Federal Computer Week


Davis: Feds shift 508 responsibilities

BY
William Matthews

March 6, 2002


Ever since new rules took effect that made federal agencies responsible
for buying accessible office technology, procurement officials have
devised several ploys to try to shift that responsibility to product
vendors, a Virginia congressman charges.

The rules, which took effect eight months ago and are spelled out in
Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, require federal agencies to ensure
that people with disabilities can use the information technology products
agencies buy. And the rules make it possible for federal employees and
members of the public to sue agencies that fail to comply.

But government contracting officials have been trying to shift liability
from the agencies that are buying products to the vendors that sell them,
according to Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.).

Davis said some federal agencies are pressuring vendors to "certify" that
their products are "508-compliant." Others insist on "government-unique
contract clauses" that vendors must sign, assuring that their products
comply with Section 508.

"[A few agencies] have been contemplating requiring contractors to submit
to mandatory third-party testing as a condition for bidding on government
contracts," Davis said.

"All of the above violate the letter and spirit of the accessibility
standards," said Davis, chairman of the House Government Reform
Committee's Technology and Procurement Policy Subcommittee. Section 508
makes it clear that federal agencies - not vendors or their products -
are responsible for complying with the accessibility standards, he said.

Davis spelled out his complaints in a letter to Stephen Perry, head of
the General Services Administration. GSA oversees government procurement
practices in general and advises agencies on Section 508.

Davis said GSA has warned agencies that they are not authorized to
require that vendors certify or warrant that their products comply with
Section 508. He asked Perry to "disseminate guidance reiterating the
prohibition" on certifications, warranties and third-party testing.

Davis' concerns mirror those of the Information Technology Association of
America, a trade organization that represents technology manufacturers
and sellers. Companies in the organization are worried about liability
problems they could face if forced to offer warranties and compliance
certifications. They also worry about the potential cost and stifling
effect of third-party testing, according to Michael Mason, an attorney
with the firm Hogan and Hartson LLP and a federal contracting specialist.

If third-party testing is permitted, companies will be pressed to build
products designed to pass the test, but not necessarily designed to best
provide accessibility, he said.

But agencies aren't alone in trying to turn Section 508 to their
advantage, said Doug Wakefield, an accessibility expert for the U.S.
Access Board, which developed the standards. Vendors have also tried to
use the law as leverage.

For example, vendors protested when the Social Security Administration
required a specific type of video card for computers. "People complained
that's not a 508 requirement," Wakefield said.

But the video cards worked best with the SSA's assistive technology, and
the agency was right - and within its rights - to require them, he said.


VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask]  In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
 VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html