Guidance on the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design

Subpart D - Title III Regulation accessibility they regulate. These comment- In contrast, many commenters argued ers argued that the Department’s title III that the proposed six-month effective regulation applies to a much broader range date should be retained in the final rule. and number of facilities and programs than the other Federal agencies (i.e., Department The Department has been persuaded by of Transportation and the General Services concerns raised by some of the comment- Administration) and that those agencies ers that the six month compliance date regulate accessibility primarily in either proposed in the NPRM for application of governmental facilities or facilities oper- the 2010 Standards may be too short for ated by quasi-governmental authorities. certain projects that are already in the midst of the design and permitting process. Several commenters representing the The Department has determined that for travel, vacation, and golf industries argued new construction and alterations, compli- that the Department should adopt a two- ance with the 2010 Standards will not be year effective date for new construction. required until 18 months from the date In addition to many of the arguments the final rule is published. This is consis- made by commenters in support of an tent with the amount of time given when 18-month effective date, these comment- the 1991 regulation was published. Since ers also argued that a two-year time frame many State and local building codes contain would allow States with DOJ-certified provisions that are consistent with 2004 building codes to have the time to amend ADAAG, the Department has decided that their codes to meet the 2004 ADAAG public accommodations that choose to so that design professionals can work comply with the 2010 Standards as defined from compatible codes and standards. in Sec. 36.104 before the compliance date will still be considered in compliance Several commenters recommended with the ADA. However, public accom- treating alterations differently than new modations that choose to comply with construction, arguing for a one-year effec- the 2010 Standards in lieu of the 1991 tive date for alterations. Another commenter Standards prior to the compliance date representing building officials argued described in this rule must choose one that a minimum of a six-month phase- or the other standard, and may not rely in for alterations was sufficient, since a on some of the requirements contained very large percentage of alteration proj- in one standard and some of the require- ects “are of a scale that they should be ments contained in the other standard. able to accommodate the phase-in.’’ Department of Justice Guidance on 2010 Standards: Title III - 45