36 CFR Parts 1190 and 1191 ADA and ABA Accessibility Guidelines - Preamble (Discussion of Comments and Changes)

707 Automatic Teller Machines and Fare Machines

Section 707 provides specifications for Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) and fare machines.

Requirements address clear floor or ground space (707.2), operable parts (707.3), privacy (707.4), speech output (707.5), input (707.6), display screens (707.7), and braille instructions (707.8). In the final rule, this section has been significantly reorganized and criteria for output and input substantially revised due to comments submitted by persons with disabilities, various disability groups, ATM manufacturers, banking institutions and trade associations, and others.

Comment. Comments from the banking industry opposed the specific criteria proposed for ATMs in favor of a more flexible performance standard. Conversely, many comments from persons with vision impairments supported the proposed specifications or urged the Board to make them more stringent.

Response. The original ADAAG relied on a performance criterion in specifying access to ATMs for people with vision impairments: "instructions and all information for use shall be made accessible to and independently usable by persons with vision impairments" (4.34.5). Based on the level of access provided at ATMs under the original ADAAG, it is the Board’s belief, consistent with the ADAAG Review Advisory Committee’s recommendations, that a descriptive set of technical criteria is essential to ensure that ATMs are adequately accessible to, and usable by, persons with vision impairments. The Board has taken into consideration concerns raised by industry concerning various specifications, as well as information on improved technological solutions, in finalizing these criteria. A number of revisions have been made to the ATM requirements which are detailed below.

Comment. Section 707 specifically covers ATMs and fare machines. In the proposed rule, the Board sought comment on whether this section should be extended to cover other types of interactive transaction machines (ITMs), such as point-of-sale machines and information kiosks, among others (Question 31). Information was requested on any possible design conflicts between the requirements of this section and any specific types of interactive transaction machines. Comments from disability groups and individuals with disabilities generally supported coverage of ITMs and point-of-sale machines. Most industry commenters opposed such an expansion since, in their opinion, such devices differ in structure and use from ATMs. Comments noted that computers used in point-of-sale machines rarely have the capacity for added functions, especially for speech. Commenters were particularly concerned that manufacturers, installers, and property owners would be held responsible for the content of web-based dynamic information. Several suggested that unlike ATMs, which are considered primarily single-purpose devices, information kiosks are multi-purpose devices that cannot produce audio files anticipating the content of the video display.

Response. The Board has elected not to broaden the scope of the rule to address all types of interactive transaction machines at this time. However, the Board has issued standards covering various types of electronic and information technology purchased by the Federal government under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. These standards encompass various types of interactive transaction machines that are procured by the Federal government. The Board intends to monitor the application of the performance-based section 508 standards to ITMs in the Federal sector for its consideration in future updates of these guidelines.

Revisions made to this section include:

• revising exceptions for drive-up ATMs to also cover drive-up fare machines (707.2, 707.3, and 707.7)

• modifying specifications for operable parts (707.3)

• limiting privacy requirements to ATMs (707.4)

• revamping and clarifying speech output capabilities and specifications (707.5)

• modifying specifications for input controls (707.6)

• adding a requirement for braille instructions (707.8)

Sections 707.2 and 707.3 address clear floor or ground space requirements and operable parts, respectively. These provisions include exceptions for drive-up only ATMs. In the final rule, the Board revised these exceptions to cover fare machines as well.

Comment. The proposed rule specified that operable parts be able to be differentiated by sound or touch without activation (707.3). Comments from industry noted that it would be difficult to achieve this requirement in the design of controls activated by touch. Some commenters advised that compliance would be more feasible if the provision recognized an allowable level of force that could be applied without the control being activated. Since many ATMs and fare machines allow users to cancel operations, including when a control is inadvertently activated, commenters questioned the need for this provision.

Response. The Board agrees that keys which enable users to readily clear or correct input errors obviate the need for controls that can be differentiated by sound or touch without activation. In the final rule, the Board has revised the requirement to apply only at ATMs and fare machines that are not equipped with "clear" or "correct" keys. Section 707.4 ensures an equivalent level of privacy in the use of ATMs for all individuals, including those who use a machine’s accessible features. In the final rule, this requirement has been made specific to ATMs, since privacy is generally of less concern in the use of fare machines.

Section 707.5 provides requirements for speech output of ATMs and fare machines.

Comment. ATM manufacturers and the banking industry opposed the specific criteria for audible output in the proposed rule (707.5) and urged the Board to replace them with more flexible performance requirements that would focus on the desired outcome instead of detailing how and to what extent access was to be achieved. Comments from disability groups strongly supported the approach taken in the proposed rule. Some of these comments requested that the specifications cover the full range of machines used and types of output. For example, some pointed out that certain types of information, such as error messages, are often overlooked in the provision of audible output.

Response. The Board has revised the requirements for audible output to emphasize the minimum performance capabilities necessary for access. This will allow room for technological innovations and improvements in providing access solutions, particularly with respect to audible output. On the other hand, the Board has also retained or added specific criterion so that a minimum level of accessibility is clearly established to avoid confusion or misinterpretation. The final rule clearly requires machines to be speech enabled, as opposed to the proposed rule’s call for "audible instructions." As revised, it requires that "all displayed information for full use shall be accessible to and independently usable by individuals with vision impairments." The specification lists particular types of output, such as operating instructions and orientation, visible transaction prompts, user input verification, and error messages. However, the over-arching performance criterion governs, as the list of particulars is not exhaustive. Consistent with the proposed rule, the speech output must be delivered through devices readily available to all users, such as a telephone handset or an industry standard connector (e.g., an audio mini jack to accommodate a user’s audio receiver).

Comment. The Board sought information on the availability of ATMs that meet the audible output requirements of the proposed rule and any impact, including costs and technological difficulties, in developing new products that would comply (Question 35). Information was also requested on the practice of redeploying ATM equipment and the impact of the output requirements on this practice. Industry commenters expressed strong concerns about the cost and feasibility of providing speech output for new and refurbished machines. Industry commenters claimed that voice output would be burdensome by necessitating both hardware and significant software investments, including on-going maintenance to support changes in the services offered by the institution. Analysis of industry comments reveals an underlying concern that manufacturers, property owners, installers, and networks must coordinate to provide anything more than limited voice output. According to these comments, such coordination is not customary in the U.S. The banking industry expressed particular concern about the application of the guidelines to ATMs that are refurbished and redeployed. According to the industry, there is a large market for used ATMs, which have an average life of 10 years, though some can last up to 20 years; as new machines are installed in existing locations, those replaced are commonly redeployed elsewhere. Since the specifications apply not only to new ATMs, but to altered machines as well, commenters expressed concern about the cost and feasibility of retrofitting existing machines as part of their relocation. On the other hand, comments from disability groups indicated that satisfactory voice output is not only feasible but is actually being accomplished by various banking institutions, including through the retrofit of existing machines.

Response. Many of the comments submitted by industry concerning the cost and impact of the requirements for audible output appeared based on the provision of recorded human speech. However, the Board intended other alternatives, which are considerably less expensive, such as digitized human speech and synthesized speech. Clarification of these permitted types of output are included in the final rule (707.5). New technologies for text-to-speech synthesis are becoming available that offer less expensive solutions in equipping machines with speech output. Such technologies, which can be installed through software or hardware enhancements, can generate all of the information required to be accessible in audible output. In the past year, the Board has become aware of various banks in different areas of the country that have provided new talking ATMs that take advantage of improved speech output technologies. With respect to refurbished machines, the requirements of these guidelines as they apply to altered elements permit departures where compliance is not technically feasible; in such cases, compliance is required to the maximum extent feasible (202.3, Exception 2). Some industry commenters expressed concern about the proposed requirements and existing machines, including those that are not altered. However, the scope of these guidelines, consistent with the Board’s mandate, extends only to new construction and planned alterations and additions. The Board does not generally have jurisdiction over requirements for existing facilities that are otherwise not being altered. Under the ADA, regulations issued by the Department of Justice (DOJ) effectively govern requirements that apply to existing places of public accommodation. How, and to what extent, the Board’s guidelines are used for purposes of retrofit, including removal of barriers and provision of program access, is wholly within the purview of DOJ. It is the Board’s understanding that DOJ is aware of the concern as raised by various commenters generally and that DOJ plans to address these concerns in its rulemaking to revise its ADA standards pursuant to the Board’s final rule.

Comment. In the proposed rule, the Board requested comment on whether ATM manufacturers or banks intend to provide audio output receivers for customers who need them to access audible output and whether customers needing such output could reasonably be expected to provide their own receivers (Question 34). Few comments addressed this question. Several individuals with vision impairments indicated that they carry headphones for talking book players and other audio devices.

Response. The Board has not included any requirements concerning the provision of audio output receivers.

Comment. The proposed rule included an advisory note indicating that audible tones can be used instead of speech for personal input that is not displayed visually for security purposes, such as personal identification numbers (707.5.3). Comments from industry supported this clarification but noted that it would be more appropriately located within the text.

Response. The Board agrees that the advisory note actually functioned as an exception to the requirement for speech output and has added it to the text in the final rule (707.5, Exception 1).

Comment. Comments from persons with disabilities requested that all visually displayed information, including advertisements, should be covered by the requirement for speech output.

Response. The Board disagrees with coverage of extraneous information not needed in the conduct of all available transactions. In the final rule, an exception has been added which notes that advertisements and similar information are not required to be audible unless they convey information that can be used in the transaction being conducted (707.5, Exception 2). This exception helps further clarify the scope of the general performance requirement of 707.5 by describing the type of information that is not covered.

Comment. Comments from industry pointed out that compliance will be difficult and extremely costly, if not impossible, for certain types of machines that cannot support speech synthesis. Some machines cannot "read" or "pronounce" dynamic alphabetic text. Dynamic alphabetic text includes words that cannot be known in advance by the machine or its host. Audible dynamic text requires either prerecorded files or a text-to-speech synthesizer to convert electronic text into speech using preprogrammed pronunciation rules.

Response. Because it would be impossible to pre-record files to anticipate all the possible dynamic alphabetic combinations in the English language, speech synthesis is the only practicable solution for producing dynamic alphabetic audible output. The Board has added an exception for machines that cannot support speech synthesis. Under this exception, dynamic alphabetic output is not required to be audible (707.5, Exception 3).

Comment. Persons with vision impairments and disability groups indicated that "repeat" and "interrupt" functions greatly facilitate use of speech output. Such commenters also stated that volume control is an important feature in accommodating the full range of users. Industry commenters pointed out that interruption of speech output is critical because such output, even when not accessed through a handset or earphones, is continuously running and will otherwise lengthen the time of all operations and transactions.

Response. The Board has added a provision that machines allow users to repeat or interrupt speech output (707.5.1). An exception allows speech output for any single function to be automatically interrupted once a transaction is selected. This specification replaces a requirement in the proposed rule that users be able to expedite transactions (707.5.4.2). In addition, the Board has included a requirement for a volume control.

Comment. The proposed rule contained a requirement that ATMs dispense paper currency in descending order with the lowest denomination on top (707.5.7). Comments from the banking industry noted that while this requirement is feasible, the denominations of currency dispensed varies depending on which bills are still available in a machine before it is re-supplied.

Response. The Board has removed the requirement for bills to be dispensed in descending order since the order of dispensation will not ensure that users will be able to identify each bill’s denomination.

Comment. The proposed rule required that machines have the capability to provide information on receipts in an audible format as well (707.5.8). Some comments from individuals with vision impairments urged the Board to revise this requirement to clearly apply to all data contained on a receipt. Industry representatives, however, advised that the requirement should apply only to essential information concerning a transaction. These comments noted that some information that may not be of interest or use to customers is nevertheless required to appear on printed receipts under Federal mandates. In addition, the banking industry indicated that some ATMs have the capability to provide copies of records, such as bank statements, which should not be subject to the speech output requirements.

Response. The Board has revised the requirement for receipt information to more clearly distinguish the type of information required to be provided through speech output and the type that is not. The final rule requires that speech output devices provide all information on printed receipts, where provided, necessary to complete or verify a transaction, including balance inquiry information and error messages (707.5.2). Extraneous information that may be provided on receipts, such as the machine location and identifier, the date and time, and account numbers is not required to be provided through speech output (Exception 1). In addition, the Board has also exempted receipt information that duplicates audible information on-screen (Exception 2) and printed materials that are not actual receipts, such as copies of bank statements and checks (Exception 3).

Section 707.6 covers input controls, including numeric and function keys.

Comment. The proposed rule required all keys used to operate a machine to be tactually discernable [sic] (707.4.2). It included specifications for key surfaces to be raised 1/25 inch minimum and that outer edges have a radius of 1/50 inch maximum (707.4.2). It also required a minimum separation between keys of c inch and specified a distance between function and numeric keys based on the distance between numeric keys (707.4.3). Comments from industry pointed to these provisions as unduly restrictive and raised questions about supporting data for the specified dimensions. These commenters urged a performance-based requirement as more appropriate.

Response. The Board has revised the final rule to require at least one input control for each function (as opposed to "all keys") to be tactually discernible (707.6.1). Key surfaces are required to be raised from surrounding surfaces, but the proposed 1/25 inch minimum has been removed. In addition, the Board has also added a requirement specific to membrane keys. Such keys must also be tactually discernible from surrounding surfaces and other keys where they are the only method of input provided.

Comment. Comments from persons with disabilities called attention to the importance of access to touch screens at fare machines and ATM machines. The proposed rule provided an exception for the touch screens of video display screens (707.4.2, Exception). This exception was meant to apply only to that method of input, since the Board intended that alternative method of input that is tactually discernible would be provided in addition to the touch screen. Commenters misread this exception as completely exempting touch screens from providing tactually discernible controls.

Response. The Board has removed the exception for touch screens in the proposed rule to avoid misinterpretation of its intent. Instead, the Board has revised the requirement for tactually discernible input controls as applying to those key surfaces that are not on active areas of display screens (707.6.1). All machines with touch screens must have tactually discernible input controls as an additional alternative to those activated by touching the screen.

Comment. The proposed rule specified the arrangement of numeric keys according to the standard 12- key telephone keypad layout, which provides numbers in ascending order (707.4.4). The ATM and banking industries indicated that numbers may be arranged in descending order, similar to the arrangement of numeric keys on standard computer keyboards as required by other national standards, such as those issued in Canada. Since ATM manufacturers operate internationally, consistency with other national standards is a key industry concern.

Response. The final rule requires numeric keys to be arranged in an ascending or descending telephone keypad layout (707.6.2). The number five key is required to be tactually distinct from the other keys (a raised dot is commonly used).

Comment. The proposed rule required function keys to be arranged in a specific order and specified particular tactile symbols and colors for standard keys (707.4.5). Comments from industry opposed the mandate for a particular key arrangement which it considered impractical due to various factors that influence the design and layout of function keys. Further, these commenters questioned the need for such a requirement in view of provisions concerning the tactile labels of keys and audible operating instructions and orientation. In addition, comments noted that the tactile symbol assigned to "clear" or "correct" keys (vertical line or bar) was inconsistent with the symbol specified by Canadian standards (raised left arrow). Response. The Board has removed the requirement for function keys to be arranged in a particular horizontal or vertical order, which it considers unnecessary since such keys are to be labeled by standardized tactile symbols. This revision permits manufacturers flexibility in the design of function key layouts. In addition, the Board has changed the required symbol for "clear" or "correct" keys to a raised left arrow for consistency with Canadian standards (707.6.3.2).

Comment. The Board specified colors for standard function keys in the proposed rule and sought comment on the appropriateness of this specification, particularly for people who are color blind (Question 32). Few comments addressed this question. Instead most commenters pointed out that the specified colors did not correlate with standards used in Canada.

Response. Since many ATM manufacturers operate internationally, the Board has elected to withdraw its color specification for function keys to avoid conflict with other existing national standards.

Comment. ATMs often reject input when maximum time intervals are exceeded. Users are at risk of having the ATM card withheld and may encounter additional transaction charges due to repeated attempts to access the machine. The Board sought comment on whether it should include a specific requirement that would allow users to extend the maximum time intervals between transactions beyond the amount of time typically allotted (Question 33). Commenters from the banking industry and ATM manufacturers noted that ATMs include standard features that ask if users want more time to conduct transactions. The requirements for speech output will ensure that such questions are accessible to users with vision impairments.

Response. The Board has not included a requirement for extending transaction time intervals in view of industry practice.

Section 707.7 addresses visual display screens and provides specifications for the screen height and the legibility of visual characters. An exception is provided for drive-up ATMs, which the Board modified in the final rule to also cover drive-up fare machines (707.7, Exception). Few comments addressed these provisions and no further substantive changes have been made.