Passenger vessel operators will need to achieve a delicate balance of stability and accessibility to meet the third and most consequential rule covering the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
They also likely will have to please the U.S. Coast Guard and the Justice and Transportation departments as they deal with requirements such as listening systems for the hearing-impaired, a minimum number of accessible cabins on small overnight vessels and possible relief areas for service dogs. For the passenger vessel industry, the cost of complying with the civil rights law would range between $66 million and $74 million a year over 20 years.
“It’s a significant rule. It will affect people prospectively, once it goes into effect. It will apply to newbuilds and to existing vessels” if the operators choose to make alterations, said Ed Welch, legislative director of the Passenger Vessel Association (PVA), the Alexandria, Va.-based trade group. “One of the key things is whether you have to put in an elevator. There are definitely going to be difficulties.”
The comment period closed in late January on the rule that has been in the works for 15 years and covers vessels, other than ferries and tenders, that carry more than 150 passengers or more than 49 overnight passengers (Subchapter K vessels), ferries that carry more than 99 passengers, and tenders that carry more than 59 passengers.
DECK SPACE AND RAMPS
The challenges range from deck space — PVA wants it defined as areas used by passengers not employees — to ramps.
For example, noted naval architect Andy Lebet of DeJong & Lebet, Jacksonville, Fla., “The requirements for doors with coamings to have a ramp on both sides seems reasonable, until you look at the amount of length it takes up on each side of the door.”
A typical Subchapter K boat with a short open area on the aft main deck for partially protected waters would require a 6" coaming. This would mean a 10' or 11' long platform/ramp combination on each side of the door, Lebet said in his comments. “Then there would be an additional five or six feet required aft of that on the open deck to allow for boarding gates, radius bulwark/railing corners, etc. So where the aft open main deck may have been approximately 10 feet in length on previous designs, it would now be 15 to 17 feet long.”
Darrell Bryan, president and CEO, Clipper Navigation Inc., Seattle, suggested flexibility on handrail extensions. “Depending on the configuration of the ramps and gangways, a 12-inch extension can in some circumstances create a safety hazard, rather than a mobility aid.”
In addition, “the requirement for assistive-listening devices provides a significant financial burden on a relatively small ferry operation such as ours,” said Bryan, whose three vessels run between Seattle and Victoria, British Columbia, and whose crewmembers assist hearing-impaired travelers. “We suggest that an exception be allowed for vessels that provide safety and emergency information visually.”
PVA also wants the passenger capacity for ferries to be raised to 150 in keeping with Coast Guard standards. “The 150-passenger threshold is the separation point between Subchapter T and K vessels, regardless of whether they are used as ferries or provide some other type of service,” PVA said in its comments. “It is exceedingly frustrating to the private sector when different federal agencies impose regulations that are not in harmony with one another.” Regulators with limited marine experience “should look to the expertise of the U.S. Coast Guard.”
Raising the ferry minimum from 99 to 150 “would make much more sense,” said Robin Trinko-Russell, vice president and CFO of Madeline Island Ferry Line, La Pointe, Wis., which operates four 149-passenger car-passenger ferries.
The rule will have “a pretty significant impact” on ferries, she said. “It would be a challenge for renovation or newbuilds on smaller vessels to incorporate accessibility requirements,” she said. “It’s not that we don’t think it’s important. We try to make things as accessible as possible.”
ELEVATORS AND CABINS
The most significant provisions in the proposed guidelines include elevators and a minimum number of accessible cabins, according to the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board).
An elevator, a limited-use elevator or a platform lift would be required to connect passenger decks, with certain exceptions. For new vessels, this equipment would cost from $108,700 for a lift to $371,000 for an elevator, the board estimates.
PVA points out that small U.S.-flag overnight cruise vessels must have a higher percentage of cabins with mobility features than larger (predominantly foreign-flagged) ships. “All vessels, regardless of the number of guest rooms, should provide one room with mobility features for each 100 rooms or fraction thereof,” PVA said.
And changes to existing vessels should not “result in an increase in vessel tonnage that causes the Coast Guard to reclassify the vessel … nor should an alteration diminish vessel safety by resulting in changes that compromise the vessel’s stability, structural integrity, or fire protection.”
The Access Board also received several comments from groups such as the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund.
“These are important guidelines, needed by the disability community for many and varied types of travel including daily commutes and recreation,” wrote Marilyn Golden, senior policy analyst. “As a matter of civil rights, it is important for these guidelines to reach as far as possible. As the Board notes, ferries are a particularly important service, since they are often used for daily commutes.”
The Access Board is considering requiring relief areas for service animals following reports of travel difficulties from people who use the animals.
Such areas “should be provided based on travel time. The number should be based on the size of the vessel,” Golden said in her comments.
“A service dog is a priceless medical aid to their handler and, in an effort to be accessible to all disabled persons in accordance with ADA law, I must strongly advocate for not only myself, but for all service dog handlers that just want their partners to have what they need to do their job,” a woman from Alaska wrote.
The Access Board now has to digest all the comments. “It’s very difficult to predict” when the final rule will be out, said Paul Beatty, board accessibility specialist, but “it won’t be done in 2014.” It becomes enforceable when the Department of Justice and the Department of Transportation adopt it as a standard, and either agency could change the provisions. Both have seats on the board.
And the Justice Department has enforcement power. It is “extremely active” in enforcing ADA cases, said Martin Orlick, partner at Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell, San Francisco, whose specialties include ADA work. “They don’t miss much at all.”
Several years ago, for example, the department’s settlement with Hilton Worldwide Inc. required accessibility changes at 900 owned and franchised hotels nationwide. Under the consent decree, Hilton had to pay a civil penalty of $50,000. But the cost of the ADA compliance was in the millions.
“Although the DOJ is authorized by statute to file litigation to enforce the ADA and to seek money damages, its lawyers are primarily motivated to obtain barrier removal. Seeking money damages is secondary, if an issue at all,” Orlick said in a story on the case.
He advises vessel operators to be proactive. “Make sure you try to get out ahead of the curve,” he said. “Bring in access consultants, but do it through a lawyer,” for protection later in case of litigation. And he suggests anyone planning to buy a vessel include ADA due diligence as part of the purchase.
Some vessel owners may postpone renovations, Orlick said, “but others will embrace it and say, ‘Hey, this is good for business.’ ”
ADA Proposed Rule
The proposed rule, which covers new construction and alterations, notes it is designed to “address the discriminatory effects of architectural, transportation, and communication barriers encountered by individuals with mobility, hearing and vision disabilities on passenger vessels.”
The number of people with mobility challenges is increasing. Households with someone who used a wheelchair or scooter doubled from 1.5% in 1990 to 3% in 2010. “If past trends continue, a linear extrapolation to 2025 projects about 4% of households will have a member who uses a wheelchair or scooter.”
While the rule applies to a wide range of passenger vessels, the guidelines for ferries that carry more than 99 passengers is “broader than for multipurpose vessels because ferries serve a critical transportation function.” An estimated 454 ferries fell in that category as of 2010 with about half permitted to carry between 100 and 150 passengers.
Estimated compliance costs for case study ferries show, for example, on a 108-passenger multihull ferry a 1.1% construction cost increase and six-to-eight seat loss if the vessel size stays the same, and a 24.5% construction cost increase and an 18% hike in fuel consumption if the size is increased.
On a 150-passenger, 20-vehicle monohull ferry, construction cost at the same size would increase less than 1%, one vehicle space would be lost, and annual revenue would fall $51,000-$86,000. A larger ferry would cost 6.7% more to build with no vehicle space lost or significant additional yearly operation and maintenance costs.
— D.K. DuPont
Source: Proposed rule, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board. (www.regulations.gov, ATBCB-2013-0003)
