AL BERNSTEIN: THANK YOU. THIS IS STRANGE. I'M AN ENGINEER AND I DO NOT HAVE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION SO WE WILL HAVE TO DO IT THE OLD FASHIONED WAY. I WILL HAVE TO USE WORDS. IT KIND OF SEEMS LIKE THE SAME FORMAT THAT WAS IN USE WHEN YOU FIRST STARTED ON THESE GUIDELINES.
(LAUGHTER.)
AL BERNSTEIN: GOOD AFTERNOON, MY NAME IS AL BERNSTEIN AND I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR'S DISABILITY RIGHTS COORDINATING COMMITTEE. AND OUR MEMBERSHIP INCLUDES REPRESENTATIVES OF THE OI'S BUREAUS AND MY COMMENTS ARE ON BEHALF OF THAT COMMITTEE. FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE ACCESS BOARD FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. WE HAVE BEEN WAITING A LONG TIME TO GET TO THIS STEP AND IT IS GREAT TO FINALLY BE HERE AND I'M SURE THE ACCESS BOARD FEELS THE SAME WAY. I WOULD FIRST LIKE TO PRESENT A FEW GENERAL COMMENTS, AND THEN TALK ABOUT A FEW SPECIFIC PROVISIONS. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT THE DEPARTMENT WILL BE PROVIDING THE BOARD WITH A DETAILED LIST OF WRITTEN COMMENTS BEFORE THE DEADLINE.
SINCE INTERIOR IS ONE OF THE PRIMARY FEDERAL LAND MANAGEMENT AGENCIES THAT DEVELOP AND MANAGE THE TYPE OF FACILITIES COVERED BY THIS NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING, THESE GUIDELINES WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPLICATION FOR THE DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, AND OPERATION OF OUR FACILITIES. DEALING WITH THE OUTDOOR ENVIRONMENT AND REQUIRES A SENSITIVE BALANCE BETWEEN MAINTAINING THE FUNDAMENTAL NATURE OF AN OUTDOOR EXPERIENCE, WHILE PROVIDING ACCESS TO THESE AREAS BY AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE. OUTDOOR RECREATION FACILITIES BRING MANY OTHER UNIQUE CHALLENGES SUCH AS CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES, TERRAIN AND DEGREE OF DEVELOPMENT ISSUES, ACHIEVING THIS BALANCE WAS A GOAL OF THE REGULATORY NEGOTIATION COMMITTEE, AND OF THESE PROPOSED GUIDELINES. IN GENERAL, WE FEEL THAT THESE GUIDELINES ACCOMPLISH THAT GOAL.
IN ADDITION TO PROVIDING PROVISIONS TO INCREASE ACCESSIBILITY AT OUR OUTDOOR SITES, THESE GUIDELINES ALSO ALLOW A PROCESS FOR DEPARTURE AND EXCEPTIONS SO THAT WE DO NOT UNREASONABLY IMPACT THESE AREAS. SEVERAL OF OUR DOI AGENCIES INCLUDING THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT, THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION AND THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ALREADY HAVE BEEN DESIGNING FACILITIES USING THE GUIDELINES SET FORTH IN THESE PROPOSALS SINCE THEY WERE FIRST PUBLISHED IN 1999.
BASED ON THESE EXPERIENCES WE FEEL THAT THESE GUIDELINES IN GENERAL ALLOW PLANNERS TO DESIGN FACILITIES THAT WILL NOT IMPACT OR ALTER THE NATURE OF THE SETTING, WHILE ALLOWING PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE IN THE WONDERFUL EXPERIENCES THAT OUR SITES PROVIDE. WE COMMEND THE ACCESS BOARD AND THE REG-NEG COMMITTEE FOR THIS EFFORT. HOWEVER, THERE ARE SOME AREAS IN THE NPRM THAT OUR COMMITTEE FEELS THE BOARD SHOULD REVIEW BEFORE THE FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED.
FIRST THERE IS A NEED TO REVIEW THE NPRM FOR CLARITY. FOR EXAMPLE, WE BELIEVE THE APPLICATIONS OF THE CONDITIONS FOR EXCEPTIONS LISTED IN SECTION T 302 NEED TO BE CLARIFIED. IT WAS OUR ASSUMPTION THAT THE CONDITIONS IN THAT SECTION WOULD APPLY TO ALL ELEMENTS OF THE RULE INCLUDING OUTDOOR RECREATION ACCESS ROUTES, BEACH ACCESS ROUTES, PICNIC AREAS, AND CAMPING AREAS. BASED UPON THE WAY THE PROPOSED GUIDELINES ARE WRITTEN IN THE NPRM, IT APEARS THAT THEY ONLY APPLY TO TRAILS. WE BELIEVE THAT THE CONDITIONS IN T302 SHOULD GENERALLY APPLY THROUGHOUT THE DOCUMENT. THIS IS ESPECIALLY TRUE IN THE ALTERATION OF EXISTING FACILITIES. WE BELIEVE THAT INVOKING THESE EXCEPTIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO CAMP GROUNDS AND PICNIC AREAS SHOULD BE THE EXCEPTION RATHER THAN THE RULE. HOWEVER, IN SOME CASES, DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE TERRAIN, WE THINK THAT FULL COMPLIANCE WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE.
SECOND, WE SUGGEST THAT THE BOARD REVIEW THE NPRM TO MAKE SURE THAT THE INTENT OF THE REG-NEG COMMITTEE REPORT WAS NOT ALTERED WHEN THE BOARD REVISED THE FORMAT OF THAT REPORT TO MATCH THE FORMAT OF ABAS WHICH WAS A HORRENDOUS JOB, I THINK IN MAKING THAT REVISED FORMAT.
THE PARTICULAR EXAMPLES FOUND IN TEXT T 303.2, IN TRAILS. WHILE THE REG-NEG COMMITTEE REPORT ONLY LISTS FOUR GENERAL EXCEPTIONS, THE NPRM INCLUDES THE 15 PERCENT THRESHOLD AS A GENERAL FIFTH EXCEPTION. AS WRITTEN IT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE ORIGINAL REPORT REQUIREMENT AND IMPLIES THAT A TRAIL DOES NOT NEED TO COMPLY WITH ANY OF THE TECHNICAL PROVISIONS FOR MORE THAN 15 PERCENT OF THE LENGTH OF THE TRAIL. WHILE WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE NPRM, WE DO BELIEVE THAT THIS SECTION NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED AND AMENDED TO REFLECT THE ORIGINAL INTENT.
THERE HAS BEEN SOME DISCUSSION AMONG INTERIOR STAFF CONCERNING SCOPING REQUIREMENTS OF PICNIC TABLES, BENCHES AND CAMPING ELEMENTS, SOME STAFF FEEL THE NUMBER IS TOO HIGH. WHILE OTHERS FEEL THAT CONSISTENT WITH THE PRINCIPLES UNIVERSAL DESIGN 100 PERCENT OF THESE ELEMENTS UPON REPLACEMENT SHOULD BE ACCESSIBLE. IN GENERAL OUR COMMITTEE FEELS THAT THE SCOPING REQUIREMENTS ARE REASONABLE AND ACCEPTABLE AS WRITTEN. ACCESSIBILITY COORDINATORS WITHIN DOI BUREAUS CONTINUE TO REMIND DESIGNERS AND PLANNERS THAT THESE ACCESSIBLE GUIDELINES ARE MINIMUM STANDARDS, AND THAT ANY AGENCY OR FIELD OFFICE CAN ADOPT HIGHER THRESHOLDS IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO SO.
I WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE A FEW COMMENTS REGARDING THE TECHNICAL PROVISIONS OF THE NPRM. AS I PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, WE WILL INCLUDE DETAILED COMMENTS ON THESE TECHNICAL PROVISIONS AS WELL.
WITH REGARD TO THE RAISED TENT PLATFORM WAY IS IN […] I'M SORRY, THAT'S THE ENGINEERING IN ME WE HAVE TO HAVE THE SECTION, WE HAVE 2 COMMENTS, IN OUR EXPERIENCE WE FOUND THAT MOST INDIVIDUALS WITH MOBILITY IMPAIRMENTS TRANSFER FROM THEIR WHEELCHAIR TO THE TENT PLATFORM, WE BELIEVE THAT THE EDGE PRO REQUIREMENT MAY CREATE A BARRIER TO THIS TRANSFER PROCESS. PERHAPS ALLOWING FOR OPENINGS SIMILAR TO THE OPENINGS IN EACH WOULD SOLVE THIS PROBLEM. ALSO, WE ARE FREQUENTLY ASKED HOW HIGH A TENT PLATFORM SHOULD BE. THIS DIMENSION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN THE TECHNICAL PROVISIONS AND WE RECOMMEND A HEIGHT OF 17 TO 19 INCHES SIMILAR TO THE HEIGHT OF A BENCH.
WITH REGARD TO BEACH ACCESS ROUTE REQUIREMENTS, AND A LOT OF THE DISCUSSION HERE, WE FEEL THAT THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT OF 6 INCHES OR HIGHER ABOVE THE BEACH SURFACE AS STATED IN EXCEPTION 6, IS TOO LOW. WE AGREE THAT THIS EXCEPTION IS NEEDED FOR AREAS WHERE THERE IS A LONG ELEVATED PLATFORM OR BOARDWALK. HOWEVER, WE FEEL THAT MEETING THE TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR BEACH ACCESS ROUTE IS NOT DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE FROM A PLATFORM 6 INCHES HIGH. AND THIS EXCEPTION AS WRITTEN WILL PROBABLY ELIMINATE A LOT OF SITES WHERE THE OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE ACCESSIBILITY EXISTS. WE RECOMMEND THAT 12 INCHES OR HIGHER BE USED INSTEAD OF 6 INCHES TO INVOKE AN EXCEPTION TO THIS REQUIREMENT.
WITH REGARD TO TRAIL SIGNAGE WE HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. FIRST WE FEEL THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME KIND OF SIGNAGE THAT INDICATES THIS TRAIL WAS DESIGNED TO MEET ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES. WE RECOMMEND A SIGN THAT INCLUDES THE INTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OF ACCESSIBILITY COMBINED WITH AN OUTDOOR RECREATION SYMBOL SIMILAR TO THE LOWER TWO EXAMPLES SHOWN IN ADVISORY T321.2 IN THE NPRM.
SECOND WHILE WE FEEL THAT THE TRAIL INFORMATION SUCH AS SURFACE INFORMATION SLOPE AND TRAIL LENGTH ARE USEFUL FOR ALL HIKERS, WE DO FEEL THAT THIS INFORMATION SHOULD NOT BE A SIGN REQUIREMENT IN THE FINAL RULE. INSTEAD, WE FEEL THAT THIS SHOULD REMAIN AN ADVISORY AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS IN THE NPRM BECAUSE THIS INFORMATION CAN BE PROVIDED IN OTHER WAYS.
OUR FINAL COMMENT CONCERNS THE OPERABLE PARTS REQUIREMENT FOR COOKING SURFACES AND GRILLS. THE FEEDBACK WE HAVE RECEIVED FROM OUR FIELD STAFF INDICATES THAT MOST OF THE PERMANENT COOKING GRILLS USED AT PICNIC AREAS IN CAMP SITES USUALLY REQUIRE 2 HANDS AND MORE THAN 5 POUNDS OF FORCE TO RAISE AND LOWER THE COOKING SURFACES. WE RECOMMEND THE BOARD RESEARCH THIS ISSUE TO VERIFY THAT THIS IS A REASONABLE REQUIREMENT BEFORE ISSUING THE FINAL RULE.
FINALLY IN ORDER TO HELP DESIGNERS AND PLANNERS BETTER UNDERSTAND THESE GUIDELINES, WE HOPE THAT THE BOARD WILL PREPARE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE MATERIALS AND CASE STUDY EXAMPLES SIMILAR TO THOSE PREPARED A FEW YEARS AGO FOR THE RECREATION GUIDELINES, AGAIN THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY, WE FEEL THAT THE BOARD AND THE STAFF HAS DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB IN PREPARING THIS NPRM. OUR AGENCIES NEED THESE GUIDELINES AND WE HOPE WE CAN GET THE FINAL RULE ISSUED IN A TIMELY MANNER. THANK YOU.