### Note: The output shown below is from the Communication

**Ac cess Realtime Translation (CA** **RT) system used in the**  **Communications Subcommittee Meeting #9 and is generally**  **unedited. The CA RT sy** **stem 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.**  Rail Vehicl es Access Advisory Committee Communications Subcommittee Meeting #9 U.S. Access Board Thursday, October 2, 2014

>> Paul Beatty: This is Paul Beatty speaking. Just letting you know that our chair will be shortly joining us. All right, everybody, we'll j ust go ahead and start, get basic administrative matters out of the way. Good afternoon. This is Paul Beatty. W elcome to the ninth meeting of the Communications Subcommittee. As you know, since anyone may participate in subcommittee discussions, no time for public comment has been scheduled for this two - hour call. I can see we have the CART chat box functioning. So for those who desire to state or are actually participating only by CART, if you desire to make a statement or raise a question, go ahead and put it in the chat box and we'll let the chair know about it and they can get you in the queue for speaking or communicating. Remember to give your name when speaking, and as a reminder you will probably have a call in November. One of the purposes of this meeting is to schedule your Novembercall. Most likely that will be the first Thursday in November,

which I did not write down. So we'll pull up the calendar quickly to see what date that is. Now, in terms of introductions, just to let you know who 's in the room, Marsha Mazz, Jim Pecht, myself Paul Beatty, and Melissa Anderson. On the phone line we have Frank, Melissa Shurland, Francis Mascarenhas, Andrew Phillips, Lise Hamlin, Frank Maldari, David Nelson. Anybody else that's participating that I h aven't read their name or read their name and butchered it and want to correct the CART transcript? [No response] Can anybody hear me? >> Yes. >> I can hear you. >> Paul Beatty: Great, OK. Good. The first Thursday in will be the 6th, same time, 1:00 to 3:00, and your chair and your November is the 6th, so tentatively your next conference call subcommittee can confirm that when we start. So at this point, I'm going to turn it over to Jim Pec ht . >> Good afternoon. I hope you had the agenda with you, and we can start with that and talk a little bit about the brief review of what went on at the September 11 face -to -face meeting. Wehad some pretty good presentations, and we put up a lot of paper in our room downstairs, and talked about how signage size vers us placement could best be looked at, and we sort of went along that. Wesort of noted, at least I did maybe, I think Tim was the one, with regards to announcements and visual displays and things like that, operationally you can't really tell people what a nnouncements they have to do and what they have to -- how they have to be structured, what they have to sound like or look like. Wh at the standards will do, they'll come in behind that, and say if you do make an announcement, it has to meetcertain accessi bility requirements, and those requirements are

what you guys need to sort of hash out as far as visual, audible, what it is and should look like. There were questions, we should probably discuss this about what should advertisements that are announced or somehow displayed over screens and things like that, how we should sort of look at those. I have my ideas, but I'm going to Then there was a potential list for recommendations to be keep my mouth shut. created and sent to DRA and FRA as far as things outsi de of the committee's scope as far as recommendations for operational things and policy things, such as putting in an information sheet which may have Braille or other things in the seat backs and things like that. So if you guys want to discuss that a little bit while we wait a little bit longer for Terry, have at it. W ho's up? And I hear crickets. [Laughter] Does anyone have any comments about the September 11 face -to -face meeting that we had, anything they'd like to bring up? >> Yes. This is Andrew P hillips, and I got the meeting minutes. I received those from the September 11 meeting, and I appreciate that there was inclusion for the need for deaf and hard of hearing people to have visual information for what is being announced on the train and thing s like that. And I wanted to clarify that the visual information that needs to be accessed to hard of hearing and deaf people, in the list there's quotation marks that says "Stop identification signs" and I feel like that should be more broader, because we 're not the only there is some kind of emergency information or other kinds of announcements that we need to be able to receive through the variable messages, or the variable messaging signs, hopefully people who need information about which stops there are. If we can make that broader and broaden that requirement. Also, I would like to emphasize that for information regarding the stops, it's important to have a route map, a route map like a tracking of the route map information, some kind of sign. That way people can look at the map and in real time andsee which stop we're at and which stop would be next.

Metros around the world tend to have a system in place like that. That should be a requirement for all. So hopefully, we can make the distinction between the variable messaging signs and also the route map tracking system. >> Thank you, Andrew. Jim Pec ht just stepped out quickly. I'm not quite sure where he went. W as there anything else that anyone wanted to mention between -- regarding the meeting, the l ast meeting? [No response] OK. Let's see here, agenda. I guess one of the issues here on your agenda is a question as to whether or not advertisements should be made accessible. Does anyone want to speak to that? >> Frank Maldari: Hi, this is Frank Maldari, I will speak to that, if you'd like. Like I said at the meeting, my opinion is that the information, and in that regard I don't think it needs to be accessible, because you'll be controlling a lot more than just how it's displayed. You'll have controls on what the font size advertising sign is not necessary information, it's optional is and all sorts of things. Generally speaking, advertisements are not following those guidelines. Maybe they should. But optional information, I don't think, should be a ne cessary requirement in a rail car. Just my opinion. >> Lise Hamlin: I'm wondering if we can do some kind of best practice on that, rather than a requirement, just because I would think advertisers wouldn't know how to make it accessible. >> I'm sorry, Lise, can you repeat that, please? >> Lise Hamlin: I'm sorry. W hat I was saying, I actually agree. I don't think that it necessarily needs to be a requirement, but I would wonder if the Access Board would be a place where they could -- where an advertiser could go to find best practices on if they did want to make their advertising accessible.>> Sure.

>> Lise Hamlin: Wemake that recommendation. >> There are certainly criteria for signs and other things on our site. One of the things that we do avoid i s a recommendation work around that. I think we can state that anyone wanting to provide an accessible sign could use these criteria, even if not required. And Jim is back in the room, so I'm handing -- and Terry is here. >> This is David. This is David. I just want to clarify that is -- ends up being a de facto standard. But I think we can something before we go a whole lot further. W e're talking about advertisements. W e're talking about printed advertisements, am I correct? >> Signs. Advertising signs. >> Right, but printed advertised signs, correct? >> Correct. >> Actual printed signs. >> So far two speakers have said they don't think they should have to be accessible. Do you have a different opinion on that, David? >> No, I just was getting clarification. I wasn't sure if you meant video or print. I just wanted to clarify that you're actually talking about printed advertisements and you clarified and said that you are. So that's all I really needed to know. Thank you. >> This is Jim. They could be either. They actually could put advertisements across the variable message sign systems in addition to.>> No, I would disagree. But two people said that, so I will

>> Terry Pacheco : This is Terry. First, I apologize for being so late and stuck in telephone cyber someplace for a while. This originally got put on the agenda because what we were talking about at the two -day meeting were specifically, at that time, were variable message signs that I believe Frank had pointed leave it at that. out, for instance on their system, that I think it was his, that some of the -- for instance, like station stops are sponsored by a particular company, and so therefore the name of the company or their ad is on the variable message. But as Jim says, personally, to me, I think that's a little different than a print sign up on the wall of the subway train or something like that. Wewere specifically talking about when a company is sponsoring a facility, if you will, one of the features like a variable message system, if the company is sponsoring the message system should that company be -- should we be making that information accessible? And I don't know whether you folks have touched on that yet or not, but I think that's a really major point of this. >> Maybe you ju st want to talk about advertising in general to start with. W hether it's a variable message sign or any other kind of sign, a sign's a sign.

>> If you want then to break it down further after you talk about whether in general there's sentiment for making some kind of advertisements accessible, then you can go there. But maybe the first cut is are there some signs -- is there some kind of advertising that should be made accessible? >> Exactly, that's what I'm saying, is that we need to be looking at, I believe, is not is all advertising -- what should we >> No, it's not -- do with all advertising necessarily, but when the advertising is paying for a sponsoring the particular feature, like the VMSsystem, as opposed to a sign for, I don't know, Maker's M ark

bourbon just on the side of a billboard type thing. Those are two different types, two very different situations. >> Frank Maldari: I was talking in general when I was making my comment that advertising, whether it be VMS, TV screen or a printed decal on the car should not be required to be accessible. That was what I was saying. Just to touch on what you were talking about, Terry, the advertising, you know, the sponsorship of a message of a station, that wasn't our operation. It was somebody else's. >> I couldn't remember. I remember it coming up. >> That was the intent with Metro here in Washington, that there were going to be advertisements on those available message signs that now give you when the next train is coming, but that never happened. > > Somebody was doing it, and the guy said it that day, somebody said it at the meeting, as I'm thinking about it, it had something more to do with in more rural areas. >> Yeah, I think it was the station was sponsored by, or the message was sponsored by. I thought, based on our discussion, it was more disruptive than anything else, because it was unnecessary information clouding necessary >> I thought somebody was doing it. information and was something that we really didn't want, but I don't remember if we got far enough to say we don't want this to happen. But my recollection was it was more noise and trouble than it was beneficial to have that. >> As a point of information in our ATM requirements in the current ADA standards, we exempt advertising unle ss that advertising is something that you would need to act on during the transaction in order to get whatever the benefit might be. In other words, enter *88 on the keyboard and you'll get 10% off your cup of coffee at Starbucks next door. That kindof ad vertising, you know, might be netted up. W here just an

advertisement that says buy Starbucks coffee isn't going to be netted up. >> This is Frank again. I think that's a good distinction. I don't see any reason it shouldn't be carried over to vehicles. ap ologize, I'm going off point just a touch. But in New York City specific, maybe I was there like three days ago, I realized that if I wanted to add money onto, for example, my credit card, the only -- I couldn't, because they would only take cash. It was like they were right next to each other explaining the difference between cash and using the credit card, and it did make a difference specific to the train. So something like that caught my eye, and I thought that probably would need to be included. >> T his is David. Let me jump in real quick. Again, I >> That was off the train, right? That was a station - based fare card machine? >> It was in the subway. >> It wasn't on -- I'm saying it wasn't on the subway car, it was -- >> No, no, no, no, no. It was at the station. It was like by a vending machine. Not in the car. It was outside the car at one of the vending machines. >> OK. Because that's not the purview of what we're doing. Anything that doesn't shake out of the car, unfortunately, is what we're lo oking at in these particular regulations. I'm not sure I understand what the issue was specifically that you had brought up. >> You're talking about the cash versus credit? Yeah. One machine was accessible, one wasn't? them said only -- well, yeah, basically what you said, only cards, only accept credit cards. The other machine was onlyaccepting cash. Yeah, basically what you just said. Two

machines. One cash, one credit only. So how would someone accept -- how do I say this? I'm off point. I know t hat. It came up for me there. Maybe something to put on the agenda down the road. I wanted to bring it up. I know it's not where we're at on point. It was two machines, one cash, one credit. How would somebody know the difference? That's all I wanted to > > No, no, no, no, no. So there were two machines. One of put out there. >> Do you know which station? I can have somebody look at it, if you can tell me what it was. Off the top of my head, I'd think you'd want that information. >> I think it was 34th Street Station. >> Do you know which line it was? >> Frank, could you guys have this particular conversation offline, via e - mail to get back onto the topic? >> Sure, sure. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. >> I agree. W e'll e - mail, Frank. >> Lise Hamlin: This is Lise. I think Marcia suggested the language from the ATMs. It sounds like it makes sense too if we can write something like that, if the information is person should have access to it. If it's just an ad, I don't know that, again, best practices would be really nice if all the advertisers made everything accessible to everyone, but I don't know if it should be a requirement. >> This is Jim. >> This is Andrew speaking. I wanted to make a comment about the TV advertisements on the train s. I wanted to know how often there are TVs in rail cars and how often those TVs actually have captions. Because they're supposed to havecaptions on everything, not just programming shows, but also

advertisements. The cost to caption every TV advertisemen t is important, even though it's couched as an advertisement, the really cheap, considering -- it's very cheap to add the captions for TV advertisements. I would like to see more TVs have advertisements on the trains with captions. >> They're carrying com mercial TV, right? >> are we talking broadcast television or just LED screens? LCD screens. >> Just like you have on the airlines now, you can watch TV shows. >> The LCD screens. This is Andrew again. I really wanted to know about the TV, they have programmed on the TVs on the trains and that's FCC's area. >> Exactly. >> For broadcasting. And for the programs or for the TV, not broadcast, then that would be something that we would need to discuss about captioning for that. >> Oftentimes it's a sub scription service that does a rebroadcast of television shows that were originally broadcast TV. If that helps. Similar to what the airlines do. >> But what about advertisements? >> I think that's FCC purview. Again, we don't -- >> guess -- >> Let me j ust -- >> Wehave -- >> Rhett me jump in. This is David Andrew, I'm going to jumpadvertisements. So they're on the TV, and if it's only on the

in. The Department of Transportation already has, like they have rules that have already been made. >> Right. >> Wealready have our guidelines set. For example, someone earlier was talking about the airplanes having TV shows. In the actual airport, though, like if you look at the baggage claim area, they have those screens there that have accessible information . All of the screens in the baggage area are captions. I'm not, however, surprised, because the Department of Transportation does require that all PSAs and advertisements on those screens be captioned. That's how it rules would apply to this situation that Andrew is talking about on the trains. >> Again, that's not Access Board's purview. W hat we can do is we can say that the TV monitor, the TV that they buy and install has to be capable of passing through captions. We can't say that they have to -- that a nyone has to generate captions. That's essentially a programmatic service that is offered by somebody. But it's not something that's part of the train. >> No, no, and I think that my point is misunderstood. No, of course, the TVs need to be caption access ible. W e're talking about openings captioning here, though. So any -- for example, old or new model TVs are going to have captioning. is at the airport. So I assume that it would apply the same They are. It's the advertising themselves, I think, that Andrew is talking about. On the -- >> I'm telling you that is not something we can regulate. W e can only regulate the hardware. W e cannot regulate the behavior of the railway companies, whether tell them they have to go out and get captioned stuff or that they have to generate captions. That's not something the Access Board can do. W e can say that if they install TV screens, the TV screens have to be capable of passing through captions. But we can't say thatsomebody has to generate those captions. Do you understand

the distinction? you know what? Never -- I think what we can do is try to recommend to the Department of Transportation, I guess encourage the captioning be -- I'm sorry, the advertisements be captioned. And I understand that we cannot regulate it, but I think we can encourage it. >> OK. >> I think if we're going to start -- if we're going to work on that, then we also need to add in there video description. If we are trying to make things accessible to everyone. So that means we've got to incl ude people who can't read the captions, who need to be able to hear them as well. So we need to add video description in there, if we're going to put in a recommendation for captioning, it should be for captioning >> This is David. I do understand the difference. But I think -- and video description. Does anyone have anything else they want to say on this topic? >> This is Frank again. Are we concluded on the topic and either agree we don't need it to be accessible o r is it still open? >> I think it's -- >> This is David. I mean, I think that what we can do is we recommend X, Y and Z, and leave it at that. I don't think that a Transportation will -- how do I say? Encourages a policy of advertisements being captioned and having audio descriptions. Then maybe they would consider that more acceptable. >> This is Andrew speaking. I agree. >> This is Jim. Can I ask a quick question? Are we sort of -- what I'm sort of hearing is, as far as the print, stick a placard orp oster up in a train car advertisement, that's not something

you guys are going to try to deal with accessibility issues, correct? >> Correct. That is correct, Jim, yes. >> Anybody disagree with that? [No response] OK. I think we can sort of deal with the other types of advertisements in the sense that if something is a -- this is decision, per se, can be made. The Department of getting back to the audible versus visual in the VMS. I think we've sort of gone along the lines if it's a canned message, an aud ible canned message it should be put up on the VMS as well. Is everybody sort of in agreement with that? >> Only as it relates to the VMS -- >> This is Andrew, and I agree that all the canned messages should be visual and variable on the VMS. I do think that some non - canned messages still need to be accessible as well. For example, in regard to emergencies, because deaf people all >> I was moving in that direction, but I was trying to creep there. But anyway. So does anyone not agree that canned audible messages over the PA system or whatever should also be required to be displayed in variable message format? >> Regardless of their content? >> Regardless of their content. >> And that's if the vehicle has VMS, right? >> No, I think we're moving toward, as I understand, we're moving toward if you provide audible, you need to provide visual. If you provide visual, you need to provide audible. So if you provide the VMS it's got to be in audible format. If you're going to pu t a PA system in there, you have to have a VMS system as well. That's the way I think we're moving. Am Iincorrect about that?

>> I fully agree. This is Andrew -- I fully agree. This is Andrew, have rights to know what to do in an emergency situation. and I fully agree on that statement. >> I wanted a clarification on it. Fine. I think it makes sense. Wealso need to consider, don't forget about the induction loop on the same thing. W e've already agreed that should be in there whenever there's an audible description. >> Correct. OK, so if we're in agreement that any canned message, no matter what it is, has to also come up on the whoever as the sponsor of that thing. If it goes in the audible, it goes in the VMS, and vice versa. So those are sort of done. Now we get to the issue of the dynamic announcements, which are not canned and how do we make those accessible in the format? I'm going to step back and let you guys have at it with that one. >> This is Frank again to start off. A reminder what we talked about, the difficulty with the unplanned or uncanned messages is speech -to-text conversion is not an exact science. Wecan see that the trouble we have CART, CART troubles time to time, you have to have somebody correcting it. So that doesn't mean you can't have more canned messages available should an emergency come up. The problem is uncanned, noncanned messages, and they're very difficult to have the text accompanying it. So the question becomes is do you want exactly what is being spoken to be displ ayed visually. For canned messages, VMS, that takes care of your stations that have Fox News or that's done pretty easily, because it's already preprogrammed. The difficulty is during emergency situation are you limiting what can be spoken to only what can be displayed visually, and I think that might be problematic. I'm suggesting that there be some flexibility in emergency situations that the audible messages don't exactly match the visual ones, because you can make some canned visual ones that will work audible message be exactly duplicated on the visual machinein and I emergency is a difficult thing to do.

>> This is Lise. I was not at the last meeting either, and David briefed me, and it's my understanding that David Gail, representing HLAA, said that we could do language like, and I think I mentioned this as quell, something along the -- this as well, something along the lines of when it becomes technically feasible to produce everything from speech to text. I don't have to tell you you can't do somet hing you can't do now, and I get that. Wemight do something like steps, from which you just were talking about. It occurred to me maybe what we could do, some of the kinds of emergencies you can put -- you can kind of guess what kind of things go wrong, and you might be able to it can some of that as a visual. But I see that only as an interim step, because I really do believe the technology's going to change before the next rule changes, and I don't want to leave a possibility where we say, W ell, you most of the time, and they should be provided, but having an don't have to do this, but when it really is technically and not an undue burden to make that technology, that speech to technology real in the car itself. I just would like to come up with some kin d of language that recognizes what you're saying, Frank, that we can't do it You don't want to let what somebody audibly is going to say, because that's never going to happen anyway. Somebody has to get on the PA and say what they want to say. In the interim, we can maybe have a few canned messages, but working toward this goal of speech to text or whatever technology makes sense that makes it more accessible to people who need visual information. >> This is Terry. I complete agree with you, Lise. That's very important. W e need to keep thinking 10 years down the line, and I think by being able to put it in as when technically feasible makes perfect sense. Anyone disagree with us on that? >> We ll, this is Frank again. >> This is Andrew speaking.>> Hold on, Andrew, I'm sorry. Frank started first. Then

Andrew, thank you. >> This is Frank again. Sorry to cut you off, Andrew. The problem I see with that is who decides when it's technically feasible, and how do you govern a feasibility of an right now, speech -to -text in a way that's actually accurate. application? It seems like a difficult thing to do. I don't know, maybe you can make it a recommended practice sort of along the lines we were talking about for the other aspect for advertisements, recomme nded practice that you make it speech to text or as much of the information available as >> This is Lisa at the Access Board. Weagree that's not an enforceable standard and to say sometime in the future when it becomes technically feasible is not really workable. I would focus on identifying those cases where you feel the content needs to be made available in multiple formats, and there is -- are we going to have an equivalent facilitation? >> I put Andrew off. Can we let Andrew get in now, please? >> S ure. >> Yes, this is Andrew speaking. And I've been thinking about this, and everyone has very valid points, and I know that it's very difficult to take these live speech messages and translate them to text right away on the train. However, I believe it can still be done. One way is if there is the driver for that car, if they could even type the message or if a person at headquarters or in a station could type the message too. But I think that what may be more important would be to have several canned me ssages, maybe 20 or 25 even canned messages, so that way that reduces the possibility of a situation arising where an announcement needs to be made practical. and there's not a canned message for it. For me, I would be afraid if we go ahead with only canne d messages then there will be maybe five canned messages andplease get off the train, or this is an emergency, please be

patient while other passengers hear there's a mechanical problem, or there's a 15 - minute delay, or there's a fire even, or something from the fire department. So the information really is important, and if I'm having to step back and wait, I don't know what's going on, there's no wa y for me to contact a co -worker and let them know there's a mechanical problem, I'll be 15 minutes late, rather than just sitting on the train, and them just saying emergency, I don't know how late I'll be, I don't know what the issue is. >> This is Lise, if I can jump in here too. See, advertisements I don't care about. Emergency situations I really do care a bout. I've been in them. I've been in situations where I don't know what's going on, but worse, nobody else knows what's going on either, because sometimes those messages are so garbled when they're audible even the hearing people can't hear them. So having something visual is really helpful to everyone. And I hear what you say, but isn't -- I got to believe there's some way we can write this so you don't put anybody -- obviously, we can't do what we can't do, again. I'm not asking people to do things, and Andrew's suggestion might work that there's not much information. So like this is an emergency, we have 20 different options to pick from or whatever, whatever that number is. I got to believe there's a way to write it in until such time that the tech nology is there, because I believe me, I have been working on this, because this is huge for people with hearing loss, speech to text is a big one, and I listen, and I'm watching, I think it's closer than you think it is, Frank. I really do. I don't want to send these rules out without even having a possibility that it might -- we could upgrade to that. >> This is Frank again. I think that's a good point. I guess the wa y I would look at it is if you write the rule which provides for what's currently possib le, and at the same time provides incentive for you to adopt new technology when it becomes available, it kind of accomplishes both goals. If you require a certain amount of canned messages, working with canned messages is not the easiest way to do it.Ide ally, as an operator you'd like to be able to do the

speech to text, never have to worry about picking the canned message. It would always be better, I would think, if you had to do it to be able to do the speech -to -text accurately than to rely on picking from one of 20 canned messages. So if you make the requirement and somehow quantify what needs to be in the -- quantify what needs to be in the canned messages, the fact that you're requiring the canned know we're really -- everything I'm hearing on speech -to -text, message is an incentive to hopefully not use them when the properly. It gives you the option. The option would be you will provide it speech to text or you shall provide so many canned messages. That way you have the option of -- >> This is Davi d. I just wanted to say, so this is David here, yeah, I think frank's right. I think that the suggesting what you said was right. However, we need to add that the -- how do I say it? Let's see. I'm trying to think how to put it. W e need to say that the dis patch center shall be involved in sending, you know, like the exact messages, the text message, whatever the announcement is that is made by the train operator. >> This is Jim. That would be an operational issue we wouldn't have any control over. Again, we wouldn't have any control over where the message comes from or who puts it out. Wejust would say it has to meet this requirement when it comes through. Let me sort of see if I can sort of -- are you guys -- the way I'm sort of hearing is you guys are so rt of leaning towards, as far as the dynamic or real -time messages, you're sort of leaning toward making a recommendation for a best practice of if you can do it. If you can't, make a recommendation to try to make a number of canned messages as possible to pick up at least some emergency situations that you can at least get some people information? Is that sort of where you're going? technology becomes available and speech to text is done >> I think with the caveat on that, again, that when it does availab le that it will lean toward text to speech, will -->> We ll, again, Terry, where we're talking this is going to be

just a recommendation to do it when you can. W hether it's there or whether you can or whether it becomes available somewhere down the road. I don't know if we can put in a caveat about when it becomes available. If you can do it, fine. If you can't, try to do something else. This is what we recommend for the something else. >> Yeah, this will be the something else, exactly. >> This is Lise. >> If you can do it, fine. Needs to be in there, too. At the beginning or the end, which at the beginning is fine. >> This is Lise. I want to clarify what Frank was saying. W ere you basically saying if you create -- if you make a requirement that there m ust be some visual information in an emergency, and then you're saying that by making it, by saying you must have a number of options to choose from for any given emergency, basically you're saying that's more of a difficult task than if somebody had a technology that was speech -to -text, so naturally the providers are going to want to go to speech -to -text if they have that option. So we don't -- I'm trying to work this through. If we have that requirement, how would we write it so they got out of it by g oing to speech to text? That's where I'm kind of struggling with in my mind, so that you would no longer be required to have this 20 different things to pick from, which again makes it harder for staff in an emergency than having speech to text, but if we don't require it, because we can't because the technology isn't there yet, how do we make that switch, how do you make it OK for the providers to go forward? >> This is Frank again. Yeah, that's basically what I was -- >> I have a comment as well. >> I think Jim was outlining it properly. The idea is you ask for the emergency information to be provided with speech to text.If it's not possible, you give them the option of providing 10, 15

canned messages that will address typical emergency situations. Th at's what I was thinking. It's an option. Either you do the speech to text or provide 10 or 15 canned messages which will cover typical emergency conditions. >> This is Andrew. I'd like to add. I want to say that speech -to -text technology, it's really not there yet. I have a strong caution about requiring speech to text, because oftentimes when you see the speech -to -text technology, there are mistakes. It's inaccurate, and is that a risk that we're willing to take? So disseminating, supplying accurate info rmation is important for emergencies. I have a friend who is a senior engineer at Yahoo Google, works on different things there, and he -- I asked him how soon do you expect the speech -to -text technology to become a good, great quality and usable on a dail y basis? And he told me more than 20 years. So my concern would be that people can get incorrect information in times of emergency, and it wouldn't only be deaf and hard of hearing people who get that information. It would be hearing people there who are watching the VMS system as well. So canned messages or actual typed messages tend to be safer in that regard. >> Terry, this is Marcia. >> Go ahead. >> This is -- >> I would -- >> I would like to suggest to the committee that if you're going to go down the road of canned messages or typing messages that the rail providers on the committee try to bring in their emergency operations folks to consult on this so that we have a better understanding of the practicality of that and how it might work.>> I thi nk that's an excellent point. I'm sitting here listening to

the idea, if I'm in an emergency or first responder type situation, who really has the time to go through 20 or 30 or 40, a listing of 40 canned messages to figure out -- I'm thinking on the subway, Metro here in DC, where you have a delay, we're single tracking between -- you could have 15 messages on just which two stations you're single tracking between. That kind of thing that there could be -- your emergency could be practically over before -- you're relying on someone finding the right message to send. That's something -- I'm not saying we shouldn't do it for that reason, but I think again it is also something that we need to be cautious about, because sometimes we have to look at risks for everyone's safety sake, and we of course need to minimize them, and I think sometimes I'm just concerned going for too many canned messages could actually defeat our whole purpose. >> This is David here. David here. I'm thinking about a situation where the subway operator doesn't have a keyboard. Then there's the dispatch center where they take over and type the messages that are feeded to the car. The train operator has limited number of messages, five to 10 say, whatever. The messages are sent remotely. For example, a situation where there's an earthquake here in DC, and that's -- I'm not sure if that is a planned part of the caption center or if they're taking over -- you need to wait for this message to move along the line, and the information isn't dis seminated. >> David, maybe you could intrigue one of Amtrak's emergency operations persons to comment on some of those frankly know at the moment whether the emergency operations center, for example using Metro here in suggestions and the feasibility of d oing those things. I don't Wa shington as an example, is able to communicate directly over the PA from downtown. I think what happens is they pass a message to the drive, then the driver voices that message. But I could be wrong. I don't know. I don't have enough information. And maybe if Frank could talk to his emergency operations folks, and maybe you could put this matter aside until we can get some of the emergency -- peoplewho specialize in emergency operations on the phone.

>> This is David. Yeah, th is is David here. We don't have the capability to do that on the train. However, we're in the process of installing, in the process of possibly replacing our messaging VMS on the train. That will be required, if possible, remote, possible remote involvemen t. However, we have one of our stations announcements. If the station people are not there to send the message, you have the capability to do it remotely. >> Thank you, David. >> It's new to us. It's new to everyone. Just here to inform everyone. >> Thank you, David. This is Terry. Could I just -- would anyone have a problem with this suggestion? Could we ask Marcia, through Marcia, I'm not totally putting it on your emergency operations, a representation from emergency operations of perhaps four dif ferent -- I'm thinking, oh, like shoulders, to ask the Access Board to invite or request WMATA or BART or MBTA, something that is doing subway? >> Wecan send an e - mail to all of the members of the Advisory Committee who are representing the industry, and we can ask them to please volunteer to come forward to discuss these issues. >> But we specifically want people, someone from at least familiar with their emergency operations center. >> Right. They would be representing the members of the Advisory Comm ittee who are industry folks. So they can talk more intelligently than I can about what technology is already available, potentially available, and what the procedures are, who would do what in an emergency. >> Yeah, exactly. That's exactly what we need to do. How about if we put together some kind of an e - mail with thosetypes of questions in it, and is that fine if we send it out even

to the committee? My point was to try to get someone from each of the variou s types of rail vehicles. Wed on't want just Amtrak or just the subway, or just commuter in Frank's case, that kind of thing. If we could at least get -- I think the more broad examples we could get, the better, so that if we could >> Definitely. >> And long distance would absolutely be the best. Wh y don't we try and get that out, something like that out perhaps this week, perhaps for the November meeting in, for the November get a subway, a commuter rail -- call? Does that work with folks? >> That' s doable. >> OK, great. Let's get that, put that on our list and -- >> This is Andrew. I would like to add that we should maybe include one or two outside people who are skilled in the area of technology itself, like telecommunications technology, becaus e I think that the solution here may not be a traditional one, it may be something that's a little knew, something out of the box, something unusual, maybe emergency preparedness people have not considered the options that could be suggested. So for example, Gallaudet University has a Technology Access Program there, and they have some very knowledgeable and skilled engineers who could possibly give us more innovative ideas or some ideas that we could add to our list of abilities, from captioning to E SPN, so adding captioning to VMS from a dispatch or something like that may be something that they could help us with. >> Andrew, why don't you reach out to those folks and see if they would be interested in attending a subcommittee meeting, >> Yes, yes, I would be happy to do that. And when are we planning to meet next? W hen would this discussion takeplace?

>> The first Thursday in November, which I think is something since they are open to everybody? like the 5th. >> The 6th. >> The 6th. >> 6th is it? >> Terry, this is Frank. Let me ask the question to make sure I'm getting the information you're requiring correctly. You would like to know how emergency information is provided to passengers on the train? Is that essentially it? >> More than that. >> Yeah, going beyond that. >> We ll, what else is it? I'm asking. Wh at else? That's a big part of it, right? How the emergency information gets to passengers. Usually it usually comes from the crew, and the information is usually given to the crew, then provided to the passengers. That's typically how it's done. But what other information are you looking for? >> We ll, for instance, someone's giving it to the crew. Is that -- would that -- in situations -- in some situations, for instance, in the crew be typing it into a VMS? Wo uld text to speech be coming from that operations center or would it still have to go -- be done by the crew? >> That's a good question. I can tell you some of what I know, if you're interested. Typically, unless you have a VMS system, it's either done by radio or cell phone. Then the person, the newer -- in newer vehicles could that person who's giving it to crew is going to relay that information to the people on the train. It's a radio -->> Right, I'm thinking for instance with a lot of the subway

systems have VMS today. >> Right. W e've tried to do this at the Long Island, anyhow. The difficult thing to do is if you're trying -- yo u can potentially create a message and send it to a train. The difficulty is making sure it goes to the one train you want it to go to and making sure there is coverage in that area to receive the data. It doesn't go over the same communication network as a radio. Radios are necessary for train operation. So we make sure wherever the train is it is ab le to have contact by radio should emergency information be there. The phone is a backup. The primary method is by radio, at least at the Long Island. It's probably typical of some agencies. So that information, to do it -- there's one question, can you do it? The second question is can you do it consistently and reliably. That's where you wind up having the communication. It's a valid question. Other people can ask the question, but generally speaking emergency information is provided to the crews. Typical ly it's by radio. There are certain equipment where it is possible to have some wayside -to - car transfer, but it's difficult because of being able to identify the single car and problems when you're trying to use alternate modes of making sure that that car is in an area where it's receiving. Wh ereas when you're talking on the radio, you get a response back from the person that they got the message. Sending a text message to the train, it's difficult to say did the train get the text message? Is the train di splaying the text message? That's a little more difficult to do when you're actually talking to somebody on the radio. >> That's interesting. Thank you. >> This is Lise. Here's the other question I would have, if we're going in the canned route. Could the emergency folks look at what they typically see? Is it realistic to have 10 messages? Is that realistic? Wo uld it have to be 20? Wh ich which is more onerous, as Terry said. I can see hooking up with a computer,you can type in a -- this has to do with a fire, here are the

options for fire. This has to do with the track problem, here are the options for track problems. How would we do that? W ho would figure out, OK what's -- even now, I get emergency messages on my phone, when it first started happening, text messages I would get these messages that there were three messages long. It was hard to figure out how to shorten a message, get the real information out to somebody. It is a skill in and of itself. I want to explore a little bit the whole canned mes sage aspect. Is it realistic? Is it something we can expect people to do? The question becomes how quantifiable is it? >> I think that's a good point. This is Frank again. Wi th what Terry said, too many messages really make it difficult for it to be effective in an emergency situation. I would think that a few messages is better than no messages, and if you limit the information -- if

it was -- if it's a train delay, you can have a couple different delays, do you really need to know it's because of a track condition or equipment condition? I don't think it really matters. You really want to know how long is it before I get out of here? The pertinent information may be how long you're stuck for and if you have to evacuate. If an evacuation is necessary, crew members are going to come through the train to provide additional information. >> This is Lise again. You're absolutely right. W hat is important to the crew is different than what's important to the passenger. W hat Andrew was saying before, there's a train delay, stay put. There's a fire, wait for crew to exit. Something >> Exactly. >> Wo uld be really helpful. >> That's exactly along the lines what I was thinking of, a few bits of information, stay put or it's time to evacuate. Those are important b its of information. Wh ether because of a track condition or car condition doesn't really matter. It's important to know you're stopping, don't get off the train.A few good messages, I think, would go a long way, if you

like that. don't require too much. I t will be easier for the person to pick them out. >> That sounds right to me too. >> Yeah, I think so. OK. So that's our next thing to do. Very good. We 've done the advertising. I think a couple of things that were important that came out of the two -day meeting were the idea, and this is where we need to -- I just want to look at -- another thing we need to look at things carefully, is the idea that we cannot recommend announcements. W e cannot require announcements. W e can only require that the announceme nts be made accessible that are made. And so at the same time, we do not -- we do not want to put anyone at any kind of risk by having people -- having companies not bother to make an announcement because we're that we need to walk on, but I think we need to walk it. Because we do not have the ability to say, No, you have to make an announcement under this situation or that. I think that's something that, assuming we're all pretty much in agreement with, unless anybody wants to take a different issue on that. >> That's one of the questions that I was asking earlier. This is Frank again. If you're limited in the canned messages as to what you can provide over the VMS system, are you required to limit the information that comes over the PA? You're right, overburdening them. I think that's a very, very fine, hazy line you want to provide as much information as you can to as many people as you can. Like you said, if there's too many messages it's hard to be able to pick from them in an emergency. At the same time, if you make sure there's some flexibility in the amount of information that's provided, that it doesn't exactly have to match, at least you can say there's an emergency condition, we'll be delayed 10 minutes, stay on the train. If the person on the PA wants to give more information that says a tree's down, 20 feet in front of us or something likethat, that's not necessarily having to go over the VMS, but is

allowed to be provided by the PA. That's the flexibility I was talking about. You want to get as much information out to everybody that you can, but you don't want to limit the >> Frank, Frank, I'm sorry, this is David. I'm going to have to kind of disagree with you on that, because really as a passenger of a train an announcement is made, we deci de a tree is down, we're going to delay it. You have access to that. That's the same important message, because I need to make a decision whether I should get off the train at that specific moment, suppose it was announced over the PA and I need to know OK , I have to decide to get off or not. Should I stay? Should I get off? I need to know if I need to make other plans for travel. information. We 're walking kind of a thin line there with the emergency messages and deciding what's important, what's not. You know, like it's just one of those things. Wegot to be cautious how we define that I think is what it comes down to. >> This is Andrew speaking. I think that the goal here is equality. I don't think that what information is available on the VMS should be limited as far -- for example, for VMS only to explain a small amount of information should not prevent the announcer from explaining more to the people who can know more information. And what David was saying, the important information is -- you know, what important information to us might not be important information to uneducated people in a from what information they share, because that can be important. Wecan find another way to get information through VMS making that equal, as well as what we get through the PSA to be available as well. An important way to have dispatch center to be able to type a message and be able to send that to the VMS system. To be truthful, my cell phone can text 140 characters message. That can be sent out in a tweet to the wo rld. I mean, a country thousands of miles away can get that message, so I don't see why a dispatch center is incapable of sending a message to the VMS system on my train. That couldexplain a tree is down and there's going to be a delay of 30

situation. So what we really need to do is not to limit the PSA minutes. >> Have you ever had a condition where you -- >> I think that that -- >> I'm sorry. The question is you don't always have coverage in every area. Anybody who has coverage gets the information, but not everybody with a cell phone is going to get that information. >> Frank, I think what Andrew was saying, though, is can we have a system where you know your VMS would be receiving that text message and sending it out over the VMS system, and I thin k, Andrew, we get into the question of whether or not that's capable or not. I think maybe we could investigate that. Wh en I have Verizon on the Metro, I can get a signal. If I have sprint, I maybe can't. But if you have a system already set up with the train system, you can make sure whatever carrier you have gets that signal there. But the question to me, though, also is are there going to be certain places where you can't? Wh at if the train is going into a place where you can't -- nobody gets a signal? T hat's one question that we'd have to look at. But then we'd also have to look at whether VMS is capable again of this system that Andrew is suggesting, where it could translate a text message into a VMS message. And I don't know. >> This is Andrew. I thin k this is all good things we need to do But for example, if you're -- I know what you're saying, Frank. some more research on. Now, I am wondering are there any times that are on the train when the operator or the conductor on the train cannot connect with dispatch center? I assume there can always be a connection through some kind of phone system. Correct? >> Typically, they use train radios. Train radios are more typically more reliable than the cell phone towers. There'srepeaters put in areas. Is it possible? From my point of view,

Frank speaking, depends on the authority. But generally speaking in our area, on the island, you get very good sometimes spotty, coverage with the cell phones. The coverage you get with the cell phones is typically the type of coverage you would get with the VMS messages system if they're using the same type of network. >> This is Andrew speaking again. I would like to add that right now NOAA has weather radio that can receive text message information. So if the NOAA can re ceive a text message through radio, then I'm sure that we could also find a system that could send a text message to a VMS system through the radio. In addition to the cell phone towers network. >> Yeah, let me answer that. This is Frank again. You can do that. I think I mentioned it before of, that it's possible. The difficulty is sometimes you don't have coverage. It's not that coverage with the radios, and you get generally good, but it's an impossible thing to send a text message over the data radio. W ith the new VMS systems you can. The problem is A, you don't always have coverage, and B, it's difficult to target a particular train. Wegot trains running right next to each other. One training is on the track with the problem, the other is on the track that doesn't have the problem. You only want to specifically identify one train. You want to identify every car on that train. So that's what the difficulty is. It's not -- the technology exists to send the message. It's the reliability to may be. >> This is Andrew speaking again. I'm not an expert in radio systems and sending data. However, I'm pretty good at sending messages through cell phones network to a specific car or target, and I think that this would be a good discussion for us that we could have . Of course, this is not going to be a perfect resolution that we're going to come up with, but maybe we can try to make the best possible solution we can come up with.I understand that sometimes there might be no messages

that come up on the VMS system a nd maybe that would be a good time that we could have a canned message pop up. However, 90 to 95% of the time when the train can receive messages through the wireless network, let it do it. Let us send it to the exact car that you want everywhere that that car deaf and hard of hearing people have the same information as the hearing people on the train so that we can understand what the people are saying on the PA system if it's a train that's going to be delayed 30 minutes due to a tree that is going to be down. >> Again, I think we need to -- Frank has given us a lot of information as far as Long Island is concerned -- >> I'm reading CART. I would like to make a correction. I said system. They will be able to benefit from the VMS system as well. >> That a good point. At the Long Island, anyhow, that's the reason we have a VMS system in the first place is for consistency and everybody being able to understand the messages. Like you said, the -- person getting on the PA, giving a garbled message is not good for anybody. But it's sometimes unavoidable. Having a visual indication is certainly a good thing to do, and we have tried without regulation to take it as far as we could, and we ran into some limitations. >> This is Andrew. I completely understan d that. I definitely understand that there are some. I believe that the technology that we have today is capable of making this possible. It may not be perfect, but it can be very good, and honestly myself, I'm very impressed that I can tweet a message just in one second people in China can read the message that I tweet. So that people on the train who cannot understand the PA being able to send a message to a train car VMS system should be doable. >> As we I think getting back to where we were a while back on this, I want to thank Frank for his information on this. At thispoint I think we still would benefit, rather than all of us sitting

here just thinking from the little pieces we know, I think we would all benefit much more from talking with some people from the operations centers of various systems. And if we can do that, and we certainly can put together a plethora of questions and possible solutions to suggest to them, suggestions for them from the conversation that we've had over the -- this afternoon. Is there anything else that we really -- is there anything that hasn't been touched on in this discussion at this point that anyone feels is really important right now? >> This is Frank. I'd like to make a quick suggestion. The questions would be very helpful to have in advance, so you make sure you get the right people who can answer them. As far as the emergency responders, you should focus, if you can focus more on the information and how it's currently given to the crews. I think it would be hard for them to answer a question on what could be done with the wireless network and other types of media, but I think if you want to get the emergency responders or however the information is get them fo r the November meeting, I would suggest that we provided, if you can provide some really good questions I think even if the particular person can't make it, we'll get an answer. It won't just be me. It will be hopefully everybody will -- >> That's it. I think we can come up with some -- like what's been occurring to me through the last exchange between you instance, if it's going to each car, if the concern is going to each -- getting the information to each car, why can't each car have its own individual IP address, with the IPV-6 program, it's not any kind of issue. I know with IPV-6 it's going to be anything under the -- anything imaginable can have its own unique IP address. To me, I don't know that much about it, but that for instance to me would seem a logical place that for instance your emergency operations would have the IP address of all of the cars on this train and all of the cars on that train. And perhaps that could be something that wouldn't be difficult, that some company may be using now. W h oknows ?

>> This is Andrew. I think that would be possible. >> I would think it probably would as well, Andrew. But neither one of yours work in emergency operations. [Laughter] I'd like to hear it from someone who knows, whose bread and butter is in th at field. and Andrew, for instance, my thought has been if it's, for >> This is Andrew. Yes, I will try to find somebody who will help us with that. >> OK. I'm just trying to see what time is it, how we're holding up. 2:33. OK. Wa sn't sure where we were at this point. The issues document. W e still need to finish getting things straightened out in the issues document. Emergency notification that are in the issues document that we really haven't looked at at all. I wanted people to think about it, see what thoughts we at least have on them, and hopefully we can -- >> This is David. OK -- >> I think just a minute, David. >> Wh o's talking? >> I'm sorry, David, it's Terry. I'm sorry, David, it's Terry. >> Wh ich document are you referring to? >> Our issues document that listed the issues that we as a committee, as a subcommittee were going to deal with. It's the document that we all had, and I believe it's on the website from last February, I think. This is where it's kind of the responsibilities that we've been charged with. One of the areas in particular that -- one of the -->> OK, yeah, I haven't seen that for a while, I guess.

>> No, no, that's it -- >> I have to look for that. notifications. Leading to the other types of -- other methods of >> I think we've all kind of let the dust accumulate on it a bit. One of the things -- some of the issues that are in there on emergency notifications were, as I just copied them into the agenda today, was use of bed shakers and visible door hard of hearing? How we should -- notifications for persons with visual impairments. Visual emergency alerts. >> OK, OK, so -- this is just -- I think that what you're talking about is, if I'm on track here, is the intercity train where we have -- where we have like our own rooms? >> That's a part of it. That's absolutely a part of it. These particular ones -- >> Yes, yes. OK -- >> If you find that, primarily involved in that. W e seem to have done -- we have done months and months of going on various types of signage, but there are other communications issues that we need to be looking at that we haven't done much of anything with. And these are some -- these are some of those issues, like notifications for someone who's asleep in a sleeping car, that type of thing. >> Right, right, yeah. So I wanted to add something. So Blair and I have talked about this on and off in the past, in the most recent months actually. But we have not really is, I guess, finished our discussion about it, because I was supposed to collect some information for him, where I, you know -- because knocks, what about for people -- for people who are deaf and I do a lot of traveling. So I wanted to do a follow up with him, and see kind of what information we could both gather.>> Could you -- could you -- could that take place -- this is

Terry again. Could that take place over the next month or two December meeting? >> Yes, yes, yeah, yeah, we can. That's what I mean. That's what I'm saying. Sorry I was not clear on that. Yeah, I wanted to do a follow- up with him, then we'll see what the information that we've collected and put that together, so then we can share it with everybody else on the committee for the next meeting. >> All right, great. That takes us down to examining the potential overlaps between the FTA and FRA requirements. >> I honestly don't know a whole lot about this. I know that this came up at our two -day meeting, on the 11th, there were a couple different things that came up about what is already required with the FRA and the FRA requirement, regulations. A couple other things about there was something else that had to do with, somebody refresh my memory on it, had to do with inspections that FRA does. Does that ring a bell to anyone? Truthfully, that's all I wrote in my notes, FRA inspections. [Laughter] OK. >> No. I don't know. I don't know. and could you bring back your views on it to our November or >> I don't either. It was something in there saying, well, the FRA inspections that should actually cover that part of it. It something, but it was -- >> This is David here. I honestly, with the FRA I've kind of got my blinders on that with. At that time I just don't remember looking at the transcript even, you know. I think really what we're talking about, t he inspection of FRA, making sure that the train is accessible. In their requirements, maybe that's what we're looking for. I have to find the exact transcript from the previous meeting to see, but that's my understanding, that the explanation needs to be clarified for all of us, I guess. I'mnot sure.

>> OK. Does anyone have anything they want to say on that subject? [No response] OK. One of the other things we had talked about, and this also may be something, Marcia, might be good for us to talk with the emergency operations people about, is the idea which apparently I notice a couple people said yes, it is feasible when we were at the September 11 meeting, is the idea of connecting emergency information to the emergency lighting system on the trains. I'm sorry, is somebody whispering something? I didn't get it. >> It's the interpreter. had something to do with -- I don't want to say policing >> I thought it was somebody looking, asking for the floor. I'm sorry. There's a requirement for emergency backup batteries for lighting systems on the train currently. >> Exactly. W e were talking about to have the -- >> The VMS system? >> The VMS or LCD that would be giving the visual announcements when it could -- that that could back up to the same system that the emergency lighting is on, so that the VMS would not go out when there was a loss of power. >> Terry, this is Jim. Basically, you're not really connecting the information to the lighting system, you're connecting them to the emergency backup power? >> Yes, exactly. >> Oftentimes there are regulations about -- oftentimes there are regulations about what various things can be on that power supply. So I think maybe this just relates to checkingwith FRA to see if there are any limitations on what can be on

that power supply. >> OK. All right. I was quite certain it was Blair brought it up, or when it came up at the meeting Blair said yes, it could be done. >> In a building you can't connect certain things to the emergency power supply, and you have to connect other things. So I think maybe the question was whether there are similar limitations in FRA rules about emergency power supplies. >> This is Frank again. Typically a rail car has a battery, and in addition to that battery, which is typically operating, it usually operates low voltage and communication type of appliances and doors. There's also a specifically dedicated emergency battery that just became regulation. I think that's what you're talking about. I think that was Marcia speaking. >> Corre ct. >> That particular one has specific requirements, the car can roll over it still has to work and has to have a certain capacity. I guess the point I'm making, you can require that the PA system work off the battery so that in case there's a power outage you do have the communication. It's another thing to require that the PA system work off this dedicated battery, which is for emergency lighting owning. That's the question you were asking, and I think that takes a little bit more looking into to se e if that's possible or not, because it's going to affect the sizing of the battery. I think it's a good question. Wecan decide is it important that it be powered by a battery, or is it important that it be powered by the particular battery for the emerge ncy lighting system, is the question. >> This is Lise. In my mind you just need a backup battery, but maybe what the other piece would be that it would last as long as the emergency lighting, whatever the requirement for theemergency lighting, it would b e the same requirement for

backup for the VMS system. >> I think it's that, but also as Frank said the emergency backup has other requirements to be able to withstand certain turning over and all of that type of thing. As opposed to which one -- which one would be the more reasonable one to connect the VMS to. I think it's a good question. If anybody can come up with someone who would be -- somewhere we could get a reliable answer on that, I think it's something we absolutely need to look at. I think there is no time when that VMS is any more important than it is in an emergency. Yes, it's important to be able to know when -- what the next station is, but if you have to you can ask the person next to you. You can dig out your map and look at it and see on your iPhone and see when it is, whatever. But in an emergency, when that is the one time when you really need information more than any other time. So I think we need to be very -- we really should be getting a professional answer, a very well educated answer on that subject, because we may need to make a decision on that, I think. >> Terry, this is -- >> This is David here. David here. I think that if we contact Linda or Melissa about FRA, they could provide that information about the new registration re lated to the backup battery: How long, if the PA system will be part of that. They should be able to provide the information. And then possibly post a question. >> Thank you, David. >> To FRA, to add the VMS. >> This is Melissa. I can definitely take th at assignment and provide information by the next meeting. >> Oh, all right. Thank you, Melissa. Great. All right. Do wehave -- our next meeting is November 6. I think we've covered

everything on today's agenda. Does anyone have anything else they want to bring up at this time? >> This is Frank again. I had a quick comment on the emergency lighting and emergency communication systems. They are in -- Melissa, I was looking in 238, and 238 - 115 has emergency lighting system, 238 - 121 has emergency communications. In there it's talking about the PA system. So attaching the VMS system to the PA system might be what we're looking to do. Because there's requirements like we talked about for rollover and emergency communication and backup, separate backup battery . There is something in there. Can you take a look at that. one has anything else, I'm going to suggest that we adjourn

>> Thanks, Frank. All right, well, if that takes care of it, if no and get -- everybody do their -- those of us who have assignments to do them, and we'll meet again on November 6. That work for everyone? >> Yes. Thank you, Terry. >> Yes. >> All right. Thank you all. Have a great what's coming up between now and then. Columbus Day and Halloween. >> OK. Operator, this concludes our cal l. >> Thank you. This now concludes today's conference. All participants may disconnect at this time. [Call ended at 2:46 p.m. Eastern Time]