Legal Issues and Emerging Technologies (2022)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

42 TCRP LRD 59 For technical guidance on making websites accessible, see the Access Board’s Section 508 Standards for Electronic and Infor- mation Technology, which apply to the federal government and address access to websites and other electronic information by people with physical, sensory, or cognitive disabilities.369 Ac- cessibility of mobile apps should follow Web Content Accessi- bility Guidelines (WCAG) 2 standards, including multimedia access.370 The WCAG 2.1 standards recommend, among other things, providing text alternatives for non-text content, captions and other alternatives for multimedia, and creating content that can be presented in different ways, including by assistive tech- nologies, without losing meaning. E. Accessibility Considerations for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Accessibility considerations will arise if a transit agency is installing electric vehicle (EV) charging stations for public use, since these pose challenges for persons with disabilities. Under Title II of the ADA, state and local governments have a “program access” obligation to not discriminate on the basis of a disability.371 When state and county entities provide EV charg- ing stations, they are offering a program, service or activity and, therefore, the program, service or activity is required under the ADA to be accessible to persons with disabilities. A transit agency installing plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) charging stations, also known as electric vehicle supply equip- ment (EVSE), will need to follow special design guidelines to accommodate people with disabilities. The ADA does not have a standard for installation of accessible EV charging stations, including the number required. The U.S. Access Board, an inde- pendent federal agency that promotes equality for people with disabilities, advises designing and building EV charging stations accessible to persons with disabilities.372 Several plans developed under the U.S. Department of Energy’s Clean Cities EV Com- munity Readiness projects describe best practices for installing ADA-compliant charging stations.373 F. Shared Mobility Services and the ADA Shared mobility—the shared use of a motor vehicles, bicycles, scooters, or other low-speed transportation modes on an as-needed, short-term basis—has the potential to help ad- dress some transportation equity challenges. The public sector is involved in many aspects of the operation of shared mobility services ranging from regulation of publicly owned rights-of- way, risk-sharing partnerships, service procurement, subsidies, 369 36 C.F.R. Part 1194. 370 Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1, Jun. 5, 2018, https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21//. 371 42 U.S.C. § 12132. 372 U.S. Access Board, Technical Guide: Parking Spaces (May 2016), https://www.access-board.gov/attachments/article/1798/ parking. pdf. 373 See U.S. Dep’t of Energy, Clean Cities Coalition Network, https://cleancities.energy.gov/partnerships/search?project_search= Electric+Vehicle+Community+Readiness. and funding. Equity requirements established under the ADA may apply to projects that do not receive federal funding, if they meet certain definitions, such as fixed route, general public de- mand responsive, and paratransit services.374 Ridesourcing services (also known as TNCs or ride- hailing) provide prearranged and on-demand transportation services for compensation; they connect drivers of personal vehicles with passengers. Smartphone mobile applications are used for booking, ratings (for both drivers and passen- gers), and electronic payment. There are a variety of vehicle types that can be offered by these services including: sedans, sports utility vehicles, vehicles with car seats, wheelchair accessible vehicles, and vehicles where the driver can assist passengers with disabilities. VII. TRANSPORTATION EQUITY: ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND TITLE VI OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT Transportation equity is ingrained in the transportation planning and funding process. Federal actions to address trans- portation equity started with the antidiscrimination provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000d) (Title VI).375 Subsequent environmental justice requirements are included in Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Ad- dress Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low- Income Populations” (Executive Order 12898), which focuses federal attention on the environmental and human health ef- fects of federal actions on minority and low-income populations with the goal of achieving environmental protection for all com- munities. Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency” (Executive Order 13166), requires federal agencies and recipients of federal funds to improve access to federally conducted and federally assisted programs and activities for persons who, as a result of national origin, have limited English proficiency (LEP). While environmental justice considerations have been man- datory for all federal agencies, including the U.S. DOT, since the issuance of Executive Order 12898 in 1994, the issue has recently received renewed attention as a result of nationwide protests for racial justice. New and innovating transportation technologies—such as EVs and autonomous vehicles—and services—such as MOD, contactless payment systems, and shared micromobility—have the potential to benefit cities. While the particular benefits de- pend on the technology, innovation can expand transportation options, improve safety and quality of service, lower the cost of providing traditional transit services, and reduce carbon emis- sions.376 According to the Sierra Club, “[b]ecause EVs have no 374 Fed. Transit Admin., Shared Mobility FAQs: Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (Dec. 7, 2016), available at https://www.transit. dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/shared-mobility-faqs-americans- disabilities-act-ada. 375 42 U.S.C. § 2000d. 376 Yujie Guoa, et. al, A Systematic Overview of Transporta- tion Equity on Terms of Accessibility, Traffic Emissions, and

TCRP LRD 59 43 tailpipe emissions, they are safer for communities tradition- ally burdened by air pollution. Low-income residents, children, the elderly, and people of color suffer disproportionately from health conditions such as asthma and heart disease.”377 However, low-income populations and minority populations may experience the benefits of innovative technology diff erently compared to other populations. Because of the potential for positive and negative outcomes, transit agencies must consider the effect of new and emerging technologies on low-income populations or minority populations and pursue policies, pro- gram, and strategies that ensure that these populations do not experience disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects from such deployment of such tech- nologies. With respect to transportation services, adverse effects may include the denial of, reduction in, or significant delay in the receipt of benefits of programs, policies, or activities. The following discussion examines equity-related issues that affect transportation, as well as the implications for new and emerging technologies and innovations in transportation that may fall under the purview of public agencies. A. Equitable Transportation In the context of new and emerging technologies in trans- portation services, equity concerns commonly center around three areas: (i) unbanked and underbanked persons, (ii) the digital divide, and (iii) access for people with disabilities, which is discussed in Section VI of this digest. These concerns are es- pecially relevant in MaaS, shared use mobility, and MOD as well as new payment systems. Personal mobile devices and credit cards are not ubiquitous nor are they readily accessible to per- sons with different disabilities. 1.  Underbanked and Unbanked Persons who are unbanked are described by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as those adults with- out a checking, savings, or money market account at a bank or other financial institution.378 The Federal Reserve estimated that 22 percent of adult Americans in 2018 were unbanked or underbanked, meaning they have a bank account but also use an alternative financial service product.379 This is a concern because many shared mobility services, such as ridesourcing (e.g., Uber and Lyft) and scooter and bike share systems, require Safety Outcomes: From Conventional to Emerging Technolo- gies, 4 Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspec- tives, (Mar. 2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100091. 377 A Guide for Transit Agencies and Others to Use the VW Settle- ment for Clean Transportation, Sierra Club, (April 2019), https:// content.sierraclub.org/evguide/blog/2019/04/guide-transit-agencies- and-others-use-vw-settlement-clean-transportation. 378 Fed. Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC), 2017 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households (2017), https://www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/2017/2017report.pdf. 379 U.S. Fed. Reserve System, Report on the Economic Well- Being of U.S. Households in 2018–May 2019 (updated Jun. 5, 2019), https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2019-economic-well- being-of-us-households-in-2018-banking-and-credit.htm. credit/debit cards for payment. Micromobility systems (bike and scooter share systems) typically require a deposit hold on a bank account or credit card for the equipment. Also, contact- less payment is becoming increasingly popular as technology advances. This can be a barrier for those who are underbanked or unbanked, raising equity challenges as the FDIC reports that a disproportionate share of underbanked and unbanked house- holds are lower-income, less-educated, younger, black and His- panic, working-age disabled, and with volatile income.380 2.  The “Digital Divide” The “digital divide” refers to those who do not have access to the Internet. Requiring access to the Internet, often through mobile devices, can be a barrier to many new and innovative transportation services. According to the Pew Research Center, the digital divide has been closing in recent years. In 2019, the number of Americans who have access to the Internet reached 90 percent compared to just 76 percent a decade earlier.381 Even so, adoption gaps remain and are based on factors including age, income, education, and community type. Lowest use is among those 65 years and older (73 percent) and those without a high school diploma (71 percent).382 B. Federal Actions to Address Transportation Equity Title VI and environmental justice are often paired together because, as the U.S. DOT FTA explains, the two overlap in their objectives to “ensure that Federal agencies promote and enforce nondiscrimination as one way of achieving the overarching objective of environmental justice—fair distribution of the ad- verse impacts of, or burdens associated with, Federal programs, policies, and activities.”383 Title VI places a statutory obligation on the federal agencies to ensure nondiscrimination in feder- ally assisted programs administered by State and local entities, while Executive Order 12898 directs federal agencies to address disproportionate adverse impacts of federal activities on minor- ity and low-income populations. Concern for environmental justice and civil rights and compliance with the corresponding statutes and legal requirements “should be integrated into every transportation decision from the first thought about a transpor- tation plan to post-construction operations and maintenance.”384 380 FDIC, 2017. 381 Monica Anderson, Mobile Technology and Home Broad- band 2019, Pew Research Center (Jun. 13, 2019), https://www. pewresearch.org/internet/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2019/06/ PI_2019.06.13_Mobile-Technology-and-Home-Broadband_FINAL2. pdf. 382 Id. 383 Fed. Transit Admin., FTA C 4702.1B, Title VI Require- ments and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients, (Oct. 1, 2012), available at https://www.transit.dot.gov/ regulations-and-guidance/fta-circulars/title-vi-requirements-and- guidelines-federal-transit. 384 Id.

44 TCRP LRD 59 1.  Title VI of the Civil Rights Act Title VI, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq., enacted as part of the land- mark Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibits discrimination by re- cipients of Federal financial assistance on the basis of race, color, and national origin, including the denial of meaningful access for LEP persons.385 Its purpose is to ensure that public funds are not spent in a way that encourages, subsidizes, or results in dis- crimination on these bases. Title VI applies to recipients and subrecipients of federal financial assistance (e.g., states, local governments, transit providers), and not to the U.S. DOT itself. Most funding agencies have regulations implementing Title VI that prohibit recipient practices that have the effect of dis- crimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin. DOT’s implementation of Title VI requirements as they apply to DOT programs is set forth in 49 C.F.R. Part 21. The U.S. DOT FTA guidance regarding Title VI compliance includes FTA Circular 4702.1B, “Title VI Requirements and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients,” (Title IV Circular) issued in 2012,386 and FTA’s Title VI Frequently Asked Questions.387 The DOT’s Title VI regulations prohibit recipients of Federal financial assistance from engaging in discriminatory actions directly or through contractual or other arrangements includ- ing using “criteria or methods of administering its program which have the effect of subjecting individuals to discrimina- tion based on their race, color, or national origin.”388 As a condi- tion of receiving federal financial assistance, Part 21 mandates that DOT’s modal administrations require assurances of Title VI compliance from grantees.389 Appendix C to Part 21 provides guidance on the application of Title VI requirements to various DOT programs. One exam- ple from the FTA illustrates the application of the nondiscrimi- nation provisions to routing, scheduling, or quality of service of transportation service:390 No person or group of persons shall be discriminated against with re- gard to the routing, scheduling, or quality of service of transportation service furnished as a part of the project on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Frequency or service, age and quality of vehicles assigned to routes, quality of stations serving different routes, and loca tion of routes may not be determined on the basis of race, color, or national origin. In the context of new and emerging technologies, FTA Title VI would apply to demand responsive services operated by state and local governments, including MOD and MaaS systems op- erated in partnership with private entities. Such programs must be administered in a nondiscriminatory manner. The FTA Title 385 42 U.S.C. § 2000d. 386 Fed. Transit Admin., FTA C 4702.1B, Title VI Require- ments and Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients, Oct. 1, 2012. 387 FTA, Title VI–Frequently Asked Questions (Dec. 2012), https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/Title_VI_ QA_12.26.12.pdf. 388 49 C.F.R. § 21.5(b)(2). 389 49 C.F.R. § 21.7. 390 49 C.F.R. Part 21, App. C. IV Circular makes clear that “a recipient may engage in activi- ties not described in the Circular, such as ridesharing programs, roadway incident response programs, or other programs not funded by the FTA, and those programs must also be adminis- tered in a nondiscriminatory manner.”391 Title VI allows persons alleging discrimination based on race, color, or national origin by recipients of Federal funds to file administrative complaints with the Federal departments and agencies that provide the financial assistance. To enforce Title VI an agency has two options (1) the termination or refusal to provide federal financial assistance to an institution or program seeking it; or (2) “any other means authorized by law,” which is understood to be a lawsuit brought by the Attorney General seeking a recipient’s compliance with Title VI.392 According to U.S. Department of Justice guidance, “[i]f a recipient of federal assistance is found to have discriminated and voluntary com- pliance cannot be achieved, the federal agency providing the assistance should either initiate fund termination proceedings or refer the matter to the Department of Justice for appropriate legal action.”393 2.  Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address  Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low- Income Populations” Since 1994, all federal agencies, including the U.S. DOT, have been required to incorporate environmental justice into their mission. Issued February 11, 1994, Executive Order 12898, “Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (“Executive Order 12898”) requires federal executive agencies and entities receiv- ing federal funds to “make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environ- mental effects of its programs, policies and activities on minor- ity populations and low-income populations.”394 According to the U.S. DOT, environmental justice is “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the devel opment, implementation, and enforcement of transporta- tion services, laws, regulations, and policies.”395 Fair treatment means that “no population, due to policy or economic dis- empowerment, is forced to bear a disproportionate burden of the negative human health and environmental impacts, includ- 391 FTA Title IV Circular at ch. II-1. 392 42 U.S.C. § 2000d-1 (“Compliance with any requirement adopted pursuant to this section may be effected (1) by the termination of or refusal to grant or to continue assistance under such program or activity to any recipient as to whom there has been an express finding on the record, after opportunity for hearing, of a failure to comply with such requirement . . . or (2) by any other means authorized by law.”). 393 U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Title VI of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, https://www.justice.gov/crt/fcs/TitleVI. 394 Exec. Order No. 12,898, 59 Fed. Reg. 7629 (Feb. 11, 1994). 395 U.S. Dep’t of Transp., Environmental Justice Strategy (Nov. 15, 2016), https://www.transportation.gov/transportation-policy/ environmental-justice/environmental-justice-strategy.

TCRP LRD 59 45 ing social and economic effects, resulting from transportation decisions, programs and policies made, implemented and en- forced at the Federal, State, local or tribal level.”396 The Presidential memorandum accompanying Executive Order 12898 identified Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as one of several Federal laws that should be applied “to pre- vent minority communities and low-income communities from being subject to disproportionately high and adverse environ- mental effects.” According to the U.S. Department of Justice, “… the core tenet of environmental justice—that development and urban renewal benefitting a community as a whole not be un- justifiably purchased through the disproportionate allocation of its adverse environmental and health burdens on the commu- nity’s minority—flows directly from the underlying principle of Title VI itself.”397 Distinguished from Title VI, Executive Order 12898 extends to protect “populations” of similarly-situated indi viduals with respect to the benefits or burdens of a plan or project, but may live far apart.398 Executive Order 12898 addresses persons belonging to any of the following groups: • Black: a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa. • Hispanic: a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race. • Asian American: a person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands. • American Indian and Alaskan Native: person having ori- gins in any of the original people of North America and who maintain cultural identification through tribal affilia- tion or community recognition. • Low-Income: person whose household income (or in the case of a community or a group, whose median household income) is at or below the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines. 399 Executive Order 12898 is intended to improve the inter- nal management of the executive branch. The executive order directs each Federal agency to develop an agency-wide envi- ronmental justice strategy to implement its requirements. U.S. DOT issued its original environmental justice strategy in 1995 and has reviewed and updated its 1995 environmental justice strategy as appropriate.400 U.S. DOT’s guiding principles for 396 Id. 397 See U.S. Dep’t of Justice Civil Rights Division, Title VI Legal Manual 59 (2001). 398 See Richard A. Marcantonio, Aaron Golub, Alex Karner, and Louise Nelson, Confronting Inequality in Metropolitan Regions: Realiz- ing the Promise of Civil Rights and Environmental Justice on Metropoli- tan Transportation Planning, 44 Fordham Urb. L.J. 1017 (2017). 399 U.S. Dept. of Transp., Civil Rights Awareness and Enforcement: FAQs (Jan. 29, 2018), https://www.transportation.gov/ civil-rights/civil-rights-awareness-enforcement/faqs. 400 U.S. Dep’t of Transp. Order 5610.2(a), Department of Transportation Actions to Address Environmental Justice envi ronmental justice are: (i) ensure full and fair participation by all potentially affected communities in the transportation decision-making process; (ii) avoid, minimize, or mitigate dis- proportionately high and adverse human health and environ- mental effects, including social and economic effects, on minor- ity or low-income populations; and (iii) prevent the denial of, reduction in, or significant delay in the receipt of benefits by minority or low-income populations.401 In 2012, DOT issued Order 5610.2(a), “Department of Transportation Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations” (DOT EJ Order), updating the original order issued in 1997. It sets forth procedures and guidance for DOT to implement Execu- tive Order 12898 and ensures a consistent approach toward achieving environmental justice within U.S. DOT by requiring that all DOT Operating Administrations (OAs) fully consider and incorporate, as appropriate, environmental justice princi- ples into existing programs, policies, and activities. The central objective of the U.S. DOT order is to ensure that all federally funded transportation-related programs, policies, or activities having the potential to adversely affect human health or the envi ronment involve a planning and programming process that explicitly considers the effects on minority populations and low- income populations. U.S. DOT lists the following as adverse effects for environ- mental justice purposes: • Body impairment, infirmity, illness, or death • Air, noise, and water pollution and soil contamination • Destruction or disruption of man-made or natural resources • Destruction or diminution of aesthetic values • Destruction or disruption of community cohesion or eco- nomic vitality • Destruction or disruption of the availability of public and private facilities and services • Vibration • Adverse employment effects • Displacement of persons, businesses, farms, or nonprofit organizations • Increased traffic congestion, isolation, exclusion or separa- tion of minority or low-income individuals within a given community or from the broader community • The denial of, reduction in, or significant delay in the receipt of, benefits of DOT programs, policies, or activities. in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (May 2, 2012), www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/mission/ transportation-policy/environmental-justice/339501/dot56102a. pdf. 401 See U.S. Dep’t of Transp., Environmental Justice Strat- egy. See also FTA C 4703.1, Environmental Justice Policy Guid- ance for Federal Transit Administration Recipients (Aug. 15, 2012), ch. I, § A (2012), www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and- guidance/ environmental-programs/environmental-justice/ environmental- justice.

46 TCRP LRD 59 The FTA has developed policy guidance in the form of a Circular (Circular 4703.1), “Environmental Justice Policy Guid- ance for Federal Transit Administration Recipients,” to provide recipients with a distinct framework to assist them as they inte- grate principles of environmental justice into their public trans- portation decision-making processes.402 Currently, U.S. DOT has incorporated transportation equity as part of its plans and programs to identify and mitigate un- equal impacts and enhance access and mobility for all federal and federally funded transportation programs. To that end, DOT “actively prevents disproportionately high and adverse effects of transportation projects on minority and low-income communities” by ensuring opportunities for minority and low- income communities to influence the transportation planning and decision-making processes through enhanced engagement and meaningful input.403 An agency is not required to select the course of action that best serves environmental justice, only to take a “hard look” at environmental justice issues.404 Courts have noted that “[t]he purpose of an environmental justice analysis is to determine whether a project will have a disproportionately adverse effect on minority and low-income populations.”405 “To accomplish this, an agency must compare the demographics of an affected population with demographics of a more general character (for instance, those of an entire state).”406 It is worth noting that the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 V.S.C. § 4321 et seq., is the other law under pinning Executive Order 12898. The accompanying Presi- dential memorandum issued by President Clinton in 1994 made identifying and analyzing EJ issues formally a part of federal agency NEPA reviews: “Each Federal agency shall analyze the environmental effects, including human health, economic and social effects, of Federal actions, including effects on minority communities and low-income communities, when such analy- sis is required by NEPA.”407 3.  Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to  Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency” In Lau v. Nichols, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that conduct that disproportionately affects LEP persons constitutes national origin discrimination prohibited under Title VI.408 Executive 402 FTA C. 4703.1, Environmental Justice Policy Guidance for Federal Transit Administration Recipients. 403 See U.S. Dep’t of Transp., Environmental Justice Strategy. 404 See Latin Ams. for Social & Econ. Dev. v. Fed. Highway Admin., 756 F.3d 447, 475-77 (6th Cir. 2014). 405 Mid States Coal. For Progress v. Surface Transp. Bd., 345 F.3d 520, 541 (8th Cir. 2003); see also Allen v. Nat’l Institutes of Health, 974 F. Supp. 2d 18, 47 (D. Mass. 2013). 406 Mid States, 345 F.3d at 541. 407 Memorandum on Environmental Justice, 1 Pub. Papers 241–242 (February 11, 1994). 408 Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563, 94 S. Ct. 786, 39 L. Ed. 2d 1 (1974) (holding failure of San Francisco school system to provide English lan- guage instruction to approximately 1,800 students of Chinese ancestry who did not speak English or to provide them with other adequate Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency,” requires Federal agencies, in- cluding U.S. DOT, to examine the services they provide, iden- tify any need for services to those with LEP, and develop and implement a system to provide those services so LEP persons can have meaningful access to them.409 The Executive Order also requires Federal agencies ensure that recipients of Federal financial assistance provide meaningful access to LEP applicants and beneficiaries. C. Using Technology to Create Transportation Equity Shared mobility—the shared use of a motor vehicles, bicycles, scooters, or other low-speed transportation modes on an as-needed, short-term basis—has the potential to help ad- dress some transportation equity challenges. Shared mobility provides disadvantaged communities with additional service offerings than traditional modes. A 2018 study from the Uni- versity of California, Los Angeles, titled “Ridehail Revolution: Ridehail Travel and Equity in Los Angeles,” compared taxis and TNCs to understand differences in customer service and discrimination.410 The primary finding was that historical re- ports of discrimination in the for-hire vehicle industry still hold true today, but the differences in service are much more appar- ent in taxis than in TNCs. According to the report, black taxi riders wait 52 percent longer than white riders, when all other factors are equal. To help public agencies and the private sector ensure that transportation services are accessible to all users, the U.S. DOT’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) developed the STEPS (Spatial, Temporal, Economic, Physiological, and Social) framework to transportation equity.411 The STEPs framework is intended to aid transit agencies in identifying and mitigating gaps in equitable service delivery to ensure their services are ac- cessible to all. Spatial factors can compromise daily travel needs, including lack of service availability in a particular neighbor- hood, excessively long distances between destinations, and the lack of public transit within walking distance. Temporal time barriers can inhibit a user from completing time-sensitive trips, such as arriving at work or completing travel due to lack of ser- vice availability at a particular time (e.g., public transit reliability instructional procedures denied them meaningful opportunity to par- ticipate in public educational program and thus violated § 601 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964). 409 A more thorough analysis of LEP requirements than is appropri- ate in this report was addressed in a 2011 TCRP Research Results Digest. See Jocelyn K. Waite, TCRP RRD 97: Transit Agency Com- pliance with Title VI: Limited English Proficiency Require- ments, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, Washington, D.C., 2011, https:// doi.org/10.17226/14476. 410 A. E. Brown, Ridehail Revolution: Ridehail Travel and Equity in Los Angeles (2018) (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Univ. of Cal. Los Angeles), https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4r22m57k. 411 Fed. Highway Admin., Travel Behavior: Shared Mobility and Transportation Equity (Aug. 2017), https://www.fhwa.dot. gov/policy/otps/shared_use_mobility_equity_final.pdf.