architectural and transportation barriers …1).pdfthursday, december 21, 2000 part ii architectural...

Thursday,

December 21, 2000

Part II

Architectural andTransportationBarriers ComplianceBoard36 CFR Part 1194Electronic and Information TechnologyAccessibility Standards; Final Rule

VerDate 11<MAY>2000 17:10 Dec 20, 2000 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\21DER2.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 21DER2

80500 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 246 / Thursday, December 21, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

1 Section 508 does not apply to national securitysystems, as that term is defined in section 5142 ofthe Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996 (40 U.S.C. 1452).

2 The Access Board is an independent Federalagency established by section 502 of theRehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 792) whose primarymission is to promote accessibility for individualswith disabilities. The Access Board consists of 25members. Thirteen are appointed by the Presidentfrom among the public, a majority of who arerequired to be individuals with disabilities. Theother twelve are heads of the following Federalagencies or their designees whose positions are

Executive Level IV or above: The departments ofHealth and Human Services, Education,Transportation, Housing and Urban Development,Labor, Interior, Defense, Justice, Veterans Affairs,and Commerce; the General ServicesAdministration; and the United States PostalService.

ARCHITECTURAL ANDTRANSPORTATION BARRIERSCOMPLIANCE BOARD

36 CFR Part 1194

[Docket No. 2000–01]

RIN 3014–AA25

Electronic and Information TechnologyAccessibility Standards

AGENCY: Architectural andTransportation Barriers ComplianceBoard.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Architectural andTransportation Barriers ComplianceBoard (Access Board) is issuing finalaccessibility standards for electronicand information technology covered bysection 508 of the Rehabilitation ActAmendments of 1998. Section 508requires the Access Board to publishstandards setting forth a definition ofelectronic and information technologyand the technical and functionalperformance criteria necessary for suchtechnology to comply with section 508.Section 508 requires that when Federalagencies develop, procure, maintain, oruse electronic and informationtechnology, they shall ensure that theelectronic and information technologyallows Federal employees withdisabilities to have access to and use ofinformation and data that is comparableto the access to and use of informationand data by Federal employees who arenot individuals with disabilities, unlessan undue burden would be imposed onthe agency. Section 508 also requiresthat individuals with disabilities, whoare members of the public seekinginformation or services from a Federalagency, have access to and use ofinformation and data that is comparableto that provided to the public who arenot individuals with disabilities, unlessan undue burden would be imposed onthe agency.

DATES: Effective Date: February 20,2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:Doug Wakefield, Office of Technical andInformation Services, Architectural andTransportation Barriers ComplianceBoard, 1331 F Street, NW., suite 1000,Washington, DC 20004–1111.Telephone number (202) 272–5434extension 139 (voice); (202) 272–5449(TTY). Electronic mail address:[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability of Copies and ElectronicAccess

Single copies of this publication maybe obtained at no cost by calling theAccess Board’s automated publicationsorder line (202) 272–5434, by pressing2 on the telephone keypad, then 1, andrequesting publication S–40 (Electronicand Information TechnologyAccessibility Standards Final Rule).Persons using a TTY should call (202)272–5449. Please record a name,address, telephone number and requestpublication S–40. This document isavailable in alternate formats uponrequest. Persons who want a copy in analternate format should specify the typeof format (cassette tape, Braille, largeprint, or computer disk). This documentis also available on the Board’s Internetsite (http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/508standards.htm).

BackgroundOn August 7, 1998, the President

signed into law the WorkforceInvestment Act of 1998, which includesthe Rehabilitation Act Amendments of1998. Section 508 of the RehabilitationAct Amendments, as amended by theWorkforce Investment Act of 1998,requires that when Federal agenciesdevelop, procure, maintain, or useelectronic and information technology,they shall ensure that the electronic andinformation technology allows Federalemployees with disabilities to haveaccess to and use of information anddata that is comparable to the access toand use of information and data byFederal employees who are notindividuals with disabilities, unless anundue burden would be imposed on theagency.1 Section 508 also requires thatindividuals with disabilities, who aremembers of the public seekinginformation or services from a Federalagency, have access to and use ofinformation and data that is comparableto that provided to the public who arenot individuals with disabilities.

Section 508(a)(2)(A) requires theArchitectural and TransportationBarriers Compliance Board (AccessBoard) 2 to publish standards setting

forth a definition of electronic andinformation technology and thetechnical and functional performancecriteria necessary for accessibility forsuch technology. If an agencydetermines that meeting the standards,when procuring electronic andinformation technology, imposes anundue burden, it must explain whymeeting the standards creates an undueburden.

On March 31, 2000, the Access Boardissued a notice of proposed rulemaking(NPRM) in the Federal Register (65 FR17346) proposing standards foraccessible electronic and informationtechnology. The proposed standardswere based on recommendations of theElectronic and Information TechnologyAccess Advisory Committee (EITAAC).The EITAAC was convened by theAccess Board in September 1998 toassist the Board in fulfilling its mandateunder section 508. It was composed of27 members including representatives ofthe electronic and informationtechnology industry, organizationsrepresenting the access needs ofindividuals with disabilities, and otherpersons affected by accessibilitystandards for electronic and informationtechnology. Representatives of Federalagencies, including the departments ofCommerce, Defense, Education, Justice,Veterans Affairs, the FederalCommunications Commission, and theGeneral Services Administration, servedas ex-officio members or observers ofthe EITAAC.

The public comment period for theproposed rule ended on May 30, 2000.Over 100 individuals and organizationssubmitted comments on the proposedstandards. Comments were submitted byFederal agencies, representatives of theinformation technology industry,disability groups, and persons withdisabilities. Approximately 35 percentof the comments came from Federalagencies. Fifteen percent came fromindividual companies and industrytrade associations. Approximately 30percent of the comments were fromindividuals with disabilities andorganizations representing persons withdisabilities. Eight states responded tothe proposed rule and the remainingcomments were from educational orresearch organizations.

The proposed standards coveredvarious products, including computers,software, and electronic office


80501Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 246 / Thursday, December 21, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

3 Whenever the Access Board revises itsstandards, the Federal Acquisition RegulatoryCouncil is required to revise the FAR, and eachappropriate Federal agency is required to revise itsprocurement policies and directives within sixmonths to incorporate the revisions.

equipment in the Federal sector. Theyprovided technical criteria specific tovarious types of technologies andperformance-based requirements, whichfocus on the functional capabilities ofcovered technologies. Specific criteriacovered controls, keyboards, andkeypads; software applications andoperating systems (non-embedded);web-based information or applications;telecommunications functions; video ormulti-media products; and informationkiosks and transaction machines. Alsocovered was compatibility withadaptive equipment that people withdisabilities commonly use forinformation and communication access.

General IssuesThis section of the preamble

addresses general issues raised bycomments filed in response to theNPRM. Individual provisions of the ruleare discussed in detail under theSection-by-Section Analysis below.

Effective Date for the Enforcement ofSection 508

Section 508(a)(2)(A) required theBoard to publish final standards foraccessible electronic and informationtechnology by February 7, 2000. Section508(a)(3) provides that within sixmonths after the Board publishes itsstandards, the Federal AcquisitionRegulatory Council is required to revisethe Federal Acquisition Regulation(FAR), and each Federal agency isrequired to revise the Federalprocurement policies and directivesunder its control to incorporate theBoard’s standards.3

Because of the delay in publishing thestandards, the proposed rule soughtcomment on making the standardseffective six months after publication inthe Federal Register to provide Federalagencies an opportunity to more fullyunderstand the new standards andallow manufacturers of electronic andinformation technology time to ensurethat their products comply with thestandards before enforcement actionscould be initiated. The NPRM noted thatpostponing the effective date of theBoard’s standards could not affect theright of individuals with disabilities tofile complaints for electronic andinformation technology procured afterAugust 7, 2000 since that right wasestablished by the statute.

Comment. There was a generalconsensus that a delay in the effective

date of the standards was warranted toprovide a reasonable period of time forindustry to bring their products intocompliance with the Board’s standards.

Response. On July 13, 2000, PresidentClinton signed into law the MilitaryConstruction Appropriations Act forFiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106–246)which included an amendment tosection 508 of the Rehabilitation Act.Under the amendment, the effectivedate for the enforcement of section 508was delayed to allow for additional timefor compliance with the Board’s finalstandards. As originally written, theenforcement provisions of section 508would have taken effect on August 7,2000. The amendment in Public Law106–246 revises the enforcement date to6 months from publication of theBoard’s final standards, consistent withthe law’s intent. As a result of theamendment, there is no need to delaythe effective date of the standards. Theeffective date for the standards is largelyan administrative provision and doesnot affect the date by which complaintsmay be filed under section 508.Complaints and lawsuits may be filed 6months from the date of publication ofthese standards in the Federal Register.

Technical and Functional PerformanceCriteria

Section 508 (a)(2)(A)(ii) requires theBoard to develop technical andfunctional performance criterianecessary to implement therequirements of section 508.

Comment. The InformationTechnology Association of America(ITAA) commented that the specificityof many of the proposed provisions gobeyond what may be characterized astechnical and functional performancecriteria. ITAA commented that thestatute intended that the standards beset forth in terms of technical andfunctional performance criteria asopposed to technical designrequirements. Performance criteria areintended to give discretion in achievingthe required end result. ITAAcommented that product developers,who have a broad understanding of theirown products, industry standards, andfuture trends need this discretion tomeet the requirements of section 508and that it is impossible to predictaccurately future technologicaladvances. Design requirements, theyadded, inhibit development andinnovation. ITAA was concerned thatmany of the proposed provisions wouldimpede technological advancementsbecause they were too specific. On theother hand, ITAA supported proposed§ 1194.5, Equivalent Facilitation,

because it would lessen the adverseimpact of the specific requirements.

Response. According toadministration policy, performancestandards are generally to be preferredto engineering or design standardsbecause performance standards providethe regulated parties the flexibility toachieve the regulatory objective in amore cost-effective way. The Board wasgiven the responsibility to developtechnical and functional performancecriteria necessary to implement therequirements of section 508. Thus, thestandards provide technicalrequirements as well as functionalperformance criteria. The standardsreflect the need to be as descriptive aspossible because procurement officialsand others need to know whencompliance with section 508 has beenachieved and because the failure to meetthe standards can result in anenforcement action. Several provisions,such as those regarding time-outfeatures, have been revised in the finalrule to be more performance orientedrather than specific design standards.

Section-by-Section Analysis

This section of the preamblesummarizes each of the provisions ofthe final rule and the commentsreceived in response to the proposedrule. Where the provision in the finalrule differs from that of the proposedrule, an explanation of the modificationis provided. The text of the final rulefollows this section.

Subpart A—General

Section 1194.1 Purpose

This section describes the purpose ofthe standards which is to implementsection 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of1973, as amended by the WorkforceInvestment Act of 1998. No substantivecomments were received and nochanges have been made to this sectionin the final rule.

Section 1194.2 Application

This section specifies what electronicand information technology is coveredby the standards. Electronic andinformation technology covered bysection 508 must comply with each ofthe relevant sections of this part. Forexample, a computer and its softwareprograms would be required to complywith § 1194.26, Desktop and portablecomputers, § 1194.21, Softwareapplications and operating systems, andthe functional performance criteria in§ 1194.31. Paragraph (a) states thegeneral statutory requirement forelectronic and information technologythat must comply with the standards



unless doing so would result in anundue burden. The term ‘‘undueburden’’ is defined at § 1194.4(Definitions) and is discussed in thepreamble under that section.

Paragraph (a)(1) states the statutoryobligation of a Federal agency to makeinformation and data available by analternative means when complying withthe standards would result in an undueburden. For example, a Federal agencywishes to purchase a computer programthat generates maps denoting regionaldemographics. If the agency determinesthat it would constitute an undueburden to purchase an accessibleversion of such a program, the agencywould be required to make theinformation provided by the programavailable in an alternative means tousers with disabilities. In addition, therequirements to make reasonableaccommodations for the needs of anemployee with a disability undersection 501 and to provide overallprogram accessibility under section 504of the Rehabilitation Act also apply.

Comment. The National Federation ofthe Blind (NFB) suggested thatadditional language be added thatwould require agencies to provideinformation by an alternative means atthe same time the information and dataare made available to others.

Response. This paragraph restates thegeneral statutory requirement to providean alternative means of providing anindividual the use of the informationand data. Providing individuals withinformation and data by an alternativemeans necessarily requires flexibilityand will generally be dealt with on acase-by-case approach. Although, theBoard agrees that information providedby an alternative means should beprovided at generally the same time asthe information is made available toothers, the provision provides theneeded flexibility to ensure thatagencies can make case-by-casedecisions. No substantive changes weremade in the final rule.

Paragraph (a)(2) sets forth thestatutory requirement for an agency todocument any claim of undue burden ina procurement. Such documentationmust explain in detail which provisionor provisions of this rule impose anundue burden and the extent of such aburden. The agency should discuss eachof the factors considered in its undueburden analysis.

Comment. The General ServicesAdministration was concerned that thisprovision was too limiting because itonly referred to products which areprocured by the Federal Governmentand did not include products which aredeveloped, maintained, or used. The

American Council of the Blind (ACB)recommended that the requirement fordocumentation apply when agenciesclaim the lack of commercially availableaccessible equipment or software. TheNFB commented that there should be arequirement for agencies to explain thespecific alternate means to be used toprovide information or data. Withoutsuch a requirement, they argued,persons with disabilities must beknowledgeable enough to inquire aboutan alternate means after first discoveringthat the product used for theinformation and data is not accessible.Although agencies would be expected toknow in advance when products willnot be accessible, persons withdisabilities will not have thisinformation until encountering theproblem.

Response. Paragraph (a)(2) addressesthe documentation of undue burden. Bystatute, the requirement to document anundue burden applies only toprocurements. This rule does notprescribe the needed documentation ofa finding of an undue burden but merelyrestates the statutory requirement that afinding be documented. The FAR isexpected to address the neededdocumentation. No substantive changeshave been made in the final rule.

Paragraph (b) states that procurementof products complying with this part issubject to commercial availability. Theconcept of commercial availability isbased on existing provisions in the FAR(see 48 CFR 2.101, Definitions of Wordsand Terms: Commercial item).

The proposed rule provided that thestandards applied to products whichwere available in the commercialmarketplace; would be available in timeto meet an agency’s deliveryrequirements through advances intechnology or performance; or weredeveloped in response to a Governmentsolicitation. As noted in the preamble,this language was derived from thedefinition for ‘‘commercial item’’ in theFAR cited above. The preamble to theproposed rule stated that thedetermination of commercialavailability is to be applied on aprovision by provision basis.

Comment. A number of commenterssought further clarification of thisprovision. Several commenters from theinformation technology industry andsome Federal agencies were concernedthat the concept of what iscommercially available was moreappropriately within the jurisdiction ofthe Federal Acquisition RegulatoryCouncil. The American Foundation forthe Blind (AFB) and the ACB wantedagencies to document theirdetermination that a product was not

commercially available similar to whatis required under undue burden. TheITAA commented that commercialavailability should not be applied on aprovision by provision basis.

Response. The Board agrees that theFAR is the appropriate venue foraddressing commercial availability. TheBoard believes that the concept ofcommercial availability is captured inthe FAR definition of ‘‘commercialitem’’.

With respect to documentation,Federal agencies may choose todocument a determination that aproduct is not available in thecommercial marketplace in anticipationof a subsequent inquiry. However, suchdocumentation is not required bysection 508.

Similar to an undue burden analysis,agencies cannot claim that a product asa whole is not commercially availablebecause no product in the marketplacemeets all the standards. If products arecommercially available that meet somebut not all of the standards, the agencymust procure the product that bestmeets the standards. The final rule hasbeen modified to clarify thisapplication.

Paragraph (c) applies this rule toelectronic and information technologydeveloped, procured, maintained, orused by an agency directly or used bya contractor pursuant to a contract withan agency.

Comment. The ITAA commented thatthis provision conflicts with section508. For example, they commented thatif a contract required a vendor topurchase and maintain a specificcomputer system for the purpose ofgathering and relaying certain data to anagency, the standards would apply tosuch a computer system even if thesystem would be used only by vendoremployees. In addition, ITAAcommented that this is not a technicaland functional performance criterion,and should be addressed by the FAR.

Response. Consistent with section5002(3)(C) of the Clinger-Cohen Act of1996 (40 U.S.C. 1452) and as furtherdiscussed in section 1194.3(b) below,products used by a contractor which areincidental to a contract are not coveredby this rule. For example, a Federalagency enters into a contract to have aweb site developed for the agency. Thecontractor uses its own office system todevelop the web site. The web site isrequired to comply with this rule sincethe web site is the purpose of thecontract, however, the contractor’soffice system does not have to complywith these standards, since theequipment used to produce the web siteis incidental to the contract. See section



1194.3(b) below. No changes were madeto this provision in the final rule.

Section 1194.3 General ExceptionsThis section provides general

exceptions from the standards.Paragraph (a) provides an exception fortelecommunications or informationsystems operated by agencies, thefunction, operation, or use of whichinvolves intelligence activities,cryptologic activities related to nationalsecurity, command and control ofmilitary forces, equipment that is anintegral part of a weapon or weaponssystem, or systems which are critical tothe direct fulfillment of military orintelligence missions. This exception isstatutory under section 508 and isconsistent with a similar exception insection 5142 of the Clinger-Cohen Act of1996. This exception does not apply toa system that is to be used for routineadministrative and businessapplications (including payroll, finance,logistics, and personnel managementapplications). For example, softwareused for payroll, word processingsoftware used for production of routinedocuments, ordinary telephones,copiers, fax machines, and webapplications must still comply with thestandards even if they are developed,procured, maintained, or used by anagency engaged in intelligence ormilitary activities. The Boardunderstands that the Department ofDefense interprets this to mean that acomputer designed to provide earlymissile launch detection would not besubject to these standards, nor wouldadministrative or business systems thatmust be architecturally tightly coupledwith a mission critical, national securitysystem, to ensure interoperability andmission accomplishment. Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (b) provides an exceptionfor electronic and informationtechnology that is acquired by acontractor incidental to a Federalcontract. That is, the products acontractor develops, procures,maintains, or uses which are notspecified as part of a contract with aFederal agency are not required tocomply with this part. For example, aconsulting firm that enters into acontract with a Federal agency toproduce a report is not required toprocure accessible computers and wordprocessing software to produce thereport regardless of whether thoseproducts were used exclusively for thegovernment contract or used on bothgovernment and non-governmentrelated activities since the purpose of

the contract was to procure a report.Similarly, if a firm is contracted todevelop a web site for a Federal agency,the web site created must be fullycompliant with this part, but the firm’sown web site would not be covered. Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (c) clarifies that, except asrequired to comply with thesestandards, this part does not require theinstallation of specific accessibility-related software or the attachment of anassistive technology device at aworkstation of a Federal employee whois not an individual with a disability.Specific accessibility related softwaremeans software which has the solefunction of increasing accessibility forpersons with disabilities to othersoftware programs (e.g., screenmagnification software). The purpose ofsection 508 and these standards is tobuild as much accessibility as isreasonably possible into generalproducts developed, procured,maintained, or used by agencies. It isnot expected that every computer willbe equipped with a refreshable Brailledisplay, or that every software programwill have a built-in screen reader. Suchassistive technology may be required aspart of a reasonable accommodation foran employee with a disability or toprovide program accessibility. To theextent that such technology isnecessary, products covered by this partmust not interfere with the operation ofthe assistive technology. No substantivecomments were received and nochanges have been made to this sectionin the final rule.

Paragraph (d) specifies that whenagencies provide access to informationor data to the public through electronicand information technology, agenciesare not required to make equipmentowned by the agency available foraccess and use by individuals withdisabilities at a location other than thatwhere the electronic and informationtechnology is provided to the public, orto purchase equipment for access anduse by individuals with disabilities at alocation other than that where theelectronic and information technology isprovided to the public. For example, ifan agency provides an information kioskin a Post Office, a means to access thekiosk information for a person with adisability need not be provided in anylocation other than at the kiosk itself.

Comment. The ACB commented thatwhere a location is not accessible, anagency must provide the information ina location that is accessible to peoplewith disabilities.

Response. This paragraph restates thegeneral statutory requirement that whenagencies provide access to informationor data to the public through electronicand information technology, theagencies are not required to makeequipment owned by the agencyavailable for access and use byindividuals with disabilities at alocation other than that where theelectronic and information technology isprovided to the public, or to purchaseequipment for access and use byindividuals with disabilities at alocation other than that where theelectronic and information technology isprovided to the public. The accessibilityof the location would be addressedunder section 504 of the RehabilitationAct or other Federal laws. Nosubstantive changes were made in thefinal rule.

Paragraph (e) states that compliancewith this part does not require afundamental alteration in the nature ofa product or service or its components.

Comment. The AFB commented thatfundamental alteration is not anappropriate factor to include in this rulesince the statute provides undue burdenas the proper protection and allowing afundamental alteration exemptionweakens the intent of the statute and itshigh expectations of government. If theconcept of fundamental alteration ismaintained, AFB recommended that itbe part of an explanation of undueburden. The Department of Commerceagreed that the inclusion of afundamental alteration exception wouldnegate the purpose of section 508. TheTrace Research and Development Centersaid that the term should be defined.

The Information Technology IndustryCouncil (ITIC) commented that theBoard should expand the concept offundamental alteration by stating that anagency should not be required tofundamentally alter the nature of aprogram or service that the agencyoffers.

Response. Fundamental alteration isan appropriate exception for inclusionin the standards. It means a change inthe fundamental characteristic orpurpose of the product or service, notmerely a cosmetic or aesthetic change.For example, an agency intends toprocure pocket-sized pagers for fieldagents for a law enforcement agency.Adding a large display to a small pagermay fundamentally alter the device bysignificantly changing its size to such anextent that it no longer meets thepurpose for which it was intended, thatis to provide a communication devicewhich fits in a shirt or jacket pocket. Forsome of these agents, portability ofelectronic equipment is a paramount



concern. Generally, adding accessshould not change the basic purpose orcharacteristics of a product in afundamental way.

Comment. The ITAA commented thattelecommunications equipmentswitches, servers, and other similar‘‘back office’’ equipment which are usedfor equipment maintenance andadministration functions should beexempt from the standards. Forexample, in the case oftelecommunications equipment,technicians might need to configureservice databases, remove equipmentpanels to replace components, or runtests to verify functionality. ITAAcommented that section 508 should notapply to these types of products sinceapplying requirements to such productswould have serious design and costramifications.

Response. The Board agrees and hasprovided an exception that productslocated in spaces frequented only byservice personnel for maintenance,repair, or occasional monitoring ofequipment are not required to complywith this part. This exception isconsistent with a similar exception inthe Board’s guidelines under theAmericans with Disabilities Act (ADA)(§ 4.1.1(5)(b) 36 CFR part 1191) and theArchitectural Barriers Act (§ 4.1.2(5)exception, Uniform FederalAccessibility Standards Appendix A to41 CFR part 101–19.6).

Section 1194.4 DefinitionsAccessible. The term accessible was

defined in the proposed rule in terms ofcompliance with the standards in thispart, as is common with otheraccessibility standards. As proposed, ifa product complies with the standardsin this part, it is ‘‘accessible’’; if it doesnot comply, it is not accessible.

Comment. The Trace Research andDevelopment Center (Trace Center) andthe General Services Administrationcommented that the proposed definitionof accessible would mean that productscan be declared ‘‘accessible’’ if they aremerely compatible with assistivetechnology and that the definition ofaccessible was being used as a measureof compliance. The Trace Centercommented that the problem with thisapproach is that a product could havefew or no accessibility features becauseit was an undue burden and still beconsidered accessible.

Response. Although the termaccessible was used sparingly in theproposed rule, the Board agrees that thedefinition may be problematic. The termas used in the proposed rule was in factaddressing products which comply withthe standards. Products covered by this

part are required to comply with allapplicable provisions of this part.Accordingly, the definition has beeneliminated in the final rule and the termaccessible is not used in the text of thefinal rule. A product is compliant withthe requirements of section 508 of theRehabilitation Act of 1973 (as amendedby the Workforce Investment Act of1998) by meeting all the applicableprovisions of part 1194.

Agency. The term agency includesany Federal department or agency,including the United States PostalService. No substantive comments werereceived regarding this definition andno changes have been made in the finalrule.

Alternate formats. Certain productinformation is required to be madeavailable in alternate formats to beusable by individuals with variousdisabilities. Consistent with the Board’sTelecommunications Act AccessibilityGuidelines (36 CFR part 1193), theproposed rule defined alternate formatsas those formats which are usable bypeople with disabilities. The proposeddefinition noted that the formats mayinclude Braille, ASCII text, large print,recorded audio, and accessible internetprogramming or coding languages,among others. ASCII refers to theAmerican Standard Code forInformation Interchange, which is anAmerican National Standards Institute(ANSI) standard defining howcomputers read and write commonlyused letters, numbers, punctuationmarks, and other codes.

Comment. One commenter wasconcerned that the term ‘‘accessibleinternet programming or codinglanguages’’ used in the description ofacceptable alternate formats wassomewhat ambiguous andrecommended using the term‘‘accessible internet formats’’.

Response. The Board agrees that theterm ‘‘accessible internet programmingor coding languages’’ may be vague. Inaddition, as noted above, the final rulewill not include the term ‘‘accessible’’.The definition for alternate formats hasbeen modified to refer to ‘‘electronicformats which comply with this part’’.This change will permit, for instance,alternate formats to include a computerfile (either on the internet or saved ona computer disk) that can be viewed bya browser and which complies with thestandards for web pages. No otherchanges have been made to thedefinition in the final rule.

Alternate methods. The proposed ruleused the term ‘‘alternate modes’’ whichwas defined as different means ofproviding information to users ofproducts, including product

documentation, such as voice, fax, relayservice, TTY, internet posting,captioning, text-to-speech synthesis,and audio description.

Comment. One commenter suggestedthat ‘‘alternate methods’’ would be abetter term to describe the differentmeans of providing information. Thecommenter was concerned that the termalternate modes would be confused withalternate modes of operation of theproduct itself which does notnecessarily refer to how the informationis provided.

Response. The Board agrees that theterm alternate methods is a moredescriptive and less confusing term thanthe term alternate modes. Other than thechange in terminology from alternatemodes to alternate methods, no otherchanges have been made to thedefinition in the final rule.

Assistive technology. Assistivetechnology is defined as any item, pieceof equipment, or system, whetheracquired commercially, modified, orcustomized, that is commonly used toincrease, maintain, or improvefunctional capabilities of individualswith disabilities. The definition wasderived from the definition of assistivetechnology in the Assistive TechnologyAct of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 3002). Thepreamble to the proposed rule notedthat assistive technology may includescreen readers which allow persons whocannot see a visual display to eitherhear screen content or read the contentin Braille, specialized one-handedkeyboards which allow an individual tooperate a computer with only one hand,and specialized audio amplifiers thatallow persons with limited hearing toreceive an enhanced audio signal. Nosubstantive comments were receivedregarding this definition and no changeshave been made in the final rule.

Electronic and informationtechnology. This is the statutory term forthe products covered by the standardsin this part. The statute explicitlyrequired the Board to define this term,and required the definition to beconsistent with the definition ofinformation technology in the Clinger-Cohen Act of 1996. The Board’sproposed definition of informationtechnology was identical to that in theClinger-Cohen Act. Electronic andinformation technology was defined inthe proposed rule to includeinformation technology, as well as anyequipment or interconnected system orsubsystem of equipment, that is used inthe creation, conversion, or duplicationof data or information.

Information technology includescomputers, ancillary equipment,software, firmware and similar



4 48 CFR Chapter 1, part 2, § 2.101 DefinitionsInformation Technology (c).

procedures, services (including supportservices), and related resources.Electronic and information technologyincludes information technologyproducts like those listed above as wellas telecommunications products (suchas telephones), information kiosks andtransaction machines, World Wide Websites, multimedia, and office equipmentsuch as copiers, and fax machines.

Consistent with the FAR,4 the Boardproposed that electronic andinformation technology not include anyequipment that contains embeddedinformation technology that is used asan integral part of the product, but theprincipal function of which is not theacquisition, storage, manipulation,management, movement, control,display, switching, interchange,transmission, or reception of data orinformation. For example, HVAC(heating, ventilation, and airconditioning) equipment such asthermostats or temperature controldevices, and medical equipment whereinformation technology is integral to itsoperation, are not informationtechnology.

Comment. Several commentersrecommended that the exception forHVAC control devices and medicalequipment be revised in the final rule.The commenters were concerned thatthe exception was too broad in that itexempted equipment such as medicaldiagnostic equipment that they feltshould be covered by the rule. Inaddition, the National Association of theDeaf (NAD) requested that publicaddress systems, alarm systems, andtwo-way communications systems suchas intercoms be expressly included aselectronic and information technology.

Response. The exemption isconsistent with existing definitions forinformation technology in the FAR.Public address systems, alarm systems,and two-way communications systemsare already addressed by the Americanswith Disabilities Act AccessibilityGuidelines and will be addressed inmore detail in the Board’s guidelinesunder the Architectural Barriers Actwhich apply to Federal facilities. Nochanges have been made to thedefinition in the final rule.

Information technology. Thedefinition of information technology isidentical to that in the Clinger-CohenAct, that is, any equipment orinterconnected system or subsystem ofequipment, that is used in the automaticacquisition, storage, manipulation,management, movement, control,display, switching, interchange,

transmission, or reception of data orinformation. Information technologyincludes computers, ancillaryequipment, software, firmware andsimilar procedures, services (includingsupport services), and related resources.No substantive comments were receivedregarding this definition and no changeshave been made in the final rule.

Operable controls. The proposed ruledefined operable controls as thosecomponents of a product that requirephysical contact for normal operation ofthe device. Examples of operablecontrols were provided, including on/off switches, buttons, dials and knobs,mice, keypads and other input devices,copier paper trays (both for insertingpaper to be copied and retrievingfinished copies), coin and card slots,card readers, and similar components.The proposed rule also clarified thatoperable controls do not include voice-operated controls.

Comment. One commenter wasconcerned that the term paper trays wasconfusing and interpreted it to mean thelarge trays on a copier which are loadedwith reams of paper for copying. Thecommenter suggested that the terminput and output trays be used instead.

Response. The Board agrees that inputand output trays are more descriptive.The final rule reflects this change whichis intended to apply to products in theirnormal operation rather than when theproduct may be used for maintenance,repair, or occasional monitoring. Forexample, a user should be able to addpaper to a desktop laser printer. Noother changes have been made to thisdefinition.

Product. The term product is used inthe rule as a shorthand for electronicand information technology. Nosubstantive comments were receivedregarding this definition and no changeshave been made in the final rule.

Self contained, closed products. Thisterm was not used in the proposed ruleand is provided in the final rule as aresult of the reorganization of thestandards. Self contained, closedproducts, are those that generally haveembedded software and are commonlydesigned in such a fashion that a usercannot easily attach or install assistivetechnology. These products include, butare not limited to, information kiosksand information transaction machines,copiers, printers, calculators, faxmachines, and other similar types ofproducts.

Telecommunications. The definitionfor telecommunications is consistentwith the definition in the Board’sTelecommunications Act AccessibilityGuidelines and the definition oftelecommunications in the

Telecommunications Act. Nosubstantive comments were receivedregarding this definition and no changeshave been made in the final rule.

TTY. TTYs are machinery orequipment that employ interactive textbased communications through thetransmission of coded signals across thetelephone network.

Comment. The Trace Centerrecommended adding the word‘‘baudot’’ to the definition of TTY toclarify that the term is not meant to bebroader than baudot TTYs. The NADand other consumer groups, however,supported the Board’s definition andencouraged the Board to use the samedefinition consistently.

Response. The definition for the termTTY is consistent with the definition ofTTY in the Board’s ADA AccessibilityGuidelines and TelecommunicationsAct Accessibility Guidelines. Nochanges have been made to thedefinition in the final rule.

Undue burden. The final rule definesthe term undue burden as ‘‘significantdifficulty or expense.’’ In determiningwhat is a significant difficulty orexpense, each agency must consider theresources available to the program orcomponent for which the product isbeing developed, maintained, used orprocured. The proposed rule definedundue burden as an action that wouldresult in significant difficulty orexpense considering all agencyresources available to the agency orcomponent. The Board sought commentin the NPRM on two additional factors(identified as factor (2) and factor (3) inthe preamble) for agencies to consider inassessing a determination of an undueburden. Factor (2) addressed thecompatibility of an accessible productwith the agency’s or component’sinfrastructure, including security, andthe difficulty of integrating theaccessible product. Factor (3) concernedthe functionality needed from theproduct and the technical difficultyinvolved in making the productaccessible.

Comment. The ITAA, ITIC and theOracle Corporation opposed theinclusion of a definition for undueburden in the final rule. Both the ITAAand the ITIC commented that definingundue burden was beyond the Board’sauthority. Oracle suggested that theconcept of undue burden under section508 was beyond the Board’s expertise inthat it was a procurement matter. Thecommenters were also concerned thatthe Board’s definition was too narrow.Alternatively, if the Board was to adopta definition for undue burden, the ITAAfavored adoption of the factorsassociated with undue burden and



undue hardship in the ADA and section504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Inparticular, the ITAA recommendedadoption of the ‘‘nature and cost’’ of theaccommodation as a factor forconsideration. ITIC favored adoption ofthe employment factors in title I of theADA if the Board were to include adefinition of undue burden. Both theITAA and the ITIC also favored theadoption of factors (2) and (3) identifiedin the NPRM if undue burden was to beaddressed in the final rule.

The remainder and majority of thecommenters did not address the issue ofwhether the Board should adopt adefinition of undue burden, but ratherhow to define it. At least two Federalagencies and 10 organizationsrepresenting persons with disabilitiesopposed the inclusion of factors (2) and(3) suggested in the NPRM. TheDepartment of Commerce and a majorityof advocacy organizations representingpeople with disabilities opposed factors(2) and (3) on the grounds that thefactors would create a loophole foragencies to avoid compliance withsection 508. The Department of VeteransAffairs opposed factor (3) as itconsidered that factor to be more aboutjob assignment than undue burden.Several commenters including SunMicrosystems and Adobe Systemsfavored adopting factors (2) and (3) inthe definition of undue burden. TheSocial Security Administration (SSA)and the Department of Health andHuman Services, Administration forChildren and Families, sought guidanceas to the amount of increased cost of aproduct that would not constituteundue burden regardless of an agency’soverall budget. Citing the example of aproduct that would cost 25 percentmore to comply with the standards, theSSA questioned whether that would beundue or would 10 percent or 50percent be considered undue. TheGeneral Services Administrationrecommended basing the financialresources available to an agency on aprogram basis.

Response. The term undue burden isbased on caselaw interpreting section504 of the Rehabilitation Act(Southeastern Community College v.Davis, 442 U.S. 397 (1979)), and hasbeen included in agency regulationsissued under section 504 since the Daviscase. See, e.g., 28 CFR 39.150. The termundue burden is also used in Title III ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.C. 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii).The legislative history of the ADA statesthat the term undue burden is derivedfrom section 504 and the regulationsthereunder, and is analogous to the term‘‘undue hardship’’ in Title I of the ADA,which Congress defined as ‘‘an action

requiring significant difficulty orexpense.’’ 42 U.S.C. 12111(10)(A). See,H. Rept. 101–485, pt. 2, at 106. In theNPRM, the Board proposed adoption of‘‘significant difficulty or expense’’ as thedefinition for undue burden. Nochanges were made to that aspect of thedefinition in the final rule.

Title I of the ADA lists factors to beconsidered in determining whether aparticular action would result in anundue hardship. 42 U.S.C.12111(10)(B)(i)–(iv). However, sincetitle I of the ADA addresses employmentand the individual accommodation ofemployees, not all of the factors aredirectly applicable to section 508 exceptfor the financial resources of thecovered facility or entity which isnecessary to a determination of‘‘significant difficulty or expense.’’Unlike title I, section 508 requires thatagencies must procure accessibleelectronic and information technologyregardless of whether they haveemployees with disabilities. Requiringagencies to purchase accessibleproducts at the outset eliminates theneed for expensive retrofitting of anexisting product when requested by anemployee or member of the public as areasonable accommodation at a latertime.

In determining whether a particularaction is an undue burden under section508, the proposed rule provided that theresources ‘‘available’’ to an ‘‘agency orcomponent’’ for which the product isbeing developed, procured, maintained,or used is an appropriate factor toconsider. The language was derivedfrom the section 504 federallyconducted regulations. Thoseregulations limited the consideration ofresources to those resources available toa ‘‘program’’. The preamble to theproposed rule noted that an agency’sentire budget may not be available forpurposes of complying with section 508.Many parts of agency budgets areauthorized for specific purposes and arethus not available to other programs orcomponents within the agency. Thedefinition of undue burden has beenclarified in the final rule to more clearlyreflect this limitation. The provisionnow states that ‘‘agency resourcesavailable to a program or component’’are to be considered in determiningwhether an action is an undue burden.Because available financial resourcesvary greatly from one agency to another,what constitutes an undue burden for asmaller agency may not be an undueburden for another, larger agency havingmore resources to commit to a particularprocurement. Each procurement wouldnecessarily be determined on a case-by-case basis. Because a determination of

whether an action would constitute anundue burden is made on a case-by-casebasis, it would be inappropriate for theBoard to assess a set percentage for theincreased cost of a product that wouldbe considered an undue burden in everycase.

The Board has not included factors (2)and (3) in the text of the final rule.While the Board acknowledges thatthese may be appropriate factors forconsideration by an agency indetermining whether an action is anundue burden, factors (2) and (3) werenot based on established caselaw orexisting regulations under section 504.Further, the Board recognizes thatundue 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 considerthese factors and may consider otherappropriate factors in their undueburden analyses.

Comment. Adobe Systems questionedwhether a product which does not meeta provision based on a finding of undueburden, has to comply with theremaining provisions.

Response. The undue burden analysisis applied on a provision by provisionbasis. A separate undue burden analysismust be conducted and, in the case ofprocurements, be documented for eachapplicable provision.

Section 1194.5 Equivalent FacilitationThis section allows the use of designs

or technologies as alternatives to thoseprescribed in this part provided thatthey result in substantially equivalent orgreater access to and use of a product forpeople with disabilities. This provisionis not a ‘‘waiver’’ or ‘‘variance’’ from therequirement to provide accessibility, buta recognition that future technologiesmay be developed, or existingtechnologies could be used in aparticular way, that could provide thesame functional access in ways notenvisioned by these standards. Inevaluating whether a technology resultsin ‘‘substantially equivalent or greateraccess,’’ it is the functional outcome,not the form, which is important. Forexample, an information kiosk which isnot accessible to a person who is blindmight be made accessible by having atelephone handset that connects to acomputer that responds to touch-tonecommands and delivers the sameinformation audibly. In addition, voicerecognition and activation areprogressing rapidly so that voice inputsoon may become a reasonablesubstitute for some or all keyboard inputfunctions. For example, already sometelephones can be dialed by voice. Ineffect, compliance with the performance



criteria of § 1194.31 is the test forequivalent facilitation.

Comment. Commenters supported theBoard in its recognition thataccessibility may sometimes be attainedthrough products that do not strictlycomply with design standards. Severalcommenters supported this conceptbecause they believed that it will resultin the development of better accesssolutions for individuals withdisabilities.

Response. No changes have beenmade to this provision in the final rule.

Subpart B—Technical Standards(Formerly Subpart B—AccessibilityStandards in the NPRM)

Comment. Subpart B of the proposedrule contained four sections: § 1194.21(General Requirements); § 1194.23(Component Specific Standards);§ 1194.25 Standards for Compatibility;and § 1194.27 (Functional PerformanceCriteria). The Board sought comment inthe proposed rule on the organization ofSubpart B in general and § 1194.21(General Requirements), § 1194.23(Component Specific Requirements) and§ 1194.25 (Requirements forCompatibility) in particular. A numberof commenters found the application ofthe proposed rule to be confusing dueto the manner in which the rule wasorganized. Commenters questionedwhether a specific product need onlycomply with the provisions under aspecific heading in § 1194.23(Component Specific Requirements) orwhether they must also look to theprovisions in § 1194.21 (GeneralRequirements), as well as § 1194.25(Compatibility). Commenters furtherquestioned whether multiple provisionswithin a specific section would apply.For example, making electronic formsaccessible was addressed under§ 1194.23(b) (Non-embedded softwareapplications and operating systems).Provisions for web sites were addressedseparately in § 1194.23(c) (Web-basedinformation or applications). Sinceelectronic forms are becoming verypopular on web sites, the commentersquestioned whether the provisions forelectronic forms under the softwaresection should also be applied to websites even though the section on websites did not specifically addresselectronic forms. Another commenterpointed out that some provisions under§ 1194.21 (General Requirements)actually addressed specific componentssuch as touch screens, which wereaddressed under General Requirementsin the proposed rule. Finally, othercommenters noted that severalprovisions under § 1194.23 (ComponentSpecific Requirements) were really

compatibility concerns, such as§ 1194.23(b) (Non-embedded software).

Response. A product must complywith the provisions under eachapplicable section in Subpart B. Forexample, a telecommunications productthat has computer, software andoperating systems, a keyboard, and webbrowser will have to comply with eachof the relevant sections in Subpart B.The Board has reorganized Subpart B inthe final rule as follows:

The title of Subpart B has beenchanged from ‘‘Accessibility Standards’’to ‘‘Technical Standards’’.

Subpart B has been reorganized sothat each section addresses specificproducts. For example, § 1194.21addresses software applications,§ 1194.22 addresses web-based intranetand internet information andapplications, and so on. Each technicalprovision that applies to a product islocated under that product heading. Asa result, there is some redundancy inthis section. However, the Boardbelieves that this format will helpclarify the application of the standardsfor each type of product. For example,the provision prohibiting the use ofcolor alone to indicate an action appliesnot only to web page design, but also tosoftware design and certain operatingsystems. In the final rule, it is addressedin § 1194.21(i) (Software applicationsand operating systems), § 1194.22(c)(Web-based intranet and internetinformation and applications), as wellas § 1194.25(g) (Self contained, closedproducts).

The provisions contained in § 1194.21(General Requirements), § 1194.23(Component Specific Requirements) and§ 1194.25 (Requirements forCompatibility with AssistiveTechnology) of the proposed rule havebeen moved to the new subpart B(Technical Standards) in the final rule.

Also, the provisions in the proposedrule under § 1194.27 (FunctionalPerformance Criteria) have beenredesignated as Subpart C (FunctionalPerformance Criteria) in the final rule.Subpart C provides functionalperformance criteria for overall productevaluation and for technologies orcomponents for which there is nospecific provision in subpart B. Thesubstance of each of the provisions inthe final rule are discussed below.

Section 1194.21 Software Applicationsand Operating Systems

Paragraphs (a) through (l) addressprovisions for software applications andoperating systems. Electronic andinformation technology productsoperate by following programminginstructions referred to as software.

Software refers to a set of logical steps(or programming instructions) thatcontrol the actions or operations of mostforms of electronic and informationtechnology products. For instance,when a pager receives a radio signal, thesoftware embedded inside the pagerdetermines whether the signal is a‘‘page’’ and how it should display theinformation it receives. The circuitryinside the pager, including the displayunit, merely follows the instructionsencoded in the software. Software canbe divided into two broad categories:Software that is embedded in a chipmounted in a product and non-embedded software that is loaded ontoa storage device such as a hard disk andcan be erased, replaced, or updated. Forinstance, a word processing programthat is installed onto a computer’s harddrive and which may be easily erased,replaced, or updated is typically ‘‘non-embedded’’ software. By contrast, theset of instructions installed on a chipinside a pager and which cannot beerased, replaced, or updated is typicallyembedded software. The proposed ruleincluded provisions for non-embeddedsoftware. However, as pointed out bycommenters, as technology changes, thedistinction between embedded softwareand non-embedded software isincreasingly becoming less clear. Theseprovisions apply to all softwareproducts.

Paragraph (a) requires that whensoftware is designed to run on a systemthat has a keyboard, the software shallprovide a way to control features whichare identifiable by text, from thekeyboard. For example, if a computerprogram included a ‘‘print’’ commandor a ‘‘save’’ command (both can bereadily discerned textually), theprogram must provide a means ofinvoking these commands from thekeyboard. For people who cannotaccurately control a mouse, havingaccess to the software’s controls throughkeyboard alternatives is essential. Forexample, rather than pointing to aparticular selection on the screen, a usermay move through the choices in adialogue box by pressing the tab key.(See § 1194.23(a)(4) and § 1194.23(b)(1)in the NPRM.)

Comment. The NPRM required thatproducts must provide logicalnavigation among interface elementsthrough the use of keystrokes.Commenters questioned the meaning of‘‘logical’’ and whether the provisions, asproposed, were requiring that eachsystem have a keyboard. Commenterswere concerned that requiring that allfeatures of every software program beaccessible from a keyboard was notfeasible because some programs that



allow an individual to draw lines andcreate designs using a mouse could notbe replicated with keystrokes.

Response. This provision applies toproducts which are intended to be runon a system with a keyboard. It does notrequire that a keyboard be added. Theterm ‘‘logical navigation’’ has beendeleted. Only those actions which canbe discerned textually are required to beexecutable from a keyboard. Forexample, most of the menu functions incommon drawing programs that allow auser to open, save, size, rotate, andperform other actions on a graphicimage can all be performed from thekeyboard. However, providing keyboardalternatives for creating an image byselecting a paintbrush, picking a color,and actually drawing a design would beextremely difficult. Such detailedprocedures require the fine level ofcontrol afforded by a pointing device(e.g., a mouse) and thus cannot bediscerned textually without a lengthydescription. Accordingly, in the finalrule, keyboard alternatives are requiredwhen the function (e.g., rotate figure) orthe result of performing a function (e.g.,save file confirmation) can berepresented with words.

Paragraph (b) prohibits applicationsfrom disrupting or disabling activatedfeatures of other products that areidentified as accessibility features,where those features are developed anddocumented according to industrystandards. Applications also shall notdisrupt or disable activated features ofany operating system that are identifiedas accessibility features where theapplication programming interface forthose accessibility features has beendocumented by the manufacturer of theoperating system and is available to theproduct developer. The applicationprogramming interface refers to astandard way for programs tocommunicate with each other, includingthe operating system, and with inputand output devices. For instance, theapplication programming interfaceaffects how programs have to displayinformation on a monitor or receivekeyboard input via the operatingsystem.

Many commercially availablesoftware applications and operatingsystems have features built-into theprogram that are labeled as accessfeatures. These features can typically beturned on or off by a user. Examples ofthese features may include, reversingthe color scheme (to assist people withlow vision), showing a visual promptwhen an error tone is sounded (to assistpersons who are deaf or hard ofhearing), or providing ‘‘sticky keys’’ thatallow a user to press key combinations

(such as control-C) sequentially ratherthan simultaneously (to assist personswith dexterity disabilities). Thisprovision prohibits software programsfrom disabling these features whenselected. (See § 1194.23(b)(2) in theNPRM.)

Comment. The proposed rule onlyspecified that software not interferewith features that affect the usability forpersons with disabilities. Commentersfrom industry noted that the provisionin the NPRM did not provide anymethod of identifying what features areconsidered access features and furtherstated that this provision was notachievable. These commenters pointedout that it was impossible for a softwareproducer to be aware of all of thefeatures in all software packages thatcould be considered an access feature bypersons with disabilities. SunMicrosystems recommended that thisprovision address access features thathave been developed using standardprogramming techniques and that havebeen documented by the manufacturer.

Response. This provision has beenmodified in the final rule to referenceaccess features which have beendeveloped and documented accordingto industry standards. No other changeshave been made in the final rule.

Paragraph (c) requires that softwareapplications place on the screen a visualindication of where some action mayoccur if a mouse click or keystroke takesplace. This point on a screen indicatingwhere an action will take place iscommonly referred to as the ‘‘focus’’.This provision also requires that thefocus be readable by other softwareprograms such as screen readers used bycomputer users who are blind. (See§ 1194.23(b)(3) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (d) requires that softwareprograms, through the use of programcode, make information about theprogram’s controls readable by assistivetechnology. Simply stated, thisparagraph requires that information thatcan be delivered to or received from theuser must be made available to assistivetechnology, such as screen readingsoftware. Examples of controls wouldinclude button checkboxes, menus, andtoolbars. For assistive technology tooperate efficiently, it must have accessto the information about a program’scontrols to be able to inform the user ofthe existence, location, and status of allcontrols. If an image is used to representa program function, the informationconveyed by the image must also beavailable in text. (See § 1194.23(b)(4)and § 1194.23(b)(5) in the NPRM.) No

substantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection, other than editorial changes.

Paragraph (e) requires that whenbitmap images are used by a program toidentify programmatic features, such ascontrols, the meaning of that image shallnot change during the operation of aprogram. ‘‘Bitmap images’’ refer to atype of computer image commonly usedin ‘‘icons’’ (e.g., a small picture of aprinter to activate the print command).Most screen reading programs allowusers to assign text names to bitmapimages. If the bitmap image changesmeaning during a program’s execution,the assigned identifier is no longer validand is confusing to the user. (See§ 1194.23(b)(6) in the NPRM.)

Comment. As proposed, thisprovision did not identify which imageshad to remain consistent during theapplication. The AFB commented thatthe provision should be modified toindicate the type of image that needs tohold a consistent meaning during therunning of an application. AFB notedthat this provision should apply only tothose bitmaps that represent a programfunction, and not to all images.

Response. The final rule applies theprovision to those images which areused to identify controls, statusindicators, or other programmaticelements. No other changes have beenmade to this section in the final rule.

Paragraph (f) provides that softwareprograms use the functions provided byan operating system when displayingtext. The operating system is the ‘‘core’’computer software that controls basicfunctions, such as receiving informationfrom the keyboard, displayinginformation on the computer screen,and storing data on the hard disk. Othersoftware programs use the standardprotocols dictated by the operatingsystem for displaying their owninformation or processing the output ofother computer programs. Whenprograms are written using uniqueschemes for writing text on the screenor use graphics, other programs such assoftware for assistive technology maynot be able to interpret the information.This provision does not prohibit or limitan application programmer fromdeveloping unique display techniques.It requires that when a unique methodis used, the text be consistently writtenthroughout the operating system. (See§ 1194.23(b)(7) in the NPRM.)

Comment. The proposed rule did notspecify that software programs must usethe functions provided by an operatingsystem when displaying text. TheNPRM required that the text would beprovided through an applicationprogramming interface that supported



interaction with assistive technology orthat it would use system text writingtools. Commenters raised severalconcerns regarding this provision. Somecommenters were concerned thatwithout a recognized interface standard,there was no assurance that assistivetechnology would be able to access thetext provided by an application.Software producers felt that theprovision should not unduly restricthow programs create or display text.Baum Electronics and GW Micropointed out that the only way to ensurethat both assistive technology andapplications are using a commoninterface, was to use the text displayingfunctions of the operating system.

Response. The Board agrees that usingoperating system functions is oneapproach that would be available to allprogrammers. The final rule has beenmodified to require that textualinformation be provided through theoperating system functions so that itwill be compatible with assistivetechnology. This provision does notrestrict programmers from developingunique methods of displaying text on ascreen. It requires that when thosemethods are used, the software alsosends the information through theoperating systems functions fordisplaying text.

Paragraph (g) prohibits applicationsfrom overriding user selected contrastand color selections and otherindividual display attributes. Asdescribed above, the operating systemprovides the basic functions forreceiving, displaying, transmitting, orreceiving information in a computer orsimilar product. Thus, the operatingsystem would appear the logical choicefor ‘‘system-wide’’ settings that wouldbe respected by all computer programson a computer. Many modern operatingsystems incorporate the ability to makesettings system-wide as an accessibilityfeature. This permits, for instance, usersto display all text in very largecharacters. Often, persons withdisabilities prefer to select color,contrast, keyboard repeat rate, andkeyboard sensitivity settings providedby an operating system. When anapplication disables these system-widesettings, accessibility is reduced. Thisprovision allows the user to selectpersonalized settings which cannot bedisabled by software programs. (See§ 1194.23(b)(9) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (h) addresses animated textor objects. The use of animation on ascreen can pose serious access problemsfor users of screen readers or other

assistive technology applications. Whenimportant elements such as push-buttons or relevant text are animated,the user of assistive technology cannotaccess the application. This provisionrequires that in addition to theanimation, an application provide theelements in a non-animated form. (See§ 1194.23(b)(11)in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (i) prohibits the use of coloras the single method for indicatingimportant information. For instance, acomputer program that requires a userto distinguish between otherwiseidentical red and blue squares fordifferent functions (e.g., printing adocument versus saving a file) wouldnot comply with this provision. Relyingon color as the only method foridentifying screen elements or controlsposes problems, not only for peoplewith limited or no vision, but also forthose people who are color blind. Thisprovision does not prohibit the use ofcolor to enhance identification ofimportant features. It does, however,require that some other method ofidentification, such as text labels, becombined with the use of color. (See§ 1194.21(a) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (j) requires softwareapplications to provide users with avariety of color settings that can be usedto set a range of contrast levels. (See§ 1194.23(b)(8) in the NPRM.)

Comment. The NPRM specified aminimum number of color settings.Some commenters were concerned thatthe proposed provision was too specific,while others felt it was too generalbecause it failed to measure howdifferent levels of contrast would beproduced. Several commenterssuggested requiring ‘‘a wide variety’’ ofcolor settings as recommended by theEITAAC. One commenter noted that, asproposed, the provision forbids amonochrome display. Commenters alsostated that some systems do not provideusers with color selection capabilities.

Response. The provision in the finalrule is limited to those circumstanceswhere the system allows a user to selectcolors. This provision requires morethan just providing color choices. Theavailable choices must also allow fordifferent levels of contrast. Many peopleexperience a high degree of sensitivityto bright displays. People with thiscondition cannot focus on a brightscreen for long because they will soonbe unable to distinguish individualletters. An overly bright background

causes a visual ‘‘white-out’’. To alleviatethis problem, the user must be able toselect a softer background andappropriate foreground colors. Theprovision has been revised as aperformance standard rather than aspecific design standard by removingthe requirement for 8 foreground and 8background color selections.

Paragraph (k) limits the flashing orblinking rate of screen items. (See§ 1194.21(c) in the NPRM.)

Comment. The Trace Centerexpressed concern that researchsupported a limit of 3 Hz, not 2 Hz asdescribed in the NPRM. Trace suggestedthat the flash or blink rate avoid anyflickering between (but not including) 3Hz and 55 Hz, which is the powerfrequency for Europe.

Response. This provision is necessarybecause some individuals withphotosensitive epilepsy can have aseizure triggered by displays whichflicker or flash, particularly if the flashhas a high intensity and is withincertain frequency ranges. The 2 Hz limitwas chosen to be consistent withproposed revisions to the ADAAccessibility Guidelines which, in turn,are being harmonized with theInternational Code Council (ICC)/ANSIA117 standard, ‘‘Accessible and UsableBuildings and Facilities’’, ICC/ANSIA117.1–1998 which references a 2 Hzlimit. The Board agrees that an upperlimit is needed, since all electricallypowered equipment, even anincandescent light bulb, has a ‘‘flicker’’due to the alternating current linevoltage frequency (60 Hz in the U.S., 55Hz in Europe). There does not appear tobe any significant incidence ofphotosensitive seizures being inducedby the line voltage frequency of ordinarylights. Therefore, the provision has beenchanged to prohibit flash or blinkfrequencies between 2 Hz and 55 Hz.

Paragraph (l) requires that peoplewith disabilities have access toelectronic forms. This section is a resultof the reorganization of the final ruleand is identical to section 1194.22(n)discussed below. (See § 1194.23(b)(10)in the NPRM.)

Section 1194.22 Web-based Intranetand Internet Information andApplications

In the proposed rule, the Boardindicated that the EITAAC hadrecommended that the Board’s ruledirectly reference priority one and twocheckpoints of the World Wide WebConsortiums’ (W3C) Web AccessibilityInitiative’s (WAI) Web ContentAccessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG1.0). Rather than reference the WCAG1.0, the proposed rule and this final rule



include provisions which are basedgenerally on priority one checkpoints ofthe WCAG 1.0, as well as other agencydocuments on web accessibility andadditional recommendations of theEITAAC.

Comment. A number of commentswere received from the WAI and othersexpressing concern that the Board wascreating an alternative set of standardsthat would confuse developers as towhich standards should be followed.WAI was further concerned that some ofthe provisions and preamble language inthe NPRM were inaccurate. On the otherhand, a number of commenters,including the ACB and several membersof the EITAAC, supported the manner inwhich web access issues were addressedin the proposed rule.

Response. The final rule does notreference the WCAG 1.0. However, thefirst nine provisions in § 1194.22,paragraphs (a) through (i), incorporatethe exact language recommended by theWAI in its comments to the proposedrule or contain language that is notsubstantively different than the WCAG1.0 and was supported in its comments.

Paragraphs (j) and (k) are meant to beconsistent with similar provisions in theWCAG 1.0, however, the final rule useslanguage which is more consistent withenforceable regulatory language.Paragraphs (l), (m), (n), (o), and (p) aredifferent than any comparable provisionin the WCAG 1.0 and generally requirea higher level of access or prescribe amore specific requirement.

The Board did not adopt or modifyfour of the WCAG 1.0 priority onecheckpoints. These include WCAG 1.0Checkpoint 4.1 which provides that webpages shall ‘‘[c]learly identify changesin the natural language of a document’stext and any text equivalents (e.g.,captions).’’; WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 14.1which provides that web pages shall‘‘[u]se the clearest and simplestlanguage appropriate for a site’scontent.’’; WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 1.3which provides that ‘‘[u]ntil user agentscan automatically read aloud the textequivalent of a visual track, provide anauditory description of the importantinformation of the visual track of amultimedia presentation.’’; and WCAG1.0 Checkpoint 6.2 which provides thatweb pages shall ‘‘[e]nsure thatequivalents for dynamic content areupdated when the dynamic contentchanges.’’

Section 1194.23(c)(3) of the proposedrule required that web pages alert a userwhen there is a change in the naturallanguage of a page. The ‘‘naturallanguage’’ referred to the spokenlanguage (e.g., English or French) of theweb page content. The WAI pointed out

that the preamble to the NPRMmisinterpreted this provision. Thepreamble suggested that a statementsuch as ‘‘the following paragraph is inFrench’’ would meet the provision. WAIresponded by noting that this was notthe intent of the provision. The WCAG1.0 recommend that web page authorsembed a code or markup language in adocument when the language changesso that speech synthesizers and Brailledisplays could adjust outputaccordingly.

The Trace Center advised that onlytwo assistive technology programs couldinterpret such coding or markuplanguage, Homepage Reader from IBMand PwWebspeak from Isound. Theseprograms contain the browser, screenreading functions, and the speechsynthesizer in a single highly integratedprogram. However, the majority ofpersons who are blind use a mainstreambrowser such as Internet Explorer orNetscape Navigator in conjunction witha screen reader. There are also severalspeech synthesizers in use today, butthe majority of those used in the UnitedStates do not have the capability ofswitching to the processing of foreignlanguage phonemes. As a result, theproposed provision that web pages alerta user when there is a change in thenatural language of a page has beendeleted in the final rule.

The Board also did not adopt WCAG1.0 Checkpoint 14.1 which provides thatweb pages shall ‘‘[u]se the clearest andsimplest language appropriate for asite’s content.’’ While a worthwhileguideline, this provision was notincluded because it is difficult toenforce since a requirement to use thesimplest language can be verysubjective.

The Board did not adopt WCAG 1.0Checkpoint 1.3 which provides that‘‘[u]ntil user agents can automaticallyread aloud the text equivalent of avisual track, provide an auditorydescription of the important informationof the visual track of a multimediapresentation.’’ Although the NPRM didnot propose addressing this issue in theweb section, there was a similarprovision in the multi-media section ofthe NPRM.

The Board did not adopt WCAG 1.0Checkpoint 6.2 which provide that webpages shall ‘‘[e]nsure that equivalentsfor dynamic content are updated whenthe dynamic content changes.’’ TheNPRM had a provision that stated ‘‘webpages shall update equivalents fordynamic content whenever the dynamiccontent changes.’’ The WAI stated in itscomments that there was no differencein meaning between the NPRM andWCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 6.2. The NPRM

provision has been deleted in the finalrule as the meaning of the provision isunclear.

A web site required to be accessibleby section 508, would be in completecompliance if it met paragraphs (a)through (p) of these standards. It couldalso comply if it fully met the WCAG1.0, priority one checkpoints andparagraphs (l), (m), (n), (o), and (p) ofthese standards. A Federal web site thatwas in compliance with these standardsand that wished to meet all of theWCAG 1.0, priority one checkpointswould also have to address the WAIprovision regarding using the clearestand simplest language appropriate for asite’s content (WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint14.1), the provision regarding alerting auser when there is a change in thenatural language of the page (WCAG 1.0Checkpoint 4.1), the provision regardingaudio descriptions (WCAG 1.0Checkpoint 1.3), and the provision thatweb pages shall ‘‘ensure thatequivalents for dynamic content areupdated when the dynamic contentchanges (WCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 6.2).

The Board has as one of its goals totake a leadership role in thedevelopment of codes and standards foraccessibility. We do this by workingwith model code organizations andvoluntary consensus standards groupsthat develop and periodically revisecodes and standards affectingaccessibility. The Board acknowledgesthat the WAI has been at the forefrontin developing international standardsfor web accessibility and looks forwardto working with them in the future onthis vitally important area. However, theWCAG 1.0 were not developed withinthe regulatory enforcement framework.At the time of publication of this rule,the WAI was developing the WebContent Accessibility Guidelines 2.0.The Board plans to work closely withthe WAI in the future on aspectsregarding verifiability and achievabilityof the Web Content AccessibilityGuidelines 2.0.

Paragraph (a) requires that a textequivalent for every non-text elementshall be provided. As the Internet hasdeveloped, the use of photographs,images, and other multimedia hasincreased greatly. Most web pages arecreated using HTML, or ‘‘HyperTextMarkup Language.’’ A ‘‘page’’ in HTMLis actually a computer file that includesthe actual text of the web page and aseries of ‘‘tags’’ that control layout,display images (which are actuallyseparate computer files), and essentiallyprovide all content other than text. Thetags are merely signals to the browserthat tell it how to display informationand many tags allow web designers to



include a textual description of the non-textual content arranged by the tag. Theprovision is necessary because assistivetechnology cannot describe pictures, butcan convey the text information to theuser. Currently, most web pageauthoring programs already provide amethod for web designers to associatewords with an image and associatingtext with non-textual content is easy foranyone familiar with HTML. Thisprovision requires that when an imageindicates a navigational action such as‘‘move to the next screen’’ or ‘‘go backto the top of the page,’’ the image mustbe accompanied by actual text thatstates the purpose of the image, in otherwords, what the image is telling you todo. This provision also requires thatwhen an image is used to represent pagecontent, the image must have a textdescription accompanying it thatexplains the meaning of the image.Associating text with these imagesmakes it possible, for someone whocannot see the screen to understand thecontent and navigate a web page. (See§ 1194.23(c)(1) in the NPRM.)

Comment. In the NPRM,§ 1194.23(c)(1) required text to beassociated with all non-textualelements, and prescribed the use ofspecific techniques, such as ‘‘alt’’ and‘‘longdesc,’’ to accomplish thatrequirement. WAI commented that,while the use of specific techniques wasprovided in WCAG 1.0 as examples ofmethods to use, the proposed rule waslimiting the manner in which text couldbe associated with non-textual elementsto two techniques. The result was thatother approaches to providing text tagsin web languages other than HTML wereprohibited.

Other commenters pointed out thatmany images on a web page do not needtext tags. They noted that some imagesare used to create formatting featuressuch as spacers or borders and thatrequiring text identification of theseimages adds nothing to thecomprehension of a page. These imageswere, in their view, textually irrelevant.One commenter suggested that thisprovision should address ‘‘every non-text element’’ because such features asbuttons, checkboxes, or audio outputwere covered by other provisions in theproposed rule.

Response. This provision incorporatesthe exact language recommended by theWAI in their comments to the proposedrule. Non-text element does not meanall visible elements. The types of non-text elements requiring identification islimited to those images that provideinformation required for comprehensionof content or to facilitate navigation.Web page authors often utilize

transparent graphics for spacing.Adding text to identify these elementswould produce unnecessary clutter forusers of screen readers.

The Board also interprets thisprovision to require that when audiopresentations are available on a webpage, because audio is a non-textualelement, text in the form of captioningmust accompany the audio, to allowpeople who are deaf or hard of hearingto comprehend the content. (See§ 1194.23(c)(1) in the NPRM.)

Paragraph (b) provides that equivalentalternatives for any multimediapresentation shall be synchronized withthe presentation. This would require, forexample, that if an audio portion of amulti-media production was captionedas required in paragraph (a), thecaptioning must be synchronized withthe audio. (See § 1194.23(c)(12) and(e)(3) in the NPRM.)

Comment. Comments fromorganizations representing persons whoare deaf or hard of hearing stronglysupported this provision. Onecommenter from the technologyindustry raised a concern that thisprovision would require all livespeeches broadcast on the Internet by aFederal agency to be captioned. Thecommenter noted that an alternativemight be to provide a transcript of thespeech which could be saved, reviewed,and searched.

Response. This provision useslanguage that is not substantivelydifferent than the WCAG 1.0 and wassupported in the WAI comments to theproposed rule. There are newtechniques for providing realtimecaptioning which are supported by newversions of programs like RealAudio.Providing captioning does not precludeposting a transcript of the speech forpeople to search or download. However,commenters preferred the realtimecaptioning over the delay in providinga transcript. No substantive changeshave been made to this provision in thefinal rule.

Paragraph (c) prohibits the use ofcolor as the single method for indicatingimportant information on a web page.When colors are used as the solemethod for identifying screen elementsor controls, persons who are color blindas well as those people who are blindor have low vision may find the webpage unusable. This provision does notprohibit the use of color to enhanceidentification of important features. Itdoes, however, require that some othermethod of identification, such as textlabels, must be combined with the useof color. (See § 1194.23(c)(2) in theNPRM.)

Comment. The WAI expressedconcern that as proposed, the provisiondid not capture the intent of theprovision as addressed in the WCAG1.0. The intent of such a requirement,according to WAI, was to have web pagedesigners use methods other than colorto indicate emphasis such as bold text.

Response. This provision incorporatesthe exact language recommended by theWAI in their comments to the proposedrule. This provision addresses not onlythe problem of using color to indicateemphasized text, but also the use ofcolor to indicate an action. For example,a web page that directs a user to ‘‘pressthe green button to start’’ should alsoidentify the green button in some otherfashion than simply by color.

Paragraph (d) provides thatdocuments must be organized so theyare readable without requiring browsersupport for style sheets. Style sheets area relatively new technology that letsweb site designers make consistentappearing web pages that can be easilyupdated. For instance, without stylesheets, making headings appear in largefont while not affecting the surroundingtext requires separate tags hidden in thedocument to control font-size andboldface. Each heading would require aseparate set of tags. Using style sheets,however, the web site designer canspecify in a single tag that all headingsin the document should be in large fontand boldface. Because style sheets canbe used to easily affect the entireappearance of a page, they are oftenused to enhance accessibility and thisprovision does not prohibit the use ofstyle sheets. This provision requires thatweb pages using style sheets be able tobe read accurately by browsers that donot support style sheets and by browsersthat have disabled the support for stylesheets. (See § 1194.23(c)(4) in theNPRM.) This requirement is based onthe fact that style sheets are a relativelynew technology and many users withdisabilities may either not havecomputer software that can properlyrender style sheets or because they mayhave set their own style sheet for allweb pages that they view.

Comment. The WAI commented thatwhile the provision was consistent withWCAG 1.0, the preamble inaccuratelynoted that this provision would prohibitthe use of style sheets that interfere withuser defined style sheets. The WAInoted that a browser running on a user’ssystem determines whether or not stylesheets associated with pages will bedownloaded.

Response. The WAI correctly notedthat this provision does not prohibit theuse of style sheets that interfere withuser-defined style sheets because the



use of style sheets is controlled by auser’s browser. This provision useslanguage that is not substantivelydifferent than WCAG 1.0 and wassupported in the WAI comments to theproposed rule. No substantive changeshave been made to this provision in thefinal rule.

Paragraph (e) requires web pagedesigners to include redundant textlinks 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, dependingon where a user clicks on the image.There are two basic types of imagemaps: ‘‘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 ‘‘uniformresource locator’’) that specifies whatweb page to retrieve when a portion ofthe picture is selected. HTML allowseach active region to have its ownalternative text, just like a picture canhave alternative text. See § 1194.22(a).By contrast, clicking on a location of aserver-side image map only specifies thecoordinates within the image when themouse was depressed—which link orURL is ultimately selected must bedeciphered by the computer serving theweb page. When a web page uses aserver-side image map to present theuser with a selection of options,browsers cannot indicate to the user theURL that will be followed when a regionof the map is activated. Therefore, theredundant text link is necessary toprovide access to the page for anyonenot able to see or accurately click on themap. (See § 1194.23(c)(6) in the NPRM.)No substantive changes have been madeto this provision in the final rule.

Paragraph (f) provides that client-sideimage maps shall be provided instead ofserver-side image maps except wherethe regions cannot be defined with anavailable geometric shape. As discussedabove, there are two general categoriesof image maps: client-side image mapsand server-side image maps. When aweb browser retrieves a specific set ofinstructions from a client-side imagemap, it also receives all the informationabout what action will happen when aregion of the map is pressed. For thisreason, client-side image maps, eventhough graphical in nature, can displaythe links related to the map, in a textformat which can be read with the useof assistive technology. (See§ 1194.23(c)(7) in the NPRM.)

Comment. The WAI suggested that thefinal rule include an exception for thoseregions of a map which cannot be

defined with an available geometricshape.

Response. This provision incorporatesthe exact language recommended by theWAI in their comments to the proposedrule.

Paragraphs (g) and (h) permit the useof tables, but require that the tables becoded according to the rules fordeveloping tables of the markuplanguage used. When tables are codedinaccurately or table codes are used fornon-tabular material, some assistivetechnology cannot accurately read thecontent. Many assistive technologyapplications can interpret the HTMLcodes for tables and will most likely beupdated to read the table coding of newmarkup languages. (See § 1194.23(c)(8–9) in the NPRM.) The Board will bedeveloping technical assistancematerials on how tables can complywith this section. In addition to thesespecific provisions, the technicalassistance materials will address all ofthe provisions in this part.

Comment. Commenters wereconcerned by the preamble discussionin the NPRM which advised against theuse of table tags for formatting of non-tabular material.

Response. The Board understands thatthere are currently few alternatives tothe use of tables when trying to placeitems in predefined positions on webpages. These provisions do not prohibitthe use of table codes to format non-tabular content. They require that whena table is created, appropriate codingshould be used. Paragraph (g)incorporates the exact languagerecommended by the WAI in theircomments to the proposed rule.Paragraph (h) uses language that is notsubstantively different than WCAG 1.0and was supported in the WAIcomments to the proposed rule. Nosubstantive changes have been made tothis provision in the final rule.

Paragraph (i) addresses the use offrames and requires that they be titledwith text to identify the frame and assistin navigating the frames. ‘‘Frames’’ area technique used by web designers tocreate different ‘‘portions’’ or ‘‘frames’’of their screen that serve differentfunctions. When a web site uses frames,often only a single frame will updatewith information while the other framesremain intact. Because using framesgives the user a consistent portion of thescreen, they are often used fornavigational toolbars for web sites. Theyare also often faster because only aportion of the screen is updated, insteadof the entire screen. Frames can be anasset to users of screen readers andother assistive technology if the labelson the frames are explicit. Labels such

as top, bottom, or left, provide few cluesas to what is contained in the frame.However, labels such as ‘‘navigationbar’’ or ‘‘main content’’ are moremeaningful and facilitate frameidentification and navigation. (See§ 1194.23(c)(10) in the NPRM.) Thisprovision uses language that is notsubstantively different than WCAG 1.0.No substantive changes have been madeto this provision in the final rule.

Paragraph (j) sets limits on the blinkor flicker rate of screen elements. Thissection is a result of the reorganizationof the final rule and is similar to section1194.21(k) discussed above. (See§ 1194.21(c) in the NPRM.) Thisprovision is meant to be consistent withWCAG 1.0 Checkpoint 7.1 whichprovides that, ‘‘[u]ntil user agents allowusers to control flickering, avoid causingthe screen to flicker.’’ This provisionuses language which is more consistentwith enforceable regulatory language.

Paragraph (k) requires that a text-onlyweb page shall only be provided as alast resort method for bringing a website into compliance with the otherrequirements in § 1194.22. Text-onlypages must contain equivalentinformation or functionality as theprimary pages. Also, the text-only pageshall be updated whenever the primarypage changes. This provision is meant tobe consistent with WCAG 1.0Checkpoint 11.4 which provides that‘‘[i]f, after best efforts, you cannot createan accessible page, provide a link to analternative page that uses W3Ctechnologies, is accessible, hasequivalent information (orfunctionality), and is updated as oftenas the inaccessible (original) page.’’

Paragraph (l) requires that when webpages rely on special programminginstructions called ‘‘scripts’’ to affectinformation displayed or to process userinput, functional text shall be provided.It also requires that the text be readableby assistive technology such as screenreading software. Scripts are widelyused by web sites as an efficient methodto create faster or more secure webcommunications. A script is aprogrammatic set of instructions that isdownloaded with a web page andpermits the user’s computer to share theprocessing of information with the webserver. Without scripts, a user performssome action while viewing a web page,such as selecting a link or submitting aform, a message is sent back to the ‘‘webserver’’, and a new web page is sentback to the user’s computer. The morefrequently an individual computer hasto send and receive information from aweb server, the greater chance there isfor errors in the data, loss of speed, andpossible violations of security. Also,



when many users are simultaneouslyviewing the same web page, thedemands on the web server may behuge. Scripts allow more work to beperformed on the individual’s computerinstead of on the web server. And, theindividual computer does not have tocontact the web server as often. Scriptscan perform very complex tasks such asthose necessary to complete, verify, andsubmit a form and verify creditinformation. The advantage for the useris that many actions take place almostinstantly, because processing takesplace on the user’s computer andbecause communication with the webserver is often not necessary. Thisimproves the apparent speed of a webpage and makes it appear moredynamic. Currently, JavaScript, astandardized object-orientedprogramming language, is the mostpopular scripting language, althoughcertain plug-ins (see below) supportslightly different scripting languages.This provision requires web pageauthors to ensure that all theinformation placed on a screen by ascript shall be available in a text formto assistive technology. (See§ 1194.23(c)(11) in the NPRM.)

Comment. The NPRM was morespecific in its application, providingthat pages must be usable when scripts,applets, or other programmatic objectsare turned off or are not supported. TheNPRM permitted the use of analternative accessible page. Severalcommenters found the proposedprovision too restrictive. They notedthat, as proposed, it could severelydiscourage innovation both for web pagedevelopers and for designers of assistivetechnology. It was argued that ifproducers of assistive technology knowthat a web page would never requireaccess to scripts, there would be noincentive to develop better access tothese features. It was also pointed outthat discussing scripts, applets, andplug-ins in the same provision was notappropriate, because plug-ins wereactual programs that run on a user’smachine and do not necessarilyoriginate on the web page. Scripts, onthe other hand, are downloaded to auser’s system from the web page (or anassociated file) and, unlike applets orplug-ins, operate completely inside thebrowser without any additionalsoftware. Therefore, as scripts directlyaffect the actual content of a web page,the web page designer has control overdesigning a script but does not havecontrol over which plug-in a user mayselect to process web content.

Response. The final rule has twoseparate provisions for scripts (l), andapplets and plug-ins (m). Web page

authors have a responsibility to providescript information in a fashion that canbe read by assistive technology. Whenauthors do not put functional text witha script, a screen reader will often readthe content of the script itself in ameaningless jumble of numbers andletters. Although this jumble is text, itcannot be interpreted or used. For thisreason, the provision requires thatfunctional text, that is text that whenread conveys an accurate message as towhat is being displayed by the script, beprovided. For instance, if a web pageuses a script only to fill the contents ofan HTML form with basic defaultvalues, the web page will likely complywith this requirement, as the textinserted into the form by the script maybe readable by a screen reader. Bycontrast, if a web page uses a script tocreate a graphic map of menu choiceswhen the user moves the pointer overan icon, the web site designer may berequired to incorporate ‘‘redundant textlinks’’ that match the menu choicesbecause functional text for each menuchoice cannot be rendered to theassistive technology. Determiningwhether a web page meets thisrequirement may require careful testingby web site designers, particularly asboth assistive technology and theJavaScript standard continue to evolve.

Paragraph (m) is, in part, a newprovision developed in response tocomments received on § 1194.23(c)(11)of the NPRM and discussed in thepreceding paragraph. While most webbrowsers can easily read HTML anddisplay it to the user, several privatecompanies have developed proprietaryfile formats for transmitting anddisplaying special content, such asmultimedia or very precisely defineddocuments. Because these file formatsare proprietary, they cannot ordinarilybe displayed by web browsers. To makeit possible for these files to be viewedby web browsers, add-on programs or‘‘plug-ins’’ can be downloaded andinstalled on the user’s computer thatwill make it possible for their webbrowsers to display or play the contentof the files. This provision requires thatweb pages which provide content suchas Real Audio or PDF files, also providea link to a plug-in that will meet thesoftware provisions. It is very commonfor a web page to provide links toneeded plug-ins. For example, webpages containing Real Audio almostalways have a link to a source for thenecessary player. This provision placesa responsibility on the web page authorto know that a compliant applicationexists, before requiring a plug-in. (See§ 1194.21(c)(11) in the NPRM.)

Paragraph (n) requires that peoplewith disabilities have access tointeractive electronic forms. Electronicforms are a popular method used bymany agencies to gather information orpermit a person to apply for services,benefits, or employment. The 1998Government Paperwork Elimination Actrequires that Federal agencies makeelectronic versions of their formsavailable on-line when practicable andallows individuals and businesses touse electronic signatures to file theseforms electronically. (See§ 1194.23(b)(10) in the NPRM.) Atpresent, the interaction between formcontrols and screen readers can beunpredictable, depending upon thedesign of the page containing thesecontrols. Some developers place controllabels and controls in different tablecells; others place control labels invarious locations in various distancesfrom the controls themselves, makingthe response from a screen reader lessthan accurate many times.

Comment. Adobe Systems expressedconcern that completing some formsrequires a script or plug-in andinterpreted the proposed rule asprohibiting such items. They pointedout that there are other methods ofcompleting a form that would notrequire scripts or plug-ins, but thosemethods require the constant transfer ofinformation between the client andserver computers. Adobe noted that thatmethod can be extremely inefficient andcan pose a security risk for theindividual’s personal data.

Response. This provision does notforbid the use of scripts or plug-ins andmany of the existing products supportthese features. If a browser does notsupport these features, however,paragraphs (l) and (m) require that someother method of working with the webpage must be provided. As assistivetechnologies advance, it is anticipatedthat the occasions when the use ofscripts and plug-ins are not supportedwill diminish significantly. Nosubstantive changes have been made tothis provision in the final rule.

Paragraph (o) provides that a methodbe used to facilitate the easy tracking ofpage content that provides users ofassistive technology the option to skiprepetitive navigation links. (See§ 1194.23(c)(13) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were received onthis provision and no changes weremade, other than editorial changes.

Paragraph (p) addresses theaccessibility problems that can occur ifa web page times-out while a user iscompleting a form. Web pages can bedesigned with scripts so that the webpage disappears or ‘‘expires’’ if a



response is not received within aspecified amount of time. Sometimes,this technique is used for securityreasons or to reduce the demands on thecomputer serving the web pages. Adisability can have a direct impact onthe speed with which a person can read,move around, or fill in a web form. Forthis reason, when a timed response isrequired, the user shall be alerted andgiven sufficient time to indicate thatadditional time is necessary. (See§ 1194.21(d) in the NPRM.)

Comment. The proposed ruleprescribed specific settings forincreasing the time-out limit based on adefault setting. The Board soughtcomment on whether a system wascommercially available that wouldallow a user to adjust the time-out. TheBoard also sought information onwhether the proposed provision wouldcompromise security. Commentersresponded that security would be anissue if the time-out period wasextended for too long and informationwith personal data was left exposed.Other commenters raised the point thatspecifying specific multiples of thedefault was unrealistic and arbitrary.The Multimedia TelecommunicationsAssociation (MMTA) stated that thedefault was not built-into a system.Rather, it was generally something thatwas set by an installer or a systemadministrator. They also noted that inorder for a user to know that more timeis needed, the user must be alerted thattime is about to run out.

Response. The provision has beenrevised as a performance standard ratherthan a specific design standard byremoving the reference to a specifiedlength of time for users to respond. TheBoard agrees that it would be difficultfor a user to know how much more timeis needed even if the time-out could beadjusted. The final rule requires onlythat a user be notified if a process isabout to time-out and be given anopportunity to answer a prompt askingwhether additional time is needed.

Section 1194.23 TelecommunicationsProducts

Paragraph (a) requires that telephoneequipment shall provide a standardnon-acoustic connection point for TTYs.A TTY is a device that includes akeyboard and display that is used totransmit and receive text over atelephone line using sound. Originally,TTY’s used acoustic connections andthe user placed the telephone handseton the TTY to transfer the sound signalsbetween the TTY and the telephone.Handsets on many modern telephonesdo not fit well with many TTY acousticcouplers, allowing interference from

outside noise. Individuals who useTTYs to communicate must have a non-acoustic way to connect TTYs totelephones in order to obtain clear TTYconnections, such as through a directRJ–11 connector, a 2.5 mm audio jack,or other direct connection. When a TTYis connected directly into the network,it must be possible for the acousticpickup (microphone) to be turned off(automatically or manually) to avoidhaving background noise in a noisyenvironment mixed with the TTYsignal. Since some TTY users make useof speech for outgoing communications,the microphone on/off capability mustbe automatic or easy to switch back andforth or a push-to-talk mode should beprovided. In the TelecommunicationsAct Accessibility Guidelines (36 CFRPart 1193), the Board recognized thatdirect-connect TTYs are customerpremises equipment (CPE) subject tosection 255 of that Act. Since CPE is asubset of electronic and informationtechnology, it is similarly covered bythis rule. This provision was adoptedfrom the Board’s TelecommunicationsAct Accessibility Guidelines so thatmanufacturers of telecommunicationsand customer premises equipmentcovered by section 255 of theTelecommunications Act wishing to sellproducts to the Federal governmentwould have a consistent set ofrequirements. (See § 1194.23(d)(1) in theNPRM.)

Comment. The MMTA commentedthat providing a direct connection to ananalog telephone may be as simple asproviding an RJ–11 jack, but that digitalphones pose additional problems. Itnoted that most multi-line businessphones operating through a PBX aredigital phones. However, it also statedthat TTY connectivity can beaccomplished by adding an analog linesimilar to what would be provided fora fax machine. The MMTA furthersuggested that TTY manufacturersshould share the burden forcompatibility. Another commentsuggested that the Board require theprovision of a shelf and outlet for aTTY.

Response. In some cases, the additionof an RJ–11 connector will be the easiestsolution. In other cases, the addition ofa ‘‘smart’’ adapter may be necessary,similar to the dataports available onmany hotel phones. Some adapters andconverters have circuitry whichdetermines the nature of the line andplug-in equipment and makes theadjustment automatically while othersare manual. There is merit, however, inviewing this provision from thestandpoint of the capabilities of asystem as opposed to the capabilities of

a single desktop unit. There may becases in which the connection is bestmade at the PBX level by installinganalog phone lines where necessary.The final provision has been modifiedto allow for either option.

With respect to the suggestion that thestandards require a shelf and outlet fora TTY, these standards apply to theelectronic and information technologyproducts themselves, not the furniturethey occupy. Therefore, these standardsdo not address auxiliary features such asshelves and electrical outlets.

Paragraph (b) requires that productsproviding voice communicationfunctionality be able to support use ofall commonly used cross-manufacturer,non-proprietary, standard signals usedby TTYs. Some products compress oralter the audio signal in such a mannerthat standard signals used by TTYs arenot transmitted properly, preventingsuccessful TTY communication. Thisprovision is consistent with theTelecommunications Act AccessibilityGuidelines. (See § 1194.23(d)(2) in theNPRM.)

Comment. Comments from industrysuggested that the Board should clarifythe standard referred to as U.S. standardBaudot communications protocol. Theynoted that there are several standards inuse in Europe. Some European productssupport more than one of thesestandards, but not the common U.S.standard. The comments said that suchproducts would arguably comply withthe provision but would not meet theintent of section 508.

Response. The proposed rule requiredthat products must support all cross-manufacturer, non-proprietaryprotocols, not just one or two. Of course,that included the common U.S. Baudotprotocol (ANSI/TIA/EIA 825). ASCII isalso used, especially on dual modeTTYs, but it is less common.Compliance with international standardITU–T Recommendation V.18 wouldmeet this provision, but productscomplying with the ITU standard maynot be commercially available. It isimportant that products and systemssupport the protocol used by most TTYscurrently in use to avoid adisenfranchisement of the majority ofpersons who are deaf or hard of hearing.However, the intent of this provision isto require support of more than justBaudot or just ASCII. At present, onlythese two are commonly used in theU.S., but others may come into use later.While the Board does not want todisenfranchise users of current devices,neither does it want to exclude thosewho buy newer equipment, as long assuch devices use protocols which arenot proprietary and are supported by



more than one manufacturer. Of course,like all the requirements of thesestandards, this provision is subject tocommercial availability. Accordingly,the provision has been changed in thefinal rule by adding the phrase‘‘commonly used.’’

Paragraph (c) provides that TTY usersbe able to utilize voice mail, auto-attendant, and interactive voiceresponse telecommunications systems.Voice mail systems are available whichallow TTY users to retrieve and leaveTTY messages. This provision does notrequire that phone systems have voiceto text conversion capabilities. Itrequires that TTY users can retrieve andleave TTY messages and utilizeinteractive systems. (See § 1194.23(d)(3)in the NPRM.)

Comment. One commenter suggestedthat the Board encourage developers tobuild-in direct TTY decoding so thatexternal TTYs are not required. Forexample, if an employee had voice mailwith TTY functionality built-in, thatemployee would be able to read TTYmessages through the computer systemdirectly, without needing to attach anexternal TTY. The commenter notedthat this would be beneficial to Federalagencies having telephonecommunication with members of thepublic who have speech or hearingdisabilities. The agency could then havedirect communication rather than beingrequired to use an external TTY deviceor utilizing a relay service. Another saidtelecommunications systems should berequired to have TTY decodingcapability built-in, to the maximumextent possible. Another commenterpointed out that voice mail, voiceresponse, and interactive systemsdepend on DTMF ‘‘touch tones’’ foroperation and that many TTYs do notprovide this function. Also, onecommenter noted that automatic speechrecognition (ASR) is not yet mature, butrequested that a requirement for ASR bereviewed every two years to determinethe feasibility of including suchcapabilities in products based on therapid change of technology.

Response. This provision requires thatvoice mail, auto-attendant, andinteractive voice response systems beusable with TTYs. It is desirable thatcomputers have built-in TTY capabilityand there are currently systems whichcan add such functionality tocomputers. This provision is aperformance requirement and the Boarddoes not feel it would be useful to bemore specific at this time. The currentproblems with voice mail and voiceresponse systems are not necessarilysusceptible to a single solution andthere are several ways to comply,

including voice recognition in somecases, depending on the system. Manyvoice mail systems could record a TTYmessage, just like a voice message, butthe outgoing message needs to includea TTY prompt letting TTY users toknow when to start keying. Arequirement for a quick response tomenu choices is the most frequentlyreported barrier for relay users. Theability to ‘‘opt out’’ of a menu andconnect with an operator or transfer toa TTY system are also ways to makethese services available and usablewithout highly sophisticated decodingtechnology.

Paragraph (d) addresses accessproblems that can arise whentelecommunications systems require aresponse from a user within a certaintime. Due to the nature of theequipment, users of TTYs may needadditional time to read and respond tomenus and messages. This provision isidentical to section 1194.22(p)discussed above. (See § 1194.21(d)(4) inthe NPRM.)

Comment. The proposed ruleprescribed specific settings forincreasing the time-out limit based on adefault setting. Commenters raised thepoint that specifying specific multiplesof the default was unrealistic andarbitrary. The MMTA stated that thedefault was not built-into a system.Rather it was generally something thatwas set by an installer or a systemadministrator. It also noted that in orderfor users to know that more time isneeded, they must be alerted that timeis about to run out.

Response. The provision has beenchanged to a performance standardrather than a specific design standard byremoving the reference to a specifiedlength of time for users to respond. TheBoard agrees that it would be difficultfor a user to know how much more timeis needed even if the time-out could beadjusted. The final rule requires onlythat a user be notified if a process isabout to time-out and be given anopportunity to answer a prompt askingwhether additional time is needed.

Paragraph (e) requires that functionssuch as caller identification must beaccessible for users of TTYs, and forusers who cannot see displays. (See§ 1194.23(d)(5) in the NPRM.)

Comment. One commenter thoughtthe reference to telecommunicationsrelay services in the NPRM implied thatcaller identification information mustsomehow be transmitted directly to theend-user.

Response. Since the end-users in atelecommunications relay service arenot directly connected, passing alongcaller identification information is not

commonly done, therefore, the referenceto relay services has been deleted toavoid confusion.

Paragraph (f) requires products to beequipped with volume control thatprovides an adjustable amplification upto a minimum of 20 dB of gain. If avolume adjustment is provided thatallows a user to set the level anywherefrom 0 to the upper requirement of 20dB, there is no need to specify a lowerlimit. If a stepped volume control isprovided, one of the intermediate levelsmust provide 12 dB of gain. The gainapplies to the voice output. (See§ 1194.23(d)(6) in the NPRM.)

Comment. Several commenterssupported the provision for a 20 dBgain, but some supported a 25 dBrequirement, pointing out that manypersons who are hard of hearing needmore than 20 dB amplification. Othersurged the Board to adopt the currentFederal Communications Commission’s(FCC) requirement for a minimum of 12dB and a maximum of 18 dB. Somecommenters said amplifying a poorquality signal would not be useful andthat the amplification may itselfintroduce distortion.

Response. The proposed level ofamplification was different from thatrequired under the FCC regulationsimplementing the Hearing AidCompatibility Act (47 CFR 68.317 (a)).The FCC requires volume control thatprovides, through the receiver in thehandset or headset of the telephone, 12dB of gain minimum and up to 18 dBof gain maximum, when measured interms of Receive Objective LoudnessRating.

The Board’s provision is consistentwith the 1998 ANSI A117.1 document,‘‘Accessible and Usable Buildings andFacilities.’’ ANSI is the voluntarystandard-setting body which issuesaccessibility standards used by thenation’s model building codes. TheBoard has issued a separate NPRM toharmonize the existing ADAAGprovision with the ANSI standard. TheFCC originally selected its requirementto be consistent with the ADAAccessibility Guidelines now beingproposed for amendment. Thisprovision is consistent with theproposed ADA and ArchitecturalBarriers Act Accessibility Guidelinesand the Telecommunications ActAccessibility Guidelines. No changeswere made to this provision in the finalrule.

Paragraph (g) requires that anautomatic reset be installed on anytelephone that allows the user to adjustthe volume higher than the normallevel. This is a safety feature to protectpeople from suffering damage to their



hearing if they accidentally answer atelephone with the amplification turnedtoo high. (See § 1194.23(d)(7) in theNPRM.)

Comment. Most commenterssupported the provision for anautomatic reset. One commenter saidthe reset would be a problem for anindividual user who would be requiredto constantly readjust his or hertelephone to a usable level.

Response. The provision is adoptedfrom the ADA Accessibility Guidelines,where it applies to public phones usedby many people. The FCC’s Part 68 rulesrequire an automatic reset when thephone is hung up if the volume exceeds18 dB gain. To provide the ability tooverride the reset function wouldrequire a waiver from the FCC since thestandards require a 20 dB gain. Nochanges have been made to this sectionin the final rule.

Paragraph (h) requires telephones, orother products that provide auditoryoutput by an audio transducer normallyheld up to the ear, to provide a meansfor effective wireless coupling tohearing aids. Many hearing aidsincorporate ‘‘T-coils’’ that generatesounds based on magnetic signalsreceived from earpieces that cangenerate the appropriate magnetic field.Generally, this provision means theearpiece generates sufficient magneticfield strength to induce an appropriatefield in a hearing aid T-coil. The outputin this case is the direct voice output ofthe transmission source, not the‘‘machine language’’ such as tonal codestransmitted by TTYs. For example, atelephone must generate a magneticoutput so that the hearing aid equippedwith a T-coil can accurately receive themessage. This provision is consistentwith the Telecommunications ActAccessibility Guidelines. (See§ 1194.23(d)(8) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (i) requires thatinterference to hearing technologies bereduced to the lowest possible level thatallows a user of hearing technologies toutilize a telecommunications product.Individuals who are hard of hearing usehearing aids and other assistivelistening devices, but they cannot beused if products introduce noise intothe listening aids because ofelectromagnetic interference. (See§ 1194.23(d)(9) in the NPRM.)

Comment. The American NationalStandards Institutes (ANSI) isdeveloping methods of measurementand defining the limits for hearing aidcompatibility and accessibility towireless telecommunications. At the

time of the proposed rule, the ANSIC63.19 ANSI/IEEE Standard for HearingAid Compatibility with WirelessDevices was not completed. The NPRMnoted that the Board may ultimatelyincorporate the standard when it iscompleted. Several commentersrecommended referencing the work ofthe ANSI committee.

Response. The ANSI committee hasrecently completed its work. No changeshave been made to this provision in thefinal rule and the provision continues tobe a performance standard rather than aspecific design standard. However,compliance with the ANSI C63.19ANSI/IEEE Standard for Hearing AidCompatibility with Wireless Deviceswould meet this provision.

Paragraph (j) provides that allproducts that act as a transport orconduit for information orcommunication shall pass all codes,translation protocols, formats, or anyother information necessary to provideinformation or communication in ausable format. In particular, signalcompression technologies shall notremove information needed for access orshall restore it upon decompression.Some transmissions include codes ortags embedded in ‘‘unused’’ portions ofthe signal to provide accessibility. Forexample, closed captioning informationis usually included in portions of avideo signal not seen by users withoutdecoders. This section prohibitsproducts from stripping out suchinformation or requires the informationto be restored at the end point. (See§ 1194.25(a) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (k) addresses controls thatrequire some physical force to activate.It is the application of force to thesecontrols that distinguishes them fromtouch sensitive controls where the merepresence of a hand or finger is detectedand reacted to by the product. (See§ 1194.23(a) in the NPRM.)

Comment. As proposed, thisprovision addressed mechanicallyoperated controls, keyboard, andkeypads. Commenters were concernedthat the provisions were too general.Some commenters said that it waspossible to interpret this section asapplying to touchscreens, and thatmaking touchscreen controls compliantwith these provisions was not possible.Commenters also raised the question ofwhether the proposed standards wouldrequire every product to have akeyboard.

Response. This provision has beenamended to clarify its application tomechanically operated controls. The

provision only applies to productswhich have mechanically operatedcontrols or keys and therefore does notrequire every product to have akeyboard. This provision was notintended to apply to touchscreens astouchscreens do not have mechanicallyoperated controls.

Paragraph (k)(1) provides thatmechanically operated controls andkeys shall be tactilely discerniblewithout activating the controls or keys.Tactilely discernible means thatindividual keys can be located anddistinguished from adjacent keys bytouch. To comply with this provision,controls that must be touched toactivate, must be distinguishable fromeach other. This can be accomplished byusing various shapes, spacing, or tactilemarkings. Because touch is necessary todiscern tactile features, this provisionprovides that the control should not beactivated by mere contact. For example,the standard desktop computerkeyboard would meet this provisionbecause the tactile mark on the ‘‘j’’ and‘‘f’’ keys permits a user to locate allother keys tactilely. The geographicspacing of the function, ‘‘numpad’’ andcursor keys make them easy to locate bytouch. In addition, most keyboardsrequire some pressure before theytransmit a keystroke. Conversely,‘‘capacitance’’ keyboards that react assoon as they are touched and have noraised marks or actual keys would notmeet this provision. A ‘‘membrane’’keypad with keys that must be pressedcan be made tactilely discernible byseparating keys with raised ridges sothat individual keys can bedistinguished by touch. (See§ 1194.23(a)(1) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (k)(2) provides thatmechanically operated controls shall beaccessible to persons with limiteddexterity. Individuals with tremor,cerebral palsy, paralysis, arthritis, orartificial hands may have difficultyoperating systems which require finemotor control, assume a steady hand, orrequire two hands or fingers to be usedsimultaneously for operation.Individuals with high spinal cordinjuries, arthritis, and other conditionsmay have difficulty operating controlswhich require significant strength. Theprovision limits the force required tofive pounds and is based on § 4.27.4 ofthe ADA Accessibility Guidelines and isconsistent with theTelecommunications Act AccessibilityGuidelines. (See § 1194.23(a)(3) in theNPRM.)



Comment. The ITIC was concernedabout requiring that all controls beeasily activated. They pointed out thaton many pieces of equipment the on/offswitch is purposely set so that it is hardto activate. This is done to preventaccidental shut-down of equipmentsuch as with a network server. They feltit was unreasonable to require changingthat type of control.

Response. The Board has addressedthis issue by adding § 1194.3(f) whichexempts such controls from thesestandards. The on/off switch on anetwork server for example, would beoperated only when maintenance of theequipment was required and would notbe for normal operation. No changeshave been made to this section in thefinal rule.

Paragraph (k)(3) establishesprovisions for key repeat rate where anadjustable keyboard repeat rate issupported. It requires that the keyboarddelay before repeat shall be adjustable toat least two seconds per character. (See§ 1194.23(a)(5) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (k)(4) provides that thestatus of toggle controls such as the‘‘caps lock’’ or ‘‘scroll lock’’ keys bedetermined by both visual means and bytouch or sound. For example, addingaudio patterns such as ascending anddescending pitch tones that indicatewhen a control is turned on or off wouldalleviate the problem of a person who isblind inadvertently pressing the lockingor toggle controls. Also, buttons whichremain depressed when activated orswitches with distinct positions wouldmeet this provision. (See § 1194.23(a)(2)in the NPRM.) No substantive commentswere received and no changes have beenmade to this section in the final rule.

Section 1194.24 Video andMultimedia Products

Paragraph (a) requires that televisiondisplays 13 inches and larger, andcomputer equipment that includestelevision receiver or display circuitrybe equipped with the capacity to decodeand display captioning for audiomaterial. (See § 1194.23(e)(1) in theNPRM.)

Comment. Commenters supportedthis provision in general, but providedsuggestions for clarification. They notedthat the FCC defines ‘‘televisionreceiver’’ as a device that can receiveand display signals from broadcast,satellite, cable transmission, or othersimilar transmission sources. Thecommenters recommended that theprovision should also address televisionmonitors that are used with video

cassette recorders (VCRs), digital videodisks (DVDs), or direct video input, butdo not include tuners. These non-receiver displays are commonly usedthroughout the government and ineducational institutions and therefore,should have the capability to decodeclosed captions. According tocommenters, the provision shouldreference analog television’s ‘‘line-21,NTSC’’ or ‘‘EIA–608’’ caption datadecoding capabilities. Many DVDpresentations already include line-21captions and commenters expressedfrustration with their inability to seethese captions on their desktop orlaptop computers. Commenters notedthat subtitles are not a substitute forcaptions, as captions convey more thanjust dialog. One commenter stated thatthe provision should apply to screens 10inches or larger; while another said thatdigital television (DTV) will allowusable captions on smaller screens andthe Board should reference the digitalcaptioning standard EIA–708.

Response. This provision has beenclarified to cover all television displays,not just those defined as a receiverunder the FCC definition. The 13-inchdisplay size was chosen because it isconsistent with the Television DecoderCircuitry Act of 1990. The term‘‘analog’’ added to this provisionclarifies the application of theprovision.

At the time of the issuance of theNPRM, the FCC was considering a ruleon digital television, but had notcompleted its rulemaking. On July 21,2000, the FCC issued an order ondecoder circuitry standards for DTV.That standard will take effect on July 1,2002. Devices covered under the FCCrules include DTV sets with integrated‘‘widescreen’’ displays measuring atleast 7.8 inches vertically, DTV setswith conventional displays measuring atleast 13 inches vertically, and stand-alone DTV tuners, whether or not theyare marketed with display screens. Theprovision in the final rule has beenchanged to reflect the FCC regulation.

Paragraph (b) requires that televisiontuners, including tuner cards for use incomputers, have the ability to handle asecondary audio track used for audiodescription of visual material. Thesecondary audio channel is commonlyused for audio description. An ‘‘audiodescription’’ is a verbal description ofthe visual content of a presentation.Audio descriptions are important forpersons who are blind or who have lowvision because they provide adescription of the visual content of apresentation synchronized with verbalinformation. (See § 1194.23(e)(2) in theNPRM.) No substantive comments were

received and no changes have beenmade to this section in the final rule.

Paragraph (c) requires the captioningof audio material in certain multimediapresentations. (See § 1194.23(e)(3) in theNPRM.)

Comment. The NPRM limited theprovision for captioning to productionsthat were procured or developed forrepeated showings to audiences thatmay include people who are deaf orhard of hearing. Commenters wereconcerned that agencies would avoidthis provision by saying that they didnot anticipate having members of theaudience who were deaf or hard ofhearing. Commenters noted that inmany instances providing an interpretermay not be a suitable alternative. Theyalso pointed out that subtitles are not aneffective substitute for captioningmultimedia presentations becausesubtitles do not display theenvironmental sounds, descriptions ofmusic, or additional text that conveys aricher content than mere translation ofthe spoken dialogue.

Response. As proposed, the provisionwas intended to require captioningwhenever the audience might include aperson who was deaf or hard of hearing.The final rule has been modified torequire that all training andinformational video and multimediapresentations that contain speech orother audio information necessary forthe comprehension of the content andwhich supports an agency’s mission,shall be open or closed captionedregardless of the anticipated audience.This provision would not require that avideotape recorded by a fieldinvestigator to document a safetyviolation be captioned or audiodescribed, for example. On the otherhand, if such a videotape weresubsequently used as part of a trainingor informational presentation, it wouldhave to be captioned and audiodescribed. A video of a retirementcelebration would not be in support ofan agency’s mission and would thus notbe required to be captioned. Also, thisprovision applies only to video andmultimedia presentations which containspeech or other audio informationnecessary for the comprehension of thecontent. A video that is not narratedwould not be required to be captionedsince it does not contain speech. TheNPRM asked a question about theavailability of software products thatcould be used to provide captioning ordescription to multimedia computerpresentations. Information supplied bycommenters suggests such products arereadily available.

Paragraph (d) requires that certainmultimedia presentations provide an



audio description of visual material.(See § 1194.23(e)(4) in the NPRM.)

Comment. The proposed rule limitedthe provision for audio description toproductions that were procured ordeveloped for repeated showings toaudiences that may include people whoare blind or who have low vision.Similar to (c) above, commenters wereconcerned that agencies may use thelimitation to avoid providing the audiodescription.

Response. This provision has beenmodified to require audio descriptionregardless of the anticipated audience.The final rule has been modified torequire that all training andinformational video and multimediaproductions which support the agency’smission, regardless of format, thatcontain visual information necessary forthe comprehension of the content, shallbe audio described. A video ormultimedia presentation that does notsupport an agency’s mission would notbe required to be audio described. Also,this provision applies only to videos ormultimedia presentations which containvisual information necessary for thecomprehension of the content. A‘‘talking heads’’ video does notgenerally contain visual informationnecessary for the comprehension of thecontent and would therefore not berequired to be audio described.

Paragraph (e) provides that thecaptioning and audio descriptionrequired in (c) and (d) above must beuser selectable unless permanent. (See§ 1194.23(e)(5) in the NPRM.)

Comment. The National Center forAccessible Media (NCAM) at publictelevision station WGBH indicated thatunlike captioning, audio descriptionscan only be hidden and then activatedon request on broadcast or cablecastvideo. The videotape format VHScommonly used by consumers andmany companies cannot encode audiodescription for later activation likeclosed captions. Videos in the VHSformat must have their descriptionspermanently recorded as part of themain audio program. As a result, theaudio descriptions on VHS cannot beturned off. As a solution, NCAMsuggested that it may be desirable tohave a separate videotape available thatwas not described, along with adescribed version to allow a user tochoose which version they wish topresent. Unlike the VHS format, CD–ROMs, DVDs and other multimedia cansupport alternate audio channels fordescriptions (or alternate languages).The means of choosing those alternatetracks varies by the medium, but usuallyinvolves selection from an on-screenmenu. Those menus must be made

audible or otherwise readily selectableso that people who are blind or visuallyimpaired can independently select andgain access to those audio descriptions.

Response. While the displaying ofcaptioning is user selectable, there maybe instances where the audiodescription would be consideredpermanent. The provision provides thatwhen permanent, the user selectabilityprovision does not apply. No changeshave been made to this section in thefinal rule.

Section 1194.25 Self Contained,Closed Products

Sections 1194.25 (a) through (j) applyto those products that generally haveembedded software and are commonlydesigned in such a fashion that a usercannot easily attach or install assistivetechnology. This section is a result ofthe reorganization of the final rule. Insome instances, a personal computerwith a touch-screen will be enclosed ina display and used as an ‘‘informationkiosk’’. Self contained, closed productsinclude, but are not limited to,information kiosks and informationtransaction machines, copiers, printers,calculators, fax machines, and othersimilar types of products. A definitionof self contained, closed products hasalso been added.

Paragraph (a) provides that accessfeatures must be built-into a selfcontained, closed product rather thanrequiring users to attach an assistivedevice to the product. Personal headsetsare not considered assistive technologyand may be required to use the product.(See § 1194.23(f)(1) in the NPRM.)

Comment. Though discussed in thepreamble, the text of the proposed ruledid not address the issue of personalheadsets. The preamble noted thatpersonal headsets were not consideredassistive technology. The ITIC urged theBoard to make this clear in the text ofthe rule.

Response. The Board has modifiedthis provision by clarifying thatpersonal headsets are not consideredassistive technology. No other changeswere made to this provision.

Paragraph (b) addresses accessproblems that can arise when selfcontained, closed products require aresponse from a user within a certaintime and is identical to § 1194.22(p) and§ 1194.23(d) which are discussed indetail above. (See § 1194.21(d) in theNPRM.) The final rule requires only thata user be notified if a process is aboutto time-out and be given an opportunityto answer a prompt asking whetheradditional time is needed.

Paragraph (c) requires that when aproduct utilizes touchscreens or

contact-sensitive controls, a method ofoperating the product be provided thatcomplies with the provisions forcontrols in § 1194.23(k)(1) through (4).(See § 1194.21(f) in the NPRM.)

Comment. The proposed rule requiredthat touchscreens or touch-operatedcontrols be operable without requiringbody contact or close human bodyproximity. Commenters found theproposed provision to be confusing. Onecommenter noted that the proposed rulerequired all touchscreens to be operableby a remote control. Severalcommenters expressed concern thataccessibility to touchscreens forindividuals who are blind or who havelow vision was not adequatelyaddressed.

Response. Touchscreens and othercontrols that operate by sensing aperson’s touch pose access problems fora range of persons with disabilities. Thisprovision does not prohibit the use oftouchscreens and contact sensitivecontrols, but, as modified, the final rulerequires a redundant set of controls thatcan be used by persons who have accessproblems with touchscreens.

Paragraph (d) addresses the use ofbiometric controls. Biometric controlsrefer to controls that are activated onlyif particular biological features (e.g.,fingerprint, retina pattern, etc.) of theuser matches specific criteria. Usingretinal scans or fingerprintidentification may become a commonpractice as a method of allowing anindividual to gain access to personaldata from an information transactiontype of machine. (See § 1194.21(e) in theNPRM.)

Comment. In the proposed rule, theBoard sought comment on the bestapproach to accessibility issues raisedby biometric forms of identification andcontrols. Commenters responded thatasking a system to have multiple formsof biometric identification could beprohibitively expensive. Mostcommenters were in agreement thatbiometric controls provide the mostsecurity. However, they also agreed thatwhen such a system needs to beaccessed by a person with a disabilityand that disability prohibits the use ofa specific biometric feature, a non-biometric alternative should beprovided that does not compromisesecurity.

Response. The provision does notrequire a specific alternative. Thatselection is left up to the agency, whichmay choose a less expensive form ofidentification. No changes were made tothis provision in the final rule.

Paragraph (e) requires that whenproducts use audio as a way tocommunicate information, the auditory



signal will be available through anindustry standard connector at astandard signal level. Individuals usingpersonal headphones, amplifiers, audiocouplers, and other audio processingdevices need a place to plug thesedevices into the product in a standardfashion. This gives the user the abilityto listen privately to the information.The product must also provide amethod to pause, restart, and interruptthe flow of information. (See§ 1194.23(f)(2) and § 1194.25(d) in theNPRM.) No substantive comments werereceived on this provision and nochanges were made, other than editorialchanges.

Paragraph (f) provides that whenproducts deliver voice output, they shallprovide incremental volume controlwith output amplification up to a levelof at least 65 dB. Where the ambientnoise level of the environment is above45 dB, a volume gain of at least 20 dBabove the ambient level shall be userselectable. According to theOccupational Safety and HealthAdministration, and the AmericanSpeech, Language, and HearingAssociation, 65 dB is the volume levelfor normal speech. This provisionrequires that audio output from a kiosktype product shall have a minimumlevel of 65 dB. For people with reducedhearing, voice levels must be 20 dBabove the surround sound level to beunderstandable. This means that as longas the noise level in the surroundingenvironment is below 45 dB, the 65 dBoutput level would be sufficient. If theproduct is in an environment with ahigh noise level, the user must be ableto raise the volume to a setting of 20 dBhigher than the ambient level. (See§ 1194.23(f)(3) in the NPRM.) A featurehas been required to automatically resetthe volume to the default level afterevery use. This is consistent with asimilar provision addressingtelecommunications products. Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no other changes have been madeto this section in the final rule.

Paragraph (g) addresses the use ofcolor prompting and is identical tosection 1194.21(i) discussed above. (See§ 1194.21(a) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedand no changes have been made to thissection in the final rule.

Paragraph (h) addresses colorselection and contrast settings and isidentical to section 1194.21(j) discussedabove. (See § 1194.23(b)(8) in theNPRM.)

Paragraph (i) addresses the use offlashing objects and is identical tosection 1194.21(k) discussed above. (See§ 1194.21(c) in the NPRM.)

Paragraphs (j)(1) through (4) provideprovisions for the physicalcharacteristics of large office equipmentincluding reach ranges and the generalphysical accessibility of controls andfeatures. Examples of these products,include but are not limited to, copiers,information kiosks and floor standingprinters. These provisions are based onthe Americans with Disabilities ActAccessibility Guidelines (ADAAG 4.2Space Allowance and Reach Ranges).Two figures are provided to helpexplain the application of theseprovisions. (See § 1194.21(b)(1) through(4) in the NPRM.) No substantivecomments were received on theseprovisions and no changes were madein the final rule.

Section 1194.26 Desktop and PortableComputers

This section is a result of thereorganization of the final rule.Paragraphs (a) through (d) containprovisions that apply to desktop andportable computers. The provisions in§ 1194.21 for software address theaccessibility of programs and operatingsystems that run on a computer. Incontrast, the provisions in this sectionaddress physical characteristics ofcomputer systems including the designof controls and the use of connectors.This section was previously addressedin § 1194.21 (General requirements),§ 1194.23 (Component specificrequirements) and § 1194.25(Requirements for compatibility withassistive technology) in the NPRM.

Paragraph (a) addresses keyboardsand other mechanically operatedcontrols. These provisions are addressedfurther in sections 1194.23(k)(1) through(4) above. (See § 1194.23(a) in theNPRM.)

Paragraph (b) provides that systemsusing touchscreen technology must alsoprovide controls that comply withsections 1194.23(k)(1) through (4)discussed above. (See § 1194.21(f) in theNPRM.) Similar to § 1194.25(c), thisprovision was modified in the final ruleto require redundant controls.

Paragraph (c) requires that whenbiometric forms of identification areused, an alternative must also beavailable. This provision is identical to§ 1194.25 (d) discussed above.

Paragraph (d) requires that productshave standard ports and connectors.This means that the connection pointson a system must comply with astandard specification that is availableto other manufacturers. This provisionassures that the designers of assistivetechnology will have access toinformation concerning the design ofsystem connections and thus be able to

produce products that can utilize thoseconnections. (See § 1194.25(b) in theNPRM.)

Comment. In the proposed rule, thisprovision was addressed in § 1194.25(b)under the requirements forcompatibility with assistive technology.A commenter noted that this provisionwas more specific to computer productsand not to all products.

Response. As noted, this provisionhas been modified to apply to computerproducts.

Subpart C—Functional PerformanceCriteria

Section 1194.31 FunctionalPerformance Criteria

This section provides functionalperformance criteria for overall productevaluation and for technologies orcomponents for which there is nospecific requirement under othersections. These criteria are alsointended to ensure that the individualaccessible components work together tocreate an accessible product. Thissection requires that all productfunctions, including operation andinformation retrieval, be operablethrough at least one mode addressed ineach of the following paragraphs.

Comment. The ITIC requestedclarification as to how a manufacturerwould determine the type and numberof assistive technology devices forwhich support must be provided by aproduct.

Response. Manufacturers do not needto be aware of the universe of assistivetechnology products on the market.Each provision specifies the type ofassistive technology that must besupported. For example, § 1194.31(a)addresses those assistive technologydevices which provide output topersons who cannot see the screen.Such devices may include screenreaders, Braille displays and speechsynthesizers. There are numerousresources available to manufacturers toassist them in identifying specific typesof assistive technology which would beused to access their product.

Paragraph (a) provides that at leastone mode of operation and informationretrieval that does not require uservision shall be provided, or support forassistive technology used by peoplewho are blind or visually impaired shallbe provided. It is not expected thatevery software program will be self-voicing or have its own built-in screenreader. Software that complies with§ 1194.21 would also satisfy thisprovision. (See § 1194.27(a) in theNPRM.) No substantive comments were



received regarding this provision and nochanges were made in the final rule.

Paragraph (b) provides that at leastone mode of operation and informationretrieval that does not require visualacuity greater than 20/70 (whencorrected with glasses) must beprovided in audio and enlarged printoutput that works together orindependently. In the alternative,support for assistive technology used bypeople who are blind or who have lowvision must be provided. Althoughvisual acuity of 20/200 is considered‘‘legally blind,’’ there are actuallymillions of Americans with visionbelow the 20/200 threshold who canstill see enough to operate and getoutput from technology, often with justa little additional boost in contrast orfont size. This paragraph requires eitherthe provision of screen enlargement andvoice output or, that the productsupport assistive technology. (See§ 1194.27(b) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedregarding this provision and no changeswere made in the final rule.

Paragraph (c) provides that at leastone mode of operation and informationretrieval that does not require userhearing must be provided, or support forassistive technology used by peoplewho are deaf or hard of hearing shall beprovided. This provision is met when aproduct provides visual redundancy forany audible cues or audio output. If thisredundancy cannot be built-into aproduct then the product shall supportthe use of assistive technology. (See§ 1194.27(c) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedregarding this provision and no changeswere made in the final rule.

Paragraph (d) requires that audioinformation important for the use of aproduct, must be provided in anenhanced auditory fashion by allowingfor an increase in volume and/oraltering the tonal quality or increasingthe signal-to-noise ratio. For example,increasing the output would assistpersons with limited hearing to receiveinformation. Audio information that isimportant for the use of a productincludes, but is not limited to, errortones, confirmation beeps and tones,and verbal instructions. (See§ 1194.27(d) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedregarding this provision. The finalprovision has been amended editoriallyto provide that support for assistivehearing devices may be provided inplace of built-in enhanced audiofeatures.

Paragraph (e) provides that at leastone mode of operation and informationretrieval which does not require user

speech must be provided, or support forassistive technology shall be provided.Most products do not require speechinput. However, if speech input isrequired to operate a product, thisparagraph requires that at least onealternative input mode also be provided.For example, an interactive telephonemenu that requires the user to say orpress ‘‘one’’ would meet this provision.(See § 1194.27(e) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedregarding this provision and no changeswere made in the final rule.

Paragraph (f) provides that at least onemode of operation and informationretrieval that does not require fine motorcontrol or simultaneous actions andwhich is operable with limited reachand strength must be provided. (See§ 1194.27(f) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedregarding this provision and no changeswere 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 fullyusable by persons with disabilities, theinformation about the product andproduct support services must also beusable by persons with disabilities.These issues are addressed in thissection.

Paragraph (a) states that when anagency provides end-userdocumentation to users of technology,the agency must ensure that thedocumentation is available upon requestin alternate formats. Alternate formatsare defined in § 1194.4, Definitions.Except as provided in paragraph (b)below, this provision does not requirealternate formats of documentation thatis not provided by the agency to otherusers of technology. (See § 1194.31(a) inthe NPRM.) No substantive commentswere received regarding this provisionand no changes other than editorialchanges were made in the final rule.

Paragraph (b) requires that agenciessupply end-users with informationabout accessibility or compatibilityfeatures that are built-into a product,upon request. (See § 1194.31(b) in theNPRM.) No substantive comments werereceived regarding this provision and,other than an editorial revisionsubstituting ‘‘methods’’ for ‘‘modes’’,and general editorial changes, no otherchanges were made in the final rule.

Paragraph (c) provides that help desksand other support services serving anagency must be capable ofaccommodating the communicationsneeds of persons with disabilities. For

example, an agency help desk may needto communicate through a TTY. Thehelp desk or support service must alsobe familiar with such features askeyboard access and other optionsimportant to people with disabilities.(See § 1194.31(a) in the NPRM.) Nosubstantive comments were receivedregarding this provision and no changesother than editorial changes were madein the final rule.

Regulatory Process Matters

Executive Order 12866: RegulatoryPlanning and Review and CongressionalReview Act

This final rule is an economicallysignificant regulatory action underExecutive Order 12866 and has beenreviewed by the Office of Managementand Budget (OMB). The final rule is alsoa major rule under the CongressionalReview Act. The Board has prepared aregulatory assessment for the final rulewhich has been placed in the docketand is available for public inspection.The regulatory assessment is alsoavailable on the Board’s Internet site(http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/assessment.htm). In the NPRM, theBoard sought comment on theregulatory assessment which wasprepared in conjunction with theproposed rule. The Board received fourcomments that specifically addressedconcerns with that economicassessment. A summary of thecomments received and the Board’sresponses can be found in Chapter Sixof the Board’s final regulatoryassessment.

Section 508 covers the development,procurement, maintenance or use ofelectronic and information technologyby Federal agencies. Exemptions areprovided by statute for national securitysystems and for instances wherecompliance would impose an undueburden on an agency. The final ruleimproves the accessibility of electronicand information technology used by theFederal government and will affectFederal employees with disabilities, aswell as members of the public withdisabilities who seek to use Federalelectronic and information technologiesto access information. The final rule isbased largely on the recommendationsof the Electronic and InformationTechnology Access AdvisoryCommittee.

The standards in the final rule will beincorporated into the FederalAcquisition Regulation (FAR). Failure ofa Federal agency to comply with thestandards may result in a complaintunder the agency’s existing complaintprocedures under section 504 of the



Rehabilitation Act or a civil actionseeking to enforce compliance with thestandards.

Estimated Baseline of Federal Spendingfor Electronic and InformationTechnology

According to OMB figures, Federalgovernment expenditures forinformation technology products was$37.6 billion in fiscal year 1999. Thedefense agencies appear to have thehighest information technology budgets,while civilian agency budgets areexpected to increase rapidly. It was notpossible however, to disaggregate thisdata such that it was useful for purposesof a regulatory assessment. Instead, theregulatory assessment uses annual salesdata collected from the General ServicesAdministration (GSA) as a proxy for theactual number of products in eachapplicable technology category. Usingthe GSA data, the regulatory assessmentestimates that the Federal governmentspends approximately $12.4 billionannually on electronic and informationtechnology products covered by thefinal rule. This estimate likelyunderstates the actual spending by theFederal government because it is limitedto the GSA data. Agencies are notrequired to make purchases through theGSA supply service, thus many itemsare purchased directly from suppliers.As a result, the government costs forsoftware and compatible hardwareproducts may actually be higher thanestimates would indicate.

The regulatory assessment alsoexamines historical budgetaryobligations for information technologytracked by OMB until fiscal year 1998.Two scenarios were examined to

develop an upper and lower bound torepresent the proportion expected to bepotentially affected by the final rule.During a five year period from fiscalyear 1994 through fiscal year 1998, theaverage proportion of the totalinformation technology obligationspotentially covered by the final ruleranged between 25 percent and 50percent. The $12.4 billion GSA estimatefalls within this range, representing 33percent of the total fiscal year 1999information technology obligations of$37.6 billion. One limitation of theseranges is that they are based on grossclassifications of informationtechnology obligations and do notprovide the level of disaggregationnecessary to parallel the GSA dataassessment. As a result, the twoscenarios likely include expenditures onproducts and services that would not beeffected by the final rule to a higherdegree than the data obtained from GSA.

The degree to which the potentialunderstatement of baseline spendingleads to an understatement of the costof the final rule is unclear. Some of thecomponents of the estimated cost of thefinal rule rely heavily on the level ofFederal spending while others areindependent of this number.

Estimated Cost of the Final Rule

The regulatory assessment includesboth direct and opportunity costsassociated with the final rule. Majorsources of cost include:

• Costs of modifying electronic andinformation technology to meet thesubstantive requirements of thestandards;

• Training of staff, both Federal andmanufacturers, to market, support, and

use technologies modified in responseto the standards; and

• Translation of documentation andinstructions into alternate formats.

The direct costs that were quantifiedare shown in Table 1. The totalquantified costs to society range from$177 million to $1,068 million annually.The Federal proportion of these costs isestimated to range between $85 millionand $691 million. The ability ofmanufacturers, especially softwaremanufacturers, to distribute these costsover the general consumer populationwill determine the actual proportionshared by the Federal government.Assuming that the addition ofaccessibility features add value to theproducts outside the Federalgovernment, it is expected that the costswill be distributed across societythereby setting a lower bound cost to theFederal government of $85 million. Ifmanufacturers do not distribute thecosts across society, the upper bound ofthe Federal cost will increase to anestimated $1,068 million. These costsmust be placed in appropriate contextby comparing them with the totalFederal expenditures for informationtechnology. By comparison, the lowerand upper bound of the incrementalcosts represent a range of 0.23 percentto 2.8 percent of the $37.6 billion spentby the Federal government oninformation technology in fiscal year1999. Although the regulatoryassessment does not analyze the timingof expenditures or reductions in costsover time, it is expected that the costswill decrease over time as a proportionof total electronic and informationtechnology spending.

TABLE 1

Electronic and information technology

Lowerbound costestimates(millions)

Upperbound costestimates(millions)

General Office Software .................................................................................................................................................. $110 $456Mission Specific Software ................................................................................................................................................ 10 52Compatible Hardware Products ....................................................................................................................................... .................... 337Document Management Products ................................................................................................................................... 56 222Microphotographic Products ............................................................................................................................................ 0.1 0.4Other Miscellaneous Products ......................................................................................................................................... 0.2 1

Total Social Cost ...................................................................................................................................................... 177 1,068Estimated Federal Proportion .......................................................................................................................................... 85 1 691

1 As noted above, if manufacturers do not distribute the costs across society, the upper bound of the Federal cost will increase to an estimated$1,068 million.

Accessible alternatives are availableto satisfy the requirements of the finalrule for many types of electronic andinformation technologies, particularlycomputers and software products. Some

electronic and information technologyproducts will require modifications tomeet the requirements of the finalstandards.

For many types of electronic andinformation technology, the final rulefocuses on compatibility with existingand future assistive devices, such asscreen readers. The final rule does not



require that assistive technologies beprovided universally. Provision ofassistive technologies is still governedby the reasonable accommodationrequirements contained in sections 501and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.Section 508 does not require thatassistive devices be purchased, but itdoes require that covered electronic andinformation technology be capable ofhaving such devices added at some latertime as necessary.

Software products represent thelargest part of the estimated costs. Theregulatory assessment assumes thatFederal software expenditures can bedivided into two major subcategories:general office applications and mission-specific applications. Internetapplications are assumed to berepresented within each of thesesubcategories. General officeapplications include operating systems,wordprocessors, and spreadsheets, andare assumed to represent 80 percent ofthe total software category. Theremaining 20 percent covers mission-specific or proprietary applications thathave limited distribution outside theFederal government. Within eachsubcategory, the estimated costs of thefinal rule are distributed according tothe level or degree of accessibilityalready being achieved in the privatesector.

The general office applicationsubcategory is broken into three groupsbased on discussions with severalindustry experts. The first 30 percent isexpected to require very littlemodification to satisfy the finalstandards and therefore no incrementalcost is associated with this group. Themiddle 40 percent is expected to requireminor to medium alterations to satisfythe final rule. The cost of modifying aparticular general office application inthis category is estimated to be in therange of 0.4 percent to 1 percent basedon discussions with severalmanufacturers. This assumption isbased on the ratio of employeesdedicated to accessibility issues. Themethodology uses employeeclassification as a proxy for cost orexpense of accessibility research anddevelopment, labor, and design that areall factored into the final product cost.The remaining 30 percent is expected torequire significant modifications to meetthe requirements of the final rule, whichis estimated to cost in the range of 1percent to 5 percent based on discussionwith industry experts.

The regulatory assessment assumesthat the remaining 20 percent of thesoftware products purchased by theFederal government representproprietary or mission-specific software

with limited distribution outside thegovernment. These products willrequire significant modification tosatisfy the final rule. Based ondiscussions with industry experts, thecost increase associated with achievingthe level of accessibility required by thefinal rule is estimated to range from 1percent to 5 percent.

Estimated Benefits of the Final RuleThe benefits associated with the final

rule results from increased access toelectronic and information technologyfor Federal employees with disabilitiesand members of the public seekingFederal information provided usingelectronic and information technology.This increased access reduces barriers toemployment in the Federal governmentfor persons with disabilities, reduces theprobability that Federal employees withdisabilities will be underemployed, andincreases the productivity of Federalwork teams. The final standards mayalso have benefits for people outside theFederal workforce, both with andwithout disabilities, as a result ofspillover of technology from the Federalgovernment to the rest of society.

Two methods are presented in theregulatory assessment for evaluating thequantifiable benefits of the final rule.The first is a wage gap analysis thatattempts to measure the difference inwages between the general Federalworkforce and Federal workers withtargeted and reportable disabilities.While this analysis is limited to whitecollar Federal workers due to dataconstraints, the potential change inproductivity is measured by thedifference between the weighted averagesalary for all white collar Federalemployees and the average within thetwo disability classes. This assumes thatan increase in accessibility will helpdiminish this wage gap by increasingworker productivity.

The alternative is a team basedapproach for measuring the productivityof Federal workers. This approach isbased on the assumption that a Federalworkers wage rate reflects theirproductivity and the scarcity of theirskills in the labor market. However thismay not apply to Federal wage rates,thus the average productivity of aFederal team is assumed to beequivalent to the average Federal wagerate. Based on this average rate, it isassumed that the final rule will producean increase in productivity rangingbetween 5 percent and 10 percent.

Since no data have been identified tosupport the increase in productivity inthe team based approach, the wage gapanalysis is used to represent the benefitsgenerated by the final rule shown in

Table 2. Keeping in mind certain datalimitations with this analysis, thebenefits derived from the wage gapmethod do not account for benefits thatmay be accrued by the general public orother Federal workers due to spillovereffects of increased accessibilityresulting from the final standards.

TABLE 2

Productivity increaseAggregate

benefits range(millions)

Lower Bound ............ ....................................Upper Bound ............ $466

Not all government policies are basedon maximizing economic efficiency.Some policies are based on furtheringthe rights of certain classes ofindividuals to achieve more equitableresults, regardless of the effect oneconomic efficiency. Accessibility toelectronic information and technology isan essential component of civil rightsfor persons with disabilities. The finalrule will ensure that Federal employeeswith disabilities will have access toelectronic and information technologyused by the Federal government that iscomparable to that of Federal employeeswithout disabilities; and that membersof the public with disabilities will havecomparable access to information andservices provided to members of thepublic without disabilities through theuse of Federal electronic andinformation technology.

Based on Bureau of Census statisticsfrom 1994, 20.6 percent or 54 millionpersons in the United States have somelevel of disability. By increasing theaccessibility of electronic andinformation technology used by theFederal government, the final rule mayalso improve future employmentopportunities in the Federal governmentfor persons with disabilities currentlyemployed by the Federal government,and for persons that are working in theprivate sector or are classified as notbeing active in the labor force.Increasing the accessibility of electronicand information technology increasesthe productivity and mobility of thedisabled sector of the labor pool that,under existing conditions, may facebarriers to their employment andadvancement within the Federalworkforce and in the private sector. Thestandards will allow other Federalworkers who become temporarilydisabled to maintain their productivityduring their illness. In addition,accessible features of electronic andinformation technology may alsoenhance the productivity of Federal



workers without disabilities andtherefore be a benefit to the workforcein general.

Regulatory Flexibility ActThe Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended,generally requires Federal agencies toconduct a regulatory flexibility analysisdescribing the impact of the regulatoryaction on small entities. However,section 605(b) of the RFA, provides thata regulatory flexibility analysis is notrequired if the rule will not have asignificant economic impact on asubstantial number of small entities.This final rule imposes requirementsonly on the Federal Government and theBoard certifies that it does not imposeany requirements on small entities. Asa result, a regulatory flexibility analysisis not required.

Executive Order 13132: FederalismBy its terms, this rule applies to the

development, procurement,maintenance or use by Federal agenciesof electronic and informationtechnology. As such, the Board believesthat it does not have federalismimplications within the meaning ofExecutive Order 13132. In the proposedrule, the Board referred to theDepartment of Education’sinterpretation of the AssistiveTechnology Act (the ‘‘AT Act’’), 29U.S.C. 3001. The Board receivedapproximately five responses fromvarious State organizations regardingthe relationship between the AT Actand Section 508 of the RehabilitationAct. The Department of Education, theagency responsible for administering theAT Act, has advised the Board that itplans to work with States to address therelationship between the AT Act andsection 508, and specifically how theBoard’s standards would apply to theStates for purposes of the AT Act. Aspart of this process, the Department ofEducation will address issues raised inthe five responses the Board received onthe relationship between the AT Actand section 508 of the RehabilitationAct.

Unfunded Mandates Reform ActThe Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

does not apply to proposed or final rulesthat enforce constitutional rights ofindividuals or enforce any statutoryrights that prohibit discrimination onthe basis of race, color, sex, nationalorigin, age, handicap, or disability.Since the final rule is issued under theauthority of section 508, part of title Vof the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 whichestablishes civil rights protections forindividuals with disabilities, an

assessment of the rule’s effects on State,local, and tribal governments, and theprivate sector is not required by theUnfunded Mandates Reform Act.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 1194Civil rights, Communications

equipment, Computer technology,Electronic products, Governmentemployees, Government procurement,Individuals with disabilities, Reportingand recordkeeping requirements,Telecommunications.

Thurman M. Davis, Sr.,Chair, Architectural and TransportationBarriers Compliance Board.

For the reasons set forth in thepreamble, the Board adds part 1194 toChapter XI of title 36 of the Code ofFederal Regulations to read as follows:

PART 1194—ELECTRONIC ANDINFORMATION TECHNOLOGYACCESSIBILITY STANDARDS

Subpart A—GeneralSec.1194.1 Purpose.1194.2 Application.1194.3 General exceptions.1194.4 Definitions.1194.5 Equivalent facilitation.

Subpart B—Technical Standards1194.21 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, andsupport.

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 theRehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended(29 U.S.C. 794d). Section 508 requiresthat when Federal agencies develop,procure, maintain, or use electronic andinformation technology, Federalemployees with disabilities have accessto and use of information and data thatis comparable to the access and use byFederal employees who are notindividuals with disabilities, unless anundue burden would be imposed on theagency. Section 508 also requires that

individuals with disabilities, who aremembers of the public seekinginformation or services from a Federalagency, have access to and use ofinformation and data that is comparableto that provided to the public who arenot individuals with disabilities, unlessan undue burden would be imposed onthe agency.

§ 1194.2 Application.(a) Products covered by this part shall

comply with all applicable provisions ofthis part. When developing, procuring,maintaining, or using electronic andinformation technology, each agencyshall ensure that the products complywith the applicable provisions of thispart, unless an undue burden would beimposed on the agency.

(1) When compliance with theprovisions of this part imposes anundue burden, agencies shall provideindividuals with disabilities with theinformation and data involved by analternative means of access that allowsthe individual to use the informationand data.

(2) When procuring a product, if anagency determines that compliance withany provision of this part imposes anundue burden, the documentation bythe agency supporting the procurementshall explain why, and to what extent,compliance with each such provisioncreates an undue burden.

(b) When procuring a product, eachagency shall procure products whichcomply with the provisions in this partwhen such products are available in thecommercial marketplace or when suchproducts are developed in response to aGovernment solicitation. Agenciescannot claim a product as a whole is notcommercially available because noproduct in the marketplace meets all thestandards. If products are commerciallyavailable that meet some but not all ofthe standards, the agency must procurethe product that best meets thestandards.

(c) Except as provided by § 1194.3(b),this part applies to electronic andinformation technology developed,procured, maintained, or used byagencies directly or used by a contractorunder a contract with an agency whichrequires the use of such product, orrequires the use, to a significant extent,of such product in the performance ofa service or the furnishing of a product.

§ 1194.3 General exceptions.(a) This part does not apply to any

electronic and information technologyoperated by agencies, the function,operation, or use of which involvesintelligence activities, cryptologicactivities related to national security,



command and control of military forces,equipment that is an integral part of aweapon or weapons system, or systemswhich are critical to the directfulfillment of military or intelligencemissions. Systems which are critical tothe direct fulfillment of military orintelligence missions do not include asystem that is to be used for routineadministrative and businessapplications (including payroll, finance,logistics, and personnel managementapplications).

(b) This part does not apply toelectronic and information technologythat is acquired by a contractorincidental to a contract.

(c) Except as required to comply withthe provisions in this part, this part doesnot require the installation of specificaccessibility-related software or theattachment of an assistive technologydevice at a workstation of a Federalemployee who is not an individual witha disability.

(d) When agencies provide access tothe public to information or datathrough electronic and informationtechnology, agencies are not required tomake products owned by the agencyavailable for access and use byindividuals with disabilities at alocation other than that where theelectronic and information technology isprovided to the public, or to purchaseproducts for access and use byindividuals with disabilities at alocation other than that where theelectronic and information technology isprovided to the public.

(e) This part shall not be construed torequire a fundamental alteration in thenature of a product or its components.

(f) Products located in spacesfrequented only by service personnel formaintenance, repair, or occasionalmonitoring of equipment are notrequired to comply with this part.

§ 1194.4 Definitions.The following definitions apply to

this part:Agency. Any Federal department or

agency, including the United StatesPostal Service.

Alternate formats. Alternate formatsusable by people with disabilities mayinclude, but are not limited to, Braille,ASCII text, large print, recorded audio,and electronic formats that comply withthis part.

Alternate methods. Different means ofproviding information, includingproduct documentation, to people withdisabilities. Alternate methods mayinclude, but are not limited to, voice,fax, relay service, TTY, Internet posting,captioning, text-to-speech synthesis,and audio description.

Assistive technology. Any item, pieceof equipment, or system, whetheracquired commercially, modified, orcustomized, that is commonly used toincrease, maintain, or improvefunctional capabilities of individualswith disabilities.

Electronic and informationtechnology. Includes informationtechnology and any equipment orinterconnected system or subsystem ofequipment, that is used in the creation,conversion, or duplication of data orinformation. The term electronic andinformation technology includes, but isnot limited to, telecommunicationsproducts (such as telephones),information kiosks and transactionmachines, World Wide Web sites,multimedia, and office equipment suchas copiers and fax machines. The termdoes not include any equipment thatcontains embedded informationtechnology that is used as an integralpart of the product, but the principalfunction of which is not the acquisition,storage, manipulation, management,movement, control, display, switching,interchange, transmission, or receptionof data or information. For example,HVAC (heating, ventilation, and airconditioning) equipment such asthermostats or temperature controldevices, and medical equipment whereinformation technology is integral to itsoperation, are not informationtechnology.

Information technology. Anyequipment or interconnected system orsubsystem of equipment, that is used inthe automatic acquisition, storage,manipulation, management, movement,control, display, switching, interchange,transmission, or reception of data orinformation. The term informationtechnology includes computers,ancillary equipment, software, firmwareand similar procedures, services(including support services), and relatedresources.

Operable controls. A component of aproduct that requires physical contactfor normal operation. Operable controlsinclude, but are not limited to,mechanically operated controls, inputand output trays, card slots, keyboards,or keypads.

Product. Electronic and informationtechnology.

Self Contained, Closed Products.Products that generally have embeddedsoftware and are commonly designed insuch a fashion that a user cannot easilyattach or install assistive technology.These products include, but are notlimited to, information kiosks andinformation transaction machines,copiers, printers, calculators, fax

machines, and other similar types ofproducts.

Telecommunications. Thetransmission, between or among pointsspecified by the user, of information ofthe user’s choosing, without change inthe form or content of the informationas sent and received.

TTY. An abbreviation forteletypewriter. Machinery or equipmentthat employs interactive text basedcommunications through thetransmission of coded signals across thetelephone network. TTYs may include,for example, devices known as TDDs(telecommunication display devices ortelecommunication devices for deafpersons) or computers with specialmodems. TTYs are also called texttelephones.

Undue burden. Undue burden meanssignificant difficulty or expense. Indetermining whether an action wouldresult in an undue burden, an agencyshall consider all agency resourcesavailable to the program or componentfor which the product is beingdeveloped, procured, maintained, orused.

§ 1194.5 Equivalent facilitation.Nothing in this part is intended to

prevent the use of designs ortechnologies as alternatives to thoseprescribed in this part provided theyresult in substantially equivalent orgreater access to and use of a product forpeople with disabilities.

Subpart B—Technical Standards

§ 1194.21 Software applications andoperating systems.

(a) When software is designed to runon a system that has a keyboard,product functions shall be executablefrom a keyboard where the functionitself or the result of performing afunction can be discerned textually.

(b) Applications shall not disrupt ordisable activated features of otherproducts that are identified asaccessibility features, where thosefeatures are developed and documentedaccording to industry standards.Applications also shall not disrupt ordisable activated features of anyoperating system that are identified asaccessibility features where theapplication programming interface forthose accessibility features has beendocumented by the manufacturer of theoperating system and is available to theproduct developer.

(c) A well-defined on-screenindication of the current focus shall beprovided that moves among interactiveinterface elements as the input focuschanges. The focus shall be



programmatically exposed so thatassistive technology can track focus andfocus changes.

(d) Sufficient information about a userinterface element including the identity,operation and state of the element shallbe available to assistive technology.When an image represents a programelement, the information conveyed bythe image must also be available in text.

(e) When bitmap images are used toidentify controls, status indicators, orother programmatic elements, themeaning assigned to those images shallbe consistent throughout anapplication’s performance.

(f) Textual information shall beprovided through operating systemfunctions for displaying text. Theminimum information that shall bemade available is text content, textinput caret location, and text attributes.

(g) Applications shall not overrideuser selected contrast and colorselections and other individual displayattributes.

(h) When animation is displayed, theinformation shall be displayable in atleast one non-animated presentationmode at the option of the user.

(i) Color coding shall not be used asthe only means of conveyinginformation, indicating an action,prompting a response, or distinguishinga visual element.

(j) When a product permits a user toadjust color and contrast settings, avariety of color selections capable ofproducing a range of contrast levelsshall be provided.

(k) Software shall not use flashing orblinking text, objects, or other elementshaving a flash or blink frequency greaterthan 2 Hz and lower than 55 Hz.

(l) When electronic forms are used,the form shall allow people usingassistive technology to access theinformation, field elements, andfunctionality required for completionand submission of the form, includingall directions and cues.

§ 1194.22 Web-based intranet and internetinformation and applications.

(a) A text equivalent for every non-text element shall be provided (e.g., via‘‘alt’’, ‘‘longdesc’’, or in elementcontent).

(b) Equivalent alternatives for anymultimedia presentation shall besynchronized with the presentation.

(c) Web pages shall be designed sothat all information conveyed with coloris also available without color, forexample from context or markup.

(d) Documents shall be organized sothey are readable without requiring anassociated style sheet.

(e) Redundant text links shall beprovided for each active region of aserver-side image map.

(f) Client-side image maps shall beprovided instead of server-side imagemaps except where the regions cannotbe defined with an available geometricshape.

(g) Row and column headers shall beidentified for data tables.

(h) Markup shall be used to associatedata cells and header cells for datatables that have two or more logicallevels of row or column headers.

(i) Frames shall be titled with text thatfacilitates frame identification andnavigation.

(j) Pages shall be designed to avoidcausing the screen to flicker with afrequency greater than 2 Hz and lowerthan 55 Hz.

(k) A text-only page, with equivalentinformation or functionality, shall beprovided to make a web site complywith the provisions of this part, whencompliance cannot be accomplished inany other way. The content of the text-only page shall be updated wheneverthe primary page changes.

(l) When pages utilize scriptinglanguages to display content, or tocreate interface elements, theinformation provided by the script shallbe identified with functional text thatcan be read by assistive technology.

(m) When a web page requires that anapplet, plug-in or other application bepresent on the client system to interpretpage content, the page must provide alink to a plug-in or applet that complieswith § 1194.21(a) through (l).

(n) When electronic forms aredesigned to be completed on-line, theform shall allow people using assistivetechnology to access the information,field elements, and functionalityrequired for completion and submissionof the form, including all directions andcues.

(o) A method shall be provided thatpermits users to skip repetitivenavigation links.

(p) When a timed response isrequired, the user shall be alerted andgiven sufficient time to indicate moretime is required.

Note to § 1194.22: 1. The Board interpretsparagraphs (a) through (k) of this section asconsistent with the following priority 1Checkpoints of the Web ContentAccessibility Guidelines 1.0 (WCAG 1.0)(May 5, 1999) published by the WebAccessibility Initiative of the World WideWeb Consortium:

Section 1194.22paragraph

WCAG 1.0checkpoint

(a) ............................................. 1.1(b) ............................................. 1.4(c) .............................................. 2.1(d) ............................................. 6.1(e) ............................................. 1.2(f) .............................................. 9.1(g) ............................................. 5.1(h) ............................................. 5.2(i) ............................................... 12.1(j) ............................................... 7.1(k) .............................................. 11.4

2. Paragraphs (l), (m), (n), (o), and (p)of this section are different from WCAG1.0. Web pages that conform to WCAG1.0, level A (i.e., all priority 1checkpoints) must also meet paragraphs(l), (m), (n), (o), and (p) of this sectionto comply with this section. WCAG 1.0is available at http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WAI–WEBCONTENT–19990505.

§ 1194.23 Telecommunications products.(a) Telecommunications products or

systems which provide a functionallowing voice communication andwhich do not themselves provide a TTYfunctionality shall provide a standardnon-acoustic connection point for TTYs.Microphones shall be capable of beingturned on and off to allow the user tointermix speech with TTY use.

(b) Telecommunications productswhich include voice communicationfunctionality shall support allcommonly used cross-manufacturernon-proprietary standard TTY signalprotocols.

(c) Voice mail, auto-attendant, andinteractive voice responsetelecommunications systems shall beusable by TTY users with their TTYs.

(d) Voice mail, messaging, auto-attendant, and interactive voiceresponse telecommunications systemsthat require a response from a userwithin a time interval, shall give an alertwhen the time interval is about to runout, and shall provide sufficient time forthe user to indicate more time isrequired.

(e) Where provided, calleridentification and similartelecommunications functions shall alsobe available for users of TTYs, and forusers who cannot see displays.

(f) For transmitted voice signals,telecommunications products shallprovide a gain adjustable up to aminimum of 20 dB. For incrementalvolume control, at least oneintermediate step of 12 dB of gain shallbe provided.

(g) If the telecommunications productallows a user to adjust the receivevolume, a function shall be provided toautomatically reset the volume to thedefault level after every use.



(h) Where a telecommunicationsproduct delivers output by an audiotransducer which is normally held up tothe ear, a means for effective magneticwireless coupling to hearingtechnologies shall be provided.

(i) Interference to hearingtechnologies (including hearing aids,cochlear implants, and assistivelistening devices) shall be reduced tothe lowest possible level that allows auser of hearing technologies to utilizethe telecommunications product.

(j) Products that transmit or conductinformation or communication, shallpass through cross-manufacturer, non-proprietary, industry-standard codes,translation protocols, formats or otherinformation necessary to provide theinformation or communication in ausable format. Technologies which useencoding, signal compression, formattransformation, or similar techniquesshall not remove information needed foraccess or shall restore it upon delivery.

(k) Products which have mechanicallyoperated controls or keys, shall complywith the following:

(1) Controls and keys shall be tactilelydiscernible without activating thecontrols or keys.

(2) Controls and keys shall beoperable with one hand and shall notrequire tight grasping, pinching, ortwisting of the wrist. The force requiredto activate controls and keys shall be 5lbs. (22.2 N) maximum.

(3) If key repeat is supported, thedelay before repeat shall be adjustable toat least 2 seconds. Key repeat rate shallbe adjustable to 2 seconds per character.

(4) The status of all locking or togglecontrols or keys shall be visuallydiscernible, and discernible eitherthrough touch or sound.

§ 1194.24 Video and multimedia products.

(a) All analog television displays 13inches and larger, and computerequipment that includes analogtelevision receiver or display circuitry,shall be equipped with caption decodercircuitry which appropriately receives,decodes, and displays closed captionsfrom broadcast, cable, videotape, andDVD signals. As soon as practicable, butnot later than July 1, 2002, widescreendigital television (DTV) displaysmeasuring at least 7.8 inches vertically,DTV sets with conventional displaysmeasuring at least 13 inches vertically,and stand-alone DTV tuners, whether ornot they are marketed with displayscreens, and computer equipment thatincludes DTV receiver or displaycircuitry, shall be equipped withcaption decoder circuitry whichappropriately receives, decodes, and

displays closed captions from broadcast,cable, videotape, and DVD signals.

(b) Television tuners, including tunercards for use in computers, shall beequipped with secondary audio programplayback circuitry.

(c) All training and informationalvideo and multimedia productionswhich support the agency’s mission,regardless of format, that contain speechor other audio information necessary forthe comprehension of the content, shallbe open or closed captioned.

(d) All training and informationalvideo and multimedia productionswhich support the agency’s mission,regardless of format, that contain visualinformation necessary for thecomprehension of the content, shall beaudio described.

(e) Display or presentation of alternatetext presentation or audio descriptionsshall be user-selectable unlesspermanent.

§ 1194.25 Self contained, closed products.(a) Self contained products shall be

usable by people with disabilitieswithout requiring an end-user to attachassistive technology to the product.Personal headsets for private listeningare not assistive technology.

(b) When a timed response isrequired, the user shall be alerted andgiven sufficient time to indicate moretime is required.

(c) Where a product utilizestouchscreens or contact-sensitivecontrols, an input method shall beprovided that complies with § 1194.23(k) (1) through (4).

(d) When biometric forms of useridentification or control are used, analternative form of identification oractivation, which does not require theuser to possess particular biologicalcharacteristics, shall also be provided.

(e) When products provide auditoryoutput, the audio signal shall beprovided at a standard signal levelthrough an industry standard connectorthat will allow for private listening. Theproduct must provide the ability tointerrupt, pause, and restart the audio atanytime.

(f) When products deliver voiceoutput in a public area, incrementalvolume control shall be provided withoutput amplification up to a level of atleast 65 dB. Where the ambient noiselevel of the environment is above 45 dB,a volume gain of at least 20 dB abovethe ambient level shall be userselectable. A function shall be providedto automatically reset the volume to thedefault level after every use.

(g) Color coding shall not be used asthe only means of conveyinginformation, indicating an action,

prompting a response, or distinguishinga visual element.

(h) When a product permits a user toadjust color and contrast settings, arange of color selections capable ofproducing a variety of contrast levelsshall be provided.

(i) Products shall be designed to avoidcausing the screen to flicker with afrequency greater than 2 Hz and lowerthan 55 Hz.

(j) Products which are freestanding,non-portable, and intended to be usedin one location and which haveoperable controls shall comply with thefollowing:

(1) The position of any operablecontrol shall be determined with respectto a vertical plane, which is 48 inchesin length, centered on the operablecontrol, and at the maximum protrusionof the product within the 48 inch length(see Figure 1 of this part).

(2) Where any operable control is 10inches or less behind the referenceplane, the height shall be 54 inchesmaximum and 15 inches minimumabove the floor.

(3) Where any operable control ismore than 10 inches and not more than24 inches behind the reference plane,the height shall be 46 inches maximumand 15 inches minimum above the floor.

(4) Operable controls shall not bemore than 24 inches behind thereference plane (see Figure 2 of thispart).

§ 1194.26 Desktop and portablecomputers.

(a) All mechanically operated controlsand keys shall comply with§ 1194.23(k)(1) through (4).

(b) If a product utilizes touchscreensor touch-operated controls, an inputmethod shall be provided that complieswith § 1194.23 (k) (1) through (4).

(c) When biometric forms of useridentification or control are used, analternative form of identification oractivation, which does not require theuser to possess particular biologicalcharacteristics, shall also be provided.

(d) Where provided, at least one ofeach type of expansion slots, ports andconnectors shall comply with publiclyavailable industry standards.

Subpart C—Functional PerformanceCriteria

§ 1194.31 Functional performance criteria.(a) At least one mode of operation and

information retrieval that does notrequire user vision shall be provided, orsupport for assistive technology used bypeople who are blind or visuallyimpaired shall be provided.

(b) At least one mode of operation andinformation retrieval that does not



require visual acuity greater than 20/70shall be provided in audio and enlargedprint output working together orindependently, or support for assistivetechnology used by people who arevisually impaired shall be provided.

(c) At least one mode of operation andinformation retrieval that does notrequire user hearing shall be provided,or support for assistive technology usedby people who are deaf or hard ofhearing shall be provided.

(d) Where audio information isimportant for the use of a product, atleast one mode of operation andinformation retrieval shall be providedin an enhanced auditory fashion, orsupport for assistive hearing devicesshall be provided.

(e) At least one mode of operation andinformation retrieval that does notrequire user speech shall be provided,or support for assistive technology usedby people with disabilities shall beprovided.

(f) At least one mode of operation andinformation retrieval that does notrequire fine motor control orsimultaneous actions and that isoperable with limited reach andstrength shall be provided.

Subpart D—Information,Documentation, and Support

§ 1194.41 Information, documentation, andsupport.

(a) Product support documentationprovided to end-users shall be made

available in alternate formats uponrequest, at no additional charge.

(b) End-users shall have access to adescription of the accessibility andcompatibility features of products inalternate formats or alternate methodsupon request, at no additional charge.

(c) Support services for products shallaccommodate the communication needsof end-users with disabilities.

Figures to Part 1194

BILLING CODE 8150–01–P



[FR Doc. 00–32017 Filed 12–20–00; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 8150–01–P
