ADA, A117.1, and TAS

Title II applies to state and local government entities. It covers public entities regardless of size and requires both physical accessibility and program accessibility. Program accessibility means a government entity must ensure its services and programs are accessible to people with disabilities even if a specific building cannot be fully modified. Title II is enforced through federal agencies and DOJ complaints.

Title III applies to places of public accommodation and commercial facilities owned or operated by private entities. It covers restaurants, retail stores, offices, hotels, theaters, and most other privately owned buildings open to the public. Title III does not impose a program accessibility obligation in the same sense as Title II, but it does require readily achievable barrier removal in existing facilities and full accessibility in new construction and alterations.

The distinction matters for two specific accessibility requirements. The elevator exception for multi-story buildings is available only to private (Title III) buildings. Government (Title II) buildings must always connect all stories by accessible route. TTY thresholds also differ: one public telephone triggers the TTY requirement in a public building; four are required in a private building.

Source: ADA 42 U.S.C. §§12131, 12181; 28 CFR Parts 35 and 36

Readily achievable barrier removal is an ongoing obligation under ADA Title III that applies to existing places of public accommodation. It does not require a construction project to activate it. Any commercial building owner subject to Title III has a continuous obligation to remove architectural barriers where doing so is readily achievable, meaning achievable without much difficulty or expense given the resources of the business.

Readily achievable is a lower standard than full compliance. Common readily achievable measures include installing grab bars, repositioning signage, adding ramps where a short height change exists, widening a restroom door, restriping parking, and installing accessible door hardware. The obligation is assessed against the financial resources of the specific business, not against a fixed cost threshold.

This obligation is distinct from the alteration path of travel requirement. The readily achievable obligation applies to all existing barriers, whether or not any construction is underway. The path of travel requirement is triggered by an alteration. Both apply independently.

Source: ADA 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(iv); 28 CFR §36.304

No. ADA Title III explicitly exempts religious organizations and entities they control from all Title III requirements. Churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, and any facility owned or operated by a religious organization are fully exempt, regardless of whether members of the public use the facility.

The exemption is broad and unconditional in the ADA. However, the Texas Accessibility Standards do not include an equivalent explicit exemption. Whether TAS applies to houses of worship under Texas Government Code Chapter 469 is not definitively settled, and TDLR has not issued a Technical Memorandum specifically addressing it. Separately, IBC and A117.1 classify houses of worship as Group A-3 assembly occupancies and apply accessibility requirements to them without exemption through the building code.

A house of worship may be exempt from ADA Title III while being subject to IBC accessibility requirements through the local building permit process, and potentially subject to TAS where Texas law applies. Each standard must be evaluated independently for any specific project.

Source: ADA 42 U.S.C. §12187

Technical infeasibility applies to alterations of existing buildings and facilities. An element is technically infeasible when existing structural conditions would require removing or altering a load-bearing member that is an essential part of the structural frame, or when other existing physical or site constraints prohibit modification to meet full compliance. Cost alone is not a ground for technical infeasibility.

Under ADA, the determination of technical infeasibility is made by the design team and owner and documented in the project record. There is no submission to a federal agency required. DOJ may challenge the determination in a complaint investigation, but it is not reviewed in advance.

Under TAS in Texas, the same concept applies but the process is different. All determinations of technical infeasibility are made by TDLR through the variance procedures in 16 TAC Chapter 68. The finding that opens the variance pathway in Texas is a formal regulatory determination by TDLR, not an internal design team judgment. The variance, once granted, is the legal authorization for the departure from full compliance.

Source: ADA 28 CFR §36.402; TAS §106.5.68

Program accessibility is an obligation specific to Title II public entities. A government agency must ensure that its programs, services, and activities are accessible to people with disabilities when viewed in their entirety. The obligation runs to the program, not to any individual building. If a specific building cannot be made physically accessible, the agency must restructure the service, relocate it to an accessible location, provide home visits, or offer an equivalent alternative.

Program accessibility is broader and more demanding than the physical accessibility requirements for new construction and alterations. A building can be compliant with ADA's physical accessibility standards and still create a program accessibility violation if the overall service it houses is not accessible to people with disabilities.

Private entities under Title III have no equivalent program accessibility obligation. Title III requires physical accessibility of the facility itself. This distinction matters for facility assessments, remediation planning, and litigation involving government-owned or government-operated facilities.

Source: ADA Title II / 28 CFR §35.150

ADA §103 (Equivalent Facilitation) provides that nothing in the ADA Standards prevents the use of designs, products, or technologies as alternatives to those specifically required, provided they result in substantially equivalent or greater accessibility and usability. It is not a variance or a waiver. It is an affirmative statement that an alternative means of compliance is authorized when the alternative provides equal or better accessibility.

Equivalent facilitation is most commonly used when A117.1 provides technical specifications for a condition that ADA 2010 does not address. The U.S. Access Board has specifically directed practitioners to use A117.1 §703.7 for Variable Message Sign specifications on ADA-covered projects, citing equivalent facilitation as the authorized pathway. The same applies to wheelchair charging areas, destination-oriented elevator systems, and blended transitions at pedestrian curb ramps.

The burden of demonstrating equivalency rests with the designer. The claim that an alternative provides equivalent or greater accessibility must be supportable with technical documentation, not simply asserted. On Texas-registered projects, TDLR plan review may require that the equivalent facilitation rationale be included in the plan review submission.

Source: ADA §103 / TAS §103 / ICC A117.1 §103

ICC A117.1 is a technical standard published by the International Code Council. It is not a law. It provides dimensional and technical requirements for accessible design that the International Building Code (IBC) adopts by reference in Chapter 11. Where IBC applies, A117.1 provides the technical requirements; IBC Chapter 11 provides the scoping (how many elements must be accessible).

ADA and TAS are separate regulatory frameworks that establish their own technical requirements. ADA and TAS do not adopt A117.1 by reference. The three sets of standards overlap significantly but differ in specific areas, and the differences matter on projects where multiple standards apply simultaneously.

Where ADA or TAS requires something and A117.1 requires something more stringent, the more stringent standard governs on projects subject to both. ADA §103 and TAS §103 each provide that designs, products, or technologies not specifically prescribed by those standards may be used where they result in substantially equivalent or greater accessibility. Because A117.1 addresses technologies and conditions that ADA and TAS do not, including Variable Message Signs, wheelchair charging areas, and updated dimensional requirements, A117.1's more current provisions can be applied on ADA and TAS projects under those standards' own equivalent facilitation authority.

Source: IBC Chapter 11; ICC A117.1-2017 §103

A117.1 Chapter 11 defines two tiers of residential accessibility, Type A and Type B, and IBC Chapter 11 determines when each is required. Type A units provide a higher level of accessibility than Type B. Both are above the minimum required by the Fair Housing Act, though Type B is the technical equivalent of FHA requirements.

Type A units require an accessible route to all rooms and spaces within the unit, all interior doors at 32-inch minimum clear width, accessible kitchen with turning space and work surface clearances, and a bathroom with either a roll-in shower or an accessible bathtub. IBC requires Type A units in buildings with more than 20 dwelling or sleeping units, at 2 percent of the total, dispersed by unit type.

Type B units require: a primary entrance on an accessible route, all interior doors at 32-inch minimum clear width, accessible route through all rooms intended for occupancy, reinforced bathroom walls for future grab bar installation, light switches and outlets at accessible height, and usable kitchen and bathroom configurations. Type B does not require a roll-in shower, a fully accessible kitchen, or accessible interior hardware. IBC requires Type B units in buildings with four or more units.

Source: ICC A117.1-2017 §§1003, 1004; IBC §1107

A117.1-2017 establishes two tiers of dimensional requirements: one for new construction and one for existing buildings. The new construction tier uses updated dimensions that reflect the larger footprint of modern power wheelchairs, motorized scooters, and other contemporary mobility devices. The existing building tier retains the dimensions from current ADA and TAS standards, which were developed primarily around the manual wheelchair.

The most significant difference is wheelchair space depth. ADA and TAS require 48 inches minimum depth for forward or rear access. A117.1 requires 60 inches for new construction, while retaining 48 inches as the existing building standard. The 60-inch dimension accommodates modern power wheelchair and scooter footprints that frequently exceed 48 inches in length.

ADA and TAS are expected to adopt the A117.1 new construction dimensions in future revision cycles. On projects governed by IBC and A117.1 for new construction, the 60-inch depth controls. On projects governed only by ADA and TAS, 48 inches is the current requirement.

Source: ICC A117.1-2017 §§107.5 (Existing Building), 802.1

A117.1-2017 §703.7 provides technical specifications for variable message signs (VMS), covering both high resolution and low resolution VMS character requirements. ADA 2010 and TAS 2012 do not address VMS. The technology proliferated after both standards were written, and neither includes provisions for dynamic electronic displays.

The U.S. Access Board has explicitly stated that ADA Standards do not address VMS and directs practitioners to A117.1 §703.7 for technical specifications. This is one of the few instances where the agency responsible for the ADA affirmatively endorses A117.1 as the applicable reference for an ADA-covered project. The Access Board has also published research on VMS legibility acknowledging that VMS use has increased dramatically with no current ADA standards ensuring legibility for people with visual impairments.

A117.1's equivalent facilitation provision (§103) authorizes use of A117.1 §703.7 on ADA and TAS projects. Wheelchair Charging Areas are in a similar situation: defined and addressed in A117.1 but absent from ADA and TAS.

Source: ICC A117.1-2017 §703.7; U.S. Access Board VMS guidance

IBC Chapter 11 and ICC A117.1 work as a paired system. Chapter 11 establishes scoping: how many accessible elements, spaces, and units are required. A117.1 establishes the technical requirements for each of those elements in dimensional and functional terms. Chapter 11 identifies which elements must comply; A117.1 defines what compliance means for each of them.

Both must be consulted. Chapter 11 contains its own technical provisions in some areas that supplement or modify A117.1, and where the two have different requirements on the same element, the more stringent governs. A project that satisfies A117.1 technically may still fail Chapter 11 scoping if the correct number of accessible units, parking spaces, or seating positions has not been provided.

ADA and TAS are separate frameworks that do not reference A117.1. Projects subject to both IBC and ADA must satisfy all three: IBC Chapter 11 scoping, A117.1 technical requirements, and ADA standards for the same elements. Where requirements differ, the most stringent applies to each specific element.

Source: IBC Chapter 11 / ICC A117.1-2017

A117.1 §103 (Equivalent Facilitation) permits alternative designs, products, or technologies that provide equal or greater accessibility than the specific technical requirements. The provision is parallel to ADA §103 and TAS §103. All three standards include this provision with essentially the same language.

In practice, equivalent facilitation under A117.1 is used for innovative accessible design approaches, emerging technologies, and conditions the standard does not specifically address. It is also the mechanism through which A117.1 solutions are applied to ADA and TAS projects: when A117.1 addresses a topic that ADA and TAS do not (Variable Message Signs, wheelchair charging areas, destination-oriented elevators), the A117.1 specification is applied on the ADA/TAS project through the equivalent facilitation provision of all three standards simultaneously.

Equivalent facilitation is not a variance pathway. It does not require regulatory approval. It does require that the designer be able to demonstrate that the alternative provides equivalent or greater accessibility, and that documentation supporting that claim be available if questioned during plan review, inspection, or litigation.

Source: ICC A117.1-2017 §103

TAS 2012 was developed specifically to harmonize Texas requirements with ADA 2010, and for most elements the technical requirements are the same. The primary differences are in enforcement, procedure, and a small number of Texas-specific provisions. TAS is enforced through TDLR plan review and post-construction inspection by a Registered Accessibility Specialist. ADA is enforced through DOJ complaints and private civil litigation. TAS creates a regulatory record; ADA compliance does not require a submission to any agency in advance of construction.

Texas-specific provisions in TAS include the Safe Harbor protection for elements built to 1994 TAS, the formal TDLR variance process for Technical Infeasibility and Structural Impracticability determinations, specific historic building designations (RTHL and SAL) in addition to the National Register, and specific references to Texas Government Code Chapter 469. On elements where TAS and ADA differ, a project subject to both must satisfy the more stringent requirement for each element.

Source: TAS 2012 / ADA 2010 / Tex. Gov't Code Ch. 469

Safe Harbor protects elements that were previously built or altered in compliance with the 1994 Texas Accessibility Standards from mandatory upgrade to 2012 TAS requirements solely because a path of travel obligation has been triggered by an alteration to a primary function area. The protection exists because the 2012 TAS harmonization with ADA 2010 introduced significant changes from the 1994 standard in many areas, and elements that were fully compliant with the prior standard should not be required to be upgraded simply because the state adopted the new harmonized version.

To claim Safe Harbor, the element must have been constructed or altered in accordance with the April 1, 1994 TAS at the time of original construction or alteration. Documentation is required. A project that cannot produce records demonstrating 1994 TAS compliance cannot claim Safe Harbor for those elements. The protection extends only to path of travel obligations triggered by altering something else. It does not protect an element that is directly included in the scope of the alteration. Safe Harbor lapses for any element that is being altered.

Source: TAS 2012 §106.5.54

Technical Memoranda (TMs) are guidance documents issued by TDLR that clarify how TAS applies to specific conditions, building types, or situations the standard does not fully address. They are not part of TAS itself, but they carry significant regulatory weight. TDLR plan reviewers apply TM guidance, and a project that conflicts with a TM will receive findings regardless of how the design team interprets TAS directly.

Key Technical Memoranda for practice include TM 2012-03, which addresses the elevator exception and the definitions of shopping center and health care provider under TAS §206.2.3, and a series of TMs addressing parking, signage, and specific occupancy conditions. The full TM library is maintained on the TDLR website. TMs are issued when TDLR determines that a provision of TAS requires clarification for consistent application across plan reviews and inspections.

When a TM clarifies or interprets a requirement, the TM governs TDLR plan review outcomes. Accessibility consulting on Texas-registered projects requires familiarity with both TAS and the applicable TM library.

Source: TDLR Technical Memoranda / tdlr.texas.gov/ab

A Registered Accessibility Specialist is a professional credentialed by TDLR to perform the plan reviews and post-construction inspections required under the Texas Architectural Barriers Act. The credential requires specific education and documented experience in accessibility standards and design. Two regulatory documents flow from this process: the Proof of Submission, which is submitted by the Designer of Record certifying that the construction documents have been completed and issued for the project, and the Notice of Substantial Compliance, which is issued by TDLR at the request of the project Owner as certification that the completed project complies with TAS requirements.

The RAS credential is separate from the Registered Architect (RA) credential. An architect is not automatically a RAS. A RAS is not automatically an architect. Where an architect on a project also holds a RAS certificate, a separate independent RAS must be engaged for plan review and inspection. The design professional cannot serve as the independent reviewer of their own project regardless of what credentials they hold.

The prohibition is stated in two provisions of 16 TAC §68.76 (Standards of Conduct). Section (c)(3) provides that a RAS shall not perform plan reviews, inspections, or related activities while also providing consulting or other professional services on the same registered project. Section (d)(8) provides that a RAS shall not perform a plan review, inspection, or related activity on a building or facility wherein the RAS participated in creating the overall design of the current project. A RAS who has provided design or consulting services on a project cannot also serve as the independent reviewer or inspector on that same project.

Source: Tex. Gov't Code Ch. 469 / 16 TAC §68.76(c)(3) and §68.76(d)(8)

The TDLR variance process under 16 TAC Chapter 68 is the formal regulatory mechanism for obtaining authorization to depart from full compliance with TAS requirements. It applies to three specific situations: Technical Infeasibility (alterations where structural or physical conditions make full compliance impossible), Structural Impracticability (new construction where unique terrain makes full compliance physically impossible), and Disproportionate Cost (path of travel obligations that would exceed 20% of the primary alteration cost).

In Texas, all three of these determinations are made by TDLR, not by the design team. A design team cannot internally conclude that a condition is technically infeasible and proceed without TDLR authorization. The variance application must be submitted to TDLR with supporting documentation. TDLR issues a formal written determination, and that determination is the legal authorization to depart from the applicable requirement. The design team’s internal finding alone does not authorize the departure.

The contrast with ADA practice is significant. Under ADA, the design team and owner make these determinations internally and document them in project records. Under TAS, the determination requires a TDLR submission and a formal TDLR response before the departure is authorized.

Source: 16 TAC Chapter 68 / TAS §106.5

When an alteration to a primary function area triggers path of travel obligations, the owner is required to make the accessible path from parking through the building entrance to the altered area accessible, including the restrooms, telephones, and drinking fountains serving that area, up to 20% of the cost of the primary alteration. If the cost of a fully compliant path of travel exceeds that 20% threshold, the owner is required to spend up to the 20% limit and may stop at that point. The remaining deficiencies are not required to be corrected as part of that project.

The 20% is calculated against the total construction cost of the work directly associated with the primary function area alteration, not including the path of travel work itself. Construction costs are documented and the calculation is submitted as part of the variance application to TDLR. In Texas, this is a formal regulatory determination made by TDLR, not an internal design team calculation. A disproportionate cost determination that has not been submitted to and approved by TDLR is not authorized.

The disproportionate cost rule applies to the obligation to upgrade the path of travel. It does not affect the accessibility requirements for the primary function area itself, which must be fully compliant regardless of cost.

Source: TAS §202.4 / 16 TAC Chapter 68

Structural impracticability applies only to new construction. Full compliance with accessibility requirements is not required where unique characteristics of the terrain make full compliance structurally impracticable. The terrain characteristic must make compliance physically impossible, not merely expensive or technically challenging. Cost is not a ground for structural impracticability under any circumstances.

Technical infeasibility applies only to alterations. Full compliance is not required where existing structural frame conditions would require removing or altering a load-bearing structural member, or where other existing physical or site constraints prohibit modification. Both grounds require objective physical evidence. Cost alone is not a ground for technical infeasibility either.

Even where one of these findings applies, the Maximum Extent Feasible obligation remains. The project must still provide the maximum physical accessibility achievable within the specific constraint. Other disability types remain fully mandatory. In Texas, both determinations require a formal TDLR variance under 16 TAC Chapter 68. Neither can be determined unilaterally by the design team.

Source: TAS §106.5.61 (Structural Impracticability) / TAS §106.5.68 (Technical Infeasibility)

Alterations to qualified historic buildings may be eligible for exceptions to specific TAS accessibility requirements where the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), housed at the Texas Historical Commission, determines that compliance with those requirements would threaten or destroy the historic significance of the building. Three categories of designation qualify: buildings listed on the National Register of Historic Places, buildings eligible for listing on the National Register, and two Texas-specific designations not referenced in ADA: Recorded Texas Historic Landmarks (RTHL) and State Archeological Landmarks (SAL).

The process requires two steps. First, the applicant consults SHPO and obtains a determination that compliance with the specific accessibility requirement would threaten or destroy historic significance. Second, that determination is submitted to TDLR as part of a formal variance application under 16 TAC Chapter 68. TDLR issues the formal determination authorizing the exception. The SHPO letter alone is not sufficient; the TDLR variance is the legal authorization.

Historic status is not a general exemption from accessibility requirements. Only the specific requirements where SHPO makes a positive determination are affected. All other accessibility requirements apply in full to the altered building.

Source: TAS §202.5 / 16 TAC Chapter 68 / Texas Historical Commission

A plan review by a Texas Registered Accessibility Specialist (RAS) is required when a construction project meets all three of the following conditions: the project involves a building or facility subject to the Texas Architectural Barriers Act, the estimated construction cost is $50,000 or more, and the project involves new construction, an addition, or an alteration.

The Texas Architectural Barriers Act applies broadly to buildings and facilities used by the public, including commercial, retail, office, educational, healthcare, assembly, and government occupancies. Single-family dwellings used exclusively as private residences are exempt under Administrative Rule 68.30(4).

The exemption applies to the portions of the dwelling used exclusively for residential purposes; not the building type as a whole. If any portion of a single-family dwelling is used for a commercial facility or public accommodation open to the public, such as a home-based business with clients, a day care, or a professional office. The portions of the dwelling used in the operation of that business are subject to TAS and may require TDLR registration and plan review if the construction cost meets the $50,000 threshold.

Important: projects with an estimated construction cost below $50,000 are not required to register or submit for plan review, but they are still required to comply with the Texas Accessibility Standards. The $50,000 threshold triggers the registration and review requirement, not the compliance obligation.

New construction requires full TAS compliance for all covered elements. An addition must comply with TAS for the added portion and may trigger path of travel obligations to the existing facility. An alteration is any renovation or modification that affects usability and requires TAS compliance for the altered elements and triggers a path of travel obligation to any primary function area served by the alteration, up to a cost limitation of 20 percent of the cost of the primary alteration.

Source: Texas Government Code §469.003; Administrative Rule 68.30(4)

Texas law requires TDLR registration and RAS review for any project with an estimated construction cost of $50,000 or more. The threshold applies to the total estimated construction cost of the project, not the cost of any single trade or scope item.

Per TDLR registration forms, the estimated cost should not include: site acquisition, architectural, engineering, or consulting fees, furnishings, or equipment that is not part of the building mechanical systems. Equipment that IS part of the building mechanical systems is included in the cost calculation. The estimate used is the one submitted at the time of TDLR registration.

There are two registration fee tiers: $175 for timely registration and $300 for late registration. All registration fees are non-refundable.

Source: Texas Government Code §469.101; TDLR Forms EAB205N, EAB245N (Rev. Sept. 2025)

Projects are registered through the Texas Architectural Barriers System (TABS), TDLR's online registration portal, at tdlr.texas.gov/TABS. Registration must be completed before submitting construction documents for a building permit. The owner may not allow a permit application to be filed or construction to begin before the plans have been submitted to a RAS.

Anyone may register a project in TABS, not only the RAS. Owners, designated agents, architects, and other users may register by creating an account in TABS as an "other" user type. The RAS is selected during registration by entering their RAS license number.

During registration the following information is required: project name, building or facility name, physical address, county, estimated start and completion dates, estimated construction cost, type of work, type of funding, scope of work and square footage, the RAS license number, and the County Appraisal District (CAD) account number.

The CAD account number is the real or commercial property ID assigned to the facility by the county appraisal district where the facility is located; not a business license number or personal account number. A copy of the CAD record is required at registration. For right-of-way projects not located at a single address, the CAD account field is not applicable. Owner name on the registration must match the name as found in the CAD database of the county where the facility is located.

For projects with ownership organized as an LP, LLP, or LLC, Form EAB247N (Limited Liability Ownership Form) must be on file to designate another entity as the project agent.

The standard registration fee is $175, payable by credit card. A $300 late registration fee applies if registration is not completed on time. All fees are non-refundable. Partially completed registrations that have not been paid are held in the TABS unpaid projects list for 60 days before being deleted.

Source: TDLR Form EAB205N (Rev. Sept. 2025); Administrative Rule 68.21; Administrative Rule 68.80

TABS; the Texas Architectural Barriers System; is TDLR's online portal for registering construction projects under the Texas Architectural Barriers Act. It is the system through which owners and design professionals register projects, receive TABS project numbers, track plan review and inspection status, and manage project records.

TABS is accessible at tdlr.texas.gov/TABS. All projects subject to the Texas Architectural Barriers Act must be registered in TABS before construction documents are submitted for a building permit.

The TABS project number issued upon registration is a required field on the Proof of Submission form and is the tracking identifier for the project throughout the TDLR review and inspection process.

Source: Administrative Rule 68.10(29); Administrative Rule 68.21

A TABS number is the unique project identification number issued by TDLR when a project is registered in the Texas Architectural Barriers System. It functions as the official tracking number for your project in TDLR's Architectural Barriers records.

The TABS number is required on the Proof of Submission form submitted with plan review documents, and many local jurisdictions require it before accepting a building permit application. Without a TABS number, a project cannot proceed through the plan review and inspection process required by state law.

The TABS number stays with the project through all phases of registration, plan review, inspection, and final clearance.

Source: TDLR Form EAB242N; Administrative Rule 68.21

TDLR registration fees are $175 for timely registration and $300 for late registration, payable by credit card through the TABS online portal. All registration fees are non-refundable.

The registration fee covers the administrative cost of registering the project in the TDLR system and issuing the TABS project number. It is separate from the fees charged by the Registered Accessibility Specialist for plan review and inspection services. RASs set and collect their own fees, which vary based on project scope, complexity, and document completeness.

Partially completed registrations that have not been paid are held in the TABS unpaid projects list for 60 days before being deleted.

Source: Administrative Rule 68.80; TDLR Registration Help Sheet

Under Texas Government Code Section 469.102, the architect, interior designer, landscape architect, or engineer with overall responsibility for the design is required to submit the plans and specifications to a RAS.

Registration in TABS can be completed by anyone including the owner, architect, designated agent, or RAS as long as they create a TABS user account. The RAS may also register the project on behalf of the client.

Regardless of who initiates the registration, the building owner is ultimately responsible for any violation of the Elimination of Architectural Barriers program laws or rules and may be subject to administrative penalties per Texas Government Code Section 469.058.

Source: Texas Government Code §469.102; §469.058

No. Under Texas Government Code Section 469.102(c), the owner may not allow an application for building permit to be filed with a local governmental entity related to the plans and specifications, or allow construction to begin, before the date the plans and specifications are submitted to a RAS.

On application to a local governmental entity for a building permit, the owner must submit to the entity proof that the plans and specifications have been submitted to the department. Most jurisdictions require a valid TABS project number before accepting a permit application.

Registering with TDLR and submitting to a RAS early in the construction document phase; before permit submission; is the correct sequence. This ensures the TABS number is available when needed and that the plan review can proceed without delaying the permit or construction start.

Source: Texas Government Code §469.102(c)

The Proof of Submission form (TDLR Form EAB242N) is a TDLR-required document submitted along with construction documents for accessibility plan review. It must be signed and dated by the Texas-licensed design professional who holds overall responsibility for the design of the project; typically the architect of record.

The form includes the TABS project number, project information, and the design professional's certification that the documents are being submitted for plan review as required by Texas Government Code Section 469.101.

The form must not be password protected when submitted electronically. The TDLR project number must be provided on the form. The form may not be submitted prior to registration of the project.

Source: TDLR Form EAB242N (Rev. Aug. 2023); Texas Government Code §469.101

Under Texas Government Code Section 469.102 and Administrative Rule 68.50, construction documents must be submitted to a RAS not later than the 20th working day after the plans and specifications are issued. In computing time, Saturday, Sunday, and legal holidays are not included.

If plans and specifications are issued on more than one date; as in phased projects; the submission must be made not later than the 20th working day after each date the plans and specifications are issued.

Change orders, addenda, and letters may also be submitted to the RAS for review. The owner or design professional may submit revised construction documents at any time.

Missing the 20-day submission deadline can result in TDLR enforcement action which may include monetary fines, license suspension or revocation. Submitting complete construction documents promptly after registration and issuance is the most reliable way to meet this requirement and avoid delays.

Source: Texas Government Code §469.102; Administrative Rule 68.50

Failure to submit for plan review within the required 20 working day window is a violation of the Texas Architectural Barriers Act and may result in TDLR enforcement action against the design professional of record and/or the building owner. TDLR has authority to pursue violations and can impose administrative penalties.

Source: Administrative Rule 68.90; Texas Occupations Code Chapter 51

A complete plan review submission generally includes: the complete set of construction documents in PDF format; architectural, civil, and any other documents containing accessibility-related elements; and the signed Proof of Submission form (EAB242N) with the TABS project number.

Per TDLR TABS requirements: all documents must be in PDF format; file names must be 30 characters or less; no individual file may exceed 30 MB; and each document must have a unique file name. All construction documents must be uploaded to TABS prior to completion of the plan review.

Construction documents must be submitted directly to the RAS, not to TDLR. Documents sent directly to TDLR become the property of TDLR, will not be returned, and will not be forwarded or uploaded into TABS.

Source: Administrative Rule 68.50(d); TDLR Form EAB242N

Yes. Construction documents submitted for TDLR plan review must be sealed by the design professional of record. Administrative Rule 68.10(16) defines issuance of plans as release after the plans have been sealed, and the 20 working day submission deadline begins from that date. The Proof of Submission form (EAB242N) requires the design professional to certify that their seal is affixed to the construction documents.

The Proof of Submission form must be signed by the design professional with overall responsibility for the design of the project. The Issue Date on the form is the date the drawings were sealed, or the last date revised for construction. For public right-of-way projects, the Issue Date is the date the drawings were issued for public bid.

Source: Administrative Rule 68.10(16); TDLR Form EAB242N (Rev. Aug. 2023)

Failure to register a project subject to the Texas Architectural Barriers Act is a violation of state law. Under Texas Government Code Section 469.058, the building owner is responsible for any violation of the Elimination of Architectural Barriers program laws or rules and may be subject to administrative penalties. TDLR's enforcement history and penalty schedule are published at tdlr.texas.gov/enforcement/absanctions.htm.

Beyond the regulatory exposure, an unregistered project that proceeds to construction without a plan review may contain accessibility deficiencies that are significantly more costly to correct in the field than they would have been to address at the design stage.

Source: Texas Government Code §469.058; Administrative Rule 68.90

Under Administrative Rule 68.41, the owner of a building or facility must obtain an inspection by a Registered Accessibility Specialist no later than one year from the date of the completion of construction. The inspection must be requested in writing by the owner or the owner's designated agent and submitted to the RAS.

The owner, the owner's designated agent, or an individual representing the owner is required to be physically on site with the RAS during the inspection and must provide a physical or electronic signature on the inspection form.

Scheduling the inspection promptly after substantial completion; rather than waiting until the one-year deadline approaches; is the recommended practice. It allows time to identify and correct any field deficiencies before the deadline and avoids enforcement exposure.

Source: Administrative Rule 68.41; TDLR Form EAB241N

If a TDLR accessibility inspection identifies violations, the Registered Accessibility Specialist must provide a written inspection report to the owner within 30 days of the date of the inspection. The report must be uploaded in TABS and must include each violation cited in detail, with the applicable TAS section number and the specific location of each violation within the building or site.

Once the inspection report is issued, the owner has specific obligations and deadlines:

Response deadline: The owner must respond to the inspection report by submitting an Inspection Response Form (EAB229N) to the RAS no later than 30 days after the date of the inspection report.

Correction deadline: All corrective modifications must be completed no later than 270 days after the date of the inspection report. The owner's corrective modification response must be uploaded in TABS within 30 calendar days of receipt by the RAS.

If corrections cannot be completed by the 270-day deadline, the owner may request an extension; however, completion dates beyond 270 days must be approved by TDLR. If a violation cannot be corrected, a variance application may be submitted for that specific condition. Uncorrected violations after the deadline are referred to TDLR's enforcement division.

Source: Administrative Rule 68.52; TDLR Form EAB229N (Rev. Aug. 2023)

Yes. A Registered Accessibility Specialist can conduct an interim inspection while construction is in progress, comparing work in place against the reviewed construction documents to identify deficiencies before they become more difficult or costly to correct.

An interim inspection is not a substitute for the final post-construction inspection required by TDLR under Administrative Rule 68.41, but it is a valuable tool for managing risk on complex projects or where construction sequencing creates accessibility elements that will be difficult to access or modify once other work is complete.

Source: Administrative Rule 68.41

The Texas Architectural Barriers Act applies broadly to buildings and facilities used by the public. Exemptions are established in Chapter 469, Government Code, Section 469.003, and Administrative Rules Sections 68.20 and 68.30.

General exemptions under the Administrative Rules include: single-family dwellings; those portions of public or privately funded apartments, condominiums, townhomes, and single-family dwellings used exclusively by residents and their guests; places of primary residence with no more than five rooms for rent occupied by the proprietor.

Important: a project below the $50,000 threshold is exempt from the registration and plan review requirement, but the project is still required to comply with the Texas Accessibility Standards. The exemption applies to the procedural requirement, not the technical compliance obligation.

Source: Texas Government Code §469.003; Administrative Rules 68.20 and 68.30

Single-family residential construction is exempt from the Texas Architectural Barriers Act. Multifamily residential construction such as apartment buildings, condominiums, and similar projects may be subject to the Act depending on project type and cost threshold.

Multifamily projects of four or more units also trigger Fair Housing Act requirements, which impose additional accessibility standards independent of TAS. The Fair Housing Act and TAS have overlapping but distinct requirements, and both must be evaluated for applicable multifamily projects.

Source: Administrative Rule 68.30(4); TAS Section 233

A primary function area is a major activity for which a building or facility is intended, as defined in TAS 106.5.45. Primary function areas include, but are not limited to, the customer service lobby of a bank, the dining area of a cafeteria, the meeting rooms in a conference center, and offices and other work areas in which the activities of the occupant are carried out.

The following are not primary function areas: mechanical rooms, boiler rooms, supply storage rooms, employee lounges or locker rooms, janitorial closets, entrances, corridors, and restrooms.

The distinction matters because alterations that affect or could affect the usability of or access to a primary function area trigger path of travel obligations under TAS 202.4, requirements that go beyond the altered area itself. Alterations to non-primary function areas do not trigger these additional obligations.

Examples of alterations that affect a primary function area include remodeling merchandise display or employee work areas in a retail store, replacing floor surfaces in a bank's customer service area, and installing a computer center in an accounting firm. Alterations to windows, hardware, controls, electrical outlets, and signage are not considered alterations that affect the usability of or access to a primary function area.

Source: TAS 106.5.45; TAS 202.4

An alteration that affects or could affect the usability of or access to a primary function area triggers path of travel obligations under TAS 202.4. The path of travel to the altered area; including the parking areas, restrooms, telephones, and drinking fountains serving the altered area; must be made accessible to the maximum extent feasible, unless the cost of doing so is disproportionate to the overall cost of the alteration.

Path of travel obligations are subject to a disproportionality limitation. If the cost of making the path of travel fully accessible exceeds 20% of the cost of the alteration to the primary function area, the path of travel must be made accessible only to the extent that it can be without incurring disproportionate costs. Per TAS 202.4, when full compliance is disproportionate, priority is given to elements in the following order:

1. An accessible entrance
2. An accessible route to the altered area
3. At least one accessible restroom for each sex or a single unisex restroom
4. Accessible telephones
5. Accessible drinking fountains
6. When possible, additional accessible elements such as parking, storage, and alarms

Source: TAS 202.4; TAS 106.5.25; TAS 106.5.41

Yes. Tenant improvements are subject to the Texas Architectural Barriers Act when the estimated construction cost meets or exceeds the $50,000 threshold and the space is in a building or facility subject to the Act. This includes interior renovations, remodels, and fit-outs of commercial, retail, office, and other non-exempt occupancies.

Tenant improvements that affect or could affect the usability of or access to a primary function area also trigger path of travel obligations.

TAS 202.4 Exception 2 provides that when a tenant makes alterations in areas that only the tenant occupies, those alterations do not trigger a path of travel obligation upon the landlord with respect to areas under the landlord's authority, provided those areas are not otherwise being altered. This exception applies to the landlord's obligations only; it does not eliminate the tenant's own path of travel obligations within the occupied space.

Source: TAS 202.4; TAS 202.4 Exception 2; Administrative Rule 68.21