Note: The output shown below is from the Communication 

Access Realtime Translation (CART) system used in the 

Communications Subcommittee Meeting #9 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. 

Rail Vehicles 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 just go ahead and start, get basic

administrative matters out of the way. 

Good afternoon. This is Paul Beatty. Welcome 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 November
call. 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 haven'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 Pecht.

>> 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.

We had some pretty good presentations, and we put up a

lot of paper in our room downstairs, and talked about how

signage size versus placement could best be looked at, and we

sort of went along that.

We sort 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

announcements they have to do and what they have to -- how

they have to be structured, what they have to sound like or

look like. What the standards will do, they'll come in behind

that, and say if you do make an announcement, it has to meet
certain accessibility 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 outside 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. Who'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 Phillips, 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 things 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 and
see 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 Pecht just stepped out quickly. I'm

not quite sure where he went. Was there anything else that

anyone wanted to mention between -- regarding the meeting,

the last 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 necessary

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. What 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: We make that recommendation.

>> There are certainly criteria for signs and other things on our

site. One of the things that we do avoid is 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. We're talking

about advertisements. We'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.

We were 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 just want to talk about advertising in general to

start with. Whether 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 VMS
system, as opposed to a sign for, I don't know, Maker's Mark

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 unless 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 kind
of advertising, you know, might be netted up. Where 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.

apologize, 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.

>> This 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 looking 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 only
accepting 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 that. 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. We'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 trains. 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 have
captions on everything, not just programming shows, but also

advertisements. The cost to caption every TV advertisement 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 commercial 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 subscription 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 just --

>> We have --

>> Rhett me jump in. This is David Andrew, I'm going to jump
advertisements. 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.

>> We already 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. What 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 anyone 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 accessible. We'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. We

can only regulate the hardware. We 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. We

can say that if they install TV screens, the TV screens have to

be capable of passing through captions. But we can't say that
somebody 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 include 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 or 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 or
poster 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

audible 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 put a PA system in there, you have to have a VMS

system as well. That's the way I think we're moving. Am I
incorrect 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.

We also need to consider, don't forget about the induction

loop on the same thing. We'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. We can 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 displayed 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 machine
in 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 something you can't do now, and

I get that. We might 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, Well, 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 kind 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. We 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?

>> Well, 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, recommended practice that you make it

speech to text or as much of the information available as

>> This is Lisa at the Access Board. We agree 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?

>> Sure.

>> 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 messages, 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 canned

messages then there will be maybe five canned messages and
please 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

way 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 about.

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 technology 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

way I would look at it is if you write the rule which provides for

what's currently possible, 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.
Ideally, 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 David. 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. We need to

say that the dispatch 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. We just 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 sort 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

available that it will lean toward text to speech, will --
>> Well, again, Terry, where we're talking this is going to be

just a recommendation to do it when you can. Whether 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. Were

you basically saying if you create -- if you make a requirement

that there must 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

going 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. That'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

information 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 daily 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 think 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 disseminated.

>> 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 doing those things. I don't

Washington 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 -- people
who specialize in emergency operations on the phone.

>> This is David. Yeah, this 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 involvement. 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 different -- 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?

>> We can 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 Committee 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 those
types 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 various types of rail vehicles. We don'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. Why 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,

because 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 ESPN, 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? When would this discussion take
place?

>> 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.

>> Well, what else is it? I'm asking. What 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?

>> Well, 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? Would 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. We've tried to do this at the Long Island, anyhow.

The difficult thing to do is if you're trying -- you 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 able 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. Typically 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.

Whereas 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 displaying 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? Would it have to be 20? Which 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? Who 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 message 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. With 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. What is

important to the crew is different than what's important to the

passenger. What Andrew was saying before, there's a train

delay, stay put. There's a fire, wait for crew to exit. Something

>> Exactly.

>> Would 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 bits of information. Whether 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. It 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. We cannot

require announcements. We can only require that the

announcements 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 like
that, 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 decide 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. We got 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.

We can 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

world. 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 could
explain 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 think, Andrew, we get into the question of whether or not

that's capable or not. I think maybe we could investigate that.

When 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?

What if the train is going into a place where you can't --

nobody gets a signal? That'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 think 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's
repeaters 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 receive 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. With 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.

We got 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 and 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 understand 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 this
point 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 for 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. Who
knows ?

>> 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 that 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. Wasn't sure where we were at this point.

The issues document. We 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.

>> Who's talking?

>> I'm sorry, David, it's Terry. I'm sorry, David, it's Terry.

>> Which 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. We 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, the 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'm
not 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. We 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 checking
with 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.

>> Correct.

>> 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 see if that's possible or not, because it's going to affect

the sizing of the battery.

I think it's a good question. We can 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 emergency 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 the
emergency lighting, it would be 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 related 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 that assignment and

provide information by the next meeting.

>> Oh, all right. Thank you, Melissa. Great. All right. Do we
have -- 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 call.

>> Thank you. This now concludes today's conference. All

participants may disconnect at this time.

[Call ended at 2:46 p.m. Eastern Time]