**Not e: The output shown below is from the Communication A** **ccess**

**Realtime Translation (CA RT) system used in the On**  **- Board**  **Circulation and Seating Subcommittee meeting # 12**  **and is generally** 

**unedited. T** **he CA RT system w** **as used to provide an accommodation to persons**  **with hearing loss and persons who are deaf, and was streamed in real**  **- time and available to the public on**  **the internet during the meeting. UNITED STA** **TES AC**  **CESS BOA RD**  **RA IL VEHICLES A** **CCESS A DVISORY COMMITTEE**  **ON -** **BO ARD CIRCULA** **TION A ND SEA** **TING SUBCOMMITTEE M**  **EE T** **IN G #**  **12 TELECONFERENCE**  **JA NUA** **RY 15, 2015 CA** **RT Operator: B** **everl y**  **Early**

>> PAUL BEATTY: Let me do the introductions, and we will turn it over to Blair. G ood afternoon, this is Paul Beatty, welcome to the 1 2 th meeting of the on

- board circulation and seati ng subcommittee. A s you know, since anyone may participate in subcommittee suggestions no time of public comment has been scheduled during this two

- hour call. The CART chat box is available. S o, we will be able to monitor it for those participants who a re only using CART to participate and who desire to raise a question or make a statement, please make it in the chat box and we will communicate to the subcommittee chair your question or your statement. P lease remember to give your name whenspeaking. A nd as a reminder, you have no other

subcommittee meetings scheduled so at this point, the next meeting that you will get together will be the full committee meeting February 26 and 27 here in DC. I am going to turn the call over to the subcommittee chair B lair Slaughter. B lair take it away. >> Blair: A ll right Paul, thank you very much. A nd you know for some strange reason I thought we had one more meeting after this. A nd that

-- I apologize for that confusion on my part. I assume everyone has got the materials off the website. T he agenda, the matrix and the latest update to the vertical access. I do not have the agenda in front of me because Ken Shiotani went to make copies so everyone else here in the room will have a copy. B ut if there is no questi ons or discussion on the agenda, I would like to approve that and move forward >> This is Bob Reuter. Idid not get a copy of the Vertical Access part. Igot everything else. >> Blair: I t was not E

- mailed Bob, I got it to the Access Board rather late so I think it was on the website but I will not swear to that. >> I have the website over here >> MELISSA ANDERSON: This is Melissa. I t was addedto the website yesterday. >> Blair: T hank you. O kay. >> MARSHA MAZZ: Paul, if you could remind folks to mute their phones when they are not talking, that would be great. >> PAUL BEATTY: Okay. You guys heard. >> Blair: T hanks Marsha. H earing no discussion on the agenda, I will assume it's accepted by silence. >> Bob:

-- Frank: B lair, I have a question. You m entioned the Vertical Access information. T hat is where. Here it is I got it that's in the

-- okay. T he meeting materials. >> At the very end. >> I didn't realize how far at the end it was. >> Blair: W hat I would like to do is do a quick revisit on the matrix there were some things I tidied up in that and added to based on my notes from the last meeting. I don't think hopefully there wouldn't be anything conscientious in that. B ut let's see the next meeting I guess is our full meeting in February. W h at is the date for that again Paul? >> PAUL BEATTY: The date will be February 26, 27 and most likely

-- >> PAUL BEATTY: This is Paul Beatty. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: This is Melissa. O ur nextmeeting will b e February 26 and 27 and that's here in our

office with full committee meeting. >> Okay. T here we go. >> Blair: A ll righty. T he first them with

-- item with note number 3 on the matrix there had been discussion before about cab and

-- what I did I went back and tried to clean that up. A nd make sure it was clear based on the comments that I had gotten before on that. S o, we can run through that. S ome of this is from the original text, but basically it says, cab ends of cars and commuter cars may have l egitimate conditions that impact the end doorway. Those conditions are system clearance, structural requirements, operator having appropriate physical space and the operator's safe field of vision. A nd then proposed. The cab ends of vehicles that may be used coupled within the train, cab ends of transit cars such as subways may have 30 inch clear openings if there is legitimate issue for operator having appropriate space in creating wider path that (inaudible) safe field of vision. B , cab cars regardles s of mode may have end door of 30 inches if there is legitimate issue again for the operator having appropriate space in creating a wider path adversely impacts the operators safe field of vision. M ovement through the doorway shall not be necessary for in dividual to get to an accessible seatingspace. N ow, that's a

-- that one may be ticklish for some

modes and may be worth discussing. T he last one, C, says if the path from an accessible area to the cab end door is required as part of the vehicle's acces sibility, the minimum clear dimension of the door

-- then the minimum clear dimension of the doorway is 30 inches. O nly safety devices may overlap the path through the doorway by a maximum of 2 inches at or about 34 inches minimum from the floor. I put t hat in there because it really

-- that meshes with some of the other conversations that we have had about the clear door

-- the clear path through other doorways, where we reach back and talked about allowing 4 inches overlap of the path above 34 inches. Since we are talking about a path that's 2 inches less than 32, I reduced that maximum overlap by 2 inches at 34 inches above the floor or higher. S o, that was the reason for adding that in. D oes anyone have any -- any thoughts one way or the other about this note 3 or any parts of it? >> Frank Maldari : B lair, this is Frank from M TA. W hen I am looking at the chart here I am not seeing at least on the commuter rail where note 3 is even listed. S o, is it suppo sed to be for specific requirement? >> Blair: Let's see. B ear with me a second Frank. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: This is Melissa Anderson. Iwas going through the matrix in the notes I think over time

some of the note numbers and the notes have become disconn ected. >> Marilyn Golden: This is Marilyn. I t's under I think the fifth or sixth column clear mobility seating location. I t's in five places. >> Frank: D oesn't seem like it's applicable there though. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: It probably really belongs in t he

-- >> Blair: You are right Frank. T he note reference is off there. T hat note in the clear mobility aid should refer to note 4, I believe. Let's see, wait a minute. B ear with me a second here. >> Frank: Yeah. >> Blair: I believe that's correct. I will doublecheck that but I believe that was incorrect reference for note 3 on those items. O kay. I am not sure, looking back, that it had a place

-- oh, yeah. >> Frank: S hould be the first column right. >> Doorway width between cars. >> Um

- hmm. >> Blai r: A nd

-->> Frank: I t says see note 7 maybe that's supposed to

be 3, yeah. Yeah, maybe that's supposed to be 3. >> Blair: A ll right. T hat makes sense. 7should be 3. Okay. >> Frank: A ssuming that you are going to get that figured out. I t does get confusing when you start moving it around. T he real question I have is I know you tried to identify specific reasons why and you think one of the things I don't know if we discussed this but typically on MU cars you have B end doors and the B end doors i s not an operating cab. A nd historically you did not have to have the larger opening in the B end doors because you didn't have to go through the B ends of the cars if it was not in the accessible path you did not have to have a larger opening. S o, if yo u make this door 32 inches, now, the way the rules are written then the aisle has to be wide enough to allow you to get there. S o, when you do that you start removing seats. Every row of seats between the end of the K and the vestibule would have to have one seat removed. A nd

-- >> Blair: R ight. >> Frank: S o I am requesting the need to do that. >> This is Bob Reuter. Two days ago in Metro in Washington shows the importance of having that clear doorway because everybody had to exit from the rearend ofthe train. A nd I am not sure whether it was a 6 or 8

- car

train but everybody had to exit through the rear door after that smoke incident in the L'Enfant Plaza station, which meant everybody had to go through the length of the train. >> Frank: I f you are going through the length of the train all of the FM doors at 30 inches the B end doors a the 32 doesn't really help you out that much. >> The question I was brought up maybe the A end doors should be 32 also. A nd there needs to be a clear path. I am not sure how we go about this but there was 45 minutes where people were moving to the rear of the train long before the fire department got there and the emergency equipment. >> Blair: Yeah. J ust so we don't plow too much of the same ground the original dis cussion was around

-- driven because of the cab car issues and some vehicles were being so narrow having a full width pathway created an operational issue. I f the

-- I think the driver was always that if access through the door was necessary to reach acce ssible space, then it had to be

-- the idea was it had to be no less than 30 inches on a cab end. B ut if you have a vehicle that didn't have access to that door anyway and that access isn't necessary--well because you have got an aisle way that doesn't

-- isn't will not accommodate someone in awheelchair, then it sort of comes off the

-- it's required. >> Frank: R ight. >> Blair: B ecause you couldn't get there anyway. >> Right. >> Blair: T hat's why I tried to plug in the caveat if it's part of the path to get to an accessible space, then that really

-- that should establish it if it's a transient car and another vehicle that has its seating condition such that the pathway is there and it's 32 inches all the way up to the door then

-- then at least that cab end door with can be 30 inches so you can get through the door. >> (inaudible). >> Frank: Ithink the wording the way you have it is the opposite way if that was your intention I think you need to change the wording. I f you read

-- the way it reads now is what you just said if you have

-- you have to get from one spot to the other. A nd you have an accessible path then the door has to be made to make as wide as the path. I f the path is not narrow too narrow to allow you to go throu gh a door anyhow there is no benefit having a wide door. >> Blair: R ight. >> 38.93 if you want to take time to reword it that's fine with me if that's your intention. >> The intention was if you have a vehicle that has a anotherwise compliant pathway to the door, that the minimum

acceptable width for

-- because of cab issues the issues mentioned structural clearance issues, whatever they are that drive that, that it can be no less than 30 inches. I n those conditions. S o I will

-- I will try to rewordsmi th this so that it's perfectly clear. T here had been a comment because the initial comments were around subways and very tight gauged vehicles, I'm sorry tight clearance vehicles, we should add MU cars and all cab cars. A nd because of the changing and st ructural requirements and what not that have been pushed down on the industry and the visibility for the operator. S o, I changed the

-- I tried to change the wording so that any vehicle rather that's operating within a train that you know has a cab functi on, this could theoretically apply to. B ut there is conditional

-- conditional conditions for this to be acceptable and they have to be legitimate and shown before you squeeze that down to 30 inches. Okay. Well, I will re

- smith that so that it's

-- there is no question there. B ut I think the principle is understood, it's to take care of cab situations that are otherwise

-- the path up to that point is compliant to the 32

- inch path. >> Blair, this is Marsha Mazz, I have a question. Your second sentence i n item B, how is that different from what you say in item C?>> Blair: Well, okay, if

-- >> MARSHA MAZZ: I read item C as being very broad. >> Blair: Yes. I t is somewhat repetitive. O ne advantage Marsha, if the doorway is 30 inches, and let's say we ge t into an evacuation situation where anyone whether

-- maybe they were ambulatory when they got on the train or in a wheelchair the possibility of moving someone on a narrow rescue chair becomes very possible even if they narrow aisleways and that

-- havin g some standard for the door even if it's not at the end of an accessible pathway can be a benefit. >> MARSHA MAZZ: All right. I understand what you are saying

-- >> Blair: I understand what you are saying I want to make sure we are not repeating somethi ng for the sake of it or repeating if a different way. >> MARSHA MAZZ: I wasn't sure if you were trying to address two different situations. I t seems to me like the last sentence in item B is covered by item A. U nless you mean something different by vehi cles accessibility. >> Blair: I tem A and item B would really refer to two different modes. I would say. >> MARSHA MAZZ: No, no, no, I am talking about B and C.>> Blair: Band C okay. >> MARSHA MAZZ: When you say the cabin doors required as part of the vehicle's accessibility, I am assuming you mean provides the

-- you know required accessible pathway. >> Blair: Yes. I n other words, if by the way the vehicles are designed or the way that the system is operated, if you bored in controlled areas

-- let's say you got on a vehicle that vehicle has accessible pathways because you may board on the vehicle where accessible space is already occupied, and you need to go to the adjacent car. T hen in that case, that vehicle

-- that system is providing 32

- inch pat hway up to that cab door, which is now 30 inches. A nd then I did that because I felt it was necessary to say, okay, if you are going to have this path through a 30

- inch doorway then I am going to get a little further and design the issue of overlapping as well so there is no question about that. >> MARSHA MAZZ: Okay. T hank you. >> Blair: O kay? I t's really sort of repeating but this is the nature of regulations sometimes it sort of repeats but it's applied to

-- >> MARSHA MAZZ: I same very hard not to b e repetitive. >> Blair: I understand.>> MARSHA MAZZ: I want to make sure if you are trying

to say something different we accurately capture it so we have two separate provisions instead of one. >> Blair: O kay. Well, as long as I

-- >> MARSHA MAZZ: If i t's something different I want to be sure I understand that so when we get to the writing we capture it. >> Blair: O kay. I will try to make revisions to make it abundantly clear for everyone so when it gets to that point, you know, you won't be scratchin g your head going what did this guy mean? A nd then when I read it again I will understand what I meant.

(LAUGHTER) >> MARSHA MAZZ: And we know your number too. >> Blair: U nfortunately I have to change that. (LAUGHTER) >> Hey Blair. O n this issue I am sure most of us are familiar with, what happened on the Washington Metro. T he smoke was in the front. Everybody had to

-- the rear of the train was fairly clear so people were going through the train to get to the rear to g et away from the smoke. I t was 45 minutes before they could get the power shut off and fire department there. T hat's 45 minutes somebody in a chair in the front car would have been stranded in the front car withthe smoke. A nd I am wondering whether we need to revisit

that clear path through the train. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Bob, this is Chris. I t's (inaudible) the committee wants to reinforce evacuation chairs be provided on all trains. S o, when you do have an emergency it's, you have a way to get your chair down that aisleway and hopefully out of the smoke. >> Bob: Of course this means providing access chair on every car or every other car and having the crews trained in using it. >> MARSHA MAZZ: Well, in fact, in Washington there weren't in first resp onders on the train in that 45 minutes. >> That's what I am saying there weren't any. >> MARSHA MAZZ: There was nobody to operate the

-- >> That means the crew would have to operate it. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: And I would just say while I could (inaudible) it 's located in the control cab, that it is so simple, basically a 10

-year - old could operate it. >> This is Gary Talbot, Blair I think the biggest issue the path of travel is less than 30 inches already you are not getting down the path of travel to the door

. T hat's the case that you are covering. >> Yes. >> Wider doors everywhere are better there is no senseto make it overly wide because you can't get there anyway. >> Blair: R ight. >> Bob: I was talking about revisiting maybe we need to have the wider ai sle. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: I think my professional opinion I don't think they are viable. I think (inaudible) in a way that basically would stall and

-- >> Bob: Iwas just thinking

-- I was not on a train I ride on the first car it seems and I do ride that a lot. >> Blair: O kay. A ll right. Well, so

-- >> Frank: B lair think you got my point you were explaining

-- the

-- well I am asking is that necessary to have a wide door when the aisles

-- the aisles are like 20 inches wide. >> Right. >> 20

- inch wide aisle do you need a 32

- inch door. >> Would evacuation chair go down a 20 inch wide aisle? >> They go down 20? >> Frank: I t's like with anything else the narrowest path is the one you have to account for. T he way that we design as you know, you make the path accessible from the entrance to where your parking location is to the bathroom if you have one. You are creating that 32

- inch wide corridorto get them to the area that the wheelchair would have to but

it doesn't allow the wheelchair to go from the full length of the car and car to car to car. T hat would be a big big change to decrease or increase the aisle space. I mean you would be removing a seat every row of seats it would be significant on some of the commuter rail cars. >> People don't like th e wide

-- >> I have to agree with you. U nfortunately, you know, you talk about up to 20% almost 20% of the seats in certain cars that's a big hit. >> Bob: I am very aware of the issue the thing is with the Washington subway brought it to the forefront. > > Blair: S ome of these things are, and I think it will come out in the investigation, as it often does, is that procedure and processes and preparedness on the part of the operator you know, if the second or sometimes the most critical part of anything in vehicles we

-- you can't depend on the vehicle to do everything. T here is the people side of it that it sounds like maybe didn't kick in as it should have. I mean that seems an inordinate amount of time of a system as integrated as Washington Metro to respond. A nd I

-- when the investigations are done we will all know more. And I don't want to speak out of turn, you know, to

-- a few days after an event.>> The fire department was in the station but they

couldn't get to the train because they weren't o n the

-- they had no way to confirm the third rail was off. >> Blair: I know our railroad before fire men address it it has to be grounded to the rail for their safety. A nd you have to be able to make those

-- those

-- you have to have everything in plac e to do that as quickly as you can I will leave it at that. S o, all right. Let's see. (Discussion off record.)
>> This is my day to pick on Ken Shiotani for a change. I asked him to make copies and then he didn't give me all of my stuff back I am s itting here

-- I think it was a test or something. O kay. Otherwise it was a very short meeting because I was running out of notes in like the next page. Okay. I think I want to leave note 3, the way it is with the understanding of what it was intended t o do as far
as -- with respect to cabs and end of car conditions where there either is a clear path in the case of a cab or not a clear path and how they relate to accessibility. You know, I think it's leaving it at 30 inches at a minimum is probably a wi se thing to do I don't know if there are conditions that whatever want to drive it lower than that. E specially within the same car where you like all of your doors to be as common as theycan be. Versus the you know A end B end being different

unless the re are strength issues associated with it. S o, if we can, I have got my notes made on that I will dress that up. I f we could move down to note 5. T hanks Ken.

(LAUGHTER) >> Blair: T here was a conversation last time about our note that says some quan tity of sheets should be easily removable or convertible to term temporarily accommodate individuals using wheelchairs. Based on the comments from the last time, I made an addition to this and this is sort of in the form of a suggestion, and just, also, t o make sure that the discussion was understood. A nd that is that there should be some definition of the quantity of seats that should be removable per vehicle by mode. Removing or converting seats should not generate conflicts with other requirements or accessibility and where conflict occurs the applicable requirement should be waived. N ow, that sounds like a get out of jail free card. B ut the intent is if you
are -- if you are doing like what we did on Amtrak and we take a bunch of seats out in the back end and here we go, do the

-- does the clear floor space requirement for everybody that's now occupying the space where we pulled out a bunch of seats does that apply strictly? You know, how do
we -- how do we address that

-- that issue. I t seems asi mple thing but it could become a point of contention at

some point for an operator who says, well I will take out 5 seats does that mean 5 folks in wheelchairs can be in those spaces or is it some smaller number or some bigger number. So, think about that a second and let me go through the rest here. D epending on the mode convertible seats may have reduced functionality this is especially true of complex seats used in inner

- city training where mechanical function interferes with other comfort features. C onvertible seats will fall into the area where the seats need to be transfer seats some language to address this possibility. I wrote that because my understanding, and wherever I can, I like for inner

- city because people are in our seats a lot longer, I d on't want a compromised flip up seat to be the seat that I am intending to the transfer seat. Ithink that's for us at Amtrak at least that's sort of an unwritten policy. So, you know, do we need to add some language around that
or -- it's one of those t hings that you can chew on for white a while. A nd I don't know, you know some seat manufacturers you can't tell if they are the flip up seats or not that's especially true when you get town to commuter seats and things you wouldn't know. B ut on a higher functioning seat would recline and tray tables and all sorts of little widgets like we like to have on the inner

- city trainscould create a less than adequate situation. S o, again think

about that. We get to I think the real meat and potatoes the operati onal practices are not part of the RVAAC respond however by requiring removable seats

-- I'm sorry remove available or convert bible seats there is implied if not defined requirement for provider to offer a seat removal plan and service depending on the mo de or the nature of the operation the impact to the provider do be substantial in absence of a policy for provision of service equipping vehicles is irrelevant. A s an example, many but not of Amtrak's car use a system that allows seats to be easily
remove s but removing seats for group is not consistent. I n tier 2 trains (inaudible) removing seats especially difficult in the case of transit systems where seat volume is more time of day critical the logistical problems of managing the car with missing seats could dramatically impact the system ability to provide its service. A n example is what type of group movements should be reviewed with

-- reviewed and community and industry input to craft more defined language for the NRV NPRM how is that for a mouthfu l? >> Geared to the high

- speed trains? >> Yes. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Where is your next career in rulemaking?(LAUGHTER) >> Gary Talbot if I could comment. I think I remember this from many, many months ago, you know, to me having the ability

-- requir ing the

-- that you have a certain number of seats I don't know what that proper number is let's say like you said 5 seats or something that could easily be removed, there are certainly a lot of other issues that go with that. B ut just letting the vehicle be the vehicle a minute by doing so you open the opportunity for folks to be able to tap into public transit and inner

- city rail versus always being split up. A ll of those other issues are real issues that would have to be sorted out. M y concern is I ce rtainly

-- I agree with you whether it's Amtrak or other agencies, where folks have you know

-- one day you try to do it and you do it so easy you can't believe it it's an issue the next time that you try to do it somebody says it's like $5,000 to remove your seats and put it back in. To me it just makes sense if there is a way to require certain number that are the convertible seats. I agree with you on the flip up seats no argument there at all more just your fixed seats if you require the ability to re move X number, you know, all of the upon requests and how that works out and all of that stuff is an operational issue for each entity versus just the base unit has that requirement already. A nd then you can tap into it andit wouldn't be irrelevant if pe ople knew about it and they

could actually do it where today often the answers

-- the answer is just no you can't. >> Talking to seat manufacturers basically they said if somebody if there are a enough people want them we will figure out a way to do it. >> Blair: I f we write the specification for a seat it includes that functionality, then that's what will happen to the seat it's just a matter of of facts. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: My question is (inaudible) is is it overall percentage or is it only that width is reachable by a certain group. >> Bob: I t's important to be reachable by an accessible route or be usable. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Here is

-- I am just referring to the top. I f I have a bi

- level commuter rail coach, I can (inaudible) I only got access to one level. I f it's top rail I have vestibules at either end that's all I have got with space to work with. O n Amtrak, there I have got a lift and I am providing (inaudible) at (inaudible) and to the rear to what

-- then you want to call that out. >> Blai r: T hat's why I noted it would make more sense to define it by mode or should be defined by mode. Because you know a couple bear of

-- couple pair of MU carsonly have so many seats that are to your point accessible

anyway. Even if you took them all out you might not be able to get to that spot. >> Bob: I was thinking MTA he has a 20

- inch aisle pulling 5 of the seats out in the bulk head in or the B end you still can't get back there to them because you can't get through the 20

- inch aisle >> This is Fra nk again I thought we were talking about making the removable seats inner

- city train not commuter rail. I think we talked about commuter rails a little different you mentioned it in your operation. T here is no place to put the seats and they need to be available as soon as the customers are
-- you are rushing into the

-- you are going into the rush hour you need the seats back there is not that independent kind of flexibility to customize the train to suit anybody. I mean, we get classrooms that come in this that say we would like to all be in the same car you can only accommodate them the best you can. I f there is a lot of people on the car they tried to cut off the car depending where you get on they can only do so much because there are other customer s on the train as well. >> You could take automatic of the seats out of the car Chicago tried that. >> I voluntary volunteer for that inner

- city.>> I wouldn't mind if I didn't have to ride the train. >> Blair: T he beautiful part about you know being in a service where we have scheduled trains and reservations is it's a little easier to plan and plan in advance. I f we make

-- if Amtrak is

-- knows that and Philadelphia there is a group getting on we need to remove X number seats before the train leaves New York that's what we do. A nd we sort it out. You know? B ut those cars aren't going to hit Washington and the world come to an end because we are going into crush loading or rush hour if we have to cut one of those cars out or substitute it. T he operat ional pressure is just not as intense as it is on a commuter situation. S o, I don't mind

-- I don't mind making that you know an Amtrak inner

- city issue. I use those terms because I think it would ADA inner

- city and Amtrak are interchangeable. We will talk about that in a little bit. B ut >> One of

-- -- the questions that came up on this whole issue here is where do you define the difference between computer

-- commuter and inner

- city when you think about the cars or services in California. >> Well

-- go ahead. M arsha? >> This is Marilyn actually. F rom DREDF I am not sure how much this applies to Bob's question though I had other thoughts should I wait Blair or

-->> Blair: Well, that is a

-- that is an important

question. I f someone from the Acces s Board could weigh in on that definition inner

- city is defined as Amtrak. S o, unless that definition gets changed, it's still Amtrak. Understanding of course when that language was crafted, California really wasn't operating any services it was all Amtrak. S o, I

-- >> Now there are subcontract services like the one they tried to put in and in Indiana. >> Blair: T hat issue is going to raise its head over and over again with PRIIA. We were just discussing some of that earlier today. B ut I don't want to

-- I can't rearrange that world. T hat is something that will have to be more conversation about. Idon't know that we can really do it here on this call, but we do need to raise the flag that it needs to be address the or else it's going to create an op portunity down the path for a level of unintended discrimination based on you know, the literal interpretation of some of these things. S o, anyway all that said, Marilyn Tess, your turn. >> Marilyn: T hank you. You know, I

-- at DREDF we haven't had expe rience with this problem other than on Amtrak. S o I leave it to others to say

-- >> Of course.(LAUGHTER) >> Marilyn: W hat is there. B ut I

-- I am not sure a lot of this extra language is needed or may be more appropriate in the report that explains the changes that you are recommending. Rather than as part of this chart, which suggests that it's part of what we are recommending, you know, to the board as part of their rule. I t seems to me that all of the operational aspects have to be handled by D OT. And what RVAAC can do is as this report moves forward there will be a very short list, as far as I know, of recommendations to DOT of things that they should include in their rule. T hey have to work a lot of this out. I

-- I don't know that we need to
-- I am concerned about the reference to cost. T his seems to me to be a civil rights issue the costs has to get absorbed. You know, I am hoping that in the final analysis DOT will require the additional fee to be nominal. A s regard

-- again, I am spe aking to the Amtrak situation. B ecause I don't have a sense of the issue on other modes. I n terms of the issue of loss functionality. W hen you think you are saying is that if a seat on Amtrak has a table and a switch or you know, any

-- any of those kin ds of amenities, then you remove seats and you have a big empty space those amenities aren't there for each spot somebody takes. I f that's what you mean, I don't think that's the casewhere people are asking for seats to be removed, they are

expecting you to replace all of these many am machine trees.
-- amenities. People are asking for a which to get a lot of people to ride. I don't want to give away the store. I s that what you mean about the functionality? B ecause I think that's a

-- I don't know. I am raising whether that's a side issue. Iknow that for us as an advocate I wasn't thinking about oh, my good, everyone has to have a table when you are putting 6 wheelchair users in a car that usually holds two. >> Blair: M arilyn that's part of it, yes

. You cornered that. T here was also

-- there is two

-- when I talk about the functionality if I make a seat that

-- one of the ways of accommodating more people in a seat it has foldable elements it collapses to get out of the way, that when you look at every other, beyond the area in a we are say we are requiring for removal of seats, or convertible seats, the challenge can be that on an inner

- city train that has bells and whistles you know lots of recline and other things that it may be difficult to ach ieve convertible seats at the same time. N ow, I just boxed myself into a corner saying it's difficult versus impossible. I think that

-- that what you said Marilyn is more applicable that when you take the seats out that you havespace -- spaces that are now arguably no longer compliant

because they might not have the light switch it should have because it's not near where the permanent acceptable space is those kind of things. I f

-- and I want to

-- the reason I included that I wanted us to think ahead a little bit to try to avoid problems and just anticipating as much as we can. You made a very good point about what goes in the notes with reference to the matrix versus the report. I added these things so that we could see them and I was not intending on leaving them in the notes parted of the chore is to go back and glean out the commentary from what we are recommending and then referencing it in the report so it's captured. S o, it's going to be an inner

- city requirement only like I said I don't have a problem swallowing that pill as "the" inner

- city railroad. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: This is Chris. Idon't know necessarily if you want to limit it directly to inner city, this is a growing PPP (inaudible) and other places. ( inaudible) there is a private ent ity that wants to set up commercial rail service from Providence to Wooster. N ow it will cross state lines and they actually have got a whole bunch of analysis and they are going through that process. T his technically inner

- city it's crossing state lines >> It's interstate.>> CHRISTOPHER HART: It would not be an Amtrak

service. >> And some of these commuter lines are getting to the point of being super commuters you are coming from south bend Indiana to Chicago you are talking two

- hour commute
or more. > > You are saying then it has the same issue as Amtrak. Is that

-- >> Yeah. >> Marilyn: Iam not saying that it doesn't, I didn't mean to suggest it doesn't I didn't know. Ileave it for you who know more about commuter to say if it applies. To Blair regarding functionality. I see what are saying now there are two levels there is functionality for the people who are taking space in the area where seats are removed but there is also the

-- the function

-- I guess you are saying that part of the function ality you want to provide to seats that are

-- that when they are not removed you don't want to compromise that by the removability. T hat's a design issue. I hope it would fall under, you know, if you spec it out they will design it. You know, it would be a shame in brand new cars to think XYZ isn't possible. F or the disability community there is often at least for DREDF there is often a little bit of a concern of a fox hen house situation when theboard

-- which legitimately may not have another way to

accomplish the task ask the industry can you do this. I f it's not in the industry's industry to say they can they will say no which may or may not mean it's possible. I am not sure a better way to accomplish that I am just expressing that
concern. I wo uld hope that we are so early in the process that we can make a recommendation, we can ask and answer as many of the questions as we possibly can to the extent that we can't it goes

-- it gets kicked down the road to the board and to DOT to establish the v iability of some of these things. B ut I see our job is to raise questions about what can the future accomplish. A nd I would really, really hesitate to start saying no to anything at this stage. Idon't think our job is to open doors here. N ot close the m. >> I agree with you Marilyn. You ask an engineer he can do it, ask the operator, he can't.

(LAUGHTER) >> Depends on engineer that you ask too. >> Not the guy driving the train. >> No, no, they will do anything that involves a throttle and a (inaudi ble). N o, I mean I have dealt with lots of engineers who only know how to say no. Regardless. T hey won't take the challenge. O kay. >> This is Jackson, I have a question regarding thedefinition for inter

- city and whether or not it's the intent that

the application of the word inner

- city covers high speed equipment as well as is shown in the matrix. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Well, it does (inaudible). >> I thought the law said it included inner

-- >> That's my understanding. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: That (inaudib le) >> The thing that gets confusing now is the fact that there is a great push from some of the various operators to move away from having Amtrak provide the service even though it's inner

- city they would be taking over Amtrak service. >> Blair: R ight. I have referred to that in the vertical movement draft that's at the back of the process as let's see inner

- city cars built for Amtrak any bi

- level equipment used by successors Amtrak (inaudible) acquired by not entity or company sanctioned under PRIIA. S o, you know, if an organization thinks they are going to go in and run the route but because they are not Amtrak they are free from the obligation to apply that was my reason for adding that in there. A nd I think it is the unintended consequence of PRIIA where inner

- city is defined as Amtrak only. >> Unfortunately, it's

-- yeah, I was looking at the definitions in section 37 of the regs. A nd they defineinner

- city rail transportation meaning transportation

provided by Amtrak. >> Amtrak, yes. >> CHR ISTOPHER HART: Let's not forget Alaska (inaudible) >> We are not touching Alaska. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: They are quite different (inaudible).

(LAUGHTER) >> Blair: O kay. (Discussion off record.)
(LAUGHTER) >> Blair: A nybody from Alaska on the call in sorry about that. R ussia that's what it was.

(LAUGHTER) >> CHRISTOPHER HART: You can see Russia from Alaska. >> This is Marilyn. T hey have done a good job on some things they are models. I also think that the timing of calls we forget Alaska an d Hawaii we need to push it even late are than California. I don't know if they have been good on the seat removal issue. >> They have a lot of other problems in Alaska thetrains are good in Alaska are the ones operated by the cruise

lines not necessaril y by Alaska Railroads. >> Blair: Well, there is understanding by some of these entities that everybody's money is green.

(LAUGHTER) >> Blair: You know? Regardless of how you get on the car your money is the same color. S o I think to the cruise line s, you know, they understand that kind of customer service. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: I think as you think about the wording you may also want to call out tourists railroads and I don't know what we call them whether it's (inaudible) railroad let's say Walt Dis ney decides to build it's own line from Los Angeles airport. T hat type of thing. >> I am wondering if PRIIA has in an effect on the 39

-- 37 because it actually changed the definition and now we have got the Supreme Court thing trying to define what Amtra k is. >> Blair: T hat could be dangerous in itself. I f we can let's move on through the notes. N ote number 6, I added from the last meeting the wording to the accessible path in the note about let's see if the vestibule is arranged allow free flowing pat h into the passenger area or aisle leading to that area then the most

-- wait a minute. T hen the mostrestrictive width of the vestibule near the door which be less

than 44 inches but in no case can the unobstructed path to the accessible seating area be less than 32 inches. I hope that makes sense that's what I had on the notes to add in so the path was

-- there was no deconstructing of the 32

- inch path. A nd, also, I added the word "should" on the issue of the path being a straight line across the doorway the 44

- inch wide projected volume through the or width through the car across from door to door. A nd I think my understanding again was everyone pretty much with the exception from the folks from BART thought that was

-- thought that that was okay. S o me agencies are already doing that. >> There is one exception there. I think Buffalo, if says they are bidirectional equipment but it's only the right front corner that is acceptable. T here are one or two occasions where you have to move from one end of the car to the other two along the accessible route. I t's a diagonal doors. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Again, (inaudible) equipment so we are not really (inaudible). >> But Blair just a

-- so, you are saying it's vestibule, if you don't have in type of a maneuver it's a straight shot. I t's not less than 52 inches? >> No, 44 >> I thought here you just said that it couldn't go lessthan 32 inches. >> Blair: I s it

-- >> Unobstructed the seating area should be less than 32. >> Yes, that's to the acceptable seating area the concept is again it would always be 44 or in

-- I have to go back and just resitter

-- just reiterate in vehicles without vestibules or that have

-- that have a defined space between doors, that you wa nt that space across the vehicle if you have got doors on both sides of the vehicles you want that 44 inches because that guarantees you a level of maneuverability and that's assuming that you are going to turn and go into an area where there is seating or you remain in the wheelchair wheelchair or whatever adjusted to keep the flow in and out of the vehicle as clean as simple as possible. A nd, again, I think you see that occurring already. S ome of these already have that. You know it's a clear shot acro ss it works very well for ambulatory and folks using wheelchairs. O kay. I did add some comments, let's see, at the end of that note end of 6B where I noted other providers and builders are seeing a shift

-- flow on and off the cars and I think there were comments from Marsha that said doo sign can work against controversy. A nd defined positionsencourage bad habits. A nd that was around the

conversation around you know if

-- if we place things so it sort of naturally makes folks con degree gait to an area if we do it correctly that works well. I f we do it poorly, then it creates a bad habit and can put people in the position where you are depending on their sensibilities and courtesy to do the right thing. I think what we are seeing there is more and more of the trend to improve the speed that people get on and off the trains regardless whether they are walking or in a wheelchair and getting folks away from the door is very critical to that. So, there is no other comments on that we will let that dog lie

. T hese

-- some of these notes will come out and be part of the notes in the report that refer back to these items so that we don't lose any of the conversation we had. O kay. In 6D

-- you know, let's see. B ear with me just a quick second. I had a note to add this part. H and holds should terminate 32 inches from the floor or follow the guidelines for objects

-- it should be objects that protrude into the defined floor space an example a vertical handhold or stanchion at a seat that blends into the seat at 34 inches optionally if the stanchion must go to the floor then the floor mount is setback 6 inches from the path of travel. I have

-->> CHRISTOPHER HART: (inaudible). >> Blair: B ear with me folks I am shuffling paper here. (Discussion off record.)

>> Blair: Let's see because something disappeared here. O h. I was missing something still. Acouple of bolts or something. O kay. I apologize. O kay the stanchion must go to the floor the floor mount is setback 6 inches from the path of travel the tra nsition back (inaudible) at or above 9 inches that is to help provide improved movement by people using wheelchairs particularly during high demand where compliant are crowded with passengers in no case should the offset be in a walking path where it would create a tripping condition. T he idea there, of course, is that you know, if you are taking those stanchion down and can keep it out of the pathway that's a good thing. I f

-- if doing that doesn't gain anything, in other words, the stanchion is maybe ne xt to a wind screen or something where you know, offsetting doesn't do anything. T his goes straight to

-- >> (inaudible). >> I am a little confused too why would you want the handhold to not to intrude into the path? Idon't understand the benefit of hav ing inches away from the path, I mean

-->> Blair: Well, I have no problem in dropping

that

-- that off. B ut it was

-- that's why it's prefaced at the front wherever practical. T hat if you could

-- if you offset something

-- if you have stanchions that goes floor to ceiling if at the very end of it, and it's near a

-- it's not in
a -- one side of it isn't in a path you can offset it, and then take it to the floor, and it doesn't create a tripping hazard at the offset, in other words, no one can go by it at the offset, then it just gives you some foot plate clearance and things like that could be useful for wheelchair. I t may not be practical depending on the application that's why it was prefaced the way it was. T he 34 inches is the dimension that's given for things to protrude into the clear pathway on the architectural side. We discussed that before, to try to keep things in a defined pathway from protruding unless they are at 34 or above because they snag the controls armrests and things on wheelchai rs. >> Frank: I f you have a pathway that's 50 inches wide, why do you care about anything of

-- any of this that's why it's confusing to me. W hy you have to terminate a handhold if it creates a pathway that's 50 inches why why would you have to terminate at 32 inches >> Blair: F rank, that's a good question. H ere again, the thinking was that, okay, you have 50 inches you exceedby huge numbers what is required but if you are boarding

trains in

-- and I am not from a commuter railroad this is all just obs ervation and speculation, when you are boarding a train and you have crush loading and a lot of folks getting on and off that 50 inches suddenly becomes a lot less and even begins to crush in on 32

- inch path anything that you do that doesn't affect the fun ctionality of that stanchion or rail that maybe gives you a few more inches of pathway, would seem a good thing to do. T hat was the intent. A nd maybe I missed the mark but that was the intent. >> Bob: Iwas looking at the plans for the new cars that are n't on the

-- aren't furnished yet. >> PAUL BEATTY: B ob, this is Paul Beatty can you speak up? >> Bob: Iwas looking at the plans for a new car with longitudinal seating there would be no transverse seating at all in the car. W hich means that aisle is going to be about 60 inches wide. I n the early drawings has the stanchions running from floor to ceiling every third seat or so right at the front of the seat. W hich means you are going to have 60 inches but you are going to have the stanchions there div ided by the longitudinal seats up into sections. You know, I can't see where this would have any major impact. In fact it gives you something to hang on to if you are goingdown the aisle. >> Yeah. >> Frank: Yeah, I guess the thing that comes to my mind is sometimes you want a handhold that's in a lower area I don't know maybe fore kids to short on or shorter people to hold on to. G enerally speaking, you know, on rail cars that I am used to commuter

-wise you try to end the stanchion before the floor but you incorporate it into the wall. S o, you know, bringing stanchion down and offsetting it 9 inches or 6 inches I am not sure what you are gaining by that. >> Bob: M anual chair user when I go in I will sit near a stanchion and wrap my arm and it so it's within the crook of my elbow that hold me that's right around 34 inches high, I suspect. >> Blair, are you thinking about the fact that you want
-- especially in a rapid transit car you want to have a lot of vertical handholds, but you want to have the cle ar space so it's the foot

-- the wheelchair footrests as you are going in is that the idea of the 9 inches? >> Blair: Yes, that was exactly right. T hat's why it's prefaced wherever practical. S o that not a would not be a hard and fast requirement. B ut it's

-- it's a thinking point you design in the car that you could make an easier pathwithout creating a monster and not having a negative effect. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: And to that end I will just mention what happened in Boston when I am going to Florida it's a lot more difficult to sweep across the path out at the end of the day versus going around all of these posts. So the (inaudible) please

-- (inaudible) seat because we don't want polls every three feet. >> Right. I think Blair mentioned that in one of the last calls around poles. I f you could avoid that, wheelchair meet rest clearance and gives cleaning people floor clearance. >> This is Gary Talbot there is a host of different modes where any time you have that open space down towards the bottom of the floor you are going to move with people. When you are in a crowded environment especially and you are cruising along you may not even realize there is a pole there if it terminates at the seat or gives you a gap you have a better chance

-- and folks who are ambulatory have something to hang on to and wheelchair users can use it to too. >> Blair: I could advocate to shake sure or ask the Access Board that that should not become a shelf but should remain whenever practical because you want it to be, h elp to be a design guide source. T here may be situations that doing that create a problem poll floor to ceiling or pole tideto a seat has a certain number of strength. I f you offset it

you create a crank condition. I t could be structural unsound but it might work. I t's simply to say, we are assuming that

-- we are legally compliant in all of our dimensions but if you do these things, it's going to be an ADA benefit, so, you know

-- going to be an added benefit. To those of us that are close it not obv ious to the designer or engineer looking at this four or five years they may scratch their head go oh, we didn't think about that. M aybe that it doesn't

-- that it doesn't impact anything negatively to follow that suggestion. But if they do it it could create an ease of movement. That's the intention of that. >> Frank: I understand better what you were trying to do. I can think of times when it would be good I can think of times when it would be bad that's what you are trying to allow. >> Blair: T hat's why

-- that's why I added

-- I tried to think what could happen? Well if it's too far out in the floor you put a loop sore somebody to trip over. S o, yeah that

-- that is why I wrote that the way that I did. A nd trust me, please, if you want to mark th is up and send it to me I will

-- I will do my best to include those clarifications. >> Frank: I think the point is if it's vertical stanchion inthe middle of the car with 6 inch offset that's not what you

are trying to do but defined space at the end of the vest actual I could see where the 6 inches would be helpful at 34 inches. S o I guess, you know, you could do it there, I guess depending how you tie them to the wall if it becomes part of the vestibule wall it doesn't seem like it's a big problem. B ut I think it's a good guideline I wish there was a better way to word it so it's easy for everybody to understand. Idon't know if there is a bet are way to worry about it. >> If you come up with something let me know. T he last thing certainly not inclu ded to

-- intended to put a loop out in the middle of the car for people to trip over that would be a claim generator as we call it. W rite blank checks or sign blank checks and let the folks fill them in tables to the pole.>> The problem with all of these dimensions here is everybody seems to all of these people seem to think that's what they are supposed to do. B ut you say your pole should terminate no lower than 34 inches to the car people I will guarantee will put it right at 34 inches. >> Blair: Yeah, but the 34 inches is the dimension that's been defined. A nd some of these things it becomes critical to lean on those definitions or else you know you never get it right.>> Right. B ut how it says in the

-- shall be no more

than 12 in 1 when you have room to make it 14 in 1 this is problem putting something specific I am not saying we shouldn't but when you say a minimum 34 inches I can guarantee everybody is going to be at 34 not some other maybe more opt mall number >> Blair: Yes, that is the u nfortunate part about, you know, if you had the other extreme defined then it would always be between 34 and 65 as a number. B ut you have to put
-- if you don't put something in there then it will always be wrong to be detriment of people that are trying to get through there. >> Frank: Ithink you have to have a number that's reasonable and make sense. >> (inaudible). >> Frank: I f there is no reason why you can't go to 38 you probably will. Imean it all depends on how energetic and good the designer is but the way

-- if you word it properly and you explain what you are doing, and the designer is interested in making it work he is going to try to do the best that he can. I mean there is always an envelope. If there is a reason why you can't go above 34 there might be then he won't. B ut if there isn't then maybe he will. >> Blair: I f we don't say anything>> You are stuck. You will get the wrong thing.

(LAUGHTER) >> I definitely have to say something the way it's stated it won't preclude. Again, it falls under the category if you know the answer let me know. >> Blair: Well, here is the other thing too, having been
on -- on the design end of it, and if you are trying to design things, you can have

-- things change over time. You could have a design off or engineering department that is very cued into accessibility and what it does for every un. A nd then in five years that will turn over and you have a department that is looking at the letter of the law. And in some cases you need and the designer or engineer or somebody trying to do the right thing, the stick the enforcement of rule to show to someone who is

-- well I am not even going to describe in my best terms what

-- but, you know, sometimes that's all folks want. T hey want
-- why does it have to be that way? Well, it's better that way. S how me? Well I don't have the time to do the research and go do that. Iwould rather just flip over the CFR and go here (indicating). T his is why you have to do it go away and do it.

(LAUGHTER) >> How accurate that is.(LAUGHTER) >> Blair: You know? T here is an old joke about arguing with engineers it's like wrestling with a pig when you are done you are tired and dirty and the pig enjoyed it.

(LAUGHTER) >> Blair: You know? Iam looking acros s at an engineer.

(LAUGHTER) >> Are you tired and dirty? (LAUGHTER) >> Blair: M y apologies to the engineers in the room >> As a designer I spent a lot of time tarring with engineers and no offense intended but it goes not just for engineers but al l of us, we have all been on the dirty end and enjoying it. S o, wherever we can define things and not make it a back breaker it would just make our path a little easier down the road to get things done correctly. >> Yeah, this is Marilyn. T hat's the good

-- that's the positive it shall one of the many positive functions of regulation. I don't know if we are more or less done with this little section I had a question on B, 6B. C an I ask that at this time? >> Blair: Yes, because looking across I think we are almost done with the notes. T here is something over on 20.But

-- okay. >> And B you have some new language in 6B. W hat is the role of your italicized paragraph? Ithink you have done a great job here in trying to capture the, you know, the different parts of the debate. I don't

-- I don't think that

-- well, I don't know.

-- I might

-- I my think it doesn't completely reflect the discussion in that I

-- it seems like any concern about

-- it seems like there was a lot more concern about having pol es than there was desire foe them. I t wasn't like 50/50. Other than that that's sort of nitpicking. But what is your trajectory for the paragraph is that part of the report? Idon't think it's going to be part of your actual chart, right? >> Blair: N o . T he chart will be gleaned down to what is absolutely necessary. A nd then the commentary, which is the italicized, and in some cases it will be the nonitalic depending when I go back through what is needed just to state the clarification for the matrix. It will go to report, and I left that in there Marilyn because I thought it was worth, the discussion was valuable. >> Marilyn: I t was and this is a good capture of it I just didn't know if it would go in the report or it would stay in your notes here t o the chart, which I think elevates it to a level that it maybe doesn't deserve. B ecause it's more of oursuggestion for requirement than it is part of that. >> Blair: R ight. I t will go into the report but most everything you see in the notes that isn't absolutely particular to the note from a definition standpoint will go over to the report. O r otherwise remain captured, so we don't lose it in the process and when the

-- when the board starts chewing through some of this stuff they will have the explan ations and it will cue us for answering questions that they might come back with down the path. >> So based on the metric cars in Chicago that have the really wide doors and vertical stanchions do not affect accessibility? Wasn't that's where it came from? >> Blair: B? >> Well, B down there the providers of stanchion. I n the doorway. >> Blair: W here it says other providers or builders are seeing a shift? W hat's the

-- >> in reducing vertical stanchions in the door areas to increase passenger flow. >> yes. >> It seems like this came up because we discussed Chicago that has the 50 or 60

- inch wide doors or something. >> Blair: Well, no, there was a lot of discussion around what different agencies have done, and are finding out isimproving you know access and circulation around the

doors. I t all originated with the whole concept of having
a -- a clear vestibule

- like path across the vehicle where you are required to make a turn to get into the accessible area of the car to ease the process of getting on and off the vehicle. That was the original point of all of this. A nd what we found was that different agencies were seeing and trying different things some of which do not include 44 inches clear across. But have stanchions and things in the path. T here was also the discussion around vertical railing or stanchions that went from floor to ceiling or near to the floor in doorways, and so we had that conversation as well Bob, but again with the idea that we keep all of the handholds that we need to keep , and keep them in the places where they do the most for folks, where they present as little obstacle as they can at the same time. >> This is Marilyn. B ob, that was

-- I think that came mostly from a couple of different sources one WMATA I think was the first entity in some meetings ago talked about removing stanchions from the middle of that open end area of rapid rail cars helped them decrease dwell time because it facilitated passenger movement. A nd then one or two industries, you know, manufacturer p articipants said that the industry trend was also to, you know, that the trend indesign was to get rid of those poles or stanchions in the

middle of that open area. I think that's what Blair was trying to capture in that sentence. I

-- I think it's a great
-- we think it's a great sentence. A nd I hope it doesn't get taken out of the discussion. >> I was just commenting on where it came from. I think

-- I think it's (inaudible). >> CHRISTOPHER HART: I think one thing that I that got lost somewhere in th e notes was some kind of vertical (inaudible) right inside the door frame. S o folks can grab on as they step over the gap. A nd I

-- I don't know if it was somebody else, but

-- >> This is Gary Talbot. Iremember that coming up but then we got in the dis cussion the more you put the vertical grab bars adjacent to the opening, you are going to have people congregate. T hat was part of the reasoning for the (inaudible). >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Well (inaudible) against what Bombardier and Kawasaki are doing on s ubway cars around the world. >> Here is the 6th seat the handholds provided to adjacent doors to aid alighting

-- maybe at the 32

- inch minimum or 6 inches less than clear opening door, whichever is greater. O kay? Vertical handholds intendedas boarding aids that project into the clear door opening

-- >> That was that whole

-- >> Blair: S o I think we are okay. A nd I think previous

-- there is other language already in the ADA that talks about handrails. S o, we are trying to

-- >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Yea h, I think we are

-- >> I think I sent you a photograph Blair of the stanchions the handrails that I was talking about. >> Blair: I think you did Bob. Ithink we are okay with that. A nd again the idea was that you know we have the handrails for folks th at are ambulatory or in wheelchairs and we make sure that they are safe dimensions, and then hopefully folks just don't stand there in the door as a matter of practice. B ut, okay. > > I f we go over to 6

-- bear with me. I did that one. We are on 22 , yes. Let's see. I s 22 in red? I have a black and white copy. >> Mine is too. >> It's unlined in green. >> Blair: G reen was something we had looked at before. T he code is if it's green we already looked at it and I let it linger and red and underline d is the change so

-- okay. That's the matrix and its notes. I noted the mistakes with the note refuse residences. A nd we can move over to the

-->> By the way, Blair that's absolutely phenomenal piece

of work. >> Blair: I appreciate that Bob. A nd com ing from

-- >> Marilyn: I t really is you have been incredible. >> Blair: B ut you
-- this is all coming from you guys we are I am putting the words down. >> Marilyn. Yeah, yeah, yeah. >> We know better. (LAUGHTER) >> Blair: I will come back with t he Amtrak arguments later. (LAUGHTER) >> CHRISTOPHER HART: (inaudible) (LAUGHTER) >> I think they should double your salary. >> I am over here in Ken's world I have to make it back to my world at some point.

(LAUGHTER) >> Blair: I took and I h ave not looked at vertical movement, that's the fall or way back summer been a long time since we originally looked at it I went back through and had notes from Andre Gagne and Marilyn primarily reand went back through and tried to clean it up. T his is up -- everything is in here, I think. B ut I have on the firstapplicability that is in italics, it's that this applies to new

bi

- level inner

- city lounge cars built for Amtrak and any bi

- level equipment used by accessers to an Amtrak route acquired by anothe r entity or company sanctioned under PRIIA. Long moons any car with the primary function that is to enhance the passenger experience beyond the purchased coach or sleeper accommodation. T his irrelevantment extends to any bi

- level car with or without food service except diners that have nonrevenue seating available to all passengers on the train on a first come service. F irst dining service with lower level kitchen are not required to have built in Vertical Access. W hile not considered true bi

- level cars single

- level cars known as dome cars Chris,

(LAUGHTER) >> That offer elevated area design for viewing scenery with or without food service must have a number of accessible seating spaces and vertical access to reach to viewing level. Accessible space is in the dome car which be convertible with use by other passengers when wheelchair users are not present. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: And

-- >> Where are you? S orry. >> Blair: W here am I the draft recommendations for vertical movement of passengers using whe elchairs orotherwise mobile impaired between levels on new inner

- city

Amtrak

-- >> if you are looking at the web page, it's below the

-- below the matrix. >> Thank you. >> All the way down. >> Blair: At the very bottom. >> My mistake got it go ahead. >> There goes Amtrak's last dome car. (LAUGHTER) >> Well

-- >> CHRISTOPHER HART: It occurs to me if you guys may want to think about putting in some kind of exterior viewing areas that are that can be provided on excursion for Alaska Railroad, or some of the cars in Colorado, they stand out on this roof, and take photos of the mountains or the bears or (inaudible). >> Blair: M y thinking Chris, and I will

-- I will add something to that effect. T he intent was if that

-- that enhancement that enhanced expe rience thing is excluded it should be

-- included it should be accessible. A nd I could

-- >> CHRISTOPHER HART: I think the object going forward should have the committee certainly call it out itwould be helpful for both the board and for DOT to

understa nd the overall (inaudible). >> Gary Talbot I completely agree with Chris. We saw that on passenger vessels where you would have like the sightseeing and sun deck with no Vertical Access, you know, we rode in sections where you had to be able to get to the first section but to me it kind of feels like that. A lthough I realize you want

-- we want to get up top we want to get to where everybody else is. >> Right. A nd, yes, and there is

-- (inaudible) persons otherwise ambulatory can't get to these either. And that is a growing issue. We see it at Amtrak with the dome and (inaudible). I t's a quandary. O kay. T hat said, then there is suggested additional (inaudible) >> Blair, before you go on one of the things that I don't

-- I am not sufficiently familiar with (inaudible) but one would think we are talking about new cars, this should also apply if some provider decides to provide longer service on a nonexisting Amtrak route when you (inaudible) limits existing. >> PAUL BEATTY: Excuse me this is Paul speak ing we need one person speaking at a time so the CART operator can record things. >> Sorry.>> Blair: T hank you Paul. Yeah Chris and Ken here in

the same room at the table.

(LAUGHTER) >> Blair: B ut this is Blair by the way. S o, Ken makes a very goo d point as did you Chris. P RIIA is in my mind is very complicated and it needs to be sorted out on I guess DOT or DOJ whoever handle it DOT needs to sort it out. B ecause there is existing definitions for inner

- city that implies only Amtrak that's the way the ADA states it. S o, I

-- I can rearrange that and if nothing else for you folks at the Access Board it will let you stir that pot but I will capture all long distance trains whether existing mounts or not. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: And long distance. >> De fine long distance. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: For private offering. >> Blair: O kay. I will make that note, very good. Okay. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Thank you. >> Blair: O kay. Let's see. I f we go t suggested

-- all bi

- level inner

- city long distance lounge car s, of course, I'm sorry I repeated that. A ll bi

- level long distance coaches, all bi

- level inner

- city long distance sleepers, and all bi

- level inner

- city long distance diner cars accessible from the adjacent car or dining tables provided in the lounge car. So,I left that in there, and the rest of the document is primarily

around more general requirements. T he guiding principle that that Marilyn provided, and I think they are valuable for everything that we are doing. I f you look at the requirements, and I won't go through all of them if there are comments please mark those up and send them back to you. >> One comment that I think I have sent back to you a couple of times it hasn't been incorporated on number 10. >> Okay. >> The list may be vertical or stair lifted it should say platform lifts or incline platform lifts. >> Blair: O kay. O r incline. T hat was what I wanted to
-- wanted to infer okay incline got you. I ncline platform. All right. I suspect after looking at it that the chances of doing the incline are probably remote because it just consumes up -- consumes so much space at the end of the day. >> This is Frank. I just a quick comment. I was wondering if you could send an editable document >> Yes, sir. >> Frank: Iappreciate it it makes it easier to have comments and see where it go >> Send it to everybody if you would. >> Blair: O kay. I s it a Word document online?>> No it's web formatted. >> This is Melissa you can just go through and copy what is on the web and paste it into a Word doc ument and you will be able to edit it. T he matrix the matrix you can't do it the agenda and Vertical Access information you can copy and paste into a Word document. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: (inaudible) (LAUGHTER) >> Blair: O kay. S o, at the end of the day I think from the Amtrak perspective, we are simply agreeing that, yes, this is physically mechanically possible to

-- without having built one but we know that they have existed and I

-- from my conversations with pretty hard headed engineers they pretty
m uch accept yeah we could probably do this. I t has a lot of other implications which is why I

-- my suggestion is and what I had written was to keep it into the lounge cars from what little work that I have done just trying to plug things in to the other p assenger cars, the consumption of room space and seat space gets to be pretty heavy. Imade the comment in the

-- what I

-- well, in what I deem is the economic risk. A nd you know when we work through this and talk through this we ended up adding things that were sort of the general requirements. Alot of the risk whether they were physical or otherwise kind of went away. You sortof figured out how you could do things the risks were

minimized if you thought through it. H owever, the if you look at numb er one under economic risk it's apply Vertical Access of nonrevenue cars have limited economic

-- encourage passengers to not use stairs for (inaudible) travel. P rimary cause or let's see. T he primary costs are any extra costs for the equipment and maint enance over time. A pply Vertical Access revenue cars coaches and sleepers would have a direct

-- a lost revenue capacity. T he physical impact in corresponding physical impact must be reviewed prior to NPRM. A nd I think that's a given for the Access Board. Part 3 is probably the most, you know, brings on a lot of conversation. A nd that is, there is very real possibility that the economics will no longer justify building bi

- level inner

- city long distance cars. T he bi

- level cars on inner

-- long distance trains, (inaudible) economic goals due to the extra height was nice the bi

- level inner

- city car came about just before the number of airline passengers surpassed the number of train passengers and railroads were trying to maintain service. N ow, bi

- level cars allow the railroad to increase the number of passengers per car, the (inaudible) on higher capacity car is lower than the profit or in our case loss reduction is greater. T here is a huge risk that the economic efficiencies of bi

- level inner

- city cars willbe lost to the accessible features this comment does not

apply to lounge cars as defined at the front of this document. P roper study should be made. T hat is you know, that could be a very conscientious statement but at the same time in the real wor ld, you know, I think our goal is to
-- if we have cars that let you go upstairs and enjoy the scenery in this country that folks should be able to go upstairs and enjoy the scenery and not be down in the trees. And we do that on cars that we

-- that at l east Amtrak considers nonrevenue we don't charge you anymore or less for accessing or not accessing that car. A nd so, I think it becomes a very key feature that and being able to get access directly to the dining car in the lounge car or possibly even goi ng from the lounge car into the dining car and not having to depend on having foot and walking to your room or eating something downstairs in the long when you would rather sit at a table with linen and that sort of thing. >> I want to be careful we don't create a situation where you could look at a car why we spend more money to build bi

- level when we can build single level and haul as many people. T hat is a potential. W hether it's Amtrak or anyone else. S o, >> Blair, are these

-- this is Marilyn. A re these concerns primarily for your revenue cars? A nd if so let memake sure that's clarified in point 3 that maybe that's not

what you mean. I f you do mean that, it might help to just be clear that that is what you mean. You don't mean all cars you mean revenue cars. >> Right. T hat's why at the very end this doesn't apply to lounge cars as defined in the front of the document. T his would be cars that you are buying a ticket for like a sleeper or coach because the others, the lounge

-- we drag those thi ngs around they don't have

-- they don't make money there is no ticket to get in there if you don't have it folks won't ride or not as many people will ride because it's a nice amenity. I see this as we are trying to make sure that we get that amenity acc eptable. >> Gary Talbot. I certainly support the lounge cars Vertical Access solution, I think it's a great idea. M y concern would be if that were the only car even access to the dining car to me it does you know just

-- especially the coach car I think the sleeper is a separate issue for me. A nd maybe I am not the best one to speak on that. B ecause but back to the coach car, maybe either I choose not to have a sleeper I don't want a sleeper or maybe I have a sleeper but I want a coach car I can see whe re you sit there five, six, seven hours and enjoy the ride kind of thing on a second level. S o I understand what you are saying on the revenue side, and Ican -- as an engineer I am struggling with where we would

put something like for like the sleeper ca r. A lthough I am still not ready to bail on it I am just saying that I can understand you know how difficult it might be. T hat the coach car is the one revenue car that just

-- I just

-- you don't typically stay? Alounge car for five, six hours. You would go there maybe like do your dinner, and the
reason -- one reason is other people want to get in there. >> That's true. >> Right? Idon't know I have never been in the top but I imagine

-- >> But Bob has. >> I would think there is more pressure on the lounge car on a bi

- level in the top level than there would be on the bottom level because there is just cool stuff going on. S o, that's where I would think, to me, if you know if you could just take existing stuff and say boy if you could make like a coach car and lounge car and connect from the lounge into the dining car vertical accessible with those elements, to me, whether you are talking

-- talking new construction or new cars or existing bi

- level cars, I don't know how much better than that we co uld hope for except like I said I am not walking away from the other stuff. B ut those two pieces, to me, are incredible.>> Bob Reuter the difference between the lower and

upper level is day and night. I have always ridden on the lower level, one time on a capitol limit, I was in an ornery mood. I guess I drug myself down the hall of the sleeper, into the lounge car, up into the seat I stayed there as long as I could as long as my body allowed me to. B ut the difference in the ride the difference in the view the difference in the experience was day and night. I t was just that much better on the second level. A nd on another case when we had a problem on the train, and we wrapped some stuff around one of the axles and they had to get out the people on the second level didn't even know what happened. >> Blair: Well, to Gary's point, the space consumer is going to be the lift and what happens at the bottom and top of it. I thought about

-- I will give everyone an example. The way Amtrak operates the loung e is coupled between the coaches and the diner. I f we

-- if we open up the pathway between

-- into the first coach you could arguably have you know accessible seating in that coach. A nd do some convertible seating that sort of thing. >> That would be a gre at idea. >> That's a great idea. >> Blair: T he tricky part comes, I talk about this as
one -- a little further down, let's see, I>> This is Gary Talbot you do that with one lift right? >> Blair: Yeah. I f we can that's a good segue Gary

-- segue to anot her thing. I n ancillary requirements it talks about item 1 says cars with upper level restrooms must have accessible restroom if they have access available from a car with a design with Vertical Access. C ars with Vertical Access with restrooms on the lower level are not required to have upper level rest rooms. T he new PRIIA bi

- level cars have a nonADA restroom on the second level and a reduced number of restrooms on the lower level. T he net number of toilets remain the same and the seating is expanded o n the lower level and reduced up

-- and reduced on the upper level it's a trade

- off. >> As long as you are not spored to sit opposite the restrooms which they do a a lot of older Amtrak cars >> The reasons for restrooms on the second level is negotiating t he stairs is a growing problem for ambulatory passengers primarily due to age, I think I can say. I f lower and upper level must have acceptable restrooms the primary function of the car the lounge as enhancement to travel is greatly reduced because the nu mber of passengers that can use the car is reduced. S o, the point

-- and in a nutshell if the lounge is the car have Vertical Access you have accessible restrooms downstairs there is not accessiblerestrooms. B ecause you use the lift to go back down to t he

restroom. >> A lot of senior citizens are using

-- >> Yes, absolutely. A nd inebriated. >> For the lounge car. >> It's the

-- >> MELISSA ANDERSON: This is Melissa. >> This is David. O kay. You have the coach car attached to the lounge car what about t he restroom on the upper level of the coach car? >> That was the point. T hat if

-- somewhere in the process of providing accessibility and restrooms if you have

-- I would do this scenario. I f you have a coach that has no upper level restrooms that is co upled to the lounge and that coach as a result of being the car it is, your
access -- if you can go from the lounge to the coach and sit in the couch the accessible restroom is downstairs in the lounge. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: This is Melissa. You have about 5 minutes to finish up, four minutes to finish up. >> Okay. >> Biggest problem I think with the coach and the lounge and the diner and all is going to be the simple problem of

-- it's not, I know it's not our venue, but it'soperational and getting them to put the cars in the right

places in the right order. >> Blair: You are absolutely right. T hat's a torement of the railroad, yes. T he fortunate part is that typically when a train is made up it's running a route over and over again. They don't

-- they tend not to twist the cars around too much unless one has to go to the shop. S o they would stay pretty much together. People have to do their job that's what they are paid for make up trains. B ut that's Blair's opinion on the railroad. B ut, yes, whatever -- whatever comes out of that we just have to live with and do it. >> I have ridden single level sleeper only once in all of those years has accessible room been opposite the dining car so I could get in the dining car. >> And in Blair's world it would n't be that way Bob, I can assure you.

(LAUGHTER) >> You are not running Amtrak yet? >> Blair: N o. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: So I think

-- this is Melissa I think we should wind down. I know that you haven't completely finished the topic of Vertical Acces s but we may be to a point where we need a draft report so that we can have that prior to the February meeting. A nd the fullcommittee can review something at that point. >> Okay. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: We will work

-- I will work with Blair and come up wi th deadlines on

-- and you may just have to do some editing on a draft and go back and forth between now and then to finish up. >> Blair: To that end Melissa, any comments or thoughts that people have please take the time to mark them up. I realize it's

- - you know, I am taking biting a big chunk for Amtrak and anyone else in the inner

- city business doing long haul trains but

-- but I would appreciate the thoughts and expertise of everyone on the call to

-- to make comments on the document. >> Will there b e subcommittee meeting at the 26

- 27 meeting? >> MELISSA ANDERSON: We haven't determined the agenda for sure yet. T he it's probably likely there will be some time for you guys to meet but we don't know for sure. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: (inaudible) we need to have some kind of draft. >> Maybe to go over the final draft of the draft. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: And do not think Melissa or I will not call people to (inaudible). >> Blair: O kay. A ll right. Well, I have nothing elseunless someone from the Access Board has something else

to add some advice, some suggestions some assignments. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: Blair, you had mentioned before that you would put together a draft report is that stale the case or do you need volunteers to step up. >> Blair: N o, I will do that at least try to get a rough draft out Melissa because

-- I think

-- I think it can be more valuable if I do the initial draft and get like some of these notes out of the notes within the notes out of the matrix notes. S o they are in somewhat logical order. A nd then I may scream for help. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: Okay. >> I certainly appreciate and I think you have done a yeoman's job. >> Unless there are volunteers to say, Blair I will do this, don't worry about it. >> You are doing such a good job that

-- (LAUGHTER) >> He is doing a fantastic job, I don't think anybody should take over.

(LAUGHTER) >> Flattery will get you everywhere. (LAUGHTER) >> MELISSA ANDERSON: Okay. Ithink we are aboutdone today thank you everybody for joining us and Blair you

and I need to talk soon I will call when I have some more information. >> Thank you very much. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: Thank you buys. \ >> PAUL BEATTY: Operator this concludes the conference call so you can shut it down. (End of meeting.)