Note: The output shown below is from the

Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) system used in the subcommittee meeting and is unedited. T he 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.

U.S. Access Board Friday, April 11, 2014 Rail Vehicles Access Advisory Committee On

- board Circulation and Seating Subcommittee meeting

>> PAUL BEATTY: Conference call operator? >> Welcome. T hank you for standing by, all lines are live and interactive. U tilize the mute function of your phone if you don't have a mute function you can press star 6 to mute and unmute. You may begin.
>> PAUL BEATTY: For the benefit of those on the line we are about ready to start the conference call

-- I mean the subcommittee meeting it's the On

- Board Circulation & Seating Subcommittee for the benefit ofthose using only the CART system to pay attention, t he

CART system chat box is not available for subcommittee participants only using CART to participate and desire to raise a question or make a statement use E

- mail address: RVAAC @ access

- board.gov. A s anybody may participate in the subcommittee, we will not be having a public comment time. A ll lines are unmuted. So, if you need to raise a question for those on the line, it might be good if you can't break in to use the E

- mail address that we will be monitoring to alert the chair that you desire to make a statement or ask a question again the E mail address RVAAC @ access

- board.gov. N ow I will turn the call over to I guess the chair of the subcommittee Blair take it away. >> Blair Slaughter: G ood morning, everyone. I was all geared up to apologize for being late I had in my head we started at 8:30 I was here early. (LAUGHTER) >> Blair Slaughter: F or a change. F irst off, my original plan coming into this was to have floor plans generated that I could have sent to everyone or sent to the Access Boa rd early enough to be distributed. B ut unforeseen events on the railroad changed my plans. So, before our next meeting I will have that informationtogether so we will have something to chew on for the

vertical circulation. O ur goal from the last meetin g was to leave that point and generate something tangible we could get our arms around and talk about. U nless someone has something to discuss about that idea, or that aspect of interior circulation

-- >> I am not sure if you can hear me Linda Martin on t he phone I can't hear Blair at all >> Blair: U h

- oh. >> Get closer or further away. >> Linda? >> LINDA MARTIN: I can't hear you at all Blair. A re other people on the phone having that problem? >> I am hearing the same thing you are Linda it's coming in an d out >> Same thing.
>> What about hear in the room breaking up >> Blair, you don't appear to be coming through the assistive listening switch mics and see what happens. >> What about now? C an everyone hear me? >> Better. >> Blair Slaughter: T ime the cha nge the batteries I guess. A s I was saying in the last subcommittee meeting, we left the Vertical Access at Blair was going todevelop drawings and I don't have those ready to share

yet. S o, unless anyone has anything to

-- a question or add to that disc ussion, we will move on to the remaining of that agenda from the last meeting. From the silence I will take that as a no. O kay. I tem 5 on the last agenda, the idea I had there was to try to list all of the items that are relevant to interior circulation that doesn't crowd the boarding and alighting side. S o, we assume that we have arrived inside the car. W hat happens next. And the way that I like to start things sometimes is to say, well, what is wrong with what is there now? Because we have been at th is for a while now. We should probably all have a list of bad things. S o, that would seem a good place to start. J ust to see where we
are. A nd I would include not just cars that are obviously wrong and have never been up to the current standard but car s that have been built to the existing standard. A nd where they may have shortcomings. S o we can move forward. >> Bob Reuter: O n the item you sent out with Marilyn Golden's very well done changes here I think there is one item that needs to add one word to it on initial technical requirements, the lift may be verticalshaft or stair lift style I think definitely add in the word

stair platform lift style so they make sure they don't stick in one of those going up the stairs thing.
>> Blair Slaughter: I wouldn't consider transferring to another seat as a viable

-- >> Bob Reuter: By the time it goes to bid somebody will try to do it.
>> Blair Slaughter: T hat's a good thing that needs to be tucked in there for sure thank you. I f we start at car entrance. If we think about it in terms of where we are today, Dennis? >> DENNIS CANNON: People should realize Dennis Cannon. P eople should realize that the current standard or guidelines are minimum requirements not best practice. O r good design even. T hey are designed to say you can't do any worse than this. Doesn't mean that what you are doing is good. Even if the

-- even with the standard, because of the typical car that boards on end through a vestibule not to be confused with the double deck sleeper cars which you enter from the center of the car. W hen you enter on the end, you have to go through a relatively narrow doorway. A nd the

-- then you have to make a right angle turn. We specified in the standard that theminimum width across that vestibule has got to be 42

inches clear and some people haven't figured out what clear means. C lear means everything. S o, for example, in the current cars when you go in the door, on the single

- level cars what is right inside the door is the trap latch. W hich sticks out about maybe 3 or 4 inches. I t's right at the control level. A nd inevitably if you are not careful going through the door, you end up or I have ruined a couple of good armrests because it tears it up. T he worst part about it is the current bridgeplate the checker plates has a rather steep drop off at both ends. S o, what happens is you get up on to it you are moving in, right about the time that you hit that down slope on the inside you are now suddenly going forward rather fast as a time when you ne ed to go slow to avoid that

-- the trap latch. We hope that

-- these are all with the current trains which I haven't seen yet one bi

- level

-- a single level that meets the current standard for 42 inch clear width in the vestibule. B ut if we are talking a bout something like lengthening and changing the space for wheelchairs, we are going to need to reconsider the 42 inches. B ecause it's tight to begin with if you are going to have a longer chair that's going to be as difficult as it is now with thecurren t shares. >> Blair Slaughter: O kay. T hanks Dennis. A nyone have any thoughts on that? I mean that is the

-- there is that cart and horse issue if we change the sizes it's going to cascade back through everything, but, yes, Bob? >> I was waiting for you to finish. B ob Reuter. T he trap latch probably doesn't comply with the visually impaired tactile being able to find it. A nd running into it. I t's not in the clear it wouldn't be a clear area >> Blair Slaughter: I was going to say you probably will fin d it when you don't want to find it. (LAUGHTER) >> Blair Slaughter: I think it's important for those of us on the Amtrak special the other day with the bridgeplates, those cars are the 1974 vintage vehicles that probably generated the thought process around widening doorways in the first place and they are still the way they are, so we are looking forward to those being breached where they are in longer a problem. They are, Dennis, within the newer single

- level cars, that has been watched very careful ly on that width. Even to the point of when you open a hinge door into a 32 inch opening so the door frame is okay but now thedoor is in the frame. S o, it's not okay anymore. T hose

kinds of details that, um, have been missed on things we tried to be ve ry diligent. A nd, also, looking at the thresholds and how critical that is to what you described moving through in a controlled fashion versus fighting with every element that you encounter. Yes, sir. >> Thank you, Blair. G ary Talbot, Amtrak. J ust a
co uple of follow

- ups to Dennis' comments. I think the most critical measurement that we have is the 42 inch vestibule. C learly the door opening is huge too. B ut 42 inch vestibule and making that clear space so people can probably navigate in there and it may in fact need to be larger. T he other issue on the private train, the other day we found the diamond plate used on the surface the walking surface that we have to roll across is God awful people can't get traction. I f it's wet it's slick as you know w hat. T he thresholds are just

-- I will tell you, I can just about anywhere in your manual wheelchair I am popping wheelies so I get myself sort of situated. T he reason I bring it up what we are hope to go do with our bridgeplate program is to improve that process as best we can, because like Dennis said, if you come off of something really steep inside there you are tearing up controllers, bashing your knuckles, it's reallynot a good situation. F uture vehicles that you are guys

are helping to pull toge ther some recommendations for the board need to be a true space where folks can really get on and off a train and do the things that we need to do. We just can't do that in that type of a space. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Chris Hart. C orrect me if I am wrong, the PRIIA the vestibule was widened to 44 or 46 inches, and

-- was it 44? O kay. A nd so, I think that might be the as you go forward, looking at Jon and Andre. A nd Josh, knowing what is being done in Europe, I don't know a train set nowadays operating wi th such a tight vestibule. J ust because it impacts the boarding and alighting time. A nd if we are really moving toward higher speed rail I won't say high

- speed rail but higher speed rail, then boarding and alighting time is the preeminent issue for improving overall running time. >> Blair Slaughter: A bsolutely. >> LINDA MARTIN: I have a comment >> Blair Slaughter: O kay. L inda? >> LINDA MARTIN: Just as a point of clarification the specification for the bi

- level car was changed to the vestibule to 44 inc hes the single level has not been changed yet it's still a work in progress. I hope.Anyway. >> UWE RUTENBERG: Uwe Rutenberg

-- sorry Chris, you go ahead. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Josh, were you able to

-- Talgo vestibule were you able to solve that on the
c urrent cars in production? >> JOSH CORAN: This is Josh Coran, Talgo. We did

-- we had an interpretation problem at that resulted in the what people considered to be the haul bay being less than 42 inches or as required in the vestibule it was because of a folded away wheelchair lift. W hat we had to do is redesign the wheelchair lift, and we solved the problem that way so we have the full 44 inches. >> UWE RUTENBERG: In Canada we specified and worked the vestibule with clearance of 60 inches. T he reason for this was specifically because if you accept a scooter or mobility device that's 54 inches long and I don't know 30 or 32 inches wide, the turning radius that these things need now just won't do the 42 or 44 inches. S o, we specified the 60 inches and th e vestibule is built to 60 inches right now. B ut I understand that in some of your older cars that might be difficult to do because you would have to move the bulk head in and restructure the whole car itself. I t waseasy in our case because it was almos t kind of a new

train new car rebuilt therefore we could do it this way. >> Why would you need to turn around in the vestibule? >> UWE RUTENBERG: To get around

-- >> Use the mic. >> There is an opening in the aisle that allows you the extra space to turn 6 0

- inch

-wide vestibule >> You need to use the microphone. >> FRANK MALDARI: A 60

- inch

-wide vestibule is enough. T he next task is getting into the passenger compartment that area is typically a big opening you can turn around if you need to. M aking the ves tibule 60 inches just seems like an overkill to me. We have 50 inches mainly because we have 50

- inch doors mainly because getting people on and off the train very quickly. When you get into one of our cars though the first area is

-- happens to be where we assign for the ADA access area, and there is a rather large opening in the aisle, and the space is directly adjacent to it. B ut I am just wondering, why would you need to turn around in the small confined area.
>> Blair Slaughter: I t wasn't to turn around but accommodate the turn radius of the scooters whichhave a very long wheel base geometry. Let me work

down the line here, Dennis? >> DENNIS CANNON: Yeah. T he issue is not turning around, the issue is the right angle, turn into the aisleway to get you back into the space. I f you look at ADAAG, for example, you will see that there are differences. We got the 42 inches from an ADAAG specification, but in ADAAG you turn into a wider, 36

- inch wide aisle. S o can you make that right angle turn easier. We permit a 32

- inch wide aisle turning from 42 inch vestibule into 32

- inch aisle is not permitted in ADAAG. We did it in the cars because we were constrained by a number of issues. A nd again, we are try to go accommodate some of the older cars. T he req uirement to have a restroom on each side of that aisle essentially dictates the maximum width that you can get in there. I f you do something like the Acela, which has a much wider aisle it's because the aisle is set to the side as opposed to trying to go down between two restrooms. A nd that works because it's a level boarding train and there are no step wells. T he other issue that is often forgotten which is what I was getting at earlier is, when the guideline says 42 inches clear, it needs to be made cl ear to people that that means fromall partitions what is typically done people think that

means the walls have to be 42 inches apart. N o, that's not correct you have to have 42 inches clear so you get
more. T he other question of course is you know, does

-- is there a better design for the trap latch. D o you need a trap latch. C an the trap stay up in some other manner? M aybe magnetic or something so you don't have to have that. T he question think

-- the other question that I have though is when you go into the vestibule at least in the older cars, there is a, maybe probably about 3/4 of an inch sill at the doorway. There is also a sill into the compartment and one into the connection. S o, the vestibule floor is actually maybe 3/4 of an inch lower tha n the rest of the floors. And I am wondering if that is just because that's the way we did it? O r if there is a reason for why that is there. I mean, one solution, of course, is to essentially raise the floor of the vestibule 3/4 of an inch and make all of the transitions nice. I am wondering if there is a reason why that is done that way? >> Blair Slaughter: D ennis I will answer that and we will move to some of the other urgent hands across the aisle here. T hat is if you look at the older cars that's because the way it was done. T here was no thoughtgiven to a wheelchair was going to traverse that in 1968

when the cars were originally designed. A nd that style was put into service. S o, that's the shorted and unfortunate answer there. Actually, some of the modifications that have been looked at for those cars to improve the floor surface have also been looked at to improve that threshold condition so that it may remain high on those old cars from one side but won't drop on the other side you will be flowing into a smoother or more level condition. Let's see. Ed? >> Just to let you know what the research found in terms of an L shaped turn, you are talking about a 42 by 42 which would accommodate at least 95% of the population we studied maybe more we found a 40 by 40 would be sufficient for an L turn. >> Blair Slaughter: O kay. G ary. >> Thank you Mr. Chair. G ary Talbot, I want to talk to the no need to turn around in the vestibule. T he Acela, one thing I really do like abo ut it, I know for folks that haven't been on the train don't ride it the way the accessible door is on the restroom it closes kind of towards the inner part of the car. S o, if you try to open that door up, and you are sitting, you know, and the door is to your left it's constantly closing on youbecause the train is in motion. I go up to the vestibule

spin around and jamb my feet into it so I can get in from that direction. I do that because the vestibule is large enough to be turned around in. T he regi onal cars there is

-- there is a lot of time you need to get through the car you need to go through the vestibule if you are in accessible end and connect today a cafe car like the train was the other day. You may not have to turn around completely in the vestibule just to make that maneuver, but the fact that it's so constricting today make that even very, very difficult. I think a 42

- inch wide clear or larger would accommodate that even
more. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: So it's

-- Chris Hart, public member. I note on Wednesday when we were on that train, the vestibule was often the only place a couple of us could tuck in to go up or get to the cafe car without having to fight our way back over the (inaudible) to get into the coach cars. A nd

-- if you were on a view liner sleeper, and you are one of the lucky people where it's not as skinny as Gary or Billy and you have a very small manual chair, the only way you can actually turn around is to back out of the sleeper room into the vestibule do a 6 or 7

- point tu rn and then get to where you want togo like in the sleeper car. T hat's the current deal with

maneuvering space. S o, I think we have got pretty decent precedent for going at least to 44. A nd I would look to the vehicle manufacturers to share what their typical vestibules are on the international offerings so that just like yesterday FRA had that comparison of floor height for European, it's real standard input. A sian versus U.S. so folks can see the difference visually. >> Blair Slaughter: A ndre Gagne? >> Yes. T his is Andre from Bombardier. I was looking at the CFR and found the door opening or doorways have a minimum clear opening of 32 inches or 30 inches. W hen I scroll down to the vestibule, it says shall have a minimum width of 42 inches. S o why the different language? W hy clear width for some doorways and minimum width for the vestibule? >> DENNIS CANNON: It's all clear width it's the way it happens to get

-- >> MARSHA MAZZ: Dennis you are not on the mic >> All of that needs to be clarified
>> Engineers would interpret it different minimum width you could have intrusions like handrails, knobs and things like that. You don't want to leave it to the engineers that's what I am saying.>> DENNIS CANNON: We did a

-- in addition to the

regulation its elf, which is written in reg

- u - babble. We produced a series of language technical assistance manual so there is one for each mode. T here is separate for commuter rail inter

- city rail all go into great deal. T hey state the requirement. T he reg
- u - babble requirement there is a bar paragraph or maybe even a couple of pages explaining how it's to be applied and giving you some other issues about things like best practice and what not. T hose are all available I am not sure that the folks necessarily got all of those things. We made them available when it was first written shortly after it was first written. A nd there is stacks of them up stairs these days. I don't think that we got a lot of use out of them but there was their intention. I t's done that way in building codes as well. If you look at things like the NFPA fire code they put out the regulation they put out a handbook which is twice as thick that has all of the explanations of the information. That's one of the ways. The other thing we did with the proposed revisions to the bus, is unlike the old original ADAAG which had a set of an appendix that has all kinds of initial information that nobody ever read, we started puttinginformation in the text itself in a gray box. S o, that you

had the advi sory information right in front of you in the regulation. S o that you didn't have to search someone else to find it. A nd we definitely need something like that. T he board will create that. We don't have to worry about it. B ut as we as part of the repo rt can put in language and talk about discussions, what we mean by this, how it should be applied, then the board can use that language as part of its advisory notes. >> Blair Slaughter: D ennis, thank you. I like that term reg

- u - babble. We spend a lot o f time diszoo ciphering code from various organizations sometimes
our own. C hris pointed out the slide that's up on the screen now that shows different dimensions for clear space nearen traps it looks like. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: Yes. J ust to be clear this is for the built environment, this is a nonmoving object. (LAUGHTER) >> CHRISTOPHER HART: So, this is for buildings these are the current door clearance standards for sliding doors arrangements. I will say in moving vehicles you have less precision i n where your chair goes. >> One thing I would like to point out in listening to the comments, right now the way that the regs seem tobe written is based on parallel and perpendicular walls.

And it seems like maybe what we need to be dealing with is the m aneuvering geometry to ensure that we get what we want at the end of the day. T hat is the maneuverability, you know, I guess the easiest way to do that is set the clear width of the vestibule but maybe we can do better and

-- and reduce the potential impa ct to the vehicle. A nd what I am thinking is just to throw out an idea, if we deal with it more from the transitioning aspect the geometry of turning and maneuvering versus parallel walls, when you build a vehicle, and I will use the Acela as a good examp le. We did

-- the Acela is not a locomotive

- hauled car. I realize everyone is dealing with different modes. J ust a little quick definition Acela

-- Acela is a train set it doesn't have traditional vestibule and body indoor arrangement that you would fin d on a typical coach that you could take apart and put in a different tray. We had a lot of leeway there. We all set the aisle way and put the electrical cabinets and things in a shallower arrangement against the wall op set of the restroom. And ended u p with a curved path from the vestibule area into the main body of the coach. B ut if you look at the way those walls are within the vestibule area, theroom walls are not parallel to if the car body, at almost

any point. T hey taper into the center line o f the car which gives you greater maneuverability. A nd what I am leading to is if we can think about it more in those terms that little space buy the

-- by the door those few ins

-- inches that don't get caught up in a parallel wall definition can be electric locker space. A nd then that space isn't pushed into the body of the coach. And I think we might be more efficient at the end of the day do a better service if we talk about it from terms of maneuverability not just all dimension obviously we have to have raw dim mentions in there but then talk about some of the design aspects that I think will help us do a better job on the industry side. A ny thoughts to that? G ary? >> Thank you Mr. Chair. G ary Talbot, Amtrak. I don't disagree with your comments, but I would say it's amazing to me

-- I have often am applying exactly what is in the ADAAG looking at it from the built environment, often in the vehicle environment. A nd I can tell you there has been so many times when you know we require certain clear space to get access to pull a door open in the built environment. S omething like that.>> Blair Slaughter: R ight >> It's amazing to me that's off an inch or two you know it is and opening the door is very, very difficult. Likewise, on you know, we exten d a level platform on a door where the door opens and swings towards you you have a longer level platform so that if you need to do something, open the door, you are not like falling down a ramp to do it. People always

-- always

-- they often mess that up

. A nd just an inch here and there just makes an incredible impact. So, I understand what you are saying and I don't disagree with it but I think there are things like the vestibule width aisle widths and door openings are sacred. I f you get those right w ith those you can do what you are talking about then you have a chance of having something closer to an Acela and less close to like a regional type thing that we have today. B ut without those hard and fast numbers to kind of package around, and try to move the things that you are talking about, and integrate, I don't

-- I would be really concerned that we would end up where it would work for some but not the larger population that it could. >> Blair Slaughter: R ight. G ary I am with you there. If we tal k about, for example, something between 42and 60 inches I think is the largest number we have

heard today, and then look at

-- go back and look at at that from

-- if 42 is the minimum as it is today or even 44 if that's what we go to, okay. B ut does that
ensure
-- that's going to get you close when we start getting back to the manufacturing side, and the engineering side it's going to run right up against that. My thinking is what what if we do a little bit of both. I f we set the minimum and you get a g ood chance of getting it right by the minimum but is there is it reasonable to extend

-- to add to the minimum a maneuvering aspect so that you sort of maybe it begins to solve the problem for sure because we are adding the maneuvering aspect along with a maneuvering of some defined thing and then we get into trouble again what is the defined maneuvering. A nd, again, I think that would let us make sure we do a good job when you talk about inches, there is the inches that let you have accessibility, and the n there is all of the other inches that stack up in the car. A nd I always tell people, you know an a rail car the inch is an inch it's not a throwaway whatever you are doing with it. I appreciate that from the accessibility side of it, that inch is just as critical as every other inch in the car. T hat's why I say ifwe can think about it in those terms, maybe we can do a

bet are job all the way around at the end of the day. >> if we set the

-- we have to have a minimum 32 aisle that you are turning into. So if we determine what the minimum vestibule width would be to be able to get into the 32 inch aisle with the scooter that could be base but as car builders if we were able to provide a wider aisle area (Jon Holbrook) when we turn the vestibule wouldn't have to be as big as the numbers that we come up with. A lso, I found in the ADAAG figure 410.6 confirm

-- they have this platform lift doors and gates it it shows 42 minimum turning into a 32 min that was with the old chair numbers. S o, what we really
n eed to come up with is the correct number min number for a scooter.
>> Blair Slaughter: R ight. J im? >> JIM WEISMAN: Quick question. H ow would you write a standard

-- I know it's getting into regular

- U

- babble how would you write a standard that gets into maneuverability without getting into hard numbers I think it's a good idea. >> ED HOFF: It's actually written in the proposed bus standards. W ith circulation paths although I wouldn't

-- buses are a little bit more restrictive it'scalled a circulation p ath that identifies the clear width

necessary from the boarding entrance to the accessible on board area called width of circulation path it's not as well design

-- defined as we could do here for rail vehicles it defines the envelope being 40 inches above the floor in other words, clear space for a height of a certain distance that helps Dennis' definition of you know where things are placed and how far the width is above the bottom of the floor. >> This is Bob Carlson. I sn't the vestibule concept a legacy design in the first place where it needs to be open, and that's where the door was? W hy are we even talking about vestibules? We are talking about Acela's not having that at all.
>> Blair Slaughter: I think just to answer that, the term vestibule as i t applies to car that's a legacy thing it still occurs. I t is not quite the thing it was years ago but there is not a better term that we have come up with like foyer or something like that but

-- foyer it is an old term.
>> Isn't it also like an old conc ept that's not necessary anymore? W hy do we have the interior door? >> Blair Slaughter: I t's

-- when you have a locomotive hauled car a car that can be broken up, ifyou build a train out of ten cars or five or six cars and

it's according to how many car s that you pull from the yard and build the train with, that's a locomotive hauled
car. T hat gives flexibility to operation seasonally and daily and things like that. W hen you get into a train set

-- also from maintenance standpoint if you have a bad car you drop it out and put another one in. Atrain set you lose a car you lose a train. S o, you really have to be geared to manage train sets it's a fixed consist without moving heaven and earth. T hat's one of the advantages and disadvantages when you loo k at train sets versus individual cars. T hat drives that.
>> As opposed to being semi

- permanently connected. Even then if the door the pocket door that goes between the vestibule and the passenger compartment if that were out on the other side of the vestibule wouldn't it do the same thing but you wouldn't have the barrier there? >> Blair Slaughter: I f you had it at the very end of the

-- essentially the end of the vehicle? >> Right.
>> Blair Slaughter: T he trick with that, yes and no. We have had t rains that were set up that way where the turbo liners we used to run up in New York State theyhad a door at the end of the collision post right by the

diaphragm and they had the restrooms and things and then another set of doors so you achieve that. You could do it both ways I suppose from a standpoint of people moving between cars, you don't want to have a stop in the middle of a diaphragm to push the button. It's

-- that gets back to another advantage of train sets. You have permanently coupled or se mipermanently coupled diaphragms. I t can be done both ways. I don't know that we want to get into dictating the car design but because things will vary probably primarily regional what works best on different cars. T here may be some other engineering lo gic to why you with a want to

-- why you would want to keep the door out of the area Andre the car builder. >> This is Andre. M aybe for comfort noise coming from the truck you isolate that passenger area from the ends. T hat could be one reason.
>> That's create a vestibule. >> Blair Slaughter: T he railroad used to charge extra for vestibule in trains back when they were wooden. Bob? >> Bob Reuter: T hat goes back before even my name Bob Reuter putting on my engineer's hat riddenthe Acela I loved the cu rved hallway I am thinking how

you would write it into spec that's the part that's interesting. H ow do you write a curved area way to put into a specification when it gets to Bombardier and here to Talgo they can interpret it the same way. A nd changing i t just to a slightly different one when you talked about the vestibules, a lot of the new commuter cars are having the entries 1/3 from the ends they don't have vestibules. Even the silver liner 5's up in Philadelphia they have low

-- high and low plat fo rm from a 1/3 entry. I t's beginning to show up. A nd the question is: We don't want to prevent it from happening in the future if a manufacturer wants to do it. Or if you spec it.
>> Blair Slaughter: R ight, right.
>> Bob: I am trying to figure out how to spec the curve thing.
>> Blair Slaughter: I t's worth looking at. T here is always a risk with adding too much definition to something. A nd or not enough. A nd I have been in enough situations where it's like if someone tells you you can't put too muc h water or you can't have too much wear in a nuclear reactor, what does it mean? You can never put enough you can't put too much? S o,you know on the design side you spend a lot of time

going through the regs trying to understand the nuances that may not have even been there to begin with. D ennis? >> DENNIS CANNON: Yeah. Ed mentioned this before. W hen we wrote the original bus standard we had

-- because of the trickiness of all of those little obstructions fare boxes and so forth. We had a requirement for the minimum width of the ramp and the minimum width of the lift. A nd then the space for the wheelchairs. A nd then we said sufficient maneuvering space for wheelchairs to get from the door to that space. W hich sounds like a nice idea in terms of performance standard. T he problem is, how do you measure that as a designer how do you actually comply with that. We had some people who built a box 30 inches by 48 inches by 30 inches high and put it on the

-- pushed it down the aisle say if it can go down the aisle that's compliant. T hat's going to work but a wheelchair isn't a box, and it's narrow at the front than the back and so forth. Even if the box didn't fit exactly doesn't mean that a wheelchair couldn't have made the choice. We had lots of issu es about people saying, well, what wheelchair are we talking about? A nd nowmanufacturers of buses are going to have to, you know,

do research of their own and find out all of the wheelchairs in existence and measure them and every time they change. S o, there is a trade

- off between being too performance oriented and too design specific. You need both and you have to kind of walk a narrow line in the revised bus standard we tried to be a little more clear about minimum requirements measured from all point s along that path. S o that we better define what we mean by sufficient clearances. A nd so, it's tricky to do the performance like universal design which is a great concept but when it comes to somebody who is actually building, putting numbers in their a uto CAD provision they have to have numbers to put in there to do the drawings. S o it's tricky. B ut that's part of where you can amplify with some advisory language. I t's also true, although this can be a pain, that you can go for equivalent facilitatio n. A nd lots of people have done that. D OT the advantage here with vehicles is DOT as an

-- has an actual procedure where you get equivalent facilitation as opposed to the Department of Justice rules which are ambiguous enough it scares everybody off. I am not going to try that I am just going to comply. B ut we have had a lotof vehicle and DOT folks apply for different kinds of

designs. T hese bridgeplates that we tested out, for example, don't comply with the standard. B ecause the two

- inch lip on the side is supposed to go all the way from one end to the other. I t makes sense to have them tapered the way they are but technically it's not in compliance. I am sure that they could get equivalent facilitation if they wanted to. O ur job here is to fix th at. S o, it's not as it currently says. M ake clear that those bridgeplates with the tapering of the side rail of permitted. B ut we need to be

-- we need to get at least some specificity to the manufacturers and we don't want to have everybody having to g o to do equivalent facilitation all over the place either. B ecause that's a process but it's also complicated.
>> Blair Slaughter: Yes, I will agree with that. Yes, Marsha. >> MARSHA MAZZ: Marsha Mazz U.S. Access Board Blair I would like to open really the best performance standards have a corollary prescriptive standard. S o, you can comply with either the prescriptive standard or the performance standard. A nd the performance standard has to describe the outcome in sufficient detail that you even by re ading the performance standard havea better understanding of what the prescriptive standard

intends to achieve. S o, if you are head inside that direction, I think it's fabulous. I also think that performance standards are much harder to write than presc riptive standards. B ut if that's where this committee wants to go, I would urge you to give it a shot it would be wonderful. >> Blair Slaughter: T his is Blair Slaughter, I am just curious from the car builders that are here, and suppliers what thoughts you have if you were handed that kind of a standard? Performance. Versus prescriptive or some combination thereof.
>> Andre: I prefer a performance standard it gives us much more leeway but it has

-- I like the idea of having both at least give guideline s to some and open the door or other things library the Acela with the curved walls and pretty much anything as long as it works in the end. I understand the difficulty of having the wheelchair you know trying to define the wheelchair what it can do. M ay be we can what we could do is take the worst case I saw three categories yesterday of wheelchairs and maybe we can take the worst case of all of them and say you have to be able to

-- you have to be compatible with these three occupied devices andmake you r way from the door to the area. S omething

like that. B ut I think it's interesting. >> Blair Slaughter: Ed? >> ED HOFF: Building off of the proposed bus regs they call out circulation paths although it doesn't say perpendicular to the path of travel, th e measurement in my mind means perpendicular to travel at point to point. I n other words, not a full box but a anywhere perpendicular to the route circulation route that you would take possible route. Let's say you are entering the vehicle and turning ri ght into the coach. T hat any point along their perpendicular to the direction of travel measure point to point has to be a certain width at a certain height. A nd then there is an advisory in blue in the proposed reg that speaks to using a 3D model or oth er design moving from the vehicle doorway to the vehicle wheelchair space will help to ensure the clear circulation path complies with that requirement. S o, it's not a performance standard but a guidance to help you get through that point. I f we do a poi nt to point perpendicular to intended route of travel or all possible intended routes and point to point and put a minimum dimension to that, and then put that advisory in similar to the proposed bus regs I think that we can achievethat. >> UWE RUTENBERG: I am on here right? I am coming back to what Marsha and Andre said about performance standards. We actually started with performance specifications in our case. A nd what is interesting is when I compare what Frank said for instance we are looking at th e 42 inch going into from the vestibule into the door, that design actually works. It's fine because you have the door in the center. I n our case, the door was off the center, at the corridor, at the all. S o, in both cases actually it works from a perfo rmance point of view but as Dennis said, you try to write this into standards and it's a very difficult thing to do. A nd very often you have to start with the performance standards or specific indications and then go to the descriptive and try to work fro m there. B ut it's very difficult to translate this then into standards and say this is what we have to do because it depends on all kinds of other elements you have in the design of the car or the seating or the corridors it's an integrated system. I t's not just the vestibule and the door. I t's you know to go into the passageway as you said in the buses, and you have to consider all of these elements to work together. S o, it's very

-- I think it's very difficultto write perfectly standards for that kin d of thing.
>> Blair Slaughter: T hank you Ed? >> ED HOFF: Again, this is if you think about an elevator where you have two doors one on one side and one on the adjacent is side to that door very much similar to what I was saying depending where the doors are located center on the wall of the elevator or when it's on the adjacent wall the long wall it could be too close to the door. I have to maneuver into the elevator do maneuverability to make it through it's not a clear shut through. I think that there is a

-- the elevator regs come close to helping you through that. B ut in the end, I think that advisory that's in the proposed bus regs is very helpful in suggesting ways to work through that. I think you need that I don't know if it's necessarily a performance standard but advisory to help you work through trying to build the design based around the narrative. >> MARSHA MAZZ: Just one more point. We are no longer able to include advisories in the fed federal register version of anything that we publish

. A nd that's not our rule it's federal register's rule. We can put advisory material on the website we are moving away from including little boxes with advisories, and movingtoward our online technical assistance guides, which

you may have seen. T hey a re relatively new. W hich will be companion documents to the materials. Moreallily segregate advisory from mandatory language which is pretty important in our world. So, don't count too heavily on the advisory to say what you need to say. I would, again, urge you to consider a performance standard or come foremans or compliance with a prescriptive standard. A nd in that way, you provide two alternatives and people can use one or the other. And so, lastly I want to say advisories are not enforceable nor ar e definitions. S o, please just take that into consideration. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: And to (inaudible) while it's never enforceable obviously it doesn't solve (inaudible) pointing to it to say you can

-- you define the door as XYZ. T hat said I think it's worthwhile to note in the 508 ICT rule working with the European Union and colleagues around the world it's very nice performance space because ICT changes much faster than any regulatory (inaudible). T hat said, I do want to go back to

-- I want to go back to something that someone raised earlier. A nd realizing that some of vestibuleissues may impact the legacy issues. S o, if I think

about (inaudible) you get along the airport and you get downtown or you get to Rotterdam or it takes you from (inaudible) airport into Tokyo or elsewhere. T hey are not actually vestibules to begin with on those trains. And so, it may behoove the advisory committee to really look at what is the state of train sets around the world, not necessarily long distance train sets. B ut there is medium distance and short haul train sets where frankly I am not picturing a lot of vestibules in the way

-- in the way that the U.S. market is used to a vestibule. >> Blair Slaughter: C hris, thanks. A s you were talking I was thinking about at Amtrak when we talk about the entrances to cars we talk about vestibules even in a bi

- level car where it isn't in the strict definition old definition of a vestibule a vestibule. B ut it is very much a transitional area from entering the door from the si de, and making a perpendicular trance significance into the car body whether it's happen ago

-- happening at the middle of the car or the end of the car on a single level or bi

- level or where that's occurring. W hether it's on you know, an inter

- city car, commuter, a light rail, whatever it might be, you are typically coming into a carand making it perpendicular transition. S o, I think

when we are looking, what we are talking about here is just that. I t's transitioning initially from the side of the trai n, into it the longitudinal body of the train. A nd how we do that. S o, those barriers that are there whether they are walls or post or whatever they are all need the same sort of

-- they are all in the way or not in the way depending on how the car is se t up. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: And I raise that, using the (inaudible) train as, I want to say it's an awesome train. But when you come in the door there is a 20 foot space where folks, where you can sit, you can per much you can keep your luggage. People go down two steps or they go up a couple steps because it's a bi

- level. I t's more that 1/3 mentality. B ut there is no bulk head separating to that side door. I t's very much like getting on a WMATA train where it's open, and obviously they chose to do that design because hey you are serving the airport, you are going to have luggage and all of that. But it produces a much different on and off sequence than (inaudible) people. W hich is the same thing for Cal Trans. You know, the (inaudible) corridor or ne wer cars in (inaudible) where you walk in you get light storage on the wall, and you get this open area thatstands up. >> Chris, again you make a good point. I think it's going to vary so vastly between the services, you know, again I look at the various services that Amtrak has and we sort of run the gamut from strictly long distance to almost a quasi commuter situation. Again, when you get down into the shorter trip modes, like the airport vehicles and things like that, it's

-- you are going to have di fferent arrangements conducive hopefully designed to manage what that train's purpose is that car's purpose is. B ut, again, I will go back to I think what we really looking at here is, and I have to keep breaking myself away from my Amtrak thinking. A nd into the broader term of we are making the transition entering the car making the transition. Yes, Dennis? >> DENNIS CANNON: Yeah probably, again, the vestibule issue is from the older design, one of the reasons that the Acela works so well is becau se the aisle is off to the side. A nd parted of that is because there are no step wells for people to fall into or whatever if they are coming down that aisle. A lthough I suspect you could protect it with handrail if they had steps we should design all of the trains like the Acela. (LAUGHTER)>> DENNIS CANNON: But transition area might be the

better way to describe it say where you are coming in from the side and making a right angle turn to get to the seating area. A nd you want to make sure that it
c omplies

-- that there is a maximum maneuvering room, something about using maybe some of the diagrams in the ADAAG that talk about moving from one aisle width to another aisle width so depending upon the aisle width that you have going into the train, that determines the width that you need perpendicular to that just inside the doorway. A nd there are a couple of diagrams in ADAAG it's not ADAAG anymore bus everybody call it is that. T hat has

-- that shows turning into from one hallway essentially into ano ther hallway. T hat depends on the widths of those corridor he is. S o, if you make the entryway that goes down into the

-- where the seating is wider, you don't need as much perpendicular room in the transition area. S o, you have given some flexibility t o people to design a variety of different configuration as long as they meet all of those minimum requirements >> Dennis, to that point I will say this real quick and I will call you David hold go ahead David yesterday we got you balled up with your

-- we broke your train ofthought. (LAUGHTER) >> David: Yes. T hank you. N o, Chris mentioned earlier about ICT and that's the international is that European standards? I want today follow

- up with what exactly ICT means just for clarification. >> CHRISTOPH ER HART: That's a 508 computer technology rule that the board has sorry. S orry. I was in government babble. (LAUGHTER) >> David: O kay. A nd, remember, I am not government. M y only concern here is that the technology is changing so much and so often

. T he way that the train cars are made, and you know the way they are now are going to be different 20 years later they are going to be lighter and stronger than they currently are than the heavy cars that we have now. N ow, I guess my frustration is the current regulations for inter

- city have not been changed over 20 years. And so, there needs to be some type of language where it's easier to follow, you know, international standards of some kind. B ut at the same time, I am scared of doing international s tandards because Europe is very

-- it's not very progressive compared to usregarding accessibility. T hey might be progressive in

terms of train cars, but I guess what I am looking for is a way that we can say we don't have to locked down for the next 20 or 30 years per se. >> FRANK MALDARI: I am just going back to what you had mentioned before. A nd I think what Dennis had mentioned before as well. I f you come up with some numbers like 42 inches for an opening in the door opening, and then an accessible path which is kind of what Ed was saying. I f you put a 3D requirement for the volume that has to move it's given you some flexibility to whether you have curved walls straight walls whether you have 42 inch leading vestibule into a 52 inch aisle or vice

-versa it gives you flexibility. I am not sure that I really understand what is wrong with the 3D volume because typically as a designer and you have auto CAD and these tools you try to do that. S o, if you could define the volume accurately, you can really do a good job of designing the interior so it's accommodating before you wind up getting to the mockup stage. T he 3D volume to me I think was the key. I f you define the 3D volume accurately and somehow talk about the man enoughability.

-- maneuverability. You can maneuverand backing up is different than having a straight path.

I would think the entrance to the

-- from the car through the transition area or vestibule into the seating area should be a straight path. A nd then after that, you are going t o have to maneuver to get to a parking spot. So, my suggestion is 3D area and maybe a few more words as to what

-- if you can back up or not back up in order to accommodate that. M y suggestion. >> Blair Slaughter: B ob? >> Bob Reuter. We are all here try to go make something work. I n October I am going to be down at APTA for the public transportation expo if it's typical everybody is going to ask me what can we get away with. (LAUGHTER) >> Bob: I t's not what we have to do or what is good but what i s the minimum we can get away with. A nd I think we talked to Bombardier we talked to Talgo we talked to everybody else who is building these things, and I will bet you have mentioned engineers are thinking exactly that way. A nd I think we have to be
care ful of giving them too much rope. >> Blair Slaughter: A s far as lack of definition or

-- >> Bob Reuter: Yes lack of definition. I am anengineer on one side I like being able to play with stuff.

But on the other side you are also playing up against what you can get away with. >> Blair Slaughter: I understand.
>> Bob Reuter: We are try to go find here putting a limit on that what they can get away with part while encouraging innovation. >> Blair Slaughter: R ight and my point in bringing that up in the first place was that if if I designed a car entrance way similar to a an Acela. I may not have the electric cabinet side which is opposite from the restroom, maybe it doesn't protrude into the car very far, you can make a maneuvering argument that says, well, if that is only 32 inches wide, but it goes 12 inches into the car and suddenly opens into a 50 inch wide space that I have done more than is required by the law or by the rule from a functionality standpoint. A nd yet it would not comply because it' s not wide enough. A nd I guess then you have to take the path equivalent facilitation and prove, yes, I have been bad over here look at what I have done at the same time. B ut, yes, there is a reality. I have run up against it with car builders where if you know you write into the specifications must comply with the ADA and then theywant to pull the book out and argue with you about why

things are the way that they are. A nd you are the job owner you are arguing. S o, it's not always the

-- the agency is not always the car builder but something in between Dennis? >> Bob Reuter: O ne who does it long enough knows they only go by the minimums, the least possible but no less than or no greater than they are going to go with whatever number you spec. >> DENNI S CANNON: In the original regulations we specify things like width and length. You know, 30 inches 48 inches so forth in the proposed bus revisions we went an additional step and talked about height up to a certain height to clear things like the controls on a power wheelchair. S o, we have gone now to more of a volume issue. O ne of the problems with that in terms of

-- we used to have a definition in the guidelines that's still in the DOT rule but in the guidelines we had the definition of a common wheel chair. And that was designed to give an idea of what the space requirements would be. W hat we found the transit agencies started using it in a totally different way that we did not intend to. T hey started using it to essentially try to exclude people fro m, especiallyparatransit because their wheelchair didn't comply with

that specific requirement. We realized in revising the bus we really didn't need that just to specify the space requirements. We took it out. You would have thought that we completely gutted the regulation from the reaction we got from the transit industry. W ho screamed and yelled about no, no, no you have to have that. S pecify

-- they wanted us to say, when we said the lift capacity was a minimum of 600 pounds they wanted to say no no you want to specify in the revision it's a maximum. B ecause that's the way they interpreted the definition of a common wheelchair which is a maximum. S o we said nope that's not true. S o, you have to be careful to some extent, I would love to have som ebody have a nice, and I think maybe Ed was working on this, you know, auto CAD figure that you could just plop down into your decide and run it through and see whether or not it's really going to work and give somebody a tool that they could use that woul d be useful as opposed to this kind of conceptual idea of what is a common wheelchair. We want to avoid using that we want to talk more about the space requirements, not the maximum requirements of a common wheelchair.>> Thank you Dennis. Ed Steinfeld. >> We could take the data we have and develop some prototypical users from that. You know, if you accommodate all of these people, you pretty much accommodate the whole sample. I n other words, man cans 3D mannequins that you could use to test out designs that could include reaching abilities and turning abilities as well.

>> I think that we could do that. T he

-- I would also recommend

-- I would recommend that you all look at online for designs of train cars because there is a lot online I found the we bsite that has all of the countries in Europe not all of them but a lot of them you can go and look at cars that some of them are very diagram at particular others aren't. I t seems to me that there are several different kinds of trains. A nd the kind of
accommodations that each train has is different as has been mentioned before. I don't think that you can have standards that apply to all of the different types that are the same standards. I t seems to me we want to think about a train standards that are different for each class of trains each type of trains. T hat's going to be harder than just coming up with one size fits all. B ut I thinkthat is the way it would make sense when you look and

see all of the differences the trains that have

-- that are lo ng distance trains need more space they need more amenities and access to amenities that you don't have in a commuter train. A nd subway trains are a whole different animal they have longitudinal seating and that allows a lot of different things to happen in it. >> Blair Slaughter: O kay. T hanks Ed. Terry. >> LINDA MARTIN: This is Linda. I have one comment. >> Go ahead Linda. >> LINDA MARTIN: Well, I guess it's actually two. One is that DOT actually did take the definition of a common wheel chair out of its definition and it's now basically a class of 3 or more wheeled mobility device, et cetera. A nd the reason is just what Dennis was saying about paratransit agencies or bus agencies who could accommodate larger heavier wheelchair usually on lifts or in their buses. A nd we are excluding them just based on their size. B ut and the other point that I wanted to make this is probably a less popular point. Which is what we often hear at FRA from builders and others that doesn't occur with commut er rail or bus services is that Amtrak inter

- city rail they sell tickets.They sell seats and they sell services and amenities.

Oftentimes when you ask them to give up space for whatever you asking them to give up space for whether a larger bathroom or a larger wheelchair space, the refrain that we hear and it's

-- and it's a consideration that has to be considered is that there is an economic part to what they do. I f you make the wheelchair space bigger or the restroom bigger you are taking away
revenue seating. A nd it's never a popular comment to make around people who, including me, who would prefer larger spaces. B ut it is part of the equation I don't want us to loose sight of. I t's a giant part of the equation when you are talking about a lift or an elevator inside a rail car and how many revenue seats that will take out to accommodate the lift itself. S o, that

-- I am just throwing it out there as that's part of the equation and would be part of a rulemaking equation once that eventually happens in terms of economic analysis that would be done in terms of the impact on railroads. >> Linda, thank you I appreciate that. A nd that's

-- that's a burden that we bear on the Amtrak side particularly. B ut Jim I will get to you in a second I owe Terry.
>> Linda trumped me. Terry Soesbee. Two thingsLinda hit on one of the ones I would get at. We come

back around to the bad car builder who doesn't want to give up the space and the bad car builder goes back to the bad equipment supplier and the designers want to design to the bear minimum. A bsolutely false impression. B ecause we are doing what our customer wants me for him and him for you, the guy saying I don't want to give up the space isn't the guy designing the bathroom or bedroom or the vestibule wh atever it is. T hat's the operator. A nd I think you know there is a couple of good points that the operating environment whether it's commuter or subway inter

- city controls you know how much space that you want to give up. People coming and going, at what rate getting on and off the train some things don't make sense in one environment than they do in the other. B ut as a designer, every other thing that we do there are standards. I go to a 1940's Dreyfus book I can find 95th percentile male updated to t he 2014 95th percentile male, but I don't have that quote standard wheelchair. I think it would be crazy to design around a standard wheelchair. B ut a maximum? A nonrectangular non

- box but that actually design

-- defined the limits of the feet, the arms , Imean all of the usual things that we design around

would be tremendously helpful. C an I go

-- I can buy $500 software called mannequin, I get 3D any shape size person I want I can design right down to perfection or near perfection. B ut I don't have t he same kind of criteria with designing for accessibility. I t's really

-- if we could do something like that, that would be very helpful at our level. >> Thank you Terry. >> JIM WEISMAN: Inter

- city rail have they talked about I want to call it cheating li ke the airlines do? I

-- what I mean is, today I checked in for my flight home it's 25 different choices now about space. A nd they, you know, if you need room to tear open the peanuts they charge you for in a. (LAUGHTER) >> JIM WEISMAN: It could be

- - it could be that in the near future, inter

- city rail distinguishes even in coach between seating spaces, and creates more room for wheelchairs by cheating there is the cheat. C heating a little here and a little there on coach seats those people pay a li ttle less they get a little less leg room overhead or whatever it is. A nd that makes more room for the chair without changing the size of the coach or the boxthat, the footprint that the coach uses. C hanging the

interior configuration of the seating. A nd it could actually be a revenue generate are for the rail system. By the way, I hate that idea. (LAUGHTER) >> JIM WEISMAN: But I feel like it's coming everywhere. You know the movies now in New York City you can buy advanced reservation and get
rec ess
-- re
-- reserved seat. You pay a little more >> I will say this quick we need to take a 10

- minute break Chris is reminding me I am glad somebody is keeping up with me. O ne, I would hope that bee don't

-- I hope we don't go down that path >> Me too.
> > From the Amtrak perspective that's all I can speak to directly historically we have tried to be where we can the nice guy. T he airlines are beating people up. You look and go the only reason the people fly is because the plane goes fast. T hey have not hing else going for them. I t isn't the way they treat people. I t isn't the way they handle people. You are basically a sack of potatoes with them with a credit card. (LAUGHTER)
>> And if you bring any extra sacks of potatoes it'smore money. S o I

- - I know that it's not always been a

clear shot with a sharp focus but we would like to be the place that you go and sigh a sigh of relief not frustration thank God I am not on an airplane. A nd I think that for all of us us whether we are in local short d istance transit or long haul passenger trains that the goal is when people get into your vehicle, they sigh a sigh of relief that they are not on the highway, that they are not in an airplane, so that we continue to grow our mutual industry the broader ind ustry of mass transportation.
>> And they can take their shoes off.
>> Stay awhile, yeah. S ometimes longer than you want to. (LAUGHTER) >> with that, should we take 10 minutes. W hat does it work out to be time wise. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: That will be 11:25.

-- or 11:20. >> Minimum or maximum. (LAUGHTER) >> Is that a performance standard or a

-- (LAUGHTER) (Short recess taken.)>> PAUL BEATTY: Yes, this is Paul. >> Hello this is the operator.
>> PAUL BEATTY: Hi operator. >> Hi.
>> PAUL BEATTY: We are still we took a break but we want all lines open. A nd we will be shortly starting again we will take it from there.
>> Okay, great. ( Short break) (Waiting to resume) (Discussion off record.)

>> Blair Slaughter: I am going to jum p in and try to get this show on the road. C ould we get back to the program, folks? H ello? N ow, boarding. T rack number 10. T he express. (LAUGHTER) >> Blair Slaughter: Last call. S ervice to Chicago. Boy, that did it. (LAUGHTER) >> Blair Slau ghter: O kay. A ll Aboard Florida for the Access Board. >> MARSHA MAZZ: Okay. F olks we are reconvening. >> Mr. Chair I don't think we gave you the honorary taser.>> Blair Slaughter: I am as bad as anyone. I f we

could get you started again. A re we ready on the

-- she is good over there okay saw some.

-- okay,
awesome. I did want to step back to comments made before the break that Ed was talking about looking at things by mode. A nd I think I got what he was saying at the same time looking at try to go move seamlessly and can you from one place to the other. I think I would have to be very careful. I f you leave home or work and you are taking one form of transit to another to another. A nd eventually ending up on a train, you want to be

-- know that you are going to do that without running into a situation where there is
a
-- there is an access problem of some sort because of dimensional differences. S o when if you think about what is happening day on the Metro here, I don't know what percentage of fo lks are going to work. S ome folks are going shopping. O thers are just transitioning to maybe union station to get the Marc train or Amtrak to go to BWI to get a plane. A ll different conditions all on the maim mode for different periods of time. I would think that we want to keep the standards as close as possible throughout the modes. I mean, maybe we say
-- from a

-- I hate the word from a minimumstandpoint, at least and then maybe in other situations

we add to that. B ut that was just my thought. D avid Nelson? >> David Nelson: O kay. I want to see more of a consistency because you know I get on one train it's older. T here is a different

-- there is different accessibility standards than a newer train so it gets very confusing when I am a first

- tim e user. I would like to see more consistency as much as possible. I n the newer regulations that is. >> Blair Slaughter: O kay. A nd David, I guess the tough part of that is if you are looking at new vehicles versus vehicles that get rehabilitated sometim es it's not

-- there is that

-- that sneaky word practicable is that the word? I hate that word. (LAUGHTER) >> I have a hard time getting my arms around what that means it's a source of argument. D avid makes a good point it's critical. I t's worse i f you are in the same train made up of different lineage of cars Dennis? >> DENNIS CANNON: We have to remember again we are riding

-- we are writing recommendations for a new
car. T here will always be the case of some of the old equipment. We have an

-- we got that argumentproposing the new bus regs from somebody said no, no

you can't change it. We will have buses of two types or whatever on

-- on the road at the same time. We will will be confused. O ur answer is that happens no matter what change you make. A nd that's always going to be the case no matter what. You will have some people that can't get on one bus when they can get on another. Paratransit lifts typically are bigger than the lifts in the fixed route buses, and the doors, it has to do w ith configuration and where the doors are and the clearance

-- the approach angle and so forth for the bus. S o it may be that you can get on a paratransit vehicle but you can't get on a bus. You may be able to get or not get on a bus but you can get on a Metro car. The Metro car has a 40

- inch wide door. B uses do not have 40

- inch wide doors. S o, there is always going to be the case of you may find yourself at some point getting off the Metro going up to the Union Station and discovering while you had no problem getting on and off the Metro you can't get off the train because it's an older model. C onsistency is great amongst the kind of things in new construction or new design. Even then we may have different requirements for buses, for example, than fo r
-- I mean, you want to talk about thedoorway width in the rail car, that's not necessarily

going to work in the bus. S o, you may find yourself that even when we write standards that talk about 32

- inch clear doorways in train cars, somebody who can get in there isn't necessarily going to be able to get on other kinds of modes. >> Blair Slaughter: T hank you Dennis. I mean, that

-- that idea sort of goes back to or gives credence to what Terry was saying before the break which is is there any sanity in t alking about not a minimum vehicle size but a maximum envelope to use, for defining movement in our rail vehicles. I mean, there is some risk there but there a lot risk with than than with the minimum where everybody defaults back to and argues about. B u t I understand. O bviously things that affect the access to a bus or train, some of those things are going to be driven by

-- by time. A nd the function of that vehicle. B ut if we

-- if we had a maximum size then

-- and you knew that vehicles of a certain ilk are going to have that capacity, then you can plan your path accordingly. I mean, if you know a paratransit vehicle has a certain level of accessibility and you need to get from point A to point B, and the bus won't do it you won't take the bus. B ut I think

-- the more consistencywe can get within what we have control over, I think, is a

reasonable thing. deny dn that was part of the rationale for some of the things like the width of the ramp say in a bus (Dennis) while we maybe had more space insid e I think I said this before. O ne of the things that we wanted to have happen if you weren't going to be able to maneuver inside a bus or any train we didn't want you to get inside to find that out. We wanted to stop you at the door. We wanted to make s ure that you didn't get into the vehicle if you weren't likely to have enough space on the inside. S o, even though you could have made the lift or the ramp or whatever a little wider if you wanted to, it was partly a limitation to say, if you can't get in this door, we don't

-- you can't maneuver in this vehicle, you should not get on the vehicle and get stuck in the vehicle. We want to stop you before you get on. >> Blair Slaughter: R ight. B ob? >> Bob Reuter. I am wondering this is just a thought, if we should designate something like nominal standard with a minimum 36 inch nominal 32 inch minimum. We are telling people we wanted 36. >> Nominal isn't defined. We ran into that with detectable warnings when we had nominal before. A ndrealized there is no definition of nominal. S o you can't

enforce it. >> Bob Reuter: T hat's what I was afraid of. >> MARSHA MAZZ: We don't include advisory in our regulations essentially by saying 36, I think nominal isn't the right word 36 preferred 32 required is essent ially an advisory not a requirement. A nd, again, we don't include advisories in the enforceable text. >> Blair Slaughter: O kay. Everyone is looking so quiet right now. C hris? >> CHRISTOPHER HART: I just wanted to

-- it's time to put together a documen t on clear force circulation for the committee. I just realized Ed is not in the room right now. B ut that is on that website. A nd I think that might help inform discussion. A nd just a little note that you guys are not meeting all day. S o, you may want to begin to think about concrete steps before everyone gets too hungry. (LAUGHTER) >> CHRISTOPHER HART: And just as a time check it is 10 minutes of noon >> Wow. S poken like a hungry man. (LAUGHTER) >> Time flies when you are having fun.>> Blair Slaughter: Well I appreciate the discussion

that we are having here. I think it's critical and it's nice to see the interaction between folks with often very different interests but common interests at end of the day here. S o, if we go back to item 5.1. A nd or 5.1.1 and we have car entrance the vestibule if we want to talk about that as a transitional area, I think we have hit on that quite a lot. M y thinking is we need

-- there needs to be homework done on >> I'm sorry what was that? >> Blair Slaughter: T hat's in the agenda (indicating). >> Thank you.
>> Blair Slaughter: I think I have an extra copy. I 'm sorry 5.1.1 was car entrance. 5 .1.2 was vestibule including thresh holds then it goes to 5.1.3 which is inner car passage. I would appre ciate because it can't just be talking I would appreciate thoughts about what we do to move this thing down the line. You know, do we put a stake up and say here is a dimension or do we feel like we need to gather more information before we can do that an d then what is that information do we want to look at volumes. >> STANTON SAUCIER: I don't want to prolong the discussion anymore than is necessary. B ut I just justoccurred to me that the through some comments that

Mr. Steinfield made reminded me of a se ries of surveys that I had done in the UK which were essentially to measure a bunch of systems to see what you could apply a definition of a standard, you know, come up with a standard definition you know based on. I t would seem to me there might be an op portunity here to have or to take leadership in describing what that standard should be and based on hard data, provided by the study that Mr. Steinfeld has already done as well as what might be gleaned from some of these things done in the UK where we mig ht be able to say this is a standard mobility device, you know, provide a generous envelope for that. A nd not only would this provide some guidance for designers of the systems, but might even provide some guidance for folks that are looking to get mobili ty aids that are you know known to be able to go through public transit systems. Perhaps this is a place for that. E specially given some of the work that's been done by Mr. Steinfeld and his group. >> Thank you sir Bob? >> Bob Reuter maybe this is a chan ce where we put up a strawman standard and let us go home play with it and see whether

-- where it works and where it doesn'twork.
>> Blair Slaughter: O kay. I guess the question is do we have time to do that today I don't think so given the hour. B ut c ould

-- should we do that as a bit of homework for Melissa wants to say something. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: I put the Steinfeld paper that he submitted to the circulation commit tie, into the meeting materials for both circulation committee and the boarding an d alighting committee I wasn't sure where we would have the opportunity to tackle it first. And it is important and one of the first steps we need to take. S o, we could continue this discussion with the boarding and alighting committee this afternoon and work together as two committees.
>> Blair Slaughter: O kay. T here is obviously a lot of overlap what one does is going to impact the other. Ultimately. I would be fine with that. B ut I think that to Bob's point and Stanton right? Stanton, yes, okay, as far as homework goes because I don't think that we can build our strawman today given the time that we have, but if we can get some of that data, is that something that you think you could

-- >> I am perfectly happy to get together

-- I noticed that Ed is not here either but I am perfectly happy to gettogether with him and share what I have and you know

see if there is something that

-- you know, for scooters for shares

-- for chairs of these types here is what represents the 95th or 98th percentile. A nd come up with that. >> Yes >> This is Marilyn. I am over here now. A lways moving around. (LAUGHTER) >> I think we can all try to work with that Ed is the guy that can come up with that most easily I think he volunteered to do it. We didn't take hi m up on it at the moment he will be back hopefully we will say hey, yes, please do it. (LAUGHTER) >> MARILYN GOLDEN: My policy is not to volunteer people when they are not there because they will just not do the thing. B ut yes I think he is happy to d o it. I also wanted to ask the question: A s we establish the space needs for different kinds of devices, mobility devices, depending on how you conceptualize that exercise you

-- it can seem like you are drifting into, well, if the people just bought sco oters then we wouldn't need to provide this other dimension and theneverything would be fine. I n other words, it can't drift

into you are prescribing what mobility device is acceptable people need to get that to ride your train. Not that you would say t hat. I t drifts into prescribing what acceptable devices are. A nd so, what >> (inaudible). >> MARILYN GOLDEN: Jim says only Medicaid can do that. O nly the funder of the chairs can do that. T hey shouldn't but they get away with it. B ut one of the guidin g principles that should be at the top of the other document that DREDF had the opportunity to make comments on is that people choose the mobility devices that they choose. A nd we have to figure out how big they tend to be. A nd how much access they need. But we can't prescribe what they use. N ow, there is limits to that, the Department of Justice has put out in the 2010 regulation the new category of other power driven mobility devices. T hat's referring to things that aren't wheelchairs and scooters co unt as wheelchairs. T hat's referring to things like SEGWAYs and what are the things that people use to tear up the environment the off road vehicles and off

-- alter rain vehicles. T hat's not all terrain vehicles. I f they can't get on those things that' s okay. P ower and manual wheelchairs andscooters within the category which is defined as the

rights are protected by the ADA Ed has figured out

-- here the man of the hour we are up to take you up on the offer to do some big thing. >> UWE RUTENBERG: This is Uwe Rutenberg. I want to add to what Marilyn is saying we did a study of access of scooters to bus and paratransit vehicles. You have across public transportation the same problem that is how do you define the new footprint for mobility devices. I f we are taking to account the fact it's now 30 by 54 we have this problem in buses and paratransit vehicles and aircraft and trains and everywhere. T he problem is that we have to find a way how to accommodate it. At the same time because when you look at the picture of scooters, for instance, that they are on the market right now, they can range from 54 inches to 80 and 90 inches you have double seated scooters you have all kinds of things out on the market. And what we have tried to do in a

-- is define between transportable scooters and nontransportable scooters and that receipts to the size dimension the turning radius and the weight. B ecause the weight is another problem that comes into the equation. W hen you are talking about lifts, platforms, bridg eplates. S o far wehave pay loads of 600 pounds. T hey seem to be not

adequate for the future. We are talking about 800 pounds in some cases a thousand pounds because if you take the increase in the weight of some people plus the mobility device, you know, very easily exceeding 600 pounds that's another aspect that you have to look into. W hat I am saying is this problem is across all public transportation issues and I think that is something that we have to solve in the future. >> Blair Slaughter: To th at end I will say this quickly. It's every mode of transportation whether it's the airlines or the railroads or buses struggles with their own set of problems. Each thinks the other one has it easier. B ut one thing I have always thought and maybe someon e in the community can speak to this is the one

-- I don't want to say group that seems to get off without worrying about much is the manufacturers of the devices. A nd I mean they are selling devices and with awful bells and whistles that's understandable but I don't know if there is anything that helps people know when they are shopping or looking, you know, someone sells you something, yeah this will fit. A nd they have got your money
-->> It's actually the opposite they tell you it's not

transit safe they won't certify them for transit
>> The instructions say that nobody knows that. >> JIM WEISMAN: When you talk to Medicaid HHS, HHS would love one size

-- Obama care doesn't protect durable medical care e quipment. M edicare Medicaid ensurers the overwhelmingly the purchasers of this thing the place for them to cheat is going to be on medical equipment and supplies because it's not protected by Obama care they would like disabled people to fit in one chair they can mass produce them it would be cheaper since they don't they are going for cheaper and lighter flimsier and not for use in the community more use at home. T here is going to be a really rub with the aging population that is going to need wheels soo n, I mean very soon. B ecause of the problem with Obama care and trying to keep costs down. A nd they keep saying that doing anything with making it transit safe or standardized for tie downs or ups the cost of the equipment. O f course customization does too for people with disabilities. Which is still the law. You still are supposed to be able to get a customized wheelchair you just have to fight.
>> Blair Slaughter: J ust from

-- I have seen atAmtrak and God knows we have done

-- we have good

days and bad days good years and bad years decades I have seen situations where the folks on the railroad would go out of their way to help someone get on the train that perhaps shouldn't have

-- their travel vehicle shouldn't be there they moved heaven and earth to get them there. A nd then they get to a different part of the railroad where the size of the vehicles and things changed say into the corridor they simply can't complete their journey. B ut the folks say in Florida just again because they didn't want to not bring them aboard. I t was, no, we are the railroad we can do anything. T hey got as far as Philadelphia and couldn't go to Harrisburg. You run into that

-- but you can't write around that. >> MARILYN GOLDEN: You shouldn't have to.
>> Blair Slaughter: T hat's

-- I don't know if it's anything that we can talk about because we have no affect on it. B ut it is from a provider side it's a difficulty.
>> I think we can talk about actually in a way I am channelling Ed for a second even though he is right here. T he way

-- I mean because I have been on the equivalent of this group for buildings, in terms of building standards the ANSI committee although that'snot related to the ADA that's private anyway it relates to

state codes. B ut the way Ed has handled it is to look at not all other power driven mobility devices but things that are wheelchairs, manual and power, and scooters he measures everybody. A nd then he comes to the (inaudible) standards fit the 95th percentile the 90th percentile. In other words, the question is how many people are we willing to exclude. S o, you know, we have

-- you know, we have tried to get it up to 95 or 90 at least. You know and some of the industry folks on the group are happy to cut it off at 8 #

- or 85 for the biggest devices but at least we know exactly what we are talking about. You are not talking about excluding one person you are talking about the numbers of people who use devices. A nd you make a decision that this standard gets just about everyone. You know, who use standard devices like wheelchairs and scooters. S o, you are not

-- you know, it's much less offensive. You are not dictating what devices people can use. You are establishing what level of standard we can come date in the built enviro nment whether a vehicle or building. S o I think it's a good way to do. >> Ed: I hear you have been planning work for us? (LAUGHTER)>> Ed: A s a federally funded center it's the thing

that we would like to do so we are willing to do this within certa in limits. I don't know what you discussed but we definitely would like to develop 3D mannequins he can do static ones so that they are basically represented

-- we could do enough that represent the different kinds of issues in the standards. S o, like I showed you those photographs you have the knee height and toe clearance issues, you have the length and the width issues, you have those are the beginnings there is a reaching issue a bit more complicated because that requires some dynamic modeling. Terry mentioned mannequins that are in human modeling programs we would like to work with human modeling software developer we have talked to them and they are not interested. I f we could get the weight of people to pressure them maybe they would be willing to do this and we could work with them and give them the data and they could create manneqins that can be moved and adjusted. I am not sure we could do that. I think we have to look into that. I could tell you what we would be able to do. We could do it in a way to start with as Marilyn pointed out we can show you who is accommodated who isn't by etch each of the

-->> I think so we don't start getting into the spaces

committee work but just to try to move this one along. If we were looking at it from

-- from the types of wheelchairs or mobility devices to capture the scooters and the range of sizes and what

-- what potentially the largest is or if we look at a range of volumes and see how that

-- what percentile that deals with I realize in your research you have that according to vehicle type so I think if we could maybe do that as a starting point just to

-- >> That's what I am thinking too.
>> Blair Slaughter: U tilize data that you already collected would at least let us begin to get our hands around this a little bit.
>> I think we would start with two dimensional drawings and which we are

-- we pretty much have. And then we can decide what ones we want to use for the three dimensional, if we want to go that far, The way we have been usually doing it we use the 50th, 75th, 90th and 95th percentile. M ainly because often there are constraints at the higher

-- at the larger end that sort of mean you have to pull back in places because you

-- the gain you are getting is not worth it. You know? I t's like high

- end stereo equipment.>> Right.
>> Ed: S o, we start with that for the three different types.
>> Again, I would like to just for the sake of not abusing your time and for the sake of the next meeting, you know, the more you can rely on data that you already collected, and apply that Gary? >> Thank you Mr. Chair. G ary Talbot, Amtrak. J ust to kind of follow

- up on what Ed is going to do I think that would be really exciting. A nd just to share with folks, what we did at Disney I think it was pretty co ol. We

-- I looked at rides and attractions to the space that would be considered like main program access area right? A nd tried to maximize that space and then from that space

-- so, whether it's a seat in an auditorium or theater or on a ride vehicle o r anything else, and then from that

-- if I could come 36

- inch space there I

-- I would put a 36

- inch wide space there. A nd then I would reverse track through the facility or the vehicle or whatever it was and not allow myself to

-- I could stay at 36, co uld go less. B ut couldn't go more because I didn't want to wedge someone in and get them stuck. If my seating area was 54 by 36 which was fairly common like on a couple of train cars stuff like that.Then I would let the path of travel by 36 and in some

cases you had to go down to 32 that's okay because I knew I would have extra space in the vehicle. L ike everybody has said what you don't want to do get somebody up the ramp they turn a corner and they are stuck. T hat's a great way of looking at it wher e you define what your largest space is you don't go above that you go that a little bit less stay compliant with the rules and you always have a nice funnel effect to get people where they need to be.
>> Blair Slaughter: R ight. I f we have multiple start points and see what the affect is then we can make rational recommendations. S o we can see what the affect is of taking that applying it to the various vehicle types. Again, with the hope of serving as great a number as possible. A nd maybe to Dennis' p oint before. M aybe there are situations where we know in a certain mode you are going to be able to do more than you can do in another. B ut we have to start somewhere. A nd I expect if it's like most things you start bigger and you argue back or you start at a size and find out that that really doesn't work you go the other way. B ut obviously we are not ready to set those sizes today if we can also

-- folks have mentioned someof the data from the European Stanton so, Stanton you

are going to go after th at information >> STANTON SAUCIER: Yes, I have access to a couple of surveys done in the UK that I am happy to share with Ed.
>> Blair Slaughter: T hat would be awesome. O kay. >> You are referring to international standards on anthropometry? >> STANTON SA UCIER: I

-- >> It was something done I think commissioned originally by transport for London but it was essentially a study of wheeled mobility devices. A nd they came to very similar confusion

----very similar conclusions to yourself. Adifference between a manual chair, a powered chair and a scooter. T here is dimensions for the 3. >> The UK transport has done three studies, and we have those so we have that. B ut if that is what it is. >> STANTON SAUCIER: If it's the same stuff great. >> Blair Slaughter: Just as a matter of housekeeping our next meeting is established right? >> MELISSA ANDERSON: Our next

-- sorry, turned myself off. T he next meeting is May 7 from 1 to 3 for the on

- board circulation committee. A nd we went backand looked at some of the scheduling that we talked

about yesterday. A nd it made sense to kind of rearrange some things so we wanted to get the consensus of the group to make sure there isn't a problem. T he communications committee will meet on or I mean the this committee will m eet May 7. B ut kind of as a rule of thumb having communications on the first Thursday on

- board circulation on the second, rooms and spaces on the third and boarding and alighting on the fourth. D oes anybody have major problems? I know Ed you had class i ssues. >> Not until September. >> Repeat it. >> Communications just generally would be on the first Thursday a conference call from 1 to 3. T hen
on
- board circulation which is this committee would be the second Thursday the rooms and spaces would be the th ird Thursday and boarding and alighting would be the fourth Thursday. A nd then if things didn't work out for some of our resources we would err towards Wednesday as a second as an alternate to Thursday Tuesday as alternate to Wednesday. A nd the week

-- a nybody have a problem with taking using that kind of as a general moving forward type schedule?>> No. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: Okay. I n May, we have our
ou t of town board meeting the week of of the 12th we won't have any meetings so, communications will meet the first on

- board circulation the 7th boarding and alighting will meet on the 22nd rather than 15th. A nd then rooms and spaces will meet on the 29th. >> MARSHA MAZZ: You are going to send this out right? >> MELISSA ANDERSON: We will send this out to everyone. We just wanted to make sure I think we have almost all of the committee here. To make sure nobody had big problems with it. >> All right. >> CHR ISTOPHER HART: (inaudible) May 8 not May 7, correct? >> I'm sorry, it got moved to the Wednesday in May I think we talked about that yesterday we talked about it yes. M ay 7 is on a Wednesday for the on

- board circulation when this committee will meet. We need to wind down it's lunch. >> Blair Slaughter: M elissa to understand what the deadline for getting material in that's generated >> if we have meeting on the Thursday Paul correctme if I am wrong we need things in by Monday pretty

much? >> Monday close of business Monday noon >> MELISSA ANDERSON: Monday, close of business eastern standard time >> Or Tuesday morning 6 a.m.
>> We all struggle to get things try to get them in by Monday.
>> Okay. T hank you >> We have a hard time ourselves.
>> Blair Slaugh ter: I understand are we doing public comment at all? N o okay. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: I do want to point out (inaudible) Carol would you wave for those of you if you don't know (inaudible) been in place over 25 years or industry and it's really (inaudible)

. We would not be where we are at today without the work of (inaudible) over the years. S o you if you don't know Carol get to know her. S he will be here. H opefully for the next meeting as well. >> Blair Slaughter: G reat. T hank you. B ob and then we a re going to close it out. >> We set the first four meetings getting on to commuter rails Amtrak trains I think it will 2018 by thetime we get to FINICULARs, I said that for the captioner.

We need to make sure we move on once we get the first part nailed down the rest should be

-- >> I think it's critical that we are having these discussions and I am trying to keep shifting between my vestibules and what I would find inside of a Metro car with polls and things like that in my head to make sure that we are

-- that while I may be thinking one thing that's applicable across the board and I will depend on the people in the room to keep us on track as well. >> CHRISTOPHER HART: If I might gently nudge, again, our equipment manufacturers put together presentation s, ideally for the next meeting, so folks can be aware of what is out there around the world. A nd begin to do that crosswalk comparison for each mode. That would be helpful I think in steering the discussion going forward. >> Blair Slaughter: To that po int can I

-- I can lean on the folks from all symptom and Bombardier and Terry at a very minimum to show what your companies have been involved with because you will know that. And Bombardier obviously and Alstom International Companies. I f you have an e xample I think that

-- >> JON HOLBROOK: You are looking in particular forADA accommodations or

-- >> Blair Slaughter: Yes, we would have

-- >> CHRISTOPHER HART: I think in hearing how important the discussion is, it would be good if we could think about compiling you know his heavy rail

-- here is heavy rail match here is quasi inter

- city we take from Brussels to Amsterdam that type of service
versus
-- ICE service cross Continental so the folks begin to see the range of things when you think about both b oarding and alighting and interior layouts. All

-- all of you have good websites with decent images but I don't know that everyone on the committee is

-- has the time to go digging through all of your sites and try to go crosswalk it. >> JON HOLBROOK: For myself, you know, contacting lots of different people across the pond to find that. But it's not

-- it's not a significant amount of time but you know I may not have something by our first conference call

-- >> Blair Slaughter: I would say whatever you have by then and then if not by then till the next one. B ut, again, to Chris's point anything that we have I think helps get the ideas into folk's heads about what we are dealing with as far as different vehicle types. A ndre?>> This is Andre from Bombar dier, if we make

presentation it has to be accessible it would be September the next meeting, right?
>> PAUL BEATTY: This is Paul speaking. I guess it depends when you are using if you use it as a conference call as lodge as we provide the PowerPoint to you and then we would have

-- you provide us the PowerPoint we would have to work with you to make it accessible because we have to put it out, available for the public to look at. S o, if you >> It's mostly pictures.
>> PAUL BEATTY: Well, again, if you give it to us we will work with you to make it accessible then if you choose to use it for the conference calls that can be done obviously turn the page 1 turn to page 2. B ut if you want to reserve it and use it in the September meeting, like all present ations, you know we get them all together and then at the next full committee we talk with the chair and we decide okay do we have 20 minutes

-- do we have 20 presentations or two what is the priority for the two

- day meeting. T he key is as you point out t here is accessibility element but we will work with you to deal with that. S o, if you get us the pictures give us a brief description of each picture, wecan insert it. We can easily show you how it's done if

you got it in PowerPoint it's easy to put it in it's easy to screen the document to see whether it has the proper text we can train you on that simple.
>> Blair Slaughter: I was going to sigh if there is a template or guide you have that could streamline the process for both parties that would be great.
>> PAUL BEATTY: Just give me a call I will show you where you click on the PowerPoint. >> He is the man okay all right. T hank you everyone for your attention. A nd for tolerating me what my dad would describe as daddy minutes instead of normal stand ard minutes daddy minutes are very long minutes. (LAUGHTER) >> Blair Slaughter: S o, I guess we need to break for lunch. A nd what time should we be back? >> MELISSA ANDERSON: We are going to start the next committee meeting at 1, I know we are cutting it short. S o it may be a few minutes after come back as quickly as you can. Request you want quick places to eat there is a food court across the street in the big building. T here are signs out there McDonald's is on the corner if you are that person n ext door is a little deli you can grab something bring it back here to eat.Chicken and donuts.
>> And 10,000 teenagers in the eatery across the street. >> Blair Slaughter: B lair is not the chair for this afternoon. >> MELISSA ANDERSON: We are going to e lect a new chair.
>> Blair Slaughter: T here is hope for getting out of here. [End of meeting]