Section 508 Amendment To The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 - Frequently Asked Questions

Frequently Asked Questions

• Is this part of the Americans with Disabilities Act?

No, it is not. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 is a different law. Section 508 is an amendment to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Section 504 of the original Rehabilitation Act laid some of the groundwork for the ADA in the areas of rehabilitation, training and employment of disabled people.

• Is this related to, or the same as, the World Wide Web Consortium's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines?

They are not the same, but they are related. These WAI guidelines were considered in establishing the Access Board's Standards, as well as other resources. But the W3C's Web Content Accessibilities Guidelines are completely voluntary. On the other hand, the Access Board's Standards are enforceable as law, and Section 508 provides remedies to those aggrieved by violations of this requirement, which, after administrative remedies are exhausted, allow for both private rights of action in court and for reasonable attorneys fees. Although compensatory or punitive damages will not be available to prevailing plaintiffs, equitable remedies, such as declaratory and injunctive relief, are available.

• How do agencies of the Federal Government make their websites 508 compliant?

The portion of Section 508 which specifically relates to websites is under Sub-part B, 1194.22. In order for a Federal agency website to comply with Section 508, it must adhere to the sixteen provisions listed therein. The Access Board's website has an annotated reference with recommendations on how to implement these provisions, but the standards have not been updated since December 21, 2000. On April 18, 2006, the Access Board published a notice in the Federal Register announcing its intent to establish an Advisory Committee to make recommendations for revisions and updates to its Section 508 Standards for electronic and information technology. The Access Board requested applications from interested organizations for representatives to serve on the Committee. The Telecommunications and Electronic and Information Technology Advisory Committee (TEITAC) met for the first time on September 27–29, 2006, at the National Science Foundation in Arlington, Virginia.

• What's the difference between accessibility and usability?

Although Section 508 addresses the accessibility of information technology by people with disabilities, it is no guarantee of practical usability by them. While usability is not mandated by federal regulations, it has become a best practice in government and industry.

• Are there certain agencies exempt from this legislation?

The law applies to all Federal agencies. There is some debate as to what legally defines an agency. Other Federal regulations and guidelines (e.g., Section 501 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act) require equal access for individuals with disabilities. Therefore, Federal agencies are required, upon request, to provide information and data to individuals with disabilities through an alternative means of access that can be used by the individuals.

Also note that an agency can still be in legal compliance by meeting one of the § 1194.3 General exceptions (e.g., the NSA). However, systems which are critical to the direct fulfillment of military or intelligence missions do not include a system that is to be used for routine administrative and business applications (including payroll, finance, logistics, and personnel management applications) and therefore must be Section 508 compliant.

• Are state and local agencies covered by Section 508?

Although the law applies to all Federal agencies, state and local government is also impacted by the act. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and, if the government entities receive Federal funding, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, generally require that State and local governments provide qualified individuals with disabilities equal access to their programs, services, or activities unless doing so would fundamentally alter the nature of their programs, services, or activities or would impose an undue burden.