SegwayChat - View Single Post

Lily Kerns · 01-26-2011, 09:58 AM

I'm getting ready to call the DOJ help line to see if they are prepared to deal with questions about the new ADA rules regarding OPDMDs (Segs, ATVs, golfcarts...) that go into effect in March.

I would welcome suggestions and ideas for this conversation. The relevant information for Title II is summarized in this link:
http://forums.segwaychat.com/showthr...007#post212007
I will need to do the same for Title III...

Title II, § 35.137 Mobility devices
Section (a) is crystal clear: wheelchairs, mobility scooters and other handicap devices MUST be given pedestrian access; (b) is about as clear as mud.

Here are some of the questions I'd like to ask:

§ 35.130 General prohibitions against discrimination
(h) A public entity may impose legitimate safety requirements necessary for the safe operation of its services, programs, or activities. However, the public entity must ensure that its safety requirements are based on actual risks, not on mere speculation, stereotypes, or generalizations about individuals with disabilities.

What will be the standard for their proof that their rules are based on actual risks? When, where, how must this proof be provided?

In what way is a permit a requirement for safety? If it is claimed that this allows OPDMD users to be informed of the safety requirements, why is it that safety rules for the general public are simply posted or provided and it is assumed that the public will make themselves acquainted with those rules. Isn't this an assumption that disabled users are somehow less responsible or intelligent than other members of the public?

§ 35.137 Mobility devices
(b-1) says "A public entity shall make reasonable modifications in its policies, practices, or procedures to permit the use of other power-driven mobility devices... unless it can demonstrate that the class of other power-driven mobility devices cannot be operated in accordance with legitimate safety requirements that the public entity has adopted pursuant to § 35.130(h).

What is the standard for "permit the use"? Does that mean they can make any regulations they wish as long as they can claim it is safety related or does it mean equal access with other disabled usage? If a doctor has prescribed a Segway as the best solution for a specific disability, then why isn't it discrimination to make different standards for its use (i.e. pedestrian access) than for those for whom "wheelchairs and manually-powered mobility aids, such as walkers, crutches, canes, braces, or other similar devices" are the logical solution for a disability? These devices all have implicit hazards and the user is assumed to be able to deal with them or the doctor would not have prescribed them. Why should the same not be true of medically prescribed Segway use?

What does "demonstrate" mean? What, when, where, how, to whom, by whom must that demonstration be made or offered? What are my options if challenged and the agency or business is unwilling or unable to specify, i.e. demonstrate, why I am being denied or regulated?

Can disabled Segway users be held to higher standards of safety than those that exist for individuals in wheelchairs or the general public? What if the rule is not related to the Segway itself, but to the attitude and skill of the user or the convenience of the agency or business? For example: Our local Simon Mall says that disabled Segway users cannot use a cell phone, cannot ride side by side, must observe manufacturer's recommendations. No one else, disabled or otherwise is restricted in this way. They must also display a permit sticker.

My permits from the MO Department of Conservation says that I cannot use it during deer hunting season in certain areas. Now, no one in their right mind wants to be wandering in the woods during MO deer hunting season, but no one else, disabled or otherwise, is denied access during those times. They too require the dispay of a handicap tag.

Can a speed limit be imposed on Segway users (walking speed, 3 mph) when other devices that can go faster than that have no limits, and there are no limits for runners, strollers, or bicycle speed limits that are rarely, if ever, enforced?

§ 35.137 (2) Inquiry into use of other power-driven mobility device. A public entity may ask a person using an other power-driven mobility device to provide a credible assurance that the mobility device is required because of the person's disability.

Given that an OPDMD user can now be stopped and required to offer some kind of proof of their disability, can they still be required to offer this proof _before_ being given a permit? Can they still be required to _ display_ proof of their disability as a condition for being allowed to use their OPDMD? How is this a safety issue?

I'd welcome suggestions and ideas for more questions. I'd also hope that others will ask these same questions of the DOJ! http://www.justice.gov/contact-us.html

01-26-2011, 09:58 AM	#1
Lily Kerns Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: SW Missouri, near Springfield Posts: 875	ADA questions for the DOJ I'm getting ready to call the DOJ help line to see if they are prepared to deal with questions about the new ADA rules regarding OPDMDs (Segs, ATVs, golfcarts...) that go into effect in March. I would welcome suggestions and ideas for this conversation. The relevant information for Title II is summarized in this link: http://forums.segwaychat.com/showthr...007#post212007 I will need to do the same for Title III... Title II, § 35.137 Mobility devices Section (a) is crystal clear: wheelchairs, mobility scooters and other handicap devices MUST be given pedestrian access; (b) is about as clear as mud. Here are some of the questions I'd like to ask: § 35.130 General prohibitions against discrimination (h) A public entity may impose legitimate safety requirements necessary for the safe operation of its services, programs, or activities. However, the public entity must ensure that its safety requirements are based on actual risks, not on mere speculation, stereotypes, or generalizations about individuals with disabilities. What will be the standard for their proof that their rules are based on actual risks? When, where, how must this proof be provided? In what way is a permit a requirement for safety? If it is claimed that this allows OPDMD users to be informed of the safety requirements, why is it that safety rules for the general public are simply posted or provided and it is assumed that the public will make themselves acquainted with those rules. Isn't this an assumption that disabled users are somehow less responsible or intelligent than other members of the public? § 35.137 Mobility devices (b-1) says "A public entity shall make reasonable modifications in its policies, practices, or procedures to permit the use of other power-driven mobility devices... unless it can demonstrate that the class of other power-driven mobility devices cannot be operated in accordance with legitimate safety requirements that the public entity has adopted pursuant to § 35.130(h). What is the standard for "permit the use"? Does that mean they can make any regulations they wish as long as they can claim it is safety related or does it mean equal access with other disabled usage? If a doctor has prescribed a Segway as the best solution for a specific disability, then why isn't it discrimination to make different standards for its use (i.e. pedestrian access) than for those for whom "wheelchairs and manually-powered mobility aids, such as walkers, crutches, canes, braces, or other similar devices" are the logical solution for a disability? These devices all have implicit hazards and the user is assumed to be able to deal with them or the doctor would not have prescribed them. Why should the same not be true of medically prescribed Segway use? What does "demonstrate" mean? What, when, where, how, to whom, by whom must that demonstration be made or offered? What are my options if challenged and the agency or business is unwilling or unable to specify, i.e. demonstrate, why I am being denied or regulated? Can disabled Segway users be held to higher standards of safety than those that exist for individuals in wheelchairs or the general public? What if the rule is not related to the Segway itself, but to the attitude and skill of the user or the convenience of the agency or business? For example: Our local Simon Mall says that disabled Segway users cannot use a cell phone, cannot ride side by side, must observe manufacturer's recommendations. No one else, disabled or otherwise is restricted in this way. They must also display a permit sticker. My permits from the MO Department of Conservation says that I cannot use it during deer hunting season in certain areas. Now, no one in their right mind wants to be wandering in the woods during MO deer hunting season, but no one else, disabled or otherwise, is denied access during those times. They too require the dispay of a handicap tag. Can a speed limit be imposed on Segway users (walking speed, 3 mph) when other devices that can go faster than that have no limits, and there are no limits for runners, strollers, or bicycle speed limits that are rarely, if ever, enforced? § 35.137 (2) Inquiry into use of other power-driven mobility device. A public entity may ask a person using an other power-driven mobility device to provide a credible assurance that the mobility device is required because of the person's disability. Given that an OPDMD user can now be stopped and required to offer some kind of proof of their disability, can they still be required to offer this proof _before_ being given a permit? Can they still be required to _ display_ proof of their disability as a condition for being allowed to use their OPDMD? How is this a safety issue? I'd welcome suggestions and ideas for more questions. I'd also hope that others will ask these same questions of the DOJ! http://www.justice.gov/contact-us.html __________________ Lily Kerns ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Faculty: To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 5 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. Last edited by Lily Kerns; 01-26-2011 at 03:44 PM..