Update and Revisions
Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards

Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines
About the Access Board
•	25 members

•	13 public members appointed by the President for four year terms

•	12 Federal members from various Federal agencies
About the Access Board
•	$6 million budget
•	28 employees
•	3 organizational units
•	Office of the Executive Director
•	General Counsel
•	Technical and Information Services
Access Board Programs
•	Guidelines and standards development
•	Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) of 1968
•	Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
•	Telecommunications Act of 1996
•	Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1998
•	Technical assistance and training
•	Research
•	ABA compliance and enforcement
Why Revisions are Needed?
•	The Access Board shall periodically review and, as appropriate, amend the standards to reflect technological advances or changes in electronic and information technology (section 508)

•	The Board shall review and update the Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines periodically (section 255)

•	Almost 6 years since the Section 508 standards were issued – 8 years for the Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines; technology has changed

•	Harmonization with requirements in other countries
Why One Rulemaking?
•	The telecommunications provisions in the section 508 standards are based on, and are consistent with, the Board’s Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines

•	The “intended audiences” and “levels of effort” for each law will remain different
Intended Audiences and
Levels of Effort
•	The Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines apply to manufacturers

•	A manufacturer of telecommunications equipment …shall ensure that the equipment is designed, developed, and fabricated to be accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, if readily achievable
Intended Audiences and
Levels of Effort
•	The Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards apply to Federal government agencies

•	When agencies develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information technology, they must ensure that it is accessible to Federal employees and individuals with disabilities who are members of the public seeking information or services from a Federal agency unless an undue burden would be imposed on the agency
Why an Advisory Committee?
•	Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act requires the Board to consult with Departments of Education, Commerce, Defense, the General Services Administration, and the Federal Communications Commission

•	We must also consult with the electronic and information technology industry and public or nonprofit organizations, including organizations representing individuals with disabilities
Why an Advisory Committee?
•	Advisory committees allow interested groups to play a substantive role in the development of rules which are then proposed for public comment
What are the Required
Rulemaking Steps?
•	Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
•	Regulatory assessment – costs and benefits
•	Submit to OMB – 90 day review period
•	Publish in Federal Register – minimum 30 day comment period

•	Final Rule
•	Regulatory assessment
•	Submit to OMB – 90 day review period
•	Publish in Federal Register
Is Rulemaking Lengthy?
•	Past history indicates that the minimum amount of time needed is about 2 years
•	Section 508 rulemaking took 2 years and 4 months
•	Section 255 rulemaking took 1 year and 11 months
Section 508 Rulemaking History
August 7, 1998 | Workforce Investment Act of 1998 signed into law
August 24, 1998 | notice of intent to establish advisory committee
September 29, 1998 | notice establishing advisory committee
October 15-16, 1998 | committee meeting
December 1-2, 1998 | committee meeting
January 5-6, 1999 | committee meeting
February 8-9, 1999 | committee meeting
March 29-30, 1999 | committee meeting
May 11-12, 1999 | committee meeting
May 12, 1999 | committee presented recommendations to the Board
March 31, 2000 | Access Board NPRM (60 day comment period)
December 21, 2000 | Access Board Final rule
January 22, 2001 | Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council NPRM (60 day comment period)
April 25, 2001 | Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council final rule

Telecommunications Act Rulemaking History
February 8, 1996 | Telecommunications Act of 1996 signed into law
March 28, 1996 | notice of intent to establish advisory committee
May 24, 1996 | notice establishing advisory committee
June 10 12, 1996 | committee meeting
August 14-16, 1996 | committee meeting
September 25-27, 1996 | committee meeting
November 6-8, 1996 | committee meeting
December 16-18, 1996 | committee meeting
January 13-14, 1997 | committee meeting
January 15, 1997 | committee presented recommendations to the Board
April 18, 1997 | Access Board NPRM (45 day comment period)
February 3, 1998 | Access Board Final rule
April 20, 1998 | FCC NPRM
July 14, 1999 | FCC adopts Report and Order and Notice of Inquiry

What About Other Agencies?
•	Not later than 6 months after the Access Board revises any standards…the [Federal Acquisition Regulatory] Council shall revise the Federal Acquisition Regulation
Draft Timeline
Proposed Rulemaking Timeline
April 18, 2006 | notice of intent to establish advisory committee
July 6, 2006 | notice establishing advisory committee
September 27-29, 2006 | committee meeting
TBD | committee meeting
TBD | committee meeting
TBD | committee meeting
TBD | committee meeting
TBD | committee meeting
TBD | committee presents recommendations to the Board
March 2008 | Access Board NPRM (60 day comment period)
September 2009 | Access Board Final rule

Goals in the Revision Process
•	“We agree that what is needed are clear, consensus driven, testable, and reliable accessibility requirements.  In this world of global scales, it is critical that accessibility requirements be harmonized throughout the world.  Product manufacturers want to build to a single set of requirements – or at least not be faced with competing world wide requirements.  We should do what we can to facilitate this, because ultimately if we can make the regulatory process easier to achieve – and by that I do not mean that we need to weaken the requirements that exist today – we will enhance accessibility for people with disabilities worldwide.”

Marc Guthrie, Access Board public member
International Workshop on Accessibility Requirements
Brussels, Belgium -- October 21, 2004
Expectations for
Advisory Committee
•	Issues within our authority –

•	Definition of electronic and information technology
•	Technical and functional performance criteria
•	Accessibility of telecommunications equipment and customer premises equipment
Expectations for
Advisory Committee
•	Important but not within our authority -

•	Enforcement of the standards and guidelines

•	Oversight, surveying agencies, and testing

•	Treatment of micro-purchases, contract clauses, Voluntary Product Accessibility Template
Consensus
•	An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole
•	Every member can say...
•	I believe that you understand my point of view and that I understand yours
•	Whether or not I prefer the group decision, I support them because they were reached fairly and openly and they are the best decisions at this time
•	We all share in the final decision
Consensus
•	Consensus does not mean...

•	Unanimous or majority vote 
•	Everyone’s first choice 
•	That everyone agrees, although enough need to be in favor to get the decision carried out
Thank you for Volunteering !!