ROUGH EDITED COPY

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

UNITED STATES ACCESS BOARD

HEARING

SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 

CAPTIONING PROVIDED BY:

DILLON REPORTING SERVICES

100 NORTH LA SALLE STREET, SUITE 1500

CHICAGO, IL 60602

* * * * *

This is being provided in a rough-draft format. Communication 

Access Real time Translation (CART) is provided in order to 

facility communication accessibility and may not be a totally 

verbatim record of the proceedings.

* * * * * 

>> NANCY STARNES: Good morning. We'd like to ask you all to 

please take your seats. We want to begin these proceedings. 

It's my honor to welcome you to this meeting, this public

hearing on the Americans with Disabilities Act, Accessibility 

Guidelines for Transportation Vehicles. That greeting is on 

behalf of myself, Nancy Starnes. And I do serve as vice-chair 

of the U.S. Access Board and on behalf of our chair, 

Polly Trottenberg as well as my colleagues who are here. And I 

will ask each of them to introduce themselves in just a moment. 

We want you to know that if you did not register to speak today, 

we don't want you to take that as meaning we don't want to hear 

from you. By all means, if you have something to contribute to 

our deliberations today, we want to encourage you to share that 

with us. 

 We would ask if you approach the witness table which is in 

the front center of this room, that you do provide us with your 

name and any professional association that you would like 

included in the record. 

 We would also want you to know that if you do need to leave 

the room to go to the rest rooms, they are outside the main 
meeting room here and to your right down a short hallway. 

 We would also like to request that you silence your cell 

phones while we're having these deliberations. Let me ask my 

colleagues and relevant board staff people to introduce 

themselves and we'll begin with the individuals to your left, my 

right. 

>> EDWARD GEE: Ed Gee, public member. 

>> HANS VAN WINKLE: Hans Van Winkle, public member. 

>> PHILLIP JENKINS: Phillip Jenkins, public member from Austin, 

Texas. 

>> JOHN BOX: John Box, public member. 

>> DOUG ANDERSON: Doug Anderson, public member. 

>> JAMES RAGGIO: I'm Jim Raggio, I'm the counsel general. 

>> NANCY STARNES: Nancy Starnes. 

>> J.R. HARDING: J.R. Harding, public member, Florida. 

>> RON GARDNER: Ron Gardner, National Federation for the Blind. 

>> NEIL MELICK: Neil Melick, public member. 

>> HOWARD ROSENBLUM: Howard Rosenblum, public member, Equip for 

Equality. 

>> JOHN WYVILL: John Wyvill, public member. 

>> GARY TALBOT: Gary B. Talbot, public member. 

>> KAREN BRAITMAYER: Karen Braitmayer, public member. 

>> NANCY STARNES: With that, we'll turn the proceedings over to 

Dr. Harding. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Nancy, fellow Board members, staff, 

and my fellow Chicagoans. I was born here back in 1966 and have 

a long family history dating back to 1805 in this fine city. As 

our vice chair indicated, Nancy, we are here on the Americans 

with Disabilities Act, Accessibility Guidelines for 

Transportation Vehicles. On July 26, 2010, our 20th birthday 

for the Americans with Disabilities Act, the proposed rule was 

published. These proposals update the ADA guidelines for 

covered buses and vans. The document addresses new types of 

systems such as bus rapid transit, lowered floors, advances in 

technologies, and including automated announcements. 

 The proposed guidelines revise specifications for vehicle 

ramps, circulation routes, wheelchair spaces, and securement 

systems. 

 The future rule will update, updates for rail vehicles. We 

plan to hold a second hearing in Washington, DC, November 8th 

and the docket will be closed on this matter November 23rd, 

2010. Like all public hearings, there are some guidelines to 

this. But since we don't have 300 people but only 13 good 

citizens who have volunteered, the maximum time frame of 5 to 7 

minutes can be extended. 

 All registered speakers can be, to the microphone in front 

of us to testify. Please notify our staffs if you want to 

testify in advance, so if you haven’t preregistered, first come, 

first served. This meeting will go until 12:00. I understand 

we'll take a little break about halfway through it to give some 
folks to courage to step up as they wish. 

 Written remarks or Power Points, please give them to staff. 

These will be added to the public record and our trusted 

attorney Jim Raggio has already received one copy of it. And 

then of course, please refrain as a courtesy to reacting to 

other people's comments or staff member’s. This is from the 

heart, and people want to specify what issues they're facing in 

transit and over the road vehicles. 

 So on that note, I'd like to get this meeting begun. So our 

first speaker is Mr. T.J. Ross. Mr. Ross?

>> Mr. ROSS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm TJ Ross, I'm the 

executive director of Pace suburban bus. My background is all 

transit. I started in the transit business in 1975 in Phoenix, 

Arizona. And so that, I would say, had the full experience of 

the accessibility requirements that have come with transit. 

 Pace is the suburban bus provider. We provide fixed route 

service throughout the 3500 square miles of northeastern 

Illinois that's outside the city of Chicago. We also provide 

van pool service, the second largest system in the country, over 

700 van pools 

 We do car pooling and of course we do dial-a-ride. We 

provide dial-a-ride services in the suburban area that are not 

ADA required dial-a-ride services, but we also have 

responsibility for providing ADA service throughout the whole 

region, which in this case is about 2 - 2.5 million trips a year 

with an expenditure of about $120 million a year. 

 What I want to do is testify about the changes in regards to 

the ADA guidelines. The revisions to the access guidelines have 

been in the works for over 20 years, as you know, and we remain 

ready to be on the forefront of what's required because of our 

commitment to the safety and comfort of our passengers. 

 This is not a new attitude. Pace began building buses with 

Orion in 1990 that had wheelchair lifts in anticipation of the 

original regulations. 

 The ADA requirements of 1991 were a starting point from 

which a lot of learning has transpired. Those early days with 

wheelchair lifts on conventional buses were truly that, learning 

days. In the past 20 years, Pace has transitioned from lifts to 

ramps. In 1998, we committed to buying only low floor buses. 

We had short ramps and now we have some longer ramps. The 

longer ramps are identifying the possible need for a variable 

size ramp due to vehicle heights, deployment areas, and 

passenger needs. 

 As you know in the suburbs, many times there are not 

sidewalks or not curbs. You have a lot of different situations 

there. 

 We learned by that that the minimum is not enough. A 

600-pound capacity in a wheelchair lift or a ramp has to be 

increased due to the passenger loading and maneuvering 

requirements. 
 We need to remember at a maximum a bus is only 102 inches 

wide. And when I started out, the maximum was at 96 inches, 

which was a very narrow bus compared to what we have now. And 

that limits the space that we have inside the bus for aisles and 

seating. 

 In addition, when the boarding area is ahead of the front 

wheels and on traditional transit buses the front wheels are 

behind the driver that really does limit the space between the 

front wheel areas. So you have a restriction area between the 

front wheels as you get on the bus. 

 Now, we have developed securements that are easier to use 

over the years. The securement belt from when we started to 

now, it’s a complete transition, very different. They're 

simpler, meaning infrequent riders can manage them as easily as 

regular customers and less assistance is needed from the bus 

operators to allow for a quicker travel. Everything about bus 

travel is speed. The quicker people can get on and get off the 

bus, the less expense we have and the more competitive we are 

with an automobile. 

 Just think, every minute delay is about $1. The operating 

cost for a bus, you can easily say $1, in some cases it might be 

as high as $1.50. 

 And also there's identified new items that need to be 

addressed by the regulations. And these include clarifications 

in most areas to remove past ambiguities. So what we are saying 

is, safer, stronger, bigger is the message I want to leave with 

you today. Pace has always worked at offering state of the art 

technology and equipment whenever possible through the 

cooperation of the builders and the suppliers in the industry. 

We're committed to doing this the right way and want to work 

with you on a set of guidelines and a feasible and improvement 

for all involved over what's required today. 

 Now, these are challenges for the manufacturers and the 

builders of vehicles and components. But we do not recognize 

any of the revisions that are overly onerous or impossible. The 

challenge to transportation providers will be to assist the 

manufacturers and suppliers of our industry in making sure they 

are in compliance with the vehicles and the systems are 

redesigned for improved accessibility 

 Now, a fact looms that isn't intended to distract from all 

of our support of this. When we want to improve things, we 

believe it takes a minimum of 12 years to make this transition. 

The life of a transit bus is set by FDA, is 12 years. And I 

want -- we do still have some high floor buses in our fleet, 

which means that they're well over 12 years old. And we haven't 

transitioned to all low floor buses yet. 

 Now, that is a long time period. So there's going to take 

some ideas of grandfathering in existing vehicles. We also know 

if retrofits are required, they can be very difficult. They can 

be very expensive. And they can have the distinct possibility 
of not working. 

 My experience with transit vehicles is that when you go in 

and you modify original designs, you have some very unintended 

consequences. 

 So we want to point that out to everyone and make sure that 

if we do end up with retrofits that we understand what we are 

doing and that they are doable and they don't create more 

problems than they solve. 

 I want to point out that our existing safety systems offer 

an impeccable track record of maintaining safe operation of our 

passengers so that there should be little concern about the 

existing fleets in our fleet as the transition occurs. 

 In regards to staff, the maintenance section of Pace will 

require full-time devoted compliance officer for this as it 

applies to the vehicle procurements, bills and watching 

regulations. There's a cost to doing these changes to the 

agency. And we'll have to bear that. We will have to find ways 

to bear that. 

 In summary, the sky is the limit as it relates to what's 

possible as we work together on these new regulations to ensure 

the safety and accessibility of our service to the passengers 

who rely on Pace. While it's true that one cannot put a price 

on safety, we're only asking that you remain aware of the 

potential cost impacts and respectfully request an incremental 

approach to implementation that is manageable for the providers 

like us. 

 I want to thank you for your time and opportunity to testify 

and I'm happy to address any questions you may have. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Ross. Because we do have time, 

I'm not on, hot. Testing? I'm not on. There we go 

 Because we have time, Mr. Ross, board members, any questions 

for our testimony today? 

 Hearing none, thank you, sir. 

 Next up to bat is Mr. Joel Sheffil. Mr. Joel Sheffil?

>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to speak. My name 

is Joel Sheffil. I am a person with a disability who uses a 

cane. And I am also the executive director of West Suburban 

Access News Association. 

 I'd like to say that when you talk about access, you not 

only need to talk about being able to get on the bus or train 

but must also be concerned about what happens after one gets on. 

Are priority seats available or are they occupied by kids or 

teens. If you say something to them, you get sworn at and 

nothing happens. Drivers are more worried about keeping on time 

than asking a passenger to move so a senior or a person with a 

disability can use a priority seat. 

 What's the use of having them? Drivers can and will pass up 

passengers. But if there were a red rotating light which 

passengers could initiate when getting to a bus stop, there 

would be no reason to pass up because the driver had to see the 
light. 

 On L trains, there is no employee on any car which is 

responsible for being sure assistance is at the departing 

station. Security guards do this. Over 50 percent of 

L stations are not accessible. 

 To take, for example, a station on the Green line by my home 

where over six senior homes are, has only an escalator going up. 

What also does it have? It has a ramp to get there from the 

sidewalk. But what does the ramp lead to? Stairs. How does a 

wheelchair get up there? 

 But if you want to depart at the station, there's no access. 

Even if you went up and took the escalator going up, if you 

wanted to depart at that station coming back, there is nothing 

going down. 

 This is not access. If we want to get people out of nursing 

homes and into the community, then transportation access is not 

something we can do. It is something we have to do to allow 

those with disabilities and seniors to be an active part of the 

community. 

 It was just announced that the Department of Justice fined a 

local bus company in Texas for violations of the ADA. This law 

must be obeyed by all transit systems. Drivers need to be 

allowed to get out of the seat. And if the bus is supposedly 

accessible, then all passengers must be considered, including 

keeping the main aisle open so that those with low vision are 

able to get on. If you have a main aisle which is loaded with 

strollers and shopping carts, how is a person with low vision or 

with no vision supposed to get through? If they can't get 

through, then is that accessible? 

 When picking up school kids, a bus becomes holy heck. The 

kids think that they own that bus, and anybody on it needs to be 

hated that they got on that bus. This is not accessible 

transportation. And we need to consider doing something about 

this. Thank you for your time. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, sir. [Are there] any comments or 

questions from members of the board? Gary and then John. I 

guess just Gary. Mr. Talbot

>> GARY TALBOT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Gary Talbot, public 

member. Joel, if you could help me with a couple of things. On 

this Green line station that you're talking about, is that a key 

station?

>> It's the Austin Avenue station, sir. That is the -- Austin 

Avenue is the dividing line between the City of Chicago and the 

suburb of Oak Park 

>> GARY TALBOT: The reason I ask, what I would recommend is, if 

it is a key station, then you're right, it should be accessible. 

If it's not a key station as your community had negotiated years 

ago, I would suggest that you work with your local CTA rep and 

try and get them to make that accessible.

>> Well, the reply we get when we have contacted is, money is 
involved and we just can't do anything. But at the same time, 

persons like myself who use a cane or anything else really are 

at risk when going down that station. 

>> GARY TALBOT: If I could have a follow-up, Mr. Chair, you 

also made a comment about the drivers and that they must be able 

to get out of their seat. Could you explain that? I mean, if a 

person using a wheeled mobility device gets on the vehicle, they 

have to put the securements on.

>> Okay fine, sir. But what about a person with a disability 

who is not using a wheelchair but you have a mother and two kids 

using the priority seats. The drivers just look and say -- just 

smile. 

>> GARY TALBOT: Thank you. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you. [Are there] any other comments or 

statements? 

 All right, the next up to bat is Ms. Debbie Pittman. 

Ms. Debbie Pittman? Whenever you're ready, ma'am.

>> Good morning. My name is Debbie Pittman. I'm here on behalf 

of Concerned Citizens of Paratransit. 

 The ADA is specifically meant to be, it was meant to be as a 

guideline for accessibility to be accomplished. But it's at a 

minimum. One of the things that is very important is that the 

guidelines need to go further than being just a minimum. 

 In relation to paratransit, vehicles that are used by 

carriers that transport people with disabilities should be 

better specified to meet the needs of people with disabilities. 

For example, vans that are meant to carry wheelchairs and, in 

some cases, two wheelchairs, if it is unsafe for passengers to 

sit behind a wheelchair because there's not enough leg room, 

those vehicles should not be allowed because in the event of an 

accident, with the wheelchair facing forward as the guidelines 

require, that wheelchairs face forward, if there's no -- if that 

wheelchair is not properly secured, which in many cases they are 

not, if the vehicle jerks for any reason or brakes are slammed 

on by the driver, that vehicle has the possibility of rolling 

back on the person that is sitting behind that wheelchair. 

 If this is going to be a requirement that the wheelchairs do 

face forward, which that is the requirement now, these vehicles, 

there needs to be enough space between a wheelchair and a chair 

that is -- and a seat that is stabilized for people to sit on. 

 Another issue is safety should be first and foremost. Vans 

that require what is like a five-passenger van should not, if 

it's having a wheelchair, a requirement should not be that a 

service animal should have to be on the floor in the vehicle 

with a wheelchair in that small van because the van, if any --

again, if anything happens and that wheelchair is not properly 

secured, that animal will be hurt. This is something that is 

very crucial. It should be specified that no service animal 

should be put in a van, a five-passenger van where there's a 

wheelchair. And there should be enough vehicles in that 
carrier's fleet that there should be a vehicle available for a 

person with a service animal and not put a person in the 

position that has a service animal to be forced to be separated 

from their service animal and leave their service animal at 

home. 

 This is a repeated issue that does go on in Chicago. And it 

has been ignored. 

 The other issue is when passengers bring issues to the 

service provider such as safety and seat belts, seat belts that 

are not properly securing the passengers, those vehicles that 

have such belts, seat belts, for example, here in Chicago, the 

new vans that have been brought in to provide paratransit 

service in the last couple years now, these seat belts do not 

lock. When the driver sits on the brakes, the rider slides 

because the seat belt moves with them. 

 I myself have been in a past accident. And that was the 

very thing that injured me because the seat belt did not lock. 

And I was basically just thrown forward and then slammed back. 

And I sustained injuries. This is something that is crucial. 

It needs to be addressed. Vehicles that have such seat belts 

that do not protect the riders should be banned. And this 

should be addressed ASAP. 

 Paratransit riders have the same rights as those that ride 

the fixed route system. Paratransit is a means of providing a 

way to be independent and live independently. It is up to the 

guidelines that are established to address all the issues that 

are involved in freedom of transportation so that accessibility 

is available to all citizens. 

 In addition, vehicles that cannot, that make it difficult 

for passengers to ride in such as passenger vans which are also 

utilized should not be utilized when they are not specifically 

set for people with disabilities. 

 If these vehicles, there are vehicles that are too high for 

a person with a disability to get into. These vehicles should 

not be utilized. And companies that utilize these vehicles and 

insist on sending them to people with disabilities that have a 

specific need that say they have a ramp requirement, they should 

be fined because fining, it should be in the regulations that 

they should be fined so that if it's written in the regulations, 

there will be more of an opportunity and more of a sincere 

feeling of the carrier actually trying to meet the need of the 

riders. 

 Also in the regulations, it needs to be established that 

riders should have a say-so in what is going on. There needs to 

be something that is protection for the riders so that issues 

are not ignored. It is supposed to be transportation and 

accessibility. And that accessibility should count for 

everyone. Thank you. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Ms. Pittman. [Are there] any 

comments or questions? 
 Hearing none, thank you so much, Ms. Pittman. 

 The next speaker is Mr. Steve Hastelis. 

 The chair is right there to your right, Steve. There are

two of them. And the microphone is probably at 11:00 range. 

 There's a microphone right there.

>> Maybe I should have sat in the chair to the left. I'm sorry. 

 Good morning. I'm Steve Hastelis. And I present this 

testimony on behalf of the National Federation of the Blind of 

Illinois, Chicago chapter 

 I retired from the Chicago transit authority four months ago 

after a career of 35 years in community relations, public 

affairs, customer assistance, and Americans with Disabilities 

Act, ADA, compliance. 

 If we can't find out route and schedule info, then we can't 

access the bus. And if we can't pay our fare, then the lack of 

information denies us access just as the lack of lift or ramp 

denies physical access to a person using a wheelchair. 

 Information access is equally critical whether we use web 

resources directly or call transit systems and request 

information from a customer service or travel information 

representative. 

 We also may seek materials in alternative formats such as 

Braille, large print, and electronic file 

 We strongly concur with recommendations urging clear 

announcements, exterior ones giving route and destination when 

buses and trains arrive at boarding locations as well as 

on-board interior ones announcing all stops. 

 Sighted persons can see obvious informational cues such as 

bus stops and street signs, route and destination signs on buses 

as well as directional information signs at rail systems. 

 Blind or visually impaired customers must access such 

information nonvisually using alternative techniques of 

blindness. Thus, we may seek such information from the transit 

system. For example, customers may ask about routes, schedules, 

and fares. 

 We also might ask about specific bus stop locations to this 

effect. Is the bus stop near side, before the intersection, far 

side, after the intersection; mid-block, or a block or two away? 

 Naming an intersection as a location does not give complete 

information. Rather, it obviously leads to more questions. For 

example, what street is the bus traveling on? Does it turn 

there? If so, from what street to what street does it go? What 

direction does the bus travel as it passes through such an 

intersection? 

 For example, outside this hotel we have an intersection of 

Ontario Street which goes one-way westbound and Michigan Avenue 

which has two-way traffic. Most of the bus service through here 

goes north and south on Michigan, but we do have one route that 

turns west to south at Michigan and Ontario. And we have 

another route that turns south to west from southbound Michigan 
to westbound Ontario. 

 So these directions are critical for a blind person both 

when you call transit information, when you look online, or when 

you ask a bus driver. And we may ask similar questions at rail 

systems regarding bus connections, station entrances, track and 

platform locations and fare collection, but apparently that's 

for another day since we're talking about buses and vans this 

morning. 

 I have other comments about fare equipment. I should deal 

with these now because bus rapid transit is kind of a new form 

of service. Bus rapid transit can range from enhancements on a 

regular street where, let's say, buses get priority at traffic 

signals to lanes designated for buses only. And the most 

advanced form of bus rapid transit involves off-board, that is, 

before you get on the bus, off-board fare collection. 

 If you have a bus rapid transit like that where you pay your 

fare before you get on the vehicle, then the logistics of paying 

the fare are essentially the same whether the thing that you 

ride is a bus on a designated lane with rubber tires on pavement 

or a railroad, light rail or commuter train. 

 Some machines have -- let's see. Some machines have speech, 

but the directions they give do not work for blind people. For 

example, on the Chicago south shore and south Bend Railroad, I 

asked the ticket agent at millennium station a few blocks south 

of here about purchasing a ticket with a credit card. She 

directed me to machines outside on the platform. I went and 

found the following. The machine gave audio prompts with 

braille and raised print sequential directions as to the 

purchase of tickets. Neither the audio nor the braille 

directions explained what keys to press for particular choices, 

either A, B, C, D keys for fare type or the number keypad for 

the station code. 

 A sighted man tried to help me but left me alone when I 

tried to do this transaction independently. The critical 

prompts for directions occurred only visually. I therefore 

returned to the ticket agent and purchased a round-trip ticket 

with cash. Virginia Railway Express, VRE, operates a commuter 

rail system south from Washington, D.C. It has ticket vending 

machines with audio which lists all the station names with 

corresponding numbers in quick succession. The blind person 

must remember all this information and make the desired 

selection only after the machine finishes reading this list. 

And my recollection is that it had at least 24 stations; from 

D.C. to Fredericksburg is what, 50-some mile, maybe 60 miles. 

It's a long commuter rail line. That kind of thing can work for 

a blind person but it needs to be more interactive 

 Again, bus rapid transit is like a rail system in that it 

operates on a designated right-of-way. Some machines have 

speech output giving blind customers the same information that 

sighted persons have. Such machines are now available and in 
use on big city rail systems such as Chicago Transit Authority, 

CTA, New York City Transit authority, NYCTA, Washington Metro, 

and on light rail systems such as the one in Minneapolis. I 

will reserve my other comments for later. And I know we talked 

about rail at a later hearing. But these issues are so 

integrally related that I touched on some rail issues this 

morning because of the nature of bus rapid transit which can 

resemble a rail system in its operation and fare collection. 

Thank you. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Steve. [Are there] any comments 

from the board? Mr. Talbot

>> GARY TALBOT: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Gary Talbot, public 

member 

 If I could just ask a question, Steve, as far as the 

communication, and I'm thinking more like at a bus stop, do you 

know, do you guys have any kind of like raised character braille 

for bus route and destination? Would that be helpful if you 

don't do it, or have you done that at all? I'm just trying to 

think, what would make that a better situation for folks who are 

blind?

>> We haven't done it in Chicago. Other systems, although I 

can't tell you the particulars, such as Austin, Texas, have done 

some work in that regard. And so maybe, I heard somebody say 

Austin earlier. So maybe that person might be able to give you 

some more detail. 

 The problem with the bus stop location is that unless you 

have a bus shelter, which is a very obvious structure, you don't 

really know where it is. In this city, for example, we have 

near-side stops. We have far-side stops. And you really need 

to investigate before you go riding the bus where is the 

physical bus stop. Otherwise, you could put braille on a sign, 

but how are you going to know where to look for it if you're 

walking down the street 

>> J.R. HARDING: Well put, Steve. Thank you. Any more 

questions. Mr. Talbot? 

>> GARY TALBOT: Yes, if I could just follow up. I'm just 

trying to think about what our draft rule has, what it doesn't 

have and how that would help this situation. So I understand 

what you're saying. But that's more of, I would think, almost a 

customer service activity or something like that, if braille and 

raised character isn't going to help on a sign or on a shelter. 

Like your comments about the scheduling, bus schedules, that 

types of thing, there's all kinds of new technology coming out 

now where we're doing electronic veritable message boards in 

shelters, that kind of thing, where you will get not only 

schedule information but next bus arrival, that type of thing. 

So I'm just trying to figure in my own mind if that's the type 

of technology you're talking about, or is this more something 

that the provider like a CTA would provide.

>> I think it would be some combination 
>> GARY TALBOT: Okay. Thank you. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Hang on, Steve. We have one more question, 

Mr. Ron gardener from Utah 

>> RON GARDNER: Steve, I'm wondering about -- and thank you for 

your testimony, Steve. I'm wondering about inside announcements 

and whether they're loud enough, whether you find that really 

helpful, whether the volume of the announcements changes with 

the intensity of the noise inside or outside the bus. 

 For example, if you're waiting on the sidewalk and there are 

sirens and lots of noise and traffic, buses coming and going, 

are you able to hear the outside announcement? And likewise, 

inside the bus, in an empty bus, it's a lot different than in a 

very full bus when people are tired and grouchy and wanting to 

get home 

 How do you find those announcements? Are they working? Do 

we need to look at that requirement for decibels or anything? 

I'm wondering about that. And also, if you will, on the 

location of bus stops, I went out and spent several hours on the 

bus system here in Chicago last evening. And I'm wondering 

about the actual stop in relationship to it a shelter if there 

happens to be a shelter. How do you identify where the bus is 

going to stop now, those issues.

>> First of all, regarding the audible announcements, I don't 

think that we adjust it real-time according to the ambient 

sound. We'd probably try to figure out a happy medium. For 

example, this morning, the bus I rode had a slightly goofed up 

announcement protocol until either it reset itself or the driver 

reset it. 

 So, you know, I had some discussion with the driver and he 

identified the route because the bus's exterior announcement 

didn't talk when it boarded. And I think that some of my 

colleagues here who are blind will say some remarks about Pace 

which is the suburban bus announcement versus the Chicago 

Transit Authority announcements. They may help answer your 

question about the clarity and the volume of announcements. 

 Regarding bus stops, buses stopping at shelters, I think we 

have instructed bus operators to stop a few feet past the 

shelter because if the bus operator stops right in the shelter 

with the front door lined up with the interior of the shelter 

and then deploys a ramp and a person using a mobility device 

comes down the ramp into the shelter, then the person is in the 

shelter until the bus leaves and may have trouble getting out of 

the shelter and so forth because the shelters were installed 

obviously after the sidewalks and the buildings were installed. 

And sometimes the clearances are pretty tight. So we don't --

we instruct the drivers not to get passengers on and off the bus 

directly from within the shelter. And some of that depends on, 

you know, what the drivers can do physically at a given bus stop 

and what the passengers request also 

>> J.R. HARDING: Is that satisfactory? 
>> RON GARDNER: How do you identify what buses are going to 

stop there, Steve?

>> If you don't know, then you would call the transit system or 

look up the bus stop location online. Otherwise, yes, because 

we have a bus stop down the street here at Michigan and Wacker. 

Some buses stop there and some don't. So that's a critical 

question. And I'm planning to discuss later that we don't 

really expect transit systems to call on third parties to assist 

customers with disabilities or blind people in particular. 

 So if you don't know, then you would ask questions of either 

the bus drivers or the customer service or transit information 

people on the phone or else you'd go online 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Steve. Thank you, Ron. [Are 

there] any other questions? 

 Hearing none, Marcia [is] our next speaker. 

>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: What's the last name?

>> J.R. HARDING: Trans--

>> No, not even close. I thought I was No. 10. I'm sorry 

>> J.R. HARDING: Well, you were, but we had a few no-shows. So 

you got moved up the food chain.

>> Okay. My name is Marcia Suwinski. This is Fred. He works 

for me. Congratulations on your birthday and congratulations, 

Howard. Good to see you. I missed you last week. I'm glad 

you're on this committee. 

 And here is an individual, but because I am the former 

co-chair of the RTA ADA advisory committee, the current vice 

chair of the Pace ADA committee and have served on the Pace blue 

ribbon committee, I have not only got my own personal experience 

but I've become a repository of experience for many other 

consumers and other clients. 

 So I speak as an individual, but I speak with experience of 

myself and others. 

 Let me address paratransit first. We have a regional 

paratransit system, as you know. It is run differently in the 

city. One of the issues with vehicles, you've heard a little 

about already. I won't repeat it. You've heard it. Some of 

the concerns, I want to emphasize are the fact that because in 

the past, we have not had any input into the configuration of 

the vehicles. I now ride often times in a vehicle where the 

seat is so high; my feet don't touch the ground. The belt is 

configured so high that it chokes me. And I have nothing to 

hold on to. So when the driver, when necessary, must hit on the 

brakes as, if you drive in a big city, you know I'm often times,

what I call the spread eagle. So there is a concern there. 

 In these same vehicles, in order for the driver to do the 

securement of the wheelchairs, he's forced to go between my legs 

about a foot off the ground, which is not pleasant for either of 

us, and secure the straps. These are small things, but they're 

not small things. They're big things. 

 By the same token, those very straps are then at least 6 
inches off the ground. When I have to leave the vehicle, I have 

to be careful and take very, very patient time off that vehicle 

because I don't know how many and where all those straps rand so 

I have to do that very carefully. That's personal experience. 

 I have been in vehicles where, because of the seat 

configuration, the service animal harness could not get through 

because the space was not wide enough. And they were either 

damaging the harness, the wheelchair, or the seat or the 

individual. 

 I've also been on vehicles where the configuration is so 

difficult that wheelchairs had to get on and get off and play 

musical wheelchairs in order to accommodate both them and the 

individuals who are ambulatory. 

 We've also had experiences where, because of the problems 

with the lift or the -- I don't want to judge why it's 

inadequate, but it's not working, individuals especially 

elderly, I know one testimony of a person who is 90 years old 

who is forced to exit the rear of a vehicle, literally sitting 

on the floor of the vehicle and sliding out because she couldn't 

get out of the vehicle. 

 Pace has been made aware of this. This is not a secret. 

Nor has it happened in the last six months, but it has happened. 

These are issues we are very concerned about as riders of 

paratransit. 

 On to fixed routes. As a person who is visually impaired 

among other disabilities, if you want us to use fixed route, and 

we'd love to, we have to be able to get to the fixed route bus 

stop in a safe manner. With the onset of quiet cars, I'm merely 

emphasizing one more time that these are issues, when the cars 

are quiet and we can't hear them, we need audible, accessible 

pedestrian signals. I know that's an IDOT, CDOT issue. If you 

want me on a bus, you have to be able to get me to the bus stop 

and in order to do that, I need to be able to cross safely and 

with quiet car, it is an issue. 

 Having said that, using fixed route vehicles, some of the 

problems we encounter are not so much on the vehicle but I will 

speak to the issue, I believe its Mr. Talbot asked, about the 

voices of the audible stops. They are often too quiet. They do 

not change in the bus when the bus is routing with lovely young 

energy coming out of high school. There is no adjustment in the 

volume to hear the stops announced. 

 I have been on several buses where the stops were not 

announced and when I asked the driver whether he had reported 

the bus as not having audible announcements, he said, it's 

broken, but magically three stops later they started talking. 

So I'm not clear where the miracle happened, but it did. 

 Also when we are trying to wait for a bus, it does not 

adjust for ambient noise at a busy intersection, so one has to 

stand very near that to get the announcement as needed. 

 Often times in a busy intersection or a transfer point, 
buses will stop behind buses. This is very difficult for us 

because we're waiting at a designated bus stop. My personal 

selection has put me next to the post that has the bus stop 

sign, I figure that's the least complicated and the bus driver

will get it. And often times the bus is stopping behind my bus 

and he's loading back there and then doesn't stop at this bus 

and merely moves on because the light is green. That's a 

consideration 

 Another issue we have with buses is routing. What you heard 

Mr. Hastelis say, I'm not going to repeat but I'm going to try 

to enhance since he got there first. We often times will 

consult either the web site or a human person with the 

RTA travel information. 

 While the web site is relatively accessible, and I have to 

say, I was one of those people who was involved in that, it is 

not completely accessible. It does not tell me where the bus 

stop is. It tells me the intersection. This is not acceptable. 

Often times on many of these web sites there is a visual picture 

with some sort of demarcation where the bus stop is. So in 

other words, if you can see on the computer, you get the 

information where the bus top is. If you can't see and you have 

to use a screen reader, you don't get that information. I know 

that's web accessibility and that's later but it's still an 

issue with transit because I don't know where the bus stop is. 

We also get no updated information if a bus stop is moved 

because of construction. If a bus stop is moved because there's 

scaffolding and you can't enter the bus stop at that 

intersection. Often times, there are all kinds of very real 

reasons and several months' worth of rerouting. But we are not 

able to access all of that either on the computer or with the 

live person. 

 Let me talk about the RTA travel train, the travel center, 

which is where we get our travel information. With the same 

information, I am still not given specific information about 

where the bus stop is. Take the 3 to Roosevelt and transfer to 

the 12. Okay. Well, that's an intersection. Where do I catch 

the 12? I don't know. Ask the bus driver. Well that, may or 

may not work because believe it or not, some of the bus drivers

don't know and it's not always a safe thing to ask him or her to 

do that. This is not equal access for us while we're trying to 

use fixed route 

 Some of the problems, boarding buses and leaving buses, 

having to do with drivers who are poorly trained or need 

retraining about using the lift and using the kneeling for the 

buses. 

 In transferring, we are often times have to rely on a third 

party to get to the transfer point or if we have to get to the 

L, the bus may not stop where the L exit or entrance is and so 

we then have to make either a block, a half a block, cross the 

street, make a U to come back to that bus stop. And there is 
nothing to indicate that either through a living person or 

through a web site. So we just don't know. 

 And if I'm the only one getting off the bus, I have to trust 

that the driver is going to give me correct information because 

my life depends on getting across that intersection, around to 

that L stop. 

 Using the L, we have been told that there are customer 

assistants that will assist us to find the doors and get on and 

off. I have been told that where there isn't a customer 

assistant, I can get someone from the CTA to help me. That is a 

great concept in theory. In reality, often times, they're not 

available or they're busy assisting other customers. 

 As more people with disabilities are using fixed route and

there is one CA, or customer assistant at a given L station, 

with the number of trains that come through that station, please 

understand, that person is still only able to be at one place at 

one time. 

 Often times I have to rely on a third party to help me. 

Also often times at the newer station, I've been told that there 

are visuals telling you the next train approaching, the train 

approaching. The information about various trains and 

transfers, that is not available to me because it doesn't speak. 

It is absolutely inaccessible. I have no idea. I have to 

depend on the literacy and the compassion of another rider who 

is going to tell me what they see on those screens so that I can 

access the right train and the right transfer. 

 I could go on and on about that. My real concern here to 

sum it up has to do with safety. It has to do with safety in 

paratransit vehicles. Let me say that the drivers in 

paratransit vehicles are phenomenal. They do really good job. 

I don't want any reflection on them. It's the vehicles. My 

concern about fixed route has more to do with the miraculous 

return of some of the audibles, either inadequately or 

adequately. And my concern about transfers, locations, 

information, access, and the opportunity to use the fixed route 

service in a way that is safe. Thank you. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you. [Are there] any questions from the 

Board? Yes, Howard, please. One of our newest members. 

>> HOWARD ROSENBLUM: Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want 

to thank you for coming down to talk to us. She's a very strong 

advocate for the community. I do have a question for you about 

one of the comments regarding support from the drivers and other 

personnel. How often do you experience the drivers being 

supportive as opposed to not being supportive in helping you 

with the information that you need or sending you the right 

directions or whatever, if you can elaborate on what's happened. 

To what extent has that really occurred?

>> I assume you are speaking about fixed route? 

>> HOWARD ROSENBLUM: Yes.

>> Okay. It is my experience that I would say between 50 to 75 
percent of the time, I get some assistance. I would say 

percentage-wise, maybe 30 to 50 percent of that is actually 100 

percent accurate. And part of that actually goes to the simple 

solution that a bus driver will say, in all honesty, the bus 

stop used to be over there but I don't see it now. 

 So that driver isn't even aware that a bus stop has changed. 

And they may or may not be able to look in an intersection and 

eyeball the new bus stop. They may or may not. It's a real 

risk. And I have to say, maybe half of the time are they 100 

percent helpful. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you. Any more questions, Howard? 

 Mr. Talbot has a question 

>> GARY TALBOT: Thank you, Mr. Chair, Gary Talbot, public 

member. Marcia, if I could just ask you a similar question I 

asked the person earlier. I believe it was Steve. Yesterday, 

we walked for a couple miles on the sidewalks. And I noted 

several of the bus stops, took some pictures of the bus stop 

signage and some of the shelters and things like that. Again, I 

would ask you the same question. 

 Because you guys use near-side, far-side, mid-block 

locations for your bus stops, it seems to me if you had some 

type of a sign that would be like raised character braille that 

would let you know that that's the right location for that stop, 

would that be helpful?

>> To some extent, that would be helpful. My concern would be 

to find some sort of uniform place or location where I could go 

to access the information. On any given block, even if you 

think of downtown, busy transfers, any of them, you have paper 

stands. You have benches. You have planters. You have bus 

shelters. You have various posts for lighting, for stoplights 

for intersections, for cameras. 

 My concern would be, would there be a specific and 

consistent place to go to get that information. So finding it 

could be as big a challenge as accessing it. That is my first 

concern 

 Another concern I would have is that if I had that 

information ahead of time, if I could go to a really accessible 

web site or a really knowledgeable person and could say, if I go 

to the corner of Michigan and Randolph on the northeast corner, 

which buses stop there, or where is that bus stop, I could get 

some information prior to actually making the trek to try to 

find it 

 We are also hoping, if there is any possibility, and this is 

a personal suggestion, if you've walked some of the sidewalks 

and the curb cuts and the areas here in the downtown area or in 

the city, you know that we not only have curb cuts but in some 

of the less angled ones we also have truncated domes that also 

help us identify where the city sidewalk stops and the street 

begins. If there was a way to indicate some sort of tactile 

mark to know that that's the bus stop, while it would not give 
me information as to which bus is going to stop, at least I 

would know I was in the right place. That's one option. That 

would be a possibility. 

 A consistency in bus stops, saying all buses stop at the far 

side of their intersection, would be another help for us to 

know. 

 Some of those rules exist, but they're not uniform. There's 

so many exceptions to the rule that it really deems the rule 

useless. So a consistency would help. A tactile demarcation 

would help. Human people on the other end of a phone that would 

know that information or could pull up a site that would 

specifically -- we have all this GPS technology. I can't 

imagine that we can't pull up a web site somewhere, somebody, 

who can see and say, okay, the bus stop is 100 feet north of 

Roosevelt. Someone can do that. I'm assured the technology is 

there. It's just not made its way to where those of us who need 

transit information can access it. That's another solution. 

Does that help? 

>> GARY TALBOT: It does, but I'll -- let me repeat myself again 

because I want to make sure I understand. I agree with you, I 

think something tactile on the ground surface would be a nice --

>> Yes

>> GARY TALBOT: Way to let folks know that, okay, you're at the 

right location. But I'm also thinking that, I know it's 

something we're trying in Boston. I know there are other cities 

and systems that have done it, putting the route number and the 

destination for any and all buses that stop at that location, 

doing it at a consistent height on the pole, on the stop, same 

place every time so that folks have a way to orient. 

 I'm just --

>> That could help, I agree with you 

>> GARY TALBOT: On the human side, my concern is, on the human 

side with budget cutbacks and things like that, you fix it 

today, and it could be gone tomorrow. If you could fix it with 

a way that you can do it on your own, like you said.

>> Absolutely. 

>> GARY TALBOT: Through the web site or through other means. 

It seems like something that we have a much better chance of 

improving bus service for folks with disabilities.

>> I think the raised character and the braille would be a 

reason to do it and the reason I'm emphasizing raised character, 

I'm also affiliated with senior organizations and those folks 

losing their vision are not going to lose braille. Having 

raised characters would help a great deal. Having it at a level 

where people could access it more effectively would be 

wonderful. And if we knew this information would be at the same 

stop where the actual bus stop sign was, I think at the worst 

possible scenario, I could go to anyone in that intersection and 

say, excuse me, please help me get to the sign that says "bus 

stop."
Once they got me to that location, I would have access to the 

print, the raised, the braille, and I could know where I had to 

go. The only impracticality piece to that would be that we have 

snow. And it might be a little tricky to get it when it is 

really cold if you have to tactilely do it. Secondly if there's 

an intersection with at least eight or ten bus stops, it could 

be a tremendous amount of information to try to put on that 

piece of, whether it be a rolling thing, a speaking thing, a 

braille thing. It would take a lot of space. 

 So I realize it could work if you have two or three buses, 

it would be fine. I do think the bus identification, when 

they're working; the audible bus identification is a great 

asset. When the bus pulls up, I know what number it is and what 

its final destination is. That is very helpful. That does help 

me. But my concern about the bus stop information would be, if 

it was a consistent place, that it would be in a way that we 

could then -- it wouldn't be overwhelming if it's a busy 

intersection 

 But I could see it as a potential solution. 

>> GARY TALBOT: Thank you. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Talbot and Marcia. I 

appreciate it. Any other questions? 

 Hearing none. I made a mistake earlier -- okay. Now I'm 

getting direction. I feel like an air traffic controller. I 

made a mistake in the pecking order of the speakers and would 

like to right that wrong. And could our other Marcia please 

come up to the table.

>> Oh, that's the problem. There aren't that many of us.

>> No. Hi, Marcia.

>> Hello.

>> No problem at all. And not a pecking order issue. I didn't 

want to not be on the list at all 

>> J.R. HARDING: No, you were there. It was just, I needed to 

have it checked that you were physically here.

>> That’s fine. Thank you. My name is Marcia Kelliker. I'm 

the director of public policy for Equip for Equality. Equip for 

Equality is a state-wide independent not-for-profit organization 

that was designated in 1985 to provide protection and advocacy 

services for people with disabilities in Illinois. 

 And we're very grateful for this opportunity to discuss 

transportation issues. Transportation issues have been an 

important priority at Equip for Equality -- oh, I'm sorry --

have been an important priority at Equip for Equality since our 

inception. And because we know that it is integral to enabling 

people with disabilities to have full, active lives in the 

community. Transportation is essential to getting to medical 

appointments, to getting to jobs, to getting to school, to 

getting to shop. Everything that people need to do who live in 

the community in most cases requires some sort of 

transportation. 
 For people who do not drive or cannot drive, and a lot of 

people, not only with disabilities but people who do not have 

disabilities, may not own a car, may be older and don't feel 

comfortable driving. They need good, safe, accessible, 

affording transportation. And so we're pleased to be able to 

provide some comments on the proposed guidelines. 

 We strongly support changing the ramp ratio from a 1.4 

maximum to a 1.6 maximum -- I'm sorry, minimum, slope at bus 

stops with or without sidewalks. Not only because there have 

been documented cases of wheelchairs sliding back but also 

because even in cases where 1.4 might work, it could become very 

precarious in inclement weather, which we have a lot in Chicago. 

 So we'd like to see that change. And we strongly support 

your recommendation. 

 I personally commute on Metra, which is our Chicagoland's 

commuter rail system. I use a cane and need to use a lift at my 

local station because the distance between the platform and the 

first step on my train at that station is too wide for me to 

safely negotiate it. And I'm very lucky that Metra has the 

lifts because of the ADA. They didn't when I started 23 years 

ago using it and didn't need a lift. They didn't have them 

either. But fortunately, because of the ADA, that has changed. 

 If it weren't for that lift, I would have to give up my job. 

And I don't -- you know, I don't want to see anybody with a 

disability have to give up their job because they cannot get to 

work because our system doesn't accommodate them. 

 We also strongly support specifying actual measurements for 

sufficient clearance. We think that will benefit everybody 

because everybody will be aware of their rights and 

responsibilities. Our only concern about that is to make sure 

that those measurements will enable people with larger 

wheelchairs to use the system. And a lot of times, things are 

geared towards smaller wheelchairs and it excludes people who 

use larger wheelchairs. 

 With regard to the automated announcements, I think the 

testimony already has really laid out a lot of issues about 

automated announcements and also how important they are. And 

they're not only important to people who are blind and people 

who needs to be not only vocal but it also needs to be visual, 

both, because you also have people riding the transit who are 

deaf. And those written announcements of the next stop and of 

the route are really helpful to those people as well, as well as 

the audio being helpful to people with disabilities. And people 

who may have cognitive disabilities may find an audio more 

helpful than visual. 

 But both are necessary to ensure access for everyone, 

depending on their disability, because it also helps other 

people. I think that's one of the things that we have not 

stressed enough with regard to accessibility under the ADA. A 

lot of the changes that have been made have made life easier for 
more than just people with disabilities. They've made life 

easier for, the curb cuts help people with baby carriages, 

people with sample cases, and people with suitcases. This 

system helps people who are unfamiliar with the train such as 

tourists or people who ride infrequently and may need that extra 

information to be sure to get on and off where they want 

 So I urge that we not only require it but we require that it 

be done in a way that will work, as I know all technology has 

problems once in a while. But it should be very rare. And the 

operators of the vehicles should know what to do when it gets 

off track so that people have this information. 

 In fact, Equip for Equality, Access Living, and some private 

attorneys represented individuals with a wide range of 

disabilities in a systemic lawsuit under the ADA some years ago 

to address a wide variety of grievances about the lack of 

accessibility of CTA buses and the CTA system in general, 

including at the time CTA bus drivers were supposed to announce 

stops. But there's almost a total systemic failure of that 

happening. 

 Among the provisions in the settlement agreement was the 

requirement that the CTA provide audio and visual automated stop 

and route announcements. But I learned this morning as I sat 

here that there's still some problems with that. And there are 

also things that I think weren't anticipated until they were put 

in about the information that is actually needed to give people 

a proper location of where they're getting off the bus so they 

know how to access the next leg of their trip. 

 We have a very complicated system in Chicago. You can take 

rail, you can take Metra, and you can take buses. And

consequently, there needs to be a source for information for 

people in whatever method works for them that will tell them 

what that transportation route will be for them. Take the train 

to here, the bus to here, and be specific. 

 And then on the accessible boarding, I just wanted to say 

that we think it's very good to be looking at accessible 

boarding for people who are using the light rail we have. Well, 

it's rapid transit system that we have in Chicago. It does have 

doors on each side. And they open at different stops on 

different sides. So there needs to be a clear understanding on 

the operators about how they make those doors accessible and 

then an accessible path to the priority seating, although as 

we've heard this morning, we also have a problem with the 

priority seating being available. 

 One of the most important things about that system is making 

sure that if they need gap fillers, the bridge plates, that they 

have them available because we have complaints all the time that 

people get to the stop and the bridge plate isn't available and 

that there's somebody who works for the system that knows how to 

properly deploy it so that people can use this system. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you so very, very much. All right, are 
there any questions from the Board members? We've got, what, 

Howard and John. Oh, Gary, John, and Howard. John, you go 

first, sir. 

>> JOHN WYVILL: Okay. John Wyvill, public member. I have a 

question for the witness. I think we all can agree that there 

is an opportunity for growth, improvement, and refinement in 

anything that we do. In the context of the proposed rule 

making, could you share with us some concrete examples from your 

experience of what in the Chicago area is being done right in 

terms of transportation vehicles?

>> That's a difficult role to take on in this audience. But I 

do think we have improved over where we were before the lawsuit. 

But we still have a long way to go. 

 We have more accessible stations than we did before. We do 

have audio and visual systems in our vehicles. And the other 

thing that we have done is, I think, addressed some of those 

issues about training personnel to try to assist people when the 

technology breaks down. But we still need to do more. We need 

to make sure that people really understand how important it is 

to address the issue right on the spot and not make people wait. 

And we also need for the system to keep track of where people 

are running into problems so they can address them. 

 One of the biggest complaints has been the lack of response 

when people file complaints. And that's the way you find out 

what's not working, is to take those complaints, take them 

seriously. And to just ignore the person and not let them know 

what you're doing about it is -- well, it's rude. And it's 

wrong. People should be responded to whenever they have an 

issue. 

 I know, you know, we're currently in a terrible fiscal 

situation in the state, not so good in our country. But we also 

need to prioritize how we use our money, how we use, for 

instance, the stimulus money. Do we really need to repair every 

street in Illinois? It sure seems like, when I'm in a car, that 

we're trying to repair -- repave every street in Illinois. And 

I know for sure some of them were repaved just a couple years 

ago. I know that that creates jobs for some people, but why 

couldn't some of that money have gone into public transit and 

into making public transit more accessible for people 

>> J.R. HARDING: Right. Thank you. I appreciate it, John. 

 Gary Talbot, question 

>> GARY TALBOT: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a follow-up to make 

sure that I understand, as far as communication, your testimony 

would be that you would -- you currently have both visual and 

audible equipment on board your buses. So your routes are 

identified with audible and visual, and then your on-board 

announcements are.

>> Inside 

>> GARY TALBOT: Inside.

>> Outside as well, I heard 
>> GARY TALBOT: And outside as well, I heard.

>> On the buses and the L's. It's hard to hear the L's.

>> Because they're very noisy 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Talbot. [Are there] any other 

questions from the board? Thank you, Marcia. I appreciate it 

 We've had a lovely chat so far, but I've got to change the 

rules a little bit. We're now down to five minutes for speaker 

comments. So I need you guys to accommodate one another to make 

sure we can get everyone. And then should we have additional 

time at the end, we can be a little more long-winded once again. 

 Kerry Legg. Ready when you are, sir.

>> Yes. Good morning. My name is Kerry Legg. I'm with New 

Flier Industries. New Flier is a major manufacturer of heavy 

duty transit buses. And when I came before the U.S. Access 

Board approximately two years ago, I believe we put in a request 

at that time that in order to make changes that would make the 

buses more accessible that we needed better guidelines. And 

you've gone a long way toward doing that. 

 There will be discussions on the content of these 

guidelines. More comments will be submitted to my office to 

Mr. Pecht before the end of November. So a few questions for 

the Board, maybe two, to look at this morning to start off with. 

At the very beginning of the document --

>> J.R. HARDING: Does everyone know [that]copies of the 

document are in the hallway and online. Okay. Please, 

Mr. Legg.

>> T201 general basically starts off by saying; new, used 

manufactured vehicles shall comply with the requirements, which 

are following along here. 

 That brings into question the 20 years' worth of buses that 

are currently on the road. Do those buses have to be modified 

to comply with the new standards once they come into effect? My 

current understanding is that, no, they do not unless they are 

to be remanufactured or sold. Is that correct? 

>> J.R. HARDING: I would turn that over to our attorney, 

Mr. Raggio. 

>> JAMES RAGGIO: Yes, we do have -- as a matter of fact, that 

was raised in Page 2 about the retrofit. We did have a 

discussion because in the past, remember we came out with a 

draft, that was a question that was raised about the retrofit. 

Our guidelines again apply to the extent they're required by the 

Department of Transportation, and basically it applies to new 

and remanufactured vehicles. 

 There is another provision in the ADA which the access board 

does not have responsibility for that's called barrier removal. 

And that applies to both facilities and to vehicles. And the 

Department of Transportation and the Department of Justice had 

responsible for implementing those provisions. And that's 

something that they will have to address in a separate rule 

making as far as whether any revision in the guidelines would 
apply to existing vehicles. 

 That is a separate provision in the ADA which the Board does 

not have to address.

>> Just a follow-up question, those vehicles that are currently 

on the road that meet the 1991 guideline requirements, if 

they're not required to be remodeled, reconditioned, 

remanufactured, they're just staying on the road as-is, not 

going to be resold until retirement, do they remove the 

international symbol of accessibility which is under Section 

T703 because they will no longer meet the new ADA regulations. 

>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: Good point. 

>> JAMES RAGGIO: I think that's something that you think is 

important to be addressed, I would suggest you include that in 

your comments. And maybe that's something we could give 

specific guidance for in terms of having some sort of 

certification as to meeting what guidelines. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Jim. Mr. Legg, any additional 

comments or questions?

>> There are comments which I will put into -- nothing I can 

cover in a five-minute time period, things such as Section 802.2 

which says that ramps need to be slip resistant but no 

coefficients of friction are applied to this, either wet or dry, 

which leaves it wide open to interpretation. 

>> J.R. HARDING: That's a good question.

>> Rear facing securement, the new provision for the backrests, 

the design of this has no force requirement capabilities, what's 

it supposed to be able to absorb, what can it be made of, the 

height of the headrest, leaves us with concerns that it may 

result in neck or back injuries because it's assuming that the 

mobility device has a backpack or something else attached to it. 

 So I would like to just further on to Mr. Ross's earlier 

comments, the original ADA was released in 1991. It's taken us 

this long to get to the level of design for forward-facing 

securement, which I'm pretty sure there's several people here 

that will attest it's certainly not perfect yet. For 

rear-facing securement, it's going to take us even longer. Our 

design engineers are currently trying to prove that they got an 

educational degree. So they're severely being taxed to come up 

with solutions to what are in these proposals. 

 So from a manufacturing standpoint, it's going to take us 

time to come up with something that can meet -- we can do most 

of this. Most of it is good, but there will be more comments 

and more discussion, I'm sure 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you. I appreciate it. Look forward to 

receiving those salient points of view. 

 Moving on, Mr. Larry Schneider.

>> Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to comment. 

 I wish I had made it before the five-minute limit. My 

comments are primarily concerned with people who ride in 

wheelchairs and public and paratransit. I'm a research 
professor at the University of Michigan Transportation Research 

Institute. I'm head of what we call the Rehab Engineering 

Center, wheelchair transportation safety, which is funded by the 

National Institute for Disability and Rehabilitation Research. 

 And I'm chair of the RESNA committee on wheelchairs in 

transportation 

 We've submitted comments, written comments to previous 

drafts of the -- prior to the NPRM. We note that some of our 

comments have either been misinterpreted or rejected. Question 

15 asks for whether some of these included. 

 So I have a number of issues I want to address. And maybe I 

can only get a couple of them out in this first five-minute time 

period. But hopefully, I can come back if there's more time. 

 Rear facing, we say we should not allow rear facing in 

smaller paratransit vehicles. This should be confined to only 

the large vehicles, particularly large vehicles, we think the 

wording ought to say, large vehicles that allow other passengers 

to stand while riding in the vehicle where you don't have any 

expectation of any frontal collision. We know they have them, 

but they're very rare. So we think that's the condition that 

rear facing wheelchair stations ought to be only allowed for. 

 The reason for not having them in the smaller vehicles and 

the reason given for rejecting it in the NPRM is not quite 

right. It's not that we don't have the technology for high 

G rear facing stations. The problem is that we're trying to 

address people with a wide range of wheelchairs and 

configurations. And when you do that in a smaller vehicle, 

you're putting that person at extreme risk of serious injury 

because you're not going to have a good fit of that head and 

back support and wheelchair. 

 The other thing we note is we recommended that the use of 

what we call a forward excursion barrier for the rear facing 

stations, again, only in the larger vehicles. And we note that 

the NPRM seems to have misinterpreted what we meant by, defining 

the geometry of that from the floor to 24 inches above the 

floor. And then they provide a headrest, a head restraint or 

head support above that, above the back of the wheelchair. 

 Well, this is really going to present a serious injury 

problem, particularly in the small vehicles. And we have an 

international standard, and we would recommend that that be 

referred to. There has been work done, the previous commenter 

mentioned about rear facing stations. We've will clarify what 

we think the geometry of that forward facing barrier should be 

and even in a small vehicle environment. In the large vehicle 

environment, that is. 

 But in the small vehicle environment, allowing rear facing 

passenger stations even with the forward excursion barrier is a 

problem because of the backpacks, etcetera, that you talk about 

and the differences in wheelchair geometry that are not going to 

allow good head and back support in a frontal collision, which 
is a serious concern in a the smaller vehicles. So the forward 

excursion barrier will clarify what we think it should be. We 

think it's totally inadequate and inappropriate as currently 

defined. 

 We also note that we recommended that for forward facing 

stations that the securement systems and the tight and restraint 

systems comply with ASE practices J2249. And that was not 

accepted, but we see no reason why you would not accept that for 

the paratransit smaller vehicle environment because almost all 

4-point securement systems comply with that anyway. So there's 

no real cost involved in saying, you know, you should comply 

with that. And we think particularly in the small vehicle 

environment, why not go with what's been done. And it's going 

to be a new standard in RESNA, WC18, we call it. That's an 

example. The small vehicle environment ought to say, you should 

have WC18 or JJ249 compliant tie-down restraint systems 

available for the occupants who are seated in wheelchairs. 

 And generally, we think that the guidelines should refer to 

existing standards where appropriate. We understand that this 

is not all about safety. We've heard a lot of comments this 

morning about safety, concern about safety. I understand that 

the Access Board and the purpose is, safety is not, you know, 

number one. It's accessibility and it’s equal rights and it's a 

lot of other things. But clearly there's a lot of concern about 

safety. We ought to not be doing things when we're presenting a 

situation which is completely unsafe like rear facing in small 

vehicles. So we just think there's no basis for that. 

 And I don't know of any small paratransit vehicles where 

there are rear facing stations anyway, so why allow that, and 

why allow that exclusively. 

 Final point I'll make in this brief five minutes is, I know 

the NPRM doesn't address the so-called operation or usage issues 

of equipment. It just simply says what should be in the 

vehicle. And the current version of the transit guideline says 

that a public -- a transit provider can have a written policy 

that says, wheelchair securement is up to the individual or they 

can say that it's required, if you're going to take, get on the 

vehicle in your wheelchair and be traveling in your wheelchair. 

 We think that leaving it up to the individual is a mistake. 

If you want to level the playing field, people who are not in 

wheelchairs have their seat bolted to the floor, they're not in 

a heavy wheelchair that could move around. We think that 

leaving that as an option to the user is really -- doesn't go 

with the spirit of what's trying to be done, that there ought to 

be -- that it ought to be required, at least the wheelchairs 

should be secured, even in the larger vehicles, and particularly 

in the smaller vehicles where obviously, the state laws will 

govern seat belt usage. And we understand there are issues 

about seat belt issues. Clearly we've heard about issues and 

concerns about those of the 
 So securement of the wheelchair, we think, should be 

mandatory, whether it's a large vehicle or a small vehicle. And 

we know there are problems with wheelchairs that make that 

difficult. We also like if the guidelines recognize that there 

is a wheelchair transportation safety standard, WC19, and we 

have a wheelchair over here that, in fact, complies with that 

that have securement points that make it a the lot easier and 

just getting that word out would be a very positive thing, if 

the guidelines would at least recognize that that type of 

wheelchair existed, if more people had them, it would make life 

easier for securing the wheelchairs and you wouldn't have 

problems with putting securement straps between legs and things 

like that for the passengers. 

 So those will be my brief five-minute comments. And I'll 

take any questions 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Dr. Schneider, go, Big Blue, you're 

4-0. You have a graduate down there at the end of the hall 

there. He's pretty excited. I think he's really thrilled that 

there is an engineer around. Do you have a comment, Mr. Talbot

>> GARY TALBOT: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much for 

your comments, Larry. I think, one question for you, I know the 

forces are so less on a large vehicle than they are a small 

vehicle, but if I could just make sure that the Board 

understands your comments, as far as securements, given your 

analogy of the rest of the seats are bolted to the floor, so if 

it's an equality issue that we're trying to achieve, whether it 

be in paratransit or a full-sized, 40-foot, 60-foot bus, your 

recommends would be that securements be required on both the 

smaller vehicles and the larger vehicles so that everybody's 

seat then is fixed to the vehicle.

>> Yes. That's exactly what I recommend 

>> GARY TALBOT: Thank you.

>> Also in the rear facing passenger station, one other thing 

was, we also recommend that not just that you have a forward 

excursion barrier, which we're clarify with the geometry what it 

should be, there should be some containment of the wheelchair, 

even though you're not securing it with straps that prevents it 

from moving into the aisle. There are ways of doing that that 

exist. So we think that a loose 400-pound wheelchair -- a loose 

400-pound wheelchair on any vehicle is a hazard to other 

occupants.

>>> Thank you, Professor. Maybe we'll see you in D.C. at our 

next meeting.

>> There's a good chance of that 

>> J.R. HARDING: Our next speaker then is David Meyer, I 

believe. David Meyer? The microphone is up here in the middle 

of the room, sir. 

 There, go, sir, whenever you're ready.

>> My name is David Meyer, and I'm here as a representative of 

the National Federation of the Blind of Illinois, Chicago 
chapter. 

 My comments this morning will concern the necessity for 

consistency in calling of stops, automated stops, for automated 

stop calling systems, for lack of a better term. My familiarity 

in this subject really goes pretty much with the Chicago area 

buses and trains, with CTA, with Pace, and with Metra. And at 

this point, I would love to commend CTA especially for the way 

that they have dealt with it on buses. 

 For one thing, it's been my experience that the CTA buses 

have been, for the most part, very consistent in the 

presentation calling of stops. The volume level of the 

announcements is generally consistent and in almost all cases, 

quite audible. 

 All streets are called, not just major intersections. 

That's something that I think should be pretty much mandatory. 

If we had the information of where we are, we can make 

decisions, and we do not have to bother others when it comes to 

knowing when to actually get off the bus. 

 Stops are also quite audible, and they're consistently 

audible. This is something that is very important because in 

cases with other buses that I have ridden in other systems, you 

don't always hear the stops as they're called, particularly when 

buses are going at a rapid rate of speed and over roads or in 

roads that are in a somewhat bumpy condition; a lot of rattles 

and ambient noise actually interferes with the stop 

announcements. 

 Another thing that's done very well, once the bus has 

stopped on the CTA, and actually this has been a pretty good 

experience, is that the route number is called and the final 

destination of the bus is called. Not only is it audible from 

outside of the bus, it's also very audible inside the bus. 

Other systems could clearly benefit from that. I have known 

another system where an outside speaker is used where these 

announcements are pretty clear from outside of the bus, but it's 

questionable whether a person riding in the back of the bus 

would actually be able to hear the announcements as there is no 

inside speaker giving those announcements. 

 Other things that could possibly be avoided, on some of the 

buses that I have ridden, it is -- a point is made to audibly 

announce that a stop is requested after a bell rings presenting 

the stop -- or alerting the driver to actually make a stop. The 

announcement that a stop is requested is at best superfluous and 

at worst distracts you from actually hearing the street. 

 It would be much more effective to give the name of the 

street where the bus is stopping rather than to just say that 

the stop is actually being requested 

>> J.R. HARDING: 30 seconds, Mr. Meyer.

>> Okay. Finally, the last thing that I would say is, design of 

new buses should be, especially for the seating that may be 

preferential, should be designed in such a way so that service 
animals can clearly be out of the way of other passengers, 

especially wheelchairs. Pace definitely got this one right with 

the newest of their buses. As a matter of fact, when I first 

boarded a bus about five years ago, my service animal gave me 

the information I needed. He simply scooted under the seat that 

was available. And he was very much out of the way of everyone. 

 If this could be a possibility, it would be great to have 

that design made a standard for new buses that will be produced 

in the future. Thank you very much. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Meyer. [Are there] any 

comments? Mr. Talbot and then Mr. Gardner

>> GARY TALBOT: Thank you, Mr. Chair just two quick follow-ups. 

On the call announcement -- or excuse me, the stop announcement, 

when someone has hit the strip and requested a stop, is your 

testimony that you'd like to have, like they're going to stop at 

a stop, so would you like to have them state the stop that's 

being -- that's being requested, is that what you would like, 

versus just the bell?

>> No -- well, let me try to break this down a little bit. I'll 

compare two of the systems that are here in the Chicago area. 

On the Chicago Transit Authority, all streets are called whether 

the bus stops or whether the street is passed. I find that to 

be really very helpful. On Pace, on the other hand, at least on 

the Pace buss that I've ridden in, when the bell is rung, you 

hear the announcement, the automated announcement say, "Stop 

requested."

That's superfluous, that's a superfluous announcement when the 

bell has already indicated that a stop needs to be made. It 

also gives no information as to where the bus is actually

stopping. So if something is to be announced, it would be much 

more effective to announce a street name rather than to say 

simply that a stop is requested. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Talbot. Mr. Gardner? 

>> RON GARDNER: David, you said that there are some bus 

companies that you've compared, some you've been able to hear 

the bus stop announcement that's coming up while you are riding 

the bus inside the bus, you can hear, and some you cannot. All 

buses rattle. If they hit a chuckhole, they're going to make a 

big noise. So we're talking about sort of equal ambient sounds. 

 In your opinion, what is it that makes the difference 

between those buses that you can hear and those buses that you 

can't? Is it the quality of the sound? Is it volume? What 

makes the difference, in your mind?

>> Probably the volume in which the sound is actually produced. 

I think in both -- in my experience has been mostly with CTA and 

Pace. With both CTA and Pace, the sound systems on the buses 

are actually pretty good. If the volume level is set to where 

the announcements can actually be heard under normal conditions, 

you can usually hear them with some struggle over ambient noise. 

 My problem with some of the Pace buses, for example, has 
been that the volume level is very inconsistent. You may get 

such a thing as 

(Whispering) Harlem Avenue, now approaching Madison. And when 

it's very low, when the announcement is very low volume level, 

especially if there's other ambient noise, it just makes it 

un -- it makes it undecipherable. It's not really audible even 

under the best of conditions. Under the worst of conditions, 

you just don't hear it at all. 

>> RON GARDNER: So the volume and the clarity are both related 

then, you're saying.

>> I would say so, yes 

>> RON GARDNER: Just to review, Mr. Chair, if I might, you're 

suggesting that when a stop is requested that we only here a 

tone or a bell rather than the words, "Stop requested," is that 

correct?

>> Yes. 

>> RON GARDNER: All right. And lastly, you, at the beginning 

of your testimony, indicated that on the CTA buses, while you're 

riding a bus, you can hear the outside announcement of which bus 

you were on and what the final destination is. Is that correct?

>> Yes, you can actually hear them on both buses. But you 

hear -- on CTA buses; you hear the announcement from both 

outside and inside of the bus 

>> RON GARDNER: Well, I guess my question is directly to that 

issue. You're not suggesting that the interior speakers 

continually state which route you're on and which is the final 

stop. You're not asking that that be announced inside the bus 

at every stop? I mean, you know whether you're still on that 

bus or not.

>> Well, of course. That's correct. But if somebody, for 

example, if the information is available, I like to be able to 

hear where it is I'm at and perhaps, you know, where the bus is 

going just for the benefit of whether or not, when I take that 

bus in the future, I might remember that I can actually take 

this bus to a route or, for example, with some of the -- for 

example, some of the buses, like some of the Pace buses have 

different routes. 307, for example, has different stopping 

points. And it would be nice to know those stopping points even 

if I'm not necessarily --

>> RON GARDNER: But you're talking about stop announcements 

inside the bus, not necessarily what the route number of the bus 

is.

>> That’s true. 

>> RON GARDNER: Okay. I think I got your point, and I thank 

you 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Gardner and Mr. Meyers. Thank 

you very much. 

 Our next speaker, and Board members will only have a 

question if it's necessary for the following speakers, Greg 

Pullman. Greg, not here?
>> I am, but I didn't put my name down 

>> J.R. HARDING: Okay. Somebody had you down. All right. 

That's okay. Okay. Next contestant on the Price is Right, Kelly 

Pierce. Kelly? It's straight in front of you, sir, just about 

five feet. There you go. And the microphone is there right to 

your right.

>> Very good. Thank you so much for this opportunity. I will 

speak largely on T704 in the NPRM, the notice of proposed 

rulemaking. But first one issue I believe completely omitted 

from the NPRM which several people today spoke about is the 

issue of locating bus stops and what several transit systems 

around the country have done is to use square poles instead of 

round poles. And round poles are typically by a number of other 

signage. And square poles typically are exclusively used -- or 

rarely, if ever, used. 

 And if transit agencies used square poles, then blind 

people could find and identify those bus stop signs a lot more 

effectively than what they're going to do now. And this would 

be much more cost effective than any kind of sign at a lower 

level that a blind person could read in braille or another form 

which could be difficult in cold weather or if the person was 

not a braille reader, but certainly identifying a square pole as 

compared to a round pole would be a simple, easy to implement, 

cost effective solution as signs are replaced and poles are 

deployed and so forth. 

 So that is one issue that the access board should 

contemplate and consider, something easy to implement that many 

transit agencies are already doing. 

 In terms of 704 of the rules, in terms of the automated stop 

announcement system, the Board does ask the question regarding 

the quality of stop announcements. And that is very important. 

I realize it's been a Board practice in the past to avoid issues 

of methods and processes in mandating that. You indicated in 

your question about asking it as an advisory. But we know 

through linguistics research, through language research, through 

other forms of objective peer reviewed, a scientifically 

validated study that there is a method in which speech is

intelligible. And there are methods and practices in which --

and approaches in which speech is not intelligible. 

 It seems in its rulemaking the Board totally ignores that 

mountain of research, that vast body of information to sidestep 

that because of its inherent discomfort with issues of methods 

and processes. 

 I would suggest that the Board consider issues of quality, 

issues of volume, for example, of stop announcements is very 

important. Issues of clarity would be very important. 

 Let me just tale you a tale of two transit systems, one in 

Chicago that I've helped develop the audio interface for and 

then the other in the suburbs. The one in Chicago, as many 

people said, that they can hear, they can understand and is 
useful. For me in the suburbs, the announcements are very 

unintelligible. I can barely hear any of them. And they only 

are given on transfer points, not on every stop. 

 It's sort of seems a little unusual that you're going to 

mandate stop announcements but not for every stop on the system. 

 The other thing to consider is other ambient noise. And the 

practice of some transit agencies to use services such as 

transit TV, which plays, for example, television programs 

throughout the entire bus experience. That is done currently on 

the Pace suburban bus system here in the Chicago area. 

 And you have TV shows playing in the background while people 

would be hearing or trying to hear the stop announcements from 

these -- that you would be mandating and that are currently on 

the bus. It's not possible to hear the stop announcements, in 

my experience, on a reliable, consistent basis over Transit TV. 

Obviously, there's a question of what happens to that revenue 

because the transit agencies derive revenue from the 

commercials. But still, it's the ambient noise issue. And that 

does not -- and the rules again don't address the ambient noise 

issue in which the volume is lowered or raised depending upon 

the noise level in the bus; as well as, if there is ongoing 

media playing of, for example, television programs on buses, the 

stop announcements would cut out that programming so passengers 

with disabilities could hear those announcements. 

 So I would encourage the Board very much to examine those 

issues of -- and actually ask perhaps other federal agencies to 

conduct additional research to learn in terms of what issues, 

what levels of quality, what levels of acoustic engineering 

would be necessary for transit agencies to implement stop 

announcement systems so that they could be heard and actually

utilized in a meaningful way, for a vast number of disabilities 

including those with multiple disables such as those with mild 

to moderate hearing impairments. 

 While something could be heard by someone with normal 

hearing, even with a mild hearing impairment, I have found, 

working with a range of people with disabilities, that they're 

not able to hear effectively many of the stop announcements even 

on the CTA buses. And their clarity which everyone suggests 

today is quite good. 

 So those are issues -- I will be filing further comments. I 

intend to, of course, work with locally some resources I have 

including the speech language laboratory in developing these 

comments eventually. But again, it is no substitute for 

original, fundamental research and also tapping into on a 

meta basis the existing body of research in terms of what is 

effective for people in general to hear and effectively make use 

of audio information, which is totally and completely missing 

from the guidelines. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Pierce. Is there a question 

from anybody? 
 Hearing none, thank you, sir.

>> You’re quite welcome 

>> J.R. HARDING: All right. Michael Grace. I'm sorry, sir. 

You're next up. Would you like to --

>> I’m going to submit written 

>> J.R. HARDING: You're going to submit written comment to us?

>> Yes 

>> J.R. HARDING: Very good. We look forward to receiving it 

then. 

 All right. Dr. Mack, m-a-a-t. Hearing none -- over there. 

Sorry, ma'am. I apologize.

>> It’s Maat, two syllables

>> J.R. HARDING: Can someone move the chair for our speaker, 

please.

>> AYO MAAT: I go through the same thing getting on some of the 

paratransit vehicles. Access is a big issue. My name is 

spelled a-y-o for the first name, last name is m-a-a-t, 

pronounced with two syllables represent IMPRUVE, which stands 

for Independent Movement of Paratransit Riders for Unity, 

Equality. We're a national group. I'm here representing 

Illinois, Michigan, parts of Ohio, parts of Miami, Detroit, New 

Orleans, and Portland, other began. There may be others. But I 

received some testimony which I will have to submit to you in 

writing from some of those people. 

 Basically, here in Illinois with the -- I'll start with the 

paratransit. I also want to briefly talk about the 

over-the-road buses. 

 I live in what is known as Zone 3 in Chicago. This is a 

zone which has a carrier that does not have accessible vehicles. 

And when I say "access," if we can't use them, they're not 

accessible. If they're too small, too high, not properly 

suspended. We discussed it with Pace. We discussed it with 

Pace's general counsel. This is the only zone or carrier that 

has vehicles that many of the people cannot ride in. The other 

zones do. 

 Basically, depending on your disability, you need to be not 

only safely secured but you have to make sure you can get on the 

vehicle. Many of the people cannot. And it's not because 

they're in oversized chairs. It's because the vehicles are 

improperly configured for a diverse population of disabled 

people. 

 I do not believe that they were meant for adults but were 

meant for children. I've seen people slide in and out of the 

vehicles. I've seen people -- well; I've received testimony 

from people who have fallen out of seats even with the belts on. 

They have made Pace aware of it. 

 Now, my complaint to Pace has been for two years. I've also 

complained to DOJ and the FTA and have not received proper 

response. I'm missing doctor appointments, etcetera, etcetera. 

I am not able to live independently as a person with a 
disability without transportation or access to it every day. So 

I do the best I can on the limited income I have. I have to 

take taxis which I can't afford to get to a zone where there is 

a safe vehicle. I don't think this is fair because people who 

ride the fixed route, if one bus doesn't work for them, they can 

take another or take the train. 

 If I could, I would not have to ride the paratransit, but I 

can't. My argument is not necessarily just with the Pace 

service board but with the system in general. I think the 

FTA and DOJ should step in and do something about this. I also 

have 20 comments from someone, I thought that I could read 

theirs, but I can't, limited to the five minutes. It takes some 

of us five minutes to 20 minutes just to get on a vehicle. I'm 

not blaming the drivers, but the belt securement systems are not 

standardized. I'm not blaming, as I said, the service board. 

But the carriers know who they're picking up and they need to 

keep those belts in order. They don't. The vehicles are not 

clean. The vehicles are often unsafe due to fumes. Many of us 

with respiratory problems cannot ride them. 

 My organization is proposing a green paratransit, not in 

competition with the current carriers and any of these states 

but separate if necessary from the system so that people can 

ride who currently cannot. We would be able to provide the 

service, we don't care if it's public, private funding, we just 

need to be able to have our independence back. It's been denied 

to us since 2008 when the zone system was installed. 

 I've rode many transportation systems. I can ride D.C.'s. 

I can ride Detroit. In fact, in June, we were in Detroit. We 

took a lot of complaints from people who were there from all 

over the world, not just from this country, the biggest 

complaint is secured, you know, having securement, vehicles they 

can ride in, suspension, and respect. There needs to be mutual 

respect between the people providing the transportation and the 

riders. 

 Was the transit system set up for the customers or for the 

people who are earning the money to provide it? This is a big 

question. We have a declaration of transit freedom and justice 

which I will make sure this Access Board gets a copy. FTA, 

Pace, CTA, RTA, the Obama administration and other does have a 

copy. We're still waiting on responses to some of our 

complaints. 

 I strongly urge you to light a fire under the FTA and DOJ so 

we can resolve these issues, not only in Illinois but in the 

other states. In Detroit, people are stranded when they miss 

their rides. There were several members of my group who would 

have been stranded if I didn't know how to advocate. I found 

the Detroit Department of Transportation to be reasonable once 

we explained our situation. But they need to provide the same 

level of service whether someone is a visitor or lives in that 

city. 
 We received excellent service and accommodation once we 

explained our situation, whereas the police in Detroit were 

unaware that those vehicles were paratransit vehicles and made 

them move to an unsafe spot where we could not access the 

vehicles. 

 I asked them, did they want me to call the news media. Of 

course, they did not so they came back to get us. Other people 

who are there who are good advocates but somehow were not able 

to get this accommodation asked if I would submit some of their 

testimony. And I'll have to ask them to do it in writing. 

 The other thing concerns getting responses, whether it's 

nighttime, evening. If we're stranded, we need the same level 

of customer service at night as we do in day. Here in Illinois, 

we don't get it. The nighttime people do not have access to 

computer. So I would like to see the regulation address that, 

having the technology that the service board needs to be able to 

know where vehicles are at all times, day or night. If they're 

running 24 hours, they need this. At night, they don't have it. 

This is a very big problem with people who are blind, people who 

can't hear as well as people like me. I can hear. I may have 

low vision, but I can still see, you know, better than most 

people. And as I said, I strongly urge you to realize, Chicago 

is a world class city. We should have world class 

transportation. Whether we live in the suburbs, the city, it 

shouldn't matter. We travel all over. We need the same right. 

We want the level of technology has. The customer service 

people, the drivers need training to know they are picking up 

people with diverse disabilities. We're not a one size, fits 

all. They actually think that some of us take too many trips. 

And I never heard a bus driver say that. That's it for now. 

But I will need to assist my friend, she asked me to assist her, 

if you call her. Thank you 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, ma'am. Are there any questions for 

this speaker? 

 Hearing none, we look forward to getting your additional 

comments for your other members for the record.

>> Thank you 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you. I believe I have Patricia next. 

Is that -- yes, please.

>> The document, I will note that it has....

>> She said, her name is Patricia Basker. She is a director of 

IMPRUVE. She also lives in zone 3 but in a suburban area. She 

has been injured trying to get on vehicles and off because the 

vehicles are over packed, overcrowded in that particular zone. 

 She would like to have some type of relief from the Access 

Board so that vehicles are consistent and so that her wheelchair 

is in the shop now was torn up because they packed too many 

people in the vehicles at one time that. Is a major complaint 

from Zone 3 in Chicago, not enough room, not only for 

wheelchairs but ambulatory people. And yes, even though there 
are some people who may have weight issues, whatever, I still 

think they should address it. I think that the vehicles, you 

said, should be the same.

>> Because Pace --

>> Okay. They should be -- the Pace suburban buses do -- are 

provided for paratransit do have enough room. If they're not 

going to use the ramp, they need to have the same type of buss 

that Pace provides. She can ride in those. A lot of people 

can. I know I can, do. But if people cannot ride up high, they 

do need the vans with the ramps, just like people need the 

kneeling buses, some of us cannot ride in the higher vehicles. 

Some of us cannot ride in ambulances. 

 In terms of the over-the-road bus, many of us cannot ride in 

them, although I think Greyhound has a better system than the 

Megabus. I don't know if you regulate the Megabus, but it has 

absolutely no lift right now according to most customers. And 

that is a cheaper bus. And we think we're being denied access 

to affordable transportation. 

 Oh, and she slides in the seat because of the way the belts 

fit. And I have been in the vehicle when that happened to her. 

And the driver is on the expressway. He can't pull over. And 

she slides out of her wheelchair even with the belt on, 

etcetera. And in terms of the other persons who talked about 

choking, yes, I get choked, too, sometimes. And we have to --

we need the straps. We have to take them off. 

 She said, the vehicles are uncomfortable for people who are 

disabled. When they turn the corner, your chair turns over. A 

lot of wheelchairs have turned over from the vehicle turning the 

corner, even though a safety inspector assures that the vehicles 

are safe. They're not wide enough. And if she has to transfer 

to a seat, she is uncomfortable in the seat but in order to 

allow another wheelchair to get on, she has to do it. She's 

forced to do it. She's forced to allow 90 minutes even if she's 

just going around the block that. Is not a Pace rule. I 

checked with Pace. That is a carrier rule, and all carriers 

should be consistent. 

 That's it. Thank you. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you both, ladies. Any questions for any 

of these speakers? 

 Hearing none, thank you again, ladies. 

 The next speaker [is] Martinez, from South Florida 

Independent Living. Wow, got a fellow Floridian made the trip.

>> That’s because it was Chicago.

>> The weather is good 

>> J.R. HARDING: We've got a lot of rain down there. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Which CIL are you with, sir?

>> The Miami one. Actually, we have a gentleman, Marc Dubin 

that I serve with. He was a former DOJ that mentions some names 

that I've seen up here 

>> J.R. HARDING: Very good. You have your five minutes, sir.
>> Thank you. My name is err knee Martinez. I'm with the 

Center for Independent Living in South Florida located in Miami, 

Florida. I also serve as chair of a Commission on Disability 

Issues at Miami-Dade County. It's an advisory board that 

collects information and issues affecting people with 

disabilities in the community, reports directly to the County 

commissioners. 

 There are two issues actually that I'd like to bring up and 

discuss. One actually is the capacity of people in wheelchairs 

that are allowed to ride on public transportation, public buses. 

I understand that the maximum is two people right now. Am I 

correct? Okay. Thank you. 

 I think that that number really needs to increase. As an 

example, in Miami specifically, transit rides, they're pretty 

far apart. And there's an example, let's say that I am picked 

up at a shopping mall. And there might be about five people in 

wheelchairs waiting for an accessible ride on the bus. Who 

chooses, how do you know? It's up to the driver actually to 

choose who and how many folks are allowed to get on, but only 

two can board. South Beach is a very hot spot in Miami. That's 

another place that's real difficult to actually access and get 

on a bus. Usually you have to, when a bus stops, he'll tell 

you, sorry, I'm full, I already have my two wheelchairs and you 

have to wait for the next bus. 

 So I think it's really important that this committee 

addresses and examines, looks at the capacity of how many people 

could ride actually on public transit. 

 The other one actually I probably will get a chuckle out of 

you guys and ladies. It's about actually riding on with 

children on paratransit. It's different from public transit. 

Public transit, you're not required to carry a car seat. I 

think that's what you call it, a car safety seat for a child. 

On paratransit, because the vehicles are smaller, they have to 

adhere to state laws' they have to -- you have to have a car 

seat on to the vehicles. 

 Now, for a person with a disability, chair, not chair, 

visually impaired also, this is a hardship. If you're going out 

to the movies or going out to the mall and actually maybe even 

taking your child out to a park, it's a very difficult thing to 

be carrying around and lugging that car seat around. You could 

use booster chairs, but they're not as safe. 

 So I recommend and suggest that paratransit vehicles start 

carrying or having on-board car seats for your children. I 

mean, this is all about inclusion. And we all have families 

that travel with us. 

 I have nothing else to say 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, sir. Glad a fellow Floridian made 

the trip. Tell Marc I said hello. I have been informed that I 

accidentally skipped two gentlemen. I would like to ask Al 

Smith to come up next who reregistered, and then in the batter's 
box is Hal Hawkins. So we have a third one. Sorry, sir. 

>> I would like to stand 

>> J.R. HARDING: Whatever is your pleasure, sir.

>> I'm not at ease sitting down --

>> J.R. HARDING: The microphone, if you want to pull it out, 

for the public record and those of us with hearing, listening 

devices.

>> I'm not used to talking and sitting at the same time 

>> J.R. HARDING: All right, very good, sir.

>> My name is Al Smith. I am a member of the Governor Quinn's 

Government Opportunity for Disabled Persons Task Force. My 

presentation has already been mailed with the exception of the 

excerpt at the end. 

 I would like to point out that in most of the smaller 

downstate counties in Illinois, there's a serious lack or a 

complete absence of affordable, safe transportation. The 

greatest job in the world is useless if you can't get to it. 

 My wife and I had a fantastic group of volunteers are 

presently working on establishing a rural transportation system 

in Knox County. We are having the assistance of the Illinois 

institute of rural affairs at Western Illinois University in 

Macomb. We're working on it. Again, the greatest job in the 

world is useless if you can't get to it. 

 In my opinion, an area that needs federal intervention is 

the development of a universal, automatic lockdown device for 

wheelchairs on mass transit buses, wheelchair taxis and trains. 

I doubt if very many much those who ride buses or trains here in 

Illinois today are properly tied down. 

 The present system is complicated, requires the service of 

an able-bodied person, and is time consuming. The system that 

my wife uses in our van is safe, secure, automatic, and requires 

no assistance. This deployable ramp in the van gives her the 

freedom to go when and where she wants without any assistance. 

 Many that use public transportation do not have this secure 

freedom. The greatest job in the world is useless if you can't 

get to it. 

 In addition, I wish to point out that your proposed Section 

T802.2, slip resistance, surfaces shall be slip resistant, is 

called into question by an Illinois state supreme court ruling 

filed on July 15th, 2010, that's three months ago, four months 

ago, in which the Illinois State Supreme Court concluded that, 

quote, "We hold that the natural accumulation rule applies in 

this case and that the CTA has no duty to remove natural 

accumulations of snow and ice from its train platforms and no 

duty to warn of such accumulations."

 This is what we're having to deal with in Illinois. We find 

this ruling appalling and shudder to think of the consequences. 

 If I could, I'll close with a four-line stanza from the Book 

of Mark, 2, 3, and 4. When some people came bringing a 
paralyzed man carried by four of them and when they could not 

bring him to the Jesus, because of the crowd, they made a hole 

in the roof and lowered him by rope to the feet of our savior. 

 In 2000 years, we've come a long way. Or have we? I'll 

take questions 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, Mr. Smith. Any questions? 

 Hearing none, thank you, sir, for your testimony. 

 The gentleman in the front row that I missed, sir, we'll go 

with you first and then we'll end with Mr. Jim Watkins.

>> Okay. 

>> J.R. HARDING: To your right. The microphone is right in 

front of you, sir.

>> Thank you. 

>> J.R. HARDING: And your name for the record.

>> Okay. My name is Jemal Powell. And I'm making my comments 

on behalf of the national Federation of the Blind in Illinois. 

I chair the transportation committee of the National Federation 

of the Blind in Illinois. And my comments deal with the issue 

of your regulations concerning automated stop announcements on 

buses. 

 And as several people mentioned, there ought to be a 

consistent standard in this. The Chicago Transit Authority does

do a very good job on their buses and trains of calling out of 

their automated stop calling working properly and with the 

volume. Unfortunately, on Pace suburban buses, they call the 

stops but sometimes the volume is very low. Sometimes it's too 

high. And they only call the main streets and transfer points 

as compared to the CTA and other systems I've been at that calls 

every corner stop. 

 Therefore, when coming up with regulations, there needs to 

be uniformity across the board so that the volume is clear and 

that the corner stops are properly called so people know where 

they are getting off at. 

 Now, I have a friend of mine who lives downstate. And she 

has issues with her transit system. And she's complained and 

complained about the not calling stops, but it's to the point 

now, where, they only call stop when is she's on the bus when 

she gets off, they don't call them. And understandably, from 

what I understand of the regulations, it's only supposed to be 

for systems with 100 or more buses. 

 I think at some point, you might want to look to expand that 

a little bit for some of these smaller systems who are very 

lax on stop calling, plus on other systems I've heard horror 

stories about drivers turning off the automated stop calling 

systems because they felt it was too distracting, even though 

they had people on the bus who could have benefited from that. 

You might want to look at, at some point, requiring systems 

whereby the driver just can't manually turn them off. 

 It's very important for people who are blind to hear the 

stops so we know where to get off at so we can do what we have 
to do. I live along a bus route where I've ridden it so long, I 

pretty much know the twists and turns, but not everybody it is 

that fortunate. Or you could have new people to an area. And 

the automated stop calling has been very helpful. Anyway, thank 

you for your time. And I will conclude my remarks. 

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, sir, any comments from members of 

the Board? 

 Hearing none 

 Mr. Watkins? This is our clean-up hitter.

>> How are you all doing? How are you doing? My name is Jim 

Watkins, heavily been involved in transit. I'm a public transit 

advocate for folks with disabilities, former co-chair of the 

RTA Advisory Committee for Northeastern Illinois, currently 

serving on the Chicago Paratransit Advisory Committee, been 

involved with disability issues since roughly 1993. I did write 

something to read today. Of course, I'm at the tail end of 

listening to everybody. There should be national standards on 

audible. There needs to be national standards. One of the 

reasons CTA is so good, they had a class action lawsuit. That's 

why we are where we are, very grateful for that for many reasons 

 We need to sit back, at least in my opinion, public service 

can't aim for everyone, what fixed route is about. Priority 

seating area, we have a severe issue here in Chicago of people 

bringing their baby carriages in and putting them in the 

priority seating area. We must remember there are some children 

with disables, they have every right to be in there, we have a 

severe issue here. Well, all I know, putting on the side the 

fact that children with disables would be in carriages, all I 

know is there is a federal mandate that makes this area 

available for people with disables and seniors. Sure don't see 

a word about anything about baby carriages. This needs to be 

looked at because it's turned into more of an issue day by day. 

 I very much support the idea pertaining to the kiosks. 

There's less and less, especially here in Chicago, you look at 

service assistants are being reduced on a daily basis. There 

needs to be working kiosks at transportation centers. There's 

no doubt about it. They need to be available for all people 

with disabilities. Pertaining to -- even though I know it's 

supposed to be buses and trains, wonderful to have access to 

Amtrak, access to people in wheelchairs to all train stations at 

Amtrak, the lift ideas. One that's already used them, you feel 

very uncomfortable in them. A couple feet off the ground, you 

sure know you can fall down. We know people that have done it. 

There needs to be a national securement device put together. 

Many of these newer chairs like this one. I use main line 95 

percent of the time. I sure could slide forward. I don't slide 

backwards. Well, this kind of chair is not -- there's no 

securement device for this type of chair on the main line in 

this area. There needs to be standards on this. Seat belts are 

wonderful. Looking at me, you wouldn't know I had both 
shoulders remove. And that's okay but actually it goes right 

across here and it pops the bone out. It's life. It's part of 

our lives. We all deal with different things in life. There 

needs to be, across the board, I read the proposals. They're 

wonderful. From 20 years ago in Chicago here where people were 

on State Street blocking buses, handcuffing themselves to buss 

to where we sit here today, I know I can use the system for the 

most part in northeastern Illinois here. Pertaining to 

paratransit, there needs to be national standards. You're 

sitting back, we have a national, paratransit is supposed to be 

here. One, it's not funded at the federal level. So it falls 

to states and local government. The state of Illinois holds, 

the RTA -- owes RTA $300 million just for operating. CTA this 

week alone took $100 million out of capital improvements just to 

keep the system going. 

 There needs to be, paratransit needs to have basic standard 

for everyone. They're going to change every couple of years 

because of the designs, but at a national level, we need to 

start back, it needs to be looked at that way. Let's not put 

together suggestions. These are wonderful suggestions, I got 

goose bumps, but I also saw possible problems in the future. As 

an advocate, we're going to say, please do it. And we're going 

to hear, we don't have the money for it. Both sides are right. 

I could go on for hours. I'm going to let it go.

>> J.R. HARDING: Thank you, sir, any questions or comments from 

members of the board? 

 Hearing none, well done. 

 As chair of this transportation committee and a member of 

the access board, I'd like to say thank you to Chicago. Really, 

your thoughtful, salient points of view, your passion, and your

advocacy will help us guide and develop a better rule. 

Remember, we're taking comments for literally another 60 days 

all the way into November. So please get your family, your 

friends, your experts, your scientists and other advocates to 

send thoughts because without your input, we can't build a 

better mousetrap. So thank you all today.