Reconciling State and The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Accessibility Guidelines. Presenters: Aaron McCullough and John Torkelson. >> AARON: Good afternoon everybody and welcome to the webcast on Reconciling State Law and the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines. My name is Aaron McCullough and I'm an employee of the Disability Law Resource Project here at the ILRU and we're the sponsor for today's event. I'll be moderating the webcast as well as participating with our -- my co-presenter. I'll also be voicing your questions to the presenters that you submit. In order to submit a question, you can click on the submit question button at the bottom of your RealOne Player screen or simply address it to webcast@ilru.org. Please send those now or at any point during the presentation. I will pose your questions to the -- to myself and the other presenter, and we are going to have a number of places where we'll pause for questions. However, if you have technical difficulties in accessing the -- either the E-mail for questions or the presentation in general, please give us a call at (713)520-0232. For any technical difficulties, call (713)520-0232. Today's webcast is going to focus on a fairly broad field, but one that we haven't dealt with in a great deal of detail in webcast format. We're going to talk about the evolution of the federal accessibility guidelines and what is happening in many places around the country at the state level. We're going to focus again on the -- what's changing with regards to the physical environment and the design and construction standards under the Americans with Disabilities Act, where that law is going and again some of the really interesting things that are happening at the state level in terms of enforcement. We're lucky to have with us a long time partner of the Disability Law Resource Project, a long time collaborator with John Torkelson. John is a managing director and founder of ACCESSpartnership -- of the ACCESSpartnership Limited, which is a consultation service that works with architects and building owners and institutions that operate facilities providing guidance on the Texas Accessibility Standards which we'll talk about more in depth as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act. John is a Registered Accessibility Specialist or RAS and you'll hear us speak of them more in the state of Texas. This is a resource for architects and building managers to get guidance on accessible design and compliance for facilities built in Texas. He also does Fair Housing Act consulting and accessibility due diligence and education and training, and I've worked with him a great deal on some training opportunities. Again, he is a Registered Accessibiity Specialist for plan reviews and inspections and he's the president and the board of the professional group for Texas Registered Accessibility Specialists called the Texas Registered Accessibility Specialists Association. John is an Aggie. I warn you, anybody who has a problem with Aggies, and he's educated with an undergraduate degree from Texas A&M University and he's currently working on a masters of architecture at the University of Texas. John, say Hi. >> JOHN: Whoops. >> AARON: Say whoops. >> JOHN: Hello, I'm learning the phone system here. >> AARON: We've already got some questions in advance, and we'll be asking those so don't worry about us getting to those. I also want to apologize. I'm filling in for Rachel Kosoy, our training coordinator and who has a lot smoother voice. Those who have attended a webcast in the past will feel the loss and I'll try to fill in for her as best as I can. She's a little bit ill today. First of all, because we anticipate we're going to get questions about this, a number of you have probably heard that there is a new set of accessibility guidelines that have been released by the Access Board, the federal agency charged with creating accessibility standards or -- well, accessibility guidelines. However, these are a set of proposed changes to the current ADAAG. Essentially this process began over a decade ago, well after the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the creation of those regulations, but quite sometime ago to update the specifications in light of the things that they had already began to hear back from the people who were obligated to comply from those design groups, from those facility operators, and in addition, they had a goal of incorporating additional special occupancies as well as bringing the set of accessibility guidelines more into concordance with standardized industry code or model building code and other industry standards. And they released a proposed -- or a preliminary set of guidelines five years ago, and a final set of guidelines back in July. Now -- now this set of guidelines, what we call the ADAABAAG or Americans with Disabilities Act Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Guidelines is open to comment for the Department of Justice which is the federal lobby that will eventually complete the rule-making and adopt this set of rules if somewhat changed sometimes in the next -- our best guess couple of years. So right now we -- the standards that you've been operating under for well over a decade are the current enforceable standards nationwide, but we do have a proposed set of laws that have clarified the position of what the federal government thinks will be accessibility compliance, but it also does some fairly brilliant things. It's provided in many cases a set of ranges rather than -- or a range for compliance and measurement rather than the hard and fast, for example, centerline on the installation of a toilet stall. They've also responded to many, many requests over the years to clarify particular provisions. They've reorganized the code or the set of guidelines. They've reorganized the appendices. In addition, they've clarified some of the figures that interpret the underlying proposed regulatory law and it's basically turned into a much easier set of codes to comply with, but I must reinforce that this is not in its final stage, nor is it enforceable and in many cases it technically falls below the minimum requirements of the current enforceable standards. So while those who are responsible for facilities and for example civic improvements and civil engineering projects probably need to be looking forward in terms of planning in the long term, right now you need to follow the current enforceable standards. In addition, what we're going to talk about for the most part today is the difference between various state approaches to compliance with accessibility guidelines, efforts from a number of states to go through code certification -- code certification process and we'll elaborate on that more, but we'll be using the Texas Accessibility Standards or the TAS as an example of how this process works. Do we have any questions at this point? Let's see. Actually we're going to save the two questions that I have for a little bit later in the presentation. And I'm going to proceed and discuss -- I'll be brief -- the certification process. Essentially it's this: The Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act provided that the U.S. Department of Justice could review state law or state accessibility code or state or local accessibility law to determine whether or not it met or exceeded the minimum requirements as established under the Americans with Disabilities Act. And this has been known as the certification process. There is a formal set of requirements as to how to request a certification, and again, this could be a state government, but it could also be a local government, a county or municipality that had the right understate law to push a set of accessibility requirements or to enforce a set of accessibility requirements. Now, a number of jurisdictions have already done this. First among those were Texas, Maine, and Florida. In addition, there is a number of states, including Maryland, which is in process -- I think they may be close to being done -- and other states such as California, Indiana and New Jersey and California which are presently undergoing a certification review process. Essentially what was occurring is the states are either having their current existing architectural barriers act or barrier removal code or accessibility law -- however it's structured -- reviewed and -- reviewed by the Department of Justice, deficiencies and minimal compliance found and modifying it to where it at least meets the minimal standards. Once they go through that process, they may choose to develop a set of enforcement criteria that is vastly different than the Americans with Disabilities Act in the way that it's enforced. Those of you in the know know that violations of any part of the ADA, including those that impact the built environment or the design community are enforced through complaints to a federal regulatory agency or by bringing a private cause of action in federal court. Under the variety of state schemes, this is a little bit different. And, again, we'll talk about how it operates in Texas; but for example in Florida, they've incorporated the state accessibility codes and the local code or inspection officials that would do any type of inspection, including electrical inspection or health, safety and welfare inspection, fire code inspection, as we understand it, is the regulatory body that in the state of Florida would inspect this. We have a different scheme in Texas and it's one that's unique in the country, and I would argue probably with some bias that it's the most effective one. I'll let John -- I'll let John back me up there. Let's see, why don't I give John a chance to talk about -- just very briefly -- the Texas Architectural Barriers Act. I think would be timely because I know we have some questions lined up about Texas. >> JOHN: Okay. Briefly I want to sort of give everybody an understanding of where the Texas Architectural Barriers Act started and originated and essentially how it has modified itself throughout time, especially given the adoption of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The original act was established in 1969 in the state of Texas which indicated that all buildings and facilities that were constructed or substantially renovated with public funds must comply with the Texas Architectural Barriers Act, which was a set of guidelines which is somewhat similar to the ADAAG that we would understand now, or the accessibility guidelines, but they have been substantially modified over time. In 1977, the Senate changed the requirements and added that certain facility types constructed after January 1st, 1978, which included those with private funds in counties of over 50,000 or more in population must be compliant as well, and that included shopping centers, transportation terminals, theatres and auditoriums, hospitals, nursing homes, et cetera. Office buildings were included in that. It fell short of requiring all public accommodations, but it was a big step because it started requiring not only those that were constructed with public funds, but also those that were constructed with private funds to be compliant. In 1991, sort of coincidental with the adoption of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the house changed the statutory requirements under the Architectural Barriers Act, transferring the elimination of architectural barriers program to the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation. They add provisions for fees to be required or to be collected by the state to have plan reviews and inspections done. It changed the application to include facilities that were considered a public accommodation as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act, placed the responsibility for submitting construction documents to the architects and engineers or building owners, added the provision for an inspection, which is a big provision that we have here in the state of Texas, as well as adding provisions for personal advertise. >> AARON: John, I'm going to hold you up here for just a second. Depending on the audience, I'm sure a lot of them know, but can you explain the difference between a public accommodation and another type of institution or facility? >> JOHN: Right. >> AARON: Under both Texas and federal law. >> JOHN: And they are essentially the same. Essentially a place of public accommodation is a place where the public is invited to go that may be privately owned, for example, office buildings, restaurants, shops, anywhere where the public is invited into is a place of public accommodation. There is a list under the ADAAG as to what a public accommodation is, and I'm trying to -- >> AARON: It's essentially anyplace that's open to the public, doing business with the public or is a commercial facility. >> JOHN: Right. >> AARON: and I think including nonprofit groups, private professional offices, recreational facilities, so even if they are privately owned, if they hold themselves out as doing business with the public, they are in all likelihood a public accommodation under both Texas and federal law; is that correct? >> JOHN: Correct, and there is also some language in there that indicates if it affects commerce or business, then it's a place of public accommodation as well. So, you know, a person's private office, if they effect commerce or if they're open to the general public they are subject to the guidelines. >> AARON: All right, I didn't mean to slow you down there or actually I did. >> JOHN: You did it right after the penalties part which is really good to do. It also -- under the change in 1991, it added for the provision of contracting for services in the state of Texas which is a big condition, especially where I sit, because it allows for the state to contract the services for the plan reviews and inspections on the to people that have passed certain regulatory requirements, certain testing and educational requirements, and that's where the -- at the time it was an independent contract provider, which is now the Registered Accessibility Specialist, which is the licensing requirement through the state of Texas which allows for the RAS's, which is Registered Accessibiity Specialist, to perform the plan reviews and inspections on behalf of the state. It also stipulated that state standards shall be consistent with federal law which is a big step. They said that their standards must be consistent and the required TDLR to pursue an equivalency certification from the Department of Justice as provided by the ADA. And that effective date was September 1st, 1991 or -- sorry -- January 1st, 1992. The next legislative session they changed the application to include all privately funded facilities and buildings that were also defined as commercial facilities, which is public accommodations is those that are for the public where they are accommodated for the public, commercial facilities are the ones that affect commerce. So essentially it brought in most of the commercial and public accommodation areas where general public is invited into. In the state of Texas, it required in this particular statutory change, it required that plans and specifications must be submitted for review and inspection to be performed on the facilities when the estimated construction cost is $50,000 or more. So what they've done is they've basically given us a limit and given us a regulatory threshold by which plans and specifications must be submitted either to the state or one of the contract providers at the time or a Registered Accessibiity Specialist that's now. And then also the Texas commission of licensing and regulations adopted the Texas Accessibility Standards which are based on the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines. And so by adopting that, that gave us the enforceable standards in the state of Texas. This became effective on April 1st, 1994. On September 23rd, 1996, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a certification that the Texas Accessibility Standards and the Texas Architectural Barriers Act and the administrative rules meet or exceed the new construction and alteration requirements of Title III of the ADA. So Texas has received that certification in 1996. In the last changes that we've had -- in 1999 there was a statutory change that required the owner to submit proof that the construction documents have been submitted to TDLR when applying for a local building permit. One of the issues that the state of Texas had in applying this program was that not many people were familiar with the program and there were quite a few projects that were slipping through the cracks or were not submitted for review in the state of Texas. And so in 1999 they started requiring that the owner provide proof that the project had been submitted to the building permit application process and then in the last legislative session in 2001, they changed the law to prohibit the building official from accepting an application for a building permit unless the official verifies that the project has been registered with TDLR. >> AARON: I think that's an important note to -- or an important nuance to detail to the audience. What Texas has is a plan review and inspection process that under the current regulatory scheme requires that those who would be granting occupancy permits, building permits, those inspection and permit granting authorities have to have an indication that the project has been registered and submitted for future plan and site review. >> JOHN: Correct. >> AARON: So we actually have this fairly simple, straightforward approach, and again, while accessibility is somewhat of a new concern, those who design and construct facilities are very familiar with the permitting and inspection requirements, of other concerns such as health, safety and welfare. So, you know, we've essentially incorporated that approach into our enforcement of accessibility, unlike the federal approach, which is, again, done through complaint to federal agencies or lawsuits. >> JOHN: The Texas accessibility standards is analogous to a building code and I want to talk a little bit about the process that we go through in the state of Texas; but it is essentially analogous to a building code. Whereas the federal guidelines under the ADA are a civil rights code and it takes legal action in order to provide compliance under the federal code. Under the state code, we have this process in place where before a construction process begins, we in the state of Texas have a plan review that's performed on the facility and then after construction is completed, we have an inspection. And so hopefully by doing the plan review -- the inspection process will go fairly smoothly and will catch most of the violations if not all of the violations prior to the facility being constructed or soon after the facility is constructed. The process in the state of Texas is that prior to getting the building permit or as the administrative rules indicate within five days of the date that the architect issues the documents for the purpose of construction or for the purpose of regulatory approval or permitting, the architect is required to submit the documents to either the Texas department of registered -- Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation or TDLR or to a RAS, a Registered Accessibiity Specialist, to initiate the process of review. If the architect fails to do that, then there are certain penalties that are in place under the Texas Board of Architectural Examiners. After the plans have been reviewed, the results of that plan review will go back to the architect so that they can incorporate that into their construction documents that are actually constructed. The plan review process, under the state of Texas, is not required to actually have an approval. It is more of an informative process by which we try to avoid any construction errors, but one of the things that we want to stress is that you're not required to have an approval in the plan review process, although we recommend that you do get one or at least make sure that all the violations or concerns are addressed prior to construction because after the subject facility is constructed, then an inspection will occur inside the facility to verify compliance. And it's obviously easier to correct something in the drawings than it is something that's built. Easier and cheaper. >> AARON: No doubt cheaper. >> JOHN: A lot cheaper and typically we get less resistance when we cite something in the drawing than we do in the construction because it's a lot cheaper and easier. >> AARON: And to be honest, people who have -- and paid for facilities to be designed, want them to be designed in compliance with the law to protect them from future liability. >> JOHN: True. >> AARON: and architects want to comply with the law so that they can get -- keep their licenses and not get sued. >> JOHN: Yes. Yes. So once we've done the inspection, then we're going to send an inspection report and we're required to send that inspection report to the owner of the facility. The owner of the facility has a certain time frame in which they need to bring those violations into compliance or else be -- the matter will be sent on through the food chain until it ultimate ends up in the enforcement division and if you ever get to the enforcement division, you don't want to be there because it typically costs -- what they'll do -- the enforcement division is the one who has the ability to administer administrative penalties which are not ease toy swallow, in addition to having to correct any violations that are there. So that's the process. There are basically two parts of the process. One is the plan review which is advisory in nature and is hopefully going to correct any violations that you may have, and then afterwards, we do the inspection. And the inspection does have to be approved. If the inspection process is not approved, then it does move on the food chain and goes on to enforcement which is what we try not to do. >> AARON: So unlike a lot of inspection officials, as a private RSA or Registered Accessibiity Specialist, you're truly partnering with the design team and the building owner to make sure that they comply with the law and that's more accessible. It seems to me a little bit less of -- which is why I like it -- a little bit less of a hostile process because you're a solution giver to them or practitioner as RAS's than they are about enforcement. >> JOHN: There is a delicate line that we walk there. Our job is to apply the Texas accessibility standards. We are licensed in order to do that. We are a great deal -- we have a great deal of information, obviously, and part of the benefit of using a Registered Accessibiity Specialist is that you do have a little bit better ability to have a one on one relationship. Our conflict of interest clause under the Registered Accessibiity Specialist procedures preclude us from being able to be a part of the design team. And that is that we can't design anything, we can't do any solutions, but we do have the ability to give information as far as, you know t solution that you're looking at is not compliant and we can tell you why, and then we're also able to have a dialogue as to why that's not compliant and allow the architect or design professionals who come to us and offer alternatives. So there is a little bit better customer service just because of the fact that we are private sector. And so our goal is to -- our job is to apply the standards, but our goal is to keep our clients happy. Now, we can't keep our clients happy at the expense of not doing our job or else we won't be licensed very long; but we are able to, you know, provide a little bit more customer service than the state may be able to. >> AARON: and, again, to me that's another bonus or another kudos to the way this scheme was set up by the state. The state actually takes it upon itself to initiate the first part of the training by creating the Texas accessibility academy that all registered accessibility specialists go through, and setting up a set of criteria for eligibility to sit for plan review and inspection certification or licensure. But they've anticipated that this is the way I read it, that demand and need is high enough to where they need to help educate and certify as many professionals doing this as possible within the state. >> JOHN: Correct. >> AARON: Which is one of the most unique things about the Texas scheme. >> JOHN: Right. >> AARON: and they are not paying me to praise them like this, but again, I've been -- I've been happy with the results. >> JOHN: the add administration that's in place right now would be the director's level is -- Bill Kuntz is the Executive Director and Bryan Francis is the executive deputy director and they have actually come out and said that their job is to get out of the process of doing plan reviews and inspections. They want to not have the state do that particular process. They want to have registered accessibility specialists -- there is also another class which is the independent contract provider which are basically entities such as cities or organization that can be licensed with the state in order to provide the services, although I do not believe at this time that there are any that are participating in that program. There were several cities that used to provide independent contract services. I know the city of Dallas did it for awhile, San Marcos and El Paso and all three of those have dropped that program. >> AARON: and what you're referring to is the city officials would have an inspector much like they would a fire code inspector, for example. >> JOHN: Right. They had absorbed it into their building code review process, you know, for building permits. >> AARON: but now -- but right now the services are not available through TDLR and the RAS's. >> JOHN: That's my understanding. >> AARON: I want to switch kind of our agenda around a tad and cover one thing. If you could just thumbnail -- I guess a year and a half in the life of a design project as it goes through from conception to when TDLR is involved to construction and then inspection. >> JOHN: I can't thumbnail anything, but I'll try. >> AARON: Just briefly. >> JOHN: What I'm going to do do is just describe -- I believe there are over 300 or 400 Registered Accessibiity Specialists in the state of Texas right now. Some of them practice full time in the accessibility field, some of them practice part time and some don't practice at all, but I'll tell you a life of a project in my business and then with some of my clients. There are different levels of activity that happens. I'll give the ideal project. The ideal project is that when you get a project in, let's say you're doing new construction, ideally when you're doing the new construction, you're going to have a series of milestones that you're going to meet in the design process. Schematic design, design development, and then you go into the construction document process. Each of those milestones are opportunities for you to meet with your Registered Accessibiity Specialist or you can -- even better would be to bring April Registered Accessibiity Specialist on not to do the plan review and inspection but to act as a consultant, separate from the person doing the plan review and inspection, to check your documents and verify compliance with the state code. Once you've gone through the design process and you've used that design or the Registered Accessibiity Specialist or the accessibility consultant to sort of follow that project along, once you get through the process and are ready to submit for construction for building permit, you should have a fairly good degree of comfort that you've satisfied most of the requirements and that the plan review process is just going to be checking for minor violations because hopefully you've caught everything beforehand. Most of the time people do not take advantage of the prereviews or the consulting and therefore when the construction documents are done, then that's the time that we actually do the review for compliance with the Texas accessibility standards. And typically we hope that we don't find anything major because if we do find something major, then that means a great deal of revision. Once you have submitted it to a Registered Accessibiity Specialist or TDLR, you'll get a report back and there will be a listing of violations in each section of the standards that the violation occurs, and then you need to correct those things and either respond or sometimes it's just that there is not enough information provided and if there is not enough information provided, we can't do our review. Obviously, we don't know that the door hardware is lever hardware if you didn't say it in your drawings but if you know there is going to be lever hardware and it's going to be accessible, you may or may not choose to respond to us. We recommend you do so everything will be compliant. During construction, we do have a lot of clients that call us up and ask us to do a preliminary inspection, typically when the plumbing is set and the walls are one sided, we can come in and do a preliminary inspection and verify that there won't be anything major or anything structural or anything that we're going to be able to identify at that phase of construction. You know, this is a valuable opportunity to check and make sure that you've gotten everything that's going to cost a lot done prior to finishing up and putting all the finishes and doing all the drywall work, et cetera. If you choose not do that, then we will come out after construction is done and do an inspection, and again, you'll get a report that will cite any violations, hopefully you'll get a report with nothing on it and you'll get an approval. We hope for that's specially in the inspection phase. Sometimes there are certain things that either weren't identified in the drawings, there may have been changes in the construction processor sometimes the contractor may not have built it the way the architect had designed it and those things, once we get that -- those identified in the report, then it's the owner's ultimate responsibility to provide compliance. Now, typically, what will happen, the owner will say, hey, architect, you know, you guys messed this up and they will say we didn't mess it up, it was the contractor and we let everybody sort of figure out whose responsibility it is going to be. Ultimately, those things need to be fixed. Once they are fixed then there are several different ways that the building owner can respond back us to us. One is through an inspection response form in the state of Texas which basically says, yes, we have approved or we've fixed everything and then it becomes sort of a legal liability of the person who signs that form or you can respond back in a letter form that says that we've completed all the corrections. Another way, and this is the way that we recommend to the clients, that they come back and have us do a reinspection so that we can verify that the corrections they are actually compliant because in some circumstances they may do corrections with every intent of being compliant and they've done them but the corrections they have done actually have not either corrected the problem or have added another problem. So, you know, we recommend that we have a reinspection, although most of the time what we get is the inspection response form or a letter indicating that the violations have been corrected. Once that's done, then we will send a notice to the owner that the corrections -- that their project has been approved. We will then send a notice to the state that this project is approved, and they will update their records and that file then gets closed never to be reopened again, unless, unfortunately, if there are violations where somebody files a complaint with the state of Texas, then that file may be reopened and may be reexamined and that's when if somebody sends us a letter or an inspection response form that says everything was corrected, and then there was a complaint filed on this particular project, they may go back to the file, see that the owner had indicated that everything was corrected or whoever had signed the notice and if everything wasn't corrected or if the corrections created another violation, then that person is going to be called in to the commission and have to explain themselves. And so that's why we recommend a follow-up inspection. And then again if all the violations aren't corrected, then it goes to the enforcement division and the enforcement division will take administrative action. >> AARON: Well, I've got several questions actually, but they are more follow up to some initial things. We're going to get to those. We have plenty of time, folks. I think what you and I should probably do real quick is -- and you've already done a great deal of this -- is talk about in fairly specific technical ways how the Texas Accessibility Standards differ from the Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility guidelines and why they do. You've covered some of that. >> JOHN: Right. The Texas Accessibility Standards was based on the ADAAG, on Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the architectural guidelines specifically that were developed for the ADA. Within the state of Texas, there was a review process to review the Americans with Disabilities Act and to somehow convert their technical provisions and scoping provisions into a document that could be enforced in the state of Texas. There are several advocacy groups which had certain wishes and desires for certain elements to be more stringent and more restrictive than the federal guidelines. They wanted a better accessibility standard; and so in the development of the accessibility standards, the Texas Accessibility Standards, there are certain provisions which are more stringent as well as because we have a different process in place in the state of Texas, being more like a building code and having a plan review and inspection process, as opposed to a civil rights law under the ADA where the way of having compliance is through a lawsuit or some other legal situation, there are certain things that have to be put into place that are not on the federal -- on the federal process. Specifically, in the guidelines, they talk about certain elements which are technically infeasible and in the federal law, there is no way to ask permission or ask for a condition to be approved if you deem it or if the design professional or the owner deems this particular condition to be technically infeasible and in the state, they couldn't sort of allow it to be that this -- because they needed something a little more solid. So in the state of Texas, there are certain circumstances where written into the code and written into the code beyond what is in the federal code, it talks about certain things that you must get approval of the commissioner or a variance from the standards in order to allow for a condition to remain. Because we're going to be doing the plan review and inspection, we have to have something concrete for the people that are reviewing the plans and inspecting it to say that you're allowed to do certain things. One of the biggest conditions, for example, is when we're in an older building and we have certain space requirements for a rest room, the rest rooms are required to be compliant if they serve an area of an alteration to a primary function. Under the federal guidelines, all you need to do is essentially determine that it's technically infeasible to enlarge that rest room and that you can't drop toilet fixtures and you just keep going. You know, the smart architect or designer will put a letter or memo into their file, but there are certain people that don't even do that and they keep going and go to the uni sex or alternate stall. In the intersection of Texas, you have to go through the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, elimination of architectural barriers program and get a variance from them in which the variance process is where there is a separate application for a variance. You essentially have to explain to the state the sections that you're talking about that you need the variance for, for example, 4.1.6.2 says that you have to have the restrooms that are serving the area of primary function that's being modified, those restrooms have to be compliant. Well, you can't make them compliant because it's technically infeasible, so you would ask for a variance to that provision and then you would document why you're not able to do it. So it's a much more rigorous process. And so that rigorous process had to be written into the administrative rules and had to be written into the Texas Accessibility Standards. So there are certain things like that where we have a difference between a civil rights code and bailing code. >> AARON: Now, of course, the variance is not going to be granted that falls below the minimum requirements of the ADA. >> JOHN: It may not. That's right. I mean it cannot. The state law as I indicated specifically says that the -- nothing that the A. B -- the architectural barriers program, under TDLR, they cannot do anything that would be less stringent than the federal standards. >> AARON: Through variance they might waive a Texas standard that rises -- that is more stringent than -- potentially -- >> JOHN: No, not necessarily. That's one case, but basically through the variance process, you are asking for some sort of documented evidence that you may do something that in the federal guidelines is implied or is granted, right? >> AARON: Yes. >> JOHN: You are allowed -- in the federal guidelines, it says that if something is technically infeasible -- >> AARON: In the alteration. >> JOHN: of a rest room or a an alteration of a certain element, one of the big issues that has been a problem in the state of Texas and actually all over the country has been parking garages. You know, if you do not have the clear height in a park garage for the van accessible space, you need 98-inches clear, if you don't have that clear for the van accessible space, in most cases it's technically infeasible to raise that parking garage up the six inches that you need, right? So it allows under the federal guidelines that says it's technically infeasible that you don't have to make that condition comply. Right? And so understate guidelines, it still has that provision, but you have to go through the state variance process in order to document that it is technically infeasible in order for in the state of Texas for you to be able to use that provision whereas on the federal level there is nowhere to go to get a variance, right? So you're sort of flying blind when you're on the federal level and you're just hoping that nobody files a complaint because it'll essentially be the judges that determine whether or not that variance is applicable or not. You know, whether or not the technical infeasibility that you have determined -- >> AARON: You have asserted. >> JOHN: Is asserted, right. Whereas in the state of Texas there is just a more formal process and you actually get a document that says in the state of Texas that you have applied. It can't fall below the guidelines, the ADAAG, right? We can't fall below the requirements of the ADAAG, but we can allow for the variances that are either explicitly granted or implied within the ADAAG. Okay? It's just a more formal process in the state of Texas. >> AARON: but you get proof of due diligence. You get proof of the process and there is a paper trail for those with complaints. >> JOHN: Yeah, and this brings up one of the issues that we want to stress, is that the Americans with Disabilities Act is a federal guideline. The Texas Accessibility Standards, under the Texas Architectural Barriers Act is a state guideline, and a lot of times those things will mesh and it will be nice and easy. A lot of times they'll -- there may be some conflict. Most of the time it's a situation where the state guideline is more stringent than the federal guideline and a lot of people ask me, well, what do I do? And the answer is, of course, in almost every code situation that you have, if you have two sets of guidelines that apply to a certain condition, you always have to design to the most stringent. That being, you know, if in the state of Texas we have a way of applying vertical access in alterations. The federal guidelines allows if you have a story that's under three story or less than 3,000 feet per story you're not required to have an elevator and you're not required to provide the vertical access there. the state of Texas has applied that in a little different way and they say that if you have a multistory facility, and you're doing an alteration on a level that is above or below the main level of egress -- or ingress, then you have to provide, if you're doing alteration to a primary function you have to provide the accessible route, even though that elevator exception is there, you have to provide the accessibility route, you just don't have to provide it with an elevator. You can use a lift through the variance processor you can use a ramp. So that's one case in which the state of Texas is -- and it's a fairly significant case -- where the state of Texas is much more stringent than the federal guidelines. >> AARON: and could you give an example of a few others? And I'm thinking of particularly like a ramp width on long ramps. >> JOHN: Yeah. The ramp width on long ramps -- there is a certain requirement for ramps that are over 30 feet in length and obviously this would be a combination of ramps or a ramp with landing in it because obviously we can't be more than 30 feet in seining will run without landings, which requires that instead of the 36-inch clear in the handrail you need 48-inches clear in the handrails. >> AARON: and there is some very specific provisions where within the Texas accessibility standards where they provide for something that is different than the ADAAG, but generally -- well always more strict, more stringent. >> JOHN: Right, it will always be more rigid. There is only one exception -- and this is a -- I don't know how to say it -- it's sort of an oversight or administrative situation that's occurred fairly recently in which the federal guideline is more stringent than the state guideline. >> AARON: And that's detectable warnings. >> JOHN: The provisions for detectable warnings on the federal guidelines when they first issued the ADAAG was reserved, in other words, it was there, but you didn't have to follow that. So when the state guidelines came out, when the Texas Accessibility Standards came out, section 29 for detectable warnings was also reserved, but they added under Section 4.7.4, they added for texture and contrasting color requirements in the state of Texas, which is more stringent than was -- >> AARON: Than currently enforce able at the federal level. >> JOHN: Right. During the reservation had a certain time frame or a sunset, right? For detectable warnings on the federal level. It was reviewed periodically and for the longest time it kept getting extended, right? Where it still was accepted where you didn't have to have detectable warnings at ramps and reflecting pools, et cetera. And that exception or that reservation has since expired and they allowed for that to expire. Under the fed rad guidelines if you're reading it technically, at ramps and reflecting pools you should have warnings, which the only warnings that they have indicated are truncated domes. In the state of Texas, under the Texas Accessibility Standards, the requirements for detectable warnings is still reserved and they have not changed that administratively and conversely we still have the provision under 4.7.4 which requires the contrasting texture and the contrasting color at the surface of a curb ramp which essentially was their way of bringing in the requirement for detectable warning into the standards back in 1994. >> AARON: Okay. We're going to take some questions real quick here. Now, I've got a question on what other states require RAS's like Texas and are there agencies that give certification to become a RAS? And the quick answer to that is no and only the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulations. There are other inspection accessibility inspection and plan review certification processes, but those are through nongovernmental entities like the international code council, am I correct, John? >> JOHN: That's my understanding. I know the city of Chicago has a plan review process for their public facilities, but not -- it's only for public facilities, it's not for the general public as far as I understand. >> AARON: and no other state is training RAS's or something similar? >> JOHN: No. The Registered Accessibility Specialist is specific to the state of Texas. >> AARON: Okay. We have another question about enforce built. And I'm going to take this one. It says if a RAS or state official approves a new construction design, is the business immune from being sued for failure to comply with new construction requirements? And the short answer to that is no, assuming that they've approved the design, it can fall short in construction. Assuming that it even gets through an inspection process, all you get at the state level is a certificate of compliance essentially, a statement of compliance. Now, it's fairly cheap insurance, I think, and it's evidence of compliance and certainly evidence of a good-faith effort to comply, but it's not a strict immunity from enforcement understate law nor under federal law. >> JOHN: and actually, Aaron, if you look at the approval letter that is we do send out, there is a couple of things. One is we indicate that it's substantially compliant. That's a legal term for sort of covering our butts a little bit to say we're not going the guarantee it's fully compliant. And the other thing that is on that approval letter is it says that it is specific to the Texas accessibility standards and the Texas Architectural Barriers Act only and is not intended to convey approval with the Americans with Disabilities Act. >> AARON: and there is good reasons, although the actual design and construct requirements, the code has been deemed to be equivalent or more strict, there are other concerns than just design and construct. Design and construction under the Americans with Disabilities Act because it's more of an omni bus civil rights law. We've got a specific question, could a RAS or architect be sued -- (Inaudible). Architectural liability under the ADA is a little unclear. We are we've got divided circuits on that, but in terms of the relationship between the person who contracts with the RAS and architect that, might be a separate civil matter, and so potentially, yes, they could negligent or contract violation or negligence. Assuming that they haven't protected themselves in other ways through contract, so, yes, they could potentially be sued. Other questions -- and I'm going to ask this -- I'm new to this arena, however, not to construction. Does New York State have plan review and inspection process built into their code enforcement? And again the answer is they don't have anything that mirrors this. I want to say -- and John, I think you know, too -- I want to say the city of New York has -- includes accessibility in some of its -- or at least some statement of accessibility in issuing construction documents? >> JOHN: I'm not familiar with -- >> AARON: I'll tell you what. I'll address that individually. I'll do a little bit of research with our peers with the northeast DBTAC, but in terms of the state, there no scheme -- anything close to what Texas does. But I'll address that individually for the person who submitted that. So expect something from me today. Another question is -- and I'll leave this one for you -- what is the height required in which a button to open an electric door should be placed? Has it been changed over the years? I often see buttons about four feet high which is too high for me, and others with limited mobility can't each these buttons at all. >> JOHN: That's a good question. The technical standards and the way that the standards have been written have not changed since 1991. Essentially there have been some clarifications and we've learned a lot about how to apply the standards over the years, and so a lot of times, especially in the state of Texas, since we're doing a lot of technical plan reviews and inspections, we get into some of the minutiae a little more and we learn how to apply the standards. In a condition like this as far as an electric door opener, if that door is required as part of an access billow routes, we need to make sure it's within one of the reach ranges which currently if you have an unobstructed side -- it's from nine inches to 54-inches and so -- and for a forward it's up to 48-inches it's limited on the height and therefore I would say that if it is placed at four feet, then it would be compliant for both the forword and side approach, which you know, as we know, even though it may be technically compliant with the standards it may not fulfill everybody's needs. >> AARON: And that's -- I think that's a good observation. Compliance isn't perfect accessibility. These were a set of compromised laws that were negotiated over a period of time and reflect minimal standards. So a more ideal reach range was achievable but not necessarily required. >> JOHN: Right. And one of the things that we've noticed and Aaron talks a little bit about the proposed guidelines or the ADAABAAG that the Access Board published last July, and the ten year struggle to get that out, one of the things that we've learned is that the side reach range which was at 54-inches was definitely not accommodating most people or a great number of people and then there was a push and so that -- in the upcoming standards, the ADAABAAG, the unobstructed side reach range is going to be lowered from 54-inches to the top down to 48-inches stow forward and side approach will be 48-inches for the allowable reach range, which as Aaron indicated, these standards aren't in effect yet, but the smart architect or the smart designer and smart building owner is going to understand, wait a minute, if this is the going to be the standards in the future and they're indicating this is a better condition I might as well go ahead and design to that standards because it's more stringent than the current standard. And there are certain examples of things that the new standards are going to have which are a little bit more stringent or maybe a clarification to the existing standards which you can apply now because they are not less stringent than the existing standards of. >> AARON: However, conversely there are some places and we've got a question on this. Is it true that the new ADA guidelines are a lot less stringent than what we presently have in place, for example, location of parking spaces, maneuvering restrooms and lobbies and much more. Could you enlighten us to the changes? >> AARON: The changes are many and in most cases they don't enact a real -- I haven't seen a single case in my review of the proposed changes that enacts a true reduction in accessibility. And in almost every case, the change in the provision has improved the ease of compliance. And thus will reduce resistance to compliance. That's how I've seen it. >> JOHN: There are very few cases where it's less accessible than the current standards. >> AARON: in many cases it's just a hypertechnical difference between a hard line measurement and a range that is just of degrees, but it makes it easier with regards to site related or materials related changes that occur from planning to construction. They have raided the requirements for certain things like the number of -- the ratio of van accessible spaces. They've clarified a position. They've listened to the callers that they have taken -- that the people who have called and asked technical questions where the current provisions were a little less clear, and included that 14 years of experience with this set of laws, you know, into these proposed guidelines. So, you know, I know that they will be easier to comply with. They will not reduce true accessibility in almost every case, and again, I think anything that makes it easier for people to comply with is going to improve overall accessibility compliance. Now, another good question that we got on that is do you have aside by side analysis of the changes of the new ADAAG vs the existing ADAAG? And the answer is no we don't. There has been a number of organizations that have promised to produce those. I haven't seen such because for a variety of reasons the Access Board hasn't released such. Mainly because this isn't a set of final laws. Industry will respond to this, particularly when it gets close to enforce built or if we get these in a final technical form. My guess is there is going to be any number of construction book publishers that will be putting these things together. They will probably be a little price y. >> JOHN: Let's describe where we in the process and where that process is. Essentially the Access Board has published proposed guidelines and then it's up to the individual jurisdiction for example the Department of Justice, the Department of Transportation, the postal service, to adopt those standards and they're going to adopt them much like a city will adopt a building code. The international building code is put out by the international code council every three years, but most city jurisdictions don't adopt a new building code for their city every three years, and so it doesn't have the effect of law until the jurisdiction adopts it either with or without changes. City of Houston, for examples adopts a model building code with amendments or with changes, and that has the effect of law within the City of Houston. The Access Board has established minimum guidelines for the ADAABAAGs which are now at the different jurisdictions, the one that we're most comfortable or familiar with is the Department of Justice. And so the Department of Justice now has these guidelines which are just proposed guidelines. They then take these guidelines and the current process that they're in, the stage of the review that they're in, is the advanced notice of proposed rule-making. >> AARON: Which they just extended. >> JOHN: Which they just extended and that gives everybody sort of a preliminary notice, hey, we're going to be changing our standards, give us some stuff that we need to look at. One of the things that you'll notice in the proposed guidelines that were published by the Access Board is it doesn't really take into account existing facilities very well. A lot of that how do you deal with existing facilities, specifically to us, is how do we deal with an existing facility that is compliant under the current ADAAG, and we -- >> AARON: What they call safe harbor. >> JOHN: in we're compliant with the current ADAAG right now and they adopt the new guidelines tomorrow and this are certain provisions like I told you about the side reach range where it was 54 and now it's going to go 48 and another one of the big changes is no not allow the (Inaudible) for a toilet fiction our the which you see a lot in single user restrooms or in Florida you see that a lot in your accessible stalls. What are we going to do if today it's compliant and tomorrow they adopt the new standards, do I have to go in and rip everything out? >> AARON: and the reason is that's the job of the Department of Justice rather than the Access Board is it's not a technical design issue. It's a legal compliance issue. So issues such as the effective date, when will this new set of laws become law and enforceable law and subject to part of the D. O. J. rule-making, Department of Justice rule-making as is issues with safe harbor, and so they've got a fair amount of rule-making up, but there is not going to be a significant amount of technical changes to these guidelines. Mainly because the D. O. J. are not architect, engineers and designers, but also because the laws that govern the behavior of the Access Board is that they can't publish a set of standards that are going to fall below the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. So, you know, these are at least that compliant. You're not going to see anything coming out of the Department of Justice that's less stringent than this. So what small technical changes that may occur are going to be fairly incidental as compared to those really key issues such as maybe some issues regarding scoping, certainly the effective date and safe harbor. >> JOHN:Yeah, and to get back to the original question is part of the reason that a lot of people have not published this side by side comparison yet is because we're not exactly sure what's going to be out there. There is a couple more steps that D. O. J. needs to progress through before we have a better understanding of what's going to come out and then had a makes our work or whoever does the side by side comparison, makes it a little easier in addition to the fact that the standards wouldn't be coming out, you know, next movement we're anticipating a year or two before the standards are effective. So when we get closer to that effective date, people will start investing the time needed, especially when they know a little bit better what the standards are going to be. >> AARON: Now, we've got a couple of other questions that are a little off topic but still relevant to what we do here and I'm going to address those. We've got a really good question that kind of follows that one up. Besides a request for aside by side comparison of the ADAABAAG vs the current enforce able ADAAG, do we have a document that denotes the differences between the Texas Accessibility Standards and those federal accessibility guidelines? And we don't have a document that is available, however, in the published version of the TAS, where it varies from the ADA access guilt guidelines, it's italicized. >> JOHN: and just so that everybody knows, if you do not have a copy of the Texas accessibility standards on the helpful resource list that's posted on the website, I do have the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation website address, which under that architectural barriers program it has an online copy that you can go to for the Texas Accessibility Standards. It will be on the right-hand side and you can get an online copy or you can order a copy from the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulations. >> AARON: Again they have it online and a PDF you can download and print a print quality version. >> JOHN: Correct. >> AARON: Well, I'll tell you right now, unless there is something else -- you had some questions, John, didn't you -- some of the early ones? >> JOHN: a couple of things that I want to do to sort of following up on that is that the state of Texas is incredibly proactive and I believe a model organization for providing accessible facilities and providing a service to the designers and architects that do business in the state of Texas. A lot of people will consider it a hindrance or somewhat of another administrative rode block, but in the long run, what this program does is it provides you a relatively inexpensive assurance that your facility is compliant, definitely, with the Texas Accessibility Standards or sort of by -- sort of by necessity through the compliance with the D. O. J. that you're compliant with the ADA. So it gives you that comfort level. In providing that service, the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation or TDLR has a website. On that website there is a couple of things that I recommend that everybody go to. One is that there is a section where it's called the frequently asked questions. It has a lot of frequently asked questions that are asked about the state regulations and they also sort of coincide with the federal regulations. And it gives some guidance on how we apply the Texas Accessibility Standards in the state of Texas. Also there is a section there that allows for you to ask technical questions and to get answers. You can either call in to the -- what's called tech info phone number or you can send an E-mail to them and get some response back. The third thing is that they have what's called a coast list where you can ask to be put on this particular post list under the state of Texas and they'll give you information as it comes along, specific to -- a lot of times it's specific to administrative situations, for example, if the administrative rules change, if there is a new technical memoranda which clarifies certain ways that the state wants a particular provision to be applied, where it may not be specifically spelled out in the standards, there is a series of technical memoranda that tell the architects and the building owners, designers and the Registered Accessibiity Specialist's how certain conditions should be applied. So the state website is an incredible resource especially if you're not terribly familiar with the Texas Accessibility Standards. >> AARON: Okay. We had another question -- and interrupt me if I've already asked this one. I think it's the first one we've got. Hopefully this person isn't angry that I waited and it's a really good question. As a human resource management consultant is conducting an audit of an employer on human resource issues, can they include a report about the Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility issues that they observed? Because this person has heard that for example you must be certify by the state of Texas in order to inspect a company site issuing the report this, is what raises their concern, and John and I talked about this beforehand and it was a very good question. I think we've made it clear that a RAS, a Registered Accessibiity Specialist in Texas is vastly different than somebody providing consultant is I on Americans with Disabilities Act, particularly employment issues. While the built environment or the architectural features of a facility that is a workplace may certainly be of interest to somebody consulting on human resource issues, there is no prohibition in the state of Texas for anybody holding themselves out as an consultant to offer advice on that. They just need to examine from a business acumen perspective on whether they are capable of rendering an opinion that would be a value to their client regarding the built environment. And many many cases, they might want to consult the services of a Registered Accessibiity Specialist or design professional or even potentially a physical therapist or an occupational therapist to get guidance with regard to the built environment. Because compliance with Title I or the employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act is a completely different animal and another series of webcasts. >> JOHN: and let me jump in here real quick, Aaron. The sort of second part of that question is let's say that the person who is doing the review for occupational compliance also wants to do one for the physical facility, let's say under Title III of the ADA. They are certainly able to do that within the state of Texas because the Registered Accessibility Specialist is required to do the plan review and inspection as required under the Texas Architectural Barriers Act, and that is when there is new construction or an alteration to a facility. In this person is going in and providing consulting services to this facility owner or to the tenant, and is just holding out themselves to be an ADA expert or an expert that can provide facility review, they are not performing the services that are required under the Texas Architectural Barriers Act and therefore can provide ADA consulting even if it is under Title III of the ADAAG or Title III of the ADA. So it's okay for somebody to come in and be an ADA expert in the state of Texas. You don't have to be a Registered Accessibiity Specialist in order to do that. You do, however, need to be a Registered Accessibiity Specialist in order to provide the Texas Architectural Barriers Act plan review and inspection as required by the state for new construction or an alteration. And then that sort of wraps into another question that we got and that is under the state of Texas, there is a certification process that the Registered Accessibility Specialist must go through. What if you're outside of the state of Texas and you want -- somebody to do a plan review or inspection of your facility, are there any ADA or federal ADA inspectors that are approved by the federal government? And Aaron, I'm going to let you answer that. >> AARON: Well, there is not actually. Because it's a civil rights law, and to be honest, I think there would be a lot of opposition to creating sort of an ADA police force or inspection force such doesn't exist. Again, there are other experts you can draw on. There are any number of consultants who hold themselves out and who are experts on the built environment, on not only compliance with accessibility law, but accessibility and universal design that exceeds those minimal requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act or the international building code or the an is I standards. Any number of registered accessibility specialists are what I call multijurisdictional. They are experts not only in the Texas law, but on the Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility guidelines, and do consult an is I outside the jurisdiction. Again, the international code council or the I-C-C does have a certification program for people who want to test and become certified in accessibility compliance and plan review -- plan review and inspection rather -- and there are any number of people who hold that certification as well, and any number of RAS's hold that. I believe John holds the precursor to that, the old I. B. C. certification, but again, there is no training requirement or background requirement for it. It's just a test that someone has to take. So when you're looking for somebody who's qualified to do this, the same way you would shop for any other consultant. You would need to have them prove up their resume and competence to deliver this service of inspection and plan review. I think I answered your question, John. >> JOHN: Yeah, that was perfect. >> AARON: Okay, we've got a pretty good question here. That's more of a fair housing question. I'm going to answer some of these things individually here. Please clarify the TAS and detectable warning, will they require truncated domes and when will they change the current t-a-s standards from reserve to whatever it will end up being? >> JOHN: That's a real good question. And. >> AARON: This is somebody in the industry so they are very interested in this. >> JOHN: It's one we don't know the answer to. It's won I would love answered as well. I think that what the state is doing -- the TDLR is doing is anticipating the publishing of the new ADAABAAG standards. They will change the Texas Accessibility Standards either immediately after or concurrently with the effective date of the new ADAABAAG standards. They are in the process of reviewing the standards and will keep close tabs on what D. O. J. is doing in order to have the Texas Accessibility Standards -- I know that one of their goals is to have it as closely match the ADAABAAG standards as possible, but also come out as concurrent as possible with the ADAABAAG standards. And so as far as that goes, one of the things they've done is they've sort of left the process of revising the current standards that are in place under the Texas Accessibility Standards until the new standards come out. Now, that doesn't mean they won't come out and realize the fact that they have an error here and put out a technical memoranda, but that is not in effect right now and so -- and I haven't heard anything about that yet. >> AARON: So I tell you what, we'll ask. We will definitely ask. >> JOHN: Yeah. So it's just one of those things that we don't know because the state has a time frame that they follow and don't always tell us what it is. And to be frank they may not know they have a conflict there and after this webcast they may realize that and will change it. Now, the smart designer and architect and building owner is going to realize there is a conflict and even though -- and this is another question that came in -- is if I'm approved under the state, TDLR, does that mean I pass the ADA? And I think we've hit that a little bit. No, it means you're compliant with the state, but even though you're substantially compliant with the state law, it does not guarantee you're compliant with the federal law and if the federal law has something that's more stringent, for example, truncated domes, then the smart designer is going to go ahead and apply that in the state of Texas because they are still then exposed under the federal law for a violation that is a technical violation under the federal law. >> AARON: All right. We have a number of other questions as I mentioned throughout that we will get around to answering. Mainly because -- they are related to our function, but not exactly related to the nature of the webcast, but I will answer those individually or hand those over to our technical assistance staff. In addition, there were other questions that we received that I don't know the answer and we'll seek out the answer and address those individually. If there are enough of those and enough of those are good questions and excellent answers that we'll get, we'll certainly post those along with the archives for this webcast, and I do want to remind everybody that the webcast will be archived in a number of days and available with the transcript as well as an archived version of the RealPlayer telecast or webcast rather. >> JOHN: I've got one last question here that was asked to me or it's actually a comment that I have that I get from a lot of clients and it's one that I can't really blame them for asking, and essentially what they're doing is when we cite a violation on these chain stores or restaurants that are done all over the country, a lot of times the question that I get is, well, why are you citing that as a violation? Either I've seen it done all over the state of Texas or all over the place the way that I'm proposing it to be done and you're telling me it's a violation. Or we do it all over the country this way, why are you citing it as a violation? And there is two answers to that and one obvious. Sometimes the state regulations are a little bit more stringent than the federal regulations and so we may be identifying something that is more stringent in the state of Texas than you may apply in Mississippi or Louisiana or in a different state. >> AARON: So imagine an application in let's say a chain of convenience/gas stations that use almost identical foot prints in several states. >> JOHN:They may say why are you requiring me to be 60-inches from the bottom of the sign and it's base the state of Texas is more stringent in that particular case. But also sometimes -- a lot of times we will see things that are violation that is are outside of the state of Texas, new construction, for example, that will have ability up curb ramps that extends out into an access aisle which is a violation because the access aisle isn't level like it's supposed to be. The reason you she a lot is because those states don't have requirements for submission and inspection which are as stringent as the state of Texas and those places that you've seen it all around the country or hopefully not built all around country are violations or technical violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. And just haven't been caught or cited or you haven't had a lawsuit on those particular provisions yet. So it's sort of points to the fact that sometimes the state is more stringent, but sometimes because of the review process and in the state of Texas you can actually become a little bit better designer or a little bit more compliant because of the process that's in place in the state of Texas. >> AARON: We've got a really excellent question and since I know the person who asked it, I now know why it's that excellent. I just realized that. Once the ADAABAAG is adopted by the Department of Justice, how would that affect existing D. O. J. certified state codes? And that's -- there is a very long answer that we can't give because it's highly speculative. My guess is that every code with existing certified state code has gone through the proceed, are scrambling just like I know the state of Texas is to stay ahead of the changes in the federal law. However, even if they don't, it won't change the applicability of their state laws at all, but it could leave -- particularly because in most cases the current standards provide for more flexibility than the state law. So you would follow the more stringent code. With regards to the state law, you would need to make those adjustments for changes or clarification that is are arguably more stringent, but in most cases -- in most cases I'm going to guess those states have Gore already gone through process and are going to go through the process again. >> JOHN: Right. And as you've seen, the state of Texas applied the Texas Accessibility Standards in 1994 and didn't get certification from the D. O. J. until 1996. So it just means probably the state of Texas will still adopt the new standards, whether concurrent with the issue answer of the ADAABAAG whether or not it's been certified at that time by putting themselves in place to be certified in the future. >> AARON: and again, those few states that are in process now and there are some right in the middle of the process, my guess is they've totally visited their plans for this, but it's a very interesting question and in fact I'm going to encourage some of my peers the other disability and technical assistance centers to let me know. That might be a good subject for another webcast. Like I said, we've got a number of other questions we'd get to but I'm going to close on that question because we're running out of time. I want the thank John Torkelson forgiving me his time and giving you guys his time during this webcast. I hope that you've learned a lot from this webcast and again I want to remind you that it will be archived along with a lot of the other good webcasts that we've had in the past. And so I would encourage you at some point to review those. I also want you to check our website for upcoming webcasts. We do have a calendar of upcoming webcasts. In addition, I'd like to acknowledge the people who -- or the organization that funds us the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research or NIDRR who funds your host, the Disability Law Resource Project for this program. I would further encourage that if you have any questions, to continue to E-mail us those questions or to call our 1-800 number, which is 189-49-4232. If you're in Texas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma or Arkansas, you'll get me. Did you're in another state, you'll get another good technical assistance from one of the ten DBTACs that serve the entire country. Again, I want to thank everybody else who is responsibility, the entire ILRU webcast team, Marj Gordon, Sharon Finney, Dawn Heinsohn, Vinh Nguyen, of course Rachel Kosoy, who was ill and probably listening at home, and of course Rob Dickehuth and Marie Bryant who is our realtime captioner who this time had to put up with two of the quickest speaking people who are involved in webcasts. You guys all have a nice day. >> JOHN: Thank you.