Specifications

Legal Opinion M 02-22 16 August 2, 2002

Chancellor's Office Legal Opinion No. M 01-17 for a full discussion of the section 508

requirements. That opinion is available in the Legal Affairs portion of the Chancellor's Office

web site, on the Opinions page, at the following URL:

http://www.cccco.edu/divisions/legal/Opinions/opinions.htm.

From 1996 to 1998 the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) conducted

a compliance review of the California Community Colleges to assess the extent to which

colleges were prepared to provide access to print and electronic information to students with

disabilities. In its January 22, 1998, letter to Chancellor Nussbaum, the OCR discussed the

community colleges' "legal obligation to provide communication as effective as that provided to

nondisabled students. . . ." The OCR is responsible for ensuring that all educational institutions

comply with the requirements of all federal civil rights laws, including section 504 and Title II of

the ADA. As a result, the opinions of OCR are generally accorded considerable weight by the

courts in interpreting the requirements of these laws. The OCR has interpreted the term

"communication" in this context to include the transfer of information, including (but not limited

to) the verbal presentation of a lecturer, the printed text of a book, and the resources on the

Internet, as well as access to information, which would include multimedia resources. The OCR

has determined that, in order for a communication with a disabled student to be "as effective as"

that provided to nondisabled students, three basic components must be considered: "timeliness of

delivery, accuracy of the translation, and provision in a manner and medium appropriate to the

significance of the message and the abilities" of the disabled student. (OCR Docket Nos. 09-95-

2206 (January 25, 1996), 09-97-2002 (April 7, 1997) and 09-97-2145 (January 9, 1998).) The

OCR has made it clear that providing alternate media for students with disabilities that does not

provide equal access will not meet the requirements of the statutes or regulations, as "[t]he issue

is not whether the student with the disability is merely provided access, but the issue is rather the

extent to which the communication is actually as effective as that provided to others." (OCR

Docket No. 09-95-2206, January 25, 1996)

In view of these decisions, we observed in Legal Opinion M 01-17 that OCR's interpretation of

the ADA "imposes essentially the same requirements on colleges" as does section 508. We went

on to explain that

"As a result, if a college does not purchase available equipment or software which

provides accessibility, OCR and the Chancellor's Office will not accept an

argument based on undue financial hardship if a discrimination complaint is

subsequently filed. This will typically mean that the college will be found in

violation of the ADA and required to replace or modify the product, often at much

higher cost."

Applying these principles to the purchase or use of video materials, it is clear that the ADA and

section 508 will generally require that colleges ensure that video material is captioned for

students with hearing impairments.

In recent months, a number of questions have arisen

Although this advisory is focused on issues related to captioning, the same legal principles would apply to audio

description of video material for use by blind or visually impaired students. Audio description involves adding a

special narrative sound track in which a narrator describes visual elements of the production which would not

M 02-22