I've seen some truly good outcomes from ADA accessibility rebuilds, but you have to start with the right car. Any old coach is a headache, and combines are few and far between. But getting the turning radius in on a new restroom starting from 'open space' isn't at all impossible. So I think as a bidder, you had to figure all this out before you bid here. We've gone so far in streetcar rebuilds as to have lift ramps rebuilt into the floor, and that worked.
NPS is no stranger to the problem, and if you've ever seen the $250K rebuild plus sponsorship of the "Invacare" combine on CVSR, you'll see what they think is possible in the NPS mindset.
http://www.rrpicturearchives.net/showPi ... id=3761936
That, of course, bears little resemblance to an 'historic' restoration of an interior. But if you've been to NPS Lowell, they had Gomaco adapt those trolley cars for wheelchair space and you'd never know it to look at them until they pull the presto-chango.

I'm trying to think of any other instance where it's turned into a criminal rather than civil proceeding in this kind of contract work (short of actually hurting somebody physically) and I'm not thinking of much precedent.

I've only had one contractor formally disbarred, but that was at the state, not federal level, but even he finally finished the contract.

We had a couple of them, surplus-from-a-local-commuter-agency; when they wore out, we purchased a new one.

Now...I have been told by an experienced commercial building contractor that to use the term "ADA" when it does not fully apply opens you up to a very possible world of hurt. If, for example, you pronounce your train is "ADA compliant" and then a person gets on board and finds a doorway that their wheelchair won't fit through...you open yourself up to liability. So I suggest if groups make their equipment "accessible" then use that term (accessible) and not "ADA" unless it is indeed fully ADA compliant. It's like the difference between "vegan" and "vegetarian".

Wait a minute. Those things WEAR OUT?!?