36 CFR Part 1193 Telecommunications Act (Section 255) Accessibility Guidelines - Preamble

Section 1193.33 Information, documentation and training [1193.25 in the NPRM] (Section-by-Section Analysis)

Paragraph (a) of this section requires that manufacturers provide access to information and documentation. This information and documentation includes user guides, installation guides, and product support communications, regarding both the product in general and the accessibility features of the product. Information and documentation are what make a product usable by anyone and, if such information is provided to the public at no charge, it must be provided to people with disabilities at no additional charge. Alternate formats or alternate modes of this information are also required to be available, upon request. Manufacturers are also required to ensure usable customer support and technical support in the call centers and service centers, which support their products.

Comment. The American Council of the Blind (ACB) commented that the provision as proposed was unclear if alternate formats must be available at no additional charge. They also added that the alternate format provided should be of the customer's choosing, that alternate formats are not interchangeable, and that a manufacturer cannot determine which format is appropriate for any particular customer.

Response. The Board agrees that the provision may have been unclear in the NPRM. The final rule has been revised to clarify that additional charges may not be required for the description of accessibility and compatibility features of the product, end-user product documentation, and usable customer support and technical support. There is nothing prohibiting a manufacturer from charging everyone for these services. However, people with disabilities may not be charged an additional fee above the fee charged to everyone.

The specific alternate format or mode to be provided is that which is usable by the customer. Obviously, it does no good to provide documentation in Braille to someone who does not read it. While the user's preference is first priority, manufacturers are not expected to stock copies of all materials in all possible alternate formats and may negotiate with users to supply information in other formats. For example, Braille is extremely bulky and can only be read by a minority of individuals who are blind. Audio cassettes are usable by more people but are difficult for users to find a specific section or to skip from one section to the next. Documentation provided on disk in ASCII format can often be accessed by computers with appropriate software, but is worthless if the information sought is how to set up the computer in the first place. Of course, if instructions are provided by videotape, appropriate video description would be needed for persons who are blind and captions would be needed for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing.

Comment. Some commenters said that customer support lines should be made accessible to people with hearing loss. Specifically, they pointed out that automated voice response systems go too fast, are not clear and do not allow for repeats making them inaccessible for most people with hearing loss. They recommended that menus should be set up to allow someone to escape early on by dialing a standard number such as "0" to talk to a person.

Response. Providing a quick means to "opt out" of a voice mail menu system is a useful feature to make such systems usable by people who are hard of hearing. In addition, ensuring usable customer support may mean providing a TTY number, since the current automated voice response systems cannot be used by individuals who are deaf either. Such systems cannot be accessed by TTY relay services since there is generally insufficient time for the operator to type the choices and the deaf caller must wait until the end before responding. Also, if such menu systems require quick responses, they may not be usable by persons with other disabilities. An appendix note has been added recommending that automated voice response systems should be set up to allow someone to escape early on. The appendix also provides guidance on how to provide information in alternate formats and modes.

Paragraph (b) requires manufacturers to include in general product information the name and contact means for obtaining the information required by paragraph (a).

Comment. The NPRM specified a telephone number but some commenters pointed out that e-mail and Internet methods might be equally valid methods of contacting a manufacturer for information.

Response. More and more companies have access to e-mail but all companies do not. The final rule has generalized this requirement to allow for different ways other than just a telephone number to contact a manufacturer. However, a phone number is the preferred method of contact since many more people have telephones than have access to e-mail or the Internet. Additional ways of contacting a manufacturer are encouraged but are not required. The name of the contact point can be an office of the manufacturer rather than an individual.

Paragraph (c) requires manufacturers to provide employee training appropriate to an employee's function. In developing, or incorporating information into existing training programs, consideration must be given to the following factors: accessibility requirements of individuals with disabilities; means of communicating with individuals with disabilities; commonly used adaptive technology used with the manufacturer's products; designing for accessibility; and solutions for accessibility and compatibility.

Comment. Several manufacturers claimed the guidelines contemplate costly training of manufacturers' employees. Several comments pointed out that the NPRM applied the readily achievable limitation only to the provisions of Subparts C and D but not to the other requirements of this rule.

Response. The key to usability is information and the manufacturer's employees must know how to provide it in an effective manner. This is especially true for good technical support, if persons with disabilities are to receive adequate information on how to use the new accessibility features of telecommunications equipment and customer premises equipment. The guidelines, however, do not require a specific training program, only that certain factors be considered and incorporated to the extent deemed appropriate by a given manufacturer.

Obviously, not every employee needs training in all factors. Designers and developers need to know about barriers and solutions. Technical support and sales personnel need to know how to communicate with individuals with disabilities and what common peripheral devices may be compatible with the manufacturer's products. Other employees may need a combination of this training. No specific program is required and the manufacturer is free to address the needs in whatever way it sees fit, as long as effective information is provided.

The Board agrees that the statute applies the readily achievable limitation to usability as well as accessibility and compatibility. As noted in the discussion in section 1193.21 above, the title of this section has been changed and the proposed section has been moved to Subpart C and renumbered accordingly.