Withdrawn: 28 CFR Parts 35 and 36, Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by State and Local Governments and Places of Public Accommodation; Equipment and Furniture (ANPRM)

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

Since this proposal is an ANPRM, the Department is not required to conduct certain economic analyses or written assessments that otherwise may be required for more formal types of agency regulatory actions (e.g., notices of proposed rulemaking or final rules) that are deemed to be economically significant regulatory actions with an annual economic impact of $100 million or more or that are expected to have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities or non-federal governmental jurisdictions (such as State, local, or tribal governments). See, e.g., Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, § U.S.C. 603-04 (2006); E.O. 13272, 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 13, 2002); E.O. 12866, 58 FR 51735 (Sept. 30, 1993), as amended by E.O. 13497, 74 Fed. Reg. 6113 (Jan. 30, 2009); OMB Budget Circular A-4, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-07-26/pdf/2010-18331.pdf (last visited June 25, 2010).

One of the purposes of this ANPRM is to seek public comment from members of the disability community, public accommodations, and governmental entities on various topics relating to accessible equipment and furniture, including perspectives from stakeholders concerning the benefits and costs of revising the Department´s titles II and III regulations to ensure the accessibility of equipment and furniture.

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

Consistent with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 and Executive Order 13272, the Department must consider the impacts of any proposed rule on small entities, including small businesses, small nonprofit organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. See § U.S.C. 603-04 (2006); E.O. 13272, 67 FR 53461 (Aug. 13, 2002). The Department will make an initial determination as to whether any rule it proposes is likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, and if so, the Department will prepare an initial regulatory flexibility analysis analyzing the economic impacts on small entities and regulatory alternatives that reduce the regulatory burden on small entities while achieving the goals of the regulation. In response to this ANPRM, the Department encourages small entities to provide cost data on the potential economic impact of adopting a specific requirement for website accessibility and recommendations on less burdensome alternatives, with cost information.

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.