This is being provided in a rough-draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings.
WENDY MARSHALL: Welcome, everybody. Thanks for coming.
We're really excited.
I'm Wendy Marshall. I'm an attorney at the Access Board.
And I have been with the Access Board for 10 years. I do a lot of things at the Access Board. I do privacy and ethics and contracts and personnel, all the things that you would think of a general counsel's office in a federal agency, but my main job actually is being a regulatory attorney.
I just have all these side hats.
And in my tenure, in the past 10 years with the Access Board, I have been the senior attorney on multiple regulations, including the medical accessibility for medical diagnostic equipment standards. I've helped with the revised 508 refresh. I've worked on the accessibility for EV charging stations, and also for the under the ADA for transportation vehicles for rail.
And I'll turn it over to Frances.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: Hi, I'm Frances Spiegel, also an attorney adviser at the Access Board. I've also been at the Access Board for almost 10 years.
Like Wendy, I also have many jobs including FOIA officer, and just general attorney in the Office of General Counsel.
But in terms of my regulatory work, I've worked on the revised 508 standard, public rights of way accessibility guidelines, and self service transaction machines most recently.
WENDY MARSHALL: And if you don't know, I know some people here do know who the Access Board is, but we are a micro agency, so we have a full-time staff right now of 23 people. So in the federal government world, that is really small.
We also are governed by our board of 25 individuals, 13 of whom are presidentially appointed members of the public, and then we also have 12 members that are from a whole bunch of different federal agencies, senior members that sit on our board from different federal agencies.
We also wanted to introduce Chris. He's to my right.
He's our general counsel.
CHRIS: I work for Wendy and Frances.
WENDY MARSHALL: He's here to take the hard questions.
The three of us make up the attorneys for the Access Board, so we get to do a lot of fun things on a daily basis.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: I would also like to introduce another Access Board luminary in the room, Howard, our former board member. Well, thank you all for being here and for choosing us in this awesome room, the bubble room.
We have to present this year because Wendy and I came to this symposium for the first time last year, and in the different sessions that we attended, we heard the Access Board mentioned several times, and not like with a lot of love and enthusiasm. What we heard was a little frustration more with the length of time it takes to issue regulations. So first of all, we don't disagree with that.
Like it does take a long time to issue regulations.
But we thought this could be an opportunity just to come and share the process, just talk about the Access Board and our rulemakings.
So with that, I'm going to start out with a little history of the Access Board. I'm going to go back to 1959, at the request of Eisenhower's President's committee on the employment of the handicapped, then called the American standards association held a conference on accessibility, which led to an initiative to develop accessible design standards for buildings and facilities. October 31, 1961, the association issued the American standards specifications for making buildings and facilities accessible to and usable by the physically handicapped.
Standards were all of 5 pages long.
In 1968, the Architectural Barriers Act was enacted signed by Lyndon Johnson, directing GSA, HUD, and DoD to issue standards to make federal facilities accessible to individuals with disabilities.
That has now been expanded to include the postal service, but at the time was initially the three agencies.
However, the legislation did not provide any enforcement mechanism. That might sound familiar.
And it might not surprise you to learn that compliance was spotty. So just a few years later, as part of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Congress created the Access Board to enforce the Architectural Barriers Act. Over time, Congress gave the Access Board additional statutory duties, principally to issue minimum guidelines for accessibility standards. Access Board issued its first guidelines in 1982, minimum guidelines and requirements for accessible design, which formed the baseline for the UFAS, Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards issued in 1984 by the four standards setting agencies.
In 1990 the ADA came along and Access Board was tasked with enforcing guidelines for the ADA.
So that's the history of how the Access Board came to be.
Today the Access Board has sort of four main areas of focus. So I'm just going to go over our first big ticket statutory authorities.
Number one, we developed technical criteria for accessibility that we issue in guidelines and standards.
We issue minimum guidelines under the ADA and ABA for building sites and public rights of way and under the ADA for transportation vehicles on fixed routes.
We issue standards under Section 508 of the Rehab Act for information and communications technology in the federal sector. We issue guidelines under section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 on the accessibility of telecommunication products and services.
And then we also issue standards or guidelines under other authorities that Congress sets out for us and various laws that have been issued since.
For example, we issued medical diagnostic equipment standards under the Affordable Care Act.
We issued recommendations for prescription drug labels under the FDA safety and innovation act. We provide technical assistance to DoT for accessibility under the Air Carrier Access Act if requested by DoT. And most recently we've been tasked with creating standards for adult changing tables for certain airport restrooms under the FAA reauthorization of 2024.
In a minute, Wendy is going to talk more about our rulemaking process. So our second big ticket statutory is providing technical assistance under the ADA and Section 508.
I'll try not to read.
So we provide technical assistance and training. So we have accessibility specialists who actually answer the phone. We are a federal agency that answers the phone.
And we answer our email.
And if members of the public have or federal agencies with respect to ABA have technical questions about the standards, our staff will answer them.
And that is a free service to the public.
Our third big ticket statutory authority is the enforcement of the Architectural Barriers Act to ensure that federal facilities are accessible.
Again, the Architectural Barriers Act requires accessibility for federal facilities, federally leased facilities, facilities that were constructed for the federal government.
We enforce compliance through a complaint-based system. So unless someone files a complaint, we don't go out necessarily and do proactive compliance work. As Wendy mentioned, we're a staff of 23 people. So that's our capacity.
To file a complaint, you file a complaint on our website.
Basically you have to provide the name, address, or sufficient description of the facility so we know what the facility is that you are complaining about.
And then the description of the barriers encountered. Complaints with be submitted anonymously, so feel free to submit them whenever you see a complaint, and if you're not sure what's included under the Architectural Barriers Act standards, it's pretty much the same as what is under the ADA standards if you're more familiar with those.
We investigate allegations where we find there is a violation, working with the agency to implement corrective action.
If there is no violation, we still encourage the agency to take action on voluntary basis.
Although we have statutory authority and could use a formal adjudication process, for decades the Access Board has only used an informal process to work with other federal agencies to resolve complaints, and we've been successful doing that.
In general, it was a mistake. The agencies don't know. Or when it was built, something went wrong. They are willing to fix the violations, and then depending on how involved the particular violation is, that has to do with how long the complaint stays open and how long it takes to get the corrective action.
Does anyone want to guess what is the agency that we get the most complaints about?
SPEAKER: Post office.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: That is correct. 75% of our open cases are the post office. That's where people are frequenting so that's where they see the barriers and know they'll return there and want them fixed.
So again, we just encourage you and others to file complaints with the Access Board regarding barriers in federal facilities. In FY2024 we received 341 new complaints. GSA manages space in 8400 buildings around the country, and then additionally in the federal government we have post offices, military facilities, and buildings owned by specific agencies.
So we don't think the number of complaints relates to the number of problems.
Rather, that a lot of people just don't know that this is the way that you resolve these things and it's pretty easily done without litigation.
Okay.
And then our fourth big ticket statutory authority is to promote accessibility throughout all segments of society. We do it in a number of different ways.
We've been supporting accessibility on tribal lands through Health and Human Services Title VI program under the Older Americans Act, which provides nutrition to elders. We've been working with that program to encourage accessibility in their Title VI centers as well as ceremonial spaces and tribal lands.
In addition, Access Board visits a city outside of Washington, D.C., every year to understand the state of accessibility in that place. Last year we went to Los Angeles. We met with members of the entertainment industry as well as city officials on a variety of topics, including the accessibility of L.A.'s public rights of way and accessibility of the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic games that will be held there.
This year we'll be working with the city of New Orleans. Board staff have visited the city twice working with officials looking at accessibility of temporary event spaces, historic areas, public rights of way, and transportation. We held a training prior to the Super Bowl to try to provide some information about accessibility to city businesses, and we hope it bring our board members to New Orleans in July for a town hall which will coincide with NFB's annual convention.
All right.
So those are our major statutory authorities. I'm going to turn it over to Wendy to talk about our rulemaking.
WENDY MARSHALL: My favorite part of my job is the rulemaking. So the Access Board follows the normal rulemaking process that most federal agencies have to follow. So we are governed by the Administrative Procedures Act. We have to file notice and comment.
We have to receive comment from the public when we have a rulemaking and incorporate those comments and concerns into our final decision.
Typically our process is to start with some sort of information gathering step. So we have been tasked over the years, we started with just the ABA federal facilities built environment, and our duties have expanded. And as we can see from even last year, we're now tasked with adult changing tables in airports. Our duties are always expanding.
So many times with a new rulemaking, we need to get information. We have 23 awesome staff that have a lot of technical expertise, but we do not know everything.
So we'll usually start with either a committee or an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking, which is just kind of dipping our toes into the rulemaking process, if you will. An advanced notice of proposed rulemaking lets us ask for public comment without proposing any actual rule text. So we'll say, for example, we're going to think about regulating rail or revising our rail rule. So in order to do this, we had a committee and the committee suggested X, Y, and Z.
What do you think about that. Here's a concern we have. Do you have any information. How is technology working.
You know, how are different systems working on the train, what should we consider.
So it allows us to gather data before we write that first rule text. So a lot of times we'll do either an ANPRM or people from disability rights organizations and from the field to ask them lots and lots of questions.
After we've gathered our information, we start with what's called a notice of proposed rulemaking, that first official step into the wonderful world of rulemaking. That will include a couple of different things. Our proposed rule text, everything we want to require.
It's going to include a preamble which will explain all the things that we want to require. Preambles are great. It's where you can get the best information. You can figure out why we're doing something, what we're thinking about, and sometimes we'll even propose alternatives. So for example in my most recent rule the EV charging stations, we had a rule text and then we had a proposal in the preamble talking about whether or not we should have a reserved accessible space like do you in parking where only a person with a disability placard can use it, or if we should have a "use last" model.
Yes, this is for a person with a disability, but just reserved until all the other spaces are taken.
So we proposed both options because we're seeing a lot of states use that "use last" model.
And we will also have a preliminary regulatory impact analysis, PRIA. This is something we're required to do with Executive Order 12866, having to analyze the cost of our rule, of the things that we're going to require the public to do, and what we think the benefits are going to be.
And then we have to make sure that those benefits outweigh the costs to society so that our rule is doing good and doing more good than it is costing.
That entire package has to get approved by our board, and then goes around for interagency review and for approval through the Office of Information Regulatory Affairs, OIRA. Or OMB. So even though we're independent, we go through White House and OIRA review. Once they review it, it gets published and it goes off into the nether world for public comment, which is really what we want to talk about today, how to make effective public comments.
I want to talk a little bit about EO12866, an Executive Order that really governs how this whole rulemaking process works.
And it talks a lot about like what rules have to go through this more rigorous evaluation of OIRA review, interagency review, doing that cost benefit analysis. And there's four different things that pull you in to that situation. An example of where I don't have to do it, if I'm doing a rule that only affects my agency, I can just do that. I don't need to ask for public comment most of the time.
I can just do it.
We look at the annual effect on the community, on the economy, so that $100 million will get you there right away. Some of our rules do that. PROWAG, I believe. Medical diagnostic equipment was not so it depends.
We can talk about creating a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfering with another agency.
I've never dealt with that one with my agency.
Materially alter the budget impact of entitlements or grants.
But the one that always gets is raising a novel, legal, or policy issue arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive Order.
For some reason that is the Access Board. Everything to do with accessibility falls under that one, so every one of our regulations is reviewed through that process.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: Just to put that all together in terms of the length of one of our rulemakings. So we draft an NPRM, the board votes on it. We send it to OIRA. That could be 6 months.
Then a 60-day comment period. We review the comments. There's just a few of us and we're reading all of the comments. We don't have AI in the mix right now.
It's just a few of us.
It's a spreadsheet, discussing them, figuring out what is going to make this rule better. We're already at a year.
We're going to draft the rule text. That takes a couple of months. Is there research that needs to be done?
We need to contract for a reg assessment because we don't have economists on staff so we have to create a federal contract, get the contractors on, they have to do the work, that could take a year typically if it's going fast.
Meanwhile, we'll be writing the preamble, which Wendy was saying is like the explanation and justification for the rule. The board then needs to vote on this package to send it to OIRA, who conducts their review. Theoretically they have 90 days. It is then published in the Federal Register.
There's a 60-day comment period typically. Then again, we start over. We review the comments, update the rule text. We contract for the final regulatory impact analysis.
We write the preamble.
The board votes. It goes back to OIRA, who conducts the interagency review. And ultimately if they clear it, the rule is published.
So that's like 3 and a half to 4 years if everything goes awesome and there aren't other intervening factors like potentially change of administration or Congress coming out with different assignments for us that have specific deadlines. So that is sort of like the time line of how our rules go.
WENDY MARSHALL: Okay. So let's talk a little bit about our rules. The Access Board has authority to write kind of two different types of regulations. There's the ones that we call minimum guidelines.
I'm going to talk about those in a second.
And then there's the other ones that are kind of done when we're done with them. So there's a few regulations that we get where once we issue, they're enforceable or there's no next step. That would be like the Section 508 standards that deal with information and communication technology in the federal government that needs to be accessible. We write those regulations.
They are enforceable as soon as our effective date hits.
Now, we don't enforce Section 508. Every agency is responsible for doing that on their own. Sounds familiar the ABA, right? So every agency handles their own complaint process internally but they don't get to change our regulations, they just have to apply them.
Another rule that will be like to be the adult changing tables. That's one that we've been directed to write and then once it's published, airports will have to start complying with it if they fall within the jurisdiction of the statute.
Medical diagnostic equipment is an interesting rule. The accessibility of medical diagnostic equipment that came from the Affordable Care Act.
That required us to make these technical standards, but didn't provide a kicker. There is no enforcement mechanism within the ACA.
So we wrote them and then they sat there.
Amazingly a year ago HHS did adopt them under their 504 rule, so if you're applying that rule, you would have to comply with our medical diagnostic equipment rule.
But unlike some of our other ones, there's no requirement that they had to do that.
They chose to do it. Which is fantastic.
Okay. Then really the heart of what we do or the biggest bulk what we're known for is the ADA accessibility guidelines and the ABA accessibility guidelines. And these are minimum guidelines.
So what that means is Congress has directed us, as an independent agency, to write these regulations and then certain entities are required to adopt them.
They cannot lessen them. They can make them more stringent or provide additional clarifications, but they cannot go below. We are the floor. They cannot go below what we say.
For the ADA, we're looking at the built environment. We're also looking at the public rights of way and transportation.
And then under the ABA, it's for the built environment and PROWAG.
For under the ADA, when we have issued those guidelines, they have to be adopted by the Department of Justice, which is who enforces the ADA.
And then adopt the ADA accessibility guidelines for all things except for public transportation which is adopted by the Department of Transportation.
For the ABA, we have four standard setting agencies that Frances alluded to earlier. They are required to adopt our ABA accessibility guidelines and apply them to whoever they govern. So that's the General Services Administration or GSA, the United States Postal Service, Department of Defense, and HUD, Housing and Urban Development.
They do it all different ways. DoJ has always done it by regulation.
DoD I think writes a memo. GSA has a regulation.
So they can really adopt how they want.
Interestingly enough, GSA, DoD, and USPS have all adopted our 2004 ADA accessibility guidelines. HUD has not.
So if you fall under for federal housing, you are applying the UFAS accessibility standards of 1984. That's where we are.
Okay.
And then transportation vehicles. That's under the ADA.
So we're talking about fixed route vehicles for transportation. So you're talking about your buses, your vans that are on a fixed route, your rail.
So with rail we're talking about commuter, inner city. So like a Marc train, Amtrak, metro is rapid, and then like light rail they have in Baltimore that's usually above -- sometimes it goes underground but usually it's street based is light rail.
So that's where our regulations come from for transportation vehicles.
We initially issued our transportation vehicles regulations back in 1998. We have updated the bus rule in 2016. Well, it was really all nonrail, over the road buses, and vans.
However that still has not been adopted by the DoT so the 1998 rule is still in effect.
And in 2020 we did work towards or we provided an ANPRM for rail and then we're working towards a proposed rule for that one.
And then our current agenda. Does everybody know what the unified agenda is?
Super nerdy. So the unified agenda is a great place to find out what agencies are working on.
We have to tell the public every 6 months what we plan to work on.
It's fun because when you look for us and you go look for U.S. Access Board, we don't exist. We are under our old name which is the architectural transportation compliance board. So you have to remember on all federal websites, it's only the regulations.gov that still refers to us under our old name. So just something to remember.
But every 6 months spring and fall, the government publishes this unified agenda and it can give you a great idea of what the federal agencies are planning on working on.
Even though it's spring, I would expect it to come out in late summer. Don't ask me why.
It's just how it works.
So in our current unified agenda, we are working on EV charging, which is the accessibility of electrical vehicle charging stations, and that would be under both the ADA and the ABA.
We have finished the proposed rule. We received 136 comments from closing and 4 late filed comments. We got a wide variety, which is great.
Disability rights organizations, individuals with disabilities that drive electric vehicles, electric vehicle managers and the people who actually install and operate these EV charging stations.
So we got some really great comments.
And we asked about 10 questions in our preamble.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: We had self service transaction machines. The Access Board issued an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking in September 2022, and then we moved on to the notice of proposed rulemaking which we submitted to OIRA in May 2024. That NPRM was unfortunately still at OIRA going under review when the change of administration happened. So as is typical, a change of administration, the pending rules are withdrawn and that rule was withdrawn.
WENDY MARSHALL: And then we have rail. So the ANPRM we did in April 2020 and internally we had been working towards a proposed rule.
So now Frances will talk about suggesting kind of the big reason we're here, how can you write an effective comment to us when we're undergoing rulemaking.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: And we also have other opportunities for public participation beyond just the public comments. So first of all, using our technical assistance is one way that you can participate, because the same people who answer the technical assistance inquiries are the technical specialists who write the rules. So if we start to get a lot of questions on a particular issue, then that's information for us that potentially rulemaking is needed in that area.
Every year we have a town hall somewhere outside of Washington, D.C., as I mentioned. If there's an accessibility issue or problem with a guideline that you want to bring to the board's attention on any topic, that's a great forum to do it because the board is there and open to any issues.
Next one is July 9, 2025, at the New Orleans Marriott.
We also have topic-based opportunities for comment. So these are typically topics that are not necessarily for rulemaking, but we are gathering information and shining a light on whatever the issue is. So this past summer we had hearings on the impact of AI on people with disabilities, and a few years ago we did a series of forums on accessibility of autonomous vehicles.
Another thing you can do is just send us an email. Like if you have something to say, you can send us an email, [email protected], and we read our emails, like I said. And people do give us their feedback.
All right. So then the other major way of course is submitting public comments.
WENDY MARSHALL: We take public comments really seriously. We do, like Frances said, if I have a rulemaking and I'm the lead attorney, I have read every single comment and so has my technical staff. I wish I had a whole bunch of interns that could read them all for me and summarize, but I don't. They're going to get read.
Which is great.
So usually with an ANPRM, I would expect your comments to be generalized because we're going to ask general questions. Sometimes we'll ask a specific question but usually we're floating big ideas.
But NPRMs, we a lot of times will put specific questions in our preamble. By all means tell us anything.
But those questions are usually there for a reason.
It's an area where we are either struggling with a decision, maybe we want to go one way but we need something to support that way. Maybe we don't know. Maybe we need information.
But those questions can really give you some good ideas of where we're looking for information or something that we're considering different options.
If you're writing a public comment, it can be helpful if you organize it by telling us you're answering question one, for example, or if you're talking about provision 301.2, put the number in there. When we're reading hundreds of comments and some that are 30 and 40 pages long, some aren't -- they don't need to be that long, but they can be -- it can get daunting to try to marry that up to what provision you're talking about. Because Frances and I are taking every comment and putting it in a massive Excel spreadsheet and aligning it by provision to go through with our technical staff that provision and every comment that relates to it. So the easier you make it for us, the more easy it is for us to go through them and get the rule done faster.
Formatting your comments. Remember, comments are public.
We have an online system, regulations.gov, where you submit your comment. I can only screen you out if you're posting like social security number level stuff or really like vulgar things. Other than that, it's just going to be posted.
And I mean really vulgar. So remember that.
Don't provide your address at your house or some really, really, really personal information that you don't want publicly posted. Anyone can read the comments.
But on the flip side, telling us about yourself can be really helpful. Giving us context to your comments. If you're comfortable.
So are you a person with a disability?
Do you work in this space? Do you regulate in this space? Are you a state and local government? Are you an architecture?
An engineer? How long have you been doing this? All of those things can help us provide that context for your comment.
Not that anyone will be weighed any heavier. They won't.
But it really helps us get an understanding of who has these concerns and why.
And then any relevant details about your geographic location, which I know sounds a little strange.
But our rules apply nationwide. So especially when we're talking about something that affects outdoor accessibility, knowing if you live somewhere that's really hilly or really flat.
If you live in San Francisco, you might have a different thought about the grade of the sidewalk than you do if you live in a state that's all flat. So those things matter.
Are you in a place that is really restrictive or really -- what's the word I'm looking for?
FRANCES SPIEGEL: If you're in a place that has great state or local accessibility code or if you're in a place relying on the federal minimums, that is helpful for us to know.
WENDY MARSHALL: The only other thing I will say is form letters. We receive form letters from different organizations. They are great and can let us know, hey, there's 50 or 100 people that support this.
But it's great if you take that form letter and add in a sentence or paragraph at the bottom that gives us your personal experience, which just bolsters the comment and can be really helpful to us as we're reading them.
Okay.
Do you guys have any questions?
FRANCES SPIEGEL: Chris is willing to take them now.
(Laughter)
CHRIS: And if you're an organization too, indicate who you represent and how many entities you represent and what their basic concerns are. Could be a hotel industry or groups of individuals, groups of organizations of and for people with disabilities. You know, that matters. Does this comment represent the view of one person or represent the view -- we'll read and consider them all, but if you represent an organization that, you know, speaking for 100,000 people with disabilities, that's a broad-based concern.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: Also information on costs. I don't know if we mentioned that but we're always looking for information on costs. One of the hardest things for us to get oftentimes. So we always appreciate if there are specific costs.
EMILY: I was wondering, it seems like you're always doing an overhaul of the guidelines. Would you ever do a rulemaking just for small updates?
WENDY MARSHALL: Yeah. So like our EV charging regulation is a small update. So we're updating the ADA and ABA accessibility guidelines to add in EV charging stations because when it was written in 2004, there was no such thing.
Self service transaction machines is another one updating the ATM and fare vending to really encompass this idea of self service transaction machines because when we wrote the rule, the only machine you were interacting with was an ATM or to get your ticket.
But now you go to the doctor's office, you go to the grocery store, you go to check in at the hotel, everywhere you go.
KEN: Restaurants.
WENDY MARSHALL: Yes. At the table they have them. That's how you pay your bill. So that's a small update in the rule text.
If you look at what that covers in the ADA and ABA accessibility guidelines, it is a small update so we wouldn't touch anything else.
EMILY: Okay.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: If you're thinking about like automatic doors, for example.
EMILY: It's more something like that I have in mind.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: The thing we have to weigh is we went over what the process is to like get a rule from start to finish. So there is the economy of scale there. Like it is a lot of work for like one provision. So I mean and just with the minimal staff, you're looking at the Office of General Counsel right here.
So there are those considerations.
KEN: I have a bunch of questions. I'll stop if other people have questions.
WENDY MARSHALL: You have time.
KEN: First question: Do you have any sense of why DoT has not adopted the bus, the nonrail vehicle standards?
FRANCES SPIEGEL: We don't know.
WENDY MARSHALL: We don't know, yeah.
KEN: OIRA doesn't -- I don't know the approval process in the different agencies.
WENDY MARSHALL: It would be priorities.
CHRIS: And remember, when these agencies adopt our guidelines and forcible standards, they go through this whole regulatory process again too. They can't go below our minimums but they still have to issue an NPRM. It might be simpler because they're just proposing to adopt our guidelines but they have to issue them, get public comment, and even go through the process of doing a free preliminary regulatory impact analysis. So it's not an easy process.
It's not as simple as putting something out.
Now, one day saying we're just adopting this as a final rule, it's not that easy.
GSA did adopt our ABA public rights of way guidelines really rather quickly.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: And DoT also.
CHRIS: Yes. So they did do that.
But some of these other things are much more complicated and can take the enforcing agencies a while to adopt them.
And there was a after the bus rule was issued, I think there was a regulatory freeze on issuing regulations.
KEN: That was Trump one.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: End of 2016.
KEN: Biden Administration had 4 years and still couldn't get it out!
TIM: Just to give a little bit of historical background also, when we updated the Section 508 standards, we also updated what were called the section 255 guidelines. And those in the normal course of events would be adopted by the Federal Communications Commission after a rulemaking.
Now, as it happened when we released them in 2017, the FCC took them under advisement but elected not to adopt them. Instead, they went ahead and made revisions to their own rule.
Similarly, when we have concurrent jurisdiction, finishing up the 508 standards, for example, there's a section on real-time text. We got a number of comments and suggestions on that and a number of cost questions.
We ran out of time and we wanted the rule to be published. So we reserved that section.
And then the understanding is, as people have questions on real-time text, we defer to the FCC on what they do in that area.
Eventually, in the fullness of time, we'll probably do a refresh and we'll update the 508 standards to incorporate new developments and changes, but it's an evolving process all the time.
WENDY MARSHALL: Any other questions?
You can go. Go ahead.
CHRIS: You said you had several questions.
KEN: I had the pleasure I guess of being the alternate to NDRN, I work for National Disability Rights Network, and we were members of the rail vehicle accessibility committee.
And I was the alternate and we managed to hire one of your retirees to be our actual member since they had more technical knowledge.
But I guess a thing that happened in this process was that, you know, because you were updating, we weren't thinking of new things. And one of the things that has happened since then was in terms of rail vehicles, the ADA statute was particularly detailed on what Amtrak, basically Amtrak and commuter rails had to do to become more accessible. So there's a lot of statutory language.
And because we had that and because frankly even the disability community advocates didn't think of that, we never thought that you could have a 32-inch wide aisle in a railcar so you could go from a coach car to the next car in case the bathroom was occupied in the car you were in and also Amtrak, the current Amtrak often has two bathrooms, an accessible one theoretically and an inaccessible one. So hopefully a person who doesn't need the accessible one uses the one that's not accessible, but if both of them are in use, the person in a wheelchair is stuck on the end of the car because the aisle is too narrow.
And what's happened -- and I hope that the Access Board does a public meeting in Miami so you can ride this line, but in Florida, the company that builds these, and will probably be the same between Los Angeles and L.A -- no, L.A. and Las Vegas, same company is going to do that -- hopefully their new cars for that service will also have 32-inch-wide aisles but that's something we didn't even think of in that advisory committee.
And the world changed.
And I've been working with Amtrak on their new procurements and they don't want to do 32-inch-wide aisles because they want to have wide seats.
So it was on my to-do list to do a petition for rulemaking but I never got permission to do it.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: We agree with you. We need to go to Miami.
(Laughter)
KEN: Just the opportunity to see and ride those trains. I mean, I always wanted to get Senator Duckworth to go.
But you know. Just to be able to go between cars so that you have the access to the alternative restroom and you have access to the food service cars on trains that have food service. I mean, it's less important on a commuter line, but it is important, it's part of the experience on Amtrak.
And, you know, Amtrak has told us, the disability community, that they're going to maximize the numbers of seats next to the food service cars and they're going to do all this nice stuff and get the conductors to bring you the food. Because even if that's the official policy, it doesn't -- if you have something that's policy and requires staff to do it, it doesn't get done as opposed to -- or, you know, if may get done some of the time but it ain't going to get done all of the time.
So having the access through the train is something that maybe I'll get permission to write a petition for rulemaking.
WENDY MARSHALL: Even if you don't have petition, our [email protected], you can always email us your thoughts. We have a proposed rule for rail out there right now. We don't have the proposed rule out obviously yet.
But you can always comment.
KEN: It's a 10 for 1 rule.
WENDY MARSHALL: We don't know how that's going to affect us. We're still waiting for guidance.
But it's still something that we would love information on. So if you have things like that, feel free. Like Frances said, our tech staff is going to forward that right on to me.
So and I'll definitely put that into the rulemaking docket.
100%. Love it.
Yeah. Come on. Oh, sorry.
SPEAKER: No, I just had a question because I'm not sure who this would fall under. As far as I understand it, the Access Board has some authority with like temporary structures, so an issue with, as someone who uses a wheelchair, when there is construction or temporary structures or let's say, I don't know, hypothetically you live in D.C. and when the President gives speeches to Congress, they put these big fences on the sidewalks and now you can't get to your appointment at the Supreme Court. Just saying hypothetically, definitely not something that happened a couple weeks ago where I had to go in the street and almost got killed three times.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: So glad you said that. When DoJ addresses PROWAG, it will get addressed. There's a guideline but DoJ needs to adopt it for enforcement.
WENDY MARSHALL: We write the technical standard but don't enforce it.
But as soon as DoJ gets their rulemaking done, that would be enforceable, and they would enforce it. So if you had a situation like that, you would file a complaint with the Department of Justice.
SPEAKER: So as it stands now...
WENDY MARSHALL: There's still a requirement for access so you can still contact DoJ, but as far as like the specific rule, the rule that Frances is talking about, that we wrote, that is still in a guideline form.
FRANCES SPIEGEL: Depends on where you are too.
CHRIS: If any part of the space is federal, then GSA's ABA Architectural Barriers Act regulation which does adopt our public rights of way accessibility guidelines would apply. So that's a threshold issue too to know whether this is a complaint to GSA or a complaint to us because we do enforce the ABA, or is it something that's within control of D.C. government in which case I think it would be state and local.
AMY ROBERTSON: I want to respond to. That hi, I'm Amy Robertson and there are some good decisions out of the ninth circuit concerning -- that stand for the proposition that even where there are not technical standards, which I think is your point, that the basic requirements for access apply. So and those are, most of those are in the context of PROWAG, where the defendant says, well, PROWAG hasn't been adopted so hey we can do whatever we want.
And the ninth circuit said, no, not exactly.
CHRIS: The reality is it takes litigation to get to that point. Unless there are standards, many entities, I won't say all, but many won't take the requirement seriously.
AMY ROBERTSON: We are in negotiations with Denver concerning on-street parking and having that exact argument. PROWAG is in the regs...
WENDY MARSHALL: The guidelines are there.
KEN: In the transportation context, and part of it is, this is an issue that NAD has been interested in. In any kind of transportation context, even though it's not currently required in the ADA regs, most transit vehicles, subways, train vehicles, have digital signage that gives us next stop or location information, preprogrammed or GPS-enabled location information.
I think the issue that I don't know if the technology is there yet, but there are emergency situations or delays, I think someone else in one of the general sessions raised the delay issues or in one of the smaller sessions. You know, what happens when a train operator or bus driver or whatever needs to give out an announcement, we're stuck in traffic or the train broke down or the signal system broke down. Those messages really should be provided in both audio and visual means.
And I just don't know -- and maybe it ties to the FCC and the 508 question about is the technology there that could be a rule soon or is that going to have to wait in terms of train operators, bus drivers, whoever, being able to put in customized on-demand things so that it doesn't have to be preprogrammed. It would be something like if he makes a public address announcement on the speaker. The text follows that.
WENDY MARSHALL: Yeah, it's definitely an issue we will grapple with as we write the proposed rule for rail.
I believe the rail advisory committee recommended requiring that, where emergency-type announcements are made. I'm like 90% sure that was in the committee requirements.
But it's definitely something that we'll have to consider as we go into rulemaking for rail when we're able to propose that.
And there's definitely, as we're embarking on rail, we've been looking at different rail across the country as we travel. That's what now all my OTIS staff get to do. I make them go ride the rail wherever they are.
And there's definitely a wide variety of what's out there and what, you know, what you have in Philadelphia is very different from what you have in Baltimore or in D.C.
So it's definitely learning about those technologies and seeing when we can publish that rulemaking, what's available and what's realistic. Yeah.
KEN: And this isn't ABA, but, you know, again, I've worked with Howard and Zainab in the airline context. Air carrier access ability. It is the issue of Deaf people don't know what's going on when they're in a vehicle, and everybody else gets to know because they get an audio announcement.
WENDY MARSHALL: Absolutely.
KEN: And text to speech is close and, you know, it shouldn't be rocket science. It should be doable soon. There will still be glitches because people with speech impediments or accents, AI isn't perfect, but it's so close.
HOWARD ROSENBLUM: This is Howard speaking. I just wanted to respond to that, Ken. I remember when I was still on the board, we discussed, I don't know if it's passed but we did discuss adding provisions to the rail rules where all announcements must be both audio and visual.
With the airlines, I'll let Zainab talk about that.
ZAINAB ALKEBSI: Yes, Ken, as you are well aware, we've been waiting for that. So I think the solution is there for the preprogrammed, but we still have to figure out how to do those ad hoc emergency announcements. I do think the technology is better now than it was compared to even 2016 when we first started this discussion. So back then, yes, it was a little more of a concern, having automated speech to text in the airline with all the background noise.
But now I feel like there's no excuse.
The technology has grew so much. The technology is there.
So I don't know why it's not happening yet.
So that's something that we're hoping to explore in the new advisory, the new ACAA commission, but unfortunately this committee is on hold because the new administration and the climate and the federal government. So I don't know where things are with this but I just want to say thank you, Ken, for raising the issue because we completely agree with you.
We as Deaf people are left behind when it comes to access for those public announcements, especially in emergency situations.
HOWARD ROSENBLUM: I want to add one more thing for the record. This is Howard speaking. I used to be with the National Association of the Deaf. Not anymore.
I'm now with Deaf Equality, just so you know.
WENDY MARSHALL: Any other questions?
Okay. Great. Well, thank you guys so much for coming. We really appreciate it.
And you get to go have a drink!
(Applause)