ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD

36 CFR Part 1194

[Docket No. 2000-01]

RIN 3014-AA25

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. 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.

Section 508(a)(2)(A) requires the Architectural and Transportation Barriers
Compliance Board (Access Board) 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.

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 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.

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 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 1194.26, Desktop and
portable computers, 1194.21, Software applications and operating systems, and the
functional performance criteria in 1194.31. Paragraph (a) states the general
statutory requirement for electronic and information technology that must comply with
the standards unless doing so would result in an undue burden. The term "undue
burden" is defined at 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 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 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) (4.1.1 (5)(b) 36 CFR part 1191) and the
Architectural Barriers Act (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 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, 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.

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 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.

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 criteria of 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:
1194.21 (General Requirements); 1194.23 (Component Specific Standards);
1194.25 Standards for Compatibility; and 1194.27 (Functional Performance
Criteria). The Board sought comment in the proposed rule on the organization of
Subpart B in general and 1194.21 (General Requirements), 1194.23 (Component
Specific Requirements) and 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
1194.23 (Component Specific Requirements) or whether they must also look to the
provisions in 1194.21 (General Requirements), as well as 1194.25 (Compatibility).
Commenters further questioned whether multiple provisions within a specific section
would apply. For example, making electronic forms accessible was addressed under
1194.23(b) (Non-embedded software applications and operating systems).
Provisions for web sites were addressed separately in 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 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 1194.23 (Component Specific
Requirements) were really compatibility concerns, such as 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, 1194.21 addresses software applications, 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 1194.21(i) (Software
applications and operating systems), 1194.22(c) (Web-based intranet and internet
information and applications), as well as 1194.25(g) (Self contained, closed
products).

The provisions contained in 1194.21 (General Requirements), 1194.23
(Component Specific Requirements) and 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 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 1194.23(a)(4) and 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 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 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 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 1194.23(b)(4) and 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 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 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 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
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 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
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 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
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 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 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 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 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 1194.23(c)(1) in the NPRM.)

Comment. In the NPRM, 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 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
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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, 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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
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 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 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 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
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 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 hearing if they accidentally
answer a telephone with the amplification turned too high. (See 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
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 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 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 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 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 4.27.4 of the ADA Accessibility Guidelines and is consistent with the
Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines. (See 1194.23(a)(3) in the
NPRM.)

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 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
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 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
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 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 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 audio
description of visual material. (See 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 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 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
1194.22 (p) and 1194.23 (d) which are discussed in detail above. (See
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 1194.23 (k) (1) through (4). (See 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 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 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 1194.23(f)(2) and 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 1194.21
(General requirements), 1194.23 (Component specific requirements) and
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 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 1194.21(f) in the NPRM.) Similar to 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 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 1194.25(b) in the NPRM.)

Comment. In the proposed rule, this provision was addressed in
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, 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 1194.21 would also satisfy this
provision. (See 1194.27(a) in the NPRM.) No substantive comments were
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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
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 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 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
Electronic and information technology
Lower bound cost estimates (millions) and Upper bound cost estimates
(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 - $6911

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 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
Lower Bound Productivity increase: -- Lower Bound Aggregate benefits
range (millions): --
Upper Bound Productivity increase: Upper Bound Aggregate benefits range
(millions): $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 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

 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.

 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 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.

 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,
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.

 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.

 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

 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 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.

 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 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 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:

Section 1194.22 Paragraph (a) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 1.1
Section 1194.22 Paragraph (b) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 1.4
Section 1194.22 Paragraph (c) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 2.1
Section 1194.22 Paragraph (d) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 6.1
Section 1194.22 Paragraph (e) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 1.2
Section 1194.22 Paragraph (f) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 9.1
Section 1194.22 Paragraph (g) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 5.1
Section 1194.22 Paragraph (h) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 5.2
Section 1194.22 Paragraph (i) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 12.1
Section 1194.22 Paragraph (j) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 7.1
Section 1194.22 Paragraph (k) WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 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.

 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.

(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.

 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.

 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 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).

Figure Description: Figure one illustrates two bird's-eye views. In both views,
the vertical plane is centered on the control area. In the first view, the vertical
plane is set back from the control area by a protrusion on the device. In the
second view, there are no protrusions on the device and the vertical plane is
right up against the control area.

(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).

Figure Description: Figure two illustrates two front views. The first view
illustrates a reach of no more than 10 inches deep with the control area
between 15 and 54 inches. The second view illustrates a reach greater than 10
inches but not more than 24 inches deep with the control area between 15 and
46 inches.

 1194.26 Desktop and portable computers.

(a) All mechanically operated controls and keys shall comply with
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 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

 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 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

 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

Figure Descriptions:

Figure one illustrates two bird's-eye views. In both views, the vertical plane is
centered on the control area. In the first view, the vertical plane is set back from
the control area by a protrusion on the device. In the second view, there are no
protrusions on the device and the vertical plane is right up against the control
area.

Figure two illustrates two front views. The first view illustrates a reach of no
more than 10 inches deep with the control area between 15 and 54 inches. The
second view illustrates a reach greater than 10 inches but not more than 24
inches deep with the control area between 15 and 46 inches.