Thread Subject: Re: teitac-subparta Digest, Vol 9, Issue 16

Note

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: Robinson, Norman B - Washington, DC
Date: Tue, Jun 05 2007 1:30 PM

Tom,

I don't understand.

1. The USPS doesn't have any legal requirement to follow the
FAR, but is explicitly named in Section 508.
2. All E&IT must be Section 508 compliant, specifically with the
legal compliance that includes documenting the general exceptions where
the technical compliance (technical standards) are not met. Can you
point to a specific reference where non-compliance is allowed (either
directly in language or indirectly by missing language subject to
interpretation perhaps?). Or perhaps an example if that would help me
understand your point of view? I certainly would appreciate it.

Regards,


Norman B. Robinson
Section 508 Coordinator
IT Governance, US Postal Service
phone: 202.268.8246



-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Tom Brett
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 4:58 PM
To: 'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] teitac-subparta Digest, Vol 9, Issue 16


Yes and no...

An agency is required by the FAR to comply with 508. There are legal
penalties if the agency does not. An agency should follow 508 when they
deploy or be subject to political embarrassment. An agency can
implement in
a non compliant manner. They must only have such an implementation when
they are challenged under 504.

Tom Brett


-----Original Message-----
From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
[mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Gregg
Vanderheiden
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 4:25 PM
To: 'TEITAC Subpart A Subcommittee'
Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] teitac-subparta Digest, Vol 9, Issue 16

Agree.

The 508 standards apply to what the agencies do - not just what they
procure.


Gregg
-- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of
> Baker, Robert C.
> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 2:01 PM
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> Subject: Re: [teitac-subparta] teitac-subparta Digest, Vol 9, Issue 16
>
> Diana wrote:
>
> > Proposed New Definition of Comparable Access Comparable
> access means
> > that individuals with disabilities have access to and use of
> > information and data that is timely, accurate, complete and
> efficient
> > when compared to that available to individuals without disabilities.
> > Timely access ensures that individuals with disabilities have
> > information and data available to them at the same time as
> individuals
>
> > without disabilities. Accurate and complete access ensures
> that the
> > information and data reflects the intended meaning especially when
> > converted into another form or media. Efficiency of access
> includes
> > consideration of the speed with which a person with a
> disability can
> > use electronic and information technology to access information or
> > perform a task as compared to an individual without disabilities.
> >
> > Does changing this to a definition help address the
> concerns about how
>
> > this would be used or not used in solicitations?
> >
>
> Robert Baker's Response,
> The definition is getting better - but once again I would
> re-iterate that I believe this spells out a responsibility to
> the agencies for implementing Section 508, as opposed to
> something that should go into a solicitation. This has a lot
> to do with how technology is implemented - not just what
> technology is purchased.
>
>

WebAIM is an initiative of:
Center for Persons with Disabilities (CPD) Utah State University