Sorry I haven't gotten on here to post lately...to catch everyone up on the continuing drama with the Social Security Administration. John's been hogging the computer and talking on the phone. He's been very busy talking to lots of different people regarding this debacle.
For those that didn't know...here is the law that covers Assistance Dogs (and Assistance Dogs in Training) for federal buildings. It is not the ADA, but the General Services Administration.
Here is the law for federal buildings owned or leased under General Services Administration(GSA) The first one is:
[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 41, Volume 2]
[Revised as of July 1, 2002]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 41CFR101-20.311]
[Page 212]
TITLE 41--PUBLIC CONTRACTS AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 101--FEDERAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS
PART 101-20--MANAGEMENT OF BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS--Table of Contents
Subpart 101-20.3--Conduct on Federal Property
Sec. 101-20.311 Dogs and other animals.
Dogs and other animals, except seeing eye dogs, other guide dogs,
and animals used to guide or assist handicapped persons, shall not be
brought upon property for other than official purposes.
The second is from www.regulations.gov , search for GSA-2005-0041-0001.
[Federal Register: November 8, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 215)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 67785-67860]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr08no05-5]
GSA's real property policies contained in this part and parts 102-
72 through 102-82 of this chapter apply to Federal agencies, including
GSA's Public Buildings Service (PBS), operating under, or subject to,
the authorities of the Administrator of General Services.
Sec. 102-74.425 What is the policy concerning dogs and other animals
on Federal property?
No person may bring dogs or other animals on Federal property for
other than official purposes. However, a disabled person may bring a
seeing-eye dog, a guide dog, or other animal assisting or being trained
to assist that individual.
(This means that they couldn't kick Mom and Denver out either.)
Let me tell what's been happening since I last posted:
John called and filed a complaint against the SSA office that denied us access...via the SS Fraud Hotline. He then called the local office and asked to speak to the supervisor...the one that was "out" when we were there. John was told that he'd call back, but after waiting all day, John called again and asked to speak to him again. I was next to him the entire time, and was listening intently. The supervisor got on the line, and apologized for not getting back to him sooner. John went over the situation again for him. He gave him the info on the law that covers federal buildings and Assistance Dogs ( and asked that they review their "policies" regarding Assistance Dogs and asked also for a formal apology. Guess what happened next?
Mom and I were listening to John's end of the conversation, and we were expecting John to say something along the lines of "Thanks, etc" Instead we were surprised to hear John defending himself and me again! The supervisor told him that there was a question as to John's disability (though he did say "I know I can't ask you what your disability is!")...and a question as to what he needed the dog (meaning me! of all things! hmph!) for in the SSA office. John explained what he needed me for (in case he dropped something, etc)...and told him that he didn't know anyone that hopped in a scooter and drove to the SSA with their dog, just for grins and giggles. The guy kept insisting that he didn't NEED me (the dog, remember?) at the SSA office. John was not pleased when he hung up the phone.
He then called the SSA Office of Inspector General, Senator Barbara Mikulski's office and the ACLU. We're waiting to hear back from all of them. The ACLU was interested, and will be discussing the situation at their next meeting...and will be getting back to John on Thursday.
Right now it's a waiting game...I'll keep you posted when we know more!
~SDS
4 hours ago
Posts
