Section 255, 508, and Beyond

This workshop focused on some of the laws that mandate access for people with disabilities. First a brief summary of those laws, then on to the workshop proceedings.

Section 255 of the Communications Act mandates that telecommunications manufacturers and service providers make their products and services accessible to people with disabilities, if readily achievable. Where accessibility is not readily achievable, devices and services must be compatible with peripheral devices commonly used by people with disabilities.

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act mandates that electronic and information technology provided by Federal departments and agencies must be accessible to people with disabilities, unless to do so is an undue burden.

This workshop consisted of a panel discussion moderated by Elizabeth Lyle, Vice President of Wallman Strategic Consulting, LLC.

The panelists were:
- Pam Gregory, Chief, Disability Rights Office, Federal Communications Commission
- Susan Palmer, Associate Director of Regulatory Affairs, Cingular Wireless, LLC
- Rich Ellis, Director of Federal Affairs, Verizon
- Linda Day, AT&T Wireless
- Debbie Fletter, AOL/Time Warner
- Eugene Seagriff, Panasonic

Elizabeth Lyle kicked off the discussion by asking what companies are doing with the new technologies, and how they are addressing next generation accessibility issues.

Pam Gregory pointed out that Section 255 is just one of several access laws; other laws apply to TV decoders, hearing aid compatibility, relay, captioning, etc. The existence of each of these laws is a testament to a market failure; companies had the ability to produce accessible products, but they didn't.

The FCC thinks that Section 255 is critical, because it is the first act to dictate how something is to be designed and fabricated. The Disability Rights Office (DRO) has tried to apply the spirit of Section 255 to other proceedings.

Many people are reluctant to file a complaint with the FCC, because they don't want to anger companies to the point that they refuse to provide access. However, this is an unfounded concern. The complaint procedure to date has been pretty friendly, and people should not hesitate to file complaints because of anticipated reprisals.

Note that there is no private right of action under Section 255; all complaints are made through the FCC, but they encourage people to discuss their problem with the company before filing a complaint.

Susan Palmer emphasized that technology is changing very rapidly, and everyone needs to work to stay on top of it. Cingular is working to provide the best access, rather than to meet the minimum requirements. Susan also feels that Cingular and other telecommunications companies have an advantage over many other Information Technology (IT) companies with respect to Section 508, because of all the work they have already done on Section 255.

Susan noted that all of Cingular's wireless services will accommodate 711 diaing by October. She also stated that Cingular is committed to maintaining analog wireless service until TTY-compatible digital services are available. She regrets that hearing aid compatibility (HAC) for digital phones appears to be farther off than TTY compatibility. However, Cingular will support the ANSI standards that report on the level of incompatibility between hearing aids and digital wireless phones. This means that customers will at least be able to make an educated guess regarding the level of interference to expect from a particular phone.

Rich Ellis stated that Verizon adopted Universal Design Principals in 1995, and that Verizon has received a number of awards for its access provisions. He also cautioned that Verizon, like other companies, is in business to make money, and a business reason must exist before a particular action is taken. While the entire disability market is huge, when it is broken down into the separate categories, most of them are individually quite small.

Rich stated his belief that Section 255 really isn't a great vehicle for change, because companies can too easily drag things out. He believes that Section 508 offers more promise, but it applies mostly to business customers. He also believes that Section 255 discourages service providers (like Verizon) from collaborating on designs with manufacturers, because doing so can subject them to liability for resulting problems. He further pointed out that phone companies hate to upgrade, because replacing fundamental equipment like switches can cause service shutdowns over a wide area.

He stressed that people with disabilities need to get involved; they need to tell companies what they want and educate company officials. He also encouraged people to join advocacy groups, find corporate allies, and offer new ideas.

Linda Day noted that most customers are unaware of many of the services and products that are already available. To correct this situation, AT&T Wireless has developed a new brochure that explains many wireless features in simple terms. AT&T firmly believes in designing accessibility into all their products, because if something is easier to use for a person with disabilities, it's likely easier for everyone to use.

AT&T wireless is currently working on a system called CHAAMP, which has the potential to reduce the interference between digital wireless phones and hearing aids. They are also excited about 711 for mobile phones, and about a new system that uses radio frequency identification (rfid) to allow a person's handheld computer or smart phone to communicate automatically with devices in the environment. An example would be a hotel system that automatically checked a person in when they walked into a hotel.

Debbie Fletter noted that AOL is relatively new to the accessibility discussion; they really started working accessibility issues a couple of years ago, but it had been pretty sporadic until last year. Because their service was inaccessible to blind people, AOL learned that they needed to establish an accessibility organization and become much better at communicating with the disability community.

They launched their accessibility initiative in July 2000 and had their first internal advocates meeting in December. AOL added accessibility responsibilities to the development process in January 2001. They are now collaborating with WGBH for captioning, have established an accessibility advisory committee, and plan to release much improved accessibility software soon. One early result of these efforts will be the addition of captioning to their Media Player. (The Media Player previously included captioning capability, but it was removed in a simplification effort.)

Questions and Answers

Q: Bell South uses TDMA and that causes interference with hearing aids; CDMA on the Verizon network seems better. But turning the backlight on causes a 500 Hz tone that's so loud I can't use the phone. What can be done about this?
A. As you know, wireless service depends on an equipment manufacturer who provides the phone and a service provider who provides the phone service. It's very important to try the phone you intend to use on the service you intend to use to ensure that these kinds of problems don't come up.

Q Technology currently exists that can provide compatibility between hearing aids and digital wireless phones. Why is there no legal requirement to do that?
A. There are a lot of issues here. ANSI standards will help. Providing shielding on hearing aids can help a lot. The basic problem is that wireless phones are transmitters, and transmitters cause interference.