[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 90 (Monday, May 11, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25496-25507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-09266]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
45 CFR Part 84
[Docket No. HHS-OCR-2026-0133]
RIN 0945-AA30
Extension of Compliance Dates for Nondiscrimination on the Basis
of Disability; Accessibility of Web Content and Mobile Applications of
Recipients of Departmental Financial Assistance
AGENCY: Office for Civil Rights, Department of Health and Human
Services.
ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: By this interim final rule (``IFR''), the Department of Health
and Human Services (``Department'') is revising the Department's
regulations implementing section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
(``section 504'') to extend the compliance dates for the requirements
for web content and mobile application (``app'') accessibility that
were adopted on May 9, 2024. The compliance date for recipients with
fifteen (15) or more employees is extended from May 11, 2026, to May
11, 2027. The compliance date for recipients with fewer than fifteen
(15) employees is extended from May 10, 2027, to May 10, 2028.
DATES:
Effective date: This IFR is effective May 7, 2026.
Comments: Written comments must be submitted on or before July 6,
2026. See section VI of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for additional
details.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN 0945-AA30 (or
Docket No. HHS-OCR-2026-0133), by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: You may submit electronic
comments at https://regulations.gov by searching for the Docket ID
number HHS-OCR-2026-0133. Follow the instructions for submitting
electronic comments. If you are submitting comments electronically, the
department strongly encourages you to submit any comments or
attachments in Microsoft Word format. If you must submit a comment in
Adobe Portable Document Format (``PDF''), the Department strongly
encourages you to convert the PDF to ``print-to-PDF'' format, or to use
some other commonly used searchable text format. Please do not submit
the PDF in scanned format. Using a print-to-PDF allows the Department
to electronically search and copy certain portions of your submissions
to assist in the rulemaking process.
Regular, Express, or Overnight Mail: You may mail written
comments to the following address only: U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, Attention: Disability IFR, RIN
0945-AA30, Hubert H. Humphrey Building, Room 509F, 200 Independence
Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20201.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Thompson, Office for Civil
Rights, Department of Health and Human Services at (202) 545-4884 or
(800) 537-7697 (TDD), or via email at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Legal Authority
Section 504 protects individuals with disabilities from disability-
based discrimination.\1\ The Department's
[[Page 25497]]
regulations implementing Section 504, found at 45 CFR part 84, apply to
programs and activities conducted by recipients of Federal financial
assistance. The Department is charged with promulgating regulations
implementing section 504 for recipients of Federal financial assistance
from the Department.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 29 U.S.C. 794.
\2\ 29 U.S.C. 794(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department issues tens of thousands of grants each year to a
wide range of recipients. Recipients of these grants and other
financial assistance from the Department include State and local
governments, social service providers, child welfare organizations,
public and private post-secondary institutions, and health care
providers of all sizes, ranging from large hospital systems to small
local clinics. These recipients vary vastly in terms of size, location,
resources and technical support, mission, and surrounding population,
and it is important that any rulemaking take these variances into
account.
On May 9, 2024, the Department published a final rule revising its
section 504 regulations titled ``Nondiscrimination on the Basis of
Disability in Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial
Assistance.'' \3\ Subpart I of the 2024 final rule set forth technical
requirements for the web content and mobile apps that recipients
provide or make available, directly or through contractual, licensing,
or other arrangements.\4\ In particular, the rule adopted the Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines (``WCAG'') version 2.1 Level AA
(hereinafter referred to as ``WCAG 2.1'') success criteria, published
in June 2018,\5\ as the technical standard for web content and mobile
app accessibility under section 504.\6\ The 2024 final rule included
provisions describing how WCAG 2.1 applies to recipients' web content
and mobile apps, as well as provisions identifying circumstances when
certain web content and content in mobile apps may not need to meet the
technical standard.\7\ The 2024 final rule's effective date was July 8,
2024,\8\ but the Rule did not require recipients to immediately comply
with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1. Rather, the 2024 final rule
provided that recipients with fifteen (15) or more employees must
comply with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1 starting on May 11,
2026,\9\ and that recipients with fewer than fifteen (15) employees
must comply with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1 starting on May 10,
2027.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 89 FR 40066 (May 9, 2024).
\4\ 89 FR 40193-94; 45 CFR 84.82-89.
\5\ Copyright (copyright) 2017-2018 W3C[supreg]. This document
includes material copied from or derived from https://www.w3.org/TR/2018/REC-WCAG21-20180605/ [https://perma.cc/UB8A-GG2F].
\6\ 89 FR 40193; 45 CFR 84.84(b)(1) through (3).
\7\ See 45 CFR 84.84 through 84.89.
\8\ 89 FR 40066.
\9\ 89 FR 40193; 45 CFR 84.84(b)(1).
\10\ 89 FR 40193; 45 CFR 84.84(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2024 final rule was the culmination of a multi-year rulemaking
process that began with a September 14, 2023 Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking \11\ that solicited public comment, received 5,269 public
comments, and ultimately resulted in the two (2) and three (3) year
implementation dates for complying with the success criteria of WCAG
2.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 88 FR 63392 (Sept. 14, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While virtually all commenters agreed that the web content and
mobile apps used by recipients should be accessible to people with
disabilities and that some standard was needed to measure
accessibility,\12\ opinions were split on the most appropriate standard
and implementation date(s).\13\ While many commenters agreed that WCAG
2.1 was the most appropriate standard that would ensure accessibility
for people with disabilities without being overly burdensome even for
the smallest recipients, some advocates thought that more stringent
standards, like WCAG 2.2 or even an evolving standard, would be more
appropriate.\14\ Others, especially groups representing recipients,
advocated for less stringent standards, like WCAG 2.0, or even
recommended that the Department merely suggest that recipients follow a
specific standard without enforcing compliance.\15\ Ultimately, based
on the information available to it at the time, the Department
concluded that requiring compliance with WCAG 2.1 struck the
appropriate balance between ensuring that a significant number of
people with disabilities, many of whom have been excluded from
recipient web content and mobile apps for years due to their
inaccessibility, could access health care and other services while
ensuring that recipients were not overly burdened with unclear or
unachievable standards.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See 89 FR 40129.
\13\ See, e.g., 89 FR 40130 and 40132-33.
\14\ See 89 FR 40130.
\15\ Id.
\16\ 89 FR 40130-32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similarly, the comments signaled disagreement over the
implementation date(s) for the requirements of 45 CFR 84.84.\17\ Some
commenters indicated that two (2) or three (3) years for implementation
was far too long, considering that people with disabilities have been
ignored by recipients when designing and acquiring web content for
decades.\18\ Others thought that the time periods should be extended to
lessen any potential burden on the smallest providers.\19\ Ultimately,
based on the information available to it at the time, the Department
kept the two (2) and three (3) year implementation periods/dates in the
final rule, reasoning that while the accessibility of web content and
mobile apps is imperative, recipients would need some time to come into
compliance, although extending the compliance further would result in
continued unnecessary exclusion.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 89 FR 40132-33.
\18\ 89 FR 40132.
\19\ 89 FR 40132-33.
\20\ 89 FR 40133.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concerning the costs that recipients would incur for compliance
with the web content and mobile app accessibility requirements of the
2024 final rule, some commenters expressed concerns that small
recipients might have budgets too small to meet the proposed rule's
compliance dates (which were ultimately adopted in the 2024 final
rule).\21\ Alternatively, other commenters stated that if recipients
began planning at the time the 2024 final rule was published, they
would be able to ensure compliance within the proposed rule's
compliance dates for web content and mobile app accessibility without
incurring unreasonable costs.\22\ Similarly, most commenters thought
that recipients of all sizes should be held to the same accessibility
standards, while some commenters thought that smaller recipients should
be held to a more lenient standard.\23\ Ultimately, the Department
decided that holding different recipients to different accessibility
standards would be untenable and result in uneven access for people
with disabilities.\24\ For example, a clinic with 15 employees that
requires patients to schedule vaccination appointments online would
have to ensure that the web content used for such scheduling conforms
with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1 and can be used by a person who
is blind and uses a screen reader. Alternatively, a clinic with 14
employees would not have to ensure that its web content used to
schedule vaccination appointments conforms with the success criteria of
WCAG 2.1, as required by the rule. The difference in time periods for
implementation was deemed the appropriate method to assist smaller
[[Page 25498]]
recipients with their obligations in light of those recipients' more
limited resources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ 89 FR 40133.
\22\ 89 FR 40133.
\23\ 89 FR 40133.
\24\ 89 FR 40134.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of note, less than a month prior to the publication of the 2024
section 504 final rule, the Department of Justice (``DOJ'') published
its own final rule updating the web content and mobile app requirements
for public entities under title II of the Americans with Disabilities
Act (``ADA'').\25\ That final rule imposed substantially similar
requirements for public entities, sometimes referred to as State and
local government entities, many of which also receive financial
assistance from the Department and are subject to the Department's
section 504 regulations. Specifically, the 2024 title II final rule
requires compliance with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1, originally
set implementation dates of two (2) and three (3) years in the future,
and differentiates between small and large covered entities based on
population size.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 89 FR 31320 (Apr. 24, 2024).
\26\ 89 FR 31337; 28 CFR 35.200. As discussed in more detail
later in this preamble, DOJ recently published an IFR delaying the
implementation dates included in its 2024 title II final rule by one
year. Therefore, the original two (2) and three (3) year
implementation dates are now three (3) and four (4) years. 91 FR
20902 (Apr. 20, 2026). 89 FR 31337; 28 CFR 35.200.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Need for This Interim Rule
The Department now believes that the compliance dates for web
content and mobile app accessibility in the 2024 final rule in Sec.
84.84(b) are unlikely to be met by a significant number of recipients,
especially local governments and other small and medium size recipients
of financial assistance from the Department, for various reasons beyond
the Department's and recipients' control.
Recently, one commenter submitted a response to the Office of
Management and Budget's (``OMB's'') request for information on
potential deregulatory actions \27\ that questioned the need for any
standards in section 504 to ensure the accessibility of web content and
mobile apps.\28\ The commenter, a virtual mental health care provider,
stated that it will need to engage in ``extensive updates'' to their
``existing patient forms and written communications'' and will have to
update the ``appearance of websites and mobile applications.'' \29\ The
commenter also stated its belief that the 2024 final rule ``imposes
substantial financial burdens on health care providers without
providing any material benefits'' \30\ and that only the general access
requirements of title III of the ADA should apply for people with
disabilities, not the specific standards in the 2024 final rule.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Request for Information: Deregulation, 90 FR 15481 (Apr.
11, 2025).
\28\ OMB Deregulatory Talkiatry Letter (May 12, 2025), https://www.regulations.gov/comment/OMB-2025-0003-8104.
\29\ Id. at 5-6.
\30\ While the Department is sympathetic to the costs that
recipients will incur in order to ensure their web content and
mobile apps conform with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1 as
required by the 2024 final rule, it does not agree with the
statement that such conformance will not provide ``any material
benefits.'' Particularly in the area of telehealth, if a person with
a disability is not able to access a recipient's web content or
mobile app because it was not designed accessibly, that person is
denied health care by a recipient of Federal dollars.
\31\ Id. at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the OMB request for information, the Department of
Government Efficiency created an opportunity for members of the public
to submit deregulatory suggestions.\32\ One anonymous commenter stated
that the success criteria of WCAG 2.1 ``impose[ ] significant burden on
innovative startups and put[ ] those who offer services to government
funded programs at a disadvantage to those offering cash pay services
and create[ ] a disincentive for companies with new technology or
services to offer them to CMS [Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services] participants.'' \33\ The commenter also stated that the 2024
final rule is ``unreasoned and oversteps boundaries as website
accessibility is already governed under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.'' \34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Deregulation Suggestions, Regulations.gov, https://www.regulations.gov/deregulation (last visited Apr. 10, 2026).
\33\ Deregulatory comment DOGE-0995, on file with OCR.
\34\ The Department recognizes the concerns of this commenter
and does not intend to limit technological innovation. The
Department does note that title II of the ADA, which applies to the
services, programs, and activities of public entities, imposes
nearly identical web content and mobile app accessibility
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the comments that the Department received concerning
its own 2024 final rule, OMB received comments about DOJ's 2024 final
rule adopting web content and mobile application accessibility
requirements under title II of the ADA. The DOJ 2024 title II final
rule imposed the same accessibility requirements as the Department's
2024 section 504 final rule, but DOJ's rule applied to State and local
government entities covered by title II of the ADA, regardless of
whether those entities also receive Federal financial assistance.\35\
There is significant overlap between covered entities under both rules
since some recipients of financial assistance from HHS are also public
entities governed by title II of the ADA. Accordingly, comments on
DOJ's 2024 title II final rule are also relevant to HHS's 2024 section
504 final rule to the extent that commenters are also subject to the
Department's section 504 rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ 89 FR 31320 (Apr. 24, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One such comment on DOJ's 2024 final rule, came from a group of
higher education advocacy associations that requested DOJ either
``delay or provide additional information regarding'' DOJ's 2024 title
II final rule.\36\ The group notes that its member institutions are
``preparing to comply with these reporting and implementation
deadlines, many of which will entail significant commitments of
resources and staff time'' but that ``[g]iven the shifts in
administration priorities, as well as the changes to staffing and
leadership, that accompany a transition between administration, there
is a lack of clarity as to what compliance may necessitate.'' \37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Letter for Russell T. Vought, Director, OMB, from Chip
Bishop, Deputy Chief Counsel, American Council on Education at 2
(May 12, 2025), https://www.regulations.gov/comment/OMB-2025-0003-8019 [https://perma.cc/9WTC-UFS7].
\37\ Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another comment came from the Small Business Administration, which
states that it believes DOJ underestimated costs for small governments
and townships and requests that public entities with smaller
populations be granted a number of exceptions to full compliance in the
allotted time.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Letter for Russell T. Vought, Director, OMB, from Chip
Bishop, Deputy Chief Counsel, U.S. Small Business Administration
Office of Advocacy (May 12, 2025), https://advocacy.sba.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Comment-Letter-Deregulation_Docket-OMB-20250003.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, the Department was also made aware of documents provided
to OMB by organizations representing U.S. cities and counties in
response to a DOJ rulemaking concerning its own web content and mobile
app accessibility requirements under title II of the ADA. On April 20,
2026, DOJ published an IFR delaying the compliance dates included in
its 2024 title II final rule by one year.\39\ During the rulemaking
process leading to DOJ's IFR, the National Association of Counties
(``NACo'') provided a document to OMB stating that it conducted a
member survey and that based on the 18 responses it received (3 from
counties with populations of less than 50,000; 12 from counties with
populations of 50,000-500,000; 3 from counties with populations of more
than 500,000), it estimated that, while DOJ's assessment of costs for
its 2024 title II final rule was
[[Page 25499]]
either accurate or overestimated costs, those costs still exceed what
counties had budgeted for web content remediation.\40\ The surveyed
counties also stated that while they have made strides toward web
content remediation, there remain obstacles, especially time-consuming
and costly remediation of PDF documents.\41\ Counties also reported
difficulty understanding how compliance will be measured while also
noting that there may be difficulty ensuring that the third party
contractors, on which they rely, make counties' web content conform to
the success criteria of WCAG 2.1.\42\ Finally, NACo recommended that
the compliance date for all entities be extended to July 1, 2027, that
counties with populations below 10,000 be exempted from web content
accessibility requirements entirely, and that prior to any finding of a
violation of web content accessibility, the covered entity in question
be provided a set period of time to cure the issue in question.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ 91 FR 20902.
\40\ See Letter from National Association of Counties to OIRA,
NACo 12866 Meeting ADA Web Based Accessibility (March 4, 2026),
https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/viewEO12866Meeting?viewRule=false&rin=1190-AA82&meetingId=1326573&acronym=1190-DOJ/CRT.
\41\ Id. at 3.
\42\ Id.
\43\ Id. at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The National League of Cities (``NLC'') similarly provided a
document to OMB expressing concern that remediation of websites for
cities of all sizes, but particularly smaller cities, will prove costly
and constrain the budgets of those cities.\44\ NLC did not provide
survey results like NACo did, but did note that over 16,000
municipalities in the United States have populations of less than
10,000 and may have budgets of $2 million or less.\45\ NLC stated that
they have been told that one-time quotes for PDF and website
remediation services (without specifying the size or budget of the
municipality or city) have ranged from a total of $10,000 to $20,000,
with total annual remediation estimates of up to $70,000.\46\ NLC also
raised concerns of remediation prices for medium to large cities,
stating that one city with a population of about 275,000 would need to
devote 1,300 staff hours for general training, PDF-specific training,
auditing, remediation oversight, and support and enforcement.\47\
Similar to NACo, NLC requested that DOJ exempt communities with
populations of less than 10,000 entirely, delay the implementation date
by at least one year, and allow for a set period of time for covered
entities to cure nonconformance before they are found in violation.\48\
Additionally, NLC requests that DOJ ``make more flexible the categories
of exempted content, to reflect the ongoing challenges cities have
faced in making content accessible that is hosted on some social media
platforms, provided on city websites by third parties such as GIS data
services, and that is required to be made available by Federal or State
laws.'' \49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ See Letter from National League of Cities to OIRA, NLC Web
Accessibility Rule Letter March 3 2026 (March 4, 2026), https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/viewEO12866Meeting?viewRule=false&rin=1190-AA82&meetingId=1326573&acronym=1190-DOJ/CRT.
\45\ Id. at 2.
\46\ Id.
\47\ Id.
\48\ Id. at 3.
\49\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to this information from cities and counties, the
Department received comments from a representative of primary health
care associations that support federally qualified health centers
(``FQHCs'').\50\ Those comments indicated that FQHCs were working
towards conformance with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1, but were
experiencing difficulties with full conformance. Specifically, the
representative indicated that there is a wide range of understanding
of, and ability to comply with, the WCAG 2.1 success criteria among
FQHCs depending on their size, staff expertise, and operations. Among
those who fully understand their obligations and have more resources,
there are still issues with remediation of web content and mobile apps
for specific success criteria. For example, some FQHCs have experienced
issues with making the electronic documents they rely on fully
accessible, while others are having difficulty ensuring that their web
content can be navigated solely with a keyboard (without a mouse). This
means that some FQHCs will have to rely on outside vendors to ensure
their websites are compliant, often at higher costs and with indefinite
timelines that may make the May 2026 deadline impossible to meet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ Comments on the feasibility of web accessibility
requirements for FQHCs, on file with OCR (Mar. 30, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Taken together, these documents indicate that FQHCs, cities, and
counties, many of which likely receive Federal financial assistance
from the Department, are experiencing difficulty ensuring that their
web content conforms to the success criteria of WCAG 2.1 as required by
the 2024 final rule because of circumstances outside of the
Department's and recipient's control. The Department also believes it
is likely that many other small and medium sized recipients beyond
FQHCs, cities, and counties are experiencing similar difficulties
coming into compliance with WCAG 2.1 as required by the 2024 final
rule. Many recipients, including local clinics, rural hospitals, and
small child welfare entities, have smaller budgets and limited internal
ability to remediate inaccessible web content. Those recipients will
likely also have to spend significant portions of their operating
budgets on outside contractors to remediate inaccessible web content,
with little or no guarantee that they will come into conformance within
the time frames required by the 2024 final rule.
While it is possible that some cities, counties, FQHCs, and other
recipients would be able to meet the necessary success criteria prior
to the 2024 final rule's implementation dates, the Department is
concerned that noncompliance among a significant portion of those
recipients would lead to a significant increase in litigation.
Section 504 is enforceable by a private right of action.\51\ It is
possible that a court could allow private litigants exercising this
right to obtain injunctive relief and attorneys' fees \52\ from
recipients based on a recipient's noncompliance with the 2024 final
rule. The risk recipients face from private lawsuits is heightened for
reasons that were not specifically addressed in the 2024 final rule,
namely that some recipients may be generating web content that would be
covered by the 2024 final rule using generative AI \53\
[[Page 25500]]
(artificial intelligence) that is potentially inaccessible.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See Barnes v. Gorman, 536 U.S. 181, 185 (2002) (stating
that section 504 is enforceable through a private right of action).
\52\ See 29 U.S.C. 794a(b) (``In any action or proceeding to
enforce or charge a violation of a provision of this subchapter, the
court, in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than
the United States, a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the
costs.'').
\53\ See, e.g., National Association of Counties, 2024 National
Association of Counties (NACo) Generative AI Membership Survey
Report at 8 (June 2024), https://naco.sharefile.com/share/view/s0cf368e9b14d4267a297a2e98290873a (``Data shows that GenAI is used
within county operations and services at minimum monthly by 60% of
respondents''); National Conference of State Legislatures,
Artificial Intelligence in Government: The Federal and State
Landscape at 8 (Nov. 2024), https://documents.ncsl.org/wwwncsl/Technology/Government-State-Fed-Landscape-v02.pdf [https://perma.cc/7T4A-BKYW] (``State agencies are using tools that have a range of
capabilities [including] content generation.''); Cascade PBS,
Washington City Officials are Using ChatGPT for Government Work
(Aug. 26, 2025) https://www.cascadepbs.org/news/2025/08/wa-city-
officials-are-using-chatgpt-to-write-government-documents/
#:~:text=Some%20records%20show%20the%20potential,the%20time%2C%E2%80%
9D%20she%20said [https://perma.cc/ZCT9-2JT6] (profiling use of AI by
local governments in Washington, and noting that ``public servants
have used generative AI to write emails to constituents, mayoral
letters, policy documents and more''). Among other uses, local
government entities are notably using AI to generate content in the
educational context. See, e.g., Anthropic, Anthropic Education
Report: How Educators use Claude (Aug. 27, 2025), https://www.anthropic.com/news/anthropic-education-report-how-educators-use-claude [https://perma.cc/4UBS-NJ7G] (``The most prominent use of AI
[among educators] was for curriculum development.''). See also
Everson et al., Uptake of Generative AI Integrated With Electronic
Health Records in US Hospitals, JAMA network Open (Dec. 1, 2025),
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41385223/
#:~:text=Overall%2C%20762%20hospitals%20(weighted%20percentage,43.7%2
5)%20were%20delayed%20adopters (stating that more than half of
hospitals responding to the survey indicated they would likely
implement generative AI by the end of 2025).
\54\ See, e.g., New York City Bar, The Impact of the Use of AI
on People with Disabilities (June 12, 2025), https://www.nycbar.org/
reports/the-impact-of-the-use-of-ai-on-people-with-disabilities/
#:~:text=SUMMARY,anti%2Ddiscrimination%20frameworks%20for%20AI
[https://perma.cc/M9YE-W9CK] (noting that generative AI may produce
inaccessible outputs if it relies on inaccessible inputs);
Northeastern University, AI and Accessibility, https://tealab.sites.northeastern.edu/generative-ai-and-accessibility/
[https://perma.cc/M9B4-2TPN] (``State-of-the-art image generation
models do not output alternative (alt) text with their images,
rendering them largely inaccessible to screen reader users'') (last
visited Feb. 5, 2026).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the 2023 section 504 NPRM included proposed exceptions
for certain course content used by postsecondary institutions and
elementary and secondary schools; \55\ however, the Department
reconsidered those exceptions in light of significant negative public
comments responding to the NPRM and did not include them in the 2024
final rule.\56\ The exclusion of those proposed exceptions from the
2024 final rule may have led to confusion, given this change, requiring
additional time for recipients to understand their compliance
obligations. By extending the compliance dates, this IFR will afford
educational institutions time to assess the substance of the 2024 final
rule. Additionally, this IFR will afford those educational institutions
an opportunity to comment on their experiences complying with the
success criteria of WCAG 2.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ 88 FR 63392, 63509-10 (Sept. 14, 2023).
\56\ See 89 FR 40145-51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the Department has not received recent comments from members
of the disability community or disability rights organizations
concerning the 2024 final rule's web content and mobile app
accessibility requirements, we recognize that delaying compliance dates
to provide a more feasible timeline for recipients to comply with web
accessibility obligations may lead to a corresponding delay in
increased access for people with disabilities. We assume that there may
be some reliance interests among people with disabilities related to
the current implementation dates of May 11, 2026, and May 10, 2027, and
that delaying those dates may negatively impact those interests.
However, given that (1) recipients are not yet required to conform with
the success criteria of WCAG 2.1, the IFR only delays the
implementation of those conformance requirements to provide time for
additional comments and consideration: and (2) the potential for
copious and costly litigation if the implementation dates are not
pushed back, the Department believes that the benefits of this IFR
outweigh the reliance interests. Moreover, the delay of the compliance
dates does not relieve recipients of their other obligations under
Section 504, including, for example, under 45 CFR 84.68(b)(7) to make
reasonable modifications when necessary to ensure accessibility and
avoid discrimination on the basis of disability. For example, if a
person with a disability is a student at a college or university that
receives Federal financial assistance from HHS and is enrolled in a
class for which course materials are posted on the college or
university website, the Department expects that the college or
university will make those necessary course materials accessible for
the student with a disability, so long as it does not impose an undue
burden on the college or university or constitute a fundamental
alteration of its programs or activities. Similarly, the Department
expects that State agencies responsible for enrolling eligible persons
in public benefit programs, including Medicaid, and whose websites
provide information on, and a means to apply for, such benefits, would
make reasonable modifications to ensure that state residents with a
disability who would otherwise be eligible for such benefits are able
to access the needed information and apply for benefits.
We also recognize that some interested parties may argue that if
recipients believe it would either be impossible or highly burdensome
to comply with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1 as required by the 2024
final rule by the existing implementation dates, they may argue that
taking certain actions required by the 2024 final rule would constitute
a fundamental alteration or undue burden. The 2024 final rule does not
require recipients to take actions that would result in a fundamental
alteration to the nature of a program or activity or in undue financial
and administrative burdens.\57\ However, the Department does not
believe these defenses are sufficient in light of the litigation risks
described above. The Department intended the fundamental alteration and
undue burden defenses to apply only to rare situations--and, thus,
expected that recipients would need to invoke such exceptions only
infrequently. Indeed, in the preamble to the 2024 final rule, the
Department stated that it believed modifying web content and mobile
apps to conform with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1 would not amount
to a fundamental alteration for most recipients.\58\ However, based on
the aforementioned comments received by the Department and OMB, the
Department now believes that significant numbers of small State and
local governments, FQHCs, and other recipients may persuasively argue
that full conformance would amount to a fundamental alteration or undue
burden. Widespread invocation of the fundamental alteration and/or
undue burden defenses was not expected when the 2024 final rule was
published, but the Department now believes such invocation is likely.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ See 45 CFR 84.88.
\58\ See 89 FR 40155.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The existence of defenses against claims should not guide the
Department's decisions in setting the 2024 final rule's compliance
deadlines. The 2024 final rule's deadlines were not intended to hinge
on the availability of defenses in eventual litigation. If the
Department took the contrary view, that would require recipients to
engage in litigation because of compliance burdens that are not
entirely within their control. Although recipients could prevail on a
defense, that does not mitigate the litigation risks described above.
Whether the fundamental alteration or undue burden defenses apply
depends on the specific facts and circumstances; the heads of covered
entities or their designees must assess the defenses after considering
all resources available for use in the funding and operation of a
program or activity, and develop a written statement of the reasons for
their conclusion that either of the defenses applies.\59\ In other
words, a significant number, possibly even the majority of recipients
would have to devote significant amounts of time and money to first
review their operating budgets, consider all available options for
compliance, and then ultimately make a determination before responding
to either complaint investigations from the
[[Page 25501]]
Department or lawsuits alleging noncompliance with section 504. The
time and costs associated with such review, investigation, and
potential litigation were not fully considered in the Regulatory Impact
Analysis for the 2024 final rule. Additionally, widespread reliance on
fundamental alteration and undue burden defenses would lead to a
situation where an unspecified number of recipients do not conform with
the success criteria of WCAG 2.1 as required by the 2024 final rule
and, at least for some period of time, do not know the extent to which
they are required to conform with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1.
Such a situation would lead to increased uncertainty among recipients,
the exact opposite of the intent of the 2024 final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ 45 CFR 84.88.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While this IFR is limited to extending the 2024 final rule's
compliance dates at Sec. 84.84(b), the Department plans to engage in
future rulemaking related to the substantive requirements of the 2024
final rule. During the extension period, the Department will consider
issuing an NPRM providing members of the public with an opportunity to
comment on the substance of the 2024 final rule and any changes
proposed by the Department, including any changes that would affect the
web content and mobile app accessibility requirements. If the
Department does not issue such an NPRM and if circumstances suggesting
further delays of this deadline do not exist, the Department fully
anticipates implementing the regulation at the new deadline. Regardless
of the compliance dates, recipients have an ongoing obligation to
ensure that their programs and activities offered using web content and
mobile apps are accessible to individuals with disabilities in
accordance with their other obligations under section 504.
III. Regulatory Amendments
This IFR extends by one year the compliance dates included in Sec.
84.84(b)(1) and (2) of the Department's regulations implementing
section 504. As discussed in Sections I and II of this preamble, these
regulatory amendments are needed to make sure recipients have
sufficient time to achieve compliance with the requirements of the 2024
final rule in light of their reported resource constraints and staffing
limitations as the rule's compliance dates approach and for the
Department to consider whether some of the regulatory provisions could
be made less burdensome. Absent these amendments, recipients would be
subject to burdens from rushed compliance efforts in advance of the
compliance dates and significant litigation risk after the dates pass.
The amendments do not alter any other provisions from the 2024 final
rule.
Section 84.84(b) establishes the compliance dates by which
recipients must ensure that the web content and mobile applications
they provide or make available, directly or through contractual,
licensing, or other arrangements, conform with the success criteria of
WCAG 2.1. Before this IFR, paragraph (b)(1) required recipients with
fifteen (15) or more employees to conform with the success criteria of
WCAG 2.1 starting on May 11, 2026. Paragraph (b)(2) required recipients
with fewer than fifteen (15) employees to conform with the success
criteria of WCAG 2.1 starting on May 10, 2027.
This IFR amends paragraph (b)(1) by extending the compliance date
for recipients with fifteen (15) or more employees by one year, from
May 11, 2026, to May 11, 2027. It also amends paragraph (b)(2) by
extending the compliance date for recipients with fewer than fifteen
(15) employees by one year, from May 10, 2027, to May 10, 2028.
IV. Severability
The Department's position is that each of the amendments in this
IFR serve a vital, related, but distinct purpose. The Department also
confirms that each of the amendments is intended to operate
independently of each other and that the potential invalidity of one
amendment should not affect the other amendments. The Department would
adopt any of the amendments independent to, and regardless of, the
invalidity of a separate amendment.
As discussed, this rulemaking will amend the 2024 final rule's
Sec. 84.84(b) compliance dates so that large recipients would have
until May 11, 2027, to comply with the rule and small recipients would
have until May 10, 2028, to comply with the same. Each of these
extensions are severable.
V. Regulatory Process Matters
A. Administrative Procedure Act
The Department issues this IFR without prior public notice and
comment pursuant to two separate and independent exceptions in the
Administrative Procedure Act (``APA''). The first applies to rules
``relating to agency management or personnel or to public property,
loans, grants, benefits, or contracts,'' under 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2). The
second, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), applies when an agency, for good
cause, finds that such procedures are impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest, and without a delayed effective date
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
Section 504 concerns nondiscrimination requirements conditioned on
the receipt of Federal financial assistance, and more particularly on
the receipt of any Federal ``grant,'' ``cooperative agreement,''
``loan,'' ``contract (other than a direct Federal procurement contract
or a contract of insurance or guaranty),'' ``subgrant,'' ``contract
under a grant'' or ``any other arrangement by which the Department
provides or otherwise makes available assistance.'' 45 CFR 84.10; see
also 45 CFR 84.5 (requiring funding recipient sign contractual
assurance of compliance with the section 504 regulations).
The Department's definition of Federal financial assistance for
purposes of section 504 is found at 45 CFR 84.10, which provides that
such assistance means ``any grant, cooperative agreement, loan,
contract (other than a direct Federal procurement contract or a
contract of insurance or guaranty), subgrant, contract under a grant or
any other arrangement by which the Department provides or otherwise
makes available assistance in the form of: (1) Funds; (2) Services of
Federal personnel; (3) Real and personal property or any interest in or
use of such property, including: (i) Transfers or leases of such
property for less than fair market value or for reduced consideration;
and (ii) Proceeds from a subsequent transfer or lease of such property
if the Federal share of its fair market value is not returned to the
Federal Government; and (4) Any other thing of value by way of grant,
loan, contract, or cooperative agreement.'' The Department has
carefully reviewed the categories of activities listed in the 5 U.S.C.
553(a)(2) exception to notice and comment rulemaking, the definition of
Federal financial assistance at 45 CFR 84.10, and the types of Federal
financial assistance provided by the Department. Based on this review,
the Department has concluded that the categories of exempt activities
in section 553(a)(2) encompass everything contained in the Department's
definition at 45 CFR 84.10 and all of the types of Federal financial
assistance provided by the Department. Thus, the Department can utilize
the 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) exception to notice and comment for this
rulemaking.
First, 45 CFR 84.10's reference to any ``grant, cooperative
agreement,\60\\\ loan,
[[Page 25502]]
or contract'' is covered by 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2)'s inclusion of ``a
matter relating to . . . loans, grants, benefits, or contract'' in the
exemption from the requirements of Section 553. Second, the inclusion
of ``subgrant'' and ``contract under a grant'' is similarly covered by
that provision. Third, ``any other arrangement by which the Department
provides or otherwise makes available assistance in the form of . . .
[r]eal and personal property or any interest in or use of such
property, including: (i) [t]ransfers or leases of such property for
less than fair market value or for reduced consideration; and (ii)
[p]roceeds from a subsequent transfer or lease of such property if the
Federal share of its fair market value is not returned to the Federal
Government'' as Federal financial assistance under 45 CFR 84.10 is
covered by the exemption in 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) for ``a matter relating
to . . . public property [or] grants.'' Fourth, ``any other arrangement
by which the Department provides or otherwise makes available
assistance in the form of . . . services of Federal personnel'' under
45 CFR 84.10 is covered by 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2)'s inclusion of ``a matter
relating to agency management or personnel''; furthermore, the
detailing of Federal personnel occurs within the context of, or in lieu
of, monies disbursed under grants, which are explicitly covered in 5
U.S.C. 553(a)(2). Fifth, 45 CFR 84.10's inclusion of ``any other
arrangement by which the Department provides or otherwise makes
available assistance in the form of: (1) [f]unds; . . . [or] (4) [a]ny
other thing of value by way of grant loan, contract, or cooperative
agreement'' as Federal financial assistance falls within and is covered
by 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2)'s exemption for ``a matter relating to . . .
personnel or to public property, loans, grants, benefits, or
contracts.'' \61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ A cooperative agreement is ''an award of financial
assistance that, consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6305, is used to enter
into the same kind of relationship as a grant (see definition of
grant in Sec. 182.650), except that substantial involvement is
expected between the Federal agency and the recipient when carrying
out the activity contemplated by the award.'' 2 CFR 182.620. Thus, a
cooperative agreement would constitute a grant.
\61\ The Department acknowledges that it has adopted substantive
regulatory requirements under section 504 through notice and comment
rulemaking. It did so pursuant to a policy adopted by the Department
in 1971 that waived the APA's statutory exemption from procedural
rulemaking requirements for rules and regulations relating to public
property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts and instructed that
the APA's good cause exception be used sparingly (Richardson
Waiver). 36 FR 2532 (Feb. 5, 1971). The Richardson Waiver, thus,
required the Department to use the APA's notice and comment
rulemaking procedures for these types of matters. The Richardson
Waiver has been rescinded. See Policy on Adhering to the Text of the
Administrative Procedure Act, 90 FR 11029 (Mar. 3, 2025). With
respect to the promulgation of rules to implement Section 504, the
Department is, nevertheless, pursuing a substantive change to the
regulatory definition of ``disability'' through notice and comment
rulemaking. See Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in
Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance 90
FR59478 (Dec. 19, 2025) (notice of proposed rulemaking). The
Department may continue to use notice and comment rulemaking, as
appropriate, for substantive changes to its section 504 rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, invoking 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) is consistent with the U.S.
Office for Management and Budget's (OMB) definition of Federal
financial assistance under 2 CFR 200.1, which defines Federal financial
assistance with the same categories as the Administrative Procedure
Act's exception for rules ``relating to agency management or personnel
or to public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts,'' 5
U.S.C. 553(a)(2). With potentially limited exceptions not applicable to
the Department, all the forms of Federal financial assistance set forth
under 2 CFR 200.1 that the Department administers would fall under the
``public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts'' exception
under section 553(a)(2) of the Administrative Procedure Act.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ See also Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Handicap in
Federally Assisted Programs--Suspension of Guidelines with Respect
to Mass Transportation, 46 FR 40687 (Aug. 11, 1981) (invoking the
exception at 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) to suspend Department of Justice
guidelines regarding prohibiting disability discrimination in
transportation programs and activities receiving Federal financial
assistance).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For these reasons, the Department has authority to issue this final
rule without prior public notice and comment, and without a delayed
effective date, under 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2).
Notice and comment rulemaking is also not needed in this case
because good cause exists to issue an interim final rule with an
immediate effective date. Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), notice and public
procedures are not required when an agency, for good cause, finds that
such procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest,'' and the agency incorporates the finding and a brief
statement of the reasons therefore in the rulemaking. Here, the
compliance dates in the 2024 final rule are quickly approaching,
including the immediate first compliance date of May 11, 2026; this IFR
is limited to extending the compliance dates. As discussed in Sections
I and II of this preamble, circumstances outside of the Department's
and recipients' control make these regulatory amendments necessary to
ensure recipients have sufficient time to achieve compliance with the
requirements of Sec. 84.84(b) of the 2024 final rule. This is in light
of the Department's belief that the compliance dates are not achievable
in the set time or would result in significant expenses and/or
litigation risks for small recipients because of the reported resource
constraints facing recipients as those dates imminently approach.
Absent these amendments, recipients would be subject to significant
litigation risk after the compliance dates passed. Because of the
private right of action, and the possibility that a court may consider
the Department's 2024 final rule when ruling on a private right of
action, the Department does not have the option to take no enforcement
action or offer a statement of policy regarding its intent to not
enforce the rule pending improvements to the circumstances for covered
entities' compliance. Moreover, because the Department does not have
time to go through notice-and-comment rulemaking before the effective
dates of Sec. 84.84(b) of the 2024 final rule, the only way for the
Department to delay the consequences of this rule is to forgo
prepublication notice and comment. Notwithstanding the presence of good
cause to promulgate this compliance extension without notice and
comment, the Department has decided, as a voluntary matter, to
promulgate this action as an IFR with a post-promulgation 60-day public
comment period.
In addition, the nature of this IFR is to delay restrictions,
rather than impose new ones, which alleviates the central concern of
the Administrative Procedure Act to create ``safeguards . . . against
arbitrary official encroachment on private rights.'' \63\ When an
agency does not burden regulated parties ``it generally does not
exercise its coercive power over'' those parties ``and thus does not
infringe upon areas that courts often are called upon to protect.''
\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ United States v. Morton Salt Co., 338 U.S. 632, 644 (1950);
see also Douglas H. Ginsburg, Steven Menashi, Our Illiberal
Administrative Law, 10 NYU J.L. & Liberty 475, 521 (2016) (``The APA
was intended to give the public a way to get relief from
administrative excess.'').
\64\ Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 832 (1985) (emphasis
omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, as discussed above, DOJ has recently issued an IFR
\65\ that extends the compliance dates of its web and mobile app
accessibility rule under title II of the ADA. This is an added basis to
find that notice and comment is impracticable, unnecessary, and/or
contrary to the public interest, because the Department's 2024 rule was
informed by Congress's intention that title II and section 504 be
interpreted
[[Page 25503]]
consistently.\66\ The Department specifically noted that it coordinated
with DOJ with respect to technical standards applicable to web content
and mobile apps and sought ``to eliminate or minimize instances where
recipients that are also public entities under title II will be held to
different standards,'' with the goal of avoiding ``unnecessary
confusion among recipients.'' \67\ The Department also responded to
commenters seeking different compliance deadlines from those in the
NPRM by noting that ``changing compliance dates runs the risk of
introducing inconsistency with other rulemakings where recipients that
are also covered by those rulemakings would be subject to different
compliance dates.'' \68\ Given the short timeframe between DOJ's
promulgation of its IFR and the imminent compliance date of the
Department's 2024 final rule, there is good cause to dispense with
prior notice and comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ 91 FR 20902 (Apr. 20, 2026).
\66\ 89 FR 40066 (``[T]o fulfill Congress's intent that title II
of the ADA and section 504 be interpreted consistently, the rule
contains provisions that mirror the corresponding provisions in the
title II ADA regulation.'').
\67\ Id. at 40131.
\68\ Id. at 40133.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For these reasons, the Department for good cause finds that
following pre-publication notice-and-comment procedures for this
rulemaking would be impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the
public interest under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
In addition, this IFR is effective immediately without a delayed
effective date pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). Under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(1), there is no requirement for a delayed effective date for
substantive rules that ``grant[ ] or recognize[ ] an exemption or
relieve[ ] a restriction.'' This IFR relieves a restriction, in the
form of existing dates for compliance with regulatory requirements.
B. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (Regulatory Review)
The Office of Management and Budget has determined that this IFR is
an economically significant regulatory action under section 3(f)(1) of
Executive Order (``E.O.'') 12866. Accordingly, this rule has been
submitted to OMB for review.
This IFR has been drafted and reviewed in accordance with section
1(b) of E.O. 12866,\69\ and section 1(b) of E.O. 13563,\70\ which
supplements and reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866. These orders
direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits.\71\ E.O. 13563 also
recognizes that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify and
provides that, where appropriate and permitted by law, agencies may
consider and discuss qualitatively values that are difficult or
impossible to quantify.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ 58 FR 51735.
\70\ 76 FR 3821, 3821 (Jan. 18, 2011).
\71\ 58 FR 51735; 76 FR 3821.
\72\ 58 FR 51735; 76 FR 3821.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained in Sections I and II of this preamble, the Department
has identified recent communications submitted to the Federal
government indicating that the Department underestimated burdens to
recipients, especially smaller recipients, when setting the compliance
dates in the 2024 final rule. There are also reported resource
constraints and staffing limitations for recipients as they work
towards compliance with the rule. This IFR extends the 2024 final
rule's compliance dates for Sec. 84.84(b) in light of these recent
communications to make sure recipients have additional time to come
into full compliance with the rule.
Data limitations make the costs and benefits of this IFR difficult
to quantify. However, the Department assessed the costs and benefits of
these one-year longer compliance dates in the Regulatory Impact
Analysis (``RIA'') that accompanied the 2024 final rule.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ See U.S. Dep't of Health and Hum. Servs. Regulatory Impact
Analysis at 60, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/sec-504-ria-final-rule-2024.pdf (hereinafter ``2024 RIA'') (Table 11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We assessed the potential impacts of this IFR by comparing the
policy scenario to an analytic baseline scenario of allowing the 2024
final rule to take effect under its initial implementation timeline. In
the baseline, recipients incur initial costs (familiarization, testing,
and remediation) over the first two or three years: two years for large
recipients and three years for small recipients. From year four onward,
recipients incur implementation costs which were not estimated to vary
from year to year. In the baseline, benefits grow over the first two or
three years as recipients complete the initial familiarization,
testing, and remediation activities. From year four onward, some
benefits remain constant (e.g., time savings from more accessible
websites), while the benefits (higher earnings) from improved education
for students with disabilities through accessible classes continue to
grow as the number of students completing accessible curricula
increases.
By pushing out implementation by one year, this IFR would eliminate
both costs and benefits in the first year that were estimated in the
RIA while adding another year of costs and benefits in the future.
While this will shift any benefits in that first year to a year in the
future, resulting in discounted benefits in the future and a lower
total benefit for the rulemaking, the IFR will also shift costs to the
future. This shift of costs to the future would result in overall
discounted costs as they are pushed further into the future.
This IFR does not impose new substantive requirements, and it does
not expand the scope of existing obligations. Instead, by extending the
compliance deadlines established in Sec. 84.84(b) of the 2024 final
rule, the Department expects this IFR better aligns with the current
status of compliance. The IFR also mitigates recipients' litigation
exposure associated with impending compliance deadlines, and it avoids
burdens to recipients from rushed compliance efforts.
Based on the foregoing, the Department believes that this IFR is
consistent with the principles of E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563, including
the requirement that, to the extent permitted by law, the Department
adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits
justify its costs and select a regulatory approach that maximizes net
benefits.\74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ See 58 FR at 51735; 76 FR at 3821.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Costs and Benefits
As noted above, the costs and benefits for this IFR will result
from delaying the implementation dates for full conformance with WCAG
2.1 by one year. In the 2024 final rule, the Department provided a
Regulatory Impact Analysis (``RIA'') that estimated yearly annualized
costs and benefits of the 2024 final rule web content and mobile
accessibility section at $934.7 million and $1,265.6 million,
respectively (using a 7% discount rate and reported in constant 2022
dollars).\75\ By pushing compliance out by one year, this IFR would
lower cost (i.e., generating cost savings) while also lowering benefits
(i.e., generating offsetting losses in benefits).\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\75\ See 89 FR 40175, Table 1. By contrast, if DOJ had not
already issued a compliance-date extension, the focus of this
analysis would be the effects experienced by entities only subject
to HHS's 2024 final rule, per row (2) of Summary Table C (89 FR
40176).
\76\ The decrease in costs would be the result of an extra year
for recipients to ensure that they come into compliance with the
success criteria of WCAG 2.1 as required by the 2024 final rule.
Implementation costs would be pushed into the future. The decrease
in benefits would be the result of individuals with disabilities not
being able to rely on recipient web content and mobile apps
conforming with the success criteria of WCAG 2.1 as required by the
2024 final rule for an additional year. The resulting loss in
accessibility, and the tangible benefits such accessibility would
provide to individuals with disabilities such as improved health
outcomes and educational opportunities, amounts to a loss in
benefits during that one year period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 25504]]
Using estimates in the 2024 final rule, Tables 1 and 2 show that by
pushing compliance out by one year, this IFR would lower annualized
costs by $114.3 million or $93.3 million, and discounted total costs by
$803.1 million or $796 million (using a 7% or a 3% discount rate, and
constant 2022 dollars).
Table 1--10-Year Undiscounted and Discounted (at 7%) Cost Savings From a One-Year Implementation Delay, in 2022 Dollars
[Millions]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline IFR Cost savings
Year -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undiscounted Discounted Undiscounted Discounted Undiscounted Discounted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2026.................................................... $1,205.4 $1,126.5 $0.0 $0.0 -$1,205.4 -$1,126.5
2027.................................................... 1,368.7 1,195.5 1,205.4 1,052.8 -163.3 -142.7
2028.................................................... 958.8 782.7 1,368.7 1,117.3 409.9 334.6
2029.................................................... 786.5 600.0 958.8 731.5 172.3 131.4
2030.................................................... 786.5 560.8 786.5 560.8 0.0 0.0
2031.................................................... 786.5 524.1 786.5 524.1 0.0 0.0
2032.................................................... 786.5 489.8 786.5 489.8 0.0 0.0
2033.................................................... 786.5 457.8 786.5 457.8 0.0 0.0
2034.................................................... 786.5 427.8 786.5 427.8 0.0 0.0
2035.................................................... 786.5 399.8 786.5 399.8 0.0 0.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.............................................. 9,038.5 6,564.7 8,252.0 5,761.6 -786.5 -803.1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized...................................... .............. 934.7 .............. 820.3 .............. -114.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--10-Year Undiscounted and Discounted (at 3%) Cost Savings From a One-Year Implementation Delay, in 2022 Dollars
[Millions]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline IFR Cost savings
Year -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undiscounted Discounted Undiscounted Discounted Undiscounted Discounted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2026.................................................... $1,205.4 $1,170.1 $0.0 $0.0 -$1,205.4 -$1,170.3
2027.................................................... 1,368.7 1,290.0 1,205.4 1,136.2 -163.3 -154.0
2028.................................................... 958.8 877.3 1,368.7 1,252.6 409.9 375.1
2029.................................................... 786.5 698.7 958.8 851.9 172.3 153.1
2030.................................................... 786.5 678.4 786.5 678.5 0.0 0.0
2031.................................................... 786.5 658.6 786.5 658.7 0.0 0.0
2032.................................................... 786.5 639.4 786.5 639.5 0.0 0.0
2033.................................................... 786.5 620.8 786.5 620.9 0.0 0.0
2034.................................................... 786.5 602.7 786.5 602.8 0.0 0.0
2035.................................................... 786.5 585.2 786.5 585.2 0.0 0.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.............................................. 9,038.5 7,821.3 8,252.0 7,026.2 -786.5 -796.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized...................................... .............. 916.9 .............. 823.7 .............. -93.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tables 3 and 4 show that by pushing compliance out by one year,
this IFR would lower annualized benefits by $204.6 million or $189.8
million, and discounted total benefits by $1,436.8 million or $1,619.2
million (using a 7% or 3% discount rate, and constant 2022 dollars).
Table 3--10-Year Undiscounted and Discounted (at 7%) Foregone Benefits From a One-Year Implementation Delay, in 2022 Dollars
[Millions]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline IFR Foregone benefits
Year -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undiscounted Discounted Undiscounted Discounted Undiscounted Discounted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2026.................................................... $350.3 $327.3 $0.0 $0.0 -$350.3 -$327.3
2027.................................................... 700.4 611.8 350.3 305.9 -350.1 -305.8
2028.................................................... 1,111.7 907.4 700.4 571.7 -411.3 -335.7
2029.................................................... 1,434.3 1,094.2 1,111.7 848.1 -322.6 -246.1
2030.................................................... 1,495.3 1,066.1 1,434.3 1,022.6 -61.0 -43.5
2031.................................................... 1,556.3 1,037.0 1,495.3 996.4 -61.0 -40.6
[[Page 25505]]
2032.................................................... 1,617.3 1,007.1 1,556.3 969.2 -61.0 -38.0
2033.................................................... 1,678.3 976.8 1,617.3 941.3 -61.0 -35.5
2034.................................................... 1,739.3 946.0 1,678.3 912.9 -61.0 -33.2
2035.................................................... 1,800.3 915.2 1,739.3 884.1 -61.0 -31.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.............................................. 13,483.1 8,889.0 11,682.9 7,452.2 -1,800.3 -1,436.8
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized...................................... .............. 1,265.6 .............. 1,061.0 .............. -204.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4--10-Year Undiscounted and Discounted (at 3%) Foregone Benefits From a One-Year Implementation Delay, in 2022 Dollars
[Millions]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baseline IFR Foregone benefits
Year -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Undiscounted Discounted Undiscounted Discounted Undiscounted Discounted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2026.................................................... $350.3 $339.8 $0.0 $0.0 -$350.0 -$339.8
2027.................................................... 700.4 659.7 350.3 330.2 -349.6 -329.5
2028.................................................... 1,111.7 1,016.6 700.4 641.0 -410.4 -375.6
2029.................................................... 1,434.3 1,273.4 1,111.7 987.7 -321.6 -285.7
2030.................................................... 1,495.3 1,288.9 1,434.3 1,237.2 -60.0 -51.7
2031.................................................... 1,556.3 1,302.5 1,495.3 1,252.3 -59.9 -50.2
2032.................................................... 1,617.3 1,314.1 1,556.3 1,265.4 -60.0 -48.8
2033.................................................... 1,678.3 1,324.0 1,617.3 1,276.7 -60.0 -47.3
2034.................................................... 1,739.3 1,332.2 1,678.3 1,286.2 -60.0 -46.0
2035.................................................... 1,800.3 1,338.8 1,739.3 1,294.2 -60.0 -44.6
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.............................................. 13,483.1 11,190.0 11,682.9 9,570.8 -1,791.4 -1,619.2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized...................................... .............. 1,311.8 .............. 1,122.0 .............. -189.8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This means that based on the 2024 final rule RIA, this IFR would
result in a net decrease in benefits by $90.2 million or $96.5 million
on an annualized basis and $633.7 million or $823.2 million on a total
discounted basis (using a 7% or 3% discount rate, and constant 2022
dollars).
While cost savings estimated by tables 1 and 2 ($114.3 million and
$93.3 million, respectively) are lower than the foregone benefits
estimated by tables 3 and 4 ($204.6 million and $189.9 million,
respectively), the estimated cost savings do not factor in additional
likely cost savings that are either unquantifiable or difficult to
quantify with a high degree of accuracy in a short period of time. For
example, unquantifiable savings will likely result from recipients
avoiding making the fact dependent determination of whether a recipient
may invoke a defense of fundamental alteration or undue burden. For
example, a recipient's head or their designee would not have to spend
time gathering evidence and making a determination of whether full
remediation of its web content to conform with the success criteria of
WCAG 2.1 amounts to a fundamental alteration. Additional unquantifiable
savings will likely result from recipients avoiding legal fees from
individuals challenging their noncompliance with WCAG 2.1.
D. Executive Order 14294 (Fighting Overcriminalization in Federal
Regulations)
E.O. 14294 requires agencies promulgating regulations with criminal
regulatory offenses potentially subject to criminal enforcement to
``explicitly describe the conduct subject to criminal enforcement, the
authorizing statutes, and the mens rea standard applicable to'' each
element of those offenses.\77\ This rule does not impose a criminal
regulatory penalty and is thus exempt from E.O. 14294's requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\77\ 90 FR 20363, 20363 (May 9, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Executive Order 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)
E.O. 14192 requires an agency, unless prohibited by law, to
identify at least ten (10) existing regulations to be repealed when the
agency publicly proposes for notice and comment or otherwise
promulgates a new regulation.\78\ In furtherance of this requirement,
section 3(c) of the order requires that ``any new incremental costs
associated with new regulations shall, to the extent permitted by law,
be offset by the elimination of existing costs associated with at least
ten (10) prior regulations.'' \79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ 90 FR 9065, 9065 (Jan. 31, 2025).
\79\ 90 FR 9065.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deregulatory actions include final actions that reduce compliance
costs below zero, which may include repealing, revising, or
streamlining existing regulations.\80\ This IFR revises the 2024 final
rule by extending the rule's web and mobile app accessibility
compliance dates by one year. As explained in the preamble, extending
the compliance dates is expected to avoid burdens to recipients in the
near term from rushed compliance efforts. It
[[Page 25506]]
is also expected to reduce litigation exposure associated with the 2024
final rule's impending compliance deadlines, including potential
liability for attorneys' fees. We estimate that the IFR will result in
$52.18 million in annualized cost savings using a 7% discount rate,
adopting a perpetual time horizon of analysis with 2024 as the base
year for discounting, and reported using constant 2024 dollars.\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ Office of Management and Budget, OMB Mem. M-25-20: Guidance
Implementing Section 3 of Executive Order 14192, ``Unleashing
Prosperity Through Deregulation'' (Mar. 26, 2025).
\81\ The estimate of $52.18 million in 2024 dollars corresponds
to $49.1 million in 2022 dollars due to 6.2742% in estimated
inflation between 2022 and 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, the Department believes that this IFR constitutes a
deregulatory action for purposes of E.O. 14192.
F. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
E.O. 13132 requires Executive Branch agencies to consider whether a
rule will have federalism implications--that is, whether the rule will
have substantial direct effects on State or local governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ 64 FR 43255, 43258 (Aug. 4, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department's regulations implementing Section 504 apply to
programs and activities that receive financial assistance from the
Department, including the programs and activities of State and local
government entities and, therefore, implicates federalism
considerations. State and local government recipients have been subject
to section 504 for decades. Accordingly, the application of section 504
and the Department's implementing regulations is not novel for State or
local governments.
This IFR does not alter the substantive requirements adopted in the
2024 final rule, including the scope of coverage or the interaction
between Federal requirements and State or local law. Instead, this rule
solely extends the 2024 final rule's compliance dates for Sec.
84.84(b). As a result, this IFR does not impose new obligations on
State or local governments, affect States' policymaking discretion, or
change the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
Because this IFR merely adjusts the timing of compliance with
existing requirements and is expected to reduce litigation exposure of
State and local governments and avoid burdens to recipients from rushed
compliance efforts, the Department has determined that it does not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
federalism summary impact statement under E.O. 13132.
G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This IFR meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a)
and (b)(2) of E.O. 12988 to specify provisions in clear language.\83\
Pursuant to section 3(b)(1)(I) of the order,\84\ nothing in this IFR or
any previous rule (or in any administrative policy, directive, ruling,
notice, guideline, guidance, or writing) directly relating to the
program that is the subject of this IFR is intended to create any legal
or procedural rights enforceable against the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ See 61 FR 4729, 4731-32 (Feb. 5, 1996).
\84\ 61 FR 4731.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Regulatory Flexibility Act
This IFR does not require a regulatory flexibility analysis under
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (``RFA'') \85\ because, for the reasons
described above in Section V.A of this preamble, the Department issues
this IFR without notice and comment.\86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\85\ 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
\86\ See Or. Trollers Ass'n v. Gutierrez, 452 F.3d 1104, 1123-24
(9th Cir. 2006) (noting that the RFA does not apply when an agency
validly invokes an exception to the public notice-and-comment
requirements of 5 U.S.C. 553).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department seeks feedback on the impact of the 2024 final rule
and this IFR. The Department seeks feedback on the numbers of
recipients affected by these rules and the costs and benefits of both
rules. The Department also seeks feedback on whether the agency should
publish additional rulemaking to consider additional regulatory
alternatives to make the 2024 final rule less costly for small
recipients.
I. Congressional Review Act
The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined
that this rule meets the criteria set forth by Subtitle E of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (also known as the
Congressional Review Act) under 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will result
in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, but not a
major increase in costs or prices or cause significant adverse effects
on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of companies based in the United States to compete with
foreign-based companies in domestic and export markets. The rule merely
extends the compliance dates in Sec. 84.84(b) of the 2024 final rule
by one year. Doing so does not impose new obligations on recipients.
For the reasons discussed herein, the Department issues this IFR
without notice and comment or a delayed effective date pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and (d)(1). Accordingly, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 808(2),
the requirement for a 60-day delayed effective date does not apply to
this rule.
J. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule will not impose additional reporting or recordkeeping
requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\87\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
K. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 4(2) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 excludes
from coverage under that Act any proposed or final Federal regulation
that ``establishes or enforces any statutory rights that prohibit
discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national
origin, age, handicap, or disability.'' \88\ Accordingly, this
rulemaking is not subject to the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ 2 U.S.C. 1503(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Electronic Submission of Comments and Posting of Public Comments
Interested persons are invited to participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written comments on all aspects of this rule via one of the
methods and by the deadline stated in the DATES section. When
submitting comments, please include ``RIN 0945-AA30'' in the subject
field. The Department also invites comments that relate to the
economic, environmental, or federalism effects that might result from
this rule. Comments that will provide the most assistance to the
Department in developing this rule will reference a specific portion of
the rule, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include
data, information, or authority that supports such recommended change.
Commenters should be aware that the electronic Federal Docket
Management System (``FDMS'') will accept comments submitted prior to
midnight Eastern Time on the last day of the comment period. Late
comments are highly disfavored. The Department is not required to
consider late comments.
Please note that all comments received are considered part of the
public record and made available for public inspection at https://www.regulations.gov. Such information includes personally identifiable
information (``PII'') (such as your name
[[Page 25507]]
and address). Interested persons are not required to submit their PII
in order to comment on this rule. However, any PII that is submitted is
subject to being posted to the publicly accessible https://www.regulations.gov site without redaction.
Confidential business information clearly identified in the first
paragraph of the comment as such will not be placed in the public
docket file.
The Department may withhold from public viewing information
provided in comments that it determines may impact the privacy of an
individual or is offensive. For additional information, please read the
Privacy Act notice that is available via the link in the footer of
https://www.regulations.gov. To inspect the agency's public docket file
in person, you must make an appointment with the agency. Please see the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT paragraph above for agency contact
information.
List of Subjects for 45 CFR Part 84
Administrative practice and procedure, Civil rights, Colleges and
universities, Communications, Disabled, Discrimination, Equal access to
justice, Federal financial assistance, Health, Health care access,
Health programs and activities, Individuals with disabilities, Medical
care, Nondiscrimination, Public health, State and local requirements.
For the reasons stated above, the Department of Health and Human
Services amends 45 CFR subtitle A, subchapter A, part 84 as set forth
below:
PART 84--NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN PROGRAMS
OR ACTIVITIES RECEIVING FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
0
1. The authority citation for part 84 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 29 U.S.C. 794.
Subpart I--Web, Mobile, and Kiosk Accessibility
Sec. 84.84 [Amended]
0
2. Section 84.84 is amended by:
0
a. In paragraph (b)(1), removing the text ``May 11, 2026'' and adding
in its place the text ``May 11, 2027''; and
0
b. In paragraph (b)(2), removing the text ``May 10, 2027'' and adding
in its place the text ``May 10, 2028''.
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2026-09266 Filed 5-7-26; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120-01-P