[Code of Federal Regulations]

[Title 45, Volume 1]

[Revised as of October 1, 2006]

From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access

[CITE: 45CFR85.62]



[Page 391-401]

 

                        TITLE 45--PUBLIC WELFARE

 

                    SUBTITLE A--DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

                           AND HUMAN SERVICES

 

PART 85_ENFORCEMENT OF NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF HANDICAP IN 

PROGRAMS OR ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN 

SERVICES--Table of Contents

 

Sec.  85.62  Coordination and compliance responsibilities.



    (a) Each component agency shall be primarily responsible for 

compliance with this part in connection with the programs and activities 

it conducts.

    (b) The OCR Director/Special Assistant shall have the overall 

responsibility to coordinate implementation of this part. The OCR 

Director/Special Assistant shall have authority to conduct 

investigations, to conduct compliance reviews, and to initiate such 

other actions as may be necessary to facilitate and ensure effective 

implementation of and compliance with, this part.

    (c) If as a result of an investigation or in connection with any 

other compliance or implementation activity, the OCR Director/Special 

Assistant determines that a component agency appears to be in 

noncompliance with its responsibilities under this part, OCR will 

undertake appropriate action with the component agency to assure 

compliance. In the event that OCR and the component agency are unable to 

agree on a resolution of any particular matter, the matter shall be 

submitted to the Secretary for resolution.



    Editorial Note: At the request of the Department of Health and Human 

Services, the ``Section-by-Section Analysis'' portion of the preamble of 

the document published at 53 FR 25595, July 8, 1988, as corrected at 53 

FR 26559, July 13, 1988, follows:



   Section-by-Section Analysis of Regulation and Response to Comments



    Where no discussion of comments follows the analysis of a section, 

no comments have been received thereon.



                          Section 85.1 Purpose.



    Section 85.1 states the purpose of the rule, which is to effectuate 

section 119 of the Rehabilitation, Comprehensive Services, and 

Developmental Disabilities Amendments of 1978, which amended section 504 

of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to prohibit discrimination on the 

basis of handicap in programs or activities conducted by Executive 

agencies or the United States Postal Service.



[[Page 392]]



                        Section 85.2 Application.



    The proposed regulation covers all programs and activities conducted 

by the Department of Health and Human Services (``HHS'' or the 

``agency'').

    This includes the following components:



The Office of the Secretary

    Office of the Under Secretary

    Office of the Deputy Under Secretary

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Legislation

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Management and Budget

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Peronnel Administration

    Office of the General Counsel

    Office of Inspector General

    Office for Civil Rights

    Office of Consumer Affairs

Office of Human Development Services

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Human Development Services

    Administration on Aging

    Administration for Children, Youth and Families

    Administration for Native Americans

    Administration on Developmental Disabilities

Public Health Service

    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health

    Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry

    Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration

    Centers for Disease Control

    Food and Drug Administration

    Health Resources and Services Administration

    Indian Health Service

    National Institutes of Health

Health Care Financing Administration

Social Security Administration

Family Support Administration.



    Under this section, a federally conducted program or activity is, in 

simple terms, anything a Federal agency does. Aside from employment, 

there are two major categories of federally conducted programs or 

activities covered by this regulation: those involving general public 

contact as part of ongoing agency operations, and those directly 

administered by the agency for program beneficiaries and participants. 

Activities in the first category include communication with the public 

(telephone contacts, office walk-ins, or interviews) and the public's 

use of the agency's facilities. Activities in the second category 

include programs that provide Federal services or benefits. This 

regulation does not, however, apply to programs or activities conducted 

outside the United States that do not involve individuals with handicaps 

in the United States.

    The major programs subject to this regulation are listed below. Each 

of the components listed above occupies facilities which the public may 

have occasion to visit, engages in written and oral communication with 

the public, and hires Federal employees. In addition, some components 

operate programs which involve extensive public use, as summarized 

below:



    Office of the Secretary--No major operating programs or activities 

conducted directly by the Federal government.

    Office of Human Development Services--No major operating programs or 

activities conducted directly by the Federal government.\1\

---------------------------------------------------------------------------



    \1\ Financial assistance programs conducted through grants to States 

and other recipients are covered by the section 504 rule for federally 

assisted programs at 45 CFR Part 84.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------



    Public Health Service--Directly operated programs include the Indian 

Health Service, and intramural research conducted by the National 

Institutes of Health.\1\

    Health Care Financing Administration--Directly operates the Medicare 

program.\1\

    Social Security Administration--Directly operates the Old Age, 

Survivors, and Disability Insurance, and Supplemental Security Income 

for the Aged, Blind, and Disabled programs.

    Family Support Administration--No major operating programs or 

activities conducted directly by the Federal government.\1\



    One commenter urged the inclusion of a program operated by one 

component of the Office of the Secretary, and for a list of all programs 

and activities to be appended to the regulation. In light of the fact 

that all programs and activities are covered, that a comprehensive list 

of all programs would be very lengthy, and that such a list would have 

to be amended frequently as new programs are enacted and existing 

programs expire, the above list appears to be sufficient.



                        Section 85.3 Definitions.



    Agency. For purposes of this part agency means the Department of 

Health and Human Services or any component part of the Department of 

Health and Human Services that conducts a program or activity covered by 

this part. Component agency means any such component part.

    Assistant Attorney General. Assistant Attorney General refers to the 

Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, United States 

Department of Justice.



[[Page 393]]



    Auxiliary aids. Auxiliary aids means services or devices that enable 

persons with impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills to have an 

equal opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, the 

agency's programs or activities. The definition provides examples of 

commonly used auxiliary aids. Although auxiliary aids are required 

explicitly only by Sec.  85.51(a)(1), they may also be necessary to meet 

other requirements of this regulation.

    Two commenters suggested expanding the definition of auxiliary aids 

and one of them further suggested re-naming auxiliary aids to read aids 

for reasonable accommodation and specifically include the services of 

attendants.

    The items set out in Sec.  85.3 are clearly described as examples, 

and are not intended to constitute an exhaustive list. By giving 

examples rather than by including a list, other aids can be used, and, 

in appropriate cases, required, without amending the regulation. In 

certain instances, the services of attendants may indeed be appropriate; 

in those instances, they will fall under the definition in Sec.  85.3. 

Therefore, there is no need to change the text of the regulations.

    Complete complaint. Complete complaint is defined to include all of 

the information necessary to enable the agency to investigate the 

complaint. The definition is necessary, because the 180 day period for 

the agency's investigation (see Sec.  85.61(g)) begins when the agency 

receives a complete complaint.

    Two commenters stated their belief that the definition of complete 

complaint is too restrictive, and urged language which would give the 

complainant specific information as to what additional information is 

needed, and a further 30 days to submit such information, failing which 

the complaint would be dismissed without prejudice, and the complainant 

would be so informed.

    Procedures similar to this suggestion are currently in place, and 

complainants will be given reasonable opportunities to complete the 

information submitted. There appears to be no need to spell these 

procedures out in the regulation.

    Facility. The definition of facility is similar to that in the 

section 504 coordination regulation for federally assisted programs (28 

CFR 41.3(f)), except that the term rolling stock or other conveyances 

has been added and the phrase or interest in such property has been 

deleted because the term facility, as used in this part, refers to 

structures and not to intangible property rights. It should, however, be 

noted that this part applies to all programs and activities conducted by 

the agency regardless of whether the facility in which they are 

conducted is owned, leased, or used on some other basis by the agency. 

The term facility is used in Sec. Sec.  85.41, 85.42, and 85.61(f).

    One commenter proposed not to delete the phrase or interest in such 

property. As previously stated, the phrase or interest in such property 

has been deleted because the term facility, as used in this part, refers 

to structures and not to intangible property rights.

    Individual with Handicaps. The definition of individual with 

handicaps is identical to the definition of handicapped person appearing 

in the section 504 coordination regulation for federally assisted 

programs (28 CFR 41.31), and the HHS regulation for federally assisted 

programs (45 CFR 84.3(j)). Although section 103(d) of the Rehabilitation 

Act Amendments of 1986 changed the statutory term handicapped individual 

to individual with handicaps, the legislative history of the amendment 

indicates that no substantive change was intended. Thus, although the 

term has been changed in this regulation to be consistent with the 

statute as amended, the definition is unchanged. In particular, although 

the term as revised refers to handicaps in the plural, it does not 

exclude persons who have only one handicap.

    One commenter suggested that we add sensory to the phrase physical 

or mental impairment. Since the definition set out in Sec.  85.3 

specifically includes the sense organs among the body systems whose 

impairment constitutes a handicap, we have not found it necessary to 

amend the regulation.

    OCR. OCR means the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of 

Health and Human Services.

    OCR Director/Special Assistant means the Director of the Office for 

Civil Rights, who serves concurrently as the Special Assistant to the 

Secretary for Civil Rights, or a designee of the OCR Director/Special 

Assistant.

    Qualified individual with handicaps. The definition of qualified 

individual with handicaps is a revised version of the definition of 

qualified handicapped person appearing in the section 504 coordination 

regulation for federally assisted programs (28 CFR 41.32) and the HHS 

section 504 regulation for federally assisted programs (45 CFR 84.3(k)).

    Paragraph (1) is an adaptation of existing definitions of qualified 

handicapped person for purposes of federally assisted preschool, 

elementary, and secondary education programs (see, e.g., 45 CFR 

84.3(k)(2)). It provides that an individual with handicaps is qualified 

for preschool, elementary, or secondary education programs conducted by 

the agency, if he or she is a member of a class of persons otherwise 

entitled by statute, regulation, or agency policy to receive these 

services from the agency. In other words, an individual with handicaps 

is qualified if, considering all factors other than the handicapping 

condition, he or she is entitled to receive educational services from 

the agency.



[[Page 394]]



    Paragraph (2) deviates from existing regulations for federally 

assisted programs because of intervening court decisions. It defines 

qualified individual with handicaps with regard to any program other 

than those covered by paragraph (1) under which a person is required to 

perform services or to achieve a level of accomplishment. In such 

programs, a qualified individual with handicaps is one who can achieve 

the purpose of the program without modifications in the program that the 

agency can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in its 

nature. This definition reflects the decision of the Supreme Court in 

Davis.

    In that case, the Court ruled that a hearing-impaired applicant to a 

nursing school was not a qualified handicapped person because her 

hearing impairment would prevent her from participating in the clinical 

training portion of the program. The Court found that, if the program 

were modified so as to enable the respondent to participate (by 

exempting her from the clinical training requirements), she would not 

receive even a rough equivalent of the training a nursing program 

normally gives. Id. at 410. It also found that the purpose of [the] 

program was to train persons who could serve the nursing profession in 

all customary ways, Id. at 413, and that the respondent would be unable, 

because of her hearing impairment, to perform some functions expected of 

a registered nurse. It, therefore, concluded that the school was not 

required by section 504 to make such modifications that would result in 

a fundamental alteration in the nature of the program. Id. at 410.

    We have incorporated the Court's language in the definition of 

qualified individual with handicaps in order to make clear that such a 

person must be able to participate in the program offered by the agency. 

The agency is required to make modifications in order to enable an 

applicant with handicaps to participate, but is not required to offer a 

program of a fundamentally different nature. The test is whether, with 

appropriate modifications, the applicant can achieve the purpose of the 

program offered, not whether the applicant could benefit or obtain 

results from some other program that the agency does not offer. Although 

the revised definition allows exclusion of some individuals with 

handicaps from some programs, it requires that an individual with 

handicaps who is capable of achieving the purpose of the program must be 

accommodated, provided that the modifications do not fundamentally alter 

the purpose of the program.

    One commenter proposed inserting the second sentence from the above 

paragraph into the regulatory text. We believe that the use of this 

language in the preamble is sufficient.

    Another commenter commended HHS for the discussion of Davis, and the 

cases interpreting the Davis decision, in order to explain why the 

language of this part does not precisely track that of the regulations 

concerning federally assisted recipients (45 CFR Part 84). Two other 

commenters stated their view that incorporating Davis and Alexander into 

the regulation was unduly restrictive, and that the differences between 

this part and Part 84 would result in holding HHS to a lesser standard 

than HHS holds recipients of Federal financial assistance.

    We believe that the Supreme Court's decision in Davis as well as the 

subsequent lower court decisions following Davis interpret section 504 

and that it is necessary to reflect those decisions in the Department's 

regulation. The suggested changes are therefore not being adopted.

    The agency has the burden of demonstrating that a proposed 

modification would constitute a fundamental alteration in the nature of 

its program or activity. Furthermore, in demonstrating that a 

modification would result in such an alteration, the agency must follow 

the procedures established in Sec. Sec.  85.42(a) and 85.51(d), which 

are discussed below, for demonstrating that an action would result in 

undue financial and administrative burdens to the agency. That is, the 

decision must be made by the agency head or his or her designee in 

writing after consideration of all resources which are legally available 

to the agency for the purpose, and must be accompanied by an explanation 

of the reasons for the decision. If the agency head determines that an 

action would result in a fundamental alteration, the agency must 

consider options that would enable the individual with handicaps to 

achieve the purpose of the program but would not result in such an 

alteration.

    Two commenters suggested that the total resources of the agency be 

considered in determining undue burden. Because many Department funds 

are earmarked for specific purposes and are therefore unavailable for 

use elsewhere, the entire agency budget is not an appropriate 

consideration.

    For programs or activities which do not fall under either of the 

first two paragraphs, paragraph (3) adopts the existing definition of 

qualified handicapped person with respect to services (28 CFR 41.32(b)) 

in the coordination regulation for programs receiving Federal financial 

assistance. Under this definition, a qualified individual with handicaps 

is an individual with handicaps who meets the essential eligibility 

requirements for participation in the program or activity.

    Paragraph (4) explains that qualified individual with handicaps 

means qualified handicapped person as that term is defined for purposes 

of employment in the EEOC regulation at 29 CFR 1613.702(f), which is 

made applicable to this part by Sec.  85.31. Nothing in this part 

changes existing regulations pertaining to employment.



[[Page 395]]



    One commenter proposed using the general section 504 definition of 

qualified handicapped person in employment cases rather than the 

definition of the EEOC regulation. The definition has been supplied by 

the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission which coordinates all 

employment discrimination matters throughout the government. It is also 

the Department's view that it is important to have a uniform definition 

of what constitutes employment discrimination throughout the Federal 

government.

    Secretary means the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human 

Services or the Secretary's designee.

    Section 504. This definition makes clear that, as used in this part, 

section 504 applies only to programs or activities conducted by the 

agency itself and not to programs or activities to which it provides 

Federal financial assistance.



                     Section 85.11 Self-evaluation.



    The agency shall conduct a self-evaluation of its compliance with 

section 504 within one year of the effective date of this regulation. 

The self-evaluation requirement is present in the existing section 504 

coordination regulation for programs or activities receiving Federal 

financial assistance (28 CFR 41.5(b)(2)) and the HHS regulations for 

federally assisted programs (45 CFR 84.6(k)). Experience has 

demonstrated the self-evaluation process to be a valuable means of 

establishing a working relationship with individuals with handicaps that 

promotes both effective and efficient implementation of section 504.

    One commenter stated that a three-year retention period is 

insufficient, and proposed that self-evaluations be kept indefinitely. 

The regulation requires the self-evaluation to be kept for a minimum of 

three years, but does not include a maximum. It is expected that the 

self-evaluation will be retained for the period provided in current 

document retention policies.

    Another commenter proposed that copies of the self-evaluation be 

made available for copying as well as for public inspection. This 

proposal has been adopted.

    A further commenter proposed the inclusion of provisions for 

assurances, transition plans and specific modification requirements. We 

believe that while assurances are appropriate--and can be specifically 

enforced--in section 504 regulations for federally assisted programs or 

activities, all of the entities involved in this part are under the 

control of the Secretary, who can issue the necessary directives; 

assurances are therefore not required.

    The final rule provides for participation in the self-evaluation 

process by individuals with handicaps or organizations representing 

individuals with handicaps by submitting comments, which may include the 

development of transition plans. It is expected that component agencies 

will consult with individuals with handicaps among their own staff in 

the course of preparing self-evaluations.

    Because modification requirements are intended to address any 

potential problems in the agency's programs or activities, they are not 

specified in the regulation.



                          Section 85.12 Notice.



    Section 85.12 requires the agency to disseminate sufficient 

information to employees, applicants, participants, beneficiaries, and 

other interested persons to apprise them of the rights and protections 

afforded by section 504 and this part. Methods of providing this 

information include, for example, the publication of information in 

handbooks, manuals, and pamphlets that are distributed to the public to 

describe the agency's programs and activities or in connection with 

recruitment; the display of informative posters in service centers and 

other public places; or the broadcasting of information by television or 

radio.

    One commenter suggested the inclusion of a reference to recruitment 

materials in the above examples. Such a reference has been included.



       Section 85.21 General prohibitions against discrimination.



    Section 85.21 is an adaptation of the corresponding section of the 

section 504 coordination regulation for programs and activities 

receiving Federal financial assistance (28 CFR 41.51).

    Paragraph (a) restates the nondiscrimination mandate of section 504. 

The remaining paragraphs in Sec.  85.21 establish the general principles 

for analyzing whether any particular action of the agency violates this 

mandate. These principles serve as the analytical foundation for the 

remaining sections of the part. If the agency violates a provision in 

any of the subsequent sections, it will also violate one of the general 

prohibitions found in Sec.  85.21. When there is no applicable 

subsequent provision, the general prohibitions stated in this section 

apply.

    Paragraph (b) prohibits overt denials of equal treatment of 

individuals with handicaps. The agency may not refuse to provide an 

individual with handicaps with an equal opportunity to participate in or 

benefit from its program simply because the person is handicapped. Such 

blatantly exclusionary practices could result from the use of 

irrebuttable presumptions that absolutely exclude certain classes of 

disabled persons (e.g., epileptics, hearing-impaired persons, persons 

with heart ailments) from participation in programs or activities 

without regard to an individual's actual ability to participate. Use of 

an irrebuttable presumption is



[[Page 396]]



permissible only when in all cases a physical condition by its very 

nature would prevent an individual from meeting the essential 

eligibility requirements for participation in the activity in question. 

It would be permissible, therefore, to exclude without an individual 

evaluation all persons who are blind in both eyes from eligibility for a 

license to operate a commercial vehicle in interstate commerce; but it 

may not be permissible to automatically disqualify all those who are 

blind in just one eye.

    In addition, section 504 prohibits more than just the most obvious 

denials of equal treatment. It is not enough to admit persons in 

wheelchairs to a program if the facilities in which the program is 

conducted are inaccessible. Paragraph (b)(1)(iii), therefore, requires 

that the opportunity to participate or benefit afforded to an individual 

with handicaps be as effective as that afforded to others. The later 

sections on program accessibility (Sec. Sec.  85.41-43) and 

communication (Sec.  85.51) are specific applications of this principle.

    Despite the mandate of paragraph (d) that the agency administer its 

programs and activities in the most integrated setting appropriate to 

the needs of qualified individuals with handicaps, paragraph (b)(1)(iv), 

in conjunction with paragraph (d), permits the agency to develop 

separate or different aids, benefits, or services when necessary to 

provide individuals with handicaps with an equal opportunity to 

participate in or benefit from the agency's programs or activities. 

Paragraph (b)(1)(iv) requires that different or separate aids, benefits, 

or services be provided only when necessary to ensure that the aids, 

benefits, or services are as effective as those provided to others. Even 

when separate or different aids, benefits or services would be more 

effective, paragraph (b)(2) provides that a qualified individual with 

handicaps still has the right to choose to participate in the program 

that is not designed to accommodate individuals with handicaps.

    Paragraph (b)(1)(v) prohibits the agency from denying a qualified 

individual with handicaps the opportunity to participate as a member of 

a planning or advisory board.

    Paragraph (b)(1)(vi) prohibits the agency from limiting a qualified 

individual with handicaps in the enjoyment of any right, privilege, 

advantage, or opportunity enjoyed by others receiving any aid, benefit, 

or service.

    Paragraph (b)(3) prohibits the agency from utilizing criteria or 

methods of administration that deny individuals with handicaps access to 

the agency's programs or activities. The phrase criteria or methods of 

administration refers to official written agency policies, as well as 

the actual practices of the agency. This paragraph prohibits both 

blatantly exclusionary policies or practices and nonessential policies 

and practices that are neutral on their face, but deny individuals with 

handicaps an effective opportunity to participate.

    Paragraph (b)(4) specifically applies the prohibition enunciated in 

Sec.  85.21(b)(3) to the process of selecting sites for construction of 

new facilities or existing facilities to be used by the agency. 

Paragraph (b)(4) does not apply to construction of additional buildings 

at an existing site.

    Paragraph (b)(5) prohibits the agency, in the selection of 

procurement contractors, from using criteria that subject qualified 

individuals with handicaps to discrimination on the basis of handicap.

    Paragraph (b)(6) prohibits the agency from discriminating against 

qualified individuals with handicaps on the basis of handicap in the 

granting of licenses or certifications. A person is a qualified 

individual with handicaps with respect to licensing or certification if 

he or she can meet the essential eligibility requirements for receiving 

the license or certification (see Sec.  85.3).

    In addition, the agency may not establish requirements for the 

programs or activities of licensees or certified entities that subject 

qualified individuals with handicaps to discrimination on the basis of 

handicap. For example, the agency must comply with this requirement when 

establishing safety standards for the operations of licensees. In that 

case, the agency must ensure that the standards it promulgates do not 

discriminate against the employment of qualified individuals with 

handicaps in an impermissible manner.

    Paragraph (b)(6) does not extend section 504 directly to the 

programs or activities of licensees or certified entities themselves. 

The programs or activities of Federal licensees or certified entities 

are not themselves federally conducted programs or activities; nor are 

they programs or activities receiving Federal financial assistance 

merely by virtue of the Federal license or certificate. However, as 

noted above, section 504 may affect the content of the rules established 

by the agency for the operation of the program or activity of the 

licensee or certified entity and thereby indirectly affect limited 

aspects of their operations.

    One commenter suggested pointing out that Federal licensees or 

certified entities, having received services from Federal employees 

during the process of licensing or certification, thereby become 

Federally assisted recipients, and are covered by 45 CFR Part 84. Such 

an argument is beyond the scope of this part, and is therefore not being 

included.

    Another commenter suggested including language such as that found in 

45 CFR 84.4(b)(1) to the effect that agencies may not perpetuate 

discrimination against qualified



[[Page 397]]



individuals with handicaps by providing significant assistance to an 

agency, organization or person that discriminates on the basis of 

handicap. Assistance from the agency that would provide significant 

support to an organization constitutes Federal financial assistance and 

the organization, as a recipient of such assistance, would be covered by 

the section 504 regulation for federally assisted programs.

    Paragraph (c) provides that programs conducted pursuant to Federal 

statute or Executive order that are designed to benefit only individuals 

with handicaps or a given class of individuals with handicaps may be 

limited to individuals those with handicaps.

    Paragraph (d) provides that the agency must administer programs and 

activities in the most integrated setting appropriate to the next of 

qualified individuals with handicaps, i.e. in a setting that enables 

individuals with handicaps to interact with nonhandicapped individuals 

to the fullest extent possible.



                        Section 85.31 Employment.



    Section 85.31 prohibits discrimination on the basis of handicap in 

employment by the agency. Courts have held that section 504, as amended 

in 1978, covers the employment practices of Executive agencies. Gardner 

v. Morris, 752 F.2d 1271, 1277 (8th Cir. 1985); Smith v. United States 

Postal Service, 742 F.2d 257, 259-60 (6th Cir. 1984); Prewitt v. United 

States Postal Service, 662 F.2d 292, 302-04 (5th Cir. 1981). Contra 

McGuiness v. United States Postal Service, 744 F.2d 1318, 1320-21 (7th 

Cir. 1984); Boyd v. United States Postal Service, 752 F.2d 410, 413-14 

(9th Cir. 1985).

    Courts uniformly have held that, in order to give effect to section 

501 of the Rehabilitation Act, which covers Federal employment, the 

administrative procedures of section 501 must be followed in processing 

complaints of employment discrimination under section 504. Morgan v. 

United States Postal Service, 798 F.2d 1162, 1164-65 (8th Cir. 1986); 

Smith, 742 F.2d at 262; Prewitt, 662 F.2d at 304. Accordingly, Sec.  

85.31 (Employment) of this rule adopts the definitions, requirements, 

and procedures of section 501 as established in regulations of the EEOC 

at 29 CFR Part 1613. Responsibility for coordinating enforcement of 

Federal laws prohibiting discrimination in employment is assigned to the 

EEOC by Executive Order 12067 (3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 206). Under this 

authority, the EEOC establishes government-wide standards on 

nondiscrimination in employment on the basis of handicap.

    One commenter proposed that the general definition of qualified 

individual with handicaps be used in this section, instead of that used 

under section 501. We believe that the above paragraphs sufficiently 

explain the need for using the section 501 definition.

    In addition to this section, Sec.  85.61(c) specifies that the 

agency will use the existing EEOC procedures to resolve allegations of 

employment discrimination.



     Section 85.41 Program accessibility: Discrimination prohibited.



    Section 85.41 states the general nondiscrimination principle 

underlying the program accessibility requirements of Sec. Sec.  85.42 

and 85.43.



        Section 85.42 Program accessibility: Existing facilities.



    This part adopts the program accessibility concept found in the 

existing section 504 coordination regulation for programs or activities 

receiving Federal financial assistance (28 CFR 41.57) with certain 

modifications. Thus, Sec.  85.42 requires that each agency program or 

activity, when viewed in its entirety, be readily accessible to and 

usable by individuals with handicaps. The part also makes clear that the 

agency is not required to make each of its existing facilities 

accessible (Sec.  85.42(a)(1)). However, Sec.  85.42, unlike 28 CFR 

41.57, places explicit limits on the agency's obligation to ensure 

program accessibility (Sec.  85.42(a)(2)).

    One commenter stated that the provisions of Sec.  85.42(a)(1) were 

negatively worded and may reflect a misinterpretation of the decision of 

the Supreme Court in Grove City College v. Bell, 465 U.S. 555 (1984), 

and argued for deletion of this language.

    The language is identical to that in the section 504 regulation for 

federally assisted programs or activities. We believe that the inclusion 

of this language is necessary in order to make clear that, while every 

aspect of every Federal program or activity need not be accessible, each 

program or activity, when viewed as a whole, must be accessible.

    Another commenter recommended adding the language ``where other 

methods are equally effective in achieving compliance from Sec.  

84.42(b) to Sec.  84.42(a)(1). We believe that, because Sec. Sec.  84.42 

(a) and (b) treat different aspects of the subject, their language must 

necessarily differ.

    Paragraph (a)(2) generally codifies recent case law that defines the 

scope of the agency's obligation to ensure program accessibility. This 

paragraph provides that in meeting the program accessibility 

requirement, the agency is not required to take any action that would 

result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of its program or 

activity, or in undue financial and administrative burdens. A similar 

limitation is provided in Sec.  85.51(d). This provision is based on the 

Supreme Court's holding in Southeastern Community College v. Davis, 442 

U.S. 397 (1979), that section 504 does not require program modifications 

that result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a program, and 

on



[[Page 398]]



the Court's statement that section 504 does not require modifications 

that would result in ``undue financial and administrative burdens.'' 442 

U.S. at 412. Since Davis, circuit courts have applied this limitation on 

a showing that only one of the two ``undue burdens'' would be created as 

a result of the modification sought to be imposed under section 504. 

See, e.g., Dopico v. Goldschmidt, 687 F.2d 644 (2d Cir. 1982); American 

Public Transit Association v. Lewis, 655 F.2d 1272 (D.C. Cir. 1981).

    Paragraph (a)(2) and Sec.  85.51(d) are also supported by the 

Supreme Court's decision in Alexander v. Choate, 469 U.S. 287 (1985). 

Alexander involved a challenge to the State of Tennessee's reduction of 

inpatient hospital care coverage under Medicaid from 20 to 14 days per 

year. Plaintiffs argued that this reduction violated section 504 because 

it had an adverse impact on handicapped persons. The Court assumed 

without deciding that section 504 reaches at least some conduct that has 

an unjustifiable disparate impact on handicapped people, but held that 

the reduction was not ``the sort of disparate impact'' discrimination 

that might be prohibited by section 504 or its implementing regulation. 

Id at 299.

    Relying on Davis, the Court said that section 504 guarantees 

qualified handicapped persons ``meaningful access to the benefits the 

grantee offers,'' id. at 301, and that ``reasonable adjustments in the 

nature of the benefit offered must at times be made to assure meaningful 

access.'' Id. n.21 (emphasis added). However, section 504 does not 

require `` `changes,' `adjustments,' or `modifications' to existing 

programs that would be `substantial' * * * or that would constitute 

`fundamental alteration[s] in the nature of a program.' '' Id. at n.20 

(citations omitted). Alexander supports the position, based on Davis and 

the earlier lower court decisions, that in some situations, certain 

accommodations for a handicapped person may so alter an agency's program 

or activity, or entail such extensive costs and administrative burdens 

that the refusal to undertake the accommodations is not discriminatory. 

Thus, failure to include such an ``undue burdens'' provision could lead 

to judicial invalidation of the regulation or reversal of a particular 

enforcement action taken pursuant to the regulation.

    This paragraph, however, does not establish an absolute defense; it 

does not relieve the agency of all obligations to individuals with 

handicaps. Although the agency is not required to take actions that 

would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a program or 

activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens, it 

nevertheless must take any other steps necessary to ensure that 

individuals with handicaps receive the benefits and services of the 

federally conducted program or activity.

    It is our view that compliance with Sec.  85.42(a) would in most 

cases not result in undue financial and administrative burdens on the 

agency. In determining whether financial and administrative burdens are 

undue, all agency resources available for use in the funding and 

operation of the conducted program or activity should be considered. The 

burden of proving that compliance with Sec.  85.42(a) would 

fundamentally alter the nature of a program or activity or would result 

in undue financial and administrative burdens rests with the agency. The 

decision that compliance would result in such alteration or burdens must 

be made by the agency head or his or her designee, and must be 

accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that 

conclusion. Any person who believes that he or she or any specific class 

of persons has been injured by the agency head's decision or failure to 

make a decision may file a complaint under the compliance procedures 

established in Sec.  85.61. The opportunity to file such a complaint 

responds to one commenter's suggestion that review by a high level 

Department official be assured.

    Paragraph (b)(1) sets forth a number of means by which program 

accessibility may be achieved, including redesign of equipment, 

reassignment of services to accessible buildings, and provision of 

aides. In choosing among methods, the agency shall give priority 

consideration to those that will be consistent with provision of 

services in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of 

individuals with handicaps. Structural changes in existing facilities 

are required only when there is no other feasible way to make the 

agency's program accessible. (It should be noted that ``structural 

changes'' include all physical changes to a facility; the term does not 

refer only to changes to structural features, such as removal of or 

alteration to a load-bearing structural member.) The agency may comply 

with the program accessibility requirement by delivering services at 

alternate accessible sites or making home visits as appropriate.

    One commenter proposed that methods other than structural changes to 

ensure accessibility should be ``equally effective''. The regulations 

implementing section 504 for federally assisted programs do not contain 

such language. The addition of the proposed language would impose a 

regulatory standard on the Department not required of recipients. In 

view of the fact that the 1978 amendments were intended to apply the 

same requirements to federally conducted programs as apply to federally 

assisted programs, the proposed language is not being adopted.

    Paragraphs (c) and (d) establish time periods for complying with the 

program accessibility requirement. As currently required for federally 

assisted programs by 28 CFR



[[Page 399]]



41.57(b), the agency must make any necessary structural changes in 

facilities as soon as practicable, but in no event later than three (3) 

years after the effective date of this part. Where structural 

modifications are required and it is not expected that these can be 

completed within six months, a transition plan should be developed 

within six months of the effective date of this part. Aside from 

structural changes, all other necessary steps to achieve compliance 

shall be taken within sixty days.

    One commenter proposes to limit the time allowed for making 

structural modifications to one year. We note that the basic requirement 

is that these changes be made ``as soon as practicable,'' and that the 

three-year limit is the maximum period of time. Furthermore, the three-

year maximum for transition plans is identical to that contained in the 

regulations for federally assisted recipients.



 Section 85.43 Program accessibility: New construction and alterations.



    Overlapping coverage exists with respect to new construction and 

alterations under section 504 and the Architectural Barriers Act of 

1968, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4151-4157). Section 85.43 provides that 

those buildings that are constructed or altered by, on behalf of, or for 

the use of the agency shall be designed, constructed, or altered to be 

readily accessible to and usable by individuals with handicaps in 

accordance with 41 CFR Part 101-19, 101-19.600 to 101-19.607 (GSA 

regulation which incorporates the Uniform Federal Accessibility 

Standards). This standard was promulgated pursuant to the Architectural 

Barriers Act of 1968, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4151-4157). We believe that 

it is appropriate to adopt the existing Architectural Barriers Act 

standard for section 504 compliance because new and altered buildings 

subject to this regulation are also subject to the Architectural 

Barriers Act and because adoption of the standard will avoid duplicative 

and possibly inconsistent standards.

    Existing buildings leased by the agency after the effective date of 

this regulation are not required by the regulation to meet accessibility 

standards simply by virtue of being leased. They are subject, however, 

to the program accessibility standards for existing facilities in Sec.  

85.42. To the extent the buildings are newly constructed or altered, 

they must also meet the new constructions and alteration requirements of 

Sec.  85.43.

    Federal practice under section 504 has always treated newly leased 

buildings as subject to the existing facility program accessibility 

standard. Unlike the construction of new buildings where architectural 

barriers can be avoided at little or no cost, the application of new 

construction standards to an existing building being leased raises the 

same prospect of retrofitting buildings as the use of an existing 

Federal facility, and the agency believes that same program 

accessibility standards should apply to both owned and leased existing 

buildings.

    In Rose v. United States Postal Service, 774 F.2d 1355 (9th Cir. 

1985), the Ninth Circuit held that the Architectural Barriers Act 

requires accessibility at the time of lease. The Rose court did not 

address the question of whether section 504 likewise requires 

accessibility as a condition of lease, and the case was remanded to the 

District Court for, among other things, consideration of this issue. Two 

commenters urged that leased buildings be required to be accessible at 

the time of lease. The agency may provide more specific guidance on 

section 504 requirements for leased buildings after the litigation is 

completed.



                      Section 85.51 Communications.



    Section 85.51 requires the agency to take appropriate steps to 

ensure effective communication with personnel of other Federal entities, 

applicants, participants, and members of the public. These steps shall 

include procedures for determining when auxiliary aids are necessary 

under Sec.  85.1(a)(1) to afford an individual with handicaps an equal 

opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, the agency's 

program or activity. They shall also include an opportunity for 

individuals with handicaps to request the auxiliary aids of their 

choice. This expressed choice shall be given primary consideration by 

the agency (Sec.  85.51(a)(1)(i)). The agency shall honor the choice 

unless it can demonstrate that another effective means of communication 

exists or that use of the means chosen would not be required under Sec.  

85.51(d). That paragraph limits the obligations of the agency to ensure 

effective communication in accordance with Davis and the circuit court 

opinions interpreting it (see supra preamble discussion of Sec.  

85.42(c)(2)). Unless not required by Sec.  85.51(d), the agency shall 

provide auxiliary aids at no cost to the individual with handicaps.

    One commenter proposed that the choice of auxiliary aid made by the 

individual with handicaps should govern unless it would constitute an 

undue hardship on the agency. We believe that the language set out above 

is adequate to ensure consideration of an individual's preference.

    Another commenter proposed that the regulation require all films and 

videotapes produced by the agency to be captioned for the hearing-

impaired. The Department intends to examine all appropriate methods of 

ensuring effective communication.

    The same commenter applauded HHS for the inclusion of the language 

requiring HHS to inform individuals with handicaps of their section 504 

rights.



[[Page 400]]



    The discussion of Sec.  85.42(a), Program accessibility, Existing 

facilities, regarding the determination of what constitutes undue 

financial and administrative burdens, also applies to Sec.  85.51(d) and 

should be referred to for a complete understanding of the agency's 

obligation to comply with Sec.  85.51.

    In some circumstances, a notepad and written materials may be 

sufficient to permit effective communication with a hearing-impaired 

person. In many circumstances, however, they may not be, particularly 

when the information being communicated is complex or exchanged for a 

lengthy period of time (e.g. a meeting) or where the hearing-impaired 

applicant or participant is not skilled in spoken or written language. 

In these cases, a sign language interpreter may be appropriate.

    One commenter proposed changing the language to state that notepads 

rarely suffice for communication with the hearing-impaired. Considering 

that a significant number of the hearing-impaired may not be skilled in 

sign language, we believe that the language used is appropriate.

    For vision-impaired persons, effective communication might be 

achieved by several means, including readers and audio recordings. In 

general, the agency intends to inform the public of (1) the 

communications services it offers to afford individuals with handicaps 

an equal opportunity to participate in or benefit from its programs and 

activities, (2) the opportunity to request a particular mode of 

communication, and (3) the agency's preferences regarding auxiliary aids 

if it can demonstrate that several different modes are effective.

    The agency shall ensure effective communication with vision-impaired 

and hearing-impaired persons involved in proceedings conducted by the 

agency. Auxiliary aids must be afforded where necessary to ensure 

effective communication at the proceedings. If sign language 

interpreters are necessary, the agency may require that it be given 

reasonable notice prior to the proceedings of the need for an 

interpreter. Moreover, the agency need not provide individually 

prescribed devices, readers for personal use or study, or other devices 

of a personal nature (Sec.  85.51(a)(1)(ii)). For example, the agency 

need not provide eye glasses or hearing aids to applicants or 

participants in its programs. Similarly, the regulation does not require 

the agency to provide wheelchairs to persons with mobility impairments.

    One commenter proposed that the items which agencies are not 

required to provide and the circumstances involved be described in more 

detail. We believe that the description given is sufficient, because the 

interpretation of this provision will be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Paragraph (b) requires the agency to ensure that individuals with 

handicaps can obtain information concerning accessible services, 

activities, and facilities.

    Paragraph (c) requires the agency to provide signage at inaccessible 

facilities that direct users to locations with information about 

accessible facilities.

    One commenter suggested specifically mentioning the international 

symbol for deafness, and placing such signs at the main entrance of 

buildings equipped to service the hearing-impaired. We believe that the 

language contained in Sec. Sec.  85.51 (b) and (c) requires the agency 

to ensure that individuals with handicaps, including those with impaired 

hearing, can obtain information regarding accessibility, and that this 

requirement is sufficient to afford flexibility on the part of the 

agency regarding use of appropriate signage.

    One commenter proposed adding the words ``in the most integrated 

setting appropriate'' to the language in Sec.  85.51(d). This language 

already appears elsewhere in the regulation, e.g. in Sec.  85.42(b)(2), 

and it is the Department's intention to act in accordance with that 

provision.



                  Section 85.61 Compliance procedures.



    Paragraph (a) specifies that paragraphs (b) and (d) through (l) of 

this section establish the procedures for processing complaints other 

than employment complaints. Paragraph (c) provides that the agency will 

process employment complaints according to procedures established in 

existing regulations of the EEOC (29 CFR Part 1613) pursuant to section 

501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 791).

    Paragraph (b) designates the official responsible for coordinating 

implementation of Sec.  85.61. The NPRM stated that responsibility for 

the implementation and operation of this ``part'' shall be vested in the 

OCR Director/Special Assistant. The final rule has been revised by 

replacing the word ``part'' with the word ``section'' to clarify the 

responsibility for coordinating implementation of Sec.  85.61.

    The agency is required to accept and investigate all complete 

complaints (Sec.  85.61(d)). Two commenters suggested that a complainant 

have an opportunity to remedy an incomplete complaint. Current 

administrative procedures provide for this practice and it need not be 

included in the text of the regulation.

    If the agency determines that it does not have jurisdiction over a 

complaint, it shall promptly notify the complainant and make reasonable 

efforts to refer the complaint to the appropriate entity of the Federal 

Government (Sec.  85.61(e)). One commenter pointed out that where a 

reference to another entity of the Federal government is required, the 

obligation to refer should be absolute, not limited to reasonable 

efforts. The language ``shall make reasonable efforts to refer'' is



[[Page 401]]



not intended to minimize the Department's obligation.

    Paragraph (f) requires the agency to notify the Architectural and 

Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (ATBCB) upon receipt of a 

complaint alleging that a building or facility subject to the 

Architectural Barriers Act was designed, constructed, or altered in a 

manner that does not provide ready access and use by individuals with 

handicaps.

    Paragraph (g) requires the agency to provide to the complainant, in 

writing, findings of fact and conclusions of law, the relief granted if 

noncompliance is found, and notice of the right to appeal (Sec.  

85.61(g)). One appeal within the agency shall be provided (Sec.  

85.61(i)). The appeal will not be heard by the same person who made the 

initial determination of compliance or noncompliance.

    Paragraph (1) permits the agency to delegate its authority for 

investigating complaints to other Federal agencies. However, the 

statutory obligation of the agency to make a final determination of 

compliance or noncompliance may not be delegated.

    Commenters have suggested the following:

    Notifying complainants whenever their complaints are referred to 

another agency. Current administrative procedures provide for this 

practice and it need not be included in the text of the regulation.

    Describing the basic parameters for submitting or obtaining evidence 

used to decide appeals. Since the grounds for appeal may be extremely 

varied, it would not be practicable to set out parameters for every 

appeal.

    Including a statement as to complainants' rights to judicial review. 

These rights are statutory and beyond the scope of this regulation.

    Obtaining the expertise of ATBCB in appropriate cases. A provision 

regarding notification of ATBCB is already included in the regulation.

    Including a statement that all other regulations, forms and 

directives issued by HHS are superseded by the nondiscrimination 

requirements of this part. The Department views any other issuances 

falling short of the requirements of this regulation as insufficient to 

ensure compliance and therefore such a statement is unnecessary.

    Provisions for attorneys fees and compensation to the prevailing 

party. Such provisions are statutory and beyond the scope of this 

regulation.



       Section 85.62 Coordination and compliance responsibilities.



    Section 85.62 sets out the respective responsibilities of the 

components of HHS and of the Director, OCR/Special Assistant in the 

implementation of section 504 to programs and activities conducted by 

HHS.

    Paragraph (c) specifies the respective roles of OCR and of the HHS 

component in cases in which noncompliance is found.

    In the event that OCR and the HHS component cannot agree on a 

resolution of any particular matter, such matter will be submitted to 

the Secretary for resolution.