States district court having jurisdiction.

If the court determines that any person, firm, or

corporation whether public or private, has committed an action prohibited by this Act, the court may-

(1) enjoin the respondent from committing such action in

the future;

(2) order the respondent to alter any policies or procedures which caused or contributed to the prohibited action;

(3) require the respondent to reimburse the aggrieved person for all actual damages sustained by such person, either in an individual capacity or as a member of a class, including reimbursement for excess charges paid or inadequate service provided as a result of the prohibited action;

(4) require the respondent to pay punitive damages, in addition to the actual damages under paragraph (3), of this subsection, of not more than $25,000 for each individual plaintiff and not more than $800,000 in the case of a class action;

(5) allow the person aggrieved such reasonable attorney fees as part of the costs assessed against the respondent, as the court in its discretion deems proper;

(6) order such other equitable relief, including

temporary or preliminary relief pending final disposition of

the case, as the court may deem appropriate; and

(7) utilize the sanction of contempt to enforce its

orders under this section.

"(b) In determining the amount of punitive damages under subsection (a) (4), of this section, the court shall consider, among other relevant factors, the amount of actual damages awarded, the frequency and persistence of the respondent's failure to comply with requirements of this Act, the respondent's resources, the number of persons affected, and the extent to which the respondent's failure to comply was intentional. "(c) Suits for damages or other legal, equitable, or declaratory relief may be maintained in the appropriate United States district court without regard to the amount in controversy or to the diversity of citizenship of the parties. No such action shall be brought later than three years after the date of Occurrence of the violation.

"(d) Whenever the Attorney General has reasonable cause to believe that any person or group of persons is engaged in a pattern or practice of resistance to the full enjoyment of any of the rights granted by this Act, or that any group of persons has been denied any of the rights granted by this Act, and such denial raises an issue of general public importance, the Attorney General may bring a civil action in any United States district court having jurisdiction by filing with it a complaint setting forth the facts and requesting such relief, including an application for a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or other order against the person or persons responsible for such pattern or practice or denial of rights, as the Attorney General considers necessary to insure the full enjoyment of the rights granted by this Act.

"(e) It shall be a defense to a claim under this Act that-(1) the claimant, at the time he sought entry, access, or service, did not have his guide dog, other guidance

instrumentality or other equipment used to provide mobility in reasonable control; or

(2) that the claimant was disorderly, abusive, or

intoxicated

"DEFINITIONS

"Sec. 5. As used in this Act, the term-

(1) "blind person" means a person whose central visual acuity does not exceed 20/200 in the better eye, with corrective lenses, as measured by the Snellen test, or a central visual acuity greater than 20/200 but with a limitation in the field of vision such that the widest diameter of the visual field subtends an angle not greater than twenty degrees;

(2) "dog guide" means a dog which is fitted with a special harness or collar suitable as an aid to the mobility of a blind person, which has been specifically and adequately trained to serve blind persons, and which is in use by a blind person as an aid to his travel, movement, or safety.

(3) "other guidance instrumentality" means an animal or device specifically and adequately trained or designed for use by a blind or otherwise disabled person as an aid to personal travel, movement or safety.

(4) "otherwise disabled person" means any person who (i) has

a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more of such person's major life activities, (ii) has a record of

such impairment, or (iii) is regarded as having such an

impairment.

EFFECT ON OTHER LAWS

"Sec. 6. Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to-

(1) modify any provision in any law or Executive order prohibiting discrimination on the basis of handicap; or of any rule, regulation, order, or agreement under such law or Executive order; or

(2) exempt or relieve any person from any liability, duty, penalty, or punishment under any present or future law of any State or political subdivision thereof, other than any such law which purports to require or permit the doing of any act which would be prohibited by this Act.

Mr. FLORIO. We are pleased to have as our last panel, Mr. Bruce Beckham, president, National Tour Association, and president, Beckham Tours; and Ms. Diamond of the Valley Oaks Travel Agency, Sherman Oaks, Calif.

Mr. Beckham, welcome to the committee. We are particularly appreciative of your role in calling to the attention of this committee the need to investigate this problem area, and in large measure it is because of yourself and others that these hearings are being conducted. We appreciate that very much. We would ask for the record you introduce your colleague. Please feel free to proceed.

STATEMENTS OF R. BRUCE BECKHAM, PAST PRESIDENT, ACCOMPANIED BY W. JAMES HOST, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL TOUR ASSOCIATION; AND JOAN DIAMOND, TRAVEL CONSULTANT, VALLEY OAKS TRAVEL AGENCY

Mr. BECKHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

To my left is the executive vice president of the National Tour Association, W. James Host. Once again, my name is Bruce Beckham. I am the immediate past president of the National Tour Association, which is the domestic tour industry association in North America. NTA represents over 400 tour operators who package and sell group travel, as well as over 1,900 tour suppliers such as hotels, motels, airlines, restaurants, attractions, bus companies, sightseeing services, and other businesses.

It is with great pride that we address your subcommittee today to share some of our members' experiences in the area of travel for the handicapped, to explore the current travel environment in which handicapped travelers operate, and to suggest some areas of Federal involvement and industry/Government cooperation in advancing our Nation's response to the disabled traveler.

This hearing is of historic importance. For the first time ever, a congressional panel is examining the specific aspect of travel for

the handicapped. The handicapped are spending their travel dollars today on both long and short trips, at destinations near and far. They want and need to be able to travel by airplane, bus, rail, cruise vessel, and car, and they need restaurants, attractions, and related services wherever they travel.

The handicapped segment of society is made up of all age groups and draws from all socioeconomic backgrounds. This widening of age, social, and economic factors translates to travel needs expanding the entire spectrum of travel services.

To share with the subcommittee some of the experiences of different NTA members, let me cite several examples of NTA involvement in tours accommodating the handicapped. Cottonland Tours of Memphis, Tenn., conducts tours for visitors to Memphis. This tour operation has adapted programs for wheelchair bound, hearing impaired, and visually impaired clients. There are many more examples included in my written testimony. However, I will not take the time today.

The Federal Government has been involved in many aspects of assisting the handicapped. This includes programs in education, employment, architectural barrier removal, and accessibility. We have not come before your subcommittee today to argue for a new Federal program for travel for the handicapped. We seek no new funding programs, nor the inevitable Federal regulations, reporting requirements, and paperwork that necessarily accompany Federal appropriations.

It is NTA's philosophy that a cooperative effort between the Federal Government and the private sector can address many of the problems our society and our Nation face. In order to foster more travel community/Federal Government cooperation in the area of travel for the handicapped, NTA would like to advance several recommendations for possible Federal involvement in the domain of existing funding programs for the handicapped.

The first recommendation that NTA would like to make is an identification of the handicapped and the problems they encounter while traveling. In order to solve or minimize these problems, the travel and tourism community needs information and statistics on the handicapped. I believe that has already been mentioned several times today.

Second, there is a lack of accurate, up-to-date information on travel services and facilities for the handicapped and a lack of a central information dissemination point. That, too, has been mentioned several times today.

A third problem lies in the existence of attitude, rather than architectural barriers. Travel and tourism service providers and other tourists do not always understand the needs of the handicapped traveler or the fact that, aside from his disability, the handicapped person is traveling for exactly the same reason as other travelers. The solution response lies in education programs, education materials, and repeated contact with the disabled.

A fourth area of response lies in the need to know what organizations, public and private, and what services are already in place to assist the handicapped. The travel and tourism industry is by its