The Americans With Disabilities Act took effect 17 years ago, requiri ng companies and public places to ensure access for the disabled.
Stadium and theater operators had to install ramps and special seating. ATM machines and elevators had to have Braille for the blind.
Now the Justice Department is set later this summer to unveil a set of expanded regulations for public access for the disabled.
Among the rules being considered:
– Required use of visible workplace alarms so the deaf can get the word on when to evacuate.
– Wider doorways for public restrooms and hotel rooms.
– Voice systems on all ATMs.
– Additional seating for wheelchair patrons at different vantage points in stadiums, theaters and concert halls.
Proponents for the disabled say the regulations are needed to close loopholes in the existing regulations and to account for advances in technology, including computerized voices for the blind.
Business groups are concerned the rules would impose excessive hardship on small businesses, especially those that already have complied with the existing regulations.
“The big issue for us right now is whether these guidelines should apply retroactively,” said Marc Freedman, director of labor law policy for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “We understand and do not object to having them apply to new construction. But to require business owners who have already spent money to make their buildings accessible to the disabled to go back and do it all over again, we think that could be an excessive burden.”
Disabled advocates counter that the regulations should actually provide clearer guidance for businesses.
“It should help remove the grounds for filing lawsuits, which has been a big problem for business,” said Marilyn Golden, policy analyst with the Berkeley-based Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund.
Once the proposed regulations come out, there will be a two-month comment period. After several more months of internal revisions, a final set of regulations will be issued, according to Cynthia Magnuson, spokeswoman for the Department of Justice’s civil rights division. Compliance deadlines for the regulations would be several months or even a year or two beyond that.
Emissions Trading
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has made a market-based trading system the centerpiece of his strategy to curb greenhouse gas emissions. On June 1, a committee his administration created to advise on setting up a market trading system came out with recommendations on how to proceed.
Among other things, the committee recommended an emissions cap that declines over time until 2020, when the total emissions of greenhouse gases are to equal 1990 levels.
Companies would be allowed to earn credits by making carbon emission reductions or they could buy credits on an exchange.
The committee also recommended phasing in the program, starting with some 500 electricity sellers and large industrial emitters and then expanding to the transportation and building sectors.
Such a gradual approach likely would mean an earlier start date and would offer more flexibility to adjust the program, the committee said.
The committee’s report has been welcomed by the California Chamber of Commerce, which backs the so-called “cap-and-trade” approach as a way to achieve emission reductions with minimal disruption to business.
Environmental groups have raised concerns about such an approach, citing examples like the South Coast Air Quality Management District’s reclaim program that they contend has done little to reduce emissions in neighborhoods surrounding major polluters.
The recommendations will next be taken up by the California Air Resources Board, which already is considering a list of “early actions” to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Power to Choose
Hoping to cut energy costs, major companies are pushing state regulators to once again allow them to choose their electricity providers,a key component of deregulation shelved after the 2001 power crisis.
Real estate companies, supermarkets, restaurants, manufacturers such as Boeing Co. and even college campuses are among nearly 200 entities that have petitioned the California Public Utilities Commission to re-open so-called “direct access.”
The term describes the right of electricity customers to leave their electric utility and choose an independent electricity provider. Late last month, the PUC voted to study the issue, and if deemed feasible, craft regulations within 18 months to reinstate the process.
It also would give big electricity users more flexibility to buy power from renewable sources such as windmill operators,something they may need to do under the state’s landmark 2006 law requiring reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by the private and public sectors.
But the move would only represent a partial step toward deregulation of the energy market. Another major component, a power exchange where power is bought and sold on an hourly and daily basis, would be difficult to restore.
The state’s exchange went bankrupt in late 2001, and much of the power now used in the state is provided via utilities under long-term contract with independent power providers.
Consumer groups along with the state’s three investor-owned utilities,PG & E; Corp., Sempra Energy’s San Diego Gas & Electric and Rosemead-based Edison International,are wary of the direct access proposal.
Consumer groups say that competition by big customers for cheaper electrical rates would result in higher bills for residents and small businesses even if they too are allowed to pursue direct access, something unclear at this point.
The utilities worry that they could be harmed by a churn of customers seeking the cheapest rates as they make plans to handle anticipated increases in demand.
The PUC will conduct a review of the issue. The commission could craft rules to determine the shape of the direct access market, including any fees that customers would have to pay to leave the utilities’ power networks. This process could take about 18 months. Competition would not take place until 2009 at the earliest.
Fine is a staff writer with the Los Angeles Business Journal.
