there will be no interruption or decrease in service to handicapped individuals.

The attitudes and skills of providers' personnel are one of the most significant factors in determining whether service for handicapped persons will be good or inadequate. The recipient must ensure that all personnel who may deal with handicapped individuals (whether as drivers or as administrative personnel) know, as necessary, how to operate lifts and other equipment properly, know how to recognize and deal with the different kinds of disabling conditions that the users may have, and deal with handicapped individuals respectfully and courteously. It is the responsibility of the recipient to make sure that this training does take place, and that handicapped users of the service are not treated poorly as the result of inadequate training.

In order to use a transportation system, any individual needs adequate information concerning that service. This is particularly true of handicapped individuals. This provision requires recipients operating scheduled accessible bus systems to provide information on schedules and in other sources of information concerning which bus runs are accessible. It is clear that, unless a potential user knows which bus on which route will be accessible, the user will be unable to take advantage of the service. A recipient need do nothing elaborate to comply with this requirement. For example, an asterisk or other symbol next to accessible bus runs on printed schedules would be adequate in most cases. If the recipient has a telephone information service for the public concerning routes and schedules, that service should provide the same information, and do so in a way useful to hearing-impaired persons (e.g., via a telecommunications

device for deaf persons).

In addition to making sure that information and communications links are established, the recipient must also make sure that the communications links have sufficient capacity to accommodate the demand for their use. A paratransit system requiring phone-in reservations that has only one telephone, which is chronically busy, probably cannot provide the kind of service that the recipient's program calls for.

Paragraph (c) of this section is intended to make explicit that the regulation does not permit recipients to engage in disparate treatment, to the disadvantage of handicapped persons, with respect to transportation on the recipient's regular mass transit system. Even though the recipient may also provide special services for handicapped individuals, if a handicapped person is capable of using the recipient's regular service for the general public, then the transit operator cannot deny the service to the handicapped person on the ground of handicap. This means, for example, that a recipient must

permit a person using means of assistance such as dog guides or crutches to use its vehicles and services for the general public, if the person can do so. This requirement and the nondiscrimination requirement of subpart A would also bar actions by recipients that impose unreasonably different or separate treatment for handicapped persons (e.g., an unjustified requirement that a handicapped person, who is able to travel independently, travel with an attendant).

Because this regulation permits a phase-in period between the approval by UMTA of the recipient's program and the achievement by the recipient of the full performance level, paragraph (d) is intended to ensure that there will not be a gap in the provision of any service to handicapped persons by the recipient. In reviewing and approving programs, UMTA will, of course, seek to ensure that the recipient's service to meet the requirements of this subpart is phased in at a reasonable pace so as to provide for a steady increase in the amount and quality of service provided up to the full performance level. If the recipient is phasing out its former type of service, and phasing in a new type of service, the exact point at which the new service has been phased in, such that the old service can be phased out, will be left to the recipient's judgment, subject to UMTA oversight.

Section 27.89 Monitoring.

Under section 9 of the UMT Act (49 U.S.C. 1607a (g)(2)), UMTA is required, every three years, to review and evaluate the entire spectrum of each recipient's federally-assisted mass transit activities. These triennial reviews will be held on a schedule to be determined by the UMTA Administrator; in all likelihood, they will be held in a staggered basis, so that approximately a third of all recipients are reviewed each year.

Paragraph (a) of this section declares that the review and evaluation of recipients' activities under this regulation will be conducted at the same time as the section 9 review and evaluation. The review and evaluation of transportation services for handicapped persons will be performed by, or at the direction of, UMTA personnel. UMTA may issue further guidance to recipients concerning the recipient's responsibilities in this process. This guidance may include, either on a general or a recipient-specific basis, requests for information necessary to assist the UMTA personnel in the review.

Some recipients will receive their first review and evaluation of performance under this regulation in the second year that their program has been in effect. Others will not receive their review and evaluation until sometime during the third or fourth year after their program has been reviewed and approved. Each recipient will, however, re

ceive subsequent reviews and evaluations every three years after their first review

occurs.

Paragraph (b) of this section concerns what is likely to be a very small group of recipients: recipients who are required to submit a program under § 27.81 of this regulation but who, for some reason, do not receive section 9 funds or otherwise are not required to go through a section 9 review and evaluation every three years. Some small recipients, for example, could fall into this category. For recipients in this category, UMTA will conduct a triennial review and evaluation of performance under this regulation just as if such a review were in conjunction with the section 9 review process.

Paragraph (c) of this section concerns what might be called a "slippage report." In its program, each recipient is required to establish a schedule for phasing in its service for handicapped persons until it reaches the full performance level. If recipients fall behind this schedule, paragraph (c) requires them to submit a report to UMTA no later than the program approval anniversary date of any year in which such slippage occurs. The report must detail the kind and degree of slippage that occurred, explain the reason for the problem, and set forth the corrective action that the recipient has taken or is taking to correct the problem and bring its entire program back on schedule. This same reporting requirement applies in any year, after achievement of the full performance level, in which the recipient's service, for any reason, falls below the full performance level.

This reporting requirement is a condition of compliance with the regulation. Failure to make the required report to UMTA is, in itself, a ground for a recipient being found in noncompliance with its obligations under the rule and being subject to sanctions under subpart F.

Section 27.91 Requirements for small
recipients.

This section sets forth a separate set of requirements that apply to section 18 recipients and other recipients (regardless of what UMTA funds they receive) which provide service to the general public only in non-urbanized areas (i.e., areas of 50,000 population or less). As with the requirements for recipients in urbanized areas, these requirements apply only to recipients that provide service to the general public. This section does not apply to section 16(b)(2) recipients or other recipients providing service only to elderly and/or handicapped persons. Recipients covered by this section are not required to follow the requirements of the rest of this subpart, except for § 27.87, "Provision of Service."

For purposes of this section, the term "recipient" should be understood to refer to

the local government agencies and other organizations actually providing transportation service in nonurbanized areas. We are aware that, in the section 18 program, a state agency is the initial recipient of UMTA funds, which the state then passes through to subrecipient service providers. However, the requirements of this section are not intended to apply to the state agencies involved.

Paragraph (b) requires all recipients covered by this section to certify, within a year of the effective date of this subpart, that they are in compliance with this rule. If a certification of the kind required by this subsection has already been provided by the recipient under the July 1981 interim final rule, and is still in effect, a new certification need not be provided. This should be the case for present section 18 recipients. Otherwise, the certification must be provided within 12 months of the effective date of the subpart.

The effect of this requirement is that recipients have service in place within the 12month period following the effective date of this subpart. Given the relatively small scale of operations by recipients in this category, the 12-month period should be sufficient. This constitutes the "reasonable time" mentioned in the regulation. A similar amount of time would be permitted future new recipients.

The substance of the transportation service that recipients are required to provide in order to be able to make this certification is similar to that required for section 18 recipients under the July 1981 interim final rule. Special efforts must be made to provide transportation that those handicapped persons unable to use the recipient's service for the general public can use. It should be noted that these efforts do not have to be made by the recipient itself; the certification goes to the presence of the "special efforts" service in the service area, not to whom is providing it.

The service provided by recipients must be "reasonable in comparison to the service provided to the general public." This statement embodies a minimum service criterion for the recipient's service to handicapped persons. It requires that the characteristics of service made available to handicapped persons be reasonably comparable to the characteristics of service for the general public. UMTA's monitoring of recipients' service will focus, on a case-by-case basis, on recipients' compliance with this criterion.

The second minimum service criterion requires that the service must meet a "significant fraction of the actual transportation needs" of handicapped persons. While the criterion stops short of requiring that all transportation needs of handicapped persons or all demand for service must be met,

it does require that substantially more than a token effort be made to meet that demand. Rural and small urban systems are seldom designed to meet all transportation needs of the people of the service area. In monitoring recipients' service, however, UMTA will review whether the service proportionately meets the needs of handicapped as well as non-handicapped members of the community.

Paragraph (c) follows the statutory language of section 317(c) by directing recipients to ensure that handicapped persons and groups representing them have adequate notice of and the opportunity to comment on the present and proposed activities of recipients for achieving compliance with the requirements of this regulation. This notice and comment process may take place at any time within the first nine months after the effective date of this subpart, but must precede the submission of any of the required certifications or reports.

This requirement applies to all recipients covered by this section, including present section 18 recipients who already have made the appropriate certificate of compliance. In the case of a present section 18 recipient or other provider of existing service, the purpose of the notice and comment period would be to identify problems in and suggest improvements to the existing service.

The same pubi.c participation requirement also applies whenever the recipient proposes significant changes in its service. The participation must occur before the change is finally decided upon and implemented.

Paragraph (d) requires each section 18 recipient to provide a one-time status report on its service. This requirement applies to all recipients covered by this section, including present section 18 recipients who have already made the certification of compliance. The report is intended to be a short summary of information concerning the four listed items.

In order to permit UMTA to continue monitoring the recipient's activities, each recipient is required, under paragraph (e), to provide a similar update report at threeyear intervals. UMTA will establish a schedule for the transmission of these reports: some recipients will provide their first such report after the second year this subpart has been in effect; others will not have to do so until after the third or fourth year. Reports under this section normally go to the designated state transportation agency (paragraph (f)). UMTA will review their reports in conjunction with its normal oversight of the section 18 program.

Section 27.93 Multi-recipient areas. Paragraph (a) provides that this section applies to recipients in any multi-recipient area. A multi-recipient area is an urbanized

area that includes two or more recipients required to prepare a program under § 27.81. The purpose of the section is to provide recipients in such an area the opportunity to combine their resources to provide service for handicapped persons on a regional basis. This section is not mandatory. Recipients are not required to join a compact and provide service in conjunction with other recipients in their area, and recipients are free to comply with regulatory requirements on an individual basis.

In most cases, all recipients in the urbanized area required to prepare a program would have to be members of the compact in order for the compact to be workable. There could be cases in which a compact with less-than-unanimous membership could be viable, however; recipients should work with their UMTA regional office to ensure that any compact which is formed would be capable of providing service meeting the requirements of this rule. Recipients outside the urbanized area, or recipients who do not have to prepare a program, may also be members of a compact.

The compact must establish a cooperative mechanism among all its signatories to ensure the provision of combined and/or coordinated service meeting all regulatory requirements. Such a mechanism could take many forms, and this section does not attempt to prescribe the institutional form the arrangement would take.

In any multi-recipient or multi-jurisdictional agreement, a key question concerns where the money is coming from. The compact must answer this question. It must provide for how the costs of service for handicapped persons in the area would be apportioned among the members of the compact, ensure the provision of adequate funding, and include reasonable decision and disputeresolution mechanisms concerning funding and service matters. The compact must be a formal, binding, written document, signed by each participating recipient. An informal understanding among recipients in an area is not sufficient for purposes of this section.

The recipients in an urbanized area have six months following the effective date of this subpart to form a compact and submit their agreement to UMTA. If the recipients fail to reach agreement and do not submit a compact within the six-month period, then each recipient must comply with regulatory requirements (including the 12-month deadline for program submittal) on its own. This means that recipients should not, while negotiating about forming a compact, neglect the early stages of planning service of their own.

If a compact meeting the standards of this section is submitted to UMTA in a timely fashion, then the members of the compact are treated by UMTA as if they were a

single recipient for all purposes under this subpart, including planning, public participation, service provision, calculation of the limit on required expenditures, monitoring, and compliance and enforcement. It is important for recipients to understand that one of the consequences of joining a compact is that the members of the compact may be treated by UMTA as collectively responsible for the failure of the compact to provide the service required by the regulation and called for by the compact's approved program.

After UMTA acknowledges the compact within 30 days of its receipt, the members of the compact would submit to UMTA a single combined program for approval under § 27.85. The program submitted on behalf of the compact's members would have to reach UMTA 12 months after the date the signed compact was acknowledged by UMTA, rather than 12 months after the effective date of this regulation. This provision is intended to permit adequate time for planning on an areawide basis.

If, subsequent to the six-month period, recipients that did not originally form a compact decided to do so, UMTA has the discretion to acknowledge it. However, in such a case, the compact members would have to submit, for UMTA's review and approval, a new, joint program for providing service to handicapped persons. This program would need to provide adequate information on how the transition from individual compliance to joint compliance with the rule would work. The individual programs that had been previously approved, and the service provided according to them, would remain in effect until the new combined program was approved.

By the same token, if an existing compact dissolves, the members would then have to submit individual programs to UMTA for approval. The same would hold true for a member that pulled out of a compact. If a recipient were to drop out of a compact, it would be required to continue to provide its services per the compact agreement until its own, new, independent program were approved and in operation.

Section 27.95 Full performance level.

(a) Timing. Under § 27.85, recipients have a year from the effective date of the new subpart E to submit their program to UMTA. UMTA has 120 days to review it. Assuming UMTA acts on the program within that time (approval, disapproval, or remand to the recipient to fix deficiencies), the phase-in period would begin to run no later than 16 months from the effective date of the rule.

During this period, recipients are obligated to phase in their service. This is not intended to be a period of delay and inaction; the recipient is obligated to implement serv

ice according to the milestones set forth in its program on time (see discussion of § 27.81).

The phase-in period may run for a maximum of six years. Many recipients (e.g., those who are starting a new system or switching to a different mode of providing service) might need all or nearly all of the six-year period. On the other hand, some recipients have systems that may come close to meeting the full performance level at the present time. It would be contrary to the intent of the rule, for example, to permit a recipient that had 90 percent of the buses it needed to meet the service criteria for an accessible bus system to take six years to acquire the other ten percent.

The rule provides that the recipient's plan and milestones must provide for attaining the full performance level as soon as reasonably feasible. UMTA, in reviewing plans, will approve phase-in periods for each transit authority on a case-by-case basis, reflecting this policy as well as the realistic needs of each recipient for time to phase-in its service, up to the six-year maximum.

This paragraph notes that a recipient can comply by meeting the requirements of either paragraph (b), or (c), or (d). This language is intended to emphasize that the recipient may decide to operate either a special service system, an accessible bus system (of either type), or a mixed system. A recipient, for example, is not required to have both an accessible bus system and a special service system. The decision on which service option to implement is intended to be made by the local recipient.

The remainder of this section lists the service criteria applicable to special service, accessible bus, and mixed systems. The Department has established six service criteria that apply to all the modes of service to handicapped persons. These concern eligibility, hours and days of service, service area, fares, restrictions and priorities based on trip purpose, and response time. Paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) explain how these six basic criteria apply, specifically, to each mode of service. Though the criteria are essentially the same, the detail of their application to the various modes of service vary somewhat in order to make sense in view of the differing characteristics of the different types of transportation.

(b) Service criteria for special service systems. The following criteria apply no matter what type of special service the recipient provides (e.g., transit authority-operated paratransit, user-side subsidy).

(1) Eligibility. The eligibility criterion provides that the recipient must treat as eliglible any individual who, at the time he or she would receive service is, by reason of a disability, physically unable to use the recipient's bus service for the general public.

A recipient may, of course, voluntarily provide service to other persons as well, such as non-disabled elderly persons or mentally handicapped individuals. However, the cost of providing this service to additional users is not an eligible expense under § 27.99.

This provision is not intended to permit recipients to turn away from their special service systems users who would be unable to use an accessible bus system for reasons unrelated to the system's accessibility. For example, physical or terrain barriers, bad weather, or distance may prevent some handicapped persons from getting to a bus stop. These persons are still required to be treated as eligible for special service, because they could board and use fully accessible buses if they were able to get to a bus stop.

The Department recognizes that persons with cognitive disabilities also have a need for transportation. Many such persons, would be able to use the regular system with appropriate training, and the Department encourages the development and implementation of such training programs to increase the transportation opportunities for mentally handicapped persons. It is also necessary that training be provided for the drivers so that they will better understand, be patient with, and appropriately respond to questions from mentally retarded per

sons.

The rule does not specify the means a recipient may use to determine physical inability to use the regular bus system, although reasonable "functional criteria” may be used. The means the recipient would use to determine physical inability to use the regular bus system would be incorporated in the program submitted for UMTA approval.

The Department does not intend to require recipients to use age, by itself, as a basis for determining that an individual is physically unable to use the regular bus system. No one need be presumed to be physically unable to use the regular bus system just because he or she has reached a certain birthday. Many elerly persons may suffer mobility impairments or other handicaps that physically prevent them from using the regular bus system, but it is these disabilities, not age itself, that determines eligibility.

The key is whether or not a particular elderly person can physically use the service for the general public. Some 80 year old individuals may be able to physically use the service for the general public, and some 65 year old individuals may be unable to do so. If, because of age, an individual is physically unable to use the regular service-even if that individual does not have a specific medical condition-that individual is eligible for the special service.

A similar analysis applies to young children. If, because the recipient has a reasonable, nondiscriminatory policy against permitting very young children to ride buses unaccompanied, or because such children cannot read destination signs, such individuals cannot use the bus system, these facts do not make them eligible to use the special service. This is because their youth, rather than a handicap, caused their inability to use the regular bus system (which is not, in any event, a physical inability).

It would not be consistent with this rule, however, for a recipient to deny a non-disabled child the opportunity to accompany a disabled parent or other adult on the special service system. This could be very important, for example, in allowing the parent to take the child to a medical appointment. The converse is also true. A non-disabled parent or other adult would have to be given the opportunity to travel with a disabled child.

The rule does not prescribe any particular procedures that recipients must use to determine eligibility. Existing systems use such means as letters from a doctor, certifications by social service organizations, and eligibility determinations (e.g., concerning meeting functional criteria) by the transit provider itself. Whatever procedure is used, the recipient needs to ensure that the procedure is prompt, avoids unnecessary procedural obstacles, does not impose more than nominal costs on potential users, and is consistent with the dignity of handicapped persons applying for eligibility. The eligibility procedure should be spelled out in the recipient's program.

The Department intends that all users eligible under the Department's standard be permitted to use a recipient's special service, regardless of the user's place of residence. A visiting wheelchair user from City A is just as eligible, under the terms of this section and § 27.87, as a wheelchair user from City B to use the latter city's special service system. Recipients may need to waive or abbreviate the certification procedures they use for their regular local riders. The same point applies to persons with temporary, as opposed to permanent, disabilities.

(2) Response time. By response time, we mean the total period from the time the disabled person calls the special service provider to request service to the time the service is actually provided to the handicapped person (i.e., pickup). Recipients are obligated to provide, as well as schedule, service, within the required period. (see also § 27.87(b)(5), concerning timely provision of service).

We do not intend, however, to view recipients as being in noncompliance solely because of an occasional late pickup. Repeated, chronic failure to provide service within