Note: The output shown below is from the Communication Access 

Realtime Translation (CART) system used in the meeting and is 

unedited, with two exceptions. The text now reflects: 1) that the 

committee had a quorum at the start of the meeting, and 2) spelling 

corrections for some participant names. The CART system was used 

to provide an accommodation to persons with hearing loss and persons 

who are deaf, and was streamed in real-time and available to the 

public on the internet during the meeting.

U.S. Access Board 

 Rail Vehicles Access Advisory Committee 

January 9, 2014 

Morning Session 10:00 a.m. 

>> Matt French: I am going to do a brief introduction on the 

AV system. We will find out here shortly if it's going to work 

today or not sorry for the delay. Since the new year we have 

had a ton of maintenance particularly this week most of it has 

not been working very well. You guys are going to be guinea 

pig we had the microphones reprogrammed no one should 

touch a microphone at all.

>> Matt French: We are going to run a test. We are 

going to be turning on the mics and no one should have to 

touch them after that. 

>> You can go ahead and start if you want

>> Chris I will turn it over to you.

>> Don't move the mics.

>> Good morning everyone. Thank you for coming to 

this session where we will--of the advisory committee 

meeting.
I will hand it over to Billy the chair, but first I want to ask 

everyone to do introductions that includes all of you in the 

audience. Most of you know me, I am Christopher Hart. I

am a public member of the Access Board. And I am the 

liaison for from the board to the committee, so I report back 

on what you guys are discussing, and out here also as a 

technical resource, and advisor for -- for you all here today 

and going forward. Beyond that, as mentioned we have had 

some technical issues, and so, hopefully things are going to 

work out today. And I do apologize, and we are going to 

move forward. So, Michael would you start with introducing 

yourself, and we will go around the table and then go to back.

>> Thank you Chris. Mike Wetherell at New York City 

Transit representing New York MCA.

>> Good morning, I am Stanton Saucier with the Ricon 

Corporation, a division of Web Tech, we are manufacturers of 

wheelchair lifting equipment.

>> Josh Coran, with Talgo, manufacturer of high speed 

train sets.

>> I am Marilyn Golden, with the Disability Rights 

Education & Defense Fund or DREDF.

>> Good morning Ed Hoff New Jersey Transit.

>> Terry Soesbee RailPlan International

>> Blair Slaughter, principal engineer at Amtrak. 
>> Robert Carlson with Transportation Authority.

>> Justin Vonashek, director of regulatory compliance.

>> Jon Holbrook Alstom Transportation.

>> Federal railroad administration.

>> David Gayle, Hearing Loss Association of America.

>> Hi, Debra Patkin, I am with the National Association 

of the Deaf.

>> Jim Weisman, United Spinal Association.

>> Uwe Rutenberg, International Centre for Accessible 

Transportation.

>> Terry Pacheco the American Council of the Blind. 

>> Jackson Xue, Parsons Brinkerhoff. 

>> Crystal Lyons, South West Transit. 

>> Stanton Hunter, Cal Trans division and rail.

>> Dennis Cannon National Disability Rights Network.b

>> I am Billy Altom with the Association of Programs for 

Rural Independent Living.

>> Paul Beatty, Access Board staff.

>> Melissa Anderson, Access Board staff

>> (inaudible)

>> Lisa Fairhall Access Board staff.

>> Bob Reuter from Access Systems also officially 

representing Colonial Paralyzed Veterans and Baltimore 

Transit Association.
>> Sid Goldstein, editor of transit access report.

>> Frank Maldari, MTA.

>> James Lucas interfleet technology of Cal Trans.

>> Ken Shiotani National Disability Rights.

>> Gary Talbot with Amtrak.

>> I am David, I am also with Amtrak.

>> Monica London with Amtrak.

>> Thomas Fodor, U.S. Department of Justice

>> John Day, Federal Transit Administration.

>> Melissa Shurland, FRA.

>> Harold Weisinger, mechanical engineer with the FRA.

>> Paul with the South West Ohio Regional 

Transportation Authority, and incoming chair of the 

(inaudible).

>> Charles Joseph.

>> Lou Woohner, with the Virginia Railway Express.

>> Glenn Miller, Washington Metropolitan Transit.

>> Naomi Milton, U.S. Department of Justice.

>> Paul Beatty: Operator, can you tell us who is on --

>> On the audio line, Edward Steinfield with the Center 

for Inclusive Design and Environmental Access.

>> Linda Martin, Federal Railroad Administration. 

>> And David Capozzi with the Access Board.

>> Would you unmute all three of the lines/
>> Chris Hart: Sorry, we are going to go through the 

agenda and we will go on from there.

>> Thank you, Chris. Apologize for some of the 

technical difficulties we are having now, it's the new year, and 

things are just working out wonderfully well for us all. But 

one of the things that I hope everybody got your -- a lot 

of-- Paul sent a lot of information. We have the agenda did 

you receive the agenda via e-mail? Everyone have a chance 

to review that? We have several things we want to accomplish 

today. At the end, there is one thing that I really want to 

drive home because we have a lot of audience members here 

and I am thrilled to see we have folks who are interested in 

what we are doing with this particular committee. And we 

will have public comment period for all of those who made 

their effort to get here. Certainly want to hear what you have 

to say. As we look through this, we have done introductions 

we have administrative matters, at our last meeting, we went 

through and put together a committee or issues lit and we are 

going to look through that I want to turn it over to Paul now 

to talk about that or do we want to approve the minutes first. 

I don't have it on the list

>> Paul Beatty: I am playing the part of Rose our 

administrative person. Most of you know where the toilets 

are. For those that are new, you go out the door, head past 
the elevators and to the right, and you have the men's rooms 

and to the left you have the women's rooms. And in an 

emergency for evacuation the evacuation stairs are essentially 

located next to the toilet rooms. One on the right, and one 

on the left access in the main lobby to the front of the 

basically down toward the Treasury building --

>> We can make one up to the Hamilton building.

>> There is a Hamilton restaurant on the other side of 

the street, other side of 14th Street.

>> Northwest corner. Thank you, Melissa.

>> Paul Beatty: We are going to be doing discussions. 

A lot of you, at least committee members, you checked off the 

box regarding not being a federally registered lobbyist. But 

from a paper work standpoint we have a form for you to fill 

out. Most of you have done that, some of you have not, so I 

will be hunting you down. In terms of members of the 

public, this applies to you if you plan to participate in any of 

the activities except for the public comment time, you 

cannot -- any of our activities, you cannot be a federally 

registered lobbyist and be allowed to participate, that's per 

executive order. Good number of you have filled out that 

form saying, I am not nor will I become, unless I tell you, a 

few of you have not. This may be important if we go into 

subcommittees where per the operating protocols of the 
committee anybody can participate in a subcommittee as if 

they were a committee member. So, you know who you are. 

Please fill out the form if you plan to participate and see me. 

These are things that Rose would be hunting you down for if 

she were here. There is a sign in form there, if you are a 

committee member don't worry about signing in. I can check 

you off, that's great. If you are an alternate, please sign in 

that way I know you are here. Second, if you are a member of 

the public, please sign in for purposes of the record and the 

minutes. At least the November minutes we will look at.

Now -- we have enough people for a quorum we can 

make formal decisions on the part of the committee, so those 

are the things that Rose would have said. Now I will move 

into my next role. We are going to look at the summary 

minutes from the November meeting. These were sent out to 

the committee. I received no comments on the minutes for 

the meeting itself. I did receive some comments on 

Attachment B. For your memory, Attachment B lists those 

attended B was the issues list refined by the Access Board 

staff that the committee developed at the November meeting. 

I believe I inserted the comments, made some changes, minor 

changes based upon things committed to me by the 

committee members. I believe Attachment B reflects what 

was discussed at the November meeting or adequately 
reflects. Now it doesn't mean that you can't add new issues. 

That's going to be later on in the agenda. The purpose now 

is to approve what happened in November. So I can place 

that on the web. And move forward. So, at this point, since 

I haven't received any additional comments, I am asking for a 

motion that the committee accept the November summary 

minutes as provided to you in my preparations E-mail.

>>So moved.

>> Dennis Cannon made a motion. Do we have a 

second?

>> Seconded by Mr. Wetherell. 

>> All in agreement? Say aye. Raise your hand. Any 

disagreement? Hearing none, for purposes of the record, the 

committee approved the November summary minutes as 

transmitted to them in the Access Board preparations E-mail I 

believe on January 6 or 7, I think the 7th. Okay. Now, we 

will turn it back to Billy for next thing on the agenda item 

review of the issues list.

>> Bill Altom: Just a couple of other small ones, cell 

phones if you have a cell phone on you, most of us do, put it 

on vibrate or silence. If you need to make a call, there is a 

small conference room right directly behind me, just behind 

the coat rack that you can step into. We ask that you refrain 

from standing out in the hallway making phone calls just 
because there are other businesses that are trying to do 

business there. And it makes it their life a lot more easy as 

well if they don't hear all of our conversations. We have 

several presentations today that I am really looking forward 

to. The first off again I am going to wear Paul out doing stuff 

for me. We developed and thank you Paul for putting that 

together from all of our brainstorming activities of putting 

together lists. So, Paul would you like to go over with us the 

Attachment B that we were talking about of --

>> Paul Beatty: This is Paul Beatty. If you go to 

Attachment B part of the summary minutes, there are--there 

was in terms of comments we did receive one comment 

requesting a new issue being added. Appeared I in the 

preparations E-mail, that provided on item 3, and the 

comment was in added to the communications section that all 

announcements in American Sign Language as well as text. 

So, we would be adding that to Attachment B under the 

communications section. The second thing, and this is more 

Access Board request, that if you go to the very last issue on 

the list it's under "other" it says standards for websites and 

smartphones. Because the focus of the committee is on rail 

vehicles and the focus of the committee is on rail vehicle 

components that fall under the Access Board jurisdiction. We 

are asking that issue to be removed because it doesn't fall 
under the Access Board jurisdiction and in general it's 

probably not part of the rail vehicle. By rail vehicle that's our 

short way of saying, you know vehicles that operate under fix 

guide way systems. All right? So as Dennis pointed out last 

time there are rubber-wheeled vehicles that fall under your 

purview, so just for clarification. Any other matters regarding 

the issues list? I may point out here it's not necessarily 

supper critical you add things right now, you know one of the 

things that we are going to get to is how you go about 

resolving issues. And the Access Board is recommending 

breaking into subcommittees if you accept that we will have 

that discussion later. If you accept that methodology at the 

subcommittee level there is the ability for people to add in 

issues particularly as you are clarifying some of the existing 

issues that are in Attachment B but since this is the time if 

you desire to add anything new, this is your list. Marilyn?

>> Hi, Marilyn Golden from DREDF. Oops. Well, I am 

not 100% sure that--I haven't compared a few things I 

thought of or weren't sure got on to what is on pardon me if I 

have redundancy, I had a number of thoughts since our 

discussion. A surface table, for example, to eat, or for your 

laptop in wheelchair spaces something with knee and toe 

space, a fixed surface, not a portable tray. As is given to you. 

Now. When I say "fixed" I don't mean it can't fold up or be 
moved out of the way mechanically but once deployed it 

should be fixed.

>> Paul Beatty: We sort of feel we caught that if you go 

to wheelchair space and other seating. Item 2, wheelchair 

space design and then C, as in Charlie, amenities and control 

of the wheelchair spaces provided people inaccessible seating, 

e.g, tray tables, charging outlets lighting movies et cetera. 

So, would that be caught in that particular issue?

>> Well, the knee and toe space should probably be in 

there.

>> That's under item 3.

>> That's under item 3, aha, sure. It --

>> We have it under dining.

>> Marilyn Golden: All right. I think that's fair. 

Redundant light control at a lower level.

>> Paul Beatty: In terms of sleeping compartments?

>> Marilyn Golden: Wherever riders passengers can 

switch on a light

>> Paul Beatty: We would say that's probably under 

2-C in terms of amenities and controls a whole bunch of 

those are provided for people in inaccessible seating.

>> Marilyn Golden: I know you have memorized it.

>> Paul Beatty: No, I have not. You are going to 

challenge me on this.
>> We are going to quiz you on this, as we do what 

section of the ADAAG something is in. Well, if this happens 

for every item I am going to want to go back into my cave. 

Should I maybe talk to you on a break and compare

>> Paul Beatty: Maybe that's a good thing you can add 

things this isn't the only time it's important we have your 

concerns on the tables so they can be evaluated.

>> Billy Altom: And other things may come up during 

if we break into a subcommittee too I am sure there is going 

to be other issues that will definitely find their way to the 

surface.

>> Marilyn Golden: If I just E-mail you?

>> Paul Beatty: That would be good. Any other 

comments about new issues? Well hearing none, obviously 

the one that we added has been added and I hear no objection 

from the committee from us removing that very last issue 

concerning websites and smartphones. So, I would say that 

at this point be creating a new attachment for purposes of the 

January summary minutes, and I will -- I will turn it back to 

Billy for the next thing on the agenda.

>> Billy Altom: Perfect. Up next we have our 

presentations. And we have six presentations today. The 

first one on the list we are going to go down this list if you 

have the agenda in front of you. We have the Federal 
Railroad Administration with Rail 101. And one of the things 

that we have asked everyone to do is try to keep these to 

about 15-minute presentations so that we can get through 

these and looks like whoever is doing this presentation if you 

would come up here to the front by me and we will -- ah 

there she comes. It's a very hot time

>> So good morning I am Melissa Shurland with the FRA 

and before we get started on this presentation, unfortunately 

we have made significant changes to the presentation since it 

was sent out by Paul Beatty. And we would like the 

committee to consider doing this presentation at another 

time. We have added a lot of graphics and more information 

that will be useful to the committee versus this version that 

was given. We were not aware of the policy for having 

presentations in Braille as well as other accessible format we 

submitted the information to Paul too late.

>> Paul Beatty: I want to make sure the committee 

clarified that. As you know, per operating procedures, 

anything that is sent out to the committee has to be 

accessible. And so, there is a back end of accessibility on 

PowerPoints. Sometimes it's real simple to do sometimes it's 

not. And the closer and update to a presentation is provided 

to staff, the more difficult it is for us to make any changes 

and do a screening. Second, the question about handing it 
out here at the committee, if something is handed out in 

paper there is an obligation to assure accessibility which 

could include Braille. Electronically we make everything 

available on a website. And we had some problems there as 

you know. And we used Dropbox I think everybody got 

electronic version the website is up and running any member 

of the public can look at the current presentations and 

participate.

So, regrettably Melissa pointed out things that needs to 

be changed time wasn't available to make the change and 

disseminate it for purposes of maintaining Access Board 

policy as well as committee operating procedures. So, 

essentially Melissa is asking she has a better version, we can't 

give it to you right now, do you want to wait and see it later.

>> Melissa Shurland: That would be at the April 

meeting.

>> I'm sorry Billy, would that be available for -- for 

distribution before the April meeting? I mean, obviously it's 

not available today. But can it be --

>> Paul Beatty: Yes, I mean one thing good the next 

couple of weeks so people have it well in advance of that 

meeting

>> Paul Beatty: Yes. Everybody but one person 

communicated to me that they could not use the Dropbox 
connection. So, I found that a very simple way of getting 

something out versus try to go deal with regulations.gov is 

not designed for what we intend to use it for that's what I am 

required to do fitting that square peg in the round hole or 

vice-versa. You have to do jamming it's not the most user 

friendly tool for purposes of disseminating information in a 

hurry. So, we would get that out to you way before. Via 

Dropbox. And only one person communicated to me they 

can't access Dropbox. And then I would send it to them 

directly. So, that would be an option where Melissa would 

give me the update we do our screening and accepted it out 

to the full committee for purposes of the April meeting.

>> Just as a point of clarity, with regard to providing 

material in alternate formats Braille and such, does the Access 

Board have the resource to do that? In other words, if we 

were to provide you with material the board can provide 

the--okay. Is there any sort of timeframe you know in other 

words, if we want to make sure that something is available for 

presentation in the April meeting, what would be a reasonable 

deadline to have it into the Access Board so that there is time 

to do that.

>> Paul Beatty: Okay. This is sort of like Marilyn's 

point of challenging me but not on B but the operating 

procedure. Operating procedure said you have to give it to 
staff 5 days before the committee meeting. I can't remember 

it it was 5 calendar days or 5 business days.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> A week ahead of time should be good enough.

>> Paul Beatty: I will work with you if it's less than 5 

days just realize the more we have to review, the more hoops 

we have to go introduce but if it's simple that's possible.

>> Thank you.

>> Thank you any other questions or issues regarding 

accessibility issues for presentations.

>> This is Terry Pacheco. Since I am in the alternate 

format business and on this committee I would be more than 

happy to work with you gratis to get anything that you need 

done in any form of accessible format.

>> Paul Beatty: Thank you Terry, I appreciate that.

>> Terry: In return, do we have audible listening 

devices today? 

>> Paul Beatty: We have getting it. We are on it.

>> We got it.

>> Billy Altom: Thank you, Terry.

>> Paul Beatty: Did the committee agree to postpone 

this presentation on Rail 101 until the April meeting? I hear 

yes?

>> Yes.
>> Billy Altom: Yes, awesome. And thank you. So 

your next one is the -- okay, perfect.

(Discussion off record.)

>> Melissa Shurland: As I said, I am Melissa with the 

Federal Railroad Administration Office of Research and 

Development. I am a program manager focusing on 

passenger rail safety as well as accessibility issues and 

alternative fields. Today I am going to give you a summary of 

the FRA activities involved with PRIIA next generation 

equipment committee. It stands for Passenger Rail 

Investment and Improvement Act of 2008. It's an act from 

congress that enabled the funding of Amtrak as well as other 

aspects of rail transportation. So, today I will give overview 

of the PRIIA next generation equipment committee activities. 

How we developed enhanced accessibility recommendations 

for the PRIIA equipment. As well as characteristics of the 

bi-level car accommodations and new enhanced accessibility 

recommendations we are currently working on and I will also 

talk a little bit about the ADAAG review that we conducted 

that was disseminated out to the committee. So, the 

PRIIA 2008 authorization from congress section 305 directed 

Amtrak and the states DOTs to establish a consortium that 

will look at developing a pool of equipment for the next 
generation of passenger rail equipment within the United 

States. And the idea was to have a standardized fleet that 

can be used across the United States. Amtrak -- FRA 

provides support and input and the states that are currently 

part of the PRIIA process are California, Illinois, Iowa, 

Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, 

Oklahoma, Washington and Wisconsin. Other states are 

allowed to join, it's not an exclusive club. There is a process 

for gaining membership that -- you can find all of this 

information at search for high speed rails, it will lead you to 

the page.

Within the PRIIA group there are many different groups 

focusing on rail transportation equipment as well as operating 

procedures, and accessibility being one of them. So the 

accessibility policy group for which the accessibility work for 

which I am the team lead for had the task of reviewing the 

current and future needs of passengers with disabilities, and 

looking at the technology that is available we were to develop 

recommendations that would best address those needs. In 

the most reasonable and cost effective manner. The FRA 

enacted a contract with Oregon State University that would 

support the development of such recommendations. Oregon 

State University looked at the demographics of our population 

within the United States as well as the population of devices 
and they developed recommendations based on those 

growing trends looking at power devices manual devices sizes 

weights et cetera.

We also looked at current design for passenger rail 

equipment both in the United States and in Canada.

Participants in the PRIIA accessibility working group 

consisted of not only FRA but also car manufacturers such as 

Kawasaki, Talgo, et cetera. We have wheelchair lift suppliers, 

Ricon as well as service providers, Amtrak, Cal Trans, 

North Carolina DOT and we have input from the Access Board 

staff as we were developing our recommendations they 

provided input to provide better clarity for the 

recommendations and provided us with guidance. Our 

recommendations were presented to the executive board of 

the next generation equipment committee on which they were 

voted on for approval. And some of the -- some of them you 

will see cooperating with a specification used for 

procurement. As I said, we are looking at additional 

recommendations for the update specifications. So, I -- so, 

as we went through the process of developing these 

recommendations looking at larger wheelchair space within 

the consider, looking at wider vestibules, et cetera, we had a 

lot of input from the manufacturers. And for the PRIIA 

bi-level car designed by the next generation committee the 
car manufacturers and the supplies found it was technically 

feasible to incorporate these recommendations into the PRIIA 

bi-level car as defined. Nonstructural recommendations such 

as changes within the restrooms will be further reviewed by 

the group for updates into the specifications. And I will get a 

little bit more in-depth into this in the later slides. The 

characteristics of the bi-level car you have passengers seated 

in the upper and lower levels. It's intended for 

medium -- medium to long distance rail service and the pass 

through from car to car is on the upper level not the lower 

level. Within the PRIIA car types there is coach car, cafe, 

lounge car and a cab baggage car. The accessible seating for 

these cars are all located on the lower level and I have a 

conceptual layout of those three cars to show in the later 

slides.

And these, again, are just for the PRIIA bi-level car 

defined in the specifications. The overall length of the PRIIA 

bi-level car is characterized 85 feet long over all height of 16 

feet 2 inches. The overall width is 10 feet 6 inches it's a 

lower floor height 18 inches above top of rail upper floor 

height is 105.5 inches above the top of the rail. The side 

door opening to enter into the car area has been categorized 

as a minimum of 52 inches clear opening. As I said, the PRIIA 

bi-level specification is intended for the development of a 
standardized fleet of equipment that can be used throughout 

the United States for passenger rail service. So, what the 

accessibility working group finally decided on and was 

approved by the executive board are these four requirements 

for enhanced accessibility that were impacted the structural 

design of the car. And we were in a procurement process 

when these recommendations were finally agreed to so, we 

focus on getting the structural changes the recommendation 

that would impact structural changes to the car and will later 

focus op those that are nonstructural such as changes within 

the restroom, as well as changes at the seating area. So, 

what we started with and what I have on this table is the 

accessibility feature followed by our recommendations that 

were improved and included in the specifications being used 

for procurement currently. And what the regulations states 

within part 38. So, first off, the PRIIA car requires a car borne 

lift to be installed in the car. We looked at that and said it 

should be 800 pounds versus the requirements of 600 

pounds that is to take into account travelers using power 

chairs, scooters that might be a little bit more -- a little 

heavier a whole lot heavier than the manual wheelchair and to 

account for the weight of the passenger. So, we are allowing 

a larger population of people to be able to gain access to the 

rail car. With the heavier load for the lift.
We also look at the platform for the wheelchair lift and 

currently the regulation has it set at 30 by 48 inches. And we 

have pushed the envelope a little bit on that, and suggested 

and was approved platform size of 30 by 54 to account for 

the larger scooters that we are seeing in the population for 

mobility devices and also to allow for the larger power chairs 

that are being used by passengers with disabilities.

Now, it will account for any extra accessories that might 

be hanging off the back of the chairs to allow people to gain 

access to the cars. More importantly what we did on the 

vestibule area we changed the clearance for 90-degree turn 

into the seating around from-- area from 42 as required by 

regulations to 44 inches. So, once you get on to a lift and 

you get into the doorway of the car, you now have a 44 inch 

wide vestibule area versus 42-inch and it's a very small 

change but it's a first step first to make a difference to getting 

folks to make that turn and get into the seating area and into 

their accessible seating location.

Also, in terms of the accessible seating location we have 

increased that to 32 by 59 versus the regulation which 

requires 32 by 48 seating. The space was enlarged due to 

maneuverability in and out of the position. FRA and some 

members from the accessibility working group view a few of 

the passenger equipment at union station and we were able to 
determine that with the 30 by 48 space people with various 

types of wheel mobility devices were having problems getting 

into that space. So, we enhanced that a little bit and 

expanded to 32 by 59.

>> Melissa, previously the ADA had the platform size 

and the accessible seating location the same. 30 by 48 and 

30 by 48, your new regulation or proposal would have 30 by 

54 for the platform size and 32 by 59 for the seating location. 

How did you come up with the numbers?

>> Melissa Shurland: The 30 by 54 was really--the 

required opening for the door was 32 inches, we didn't want 

to extend into that space too much. As you say, we have to 

try to get the folks in through the doorway. And to make the 

length of the platform any longer than 30 by 59 we might 

have issue with having cargo lift on both sides of the car and 

having them to be stored within the vestibule area properly 

and not to take up too much space in the area. It was 

decided from the research that Oregon State University 

conducted that a 30 by 54 we will be able to capture a 

majority between 85 and 90% of the wheel mobility device 

population. Not necessarily the passenger but just the 

various sizes and types of the wheel mobility devices that are 

out there.

>> So, you were attempting to get the best -- to 
maximize the possible space could we have access to the 

Oregon State --

>> Melissa Shurland: That work is in process. We 

hope to have the -- we hope to have the research finalized in 

this fiscal year as for the PRIIA portion of that, that might see 

a different evolution. But FRA research will be able at the end 

of the fiscal year which include the background research.

>> Chris Hart: It includes a lift industry they can 

elaborate further. They had some years ago already 

increased the platform size, and the lift capacity to in some 

cases well over 800 pounds and beyond 54 inches. So, in 

fact, what OSU and FRA were recognizing is the industry was 

already there, and they -- they had not yet caught up to 

where industry is. If I am right, there is -- if you buy a lift for 

manufacturers most likely it's going to be well over 800 

pounds and going to be 54 inches on the platform; is that 

correct?

>> Yeah. In terms of what is typically done for 

paratransit platform sizes are generally larger 32 or 34 inches 

in width 54 and 56 inches in length. I think it's probably also 

appropriate to point out at this time you know you might 

question you know, well if the platform size for the wheelchair 

lift is only sort of 30 by 54, why allocate more space for the 

chair. Well, there was quite a bit of discussion about it's not 
just, you know, storage space there has to be room available 

to maneuver. So that was the justification for having the 

space for the chair and the vehicle a bit larger than the space 

on the platform itself.

>> Yeah, and I appreciate the -- those comments, the 

reason for my question is I would like to -- I think what we 

have got we probably have a lot of research that went into it I 

am trying to dig down. When we start looking at the items 

can start looking at factual type of things so that we can -- I 

am looking for further down the road when we try to make 

decisions.

>> Chris Hart: The --

>> Paul Beatty: Wait a minute.

>> Billy Altom: One second Chris. We have 5 more 

presentations to go what I would suggest is that we allow her 

to finish her presentation and ask questions. Robert, I did 

see your hand up, I am going to call on you because you were 

in the queue. Once we do that we will get on track and allow 

her to finish and ask questions so that we can get through all 

of these I can get you in the queue. Plus, for our participants 

who are using our interpreter services, they need to know who 

is speaking. I am watching, and we are eliminating part of 

our group. I want to get it back on track for us, thank you 

all. Go ahead.
>> Robert Carlson: Your on board circulation 

designation for clear passage 32 inches is that along the 

entire aisle of the lower level or just at the end of it?

>> Melissa Shurland: That is -- well, that is to allow 

access to the accessibility restroom but what we have seen so 

far that -- with one design layout that can be for the entire 

lower level. But that might not be typical for all equipment. 

And to -- you can't have 32 inch wide space but it may not be 

a clear passage to the restroom. We see maneuverability is 

an important aspect for enhanced accessibility.

>> Robert Carlson: Okay. Thank you.

>> Melissa Shurland: This is the layout for the coach 

car it's a conceptual layout. As I said we have procurement in 

process so we are seeing design drawings that is being 

developed that are incorporating the enhanced accessibility 

requirements. And this is the coach car -- the top drawing is 

the upper level and the lower drawing is the lower level where 

the accessible seating area is and restroom is located. As 

you see the accessible space there is a table that is also an 

energy observing table as is required by the passenger rail 

industry now to ensure that passengers are safe during 

collision and derailments. We have here the lounge car with 

the upper level on the top half of the slide, and the lower level 

where the ADA seating on the lower half of the slide. And 
this is the cab car baggage car once again upper level is the 

general seating and lower level is where we find the accessible 

location along with the accessible restrooms.

And as I mentioned, we were in the PRIIA accessible 

working group we are looking at additional accessibility 

enhancements for inter-city passenger rail car as defined by 

PRIIA. Here are some of our recommendations. We are 

looking for two accessible seating positions with two transfer 

seats on each car that are designated as PRIIA cars. And for 

these seating locations to have a window located next to 

them. And that's just the idea that passengers that are using 

disability devices, ability devices will be able to have a view as 

they travel like other passengers. We are also making minor 

suggestions and recommendations to the PRIIA group such as 

having a pivoting arm chair. And to have tray tables such a 

workstation table at the accessible seating location. As you 

saw from the conceptual drawings that I showed, those are 

already incorporated into the PRIIA layout this we would like it 

written within the specification. We also are looking to have 

30 at least a 30-inch vertical clearance underneath the tables 

if there is a table provided at the accessible seating location 

or within the dining car at any accessible seating location. 

Toe and knee clearance needs to be taken into consideration, 

and we have incorporated some of that within our 
recommendations. For the accessible restroom, we are 

recommending a power slide assist -- power sliding doors. 

And this is to allow access to the restroom to be easy as 

possible without the need for putting -- how heavy are those 

doors 200 pounds? The restroom doors

>> I don't know, I would assume --

>> Melissa Shurland: Well, the restroom doors are 

fairly having the idea of having a power assisted door will 

allow users to gain access to the restroom area much easier 

than having to use the sliding manual doors.

Within the restroom itself we have talked about 

maneuverability and being able to access the toilet, being able 

to access the sink is very important. We have looked at 

equipment currently within service and we have seen that 

folks in power chairs and scooters may be able to gain access 

to the restroom but may not be able to gain access to the 

toilet. They will not be able to transfer and do what they 

have to do within that small space or some folks may not be 

able to gain access at all because of their joy sticks on the 

mobility devices, or extra accessories that they need for 

travel. Within the restroom we are going to be making a lot 

of recommendations importantly we are asking for emergency 

call buttons to be located both from a seated position on the 

toilet as well as from about 10 inches above the floor. And 
we will be using the guidance from our view of the ADAAG to 

specify various reach ranges.

Some of the recommendations such as automatic toilet 

flush automatic soap dispense controls being able to reach 

the sink from the seated position if needed also having the 

split type toilet seat has been recommended and it might 

seem to be small, but it will facilitate use of the facilities.

One of our more important recommendations deals with 

communication. We have reviewed the current part 38 as we 

have seen that there is not much within the regulations for 

communication with passengers that have a disability, and 

therefore, we feel that for the PRIIA cars at a minimum it 

should have audio and visual announcements for passengers 

both informing of travel information as well as emergency 

information. And this will facilitate travels not only 

passengers with disabilities but for all passengers.

Also, of importance, is emergency evacuation for 

passengers that are using wheel mobility devices if the train 

breaks down if there is any type of derailment, collision, it's 

important to get those people off of the train. So, within the 

accessibility working group we have identified the need for an 

emergency evacuation chair that can be stored on the car that 

can be used to evacuation wheel mobility device users. We 

have also acknowledged that there is some wheelchair users 
as well as other passengers with disabilities that use service 

animals. And we have acknowledged that these animals need 

to be out of the passageway of other passengers out of the 

way of luggage that might be wheeled down the aisle or bags. 

So we -- we said that for the PRIIA cars it should have space 

for service animals out of passage way of people. And it can 

be under seats, but it has to be within the accessible space so 

that the user can communicate with the animal.

That's it for our recommendation. We are currently 

working with Amtrak and with our contractor Oregon State 

University to take our recommendation and to update various 

drawings of equipment type to see exactly how feasible they 

are and also to tweak them and make them a little bit more 

better. Once we go through that process, we will he will vote 

on it within the next generation equipment committee and the 

specification for PRIIA cars will be updated to include that 

information. In December of 2012, the U.S. Department of 

Transportation also the secretary issued guidance on 

accessibility on transportation equipment. Basically, it was 

dealing with what to do with accessibility standards--when 

accessibility standards apply to rail wars -- rail cars when 

there is no specific guidance within Part 38 the NGEC asked 

the working group to review all of ADAAG and to see which 

other parts are, might be applicable to passenger rail 
equipment. It pointed to chapters 3 and 9 talking about knee 

and toe clearances as reach ranges but the NGEC wanted to 

look at all of ADAAG and see if there is any guidance we can 

use to make train travel a little bit better. So, the 

accessibility working group formed the small team consisting 

of Amtrak the FRA some members from the U.S. Access Board 

staff, as well as some states, and we reviewed ADAAG, and 

looking at Part 38 and where Part 38 was silent on a specific 

feature. We looked to ADAAG to see if we could use any of 

that information. We developed the table that was 

disseminated out to you and I just would like to let you know 

that we have not done any technical feasibility assessment of 

these comparisons. We just said here is information that 

might be useful as you design a rail car to be more accessible. 

For example, when we talk about public address, there isn't 

anything significant within Part 38 about communication with 

passengers that have a disability so we looked to ADAAG and 

we did find section 810 that speak a little bit more on that, 

and we also advise the committee that what is in ADAAG bay 

in the be sufficient that you need to go a little bit beyond that. 

And as I said, with the procurement that is in process and 

Stan Hunter is the lead on that effort they are looking at 

communication devices and protocols for the PRIIA bi-level 

equipment and Stan can speak a little bit more to that. So, 
the review of the ADAAG was really a tool for the industry 

guidance to say these are things that consider as you design a 

rail car to be accessible. Knee and toe clearances that's not 

specifically called out within Part 38 but it's important as we 

talk about gaining access to various features within the car 

and maneuverability, communication. That's super important 

in this age of technology to be able to communicate with all of 

your passengers. And not only the ones that may have a 

hearing or sight problem but all passengers. Because we 

have all heard the squawks that come out some of the 

passenger rail equipment giving information, and it's not 

useful to many of us. So, as I said, it was really meant for 

reference guide. So, in conclusion, within the PRIIA 

accessibility working group we have identified a few issues 

that needs to be addressed with accessibility. 

Maneuverability, and more importantly communication. And 

because we were within a schedule to use public funding to 

support the PRIIA process as well as California was going to 

procurement process, we were not able to sufficiently and 

satisfactorily include any type of requirements for 

communication on the PRIIA bi-level cars. California has 

taken on the task of incorporating a change order that will 

include some of our features that we have identified here. 

But they will be going beyond what I have discuss and Stan 
can speak a little bit more to that. If he would like.

>> Stan Hunter: Thank you Melissa this is Stan Hunter, 

chief of office of rail. As Melissa mentioned, Cal Trans is in 

the lead working with Illinois DOT and next generation 

equipment committee to procure next generation bi-level rail 

car fleet for use in California. And throughout the midwest 

and potentially other locations in the United States as well. 

And during the development of the specifications for the 

bi-level car the next generation equipment committee adopt a 

number of the recommendations that Melissa discussed for 

wheelchair access and lift platform size and payload 

accommodation and some of the other things.

And then as a commensurate exercise Cal Trans working 

in corporation with Amtrak and with the NGEC is developing 

standards and specifications for a duty mode effective 

communication system that will be applied to the new 

equipment currently being built by Nippon Sharyo, as well as 

retroactively applied to the bi-level rail fleet in California for 

full system commonality and compatibility. That will include 

as many of the modern standards for dual-mode 

communication as we can through visual signs messages 

audible announcements, assistive listening devices. We are 

in the process of framing up the task order that will be 

utilized through Amtrak's contract with an on board 
information system provided that Amtrak is soon to award, 

and once the award is made then through a task order will 

develop technical specifications for the installation of the 

hardware as well as development of the content and the 

ongoing system management for the passenger 

communication system including automated announcements 

and signs, realtime announcement system status updates and 

potential other content passenger information amenities 

connecting information station stop information. And as we 

go forward within this committee, we will be coming back to 

the committee for some advice and pointers as to how we go 

about developing the system specification and the content of 

the on board information system so that as we develop the 

task order and ultimately implement it on the equipment we 

meet as many of the needs of the committee as we possibly 

can. We have an opportunity to really bring the bi-level fleet 

of rare equipment up to a very new standard that goes well 

beyond the existing ADA requirements, and serves all of our 

traveling public to a much better degree in addition to the 

needs of the group represented here. So, I want to thank 

Melissa and the FRA for putting together this presentation. I

think this is a very valuable tool for this group to understand 

where we are with the procurement of the existing equipment. 

We have gone through two levels of design review on the 
modern -- on the new Nippon cars incorporating the 

elements that Melissa discussed, as I said, the next step will 

be to develop the passenger information system standard that 

will be applied to these cars as well.

And if there are any questions, you can bring them up 

now or ask me at any time during today. Thank you Melissa, 

thank you chairman.

>> Billy Altom: Do you have a question?

>> Very quick. Two things. I never heard any mention 

of the space between the cars, so someone doesn't 

accidentally fall in number one. Number two we are talking 

about using buttons, which I don't think there is anything in 

the ADAAG about it, because it's so much newer, there cannot 

be touch pads. Touch pads are not accessible. You don't 

want to have to try to figure out how to open a bathroom 

door. Those are just two things to keep in mind. Thank 

you.

>> Melissa Shurland: Thank you for that feedback. 

And I think when we discussed emergency call buttons we 

were thinking more of mushroom style button versus, as you 

mentioned, something that might be touch pad.

>> I was thinking more of the ones to open the door 

into the restrooms for the toilet for the soap, those kinds of 

things too.
>> Melissa Shurland: We are cognizant any type of 

control devices needs to be accessible.

>> Touch pads are so popular now.

>> Melissa Shurland: Our guide from the Office of the 

Secretary Rich Dewilder, he actually has some of you guys may 

know he is a quadriplegic, he has been guiding us to 

incorporate as much as possible.

>> Billy Altom: Thank you. Way in the back.

>> Thank you, Melissa. Justin. The lifts increase from 

600 to 800, I am curious how you arrived at the 800; why not 

a thousand?

>> Melissa Shurland: That was because in talking to 

the car manufacturer for the structural elements of the car 

there were concerns that they may not be able to support 800 

pounds. 1000 pounds on both sides of the cars in a 

cantilever design, so we got guidance from Ricon that 800 

would be a safer bet to go. That was mainly for safety 

structural purposes.

>> Thank you.

>> Melissa, is the intent --

>> Identify yourself.

>> Larry, Amtrak. Is the intent for the with the 

increased lift capacity to keep the safety factor at 3 or is it 

going to --
>> Melissa Shurland: The safety factor is the same, it's 

the design load that has been changed.

>> Marilyn Golden: Marilyn Golden from DREDF. I

wanted to -- I don't know when is the right time to say this 

but I hope the recommendations which, you know, by and 

large if not completely are very good. Should be considered 

as a floor by this group. To work from, I would hope.

>> Billy Altom: Thank you. Any other questions any 

participants on the phone have a question? Or comments?

>> Yeah, I -- this is Ed Steinfield. Can anybody hear 

me?

>> We got you Ed.

>> Maybe I have to -- I'm sorry, I couldn't hear the 

entire presentation but I have it up on my screen I got pulled 

out of the call for a minute. But I just have a question about 

the plan just having some trouble figuring out what is going 

on here. On the lower level, though can -- what is 

happening on either end of the plans that show this empty 

space? And the other question that I have is: Why is there a 

lift when it looks like there is upgrade entry? Or maybe I am 

misreading this.

>> This is Josh Coran. I think I can answer both of 

those questions in my presentation on the various types of 

bi-level cars.
>> Billy Altom: Perfect. Will that work Ed? 

>> Ed Steinfield: Yes, I need to get more of a sense of 

context how you get in and out and what the lift is for. That 

can wait.

>> Billy Altom: Josh, will get that for us here in a bit. 

Any other questions or comments? Yes.

>> I did have one. I just wanted to make sure I wanted 

to talk specifically about the shared accessibility barrier for 

deaf and hard of hearing for communication purposes do we 

have anything --

>> Can you repeat that?

>> Sorry. I am looking at the accessibility that you are 

talking about here the specifications for the shared need of 

space for communication for deaf and hard of hearing users.

>> Melissa Shurland: Can you elaborate what it is the 

shared meet up space? I am not quite understanding that.

>> For text information, those specifications that you 

were talking about announcements deaf and hard of hearing 

people need to know where -- have you going to have any 

shared specifications available for deaf and hard of hearing 

users for announcements or texts or anything that is 

happening in specific areas?

>> Stan can speak a little bit to that and then I will 

follow-up.
>> Stan Hunter: This is Stan Hunter. I'm sorry, could 

you repeat the question? I missed a big part of it.

>> My apologies.

>> I just wanted to have -- have you reviewed any 

specifications in relation to deaf and hard of hearing 

individuals, can you elaborate more on what you are going to 

be doing in that regard basically.

>> Stan Hunter: We are in the process of collecting 

technical information for assistive listening devices. I know 

Janice Schacter Lintz who was here last meeting is not here 

today has offered to assist us in collecting technical 

information for assistive listening devices inductive loop 

systems. Right at the moment what we are doing is framing 

out the basic structure of the on board information system in 

identifying our needs, our areas of need for additional 

technical information. And certainly assistive listening device 

systems is one area in which we have technical research to do 

in order to put together a technical specification for the 

system. So, we are at the leading edge of that effort but we 

are very interested -- in proceeding with the implementation 

of assistive listening systems in -- with the assistance of this 

group.

>> Melissa Shurland: To piggyback on what Stan said 

within the working group and FRA we have had discussions 
with representatives from both the blind as well as deaf 

community that can provide input and guidance in terms of 

things contrast rates scroll rates for the equipment so that 

communication will be to -- so that within FRA and 

accessibility working group we have met with the American 

Council for the Blind as well as the national association of the 

deaf, to get input on what type of technology is best for 

communication, as well as the format, as well as items such as 

scroll rate for text, and contrast. So, FRA will be supporting 

Cal Trans and the NGEC going forward to ensure that the 

communication equipment as provided in the information is 

accessible as possible. Does that answer your question?

>> Yes, thank you.

>> This is Linda Martin, can you hear me?

>> Yes, go ahead Linda.

>> Linda Martin: I just have one point that I wanted to 

make about the communication aspect. What is in Part 38 

right now is basically requires that passengers be given 

information about travel. And what the regulation says right 

now is -- what the regulation says right now basically I am 

looking the right at it alternative systems or devices providing 

equivalent access are also permitted. This -- there is also a 

section and appendix -- this was all written in 1990 which 

says that we are sort of tabling DOT kind of tabled the 
discussion on what those alternative systems or devices would 

look like. Because at the time the technology was, I guess, in 

flux and there was intent to do studies about what the best 

method of communication would be. And so, this is 

definitely an area in Part 38 that needs a lot of work and 

needs guidance to make it clear what is required and what is 

not required with regard to dual-mode communication. Kind 

of a source of an issue for us and we hope that the committee 

will look at that, and decide what you know might be best as a 

recommendation. Thank you.

>> Billy: You're welcome. Thank you. Jim?

>> James Weisman: I am assuming you ruled out 

second level access there was consideration of it and it was 

dismissed?

>> Melissa Shurland: We did a lot of discussions on 

having access to the upper level however due to 

maintainability of lifts and reliability the committee decided at 

this time we were not going to go forward with those ideas. 

We have fairly extensive discussions, there was also structural 

concerns when we start to consider various collision 

scenarios.

>> James Weisman: Just a quick follow-up. Amenities 

would be able on a second level probably that wouldn't be on 

the first level. And I am curious how that was dealt with.
>> This is Stan Hunter from Cal Trans. I think 

Jeff's -- not Jeff Josh's bi-level presentation will clarify the 

complexity of the situation with the variety of rail equipment 

that has more than one level, and it's -- it becomes a real 

challenge in the tri-level or multi level rail car community to 

provide access to more than two levels on the equipment in 

particular. But in answer to your question about amenity, it's 

our objective to provide all of the same amenities on the lower 

level of the car as the upper level of the car toilet room 

access, lighting, public address, water fountain, seating, 

luggage storage, the only difference is pass-through from one 

car to another that's the upper level of the car at 100 inch 

height as Melissa suggested. All of the other amenities of the 

car emergency passage -- emergency passenger two-way 

communication, like I said, it's -- we are providing as much 

equivalent amenities on all levels of the car as is technically 

possible, other than pass-through from one car to the next. 

The lower level is equivalent to the upper level.

>> Billy Altom: Any other questions or comments? 

None? Thank you very much. Melissa and Stan, thank you.

 (APPLAUSE) 

>> Chris Hart: I want there is a question.

>> Billy Altom: Marilyn, I didn't see you back there, 

sorry.
>> Marilyn Golden: I was hiding from you. Melissa, 

these are proposed, I don't know the right language exactly. 

But in some kind of way, these are now proposed for PRIIA 

they are not part of PRIIA.

>> Melissa Shurland: Some of them are the ones 

structural in nature the wheelchair lift and wheelchair spacing 

the vestibule clearance those are actually part of the PRIIA 

specifications the restroom features such as water 

temperature limits, emergency call button within the restroom 

sliding doors those are proposed and we will be going 

through more review and we should be presenting them to 

the board by the end of the year.

>> Marilyn Golden: The end of 2014.

>> Melissa Shurland: Yes.

>> Marilyn Golden: I don't know all of the steps but I 

am curious what needs to happen if anything to make sure 

they are made part of PRIIA, is there a role for the public to 

play.

>> Melissa Shurland: The process with PRIIA we really in 

the working group have to show it's technically feasible. And 

then it goes to the policy group which makes policy for 

accessibility and they will design that -- you know this is 

something good for us to do. And it's as simple as getting 

approval from the executive board which consists of votes 
from the states, Amtrak and FRA. The states have spent one 

vote counts as one vote am I correct? So the 11 states that 

are participating members have one vote Amtrak has one vote 

and the FRA has one vote. Within the executive board.

>> Marilyn Golden: So the states have 11 votes or 

something.

>> Melissa Shurland: One.

>> Marilyn Golden: One as a whole I see that must be 

fun to decide upon. Okay. There isn't public comment or 

anything like that?

>> Melissa Shurland: There isn't public comment but 

the public is allowed to make what we call change requests to 

the specifications so you can submit a change request and 

within the committee we would review it and make a 

determination whether or not that change is possible. And 

we have had change requests from Gary Talbot in terms of 

accessibility and communication as well as David Nelson. 

And one of the changes that we have incorporating thus far is 

the need for assistive listen -- systems within the train that 

change was accepted and incorporated into the latest specks 

however it was after the California procurement that was not 

part of that spec that was used. But since it's my 

understanding they will be incorporating that feature on their 

cars.
>> Thank you.

>> Stan Hunter: Marilyn, this is Stan again. One other 

thing Melissa mentioned toilet room amenities that had not 

made it technically into the specification for the bi-level cars 

but we are still looking into touchless faucets and soap 

dispensers. We are looking into power assist toilet room 

doors. Water temperature there are Food and Drug 

Administration regulations for water temperatures we have to 

do a comparison between what this group proposes and what 

FDA requires. A lot of those amenities. We know they are 

on the horizon and desired by the group and we are in a 

position we are we are only rolling them out in the new 

Nippon order but retrofits to toilet rooms we are adding 

amenities not only the amenity for this group but for all 

passengers and the technology for things for touchless 

faucets is common standard reliable. It's more reliable and 

easier to maintain operationally less to maintain than a 

traditional button faucet. There is a lot of advantages to adopt 

a lot of the recommendations even though they are not 

requirements.

>> Linda Martin: This is Linda. I have one comment 

when appropriate.

>> Go ahead, Linda.

>> Linda Martin: I wanted to make the comment which 
is that Melissa you probably know this but the specifications 

are not regulations they are voluntary I am putting air quotes 

around that a little bit. Specifications that builders can use. 

FRA you know, essentially required it for in certain 

procurements including the bi-level multistate procurement. 

Therefore we are required, in air quotes, to apply those. And 

have graciously agreed to look at all of the other ones that 

didn't make it into the specification for those new rail cars. 

But I mean, that's why you know the process is different it's 

not -- it's not a rulemaking so there isn't you know the typical 

notice of proposed rulemaking and commenting and all of 

that, that will occur you know with this group.

>> Billy Altom: Thank you.

>> Robert Carlson. Just a follow on to that comment 

about the second level, upper level accessibility. I notice in 

the cafe car there is a food service elevator, is that a fully 

accessible elevator or is it like a service elevator for the 

operation.

>> That's just service -- it's essentially a dumb waiters 

to move boxes of food products to the upper level.

>> All right. Thanks.

>> Billy Altom: All right. Thank you very much.

>> Melissa Shurland: Thank you.

>> Billy Altom: We have time for a question.
>> Introduce yourself

>> Frank Maldari, MTA, New York. The question that I 

had was where did 10 inches come from, the emergency call 

button height in the bathroom, I was wondering the purpose 

of that.

>> Melissa Shurland: That was just in the event that 

someone falls on to the floor of the restroom to be able to 

reach a call button we feel 10 inches was sufficient especially 

for someone of small stature.

>> Okay.

>> Billy Altom: Awesome. Thank you very much. 

Fun part of being the chair of this I am going to make an 

executive decision here we are going to take a break for about 

10 minutes to give our folks a chance to catch up. And our 

signers the chance to take a little break, and plus selfishly I 

need to go to the restroom. So we are going to break for 10 

minutes we will come back at a quarter till and we will be up 

in with the next presentation. 

>> People on the call we will leave the lines open.

(Short recess taken.) 

>> BILLY ALTOM: If the members will come back to the 

table we will get together and do the next presentation on the 

toilet module footprint. And then we will have a chance to go 

find a place to eat lunch. All righty. It looks like we have 
folks pretty much back. Thank you for indulging me for a 

quick break. Up next we have our next presentation is from 

the Bombardier --

>> Correct.

>> BILLY ALTOM: -- Transportation. And we are going 

to turn it over immediately and just allow you to take off on it.

>> Good morning, my name is Andre Gagne, I work for 

Bombardier and my presentation is on the subject of toilet 

modules. The first thing that I am going to discuss is the 

current CFR regulations just a subset of the requirements 

those that affect the toilet footprint, the second topic is will 

present a few north American toilet modules, and originally 

my presentation was supposed to end there, but then I had 

the unfortunate idea of asking my colleagues in Europe to 

send whatever materials they had right before Christmas. 

And so they flooded me with information and I am going to 

present to you -- I call that the benchmarking but let's say a 

summary of the information that they provided. I am a 

comparison table that will compare the various modules and 

requirements in terms of area. And then a few conclusions. 

So, the CFR first of all there is a requirement for the minimum 

clear floor area of 35 by 60. There is requirements for the 

doorway, it has to be 32 inches minimum opposite to the 

water closet and 39 inches if it's on the side wall. Fixtures 
may overlap under certain conditions. The grab bars have to 

be -- there is one that has to be behind the water closet. 

And another one that has to be on the side wall next to the 

water closet as well. And wheelchairs in another section of 

the CFR wheelchairs have to be 30 by 48 minimum. 

So -- now, I found a few issues with those requirements. 

Here my comments. First of all, there is no relationship 

between the floor area and the water closet itself. So you 

leave the rest to the engineers who design the toilet mod 

actual. Second of all there it's a rectangle square corners are 

not necessarily adding usability to the space. And another 

comment is on the grab bars. They are attached to walls and 

not -- there is no relationship between the grab bars and the 

water closet. So, in terms of north American toilet modules 

the first is from the Long Island railroad cars the M7's you can 

see the perimeter in the dark line there is a toilet door in 

orange color 39 inches wide there is a few overlapping 

features there is a bench here it's give to -- it's difficult to see 

with the laser there is the bench the toilet seat is right here 

(indicating). I will get my laser pointer if you don't mind this 

one is not working well. Give me a minute.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Andre, could you describe that?

>> Correct. This is a toilet module view from the top, 

top down. You see the perimeter itself that's floor heavily. 
You have the door right here (indicating). And then you have 

transfer seat that can be folded up. You have the toilet seat 

here. And there is the sink right there (indicating). And if I 

put the minimum clear floor area over that you see it meets 

the requirements. Next step is new nerves multi level 

commuter car. You have the perimeter of the toilet module 

at the far left right here. The door in orange here 

(indicating). And overlapping features are the toilet seat and 

the sink in the corner right here (indicating). And again the 

minimum clear floor areas 35 by 60. And last up is I think it 

was a request from Mr. Cannon, Amtrak, Acela Express, all 

three are the same scale you can compare them. And so, 

again, the toilet module perimeter of the floor level you have 

the door which is curved 39 inches of clear width opening. 

And the toilet seat overlaps a little bit on the sink here in the 

corner. And that might explain why it's maybe a bit more 

easy to use because there is obviously more space you can 

see the 35 by 60 but there is more space next to the water 

closet. That might be more convenient for transferring from 

the wheelchair to the water closet. Now, in the information I 

received from Europe, there is the technical specific cases for 

interoperability the requirements for vehicles that go across 

borders in Europe. And it's from the European railway 

agency. If you click or put the presentation in presentation 
mode and you click on the logo, you can get directly to the 

website. And I believe this specification is free of charge so if 

you want to take a look at it for yourself.

Next up is the information or operating rule from the 

international union of railways the UIC they provide guidance 

for accessibility of rail cars. The last one the next one sorry 

is from the European committee for standardization they are 

in the -- they are developing a standard for the accessibility 

of toilet modules. It's not out yet it's being drafted. But you 

can have different versions one from Germany, one is the 

British, they are developing one. They are going to try to 

combine them into one. And the last document that I got is 

from the ISO international organization for standardization. 

It provides requirements for specifications for wheelchairs and 

occupants. I have a few pictures of European modules. You 

will see common themes. First of all, there is maneuvering 

space, which is usually a circle. The water closet is there. 

You can see the handrail there which is foldable. There is 

one on the side wall here and the sink which is accessible 

from the maneuvering space. This one is for original cars in 

Germany. Next one, again, for high-speed rail Germany, in 

Sweden you have the maneuvering space, the foldable grab 

handle, water closet and other fixed handle here on the side 

wall and sink. And another one in France EGC still 
maneuvering space the foldable handrail fixed handrail and 

the sink. Slide differences between modules but they fairly 

look the same. The process that I found in European 

regulations is the following they start defining what 

wheelchair and occupant is in terms of dimensions. Then 

they talk about transferring the passenger in the wheelchair 

from the wheelchair to the water closet. And then they talk 

about general accessibility of inside the toilet module. So, I 

will touch each of those subjects. First one in ISO standard 

they provide dimensions for the wheelchair. They also define 

dimensions for the wheelchair with the occupant so what you 

do they add two inches for the feet for the length. And two 

inches on each side for the hands. And various regulations 

define the turning circle, which is 1500 meters or a bit more 

than 59 inches in diameter. And that's the envelope that the 

minimum envelope inside which a wheelchair can be turned 

360 degrees.

The CFR is at 30 by 48 which is just a bit less than the 

wheelchair with occupant from the ISO. I made a small 

sketch to put everything into perspective. So the first dotted 

line the dark line is the wheelchair from the ISO. In gray 

dotted line here (indicating) is the wheelchair with occupant 

from the ISO. You can see in blue it's the CFR requirement 

for the wheelchair. So very close to the other ones. You 
have the 35 by 60 millimeter floor area here in red. And the 

turning circle of 59.1 inches in diameter. So next up is 

transfer methods. There is two methods that are defined. 

The first one is diagonal. Basically the wheelchair passenger 

is facing the toilet between 0 degrees or can go up to angle of 

125 degrees on either side of the toilet. To accommodate 

that kind of traps for. The second method is lateral. Where 

the wheelchair is next to the water closet. And it can be at an 

angle between 0 and 40 degrees. Again, to help in 

transferring the occupant from the wheelchair to the water 

closet is hand rails so there is -- it has to go up to the edge 

of the toilet here water closet. And the wheelchair side it has 

to flip up like you saw on the pictures earlier on the other side 

it can be fixed. Fixed. Accessibility the first thing, there is 

clear space in front of the water closet obviously for the feet 

of the passengers. And then, the maneuvering space the first 

thing is the passenger goes through the door, gets to the 

maneuvering space, can do a turn access to the various 

facilities inside the toilet. And then get into the transfer 

position. Now what I put on the graph there is the lateral 

position but it could be something else could be a different 

position 40 degrees instead of 0 degrees like it's shown here. 

And they also mention at the bottom there is a need for a 2 

inch radius to facilitate cleaning but it doesn't affect the 
maneuvering space since I mention there was a 2 inch space 

around each side of the wheelchair for hands, so that use that 

space also to put a radius at the bottom. Here on this table 

what I did was to compare the area taken by the various 

modules and requirements. I can -- the CFR requires 14.6 

square foot you can see the various modules Long Island 

New Jersey and the Amtrak Express toilets are taking 19 and 

24 square foot. The turning circle by itself is 19.1 square 

foot. And a European toilet style with lateral transfer with 

turning circle inside is 25.2 square foot. Slightly larger than 

the Amtrak Acela module it bet uses the space inside the 

toilet. So, the comments and conclusions, like I mentioned 

earlier the CFR does not establish a relationship between the 

clear floor area and other toilet fixtures. This clear floor area 

is square or rectangular but has square corners so it doesn't 

have any usable space in those corners. The ISO covers 80% 

of wheelchair -- 85% of wheelchairs this is a statement in the 

standard that says that. The wheelchair size defined in the 

CFR is almost identical to the one in the ISO with the occupied 

wheelchair in the ISO standard. The CFR requires grab bars 

to be installed on walls, I believe it would be better if they are 

located from the closet so they would be more usable. I

was -- actually some standards in Europe and my colleagues 

also in Europe mentioned to me that the lateral transfer seems 
to be the preferred method the lateral transfer at 0 degrees 

seems to be the preferred method that's the one if I go back 

that's this one here represented here. Seems to be the 

preferred method of transfer from the wheelchair to the water 

closet. Having a turning circle inside the toilet makes it 

easier to access all of the features of inside the toilet 

including exiting from the front. And toilet modules that 

have this turning circle inside are just slightly larger than the 

ones in the Acela Express the other thing if you have a 

diagonal transfer position this can lead to a smaller toilet 

module footprint. And this is it. Thank you.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you. Anybody have any 

questions or comments for Andre?

>> Blair Slaughter. I apologize, I came in after we 

started. Are there any weight capacities for wheelchair lifts 

or anything did you see anything in the European standards 

for those?

>> I don't remember seeing it but I did not review 

everything because there was a lot of materials so a lot of 

features, so --

>> BILLY ALTOM: Okay.

>> To save you trouble and tell you that the design in 

the CFR is not really accessible. It was based on old design 

from Amtrak and at the time of the discussion it was pretty 
clear that Amtrak didn't want to change the standards so we 

fixed it a little bit. We sort of nudged the door and so forth. 

And we always knew it was inaccessible. One of the 

problems that Amtrak mentioned they said it was imperative 

they have two restrooms. On each car. And so, the idea of 

trying to fit accessible and inaccessible was a problem 

for -- from that design. Now, the Acela has both it has two 

restrooms a phone booth and accessible restroom I have used 

both. The thing that I noticed when I toured the prototype in 

Vermont with FRA, and the thing that I noticed was that it had 

a power door that Amtrak then took off because in fact there 

is a -- there is a spot on the wall that shows where the button 

used to be. At least in some of the Acelas I have been in. 

The issue is we know that the current standard is not 

accessible. We need to do something better. The 

Bombardier is far better, it allows you to maneuver I could 

actually turn around in this chair and make a side transfer and 

so forth. I have not seen some of these other toilets to see 

whether they are really work as well as that one. At least I 

know that that one worked great.

>> This is Andre, would you like to answer the power 

doors?

>> Sure. As I recall -- and Andre and I worked on the 

Acela program together. At the time that the Acela was being 
developed, what we had was a sort of a power assist but there 

was a time delay feature in the door that allowed the door to 

remain open for a period of time and then close using the 

system of counter weights or spring drive or things. 

Ultimately as I recall, that ended up just not functioning well 

with any kind of regularity. However, the technology, I think 

it's safe to say that the technology for power doors has come 

a long ways. And we are currently applying the power door 

to our new single level sleeper rooms and it looks like it's 

going to be very reliable system. So, I think going forward it 

becomes a very realistic thing to include without having to 

worry about it you know working reliably. The work that was 

done, Dennis going back to the very earliest days of the ADA, 

when Dennis was at the Access Board there was a lot of things 

that constrained Amtrak with its existing cars that -- that we 

were able to get away from on the Acelas. One of them being 

the way that the toilet systems themselves worked not just the 

room space. We have done some other tee signs and 

perhaps in future meetings I can bring those in and show you 

where we are heading to have rooms that are truly accessible 

rather than aligning up to an old sketch in the CFR.

>> This is Andre. If I may, the cut out was for the 

latching system there was a button to unlatch the door but 

you had to open it manually. And then there was a system to 
bring it back to close, to close position automatically.

>> I have a comment that's related. That is: One of 

the big problems with all of these doors, is when you close 

the door the latch mechanism is very close to the edge. It's 

very, very difficult to get to it. Especially with the footrest on 

your chair. Now, years ago, it was an Amtrak design that had 

that old inaccessible restroom with the sliding door. They 

actually put the latching mechanism on the other side of the 

door. Which was convenient for accessibility but nobody ever 

saw it there and so most of the people that went in didn't 

know how to latch the door. But there is a problem with 

having that latch even you know with the lever so close to the 

door. I think we need to change operating mechanisms 

requirement that says, any operable control has to be minute 

number of 12 inches away from an inside corner.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Any other comments or Chris did you 

have? John?

>> Jon Holbrook. Stan, if you could give a little input on 

the PRIIA -- I see there was discussion about the PRIIA toilet 

room, I don't see the 60 inch turning circle there, and you 

know the thought there because I see there are some cars 

where you have the opportunity to have a turning circle and 

then there is as Blair would attest to there is times when toilet 

room you want to be able to go straight in, transfer, power 
door, you know smaller -- a smaller toilet room. So, I see 

the shape of the PRIIA sketch here and I just wondered you 

know how the -- how did that evolve.

>> Stan: Thanks, Jon. Stan Hunter again. The PRIIA 

conceptual floor plan provided in the previous presentation 

was really for the purposes of conceptual layout and in 

addition to meeting -- as we went through and developed the 

specifications for PRIIA of course there was the requirement to 

meet the minimum Tim mentions of ADA. But after the 

award to Nippon and going through design review of the toilet 

room module and the circulation of the vestibule and access 

to the passageway to the accessible seating area, as well as 

based on the toilet room size for the equipment that we have, 

in California currently, we in addition to the 35 by 60 

rectangular clear space requirement, we added the 

requirement -- you there? We added the requirement for a 

60-inch radius -- 60-inch diameter turning circle as well so 

we have both 35 by -- 35 by 60 -- 35 by 50 foot print -- 35 

by -- sorry. Yeah the 35 by 60 wreck tack gel -- we have 

oath rectangle as well as 60-inch diameter clear space turning 

circle in our toilet room to meet both requirements. Because 

we felt we had established a level of circulation in the toilet 

room on the existing equipment that meant both the turning 

circle and the rectangle and we wanted to maintain that.
>> All right. Just one more thing Billy. I think I 

probably get some concurrence of people who thought of 

toilet rooms in their sleep as far as the designs. On a 

commuter car where your vestibule set up is a little bit 

different in order to have handicap accessible toilet room, that 

60-inch circle could be prohibitive or it would have to be 

moved, you know, further into the car if you have a 

center -- center vestibule door like on a lot of commuter cars. 

I think when it gets to the discussion, there could be some 

issues of applicability, you know, one car type versus another 

where you come into the California car and you have that 

vestibule in the open area to do that but if you were -- if you 

came in N vestibule and turned into another door way that 

went into an aisled car you are hard pressed to-- to put that 

size of the toilet room. They can be accommodated Andre I 

don't know -- I don't know whose car it was in Europe it had a 

power door, you could drive straight into the thing and the 

power door you know closed behind and control was there. 

They had about a 0, you know, 0 degree side transfer the sink 

was right there. You had to hope that the door was 

incredibly reliable because there was -- I could understand 

where a person could do everything in there but if the door 

didn't work they are in trouble. So --

>> Dennis Hunter: One of the issues that drove that 
particular design of the old inaccessible restroom was the 

placement of the aisle and of course the Acela fixes that 

having the aisle offset it's not in the center anymore. Part of 

the rationale or we did discuss that at one point with FRA and 

Amtrak both, was that to -- the Acela is level boarding. You 

don't have step wells in the vestibule. If you have step wells 

in the vestibule the fear was if you offset the aisle at all, you 

would have a possibility of somebody coming down the aisle 

and getting into the step well if it were open. So, that was 

one of the issues. If you have level boarding, there shouldn't 

be a problem with that issue. But if there are step wells that 

may be something that needs to be worked on. It seems to 

me you could have, you know, a barrier that came into place 

when the steps were when the trap was lifted.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you Ed first

>> Ed Hoff, New Jersey Transit. Some of the European 

models and I couldn't tell whether they were power operated 

or really minimum effort. If they are really minimum effort, 

can that same technology be used on a standard rectangular 

door a flush sliding door. I was curious to know about the 

circular doors and the effort involved in opening and closing 

the doors manually your reach range is going to change with 

every inch that you move the door. And what--what 

ergonomics played into determining what the radius would 
be. First of all, are they power doors in the European models.

>> Yes, there are power doors I received documentation 

regarding those and requirements and system functional 

descriptions for those systems. So for most of them yes, 

they are powered.

>> Ed Steinfield: And the big concern obviously is also 

Dennis raised earlier with the reliability of the power modules. 

Are obviously we employ them still today. The reliability is 

increased to the point where we are not after prayed to use 

them anymore are we?

>> To use what?

>> Ed Steinfield: Power doors.

>> Power doors for restrooms? We haven't 

implemented one a power door but I have reliability data from 

suppliers in Europe that assess their systems improvement 

have been used in multiple vehicles before and are reliable 

so--

>> BILLY ALTOM: Blair then--

>> Blair: One of the things that I noticed in the 

European restrooms, is the proximity the sink to the water 

closet. And our thinking has been for a long time that ideally 

the sink is accessible while you are still on the water closet. 

And while you are trying to access is it from the wheelchair. 

And I have heard that as being very important thing for 
ambulatory folks as well as who have colostomy bags and 

things like that being able to reach the sink prior to traps 

forking or while seated is very valuable. So, I am just curious 

what thoughts there might be on that. It didn't seem to be 

an issue on the European side.

>> BILLY ALTOM: That's a new one on me

>> If he look at the sketches, -- if we look at the 

sketches let me go back here (indicating). You can see that 

the Acela module has access to those sinks directly from the 

wheelchair. For the other modules it would be a little bit 

difficult for the New Jersey module and the Long Island 

railroad module. Maybe depending on the size of the 

wheelchair it would be difficult. For the -- if I go to the 

modules from Europe, from what I see they are all accessible 

directly from the wheelchair. So that could be a feature that's 

implied in the rule saying that this is preferable or mandatory.

>> Right.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Okay.

>> Terry with RailPlan. Two issues, curb door powers 

and manual. We design and build superliner coach accessible 

bathrooms with curved doors without power with very low 

effort to operate them. And the new view liner accessible 

bedroom which is also bedroom, bathroom, and shower, has a 

curved powered door and when you lose power it's also very 
easy effort manually opening door.

>> Okay.

>> Terry: As a matter of fact, the superliner coach 

bathroom was given an international design award through 

the Brunell organization jointly with RailPlan and Amtrak we 

had international positive attention for once.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> BILLY ALTOM: Awesome. Jackson?

>> Yes. Just answering Ed's question. Just from what

I have seen internationally if you ever get a chance to ride for 

example the Seimen's high-speed train they have ADA toilet 

module with a power door that's curved. And it's from what I 

have seen fairly reliable you push a button the door opens you 

get on the other side you push another button it automatically 

closes there is another button under that to lock the door. 

As -- as was mentioned if you know in the event that you do 

lose power there is a latch on there that you could manually 

open and close the door with little effort as well.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Awesome. Chris?

>> Chris Hart: I would just note the curved doors if 

they are in -- in use for the last 25 years comparing that to 

my travels as a high school student in Europe when I didn't 

know -- getting on the GTB I was there in '94 it was amazing 

to see the difference compared to existing new rails. What 
the design was. In Europe or in Asia, you would not walk into 

a stainless steel vestibule with ice and here in a sense we do 

that from Chicago east.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Chris Hart: And I say that in 2014. So, our 

European and Japanese colleagues figured out how to put 

(inaudible) in vestibules. So, in some ways we are trying to 

catch up with where--around the world. I think what Andre 

did so graphically it show that one thing that Stan said he 

could help us to overlay existing California that will help on to 

Andre's so--so the existing California rail you can see what 

that one looks like. It's similar to that one that's in use in 

Dallas Ft. Worth and a couple other commuter rail systems, 

you see there is a lot of commonalities in what California is 

doing just 10 years--i don't know how long that -- I don't 

know how old this equipment is to what Dallas Ft. Worth is 

and a couple of other systems clearly, I think it shows 

exemplary areas in where the industry has figured it out. 

And given electric doors, I am pretty confident this is not a 

(inaudible).

>> BILLY ALTOM: Jon.

>> I am looking at, Terry mentioned the bathroom I am 

looking at it on your site. The discussion really will come 

down to it's about transfer. That's a diagonal. And then you 
have the lateral -- and then you have the lateral there are 

spatial constraints but then again he and I are probably not 

the ones to be speaking to the preference. But that's what it 

comes down to wouldn't you say Terry spatially whether it's a 

diagonal or--

>> Terry: In our case it comes down to what the 

agency, the specific agency has set as a target. And what 

they-- what they set as their priorities. So, if the agency 

says, and I don't think I have ever heard this but we don't care 

about revenue seats, give us the best bathroom you can, you 

know, we can do a wonderful job. They rarely say that. So, 

it's-- it is the compromise of you know what the minimum 

requirements are what the optimum is and some balance in 

between. And quite frankly what we do is a reflection pass 

through our customer who is typically the car builder and it's 

their interpretation of what the agency directs them to do.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Any other questions or comments 

from or participants on the phone?

>> Dennis Hunter: Bombardier is the 

drawing -- because in addition to setting out measurements 

and so forth in guidelines it's useful to have a drawing that 

shows those guidelines that has measurements in it are they 

Bombardier drawings of the Acela toilet proprietary or could 

they be used in the guideline?
>> Andre Gagne: What I did make sketches from the 

original drawings I would have to look it up with the legal 

department, okay, to see if we can provide those drawings 

freely. And I will give that to you later.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Okay. Larry?

>> Larry: I will say that if it -- if it helps the process, 

from the Amtrak side, when we typically go out if we are 

working with a suppliers like RailPlan, we buy the engineering 

so we own the designs that's not necessarily the case when we 

buy cars. But I think it's safe to say if sharing that 

information for the process helps the committee anything that 

we have we will be glad to share with the organization. As 

long as it's not owned by a --

>> Mike Wetherell. I suggest what we do if we do 

something like we don't take a particular car builder's drawing 

and put in what we put forward. What we should do is take it 

and derive information from it and use a sketch we don't want 

to show favoritism or anything --

>> Larry: If I may, again it's important to understand 

when the Acela bathroom layout was done there was actually 

some aspects of that that don't meet the strict letter of the 

rule, and there was an equivalent facilitation done with 

Bombardier on that back in its development. It's more 

functional and that was part of the development process. So, 
I would say we have to be careful on what we use if from that 

standpoint. I agree I think it's important that we show here 

are examples of what functions well. I will go a little further 

and say, I think if we are diligent it our process here, we 

should go so far as to define what levels of what transfer 

methods are provided if it's one method which I which is 

dangerous we should have multiple methods for transfer 

because that will accommodate more people.

>> Chris Hart: If I might I would like to interject. I

just want to answer regarding research. (inaudible) Ed and 

staff I am sure will be happy if folks are interested to go 

through some of that research so that folks understand 

because questions raised this morning are questions that 

folks have asked off and on for years. But now that really 

good dialogue help form questions going forward. And 

transfers, there is no one transfer that is ever (inaudible).

>> BILLY ALTOM: Any other questions or comments? 

Just as a person who uses a wheelchair and travels a lot, one 

of the things that I look for in accessibility and that you value 

accessibility for is because the thing that I get every time pick 

a mode of transportation I travel by myself. And that's the 

first thing that happens are you by yourself? I am going so 

we have to keep in mind that people with disabilities can do 

and will travel by themselves without the help of other folks 
so those accessibility features are incredibly important 

for -- especially from a personal level I wanted to throw the 

commentary out there. Thank you Andre for your 

presentation, I appreciate it. Let's give him a hand. Thank 

you.

 (APPLAUSE)

>> Dennis Hunter: I assume -- one assumes that you 

will have the nurse

>> BILLY ALTOM: In the Netherlands they assume I will 

have a nurse?

>> Dennis Hunter: Or some companions the 

accessibility is designed that way.

>> BILLY ALTOM: We will have someone perfect timing 

you got us to the bottom of the hour it's 12:30. I think we 

should -- I think we should work until 1 -- no, I wanted to 

see people's expressions I think we should go ahead and take 

our break for lunch we can come back at 1:30. Perfect. 

There are places to eat just outside around the corner I am 

not sure you are aware if you go straight across the street into 

the building there is a food court on the -- you are going to 

be around me long enough to know every time I point it's 

going to be to my right.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> BILLY ALTOM: You want to go that way. Thank you 
very much we will break for lunch and be back at 1:30 for 

those on the phone be back here in just an hour.

>> Ladies and gentlemen on the teleconference the 

phone line will remain open.

(Lunch recess taken.)