# 181

II-6.1000
II-6.3100 February 15, 1996

The Honorable Rick Santorum

United States Senator
Suite 960 Widener Building
One South Penn Square
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107

Dear Senator Santorum:

I am responding to your letter on behalf of your

constituent, Judge James P. MacElree II of the Court of Common
Pleas of Chester County, Pennsylvania, regarding the requirements
of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). The
response to your letter was delayed because of the shutdown of
the Federal government. We apologize for any inconvenience to
your constituent.

Judge MacElree's letter expresses concern that the

requirements of the ADA for alteration of courtrooms increase the
costs of the planned alterations and limit the functionality of
courtroom design. Specifically, Judge MacElree believes that the
ADA requires a ramp or lift at any elevated judge's bench,
witness stand, jury box, or clerk's stand and that any ramp must
be 16 feet long for every 6 inches of height.

The ADA prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability

by State and local government agencies, including courts. The
Department of Justice's regulations implementing title II
(enclosed) specify that whenever an entity covered by title II
undertakes an alteration to a facility, the altered area must be
made accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.
The standard of accessibility to be applied may be either the
Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS), 41 C.F.R. pt.
101-19.6, Appendix A, or the ADA Standards for Accessible Design
(Standards), 28 C.F.R. pt. 36, Appendix A (enclosed).
 Both the ADA Standards and UFAS require all altered public
and common use areas to be made accessible. Therefore, jury
boxes and witness stands must be accessible to individuals with
disabilities, including those who use wheelchairs. In order to
be considered accessible, a jury box or witness stand must be
reachable by an accessible route, must contain at least one
accessible wheelchair space (a removable seat may be installed in
the space when it is not needed to accommodate a wheelchair), and
must be served by an unobstructed turning space. Any fixed
counters or operating mechanisms in a jury box or witness stand
must be accessible.

Judge MacElree seems most concerned about the requirement

that an accessible route be provided to the accessible areas.
The ADA does require such an accessible route. If the accessible
juror or witness seating is not raised, such an accessible route
consists simply of a level route with adequate width and head
room. If the accessible seating is raised, a ramp that complies
with ADA Standard 4.8 or UFAS 4.8 must generally be provided.
Such a ramp need not be 16 feet long for each 6 inches of height,
however, as Judge MacElree believes. Rather, it must generally
have a 1:12 slope, i.e., 1 foot long for every 1 inch high
(a 6-inch high ramp would, therefore, only have to be 6 feet
long). In addition, in alterations, if space limitations
prohibit use of a 1:12 ramp, a steeper slope may be used.

As Judge MacElree notes, the requirement that some juror and

witness seats be level or ramped may alter traditional courtroom
design. This alteration is necessary, however, to ensure that
individuals with disabilities have the same opportunities to
participate fully in their communities that non-disabled
individuals have, including the opportunities for jury service
and for participation as witnesses in legal proceedings.

Judge MacElree has also asked about accessibility of judges'

benches and clerks' and reporters' stands. The UFAS and ADA
Standards do not provide specific scoping requirements for such
spaces. However, one of the purposes of the ADA is to increase
employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities.
Therefore, the ADA generally requires construction to be
accomplished in such a way that it will not pose an obstacle to
employment of individuals with disabilities. In order to balance
traditional courtroom design with the need to avoid obstacles to
employment, the Department of Justice has recently issued
proposed design standards for courtrooms (enclosed). If adopted,
such standards would require judges' benches and clerks' stations
to be either fully accessible or adaptable, at the discretion of
the builder. An adaptable bench or station would be designed to
contain necessary maneuvering clearances and other spaces so full
accessibility can easily be achieved when an employee requires
it. For example, an adaptable judges' bench would not need a
ramp if it were designed so that a ramp or lift can be easily
installed at a later date.

Under the proposed rule, court reporters' stations,

bailiffs' stations, and counsel and litigants' stations must be
fully accessible. The Department believes that requiring full
accessibility of these areas will have minimal conflict with
traditional courtroom design. In addition, full accessibility is
justified by the more fungible nature of these positions, i.e.,
more than one person may use these stations, which increases the
likelihood that an individual with a disability will need to use
the stations.

I hope this information will assist you in responding to

your constituent.

Sincerely,

Deval L. Patrick
Assistant Attorney General
Civil Rights Division

Enclosures