- 9 -
individuals with hearing impairments, the examples given include:
Qualified interpreters, notetakers, computer-aided
transcription services, written materials, telephone
handset amplifiers, assistive listening devices,
assistive listening systems, telephones compatible with
hearing aids, closed caption decoders, open and closed
captioning, telecommunications devices for deaf persons
(TDD’s), videotext displays, or other effective methods
of making aurally delivered materials available to
individuals with hearing impairments.
28 C.F.R. sec. 36.303(b)(1).
The ADA requires businesses to ensure effective
communication through the use of auxiliary aids and services.
Costs associated with complying with this requirement are
“eligible access expenditures” for purposes of the disabled
access credit. Sec. 44(c)(2). Petitioner argues that the
purchase of the system enables his business to meet this
requirement with respect to hearing-impaired individuals and,
therefore, the cost of the system qualifies as an eligible access
expenditure. For the following reasons, we disagree.
At the outset, we note that petitioner was already in
compliance with the ADA at the time that he purchased the system.
Petitioner did not discriminate against, or refuse to treat,
hearing impaired individuals “on the basis of disability”. 42
U.S.C. sec. 12182(a). Nor did he fail to take necessary steps to
ensure that no individual with a disability is denied services
because of the absence of auxiliary aids and services. See 42
U.S.C. sec. 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii). He effectively communicated
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011