Note: The output shown below is from the Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) 

system used in the Rooms and Spaces Subcommittee Meeting #4 and is generally unedited. 

The CART system was 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. 

Thursday, August 21, 2014

United States Access Board

Rail Vehicles Access Advisory Committee

Rooms and Spaces Subcommittee Meeting #4

>> Paul: Good afternoon, everybody. This is Paul Beatty. Welcome to 

the fourth meeting of the rooms and spaces subcommittee. As you know 

everyone may participate in subcommittee discussions. Therefore no time 

for public comment has been scheduled during this roughly hour and a half 

call. Although we have CART now, there is -- I don't know if we have 

a chat box. Well, we have a chat box, so therefore if you want to send 

something to us for those that are only using CART to participate and 

you want to raise a question or make a statement, we'll be monitoring 

the chat box or you can send it to the ARVAC e-mail address at 

RVAAC@access-board.gov. Remember to give your name when you are 

speaking and as a reminder this is your last call for the subcommittee. 

Your next meeting will most likely be during the time of the full committee 

meeting scheduled for September 11th and 12th. What we'll do now is make 

introductions in the room here. You have myself, Jim Pecht and Melissa 
Anderson and our CART operator, Sherry. 

On the phone line, we got a lot of the major players. Let's see I see 

a meeting view, Andre, Chris, Jennifer, Dennis, David Blair, Kenneth Eloy 

and Jose Vegas. Okay. If there's somebody I missed, please let us know. 

At this point, I'm going to turn the call over to Dennis who is the 

subcommittee chair and we'll take it from there. Take it away, Dennis. 

>> Okay. Thank you. Thank you, everybody, for showing up. 

Pardon the delay and whatnot. What you have attached to the agenda is 

the document with bullet points. It was basically discusses our last 

meeting and I filled it out with things that I -- that we discussed in 

the last meeting and came to some general agreement on. And so I want 

to go over it again and talk about making the presentations to the full 

committee meeting. But one of the things I did in revising this document, 

I hope you all have it in front of you there, is to move things around 

a little bit and putting a general scoping provision for most of the 

requirements and then separate out the technical requirements and so 

forth for each of the spaces that we were talking about. And I want to 

talk about several issues that have come up with respect to the scoping. 

Let's start out with the scoping for restrooms. 

Right now in inner city rail cars, there is a requirement that if you 

have restrooms for the public -- this is true of all of them actually 

-- if you have a restroom for the public, you have to have an accessible 

restroom. It does not say that if you do not have restrooms for the public 

like on a rapid rail or light rail that you have to have an accessible 

restroom. So that's one of the issues. Also, currently there is an 

exception or a statement that says accessible restrooms are not required 
in dining cars and other food service cars where there is no restroom 

for the public. 

And that was added in part because we were trying to accommodate Amtrak 

at the time. ADA is a nondiscrimination, so if you don't provide facility 

for somebody, you don't have to provide it for anybody. You don't have 

to provide accessible ones. 

So in Amtrak every coach car has two restrooms. This is basically 

Amtrak's policy...except for some of those spaces like dining cars and 

some cafe cars and so forth where there is no accessible -- there's no 

restroom for anybody. 

So the first part of the scoping says where there are restrooms for the 

public, you have to have an accessible one. Then it says a car with no 

accessible restrooms is not required to have -- with no public restroom 

it is not required to have an accessible restroom. 

And here is the part that is an issue that we need to discuss and that 

is there are two different requirements. One for commuter rail and one 

for inner city and don't ask me why they're different just because I wrote 

the provision. 

( LAUGHTER ) 

>> Dennis: In inner city, which is Amtrak, and by the way, inner city 

is defined as Amtrak in the statute, so all those other things like 

high-speed rail technically are not inner city. Inner city is only 

Amtrak. 

It says the restroom shall be adjacent to the spaces for wheelchairs. 

In commuter rails it says the restrooms shall be in close proximity to. 

Now, in the existing -- in the older Amfleet cars the design was the space 
for wheelchairs to be right at -- right across from the door of the 

restroom, which is adjacent to and so forth which means it would be 

adjacent. 

Frankly I have written in those cars many times and that's not really 

a convenient place to be, especially if there's no exhaust fan on the 

restroom. 

I don't personally like to have to sit right next to it. 

In the Acela, the accessible restroom is actually out in the vestibule. 

In other words, you go through the door to the compartment out into the 

vestibule to get to the restroom, which personally I think is a much better 

idea. 

So the question that arises is should it say adjacent? 

Should it say as I wrote here as close as practicable or is there some 

other question about the distance that one has to travel for a restroom 

and I'm wondering if what people think about that, those idea -- we don't 

-- in general when you're talking about a conventional inner city rail 

system, commuter or inner city, the two cars -- two cars are coupled 

together with a couple that allows a lot of lateral and vertical movement 

going through that junction from one car to another and was a big concern 

during the writing of this subtitle B with Steve and others in that he 

didn't want people to have to go from one car to another while the train 

was in motion. It's possible to go from one car to another in the Acela. 

I've done it many times. You go from the cabin to the cafe car for 

example. The floor between that -- between those two cars is quite rough 

and so it's bumpy. 

One of the questions about -- that's been raised recently about the 

attempt to put in some high-speed rail is using what is called a fixed 
consist train. 

In other words, the cars is not separable. They're actually connected 

permanently one to the other and while they bend or rotate at that 

particular junction, they don't have any of the up and down or side to 

side motion that one would experience. 

I've seen some videos for example of -- I think it should consend trains 

in Japan where there is a wheelchair user sitting in that doorway while 

the train is going through at high speed through some curves and even 

through some switches at the stations that show essentially no movement. 

So one of the questions or the big question is what do we want to say 

about the placement? 

Do we want to say the restroom should be adjacent to the spaces for 

wheelchairs or do we want to say in close proximity? 

Do we want to say as close as practicable? 

Do we want to define the distance? 

What are peoples' thoughts about that? 

Anybody? 

Especially wheelchair users? 

>> Could you say the choices again of phrases, in close proximity, 

adjacent or --

>> As close as practicable. 

>> It sounds like in close proximity takes into the concern you 

articulated, but that's really just off the top of my head. This is 

Marilyn. 
Sorry. 

>> Dennis, this is Blair. 

Just maybe for the sake of clarification, when you have fixed consist 

trains like the Acela where they're not coupled up -- a train set versus 

a locomotive coach that's an independent vehicle, it really affects --

you know, as you have seen, give a lot of difference from what you can 

do from a maneuverability, a safe maneuverability standpoint for 

vehicles. As you know a lot of the existing cars we were doing things 

to try to, you know, get as compliant as we could with the old vehicles. 

With newer vehicles I think you certainly -- or new vehicles you certainly 

have a greater opportunity to place the accessible spaces and the 

restrooms so that they're -- you know, you're not sitting right across 

from the restroom door, that kind of situation. I mean, that's always 

our goal because nobody wants to sit right across from the restroom. 

>> Especially when the person inside hasn't appropriately latched the 

door and it keeps sliding open. 

( LAUGHTER ) 

>> Well, I had that for the powered door in Spain and I'm not sure who 

was more embarrassed than me for opening the door or the person who was 

in there. It was all on a timer. You couldn't close anything. It was 

all going to go on its own sweet time, so just embarrassed. 

>> Dennis: Any other thoughts? 
>> I would say, Dennis, this is Blair again. The Acela depending on the 

car you're in, because it has the single-fixed diaphragm, which gives 

you that pathway that doesn't have a sheering effect that you see on 

regular cars, you have a nice sealed area which is environmentally 

conditioned and then there is the bi-party doors that actually exist 

between what we call the unisex restroom and the accessible restroom, 

so one of the restrooms is more in the car body and the other is more 

in the vestibule if you want to think about it that way. 

>> Dennis: The accessible one is out beyond the doors. But the other 

one, the small phone booth is inside. 

>> Yes. In fact, in some of the cars it was a phone booth. In others 

it's a restroom. 

( LAUGHTER ) 

>> This is Ken. 

I guess the issue is that, you know, in -- if you do have a brand-new 

train set, you can do a whole bunch of other nice things in terms of the 

Talgo cars also have that, they're coupled together and they have a wide 

space between it. But for writing new regs, some of the cars, you know, 

Amtrak or other commuter rail providers might at some point buy train 

sets where all the cars are, you know, semipermanently coupled together 

but they're also going to be new cars that are going to be coupled with 

old cars. You know, I think reality is we're going to have a fleet of 

cars for another 20 years probably. So I think we need to write whatever 

the thing is and it needs to be written broadly so it emcompasss both 
train set kind of cars and individual cars that will probably still be 

coupled older. 

I think that, you know, is going to be a reality is older inaccessible 

cars or, you know, barely accessible cars will be coupled to newer cars 

in high -- you know, fairly likely for some more generations maybe for 

decades at least. 

>> Well, this is Dennis, and that's true, there will be a lot of the old 

cars, but remember the guidelines that we're writing are only for new 

cars. So they will not apply to any of those things, and so it only will 

apply to -- it will only take effect at the implementation date that was 

established by DOT. So anything that's purchased prior to DOT's, 

whatever it is, is following the old regulations. The current 

regulations that are in effect today. 

Regulations that follow from the guidelines that this committee 

recommends from the board will only apply to cars that are purchased after 

that date whatever it is. 

>> I guess what I'm trying to say is that it is likely there will be new 

cars that are purchased that will be intended to couple with old cars. 

We're not going to have all new cars that are all in train sets. I guess 

that's what I was trying to clarify. 

>> Yes. That's correct. And so what I was talking about is in a 

brand-new -- let me give you a specific example from the Shincansand. 

Does anybody speak Japanese? 

They didn't know it was Shincasand or Shincasand. 

>> I think it's Shincasand, but I was born here, so don't mind me 

pronunciation. 
>> In that particular -- there's an effort to try to get high-speed rail 

going in the U.S. using that kind of train set. That train set as designed 

has restrooms in every other car. So there is no public restroom in half 

of its eight cars. I think there's six or something. 

And the issue is in the car with the restroom as currently conceived there 

will be a space for a wheelchair there right in close proximity to. The 

space for the wheelchair in the other car will be at that same end, but 

in order to get to the restroom, you actually pass to the other car. 

And the difference between the fixed consist and the coupled consist is 

that that connection doesn't really move, and so the question is, is that 

acceptable? 

Anybody? 

>> What doesn't really move? 

>> Dennis: The two cars don't move. They bend, but they don't have the 

lateral, the back and forth and the up and down movement with respect 

to each other the way the physical coupled cars do. 

>> This is Marilyn. Does this affect the restroom question or does this 

affect a different issue? 

>> Dennis: It's the issue of the closeness. In other words, if you have 

to go -- if you go from a space in one car to the restroom in the next 

car and they're right at the same ends, does that meet the requirement 

of close proximity? 
Or, I mean, it could. It doesn't meet adjacent as the current reg says. 

And is that okay? 

>> Well, could I clarify the question? 

This is Eloy Martinez calling from -- representing the Texas Central 

High-speed Rail Operation. What we're proposing in Texas is an 8-car

train set that's based upon the Shincasend technology and what we're 

trying to afford is easy access to the washroom or restroom by a wheelchair 

patron, either from within the same car you have to go through a little 

bit of a vestibule in order to get there. Or from the adjacent car and 

due to the design or construction of the equipment that we have, you know, 

our equipment is very wide, we provide more than adequate space from one 

car to another. The doors are automatic so there's nothing that needs 

to be pressed in order to make that -- to traverse that route. And the 

washroom is -- the door to the washroom is wide enough so that it's pretty 

easy access for anybody. And so the question that we have is, you know 

-- or that was raised was, you know, in terms of a definition of adjacent, 

does adjacent really mean you have to be within the same car or I like 

the language of in close proximity because the access to the washroom 

is just as easy from either car in what we're trying to afford here. 

One of the reasons that there isn't -- there's very little intercar motion 

when you're going from the adjacent car into the car that has the 

accessible Beth room because -- bathroom because of the types of curves 

that are involved in our system. 

So for right quality purposes in order to achieve the speeds that we're 

talking about, they are very, very gentle curves and so there's very, 

very small movement between -- at the intercar connection. And so it's 
something that's very easy to traverse and we have a video which we can 

share at some point with members of the subcommittee that demonstrate 

that that Dennis referred to earlier. 

>> Sure. This is Chris. Hi. 

I think it would be great if we could figure out accessible...one thing 

that I want to point out and folks raise there is that -- can be quite 

difficult so Gary Talbot from Amtrak can speak to it more and technically 

travel around the country and it's hard to...and I think that the 

committee ought to think of it a bit about how we deal with that...whether 

it is reasonable to accept...high-speed operation. 

>> Dennis: This is Dennis. The proposal or the idea would be that that 

would apply only to fixed consist cars. It would not apply to coupled 

cars. You're right. With coupled cars it would not be feasible to go 

from one car to another. And the fixed consist car as shown in Shincasend 

has -- if you bend through the connection in Acela for example, the floor 

that you go from one car to another is rigid and it's quite bumpy. But 

in the shincasend, the floor actually is a flat metal plate that has a 

taper on both ends and is probably about only two feed wide, something 

like that. Does not move laterally or vertically or horizontally at that 

point. Only, again, only for the fixed consist car and part of the other 

scoping requirement was that they would have to be -- that the path from 

that spot to the restroom would have to meet the requirements for an 

accessible onboard circulation which is being developed in the other 

subcommittee. 

>> Dennis, this is Paul Beatty. Just to let you know, David Nelson has 

raised his hand to ask a question. So the chair of the committee can 
decide when he can ask the question. 

>> If it's about this, go ahead and ask now. 

>> Blair answered for me. So the Taobo cars, I thought that it was already 

set up that...two cars each have their own accessible space and then an 

accessible restroom, that it's fixed. 

>> Dennis: That I can't answer. Is there somebody else that can answer 

whether Taboa is like that? 

>> Yes. Is Blair there? 

>> This is Dennis. I'm just trying to pull up floor plans for the Tabo 

to see what they look like. It's a little bit different beast because 

of the way the suspension works. It's more like an articulated train 

where wheels are shared between cars. The Shincasend, if you decouple 

the cars would stand by themselvess because from what I see they all have 

their own trucks, but if you look at the TBG and the Taobo-type systems 

where they actually share suspension between cars, it becomes very 

different. It could be very good in an articulated train, but I think 

to your point, you want to write the caveat of articulated wide...and 

language that makes it very clear that if you're going to have this 

condition, it has to meet, you know, a strict criteria. I think what 

you'll find is that providers...because for a given train it could 

increase, you know, revenue seating capacity on the trains. And 

without... 

>> Blair, you're fading in and out. 

>> Yeah, you're breaking up. 

>> I'm sorry. Is this better? 

I'm closer to the phone now. 

>> Yeah. 
>> But let me if I could I'm looking up some information on the Taobo 

to answer David's question specifically about the vehicle restroom-wise. 

But I think if you're careful about how you write the caveat for 

permanently or semipermanently coupled trains and articulated trains 

that you could have a very nice pathway between the car without any issue. 

What make say the Japanese trains versus the Acela, the Acela is connected 

in a very similar way, but you get -- you still get some vertical motion 

but you don't get the sheering action that you get on a traditional car 

because the diaphragm, the pathway is truly connected car to car. 

The folks from the Texas high-speed trains, when you get into stations 

where you're not concerned with speed, you're going to be back into areas 

where the pathway between cars if you are using traditional cars could 

be compromised... 

>> Faded out again, Blair. 

>> I'm going to pick the phone up now. Is that better? 

>> It just keeps cutting in and out. You drop a word here and there. 

>> Oh. 

>> It's not fading so much as it just stops. 

>> Just cuts in and out. You know, I --

>> The opening between the inner car is about 27 -- a little over 27 inches 

and from -- and the door opening is about -- is a little over 36. 

>> Okay. 
>> Between the cars it's not the 32 that we have talked about. But the 

space for...is compartmentalized for ADA seating location. 

>> Okay. 

>> This is Dennis and the requirement would be that this connection 

whatever it is has to meet the requirements for accessible onboard 

circulation, so it would have to be 32 inches clear period or you couldn't 

do it and then we could probably establish and should establish issues 

an this is really your committee, Blair, things like quarter inch vertical 

maximum, all of the things that we talk about in buildings and facilities 

about surfaces, floor surfaces. 

>> Right. And Dennis, I would go a little further and say you would want 

the clear aisle space to be maintained over the entirety of the route. 

Because you don't want someone -- even with a full diaphragm, connected 

diaphragm, that space when the cars are moving through very tight spaces 

like going into Washington or New York through the switches, you can get 

-- you won't get the sheering action, but you can get the space changing. 

It may be maintaining 32 inches, but the path is changing shape. 

( LAUGHTER ) 

>> From being maybe a rectanglean to a -- so you want to put something 

this there to say you have to design the geometry of the scale things 

so that those dimensions are maintained over the intended operating path 

of the train. 

>> That language -- again, this is Eloy from Texas Central High-speed 

Rail. That language is actually very good language. I agree with that. 
The specific operation that we're suggesting in Texas is basically a very 

straight shot between Dallas and Houston and coming into stations, you 

know, the stations are being planned such that there's not going to be 

the need to traverse through multiple switches in order to get over to 

a particular platform. It's coming Brett -- pretty much straight in and 

result of that we're going to be able to provide superior access from 

the platform on to the equipment and then cars on to the equipment. 

>> Well, and that is the best situation. You're building a new 

infrastructure, new trains and everything is completely within your 

control. 

>> And this is Dennis. And that's what I think would -- what I'm talking 

about is that it has to meet some strict requirements and one of them 

is essentially that you have got general curve and essentially new 

infrastructure. So it would only apply -- the ability to move from one 

car to another or the need to move from one car to another would only 

apply in those strict requirements. It would not apply to your standard 

coupled cars on any other system. 

>> This is Ken. Blair, can you just explain which direction sheering 

means in the car when you're saying --

>> Okay. If you take the very end of two cars that are coupled together, 

the device that compresss between the cars is the diaphragm. 

>> Right. 

>> And if the car is -- they're two separate vehicles. They're not like 

the Acela where they're physically bolted together. When you go through 
a reverse curve or not so much a regular switch, when you go through a 

reversing curve as you're going into a station or getting lined up for 

tunnels and various things, changing tracks even out on the railroad, 

you get a situation where one of the cars is still in the radius of one 

curve and the other one is already in the radius of a reversing curve. 

And so because of the distance from the center line of the trucks or the 

Bogies to the end of the car, you get a swing of the end of the car and 

you could actually get a sheering action of the diaphragms where let's 

say the space is -- if it's 30 inches wide or 32 inches wide, it could 

narrow down to, you know, 10 or 15 inches. 

>> Right. Now I'm visualizing -- the way you're describing it, now I'm 

visualizing it. 

Thank you. 

>> Okay. No problem. 

>> Okay. This is Dennis. I think we have decided that the proper wording 

is in close proximity. So that's like the first part of this. 

The second part is whether there needs to be or should be an allowance 

for moving between cars under certain specified type conditions. 

Does that sum up what we're saying? 

>> And that being fixed or articulated trains? 

Not the coupling a brand-new accessible car to an Amfleet car or 

something? 

>> No. No. It would have to be a fix cars moving between have to be 

fixed and the pathway has to meet the requirements for accessible --

whatever we're calling this thing. I call it accessible onboard 
circulation path. But we need a name for that, Blair. Whatever we're 

calling it. 

We don't want to use accessible route because that's already defined 

somewhere and so we have to create this for the right-of-way and so forth. 

It would only apply to that. It only applies when you have got the fixed 

thing. It only applies under all the curve conditions on the -- that 

it doesn't change. It's always 32 inches clear, no matter what. 

And that the surface on which you meet the requirements for bumps and 

whatever. 

Anybody have a problem with that concept? 

>> That sounds good to me. 

>> I think that's okay. 

>> Okay for me. 

>> Dennis: Okay. Can we go now to the technical requirements? 

And I have already heard earlier on about there is an issue where we had 

said that it needs to have a 60-inch turn-in circle in it. 

I wrote in red after that or T-turn because T-turns are typically 

something that's used in the building environment as an alternative to 

the 60-inch circle and I don't know if we want to include that or not. 

I think one of the issues I want to ask the people -- the wheelchair users 

who have ridden on the Acela and have used that restroom, whether that 

meets certain criteria. 

I thought that there was a 60-inch turning circle in there and I think 

Andre, I think that's who sent it, sent me a drawing of the Acela restroom 

and it is not fixed...in that it meets the old core requirements for this 
rectangular space that's given the very core design restroom with the 

requirements but a side transfer and so what you have created in there 

is essentially an L-shape space which works in terms of at least for me 

to be able to turn completely around and maneuver very nicely. So the 

question is -- and I would like of the people who have actually used that 

restroom, does it work for you and if so, is that an alternative design 

given that, you know, the space constraints on a train car and if it is, 

how do we write it? 

Or do we simply say that you must have the current, you know, rectangular 

space plus side transfer which is what the Acela gives you. So I would 

like to hear from the people who are wheelchair users and who have used 

that restroom to find out whether it works. 

>> Real quick. This is David and I don't know if we're having technical 

problems with the conference cause because I'm getting a lot of static 

on the line. You cut out a little bit here and there. 

>> This is Paul Beatty speaking. I know that according to the operator, 

Dennis, we're getting a lot of static from your line. Also we do know 

that as we have been listening, at least three people, not including 

Dennis, were cutting out and we sort of mentioned that when we were talking

to Blair and that might be an issue related to people using speakerphones. 

>> Okay. 

>> I'm using Skype so I don't know if that's causing problems or not. 

But I'm getting static too. 

Hello? 

>> Yeah, we hear you. 
>> Yeah. It's -- this is Marilyn. 

>> The disturbances are tolerable for me. I don't know if they may not 

be for others. 

>> Turning circle, let's get the that particular provision. 

Couple that with the outside transfer. 

How many people would -- how many wheelchair users have used the Acela

restroom on the call? 

Anybody? 

>> I have used it. 

>> And does it work for you? 

Chris? 

>> It works. However, aside from ideal. 

>> Okay. 

>> Has anybody used -- this is Uwe. Has anybody used the Acela washroom 

for assisted transfer? 

Somebody else who has to help you get from your chair to the toilet? 

>> Nobody. 
>> It would be a lot more difficult than say Dallas or Ft. Worth train 

or California or the Central corridor cars. 

>> Chris, do those cars have a 60-inch turn-in circle? 

>> Those are bigger. Acelas actually have a full 60-inch turn circle. 

They are some of the higher speed rail cars available in Europe and Asia. 

>> This is Uwe. 

One of the main reasons for the 60-inch circle is also that people --

or a person in the wheelchair wants to go into the washroom facing in 

and when they are leaving the washroom also facing out so there has to 

be a way of, you know, going in, ma moveing inside -- ma moveing inside 

that allows you to do this. 

Now, if the T set up is working for that purpose then, I'm all for it. 

But I think that one of the main reasons is you want to face inward and 

face outward. 

>> Unless you are a really good -- and unless you're operating at very, 

very high speeds, what you're getting to be is it gets more difficult 

when you have got to sway side to side working against you. 

>> Okay. 

So I'm hearing basically that adding the T-turn seems like a good idea 
and we still want to keep it a 60-inch turn-in; is that right? 

>> I would say that would be a great idea because it... 

>> Okay. 

>> This is Jonathan Michel at Rail Plan. I don't know if anyone has been 

on the super liner ADA Coach lower level. Blair, has -- Chris, have you 

been on that one? 

>> Not in... 

>> You were referring to a sleeper? 

>> Yes. A sleeper. 

>> This is the compartment I have. 

>> This is Blair. I finally made it back on again. 

The line is so bad I couldn't hear. 

Can you hear me now? 

>> Yes, we can. 

>> Great. 

The car that Jonathan is talking about, we have only done one or two so 

far, and they are coaches. 
They're the oldest of super liner 1 coaches and that -- I believe that 

restroom was on display at the Boston interior show --

>> Yes, that's correct. 

>> And I think that has a 60-inch turning circle in it. 

>> It is really -- I believe it's more of an oval. It is a 60-inch on 

the length and I believe 58 on the width because of the hand drier. 

, But it's near -- I believe it's nearly a 60-inch diameter. 

>> Does it permit a side -- this is Ken. Does it permit a side transfer? 

>> Yes. 

>> I guess none of us have seen it. 

( LAUGHTER ) 

>> It sounds like -- this is Marilyn. The variety of options mean that 

there is a need to specify a 60 or T and a side transfer since they may 

not be colocated. 

>> Yes. This is Dennis. I would say we need to say both. 

>> This is Marilyn again. And is there any question about whether doing 

that gives us what we need? 
I mean, Chris, I don't know what your -- you know, it sounds like you 

managed that you would like additional requirements of some kind or --

>> I just think that based on the prior...what we're seeing in California 

and bilevel that...whereas the same design as what is operating between 

Dallas and Ft. Worth that is a design nobody has raised complaints about 

-- versus some more compact ones where folks are really concerned. 

I do think there is also a concern that when you do get into assisted 

transfers this space, that may not necessarily be in the current design. 

>> This is Dennis. It sounds to me like what we need is to have some 

of those diagrams available for -- and at the very least, for the committee 

to look at and maybe for technical assistance manual so that we can --

so the board can issue things that say here are suggestions for how you 

meet these requirements. So I really like to see those drawings if we 

can. I'm not sure how to get them. But... 

>> You mean for the kind of space requirements for assisted and 

nonassisted transfers? 

>> No. I'm thinking of the designs that have already been done that Chris 

is mentioning that seem to work. That say here's things that we think 

-- here's designs that seem to be accessible and I would really like to 

be able to show people that, especially the train designers to say here 

is something you should kind of shoot for because these work. 

>> Dennis, this is Blair. I can get you copies of what's in use on the 

Pacific Surf Liners which I think is what Chris is referring to. And 
the new design for the Super Liner lower level restrooms and the...if 

it was done I think that...facilitation on that because we were able to 

create a situation for side transfer but we couldn't get all of the 

dimensions, you know, the required dimensions, but the thinking was 

because it worked better, that it was still a good thing. So as I recall, 

and it's been a while now, there was an equivalent facilitation done for 

that restroom. 

>> Okay. This is Uwe, Dennis. I can get you some examples from trains

in Canada and in Europe that show the dimensions that are required for 

assisted transfers. 

>> That would be great. 

>> Yeah, I will get them to you before our next meeting. 

>> Okay. 

I think this is the last meeting before the general committee meeting, 

at which point we want to present something to the full committee which 

is at least sort of -- some kind of consensus from the subcommittee. 

>> Right. I'll try to get them to you next week. 

>> Okay. 

>> Dennis, this is Blair. And I think you may have already said this 

before, but the subject of sinks, of a wash basin and its proximity to 

the toilet, I mean, one of the things that we have always thought was 

important was the ability to wash up before you transfer back to the 

wheelchair. 

And I have seen designs for restrooms where the sink is on one side of 
the room and the toilet's on the other. 

So, you know, getting to the sink required transferring back, to the 

wheelchair and going into the room, so is that something that we ought 

to put in here to -- or we may have already covered it before and I'll 

apologize. 

>> No, it's not in here, but we do talk about grab bars, one of which 

the one on the side can be along in front of the -- and that's essentially 

what the Acela does. I'm not sure if you can reach the lab from the toilet 

in the Acela. It's close but I'm not sure if you can actually get there. 

>> Right. And like I say, some of them can, but from a user perspective, 

is that something that we ought to include? 

And I've also spoken to people who are ambulatory but had colostemy bags 

and things like that and said boy it would really be nice to use a sink 

before you leave to take care of all those sanitary issues so I mean, 

I would say why not make that a requirement. 

>> This is Uwe. Blair, you're totally right. That's a very good 

requirement and we have discussed this many times. Very often it is not 

possible or people couldn't do it because it conflicts sometimes with 

the space you have near the toilet for transfers. But ideally it would 

be very good to have this in the proximity of the toilet where you can 

reach it from the toilet position, yes. 

>> Okay. 

This is Dennis. 

Anybody else got -- I'll add that to our report if that's -- I'm not sure 

we can -- well, close enough to be reached from seated on the toilet and 

we have to have designers figure out the actual mechanism of what you 
do. Because if you put it too close to the toilet, like back beside the 

toilet, then you couldn't reach it from the wheelchair You just wanted 

to use the lab. 

But if it's a design issue, I don't think we can settle it at this 

regulatory requirement. But something like reachable from within reach 

of a person sitting only toilet, I think that makes sense. Anybody else 

have any comments about that? 

>> This is Andre. One comment I have on the T-turn...were you referring 

to the ICCA-17 for the shape of this area, the T-area? 

>> The T-turn is this common thing that's in the ADA/ABA accessibility 

guidelines. I'm not sure it's still called that these days. Jim Pecht, 

do you know? 

Is it still there? 

>> Yep. It's still there. 

>> It basically allows you to cut off the corners to put stuff in the 

corners so that you -- you may have to maneuver and actually as Chris 

points out any maneuvering that you have to do is complicated by the fact 

that the train is moving. So we have to be careful about that, but I 

think we can't be more specific about how to tie that down and hope the 

designers will come up with ideas that maybe they can test it prototype. 

But anybody -- so T-turn is kind of a term of art from the ADA/ABA Access 

Board guidelines. 

>> All right. So I will refer to that then. I can provide a sketch of 

what a T-turn looks like, at least the area looks like inside the Acela
restroom. I provided you already with the turning circle, 60-inch 

turning circle, so I can add to that by providing the T-turn. 

>> This is Ken. 

Andre, are the Trinity -- the Dallas Ft. Worth Trinity rail cars, Bombarte 

bilevel cars? 

>> Where the ends are tapered? 

>> Yeah. 

>> Yeah, I believe so. Yes. 

>> Do you know if you have drawings of the restrooms in those cars because 

I've been on those cars in the Northstar out of Minneapolis and they don't 

have -- theirs, the toilet is not -- it's sort of diagonally into a corner 

rather than out so that you can do a side transfer, but maybe -- do you 

have different restrooms in different -- that have been ordered by 

different transit authorities or commuter authorities? 

>> No. There's only one type of restroom. This is Andre. There's only 

one type of restroom that exists for these types of vehicles and it's 

fairly small restroom. It does not meet the ADA regulation, but it has 

an equivalence approval by the FDA and universal drawings and stuff like 

that. But it's a small restroom. So what we're working on right now 

with this 60-inch circle or a T-turn inside the restroom is totally 

different and would provide for more -- a much bigger restroom space. 

>> Okay. Thank you. 

>> So I could provide at least a sketch of what it looks like in terms 

of dimension. But I don't think it's a good point of reference for the 
restroom for the future. 

>> Right. Just because Chris had said he has not heard any problems about 

it. But maybe he just had not heard problems about it because clearly 

-- I don't remember how big it was, but it clearly did not have a side 

transfer ability, I don't think. 

>> No. It's front transfer, so maybe we're talking about different 

vehicles now. 

>> Yeah, maybe that's where the confusion is. We'll have to follow up 

with Chris later. 

Thank you. 

>> This is Dennis. Let's try and move on a little bit hear. 

>> This is Marilyn. Actually I have one last question about that. 

I am wondering if the fact that you have, you know, bouncing and swaying 

on a train is, you know, wheelchairs, a T-turn doesn't really replace 

a 60-inch turning circle. Just throwing that out there for discussions. 

>> Yeah. This is Dennis, and I think you may be right and I don't think 

we'll know until we actually look at some drawings and see whether or 

not it works. But you're right. T-turns can be tricky and especially 

since the car is moving, it makes them more difficult. But I don't think 

we can say -- I condition say off the top of my head that it wouldn't 

work. 

>> Well, it seems to me that we know it will work for some people. But 

whether we can say it works for everyone -- now, there may be some people 

who there isn't any design that works, but, you know, I mean, moving with 

-- going with the general thrust that we're accommodating, you know, a 

high percentile, I would just put a couple of question marks on that future 
provision. That may need to be evaluated. 

>> Okay. I'll put that in parentheses and say that this needs further 

discussion. 

>> Thanks. 

>> Okay. 

So if we can move on. We're talking about side transfer. We got power 

doors. That's about the controls and operating mechanism sections that 

are going to be somewhere about reach ranges and force and so forth. And 

the other provision about the 12-inch minimum from inside a corner, that 

was in the last draft and I added this statement that said it doesn't 

apply to the latch or knob that you use for manual operation. 

Did I lose everybody? 

>> No. No. 

>> No. 

You didn't lose us. 

>> My other phone is ringing and the last time that happened is because 

I was dropped from the call. 

So, okay... so the handle as I think mentioned that it needed to be close 

to the edge in order to be able to actually latch and I said okay, well 

then don't make that 12-inch minimum thing apply to lap handles. Lap 

handles is for manual operation when the power fails and the power button 
has to be 12 inches out of the inside corner. Anyone have any concerns 

about that? 

Hearing none...we talked about grab bars and use the requirements general 

--

>> I'm sorry. Can you clarify a little bit. I got a little lost about 

that. The 12-inch manual, what does that mean exactly? 

>> Okay. What happens in a lot of these -- first of all we're requiring 

a power door. But in a lot of the manual operations, the latches and 

the locks when you're doing a manual sliding door, they're in an inside 

corner and so they're so close to the edge that your foot rest get in 

the way when you try to reach forward to get the controls. So we wanted 

to have a power door and we wanted to make sure the button that you push 

to open and close it is not in that corner right up against the corner. 

It's got to be out from the corner a bit so you can actually reach it. 

And one of the issues was raised last time was, well, the handle that 

you need to operate when you're not doing the button, it needs to be close 

to that latch point. Close to where the door meets the wall. 

And so you can't have it really -- I guess you could with some fancy 

mechanism. There used to be a provision in the old Amtrak that if the 

button could latch, it was on the other side of the door and nobody 

remembered to push it and that's when you were sitting next to the toilet 

the door would slide open. 

So what I wanted to say is that the requirement to be 12 inches out from 

that inside corner doesn't apply to that latch that you use in manual 

operation because we're assuming that most of the time you're going to 

be pushing a button to open and close the door. 
>> Makes sense. 

>> Okay. 

>> Dennis, this is Andre. Also this latch, I think when Frank was 

discussing this issue earlier, I was still having in mind the fact that 

we use latches right now, mechanical latches. When you have an 

electrical power door, then you just push a button and it opens and closes 

so you're not going to have that latch in the same position just like 

a side door on a vehicle. You don't have a big latch on it between doors 

to hold the doors together. So hopefully these latches are going to 

disappear with -- within the near future. 

>> I expect there will be -- there has to be some thing that's there when 

the power fails that opens it. So that's what I was trying to cover. 

The thing you use in manual operation. But you're right, you should get 

rid of most of the latches and handles and so forth. Because we talked 

about grab bars across the front of a lab and we talked about allowing 

a full-bound grab bar on the open side of the closet and people were 

concerned that it might interfere with maneuvering clearance and 

specified that it might need force requirement for folding and deploying 

and does not intrude into the required floor space when it's deployed. 

I guess that should be when it's not deployed. 

>> That's correct. 

>> And when the laboratory controls we talked about being proximity 

activated which is typically infrared. Might be something else but I 

suspect generally infrared is what you get and I believe Blair said 
they're going to that kind of system anyway. 

>> Yeah, Dennis, this is Blair. What we're finding is that on some of 

the older cars where the water of the gravity-base system, the automatic 

faucets with their electric valves depend on having a fair amount of 

pressure to work properly, so some of those cars with gravity feed we're 

actually having to go back to a mechanical automatic closing faucet 

because we only get like a few drips of water out of the darn thing very 

frustrating and I thought it was just an electric Solanol valve that open 

and close but it does require the water pressure to function properly 

but that's creating a bit of a quandry but I think through time we'll 

sort through that. I had a question about the grab bars. In the regs, 

the existing regs looking at inner city is written the same way throughout 

the different rail modes, it says a grab bar at least 24 inches long shall 

be mounted behind the water closet and the horizontal grab bar of at least 

40 inches long shall be mounted on at least one side wall with one end 

not more than 12 inches from the back wall. And a height between 33 and 

36 inches above the floor. Now, we have had situations where because 

of the geometry of the room we would take the long bar back and turn the 

corner and there was implicate that vertical was okay. We have got some 

where it's a vertical grab which has some value, but there's been a lot 

of discussion over time whether that was intended to be a 24-inch 

horizontal or a vertical and I wonder if we just need to clarify that 

-- vertical obviously has some uses, but should there be a better 

definition there that include a vertical and horizontal reference for 

those? 

>> I was assuming that it was going to be using -- it doesn't say that, 
does it? 

Well, yes, it does. 

My understanding is in the new bathing facilities -- or at least if ANSI 

maybe. Maybe it's not in the ABA/ADA. There is a provision for a 

vertical grab bar but there's also a horizontal one. 

Jim, do you have that? 

>> The vertical is in the ANSI document at the moment. We don't have 

one in the board --

>> Yeah, this is Marilyn. The vertical grab bar is really great for some 

groupings of people with disabilities. You know, ambulatory people, you 

know, older people who need it for standing up, et cetera, and various 

other uses. It doesn't replace the horizontal grab bar though, and there 

is an ANSI requirement for it. But it's not instead of. That's my --

I don't know -- that's my understanding of the role of the vertical grab 

bar. 

>> This is Jim. That's correct. 

>> This is Blair. 

And just speaking from the railroad side of the house and I think for 

clarity because we get into, you know, into ANSI. We get into the 

architectural side. If anything that we can do here, and I say this 

because...and so having those grab bars... 

>> You're dropping off again, Blair. 

>> Bear with me just a second. I think someone -- oh, can you hear me 

now? 

>> You're coming through. There's just some noise sometimes. 

>> I think someone forgot to pay the bill. 

Anyway, though, think anything that we can give the definition on here 
that doesn't require, you know, running to all those other various other 

outside of the railroad standards... 

>> This is Dennis. What we did with buses and what we did with rights 

of ways and so forth is where there were provisions that we wanted to 

borrow from buildings and facilities, we took those provisions and put 

them physically in the requirement so you didn't have to look at a 

different document and so that's what I'm hoping that the board will do 

this time. 

Those provisions are right there and when we did rights of way, we took 

some of them and then modified them slightly to make them more pertinent 

to the right of way and so I'm assuming that that's what the board will 

do when it writes these guidelines and I think that it's -- when I say 

usability in the building requirements I might also reference ANSI 

because there might be good pieces in there. 

>> Yeah, this is Marilyn. 

That would be a good policy for every set of guidelines the board puts 

out to include anything -- you know, you never have to go to an outside 

document. 

>> Right. 

Okay. Anymore on this? 

Dining cars...didn't have a scoping. It's well provided and that's sort 

of general for all of the standards where you have it. Table space, 

transfer seats, mats, under side and the -- anything else we need to do 

there? 

>> Dennis, this is Uwe. Just one more item for the washroom. Should 
we include the emergency call button? 

>> Ah...yes. 

Good idea. 

>> This is David. Also if we can -- I think that we need to make sure 

that the emergency call button is not near the flush button. 

( LAUGHTER ) 

>> Okay. 

>> This is Marilyn. There is a lot of funny stories attached to when 

it is. 

( LAUGHTER ) 

>> I think it's specified in the building code for the dimensions and 

we can take these and then put them into our requirements in here as well. 

>> Okay. 

>> This is Blair. Not to wander off in the weeds, but I have to tell 

you folks this real quick on the Acelas. For those who have seen those 

trains for a while, you remember that the original flush device was a 

handle. It looked like a handle on a toilet at home. And it was done 

that way because there's push buttons everywhere on trains and didn't 

want it to look like just another train. So people go into trains 

expecting -- and planes, expecting to push buttons. So they push the 

only button they could find which was the attendant call button and not 
the handle that looked like like that toilet at home and so we had to 

go to the push button and it looks fine now. 

( LAUGHTER ) 

>> Okay. 

Sleeping department, at least one...in each sleeping car and the 

technical requirements are toilet requirement shall install and so forth 

-- turn-in circles where the bed is deployed. That's important because 

right now you can't move once the bed is down. Controls lights for 

everything within reach or you can have a duplicate control. One is a 

remote or even you might even develop an app for your Smartphone to control 

all the lights and that's somewhere down the line. Positive door latch 

operable outside from train personnel. Reference to use the vehicles 

as a kind of a model of what's possible. I don't want to make that like 

this is the design you have to follow but that's an example of how you 

can do that. 

The bed at wheelchair height and provides a table again meeting all those 

other kinds of requirements. 

Anything in there needs to be discussed? 

>> Dennis, this is Jim. I got one question for you. 

I assume you mean a shower -- a fixed shower seat. Not a shower chair, 

which I is a term of art, I think of as a movable piece of furniture. 

Is that correct? 

>> Some people want to use or is transferred into a shower chair and then 

over to the shower. 
>> Yeah. What I'm talking about is a fixed seat mounted to the wall in 

the shower compartment and it might pull out or pull down --

>> It's a pull down seat. 

>> That's what I was talking about. We'll change that to make sure --

>> This is David here. Now, you talked about the Arail model. I'm not 

sure what that is. Can I look that up via website? 

>> The diagram or the drawing that we put forth was in the last meeting 

I.'s a line drawing that was presented for us and it was on the -- I don't 

know whether the stuff from previous meetings has been archiveed 

somewhere. Jim? 

Jim Pecht. 

>> This is Paul Beatty speak. Anything from previous meetings has been 

placed on the regulations.gov website except for the last conference 

call. We haven't added that on yet. 

>> Okay. 

Our last is rooms and spaces we had a drawing of the VOL accessible sleeper 

design. 

>> And that is Paul speaking. That was added. That was at the July 

meeting and that's on the website regulations.gov. If you go to the ARVAC 

website, there is a link that brings you to the material an 

regulations.gov. 

>> Perfect. Thank you. 

>> Okay. 
>> This is Marilyn. I had a question about the sleeper. 

Were you finished? 

Were you on a roll there of finishing your description? 

>> Yeah. What do you want to say about -- just talked about the technical 

requirements. Go ahead. 

>> Well, this is an issue that may not be within the subcommittee's purview 

or whatever, but then it's just sort of a -- I want to put maybe an after 

in some peoples' minds in looking ahead and how the committee fit 

together. Because on the subcommittee I guess it's Blair subcommittee's 

where we're talking about vertical access. 

There was this idea that people who are using the accessible sleeper can 

avail themselves of it if the accessible sleeper is put in a certain car. 

You know, put like on the ground floor of the car that has the vertical 

access. It was just a wild idea of how to make it possible to make both 

of them available to the individual. 

I don't think it fits within the four walls of the subcommittee. And 

there may be 100 reasons why we can't do it and now is not the perfect 

time for that discussion, but there will be a time. 

And so I just -- so I want to -- I just want to point out that the sleeper 

has to be accessible and then when we get to fitting all the pieces 

together we have to think about where the person who uses that car can 

go. 

Who uses that facility can go. 
>> Right. As in the current cars they're sort of stuck in the lower level 

of a car and can't go anywhere else. 

>> Right. 

>> So I guess raising it as a flag for a later date. 

>> Like -- and we'll have to deal with that -- there is a whole range 

of issues about what to do about that. 

Part of the issue, a small piece of it is sort of covered in the lounge 

car, which the single of the lounge car available and the single level 

could apply to the provisions below. Bilevel lounge cars apply on the 

lower level. And there may or may not be a requirement at some point 

but vertical access in the lounge car. But there is a provision and I 

couldn't find it actually in DOT that says when you have a bilevel dining 

car and which by the way is statutorily prohibited for us to make any 

requirements for those bilevel dining cars in terms of space and seating 

and whatever; that there's provision on the lower level of the lounge 

car for an accessible restroom and accessible seating. Now, what I said 

in this new scoping provision is it says where vertical access is 

provided, accessible seating and spaces shall also be provided on the 

upper level. Where bilevel dining car is provided, an accessible bilevel 

lounge car shall be directly coupled to it. And then I would suggest 

that in our report that we recommend -- or ask that the Access Board 

recommend -- or that we cover the issue when the -- when this is adopted 

by DOT, that DOT establishes an operational procedure that says in that 

case you have to have the same services available in the dining car has 

to be available in the upper level -- or in the lounge car period. 
So if you get essentially a double dining car in that provision. But 

you have to provide the same services in the lounge car that you provide 

in the bilevel dining car. 

Anybody have questions about that provision? 

>> Dennis, this is Blair, and my thinking was and tell me if the statute 

applies to this, is that if you had an accessible -- a vertically 

accessible lounge that was accessible end to end or at least to one extreme 

end, that you have the opportunity of having an accessible diner. I mean, 

it would work either way. We have converted some of our lounges to 

include the contact same table that are in the diners, so it functionally 

would work either way. I would say though -- because I think when the 

original ADA was crafted, were a little more cut and dry. There were 

lounge cars and there were diners. And now we have -- and we have seen 

through time a lot of the vehicles where you have cars that are above 

within the same vehicle. So it might be worth adding that into the 

wording as well, multiuse cars that are, you know, dining and lounge or 

whatever their multiple use is, that we don't let those slip through the 

cracks or leave them underdefined and create confusion later. 

>> Right. And this is Dennis. 

When working on this provision in the house at least there was some 

concerns by Damon's committee and his aide that if the board or anybody, 

DOT said that there had to be a certain number of spaces, seating spaces 

on the upper level of a bilevel dining car, that that would force vertical 

access requirements and they didn't want that to happen. So that's why 

the statute expressly says you cannot require spaces or restrooms on a 

bilevel dining car. So if you're going to do anything about the dining 
car it's going to be because there is a lounge car that's next to it and 

you're getting service there and that's really an operational issue that 

DOT will have to address. 

>> Okay. We typically, and I think this would always be the case unless 

a car had a problem and was taken out, that if you have a diner, you have 

a lounge in the bilevel conditions. It would be -- there were trains 

we ran at one time where, you know, partway of the route portion where 

the train separated off and went to a different place and took the lounge. 

So now that train was left with just a diner and no lounge and then the 

other train had a lounge and no diner, so... 

>> Isn't that the way the Empire still works in the last stretch from 

-- one goes to Northern Washington, one goes to Southern Washington or 

something? 

Or not? 

>> Ken, this is Blair. I'm not sure. I would have to look. I know that 

train does or did some strange gyration out there. 

>> Right. I think it splits for the last. One goes to Northern 

Washington State. One goes south or something. 

>> This is Dennis and one of them -- I know when you go from Washington, 

D.C. to Tampa or Miami that the train splits at Jacksonville. In fact, 

when you get on the train in Washington, they ask you where you're going 

because you have to be in the right half of the train to get there. One 

half of it goes off and the other half goes off I think to Miami. I know 

I have ridden on that a couple of times. So that's true at least a couple 

of places. I don't know how it's divided. 

>> Well, we don't split those anymore. But they can always come back. 
You know, you always have that situation but I was just most concerned 

about where we had considers that become dual use. You know, it may be 

a lounge/diner or some other name that can be one or the other or both. 

And sometimes there is the opportunity to -- you know, if it has lounge 

service down stairs, I don't care what it does upstairs, it needs to be 

-- the down stairs has to be accessible and if we go vertical, then 

whatever is upstairs needs to be accessible no matter what you call the 

car. 

>> Right. 

>> This is David here. 

Now, I think that what Ken was mentioning is the Polar car. Now, that 

was for the first-class passengers. So it's a different type of dining 

lounge car than the regular standard dining and lounge cars. 

>> Okay. 

This is Dennis. I will try to craft some maybe advisory information or 

something that says that we should be clear that we're not leaving things 

out; that there may be some cars that are combination that need to borrow 

these requirements in each of the parts of it. So if it's part dining, 

part lounge, then the lounge part has to comply to lounge and the dining 

the dining. Does that make sense? 

>> That sounds good. 

>> And the technical provisions are simple. 
Dining car has an accessible restroom. The subset areas we sort of 

generally discussed the idea this needs to comply with the guidelines 

for cafeterias, trays and the turns. And vending machines because in 

the train decided that vending machines unlike other places are actually 

fixed need to have some provisions for controls and operating mechanisms 

and I'm not sure about are there currently, Jim, provisions for point 

of sale? 

Jim Pecht? 

>> Not currently, no. 

>> Okay. So we want to make sure the vending machines are usable if you're 

going to have self- service and I guess vending machines should be selfservice as well as vending. I don't know if you want to call them that 

or not. 

But the machines, if you're going to assume that people get their own 

stuff, those things have to be accessible. 

Anything you need to add to this provision? 

>> I had a comment. This is Jonathan Michel. 

I guess considering the way that the aviation industry has been going 

with kind of its mixed use larger spaces. If the rail industrial does 

decide to go to, you know, a larger floor plan in the near future or even 

in the next 10 to 20 years, I think we should try to, you know, think 

that far ahead. It could be that in the future we're no longer talking 

about an ADA room. But we're talking about, you know, almost like a 

first-class space that's maybe boxed in but not fully incapsulateed. I 

don't know, that's just something that I thought might be interesting 
to voice -- to think about if we're developing this right now. 

>> Okay. I'm not sure how to frame that. 

>> I'm not sure where it would fall, if it would fall on just regular 

coach or if it would fall underneath a sleeper. I think it ends up being 

a hybrid of both. But I do think it's something that operators might 

see in the near future as something that is viable based on -- because 

of the amount of floor space that can be gained and what people would 

be willing to pay for it. 

>> Hmm...well, this is Dennis. Here is a thought. 

In the current regulations I think it's sub part H, it's sort of other. 

It's anything else that we didn't cover and it says if you have a 

transportation system that doesn't fit in the previously defined 

provisions, any of them, doesn't mean you're off the hook. It still has 

to be accessible. Accessibility provisions have to be cleared by DOT 

with conversation with the Access Board and set forth the specifics of 

how it is you're going to make it accessible. Example of this was 

somebody -- there is in Europe. Not sure where, somebody was proposing 

to put one here. Essentially a people mover kind of system in which it 

was a cable driven and the cars never stopped moving. When they got to 

the platform, the platform was moving as well and it moved at the same 

speed as the cars. I think they have these in Disney world or Disneyland 

too. 

So you go straight on from the moving platform to the moving vehicle and 

the question is how do you make that accessible. And another thing was 

Chicago was originally going to build a rapid transit system which doesn't 
quite fit into any of the nice -- and so the RTA from Chicago came with 

a consultant and presented to DOT and the board its plan of how it was 

going to make them accessible, what it was going to do and it had to be 

approved. So we could put a provision similar to that in here that says 

if you have a space that doesn't meet specifically these requirements 

you have to apply to the provider a plan of how you're going to make it 

accessible and it has to be approved by DOT with input from the board. 

So does that work for you? 

>> Yeah, I would agree with that. 

>> Yeah. 

This is Marilyn. Yeah. 

>> Okay. 

Are you done? 

>> I had a -- this is Marilyn. I had a question. 

And I don't know if this is -- is this committee or this is another 

subcommittee, but -- and it may be the circulation subcommittee. Have 

we -- has someone paid attention to -- and I don't know all the 

terminology, but is a lounge car different from just an ordinary car where 

people sit? 

But have we paid attention to accessible spaces having all the amenities 

-- all the passenger amenities that other spaces have? 

That other seating has? 

Work surfaces for example that are proximate to you and so forth? 
>> I think that's covered under the onboard circulation part because 

that's the subcommittee that's dealing with the accessible wheelchair 

spaces, and I don't know whether we specifically covered that but I have 

in the back of my mind is that it has to be because the statute says you 

have to have a hard surface on which to eat which was intended to be a 

table that which got translated into you can balance a plastic tray on 

your lap and that meets the requirement and as far as I'm concerned, that 

is not what was intended. And we need to make it clear that you have 

to have a table, something that's attached to either a wall or the car 

or on the back of the seat in front of you like it is on an airline, so 

-- and controls -- I think Amtrak is pretty much putting electrical 

controls at all the seating locations. I know that's true on the Acela

so you can plug in your computer and charge your phone and there is also 

a call button. I'm not sure what it does, where it goes to. I know on 

the ice train I was told in Germany that the -- all the conductors wear 

pagers and if you push the button, the pager beeps and tells you where 

that is coming from. I don't know if that's the way it works -- that's 

rally an operational issue from DOT, not the design of the car. You want 

to make sure there is a call button at the seat and all the controls for 

things like the lights and the, you know, whatever else you might have 

have to be within reach and use. 

>> This is Marilyn again. You know, that's right, and I think it's 

interesting that you mention the hard surface requirement, which I 

certainly agree with your representation of that. But that's the 

requirement independent of other passengers having that amenity because 

it's a replacement for access to the dining car. It's a poor replacement, 
but it's there to give you at least the ability to eat a meal in a civilized 

way or something. 

The other passengers have a table to work on so you get a table. Other 

passengers have an electrical outlet, so you get one too. And that would 

have to apply to space -- transfer spaces as well as wheelchair spaces. 

But anyway, it sounds like it's another subcommittee. So... 

>> This is Blair. How to word that, but what I tried to explain to folks 

is think about it in terms of let's say a car has 70 seats and out of 

those 70 seats 50 of them are in the clear view of a window and the rest 

of them are sort of scattered about and maybe they're next to a post or 

whatever or they're in a corner. But that the accessible space should 

be from that standpoint, should at least be equivalent to what is their 

-- I don't want to say the best, but what is the typical space in the 

car, and I think that would help us get to the point where we're not 

creating these dark little corners with no windows, which we have been 

guilty of before. But it puts some heat into that so that when people 

are considering, okay, we have to have this space and we have to have 

this amenity and all that, typically you don't find that the person who's 

using the wheelchair is -- it maybe has all the other amenities but doesn't 

have a window which is a very basic part of traveling Britain. And they 

may be one of only two or three people in the car that can't get to a 

window or they may be the only one that can't get to a window, so I've 

been trying to think about how to word that and if you have got any 

thoughts, I'd appreciate it. 

>> Well, you can just require -- this is Marilyn. Those are interesting 

questions. If the one amenity in question here is the window because 
it has the other things, you can just specify that it has access to a 

window or something like that. 

>> Right. 

>> And you can just go in and say that explicitly. 

>> Yes. And you take the Acela as an example, there is a seat that you 

can transfer to that has a table and that same table is the one that's 

available if you decide to stay in your wheelchair. 

The other seat that's just for transfer is like every other seat except 

it has a flip-up armrest and you use the tray that I believe that's in 

front of you from the seat in front of you. 

So if there is a way to put that into words so that it -- later on when 

we're not allowed to understand what it meant, it will be crystal clear 

for people designing the train. 

So I would write something up, regardless of what this committee does, 

I want it to be a policy inside of this railway anyway. 

>> Sounds good. 

And it sounds like we may be done., Except for the full committee report 

--

>> Dennis, you have got two minutes. 

>> Present this and essentially make those changes that are in there and 

present this to the full committee as the report from our subcommittee. 

Anybody have a problem -- and of course anybody that has any concerns 

about specific things is free to raise those in the committee meeting. 

>> I think -- this is Uwe -- this is looking pretty good so far, Dennis 

and it looks like a very good document to present to the committee. 

>> Anybody comes up with ideas and wants to add stuff, feel free to do 
that at the presentation. 

So is there anything else we need to do in the last minute or less? 

If not, I will see most of you in September I guess and I guess there 

is a another subcommittee meeting in between that. I can't remember. 

>> Yeah, I think it's --

>> Yes. This is Marilyn. We have another board and a lighting meeting. 

>> Okay. 

Thank you all for your work and assistance and talk to some of you later 

and we'll see a lot of you at the committee meeting. 

>> Thank you, Dennis. 

>> Thank you, Dennis. 

>> Thank you, Dennis. 

>> Operator, this concludes our conference call. 

>> Thank you for your participation in today's conference. Your call 

has ended and you may now disconnect. Once again, we appreciate your 

participation in today's conference. You may now disconnect.