

The FOI/PA Branch also provides access to

ADA materials on the World Wide Web

(www.usdoj.gov/crt/foia/records.htm). A link

to search or visit this website is provided from

the ADA Home Page.

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

OTHER SOURCES OF ADA INFORMATION

IV. Other Sources of ADA Information

The Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission offers technical assistance to the

public concerning the employment provisions

of title I of the ADA.

ADA publications

800-669-3362 (voice)

800-800-3302 (TTY)

ADA questions

800-669-4000 (voice)

800-669-6820 (TTY)

www.eeoc.gov

The Federal Communications Commission

offers technical assistance to the public

concerning the communication provisions of

title IV of the ADA.

ADA publications and questions

888-225-5322 (voice)

888-835-5322 (TTY)

www.fcc.gov/cgb/dro

U.S. Department of Transportation,

Federal Transit Administration

ADA Assistance Line for regulations

and complaints

888-446-4511 (voice/relay)

www.fta.dot.gov/ada

The U.S. Architectural and Transportation

Barriers Compliance Board, or Access

Board, offers technical assistance to the

public on the ADA Accessibility Guidelines.

ADA publications and questions

800-872-2253 (voice)

800-993-2822 (TTY)

www.access-board.gov

The Disability and Business Technical

Assistance Centers are funded by the U.S.

Department of Education through the National

Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation

Research (NIDRR) in ten regions of the

country to provide resources and technical

assistance on the ADA.

ADA technical assistance

800-949-4232 (voice & TTY)

www.adata.org

Project ACTION is funded by the U.S.

Department of Transportation to provide ADA

information and publications on making

transportation accessible.

Information on accessible transportation

800-659-6428 (voice/relay)

202-347-3066 (voice)

202-347-7385 (TTY)

www.projectaction.org

The Job Accommodation Network (JAN) is

a free telephone consulting service funded by

the U.S. Department of Labor. It provides

information and advice to employers and

people with disabilities on reasonable

accommodation in the workplace.

Information on workplace accommodation

800-526-7234 (voice & TTY)

www.jan.wvu.edu

ENFORCING THE ADA -- UPDATE • OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2002

HOW TO FILE COMPLAINTS

V. How to File Complaints

Title I

Complaints about violations of title I

(employment) by units of State and

local government or by private

employers should be filed with the

Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission. Call 800-669-4000

(voice) or 800-669-6820 (TTY) to

reach the field office in your area.

Titles II and III

Complaints about violations of title II by

units of State and local government or

violations of title III by public

accommodations and commercial facilities

should be filed with --

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Disability Rights Section - NYAV

Washington, D.C. 20530

If you wish your complaint to be

considered for referral to the Department’s

ADA Mediation Program, please mark

“Attention: Mediation” on the outside of the

envelope.

The Attorney General has determined that publication of this periodical is necessary in the transaction of the public

business required by law of the Department of Justice.