[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 165 (Monday, October 29, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2268]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 H.R. 3985, THE OVER-THE-ROAD BUS TRANSPORTATION ACCESSIBILITY ACT OF 
                                  2007

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JAMES L. OBERSTAR

                              of minnesota

                    in the house of representatives

                        Monday, October 29, 2007

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3985 
the ``Over-the-Road Bus Transportation Accessibility Act of 2007'', 
introduced today by the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio). I am proud 
to cosponsor this important legislation, which will ensure that 
motorcoach accessibility regulations promulgated by the Department of 
Transportation, DOT, pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, 
ADA, are fully implemented, vigorously monitored, and actively 
enforced.
  In 1990, upon signing the landmark ADA into law, President George H. 
W. Bush stated that the ADA ``promises to open up all aspects of 
American life to individuals with disabilities--employment 
opportunities, government services, public accommodations, 
transportation, and telecommunications.'' In many respects, the Act has 
been implemented to result in expanded and enhanced transportation 
opportunities for individuals with disabilities. However, as a recent 
U.S. Court of Appeals case revealed, a troubling void in DOT's 
oversight of the over-the-road bus accessibility regulations has 
unnecessarily reduced the protection Congress intended to afford under 
the ADA.
  In 1998, DOT adopted a final rule requiring vehicle modifications to 
intercity, charter, and tour buses to accommodate individuals with 
disabilities. These regulations set forth requirements for these 
transportation providers, referred to as over-the-road bus operators, 
to acquire or lease accessible vehicles or provide accessible service 
to passengers with disabilities on a 48-hour advanced notice basis. The 
requirements are phased in over time, and vary by type of service 
provided by a company, either fixed route or ``demand responsive'', 
such as charter and tour service. Alternative compliance requirements 
were established for small businesses.
  The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (``FMCSA'') is the 
modal agency responsible for ensuring that over-the-road bus 
transportation providers comply with DOT regulations, including safety 
rules. However, according to FMCSA's interpretation, the existing motor 
carrier statute limits the agency's ability to enforce the over-the-
road bus accessibility regulations promulgated by DOT.
  On December 19, 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. 
Circuit, in Peter Pan Bus Lines, Inc. and Bonanza Acquisition, LLC V. 
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, rejected FMCSA's assertion 
that the agency does not have discretion to interpret the law to allow 
FMCSA to consider compliance with ADA regulations in determining 
whether a bus company is fit to operate in interstate commerce. The 
case was remanded to FMCSA in February 2007, and the Court directed the 
agency to reexamine the statute.
  FMCSA did not respond to the Court for more than 8 months, and I have 
no doubt the pattern of inaction would have continued without pressure 
from Congress. Earlier this month, Highways and Transit Subcommittee 
Chairman DeFazio and I sent a letter to Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administrator John Hill, expressing our intent to legislate a solution 
to this problem if the agency did not respond with its plans to make 
changes administratively to ensure that ADA requirements were being met 
by the over-the-road bus operators that FMCSA registers.

  Last week, FMCSA issued a decision in response to the Court order. In 
the decision on remand, the agency defends its original position that 
the underlying statute does not provide the authority for FMCSA to 
consider compliance with ADA. The agency further argues that the 
Department of justice (``DOJ'') has enforcement authority under the ADA 
to investigate all alleged violations and commence a civil action in 
court, pursuant to part 36 of title 28, Code of Federal Regulations. 
This includes authority over transportation providers. Therefore, FMCSA 
concludes the agency has no role in taking action with respect to ADA 
violations by over-the-road bus companies. In fact, in the October 26, 
2007 decision FMCSA states: ``If Congress intended to expand the 
fitness criteria to include compliance with additional DOT regulations, 
such as 49 CFR part 37, it presumably would have said so.''
  Let there be no doubt--Congress will be saying so with this 
legislation. This bill removes any statutory ambiguity and gives FMCSA 
the authority to take action against violators of the ADA.
  H.R. 3985 strengthens FMCSA's ability to monitor and enforce 
compliance with the Department of Transportation's regulations 
governing the accessibility of over-the-road bus transportation. The 
bill amends Section 13902(a)(1) of title 49, United States Code, to 
prohibit the agency from granting registration authority to a motor 
carrier providing over-the-road bus transportation who is not willing 
and able to comply with the accessibility regulations under subpart H 
of part 37, title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The bill also 
clarifies that the Secretary may suspend, amend, or revoke a motor 
carrier's registration in the event of a willful failure to comply with 
regulations pursuant to the ADA. H.R. 3985 further requires the 
Department of Transportation and the Department of Justice to enter 
into a memorandum of understanding to ensure coordination between the 
two Departments, to clearly define each Department's roles and 
responsibilities in enforcing the provisions of the ADA, and to avoid 
duplication of effort.

  Violations of ADA regulations are not a theoretical problem. Several 
newspaper articles have highlighted problems that individuals with 
disabilities have encountered in trying to ride curbside buses. 
Curbside bus companies operate fixed-route, intercity bus service, 
mainly between cities along the Northeast Corridor, picking up and 
dropping off passengers on the street rather than in bus terminals. A 
March 2, 2006 Washington Post investigation revealed that 11 companies 
that operate in the Northeast Corridor had violated ADA regulations. 
(See ``Bus Lines Cited in Federal Probe; 11 Firms Accused of Violating 
ADA''; Washington Post, March 2, 2006; Financial; page D1).
  Madam Speaker, the Americans with Disabilities Act was enacted 17 
years ago, and nearly a decade has passed since the Department of 
Transportation issued implementing regulations. This legislation, to 
ensure that the accessibility regulations promulgated by DOT are 
adhered to by all over-the-road bus operators, is both necessary and 
overdue.
    




                          ____________________