U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

23–251 2005

ACCESSIBILITY OF THE HOUSE COMPLEX FOR 

PERSONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE 

ADMINISTRATION 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JULY 28, 2005 

Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION 

BOB NEY, Chairman 

VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan 

JOHN L. MICA, Florida 

CANDICE MILLER, Michigan 

JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California 

THOMAS M. REYNOLDS, New York 

JUANITA MILLENDER-MCDONALD, 

California 

Ranking Minority Member 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

PAUL VINOVICH, Staff Director 

GEORGE SHEVLIN, Minority Staff Director 

(1) 

ACCESSIBILITY OF THE HOUSE COMPLEX 

FOR PERSONS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS 

Thursday, July 28, 2005 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D.C. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in Room 

1310, Longworth, Hon. Robert W. Ney [chairman of the committee] 

presiding. 

Present: Representatives Ney, Ehlers, Millender-McDonald and 

Lofgren. 

Staff Present: David Duncan, Deputy Staff Director; Jennifer 

Mohtarez, Professional Staff Member; Michael Harrison, Minority 

Professional Staff Member; George F. Shevlin, Minority Staff Director; and Sterling Spriggs, Minority Tech Director. 

The CHAIRMAN. I want to welcome everyone today to the Committee on House Administration. We are holding an oversight hearing on the efforts to improve accessibility to the House complex. I 

want to thank our Ranking Member, Juanita Millender-McDonald, 

from California, for her interest, and also the staff on both sides 

of the aisle for the work, preparation, and interest they have on 

this issue. I would also like to thank our House officers who are 

here today, as well as our Chief of Police. And I appreciate their 

work, not just today, but over the years, to work with the issues. 

And again, this oversight hearing is on efforts to improve accessibility to the House complex for persons who have special needs. 

First we will hear from our good friend, Congressman Langevin. 

And our next panel will then include people responsible for accessibility here on the House side of the Capitol. We have Chief Gainer, 

Terrance Gainer, Chief of the Capitol Police; Alan Hantman, our 

Architect of the Capitol; and House Chief Administrative Officer, 

Jay Eagen. 

Our third and final panel consists of professionals from the private sector. They have experience in deploying common sense, rational solutions to improve accessibility. 

Before we get started with this hearing, I just want to make a 

few comments. After our recent evacuations, several folks came to 

us—Members, staff and persons that had a form of disability—and 

said that they had problems getting out of the buildings. I recognize the unique challenges we face while trying to evacuate over 

40,000 people in the entire complex of Congress—House, Senate, 

and the Capitol proper—within a matter of minutes; this is a problem that we can’t allow to continue. In the other hearing we had 

on the evacuation, some of these issues were raised. And this hearVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:59 Sep 27, 2005 Jkt 23251 PO 00000 Frm 000003 Fmt 06633 Sfmt 06633 E:\HR\OC\A251.XXX A251
2 

ing is going to look at how we can go about solving the problems 

related to emergency evacuations. But the scope is a lot broader 

than that. We are also looking into the issue of getting into the 

buildings, getting around buildings, working here, visiting here, 

and communicating here. 

When we talk about accessibility, my perspective is that a facility 

isn’t truly accessible unless it is accessible to everyone, especially 

an important institution like ours, where all people must be able 

to access their elected Representative on issues affecting the citizenry of the United States and, frankly, issues affecting people 

around the world. When constituents visit their Members, they 

should have an easy time in doing so, regardless of their relative 

abilities. That must be the manner in which the people’s House operates. 

While our institution is unique in the functions and structures 

that house it, it is also full of rich architectural history. If we tore 

them down and started over, we obviously could make them more 

accessible and easier to use, but that is not a realistic approach to 

the problem. So we need to improve accessibility as much as possible, while trying to maintain the historical significant aspects of 

the building. 

The hearing today will provide an opportunity for the Committee 

to examine past and current efforts to improve the House’s accessibility, but it will also provide an opportunity to identify creative solutions. 

Our final panel will provide insight into techniques and systems 

used elsewhere to address the continuing need for improvement 

and accessibility, and to give suggestions on how to apply these 

technologies and best practices to help us achieve our collective responsibility for safety and easy access for all visitors, Members and 

staff. 

And again, I want to thank our Ranking Member and members 

of the Committee that are here. We have two members that have 

joined us. And again, this is an important issue; it is an issue that 

Members want to deal with and have wanted to address over the 

years. And in some cases new Members’ offices are just designed 

for years past, when unfortunately in our society this wasn’t 

thought about; or frankly, if it was thought about, nobody really 

cared to do anything about it. Times have changed, thank goodness, in the United States: that is the purpose of our hearing. 

And with that, I will yield to our Ranking Member. Thank you. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good 

morning to all of you. 

First of all, I would like to thank you, Mr. Chairman, on the last 

evacuation, because I was right under your wings and you were 

able to provide me with information as to what was going on in 

terms of our having to evacuate. And so we thank you very much 

for that. 

Also, I would like to thank the Chief and the Capitol Police. I 

might add that though there are improvements to be made, there 

was a very smooth transition, especially as far as I am concerned, 

as we left the floor to leave the building. And so I thank all of those 

Capitol Police who were there and thank you for the improvements 

that have been made to date. 

3 

Mr. Chairman, this is a very important hearing on the accessibility of the House complex for persons with special needs. 

This is a very timely hearing because this week marks the 15th 

anniversary of passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 

1990. Like several other laws, the ADA did not initially apply to 

the Congress. Only after the passage of the Congressional Accountability Act did Congress formally decide to comply with the ADA 

and make itself as accessible as possible for all members of our society. In retrospect, it seems incredible that Congress did not cover 

itself from the start, but it did not. This hearing will review the 

progress made toward that goal in the last decade. 

As we begin, perhaps we should take a moment and consider the 

term ‘‘accessibility’’ in the broadest context. In my view, accessibility means ensuring that everyone can enter the House facilities 

readily, conduct his or her business while there, whether it be for 

work or pleasure, and then leave the facility safely, especially in 

the event of a dire emergency or necessity. Clearly, the House has 

made progress. It is more accessible now than it was a decade ago. 

Members of our second panel today, the Architect of the Capitol, 

the House Chief Administrative Officer, and the Chief of the Capitol Police have contributed greatly to that progress, and I thank 

them for that. More work lies ahead, and we look forward to their 

plans and recommendations. 

We should also look forward to hearing from our third panel of 

distinguished onsite experts who can offer common sense solutions 

to the significant difficulties that remain. In addition to those two 

panels, I certainly look forward to hearing from our distinguished 

colleague from Rhode Island, Representative James Langevin. Mr. 

Langevin can provide the perspective of a Member who must confront the full range of accessibility issues in the course of his work 

in the House every day. 

Mr. Chairman, this is an especially good follow-up to our June 

hearing that examined the May 11th emergency evacuation of the 

Capitol complex. We heard then about the need to redouble our 

focus on emergency planning. I certainly look forward to hearing 

the views of today’s witnesses on this aspect of accessibility. 

There is much to explore here today. Again, I appreciate your 

holding the hearing, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to the testimony. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank the Ranking Member, the gentlelady 

from California, for her comments. 

Mr. Ehlers. 

Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank you 

for holding this hearing. I think it is one of the more important 

pieces of legislation passed in the past couple decades. I appreciate 

the first President Bush for initiating this and pushing it hard and 

getting it done. I only regret that Congress did not immediately put 

it in effect in our buildings here. I wish they had; it would have 

given us a head start. But I am pleased that when Newt Gingrich 

became Speaker, that was a very high priority for him. So we put 

ourselves into that law very quickly. 

I think the progress is very good. It is very difficult to do many 

of these things in these old buildings, especially with the large 

amounts of stone and concrete in the buildings. We have made 

4 

progress; we have more to do. And I think it is very important that 

we have this hearing so that we can highlight what remains to be 

done. But I am pleased not only for the reasons of staff members 

being able to get around the buildings easily, but especially the 

many tourists that we have. And I know that many of those who 

come from my district are elderly, they charter buses to come, and 

they would not have been able to see the Capitol very well at all 

in the past. Now they can come and thoroughly enjoy it, and they 

do enjoy seeing where the founders of this Nation worked. And so 

it is not just a matter of accommodating employees, but accommodating millions of visitors. 

I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. The gentlelady from California, Ms. 

Lofgren. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I do have a statement, but I know 

Mr. Langevin has a conflict with another committee assignment, so 

I am wondering if I can defer until after his testimony. 

The CHAIRMAN. You may defer until afterwards. 

[The statement of Ms. Lofgren follows:] 

5 


Insert offset folio 12 here 23251.001
6 


Insert offset folio 13 here 23251.002
7 


Insert offset folio 14 here 23251.003
8 

The CHAIRMAN. And with that, we want to welcome our colleague, Congressman Langevin. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. JAMES R. LANGEVIN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF RHODE 

ISLAND 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Good morning. I want to begin by thanking you, Chairman Ney 

and Ranking Member Millender-McDonald, and the entire committee for convening today’s hearing, ‘‘Accessibility of the House 

Complex For Persons With Special Needs.’’ I commend you for your 

dedication to improving our service to Americans with disabilities, 

and I am grateful for the opportunity to testify. 

In particular, Mr. Chairman, I just want to mention how much 

I appreciate how personally you have been involved in accessibility 

issues. And people with disabilities certainly have a friend in Bob 

Ney—and I appreciate that—as well as Ms. Millender-McDonald 

and the other members of this committee. 

This week marked the 15th anniversary of the Americans with 

Disabilities Act, and I have encouraged Americans to acknowledge 

the anniversary by reflecting on the act’s successes and discussing 

the work that is still left to be done. It is fitting that we also examine our own workplace and the ways that we can make it better. 

Now, when I entered Congress in 2000 as the first quadriplegic 

ever to serve in the House, some changes had to be made to accommodate my service. I would like to start by acknowledging the efforts of the House leadership, the CAO, this committee and many 

others to ensure that I can work in Congress just as effectively as 

any Member. And I was, and continue to be, overwhelmed by how 

helpful my colleagues have been. 

I was provided accessible office space on the first floor of the 

Cannon Building; additional space on the House floor was provided 

through removal of a chair; and an adjustable podium in the well 

of the Chamber also, that allows me to address my colleagues on 

the floor. And like many reasonable accommodations, this podium, 

which moves easily up and down to various heights, has proven 

useful to Members both with and without disabilities. 

Now, while these changes have made it possible for me to do my 

job, there are certainly areas where the House can improve at accessibility, both for me and for our many disabled staff members, 

interns, and especially visitors. 

I believe the most pressing issue facing persons with special 

needs in the House of Representatives is in the area of emergency 

preparedness. Now, because of the limited number of accessible entrances in and out of the Capitol, it is critical that these accessible 

routes are clear, marked, staffed and unobstructed. Capitol Police 

and other staff members must be knowledgeable about where to direct visitors in the case of an emergency or evacuation. And again, 

recent years have seen many significant improvements in this area, 

but we still need to remain ever mindful of the needs of those with 

disabilities as we implement an emergency response and evacuation plan. 

Now, for example, I understand that the House will soon implement new guidelines designating Capitol Police-staffed elevators in 

9 

each House office building to be used by individuals with disabilities during evacuation. And I applaud this initiative, and I hope 

that all officers will receive training about how to communicate 

this information to their disabled staff, their interns and guests. 

And I would also advocate that each building entrance have the 

right evacuation information available to share with visitors with 

obvious disabilities. 

I know that also one elevator in the Capitol Building uses a separate power supply and will remain operational in a blackout. However, I am concerned that visitors and most staff are not aware of 

this elevator and could not take advantage of it in a power loss situation. I would suggest that signs be placed in the Capitol so that 

all individuals with disabilities are aware of the location of this elevator. 

Now, furthermore, it would be wise to consider ensuring that at 

least one elevator in each House office building is similarly set up 

to be unaffected by power loss. 

One other thing that comes to mind as well: When there is a vote 

in progress, for example, we know that the bottom elevator buttons 

no longer are functional for the Member elevators, and the elevator 

buttons above those that are normally used are the ones that are 

in operation; and obviously those are far out of reach for someone 

who is in a wheelchair, not able to reach to that height. So I think 

it would be important to reconsider the placement of those buttons, 

or making them operational in the event of—the bottom buttons 

operational in the event of an emergency. 

Now, I also serve on two committees, Armed Services and Homeland Security. The Armed Services Committee hearing room was 

made accessible for me during my first term. However, the Homeland Security Committee does not have a permanent committee 

room, and we have met in several locations over the last few years. 

And when the committee utilizes a room, a temporary portable 

ramp is often brought in so that I can access the dais. And while 

this works on a day-to-day basis, in the case of an emergency, having to properly position the ramp and clear obstacles could shave 

valuable minutes off my exit time. Now, I hope in the near future 

the plans will be made to make all hearing rooms accessible. 

Finally, I believe our most critical shortcoming is the access to 

the House Chamber itself. In order to exit or enter the Chamber, 

I and other wheelchair or scooter users must use a doorway off the 

Speaker’s lobby, far to one side of the floor. Now, under normal circumstances, this route is adequate; however, in a panic-filled emergency situation, I am not confident that I could make it through 

the crowd and out of the Chamber quickly or safely if I were on 

the opposite side. 

Now, my staff has attended emergency drills on the House floor 

on my behalf, and they have expressed the same fears to me based 

on what they witnessed during the exercises. 

Now, I understand that options and work is under consideration 

for emergencies, to include the use of a pull-out ramp that could 

be extended over the stairs when needed. Under this scenario, a 

designated employee would have the responsibility for placing the 

ramp over the stairs at the main entrance in order to provide 

handicapped Members or staff an additional exit from the ChamVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:59 Sep 27, 2005 Jkt 23251 PO 00000 Frm 000011 Fmt 06633 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\A251.XXX A251
10 

ber. And while these solutions sound viable in theory, I certainly 

have doubts about their execution in a chaotic and panicked evacuation where everyone’s primary concern will be getting themselves 

to safety as quickly as possible. 

If you can think of how it would play out, I understand that this 

ramp would be over the stairs opposite the Speaker’s rostrum, and 

someone would have to pull the ramp out over the stairs. Again, 

in theory it works, but if the alarm goes off and people are quickly 

exiting the Chamber, that means they would have to stop people 

from exiting, pull out the ramp, get it into position, and then allow 

people to go out. I just find it unlikely that that is going to play 

out as intended. 

Now, as you address accessibility issues facing our workplace, I 

hope that you will bear these comments in mind. Again, I want to 

thank the committee for your interest in these issues. 

My treatment as a Member of Congress illustrates the tremendous advances America has made in terms of accommodating employees with disabilities. It shows how institutions, even very old 

ones, can adapt to accommodate people in special circumstances. 

I have often said that I may be the first quadriplegic ever to 

serve in the United States House of Representatives, but I most 

certainly will not be the last. We owe it to our colleagues, our visitors, and to the future leaders of our Nation to do all that we can 

to see that the Capitol complex meets their accessibility needs. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back and I thank you for 

the opportunity to testify. 

[The statement of Mr. Langevin follows:] 

11 


Insert offset folio 23 here 23251.004
12 


Insert offset folio 24 here 23251.005
13 

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I want to thank the gentleman, and I think 

your testimony is important. Also, I would like to state that you 

contribute a lot to Congress, and add valuable insights to the 

issues we deal with. I know when I was in the state senate one 

time, I had fractured my leg, and it was temporary, 6, 7 weeks— 

and this was years ago, 14, 15 years ago—trying to get around was 

a nightmare. And it sure woke me up. And I don’t think a lot of 

people think about the issue. You being here and the insight you 

provide is extremely valuable for the House future. It extends not 

just to Members but also to visitors and staff. 

Here in our Committee, when I first became Chairman, we hired 

a gentleman who did our policy, who is blind; he has now moved 

over to the Department of Commerce. But it gave us a lot of reflection and insight here about ways that we could change things. And 

the way we did it was to sit down with Pat and find out ways that 

worked. And some of those things have become permanent ideas 

that we can use in other places in the House. So I appreciate your 

testimony. 

I have one question to ask. I guess I didn’t follow it; the issue 

of the ramp that pulls out by the Speaker’s rostrum, it goes over 

which step? 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Directly opposite the Speaker’s rostrum. The 

door, for example, that the President enters and exits during the 

State of the Union, that main entrance, just opposite his rostrum 

at the other end of the Chamber.There will be—I guess they are 

working on installing a ramp that will pull out from under the 

stairs and go over the stairs. I have advocated that there should 

be a permanent ramp that is placed there. It is only a matter of 

a few stairs, and it doesn’t seem that it would protrude out too far 

into the hallway. In fact, the stairs are actually recessed in before 

you actually get to the end of the doorway, so it really wouldn’t extend far out to the hall. I have advocated that that be a permanent 

ramp so you don’t have to have someone pull it out and put it back 

every time you want to use it. 

The CHAIRMAN. It would probably help in that case, too. Some of 

the stairs have narrowed over the course since 1859, going up into 

there. Now I know where you are talking about. 

I think you are talking about room 311, with Cannon for Homeland Security, Room 311. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. There are a few different committee rooms that 

they use. 

The CHAIRMAN. I know that the Architect is equipping Room 311 

with some changes. There is still an issue where Homeland Security is looking for some office space in another building, I don’t 

know which one. But I think 311 has an August plan by the Architect, which is some good news on that. 

I don’t have any questions, I just appreciate the insight that you 

have given us in working with us on this issue. 

The gentlelady. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I 

too appreciate you coming this morning. You have set the precedent for us to really look at this critically for Members, as well as 

for those who come to visit in the House. 

14 

When you spoke of signs in the corridor, throughout the corridor, 

that they should be clear, marked, and I think lighted, and also I 

think they should be audible for those special needs folks who need 

to have that type of sound as well, as we evacuate or have to evacuate. 

You mentioned elevators. They are slow with us anyway. I think 

these elevators need to be checked and double-checked. But to even 

think of the fact that the button needs to be in a place where it 

is accessible is another very sensitive thing that perhaps a lot of 

us don’t think about, and I think it is so important that that is 

done. 

Are there any other things, any other organizations and departments here in the House that you have tried to have accommodations and they have not been readily accessible to you? Or are people very accommodating to you? 

Mr. LANGEVIN. No. I found in most all situations, those that have 

responsibility for trying to make the changes have worked diligently to make it happen. With the exception of adding a permanent ramp through one of the other doors of the House Chamber, 

of the House floor, everything else has happened pretty quickly. 

The only other thing that comes to mind is the issue of automatic 

door openers for people with disabilities. You know, I suppose if 

you have a staff member or visitors who come to visit, they can’t 

exit or enter the room without the assistance of someone opening 

or closing the door. Obviously—I know I have automatic door openers right outside my office. I know Ms. Lofgren has a member on 

her staff with a disability and has automatic door openers outside 

of her office. And some Members do. I notice maybe a couple of 

other Members have them. But that should, if possible, become 

standard. 

And the other only thing that comes to mind is—and I don’t necessarily have any answers as to how you remedy this, but for someone with a disability there are only two ways to—oh, I am sorry; 

there are two or three ways to exit the building: the Capitol, and 

that is merely all on the first floor. But if you are coming right off 

the House Chamber, for example, if I am coming out of the House 

Chamber I have to exit the Chamber, get into the elevator, go down 

one floor, and then down a corridor and out the first floor entrance, 

or go down to the sub-basement and exit through the tunnel. 

And I know that there are options that are being considered or 

reviewed as to how someone could exit the building from the second floor, as most Members would do if they were leaving the 

Chamber in an emergency situation; even routine. But other than 

that, and adding a probably very long ramp off those very high 

stairs, there aren’t many good options. But I know that there are 

also situations where they have special chairs that people would be 

transferred into and could help the individual to go down the 

stairs. But those are just the things that come to mind. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. That is great information, and information that we should, indeed, take under advisement in ensuring 

that we continue to provide accessibility for more Members who are 

coming in and more visitors, who are sure to increase. Given the 

expansion in the new Visitors Center, we will have more folks coming in. 

15 

You spoke about the one elevator that remains operable in light 

of a blackout, and a lot of folks don’t know about this elevator. I 

suppose I don’t know either. Where is this elevator again? 

Mr. LANGEVIN. If you are looking at the House Chamber, and you 

are looking right at the Speaker’s rostrum, it would be the elevator 

to the left of the—so you would exit the Speaker’s lobby left, and 

it is—Wendy, the elevator operator, it is usually—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Is that the elevator that Wendy operates? 

Mr. LANGEVIN. That is right. 

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. Everybody knows Wendy. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. And I have been informed, unless I am mistaken, 

that all elevators work even if the fire alarms are going off, the 

emergency alarm is going off. I believe that is correct. 

Mr. HANTMAN. We have emergency power on two elevators in the 

Capitol. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. And where is the other one, Mr. Architect? 

Mr. HANTMAN. On the Senate side. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. I was going to ask, what is the comparable nature of the House and the Senate in terms of accessibility? And I suppose you will get to that when you come to that. 

So during the last evacuation, I was concerned about other Members as well as yourself in getting out. I wonder if—and typically 

they tell you if emergencies come, do not use elevators; but that 

one, of course, will have to be used by those who are with special 

needs. Is that the elevator that you went down on to get out? 

Mr. LANGEVIN. That’s right. And I knew about it, so I automatically just went to the elevator and down to the first floor and out. 

They said the other option is to go down to the sub-basement and 

out through the tunnel. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Mr. Chairman, I was asking staff if 

all hearing rooms have the accessibility of Members to come up to 

the dais. And they think perhaps all of them were accessible, with 

the exception of the one that the Congressman speaks of in the 

area, I suppose, that he has been using in terms of Homeland Security. So that is something that we need to check. And I had a briefing the other day in 311, so there needs to be more further work 

on that as well. 

We thank you very much for being here this morning, sharing 

your thoughts with us. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Gentlelady from California. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Well, I thank Congressman Langevin. As a Member of Congress, he has the ability to be heard in a way that members of the staff and public don’t, and so I think it is very important that he is here, not only identifying issues that he has faced, 

but also speaking for hundreds of people who couldn’t be a witness, 

who are in wheelchairs or who need accommodations for access in 

emergency. I think it is very important both for the public and for 

staff, and I thank you for taking the time to do it. 

One question I had—we are on the same floor, and there is a 

button access into the Cannon Building—but your office is down 

the hall, so even in an evacuation—obviously you are not always 

16 

in your office, but in an evacuation you actually have to backtrack, 

I assume, in order to get out. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. If I were going to go out to the street entrance, 

I would just go down that hall. I am hoping that eventually—and 

I believe plans may be underway—to make the elevator nearest my 

office operational and have a separate power supply. 

Ms. LOFGREN. So that would be one solution. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. The one thing that also concerns me, and I think 

it needs to be thought through a little bit more, I understand that 

elevators would be designated, and people with disabilities, I am 

told—and this is just from information I received from a disabled 

staffer—said that they are instructed to go to one particular place 

and there will be people there to assist them out. And this individual pointed out to me, he went to this location and waited, you 

know, for a while for someone to arrive—which someone ultimately 

did arrive to assist him—but he said he could have been out of the 

building long before if he had just gone to the nearest entrance or 

exit. And I think that is something to be considered. 

I think people with disabilities, if there is an emergency situation, if they know of an exit out of the building, should just immediately try to get out the quickest way possible. And if they are 

going to need assistance, then there is no particular place—— 

Ms. LOFGREN. I think that is an excellent point, because when 

there is an evacuation it is a little intense, and the less plans that 

need to be implemented, the better off we are going to be. If we 

could just allow people to exit on their own, that is much to be preferred, it seems to me. 

I have a statement which I will make a part of the official record. 

I would like to note that I do have a member of my staff who uses 

a wheelchair who is here today, Vance Taylor, and he has been a 

help to me in understanding these issues. 

And just as Congressman Langevin has for all of us in the Congress, one of the issues that Vance has run into—and I am wondering if you have, Congressman—is when there is an evacuation 

and you are on the street, the Jersey barriers are very close together; and in an evacuation, at one point Vance’s chair was actually stuck between two Jersey barriers. And I am wondering if that 

is an issue that you have run into—I think you might have been 

in your van, I don’t know if you were on the street or not—but in 

your moving around, whether that has posed a challenge. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. I haven’t run into that problem, but I think I 

know what you are talking about in terms of further out towards 

the street, a little bit away from the complex where Jersey barriers 

still exist. I have seen many of the Jersey barriers have been replaced by the steel poles that are permanently mounted in the 

ground that surround the Capitol complex. To my knowledge, those 

are spread spaces wide enough so that there is not a problem going 

through them. But the Jersey barriers, I can’t speak to that, but 

I can see where that may be a problem. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Maybe I can ask the Architect on that? 

I know you have to get to another committee, so I won’t ask any 

further questions at this point, other than just to say thanks. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you. 

17 

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank the gentleman again for your 

testimony and your insight. I also want to thank you for your assistance with the Help America Vote Act a couple years ago. Your 

insight on that was critical to us being able to get a bill to consideration with a lot of special needs issues. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Your leadership was very helpful on that issue as 

well, Mr. Chairman. Again, on this and many others, I thank you 

for your sensitivity. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Have a good day. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. We are on to panel two. 

I want to thank our second panel for being here today. We are 

fortunate to have with us Jay Eagen, our House Chief Administrative Officer; Alan Hantman, our Architect over the U.S. Capitol; 

and Chief Gainer, Chief of Police of the Capitol Police. 

And with that, which order do you want to begin with? 

Chief GAINER. I defer to my superiors. 

The CHAIRMAN. We will begin with the Architect of the Capitol. 

Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF ALAN HANTMAN, ARCHITECT OF THE 

CAPITOL 

Mr. HANTMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. 

And good morning, Ranking Member Millender-McDonald, and 

other members of the committee. 

I appreciate the opportunity to discuss our efforts to improve 

safety and accessibility across the Capitol complex. 

Safety is a top priority for the AOC. Over the past several years, 

the level of safety throughout the Capitol complex has been continuously improving in an effort to bring our facilities up to date 

with modern codes. Included in that commitment are efforts to 

make the U.S. Capitol and other buildings accessible to all. 

Because the buildings under our care are historic landmark 

structures, applying modern-day fire and safety codes and ADA requirements are not easy tasks, since solutions are not always 

straightforward. This sometimes involves developing alternative 

performance criteria rather than applying strictly proscriptive criteria in the code. 

Thorough studies are completed to assure that appropriate fire 

protections and solutions are developed, that accessibility and safe 

ways to egress are provided, while ensuring that unique architectural features in this building are not compromised or destroyed. 

Following passage of the ADA, the AOC established an ADA accessibility program to eliminate physical barriers and improve all 

means of access on Capitol Hill. Today, ADA issues are typically 

handled as routine components of larger projects. With new facilities such as the CVC, they are designed in full compliance with 

ADA from ground zero. That means adequate elevators, escalators, 

ramps, strobes, text screening and orientation theaters. All of these 

issues are much more simple to accommodate in new structures, as 

the Chairman pointed out in his opening statements. 

The AOC also places the highest priority on providing immediate 

attention to relieve specific accessibility problems that are identified. 

18 

Mr. Chairman, over the years, Congress has been very supportive in providing the necessary funds to assure the accessibility, 

safety, and well-being of everyone who works in and visits the Capitol complex. 

The joint commitment of the AOC and Congress has resulted in 

a number of vital projects, including the modernization of public 

restrooms in the Capitol and House office buildings; the installation of way-finding and ADA signage that features exit signage in 

Braille and raised characters; the removal of revolving doors and 

replacing them with swing doors which are more accessible to people in wheelchairs; the installation of ramps and automatic door 

openers, as well as the modification of curbs and sidewalks; the installation of strobe alarms and sprinklers throughout our buildings; 

and the establishment of emergency staging areas that was discussed before; the removal of flagpoles and other objects in hallways that are tripping hazards during an emergency evacuation. 

In addition, we have been working closely with the other legislative branch agencies to find better, more efficient ways to evacuate 

the buildings during emergencies and to educate people on the 

safest way to exit. This includes identifying certain elevators to be 

used to evacuate mobility-impaired individuals in an emergency. 

Mr. Chairman, this is a short list of the many projects we have 

been working on over the past several years. 

Since September 11th, we have taken a closer look at a number 

of issues beyond security; among them, accessibility and the ability 

to evacuate all people safely and quickly from our buildings. The 

AOC is dedicated to providing a safe and secure environment 

throughout the Capitol complex, while at the same time preserving 

the historic value and beauty of these national landmarks. 

I look forward to our continued work together on this important 

issue, and I am happy to answer any questions you may have. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. Hantman follows:] 

19 


Insert offset folio 39 here 23251.006
20 


Insert offset folio 40 here 23251.007
21 


Insert offset folio 41 here 23251.008
22 


Insert offset folio 166 here 23251.009
23 

The CHAIRMAN. And the CAO, Mr. Eagen. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. EAGEN III, CHIEF 

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 

Mr. EAGEN. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

Millender-McDonald, members of the committee. I am pleased to be 

before you to talk about the CAO’s responsibilities in assisting persons with disabilities to have assess to the House campus. In stating that, I would like to be clear that I would also like to speak 

to other functions that are performed by other House entities, including the House leadership, Member and committee offices, the 

Architect of the Capitol, the Clerk’s Office, the Congressional Special Services Office—and I brought brochures from that particular 

operation, which is a bicameral service across the House and Senate boundaries—and the Office of the Sergeant at Arms. 

With a mandate of accessibiity as cornerstone, the CAO has 

worked over the last 10 years to assist House offices with making 

their workplaces more accessible to employees and visitors. In the 

area of computer accessibility, section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act 

provides that individuals with disabilities are to have access to 

Federal Government electronic information comparable to the access available to individuals without disabilities. 

The Web Services Branch of House Information Resources, part 

of the CAO, assists Member and committee offices that use its 

services to create and maintain accessible Web sites. The CAO also 

publishes materials that are used as an educational tool about the 

disability services that are provided throughout the House. 

In January of this year, the latest version of HouseSmart was 

distributed to all House offices. Organized by topic, HouseSmart 

contains a section on available disability services such as audio, 

Braille and large-print publication services, and information on 

how to obtain specially formatted maps and brochures from the 

Congressional Special Services Office. 

HouseSmart also contains information on telecommunications devices, TTYs, available for hearing impaired individuals, and contact 

information for the Congressional Special Services Office to obtain 

training on how to use the TTY machines. A TTY is a special device that lets people who are hearing impaired or speech impaired 

use the telephone to communicate by allowing them to type messages back and forth to one another. Public TTY machines are located in the Rayburn, Longworth, and Ford House office buildings, 

and in the Capitol. 

CAO also publishes the biweekly House Services Bulletin that 

contains information about House services, including disability 

services such as the availability of TTY machines and a Federal 

relay service. The Federal relay service provides for communication 

assistance to act as intermediaries for telecommunications between 

hearing individuals and individuals who are hearing impaired or 

have speech disabilities. It also allows House employees, who have 

the same disabilities, equal communication access. 

As part of the renovation of House committee hearing rooms, 

CAO is installing state-of-the-art infrared assistive listening devices. These systems employ infrared light that carries the desired 

sound from the source—a person speaking, or music—via a transVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:59 Sep 27, 2005 Jkt 23251 PO 00000 Frm 000025 Fmt 06633 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\A251.XXX A251
24 

mitter to hearing impaired listeners wearing receivers. Sixteen 

committee hearing rooms and three subcommittee hearing rooms 

presently have the systems installed. For those hearing rooms that 

do not contain the infrared assistive listening devices, the Congressional Special Services Office has portable assistive listening devices that may be loaned for short-term use. 

Ten House committee witness tables have been modified to accommodate witnesses that use wheelchairs. CAO has two additional tables that comply with height requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act that may be used by committees, or we 

can temporarily modify witness tables so that tables are compliant. 

In fact, the table we are using today is one of those loaner tables. 

During the 108th Congress, the Committee on House Administration approved a program to replace existing Member office furniture with modular furniture. Modular furniture has numerous 

features that can assist those employees with a disability, including 

data and electrical outlets at desk height, door pulls that are ADAcompliant, and adjustable-height keyboards. In addition, during the 

office design phase, inquiries were made to determine what accommodations need to be made, and the plans were reviewed to ensure 

accessibility standards. 

ADA Services, which is under the CAO, was created to enhance 

the awareness of ADA public access issues within House organizations. In furtherance of this, ADA Services provides one-stop service to assist House staff in making their programs accessible to persons with disabilities. ADA Services works with the Congressional 

Special Services Office to help provide sign language interpreters, 

brochures, and maps that allow for blind or visually impaired visitors to tour the Capitol. 

The CAO also works in conjunction with the Architect of the 

Capitol to provide inspections to Member and committee offices 

that center on OSHA safety and ADA compliance. During these inspections, wheelchair accessibility of an office is assessed and suggestions are made to staff on office configurations to provide greater accessibility. 

With regard to employment barriers, the CAO administers a contract to provide temporary employment opportunities with the 

House officers—the CAO, the Clerk of the House and the Sergeant 

at Arms—for individuals with disabilities. The program is designed 

to provide these individuals with the necessary job skills that potentially lead to employment with the House. To date, 24 people 

with disabilities have been placed in the CAO and Sergeant at 

Arms offices. 

To fully realize the goal that Congress mandated when the Congressional Accountability Act was adopted, we see at least three 

key areas that still have more work to be done. First, while we 

have made progress, the challenge of the high volume of staff turnover requires a continuous education concerning ADA services by 

all entities, including the CAO. 

Second, we must keep looking for new assistive technologies to 

further break down the barriers to access. This includes not only 

physical access but also employment access. 

And finally, we need to look for creative partnerships with the 

Office of Compliance and other similar entities to provide a robust 

25 

training program for all House staff so they can assist in providing 

access to all who work or visit the House. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify, Mr. Chairman, I am 

happy to answer any questions. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Eagen. 

[The statement of Mr. Eagen follows:] 

26 


Insert offset folio 48 here 23251.010
27 


Insert offset folio 49 here 23251.011
28 


Insert offset folio 50 here 23251.012
29 


Insert offset folio 51 here 23251.013
30 

The CHAIRMAN. Chief Gainer. 

STATEMENT OF TERRANCE W. GAINER, CHIEF OF POLICE, 

UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE 

Chief GAINER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Ranking Member, 

and members of the committee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before the committee. I would ask leave to file my complete 

remarks, and I have some abbreviated comments. 

The recent attacks on London’s mass transportation system provides us with a vivid warning to maintain our vigilance and continue to build an emergency preparedness program that will ensure 

safe access and egress for each of the tens of thousands of employees and visitors who populate this complex every day. 

Although we can never be complacent and will always strive to 

improve, we have made great strides in the almost 4 years since 

the terrorist attacks of 9/11 in advancing our readiness to respond 

to emergencies and our ability to protect the occupants of the Congressional complex. 

Just in the last year, with the approval and support of this committee, the Capitol Police have created a 10-person Emergency 

Management Division to address the way in which we prepare for 

and respond to emergencies. This group consists of planning and 

training specialists who bring us many years of experience in incident command, hazardous material response, firefighting, public 

health and disaster assistance, that can be translated into improved contingency plans, better training and exercises that improve the proficiency of our officers in emergency response procedures. 

We work closely here with our partners from the House Sergeant 

at Arms Office and the House Office of Emergency Planning, Preparedness and Operations, as well as the Architect of the Capitol 

and the Senate Sergeant at Arms Office of Security and Emergency 

Preparedness. 

As an example, we worked closely with the Police Board, the 

House Sergeant at Arms and his staff on a computerized evacuation model of the Capitol Building that should verify the best 

evacuation routes and help us move more people safely out of the 

building in the least amount of time. If this effort is successful, we 

hope to perform the same type of modeling in other buildings within the Capitol complex. 

The partnership amongst the legislative Emergency Preparedness Organization is formalized in the Capitol Hill Emergency 

Measures Task Force. This group is made up of representatives of 

the Capitol Police, House, Senate, Architect of the Capitol, D.C. 

Fire, and other legislative branch entities, such as the GAO, the 

GPO and the Library of Congress. They meet every 2 weeks to facilitate improvements in our emergency preparedness and life safety programs. 

We do take very seriously our responsibilities to assist with the 

safe evacuation of the building. We treat every building evacuation, 

whether a drill, unintentional alarm activation, or the actual emergency, as a learning experience and a chance to improve our methods and skills. Observations from many sources are recorded, incorVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:59 Sep 27, 2005 Jkt 23251 PO 00000 Frm 000032 Fmt 06633 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\A251.XXX A251
31 

porated into our plans and procedures, and shared with all our divisions and shifts. 

It is unfortunate that we live in a world where such scenarios 

may need to be considered, but even the recent air threat evacuations provided lessons and inspired new procedures. Based on 

these events, we have implemented rally points for evacuees to 

gather on each side of the complex that are far enough away from 

the building for safety but close enough for the Capitol Police to 

provide a measure of security and up-to-date information on the 

resolution of the incident. 

The design and construction of these buildings present difficult 

challenges that have no easy financial or architectural solutions, 

but we are committed to providing people with physical disabilities 

the best possible chance to safely exit these buildings in the event 

of an emergency. This issue is a priority of the Emergency Measures Task Force, and they have worked closely with advocacy 

groups for the disabled to help formulate a practical and effective 

solution. 

For the last 18 months, we have been building and testing a prototype emergency elevator evacuation program for the mobilityimpaired. If an emergency building evacuation is required, a Capitol Police officer takes control of the designated elevator in each 

building and visits each floor evacuating people needing assistance. 

Our officers will continue to perform this function as long as it is 

reasonably safe to do so, and then in that event, turn this over to 

the fire department, who are better equipped and armed to do this. 

In cooperation with the Senate Sergeant at Arms, we have successfully tested this procedure in the Senate office buildings through 

several rounds of evacuation drills, often using mobility-impaired 

volunteers from Members’ offices and committees and staffs to ensure that the process meets their needs. 

The Architect of the Capitol has provided excellent technical support in resolving a number of mechanical issues in the Capitol and 

the House office buildings. In the next few weeks, in coordination 

with the emergency planners and the House Sergeant at Arms, we 

will continue the training of both officers and staff on the procedures, and expect to implement the complete program campus-wide 

very shortly. 

Mr. Chairman, although we still have much to accomplish with 

our partners from the House, the Senate, the Architect of the Capitol, the Office of Compliance, and most importantly, I think, the 

advocacy groups, I am proud of what the Capitol Police have accomplished to make this complex safe for everyone. 

I again would like to thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee, and I would be happy to answer any questions 

that you may have. 

[The statement of Chief Gainer follows:] 

32 


Insert offset folio 57 here 23251.014
33 


Insert offset folio 58 here 23251.015
34 


Insert offset folio 59 here 23251.016
35 


Insert offset folio 60 here 23251.017
36 

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank all members of the panel. I have 

a few questions I just wanted to go through; I will start with the 

Capitol Hill Police Chief. 

How are offices notified of locations of the mustering stations for 

persons on the floors? By mustering, I mean the gathering areas 

where people would go to that need assistance. 

Chief GAINER. That would be part of the training program conducted by both the Capitol Police and the Office of Emergency Preparedness of the House Sergeant at Arms Office. We know we have 

a lot more work to do there. For assistance, I have a brochure that 

was designed and we developed for the Senate side, and it would 

be our intention to have this for the House side also. It does require further training. 

The CHAIRMAN. What can we do about emergency warnings for 

people who are deaf? We struggled here with the audio signals, and 

of course, we couldn’t get it all wired, so I think you made a good 

choice in the temporary, with the plug-in signals—I forget what 

you call them. 

Mr. HANTMAN. I think, Mr. Chairman, you are talking about 

strobes? 

Mr. CHAIRMAN. Yes, for the signal you can hear. We couldn’t wire 

the whole building, so we went to the plug-ins that would give the 

emergency signal audibly—annunciators. Thank you. What about 

visuals? 

Chief GAINER. The strobe lights is what would be used. 

And if I can, Mr. Chairman, an important part of any of these 

emergency procedures is that the plan in the individual office and 

the office’s responsibility in buddies, especially when it comes to 

people with disabilities, is to make sure that they have a buddy 

system and work together with that buddy. 

The CHAIRMAN. Who is responsible, in a fire emergency, for evacuating persons who have special needs, United States Capitol Police or the Metro D.C. Fire? 

Chief GAINER. The first responders, we presume, are going to be 

the United States Capitol Police. And again, based on the—just recently completed on the House side—the designation of the emergency elevators, and then the training that will be done over the 

next 30 to 60 days, the individual offices and the evacuees would 

go to the designated spots. And we are training our officers, who 

will take responsibility for the operation of the elevators at those 

rallying points. They will stay and do that until everybody is evacuated, unless the situation in the building, whether it is fire or 

smoke, precludes them from taking further action; then we will 

turn that over to D.C. Fire. 

As soon as D.C. Fire comes, working with the fire marshal of the 

Capitol complex, we set up a joint command post, and we would 

turn that evacuation procedure over to the fire department. 

The CHAIRMAN. If D.C. Fire cannot get here for some reason, 

what do we do? I know that the United States Capitol Police respond, but what do we do fire-wise to begin? We don’t have anything that would—— 

Chief GAINER. We do not have fire trucks or firefighting equipment. So in the event of a fire, we would sound the alarm, begin 

37 

the evacuation, and we would continue to evacuate until it is no 

longer physically possible for us to do that. 

The CHAIRMAN. I just wanted to note one thing about the morning—I had arrived here very early in the morning to go through emails, 4 o’clock or something. And then around 4:10 the alarm 

went off; they caught something on fire on the balcony. I am assuming that as D.C. came up the barrier was dropped and they 

came in. I was just wondering if there was some kind of problem— 

not that you can solve every problem—but what would happen to 

us fire-wise? We don’t even have one vehicle on hand for the fire 

side. 

I think as far as still evacuating, we would still be able to perform that. United States Capitol Police would go look for all persons and also persons that have some special needs, but fire-wise, 

we are kind of on our own until D.C. Metro gets here. 

Chief GAINER. In many respects, except we are in the midst of 

certifying and training our officers in the use of the fire extinguishers, but that is not the primary response. But there is a process that we need to—and I think we have been working with the 

Office of Compliance to make sure that we use those minimum capabilities. But we think the relationship and the communication we 

have with D.C. Fire is that they are here as quickly as possible. 

We have our own procedures for removing the barriers to get 

them in. We work and we drill that. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. And for the Architect, do you have 

any ‘‘most difficult’’ stories that are the most difficult things to do, 

or one building is more difficult than another; or does it tend to be 

difficult all over the place? 

Mr. HANTMAN. Well, the issue of historic preservation that you 

prefaced your remarks with earlier on, is really a tremendous challenge. As you know, there are ramps all over the Capitol, there are 

changes of elevation. Congressman Langevin was talking about differences in elevation and access to the House Chamber. The specific door he was talking about, for instance, was the main door 

leading right into the House Chamber, and there is a 20-inch differential in height over there with those three steps. According to 

ADA, we should have a 20-foot-long ramp accessing that if we were 

to meet the ADA criteria. 

What the Congressman was talking about was basically we are 

looking at doing a 7-foot ramp that can pull out, doesn’t meet ADA, 

but it does, in fact, give you the ability to move somebody quickly 

through there and down and out of the Chamber. 

So it is really the elevational changes that become so difficult all 

around the building, whether it is the Cannon Building, which is 

specifically fairly difficult because of the changes in grade around 

the outside of the building. The West Front of the Capitol, for instance, with the amazing number of steps that we have over there; 

it is not very practical, in fact, to have ramps. 

One of the things we looked at, in fact, for the last Presidential 

Inaugural is that we redesigned the stands for the inauguration 

ceremonies to put lifts and ramps in so that people could get down 

to the Presidential platform, and to the congressional platforms, to 

give it as much accessibility as we could. And we try to do that on 

a case-by-case basis. 

38 

Chief GAINER. Mr. Chairman, forgive me, would you mind—lest 

I leave the impression that we are powerless until the fire department comes—there has been, under the Architect’s direction, the 

installation of the sprinkler system throughout the campus, which 

I think is very important in mitigating fire damage or smoke damage. So it is an important part of the process that is ongoing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Someone said we ought to have a fire department, and I believe that. We have to use the availability of the 

Metro D.C., but having a fire department is a great point when trying to think about every contingency. I know all three of you gentlemen, and we have worked for years to try to think of every single thing you can think of, and then think of something more. And 

I understand that nothing is perfect. But that day I was just thinking if there was some scenario or some type of bombs on different 

sides of the streets, where it would be good to have one piece of 

equipment on hand. But in terms of the evacuation, we would be 

intact and able to continue to do what we do, with or without the 

arrival of the fire department. 

The other question I had was to the architect. Does it make more 

sense to pursue some of these issues, hearing rooms, et cetera, one 

at a time as they come, several improvements at once, or in 

groups? Is there any strategy to that. 

Mr. HANTMAN. Not only in hearing rooms, Mr. Chairman, but in 

Members’ offices. We have been dealing with them on a one-at-atime basis. It is very expensive, very difficult with the tight quarters and the number of people who sit at a dais, for instance. The 

new hearing room that will be used for Homeland Security, which 

you talked about earlier, used to be the Small Business room in 

Cannon 311. There will be a new lower dais that will be installed 

inside this kind of a horseshoe, and that will be fully accessible to 

any Members who would sit over there. And again, Veterans Affairs has been tailored specifically to the needs of Representative 

Langevin, his getting in there, and we have done that for his office, 

for other offices as individuals come in. We certainly have specific 

door openers, easy accessibility for that and make sure that we address their specific needs. The cost of doing it across the campus 

would be simply astronomical. 

The CHAIRMAN. The last question I have of the architect is, do 

we have any time frame for the completion date for hearing rooms? 

Mr. HANTMAN. In terms of ADA criteria? We, again, Mr. Chairman, are dealing with them on a one-by-one basis as needed, as 

members have that accessibility, as members of the staff serving 

that committee have those needs. So we are doing surveys of each 

of the individual rooms in determining what would have to be 

done. 

The CHAIRMAN. So we will have a guesstimate idea at some point 

in time. It will take 3 years at this amount of money or 4 years 

at that amount of money. 

Mr. HANTMAN. That certainly could be developed. 

The CHAIRMAN. If we could develop guesstimate, I think that 

would be a good idea. 

Thank you. 

39 

Mr. Eagen, do you have sufficient funding for the accessibility 

services to be carried out? This is a softball that is a very important softball. 

Mr. EAGEN. Mr. Chairman, the one key program—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your no, Mr. Eagen. Go ahead. 

Mr. EAGEN. Never is there enough funding. One key program 

that I mentioned earlier in my testimony that does have a direct 

link to ADA accessible improvements is the modular furniture program for Members’ offices. And we began a program last year, and 

it is going to take us some amount of time to accomplish it. We are 

literally trying to cover 10,000 desktops. The schedule is directly 

correlated to the amount of funding that is available, because the 

funding drives how much we can do on a yearly basis. So I would 

answer that somewhat politely to say, we can do it more quickly 

if there is more funding available. How quickly we do it is dictated 

by the funding to a large point. 

The CHAIRMAN. I had another question about modular furniture. 

I think modular furniture has to help in these terrible, terrible 

tight spaces in the personal offices. At least modular furniture 

gives a little bit more room. And you know how the offices are. If 

you have another foot of space, it is a good thing. I would assume 

that you have been really good about doing that project. 

In all seriousness, I threw that money question out there because 

you get people, Members, staff, and the public that want certain 

things done. And they are right in wanting those things done. But 

in order to get those certain things done, it takes a certain amount 

of money to do it. So I just think, somewhere along the line, if we 

look at, what we want to do and the space requirements, how we 

want to change things in personal offices, these committee rooms, 

if we get some guesstimates, at least we know, here it is, and then 

we as authorizers can work with the appropriators. And the appropriators have done a good job in talking to Mr. Lewis and people 

on the staff, and we try to take it in increments. 

I think the money question is a big one. I think we do have to 

say there are certain things we will not be able to continue to do 

unless we have a certain amount of money. We still have to put 

the effort through, whether it is ADA or other issues. And with 

that, I have one final question, and I will yield to my colleagues 

who have been so patient. If anybody will answer. I want to go 

back to a point that was brought up in previous hearings. There 

are so many things in the hallways of these buildings, and I know 

one group said, ‘‘Well, you know, those are our signs on the deficit’’. 

I am not saying I disagree with them for putting that sign up 

there, by the way. And then there are other people that have 

things in the hallways that are actually desks, and they haven’t 

even marked them, ‘‘Take it away’’ or ‘‘Just leave it here’’. In an 

emergency we have to somehow come to terms with these. Perhaps 

Members could place them on the wall. But I still think, in an 

emergency, all these things in the hallways, especially the racks, 

could be tripped over. 

Any comments on it? Let me take it away from an emergency for 

a second. With situations of having citizens or staff or Members in 

the building that have special needs, we have devices that have to 

drive through the hallways. If there is an emergency of an actual 

40 

plane headed here, what happens on that basis with people with 

special needs? Would anybody like to comment? 

Mr. HANTMAN. In line with the issues that are really clearly obstructions in the corridor, Mr. Chairman, one of the things we 

would like to do is outside of many Members’ offices, there are 

state flags. We even have a program to take those flags off the 

floors and have wall mounted elements on them so that nobody 

would trip if they were sight impaired coming down the corridor. 

So anything that really obstructs activity going down the corridor 

is something that really needs to be taken care of and looked at. 

Mr. EAGEN. With regard to the hallway policies, Mr. Chairman, 

you asked a similar question at the first hearing on this subject. 

The Architect and the Chief Administrative Officer have proposed 

a comprehensive set of hallway policies. They are intended to not 

only address the appearance issues that we talked about at the last 

hearing, but also the safety issues of egress and to make the hallways compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. I think 

the sensitivity that is confronting them is exactly what you referenced in that a few members have some artifacts that have been 

placed, and it has been a challenge to find a way to address those. 

The CHAIRMAN. The appearance is one thing that we could debate. I mean, a lot of people do care about the appearance. But to 

me, the appearance is secondary. If you have people going down 

hallways, and there are desks and furniture in those hallways, and 

you are trying to take a motorized device down there, that’s a problem. If you are a blind person, walking on the right side of the hallways as you exit, and there are all these things ahead of you, that’s 

a problem too. With thousands of people coming down hallways, I 

think that has to be the number one thought in our mind. 

Anyone else? 

With that, I want to thank you for your patience, both members. 

Yield to the gentlelady. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you all for being here, all three of you, and we commend 

you for the work that you have done. You have done just exceptional work in trying to meet the requirements and the provisions 

of the ADA. And it is not an easy task, I know, but all the—but 

it is an important task none the least. I will start with our Capitol 

Police Chief. 

And Mr. Chief, you spoke about the rallying points, especially 

given the aftermath of May 11th evacuations. Have the existence 

of those rallying points been communicated to the Members and 

staff? How have you done that communication? Because still, at the 

last one, there were folks who were uncertain. I was in the Capitol. 

I was concerned about my staff in the House. How do those House 

Members, have they been communicated enough, those rallying 

points? 

Chief GAINER. Probably not, ma’am. We have just completed a revised air evacuation plan. It was given to the—it was shared with 

the House officers as recently as this week, and we are working 

with planning office, office of planning to complete that training 

during this August recess so that we hope, when everybody returns 

after the August recess, the training hopefully will be complete 

with all the offices and everybody will be aware of rally points. 

41 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. So during our being away from the 

place, you will be training the staff. 

Chief GAINER. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. That would be good. However, I 

would like to think—would that 1 month be sufficient or should 

that be an ongoing type of thing? 

Chief GAINER. Clearly, as Mr. Eagen said, it really needs to be 

an ongoing event given the turnover and the fact just that practice 

does make perfect, and we need to keep re-emphasizing that. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. And that is true. And as you mention, new staff, hopefully you are cognizant of new staff coming on, 

all three of you. So whatever you are training this present staff, 

when new staff comes on, I hope you have something in place so 

that new staff then can come up to date with the communications 

of the evacuation plans and programs. 

Chief GAINER. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. And I hope that is in place. How do 

you—persons who are visually and hearing disabled, how do you 

warn them, staff and visitors? How do you warn them? I think the 

architect spoke about the strobe light, and it lights up at the time 

of an emergency. My question will be to you, but is there any place 

or any plan that tells them where to go? It is one thing for a light 

to light up, and things are sparkling. But it is another thing for 

people to know which direction to go at the time of that emergency. 

So, Mr. Hantman? 

Mr. HANTMAN. Thank you for that question. The issue of the type 

of emergency also becomes important. If you are talking about 

something that is an evacuation because it is a fire in the building, 

people need to come out of the building. If we are talking about a 

shelter-in-place type of situation because there is some other type 

of issue out there, you really need to have a sound system that 

talks, annunciator system that gives people specific directions: Go 

to the exit; go immediately out of the building; go to your rallying 

point; or get as far away from the building as you can; or whatever 

the nature of it is. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Yes, audible. We have to have something that is audible as well as direction pointing. I mean this is 

an education for Members of Congress as well as the public as well. 

We are learning as you are learning, and so it is important for me 

to know those—how, in fact, the Chief of Police, how do we warn 

visually and hearing disabled staff and visitors during the time of 

an evacuation? 

Chief GAINER. Well, it really is a combination of things. And it 

is probably easier for staff because you can have pre-planning and 

work with each office to set that up and establish a buddy system 

so you would do it through a combination of the audible, which 

would either be the annunciator or the—as we just complete the 

PA system around the campus and the other means with which we 

send the messaging out. So for the visually impaired, we would be 

using the strobe light. 

Now, I think the challenge to us is how we identify those visitors 

to the building who haven’t had the benefit of our planning. So we 

have discussed and are working on the notion that, where possible—and again, we are still working through the ying and yang 

42 

of this—where possible, we would have a 1-page laminated sheet 

or something that we give to those people who we could identify, 

people with disabilities, to give them some further guidance. 

But, frankly, I think that is what we need to work with the community on so that we who aren’t, don’t have the insight—we like 

to believe we do—but we need to work with people who understand 

the problem to see how we best communicate with the individuals 

as they enter our building. 

In addition, then, we have to make, as the Architect and others 

are doing, is put the signage up. And you will see both visiting the 

Senate side, and we are completing the House side, the signage to 

those who can see the signage and the blue and white signs as to 

which way to go and what way not—or excuse me, which way to 

go, positive signs, as well as the marking of exits and other areas. 

Now there are discussions in these working groups whether there 

ought to be, you know, markings on the floor or the wall. And I 

think we are debating all those things in light of the architectural 

impact of those issues. So it is a work in progress. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. You know, Mr. Chairman, as I listen to them, and they are holding up their various pamphlets and 

things that they are doing, because you will have to do this and 

you will have to do it where it is a person who needs Braille, you 

have to accommodate them. There is a need to re-look at some 

budgetary issues here because you are having to do and go beyond 

what you normally do in terms of your budget to do things that are 

just, that must be done for those who have special needs. 

And as I hear you, certainly the Chairman kind of said it in jest, 

but I think it is important that there is a reviewing of budget in 

terms of what they are having to do. 

Mr. Chief, you spoke of the elevator that the Congressman spoke 

about and that you have officers directing people to that elevator 

with special needs. Did I hear that clearly? And officers are there 

to direct them into this elevator? Will the present operator be operating that elevator at the time of the evacuation, or will we have 

those officers doing that? How is that done during the evacuation 

period? 

Chief GAINER. Yes, ma’am. The plan is to mirror what we have 

now in practice on the Senate side, and that is that, ideally, we 

would like to have all the House officers, for instance, trained to 

operate the designated emergency elevators. But that takes some 

time. So what we are doing is identifying officers who normally 

work, as a rule, near those emergency designated elevators. And 

they will be trained by our own personnel as well as the House Office of Emergency Planning, Preparedness and Operations. They 

will have the keys to operate those, and they have a temporary 

breathing apparatus to assist them to try to stop at each floor, step 

off the elevator, look up and down the hallway to see who is coming, get the people on the elevator and get them out. But they will 

do that for as long as it is physically safe for them and then, eventually, turn it over to the Fire Department. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Mr. Architect, I think you spoke to 

it. Sometimes we are speaking to staff as you are speaking, so it 

is not to be rude; it is just to kind of clarify what I am hearing you 

said the last time to get to them. The Congressman expressed conVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:59 Sep 27, 2005 Jkt 23251 PO 00000 Frm 000044 Fmt 06633 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\A251.XXX A251
43 

cerns about the lack of accessible ramps from the House Chamber, 

and I think you were speaking somewhat on that. How do you address those concerns and address the deficiencies in the House Office Buildings as well with respect to the specific emergency evacuation requirements for all employees, visitors with limited mobility? 

Mr. HANTMAN. We have identified, Congresswoman, two exits 

from every building. In fact what we could do is show you some 

boards right now. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. And you know what, at some point 

when I get back, I want to physically walk with you guys, and you 

show me what you are talking about so that I can kind of internalize it as well. 

Mr. HANTMAN. Each of the House Office Buildings, with the exception of the Cannon Building, right now has two means of exiting 

safely out of the building. Here we see the Cannon building. And 

the main means of access and egress is really along New Jersey 

Avenue over here, so there is a ramp coming in over here. We have 

a fundamental problem again with elevation dropping off very 

strongly on First Street and down New Jersey Avenue. And we had 

been discussing at one time the possibility of having a second 

means of egress out through the truck dock area over here. That 

is really not an ideal situation because, again, you are having people come out kind of in the middle of the block, and it really 

doesn’t—they are next to the truck dock. They have got to cross the 

street in the middle over there, so it is not good. But in terms of 

air con and evacuation, maybe it is time that we looked at that 

again and had some mitigating circumstances so that we can have 

a second means out of the Cannon Building itself. And if we could 

see another—and again, you will see here two elevators that are 

on basically emergency power. And the administrative solutions 

that the chief has will work with one of those elevators as a primary and another as a secondary. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Each one of the buildings? 

Mr. HANTMAN. Each one of the buildings will have two elevators 

on the emergency power. So if main power goes off, we have emergency generators that those elevators are hooked up to so that we 

can bring people out. Here we see the Rayburn Building, and there 

is an exit in the courtyard over here. You can see that there is the 

exit symbol for the handicapped in both areas. And you will see 

that it also occurs on South Capitol Street. You have a way to get 

out from this direction as well. So we really have two means of getting out of the building: over here on the courtyard and then over 

here on C Street. So that is the Rayburn Building. And by the way, 

one of the things that the Chief said before relative to our philosophy in terms of life safety, the Rayburn Building is 99 percent 

sprinklered at this point in time. It will be fully sprinklered by the 

end of this year. And that really gives us the ability not necessarily 

to have the areas of refuge, because the code doesn’t call for that 

if you have a fully sprinklered building. So that is our philosophy, 

to make sure we go in, and we do the high-end security solution 

for all of our buildings. 

Here we see the Ford House Office Building, two exits on Third 

Street. And on Second Street, we have installed ramps over there 

44 

so people can get in from both of those sides as well. And here, you 

will see two other elevators again identified on the emergency 

power system so that they can be used in an emergency situation. 

On the next board over here, we see for the Longworth Building, 

we have an exit out at the front and another exit on the side over 

here on South Capitol Street. Again, two To elevator locations that 

would serve that function. 

And on the last board, here we see the Capitol Building itself 

which we had referred to earlier on. And this shows of course the 

ramp way at the south. There is also a means of egress by way of 

a ramp by the Memorial door over here out to the plaza, with an 

elevator over here on the east side which would lead right from the 

floor level down to this level to come on out. And there is another 

on the Senate side as well. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. You know, and thank you so much 

for that. It has certainly shown, to some extent, just what the accommodations are. In listening to the Congressman, and I was asking staff, how does he get into the Capitol to vote? Of course, he 

has to go through the document door or another door they were 

telling me to come in. But it takes time. A lot of us are running 

in 5 minutes to get to an elevator to get down to vote. But they 

almost have to leave before the vote starts in order to get to all of 

this and do all of that and do all of this to get to the floor. Is there 

any way we can accommodate them where it is, the time element 

is, has lessened to what it seems to me it would take 15 minutes 

for them to do all of this? 

Mr. HANTMAN. Congresswoman, we have physical issues of distance. Clearly, as Congressman Langevin indicated, he has a first 

floor office to enable him to shorten any trip. He is not on the sixth 

floor of a building, so he doesn’t have to take an elevator necessarily in that building to come out. He can exit the building directly, which I think was a wonderful accommodation by the House 

itself. But distance is distance. And if you are using a wheelchair 

and you are coming up on a ramp on the south entrance, that will 

lead you directly to the elevators that will take you up to the 

House floor. And it takes a certain amount of time to traverse that 

area. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Is there any way you see that, in 

the future, near future, that that might be shortened some, or will 

there never be because of just the way this place is— 

Mr. HANTMAN. Well, one of the things we have done, we have expanded something to the amount of $20 million on elevator renovations to increase the speed of elevators and the—— 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Thank you. Speed. 

Mr. HANTMAN. In fact, we have some 66 elevators through the 

House Office Buildings and the Capitol as well; 40 of the 62 elevators in the House Office Buildings have been updated so far, and 

26 of the 27 in the Capitol have been updated so far. So, again, the 

speed on that has been improved, and the accessibility and the 

compliance with ADA has also been improved on all of those elevators. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Are we mandated to meet the requirements that are outlined in the ADA by a date specific, Mr. 

Hantman? 

45 

Mr. HANTMAN. I am not aware of any date specific. What we do 

is we have an annual plan, and we look out a number of years, and 

we try to—as indicated before, budget is always an issue. And what 

we are trying to do is ask for reasonable amounts of money in increments so that we can do two things, again, not bust the budget 

and, number two, also not inconvenience the Members. One of the 

challenges that we have, for instance, even in putting in sprinkler 

systems in the Rayburn Building is, because Members are there, 

every space is really taken. We go in at night when the office is 

empty. We do our work. We come back. We clean the office so people can be in it the next day. We do the same thing the following 

night. So space, as you know, Congresswoman, is at a tremendous 

premium over here. The level of inconvenience that the Members 

have really is negative from the perspective of what jobs they can 

do. So working around those schedules and doing things on premium time is something that we find that we must do many, many 

times. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Well, let me thank those who, the 

workers, because of the times we are in our offices until midnight 

or early mornings, frankly. I try to get out no later than midnight, 

after the floor has closed and we can go back and finally get to 

some of the paper work. And they are just so accommodating. They 

won’t come in and disturb us. And sometimes, I say come on in and 

get what you need. Do whatever, work around me. So they are 

trained very well to try not to hinder us or come in while we are 

there. So we thank you for that. 

Mr. Eagen thank you so much for this. This is very nice. 

And the Chief held up one of his, and I suppose I will get one 

of yours as well. 

But this is very nice. 

You mentioned the availability of the TTY system. And I read 

some of the information here about that. What about the TTY system? Do we have that for visitors who want to go to the hearing 

rooms and hear the various hearings that we have? Are those accommodated for them? 

Mr. EAGEN. The TTY is more usable in an office environment. It 

wouldn’t, I don’t believe, be an effective tool in a case like this. Alternatively, there is a system called CART that a committee can 

have brought in at its expense for a hearing that would basically 

create a text rendition of the discussion that is going on in the 

hearing. Those are available. We have made arrangements for that 

service on occasion for committees, and it is the committees’ discretion if they determine that they have a need for the particular 

hearing that they are holding. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. I know when I was the vice mayor 

of a city, and we had—we asked for those who were coming in to 

make sure that we had accommodations for those with special 

needs. And I was just wondering if we have accommodations for 

those coming in to hear, all be it the floor or the hearing rooms, 

if we had accommodations for them. 

Mr. EAGEN. Well, in my testimony, I made reference to the assistive listening devices that are being installed in the committee 

rooms. It is an infrared system. We have done 16 full committee 

rooms and three subcommittee rooms, and as we continue to upVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:59 Sep 27, 2005 Jkt 23251 PO 00000 Frm 000047 Fmt 06633 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\A251.XXX A251
46 

grade the audio and visual capabilities in the rest of the committee 

rooms, those kind of devices will be installed. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Okay. 

The training programs, are the training programs and software 

adjusted for staff with functional impairment? 

Mr. EAGEN. You are referring to the learning center in the Longworth Building I assume by that question. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Yes. 

Mr. EAGEN. Primarily, this is where we do most of our training. 

The facility is relatively new, and it was constructed in terms of 

the furniture to make it accessible for mobility issues. There are 

special desktops that accommodate wheelchairs and so forth. In the 

cases where we do have a hearing-impaired individual, we will 

bring in an interpreter that will be able to assist the trainer to be 

able to share the information in that manner. I think that the intention of creating those learning center capabilities was to train 

all staff, whether they have a disability or not. And I think that 

we need to take another look at it, quite candidly, and make sure 

that we are meeting that standard. 

I talked to the director of the program last night in fact, and I 

said, I think it is time for us to take a better look at the facility 

and see if there are some enhancements we need to do. So I will 

commit to you that we are going to take a look at that, and we will 

do it promptly. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Good. I would like to hear back from 

you as to what your findings are once you have done that. 

Mr. EAGEN. I will be happy to do that. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. And do you have special equipment 

or other provisions for seeing-eye dogs? 

Mr. EAGEN. That is something I will have to research for you. I 

cannot answer that question off the top of my head. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. Okay. Well, you know, like I say, we 

are all getting into this and experiencing things that are needed. 

But as we look at those special needs for special people, certainly 

get back with me on that and let us know what we can do to help 

in accommodating those who also will have seeing-eye dogs here. 

Mr. EAGEN. Congresswoman, if I could make one point relative 

to the Americans with Disabilities Act and the House situation that 

I think might be informing as you consider these issues: The House 

is a bit of a unique entity in comparison to many organizations 

where there is a single employing authority. In the House of Representatives, instead, we have about 600 employing authorities. In 

fact, you are one of them. Mr. Ney is another, so forth and so on. 

I am one of them. And in that regard, it is a bit of a challenge to 

create that partnership, if you will. 

Under the law, the employing authority is responsible for the accommodations within their office space. And at the same time, we 

also have institutional services that are provided by organizations 

like mine or the Architect and so forth and so on. And sometimes, 

I perceive some gray areas where that bridge needs to be more 

clearly built to understand where the responsibility is. 

To give you an example of this, we, the Chief Administrative Officer is responsible for providing carpet to Members’ offices. Members’ offices don’t have to pay for that carpet. Well, under the 

47 

Americans with Disabilities Act, the carpet pile has to be a certain 

density to be wheelchair acceptable. So it is my responsibility to 

make sure that, when we install carpet, it is ADA compliant. 

Conversely, the responsibility, the authority for equipment within a Members’ office, the computers and other kinds of devices, are 

actually the responsibility of the Member. It requires a Member’s 

signature to buy something. We may go buy it for you and purchase the good for you, but in reality, the authority to buy that particular piece of equipment is the Member’s responsibility. And if an 

accommodation were required for a particular employee, the responsibility lies with the Member to make the call that I need that 

piece of equipment. I think our role and our challenge is to try to 

provide the advice, the access to merchants and commercial entities 

to come up with those kinds of equipment. 

And an example of that was a few years ago, for the minority 

staff on the Committee on House Administration, the Democratic 

staff, they brought in an intern who was visually impaired. They 

came to us and identified a special need for a telephone device. We 

were able to work with Avaya, one of the providers, and they came 

up with a unique piece of equipment that worked for that particular individual. So that is an example of the partnership that I 

think we need to try to undertake working with 600 employing entities in the House. 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. You are absolutely right. And how 

you have laid that out is indeed correct. But when I made reference 

to the seeing-eye dogs I am talking about visitors, not necessarily 

the Members themselves; because certainly the Members are, I 

would think, have an obligation to some of this. And all of us are 

grappling with how we better meet the needs and accommodations 

for those with special needs. 

And so, certainly, none of us are perfect in trying to do that. But 

it does take a partnership. And I grant you that I am here to work 

with all of you on how we can help to accommodate those needs. 

The last one I have, Mr. Chairman is one that a California colleague of mine, Congressman Sam Farr last year asked, he had an 

intern who happens to have used a wheelchair—and this is more 

or less for the architect. And he requested two automatic door 

openers for his office to accommodate this intern, but cancelled the 

request more than 7 weeks later when the internship was about to 

end, and the door openers still had not been installed. And I guess 

the question is, how long do projects usually take compared to 

other high-priority projects? 

Mr. HANTMAN. I think each individual project is fairly unique. I 

can certainly check with the Superintendent of the House and find 

out the history. In terms of automatic door openers, we have installed them to several buildings as well as to individual suites 

when they are called for. We installed them at the New Jersey Avenue entrance to the Cannon Building and the South Capitol Street 

entrance of the center court of the Rayburn Building, at the Ford 

Office building on the Third Street entrance and in individual offices as requested as the need occurs. We don’t stockpile the equipment. We have to order it. Depending on the long lead and nascent 

nature of it from the individual vendor, we try to get to that as 

quickly as we can. 

48 

Ms. MILLENDER-MCDONALD. And I certainly do understand that. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Gentlelady from California Ms. Lofgren. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Just a few simple questions since I think we have 

covered a lot of ground this morning. Do you do—after an evacuation, do we do surveys of staff who are either in a wheelchair or 

visually impaired—we have, you know, a very diverse staff—to find 

out what they have actually run into? Because one of the things 

that I really believe is that you don’t really understand the barriers 

until you live them. And I have certainly found that, with my own 

staff, things that I just never would have thought of. Have we done 

that? 

Chief GAINER. We conduct after-action reports but I can’t say 

that we have talked to individuals. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Can I suggest that we do that? 

Chief GAINER. I think it is a very good idea ma’am, yes. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you very much. 

The other question I wanted to mention, I already mentioned the 

jersey barriers, and I hope that that is easy to do. Today, we can 

go out and measure them and make sure that they actually work 

for people in a wheelchair. On the issue, this is not an evacuation 

issue, but I am on the Homeland Security Committee as well, and 

we don’t have a hearing room. And it seems to me that it would 

help, I mean, the issue that Congressman Langevin faces is different than the public and staff because he has to get up to the 

dais, and other people generally don’t. So I think that if we could 

arrive at a room and make it accessible, it would be a huge help 

rather than to have—I mean, ultimately, all the rooms should be 

made accessible, but if we could prioritize, if we could just get a 

hearing room for that committee, because Mr. Langevin serves on 

that committee, that would be very useful. I don’t know. Maybe 

Mr.—I guess the committee, this committee helps with those assignments. Maybe I should direct this suggestion to the chairman. 

But I think it would save us money. 

The CHAIRMAN. If the gentlelady would yield. Just for clarification for you, now 311 would be transferred from Small Business to 

Homeland Security September 11, right? 

Mr. HANTMAN. Yes. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Okay. 

The CHAIRMAN. There are still going to be some issues; the Subcommittee and some other staff on both sides of the aisle still need 

to determine where they are going to be. But I think the renovation 

of room 311 will be up to speed this August and then September 

1 is the actual transfer and Small Business transfers it. 

Mr. HANTMAN. Right. And as I indicated earlier, there will be 

more dais seats on a lower level directly accessible for wheelchairs. 

Ms. LOFGREN. I would suggest that, perhaps, I mean, we will 

have in the future other Members of Congress who are in wheelchairs, but right now, we just have one. And so we should ask Jim, 

you know, he is Ranking Member of one of the subcommittees. If 

we could just hone in on, prioritize that, I think it would help focus 

our finances as we move forward. And we have got to start someVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:59 Sep 27, 2005 Jkt 23251 PO 00000 Frm 000050 Fmt 06633 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\A251.XXX A251
49 

place and then ultimately the whole Congress. But that is just a 

suggestion. 

The other thing I wanted to mention has to do with people who 

are not disabled but who are frail. And one of the things I noticed 

at the last evacuation, there were some staffers in the Capitol who 

are very elderly and who have been there a very long time. And 

I saw them, I mean, they were really in terrible shape. And I think, 

I mean, how some of those elderly people actually ran is beyond 

me. And that, in addition to what we are doing in terms of evacuation plans for people in wheelchairs or sight impaired or whatever, we ought to give some thought to some of the people who we 

know are really quite elderly and frail and how—I don’t want to 

mention anybody’s name—but we need to have a plan so that they 

don’t drop dead running down the street. If I can suggest that. 

Chief GAINER. Yes, ma’am. 

Ms. LOFGREN. And finally, on the issue of hallways, I will just 

make a prediction. We are going to have a huge fight if we try to 

take our American flags away. I don’t think that is going to happen. And—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentlelady yield? They will still be there. 

I had the same question. Could you explain that for the gentlelady? 

I am sorry to interrupt. 

Mr. HANTMAN. Congresswoman, the concept was not to eliminate 

the flags. But right now, they are sitting in bases on the floor 

which would be tripping hazards in an evacuation type of situation, 

especially for the sight impaired. So the design now will be that we 

will have wall-mounted brackets so the flags can be outside the office, but they will eliminate tripping hazards on the floor. 

Ms. LOFGREN. So they would basically be out, but just not on the 

floor. Okay. I understand that better. And not just one. I have 

many flags. I have a county flag, a city flag, a State flag. 

The CHAIRMAN. We talked about that. 

Ms. LOFGREN. Missing in Action flag. And I—just a point of view, 

Members, I don’t, but Members on both sides of the aisle on a variety of issues have displays expressing their viewpoint, and I think 

that we are going to have a huge issue there. I think we ought to 

postpone that fight until all the desks and chairs are removed, and 

that could be quite some time. 

But I yield back and thank the gentleman for recognizing me. 

The CHAIRMAN. The question you asked was the first thing I 

asked on the flags. I also couldn’t envision how those flags fit that 

way in the hallway. But I saw a model, and they actually, stand 

just as our current flags do. You just don’t have the base. I know 

some Members have eight, nine flags. We can work with that to accommodate them. But I just wanted to make it clear that they 

would still be there. You just don’t have the bottom wooden part 

with the base. 

Ms. LOFGREN. That would work. 

The CHAIRMAN. I have no further questions. I just wanted to 

show for an example the infrared devices up there that Mr. Eagen 

was talking about. And these are the devices that we referred to 

in the Dear Colleague that Congresswoman Millender-McDonald 

and I distributed. We say on there: If you have any special requests, call us and this would be the device which we have here. 

50 

And if you have a hearing impairment problem, infrared may help 

to increase it. 

With that, I want to thank all three of you for being here. Our 

Sergeant of Arms, Mr. Livinggood, is here. We thank him for all 

his due diligence over the years working with the issues. 

STATEMENTS OF HILARY C. STYRON, ACTING DIRECTOR, 

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS INITIATIVE, NATIONAL ORGANIZATION ON DISABILITY; ELIZABETH A. DAVIS, J.D., Ed.M., 

EAD & ASSOCIATES, LLC., EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT & 

SPECIAL NEEDS CONSULTANTS; AND JACK J. MURPHY, MANAGING DIRECTOR, JJM & ASSOCIATES, LLC. 

The CHAIRMAN. And we will go on to the next panel. Thank you 

very much. I want to welcome the third and last panel for today. 

First, we have Hilary Styron, an EPI acting director. She currently serves as acting director for the National Organization on 

Disability’s Emergency Preparedness Initiative. She has extensive 

experience in all hazards emergency management, emergency medical services, and implementation of long-range strategic planning. 

She participates in preparedness and planning efforts undertaken 

across the country. In 1991, she began developing disaster-related 

plans for training exercises and operational procedures, and conducted studies related to emergency preparedness. After September 

11, she relocated to Washington, D.C., where she has been actively 

engaged in preparedness planning for the National Capitol Region 

as well as a wide variety of places, including the U.S. Senate Office 

of Security. So we want to welcome you here. 

And the next witness is Elizabeth Davis. Elizabeth Davis is an 

emergency management consultant specializing in special needs 

planning. She received her J.D. from Boston University School of 

Law and her Educational Master’s from Boston University School 

of Education with a degree in the socio-bicultural study of deafness 

and American Sign Language. She holds an undergraduate degree 

with a major in sociology and a minor in political science from Columbia University. After many years as an advocate in the disability area, she began public service after law school with the New 

York City Mayor’s Office for People With Disabilities as an assistant to the council and senior policy advisor. She is also an accomplished public speaker and has a reputation for creating solutions. 

She is considered one of the Nation’s go-to sources for emergency 

management and special needs. 

And our last witness is Mr. Jack Murphy. He established a business enterprise for consulting in the field of fire and life safety 

emergency action plans and preparedness, incident management 

systems, fire litigation disaster code analysis, building cost surveys 

and various fire-service-related training programs. As a retired fire 

marshall, former deputy chief, he is responsible for the operational 

budget code enforcement and inspection procedures, pre-incident 

planning, and has organized, coordinated and promoted community 

fire-safety awareness campaigns. And he is also corporate vice 

president of a Fortune 50 company for the global fire emergency 

preparedness department that provides technical expertise and fire 

protection and crisis management for domestic and international 

facilities. 

51 

I want to welcome all three witnesses, and we will begin with 

Ms. Styron. 

STATEMENT OF HILARY C. STYRON 

Ms. STYRON. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and members of the 

committee. 

I am Hilary Styron, acting director of the National Organization 

on Disability’s Emergency Preparedness Initiative. Prior to joining 

NOD, as you have just stated, I had the honor and privilege to 

work on Capitol Hill as an emergency management practitioner 

with the Library of Congress and the Senate Sergeant at Arms Office of Security and Emergency Preparedness. On behalf of the 

NOD, founder Alan Reich and President and Chairman Michael 

Deland, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today 

to discuss these very important issues. 

I would also like to thank Congressman Langevin for his remarks here today and for continuing to be a NOD congressional 

sponsor. The National Organization on Disability launched its 

Emergency Preparedness Initiative in the wake of the September 

11, 2001, terrorist attacks. NOD recognized that people with disabilities have a great stake in the effectiveness of public programs 

aimed at preparing for and responding to all types of disasters. 

Now in its fourth year, EPI continues its national education outreach and awareness programs with three primary goals in mind: 

The first is to make sure that the special needs of people with disabilities are adequately addressed prior to an emergency in order 

to minimize the adverse impact on people with disabilities in their 

communities. Second is to ensure that people with disabilities are 

included in the emergency planning process at all levels of government and the private sector so they can offer their insights, knowledge and resourcefulness. Third, is to ensure that people with disabilities take an active role in their personal preparedness at home 

and in the workplace. People with disabilities can contribute greatly to the effectiveness of local emergency management planning. 

Continued education and outreach for both first responders and 

people with disabilities will help increase the level of their preparedness for all people across the country. 

As you know, on Tuesday of this week, many of us here today 

celebrated the 15th anniversary of the passing of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act. Even with 15 years of progress, the results 

show from a 2004 NOD Harris Poll Survey of Americans with Disabilities that there are wide gaps in major life areas of people with 

disabilities as compared to their peers without disabilities, and we 

remain pervasively disadvantaged in 10 key indicator areas. An 

area or gap that has not been discussed in that particular survey 

is the sometimes inconsistent, inadequate or ineffective emergency 

preparedness planning for people with disabilities. In 2001 and in 

2003, NOD surveyed emergency preparedness in people with disabilities, and the results show that 58 percent of people with disabilities did not know whom to contact about emergency plans in 

their community; 61 percent have not made home preparedness 

plans or plans to quickly and safely evacuate their home. 

The CHAIRMAN. I am sorry. Was this a nationwide survey, you 

say? 

52 

Ms. STYRON. This was a national survey, yes. The 2003 survey 

did find a noteworthy improvement however in workplace preparedness. With people with disabilities that are employed, 68 percent of those people indicate that they have made plans to quickly 

and safely evacuate from their jobs. It is a dramatic increase from 

the 45 percent in 2001. This suggests that efforts to design and implement disabilities-specific disaster planning are making an impact where people work. It is also an indicator that when appropriate, effective plans are made, all people can be prepared. 

A 2004 survey by NOD funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security polled emergency managers in States, large, midsized and small cities across the country and with regards to preparedness for people with disabilities. The results showed that 22 

percent of emergency managers have a plan under development 

that will incorporate special needs into emergency plans; 76 percent did not have a paid expert to address the issues of emergency 

preparedness and disabilities; 73 percent said no funding had been 

received to address emergency planning for people with disabilities 

or special needs; 42 percent of emergency managers self-affirmed 

in this survey that they had a public awareness campaign directed 

as providing emergency information to people with disabilities with 

only 16 percent of those 42 percent making that campaign available in an accessible format, which would be Braille, large print or 

cassette. 

I know that the House has worked diligently to improve accessibility for Members, staff and visitors due in large part to the hard 

work and guidance of this Committee. There have been improvements in communications equipment, building modifications and 

review of occupant emergency plans. However, even with these improvements, there is still much work to be done. It is also important to acknowledge the work of the Office of Emergency Planning 

and Preparedness, the AOC, the Chief Administrative Office, and 

the Capitol Police and what they have accomplished thus far. I appreciate their willingness to further address critical issues by being 

here today. Recognition of these issues by House planners and Capitol Police is a positive first step towards developing an effective 

strategy that both maximizes resources and creates emergency preparedness plans that are operationally sound during real-time implementation. 

OEPPO and the Capitol Police recognize special needs issues by 

including a reference to, quote, be prepared to assist persons with 

disabilities, in the publication, Responding to Special Emergencies 

Guide for the United States Capitol Complex, released April 3, 

2003. However, within that document, there was no further instruction on how to deliver the assistance or what that assistance 

might entail. In exercise drills, some scenarios written for the 

chamber did specify inclusion of, quote, at least one person in a 

wheelchair. However, evaluation forms only requested feedback on 

handicapped persons’ transportation issues. Incidentally, the term 

‘‘handicapped person’’ is outdated and has been replaced with people with disabilities. At that time, exercises were not evaluated for 

the accessibility of alerts and notifications, for communications 

equipment, facility infrastructure or situation briefings for staffers 

with disabilities. The after-action report on one of these exercises 

53 

indicated multiple problems, such as: The wheelchair escort got lost 

on the tunnel route; an emergency wheelchair was used incorrectly; 

too few storage areas for evacuation chairs near the chamber; and 

the wheelchair aid designated to an individual to relocate left that 

individual after he moved him to another location. 

The continuing challenge will be to prioritize life-safety issues 

over physical security perimeter measures. While a strategic security goal may be to keep the wrong people from entering the building, these same goals may keep all people from leaving the building 

in an emergency. The Strategic Plan of the Capitol Police to augment the prevention, response and support capabilities of the department does acknowledge and does include that staff and the 

public have a heightened awareness of their personal security and 

safety and would enhance the department’s ability to educate staff, 

gain cooperation and allow for the building of partnerships 

amongst the congressional community. 

This concept can and should reach beyond physical security in 

the traditional sense and be utilized across all life-safety issues, including emergency preparedness for people with disabilities. 

Inconsistent planning for people with disabilities does not solely 

rest in the hands of OEPPO or the Capitol Police. In the December 

2003 ‘‘Bulletin’’ published by the Office of Compliance, there was 

no mention of people with disabilities. 

The CHAIRMAN. I am sorry. Could you repeat that again? 

Ms. STYRON. Sure, in the December 2003 ‘‘Bulletin’’ published by 

the Office of Compliance, there is no mention of people with disabilities. The current Web-based template that the House offices 

are encouraged to use to complete emergency action plans is dated 

from 1997, and that does not include considerations for staffers or 

visitors with disabilities. It also focuses on fire as the cause of evacuation and does not reference the all-hazards planning approach to 

develop emergency plans. 

While the instructions on the Web do indicate that the template 

is a guide, template-based planning obviously omits very critical information and ignores the special needs of people with disabilities 

in emergencies. For instance, if there is no staffer in the office with 

a known or visible disability, it seems likely that the office emergency coordinator writing their plan as a collateral duty may not 

know how to or if they should plan for people with disabilities 

thereby being unprepared for a staffer or visitor and their needs 

during an emergency. Out of sight, out of mind. 

Not having a qualified expert or guidance on how to plan for disabilities during emergencies that is readily available to the office 

emergency coordinators, the Capitol Police, OEPPO, Architect of 

the Capitol, the CAO and the Sergeant at Arms has had a negative 

impact on the ultimate level of preparedness and safety for the 

House complex. To further illustrate the need, the Capitol Buildings Occupant Emergency Plan published in 2000 indicated that 

persons needing assistance even if only due to a temporary condition or who cannot otherwise use the stairs or steps to evacuate a 

building should follow the specific instructions indicated in each 

Capitol Building Occupant Emergency Plan, the published emergency evacuation procedures brochures or the posted instructions 

within the building. I have already indicated that the templates for 

54 

these plans did not account for disability needs, and yet part of the 

larger complex plan refers the person back to the incomplete occupant evacuation plans. It is like a vicious circle. 

Just imagine people with disabilities in the chaotic environments 

of an emergency thumbing frantically through paperwork for instructions rather than proceeding to an evacuation area or reaching 

a designated area of safe haven. A person with a disability would 

be far better served by live communication and real-time instructions combined with comprehensive training and education. 

While working on Capitol Hill, much of my time was spent increasing the efforts to address emergency preparedness and evacuation planning for people with disabilities. Even though some of my 

efforts were met with hesitation and resistance, positive results 

were achieved that included establishing a Capitol Hill Emergency 

Management Working Group that was a Hill-wide emergency management group; distribution of a National Organization on Disability’s Emergency Preparedness Initiative Guide on the Special 

Needs of People with Disabilities in the fall of 2002 to emergency 

managers and police officials across the Hill complex, including the 

House. A training seminar was hosted by the Senate Sergeant at 

Arms on April 16, 2003 on emergency preparedness for people with 

disabilities. It should be noted that the seminar was open and invited parties were encouraged to attend. My records do not indicate 

however that emergency managers or disability specialists from the 

House were able to attend. However, House personnel with disabilities did attend that seminar. 

Ms. STYRON. And finally, we were able to establish an internal 

working group of emergency managers, disability leadership and 

Senate staff with disabilities interested in developing a plan to address their needs and the needs of thousands of visitors with disabilities. And as you have heard today from previous testimony, the 

Senate has done some things with their elevators and different 

training protocols with the House and the Architect of the Capitol 

and the Capitol Police. So they are certainly moving forward, and 

that might be a good reference point for the committee to consider 

as far as an internal working group is concerned. 

In a recent discussion of the Emergency Measures Task Force 

members from across the Hill complex, concerns were raised over 

the issue of evacuations and the use of elevators. This was also 

mentioned at today’s hearing and the hearing on June 9th of this 

Committee. It is clear that even if every single elevator functioned 

the same way and were ready tomorrow, there would still be an inconsistent approach to how and when to use them and who would 

have priority use of elevators. 

During this discussion, it was not apparent that any House personnel specifically representing disability issues were participating 

on this Emergency Measures Task Force. 

Recently, I spoke with several House offices that might be responsible for emergency preparedness planning for the special 

needs population but was unable to confirm what office has the ultimate authority. 

I cannot confirm if the instructions given in 2003 have been revised or clarified. I cannot tell you if current emergency action 

plans or occupant evacuation plans include disability considerVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:59 Sep 27, 2005 Jkt 23251 PO 00000 Frm 000056 Fmt 06633 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\A251.XXX A251
55 

ations or if the staff have been appropriately and effectively educated and trained on these considerations. 

Recent events, press statements and prior hearing testimony, 

and testimony given today to this Committee suggest, at best, a 

very disjointed, confusing and inconsistent approach to emergency 

planning for people with disabilities for the House complex. Because of these issues being so critical to protecting and saving lives, 

the officials here today and the Committee, I encourage you to 

change the emergency management system and your planning priorities. 

We have just heard testimony today about what new plans are 

being developed, and in addition to those plans, there are some following recommendations for this committee to consider: The House 

should establish an internal disability preparedness working group 

that consists of emergency management officials, disability leadership and House staffers with disabilities. They should try to identify what House personnel have disabilities that are known and unknown. They should develop a comprehensive training and education program and exercise these plans on a regular basis. 

An internal working group such as this, as I have already said, 

has been reasonably successful on the Senate side as well as several Federal agencies here in Washington, including the Department of Labor, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and FEMA. 

The House should retain a qualified recognized expert to address 

disability-related issues for all House buildings, plans and procedures as well as help the House facilitate the aforementioned working group. This expert should be qualified to address disability-related issues, as well as have emergency management experience 

that includes response-and-recovery operations involving the special needs of people with disabilities. 

Continuing to review plans from a one-sided perspective of either 

the emergency manager or the disability coordinator, respectfully, 

will further perpetuate the inconsistent planning efforts taking 

place throughout the House complex. The expert should assist this 

Committee, the working group, the Capitol Police and the Architect 

of the Capitol in conducting a very detailed review of all House 

emergency action plans and occupant evacuation planning materials for the appropriate and effective inclusion of disability-related 

issues. This person should help the Committee and the Capitol Police develop the education curriculum and the training materials, 

as well as police protocols for response and recovery. 

Successful response-and-recovery plans that have this dynamic 

part included are available in New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Florida and several other agencies here within the Washington Federal 

sector. 

The House should implement a comprehensive training education 

program. Awareness and education are the keys to be prepared. 

EPI is currently providing outreach and awareness across the country on this very issue. We have partnered with several organizations, including the International Association of Emergency Managers (IAEM), to develop a special needs committee for emergency 

managers who are members of this organization. EPI’s national 

awareness campaign, ‘‘Partners in Preparedness’’, will be launched 

for the National Preparedness Month in September and includes 

56 

IAEM, the International Association of Fire Chiefs and the National Center on Independent Living. EPI continues to expand its 

role in Federal partnerships with DHS, FEMA, the National Capitol Region, Red Cross and National Citizen Corps. Education and 

outreach was a huge success at the National Capitol Region sponsored conference last fall, and many of the over 400 attendees continue to expand disability preparedness within their organization. 

I can tell you affirmatively that the Capitol Police and the Architect of the Capitol did have representatives at that conference last 

fall. 

Partnerships for Education to both first responders and the disability community will help turn the tide for emergency preparedness for people with disabilities. It will help the House as well. And 

this Committee can provide the much-needed leadership and support to this very important accessibility issue for the House complex. 

The House should seek to have representation of disability-related issues on the Emergency Measures Task Force meetings as 

a regular member of that group. 

Disability emergency preparedness issues are dynamic, with very 

specific nuances. Not having representation at the table with emergency management leaders from across the Hill sets the tone for 

continued exclusion rather than inclusion. 

In closing, I would like to recognize the Capitol Police and House 

Emergency Management officials for the very hard work that they 

have done to make the complex safer and more secure. The police 

have a tremendous responsibility and are to be commended for 

staying on the front lines, even when someone like myself comes 

along to say, ‘‘the plans need some work’’. 

I thank the committee for their time today and for recognizing 

the importance of planning for the needs of people with disabilities. 

And I am pleased to answer any questions the committee may 

have. 

[The statement of Ms. Styron follows:] 

57 


Insert offset folio 113 here 23251.018
58 


Insert offset folio 114 here 23251.019
59 


Insert offset folio 115 here 23251.020
60 


Insert offset folio 116 here 23251.021
61 


Insert offset folio 117 here 23251.022
62 


Insert offset folio 118 here 23251.023
63 


Insert offset folio 119 here 23251.024
64 


Insert offset folio 120 here 23251.025
65 


Insert offset folio 121 here 23251.026
66 


Insert offset folio 122 here 23251.027
67 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Murphy. 

STATEMENT OF JACK J. MURPHY 

Mr. MURPHY. I am Jack Murphy. I appreciate the opportunity to 

speak to you today about emergency action plans and accessibility. 

In the early winter of 2001, the fire and safety directors of greater New York appointed a task force to address the issue with a 

view to outlining a number of suggestions that would reflect the insight of our collective experience. Many of these findings have been 

incorporated into an emergency action plan that was adopted by 

the City of New York. One emergency action plan feature addresses 

how to best enhance a full high-rise building evacuation for all occupants, inclusive of people with disabilities. 

There are two main accessibility objectives for emergency preparedness. The first is to make sure that special needs of people 

with disabilities are sufficiently addressed prior to an emergency 

incident. And second is to ensure that a person with a disability 

is included in the emergency planning process by simply asking: 

What can we do to assist with your evacuation? 

The accessibility elements that are incorporated into an all hazard emergency evacuation must not only be with a plan of action 

but must be put into practice so as to reduce the level of probability. 

To further understand the impact of accessibility, an emergency 

action plan needs to address but not limit its scope. A solid foundation for an all-hazard emergency response begins with a dedicated 

evacuation director whose sole purpose is to direct an evacuation, 

provide the best practices of life safety and emergency management. To further assist the evacuation director, some internal and/ 

or external threats may require a team approach to perform an effective evacuation or shelter-in-place mode. A building incident 

command team comprised of the Capitol Police supervisor and a 

building HVAC supervisor, which is a heat and vent air conditioning person, would further enhance an all-hazard evacuation for 

a chemical or a bomb threat. 

Floor emergency evacuation teams, such as the Capitol staff, 

must have knowledge and have been drilled on their respective 

floors as to where each staircase is located, where all street-level 

exits discharge onto, horizontal transfer corridors, elevators designated for all-hazard evacuation and accountability relocations so 

that, on specific directions, they know straight forward what to do 

and where to go. 

Trained community emergency response teams, such as CERT, 

can be adapted by the building management staff that make up the 

mechanical section of the building. A CERT team who has been selected, organized and trained in emergency preparedness may be a 

valuable asset, particularly in a city-wide multiple incident emergency. 

All-hazard evacuation voice announcements need to be communicated to the occupants for particular types of evacuation so as to 

meet the needs of a potential threat at hand. For example, a Code 

Black announcement will direct occupants to use all elevators and 

all stairs, stairs only, stairs that lead directly to the exterior, internal relocation within the Capitol space, and shelter-in-place. 

68 

The accommodations of people with disabilities and special 

needs, when asked to assist with their evacuation, a support network team may be added to the floor evacuation team. There also 

may be a need to install a portable Evac on floors identified as one 

that needs such a chair. The designated primary and secondary 

areas of assistance must be coordinated with the District of Columbia Fire Department. 

The use of elevators—and I emphasize this—for emergencies 

other than fire can enhance a rapid departure for people with disabilities and expedite a mass evacuation. In many large buildings, 

the existing 44-inch stair width was not designed to handle a full 

building evacuation. Elevators, however, can remove 12 percent of 

the people in these buildings within 5 minutes. 

When using an elevator as part of the emergency action plan provision, the following conditions need to be met. All elevator cars 

must be recalled to the fire department entry floor and be held in 

place. The elevator is to be manned by a trained Capitol staff person. A two-way voice communication between the evacuation director and each elevator car must be established. And when a person 

with a disability needs an alternative evacuation, the floor should 

be recognized and posted at the fire command station. 

To assist first responders, a comprehensive building information 

card must be available at the fire command station. This card will 

give a description of the building, its support systems and contain 

a schematic of floor plans. This will also greatly enhance the fire 

department commanders with the areas of refuge assistance. 

Under a unified command structure, all first responders need to 

cooperate and coordinate the endeavors with EMS, fire, police, the 

D.C. Office of Emergency Management and, when necessary, the 

military, to rapidly reduce an incident. 

A quick and easy procedure for first responders when assisting 

people with disabilities is to ask that person how you can best help 

them before any assistance is given, if they have any limitations 

or problems that may affect their safety, and when carrying the 

person, avoid putting pressure on their arms, legs and chest. 

The new all-hazard emergency evacuation modes need to be in 

place so as to assess the various threat levels for an effective evacuation. The recognized strategy will utilize the tactical considerations for a full and/or partial evacuation, internal relocation and/ 

or shelter-in-place with specific directions for the use of elevators 

and stairs. 

An annual evacuation drill will help identify critical coordination 

activities, the potential behavior of occupants, and communication 

links for both fire and all-hazard emergencies. Immediately after 

an exercise, a participant hot wash should be conducted by gathering people together in different functional groups. This information can provide insight into what events happened the way they 

did or why expected actions did not take place. 

In closing, the emergency action plan for accessibility must be a 

commonsense approach, so as to reassure that life safety is the welfare of all occupants. There are other emergency features that need 

to be implemented, such as a public accountability knowledge system to assist the incident commander with real-time information 

on people who have evacuated and assist with critical medical inVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:59 Sep 27, 2005 Jkt 23251 PO 00000 Frm 000070 Fmt 06633 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\A251.XXX A251
69 

formation and mass casualty incidents. The installation of photoluminous markings within all stair towers will greatly enhance an 

evacuation in total darkness that must follow a proscribed standard, and elevators which are currently being evaluated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology need to operate in all 

emergencies, including fire, so as to enhance life safety. 

These series of suggestions will give flexibility and more effective 

applications to a growing need that has, with such menacing suddenness, alerted us to respond to it with a determined purpose. 

I would like to thank you today for the opportunity to share 

these experiences with you. 

[The statement of Mr. Murphy follows:] 

70 


Insert offset folio 129 here 23251.028
71 


Insert offset folio 130 here 23251.029
72 


Insert offset folio 131 here 23251.030
73 


Insert offset folio 132 here 23251.031
74 


Insert offset folio 133 here 23251.032
75 


Insert offset folio 134 here 23251.033
76 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Murphy. 

Ms. Davis. 

STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH A. DAVIS, J.D., Ed.M. 

Ms. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, let me 

be the first one today to say good afternoon instead of good morning, and that I thank you very much for the opportunity to appear 

before you to continue our conversation. 

Since my practice is based in New York City, I wish to actually 

look there for an example, but I want to go back some time in history to the afternoon of March 25, 1911, as a fire broke out on the 

top floors of the building that housed the Triangle Shirtwaist Company, one of the most tragic fires in American history. And by the 

time the fire was extinguished, nearly 20 minutes after it had 

begun, 146 were dead. These were working immigrant women, 

some as young as 15 years old. 

What the fire did was to draw attention to a horrific tragedy that 

was just waiting to happen; it spotlighted the following fact: The 

building itself faired well. The terra cotta encased support beams 

actually held under the fire’s intense heat. The human condition, 

however, was devastating. The fire inspections and precautions 

were woefully inadequate. This was one of the first times in our 

history when the resulting outcry was heard: People in buildings 

must be more valued than the buildings themselves. What followed, therefore, was a State Review Commission, legislated fireproofing, mainstreamed use of sprinkler systems and new safety 

standards. 

Here, now, no matter what the event that churns our review 

process, we have an opportunity to learn from our past. Allow me 

to state the obvious: The disability community is not a homogeneous group, and as such, one-size-fits-all safety solutions will 

not work. Incidentally, this is also why a template solution without 

adaptation fails at that point as well. 

We must account for those persons with disabilities known to us 

as planners, those whom we can reasonably assume exist, as well 

as those unknown to us at the onset of planning. In total, this includes visible and invisible disabilities, episodic and chronic, motor, 

sensory, cognitive—in fact, the entire spectrum of difference. And 

our focus today, while it seems to be on getting out of a structure, 

in fact will have an application to the general population at large 

as it must be acknowledged that disability is in some ways an 

equalized factor: At any time, anyone can find themselves newly 

entering this group. 

Examine a few general examples, if you would, of both low- and 

high-tech solutions established initially for the benefit of just persons with disabilities but which in fact have had a significant safety impact on all persons. Audible way findings signage, perhaps installed for those with low or no vision, in heavy smoke conditions, 

this tool can assist anyone to locate an exit or an escape route. 

Exit door highly-visible color designation, perhaps painted for a 

person with cognitive disabilities, in a time of high anxiety or confusion, this immediately recognizable distinction assists anyone in 

locating the correct exit door. 

77 

Stairlanding intercoms, perhaps installed for persons with mobility disabilities but usable by anyone unable to negotiate stairs due 

perhaps to a heart or respiratory condition or even pregnancy. 

The placement of an interactive communication system connects 

directly from that enclosed Area of Rescue Assistance to the building command post meaning immediate notification of needs to rescue personnel. 

Stair evacuation devices and equipment, perhaps purchased with 

a specific employee in mind, strategic placement of several of these 

devices can be used to remove anyone from a dangerous area, including those, perhaps, impacted by the initial triggering event. 

But no matter the event or the equipment available, the single 

most important emergency planning factor in survival remains 

practice. Two examples: A local service provider with offices just 

blocks from the World Trade Center in Manhattan, after the first 

World Trade Center bombings in 1993 worked with the Office of 

Emergency Management and with the Fire Department of New 

York City to develop a building evacuation plan specifically for its 

staff, most of whom had limited or no vision themselves. Their 

proactive approach and practice, in fact, paid off during the events 

of 9/11 when the entire staff was able to calmly and safely selfevacuate from the 9th floor of their office building. They recount 

hearing other underprepared building occupants yell, ‘‘Follow the 

blind people, they seem to be know where they are going!’’ 

A second example: A manager who uses a wheelchair was physically carried down 65-plus flights of stairs in 1993, but after that 

event, the agency purchased an evacuation chair for that manager 

and trained an entire team of co-workers in its use. While they certainly had to transverse several staircases to exit the building, the 

group of nine persons made it out in just under one hour, as compared to the 5-plus hours it had taken them in 1993. This time 

lapse quite literally was the difference between life and death. 

Prior to the events of September 11th, many members of the disability community, when asked to honestly articulate their own 

emergency plans, would state in very clear and certain terms, they 

would likely be left to last and only hope that help would reach 

them. The answer then moved from this to the realm of acknowledging a co-worker, a neighbor or perhaps a stranger who could 

take on the role of ‘‘buddy.’’ Incidentally, the buddy concept has 

evolved into a concept of ‘‘network of assistance.’’ But now the disability community, as just illustrated, is saying more loudly that 

we have an active role to play in our own survival, and that none 

of these past solutions alone appear to be acceptable. 

For now these tools should include not only actual devices and 

rehearsed drills, but also egress modelling, taking people with disabilities into account as well as a review of some of those entrenched standard protocols. The most apparent gaps existing 

today are in the following categories: 1. Notification and warning. 

No consistent use of technology and multiple mediums in the built 

environment to provide immediate, consistent and critical emergency information to all persons effectively. 2. Evacuation—— 

The CHAIRMAN. Could you say that one more time? 

Ms. DAVIS. Certainly. My point with regard to notification and 

warning is that the gap appears to be that we have not agreed 

78 

upon a consistent use of technology. We have not recognized the 

use of multiple mediums within a built environment. And this, 

therefore, I would suggest, means that we have eliminated consistent critical information from reaching all persons. 

If I might add, by example, multiple medium use—we talked 

about some of the higher-tech technologies, some of the infrared 

systems, perhaps some of the dual-communications systems in certain areas. I would be happy to provide, after this hearing, to all 

Members a communication picture board, a pictorial opportunity to 

convey emergency or evacuation information with persons, including those who are non-English speaking. This was provided to the 

Sergeant at Arms two years ago, and it might, in fact, offer some 

answers or certainly spur some thought, and I will get that copy 

to you. 

Other areas include two evacuation devices. Here, again, are gap 

areas where no usability standards, no review standards and no 

comparison standards currently exist. The sad reality remains— 

and I have said this many times—is that I can find out more on 

the internet today about a TV or a VCR before I buy one than I 

can about life safety equipment purposely designed to assist persons with disabilities. 

Until we do a better job at pointing out that many solutions already exist, those with specific purposes as well as new applications, we lose out on the ability right now to put things in place 

that can make a difference. I would suggest that this is not dissimilar from the new sprinkler regulations post-1911, even though 

that tool existed since the late 1870s. 

Today’s hearing adds to the discourse now underway within the 

emergency professional community, the academic community, the 

regulatory community and the disability community itself. Attitudes that emergency needs of people with disabilities are somehow 

less important a priority as they impact only a few certainly must 

be dispelled. Attitudes that solutions cannot be realized must be 

dispelled. And attitudes that what is developed or changed for a 

person with a disability in this area does not have broader application must also be dispelled. And this committee hearing I believe 

is helping in this process. 

The Capitol Police, the House Emergency Management officials 

and other planners have an incredible responsibility and have done 

certainly a Herculean job at balancing many competing interests. 

I submit that the legacy of this Committee and the tangible outcomes of this hearing could be the establishment of a Special Needs 

Emergency Working Group, not dissimilar from many now created 

by State and local governments and many private businesses. This 

group would be a cross-disciplinary membership of multiple stakeholders working with, not for, people with disabilities and acting in 

support and in an advisory role to the members who are actually 

tasked with the responsibility of planning. This group would be in 

the position to look to our colleagues here at the USDA, U.S. DOT, 

DOL and U.S. Access Board, to name a few. We can look to them 

for recommendations based on their internal efforts and planning 

for these same issues. 

And with such an effort, this committee moves the process along 

in a meaningful way. The planners find new and innovative supVerDate Aug 31 2005 21:59 Sep 27, 2005 Jkt 23251 PO 00000 Frm 000080 Fmt 06633 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\A251.XXX A251
79 

port and subject knowledge, and the country sees the House leading by example, a wonderful message to coincide this week with the 

15th anniversary of the signing of the ADA and all of the efforts 

over the past year since the signing of Executive Order 13347. 

And in closing, I offer a call to action. If people with disabilities 

are not taken into account before an event, the issues will not be 

addressed properly during a disaster, and this will certainly have 

a huge impact not just on that individual, but on the entire community after the emergency. 

I thank you very much for permitting me to summarize what is 

certainly a broader and more complex topic. In the interest of time, 

I have submitted an abbreviated resource listing, this I should 

point out, with many empirical studies currently funded with Federal dollars. Several actually use studies of full movement models 

and include the component of ‘‘capability’’ or ‘‘special need’’ to 

evaluate evacuation procedure and protocol. 

I want to thank you and persons in attendance for your sincere 

interest in and your hard work on this very important issue. 

[The statement of Ms. Davis follows:] 

80 


Insert offset folio 144 here 23251.034
81 


Insert offset folio 145 here 23251.035
82 


Insert offset folio 146 here 23251.036
83 


Insert offset folio 147 here 23251.037
84 


Insert offset folio 148 here 23251.038
85 


Insert offset folio 149 here 23251.039
86 


Insert offset folio 150 here 23251.040
87 


Insert offset folio 151 here 23251.041
88 


Insert offset folio 152 here 23251.042
89 


Insert offset folio 153 here 23251.043
90 

The CHAIRMAN. A vote is coming up, but I do have a question. 

I have a little more work to do based on the testimony involved in 

all three, the wonderful testimony of all three of you. 

Is there anything in your mind that stands out, public or private 

sector, in terms of a building that has been updated and equipped 

for a person that has a disability? And in conjunction with that, 

have you seen any particularly innovative planning processes? 

Mr. MURPHY. There are some buildings that have been retrofitted to a degree, taking a look at, for example, a building that has 

stairwells, open stairwells. While you may enclose the corridor, put 

up fire doors, that will close automatically. If that can’t be done, 

take a look at a room near the staircase that can be designated as 

a disabled place, for assistance, that has an exit to the street side. 

We at least can get the individual out. That would be equipped 

with a voice box that you push the button that would go down to 

the fire command and tell the person where they are in that particular building. And to do that in a stack effect, if you do it on 

the floors, as long it is in reach of a ladder, you might be able to 

use that as a long alternative to get out. So there are buildings out 

there that are looking at that. 

Ms. DAVIS. I think I would add that we can consider not just the 

actual hardening of physical structural, (or not just the equipment, 

but also the practiced protocol for the change in our standard of 

emergency planning). All three of those areas creates an opportunity for us to look readily for creative solutions, even if they don’t 

appear to be readily available to us in a building environment. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let me ask one other question, if I could, and 

that is, do you have any comments on anything in these buildings? 

Mr. MURPHY. Any obstruction in the hallway from the fire service is an impediment, no matter if it is temporary or permanent. 

The hallways are designed for a reason. This is a very large building. The width of the hallways are 8 to 10 feet. You see them in 

schools. If you have narrow ones, it gets even worse. 

The aspect here that we talk about buildings being fully 

strengthened, but what it needs is a balanced approach. Buildings 

full of sprinklers, will it put the whole fire out? Once that sprinkler 

goes off, that hot smoke and gas banks down to the floor real quick. 

If it gets out into the hallways, it might not be hot smoke or heat, 

but you still have a blindness of finding where the stairs are. Any 

buildings that have open stairwells or flues, chimney flues, if you 

have a fire in the basement, this will override a building and make 

it a hazard to get out within several minutes. 

When the sprinkler does go off, how is the smoke being contained? If that smoke is traversing down from the heat and everything at a thousand degrees, and maybe you can move through, you 

might get disorientation, where are the stairwells? If I compartmentalize that, it gets out into the hallway. That smoke, which is 

now banked down to the floor, you might not be able to see those 

staircases. As a fire fighter in a sprinkler building, I listen to the 

sound of the water flowing to get me to the scene of the fire. 

The CHAIRMAN. So to summarize that, if you have to get down 

and you can’t see, you are going to be knocking these down, and 

they are going to go across each other, and now you have a real 

hazard, of all these things that are on these tripods crossed with 

91 

each other. Now you not only have potential hitting them, they are 

filling the hallways, both sides, and you couldn’t possibly get out 

if you had to, is that correct? 

Mr. MURPHY. Yes. A lot of things that we did, Mr. Chairman, in 

schools, we have taken out stands and everything else. We let them 

put display boards on the wall. While it isn’t friendly, it at least 

cuts down on the obstructions. 

Ms. STYRON. I only suggest that as the committee moves forward 

to egress routes, to be clear of all obstacles; that will certainly increase the chances of survival of all other people in these buildings 

as well. 

Ms. DAVIS. I would just add, when we talk about individual preparedness and planning—whether we do this through reminders, 

fliers, announcements—attention must be brought back to those 

points every so often. We look to ourselves and also take into account our own environment; have things changed? Is there an office 

that is moving? Is there a temporary blockage? Things that will impact us today if we need to traverse the same hallway. So I think 

we need to raise the level of personal preparedness to the point, 

with or without disability, that we have done our own checklist on 

a daily basis of the environment we encounter for work, or as you 

suggested, as a guest member here as well. 

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Regarding some of the things you expressed—we would be able 

to ask our experts questions, but two of them have left already. 

But have any of you reviewed some of the areas that we have 

improved upon due to ADA? Have any of you gone through and reviewed any of this? 

Ms. STYRON. We have not been given an opportunity to review 

buildings or the ADA reports that are being released prior to this 

testimony. Other than my previous experience having worked on 

the Hill, we haven’t been able to physically see the upgrades other 

than that what we hear in the testimony or that we might be 

aware of otherwise. We have not been able to do that prior to 

today. 

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. And it seems, as I said to the second 

panel, who are the officials of this place overseeing different offices 

and organizations, that I need to physically go through and see, 

too; because people can say one thing, but until you have seen what 

they have done is another thing, and to see whether or not that is 

adequate for what we are trying to get and to put in place. 

It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that we need to convene a meeting just with the experts and our head persons, who were on the 

second panel, to have an informal discussion—it doesn’t have to be 

a hearing—so that we can exchange these, and then we will be able 

to walk and physically see this. That is the only way we are going 

to get down to the crux of what we are really trying to convey and 

trying to put in place for our folks who have special needs. 

And so, it is not enough to just talk back and forth here. I think 

it is time for three experts—or whoever the designee experts are— 

to get with the members who preceded you to talk about that. 

Mr. Murphy talked about—sometimes when you see me speaking 

to the staff, I want to know, do we have such things in place, so 

I am trying to see who is communicating what. And it seems that 

92 

there is not communication flowing enough, because if you have a 

fire drill, that should be a different drill than an evacuation drill, 

because it seems to me they are not congruent, in my opinion. An 

evacuation drill should then tell folks where to go. And then there 

should be groups of folks there to say, are all persons in my group 

here, and if they are not here, who do I need to tell that they are 

not here?Communication has to flow. 

So, Mr. Murphy, you said that all elevators should be operating 

in an emergency. And that is what I am saying—if I was trapped 

on the fourth floor, I would just wait for an elevator. I am going 

to take the elevator and get out of this building. And so that is 

what I have heard you say, and expand on that, if you would. 

Mr. MURPHY. What we are working on, and we are trying to do 

it through several groups, I am a member of the National Fire Protection Association High-Rise Task Force, we met recent with NIST 

on elevators and how to work them into the overall fold of not only 

all-hazards, but for fires. We are looking at compartmentalizing 

elevators, separating them from the building itself—enclosing it. 

What we did in New York City is, all elevators above the first 

floor must be enclosed. What we are trying to do is stop the smoke 

from traveling up and spreading out to all the floors. You can have 

a very small fire and still have the smoke travel throughout the 

building. They are doing that now. We have some guidelines on 

that, and World Trade Center Seven, that type of elevator is going 

in. We also asked when we got a World Seven elevator dedicated 

to the fire service that will be used only for the fire service, but 

we encourage VIP use, so it is used every day. We see this in the 

British codes, where they have elevators, lifts to the fire service. 

Elevators, if we can run them outside of the building on the rain, 

snow, hail, why can’t we get one or two that will run on adverse 

conditions in a building? So that initiative has gotten all the elevator people together to take a look at that. 

What can we do right now? Right now is just, don’t rely on one 

elevator. What if that is the area that you have to evacuate? And 

if you use the elevator, if there is some type of contaminant, that 

is a piston that will drive that product up into the building. 

The Capitol Building is a low-rise building. However, I call it a 

hazard high-rise. It is over 700-feet long. How do you get from one 

end of the building to the other end of the building? Break it down, 

not to a full building. What if you are left with one stairwell to 

evacuate? That is the bottom line of that. How do I direct people 

when they leave? 

In our training aspect in New York high-rises, we train the staff 

first, get them comfortable. We drop them down, all the way down. 

They will see what horizontal corridors are. On the 15th floor, you 

traverse over and go all the way down. We take them to the outside of the street and say, where are you? The only day we mark 

A, B, C and D on the stairs. We walk them around and say, if you 

are given specific directions—attention, attention, this is the fire 

safety threat, we have a Code Black, police, evacuate the stairs, 

and color green. When they get down to the bottom, they know 

they are at J Street. What direction do you have to go if we tell 

you north, south, east or west? So those are the things we are trying to define a little bit more. It has been thrust upon us. 

93 

I agree with the architects here; every building is grandfathered. 

They were never designed to be fully evacuated like this. So we are 

trying to work in the confines of what we have existing. Now, however, going forward, how do we make these things better? Because 

if they weren’t designed that way, all of these stair towers would 

be 6-feet wide. There would be 15 exit discharges at the bottom at 

the street level as you have at the MCI Center and things like 

that. 

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. And they were not designed to carry 

as many folks who are in here, too. So you have all of those things 

now that have just expanded beyond the capacity of what we have 

now. 

There are so many questions to raise here. There are so many 

things. They are telling us the vote is going to go off, and we don’t 

want to be in the middle of that. 

Ms. Styron has suggested a working group. I think there should 

be some type of a meeting with our experts and those who are responsible, because after all, with all these things they are trying 

to grapple with, we have to rely on the experts. And there should 

be an informal meeting just around the table where we all talk and 

then we all go and review what we talked about and see what is 

best. 

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. The last thing is this EvacuTrack. This 

is something that it seems like we need to invest in as well, where 

those that do not have the capacity to get to an elevator can go 

downstairs. 

Ms. STYRON. We are looking at evacuation assistive devices. 

There are many different ones on the market to address different 

needs for different individuals, and when you are looking at possibly appropriating different pieces of equipment, we really need to 

have done what you said, a working group, and think about the 

considerations that we are really trying to address and what they 

can do for the individual. 

Ms. DAVIS. Factors that go into taking into account your selection 

of purchase of equipment would include not just the equipment 

itself, but the facility in which you intend to use it. Very different 

than just the type or intent, the user and cost factor need study 

too. These are all elements that come into play. And there are a 

number of marketed items now available that would meet these 

different needs, but it might be a different piece of equipment in 

one building rather than another or even on different floors of the 

same building. So as long as you keep that issue open, you will find 

the most appropriate solutions. 

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I can accept that. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Let me just close, I just want to summarize a 

couple of things. 

I have learned a lot today. And I was just saying to our Ranking 

Member, we don’t need an act of Congress to make this happen. 

We can sit down together. The Ranking Member is supportive—we 

have a bipartisan group here, and we have two staffs. We can work 

this out. We don’t have to pass an act of Congress. 

This hearing went in the exact direction we wanted it to go, from 

the testimony of a Member of Congress himself and then from our 

94 

officers who deal with this on a daily basis and then to our experts 

and advocates for these issues. I think it is healthy that we recognize that we have done a lot of things, with everybody working together in an unusual situation since 9/11. We had to address a lot 

of different issues. Sometimes we take a broader picture and forget 

the important things. 

You do learn by loss. My cousin and her husband were deaf, and 

I worked a lot with the blind. When we had a staffer who was 

blind, the interesting thing is he had a device where he listened. 

It is for him, but I listened to it and realized, I can use that too. 

I don’t have to read that. I can use it. That is a clear example 

where we learn. So things we do for persons with special needs will 

help the whole in a lot of cases. 

As I look through your testimony, there are some things you addressed that we aren’t up to speed on, but that we can be up to 

speed on. We will sit down and form some type of a working 

group—our officers are always open to that—to see how we can 

make things better. 

This, to me, was a very positive hearing. I want to thank Ms. 

Styron, National Organization on Disability, and all of you for participating. 

Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for a great 

hearing. 

Ms. STYRON. Thank you very much. 

[Whereupon, at 12:40 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

Æ