# Presentation: 370066

## Update and Revisions

- Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards
- Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines

## About the Access Board

- 25 members
- 13 public members appointed by the President for four year terms
- 12 Federal members from various Federal agencies

## About the Access Board

- $6 million budget
- 28 employees
- 3 organizational units
- Office of the Executive Director
- General Counsel
- Technical and Information Services

## Access Board Programs

- Guidelines and standards development
- Architectural Barriers Act (ABA) of 1968
- Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
- Telecommunications Act of 1996
- Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1998
- Technical assistance and training
- Research
- ABA compliance and enforcement

## Why Revisions are Needed?

- The Access Board shall periodically review and, as appropriate, amend the standards to reflect technological advances or changes in electronic and information technology *(section 508)*
- The Board shall review and update the Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines periodically *(section 255)*
- Almost 6 years since the Section 508 standards were issued – 8 years for the Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines; technology has changed
- Harmonization with requirements in other countries

## Why One Rulemaking?

- The telecommunications provisions in the section 508 standards are based on, and are consistent with, the Board’s Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines
- The “intended audiences” and “levels of effort” for each law will remain different

## Intended Audiences andLevels of Effort

- The Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines apply to _manufacturers_
- A manufacturer of telecommunications equipment ...shall ensure that the equipment is designed, developed, and fabricated to be accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, if _readily achievable_

## Intended Audiences andLevels of Effort

- The Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards apply to _Federal government agencies_
- When agencies develop, procure, maintain, or use electronic and information technology, they must ensure that it is accessible to Federal employees and individuals with disabilities who are members of the public seeking information or services from a Federal agency unless an _undue burden_ would be imposed on the agency

## Why an Advisory Committee?

- Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act requires the Board to consult with Departments of Education, Commerce, Defense, the General Services Administration, and the Federal Communications Commission
- We must also consult with the electronic and information technology industry and public or nonprofit organizations, including organizations representing individuals with disabilities

## Why an Advisory Committee?

- Advisory committees allow interested groups to play a substantive role in the development of rules which are then proposed for public comment

## What are the RequiredRulemaking Steps?

- Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
- Regulatory assessment – costs and benefits
- Submit to OMB – 90 day review period
- Publish in Federal Register – minimum 30 day comment period
- Final Rule
- Regulatory assessment
- Submit to OMB – 90 day review period
- Publish in Federal Register

## Is Rulemaking Lengthy?

- Past history indicates that the _minimum_ amount of time needed is about 2 years
- Section 508 rulemaking took 2 years and 4 months
- Section 255 rulemaking took 1 year and 11 months

## Slide 13

| Section 508 Rulemaking History |  |
| --- | --- |
| August 7, 1998 | Workforce Investment Act of 1998 signed into law |
| August 24, 1998 | notice of intent to establish advisory committee |
| September 29, 1998 | notice establishing advisory committee |
| October 15-16, 1998 | committee meeting  |
| December 1-2, 1998 | committee meeting  |
| January 5-6, 1999 | committee meeting  |
| February 8-9, 1999 | committee meeting  |
| March 29-30, 1999 | committee meeting  |
| May 11-12, 1999 | committee meeting  |
| May 12, 1999 | committee presented recommendations to the Board |
| March 31, 2000 | Access Board NPRM (60 day comment period) |
| December 21, 2000 | Access Board Final rule |
| January 22, 2001 | Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council NPRM (60 day comment period) |
| April 25, 2001 | Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council final rule  |

## Slide 14

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

## What About Other Agencies?

- Not later than 6 months after the Access Board revises any standards...the [Federal Acquisition Regulatory] Council shall revise the Federal Acquisition Regulation

## Draft Timeline

| Proposed Rulemaking Timeline |  |
| --- | --- |
| April 18, 2006 | notice of intent to establish advisory committee |
| July 6, 2006 | notice establishing advisory committee |
| September 27-29, 2006 | committee meeting  |
| TBD | committee meeting  |
| TBD | committee meeting  |
| TBD | committee meeting  |
| TBD | committee meeting  |
| TBD | committee meeting  |
| TBD | committee presents recommendations to the Board |
| March 2008 | Access Board NPRM (60 day comment period) |
| September 2009 | Access Board Final rule |

## Goals in the Revision Process

- “We agree that what is needed are _clear, consensus driven, testable, and reliable_ accessibility requirements.  In this world of global scales, it is critical that accessibility requirements be _harmonized_ throughout the world.  Product manufacturers want to build to a single set of requirements – or at least not be faced with competing world wide requirements.  We should do what we can to facilitate this, because ultimately if we can make the regulatory process easier to achieve – and by that I _do not_ mean that we need to _weaken the requirements that exist today_ – we will enhance accessibility for people with disabilities worldwide.”
*Marc Guthrie, Access Board public member*
*International Workshop on Accessibility Requirements*
*Brussels, Belgium -- October 21, 2004*

## Expectations forAdvisory Committee

- Issues within our authority –
- Definition of electronic and information technology
- Technical and functional performance criteria
- Accessibility of telecommunications equipment and customer premises equipment

## Expectations forAdvisory Committee

- Important but _not within our authority_ -
- Enforcement of the standards and guidelines
- Oversight, surveying agencies, and testing
- Treatment of micro-purchases, contract clauses, Voluntary Product Accessibility Template

## Consensus

- An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole
- Every member can say...
- I believe that you understand my point of view and that I understand yours
- Whether or not I prefer the group decision, I support them because they were reached fairly and openly and they are the best decisions at this time
- We all share in the final decision

## Consensus

- Consensus _does not_ mean...
- Unanimous or majority vote
- Everyone’s first choice
- That everyone agrees, although enough need to be in favor to get the decision carried out

## Thank you for Volunteering !!