[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 51 (Tuesday, March 21, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S847-S853]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BIENNIAL REPORT ON AMERICAN WITH DISABILITIES ACT PUBLIC SERVICES AND
ACCOMMODATIONS INSPECTIONS--116TH CONGRESS
Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Biennial
[[Page S848]]
Report on Americans with Disabilities Act Public Services and
Accommodations Inspections--116th Congress, from the Office of
Congressional Workplace Rights, be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, Office of the
General Counsel,
Washington, DC, Mar. 21, 2023.
Re: Biennial Report on Americans with Disabilities Act Public
Services and Accommodations Inspections--116th Congress
Hon. Patty Murray,
Office of the President Pro Tempore of the Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Kevin McCarthy,
Office of the Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Madam President and Mr. Speaker: Enclosed is our
Report on the Americans with Disabilities Act Public Services
and Accommodations Inspections conducted during the 116th
Congress. As provided in section 210(f)(1) of the
Congressional Accountability Act (CAA), 2 U.S.C.
Sec. 133l(f)(l), at least once each Congress the General
Counsel of the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights is
required to inspect the facilities of covered entities in the
legislative branch for compliance with the public services
and accommodations provisions of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990. On the basis of each periodic
inspection, the General Counsel must prepare and submit a
report containing the results of the inspection. 2 U.S.C.
Sec. 1331(f)(2).
While our inspections reveal a significant number of
barriers to access in facilities on and around Capitol Hill,
we have observed substantial progress being made towards
improved accessibility. I believe this progress is the result
of both our cooperative working relationship with the Office
of Architect of the Capitol and other employing offices, and
our focus on educating the legislative branch community
regarding accessibility for individuals with disabilities.
We look forward to continuing this work in the current and
future Congresses.
Very truly yours,
John D. Uelmen,
General Counsel.
Biennial Report on Americans with Disabilities Act Public Services and
Accommodations Inspections--Accessibility Report 116th Congress
Statement From the General Counsel
Under the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA),
as amended, during each Congress, the Office of the General
Counsel (OGC) of the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights
(OCWR) is required to inspect the facilities covered entities
in the legislative branch for compliance with the public
services and accommodations provisions of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA).
The reports that we issue and make public at least once
each Congress summarize the detailed reports we provide to
legislative branch offices throughout the inspection period.
During our ADA inspections, we work with offices to identify
barriers to access by comparing existing conditions with the
2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design (the most recent
standards). When we find a condition that is not in
compliance with the 2010 Standards, we make a finding
identifying the condition as a barrier to access and report
it as such. Not all barriers to access are necessarily
violations of the ADA. In some cases, the condition be in
compliance with the 1991 Standards, but not the 2010
Standards, making the condition ``safe harbored'' until the
area is renovated or altered. In other cases, there may be
technical feasibility or historicity issues that render
compliance with the standard extremely difficult or even
impossible. In those cases, we work with the Architecht of
the Capitol (AOC) and other employing offices to find other
ways to address the accessibility issues. While not all
barriers to access are necessarily violations of the ADA, we
believe it is important to identify all barriers to access so
that these issues can be addressed when planning future
projects.
During the 116th Congress, we inspected House Member
Offices to ensure access for constituents and other visitors
with disabilities. We also focused on the Office of Attending
Physician's health units, located in numerous facilities
around the Hill. Access to the health units can be critical
for disabled visitors, and our inspections revealed
opportunities to make them more accessible.
Another important area of focus during the 116th Congress
was the United States Capitol Police (USCP) Headquarters
detention center. It is especially critical to ensure access
here since disability rights groups engage in regular
protests on the Hill. We hope that our inspections here will
result in increased accessibility of the detention center.
For the first time, during the 116th Congress, we looked at
the accessibility of exhibits and display areas. Popular with
visitors, these are located throughout the Capitol campus,
and are especially concentrated in the Library of Congress.
This review was unique for us: though these areas are covered
by the ADA, for many aspects of them, no enforceable
accessibility standards exist. We used guidelines developed
by the Smithsonian Institution to inform our review. We noted
many accessibility successes, including programming designed
for visitors with disabilities. We also observed
opportunities for these facilities to better help disabled
visitors enjoy their experiences.
The 116th Congress saw the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Even with this challenge, we were able to carry out ADA
inspections and continue to make substantial progress in
improving accessibility on the Capitol Hill campus. The most
recent report from the AOC, which is attached to this report,
indicates that 64% of the findings from the 115th Congress
have been closed, planned engineering solutions are being
developed for 21% of the findings, and solutions are planned
but not yet completed for the remaining 15%. We once again
thank the AOC and the other employing offices for working
with us to develop and implement solutions to the barriers
that have been identified.
John D. Uelmen,
General Counsel,
Office of Congressional Workplace Rights.
Introduction
OCWR OGC ACCESSIBILITY PROGRAM
Under Section 210 of the CAA, the OGC enforces the public
services and accommodations provisions found in Titles II and
III of the ADA. These provisions mandate that public services
and accommodations, including the facilities where these
services are provided, be accessible to individuals with
disabilities.
The OGC has found that educating the legislative branch
community about the accessibility requirements of the ADA is
one of the most effective ways to improve access. From live
training to video content to the office's Fast Facts
publications series, we provide a range of resources to help
employing offices learn about their obligations under the
ADA. Our goal is to empower employing offices with the
information they need to make their spaces accessible to
individuals with disabilities. We conduct our biennial
inspections of legislative branch facilities and grounds on
the Hill with that goal in mind.
Our inspections help offices identify areas where
improvement is needed and consider suggestions to improve
accessibility. We also use the inspection results to develop
educational resources for use by the offices to improve
access. Since the inception of our inspection program, we
have seen tremendous progress in improved accessibility of
the Capitol complex facilities.
This report highlights some of the most significant areas
of improvement on the Hill and summarizes the results of our
116th Congress ADA inspections.
ADA BARRIER-REMOVAL SURVEY PROCESS
Since the 111th Congress, the OGC has utilized a barrier
removal survey approach to document accessibility barriers
during inspections. This involves: 1) identifying barriers to
access, as measured against the 2010 ADA Standards for
Accessible Design (Standards); 2) assessing the severity of
each barrier to quantify the need for removal; and 3)
evaluating potential solutions to the barriers based upon
cost and need.
To maximize resources, each biennial inspection focuses on
specific facilities or grounds. Within each facility, we
focus on the areas that are open to visiting members of the
public, such as entrances/exits, restrooms, elevators, and
interior routes.
During the ll6th Congress, the OGC continued its
contractual relationship with Evan Terry Associates, P.C. to
utilize its ADA survey software to implement the barrier-
removal survey approach on the Capitol Hill campus.
Individual barriers are assigned a severity code of either A,
B, C, or D. These codes signify how much the barrier deviates
from the 2010 Standards and the relative impact of this
deviation on individuals with disabilities.
ADA Barrier Severity Codes:
A. Safety Consideration.
B. Blocks Access.
C. Major Inconvenience.
D. Minor Inconvenience.
Consistent with how ADA surveys are usually conducted for
private corporations and government entities, the OGC does
not record D-coded severities in its surveys because the
deviation at issue in these barriers has little impact upon
accessibility. Consequently, the cost to correct the
deviation usually far exceeds any benefit that would result
from correcting the deviation.
In addition to the standard severity codes A-D, barriers
may be assigned a severity code of G, which means that the
element in question did not meet the requirements of the 2010
Standards but did meet the requirements of the 1991
Standards, which, in some cases, are less strict. Under the
ADA, G-coded barriers do not need to be corrected unless the
element in question has been altered or replaced since the
2010 Standards became enforceable. If the element has not
been altered or replaced, it qualifies for the ``safe
harbor'' exception, and the responsible party does not need
to take further action until it alters or replaces the
element. The OGC still notifies employing offices of G-coded
barriers identified in their facilities so that these offices
can better plan for alterations and replacements.
Results
116th CONGRESS INSPECTION RESULTS
During the 116th Congress, the OGC inspected more than 10
facilities on Capitol Hill, with a focus on health units in
the House and Senate Office Buildings, the Library of
Congress, and the U.S. Capitol
[[Page S849]]
Building; Member offices in the House Office Buildings; the
USCP Headquarters' detention center; and exhibit and display
areas in the buildings of the Library of Congress, the U.S.
Capitol and Capitol Visitor Center, the Botanic Garden, and
the House and Senate Office Buildings.
Within these facilities, we identified 163 barriers to
access, plus the barriers identified in the exhibit and
display areas. During this inspection, the Rayburn House
Office Building had the highest number of barriers (41),
followed by the USCP Headquarters (24), and the Library of
Congress Madison Building (22).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Percentage of
Facility Barriers Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rayburn House Office Building........... 41* 25.15
United States Capitol Police 24 14.72
Headquarters...........................
Library of Congress Madison Building.... 22 13.50
Longworth House Office Building......... 19* 11.66
Hart Senate Office Building**........... 17 10.43
Ford House Office Building.............. 13 7.98
Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. House Office 9 5.52
Building...............................
United States Capitol Building.......... 8 4.91
Cannon House Office Building............ 7* 4.29
Russell Senate Office Building**........ 3 1.84
-------------------------------
Grand Total......................... 163 100.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes one or more ``whole facility'' barriers
** Senate Member office and Senate Committee Room inspections were
postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and therefore did not occur
during the 116th Congress.
BARRIER CATEGORIES
For identification purposes, we categorize the barriers
into barrier types, which generally reflect the particular
type of object found to be inaccessible or the area in the
facility where we identified the barrier, such as in a
restroom or an elevator lobby. In the 116th Congress, the
most commonly identified barrier category was Single-User
Restrooms. Over one-third of the total barriers (58 out of
163) were identified in this category. We identified 14
barriers, 9% of the total, in the Multi-User Restrooms
category, meaning barriers found in restrooms accounted for
nearly half of all the barriers found during the 116th
Congress.
Restrooms have historically been an area in which our
inspections identify a significant percentage of barriers.
During the 115th Congress, 47% of the barriers we identified
were in restrooms (45% in multi-user restrooms, and 2% in
single-user restrooms). The 114th Congress inspections found
41% of barriers in multi-user restrooms and 0.05% in single-
user restrooms. It is therefore not surprising that restrooms
were again by far the most common location of findings. The
prevalence of barriers found in single-use over multi-user
restrooms during the 116th Congress inspections reflects the
type of facilities on which these inspections focused: the
health units all had single-user restrooms.
After single-user restrooms, the category with the next
highest number of barriers was Interior Route, with 43
barriers identified (27% of the total). The Interior Route
category includes barriers related to the path of travel
being too narrow for a wheelchair user or insufficient knee
and toe clearance at a table.
WHOLE FACILITY BARRIERS
The Doors and Storage categories each include three ``whole
facility'' barriers. The ``whole facility'' designation is
used when an issue is repeatedly identified across a
substantial number of offices or locations in a single
facility. Whole facility barriers are generally architectural
in nature, such as doors into Member offices that do not meet
ADA standards, and are issues that will need to be addressed
as a whole by AOC or the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO).
During the 116th Congress, we designated a non-
architectural barrier as a whole facility barrier. Portions
of literature racks in House Member offices were outside of
accessible reach ranges. The literature racks, like other
furniture, are supplied to the offices by the CAO. Since the
issue is not within the control of the offices and must be
addressed by the CAO, we used the whole facility barrier
designation.
In contrast, a barrier that is within the control of the
office itself--like a candy dish out of reach range--would be
reported individually, even if present across a large number
of offices.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Percentage of
Barrier Category Barriers Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single-User Restrooms................... 58 35.58
Interior Route.......................... 47 28.83
Doors................................... *21 12.88
Multi-User Restrooms.................... 14 8.59
Storage................................. *8 4.91
Exam Rooms.............................. 4 2.45
Sinks................................... 3 1.84
Telephone............................... 2 1.23
Ramps................................... 2 1.23
Alarms.................................. 1 0.61
Business & Mercantile................... 1 0.61
Judicial/Correctional Facilities........ 1 0.61
Signage................................. 1 0.61
-------------------------------
Grand Total......................... 163 100.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Includes one or more ``whole facility'' barriers
Locations
HOUSE OFFICE BUILDINGS: MEMBER OFFICES
During the 116th Congress, we surveyed Member offices in
the House Office Buildings. (We also surveyed these
buildings' health units, detailed in the ``Health Units''
section beginning on page 15.) We identified a total of 50
barriers in Member offices in the House Office Buildings: 28
were identified in Rayburn, 17 in Longworth, and 5 in Cannon.
For the Member offices, many of the barriers stem from
furniture, furniture layout, and self-service items and are
typically not structural in nature. This means that many
Member office barriers can be resolved easily, quickly, and
sometimes, at no cost. For example, some Member offices have
chairs or tables in the waiting area that obstruct the path
of travel for a person using a wheelchair. These types of
issues can be fixed by moving the furniture as needed. Other
offices have brochures and other self-service items that are
positioned too high or too low for someone in a wheelchair to
access. These issues can be fixed by moving the items to an
appropriate height. Staff in the Member offices can implement
these solutions.
The OCWR has easy-to-understand ADA resources, including a
short ADA inspection tutorial video and a tip sheet on
improving office accessibility, to help Member offices
configure their office spaces in accordance with the ADA
Standards and address common, easy-to-fix issues. Offices may
access these resources on our website at ocwr.gov.
In addition to the less-complicated barriers that are
typical for Member offices, there are some structural issues
in the Member offices in Rayburn, Longworth, and Cannon.
These include doors that are too narrow for someone in a
wheelchair to pass through or doors that close too quickly or
require too much force to open. These barriers generally
affect entire facilities and potentially implicate the
historic fabric of the buildings, which will have to be
considered when developing a solution acceptable to both the
AOC and the OGC.
Rayburn
In Rayburn, we found 28 barriers in Member offices.
Barriers were identified in the categories Interior Route,
Doors, and Storage. Interior Route barriers include barriers
that inhibit maneuvering from one place in an office to the
next, such as having a narrow or obstructed pathway from the
office reception area into the designated meeting space. If a
pathway is too narrow or obstructed by office furniture, a
person in a wheelchair may not be able to proceed into the
meeting area.
Three of the barriers identified in Rayburn are actually
whole facility barriers, present in many offices throughout
Rayburn. Two of Rayburn's whole facility barriers concerned
doors. These were assigned because double doors did not have
at least one leaf that provides enough clear width, and
because many doors required too much force to open and closed
too quickly.
The second whole facility barrier in Rayburn is in the
Storage category. The barrier concerned office literature and
magazine racks that were positioned outside of the required
reach range, such that someone in a wheelchair or other
mobility device may not be able to reach them.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in Member offices in Rayburn
and describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
We found 13 barriers in Rayburn's health unit (see the
Rayburn chart on page 17), bringing the total number of
barriers we identified in Rayburn to 41.
Interior Route (25):
Not enough knee and/or toe clearance at conference/meeting
tables: 17.
Carpet is not securely attached and/or exposed edges of
carpet are not fastened to the floor: 6.
Candy jar requires two hands or tight grasping/pinching/
twisting to operate: 1.
Path for wheelchairs through reception area is too narrow:
1.
Doors (2*):
Office doors close too quickly: Whole facility.
Doors are too narrow: Whole facility.
Storage (1*): Literature in magazine rack is outside of
reach range: Whole facility.
Grand Total (28*):
*Includes one or more ``whole facility'' barriers.
Longworth
In Longworth, we found 17 barriers in Member offices.
Barriers were identified in the categories Interior Route,
Doors, and Storage.
One of the interior route barriers identified most in
Longworth concerns meeting tables and carpets. Six meeting
tables in Longworth lacked adequate knee and/or toe
clearance.
Two of the barriers identified in Longworth are whole
facility barriers. The first is in the Doors category. Many
office reception areas had desks or other nonpermanent
obstructions blocking a doorway's required maneuvering
clearance, making those doors difficult to open from a
wheelchair. This issue could be addressed by rearranging
furniture in these offices.
The second whole facility barrier in Longworth is in the
Storage category. The barrier concerned office literature and
magazine racks that were positioned outside of the required
reach range, such that someone in a wheelchair or other
mobility device may not be able to reach them.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in Member offices in Longworth
and describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
We found 2 barriers in Longworth's health unit (see the
Longworth chart on page 18) for a total of 19 barriers
identified in Longworth.
Interior Route (15):
Not enough knee and/or toe clearance at conference/meeting
tables: 6.
Carpet is not securely attached and/or exposed edges of
carpet are not fastened to the floor: 5.
[[Page S850]]
Clear floor space at literature rack is obstructed by
furniture: 3.
Path for wheelchairs through reception area is too narrow:
1.
Doors (1*): Maneuvering clearance at door is obstructed by
furniture: Whole facility.
Storage (1*): Literature in magazine rack is outside of
reach range: Whole facility.
Grand Total (17*)
*Includes one or more ``whole facility'' barriers.
Cannon
In Cannon, we found 5 barriers in Member offices. Barriers
were identified in the categories Interior Route and Storage.
The Storage category barrier was a whole facility barrier,
present in many offices throughout Cannon. The barrier
concerned office literature and magazine racks that were
positioned outside of the required reach range, such that
someone in a wheelchair or other mobility device may not be
able to reach them.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in Member offices in Cannon
and describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
We found 2 barriers in Cannon's health unit (see the Cannon
chart on page 18) for a total of 7 barriers in Cannon.
Interior Route (4):
Clear floor space at literature rack is obstructed by
furniture: 2
Not enough knee and/or toe clearance at conference/meeting
tables: 1
Carpet is not securely attached and/or exposed edges of
carpet are not fastened to the floor: 1
Storage: (1*): Literature in magazine rack is outside of
reach range: Whole facility
Grand Total: (5*).
* Includes one or more ``whole facility'' barriers(:).
Grand total: (5*).
* Includes one or more ``whole facility'' barriers.
HEALTH UNITS
Established by congressional resolution in 1928 to meet the
medical needs of Members of Congress, the Office of Attending
Physician (OAP) has expanded its services over the years and
now provides emergency care to staff and visitors at health
units throughout the Capitol campus.
In addition to providing medical clinic services, many of
the OAP's health units contain private areas with cots and
sinks that can be used for lactation, resting, or meeting
other personal health needs. These spaces thus make it
easier--or, sometimes, possible--for people with disabilities
or health concerns to visit the Capitol campus.
The chart that follows lists the to a-1 umber of barriers
we identified in each health unit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Percentage of
Facility Barriers Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Library of Congress Madison Building.... 22 24.72
Hart Senate Office Building............. 17 19.10
Rayburn House Office Building........... 13 14.61
Ford House Office Building.............. 13 14.61
Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr. House Office 9 10.11
Building...............................
United States Capitol................... 8 8.99
Russell Senate Office Building.......... 3 3.37
Cannon House Office Building............ 2 2.25
Longworth House Office Building......... 2 2.251
-------------------------------
Grand Total......................... 89 100.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified across all health units.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Percentage of
Barrier Category Barriers Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Single-User Restrooms................... 52 58.43
Doors................................... 18 20.22
Storage................................. 5 5.62
Exam Roooms............................. 4 4.49
Sinks................................... 3 3.37
Interior Route.......................... 3 3.37
Telephone............................... 2 2.25
Alarms.................................. 1 1.12
Signage............................. 1 1.12
-------------------------------
Grand Total......................... 89 100.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HEALTH UNITS: HOUSE OFFICE BUILDINGS
Rayburn
We found 13 barriers in Rayburn's health unit. Most (10)
were found in the restroom, which presents a number of
barriers for people with physical disabilities, including a
mirror that is mounted too high for many users to see
themselves and a coat hook and light switch mounted above
acceptable reach ranges. These barriers can make it difficult
for wheelchair users, people of short stature, or those with
difficulty reaching to use this restroom. Additionally, this
restroom lacks a visual alarm signal. Deaf or hard of hearing
people using this restroom may not be alerted if the
building's fire alarm goes off.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in Rayburn's health unit and
describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
Single-user restrooms (10):
Mirror is mounted too high: 1.
Coat hook is outside of reach range: 1.
Light switch is outside of reach range: 1.
No visual fire alarm in restroom: 1.
Not enough knee and/or toe clearance at sink: 1.
Maneuvering clearance at doorway is less than required: 1.
No directional signage to nearest accessible restroom: 1.
No International Symbol of Accessibility at accessible
restroom: 1.
Raised character and braille room sign is not provided at
restroom: 1.
Toilet paper dispenser is not positioned properly: 1.
DOORS (2): Door hardware requires tight grasping, pinching,
or twisting to operate: 2.
Storage (1): Literature in magazine rack is outside of
reach range: 1.
Grand total (13).
Longworth
We found 2 barriers in Longworth's health unit. One barrier
concerned the unit's front door, which has a power-assisted
door that can be opened by pressing an actuator button, but
the door opener is not connected to a standby power source.
The other barrier was a door handle that requires tight
grasping, pinching, or twisting of the wrist to operate,
which could prevent anyone with impaired manual dexterity or
strength from opening it.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in i Longworth's health unit
and describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
Doors (2):
Automatic or power-assisted door does not have standby
power: 1.
Door hardware requires tight grasping, pinching, or
twisting to operate: 1.
Grand Total (2).
Cannon
We found 2 barriers in Cannon's health unit. Both barriers
concerned the restroom.
The restroom lacked a sign with raised lettering and
braille designating it. Blind or visually impaired people may
have difficulty identifying this restroom as a result.
The restroom lacked adequate clear floor space at the
toilet, which is needed by wheelchair users to transfer to
the toilet. The restroom itself does have room to provide
sufficient clear floor space, but the space was obstructed by
a coat rack and a laundry bin.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in Cannon's health unit and
describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
Single-user restrooms (2):
Raised letter and braille sign is not provided at restroom:
1.
Clear floor space at toilet is obstructed by furniture: 1.
Grand total (2).
Ford
We found 13 barriers in Ford's health unit. Seven were
identified in the single-user restroom, including grab bars
located in incorrect positions. Throughout this health unit,
door hardware requires tight grasping and twisting to
operate.
The barrier concerning improper positioning of a toilet
paper dispenser is ``safe harbored'' because the condition
complies with the 1991 Standards, but not the 2010 Standards,
and the element in question has not been altered or replaced
since the 2010 Standards became enforceable.
Ford is the only House Office Building that does not
contain Member offices. Its health unit was the only part of
the facility we inspected during the 116th Congress. We
inspected other public spaces in Ford during the 115th
Congress.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in Ford and describes the
specific types of barriers within each category.
Single-User Restrooms (7):
Door hardware requires tight grasping, pinching, or
twisting to operate: 1.
Toilet paper dispenser is not positioned properly: 1.
Side wall grab bar is in incorrect location: 1.
No visual fire alarm in restroom: 1.
Clear floor space at toilet is obstructed by furniture: 1.
Raised letter and braille sign is not provided at restroom:
1.
Rear grab bar is in incorrect location: 1.
Doors (5):
Door hardware requires tight grasping, pinching, or
twisting to operate: 3.
Door maneuvering clearance is obstructed by furniture: 2.
Interior Route (1): Not enough knee and/or toe clearance at
meeting table: 1.
Grand Total (13).
HEALTH UNITS: SENATE OFFICE BUILDINGS
During the 116th Congress, we inspected the health units
located in the Hart and Russell Senate Office Buildings.
There is no health unit located in the Dirksen Senate Office
Building. We have inspected other public spaces of these
buildings during previous Congresses and did not reinspect
those areas during the 116th Congress. Senate Member office
inspections were postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and
therefore did not occur during the 116th Congress.
Hart
We found 17 barriers in the health unit in the Hart Office
Building, 14 of which were located in the restroom. Most
barriers in this restroom present challenges to physically
disabled users, including a doorway without the required
clearance for a wheelchair user to readily open the door, a
door lock too high for many to reach, and a grab bar
obstructed by a wall-mounted sharps box. People with
disabilities affecting their hearing or vision could
encounter barriers in this restroom as well: the room's alarm
lacks a visual component, and the room is not identified with
tactile signage (raised lettering and braille).
[[Page S851]]
The other barriers are in the categories of Exam Rooms and
Doors. The barriers in the Exam Rooms category were located
in a room designated as a resting room. They pertain to a
coat hook located too high for most wheelchair users to reach
and a light switch that requires twisting with a tight grasp,
which can be inaccessible for someone whose disability
impairs the use of their hands.
Two of the barriers we found in Hart are ``safe harbored''
because the condition complies with the 1991 Standards, but
not the 2010 Standards, and the element in question has not
been altered or replaced since the 2010 Standards became
enforceable. These are the barriers concerning inadequate
clear floor space at a toilet and a coat hook outside of
reach range.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in Hart's health unit and
describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
Single-User Restrooms (14):
Grab bar obstructed by wall-mounted accessory: 1.
Seat cover dispenser clear floor space obstructed by
toilet: 1.
Coat hook is outside of reach range: 1.
Trash can requires foot operation: 1.
Door lock is outside of reach range: 1.
No visual fire alarm in restroom: 1.
Maneuvering clearance at doorway is less than required: 1.
Flush control is not on open side of toilet: 1.
Raised letter and braille sign is not provided at restroom:
1.
Rear grab bar is not long enough: 1.
Soap dispenser is outside of reach range: 1.
Toilet seat is too high: 1.
Not enough clear floor space at toilet: 1.
Pipes are not insulated: 1.
Exam Rooms (2):
Coat hook is outside of reach range: 1.
Trash can requires foot operation: 1.
Doors (1): Door is too heavy and closes too quickly: 1.
Grand Total (17).
Russell
Three barriers were found in the health unit in the Russell
Office Building: two related to doors, and one related to the
restroom.
Both barriers in the Doors category pertain to the main
door into the health unit. The door is recessed into an
alcove in a way that makes it challenging for a wheelchair
user to open. The door's hardware requires tight grasping and
twisting to operate. Both of these barriers could be removed
by installing an automatic door opening device.
Our barrier survey format lists one barrier in the
restroom. In fact, the barrier notes clarify that this
restroom does not provide any accessibility features,
including clear floor space for someone using a mobility
device, grab bars, and dispensers within required reach
ranges.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in Russell's health unit and
describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
Doors (2):
Door hardware requires tight grasping, pinching, or
twisting to operate: 1.
Maneuvering clearance at doorway is less than required: 1.
Single-User Restrooms (1): Restroom is too small to comply
with the requirements for an accessible single-user restroom
(for example, clear floor space): 1.
Grand Total (3).
HEALTH UNITS: THOMAS P. O'NEILL, JR. HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
Our inspection of the health unit located in the O'Neill
House Office Building documented nine barriers, four of which
were found in the restroom. During the 116th Congress, our
inspections in O'Neill were limited to the health unit. We
completed a comprehensive survey of other spaces in O'Neill
during our 117th Congress inspection cycle, and the results
of those inspections will be published in the 117th Congress
biennial ADA inspection report.
The highest barrier total was found in the single-user
restroom. People with disabilities affecting mobility, sight,
and hearing could encounter barriers throughout the health
unit, including its restroom.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in O'Neill's health unit and
describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
Single-User Restrooms (4):
Mirror is mounted too high: 1.
Door is too heavy and closes too quickly: 1.
Raised letter and braille sign is not provided at restroom:
1.
Toilet paper dispenser is not positioned properly: 1.
Exam Rooms (2): Coat hook is outside of reach range: 2.
Telephone (1): Existing volume control is noncompliant: 1.
Doors (1): Maneuvering clearance at door is obstructed by
furniture: 1.
Storage (1): Portions of literature rack are outside of
reach range: 1.
Grand Total (9).
HEALTH UNITS: LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
Madison
Our inspections for the 116th Congress identified 22
barriers in the Madison Building, where the health unit for
the Library of Congress is located. We have inspected other
spaces in Madison, as well as the other Library of Congress
buildings, Adams and Jefferson, during previous Congresses
and did not reinspect there during the 116th Congress.
The most common barrier type was Single-User Restrooms,
with seven barriers identified in this category. Most of
these are barriers to people using mobility devices or with
other physical disabilities, such as a lack of adequate space
to maneuver a mobility device.
Another common barrier type found in Madison was door
barriers. These each make a door difficult or impossible to
open from a mobility device.
Madison's health unit contains a resting room with a sink,
which is used as a lactation room for visitors. This space
facilitates the use of the Library by a disabled person who
may need a resting room for any number of reasons. However,
barriers we identified in this room--seven in total,
including three pertaining to the sink--could make it
difficult to use.
Some of these barriers are ``safe harbored'' because the
condition complies with the 1991 Standards, but not the 2010
Standards, and the element in question has not been altered
or replaced since the 2010 Standards became enforceable.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in Madison and describes the
specific types of barriers within each category.
Single-user restrooms (7):
Coat hook is outside of reach range: 1.
Trash can requires foot operation: 1.
Raised letter and braille sign is not provided at restroom:
1.
Toilet paper dispenser is not positioned properly: 1.
Not enough clear floor space at toilet: 1.
Clear floor space at toilet is obstructed by trash can: 1.
Pipes are not insulated: 1.
Doors (4):
Maneuvering clearance at door is obstructed by furniture:
1.
Maneuvering clearance at doorway is less than required: 2.
Door stop interrupts smooth surface or panel on bottom of
push side of door: 1.
Sinks (3):
Not enough clear floor space at sink: 1.
Pipes are not insulated: 1.
Sink rim is too high: 1.
Storage (3):
Coat hook is outside of reach range: 1.
Portions of literature rack are outside of reach range: 2.
Interior route (2):
Light switch is outside of reach range: 1.
Counter protrudes into pathway: 1.
Telephone (1): Existing volume control is noncompliant: 1.
Alarms (1): No visual fire alarm in resting/lactation room:
1.
Signage (1): Raised letter and braille sign is not provided
at rooms identified visually: 1.
Grand total (22).
HEALTH UNITS: UNITED STATES CAPITOL BUILDING
During the 116th Congress, we inspected the health unit
located in the Capitol Building. While we have performed
biennial ADA inspections on the exterior grounds of the
Capitol Building and in the Capitol Visitor Center, this was
the first OGC ADA inspection performed in the Capitol
Building.
We identified eight barriers in the Capitol Building's
health unit. Seven were in the restroom. The one barrier not
located within the restroom was assigned to the doorway into
the restroom, where a sink blocked the doorway's maneuvering
clearance. This prevents wheelchair users from easily opening
a door.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in the Capitol Building and
describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
Single-user restrooms (7):
Sharps box is mounted outside reach range: 1.
Coat hook is outside of reach range: 1.
Raised letter and braille sign is not provided at restroom:
1.
Rear grab bar is not long enough: 1.
Shelf is too high: 1.
Side wall grab bar is in incorrect location: 1.
Pipes are not insulate: 1.
Doors (1): Maneuvering clearance at doorway is less than
required: 1.
Grand total (8).
USCP HEADQUARTERS
During the 116th Congress, we inspected the USCP's
detention center, located inside USCP Headquarters. Members
of the public may enter USCP Headquarters for various
reasons, whether they are applying for a demonstration permit
or have been detained by the USCP. We inspected other areas
in the USCP Headquarters during the 115th Congress, when we
inspected the first floor customer service area, and during
the 114th Congress, when we looked at exterior routes
adjacent to the building.
Most barriers were found in the two multi-user restrooms.
In addition to other barriers, neither contained a toilet
stall wide enough for a wheelchair user to access.
The second highest barrier total was found in the single-
user restroom. These barriers in fact related to the toilet
fixture inside a detention cell. Accessibility is of unique
importance due to the nature of the setting: someone who is
detained does not have the option to try to find an
accessible restroom elsewhere. Among other barriers, the
toilet was too low to the ground and no grab bars
[[Page S852]]
were provided, so a wheelchair user could find transferring
to the toilet quite difficult or, likely, impossible.
An additional in-cell barrier was found at the bench, where
clear floor space for a wheelchair user was not provided.
Some of these barriers are ``safe harbored'' because the
condition complies with the 1991 Standards, but not the 2010
Standards, and the element in question has not been altered
or replaced since the 2010 Standards became enforceable.
The chart that follows lists the total number of barriers
in each category we identified in USCP Headquarters and
describes the specific types of barriers within each
category.
Multi-user restrooms (14):
Coat hook is outside of reach range: 2.
Door threshold into restroom is too high: 2.
Rear grab bar is in incorrect location: 1.
Rear grab bar is missing: 1.
Side wall grab bar is in incorrect location: 1.
Stall door pull is provided on pull side only: 2.
Toilet paper dispenser is not positioned properly: 1.
Stall door lock requires tight grasping, pinching, or
twisting of the wrist to operate: 2.
Accessible stall is not deep enough: 1.
Accessible stall is not wide enough: 1.
Single-user restrooms (6):
Mirror is mounted too high: 1.
No knee/toe clearance or clear floor space at sink: 1.
Flush control is not on open side of toilet: 1.
No grab bars at toilet: 1.
Toilet paper dispenser is not positioned properly: 1.
Toilet seat is too low: 1.
Ramps (2):
Edge protection is not provided at ramp and ramp landing:
1.
Handrail does not extend far enough beyond bottom of ramp
run: 1.
Judicial/correctional facilities (1): Clear floor space at
detention cell bench is not wide enough: 1.
Business and mercantile (1): Processing counter is too
high: 1.
Grand total (24).
Spotlight on Exhibits
While we have historically focused on physical
accessibility in campus facilities during our ADA biennial
inspections, equal access to services, programs, and
activities, including exhibits, offered by legislative branch
entities is also required by the ADA as applied by the CAA.
To examine this aspect of accessibility, during the 116th
Congress, we conducted a review of exhibits in the buildings
of the Library of Congress, the U.S. Capitol Building and the
Capitol Visitor Center, the Botanic Garden, and the House and
Senate Office Buildings.
During other OCWR biennial ADA inspections, we measure
accessibility based on compliance with the 2010 ADA Standards
for Accessible Design. For many aspects of exhibits, no
enforceable accessibility standards exist. Though not covered
directly by any set of standards, exhibits are still covered
by ADA regulations, such as those concerning general
nondiscrimination; modification of policies, practices, and
procedures; program access; maintenance of accessible
features; and effective communication. Thus, because the
Standards do not cover many aspects of exhibits and displays
directly, we conducted our review based on how various
features might implicate ADA regulations.
The Smithsonian Guidelines for Accessible Design are a
useful resource for determining how to provide accessible
exhibits and displays and informed our review of CAA-covered
exhibits. The guidelines were developed by the Smithsonian
Accessibility Program in the 1990s in response to a lack of
guidelines for exhibit accessibility. They are based on
construction standards of the Architectural Barriers Act of
1968, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the ADA, and were
developed in consultation with exhibit designers.
We reviewed exhibits and displays in the Library of
Congress Jefferson, Madison, and Adams buildings; the U.S.
Capitol Building and the Capitol Visitor Center; the Botanic
Garden and Bartholdi Park; the Hart, Dirksen, and Russell
Senate Office Buildings; and the Cannon House Office
Building.
At these facilities, visitors with disabilities will find
many accessibility practices already in place. For instance,
at the Library of Congress, visitors can enjoy twice-weekly
``Touch History'' tours, a program for visitors with visual
impairments that utilizes a specially trained docent to
describe the building using vivid language. At the Capitol
Visitor Center, listening devices with audio description are
used for the orientation film and tours and are available at
the information desks, and an audio descriptive tour is also
available for download onto a personal device. The Botanic
Garden provides a variety of programs and features designed
for visitors with disabilities, including sensory programs
for neurodivergent visitors and raised garden beds that allow
visitors of varying heights and abilities to enjoy, interact
with, and touch the plants in Bartholdi Park.
Our review revealed many opportunities for these facilities
to better help disabled visitors enjoy their experiences.
Models, other interactive displays, and braille should be
positioned within accessible reach ranges. To provide
accessibility for visitors with visual impairments, labels
and signage should use easily readable type size, avoid using
italics, provide adequate contrast between text and
background colors, and be adequately lit. In addition, labels
and signage are most accessible for visitors in wheelchairs
and those of short stature when positioned so that they can
be approached closely for reading, including being mounted at
a low height and not obstructed by seating or other objects.
Consistent staff training will help to ensure that disabled
visitors are accommodated and receive accurate information
about programs available to them.
The ``Mountains and Clouds'' piece in the atrium of the
Hart Office Building presents an excellent opportunity for
enhancing accessible visitor experiences on Capitol Hill.
Designed by American sculptor Alexander Calder, ``Mountains
and Clouds'' is a monumental-scale work comprising a 51-foot
high, 38-ton steel mountain range; suspended aluminum clouds
were removed in 2014 for structural safety reasons. A small
tactile model could be provided so that visitors who are
blind or have low vision could get a sense of the proportion
and shape of the pieces.
Updates
PROGRESS UPDATES FROM THE AOC
At the beginning of each year, the AOC updates the OGC on
its progress with removing identified barriers and improving
accessibility in Capitol complex facilities and grounds. The
AOC uses a third-party consultant to verify that
accessibility barriers have been remediated. Based on the
status of this verification process as of the AOC's January
2023 update (which includes updates through December 31,
2022), the AOC reports that barriers identified in the 111th,
112th, 113th, 114th, ll5th, 116th, and ll7th Congresses have
been verified as closed as follows:
111th Congress: 90% closed.
112th Congress: 97% closed.
113th Congress: 30% closed.
114th Congress: 64% closed.
115th Congress: 61% closed.
116th Congress: 6% closed.
117th Congress: 2% closed.
The AOC also highlights some of its recent key
accessibility improvements made during the 116th Congress,
including:
Installation of accessible lifts to provide access to the
Senate Chamber dais;
Installation of automatic door operators to increase
accessibility at doorways;
Installation of additional ADA-compliant water bottle
filling stations, beyond ADA requirements;
Continued improvement to Capitol campus physical
accessibility, such as installation and/or renovation of
ramps, sidewalks, and curb cuts;
Installation of a significant number of accessibility
improvements during the extensive overhaul of the U.S.
Capitol Visitor Center's Exhibition Hall; and
Continued improvement of internal processes to ensure
accessibility standards are implemented on design and
construction projects.
This update from the AOC is included with this report in
the Appendix.
BARRIER REMOVAL COSTS
While the OGC has not received cost estimates from the AOC
for this report, the software used for conducting the
inspections and developing solutions generates rough
estimates of the costs associated with the solutions,
adjusting for construction costs in the D.C. area and the
higher costs associated with government construction work.
Based on these software estimates, the total cost for
correcting all the barriers found during the 116th Congress
totals approximately $4.3 million. The actual construction
costs for removing these barriers have not been confirmed or
validated by the AOC.
LIMITED RESOURCES AND COVID-19 REDUCED SCOPE OF INSPECTIONS
Our ADA inspection during the 116th Congress was limited by
several factors. Given that there are 17.4 million square
feet of interior space on the Capitol Hill campus and over
580 acres of grounds, OGC simply does not have the resources
to inspect more than a very small portion of the campus each
Congress. To maximize resources, each biennial inspection
focuses on specific facilities or grounds.
In 2020, many on-site inspections were postponed due to the
COVID-19 pandemic, including Senate Member office
inspections, originally scheduled for the summer of 2020.
Additionally, resources were diverted to produce the
``House Resolution 756 Joint Report on Accessibility.'' On
March 10, 2020, the House of Representatives passed HR 756--
``Moving Our Democracy and Congressional Operations Towards
Modernization.'' This resolution required OCWR, AOC, and the
Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representatives to prepare a
joint report regarding the state of accessibility of the
Capitol buildings and grounds and a timetable, plan, costs,
and challenges to achieving full accessibility. To draft this
report, the working group reviewed data from the OCWR's
biennial ADA inspections and assessed the functional
accessibility of the House Office Buildings.
TRANSITION PLANS
Although Congress has not approved the ADA regulations
proposed by the OCWR Board of Directors, the proposed
regulations follow those promulgated by the Department of
Justice by requiring consultation with members of the
disability community and the development of transition plans
that will determine how and when barriers will be removed and
facilities will otherwise be made
[[Page S853]]
readily accessible for people with disabilities. See 28
C.F.R. Sec. 35.150(d).
Our approach to ADA inspections encourages consultation
with the disability community and the development of thorough
and effective transition plans. The information we provide to
employing offices regarding barrier severity and estimated
solution costs aids the transition planning process, as
employing offices can utilize this information to prioritize
abatement projects.
INVESTIGATION OF CHARGES OF DISCRIMINATION AND REQUESTS FOR INSPECTION
During the 116th Congress, the OGC received four ADA
requests for inspection and charges of discrimination.
Two cases concerned restroom accessibility in the Library
of Congress Madison Building and the Cannon House Office
Building. The responsible employing offices cooperated with
our office in the investigation and removed the barriers to
access.
One case concerned a request for disability accommodation
made to a House Committee. The responsible employing office
cooperated with our office in the investigation, which did
not result in any findings of violations of the ADA or the
CAA.
One case concerned physical accessibility in a Committee
hearing room in the Rayburn House Office Building. Ramps to a
dais were excessively sloped and posed other barriers to
access. The responsible employing offices fully cooperated
with our office and have developed a plan to remove the
barriers to access as part of an upcoming renovation of the
room. We are continuing to monitor this case.
Acknowledgments
The OGC ADA inspection team during the 116th Congress was
comprised of Shonda Perkins, Occupational Safety and Health
Inspection Coordinator; Crystal Barber, Occupational Health
and Safety Specialist; Christopher Robinson, Senior
Occupational Safety and Health Specialist; Mark Nester,
Occupational Safety and Health Specialist; James Peterson,
Occupational Safety and Health Specialist; and Kaylan Dunlap,
Accessibility Specialist with Evan Terry Associates (ETA).
The OGC appreciates the cooperation of all legislative
branch offices during the inspection process. We particularly
appreciate the assistance and time given by the employees of
the AOC, the Library of Congress, the USCP, the Office of
House Employment Counsel, and the Office of Senate Chief
Counsel for Employment.
Thanks to Beth Ziebarth, Smithsonian Institution's Deputy
Head Diversity Officer and Director, Access Smithsonian, for
providing context and history regarding the Smithsonian
Accessibility Program and Smithsonian Guidelines for
Accessible Design.
Dynah Haubert, OGC Associate General Counsel, is the
primary author of this report.
The OGC also acknowledges the invaluable assistance
provided by ETA. The OGC would not have been able to
implement the barrier removal survey approach to ADA
inspections without ETA's assistance and software.
John D. Ueiman,
General Counsel.
Appendix
Architect of the Capitol,
Washington, DC, January 26, 2023.
Mr. John D. Uelmen,
General Counsel, Office of Congressional Workplace Rights.
Dear Mr. Uelmen: The Architect of the Capitol (AOC) is
pleased to provide this annual Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA) progress report for 2022 on removing the
accessibility barriers identified in the Office of
Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR) biennial reports for
the 111th, 112th, 113th, 114th, 115th, 116th and 117th
Congress. This report includes data for the calendar year
December 31, 2022.
The list below provides AOC's progress in correcting the
accessibility barriers noted:
90 percent (189 of 209) of the 111th Congress barriers have
been remediated.
97 percent (386 of 398) of the 112th Congress barriers have
been remediated.
30 percent (51 of 168) of the 113th Congress barriers have
been remediated.
64 percent (1,589 of 2,477) of the 114th Congress barriers
have been remediated.
61 percent (676 of 1,113) of the 115th Congress barriers
have been remediated.
6 percent (10 of 163) of the 116th Congress barriers have
been remediated.
2 percent (6 of 259) of the 117th Congress barriers have
been remediated.
The unabated barriers identified for each biennial
congressional report are identified following categories:
111th Congress:
Planned, engineered solutions are being developed: 10
percent (20 of 209 barriers).
112th Congress:
Planned, engineered solutions are being developed: 3
percent (12 of 398 barriers).
113th Congress:
Planned but not yet completed: 1 percent (2 of 168
barriers).
Planned, engineered solutions have been developed: 68
percent (115 of 168 barriers).
114th Congress:
Planned but not yet completed: 20 percent (492 of 2,477
barriers).
Planned, engineered solutions are being developed: 16
percent (396 of 2,477).
115th Congress:
Planned but not yet completed: 15 percent (165 of 1,113
barriers).
Planned, engineered solutions are being developed: 24
percent (272 of 1,113 barriers).
116th Congress:
Planned but not yet completed: 66 percent (108 of 163
barriers).
Planned, engineered solutions are being developed: 28
percent (45 of 163 barriers).
117th Congress:
Planned but not yet completed: 78 percent (203 of 259
barriers).
Planned, engineered solutions are being developed: 19
percent (50 of 259 barriers).
Enclosure 1 is a detailed spreadsheet listing each
accessibility barrier identified by the OCWR for the 111th,
112th, 113th, 114th, 115th, 116th and 117th Congress and the
AOC's progress remediating them. This enclosure also contains
the verification data from our third-party consultant for
2022. We will continue to obtain abatement verification
reports and photos from our third-party consultant throughout
2023.
Enclosure 2 contains a complete list of ADA accomplishments
completed by the AOC. Some highlights include:
Physical Access
Continued improvement to the physical accessibility of the
Capitol campus such as installation and/or renovation of
handrails, ramps, thresholds, pathways, stairs, lifts,
signage, sidewalks and curb cuts.
Installed accessible lifts to provide access to the Senate
Chamber dais.
Installed additional ADA-compliant water bottle filling
stations, beyond ADA requirements.
Installed automatic door operators to increase
accessibility at doorways.
Installed ADA-complaint worksurfaces and food service
countertops in the Dirksen Senate Office Building.
Program Access
The U.S. Capitol Visitor Center completed an extensive
overhaul of Exhibition Hall, which included a significant
number of accessibility improvements such as the
incorporation of braille, tactile models, touch-screen
interactives, captioned video content, audio guides and
large-print materials.
The U.S. Botanic Garden updated and expanded accessibility
information on its website to enable a successful visit by
all individuals and added speech-to-text transcription
services for online educational programs.
Program Management
Held accessibility coordination meetings with attendance
from the AOC's jurisdiction and major divisions.
Continued to evaluate and improve internal processes to
ensure accessibility standards are met on design and
construction projects.
Continued to work with an independent quality assurance/
quality control inspector who confirms completed work is ADA
compliant.
Collaboration with the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights, Office
of General Counsel
Continued to work cooperatively with you and OCWR staff on
OCWR ADA inspections, as well the existing open ADA case.
Please contact Danezza Quintero at 202.674.0260 or me at
202.226.4701 if you have questions or require further
information.
Sincerely,
Patricia Williams, CSP,
Director, Safety and Code Compliance.
Enclosures.
____________________