[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 78 (Thursday, May 11, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E995-E996]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                       A TRIUMPH OF COMMON SENSE

                                 ______


                           HON. DOUG BEREUTER

                              of nebraska

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 10, 1995

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, Washington, DC's, Metro deserves high 
praise for its steadfast resolve which resulted in a common sense 
agreement on its subway platform edges. Last year, the Department of 
Transportation insisted that Metro install costly platform edges with 
bumps in order to warn blind riders and comply with the Americans with 
Disabilities Act. However, this huge expenditure would have resulted in 
little, if any, benefit. In fact, there was disagreement among the 
organizations representing the visually impaired about the merit of the 
platform edge requirement. This appeared to be yet another case of the 
Federal Government forcing compliance simply for the sake of compliance 
rather than making an effort to meet an actual need. On June 13, 1994, 
this Member wrote to Metro's general manager, Lawrence Reuter, to urge 
him to stand up to the DOT bureaucracy and fight for a practical 
solution. A copy of the letter was also sent to Transportation 
Secretary Federico Pena.
  This Member is pleased that a reasonable agreement has now been 
reached between Metro and the Federal Transit Administration. Under the 
agreement, Metro will install a system of transmitters that will allow 
visually impaired riders wearing wrist beepers to be signaled when they 
are too close to the edge of the subway platform. This system will be 
much less expensive than the proposed bumpy platforms and should also 
provide a higher degree of safety. This Member also commends the 
Federal Transit Administration for finally demonstrating common sense 
and flexibility in arriving at this agreement. Too bad it took a 
confrontation to reach a common sense solution but sometimes that is 
necessary.
  Mr. Speaker, this Member commends to his colleagues the following 
editorial in support of the agreement from the April 27, 1995, edition 
of the Washington Post.
                    Metro Platforms: Reason Prevails

       It had all the earmarks of a classic legal regulatory 
     battle between a regional agency and the federal government: 
     Metro General Manager Lawrence G. Reuter was bucking an order 
     from the federal government under the Americans With 
     Disabilities Act to rip out and replace all of its subway 
     platform edges as a safety measure for blind riders. Comply 
     or risk federal funding, said the Department of 
     Transportation's Federal Transit Administration. It's too 
     expensive and isn't needed on a system with a good safety 
     record already, replied Mr. Reuter.
       We'll sue, said DOT. We're not budging, said Metro, noting 
     that there was a division of opinion among organizations 
     representing people whose vision is impaired as to the 
     usefulness, or potential additional hazards, of the federally 
     mandated surfaces with raised bumps.
       But now, after nearly a year of wrangling, bumpy edges are 
     giving way to smooth solutions. The Clinton administration 
     has backed away from its demand, settling instead for 
     agreement by Metro to install a system of transmitters that 
     will signal blind riders wearing wrist beepers that they are 
     close to platform edges. Federal mass transit administrator 
     Gordon J. Linton concluded that the regulation is ``so narrow 
     and prescriptive'' that ``there is not room to exercise 
     judgment or discretion'' and agreed to grant Metro's request 
     for a ``determination of equivalent facilitation'' for the 
     edges that are already along the platforms.
       Translation: Score one for good sense. Instead of 
     proceeding with expensive, time- [[Page E996]] consuming 
     litigation to try to force expensive, revenue-consuming 
     measures to resolve a problem that didn't seem to be one, the 
     federal government though better of it.
     

                          ____________________