Share Your Thoughts on Proposed ADA Changes - LightHouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired

Following are the questions that the DOJ is seeking answers to from the public, in each of the issue areas:
I. Accessibility of Web Information
II. Movie Captioning and Video Description
III. Accessibility of Next Generation 9-1-1
IV. Equipment and Furniture

I. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities and Public Accommodations
ref: http://www.ada.gov/anprm2010/web%20anprm_2010.htm

Question 1. Should the Department adopt the WCAG 2.0´s “Level AA Success Criteria” as its standard for website accessibility for entities covered by titles II and III of the ADA? Is there any reason why the Department should consider adopting another success criteria level of the WCAG 2.0? Please explain your answer.

Question 2. Should the Department adopt the section 508 standards instead of the WCAG guidelines as its standard for website accessibility under titles II and III of the ADA? Is there a difference in compliance burdens and costs between the two standards? Please explain your answer.

Question 3. How should the Department address the ongoing changes to WCAG and section 508 standards? Should covered entities be given the option to comply with the latest requirements?

Question 4. Given the ever-changing nature of many websites, should the Department adopt performance standards instead of any set of specific technical standards for website accessibility? Please explain your support for or opposition to this option. If you support performance standards, please provide specific information on how such performance standards should be framed.

II. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Movie Captioning and Video Description
http://www.ada.gov/anprm2010/movie_captions_anprm_2010.htm

A. Coverage issues:

Question 1. The Department is considering proposing a regulation that contains a sliding compliance schedule whereby the percentage of movie screens offering closed captioning and video description increases on a yearly basis, beginning with 10 percent in the first year any such rule becomes effective, until the 50 percent mark is reached in the fifth year. Please indicate whether this approach achieves the proper balance between providing accessibility for individuals with sensory disabilities and giving movie theaters and owners sufficient time to acquire the technology and equipment necessary to exhibit movies with closed captioning and video descriptions. Also, if you believe that a different compliance schedule should be implemented, please provide a detailed response explaining how this should be accomplished and the reasons in support. Should a different compliance schedule be implemented for small businesses? If so, why? What should that schedule require?

Question 2. The Department is considering proposing regulatory language requiring movie theater owners and operators to exhibit movies with closed captions and movies with video description so that, after any sliding compliance scale has been achieved by the final year (e.g., at year 5), all showings of at least one-half of the movie screens at the theater will offer captioning and video description. We seek comment on the most appropriate basis for calculating the number of movies that will be captioned and video described: should this be the number of screens located in a particular theater facility, the number of screens owned by a particular movie theater company, the number of different movies being screened in a particular theater facility, or some combination thereof? Should a different basis be used for small business owners? If so, why? What basis should be used? Please include an explanation of the advantages and disadvantages of each option and the reasons a particular option is preferred over another.

Question 3. If the number of screens located in a particular theater facility is the preferred option, please explain whether the fact that some theaters show the same movie on multiple screens poses any concerns with regard to the number of movies being screened with captions and video descriptions, and if so, what they are and whether there are any ways to address those concerns. Does this option pose particular concerns to small businesses? If so, what are they? Please indicate whether the Department should include specific language in the regulation that states that the basis for calculating the number or percentage is the number of captioned and video described movies the theater receives from the movie producers in order to make clear that the owner has no independent obligation to caption or describe movies.

Question 4. If the number of screens owned by a particular movie theater company is the preferred option, please explain whether there are any concerns about the geographic distribution of movies being screened with captions and video descriptions, and if so, what they are and whether there are any ways to address those concerns. Does this option pose particular concerns to small businesses? If so, what are they? Please indicate whether the Department should include specific language in the regulation that states that the basis for calculating the number or percentage of movies is the number of captioned and video described movies the theater receives from the movie producers in order to make clear that the owner has no independent obligation to caption or describe movies.

Question 5. If the number of movies being screened in a particular movie theater facility is the preferred option, please indicate whether the Department should include specific language in the regulation that states that the basis for calculating the number or percentage of movies is the number of captioned and video described movies the theater receives from the movie producers in order to make clear that the owner has no independent obligation to caption or describe movies. Does this option pose particular concerns to small businesses? If so, what are they?

Question 6. If some combination of these three methods is the preferred option, please explain that option and how it would be implemented. Should a different combination or percentage be used for small business owners? If so, why? What combination or percentage should be used for small business owners? Please indicate whether the Department should include specific language in the regulation that states that the basis for calculating the number or percentage is the number of captioned and video described movies the theater receives from the movie producers in order to make clear that the owner has no independent obligation to caption or describe movies.

Question 7. Should any such regulation require that the same number or percentage of movies with video description be exhibited as required for movies with captioning or should a different number or percentage be imposed? If the latter, what would be the justification for distinguishing between these forms of access? Should small businesses use a different ratio or percentage of video described movies or should they also be required to exhibit the same number or percentage of video described and captioned movies as other entities?

Question 8. Should the Department adopt a requirement that movie theater owners and operators exhibit captioned and video described movies beginning on the day of their release? If not, why not (e.g., could such a requirement impose additional burdens and if so, what are they)? Should a different requirement be imposed on small business owners? If so, why? What should that requirement be?

Question 9. While the Department is not considering requiring the use of open captioning, should movie theater owners and operators be given the discretion to exhibit movies with open captioning, should they so desire, as an alternate method of achieving compliance with the captioning requirements of any Department regulation? If theaters opt to use open captioning, should they be required to exhibit movies with such captioning at peak times so that people with disabilities can have the option of going to the movies on days and times when other moviegoers see movies?

B. Digital Cinema:

Question 10. How many movie theater owners or operators have converted, in whole or in part, to digital cinema? How many have concrete plans to convert 25 percent of their theaters in the next five years? Next ten years? How many have concrete plans to convert 50 percent of their theaters in the next five years? Next ten years? How many have concrete plans to convert 75 percent of their theaters in the next five years? Next ten years? What are the estimates for the cost for a movie theater to convert a movie auditorium to digital cinema? Are these costs different for small businesses? Have small businesses entered into any cost-sharing agreements or other financing arrangements to assist in such a conversion?

Question 11. Have specific protocols or standards been developed for captioning and video description for digital cinema and, if so, what are they?

C. Equipment and technology questions:

Question 12. Do the closed captioning and video description technologies currently available require the use of a digital sound system or digital cinema? Have technologies been developed that do not require the use of either a digital sound system or digital cinema in order to display open or closed captions and offer video description? If any new technologies have been developed, please explain how they work and what, if any, additional costs are associated with the purchase or use of such technologies? Are there technologies in development that will not require the use of a digital sound system or digital cinema in order to display captions or video description? If so, what are they and when are they expected to be available for use by movie theater owners and operators? Please explain what, if any, additional costs are associated with the purchase or use of such technologies.

Question 13. Is the existing closed captioning and video description equipment in use for digital sound systems compatible, or able to be integrated, with digital cinema systems? If not, why not? Are there additional costs associated with using this equipment with digital cinema systems? If so, please provide details. Are the costs different for small businesses? If so, why? What are they?

Question 14. With regard to closed captioning systems, is the ability to read the captions equally good throughout the movie theater or are there certain seats in the theater that provide an enhanced level of readability or line of sight both to the screen and the adjustable panel affixed at or near the patron´s seat? If certain seats enable individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to view movies more effectively, which seats are they and why are they better (e.g., the image is better, there are fewer obstructions, there is less need to continually adjust the panel, etc.)? Should movie theater owners and operators be required to hold such seats for individuals with disabilities who wish to use the theater´s closed captioning system? Since movie theater seating is usually first-come, first-serve, is there an effective system that movie theaters would be able to implement to hold back releasing such seats? Should movie theater owners and operators be allowed to release such seats if they are not requested within a certain amount of time before the start of the movie? Should movie theater owners and operators be allowed to release such seats to the general movie going audience once all of the other seats in the theater have been sold out? Are there alternatives for seating that minimize the cost but still provide patrons who are deaf or hard of hearing with effective and efficient readability of the captions and lines of sight to the screen?

Question 15. Are there other factors that the Department should include with regard to the display of captions or the use of video description? What is the cost of purchasing/incorporating video description equipment per screen/theater? Are the costs different for small businesses? If so, why? What are they?

Question 16. Has any specific equipment been developed or is there equipment in development for use with digital cinema that would be necessary to exhibit closed captioned movies or movies with video description? If so, is that equipment included in the general cost of the conversion to digital cinema or is an additional fee imposed? If an additional fee is imposed, please provide details. Are the costs different for small businesses? If so, why? What are they?

Question 17. Are there any other technical requirements that the Department should consider for inclusion in any regulation? If so, please provide details.

D. Notice Requirements:

Question 18. Should the Department include a requirement that movie theater owners and operators establish a system for notifying individuals with disabilities in advance of movie screenings as to which movies and shows at its theaters provide captioning and video description? If so, how should such a requirement be structured? For example, should the Department require movie theater owners and operators to include, in their usual movie postings in the newspaper, on telephone recordings, and on the Internet, a notation or some other information that a movie is captioned, the type of captioning provided, or that the movie has video description? Should the Department require movie theater owners and operators to establish a procedure or method for directing individuals with sensory disabilities to where in each movie theater they should go to obtain any necessary captioning and video description equipment? Should movie theater owners and operators have the discretion to determine what notification procedure or method is most appropriate or should the Department specify how and where individuals with disabilities can obtain such equipment at each theater? What are the costs for these types of notifications? Are there any alternative types of notifications possible? Are these costs different for small businesses? If so, why? What are they?

E. Training:

Question 19. Should the Department consider including a training requirement for movie theater personnel? Should the Department require that movie theater owners and operators ensure that at least one individual working any shift at which a captioned or video described movie is being screened be trained on how any captioning and video description equipment operates and how to convey that information quickly and effectively to an individual with a disability who seeks help in using that equipment? What re the costs and burdens to implementing such a training requirement? Are these costs different for small businesses? If so, why? What are they? Would written and recorded explanations of how the equipment works be a better alternative?

F. Cost and benefits of movie captioning and video description regulations.

Question 20. The Small Business Administration size standard for small movie theatres is $7 million dollars in annual gross revenues. Does the public have estimates of the numbers of small entities that may be impacted by future regulation governed by this ANPRM? How many small entities presently provide movie captioning or video description? How many small entities already have, or have plans to convert to, digital cinema? How many small entities presently have, or plan to convert to, digital sound systems? How much would it cost each small entity to provide movie captioning and video description technology using digital sound? How much would it cost each small entity to provide movie captioning or video description if the entity converted to digital cinema?

Question 21. Currently, what are the general costs per movie theater owner or operator to display movies with closed captioning? How many small entities offer this feature? What are the general costs to small entities to display movies with open or closed captioning? For all entities, is that figure per auditorium, per facility, or per company? Do these costs change for showing IMAX or 3D films with captions? Are there any cost-sharing or cost-allocation agreements that help mitigate these costs for movie theater owners or operators? Is most or all of this expense a one-time fee? If not, please explain.

Question 22. Currently, what are the general costs per movie theater owner or operator to display movies with video description? How many small entities offer this feature? What are the general costs to small entities to display movies with video description? For all entities, is that figure per auditorium, per facility, or per company? Are there any cost-sharing or cost-allocation agreements that help mitigate these costs for movie theater owners or operators? Is most or all of this expense a one-time fee? If not, please explain.

Question 23. Currently, what are the general costs to convert to digital cinema? Are the costs different for small entities? If so, why? What are the costs for small entities? Is that figure per auditorium, per facility, or per company? Are there cost-sharing or cost-allocation agreements that help mitigate these costs for movie theater owners or operators?

Question 24. What impact will the measures being contemplated by the Department requiring captioning and video description of movies have on small entities? Please provide information on: (a) capital costs for equipment needed to meet the regulatory requirements; (b) costs of modifying existing processes and procedures; (c) any effects to sales and profits, including increases in business due to tapping markets not previously reached; and (d) changes to market competition as a result of the proposed rule.

Question 25. Should any category or type of movie theater be exempted from any regulation requiring captioning or video description? For example, the Department now considers it likely that drive-in theaters will not be subject to this rule because the Department is not aware of any currently available technology that would enable closed captioning or video description of movies shown in drive-in theaters. Are there other types of movie facilities that should be exempted and why?

Question 26. If an exemption is provided, how should such an exemption be structured? Should it be based on the size of the company? To determine size, should the Department consider (a) using the Small Business Size Standard of $7 million dollars in annual gross revenue so that movie theater owners who fall within those parameters should be exempt?; (b) using factors such as whether the movie theater owner is an independent movie house (not owned, leased, or operated by, a movie theater chain), or small art film house in order to be exempt?; or (c) using some other formula or factors to determine if a movie theater owner should be exempt? Should the Department consider the establishment of different compliance requirements or timetables for compliance for small entities, independent movie houses, or small art film houses to take into account the resources available to small entities? What are other alternatives for small businesses, independent move houses, or small art film houses that would minimize the cost of future regulations?

============

III. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services; Accessibility of Next Generation 9-1-1
ref: http://www.ada.gov/anprm2010/nextgen_9-1-1%20anprm_2010.htm

A. Direct, equal access to NG 9-1-1

Question 1. What modes of communication (e.g., voice, text, video, or data) do (or will) individuals with disabilities use to make direct calls to a PSAP, and from what types of devices would the calls be made?

i. Text communications
IP allows several formats of text communications, divided into two types: real-time, and non-real-time. Real-time text communications refer to those that are sent and received on a character-by-character basis; the characters are sent immediately once typed and also displayed immediately to the receiving person. In an emergency, sending text communications to a PSAP in real-time may save valuable time that is needed to effectively respond to the emergency. Non-real-time communications rely on messaging capabilities where users “type-enter-wait-read-respond-reply”—e.g., short messages service (SMS) texts, multimedia messaging service (MMS), instant messaging (IM), text chat, and email. When this type of messaging is used, messages can overlap one another. In an emergency, this could result in the caller or PSAP personnel responding to each other out of the order in which their communications were sent, creating some confusion or delay. The agenda for the FCC´s National Broadband Plan states that this year, the FCC will open a proceeding to identify a reliable, interoperable, real-time text standard to enable consumers to communicate in a digital and IP-based environment. Broadband Action Agenda, http://www.broadband.gov/plan/national-broadband-plan-action-agenda.pdf at 4.10 (last visited July 12, 2010).[10]

Currently, telephone 9-1-1 technologies support TTYs, which provide text communications in an analog environment. Using IP-based devices, PSAPs would require a text gateway in order to converse with individuals using analog-based devices.

Question 2. Should the Department issue a requirement for NG 9-1-1 technologies to support text communications along with analog-based TTY communications? If so, should NG 9-1-1 text technologies be backward compatible with analog-based TTYs or should the two communication methods be available side by side?

Question 3. Which, if any, of the following text options should the Department designate as essential accessibility features of NG 9-1-1 to be incorporated into the initial deployment of an NG 9-1-1 system to assure equal access to emergency call-taking centers for individuals with disabilities?

Real-time text
Short message service (SMS)
Instant messaging (IM)
Email
Analog gateway
Other modes of text communicatio
The Department recognizes that all of these text options will benefit not only individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, but also individuals with other disabilities who require an alternative mean to making a voiced 9-1-1 call due to their disabilities. . The Department recognizes that a State or local government´s NG 9-1-1 system may eventually provide all of these options in the future. However, the Department is interested in learning how each of the options would benefit individuals with disabilities in order to determine whether they should be designated as “essential” to providing access to NG 9-1-1.

Individuals with disabilities are increasingly using smart phones since they are currently the only accessible mobile devices available for text messaging (e.g., email, SMS, or IM). Until NG 9-1-1 services are implemented, PSAPs will not be able to receive text messages sent directly to 9-1-1 from these devices.

Question 4. For this period, should a PSAP develop and implement an interim plan to receive text messages directly or via a third party? How should a PSAP develop an interim plan? What solutions should PSAPs consider as part of their interim plan?

Question 5. Are there significant issues related to the interoperability of messages sent by text that need to be addressed in any final regulation?

ii. Video communications

A technology that has emerged since publication of the original title II rule allows individuals who use sign language to communicate by video. An individual who communicates by American Sign Language (ASL) may use a videophone or other video device (e.g., a web cam connector to a computer) to directly communicate in sign language with either another videophone user or a voice telephone user. In the latter case, videophones can be used to make TRS calls (Video Relay Service) or to use remote sign language interpreting services (video remote interpreting or VRI) when an in-person interpreter is not available. VRI is generally a fee-based service. NG 9-1-1 technologies will allow video phone users to make direct video calls to a PSAP and allow the callers and the emergency personnel to engage in virtual face-to-face communication.

The Department is seeking comments on what steps a PSAP, in providing video services, should take to ensure effective communication with a 9-1-1 caller who uses sign language for communication. One possible method of communication for handling a direct video-to-video call between the individual with disabilities and the PSAP would be through the use of VRI. Upon receipt of a request for sign language services, the PSAP would make a call to a VRI service center and connect the interpreter so that the interpreter appears on both the caller´s and PSAP´s video phone screens. The call would then become a 3-way video call between the caller and PSAP, both using the interpreter. The PSAP would see both the interpreter and caller on the PSAP´s screen, and both the interpreter and the caller would see each other on their screens. Using this method, the PSAP would have the ability to “conference in” (virtually instantaneously) a qualified interpreter (in-house or in a remote facility)

Question 6. In implementing NG 9-1-1, should the Department amend its title II regulation to require each PSAP to provide VRI service? If so, should the Department regulate how to provide such service?

With NG 9-1-1, call routing allows the sharing of networks to route calls for multiple numbers (e.g., 2-1-1, 3-1-1, 8-1-1, suicide hotline, poison control). Also, NG 9-1-1 enables call access, transfer, and backup between and among 9-1-1 call-taking centers and between these centers and specialized emergency services.

Question 7. Should a center also be allowed to transfer a caller´s call to a particular center where call takers are trained and fluent in oral/sign language interpreting services or where call takers are trained in working with individuals with speech impairments? If so, should a final rule address call routing policies that restrict or prohibit such transfers?

The title II rule requires that when an oral or sign language interpreter is necessary for effective communication, the interpreter must be “qualified.” The rule has defined “qualified interpreter” as “an interpreter who is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially both receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary.” 28 CFR 35.104. Although the definition does not require “certified” interpreters, it does require interpreters with the necessary skills to interpret accurately in the particular context.

Question 8. In the context of NG 9-1-1, the Department is asking for public views on whether PSAPs should use only those interpreters who are specifically trained to handle emergency calls in using interpreting services on-site or via VRI.

Question 9. The Department also seeks comments on any other methods for ensuring equal access to NG 9-1-1 for individuals with disabilities. Should the Department issue standards for other methods to provide accessible NG 9-1-1 services? Should the Department require specialized training to ensure that these services can effectively respond to the needs of people with disabilities in an NG 9-1-1 environment?

B. Performance standards as opposed to technical standards
The Department is aware of ongoing efforts by both the National Emergency Number Association (NENA) and the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials International to develop technical standards for guidance to service providers, equipment manufacturers, and industry-related standard setting bodies. The Department has used the performance standard of “direct access” for PSAPs in enforcing title II.

Consistent with the Department´s existing approach, the Department is considering the use of performance standards, as opposed to technical standards, as new title II requirements for access to NG 9-1-1. Two primary considerations support this approach. First, in light of evolving 9-1-1 technologies, it may not be feasible to have identical scoping and technical specifications nationwide to ensure disability access to NG 9-1-1. Second, performance standards would contain flexibility to allow operational standards, protocols, and best practices to be adopted and implemented to meet unique State and local circumstances and needs.

Question 10. Should any regulatory provision on NG 9-1-1 requirements under title II be performance-based, or should a final rule provide technical specifications for call-taking technology and equipment? Please provide as much detail as possible in support of your view.

Question 11. What are the technical issues that the Department should address in developing minimum standards?

NENA, a leading professional, nonprofit organization on 9-1-1 services, has actively worked with public safety, industry, and government groups, to develop technical and operational standards for NG 9-1-1 systems and services.

Question 12. Should the Department adopt any of NENA´s standards as the minimum standards for direct access to NG 9-1-1 services for individuals with disabilities?

Speech-to-speech service (STS) is a form of TRS that involves the use of relay operators for people with speech disabilities who have difficulty being understood on the phone. STS relay operators are trained individuals familiar with many different speech patterns and language recognition skills. The relay operator makes the call and repeats the words exactly. Individuals using STS include those with cerebral palsy, Parkinson´s disease, a laryngectomy, ALS, stuttering, muscular dystrophy, stroke, and other conditions affecting clarity of speech.[11]

Question 13. Should the title II regulation be amended to require that PSAPs directly receive calls from individuals with speech disabilities?

=========

IV. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by State and Local Governments and Places of Public Accommodation; Equipment and Furniture
ref: http://www.ada.gov/anprm2010/equipment_anprm_2010.htm

Medical Equipment Questions

To assist the Department to develop appropriate requirements for medical equipment and furniture, we are seeking information that will inform the rulemaking process. With respect to medical equipment, for each type of medical equipment it would be helpful to know details about the accessible features and if particular types of equipment with accessible features are currently available. The Department is seeking the following information:

Question 1. The Department is considering adopting the Access Board´s standards for medical diagnostic equipment. What other types of medical equipment and furniture should the Department include in its proposed regulation? What modifications to other types of medical equipment and furniture, including equipment and furniture used for treatment or other non-diagnostic purposes, such as hospital beds, should be included in the Department´s proposed regulations?

Question 2. The Access Board is expected to promulgate design standards for medical and dental diagnostic tables and chairs. Are there tables or chairs used for medical, dental, ophthalmology, or optometry treatments, which are not typically used for diagnostic purposes, that would pose unique accessibility challenges? What modified features would make these tables or chairs accessible? What features would enhance patient stability and facilitate correct positioning?

Question 3. What types of lifts are the safest, most efficient, and most cost effective in transferring patients with disabilities in different medical or dental settings? Should the use of lifts or staff to lift patients be considered a substitute for providing independent access to medical equipment?

Question 4. If a hospital or medical provider uses staff to lift patients onto and off of medical equipment and furniture, should it be excused from the requirement of having lifts in any or all situations? What types of training programs are available to provide information to staff on lifting and transferring patients with disabilities? Are there any particular situations where lifting by staff should not be allowed?

Question 5. What features, such as low bed heights, can best enhance the accessibility of hospital beds and gurneys? Are these features available on products currently available?

Question 6. What technologies are currently available to increase the accessibility of infusion pumps? What types of infusion pumps are partially or fully operated by patients in the normal course of treatment?

Question 7. What are the greatest difficulties facing individuals with disabilities in accessing rehabilitative and exercise equipment and furniture in a therapeutic setting? What equipment and furniture most effectively permits accessibility for different types of rehabilitative needs? Can different types of equipment meet different access needs of, for example, people with low-vision who need access to visual displays on equipment? Are there differences between exercise equipment in therapeutic settings and exercise equipment in non-therapeutic settings (e.g., gym or fitness center)? What exercise equipment or machines are available to meet the needs of individuals with mobility impairments?

Question 8. What types of ancillary equipment are most effective in different types of medical or dental examination or treatment settings?

Question 9. Is there a need for separate standards for bariatric medical equipment and furniture in the Department´s equipment and furniture regulation? If so, what equipment and furniture are necessary to address the needs of patients with disabilities who are obese?

x. Scoping and Triggering Events for Medical Equipment and Furniture
If the Department proposes a rule recommending regulations requiring accessible medical equipment and furniture, it should provide guidance on the appropriate amount of different types of medical equipment and furniture that must be accessible. In making this determination, the Department might consider the size of a medical practice or the patient population and other factors. For example, in a doctor´s office with two exam rooms, one accessible examination table might be a reasonable number of accessible examination tables. However, in a hospital with multiple medical departments, a reasonable number might include at least one accessible examination table in each department. Radiologic and other diagnostic equipment is highly specialized and a reasonable number of accessible diagnostic equipment in a radiology department might be one of each type of diagnostic equipment.

Question 10. What are the key criteria for scoping in different types of medical settings? What are appropriate scoping requirements for each of the types of medical equipment and furniture discussed above?

Question 11. How could medical providers time replacement or modification of equipment and furniture to ensure that individuals with disabilities receive equal access to healthcare without undue delay? What types of triggering events are appropriate for different types of medical equipment and furniture? Should the Department require the purchase rather than the replacement of some accessible equipment and furniture at a certain point? Should the replacement of inaccessible medical equipment or furniture be triggered only by the end of the useful life of the equipment or furniture?

B. Exercise equipment and furniture

Question 12. What types of accessible exercise equipment and furniture are available on the commercial market? What types of equipment and furniture are already accessible to individuals with disabilities? Is independently operable equipment and furniture available for individuals who are blind or who have low vision, or who have manual dexterity issues.

Question 13. Should the Department require covered entities to provide accessible exercise equipment and furniture ? How much of each type of equipment and furniture should be provided? Should the requirements for accessible equipment and furniture be the same for small and large exercise facilities, and if not, how should they differ?

C. Accessible golf cars

Question 14. What is the most effective means of addressing the needs of golfers with mobility disabilities? Are golf cars currently available that are readily adaptable for the addition of hand controls and swivel seats? If so, are those cars suitable for driving on greens? To what extent are accessible golf cars of all types stable, lightweight, and moderately priced?

Question 15. What are appropriate scoping requirements for accessible golf cars? Should the criteria used to determine scoping stem from factors including the number of golf course patrons, the number of golfing holes (e.g. nine, 18, or 27) at the facility, the number of inaccessible golf cars in use, or other criteria? Should each 18-hole course be required to provide a certain number of accessible golf cars?

D. Beds in accessible guest rooms and sleeping rooms

Question 16. Should the Department develop a general standard that specifies requirements for beds wherever accessible sleeping accommodations are required? What are appropriate bed heights to ensure accessibility by individuals with mobility disabilities and should there be requirements for mattresses to ensure that the height of the mattress, even when compressed by the weight of a person sitting or laying down on it, remains within a certain range? Are there existing standards that the Department should look to for developing standards for beds in accessible rooms? What is the optimal clearance needed under a bed to accommodate a mechanical lift? Should any such requirements apply to all accessible guestrooms or sleeping rooms or only to a percentage of them? What time line should the Department establish for requiring accessible beds in accessible guest rooms and sleeping rooms and should such a time line be phased in?

E. Beds in nursing homes and other care facilities

Question 17. Should the standards be different for adjustable beds, such as hospital beds, and for fixed height beds? Should the Department treat beds in nursing homes in the same manner as beds in hospitals? Should the Department treat beds in nursing homes or hospitals in the same manner as it treats beds in places of lodging? Should all accessible rooms have adjustable beds?

F. Electronic and information technology

The Department believes that it is important for individuals with disabilities to have an equal opportunity to use electronic and information technology (EIT) equipment and furniture, such as kiosks, interactive transaction machines (ITMs), point-of-sale (POS) devices, and automated teller machines (ATMs). Individuals with disabilities who engage in financial or other transactions should be able to do so independently and not have to provide third parties with private financial information, such as a personal identification number (PIN). Equipment and furniture are covered for both physical access and effective communication.

Among the available equipment and furniture that use EIT are kiosks, which are interactive computer terminals that provide a wide range of services, including information sharing, ticketing, airline check-in, Internet access, movie ticket sales and DVD rentals, security screening, bill paying, and photo developing. ITMs include POS devices, such as credit card payment terminals, retail store self-checkout stations, machines used for ordering food at quick service restaurants, and gas station pay-at-the-pump systems. The number of POS machines used by businesses and state and local programs and activities (such as at student unions at state colleges and universities) nationwide continues to increase, as does the range of transactions handled by these machines. With the advent of touch screen technology, customers are now required to enter data using a flat screen while reading changing visual information and instructions. Persons who cannot see the flat screen must rely on other people to input their information, including their personal identification numbers (PINs). At least one state (California) already requires all check-out locations with a flat screen POS device to have a permanently attached tactile keypad that is usable by individuals with visual disabilities. Cal. Fin. Code 13082 (West 2006). While some POS devices are mounted at a height that fits within current reach range guidelines, the Department is aware that the fixed upward orientation of some of these devices can impede their accessibility by making it difficult for a person with a mobility disability to view the screen, enter a PIN, or sign an authorization.

The Department´s preamble to its 1991 regulations explained that, “[g]iven that ¤ 36.304´s focus is on the removal of physical barriers, the Department believes that the obligation to provide communications equipment and devices . . . is more appropriately determined by the requirements for auxiliary aids and services under ¤36.303.” 56 FR 35544, 35568. The 1991 Standards contained requirements for physical accessibility for ATMs and also required that “[i]nstructions and all information for use shall be made accessible to and independently usable by persons with vision impairments.” 28 CFR pt. 36, app A, section 4.34.5. The Department has traditionally taken the position that the communication-related elements of ATMs are auxiliary aids and services, and are not physical elements. On March 22, 2010, the Access Board published an ANPRM seeking public comment on its plans to amend the 2004 ADA/ABA Accessibility Guidelines to include technical guidelines for self-service machines used for ticketing, check-in or check-out, seat selection, boarding passes, or ordering food in restaurants and cafeterias. See 75 FR 13457. In the ANPRM, the Access Board noted the proliferation of inaccessible POS machines, kiosks, and other self-service machines and referenced ADA litigation against various public accommodations over the past ten years that has resulted in numerous settlement agreements and structured negotiations requiring the installation of tactile POS devices.

Question 18. What are the challenges posed by the inaccessibility of EIT, including EIT kiosks, POS devices, and ITMs? Are there issues regarding other uses of EIT that the Department should consider adopting to ensure that EIT equipment is accessible?

i. EIT for effective communication in accessible rooms
The Department´s title III regulation, 28 CFR 36.303(d)(1) requires places of public accommodation that provide customers, patients, or clients the opportunity to make outgoing telephone calls on more than an incidental convenience basis to make TTYs available for the use of customers, patients, or clients who have communication disabilities. It has been suggested that the Department should expand the coverage of this section to require covered entities to provide recognize that there are a wide range of devices now used as communication aids by individuals with disabilities. Therefore, the Department seeks comments regarding the incorporation of EIT into this requirement as it applies to accessible sleeping rooms in facilities such as hospitals, nursing homes, hotels, or other places of lodging to permit effective communication by individuals with disabilities, including those who are deaf or hard of hearing.

New technologies have emerged that permit the use of EIT for effective communication. As telecommunication technologies are developing, persons with disabilities are transitioning from analog or legacy devices to digital telecommunication devices. Among these devices are video phones (including web cam), text messaging pagers and computers, and captioned telephones. Video relay services (VRS) permit individuals who use sign language for communication to use a video remote interpreting service (VRI). The relay services are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission. Text communications can be divided into two types: real time, and non-real time. Real-time text communications refer to those that are sent and received on a character-by-character basis; the characters are sent immediately once typed and also displayed immediately to the receiving person. Non-real time communications rely on messaging capabilities where users “type-enter-wait-read-respond-reply”—e.g., short messages service (SMS) texts, multimedia messaging service (MMS), instant messaging (IM), text chat, and email.

Question 19. What types of EIT would permit individuals with communication disabilities to most effectively communicate from an accessible hospital room, nursing home facility, guest or sleeping room? Should the Department regulate effective communication from such facilities? What are the costs associated with various types of EIT in such settings?

ii. Scoping and triggering events for EIT equipment
The Department is considering possible criteria for establishing scoping and triggering events for EIT devices and for particular features of such devices, such as tactile controls or voice output. Such criteria might include the total number of EIT devices in a certain facility.

Question 20. What are appropriate scoping criteria for the availability of accessible EIT and triggering events for the replacement or refurbishing of EIT devices, including kiosks, ITMs and ATMs, to ensure accessibility?

G. Other types of equipment and furniture

Different types of equipment and furniture can pose challenging accessibility problems or can serve as remedies to those problems. The Department welcomes public input on other types of equipment and furniture that warrant attention. For example, the Department is aware that equipment and furniture exists that may provide ready access for individuals with disabilities, including pool chairs that permit individuals who use wheelchairs to enter a pool with a sloped entrance without submerging their personal wheelchair and shower chairs for accessible hotel rooms with roll-in showers. The Department has learned that access to computer terminals in public libraries, which allow members of the public to access the Internet, often lack accessibility features (such as screen readers) and are in inaccessible locations. Another concern is access to television in hotels, hospitals, nursing homes, and other care facilities when certain television sets do not provide a way for consumers to turn closed captions on and off.

Question 21. Are there other types of equipment or furniture that impede accessibility that should be specifically addressed in the Department´s regulation? What types of accessible equipment or furniture would effectively address any such concerns? What scoping would adequately address the impediments to accessibility and what triggering event would be appropriate for each type of other equipment or furniture? Are there particularly helpful types of equipment or furniture that are not generally available to the public that may assist individuals with disabilities, such as pool or shower chairs?

VI. Regulatory Process Matters (SBREFA, Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Orders, Benefits and Costs

Question 22. Do commenters have information available that can aid the Department in identifying existing accessible equipment and furniture? What are the costs of accessible equipment and furniture and how do these costs differ from the costs of inaccessible equipment and furniture? What are the normal replacement schedules for each of the types of equipment and furniture discussed in this ANPRM or other types proposed for coverage? What are the costs and benefits of different scoping requirements for different types of equipment and furniture? What are reasonable less costly or burdensome regulatory alternatives that would still achieve the objectives of the proposed rules? What are the costs and benefits, both quantitatively and qualitatively, of providing individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to access health care, recreational facilities, exercise equipment, furniture in hotels, nursing homes, and hospitals, and electronic information and transactions? The Department seeks specific cost information, including information on the costs and benefits, as well as anecdotal evidence of the costs and benefits of accessible equipment and furniture.

A. Impact on small entities

Question 23. The Department seeks input regarding the impact the measures being contemplated by the Department with regard to accessible equipment and furniture will have on small entities if adopted by the Department. The Department encourages you to include any cost data on the potential economic impact on small entities with your response.

Question 24. Are there alternatives that the Department can adopt, which were not previously discussed, that will alleviate the burden on small entities? Should there be different compliance requirements or timetables for small entities that take into account the resources available to small entities or should the Department adopt an exemption for certain or all small entities from coverage of the rule, in whole or in part. Please provide as much detail as possible in your response.

2 thoughts on “Share Your Thoughts on Proposed ADA Changes”

admin says:

12/23/2010 at 1:37 pm

Following are the questions that the DOJ is seeking answers to from the public, in each of the issue areas:
I. Accessibility of Web Information
II. Movie Captioning and Video Description
III. Accessibility of Next Generation 9-1-1
IV. Equipment and Furniture

I. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities and Public Accommodations
ref: http://www.ada.gov/anprm2010/web%20anprm_2010.htm

Question 1. Should the Department adopt the WCAG 2.0´s “Level AA Success Criteria” as its standard for website accessibility for entities covered by titles II and III of the ADA? Is there any reason why the Department should consider adopting another success criteria level of the WCAG 2.0? Please explain your answer.

Question 2. Should the Department adopt the section 508 standards instead of the WCAG guidelines as its standard for website accessibility under titles II and III of the ADA? Is there a difference in compliance burdens and costs between the two standards? Please explain your answer.

Question 3. How should the Department address the ongoing changes to WCAG and section 508 standards? Should covered entities be given the option to comply with the latest requirements?

Question 4. Given the ever-changing nature of many websites, should the Department adopt performance standards instead of any set of specific technical standards for website accessibility? Please explain your support for or opposition to this option. If you support performance standards, please provide specific information on how such performance standards should be framed.

II. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability; Movie Captioning and Video Description
http://www.ada.gov/anprm2010/movie_captions_anprm_2010.htm

A. Coverage issues:

Question 1. The Department is considering proposing a regulation that contains a sliding compliance schedule whereby the percentage of movie screens offering closed captioning and video description increases on a yearly basis, beginning with 10 percent in the first year any such rule becomes effective, until the 50 percent mark is reached in the fifth year. Please indicate whether this approach achieves the proper balance between providing accessibility for individuals with sensory disabilities and giving movie theaters and owners sufficient time to acquire the technology and equipment necessary to exhibit movies with closed captioning and video descriptions. Also, if you believe that a different compliance schedule should be implemented, please provide a detailed response explaining how this should be accomplished and the reasons in support. Should a different compliance schedule be implemented for small businesses? If so, why? What should that schedule require?

Question 2. The Department is considering proposing regulatory language requiring movie theater owners and operators to exhibit movies with closed captions and movies with video description so that, after any sliding compliance scale has been achieved by the final year (e.g., at year 5), all showings of at least one-half of the movie screens at the theater will offer captioning and video description. We seek comment on the most appropriate basis for calculating the number of movies that will be captioned and video described: should this be the number of screens located in a particular theater facility, the number of screens owned by a particular movie theater company, the number of different movies being screened in a particular theater facility, or some combination thereof? Should a different basis be used for small business owners? If so, why? What basis should be used? Please include an explanation of the advantages and disadvantages of each option and the reasons a particular option is preferred over another.

Question 3. If the number of screens located in a particular theater facility is the preferred option, please explain whether the fact that some theaters show the same movie on multiple screens poses any concerns with regard to the number of movies being screened with captions and video descriptions, and if so, what they are and whether there are any ways to address those concerns. Does this option pose particular concerns to small businesses? If so, what are they? Please indicate whether the Department should include specific language in the regulation that states that the basis for calculating the number or percentage is the number of captioned and video described movies the theater receives from the movie producers in order to make clear that the owner has no independent obligation to caption or describe movies.

Question 4. If the number of screens owned by a particular movie theater company is the preferred option, please explain whether there are any concerns about the geographic distribution of movies being screened with captions and video descriptions, and if so, what they are and whether there are any ways to address those concerns. Does this option pose particular concerns to small businesses? If so, what are they? Please indicate whether the Department should include specific language in the regulation that states that the basis for calculating the number or percentage of movies is the number of captioned and video described movies the theater receives from the movie producers in order to make clear that the owner has no independent obligation to caption or describe movies.

Question 5. If the number of movies being screened in a particular movie theater facility is the preferred option, please indicate whether the Department should include specific language in the regulation that states that the basis for calculating the number or percentage of movies is the number of captioned and video described movies the theater receives from the movie producers in order to make clear that the owner has no independent obligation to caption or describe movies. Does this option pose particular concerns to small businesses? If so, what are they?

Question 6. If some combination of these three methods is the preferred option, please explain that option and how it would be implemented. Should a different combination or percentage be used for small business owners? If so, why? What combination or percentage should be used for small business owners? Please indicate whether the Department should include specific language in the regulation that states that the basis for calculating the number or percentage is the number of captioned and video described movies the theater receives from the movie producers in order to make clear that the owner has no independent obligation to caption or describe movies.

Question 7. Should any such regulation require that the same number or percentage of movies with video description be exhibited as required for movies with captioning or should a different number or percentage be imposed? If the latter, what would be the justification for distinguishing between these forms of access? Should small businesses use a different ratio or percentage of video described movies or should they also be required to exhibit the same number or percentage of video described and captioned movies as other entities?

Question 8. Should the Department adopt a requirement that movie theater owners and operators exhibit captioned and video described movies beginning on the day of their release? If not, why not (e.g., could such a requirement impose additional burdens and if so, what are they)? Should a different requirement be imposed on small business owners? If so, why? What should that requirement be?

Question 9. While the Department is not considering requiring the use of open captioning, should movie theater owners and operators be given the discretion to exhibit movies with open captioning, should they so desire, as an alternate method of achieving compliance with the captioning requirements of any Department regulation? If theaters opt to use open captioning, should they be required to exhibit movies with such captioning at peak times so that people with disabilities can have the option of going to the movies on days and times when other moviegoers see movies?

B. Digital Cinema:

Question 10. How many movie theater owners or operators have converted, in whole or in part, to digital cinema? How many have concrete plans to convert 25 percent of their theaters in the next five years? Next ten years? How many have concrete plans to convert 50 percent of their theaters in the next five years? Next ten years? How many have concrete plans to convert 75 percent of their theaters in the next five years? Next ten years? What are the estimates for the cost for a movie theater to convert a movie auditorium to digital cinema? Are these costs different for small businesses? Have small businesses entered into any cost-sharing agreements or other financing arrangements to assist in such a conversion?

Question 11. Have specific protocols or standards been developed for captioning and video description for digital cinema and, if so, what are they?

C. Equipment and technology questions:

Question 12. Do the closed captioning and video description technologies currently available require the use of a digital sound system or digital cinema? Have technologies been developed that do not require the use of either a digital sound system or digital cinema in order to display open or closed captions and offer video description? If any new technologies have been developed, please explain how they work and what, if any, additional costs are associated with the purchase or use of such technologies? Are there technologies in development that will not require the use of a digital sound system or digital cinema in order to display captions or video description? If so, what are they and when are they expected to be available for use by movie theater owners and operators? Please explain what, if any, additional costs are associated with the purchase or use of such technologies.

Question 13. Is the existing closed captioning and video description equipment in use for digital sound systems compatible, or able to be integrated, with digital cinema systems? If not, why not? Are there additional costs associated with using this equipment with digital cinema systems? If so, please provide details. Are the costs different for small businesses? If so, why? What are they?

Question 14. With regard to closed captioning systems, is the ability to read the captions equally good throughout the movie theater or are there certain seats in the theater that provide an enhanced level of readability or line of sight both to the screen and the adjustable panel affixed at or near the patron´s seat? If certain seats enable individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing to view movies more effectively, which seats are they and why are they better (e.g., the image is better, there are fewer obstructions, there is less need to continually adjust the panel, etc.)? Should movie theater owners and operators be required to hold such seats for individuals with disabilities who wish to use the theater´s closed captioning system? Since movie theater seating is usually first-come, first-serve, is there an effective system that movie theaters would be able to implement to hold back releasing such seats? Should movie theater owners and operators be allowed to release such seats if they are not requested within a certain amount of time before the start of the movie? Should movie theater owners and operators be allowed to release such seats to the general movie going audience once all of the other seats in the theater have been sold out? Are there alternatives for seating that minimize the cost but still provide patrons who are deaf or hard of hearing with effective and efficient readability of the captions and lines of sight to the screen?

Question 15. Are there other factors that the Department should include with regard to the display of captions or the use of video description? What is the cost of purchasing/incorporating video description equipment per screen/theater? Are the costs different for small businesses? If so, why? What are they?

Question 16. Has any specific equipment been developed or is there equipment in development for use with digital cinema that would be necessary to exhibit closed captioned movies or movies with video description? If so, is that equipment included in the general cost of the conversion to digital cinema or is an additional fee imposed? If an additional fee is imposed, please provide details. Are the costs different for small businesses? If so, why? What are they?

Question 17. Are there any other technical requirements that the Department should consider for inclusion in any regulation? If so, please provide details.

D. Notice Requirements:

Question 18. Should the Department include a requirement that movie theater owners and operators establish a system for notifying individuals with disabilities in advance of movie screenings as to which movies and shows at its theaters provide captioning and video description? If so, how should such a requirement be structured? For example, should the Department require movie theater owners and operators to include, in their usual movie postings in the newspaper, on telephone recordings, and on the Internet, a notation or some other information that a movie is captioned, the type of captioning provided, or that the movie has video description? Should the Department require movie theater owners and operators to establish a procedure or method for directing individuals with sensory disabilities to where in each movie theater they should go to obtain any necessary captioning and video description equipment? Should movie theater owners and operators have the discretion to determine what notification procedure or method is most appropriate or should the Department specify how and where individuals with disabilities can obtain such equipment at each theater? What are the costs for these types of notifications? Are there any alternative types of notifications possible? Are these costs different for small businesses? If so, why? What are they?

E. Training:

Question 19. Should the Department consider including a training requirement for movie theater personnel? Should the Department require that movie theater owners and operators ensure that at least one individual working any shift at which a captioned or video described movie is being screened be trained on how any captioning and video description equipment operates and how to convey that information quickly and effectively to an individual with a disability who seeks help in using that equipment? What re the costs and burdens to implementing such a training requirement? Are these costs different for small businesses? If so, why? What are they? Would written and recorded explanations of how the equipment works be a better alternative?

F. Cost and benefits of movie captioning and video description regulations.

Question 20. The Small Business Administration size standard for small movie theatres is $7 million dollars in annual gross revenues. Does the public have estimates of the numbers of small entities that may be impacted by future regulation governed by this ANPRM? How many small entities presently provide movie captioning or video description? How many small entities already have, or have plans to convert to, digital cinema? How many small entities presently have, or plan to convert to, digital sound systems? How much would it cost each small entity to provide movie captioning and video description technology using digital sound? How much would it cost each small entity to provide movie captioning or video description if the entity converted to digital cinema?

Question 21. Currently, what are the general costs per movie theater owner or operator to display movies with closed captioning? How many small entities offer this feature? What are the general costs to small entities to display movies with open or closed captioning? For all entities, is that figure per auditorium, per facility, or per company? Do these costs change for showing IMAX or 3D films with captions? Are there any cost-sharing or cost-allocation agreements that help mitigate these costs for movie theater owners or operators? Is most or all of this expense a one-time fee? If not, please explain.

Question 22. Currently, what are the general costs per movie theater owner or operator to display movies with video description? How many small entities offer this feature? What are the general costs to small entities to display movies with video description? For all entities, is that figure per auditorium, per facility, or per company? Are there any cost-sharing or cost-allocation agreements that help mitigate these costs for movie theater owners or operators? Is most or all of this expense a one-time fee? If not, please explain.

Question 23. Currently, what are the general costs to convert to digital cinema? Are the costs different for small entities? If so, why? What are the costs for small entities? Is that figure per auditorium, per facility, or per company? Are there cost-sharing or cost-allocation agreements that help mitigate these costs for movie theater owners or operators?

Question 24. What impact will the measures being contemplated by the Department requiring captioning and video description of movies have on small entities? Please provide information on: (a) capital costs for equipment needed to meet the regulatory requirements; (b) costs of modifying existing processes and procedures; (c) any effects to sales and profits, including increases in business due to tapping markets not previously reached; and (d) changes to market competition as a result of the proposed rule.

Question 25. Should any category or type of movie theater be exempted from any regulation requiring captioning or video description? For example, the Department now considers it likely that drive-in theaters will not be subject to this rule because the Department is not aware of any currently available technology that would enable closed captioning or video description of movies shown in drive-in theaters. Are there other types of movie facilities that should be exempted and why?

Question 26. If an exemption is provided, how should such an exemption be structured? Should it be based on the size of the company? To determine size, should the Department consider (a) using the Small Business Size Standard of $7 million dollars in annual gross revenue so that movie theater owners who fall within those parameters should be exempt?; (b) using factors such as whether the movie theater owner is an independent movie house (not owned, leased, or operated by, a movie theater chain), or small art film house in order to be exempt?; or (c) using some other formula or factors to determine if a movie theater owner should be exempt? Should the Department consider the establishment of different compliance requirements or timetables for compliance for small entities, independent movie houses, or small art film houses to take into account the resources available to small entities? What are other alternatives for small businesses, independent move houses, or small art film houses that would minimize the cost of future regulations?

============

III. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local Government Services; Accessibility of Next Generation 9-1-1
ref: http://www.ada.gov/anprm2010/nextgen_9-1-1%20anprm_2010.htm

A. Direct, equal access to NG 9-1-1

Question 1. What modes of communication (e.g., voice, text, video, or data) do (or will) individuals with disabilities use to make direct calls to a PSAP, and from what types of devices would the calls be made?

i. Text communications
IP allows several formats of text communications, divided into two types: real-time, and non-real-time. Real-time text communications refer to those that are sent and received on a character-by-character basis; the characters are sent immediately once typed and also displayed immediately to the receiving person. In an emergency, sending text communications to a PSAP in real-time may save valuable time that is needed to effectively respond to the emergency. Non-real-time communications rely on messaging capabilities where users “type-enter-wait-read-respond-reply”—e.g., short messages service (SMS) texts, multimedia messaging service (MMS), instant messaging (IM), text chat, and email. When this type of messaging is used, messages can overlap one another. In an emergency, this could result in the caller or PSAP personnel responding to each other out of the order in which their communications were sent, creating some confusion or delay. The agenda for the FCC´s National Broadband Plan states that this year, the FCC will open a proceeding to identify a reliable, interoperable, real-time text standard to enable consumers to communicate in a digital and IP-based environment. Broadband Action Agenda, http://www.broadband.gov/plan/national-broadband-plan-action-agenda.pdf at 4.10 (last visited July 12, 2010).[10]

Currently, telephone 9-1-1 technologies support TTYs, which provide text communications in an analog environment. Using IP-based devices, PSAPs would require a text gateway in order to converse with individuals using analog-based devices.

Question 2. Should the Department issue a requirement for NG 9-1-1 technologies to support text communications along with analog-based TTY communications? If so, should NG 9-1-1 text technologies be backward compatible with analog-based TTYs or should the two communication methods be available side by side?

Question 3. Which, if any, of the following text options should the Department designate as essential accessibility features of NG 9-1-1 to be incorporated into the initial deployment of an NG 9-1-1 system to assure equal access to emergency call-taking centers for individuals with disabilities?

Real-time text
Short message service (SMS)
Instant messaging (IM)
Email
Analog gateway
Other modes of text communicatio
The Department recognizes that all of these text options will benefit not only individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, but also individuals with other disabilities who require an alternative mean to making a voiced 9-1-1 call due to their disabilities. . The Department recognizes that a State or local government´s NG 9-1-1 system may eventually provide all of these options in the future. However, the Department is interested in learning how each of the options would benefit individuals with disabilities in order to determine whether they should be designated as “essential” to providing access to NG 9-1-1.

Individuals with disabilities are increasingly using smart phones since they are currently the only accessible mobile devices available for text messaging (e.g., email, SMS, or IM). Until NG 9-1-1 services are implemented, PSAPs will not be able to receive text messages sent directly to 9-1-1 from these devices.

Question 4. For this period, should a PSAP develop and implement an interim plan to receive text messages directly or via a third party? How should a PSAP develop an interim plan? What solutions should PSAPs consider as part of their interim plan?

Question 5. Are there significant issues related to the interoperability of messages sent by text that need to be addressed in any final regulation?

ii. Video communications

A technology that has emerged since publication of the original title II rule allows individuals who use sign language to communicate by video. An individual who communicates by American Sign Language (ASL) may use a videophone or other video device (e.g., a web cam connector to a computer) to directly communicate in sign language with either another videophone user or a voice telephone user. In the latter case, videophones can be used to make TRS calls (Video Relay Service) or to use remote sign language interpreting services (video remote interpreting or VRI) when an in-person interpreter is not available. VRI is generally a fee-based service. NG 9-1-1 technologies will allow video phone users to make direct video calls to a PSAP and allow the callers and the emergency personnel to engage in virtual face-to-face communication.

The Department is seeking comments on what steps a PSAP, in providing video services, should take to ensure effective communication with a 9-1-1 caller who uses sign language for communication. One possible method of communication for handling a direct video-to-video call between the individual with disabilities and the PSAP would be through the use of VRI. Upon receipt of a request for sign language services, the PSAP would make a call to a VRI service center and connect the interpreter so that the interpreter appears on both the caller´s and PSAP´s video phone screens. The call would then become a 3-way video call between the caller and PSAP, both using the interpreter. The PSAP would see both the interpreter and caller on the PSAP´s screen, and both the interpreter and the caller would see each other on their screens. Using this method, the PSAP would have the ability to “conference in” (virtually instantaneously) a qualified interpreter (in-house or in a remote facility)

Question 6. In implementing NG 9-1-1, should the Department amend its title II regulation to require each PSAP to provide VRI service? If so, should the Department regulate how to provide such service?

With NG 9-1-1, call routing allows the sharing of networks to route calls for multiple numbers (e.g., 2-1-1, 3-1-1, 8-1-1, suicide hotline, poison control). Also, NG 9-1-1 enables call access, transfer, and backup between and among 9-1-1 call-taking centers and between these centers and specialized emergency services.

Question 7. Should a center also be allowed to transfer a caller´s call to a particular center where call takers are trained and fluent in oral/sign language interpreting services or where call takers are trained in working with individuals with speech impairments? If so, should a final rule address call routing policies that restrict or prohibit such transfers?

The title II rule requires that when an oral or sign language interpreter is necessary for effective communication, the interpreter must be “qualified.” The rule has defined “qualified interpreter” as “an interpreter who is able to interpret effectively, accurately, and impartially both receptively and expressively, using any necessary specialized vocabulary.” 28 CFR 35.104. Although the definition does not require “certified” interpreters, it does require interpreters with the necessary skills to interpret accurately in the particular context.

Question 8. In the context of NG 9-1-1, the Department is asking for public views on whether PSAPs should use only those interpreters who are specifically trained to handle emergency calls in using interpreting services on-site or via VRI.

Question 9. The Department also seeks comments on any other methods for ensuring equal access to NG 9-1-1 for individuals with disabilities. Should the Department issue standards for other methods to provide accessible NG 9-1-1 services? Should the Department require specialized training to ensure that these services can effectively respond to the needs of people with disabilities in an NG 9-1-1 environment?

B. Performance standards as opposed to technical standards
The Department is aware of ongoing efforts by both the National Emergency Number Association (NENA) and the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials International to develop technical standards for guidance to service providers, equipment manufacturers, and industry-related standard setting bodies. The Department has used the performance standard of “direct access” for PSAPs in enforcing title II.

Consistent with the Department´s existing approach, the Department is considering the use of performance standards, as opposed to technical standards, as new title II requirements for access to NG 9-1-1. Two primary considerations support this approach. First, in light of evolving 9-1-1 technologies, it may not be feasible to have identical scoping and technical specifications nationwide to ensure disability access to NG 9-1-1. Second, performance standards would contain flexibility to allow operational standards, protocols, and best practices to be adopted and implemented to meet unique State and local circumstances and needs.

Question 10. Should any regulatory provision on NG 9-1-1 requirements under title II be performance-based, or should a final rule provide technical specifications for call-taking technology and equipment? Please provide as much detail as possible in support of your view.

Question 11. What are the technical issues that the Department should address in developing minimum standards?

NENA, a leading professional, nonprofit organization on 9-1-1 services, has actively worked with public safety, industry, and government groups, to develop technical and operational standards for NG 9-1-1 systems and services.

Question 12. Should the Department adopt any of NENA´s standards as the minimum standards for direct access to NG 9-1-1 services for individuals with disabilities?

Speech-to-speech service (STS) is a form of TRS that involves the use of relay operators for people with speech disabilities who have difficulty being understood on the phone. STS relay operators are trained individuals familiar with many different speech patterns and language recognition skills. The relay operator makes the call and repeats the words exactly. Individuals using STS include those with cerebral palsy, Parkinson´s disease, a laryngectomy, ALS, stuttering, muscular dystrophy, stroke, and other conditions affecting clarity of speech.[11]

Question 13. Should the title II regulation be amended to require that PSAPs directly receive calls from individuals with speech disabilities?

=========

IV. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by State and Local Governments and Places of Public Accommodation; Equipment and Furniture
ref: http://www.ada.gov/anprm2010/equipment_anprm_2010.htm

Medical Equipment Questions

To assist the Department to develop appropriate requirements for medical equipment and furniture, we are seeking information that will inform the rulemaking process. With respect to medical equipment, for each type of medical equipment it would be helpful to know details about the accessible features and if particular types of equipment with accessible features are currently available. The Department is seeking the following information:

Question 1. The Department is considering adopting the Access Board´s standards for medical diagnostic equipment. What other types of medical equipment and furniture should the Department include in its proposed regulation? What modifications to other types of medical equipment and furniture, including equipment and furniture used for treatment or other non-diagnostic purposes, such as hospital beds, should be included in the Department´s proposed regulations?

Question 2. The Access Board is expected to promulgate design standards for medical and dental diagnostic tables and chairs. Are there tables or chairs used for medical, dental, ophthalmology, or optometry treatments, which are not typically used for diagnostic purposes, that would pose unique accessibility challenges? What modified features would make these tables or chairs accessible? What features would enhance patient stability and facilitate correct positioning?

Question 3. What types of lifts are the safest, most efficient, and most cost effective in transferring patients with disabilities in different medical or dental settings? Should the use of lifts or staff to lift patients be considered a substitute for providing independent access to medical equipment?

Question 4. If a hospital or medical provider uses staff to lift patients onto and off of medical equipment and furniture, should it be excused from the requirement of having lifts in any or all situations? What types of training programs are available to provide information to staff on lifting and transferring patients with disabilities? Are there any particular situations where lifting by staff should not be allowed?

Question 5. What features, such as low bed heights, can best enhance the accessibility of hospital beds and gurneys? Are these features available on products currently available?

Question 6. What technologies are currently available to increase the accessibility of infusion pumps? What types of infusion pumps are partially or fully operated by patients in the normal course of treatment?

Question 7. What are the greatest difficulties facing individuals with disabilities in accessing rehabilitative and exercise equipment and furniture in a therapeutic setting? What equipment and furniture most effectively permits accessibility for different types of rehabilitative needs? Can different types of equipment meet different access needs of, for example, people with low-vision who need access to visual displays on equipment? Are there differences between exercise equipment in therapeutic settings and exercise equipment in non-therapeutic settings (e.g., gym or fitness center)? What exercise equipment or machines are available to meet the needs of individuals with mobility impairments?

Question 8. What types of ancillary equipment are most effective in different types of medical or dental examination or treatment settings?

Question 9. Is there a need for separate standards for bariatric medical equipment and furniture in the Department´s equipment and furniture regulation? If so, what equipment and furniture are necessary to address the needs of patients with disabilities who are obese?

x. Scoping and Triggering Events for Medical Equipment and Furniture
If the Department proposes a rule recommending regulations requiring accessible medical equipment and furniture, it should provide guidance on the appropriate amount of different types of medical equipment and furniture that must be accessible. In making this determination, the Department might consider the size of a medical practice or the patient population and other factors. For example, in a doctor´s office with two exam rooms, one accessible examination table might be a reasonable number of accessible examination tables. However, in a hospital with multiple medical departments, a reasonable number might include at least one accessible examination table in each department. Radiologic and other diagnostic equipment is highly specialized and a reasonable number of accessible diagnostic equipment in a radiology department might be one of each type of diagnostic equipment.

Question 10. What are the key criteria for scoping in different types of medical settings? What are appropriate scoping requirements for each of the types of medical equipment and furniture discussed above?

Question 11. How could medical providers time replacement or modification of equipment and furniture to ensure that individuals with disabilities receive equal access to healthcare without undue delay? What types of triggering events are appropriate for different types of medical equipment and furniture? Should the Department require the purchase rather than the replacement of some accessible equipment and furniture at a certain point? Should the replacement of inaccessible medical equipment or furniture be triggered only by the end of the useful life of the equipment or furniture?

B. Exercise equipment and furniture

Question 12. What types of accessible exercise equipment and furniture are available on the commercial market? What types of equipment and furniture are already accessible to individuals with disabilities? Is independently operable equipment and furniture available for individuals who are blind or who have low vision, or who have manual dexterity issues.

Question 13. Should the Department require covered entities to provide accessible exercise equipment and furniture ? How much of each type of equipment and furniture should be provided? Should the requirements for accessible equipment and furniture be the same for small and large exercise facilities, and if not, how should they differ?

C. Accessible golf cars

Question 14. What is the most effective means of addressing the needs of golfers with mobility disabilities? Are golf cars currently available that are readily adaptable for the addition of hand controls and swivel seats? If so, are those cars suitable for driving on greens? To what extent are accessible golf cars of all types stable, lightweight, and moderately priced?

Question 15. What are appropriate scoping requirements for accessible golf cars? Should the criteria used to determine scoping stem from factors including the number of golf course patrons, the number of golfing holes (e.g. nine, 18, or 27) at the facility, the number of inaccessible golf cars in use, or other criteria? Should each 18-hole course be required to provide a certain number of accessible golf cars?

D. Beds in accessible guest rooms and sleeping rooms

Question 16. Should the Department develop a general standard that specifies requirements for beds wherever accessible sleeping accommodations are required? What are appropriate bed heights to ensure accessibility by individuals with mobility disabilities and should there be requirements for mattresses to ensure that the height of the mattress, even when compressed by the weight of a person sitting or laying down on it, remains within a certain range? Are there existing standards that the Department should look to for developing standards for beds in accessible rooms? What is the optimal clearance needed under a bed to accommodate a mechanical lift? Should any such requirements apply to all accessible guestrooms or sleeping rooms or only to a percentage of them? What time line should the Department establish for requiring accessible beds in accessible guest rooms and sleeping rooms and should such a time line be phased in?

E. Beds in nursing homes and other care facilities

Question 17. Should the standards be different for adjustable beds, such as hospital beds, and for fixed height beds? Should the Department treat beds in nursing homes in the same manner as beds in hospitals? Should the Department treat beds in nursing homes or hospitals in the same manner as it treats beds in places of lodging? Should all accessible rooms have adjustable beds?

F. Electronic and information technology

The Department believes that it is important for individuals with disabilities to have an equal opportunity to use electronic and information technology (EIT) equipment and furniture, such as kiosks, interactive transaction machines (ITMs), point-of-sale (POS) devices, and automated teller machines (ATMs). Individuals with disabilities who engage in financial or other transactions should be able to do so independently and not have to provide third parties with private financial information, such as a personal identification number (PIN). Equipment and furniture are covered for both physical access and effective communication.

Among the available equipment and furniture that use EIT are kiosks, which are interactive computer terminals that provide a wide range of services, including information sharing, ticketing, airline check-in, Internet access, movie ticket sales and DVD rentals, security screening, bill paying, and photo developing. ITMs include POS devices, such as credit card payment terminals, retail store self-checkout stations, machines used for ordering food at quick service restaurants, and gas station pay-at-the-pump systems. The number of POS machines used by businesses and state and local programs and activities (such as at student unions at state colleges and universities) nationwide continues to increase, as does the range of transactions handled by these machines. With the advent of touch screen technology, customers are now required to enter data using a flat screen while reading changing visual information and instructions. Persons who cannot see the flat screen must rely on other people to input their information, including their personal identification numbers (PINs). At least one state (California) already requires all check-out locations with a flat screen POS device to have a permanently attached tactile keypad that is usable by individuals with visual disabilities. Cal. Fin. Code 13082 (West 2006). While some POS devices are mounted at a height that fits within current reach range guidelines, the Department is aware that the fixed upward orientation of some of these devices can impede their accessibility by making it difficult for a person with a mobility disability to view the screen, enter a PIN, or sign an authorization.

The Department´s preamble to its 1991 regulations explained that, “[g]iven that ¤ 36.304´s focus is on the removal of physical barriers, the Department believes that the obligation to provide communications equipment and devices . . . is more appropriately determined by the requirements for auxiliary aids and services under ¤36.303.” 56 FR 35544, 35568. The 1991 Standards contained requirements for physical accessibility for ATMs and also required that “[i]nstructions and all information for use shall be made accessible to and independently usable by persons with vision impairments.” 28 CFR pt. 36, app A, section 4.34.5. The Department has traditionally taken the position that the communication-related elements of ATMs are auxiliary aids and services, and are not physical elements. On March 22, 2010, the Access Board published an ANPRM seeking public comment on its plans to amend the 2004 ADA/ABA Accessibility Guidelines to include technical guidelines for self-service machines used for ticketing, check-in or check-out, seat selection, boarding passes, or ordering food in restaurants and cafeterias. See 75 FR 13457. In the ANPRM, the Access Board noted the proliferation of inaccessible POS machines, kiosks, and other self-service machines and referenced ADA litigation against various public accommodations over the past ten years that has resulted in numerous settlement agreements and structured negotiations requiring the installation of tactile POS devices.

Question 18. What are the challenges posed by the inaccessibility of EIT, including EIT kiosks, POS devices, and ITMs? Are there issues regarding other uses of EIT that the Department should consider adopting to ensure that EIT equipment is accessible?

i. EIT for effective communication in accessible rooms
The Department´s title III regulation, 28 CFR 36.303(d)(1) requires places of public accommodation that provide customers, patients, or clients the opportunity to make outgoing telephone calls on more than an incidental convenience basis to make TTYs available for the use of customers, patients, or clients who have communication disabilities. It has been suggested that the Department should expand the coverage of this section to require covered entities to provide recognize that there are a wide range of devices now used as communication aids by individuals with disabilities. Therefore, the Department seeks comments regarding the incorporation of EIT into this requirement as it applies to accessible sleeping rooms in facilities such as hospitals, nursing homes, hotels, or other places of lodging to permit effective communication by individuals with disabilities, including those who are deaf or hard of hearing.

New technologies have emerged that permit the use of EIT for effective communication. As telecommunication technologies are developing, persons with disabilities are transitioning from analog or legacy devices to digital telecommunication devices. Among these devices are video phones (including web cam), text messaging pagers and computers, and captioned telephones. Video relay services (VRS) permit individuals who use sign language for communication to use a video remote interpreting service (VRI). The relay services are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission. Text communications can be divided into two types: real time, and non-real time. Real-time text communications refer to those that are sent and received on a character-by-character basis; the characters are sent immediately once typed and also displayed immediately to the receiving person. Non-real time communications rely on messaging capabilities where users “type-enter-wait-read-respond-reply”—e.g., short messages service (SMS) texts, multimedia messaging service (MMS), instant messaging (IM), text chat, and email.

Question 19. What types of EIT would permit individuals with communication disabilities to most effectively communicate from an accessible hospital room, nursing home facility, guest or sleeping room? Should the Department regulate effective communication from such facilities? What are the costs associated with various types of EIT in such settings?

ii. Scoping and triggering events for EIT equipment
The Department is considering possible criteria for establishing scoping and triggering events for EIT devices and for particular features of such devices, such as tactile controls or voice output. Such criteria might include the total number of EIT devices in a certain facility.

Question 20. What are appropriate scoping criteria for the availability of accessible EIT and triggering events for the replacement or refurbishing of EIT devices, including kiosks, ITMs and ATMs, to ensure accessibility?

G. Other types of equipment and furniture

Different types of equipment and furniture can pose challenging accessibility problems or can serve as remedies to those problems. The Department welcomes public input on other types of equipment and furniture that warrant attention. For example, the Department is aware that equipment and furniture exists that may provide ready access for individuals with disabilities, including pool chairs that permit individuals who use wheelchairs to enter a pool with a sloped entrance without submerging their personal wheelchair and shower chairs for accessible hotel rooms with roll-in showers. The Department has learned that access to computer terminals in public libraries, which allow members of the public to access the Internet, often lack accessibility features (such as screen readers) and are in inaccessible locations. Another concern is access to television in hotels, hospitals, nursing homes, and other care facilities when certain television sets do not provide a way for consumers to turn closed captions on and off.

Question 21. Are there other types of equipment or furniture that impede accessibility that should be specifically addressed in the Department´s regulation? What types of accessible equipment or furniture would effectively address any such concerns? What scoping would adequately address the impediments to accessibility and what triggering event would be appropriate for each type of other equipment or furniture? Are there particularly helpful types of equipment or furniture that are not generally available to the public that may assist individuals with disabilities, such as pool or shower chairs?

VI. Regulatory Process Matters (SBREFA, Regulatory Flexibility Act, Executive Orders, Benefits and Costs

Question 22. Do commenters have information available that can aid the Department in identifying existing accessible equipment and furniture? What are the costs of accessible equipment and furniture and how do these costs differ from the costs of inaccessible equipment and furniture? What are the normal replacement schedules for each of the types of equipment and furniture discussed in this ANPRM or other types proposed for coverage? What are the costs and benefits of different scoping requirements for different types of equipment and furniture? What are reasonable less costly or burdensome regulatory alternatives that would still achieve the objectives of the proposed rules? What are the costs and benefits, both quantitatively and qualitatively, of providing individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to access health care, recreational facilities, exercise equipment, furniture in hotels, nursing homes, and hospitals, and electronic information and transactions? The Department seeks specific cost information, including information on the costs and benefits, as well as anecdotal evidence of the costs and benefits of accessible equipment and furniture.

A. Impact on small entities

Question 23. The Department seeks input regarding the impact the measures being contemplated by the Department with regard to accessible equipment and furniture will have on small entities if adopted by the Department. The Department encourages you to include any cost data on the potential economic impact on small entities with your response.

Question 24. Are there alternatives that the Department can adopt, which were not previously discussed, that will alleviate the burden on small entities? Should there be different compliance requirements or timetables for small entities that take into account the resources available to small entities or should the Department adopt an exemption for certain or all small entities from coverage of the rule, in whole or in part. Please provide as much detail as possible in your response.
Naomi says:

01/09/2011 at 8:32 am

How do i get to testify on Jan. 10? I would like to give public testimony with regards to the forced use by PG&E of “Smart Meters” across the U.S.. I live in Berkeley and would like to give testimony on the immediate health effects of smart meters which use a MICRO WAVES and other frequencies which have an effect on physical, mental health & well being. I’ve been living with the smart meter for months and my doctor just wrote a letter addressed to PG&E recommending they have an opt out for disabled individuals. Since the smart meters have been installed last June, my computer keeps crashing and I have to keep rebooting it. When I leave home and travel out of town where the smart meters are not yet installed, my computer works fine. I have immediate concerns for those using devices that may be adversely effected such as sleeping devices for apnea, etc..
naomi_lombardi@yahoo.com

Comments are closed.