[Federal Register: December 21, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 246)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 80499-80528]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21de00-25]
[[Page 80499]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
36 CFR Part 1194
Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards; Final
Rule
[[Page 80500]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD
36 CFR Part 1194
[Docket No. 2000-01]
RIN 3014-AA25
Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards
AGENCY: Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
(Access Board) is issuing final accessibility standards for electronic
and information technology covered by section 508 of the Rehabilitation
Act Amendments of 1998. Section 508 requires the Access Board to
publish standards setting forth a definition of electronic and
information technology and the technical and functional performance
criteria necessary for such technology to comply with section 508.
Section 508 requires that when Federal agencies develop, procure,
maintain, or use electronic and information technology, they shall
ensure that the electronic and information technology allows Federal
employees with disabilities to have access to and use of information
and data that is comparable to the access to and use of information and
data by Federal employees who are not individuals with disabilities,
unless an undue burden would be imposed on the agency. Section 508 also
requires that individuals with disabilities, who are members of the
public seeking information or services from a Federal agency, have
access to and use of information and data that is comparable to that
provided to the public who are not individuals with disabilities,
unless an undue burden would be imposed on the agency.
DATES: Effective Date: February 20, 2001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Wakefield, Office of Technical
and Information Services, Architectural and Transportation Barriers
Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, NW., suite 1000, Washington, DC 20004-
1111. Telephone number (202) 272-5434 extension 139 (voice); (202) 272-
5449 (TTY). Electronic mail address: wakefield@access-board.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Copies and Electronic Access
Single copies of this publication may be obtained at no cost by
calling the Access Board's automated publications order line (202) 272-
5434, by pressing 2 on the telephone keypad, then 1, and requesting
publication S-40 (Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility
Standards Final Rule). Persons using a TTY should call (202) 272-5449.
Please record a name, address, telephone number and request publication
S-40. This document is available in alternate formats upon request.
Persons who want a copy in an alternate format should specify the type
of format (cassette tape, Braille, large print, or computer disk). This
document is also available on the Board's Internet site (http://
www.access-board.gov/sec508/508standards.htm).
Background
On August 7, 1998, the President signed into law the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998, which includes the Rehabilitation Act
Amendments of 1998. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act Amendments,
as amended by the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, requires that when
Federal agencies develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and
information technology, they shall ensure that the electronic and
information technology allows Federal employees with disabilities to
have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to
the access to and use of information and data by Federal employees who
are not individuals with disabilities, unless an undue burden would be
imposed on the agency.\1\ Section 508 also requires that individuals
with disabilities, who are members of the public seeking information or
services from a Federal agency, have access to and use of information
and data that is comparable to that provided to the public who are not
individuals with disabilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Section 508 does not apply to national security systems, as
that term is defined in section 5142 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of
1996 (40 U.S.C. 1452).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 508(a)(2)(A) requires the Architectural and Transportation
Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) \2\ to publish standards
setting forth a definition of electronic and information technology and
the technical and functional performance criteria necessary for
accessibility for such technology. If an agency determines that meeting
the standards, when procuring electronic and information technology,
imposes an undue burden, it must explain why meeting the standards
creates an undue burden.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Access Board is an independent Federal agency
established by section 502 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 792)
whose primary mission is to promote accessibility for individuals
with disabilities. The Access Board consists of 25 members. Thirteen
are appointed by the President from among the public, a majority of
who are required to be individuals with disabilities. The other
twelve are heads of the following Federal agencies or their
designees whose positions are Executive Level IV or above: The
departments of Health and Human Services, Education, Transportation,
Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Interior, Defense, Justice,
Veterans Affairs, and Commerce; the General Services Administration;
and the United States Postal Service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 31, 2000, the Access Board issued a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register (65 FR 17346) proposing
standards for accessible electronic and information technology. The
proposed standards were based on recommendations of the Electronic and
Information Technology Access Advisory Committee (EITAAC). The EITAAC
was convened by the Access Board in September 1998 to assist the Board
in fulfilling its mandate under section 508. It was composed of 27
members including representatives of the electronic and information
technology industry, organizations representing the access needs of
individuals with disabilities, and other persons affected by
accessibility standards for electronic and information technology.
Representatives of Federal agencies, including the departments of
Commerce, Defense, Education, Justice, Veterans Affairs, the Federal
Communications Commission, and the General Services Administration,
served as ex-officio members or observers of the EITAAC.
The public comment period for the proposed rule ended on May 30,
2000. Over 100 individuals and organizations submitted comments on the
proposed standards. Comments were submitted by Federal agencies,
representatives of the information technology industry, disability
groups, and persons with disabilities. Approximately 35 percent of the
comments came from Federal agencies. Fifteen percent came from
individual companies and industry trade associations. Approximately 30
percent of the comments were from individuals with disabilities and
organizations representing persons with disabilities. Eight states
responded to the proposed rule and the remaining comments were from
educational or research organizations.
The proposed standards covered various products, including
computers, software, and electronic office
[[Page 80501]]
equipment in the Federal sector. They provided technical criteria
specific to various types of technologies and performance-based
requirements, which focus on the functional capabilities of covered
technologies. Specific criteria covered controls, keyboards, and
keypads; software applications and operating systems (non-embedded);
web-based information or applications; telecommunications functions;
video or multi-media products; and information kiosks and transaction
machines. Also covered was compatibility with adaptive equipment that
people with disabilities commonly use for information and communication
access.
General Issues
This section of the preamble addresses general issues raised by
comments filed in response to the NPRM. Individual provisions of the
rule are discussed in detail under the Section-by-Section Analysis
below.
Effective Date for the Enforcement of Section 508
Section 508(a)(2)(A) required the Board to publish final standards
for accessible electronic and information technology by February 7,
2000. Section 508(a)(3) provides that within six months after the Board
publishes its standards, the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council is
required to revise the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), and each
Federal agency is required to revise the Federal procurement policies
and directives under its control to incorporate the Board's
standards.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Whenever the Access Board revises its standards, the Federal
Acquisition Regulatory Council is required to revise the FAR, and
each appropriate Federal agency is required to revise its
procurement policies and directives within six months to incorporate
the revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because of the delay in publishing the standards, the proposed rule
sought comment on making the standards effective six months after
publication in the Federal Register to provide Federal agencies an
opportunity to more fully understand the new standards and allow
manufacturers of electronic and information technology time to ensure
that their products comply with the standards before enforcement
actions could be initiated. The NPRM noted that postponing the
effective date of the Board's standards could not affect the right of
individuals with disabilities to file complaints for electronic and
information technology procured after August 7, 2000 since that right
was established by the statute.
Comment. There was a general consensus that a delay in the
effective date of the standards was warranted to provide a reasonable
period of time for industry to bring their products into compliance
with the Board's standards.
Response. On July 13, 2000, President Clinton signed into law the
Military Construction Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public
Law 106-246) which included an amendment to section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act. Under the amendment, the effective date for the
enforcement of section 508 was delayed to allow for additional time for
compliance with the Board's final standards. As originally written, the
enforcement provisions of section 508 would have taken effect on August
7, 2000. The amendment in Public Law 106-246 revises the enforcement
date to 6 months from publication of the Board's final standards,
consistent with the law's intent. As a result of the amendment, there
is no need to delay the effective date of the standards. The effective
date for the standards is largely an administrative provision and does
not affect the date by which complaints may be filed under section 508.
Complaints and lawsuits may be filed 6 months from the date of
publication of these standards in the Federal Register.
Technical and Functional Performance Criteria
Section 508 (a)(2)(A)(ii) requires the Board to develop technical
and functional performance criteria necessary to implement the
requirements of section 508.
Comment. The Information Technology Association of America (ITAA)
commented that the specificity of many of the proposed provisions go
beyond what may be characterized as technical and functional
performance criteria. ITAA commented that the statute intended that the
standards be set forth in terms of technical and functional performance
criteria as opposed to technical design requirements. Performance
criteria are intended to give discretion in achieving the required end
result. ITAA commented that product developers, who have a broad
understanding of their own products, industry standards, and future
trends need this discretion to meet the requirements of section 508 and
that it is impossible to predict accurately future technological
advances. Design requirements, they added, inhibit development and
innovation. ITAA was concerned that many of the proposed provisions
would impede technological advancements because they were too specific.
On the other hand, ITAA supported proposed Sec. 1194.5, Equivalent
Facilitation, because it would lessen the adverse impact of the
specific requirements.
Response. According to administration policy, performance standards
are generally to be preferred to engineering or design standards
because performance standards provide the regulated parties the
flexibility to achieve the regulatory objective in a more cost-
effective way. The Board was given the responsibility to develop
technical and functional performance criteria necessary to implement
the requirements of section 508. Thus, the standards provide technical
requirements as well as functional performance criteria. The standards
reflect the need to be as descriptive as possible because procurement
officials and others need to know when compliance with section 508 has
been achieved and because the failure to meet the standards can result
in an enforcement action. Several provisions, such as those regarding
time-out features, have been revised in the final rule to be more
performance oriented rather than specific design standards.
Section-by-Section Analysis
This section of the preamble summarizes each of the provisions of
the final rule and the comments received in response to the proposed
rule. Where the provision in the final rule differs from that of the
proposed rule, an explanation of the modification is provided. The text
of the final rule follows this section.
Subpart A--General
Section 1194.1 Purpose
This section describes the purpose of the standards which is to
implement section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended by
the Workforce Investment Act of 1998. No substantive comments were
received and no changes have been made to this section in the final
rule.
Section 1194.2 Application
This section specifies what electronic and information technology
is covered by the standards. Electronic and information technology
covered by section 508 must comply with each of the relevant sections
of this part. For example, a computer and its software programs would
be required to comply with Sec. 1194.26, Desktop and portable
computers, Sec. 1194.21, Software applications and operating systems,
and the functional performance criteria in Sec. 1194.31. Paragraph (a)
states the general statutory requirement for electronic and information
technology that must comply with the standards
[[Page 80502]]
unless doing so would result in an undue burden. The term ``undue
burden'' is defined at Sec. 1194.4 (Definitions) and is discussed in
the preamble under that section.
Paragraph (a)(1) states the statutory obligation of a Federal
agency to make information and data available by an alternative means
when complying with the standards would result in an undue burden. For
example, a Federal agency wishes to purchase a computer program that
generates maps denoting regional demographics. If the agency determines
that it would constitute an undue burden to purchase an accessible
version of such a program, the agency would be required to make the
information provided by the program available in an alternative means
to users with disabilities. In addition, the requirements to make
reasonable accommodations for the needs of an employee with a
disability under section 501 and to provide overall program
accessibility under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act also apply.
Comment. The National Federation of the Blind (NFB) suggested that
additional language be added that would require agencies to provide
information by an alternative means at the same time the information
and data are made available to others.
Response. This paragraph restates the general statutory requirement
to provide an alternative means of providing an individual the use of
the information and data. Providing individuals with information and
data by an alternative means necessarily requires flexibility and will
generally be dealt with on a case-by-case approach. Although, the Board
agrees that information provided by an alternative means should be
provided at generally the same time as the information is made
available to others, the provision provides the needed flexibility to
ensure that agencies can make case-by-case decisions. No substantive
changes were made in the final rule.
Paragraph (a)(2) sets forth the statutory requirement for an agency
to document any claim of undue burden in a procurement. Such
documentation must explain in detail which provision or provisions of
this rule impose an undue burden and the extent of such a burden. The
agency should discuss each of the factors considered in its undue
burden analysis.
Comment. The General Services Administration was concerned that
this provision was too limiting because it only referred to products
which are procured by the Federal Government and did not include
products which are developed, maintained, or used. The American Council
of the Blind (ACB) recommended that the requirement for documentation
apply when agencies claim the lack of commercially available accessible
equipment or software. The NFB commented that there should be a
requirement for agencies to explain the specific alternate means to be
used to provide information or data. Without such a requirement, they
argued, persons with disabilities must be knowledgeable enough to
inquire about an alternate means after first discovering that the
product used for the information and data is not accessible. Although
agencies would be expected to know in advance when products will not be
accessible, persons with disabilities will not have this information
until encountering the problem.
Response. Paragraph (a)(2) addresses the documentation of undue
burden. By statute, the requirement to document an undue burden applies
only to procurements. This rule does not prescribe the needed
documentation of a finding of an undue burden but merely restates the
statutory requirement that a finding be documented. The FAR is expected
to address the needed documentation. No substantive changes have been
made in the final rule.
Paragraph (b) states that procurement of products complying with
this part is subject to commercial availability. The concept of
commercial availability is based on existing provisions in the FAR (see
48 CFR 2.101, Definitions of Words and Terms: Commercial item).
The proposed rule provided that the standards applied to products
which were available in the commercial marketplace; would be available
in time to meet an agency's delivery requirements through advances in
technology or performance; or were developed in response to a
Government solicitation. As noted in the preamble, this language was
derived from the definition for ``commercial item'' in the FAR cited
above. The preamble to the proposed rule stated that the determination
of commercial availability is to be applied on a provision by provision
basis.
Comment. A number of commenters sought further clarification of
this provision. Several commenters from the information technology
industry and some Federal agencies were concerned that the concept of
what is commercially available was more appropriately within the
jurisdiction of the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council. The
American Foundation for the Blind (AFB) and the ACB wanted agencies to
document their determination that a product was not commercially
available similar to what is required under undue burden. The ITAA
commented that commercial availability should not be applied on a
provision by provision basis.
Response. The Board agrees that the FAR is the appropriate venue
for addressing commercial availability. The Board believes that the
concept of commercial availability is captured in the FAR definition of
``commercial item''.
With respect to documentation, Federal agencies may choose to
document a determination that a product is not available in the
commercial marketplace in anticipation of a subsequent inquiry.
However, such documentation is not required by section 508.
Similar to an undue burden analysis, agencies cannot claim that a
product as a whole is not commercially available because no product in
the marketplace meets all the standards. If products are commercially
available that meet some but not all of the standards, the agency must
procure the product that best meets the standards. The final rule has
been modified to clarify this application.
Paragraph (c) applies this rule to electronic and information
technology developed, procured, maintained, or used by an agency
directly or used by a contractor pursuant to a contract with an agency.
Comment. The ITAA commented that this provision conflicts with
section 508. For example, they commented that if a contract required a
vendor to purchase and maintain a specific computer system for the
purpose of gathering and relaying certain data to an agency, the
standards would apply to such a computer system even if the system
would be used only by vendor employees. In addition, ITAA commented
that this is not a technical and functional performance criterion, and
should be addressed by the FAR.
Response. Consistent with section 5002(3)(C) of the Clinger-Cohen
Act of 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1452) and as further discussed in section
1194.3(b) below, products used by a contractor which are incidental to
a contract are not covered by this rule. For example, a Federal agency
enters into a contract to have a web site developed for the agency. The
contractor uses its own office system to develop the web site. The web
site is required to comply with this rule since the web site is the
purpose of the contract, however, the contractor's office system does
not have to comply with these standards, since the equipment used to
produce the web site is incidental to the contract. See section
[[Page 80503]]
1194.3(b) below. No changes were made to this provision in the final
rule.
Section 1194.3 General Exceptions
This section provides general exceptions from the standards.
Paragraph (a) provides an exception for telecommunications or
information systems operated by agencies, the function, operation, or
use of which involves intelligence activities, cryptologic activities
related to national security, command and control of military forces,
equipment that is an integral part of a weapon or weapons system, or
systems which are critical to the direct fulfillment of military or
intelligence missions. This exception is statutory under section 508
and is consistent with a similar exception in section 5142 of the
Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. This exception does not apply to a system
that is to be used for routine administrative and business applications
(including payroll, finance, logistics, and personnel management
applications). For example, software used for payroll, word processing
software used for production of routine documents, ordinary telephones,
copiers, fax machines, and web applications must still comply with the
standards even if they are developed, procured, maintained, or used by
an agency engaged in intelligence or military activities. The Board
understands that the Department of Defense interprets this to mean that
a computer designed to provide early missile launch detection would not
be subject to these standards, nor would administrative or business
systems that must be architecturally tightly coupled with a mission
critical, national security system, to ensure interoperability and
mission accomplishment. No substantive comments were received and no
changes have been made to this section in the final rule.
Paragraph (b) provides an exception for electronic and information
technology that is acquired by a contractor incidental to a Federal
contract. That is, the products a contractor develops, procures,
maintains, or uses which are not specified as part of a contract with a
Federal agency are not required to comply with this part. For example,
a consulting firm that enters into a contract with a Federal agency to
produce a report is not required to procure accessible computers and
word processing software to produce the report regardless of whether
those products were used exclusively for the government contract or
used on both government and non-government related activities since the
purpose of the contract was to procure a report. Similarly, if a firm
is contracted to develop a web site for a Federal agency, the web site
created must be fully compliant with this part, but the firm's own web
site would not be covered. No substantive comments were received and no
changes have been made to this section in the final rule.
Paragraph (c) clarifies that, except as required to comply with
these standards, this part does not require the installation of
specific accessibility-related software or the attachment of an
assistive technology device at a workstation of a Federal employee who
is not an individual with a disability. Specific accessibility related
software means software which has the sole function of increasing
accessibility for persons with disabilities to other software programs
(e.g., screen magnification software). The purpose of section 508 and
these standards is to build as much accessibility as is reasonably
possible into general products developed, procured, maintained, or used
by agencies. It is not expected that every computer will be equipped
with a refreshable Braille display, or that every software program will
have a built-in screen reader. Such assistive technology may be
required as part of a reasonable accommodation for an employee with a
disability or to provide program accessibility. To the extent that such
technology is necessary, products covered by this part must not
interfere with the operation of the assistive technology. No
substantive comments were received and no changes have been made to
this section in the final rule.
Paragraph (d) specifies that when agencies provide access to
information or data to the public through electronic and information
technology, agencies are not required to make equipment owned by the
agency available for access and use by individuals with disabilities at
a location other than that where the electronic and information
technology is provided to the public, or to purchase equipment for
access and use by individuals with disabilities at a location other
than that where the electronic and information technology is provided
to the public. For example, if an agency provides an information kiosk
in a Post Office, a means to access the kiosk information for a person
with a disability need not be provided in any location other than at
the kiosk itself.
Comment. The ACB commented that where a location is not accessible,
an agency must provide the information in a location that is accessible
to people with disabilities.
Response. This paragraph restates the general statutory requirement
that when agencies provide access to information or data to the public
through electronic and information technology, the agencies are not
required to make equipment owned by the agency available for access and
use by individuals with disabilities at a location other than that
where the electronic and information technology is provided to the
public, or to purchase equipment for access and use by individuals with
disabilities at a location other than that where the electronic and
information technology is provided to the public. The accessibility of
the location would be addressed under section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act or other Federal laws. No substantive changes were made in the
final rule.
Paragraph (e) states that compliance with this part does not
require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a product or service
or its components.
Comment. The AFB commented that fundamental alteration is not an
appropriate factor to include in this rule since the statute provides
undue burden as the proper protection and allowing a fundamental
alteration exemption weakens the intent of the statute and its high
expectations of government. If the concept of fundamental alteration is
maintained, AFB recommended that it be part of an explanation of undue
burden. The Department of Commerce agreed that the inclusion of a
fundamental alteration exception would negate the purpose of section
508. The Trace Research and Development Center said that the term
should be defined.
The Information Technology Industry Council (ITIC) commented that
the Board should expand the concept of fundamental alteration by
stating that an agency should not be required to fundamentally alter
the nature of a program or service that the agency offers.
Response. Fundamental alteration is an appropriate exception for
inclusion in the standards. It means a change in the fundamental
characteristic or purpose of the product or service, not merely a
cosmetic or aesthetic change. For example, an agency intends to procure
pocket-sized pagers for field agents for a law enforcement agency.
Adding a large display to a small pager may fundamentally alter the
device by significantly changing its size to such an extent that it no
longer meets the purpose for which it was intended, that is to provide
a communication device which fits in a shirt or jacket pocket. For some
of these agents, portability of electronic equipment is a paramount
[[Page 80504]]
concern. Generally, adding access should not change the basic purpose
or characteristics of a product in a fundamental way.
Comment. The ITAA commented that telecommunications equipment
switches, servers, and other similar ``back office'' equipment which
are used for equipment maintenance and administration functions should
be exempt from the standards. For example, in the case of
telecommunications equipment, technicians might need to configure
service databases, remove equipment panels to replace components, or
run tests to verify functionality. ITAA commented that section 508
should not apply to these types of products since applying requirements
to such products would have serious design and cost ramifications.
Response. The Board agrees and has provided an exception that
products located in spaces frequented only by service personnel for
maintenance, repair, or occasional monitoring of equipment are not
required to comply with this part. This exception is consistent with a
similar exception in the Board's guidelines under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) (Sec. 4.1.1(5)(b) 36 CFR part 1191) and the
Architectural Barriers Act (Sec. 4.1.2(5) exception, Uniform Federal
Accessibility Standards Appendix A to 41 CFR part 101-19.6).
Section 1194.4 Definitions
Accessible. The term accessible was defined in the proposed rule in
terms of compliance with the standards in this part, as is common with
other accessibility standards. As proposed, if a product complies with
the standards in this part, it is ``accessible''; if it does not
comply, it is not accessible.
Comment. The Trace Research and Development Center (Trace Center)
and the General Services Administration commented that the proposed
definition of accessible would mean that products can be declared
``accessible'' if they are merely compatible with assistive technology
and that the definition of accessible was being used as a measure of
compliance. The Trace Center commented that the problem with this
approach is that a product could have few or no accessibility features
because it was an undue burden and still be considered accessible.
Response. Although the term accessible was used sparingly in the
proposed rule, the Board agrees that the definition may be problematic.
The term as used in the proposed rule was in fact addressing products
which comply with the standards. Products covered by this part are
required to comply with all applicable provisions of this part.
Accordingly, the definition has been eliminated in the final rule and
the term accessible is not used in the text of the final rule. A
product is compliant with the requirements of section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (as amended by the Workforce Investment Act
of 1998) by meeting all the applicable provisions of part 1194.
Agency. The term agency includes any Federal department or agency,
including the United States Postal Service. No substantive comments
were received regarding this definition and no changes have been made
in the final rule.
Alternate formats. Certain product information is required to be
made available in alternate formats to be usable by individuals with
various disabilities. Consistent with the Board's Telecommunications
Act Accessibility Guidelines (36 CFR part 1193), the proposed rule
defined alternate formats as those formats which are usable by people
with disabilities. The proposed definition noted that the formats may
include Braille, ASCII text, large print, recorded audio, and
accessible internet programming or coding languages, among others.
ASCII refers to the American Standard Code for Information Interchange,
which is an American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard
defining how computers read and write commonly used letters, numbers,
punctuation marks, and other codes.
Comment. One commenter was concerned that the term ``accessible
internet programming or coding languages'' used in the description of
acceptable alternate formats was somewhat ambiguous and recommended
using the term ``accessible internet formats''.
Response. The Board agrees that the term ``accessible internet
programming or coding languages'' may be vague. In addition, as noted
above, the final rule will not include the term ``accessible''. The
definition for alternate formats has been modified to refer to
``electronic formats which comply with this part''. This change will
permit, for instance, alternate formats to include a computer file
(either on the internet or saved on a computer disk) that can be viewed
by a browser and which complies with the standards for web pages. No
other changes have been made to the definition in the final rule.
Alternate methods. The proposed rule used the term ``alternate
modes'' which was defined as different means of providing information
to users of products, including product documentation, such as voice,
fax, relay service, TTY, internet posting, captioning, text-to-speech
synthesis, and audio description.
Comment. One commenter suggested that ``alternate methods'' would
be a better term to describe the different means of providing
information. The commenter was concerned that the term alternate modes
would be confused with alternate modes of operation of the product
itself which does not necessarily refer to how the information is
provided.
Response. The Board agrees that the term alternate methods is a
more descriptive and less confusing term than the term alternate modes.
Other than the change in terminology from alternate modes to alternate
methods, no other changes have been made to the definition in the final
rule.
Assistive technology. Assistive technology is defined as any item,
piece of equipment, or system, whether acquired commercially, modified,
or customized, that is commonly used to increase, maintain, or improve
functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities. The
definition was derived from the definition of assistive technology in
the Assistive Technology Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 3002). The preamble to
the proposed rule noted that assistive technology may include screen
readers which allow persons who cannot see a visual display to either
hear screen content or read the content in Braille, specialized one-
handed keyboards which allow an individual to operate a computer with
only one hand, and specialized audio amplifiers that allow persons with
limited hearing to receive an enhanced audio signal. No substantive
comments were received regarding this definition and no changes have
been made in the final rule.
Electronic and information technology. This is the statutory term
for the products covered by the standards in this part. The statute
explicitly required the Board to define this term, and required the
definition to be consistent with the definition of information
technology in the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. The Board's proposed
definition of information technology was identical to that in the
Clinger-Cohen Act. Electronic and information technology was defined in
the proposed rule to include information technology, as well as any
equipment or interconnected system or subsystem of equipment, that is
used in the creation, conversion, or duplication of data or
information.
Information technology includes computers, ancillary equipment,
software, firmware and similar
[[Page 80505]]
procedures, services (including support services), and related
resources. Electronic and information technology includes information
technology products like those listed above as well as
telecommunications products (such as telephones), information kiosks
and transaction machines, World Wide Web sites, multimedia, and office
equipment such as copiers, and fax machines.
Consistent with the FAR,\4\ the Board proposed that electronic and
information technology not include any equipment that contains embedded
information technology that is used as an integral part of the product,
but the principal function of which is not the acquisition, storage,
manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching,
interchange, transmission, or reception of data or information. For
example, HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) equipment
such as thermostats or temperature control devices, and medical
equipment where information technology is integral to its operation,
are not information technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 48 CFR Chapter 1, part 2, Sec. 2.101 Definitions Information
Technology (c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment. Several commenters recommended that the exception for HVAC
control devices and medical equipment be revised in the final rule. The
commenters were concerned that the exception was too broad in that it
exempted equipment such as medical diagnostic equipment that they felt
should be covered by the rule. In addition, the National Association of
the Deaf (NAD) requested that public address systems, alarm systems,
and two-way communications systems such as intercoms be expressly
included as electronic and information technology.
Response. The exemption is consistent with existing definitions for
information technology in the FAR. Public address systems, alarm
systems, and two-way communications systems are already addressed by
the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines and will
be addressed in more detail in the Board's guidelines under the
Architectural Barriers Act which apply to Federal facilities. No
changes have been made to the definition in the final rule.
Information technology. The definition of information technology is
identical to that in the Clinger-Cohen Act, that is, any equipment or
interconnected system or subsystem of equipment, that is used in the
automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement,
control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of
data or information. Information technology includes computers,
ancillary equipment, software, firmware and similar procedures,
services (including support services), and related resources. No
substantive comments were received regarding this definition and no
changes have been made in the final rule.
Operable controls. The proposed rule defined operable controls as
those components of a product that require physical contact for normal
operation of the device. Examples of operable controls were provided,
including on/off switches, buttons, dials and knobs, mice, keypads and
other input devices, copier paper trays (both for inserting paper to be
copied and retrieving finished copies), coin and card slots, card
readers, and similar components. The proposed rule also clarified that
operable controls do not include voice-operated controls.
Comment. One commenter was concerned that the term paper trays was
confusing and interpreted it to mean the large trays on a copier which
are loaded with reams of paper for copying. The commenter suggested
that the term input and output trays be used instead.
Response. The Board agrees that input and output trays are more
descriptive. The final rule reflects this change which is intended to
apply to products in their normal operation rather than when the
product may be used for maintenance, repair, or occasional monitoring.
For example, a user should be able to add paper to a desktop laser
printer. No other changes have been made to this definition.
Product. The term product is used in the rule as a shorthand for
electronic and information technology. No substantive comments were
received regarding this definition and no changes have been made in the
final rule.
Self contained, closed products. This term was not used in the
proposed rule and is provided in the final rule as a result of the
reorganization of the standards. Self contained, closed products, are
those that generally have embedded software and are commonly designed
in such a fashion that a user cannot easily attach or install assistive
technology. These products include, but are not limited to, information
kiosks and information transaction machines, copiers, printers,
calculators, fax machines, and other similar types of products.
Telecommunications. The definition for telecommunications is
consistent with the definition in the Board's Telecommunications Act
Accessibility Guidelines and the definition of telecommunications in
the Telecommunications Act. No substantive comments were received
regarding this definition and no changes have been made in the final
rule.
TTY. TTYs are machinery or equipment that employ interactive text
based communications through the transmission of coded signals across
the telephone network.
Comment. The Trace Center recommended adding the word ``baudot'' to
the definition of TTY to clarify that the term is not meant to be
broader than baudot TTYs. The NAD and other consumer groups, however,
supported the Board's definition and encouraged the Board to use the
same definition consistently.
Response. The definition for the term TTY is consistent with the
definition of TTY in the Board's ADA Accessibility Guidelines and
Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines. No changes have been
made to the definition in the final rule.
Undue burden. The final rule defines the term undue burden as
``significant difficulty or expense.'' In determining what is a
significant difficulty or expense, each agency must consider the
resources available to the program or component for which the product
is being developed, maintained, used or procured. The proposed rule
defined undue burden as an action that would result in significant
difficulty or expense considering all agency resources available to the
agency or component. The Board sought comment in the NPRM on two
additional factors (identified as factor (2) and factor (3) in the
preamble) for agencies to consider in assessing a determination of an
undue burden. Factor (2) addressed the compatibility of an accessible
product with the agency's or component's infrastructure, including
security, and the difficulty of integrating the accessible product.
Factor (3) concerned the functionality needed from the product and the
technical difficulty involved in making the product accessible.
Comment. The ITAA, ITIC and the Oracle Corporation opposed the
inclusion of a definition for undue burden in the final rule. Both the
ITAA and the ITIC commented that defining undue burden was beyond the
Board's authority. Oracle suggested that the concept of undue burden
under section 508 was beyond the Board's expertise in that it was a
procurement matter. The commenters were also concerned that the Board's
definition was too narrow. Alternatively, if the Board was to adopt a
definition for undue burden, the ITAA favored adoption of the factors
associated with undue burden and
[[Page 80506]]
undue hardship in the ADA and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. In
particular, the ITAA recommended adoption of the ``nature and cost'' of
the accommodation as a factor for consideration. ITIC favored adoption
of the employment factors in title I of the ADA if the Board were to
include a definition of undue burden. Both the ITAA and the ITIC also
favored the adoption of factors (2) and (3) identified in the NPRM if
undue burden was to be addressed in the final rule.
The remainder and majority of the commenters did not address the
issue of whether the Board should adopt a definition of undue burden,
but rather how to define it. At least two Federal agencies and 10
organizations representing persons with disabilities opposed the
inclusion of factors (2) and (3) suggested in the NPRM. The Department
of Commerce and a majority of advocacy organizations representing
people with disabilities opposed factors (2) and (3) on the grounds
that the factors would create a loophole for agencies to avoid
compliance with section 508. The Department of Veterans Affairs opposed
factor (3) as it considered that factor to be more about job assignment
than undue burden. Several commenters including Sun Microsystems and
Adobe Systems favored adopting factors (2) and (3) in the definition of
undue burden. The Social Security Administration (SSA) and the
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children
and Families, sought guidance as to the amount of increased cost of a
product that would not constitute undue burden regardless of an
agency's overall budget. Citing the example of a product that would
cost 25 percent more to comply with the standards, the SSA questioned
whether that would be undue or would 10 percent or 50 percent be
considered undue. The General Services Administration recommended
basing the financial resources available to an agency on a program
basis.
Response. The term undue burden is based on caselaw interpreting
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Southeastern Community College
v. Davis, 442 U.S. 397 (1979)), and has been included in agency
regulations issued under section 504 since the Davis case. See, e.g.,
28 CFR 39.150. The term undue burden is also used in Title III of the
ADA, 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii). The legislative history of the ADA
states that the term undue burden is derived from section 504 and the
regulations thereunder, and is analogous to the term ``undue hardship''
in Title I of the ADA, which Congress defined as ``an action requiring
significant difficulty or expense.'' 42 U.S.C. 12111(10)(A). See, H.
Rept. 101-485, pt. 2, at 106. In the NPRM, the Board proposed adoption
of ``significant difficulty or expense'' as the definition for undue
burden. No changes were made to that aspect of the definition in the
final rule.
Title I of the ADA lists factors to be considered in determining
whether a particular action would result in an undue hardship. 42
U.S.C. 12111(10)(B)(i)-(iv). However, since title I of the ADA
addresses employment and the individual accommodation of employees, not
all of the factors are directly applicable to section 508 except for
the financial resources of the covered facility or entity which is
necessary to a determination of ``significant difficulty or expense.''
Unlike title I, section 508 requires that agencies must procure
accessible electronic and information technology regardless of whether
they have employees with disabilities. Requiring agencies to purchase
accessible products at the outset eliminates the need for expensive
retrofitting of an existing product when requested by an employee or
member of the public as a reasonable accommodation at a later time.
In determining whether a particular action is an undue burden under
section 508, the proposed rule provided that the resources
``available'' to an ``agency or component'' for which the product is
being developed, procured, maintained, or used is an appropriate factor
to consider. The language was derived from the section 504 federally
conducted regulations. Those regulations limited the consideration of
resources to those resources available to a ``program''. The preamble
to the proposed rule noted that an agency's entire budget may not be
available for purposes of complying with section 508. Many parts of
agency budgets are authorized for specific purposes and are thus not
available to other programs or components within the agency. The
definition of undue burden has been clarified in the final rule to more
clearly reflect this limitation. The provision now states that ``agency
resources available to a program or component'' are to be considered in
determining whether an action is an undue burden. Because available
financial resources vary greatly from one agency to another, what
constitutes an undue burden for a smaller agency may not be an undue
burden for another, larger agency having more resources to commit to a
particular procurement. Each procurement would necessarily be
determined on a case-by-case basis. Because a determination of whether
an action would constitute an undue burden is made on a case-by-case
basis, it would be inappropriate for the Board to assess a set
percentage for the increased cost of a product that would be considered
an undue burden in every case.
The Board has not included factors (2) and (3) in the text of the
final rule. While the Board acknowledges that these may be appropriate
factors for consideration by an agency in determining whether an action
is an undue burden, factors (2) and (3) were not based on established
caselaw or existing regulations under section 504. Further, the Board
recognizes that undue burden is determined on a case-by-case basis and
that factors (2) and (3) may not apply in every determination. Agencies
are not required to consider these factors and may consider other
appropriate factors in their undue burden analyses.
Comment. Adobe Systems questioned whether a product which does not
meet a provision based on a finding of undue burden, has to comply with
the remaining provisions.
Response. The undue burden analysis is applied on a provision by
provision basis. A separate undue burden analysis must be conducted
and, in the case of procurements, be documented for each applicable
provision.
Section 1194.5 Equivalent Facilitation
This section allows the use of designs or technologies as
alternatives to those prescribed in this part provided that they result
in substantially equivalent or greater access to and use of a product
for people with disabilities. This provision is not a ``waiver'' or
``variance'' from the requirement to provide accessibility, but a
recognition that future technologies may be developed, or existing
technologies could be used in a particular way, that could provide the
same functional access in ways not envisioned by these standards. In
evaluating whether a technology results in ``substantially equivalent
or greater access,'' it is the functional outcome, not the form, which
is important. For example, an information kiosk which is not accessible
to a person who is blind might be made accessible by having a telephone
handset that connects to a computer that responds to touch-tone
commands and delivers the same information audibly. In addition, voice
recognition and activation are progressing rapidly so that voice input
soon may become a reasonable substitute for some or all keyboard input
functions. For example, already some telephones can be dialed by voice.
In effect, compliance with the performance
[[Page 80507]]
criteria of Sec. 1194.31 is the test for equivalent facilitation.
Comment. Commenters supported the Board in its recognition that
accessibility may sometimes be attained through products that do not
strictly comply with design standards. Several commenters supported
this concept because they believed that it will result in the
development of better access solutions for individuals with
disabilities.
Response. No changes have been made to this provision in the final
rule.
Subpart B--Technical Standards (Formerly Subpart B--Accessibility
Standards in the NPRM)
Comment. Subpart B of the proposed rule contained four sections:
Sec. 1194.21 (General Requirements); Sec. 1194.23 (Component Specific
Standards); Sec. 1194.25 Standards for Compatibility; and Sec. 1194.27
(Functional Performance Criteria). The Board sought comment in the
proposed rule on the organization of Subpart B in general and
Sec. 1194.21 (General Requirements), Sec. 1194.23 (Component Specific
Requirements) and Sec. 1194.25 (Requirements for Compatibility) in
particular. A number of commenters found the application of the
proposed rule to be confusing due to the manner in which the rule was
organized. Commenters questioned whether a specific product need only
comply with the provisions under a specific heading in Sec. 1194.23
(Component Specific Requirements) or whether they must also look to the
provisions in Sec. 1194.21 (General Requirements), as well as
Sec. 1194.25 (Compatibility). Commenters further questioned whether
multiple provisions within a specific section would apply. For example,
making electronic forms accessible was addressed under Sec. 1194.23(b)
(Non-embedded software applications and operating systems). Provisions
for web sites were addressed separately in Sec. 1194.23(c) (Web-based
information or applications). Since electronic forms are becoming very
popular on web sites, the commenters questioned whether the provisions
for electronic forms under the software section should also be applied
to web sites even though the section on web sites did not specifically
address electronic forms. Another commenter pointed out that some
provisions under Sec. 1194.21 (General Requirements) actually addressed
specific components such as touch screens, which were addressed under
General Requirements in the proposed rule. Finally, other commenters
noted that several provisions under Sec. 1194.23 (Component Specific
Requirements) were really compatibility concerns, such as
Sec. 1194.23(b) (Non-embedded software).
Response. A product must comply with the provisions under each
applicable section in Subpart B. For example, a telecommunications
product that has computer, software and operating systems, a keyboard,
and web browser will have to comply with each of the relevant sections
in Subpart B. The Board has reorganized Subpart B in the final rule as
follows:
The title of Subpart B has been changed from ``Accessibility
Standards'' to ``Technical Standards''.
Subpart B has been reorganized so that each section addresses
specific products. For example, Sec. 1194.21 addresses software
applications, Sec. 1194.22 addresses web-based intranet and internet
information and applications, and so on. Each technical provision that
applies to a product is located under that product heading. As a
result, there is some redundancy in this section. However, the Board
believes that this format will help clarify the application of the
standards for each type of product. For example, the provision
prohibiting the use of color alone to indicate an action applies not
only to web page design, but also to software design and certain
operating systems. In the final rule, it is addressed in
Sec. 1194.21(i) (Software applications and operating systems),
Sec. 1194.22(c) (Web-based intranet and internet information and
applications), as well as Sec. 1194.25(g) (Self contained, closed
products).
The provisions contained in Sec. 1194.21 (General Requirements),
Sec. 1194.23 (Component Specific Requirements) and Sec. 1194.25
(Requirements for Compatibility with Assistive Technology) of the
proposed rule have been moved to the new subpart B (Technical
Standards) in the final rule.
Also, the provisions in the proposed rule under Sec. 1194.27
(Functional Performance Criteria) have been redesignated as Subpart C
(Functional Performance Criteria) in the final rule. Subpart C provides
functional performance criteria for overall product evaluation and for
technologies or components for which there is no specific provision in
subpart B. The substance of each of the provisions in the final rule
are discussed below.
Section 1194.21 Software Applications and Operating Systems
Paragraphs (a) through (l) address provisions for software
applications and operating systems. Electronic and information
technology products operate by following programming instructions
referred to as software. Software refers to a set of logical steps (or
programming instructions) that control the actions or operations of
most forms of electronic and information technology products. For
instance, when a pager receives a radio signal, the software embedded
inside the pager determines whether the signal is a ``page'' and how it
should display the information it receives. The circuitry inside the
pager, including the display unit, merely follows the instructions
encoded in the software. Software can be divided into two broad
categories: Software that is embedded in a chip mounted in a product
and non-embedded software that is loaded onto a storage device such as
a hard disk and can be erased, replaced, or updated. For instance, a
word processing program that is installed onto a computer's hard drive
and which may be easily erased, replaced, or updated is typically
``non-embedded'' software. By contrast, the set of instructions
installed on a chip inside a pager and which cannot be erased,
replaced, or updated is typically embedded software. The proposed rule
included provisions for non-embedded software. However, as pointed out
by commenters, as technology changes, the distinction between embedded
software and non-embedded software is increasingly becoming less clear.
These provisions apply to all software products.
Paragraph (a) requires that when software is designed to run on a
system that has a keyboard, the software shall provide a way to control
features which are identifiable by text, from the keyboard. For
example, if a computer program included a ``print'' command or a
``save'' command (both can be readily discerned textually), the program
must provide a means of invoking these commands from the keyboard. For
people who cannot accurately control a mouse, having access to the
software's controls through keyboard alternatives is essential. For
example, rather than pointing to a particular selection on the screen,
a user may move through the choices in a dialogue box by pressing the
tab key. (See Sec. 1194.23(a)(4) and Sec. 1194.23(b)(1) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The NPRM required that products must provide logical
navigation among interface elements through the use of keystrokes.
Commenters questioned the meaning of ``logical'' and whether the
provisions, as proposed, were requiring that each system have a
keyboard. Commenters were concerned that requiring that all features of
every software program be accessible from a keyboard was not feasible
because some programs that
[[Page 80508]]
allow an individual to draw lines and create designs using a mouse
could not be replicated with keystrokes.
Response. This provision applies to products which are intended to
be run on a system with a keyboard. It does not require that a keyboard
be added. The term ``logical navigation'' has been deleted. Only those
actions which can be discerned textually are required to be executable
from a keyboard. For example, most of the menu functions in common
drawing programs that allow a user to open, save, size, rotate, and
perform other actions on a graphic image can all be performed from the
keyboard. However, providing keyboard alternatives for creating an
image by selecting a paintbrush, picking a color, and actually drawing
a design would be extremely difficult. Such detailed procedures require
the fine level of control afforded by a pointing device (e.g., a mouse)
and thus cannot be discerned textually without a lengthy description.
Accordingly, in the final rule, keyboard alternatives are required when
the function (e.g., rotate figure) or the result of performing a
function (e.g., save file confirmation) can be represented with words.
Paragraph (b) prohibits applications from disrupting or disabling
activated features of other products that are identified as
accessibility features, where those features are developed and
documented according to industry standards. Applications also shall not
disrupt or disable activated features of any operating system that are
identified as accessibility features where the application programming
interface for those accessibility features has been documented by the
manufacturer of the operating system and is available to the product
developer. The application programming interface refers to a standard
way for programs to communicate with each other, including the
operating system, and with input and output devices. For instance, the
application programming interface affects how programs have to display
information on a monitor or receive keyboard input via the operating
system.
Many commercially available software applications and operating
systems have features built-into the program that are labeled as access
features. These features can typically be turned on or off by a user.
Examples of these features may include, reversing the color scheme (to
assist people with low vision), showing a visual prompt when an error
tone is sounded (to assist persons who are deaf or hard of hearing), or
providing ``sticky keys'' that allow a user to press key combinations
(such as control-C) sequentially rather than simultaneously (to assist
persons with dexterity disabilities). This provision prohibits software
programs from disabling these features when selected. (See
Sec. 1194.23(b)(2) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The proposed rule only specified that software not
interfere with features that affect the usability for persons with
disabilities. Commenters from industry noted that the provision in the
NPRM did not provide any method of identifying what features are
considered access features and further stated that this provision was
not achievable. These commenters pointed out that it was impossible for
a software producer to be aware of all of the features in all software
packages that could be considered an access feature by persons with
disabilities. Sun Microsystems recommended that this provision address
access features that have been developed using standard programming
techniques and that have been documented by the manufacturer.
Response. This provision has been modified in the final rule to
reference access features which have been developed and documented
according to industry standards. No other changes have been made in the
final rule.
Paragraph (c) requires that software applications place on the
screen a visual indication of where some action may occur if a mouse
click or keystroke takes place. This point on a screen indicating where
an action will take place is commonly referred to as the ``focus''.
This provision also requires that the focus be readable by other
software programs such as screen readers used by computer users who are
blind. (See Sec. 1194.23(b)(3) in the NPRM.) No substantive comments
were received and no changes have been made to this section in the
final rule.
Paragraph (d) requires that software programs, through the use of
program code, make information about the program's controls readable by
assistive technology. Simply stated, this paragraph requires that
information that can be delivered to or received from the user must be
made available to assistive technology, such as screen reading
software. Examples of controls would include button checkboxes, menus,
and toolbars. For assistive technology to operate efficiently, it must
have access to the information about a program's controls to be able to
inform the user of the existence, location, and status of all controls.
If an image is used to represent a program function, the information
conveyed by the image must also be available in text. (See
Sec. 1194.23(b)(4) and Sec. 1194.23(b)(5) in the NPRM.) No substantive
comments were received and no changes have been made to this section,
other than editorial changes.
Paragraph (e) requires that when bitmap images are used by a
program to identify programmatic features, such as controls, the
meaning of that image shall not change during the operation of a
program. ``Bitmap images'' refer to a type of computer image commonly
used in ``icons'' (e.g., a small picture of a printer to activate the
print command). Most screen reading programs allow users to assign text
names to bitmap images. If the bitmap image changes meaning during a
program's execution, the assigned identifier is no longer valid and is
confusing to the user. (See Sec. 1194.23(b)(6) in the NPRM.)
Comment. As proposed, this provision did not identify which images
had to remain consistent during the application. The AFB commented that
the provision should be modified to indicate the type of image that
needs to hold a consistent meaning during the running of an
application. AFB noted that this provision should apply only to those
bitmaps that represent a program function, and not to all images.
Response. The final rule applies the provision to those images
which are used to identify controls, status indicators, or other
programmatic elements. No other changes have been made to this section
in the final rule.
Paragraph (f) provides that software programs use the functions
provided by an operating system when displaying text. The operating
system is the ``core'' computer software that controls basic functions,
such as receiving information from the keyboard, displaying information
on the computer screen, and storing data on the hard disk. Other
software programs use the standard protocols dictated by the operating
system for displaying their own information or processing the output of
other computer programs. When programs are written using unique schemes
for writing text on the screen or use graphics, other programs such as
software for assistive technology may not be able to interpret the
information. This provision does not prohibit or limit an application
programmer from developing unique display techniques. It requires that
when a unique method is used, the text be consistently written
throughout the operating system. (See Sec. 1194.23(b)(7) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The proposed rule did not specify that software programs
must use the functions provided by an operating system when displaying
text. The NPRM required that the text would be provided through an
application programming interface that supported
[[Page 80509]]
interaction with assistive technology or that it would use system text
writing tools. Commenters raised several concerns regarding this
provision. Some commenters were concerned that without a recognized
interface standard, there was no assurance that assistive technology
would be able to access the text provided by an application. Software
producers felt that the provision should not unduly restrict how
programs create or display text. Baum Electronics and GW Micro pointed
out that the only way to ensure that both assistive technology and
applications are using a common interface, was to use the text
displaying functions of the operating system.
Response. The Board agrees that using operating system functions is
one approach that would be available to all programmers. The final rule
has been modified to require that textual information be provided
through the operating system functions so that it will be compatible
with assistive technology. This provision does not restrict programmers
from developing unique methods of displaying text on a screen. It
requires that when those methods are used, the software also sends the
information through the operating systems functions for displaying
text.
Paragraph (g) prohibits applications from overriding user selected
contrast and color selections and other individual display attributes.
As described above, the operating system provides the basic functions
for receiving, displaying, transmitting, or receiving information in a
computer or similar product. Thus, the operating system would appear
the logical choice for ``system-wide'' settings that would be respected
by all computer programs on a computer. Many modern operating systems
incorporate the ability to make settings system-wide as an
accessibility feature. This permits, for instance, users to display all
text in very large characters. Often, persons with disabilities prefer
to select color, contrast, keyboard repeat rate, and keyboard
sensitivity settings provided by an operating system. When an
application disables these system-wide settings, accessibility is
reduced. This provision allows the user to select personalized settings
which cannot be disabled by software programs. (See Sec. 1194.23(b)(9)
in the NPRM.) No substantive comments were received and no changes have
been made to this section in the final rule.
Paragraph (h) addresses animated text or objects. The use of
animation on a screen can pose serious access problems for users of
screen readers or other assistive technology applications. When
important elements such as push-buttons or relevant text are animated,
the user of assistive technology cannot access the application. This
provision requires that in addition to the animation, an application
provide the elements in a non-animated form. (See Sec. 1194.23(b)(11)in
the NPRM.) No substantive comments were received and no changes have
been made to this section in the final rule.
Paragraph (i) prohibits the use of color as the single method for
indicating important information. For instance, a computer program that
requires a user to distinguish between otherwise identical red and blue
squares for different functions (e.g., printing a document versus
saving a file) would not comply with this provision. Relying on color
as the only method for identifying screen elements or controls poses
problems, not only for people with limited or no vision, but also for
those people who are color blind. This provision does not prohibit the
use of color to enhance identification of important features. It does,
however, require that some other method of identification, such as text
labels, be combined with the use of color. (See Sec. 1194.21(a) in the
NPRM.) No substantive comments were received and no changes have been
made to this section in the final rule.
Paragraph (j) requires software applications to provide users with
a variety of color settings that can be used to set a range of contrast
levels. (See Sec. 1194.23(b)(8) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The NPRM specified a minimum number of color settings.
Some commenters were concerned that the proposed provision was too
specific, while others felt it was too general because it failed to
measure how different levels of contrast would be produced. Several
commenters suggested requiring ``a wide variety'' of color settings as
recommended by the EITAAC. One commenter noted that, as proposed, the
provision forbids a monochrome display. Commenters also stated that
some systems do not provide users with color selection capabilities.
Response. The provision in the final rule is limited to those
circumstances where the system allows a user to select colors. This
provision requires more than just providing color choices. The
available choices must also allow for different levels of contrast.
Many people experience a high degree of sensitivity to bright displays.
People with this condition cannot focus on a bright screen for long
because they will soon be unable to distinguish individual letters. An
overly bright background causes a visual ``white-out''. To alleviate
this problem, the user must be able to select a softer background and
appropriate foreground colors. The provision has been revised as a
performance standard rather than a specific design standard by removing
the requirement for 8 foreground and 8 background color selections.
Paragraph (k) limits the flashing or blinking rate of screen items.
(See Sec. 1194.21(c) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The Trace Center expressed concern that research supported
a limit of 3 Hz, not 2 Hz as described in the NPRM. Trace suggested
that the flash or blink rate avoid any flickering between (but not
including) 3 Hz and 55 Hz, which is the power frequency for Europe.
Response. This provision is necessary because some individuals with
photosensitive epilepsy can have a seizure triggered by displays which
flicker or flash, particularly if the flash has a high intensity and is
within certain frequency ranges. The 2 Hz limit was chosen to be
consistent with proposed revisions to the ADA Accessibility Guidelines
which, in turn, are being harmonized with the International Code
Council (ICC)/ANSI A117 standard, ``Accessible and Usable Buildings and
Facilities'', ICC/ANSI A117.1-1998 which references a 2 Hz limit. The
Board agrees that an upper limit is needed, since all electrically
powered equipment, even an incandescent light bulb, has a ``flicker''
due to the alternating current line voltage frequency (60 Hz in the
U.S., 55 Hz in Europe). There does not appear to be any significant
incidence of photosensitive seizures being induced by the line voltage
frequency of ordinary lights. Therefore, the provision has been changed
to prohibit flash or blink frequencies between 2 Hz and 55 Hz.
Paragraph (l) requires that people with disabilities have access to
electronic forms. This section is a result of the reorganization of the
final rule and is identical to section 1194.22(n) discussed below. (See
Sec. 1194.23(b)(10) in the NPRM.)
Section 1194.22 Web-based Intranet and Internet Information and
Applications
In the proposed rule, the Board indicated that the EITAAC had
recommended that the Board's rule directly reference priority one and
two checkpoints of the World Wide Web Consortiums' (W3C) Web
Accessibility Initiative's (WAI) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
1.0 (WCAG 1.0). Rather than reference the WCAG 1.0, the proposed rule
and this final rule
[[Page 80510]]
include provisions which are based generally on priority one
checkpoints of the WCAG 1.0, as well as other agency documents on web
accessibility and additional recommendations of the EITAAC.
Comment. A number of comments were received from the WAI and others
expressing concern that the Board was creating an alternative set of
standards that would confuse developers as to which standards should be
followed. WAI was further concerned that some of the provisions and
preamble language in the NPRM were inaccurate. On the other hand, a
number of commenters, including the ACB and several members of the
EITAAC, supported the manner in which web access issues were addressed
in the proposed rule.
Response. The final rule does not reference the WCAG 1.0. However,
the first nine provisions in Sec. 1194.22, paragraphs (a) through (i),
incorporate the exact language recommended by the WAI in its comments
to the proposed rule or contain language that is not substantively
different than the WCAG 1.0 and was supported in its comments.
Paragraphs (j) and (k) are meant to be consistent with similar
provisions in the WCAG 1.0, however, the final rule uses language which
is more consistent with enforceable regulatory language. Paragraphs
(l), (m), (n), (o), and (p) are different than any comparable provision
in the WCAG 1.0 and generally require a higher level of access or
prescribe a more specific requirement.
The Board did not adopt or modify four of the WCAG 1.0 priority one
checkpoints. These include WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 4.1 which provides that
web pages shall ``[c]learly identify changes in the natural language of
a document's text and any text equivalents (e.g., captions).''; WCAG
1.0 Checkpoint 14.1 which provides that web pages shall ``[u]se the
clearest and simplest language appropriate for a site's content.'';
WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 1.3 which provides that ``[u]ntil user agents can
automatically read aloud the text equivalent of a visual track, provide
an auditory description of the important information of the visual
track of a multimedia presentation.''; and WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 6.2
which provides that web pages shall ``[e]nsure that equivalents for
dynamic content are updated when the dynamic content changes.''
Section 1194.23(c)(3) of the proposed rule required that web pages
alert a user when there is a change in the natural language of a page.
The ``natural language'' referred to the spoken language (e.g., English
or French) of the web page content. The WAI pointed out that the
preamble to the NPRM misinterpreted this provision. The preamble
suggested that a statement such as ``the following paragraph is in
French'' would meet the provision. WAI responded by noting that this
was not the intent of the provision. The WCAG 1.0 recommend that web
page authors embed a code or markup language in a document when the
language changes so that speech synthesizers and Braille displays could
adjust output accordingly.
The Trace Center advised that only two assistive technology
programs could interpret such coding or markup language, Homepage
Reader from IBM and PwWebspeak from Isound. These programs contain the
browser, screen reading functions, and the speech synthesizer in a
single highly integrated program. However, the majority of persons who
are blind use a mainstream browser such as Internet Explorer or
Netscape Navigator in conjunction with a screen reader. There are also
several speech synthesizers in use today, but the majority of those
used in the United States do not have the capability of switching to
the processing of foreign language phonemes. As a result, the proposed
provision that web pages alert a user when there is a change in the
natural language of a page has been deleted in the final rule.
The Board also did not adopt WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 14.1 which
provides that web pages shall ``[u]se the clearest and simplest
language appropriate for a site's content.'' While a worthwhile
guideline, this provision was not included because it is difficult to
enforce since a requirement to use the simplest language can be very
subjective.
The Board did not adopt WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 1.3 which provides that
``[u]ntil user agents can automatically read aloud the text equivalent
of a visual track, provide an auditory description of the important
information of the visual track of a multimedia presentation.''
Although the NPRM did not propose addressing this issue in the web
section, there was a similar provision in the multi-media section of
the NPRM.
The Board did not adopt WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 6.2 which provide that
web pages shall ``[e]nsure that equivalents for dynamic content are
updated when the dynamic content changes.'' The NPRM had a provision
that stated ``web pages shall update equivalents for dynamic content
whenever the dynamic content changes.'' The WAI stated in its comments
that there was no difference in meaning between the NPRM and WCAG 1.0
Checkpoint 6.2. The NPRM provision has been deleted in the final rule
as the meaning of the provision is unclear.
A web site required to be accessible by section 508, would be in
complete compliance if it met paragraphs (a) through (p) of these
standards. It could also comply if it fully met the WCAG 1.0, priority
one checkpoints and paragraphs (l), (m), (n), (o), and (p) of these
standards. A Federal web site that was in compliance with these
standards and that wished to meet all of the WCAG 1.0, priority one
checkpoints would also have to address the WAI provision regarding
using the clearest and simplest language appropriate for a site's
content (WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 14.1), the provision regarding alerting a
user when there is a change in the natural language of the page (WCAG
1.0 Checkpoint 4.1), the provision regarding audio descriptions (WCAG
1.0 Checkpoint 1.3), and the provision that web pages shall ``ensure
that equivalents for dynamic content are updated when the dynamic
content changes (WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 6.2).
The Board has as one of its goals to take a leadership role in the
development of codes and standards for accessibility. We do this by
working with model code organizations and voluntary consensus standards
groups that develop and periodically revise codes and standards
affecting accessibility. The Board acknowledges that the WAI has been
at the forefront in developing international standards for web
accessibility and looks forward to working with them in the future on
this vitally important area. However, the WCAG 1.0 were not developed
within the regulatory enforcement framework. At the time of publication
of this rule, the WAI was developing the Web Content Accessibility
Guidelines 2.0. The Board plans to work closely with the WAI in the
future on aspects regarding verifiability and achievability of the Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0.
Paragraph (a) requires that a text equivalent for every non-text
element shall be provided. As the Internet has developed, the use of
photographs, images, and other multimedia has increased greatly. Most
web pages are created using HTML, or ``HyperText Markup Language.'' A
``page'' in HTML is actually a computer file that includes the actual
text of the web page and a series of ``tags'' that control layout,
display images (which are actually separate computer files), and
essentially provide all content other than text. The tags are merely
signals to the browser that tell it how to display information and many
tags allow web designers to
[[Page 80511]]
include a textual description of the non-textual content arranged by
the tag. The provision is necessary because assistive technology cannot
describe pictures, but can convey the text information to the user.
Currently, most web page authoring programs already provide a method
for web designers to associate words with an image and associating text
with non-textual content is easy for anyone familiar with HTML. This
provision requires that when an image indicates a navigational action
such as ``move to the next screen'' or ``go back to the top of the
page,'' the image must be accompanied by actual text that states the
purpose of the image, in other words, what the image is telling you to
do. This provision also requires that when an image is used to
represent page content, the image must have a text description
accompanying it that explains the meaning of the image. Associating
text with these images makes it possible, for someone who cannot see
the screen to understand the content and navigate a web page. (See
Sec. 1194.23(c)(1) in the NPRM.)
Comment. In the NPRM, Sec. 1194.23(c)(1) required text to be
associated with all non-textual elements, and prescribed the use of
specific techniques, such as ``alt'' and ``longdesc,'' to accomplish
that requirement. WAI commented that, while the use of specific
techniques was provided in WCAG 1.0 as examples of methods to use, the
proposed rule was limiting the manner in which text could be associated
with non-textual elements to two techniques. The result was that other
approaches to providing text tags in web languages other than HTML were
prohibited.
Other commenters pointed out that many images on a web page do not
need text tags. They noted that some images are used to create
formatting features such as spacers or borders and that requiring text
identification of these images adds nothing to the comprehension of a
page. These images were, in their view, textually irrelevant. One
commenter suggested that this provision should address ``every non-text
element'' because such features as buttons, checkboxes, or audio output
were covered by other provisions in the proposed rule.
Response. This provision incorporates the exact language
recommended by the WAI in their comments to the proposed rule. Non-text
element does not mean all visible elements. The types of non-text
elements requiring identification is limited to those images that
provide information required for comprehension of content or to
facilitate navigation. Web page authors often utilize transparent
graphics for spacing. Adding text to identify these elements would
produce unnecessary clutter for users of screen readers.
The Board also interprets this provision to require that when audio
presentations are available on a web page, because audio is a non-
textual element, text in the form of captioning must accompany the
audio, to allow people who are deaf or hard of hearing to comprehend
the content. (See Sec. 1194.23(c)(1) in the NPRM.)
Paragraph (b) provides that equivalent alternatives for any
multimedia presentation shall be synchronized with the presentation.
This would require, for example, that if an audio portion of a multi-
media production was captioned as required in paragraph (a), the
captioning must be synchronized with the audio. (See
Sec. 1194.23(c)(12) and (e)(3) in the NPRM.)
Comment. Comments from organizations representing persons who are
deaf or hard of hearing strongly supported this provision. One
commenter from the technology industry raised a concern that this
provision would require all live speeches broadcast on the Internet by
a Federal agency to be captioned. The commenter noted that an
alternative might be to provide a transcript of the speech which could
be saved, reviewed, and searched.
Response. This provision uses language that is not substantively
different than the WCAG 1.0 and was supported in the WAI comments to
the proposed rule. There are new techniques for providing realtime
captioning which are supported by new versions of programs like
RealAudio. Providing captioning does not preclude posting a transcript
of the speech for people to search or download. However, commenters
preferred the realtime captioning over the delay in providing a
transcript. No substantive changes have been made to this provision in
the final rule.
Paragraph (c) prohibits the use of color as the single method for
indicating important information on a web page. When colors are used as
the sole method for identifying screen elements or controls, persons
who are color blind as well as those people who are blind or have low
vision may find the web page unusable. This provision does not prohibit
the use of color to enhance identification of important features. It
does, however, require that some other method of identification, such
as text labels, must be combined with the use of color. (See
Sec. 1194.23(c)(2) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The WAI expressed concern that as proposed, the provision
did not capture the intent of the provision as addressed in the WCAG
1.0. The intent of such a requirement, according to WAI, was to have
web page designers use methods other than color to indicate emphasis
such as bold text.
Response. This provision incorporates the exact language
recommended by the WAI in their comments to the proposed rule. This
provision addresses not only the problem of using color to indicate
emphasized text, but also the use of color to indicate an action. For
example, a web page that directs a user to ``press the green button to
start'' should also identify the green button in some other fashion
than simply by color.
Paragraph (d) provides that documents must be organized so they are
readable without requiring browser support for style sheets. Style
sheets are a relatively new technology that lets web site designers
make consistent appearing web pages that can be easily updated. For
instance, without style sheets, making headings appear in large font
while not affecting the surrounding text requires separate tags hidden
in the document to control font-size and boldface. Each heading would
require a separate set of tags. Using style sheets, however, the web
site designer can specify in a single tag that all headings in the
document should be in large font and boldface. Because style sheets can
be used to easily affect the entire appearance of a page, they are
often used to enhance accessibility and this provision does not
prohibit the use of style sheets. This provision requires that web
pages using style sheets be able to be read accurately by browsers that
do not support style sheets and by browsers that have disabled the
support for style sheets. (See Sec. 1194.23(c)(4) in the NPRM.) This
requirement is based on the fact that style sheets are a relatively new
technology and many users with disabilities may either not have
computer software that can properly render style sheets or because they
may have set their own style sheet for all web pages that they view.
Comment. The WAI commented that while the provision was consistent
with WCAG 1.0, the preamble inaccurately noted that this provision
would prohibit the use of style sheets that interfere with user defined
style sheets. The WAI noted that a browser running on a user's system
determines whether or not style sheets associated with pages will be
downloaded.
Response. The WAI correctly noted that this provision does not
prohibit the use of style sheets that interfere with user-defined style
sheets because the
[[Page 80512]]
use of style sheets is controlled by a user's browser. This provision
uses language that is not substantively different than WCAG 1.0 and was
supported in the WAI comments to the proposed rule. No substantive
changes have been made to this provision in the final rule.
Paragraph (e) requires web page designers to include redundant text
links for each active region of a server-side image map on their web
pages. An ``image map'' is a picture (often a map) on a web page that
provides different ``links'' to other web pages, depending on where a
user clicks on the image. There are two basic types of image maps:
``client-side image maps'' and ``server-side image maps.'' With client-
side image maps, each ``active region'' in a picture can be assigned
its own ``link'' (called a URL or ``uniform resource locator'') that
specifies what web page to retrieve when a portion of the picture is
selected. HTML allows each active region to have its own alternative
text, just like a picture can have alternative text. See
Sec. 1194.22(a). By contrast, clicking on a location of a server-side
image map only specifies the coordinates within the image when the
mouse was depressed--which link or URL is ultimately selected must be
deciphered by the computer serving the web page. When a web page uses a
server-side image map to present the user with a selection of options,
browsers cannot indicate to the user the URL that will be followed when
a region of the map is activated. Therefore, the redundant text link is
necessary to provide access to the page for anyone not able to see or
accurately click on the map. (See Sec. 1194.23(c)(6) in the NPRM.) No
substantive changes have been made to this provision in the final rule.
Paragraph (f) provides that client-side image maps shall be
provided instead of server-side image maps except where the regions
cannot be defined with an available geometric shape. As discussed
above, there are two general categories of image maps: client-side
image maps and server-side image maps. When a web browser retrieves a
specific set of instructions from a client-side image map, it also
receives all the information about what action will happen when a
region of the map is pressed. For this reason, client-side image maps,
even though graphical in nature, can display the links related to the
map, in a text format which can be read with the use of assistive
technology. (See Sec. 1194.23(c)(7) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The WAI suggested that the final rule include an exception
for those regions of a map which cannot be defined with an available
geometric shape.
Response. This provision incorporates the exact language
recommended by the WAI in their comments to the proposed rule.
Paragraphs (g) and (h) permit the use of tables, but require that
the tables be coded according to the rules for developing tables of the
markup language used. When tables are coded inaccurately or table codes
are used for non-tabular material, some assistive technology cannot
accurately read the content. Many assistive technology applications can
interpret the HTML codes for tables and will most likely be updated to
read the table coding of new markup languages. (See Sec. 1194.23(c)(8-
9) in the NPRM.) The Board will be developing technical assistance
materials on how tables can comply with this section. In addition to
these specific provisions, the technical assistance materials will
address all of the provisions in this part.
Comment. Commenters were concerned by the preamble discussion in
the NPRM which advised against the use of table tags for formatting of
non-tabular material.
Response. The Board understands that there are currently few
alternatives to the use of tables when trying to place items in
predefined positions on web pages. These provisions do not prohibit the
use of table codes to format non-tabular content. They require that
when a table is created, appropriate coding should be used. Paragraph
(g) incorporates the exact language recommended by the WAI in their
comments to the proposed rule. Paragraph (h) uses language that is not
substantively different than WCAG 1.0 and was supported in the WAI
comments to the proposed rule. No substantive changes have been made to
this provision in the final rule.
Paragraph (i) addresses the use of frames and requires that they be
titled with text to identify the frame and assist in navigating the
frames. ``Frames'' are a technique used by web designers to create
different ``portions'' or ``frames'' of their screen that serve
different functions. When a web site uses frames, often only a single
frame will update with information while the other frames remain
intact. Because using frames gives the user a consistent portion of the
screen, they are often used for navigational toolbars for web sites.
They are also often faster because only a portion of the screen is
updated, instead of the entire screen. Frames can be an asset to users
of screen readers and other assistive technology if the labels on the
frames are explicit. Labels such as top, bottom, or left, provide few
clues as to what is contained in the frame. However, labels such as
``navigation bar'' or ``main content'' are more meaningful and
facilitate frame identification and navigation. (See
Sec. 1194.23(c)(10) in the NPRM.) This provision uses language that is
not substantively different than WCAG 1.0. No substantive changes have
been made to this provision in the final rule.
Paragraph (j) sets limits on the blink or flicker rate of screen
elements. This section is a result of the reorganization of the final
rule and is similar to section 1194.21(k) discussed above. (See
Sec. 1194.21(c) in the NPRM.) This provision is meant to be consistent
with WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 7.1 which provides that, ``[u]ntil user agents
allow users to control flickering, avoid causing the screen to
flicker.'' This provision uses language which is more consistent with
enforceable regulatory language.
Paragraph (k) requires that a text-only web page shall only be
provided as a last resort method for bringing a web site into
compliance with the other requirements in Sec. 1194.22. Text-only pages
must contain equivalent information or functionality as the primary
pages. Also, the text-only page shall be updated whenever the primary
page changes. This provision is meant to be consistent with WCAG 1.0
Checkpoint 11.4 which provides that ``[i]f, after best efforts, you
cannot create an accessible page, provide a link to an alternative page
that uses W3C technologies, is accessible, has equivalent information
(or functionality), and is updated as often as the inaccessible
(original) page.''
Paragraph (l) requires that when web pages rely on special
programming instructions called ``scripts'' to affect information
displayed or to process user input, functional text shall be provided.
It also requires that the text be readable by assistive technology such
as screen reading software. Scripts are widely used by web sites as an
efficient method to create faster or more secure web communications. A
script is a programmatic set of instructions that is downloaded with a
web page and permits the user's computer to share the processing of
information with the web server. Without scripts, a user performs some
action while viewing a web page, such as selecting a link or submitting
a form, a message is sent back to the ``web server'', and a new web
page is sent back to the user's computer. The more frequently an
individual computer has to send and receive information from a web
server, the greater chance there is for errors in the data, loss of
speed, and possible violations of security. Also,
[[Page 80513]]
when many users are simultaneously viewing the same web page, the
demands on the web server may be huge. Scripts allow more work to be
performed on the individual's computer instead of on the web server.
And, the individual computer does not have to contact the web server as
often. Scripts can perform very complex tasks such as those necessary
to complete, verify, and submit a form and verify credit information.
The advantage for the user is that many actions take place almost
instantly, because processing takes place on the user's computer and
because communication with the web server is often not necessary. This
improves the apparent speed of a web page and makes it appear more
dynamic. Currently, JavaScript, a standardized object-oriented
programming language, is the most popular scripting language, although
certain plug-ins (see below) support slightly different scripting
languages. This provision requires web page authors to ensure that all
the information placed on a screen by a script shall be available in a
text form to assistive technology. (See Sec. 1194.23(c)(11) in the
NPRM.)
Comment. The NPRM was more specific in its application, providing
that pages must be usable when scripts, applets, or other programmatic
objects are turned off or are not supported. The NPRM permitted the use
of an alternative accessible page. Several commenters found the
proposed provision too restrictive. They noted that, as proposed, it
could severely discourage innovation both for web page developers and
for designers of assistive technology. It was argued that if producers
of assistive technology know that a web page would never require access
to scripts, there would be no incentive to develop better access to
these features. It was also pointed out that discussing scripts,
applets, and plug-ins in the same provision was not appropriate,
because plug-ins were actual programs that run on a user's machine and
do not necessarily originate on the web page. Scripts, on the other
hand, are downloaded to a user's system from the web page (or an
associated file) and, unlike applets or plug-ins, operate completely
inside the browser without any additional software. Therefore, as
scripts directly affect the actual content of a web page, the web page
designer has control over designing a script but does not have control
over which plug-in a user may select to process web content.
Response. The final rule has two separate provisions for scripts
(l), and applets and plug-ins (m). Web page authors have a
responsibility to provide script information in a fashion that can be
read by assistive technology. When authors do not put functional text
with a script, a screen reader will often read the content of the
script itself in a meaningless jumble of numbers and letters. Although
this jumble is text, it cannot be interpreted or used. For this reason,
the provision requires that functional text, that is text that when
read conveys an accurate message as to what is being displayed by the
script, be provided. For instance, if a web page uses a script only to
fill the contents of an HTML form with basic default values, the web
page will likely comply with this requirement, as the text inserted
into the form by the script may be readable by a screen reader. By
contrast, if a web page uses a script to create a graphic map of menu
choices when the user moves the pointer over an icon, the web site
designer may be required to incorporate ``redundant text links'' that
match the menu choices because functional text for each menu choice
cannot be rendered to the assistive technology. Determining whether a
web page meets this requirement may require careful testing by web site
designers, particularly as both assistive technology and the JavaScript
standard continue to evolve.
Paragraph (m) is, in part, a new provision developed in response to
comments received on Sec. 1194.23(c)(11) of the NPRM and discussed in
the preceding paragraph. While most web browsers can easily read HTML
and display it to the user, several private companies have developed
proprietary file formats for transmitting and displaying special
content, such as multimedia or very precisely defined documents.
Because these file formats are proprietary, they cannot ordinarily be
displayed by web browsers. To make it possible for these files to be
viewed by web browsers, add-on programs or ``plug-ins'' can be
downloaded and installed on the user's computer that will make it
possible for their web browsers to display or play the content of the
files. This provision requires that web pages which provide content
such as Real Audio or PDF files, also provide a link to a plug-in that
will meet the software provisions. It is very common for a web page to
provide links to needed plug-ins. For example, web pages containing
Real Audio almost always have a link to a source for the necessary
player. This provision places a responsibility on the web page author
to know that a compliant application exists, before requiring a plug-
in. (See Sec. 1194.21(c)(11) in the NPRM.)
Paragraph (n) requires that people with disabilities have access to
interactive electronic forms. Electronic forms are a popular method
used by many agencies to gather information or permit a person to apply
for services, benefits, or employment. The 1998 Government Paperwork
Elimination Act requires that Federal agencies make electronic versions
of their forms available on-line when practicable and allows
individuals and businesses to use electronic signatures to file these
forms electronically. (See Sec. 1194.23(b)(10) in the NPRM.) At
present, the interaction between form controls and screen readers can
be unpredictable, depending upon the design of the page containing
these controls. Some developers place control labels and controls in
different table cells; others place control labels in various locations
in various distances from the controls themselves, making the response
from a screen reader less than accurate many times.
Comment. Adobe Systems expressed concern that completing some forms
requires a script or plug-in and interpreted the proposed rule as
prohibiting such items. They pointed out that there are other methods
of completing a form that would not require scripts or plug-ins, but
those methods require the constant transfer of information between the
client and server computers. Adobe noted that that method can be
extremely inefficient and can pose a security risk for the individual's
personal data.
Response. This provision does not forbid the use of scripts or
plug-ins and many of the existing products support these features. If a
browser does not support these features, however, paragraphs (l) and
(m) require that some other method of working with the web page must be
provided. As assistive technologies advance, it is anticipated that the
occasions when the use of scripts and plug-ins are not supported will
diminish significantly. No substantive changes have been made to this
provision in the final rule.
Paragraph (o) provides that a method be used to facilitate the easy
tracking of page content that provides users of assistive technology
the option to skip repetitive navigation links. (See
Sec. 1194.23(c)(13) in the NPRM.) No substantive comments were received
on this provision and no changes were made, other than editorial
changes.
Paragraph (p) addresses the accessibility problems that can occur
if a web page times-out while a user is completing a form. Web pages
can be designed with scripts so that the web page disappears or
``expires'' if a
[[Page 80514]]
response is not received within a specified amount of time. Sometimes,
this technique is used for security reasons or to reduce the demands on
the computer serving the web pages. A disability can have a direct
impact on the speed with which a person can read, move around, or fill
in a web form. For this reason, when a timed response is required, the
user shall be alerted and given sufficient time to indicate that
additional time is necessary. (See Sec. 1194.21(d) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The proposed rule prescribed specific settings for
increasing the time-out limit based on a default setting. The Board
sought comment on whether a system was commercially available that
would allow a user to adjust the time-out. The Board also sought
information on whether the proposed provision would compromise
security. Commenters responded that security would be an issue if the
time-out period was extended for too long and information with personal
data was left exposed. Other commenters raised the point that
specifying specific multiples of the default was unrealistic and
arbitrary. The Multimedia Telecommunications Association (MMTA) stated
that the default was not built-into a system. Rather, it was generally
something that was set by an installer or a system administrator. They
also noted that in order for a user to know that more time is needed,
the user must be alerted that time is about to run out.
Response. The provision has been revised as a performance standard
rather than a specific design standard by removing the reference to a
specified length of time for users to respond. The Board agrees that it
would be difficult for a user to know how much more time is needed even
if the time-out could be adjusted. The final rule requires only that a
user be notified if a process is about to time-out and be given an
opportunity to answer a prompt asking whether additional time is
needed.
Section 1194.23 Telecommunications Products
Paragraph (a) requires that telephone equipment shall provide a
standard non-acoustic connection point for TTYs. A TTY is a device that
includes a keyboard and display that is used to transmit and receive
text over a telephone line using sound. Originally, TTY's used acoustic
connections and the user placed the telephone handset on the TTY to
transfer the sound signals between the TTY and the telephone. Handsets
on many modern telephones do not fit well with many TTY acoustic
couplers, allowing interference from outside noise. Individuals who use
TTYs to communicate must have a non-acoustic way to connect TTYs to
telephones in order to obtain clear TTY connections, such as through a
direct RJ-11 connector, a 2.5 mm audio jack, or other direct
connection. When a TTY is connected directly into the network, it must
be possible for the acoustic pickup (microphone) to be turned off
(automatically or manually) to avoid having background noise in a noisy
environment mixed with the TTY signal. Since some TTY users make use of
speech for outgoing communications, the microphone on/off capability
must be automatic or easy to switch back and forth or a push-to-talk
mode should be provided. In the Telecommunications Act Accessibility
Guidelines (36 CFR Part 1193), the Board recognized that direct-connect
TTYs are customer premises equipment (CPE) subject to section 255 of
that Act. Since CPE is a subset of electronic and information
technology, it is similarly covered by this rule. This provision was
adopted from the Board's Telecommunications Act Accessibility
Guidelines so that manufacturers of telecommunications and customer
premises equipment covered by section 255 of the Telecommunications Act
wishing to sell products to the Federal government would have a
consistent set of requirements. (See Sec. 1194.23(d)(1) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The MMTA commented that providing a direct connection to
an analog telephone may be as simple as providing an RJ-11 jack, but
that digital phones pose additional problems. It noted that most multi-
line business phones operating through a PBX are digital phones.
However, it also stated that TTY connectivity can be accomplished by
adding an analog line similar to what would be provided for a fax
machine. The MMTA further suggested that TTY manufacturers should share
the burden for compatibility. Another comment suggested that the Board
require the provision of a shelf and outlet for a TTY.
Response. In some cases, the addition of an RJ-11 connector will be
the easiest solution. In other cases, the addition of a ``smart''
adapter may be necessary, similar to the dataports available on many
hotel phones. Some adapters and converters have circuitry which
determines the nature of the line and plug-in equipment and makes the
adjustment automatically while others are manual. There is merit,
however, in viewing this provision from the standpoint of the
capabilities of a system as opposed to the capabilities of a single
desktop unit. There may be cases in which the connection is best made
at the PBX level by installing analog phone lines where necessary. The
final provision has been modified to allow for either option.
With respect to the suggestion that the standards require a shelf
and outlet for a TTY, these standards apply to the electronic and
information technology products themselves, not the furniture they
occupy. Therefore, these standards do not address auxiliary features
such as shelves and electrical outlets.
Paragraph (b) requires that products providing voice communication
functionality be able to support use of all commonly used cross-
manufacturer, non-proprietary, standard signals used by TTYs. Some
products compress or alter the audio signal in such a manner that
standard signals used by TTYs are not transmitted properly, preventing
successful TTY communication. This provision is consistent with the
Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines. (See
Sec. 1194.23(d)(2) in the NPRM.)
Comment. Comments from industry suggested that the Board should
clarify the standard referred to as U.S. standard Baudot communications
protocol. They noted that there are several standards in use in Europe.
Some European products support more than one of these standards, but
not the common U.S. standard. The comments said that such products
would arguably comply with the provision but would not meet the intent
of section 508.
Response. The proposed rule required that products must support all
cross-manufacturer, non-proprietary protocols, not just one or two. Of
course, that included the common U.S. Baudot protocol (ANSI/TIA/EIA
825). ASCII is also used, especially on dual mode TTYs, but it is less
common. Compliance with international standard ITU-T Recommendation
V.18 would meet this provision, but products complying with the ITU
standard may not be commercially available. It is important that
products and systems support the protocol used by most TTYs currently
in use to avoid a disenfranchisement of the majority of persons who are
deaf or hard of hearing. However, the intent of this provision is to
require support of more than just Baudot or just ASCII. At present,
only these two are commonly used in the U.S., but others may come into
use later. While the Board does not want to disenfranchise users of
current devices, neither does it want to exclude those who buy newer
equipment, as long as such devices use protocols which are not
proprietary and are supported by
[[Page 80515]]
more than one manufacturer. Of course, like all the requirements of
these standards, this provision is subject to commercial availability.
Accordingly, the provision has been changed in the final rule by adding
the phrase ``commonly used.''
Paragraph (c) provides that TTY users be able to utilize voice
mail, auto-attendant, and interactive voice response telecommunications
systems. Voice mail systems are available which allow TTY users to
retrieve and leave TTY messages. This provision does not require that
phone systems have voice to text conversion capabilities. It requires
that TTY users can retrieve and leave TTY messages and utilize
interactive systems. (See Sec. 1194.23(d)(3) in the NPRM.)
Comment. One commenter suggested that the Board encourage
developers to build-in direct TTY decoding so that external TTYs are
not required. For example, if an employee had voice mail with TTY
functionality built-in, that employee would be able to read TTY
messages through the computer system directly, without needing to
attach an external TTY. The commenter noted that this would be
beneficial to Federal agencies having telephone communication with
members of the public who have speech or hearing disabilities. The
agency could then have direct communication rather than being required
to use an external TTY device or utilizing a relay service. Another
said telecommunications systems should be required to have TTY decoding
capability built-in, to the maximum extent possible. Another commenter
pointed out that voice mail, voice response, and interactive systems
depend on DTMF ``touch tones'' for operation and that many TTYs do not
provide this function. Also, one commenter noted that automatic speech
recognition (ASR) is not yet mature, but requested that a requirement
for ASR be reviewed every two years to determine the feasibility of
including such capabilities in products based on the rapid change of
technology.
Response. This provision requires that voice mail, auto-attendant,
and interactive voice response systems be usable with TTYs. It is
desirable that computers have built-in TTY capability and there are
currently systems which can add such functionality to computers. This
provision is a performance requirement and the Board does not feel it
would be useful to be more specific at this time. The current problems
with voice mail and voice response systems are not necessarily
susceptible to a single solution and there are several ways to comply,
including voice recognition in some cases, depending on the system.
Many voice mail systems could record a TTY message, just like a voice
message, but the outgoing message needs to include a TTY prompt letting
TTY users to know when to start keying. A requirement for a quick
response to menu choices is the most frequently reported barrier for
relay users. The ability to ``opt out'' of a menu and connect with an
operator or transfer to a TTY system are also ways to make these
services available and usable without highly sophisticated decoding
technology.
Paragraph (d) addresses access problems that can arise when
telecommunications systems require a response from a user within a
certain time. Due to the nature of the equipment, users of TTYs may
need additional time to read and respond to menus and messages. This
provision is identical to section 1194.22(p) discussed above. (See
Sec. 1194.21(d)(4) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The proposed rule prescribed specific settings for
increasing the time-out limit based on a default setting. Commenters
raised the point that specifying specific multiples of the default was
unrealistic and arbitrary. The MMTA stated that the default was not
built-into a system. Rather it was generally something that was set by
an installer or a system administrator. It also noted that in order for
users to know that more time is needed, they must be alerted that time
is about to run out.
Response. The provision has been changed to a performance standard
rather than a specific design standard by removing the reference to a
specified length of time for users to respond. The Board agrees that it
would be difficult for a user to know how much more time is needed even
if the time-out could be adjusted. The final rule requires only that a
user be notified if a process is about to time-out and be given an
opportunity to answer a prompt asking whether additional time is
needed.
Paragraph (e) requires that functions such as caller identification
must be accessible for users of TTYs, and for users who cannot see
displays. (See Sec. 1194.23(d)(5) in the NPRM.)
Comment. One commenter thought the reference to telecommunications
relay services in the NPRM implied that caller identification
information must somehow be transmitted directly to the end-user.
Response. Since the end-users in a telecommunications relay service
are not directly connected, passing along caller identification
information is not commonly done, therefore, the reference to relay
services has been deleted to avoid confusion.
Paragraph (f) requires products to be equipped with volume control
that provides an adjustable amplification up to a minimum of 20 dB of
gain. If a volume adjustment is provided that allows a user to set the
level anywhere from 0 to the upper requirement of 20 dB, there is no
need to specify a lower limit. If a stepped volume control is provided,
one of the intermediate levels must provide 12 dB of gain. The gain
applies to the voice output. (See Sec. 1194.23(d)(6) in the NPRM.)
Comment. Several commenters supported the provision for a 20 dB
gain, but some supported a 25 dB requirement, pointing out that many
persons who are hard of hearing need more than 20 dB amplification.
Others urged the Board to adopt the current Federal Communications
Commission's (FCC) requirement for a minimum of 12 dB and a maximum of
18 dB. Some commenters said amplifying a poor quality signal would not
be useful and that the amplification may itself introduce distortion.
Response. The proposed level of amplification was different from
that required under the FCC regulations implementing the Hearing Aid
Compatibility Act (47 CFR 68.317 (a)). The FCC requires volume control
that provides, through the receiver in the handset or headset of the
telephone, 12 dB of gain minimum and up to 18 dB of gain maximum, when
measured in terms of Receive Objective Loudness Rating.
The Board's provision is consistent with the 1998 ANSI A117.1
document, ``Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities.'' ANSI is
the voluntary standard-setting body which issues accessibility
standards used by the nation's model building codes. The Board has
issued a separate NPRM to harmonize the existing ADAAG provision with
the ANSI standard. The FCC originally selected its requirement to be
consistent with the ADA Accessibility Guidelines now being proposed for
amendment. This provision is consistent with the proposed ADA and
Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Guidelines and the
Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines. No changes were made
to this provision in the final rule.
Paragraph (g) requires that an automatic reset be installed on any
telephone that allows the user to adjust the volume higher than the
normal level. This is a safety feature to protect people from suffering
damage to their
[[Page 80516]]
hearing if they accidentally answer a telephone with the amplification
turned too high. (See Sec. 1194.23(d)(7) in the NPRM.)
Comment. Most commenters supported the provision for an automatic
reset. One commenter said the reset would be a problem for an
individual user who would be required to constantly readjust his or her
telephone to a usable level.
Response. The provision is adopted from the ADA Accessibility
Guidelines, where it applies to public phones used by many people. The
FCC's Part 68 rules require an automatic reset when the phone is hung
up if the volume exceeds 18 dB gain. To provide the ability to override
the reset function would require a waiver from the FCC since the
standards require a 20 dB gain. No changes have been made to this
section in the final rule.
Paragraph (h) requires telephones, or other products that provide
auditory output by an audio transducer normally held up to the ear, to
provide a means for effective wireless coupling to hearing aids. Many
hearing aids incorporate ``T-coils'' that generate sounds based on
magnetic signals received from earpieces that can generate the
appropriate magnetic field. Generally, this provision means the
earpiece generates sufficient magnetic field strength to induce an
appropriate field in a hearing aid T-coil. The output in this case is
the direct voice output of the transmission source, not the ``machine
language'' such as tonal codes transmitted by TTYs. For example, a
telephone must generate a magnetic output so that the hearing aid
equipped with a T-coil can accurately receive the message. This
provision is consistent with the Telecommunications Act Accessibility
Guidelines. (See Sec. 1194.23(d)(8) in the NPRM.) No substantive
comments were received and no changes have been made to this section in
the final rule.
Paragraph (i) requires that interference to hearing technologies be
reduced to the lowest possible level that allows a user of hearing
technologies to utilize a telecommunications product. Individuals who
are hard of hearing use hearing aids and other assistive listening
devices, but they cannot be used if products introduce noise into the
listening aids because of electromagnetic interference. (See
Sec. 1194.23(d)(9) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The American National Standards Institutes (ANSI) is
developing methods of measurement and defining the limits for hearing
aid compatibility and accessibility to wireless telecommunications. At
the time of the proposed rule, the ANSI C63.19 ANSI/IEEE Standard for
Hearing Aid Compatibility with Wireless Devices was not completed. The
NPRM noted that the Board may ultimately incorporate the standard when
it is completed. Several commenters recommended referencing the work of
the ANSI committee.
Response. The ANSI committee has recently completed its work. No
changes have been made to this provision in the final rule and the
provision continues to be a performance standard rather than a specific
design standard. However, compliance with the ANSI C63.19 ANSI/IEEE
Standard for Hearing Aid Compatibility with Wireless Devices would meet
this provision.
Paragraph (j) provides that all products that act as a transport or
conduit for information or communication shall pass all codes,
translation protocols, formats, or any other information necessary to
provide information or communication in a usable format. In particular,
signal compression technologies shall not remove information needed for
access or shall restore it upon decompression. Some transmissions
include codes or tags embedded in ``unused'' portions of the signal to
provide accessibility. For example, closed captioning information is
usually included in portions of a video signal not seen by users
without decoders. This section prohibits products from stripping out
such information or requires the information to be restored at the end
point. (See Sec. 1194.25(a) in the NPRM.) No substantive comments were
received and no changes have been made to this section in the final
rule.
Paragraph (k) addresses controls that require some physical force
to activate. It is the application of force to these controls that
distinguishes them from touch sensitive controls where the mere
presence of a hand or finger is detected and reacted to by the product.
(See Sec. 1194.23(a) in the NPRM.)
Comment. As proposed, this provision addressed mechanically
operated controls, keyboard, and keypads. Commenters were concerned
that the provisions were too general. Some commenters said that it was
possible to interpret this section as applying to touchscreens, and
that making touchscreen controls compliant with these provisions was
not possible. Commenters also raised the question of whether the
proposed standards would require every product to have a keyboard.
Response. This provision has been amended to clarify its
application to mechanically operated controls. The provision only
applies to products which have mechanically operated controls or keys
and therefore does not require every product to have a keyboard. This
provision was not intended to apply to touchscreens as touchscreens do
not have mechanically operated controls.
Paragraph (k)(1) provides that mechanically operated controls and
keys shall be tactilely discernible without activating the controls or
keys. Tactilely discernible means that individual keys can be located
and distinguished from adjacent keys by touch. To comply with this
provision, controls that must be touched to activate, must be
distinguishable from each other. This can be accomplished by using
various shapes, spacing, or tactile markings. Because touch is
necessary to discern tactile features, this provision provides that the
control should not be activated by mere contact. For example, the
standard desktop computer keyboard would meet this provision because
the tactile mark on the ``j'' and ``f'' keys permits a user to locate
all other keys tactilely. The geographic spacing of the function,
``numpad'' and cursor keys make them easy to locate by touch. In
addition, most keyboards require some pressure before they transmit a
keystroke. Conversely, ``capacitance'' keyboards that react as soon as
they are touched and have no raised marks or actual keys would not meet
this provision. A ``membrane'' keypad with keys that must be pressed
can be made tactilely discernible by separating keys with raised ridges
so that individual keys can be distinguished by touch. (See
Sec. 1194.23(a)(1) in the NPRM.) No substantive comments were received
and no changes have been made to this section in the final rule.
Paragraph (k)(2) provides that mechanically operated controls shall
be accessible to persons with limited dexterity. Individuals with
tremor, cerebral palsy, paralysis, arthritis, or artificial hands may
have difficulty operating systems which require fine motor control,
assume a steady hand, or require two hands or fingers to be used
simultaneously for operation. Individuals with high spinal cord
injuries, arthritis, and other conditions may have difficulty operating
controls which require significant strength. The provision limits the
force required to five pounds and is based on Sec. 4.27.4 of the ADA
Accessibility Guidelines and is consistent with the Telecommunications
Act Accessibility Guidelines. (See Sec. 1194.23(a)(3) in the NPRM.)
[[Page 80517]]
Comment. The ITIC was concerned about requiring that all controls
be easily activated. They pointed out that on many pieces of equipment
the on/off switch is purposely set so that it is hard to activate. This
is done to prevent accidental shut-down of equipment such as with a
network server. They felt it was unreasonable to require changing that
type of control.
Response. The Board has addressed this issue by adding
Sec. 1194.3(f) which exempts such controls from these standards. The
on/off switch on a network server for example, would be operated only
when maintenance of the equipment was required and would not be for
normal operation. No changes have been made to this section in the
final rule.
Paragraph (k)(3) establishes provisions for key repeat rate where
an adjustable keyboard repeat rate is supported. It requires that the
keyboard delay before repeat shall be adjustable to at least two
seconds per character. (See Sec. 1194.23(a)(5) in the NPRM.) No
substantive comments were received and no changes have been made to
this section in the final rule.
Paragraph (k)(4) provides that the status of toggle controls such
as the ``caps lock'' or ``scroll lock'' keys be determined by both
visual means and by touch or sound. For example, adding audio patterns
such as ascending and descending pitch tones that indicate when a
control is turned on or off would alleviate the problem of a person who
is blind inadvertently pressing the locking or toggle controls. Also,
buttons which remain depressed when activated or switches with distinct
positions would meet this provision. (See Sec. 1194.23(a)(2) in the
NPRM.) No substantive comments were received and no changes have been
made to this section in the final rule.
Section 1194.24 Video and Multimedia Products
Paragraph (a) requires that television displays 13 inches and
larger, and computer equipment that includes television receiver or
display circuitry be equipped with the capacity to decode and display
captioning for audio material. (See Sec. 1194.23(e)(1) in the NPRM.)
Comment. Commenters supported this provision in general, but
provided suggestions for clarification. They noted that the FCC defines
``television receiver'' as a device that can receive and display
signals from broadcast, satellite, cable transmission, or other similar
transmission sources. The commenters recommended that the provision
should also address television monitors that are used with video
cassette recorders (VCRs), digital video disks (DVDs), or direct video
input, but do not include tuners. These non-receiver displays are
commonly used throughout the government and in educational institutions
and therefore, should have the capability to decode closed captions.
According to commenters, the provision should reference analog
television's ``line-21, NTSC'' or ``EIA-608'' caption data decoding
capabilities. Many DVD presentations already include line-21 captions
and commenters expressed frustration with their inability to see these
captions on their desktop or laptop computers. Commenters noted that
subtitles are not a substitute for captions, as captions convey more
than just dialog. One commenter stated that the provision should apply
to screens 10 inches or larger; while another said that digital
television (DTV) will allow usable captions on smaller screens and the
Board should reference the digital captioning standard EIA-708.
Response. This provision has been clarified to cover all television
displays, not just those defined as a receiver under the FCC
definition. The 13-inch display size was chosen because it is
consistent with the Television Decoder Circuitry Act of 1990. The term
``analog'' added to this provision clarifies the application of the
provision.
At the time of the issuance of the NPRM, the FCC was considering a
rule on digital television, but had not completed its rulemaking. On
July 21, 2000, the FCC issued an order on decoder circuitry standards
for DTV. That standard will take effect on July 1, 2002. Devices
covered under the FCC rules include DTV sets with integrated
``widescreen'' displays measuring at least 7.8 inches vertically, DTV
sets with conventional displays measuring at least 13 inches
vertically, and stand-alone DTV tuners, whether or not they are
marketed with display screens. The provision in the final rule has been
changed to reflect the FCC regulation.
Paragraph (b) requires that television tuners, including tuner
cards for use in computers, have the ability to handle a secondary
audio track used for audio description of visual material. The
secondary audio channel is commonly used for audio description. An
``audio description'' is a verbal description of the visual content of
a presentation. Audio descriptions are important for persons who are
blind or who have low vision because they provide a description of the
visual content of a presentation synchronized with verbal information.
(See Sec. 1194.23(e)(2) in the NPRM.) No substantive comments were
received and no changes have been made to this section in the final
rule.
Paragraph (c) requires the captioning of audio material in certain
multimedia presentations. (See Sec. 1194.23(e)(3) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The NPRM limited the provision for captioning to
productions that were procured or developed for repeated showings to
audiences that may include people who are deaf or hard of hearing.
Commenters were concerned that agencies would avoid this provision by
saying that they did not anticipate having members of the audience who
were deaf or hard of hearing. Commenters noted that in many instances
providing an interpreter may not be a suitable alternative. They also
pointed out that subtitles are not an effective substitute for
captioning multimedia presentations because subtitles do not display
the environmental sounds, descriptions of music, or additional text
that conveys a richer content than mere translation of the spoken
dialogue.
Response. As proposed, the provision was intended to require
captioning whenever the audience might include a person who was deaf or
hard of hearing. The final rule has been modified to require that all
training and informational video and multimedia presentations that
contain speech or other audio information necessary for the
comprehension of the content and which supports an agency's mission,
shall be open or closed captioned regardless of the anticipated
audience. This provision would not require that a videotape recorded by
a field investigator to document a safety violation be captioned or
audio described, for example. On the other hand, if such a videotape
were subsequently used as part of a training or informational
presentation, it would have to be captioned and audio described. A
video of a retirement celebration would not be in support of an
agency's mission and would thus not be required to be captioned. Also,
this provision applies only to video and multimedia presentations which
contain speech or other audio information necessary for the
comprehension of the content. A video that is not narrated would not be
required to be captioned since it does not contain speech. The NPRM
asked a question about the availability of software products that could
be used to provide captioning or description to multimedia computer
presentations. Information supplied by commenters suggests such
products are readily available.
Paragraph (d) requires that certain multimedia presentations
provide an
[[Page 80518]]
audio description of visual material. (See Sec. 1194.23(e)(4) in the
NPRM.)
Comment. The proposed rule limited the provision for audio
description to productions that were procured or developed for repeated
showings to audiences that may include people who are blind or who have
low vision. Similar to (c) above, commenters were concerned that
agencies may use the limitation to avoid providing the audio
description.
Response. This provision has been modified to require audio
description regardless of the anticipated audience. The final rule has
been modified to require that all training and informational video and
multimedia productions which support the agency's mission, regardless
of format, that contain visual information necessary for the
comprehension of the content, shall be audio described. A video or
multimedia presentation that does not support an agency's mission would
not be required to be audio described. Also, this provision applies
only to videos or multimedia presentations which contain visual
information necessary for the comprehension of the content. A ``talking
heads'' video does not generally contain visual information necessary
for the comprehension of the content and would therefore not be
required to be audio described.
Paragraph (e) provides that the captioning and audio description
required in (c) and (d) above must be user selectable unless permanent.
(See Sec. 1194.23(e)(5) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The National Center for Accessible Media (NCAM) at public
television station WGBH indicated that unlike captioning, audio
descriptions can only be hidden and then activated on request on
broadcast or cablecast video. The videotape format VHS commonly used by
consumers and many companies cannot encode audio description for later
activation like closed captions. Videos in the VHS format must have
their descriptions permanently recorded as part of the main audio
program. As a result, the audio descriptions on VHS cannot be turned
off. As a solution, NCAM suggested that it may be desirable to have a
separate videotape available that was not described, along with a
described version to allow a user to choose which version they wish to
present. Unlike the VHS format, CD-ROMs, DVDs and other multimedia can
support alternate audio channels for descriptions (or alternate
languages). The means of choosing those alternate tracks varies by the
medium, but usually involves selection from an on-screen menu. Those
menus must be made audible or otherwise readily selectable so that
people who are blind or visually impaired can independently select and
gain access to those audio descriptions.
Response. While the displaying of captioning is user selectable,
there may be instances where the audio description would be considered
permanent. The provision provides that when permanent, the user
selectability provision does not apply. No changes have been made to
this section in the final rule.
Section 1194.25 Self Contained, Closed Products
Sections 1194.25 (a) through (j) apply to those products that
generally have embedded software and are commonly designed in such a
fashion that a user cannot easily attach or install assistive
technology. This section is a result of the reorganization of the final
rule. In some instances, a personal computer with a touch-screen will
be enclosed in a display and used as an ``information kiosk''. Self
contained, closed products include, but are not limited to, information
kiosks and information transaction machines, copiers, printers,
calculators, fax machines, and other similar types of products. A
definition of self contained, closed products has also been added.
Paragraph (a) provides that access features must be built-into a
self contained, closed product rather than requiring users to attach an
assistive device to the product. Personal headsets are not considered
assistive technology and may be required to use the product. (See
Sec. 1194.23(f)(1) in the NPRM.)
Comment. Though discussed in the preamble, the text of the proposed
rule did not address the issue of personal headsets. The preamble noted
that personal headsets were not considered assistive technology. The
ITIC urged the Board to make this clear in the text of the rule.
Response. The Board has modified this provision by clarifying that
personal headsets are not considered assistive technology. No other
changes were made to this provision.
Paragraph (b) addresses access problems that can arise when self
contained, closed products require a response from a user within a
certain time and is identical to Sec. 1194.22(p) and Sec. 1194.23(d)
which are discussed in detail above. (See Sec. 1194.21(d) in the NPRM.)
The final rule requires only that a user be notified if a process is
about to time-out and be given an opportunity to answer a prompt asking
whether additional time is needed.
Paragraph (c) requires that when a product utilizes touchscreens or
contact-sensitive controls, a method of operating the product be
provided that complies with the provisions for controls in
Sec. 1194.23(k)(1) through (4). (See Sec. 1194.21(f) in the NPRM.)
Comment. The proposed rule required that touchscreens or touch-
operated controls be operable without requiring body contact or close
human body proximity. Commenters found the proposed provision to be
confusing. One commenter noted that the proposed rule required all
touchscreens to be operable by a remote control. Several commenters
expressed concern that accessibility to touchscreens for individuals
who are blind or who have low vision was not adequately addressed.
Response. Touchscreens and other controls that operate by sensing a
person's touch pose access problems for a range of persons with
disabilities. This provision does not prohibit the use of touchscreens
and contact sensitive controls, but, as modified, the final rule
requires a redundant set of controls that can be used by persons who
have access problems with touchscreens.
Paragraph (d) addresses the use of biometric controls. Biometric
controls refer to controls that are activated only if particular
biological features (e.g., fingerprint, retina pattern, etc.) of the
user matches specific criteria. Using retinal scans or fingerprint
identification may become a common practice as a method of allowing an
individual to gain access to personal data from an information
transaction type of machine. (See Sec. 1194.21(e) in the NPRM.)
Comment. In the proposed rule, the Board sought comment on the best
approach to accessibility issues raised by biometric forms of
identification and controls. Commenters responded that asking a system
to have multiple forms of biometric identification could be
prohibitively expensive. Most commenters were in agreement that
biometric controls provide the most security. However, they also agreed
that when such a system needs to be accessed by a person with a
disability and that disability prohibits the use of a specific
biometric feature, a non-biometric alternative should be provided that
does not compromise security.
Response. The provision does not require a specific alternative.
That selection is left up to the agency, which may choose a less
expensive form of identification. No changes were made to this
provision in the final rule.
Paragraph (e) requires that when products use audio as a way to
communicate information, the auditory
[[Page 80519]]
signal will be available through an industry standard connector at a
standard signal level. Individuals using personal headphones,
amplifiers, audio couplers, and other audio processing devices need a
place to plug these devices into the product in a standard fashion.
This gives the user the ability to listen privately to the information.
The product must also provide a method to pause, restart, and interrupt
the flow of information. (See Sec. 1194.23(f)(2) and Sec. 1194.25(d) in
the NPRM.) No substantive comments were received on this provision and
no changes were made, other than editorial changes.
Paragraph (f) provides that when products deliver voice output,
they shall provide incremental volume control with output amplification
up to a level of at least 65 dB. Where the ambient noise level of the
environment is above 45 dB, a volume gain of at least 20 dB above the
ambient level shall be user selectable. According to the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, and the American Speech, Language,
and Hearing Association, 65 dB is the volume level for normal speech.
This provision requires that audio output from a kiosk type product
shall have a minimum level of 65 dB. For people with reduced hearing,
voice levels must be 20 dB above the surround sound level to be
understandable. This means that as long as the noise level in the
surrounding environment is below 45 dB, the 65 dB output level would be
sufficient. If the product is in an environment with a high noise
level, the user must be able to raise the volume to a setting of 20 dB
higher than the ambient level. (See Sec. 1194.23(f)(3) in the NPRM.) A
feature has been required to automatically reset the volume to the
default level after every use. This is consistent with a similar
provision addressing telecommunications products. No substantive
comments were received and no other changes have been made to this
section in the final rule.
Paragraph (g) addresses the use of color prompting and is identical
to section 1194.21(i) discussed above. (See Sec. 1194.21(a) in the
NPRM.) No substantive comments were received and no changes have been
made to this section in the final rule.
Paragraph (h) addresses color selection and contrast settings and
is identical to section 1194.21(j) discussed above. (See
Sec. 1194.23(b)(8) in the NPRM.)
Paragraph (i) addresses the use of flashing objects and is
identical to section 1194.21(k) discussed above. (See Sec. 1194.21(c)
in the NPRM.)
Paragraphs (j)(1) through (4) provide provisions for the physical
characteristics of large office equipment including reach ranges and
the general physical accessibility of controls and features. Examples
of these products, include but are not limited to, copiers, information
kiosks and floor standing printers. These provisions are based on the
Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG 4.2
Space Allowance and Reach Ranges). Two figures are provided to help
explain the application of these provisions. (See Sec. 1194.21(b)(1)
through (4) in the NPRM.) No substantive comments were received on
these provisions and no changes were made in the final rule.
Section 1194.26 Desktop and Portable Computers
This section is a result of the reorganization of the final rule.
Paragraphs (a) through (d) contain provisions that apply to desktop and
portable computers. The provisions in Sec. 1194.21 for software address
the accessibility of programs and operating systems that run on a
computer. In contrast, the provisions in this section address physical
characteristics of computer systems including the design of controls
and the use of connectors. This section was previously addressed in
Sec. 1194.21 (General requirements), Sec. 1194.23 (Component specific
requirements) and Sec. 1194.25 (Requirements for compatibility with
assistive technology) in the NPRM.
Paragraph (a) addresses keyboards and other mechanically operated
controls. These provisions are addressed further in sections
1194.23(k)(1) through (4) above. (See Sec. 1194.23(a) in the NPRM.)
Paragraph (b) provides that systems using touchscreen technology
must also provide controls that comply with sections 1194.23(k)(1)
through (4) discussed above. (See Sec. 1194.21(f) in the NPRM.) Similar
to Sec. 1194.25(c), this provision was modified in the final rule to
require redundant controls.
Paragraph (c) requires that when biometric forms of identification
are used, an alternative must also be available. This provision is
identical to Sec. 1194.25 (d) discussed above.
Paragraph (d) requires that products have standard ports and
connectors. This means that the connection points on a system must
comply with a standard specification that is available to other
manufacturers. This provision assures that the designers of assistive
technology will have access to information concerning the design of
system connections and thus be able to produce products that can
utilize those connections. (See Sec. 1194.25(b) in the NPRM.)
Comment. In the proposed rule, this provision was addressed in
Sec. 1194.25(b) under the requirements for compatibility with assistive
technology. A commenter noted that this provision was more specific to
computer products and not to all products.
Response. As noted, this provision has been modified to apply to
computer products.
Subpart C--Functional Performance Criteria
Section 1194.31 Functional Performance Criteria
This section provides functional performance criteria for overall
product evaluation and for technologies or components for which there
is no specific requirement under other sections. These criteria are
also intended to ensure that the individual accessible components work
together to create an accessible product. This section requires that
all product functions, including operation and information retrieval,
be operable through at least one mode addressed in each of the
following paragraphs.
Comment. The ITIC requested clarification as to how a manufacturer
would determine the type and number of assistive technology devices for
which support must be provided by a product.
Response. Manufacturers do not need to be aware of the universe of
assistive technology products on the market. Each provision specifies
the type of assistive technology that must be supported. For example,
Sec. 1194.31(a) addresses those assistive technology devices which
provide output to persons who cannot see the screen. Such devices may
include screen readers, Braille displays and speech synthesizers. There
are numerous resources available to manufacturers to assist them in
identifying specific types of assistive technology which would be used
to access their product.
Paragraph (a) provides that at least one mode of operation and
information retrieval that does not require user vision shall be
provided, or support for assistive technology used by people who are
blind or visually impaired shall be provided. It is not expected that
every software program will be self-voicing or have its own built-in
screen reader. Software that complies with Sec. 1194.21 would also
satisfy this provision. (See Sec. 1194.27(a) in the NPRM.) No
substantive comments were
[[Page 80520]]
received regarding this provision and no changes were made in the final
rule.
Paragraph (b) provides that at least one mode of operation and
information retrieval that does not require visual acuity greater than
20/70 (when corrected with glasses) must be provided in audio and
enlarged print output that works together or independently. In the
alternative, support for assistive technology used by people who are
blind or who have low vision must be provided. Although visual acuity
of 20/200 is considered ``legally blind,'' there are actually millions
of Americans with vision below the 20/200 threshold who can still see
enough to operate and get output from technology, often with just a
little additional boost in contrast or font size. This paragraph
requires either the provision of screen enlargement and voice output
or, that the product support assistive technology. (See Sec. 1194.27(b)
in the NPRM.) No substantive comments were received regarding this
provision and no changes were made in the final rule.
Paragraph (c) provides that at least one mode of operation and
information retrieval that does not require user hearing must be
provided, or support for assistive technology used by people who are
deaf or hard of hearing shall be provided. This provision is met when a
product provides visual redundancy for any audible cues or audio
output. If this redundancy cannot be built-into a product then the
product shall support the use of assistive technology. (See
Sec. 1194.27(c) in the NPRM.) No substantive comments were received
regarding this provision and no changes were made in the final rule.
Paragraph (d) requires that audio information important for the use
of a product, must be provided in an enhanced auditory fashion by
allowing for an increase in volume and/or altering the tonal quality or
increasing the signal-to-noise ratio. For example, increasing the
output would assist persons with limited hearing to receive
information. Audio information that is important for the use of a
product includes, but is not limited to, error tones, confirmation
beeps and tones, and verbal instructions. (See Sec. 1194.27(d) in the
NPRM.) No substantive comments were received regarding this provision.
The final provision has been amended editorially to provide that
support for assistive hearing devices may be provided in place of
built-in enhanced audio features.
Paragraph (e) provides that at least one mode of operation and
information retrieval which does not require user speech must be
provided, or support for assistive technology shall be provided. Most
products do not require speech input. However, if speech input is
required to operate a product, this paragraph requires that at least
one alternative input mode also be provided. For example, an
interactive telephone menu that requires the user to say or press
``one'' would meet this provision. (See Sec. 1194.27(e) in the NPRM.)
No substantive comments were received regarding this provision and no
changes were made in the final rule.
Paragraph (f) provides that at least one mode of operation and
information retrieval that does not require fine motor control or
simultaneous actions and which is operable with limited reach and
strength must be provided. (See Sec. 1194.27(f) in the NPRM.) No
substantive comments were received regarding this provision and no
changes were made in the final rule.
Subpart D--Information, Documentation, and Support
Section 1194.41 Information, Documentation, and Support
In order for a product to be fully usable by persons with
disabilities, the information about the product and product support
services must also be usable by persons with disabilities. These issues
are addressed in this section.
Paragraph (a) states that when an agency provides end-user
documentation to users of technology, the agency must ensure that the
documentation is available upon request in alternate formats. Alternate
formats are defined in Sec. 1194.4, Definitions. Except as provided in
paragraph (b) below, this provision does not require alternate formats
of documentation that is not provided by the agency to other users of
technology. (See Sec. 1194.31(a) in the NPRM.) No substantive comments
were received regarding this provision and no changes other than
editorial changes were made in the final rule.
Paragraph (b) requires that agencies supply end-users with
information about accessibility or compatibility features that are
built-into a product, upon request. (See Sec. 1194.31(b) in the NPRM.)
No substantive comments were received regarding this provision and,
other than an editorial revision substituting ``methods'' for
``modes'', and general editorial changes, no other changes were made in
the final rule.
Paragraph (c) provides that help desks and other support services
serving an agency must be capable of accommodating the communications
needs of persons with disabilities. For example, an agency help desk
may need to communicate through a TTY. The help desk or support service
must also be familiar with such features as keyboard access and other
options important to people with disabilities. (See Sec. 1194.31(a) in
the NPRM.) No substantive comments were received regarding this
provision and no changes other than editorial changes were made in the
final rule.
Regulatory Process Matters
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Congressional
Review Act
This final rule is an economically significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866 and has been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). The final rule is also a major rule under
the Congressional Review Act. The Board has prepared a regulatory
assessment for the final rule which has been placed in the docket and
is available for public inspection. The regulatory assessment is also
available on the Board's Internet site (http://www.access-board.gov/
sec508/assessment.htm). In the NPRM, the Board sought comment on the
regulatory assessment which was prepared in conjunction with the
proposed rule. The Board received four comments that specifically
addressed concerns with that economic assessment. A summary of the
comments received and the Board's responses can be found in Chapter Six
of the Board's final regulatory assessment.
Section 508 covers the development, procurement, maintenance or use
of electronic and information technology by Federal agencies.
Exemptions are provided by statute for national security systems and
for instances where compliance would impose an undue burden on an
agency. The final rule improves the accessibility of electronic and
information technology used by the Federal government and will affect
Federal employees with disabilities, as well as members of the public
with disabilities who seek to use Federal electronic and information
technologies to access information. The final rule is based largely on
the recommendations of the Electronic and Information Technology Access
Advisory Committee.
The standards in the final rule will be incorporated into the
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). Failure of a Federal agency to
comply with the standards may result in a complaint under the agency's
existing complaint procedures under section 504 of the
[[Page 80521]]
Rehabilitation Act or a civil action seeking to enforce compliance with
the standards.
Estimated Baseline of Federal Spending for Electronic and Information
Technology
According to OMB figures, Federal government expenditures for
information technology products was $37.6 billion in fiscal year 1999.
The defense agencies appear to have the highest information technology
budgets, while civilian agency budgets are expected to increase
rapidly. It was not possible however, to disaggregate this data such
that it was useful for purposes of a regulatory assessment. Instead,
the regulatory assessment uses annual sales data collected from the
General Services Administration (GSA) as a proxy for the actual number
of products in each applicable technology category. Using the GSA data,
the regulatory assessment estimates that the Federal government spends
approximately $12.4 billion annually on electronic and information
technology products covered by the final rule. This estimate likely
understates the actual spending by the Federal government because it is
limited to the GSA data. Agencies are not required to make purchases
through the GSA supply service, thus many items are purchased directly
from suppliers. As a result, the government costs for software and
compatible hardware products may actually be higher than estimates
would indicate.
The regulatory assessment also examines historical budgetary
obligations for information technology tracked by OMB until fiscal year
1998. Two scenarios were examined to develop an upper and lower bound
to represent the proportion expected to be potentially affected by the
final rule. During a five year period from fiscal year 1994 through
fiscal year 1998, the average proportion of the total information
technology obligations potentially covered by the final rule ranged
between 25 percent and 50 percent. The $12.4 billion GSA estimate falls
within this range, representing 33 percent of the total fiscal year
1999 information technology obligations of $37.6 billion. One
limitation of these ranges is that they are based on gross
classifications of information technology obligations and do not
provide the level of disaggregation necessary to parallel the GSA data
assessment. As a result, the two scenarios likely include expenditures
on products and services that would not be effected by the final rule
to a higher degree than the data obtained from GSA.
The degree to which the potential understatement of baseline
spending leads to an understatement of the cost of the final rule is
unclear. Some of the components of the estimated cost of the final rule
rely heavily on the level of Federal spending while others are
independent of this number.
Estimated Cost of the Final Rule
The regulatory assessment includes both direct and opportunity
costs associated with the final rule. Major sources of cost include:
Costs of modifying electronic and information technology
to meet the substantive requirements of the standards;
Training of staff, both Federal and manufacturers, to
market, support, and use technologies modified in response to the
standards; and
Translation of documentation and instructions into
alternate formats.
The direct costs that were quantified are shown in Table 1. The
total quantified costs to society range from $177 million to $1,068
million annually. The Federal proportion of these costs is estimated to
range between $85 million and $691 million. The ability of
manufacturers, especially software manufacturers, to distribute these
costs over the general consumer population will determine the actual
proportion shared by the Federal government. Assuming that the addition
of accessibility features add value to the products outside the Federal
government, it is expected that the costs will be distributed across
society thereby setting a lower bound cost to the Federal government of
$85 million. If manufacturers do not distribute the costs across
society, the upper bound of the Federal cost will increase to an
estimated $1,068 million. These costs must be placed in appropriate
context by comparing them with the total Federal expenditures for
information technology. By comparison, the lower and upper bound of the
incremental costs represent a range of 0.23 percent to 2.8 percent of
the $37.6 billion spent by the Federal government on information
technology in fiscal year 1999. Although the regulatory assessment does
not analyze the timing of expenditures or reductions in costs over
time, it is expected that the costs will decrease over time as a
proportion of total electronic and information technology spending.
Table 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lower bound Upper bound
cost cost
Electronic and information technology estimates estimates
(millions) (millions)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Office Software....................... $110 $456
Mission Specific Software..................... 10 52
Compatible Hardware Products.................. ........... 337
Document Management Products.................. 56 222
Microphotographic Products.................... 0.1 0.4
Other Miscellaneous Products.................. 0.2 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Social Cost......................... 177 1,068
Estimated Federal Proportion.................. 85 \1\ 691
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As noted above, if manufacturers do not distribute the costs across
society, the upper bound of the Federal cost will increase to an
estimated $1,068 million.
Accessible alternatives are available to satisfy the requirements
of the final rule for many types of electronic and information
technologies, particularly computers and software products. Some
electronic and information technology products will require
modifications to meet the requirements of the final standards.
For many types of electronic and information technology, the final
rule focuses on compatibility with existing and future assistive
devices, such as screen readers. The final rule does not
[[Page 80522]]
require that assistive technologies be provided universally. Provision
of assistive technologies is still governed by the reasonable
accommodation requirements contained in sections 501 and 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act. Section 508 does not require that assistive devices
be purchased, but it does require that covered electronic and
information technology be capable of having such devices added at some
later time as necessary.
Software products represent the largest part of the estimated
costs. The regulatory assessment assumes that Federal software
expenditures can be divided into two major subcategories: general
office applications and mission-specific applications. Internet
applications are assumed to be represented within each of these
subcategories. General office applications include operating systems,
wordprocessors, and spreadsheets, and are assumed to represent 80
percent of the total software category. The remaining 20 percent covers
mission-specific or proprietary applications that have limited
distribution outside the Federal government. Within each subcategory,
the estimated costs of the final rule are distributed according to the
level or degree of accessibility already being achieved in the private
sector.
The general office application subcategory is broken into three
groups based on discussions with several industry experts. The first 30
percent is expected to require very little modification to satisfy the
final standards and therefore no incremental cost is associated with
this group. The middle 40 percent is expected to require minor to
medium alterations to satisfy the final rule. The cost of modifying a
particular general office application in this category is estimated to
be in the range of 0.4 percent to 1 percent based on discussions with
several manufacturers. This assumption is based on the ratio of
employees dedicated to accessibility issues. The methodology uses
employee classification as a proxy for cost or expense of accessibility
research and development, labor, and design that are all factored into
the final product cost. The remaining 30 percent is expected to require
significant modifications to meet the requirements of the final rule,
which is estimated to cost in the range of 1 percent to 5 percent based
on discussion with industry experts.
The regulatory assessment assumes that the remaining 20 percent of
the software products purchased by the Federal government represent
proprietary or mission-specific software with limited distribution
outside the government. These products will require significant
modification to satisfy the final rule. Based on discussions with
industry experts, the cost increase associated with achieving the level
of accessibility required by the final rule is estimated to range from
1 percent to 5 percent.
Estimated Benefits of the Final Rule
The benefits associated with the final rule results from increased
access to electronic and information technology for Federal employees
with disabilities and members of the public seeking Federal information
provided using electronic and information technology. This increased
access reduces barriers to employment in the Federal government for
persons with disabilities, reduces the probability that Federal
employees with disabilities will be underemployed, and increases the
productivity of Federal work teams. The final standards may also have
benefits for people outside the Federal workforce, both with and
without disabilities, as a result of spillover of technology from the
Federal government to the rest of society.
Two methods are presented in the regulatory assessment for
evaluating the quantifiable benefits of the final rule. The first is a
wage gap analysis that attempts to measure the difference in wages
between the general Federal workforce and Federal workers with targeted
and reportable disabilities. While this analysis is limited to white
collar Federal workers due to data constraints, the potential change in
productivity is measured by the difference between the weighted average
salary for all white collar Federal employees and the average within
the two disability classes. This assumes that an increase in
accessibility will help diminish this wage gap by increasing worker
productivity.
The alternative is a team based approach for measuring the
productivity of Federal workers. This approach is based on the
assumption that a Federal workers wage rate reflects their productivity
and the scarcity of their skills in the labor market. However this may
not apply to Federal wage rates, thus the average productivity of a
Federal team is assumed to be equivalent to the average Federal wage
rate. Based on this average rate, it is assumed that the final rule
will produce an increase in productivity ranging between 5 percent and
10 percent.
Since no data have been identified to support the increase in
productivity in the team based approach, the wage gap analysis is used
to represent the benefits generated by the final rule shown in Table 2.
Keeping in mind certain data limitations with this analysis, the
benefits derived from the wage gap method do not account for benefits
that may be accrued by the general public or other Federal workers due
to spillover effects of increased accessibility resulting from the
final standards.
Table 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aggregate benefits
Productivity increase range (millions)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lower Bound....................................... ....................
Upper Bound....................................... $466
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not all government policies are based on maximizing economic
efficiency. Some policies are based on furthering the rights of certain
classes of individuals to achieve more equitable results, regardless of
the effect on economic efficiency. Accessibility to electronic
information and technology is an essential component of civil rights
for persons with disabilities. The final rule will ensure that Federal
employees with disabilities will have access to electronic and
information technology used by the Federal government that is
comparable to that of Federal employees without disabilities; and that
members of the public with disabilities will have comparable access to
information and services provided to members of the public without
disabilities through the use of Federal electronic and information
technology.
Based on Bureau of Census statistics from 1994, 20.6 percent or 54
million persons in the United States have some level of disability. By
increasing the accessibility of electronic and information technology
used by the Federal government, the final rule may also improve future
employment opportunities in the Federal government for persons with
disabilities currently employed by the Federal government, and for
persons that are working in the private sector or are classified as not
being active in the labor force. Increasing the accessibility of
electronic and information technology increases the productivity and
mobility of the disabled sector of the labor pool that, under existing
conditions, may face barriers to their employment and advancement
within the Federal workforce and in the private sector. The standards
will allow other Federal workers who become temporarily disabled to
maintain their productivity during their illness. In addition,
accessible features of electronic and information technology may also
enhance the productivity of Federal
[[Page 80523]]
workers without disabilities and therefore be a benefit to the
workforce in general.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as
amended, generally requires Federal agencies to conduct a regulatory
flexibility analysis describing the impact of the regulatory action on
small entities. However, section 605(b) of the RFA, provides that a
regulatory flexibility analysis is not required if the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This final rule imposes requirements only on the Federal
Government and the Board certifies that it does not impose any
requirements on small entities. As a result, a regulatory flexibility
analysis is not required.
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
By its terms, this rule applies to the development, procurement,
maintenance or use by Federal agencies of electronic and information
technology. As such, the Board believes that it does not have
federalism implications within the meaning of Executive Order 13132. In
the proposed rule, the Board referred to the Department of Education's
interpretation of the Assistive Technology Act (the ``AT Act''), 29
U.S.C. 3001. The Board received approximately five responses from
various State organizations regarding the relationship between the AT
Act and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. The Department of
Education, the agency responsible for administering the AT Act, has
advised the Board that it plans to work with States to address the
relationship between the AT Act and section 508, and specifically how
the Board's standards would apply to the States for purposes of the AT
Act. As part of this process, the Department of Education will address
issues raised in the five responses the Board received on the
relationship between the AT Act and section 508 of the Rehabilitation
Act.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act does not apply to proposed or
final rules that enforce constitutional rights of individuals or
enforce any statutory rights that prohibit discrimination on the basis
of race, color, sex, national origin, age, handicap, or disability.
Since the final rule is issued under the authority of section 508, part
of title V of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 which establishes civil
rights protections for individuals with disabilities, an assessment of
the rule's effects on State, local, and tribal governments, and the
private sector is not required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 1194
Civil rights, Communications equipment, Computer technology,
Electronic products, Government employees, Government procurement,
Individuals with disabilities, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Telecommunications.
Thurman M. Davis, Sr.,
Chair, Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Board adds part 1194
to Chapter XI of title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as
follows:
PART 1194--ELECTRONIC AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACCESSIBILITY
STANDARDS
Subpart A--General
Sec.
1194.1 Purpose.
1194.2 Application.
1194.3 General exceptions.
1194.4 Definitions.
1194.5 Equivalent facilitation.
Subpart B--Technical Standards
1194.21 Software applications and operating systems.
1194.22 Web-based intranet and internet information and
applications.
1194.23 Telecommunications products.
1194.24 Video and multimedia products.
1194.25 Self contained, closed products.
1194.26 Desktop and portable computers.
Subpart C--Functional Performance Criteria
1194.31 Functional performance criteria.
Subpart D--Information, Documentation, and Support
1194.41 Information, documentation, and support.
Figures to Part 1194
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 794d.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 1194.1 Purpose.
The purpose of this part is to implement section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794d). Section 508
requires that when Federal agencies develop, procure, maintain, or use
electronic and information technology, Federal employees with
disabilities have access to and use of information and data that is
comparable to the access and use by Federal employees who are not
individuals with disabilities, unless an undue burden would be imposed
on the agency. Section 508 also requires that individuals with
disabilities, who are members of the public seeking information or
services from a Federal agency, have access to and use of information
and data that is comparable to that provided to the public who are not
individuals with disabilities, unless an undue burden would be imposed
on the agency.
Sec. 1194.2 Application.
(a) Products covered by this part shall comply with all applicable
provisions of this part. When developing, procuring, maintaining, or
using electronic and information technology, each agency shall ensure
that the products comply with the applicable provisions of this part,
unless an undue burden would be imposed on the agency.
(1) When compliance with the provisions of this part imposes an
undue burden, agencies shall provide individuals with disabilities with
the information and data involved by an alternative means of access
that allows the individual to use the information and data.
(2) When procuring a product, if an agency determines that
compliance with any provision of this part imposes an undue burden, the
documentation by the agency supporting the procurement shall explain
why, and to what extent, compliance with each such provision creates an
undue burden.
(b) When procuring a product, each agency shall procure products
which comply with the provisions in this part when such products are
available in the commercial marketplace or when such products are
developed in response to a Government solicitation. Agencies cannot
claim a product as a whole is not commercially available because no
product in the marketplace meets all the standards. If products are
commercially available that meet some but not all of the standards, the
agency must procure the product that best meets the standards.
(c) Except as provided by Sec. 1194.3(b), this part applies to
electronic and information technology developed, procured, maintained,
or used by agencies directly or used by a contractor under a contract
with an agency which requires the use of such product, or requires the
use, to a significant extent, of such product in the performance of a
service or the furnishing of a product.
Sec. 1194.3 General exceptions.
(a) This part does not apply to any electronic and information
technology operated by agencies, the function, operation, or use of
which involves intelligence activities, cryptologic activities related
to national security,
[[Page 80524]]
command and control of military forces, equipment that is an integral
part of a weapon or weapons system, or systems which are critical to
the direct fulfillment of military or intelligence missions. Systems
which are critical to the direct fulfillment of military or
intelligence missions do not include a system that is to be used for
routine administrative and business applications (including payroll,
finance, logistics, and personnel management applications).
(b) This part does not apply to electronic and information
technology that is acquired by a contractor incidental to a contract.
(c) Except as required to comply with the provisions in this part,
this part does not require the installation of specific accessibility-
related software or the attachment of an assistive technology device at
a workstation of a Federal employee who is not an individual with a
disability.
(d) When agencies provide access to the public to information or
data through electronic and information technology, agencies are not
required to make products owned by the agency available for access and
use by individuals with disabilities at a location other than that
where the electronic and information technology is provided to the
public, or to purchase products for access and use by individuals with
disabilities at a location other than that where the electronic and
information technology is provided to the public.
(e) This part shall not be construed to require a fundamental
alteration in the nature of a product or its components.
(f) Products located in spaces frequented only by service personnel
for maintenance, repair, or occasional monitoring of equipment are not
required to comply with this part.
Sec. 1194.4 Definitions.
The following definitions apply to this part:
Agency. Any Federal department or agency, including the United
States Postal Service.
Alternate formats. Alternate formats usable by people with
disabilities may include, but are not limited to, Braille, ASCII text,
large print, recorded audio, and electronic formats that comply with
this part.
Alternate methods. Different means of providing information,
including product documentation, to people with disabilities. Alternate
methods may include, but are not limited to, voice, fax, relay service,
TTY, Internet posting, captioning, text-to-speech synthesis, and audio
description.
Assistive technology. Any item, piece of equipment, or system,
whether acquired commercially, modified, or customized, that is
commonly used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities
of individuals with disabilities.
Electronic and information technology. Includes information
technology and any equipment or interconnected system or subsystem of
equipment, that is used in the creation, conversion, or duplication of
data or information. The term electronic and information technology
includes, but is not limited to, telecommunications products (such as
telephones), information kiosks and transaction machines, World Wide
Web sites, multimedia, and office equipment such as copiers and fax
machines. The term does not include any equipment that contains
embedded information technology that is used as an integral part of the
product, but the principal function of which is not the acquisition,
storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display,
switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data or
information. For example, HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning) equipment such as thermostats or temperature control
devices, and medical equipment where information technology is integral
to its operation, are not information technology.
Information technology. Any equipment or interconnected system or
subsystem of equipment, that is used in the automatic acquisition,
storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display,
switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data or
information. The term information technology includes computers,
ancillary equipment, software, firmware and similar procedures,
services (including support services), and related resources.
Operable controls. A component of a product that requires physical
contact for normal operation. Operable controls include, but are not
limited to, mechanically operated controls, input and output trays,
card slots, keyboards, or keypads.
Product. Electronic and information technology.
Self Contained, Closed Products. Products that generally have
embedded software and are commonly designed in such a fashion that a
user cannot easily attach or install assistive technology. These
products include, but are not limited to, information kiosks and
information transaction machines, copiers, printers, calculators, fax
machines, and other similar types of products.
Telecommunications. The transmission, between or among points
specified by the user, of information of the user's choosing, without
change in the form or content of the information as sent and received.
TTY. An abbreviation for teletypewriter. Machinery or equipment
that employs interactive text based communications through the
transmission of coded signals across the telephone network. TTYs may
include, for example, devices known as TDDs (telecommunication display
devices or telecommunication devices for deaf persons) or computers
with special modems. TTYs are also called text telephones.
Undue burden. Undue burden means significant difficulty or expense.
In determining whether an action would result in an undue burden, an
agency shall consider all agency resources available to the program or
component for which the product is being developed, procured,
maintained, or used.
Sec. 1194.5 Equivalent facilitation.
Nothing in this part is intended to prevent the use of designs or
technologies as alternatives to those prescribed in this part provided
they result in substantially equivalent or greater access to and use of
a product for people with disabilities.
Subpart B--Technical Standards
Sec. 1194.21 Software applications and operating systems.
(a) When software is designed to run on a system that has a
keyboard, product functions shall be executable from a keyboard where
the function itself or the result of performing a function can be
discerned textually.
(b) Applications shall not disrupt or disable activated features of
other products that are identified as accessibility features, where
those features are developed and documented according to industry
standards. Applications also shall not disrupt or disable activated
features of any operating system that are identified as accessibility
features where the application programming interface for those
accessibility features has been documented by the manufacturer of the
operating system and is available to the product developer.
(c) A well-defined on-screen indication of the current focus shall
be provided that moves among interactive interface elements as the
input focus changes. The focus shall be
[[Page 80525]]
programmatically exposed so that assistive technology can track focus
and focus changes.
(d) Sufficient information about a user interface element including
the identity, operation and state of the element shall be available to
assistive technology. When an image represents a program element, the
information conveyed by the image must also be available in text.
(e) When bitmap images are used to identify controls, status
indicators, or other programmatic elements, the meaning assigned to
those images shall be consistent throughout an application's
performance.
(f) Textual information shall be provided through operating system
functions for displaying text. The minimum information that shall be
made available is text content, text input caret location, and text
attributes.
(g) Applications shall not override user selected contrast and
color selections and other individual display attributes.
(h) When animation is displayed, the information shall be
displayable in at least one non-animated presentation mode at the
option of the user.
(i) Color coding shall not be used as the only means of conveying
information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or
distinguishing a visual element.
(j) When a product permits a user to adjust color and contrast
settings, a variety of color selections capable of producing a range of
contrast levels shall be provided.
(k) Software shall not use flashing or blinking text, objects, or
other elements having a flash or blink frequency greater than 2 Hz and
lower than 55 Hz.
(l) When electronic forms are used, the form shall allow people
using assistive technology to access the information, field elements,
and functionality required for completion and submission of the form,
including all directions and cues.
Sec. 1194.22 Web-based intranet and internet information and
applications.
(a) A text equivalent for every non-text element shall be provided
(e.g., via ``alt'', ``longdesc'', or in element content).
(b) Equivalent alternatives for any multimedia presentation shall
be synchronized with the presentation.
(c) Web pages shall be designed so that all information conveyed
with color is also available without color, for example from context or
markup.
(d) Documents shall be organized so they are readable without
requiring an associated style sheet.
(e) Redundant text links shall be provided for each active region
of a server-side image map.
(f) Client-side image maps shall be provided instead of server-side
image maps except where the regions cannot be defined with an available
geometric shape.
(g) Row and column headers shall be identified for data tables.
(h) Markup shall be used to associate data cells and header cells
for data tables that have two or more logical levels of row or column
headers.
(i) Frames shall be titled with text that facilitates frame
identification and navigation.
(j) Pages shall be designed to avoid causing the screen to flicker
with a frequency greater than 2 Hz and lower than 55 Hz.
(k) A text-only page, with equivalent information or functionality,
shall be provided to make a web site comply with the provisions of this
part, when compliance cannot be accomplished in any other way. The
content of the text-only page shall be updated whenever the primary
page changes.
(l) When pages utilize scripting languages to display content, or
to create interface elements, the information provided by the script
shall be identified with functional text that can be read by assistive
technology.
(m) When a web page requires that an applet, plug-in or other
application be present on the client system to interpret page content,
the page must provide a link to a plug-in or applet that complies with
Sec. 1194.21(a) through (l).
(n) When electronic forms are designed to be completed on-line, the
form shall allow people using assistive technology to access the
information, field elements, and functionality required for completion
and submission of the form, including all directions and cues.
(o) A method shall be provided that permits users to skip
repetitive navigation links.
(p) When a timed response is required, the user shall be alerted
and given sufficient time to indicate more time is required.
Note to Sec. 1194.22: 1. The Board interprets paragraphs (a)
through (k) of this section as consistent with the following
priority 1 Checkpoints of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
1.0 (WCAG 1.0) (May 5, 1999) published by the Web Accessibility
Initiative of the World Wide Web Consortium:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WCAG 1.0
Section 1194.22 paragraph checkpoint
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a)........................................................ 1.1
(b)........................................................ 1.4
(c)........................................................ 2.1
(d)........................................................ 6.1
(e)........................................................ 1.2
(f)........................................................ 9.1
(g)........................................................ 5.1
(h)........................................................ 5.2
(i)........................................................ 12.1
(j)........................................................ 7.1
(k)........................................................ 11.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Paragraphs (l), (m), (n), (o), and (p) of this section are
different from WCAG 1.0. Web pages that conform to WCAG 1.0, level A
(i.e., all priority 1 checkpoints) must also meet paragraphs (l), (m),
(n), (o), and (p) of this section to comply with this section. WCAG 1.0
is available at http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI-WEBCONTENT-19990505.
Sec. 1194.23 Telecommunications products.
(a) Telecommunications products or systems which provide a function
allowing voice communication and which do not themselves provide a TTY
functionality shall provide a standard non-acoustic connection point
for TTYs. Microphones shall be capable of being turned on and off to
allow the user to intermix speech with TTY use.
(b) Telecommunications products which include voice communication
functionality shall support all commonly used cross-manufacturer non-
proprietary standard TTY signal protocols.
(c) Voice mail, auto-attendant, and interactive voice response
telecommunications systems shall be usable by TTY users with their
TTYs.
(d) Voice mail, messaging, auto-attendant, and interactive voice
response telecommunications systems that require a response from a user
within a time interval, shall give an alert when the time interval is
about to run out, and shall provide sufficient time for the user to
indicate more time is required.
(e) Where provided, caller identification and similar
telecommunications functions shall also be available for users of TTYs,
and for users who cannot see displays.
(f) For transmitted voice signals, telecommunications products
shall provide a gain adjustable up to a minimum of 20 dB. For
incremental volume control, at least one intermediate step of 12 dB of
gain shall be provided.
(g) If the telecommunications product allows a user to adjust the
receive volume, a function shall be provided to automatically reset the
volume to the default level after every use.
[[Page 80526]]
(h) Where a telecommunications product delivers output by an audio
transducer which is normally held up to the ear, a means for effective
magnetic wireless coupling to hearing technologies shall be provided.
(i) Interference to hearing technologies (including hearing aids,
cochlear implants, and assistive listening devices) shall be reduced to
the lowest possible level that allows a user of hearing technologies to
utilize the telecommunications product.
(j) Products that transmit or conduct information or communication,
shall pass through cross-manufacturer, non-proprietary, industry-
standard codes, translation protocols, formats or other information
necessary to provide the information or communication in a usable
format. Technologies which use encoding, signal compression, format
transformation, or similar techniques shall not remove information
needed for access or shall restore it upon delivery.
(k) Products which have mechanically operated controls or keys,
shall comply with the following:
(1) Controls and keys shall be tactilely discernible without
activating the controls or keys.
(2) Controls and keys shall be operable with one hand and shall not
require tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the wrist. The force
required to activate controls and keys shall be 5 lbs. (22.2 N)
maximum.
(3) If key repeat is supported, the delay before repeat shall be
adjustable to at least 2 seconds. Key repeat rate shall be adjustable
to 2 seconds per character.
(4) The status of all locking or toggle controls or keys shall be
visually discernible, and discernible either through touch or sound.
Sec. 1194.24 Video and multimedia products.
(a) All analog television displays 13 inches and larger, and
computer equipment that includes analog television receiver or display
circuitry, shall be equipped with caption decoder circuitry which
appropriately receives, decodes, and displays closed captions from
broadcast, cable, videotape, and DVD signals. As soon as practicable,
but not later than July 1, 2002, widescreen digital television (DTV)
displays measuring at least 7.8 inches vertically, DTV sets with
conventional displays measuring at least 13 inches vertically, and
stand-alone DTV tuners, whether or not they are marketed with display
screens, and computer equipment that includes DTV receiver or display
circuitry, shall be equipped with caption decoder circuitry which
appropriately receives, decodes, and displays closed captions from
broadcast, cable, videotape, and DVD signals.
(b) Television tuners, including tuner cards for use in computers,
shall be equipped with secondary audio program playback circuitry.
(c) All training and informational video and multimedia productions
which support the agency's mission, regardless of format, that contain
speech or other audio information necessary for the comprehension of
the content, shall be open or closed captioned.
(d) All training and informational video and multimedia productions
which support the agency's mission, regardless of format, that contain
visual information necessary for the comprehension of the content,
shall be audio described.
(e) Display or presentation of alternate text presentation or audio
descriptions shall be user-selectable unless permanent.
Sec. 1194.25 Self contained, closed products.
(a) Self contained products shall be usable by people with
disabilities without requiring an end-user to attach assistive
technology to the product. Personal headsets for private listening are
not assistive technology.
(b) When a timed response is required, the user shall be alerted
and given sufficient time to indicate more time is required.
(c) Where a product utilizes touchscreens or contact-sensitive
controls, an input method shall be provided that complies with
Sec. 1194.23 (k) (1) through (4).
(d) When biometric forms of user identification or control are
used, an alternative form of identification or activation, which does
not require the user to possess particular biological characteristics,
shall also be provided.
(e) When products provide auditory output, the audio signal shall
be provided at a standard signal level through an industry standard
connector that will allow for private listening. The product must
provide the ability to interrupt, pause, and restart the audio at
anytime.
(f) When products deliver voice output in a public area,
incremental volume control shall be provided with output amplification
up to a level of at least 65 dB. Where the ambient noise level of the
environment is above 45 dB, a volume gain of at least 20 dB above the
ambient level shall be user selectable. A function shall be provided to
automatically reset the volume to the default level after every use.
(g) Color coding shall not be used as the only means of conveying
information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or
distinguishing a visual element.
(h) When a product permits a user to adjust color and contrast
settings, a range of color selections capable of producing a variety of
contrast levels shall be provided.
(i) Products shall be designed to avoid causing the screen to
flicker with a frequency greater than 2 Hz and lower than 55 Hz.
(j) Products which are freestanding, non-portable, and intended to
be used in one location and which have operable controls shall comply
with the following:
(1) The position of any operable control shall be determined with
respect to a vertical plane, which is 48 inches in length, centered on
the operable control, and at the maximum protrusion of the product
within the 48 inch length (see Figure 1 of this part).
(2) Where any operable control is 10 inches or less behind the
reference plane, the height shall be 54 inches maximum and 15 inches
minimum above the floor.
(3) Where any operable control is more than 10 inches and not more
than 24 inches behind the reference plane, the height shall be 46
inches maximum and 15 inches minimum above the floor.
(4) Operable controls shall not be more than 24 inches behind the
reference plane (see Figure 2 of this part).
Sec. 1194.26 Desktop and portable computers.
(a) All mechanically operated controls and keys shall comply with
Sec. 1194.23(k)(1) through (4).
(b) If a product utilizes touchscreens or touch-operated controls,
an input method shall be provided that complies with Sec. 1194.23 (k)
(1) through (4).
(c) When biometric forms of user identification or control are
used, an alternative form of identification or activation, which does
not require the user to possess particular biological characteristics,
shall also be provided.
(d) Where provided, at least one of each type of expansion slots,
ports and connectors shall comply with publicly available industry
standards.
Subpart C--Functional Performance Criteria
Sec. 1194.31 Functional performance criteria.
(a) At least one mode of operation and information retrieval that
does not require user vision shall be provided, or support for
assistive technology used by people who are blind or visually impaired
shall be provided.
(b) At least one mode of operation and information retrieval that
does not
[[Page 80527]]
require visual acuity greater than 20/70 shall be provided in audio and
enlarged print output working together or independently, or support for
assistive technology used by people who are visually impaired shall be
provided.
(c) At least one mode of operation and information retrieval that
does not require user hearing shall be provided, or support for
assistive technology used by people who are deaf or hard of hearing
shall be provided.
(d) Where audio information is important for the use of a product,
at least one mode of operation and information retrieval shall be
provided in an enhanced auditory fashion, or support for assistive
hearing devices shall be provided.
(e) At least one mode of operation and information retrieval that
does not require user speech shall be provided, or support for
assistive technology used by people with disabilities shall be
provided.
(f) At least one mode of operation and information retrieval that
does not require fine motor control or simultaneous actions and that is
operable with limited reach and strength shall be provided.
Subpart D--Information, Documentation, and Support
Sec. 1194.41 Information, documentation, and support.
(a) Product support documentation provided to end-users shall be
made available in alternate formats upon request, at no additional
charge.
(b) End-users shall have access to a description of the
accessibility and compatibility features of products in alternate
formats or alternate methods upon request, at no additional charge.
(c) Support services for products shall accommodate the
communication needs of end-users with disabilities.
Figures to Part 1194
BILLING CODE 8150-01-P
[[Page 80528]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR21DE00.000
[FR Doc. 00-32017 Filed 12-20-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8150-01-P