From: Jenine Stanley <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: GDUI Hawaii Document: Settlement Explanation

The following document is a result of many questions regarding the
preliminary settlement of the Hawaii quarantine exemption case. Please
feel free to distribute it to anyone interested. Copies of this document
will be available from GDUI in large print, braille, audio tape, diskette
and electronic mail. Thanks to all of you for your support.


GDUI WINS PRELIMINARY SETTLEMENT VICTORY IN HAWAII!

This document is produced by Guide Dog Users Inc. (GDUI) to explain
preliminary settlement terms which will allow blind people
traveling with guide dogs to enter and exit the state of Hawaii
under specific conditions. This settlement is the result of a 1993
court case challenging Hawaii's quarantine for carnivorous animals.

 INTRODUCTION:

 The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guarantees the right of
a guide dog handler to be accompanied by his/her dog in all places
of public accommodation. Given this supporting legislation, many
people think that access to Hawaii should be as simple as access
from one state to another. There are, however a few circumstances
where the ADA must be balanced against other important public
interests. One of these circumstances is when the presence of the
dog constitutes a disruption to services, programs or activities of
the public entity or a potential threat to public health and
safety.

 It is this disruption or threat that is the key to the following
case and subsequent settlement terms. The goal of the case has
always been to balance the need of the state of Hawaii for
maintaining its quarantine and protection program against rabies,
with the need of blind people who travel with the aid of guide dogs
to use their mobility tool of choice.

 Hawaii is the only state in the Union which is rabies-free and
which has a quarantine for dogs. The state feels that exempting the
quarantine to allow guide dogs and other service animals to
accompany their disabled handlers would substantially impact its
rabies control measures. To assure the state of Hawaii that guide
dogs pose no significant threat to the maintenance of its
rabies-free status, we have agreed to the following settlement
terms. The real strength of the ADA in this case is that it allows
for such mutually beneficial compromises. We appreciate the support
and cooperation of all guide dog handlers, training providers and
friends as we embark on new ground in access law and practice.

HISTORY OF THE CASE:

      On March 2, 1993, Vernon Crowder and Linda Cote, on behalf of
themselves and other individuals with visual disabilities
(collectively "Class Plaintiffs"), filed a Class Action Complaint
in the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii
alleging that the State of Hawaii's use of a 120-day quarantine for
guide dogs as a rabies control measure violated the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. ^U^U 12101 et seq.  The Class
Plaintiffs alleged<, and the State denies,> that because Hawaii's
quarantine policies effectively denied visually impaired users of
guide dogs meaningful access to Hawaii, those policies violated the
ADA and should have been reasonably modified by implementing a
vaccine-based system.

      The United States District Court for the District of Hawaii
granted summary judgment in favor of Hawaii, holding that "the
quarantine requirement is a public health measure, and not a
'service' or benefit furnished by the state to eligible
participants."  (Crowder v. Kitagawa, 842 F. Supp. 1257, 1267 (D.
Hawaii 1994).  The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit reversed the grant of summary judgment.  (Crowder v.
Kitagawa, 81 F. 3d 1480 (9th Cir. 1996).  First, the court held
that Hawaii's quarantine requirement is a "policy, practice or
procedure" within the meaning of the ADA.  The court also held that
the quarantine policy, by denying visually impaired users of guide
dogs access to those dogs, denied these individuals the use of a
variety of public services, from public transportation to parks,
government buildings, tourist attractions and other public
facilities.

 The United States Department of Justice participated as amicus
curiae (friend of the court) before the Ninth Circuit, and
following remand the United States moved to intervene as a party.
On August 7, 1996, the United States District Court for the
District of Hawaii granted the United States' motion; the United
States subsequently filed a Complaint in Intervention, alleging
that Hawaii's refusal to modify reasonably its quarantine policies
violated Title II of the ADA.

     In May 1997, Hawaii adopted a new rabies control system
utilizing essential elements of Class Plaintiffs' proposed
alternatives.  The new quarantine terms still prohibited blind
people from working with their guide dogs as the quarantine period
was shortened from 120 to 30 days, but still denied blind people
the use of their guide dogs. Aspects of the class plaintiffs'
"reasonable accommodations to quarantine" were, however,
incorporated into this new 30 day quarantine policy.

 In a decision dated September 3, 1997, the United States District
Court for the District of Hawaii found that the May 1997 Rule "is
no different from the 120 day quarantine in the manner in which it
denies the visually-impaired the benefits of services, programs and
activities of the public entities of Hawaii."

 HOW DID THE ADA WORK FOR US?

 The concept of allowing guide dogs access with their blind
handlers was overruled by the public safety concerns in maintaining
the Hawaiian quarantine system. The portion of the ADA used to
assert the class plaintiffs' right to travel to Hawaii involved
"reasonable accommodation." The state of Hawaii felt that a
reasonable accommodation to quarantine was to provide an apartment
on the quarantine grounds for the guide dog handler and limited
opportunities to work the dog while visiting the islands, under
close supervision. The class plaintiffs refused this as a
reasonable accommodation and presented instead a program of
vaccinations, titer tests and microchip identification which would
allow the dog to work in real-time situations with the handler. It
was this point of "reasonable accommodation" which was upheld by
the decision of the 9th circuit district court of appeals in 1996.

 The ADA is a many faceted act with sometimes broad
interpretations. GDUI and participating co-plaintiffs have laid
significant ground work by looking beyond the obvious portion of
the law and finding ways that it could be used in our favor.

Settlement terms in this case apply only to residents of the United
States because the lawsuit was filed on behalf of America
residents. Although specific guide dog training providers are named
from the United States, Australia and New Zealand, the rules
provide  mechanism for validating additional guide dog training
programs. Guide dog handlers in other countries, or those who have
received their dogs from training providers not listed, or who have
self trained their dogs may thus apply for admission under the
rules. Consideration is being given by GDUI of this population,
however. For those from other countries, questions about the
applicability of the ADA and rabies prevention and
 education programs must be addressed.

 THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT:

 GDUI agreed to enter into this preliminary settlement agreement
for several reasons. We felt, on the advice of the class counsel of
Michael Lilly, that this was the most efficient means of beginning
access to Hawaii for blind people, especially in light of the risk
of an unfavorable outcome in the litigation. We also felt that, due
to the state's considerable ability to prolong any hope of
settlement through the court system by trial, a settlement under
these terms would be the most efficient and effective use of GDUI's
resources. Guide Dog Users Inc. has a strong commitment to this
case and its subsequent outcome.

 The settlement agreement will remain active under the terms listed
below and in the section regarding time lines and reporting
responsibilities, for a period of five years. This means that no
member who does not "opt out" of the class may take similar legal
action against Hawaii during that time period. Since the rules will
be signed into Hawaiian law, a foundation will be set during this
five year period from which we can build. Access will not end after
five years. With vigilance and persistence, access can only grow.

 The following terms for travel to Hawaii may seem restrictive,
however, we ask that you understand that both parties gave up
significant stands to come to this agreement. The rules are also
very similar to those adopted in New Zealand and Australia which
have already been used by American guide dog handlers. The state of
Hawaii has never before considered any exemption from its
quarantine policies. These exemptions for guide dogs are thus a
huge step for all involved.   Below is an outline of the settlement
terms, based on information that appeared in the Winter, 1997 issue
of PAWTRACKS. Brief explanations are included. More detailed
information is planned upon the release and approval of the final
rules.   Those desiring more detailed information may contact our
class counsel:

Michael A. Lilly
P.O. Box 3439,
Honolulu, HI 96801,
Phone:  (808) 528-1100
fax (808) 531-2415
Electronic mail:  [log in to unmask]

 1.  The guide dog team must have graduated from a guide dog school
registered through the Hawaiian Department of Agriculture. The
following schools are currently included in this registry. Rules
are being adopted which will allow additional guide dog training
programs to be approved.

       Royal Guide Dogs of Australia
      Royal Guide Dog Foundation of New Zealand
      Eye Dog Foundation
      Guide Dogs of America
      Guide Dogs for the Blind
      Guide Dogs of the Desert
      Guide Dog Foundation
      Guiding Eyes for the Blind
      Fidelco Guide Dog Foundation
      Freedom Guide Dogs
      Kansas Specialty Dog Service
      Leader Dogs for the Blind
      Pilot Dogs
 Southeastern Guide Dogs
      The Seeing Eye

 NOTE:  This system of registration of schools and teams is part of
a compromise aimed at assuring that dogs are given appropriate
veterinary care during their puppyhood and training, and that blind
people are educated, during the training process, on the
appropriate vaccinations necessary to maintain good health and
assure protection from rabies.  The class plaintiffs engaged
several experts in veterinary medicine and guide dog schools who
testified in their depositions on the importance of a solid
training foundation in ensuring protection against rabies.

 2.  The guide dog must be currently vaccinated for rabies.

 3.  Prior to arrival in Hawaii, the guide dog must have had two
(2) OIE FAVN titer tests of at least 0.5 international units. The
OIE FAVN titer test is the only rabies antibody test accepted by
the Hawaiian Department of Agriculture. The first test may be taken
any time after the dog is twelve months of age. The second test
must be taken no more than two years and no less than thirty days
prior to travel. Tests must have been taken no less than thirty
days apart.

 IMPORTANT NOTE:  The OIE FAVN tests may only be conducted by the
laboratories at Kansas State University and Fort Sam Houston.
Information on how to reach these programs will be available in a
pamphlet produced by GDUI for your veterinarian upon approval of
the final rules.

 4.  The guide dog must have an implanted microchip, readable by an
AVID scanner. The AVID scanner will read the following chips:

    All AVID Microchips (Encrypted and Unencrypted)
     BMDS/DESTRON-Fearing
     Infopet #1
     Anicare Life Chip
     Anitech
     IDI/Destron 400 kHz
     IDI/Destron 125 kHz
     Biosonic
     Schering-Plough "Home Again"

NOTE: we recommend that you choose the AVID microchip to avoid
potential errors in reading the chip on arrival in Hawaii.

5.  A health certificate, issued no more than fourteen (14) days
prior to arrival, including the following information:

   Description of the guide dog
     Notice of treatment for internal and external parasites
within fourteen days of arrival.
     certification of freedom from disease.
     Notice of current rabies vaccine and heartworm test.

6.  Upon arrival, the guide dog must have blood drawn for a third
OIE FAVN titer test and must have a physical exam done at the
Honolulu International Airport at the state's expense. If the guide
dog handler wishes the exam to be conducted by a private
veterinarian rather than the state supplied veterinarian, such exam
will be done at cost to the handler.

NOTE:  The guide dog handler must give the State of Hawaii at least
24-hours advance notice of arrival in the State.

7.  If the dog remains in Hawaii after thirty days it must have
another physical examination.

8.  An unlimited number of guide dog teams may stay in approved
Hawaii hotels. An "approved hotel" is one that has proven it can
offer a secure environment, free from other carnivores in the guest
areas. Approved hotels include:

     All four and five star hotels in the State of Hawaii
     Hilton hotels
     Hyatt hotels
     Outrigger hotels
     Four Seasons hotels
     Mauna Kea hotels
     Maunalani Hotel
     Prince Hotel
     Holiday Inn hotels
     Sheraton hotels
     Westin hotels
     Aston hotels and resorts

NOTE:  Some condos and time share resorts are owned by the above
companies. These types of residences would be considered approved
hotels.  Additionally, the rules allow the addition of other hotels
after request by a guide dog user and an adequate opportunity for
the State to visit and approve the hotel.

9.  The number of dogs allowed at pre-approved, private residences,
including "bed and breakfast" establishments, are not currently
limited by the proposed rules.

NOTE:  If you will be staying in a private residence, it must be
approved by the Hawaiian Department of Agriculture and no other
carnivores, accept for guide, service or hearing dogs, may reside
in the residence during your stay.


10.  While in Hawaii, including any of its islands, the guide dog
team is allowed to travel freely as long as contact with other
animals is avoided as best can be done. Contact with other guide
dogs is allowed.

NOTE:  Specifics regarding this rule are being worked out. We
understand that it is often impossible to avoid encountering other
animals.

The actual rules are very detailed and will be made available
through GDUI in the near future.

After the rules are adopted by the State, a hearing will be held
before the United States District Court to finally approve the
settlement and the rules. Before the hearing, notice will be given
to all class members through the media and various publications of
their right to "opt in" or "opt out" of the class.  If you "opt
out" of the class, you will not be bound by or receive the benefits
of the settlement and you will be free to file your own lawsuit.
You may "opt in" -- that is, accept the benefits of and be bound by
the settlement -- by either accepting the settlement in writing or
doing nothing.

CHECKS AND BALANCES:

The proposed rules include many checks and balances for both guide
dog handlers and the State of Hawaii. The state must keep records
and make them available regarding the number of guide dogs admitted
to the state and any problems encountered. The Department of
Justice, Office of Civil Rights will receive reports from the state
every six months detailing any complaints, comments, rejections of
guide dog teams, etc., for a period of five (5) years.


In addition, GDUI plans to retain the counsel of Michael Lilly of
Ning, Lilly and Jones, for at least eighteen months after the rules
have been signed into law, to assure the smooth implementation of
the settlement. Mr. Lilly has extended his assistance to anyone
coming to Hawaii under this new agreement.

WHAT WILL I NEED TO GO TO HAWAII?

Let's give an example of a typical trip to Hawaii to show the
process.

John Smith and his wife, both guide dog handlers, wish to go to
Hawaii. After obtaining the "vet information brochure from GDUI,
they will first contact their vet to set up a blood test and
paperwork to be sent to the approved laboratory at Kansas State
University. Cost for this test may vary widely.

If they do not have microchip identification for their dogs, they
will also obtain microchips, easily implanted by any vet. Cost of
most types of microchips, including AVID and "Home Again" chips is
waved, as is chip registration, for people with service animals.

Next, the Smiths will plan their itinerary. Once this is secure,
they will send a copy, including all addresses at which they plan
to reside, flight information and any private residences they plan
to visit, to the Hawaiian Department of Agriculture.   No less than
thirty days before arrival, they will have their dogs' blood drawn
again and sent to the lab for another titer test. To expedite
paperwork, it is suggested to do this second test no less than
thirty days after the first test.

No more than fourteen days before their arrival, the Smiths will
get health certificates from their vet. At this time, they will
have a heartworm test performed. The dogs will also be treated for
external parasites by having a flea bath, dip or other specified
application and for internal parasites with deworming medication.


At  least 24 hours prior to arrival, the Smiths must call the State
of Hawaii Department of Agriculture and provide their airline,
flight number and time of arrival and intended place(s) of stay.

Assuming that all their paperwork regarding flight times, etc. has
been submitted and received in Hawaii, the Smiths will fly to
Honolulu. At the airport, they will meet the Department of
Agriculture certified vet for a physical exam and blood draw at the
state's expense. Once this exam is finished, the Smiths are free to
go to their hotel and will not be further restricted in travel
unless the test comes back as unacceptable, which should be highly
unlikely.

If the vet is late or cannot come, as in the case of a late night
arrival, the Smiths will be released to their hotel and the vet
will arrive for the checkup within twenty-four hours.

CAN HAWAIIANS LEAVE THEIR STATE NOW?

Yes, once the rules are adopted, which is expected this spring!
The settlement does provide terms for Hawaiian residents and their
guide dogs to come to the mainland United States and return free of
quarantine restrictions. They must show the same titer testing
program and will be tested upon their arrival back in the state.
This freedom of travel for blind Hawaiians is a landmark in guide
dog access!

CAN I STOP IN HAWAII ON  MY WAY TO ANOTHER DESTINATION?

Currently, rules are being worked out for people to "lay over" with
their guide dogs and/or come to Hawaii from another rabies free
zone to return to the mainland United States. Details on these
situations will be available soon.

We appreciate your support during this long battle for access.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to
contact GDUI at:

Guide Dog Users Inc.
14311 Astrodome Drive
Silver Spring Maryland 20906
1-301-598-2131
1-888-858-1008
[log in to unmask]


Jenine Stanley
[log in to unmask]
"May the forces of evil get confused on their way to your house."
 JMS-CAT
Consultants on Access to Transportation
President, Guide Dog Users Inc. (GDUI)
http://www.infinet.com/~jeninems



        Paul L. Mimms, MSW
President - Heartland Guide Dog Users
Secretary - Missouri SRAC
Crawford, MVP

[log in to unmask]

If you can't manage a smile today, I'll give you one of mine!