Thread Subject: Best Meets
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Diane Golden
Date: Wed, Mar 21 2007 4:25 PM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: firstname.lastname@example.org: "Re: Best Meets"
- Previous message in thread: Lybarger, Barbara (MOD): "Re: Best meets"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
In Robert's last message he asked about re-framing the discussion.
Basically, should the 508 regs be addressing procurement decision-making
logic or not? As I thought about that, I decided to take a shot at revising
the current regs to remove the existing language that already leads one to
believe the regs are dictating procurement decision-making, specifically
statements like "agencies shall procure". In doing so the language might
look like the following --
(b) When procuring a product, each agency shall ensure [procure] products
[,which] comply with the provisions in this part when such products are
available in the commercial marketplace (and the products? utility and
performance meet the agency?s identified business and technical
(c) Agencies cannot claim a product, as a whole is not commercially
available because no product in the marketplace meets all the standards. If
products are commercially available that meet some but not all of the
standards, the agency must ensure that [procure the] products [that] best
[meets the standards] comply with the provisions in this part (and meet the
agency?s identified business and technical requirements.)
The references to business and technical requirements (in parens) might or
might not be included. Does this come close to provide the same level of
direction (or ambiguity depending on your point of reference) as the current
regs while eliminating the conundrum of 508 regs dictating procurement