T. 2/18/93 SBO:WRW:rjc XX FEB 26 1993 (b)(6) Dear Mr.

XX This is in response to your letter to the Department of Justice concerning accessibility of hotels under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). We apologize for the delay in responding. The ADA authorizes the Department to provide technical assistance to entities that are subject to the Act. This letter provides informal guidance to assist you in understanding how the ADA may apply. However, this technical assistance does not constitute a determination by the Department of Justice of your rights or responsibilities under the ADA and does not constitute a binding determination by the Department of Justice. Your letter describes a situation in which the only accessible rooms of a hotel are located in the more expensive new wing. You asked whether this violates the ADA because a disabled individual is not given the same choice of rates as is given to able-bodied individuals. Title III of the ADA requires places of public accommodation such as hotels to remove barriers that are "readily achievable". Readily achievable means easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense. A hotel would not have to make every room accessible under the readily achievable standard. The duty to make readily achievable changes never extends to more rooms than the number of rooms that would be required to made accessible under the new construction standards contained in the ADA Accessibility Guidelines ("Guidelines"). Under the Guidelines, the number of accessible rooms that are required depends on the number of rooms in the hotel. See section 9.1.2 of the Guidelines, which is an appendix to the enclosed Department of Justice title III regulation.

Records, CRS, Worthen, Friedlander, Breen, FOIA :UDD:Worthen:Letters.Gen.HotelADA

01-01919 -2Section 9.1.4(1) is particularly important in determining what the Guidelines require in new construction of hotels. That section requires that accessible hotel rooms be dispersed among the various types of available accommodations. Cost is specifically identified as one of the factors. Section 9.1.4(2) provides, however, that it will be deemed equivalent facilitation if all of the accessible rooms are multiple occupancy rooms, provided that such rooms are available at the cost of a singleoccupancy room to an individual with disabilities who requests a single-occupancy room. Based on the above, the hotel should make an adequate number of accessible rooms available at both the lower and higher prices, if it is readily achievable to do so. If it is not readily achievable to remove barriers in the lower priced rooms, then the hotel must permit a disabled patron to stay in the higher priced room at the less expensive rate, if the patron has requested the less expensive room. Such a system would constitute an alternative to barrier removal and would be required by 28 C.F.R. 336.305, if readily achievable. I hope this information is helpful to you. Sincerely, Stewart B. Oneglia Chief Coordination and Review Section Civil Rights Division Enclosure

01-01920 (b)(6) January 8, 1992

U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Coordination & Review Section P.O. Box 66118 Washington, D.C. 20035-6118 ATTN: Stewart B. Oneglia Dear Mr. Oneglia: I have a question for you on the ADA! A hotel in Las Vegas will advertise their room rates as follows: A room in the new section is $55. for Friday/Saturday night. That same room in the new section Sunday/Thursday is $45. per night. A room in the old section Friday/Saturday is $35. per night. That same room in the old section Sunday/Thursday is $20. per night.

The problem is: only the new section has the handicap wheelchair accessible room. The Las Vegas bound person thats a wheelchair user and must have a wheelchair accessible room doesn't have the choice as the ablebodied person has. Is this a violation of the ADA? Seems like it is to me. Section 36.202(b) states: "prohibits services or accommodations that are not equal to those provided others." The wheelchair user has no choice. Pay the higher rate or don't stay at that hotel. The ablebodied person has the choice, the high rate or the low rate. It seems this is a case of 100% discrimination. Your comments on this issue would greatly be appreciated. Sincerely yours (b)(6)