Note: The output shown below is from the Communication 

Access Realtime Translation (CART) system used in the 

Communications Subcommittee Meeting #10 and is generally

unedited. The CART system was used to provide an 

accommodation to persons with hearing loss and persons who 

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

public on the internet during the meeting. 

CART Operator: Beverly Early

Rail Vehicles Access Advisory Committee

Communications Subcommittee Meeting #10

U.S. Access Board

Thursday, November 6, 2014

U.S. Access Board. This is the U.S. Access Board.

>> This is the U.S. Access Board.

>> Marsha do I have you on the line? Marsha Mazz?

>> Yes I am here I was unmuted

>> Jim Pecht? 

Here.

>> Okay. Okay. So we are good we don't have 

everybody on the line right now but we have to start. 

This is Rosemarie with U.S. Access Board and I will go 

ahead and when you hear your name repeat your 
name and the organization that you are with we are 

going to do an audio check and will call at the same 

time. So we have Marsha Mazz and Jim Pecht Paul 

Beatty?

>> Yes.

>> Nd a the line is good.

>> Melissa Shurland?

>> This is Melissa Shurland from FRA.

>> and the line is good.

>> Melissa Anderson?

>> Melissa Anderson Access Board staff.

>> the line is good.

>> Ed Hoff?

>> Ed Hoff New Jersey Transit.

>> Line is good. Blair Slaughter?

>> Blair Slaughter from Amtrak.

>> Line is good. Andrew Phillips?

>> Yes. Andrew Phillips.

>> and the line is good.

>> David Martinez.

>> David Martinez Metra.

>> The line is good. Janice Lintz?

>> Yes.

>> Line is good.
>> David Nelson?

>> Yes, David Nelson Amtrak.

>> Operator just in case we need any lines 

boosted during the calls and I will repeat the request 

on the chat box here. Paul bait tee I guess you are 

on the call so you are taking over?

>> Correct.

>> Okay. Go ahead Paul.

>> Okay. Good afternoon this is Paul Beatty. 

Welcome to the meeting of the Communications 

Subcommittee. As you know since anyone may 

participate in subcommittee discussions no time of 

public comment has been scheduled during the 

two-hour call. Since the CART system chat box is not 

available for subcommittee participants who are only 

using CART to participate in and you desire to raise a 

question or make a statement use E-mail access 

RVAAC @ access-board.gov. Shortly I will have to 

leave the call but Melissa Anderson will be monitoring 

that box so she will communicate if anybody sends an 

E-mail. When speaking out of line please remember 

to give your name, as a reminder this subcommittee's 

next meeting is scheduled for December 4th. Rose 

has introduced those on the line, so I am turning the 
call over to Jim Pecht the staff lead for this 

subcommittee. Go ahead Jim. 

>> JIM PECHT: Good afternoon, this is Jim Pecht. 

I am going to be running today's meeting. Our 

subcommittee chair Terry Pacheco had another 

commitment she could not get out of she sends 

apologies and regreets. She won't be on the call 

today. I will be going with this. Since we had -- we 

are starting a little bit late I am going to skip going 

through the discussion of the October 2nd meeting 

we can go back to it later. We had a request from 

Melissa Shurland who wanted to discuss back up 

power for the variable message systems because she 

has a commitment she has to leave for in a bit I will 

turn it over to for whatever comments she wants to 

start with we can go from there.

>> Thank you very much, Melissa Shurland from 

FRA back in September-august I spoke entirely with 

office -- (inaudible). Can you hear me now?

>> Yes we can, but your line goes in and out.

>> Okay. So, back in August/September time 

frame I -- on the possibility of tying the variable 

messaging system into the emergency communication 

(inaudible) for their equipment. And the consensus 
within the FRA that there is no regulation that would 

prevent the feature from being part of passenger rail 

car. They feel it's a good idea to have such a feature 

the only caution should the rail cars be separated 

from the locomotive during derailment or any 

incidents. The cars that are behind the-- separated 

from the locomotive may not be able to get the 

message. So essentially any system that is a variable 

message system even though it may have power you 

probably have to consider a secondary -- like a WI/FI 

system so that you can communicate to all cars 

whether or not they are connected by a train line. 

Which hard wire train line systems. And that's all I 

have to report from our end. I can take comments or 

questions. And other assignments to take back to 

the FRA as I said there is no regulation preventing this 

system from being part of the emergency back up 

power system. And the FRA feels it would be a good 

feature to have.

>> This is David Nelson here. If you could clarify 

for me about how the existing -- existing emergency 

announcements are being done. So, you are saying 

(inaudible) I would assume would make the 

announcement through -- 
>> One moment I don't know where that's coming 

from.

>> Yes, so, currently this -- I assume you are 

asking whether or not the -- as I mentioned cars are 

separated the train line communication is severed 

whether or not you would be able to communicate 

with all cars currently that's not a feature that the cars 

that are in service have. If there is a separation of the 

cable you will lose communication with the car 

severed. In 2008-9 timeframe, I worked in the 

research project that looked at the possibility of 

having a wireless back up communication system that 

whether the train line system was severed you would 

be able to communicate with all of the cars because of 

orientation that would have been based on a WI/FI. 

At that time technology was not mature enough to 

provide reliability. There was additional problems. 

So, currently if there is any serving of the train line 

cable communication is lost to the cars that are 

severed.

>> This is Jim Pecht. I am assuming that means 

all communications are severed, and at that point that 

it's up to railroad staff to put out announcements or 

things like that individually to each car I am 
assuming?

>> Yes. So this will require the staff in whatever 

the operating procedures are to try to inform the 

customer of whatever is going on and this is probably 

going from car to car and providing that information.

>> Okay. This is David Nelson again. So, the 

new next generation standards that the PRIIA 305 the 

train sets not part of the ADA working group did they 

update that regulation concerning WI/FI in order to do 

the communication from one car to the next?

>> Um, in terms of the PRIIA specifications there 

is nothing in the specifications currently with 

communication that is doesn't have a WI/FI back up 

system. And in terms of the California cars that are 

currently under procurement they will be doing a sort 

of a change order to their contract to provide their 

communication system that would allow for dual 

mode rail messaging system on the trains to 

dynamically change the information that they send to 

the passengers. That is going to be a contract out of 

the PRIIA services in California.

>> So, this is David Nelson you are saying FRA will 

have to develop a new regulation or new standard for 

future cars maybe even for existing cars to start to 
have a back up WI/FI?

>> As I said, we considered that back in 2008-9 

timeframe using the railroad's safety advisory group 

the RVAAC process. At that time the technology was 

not sufficiently reliable in order to guarantee that we 

will be able to speak to the cars that are severed from 

the train. So, that idea was shelved. I can't speak 

whether or not that was included in the -- in an 

action item for future rulemaking. But it is 

something that we have considered before.

>> But it hasn't been followed up since or lately.

>> No, it has not.

>> Okay. Thank you.

>> Any questions?

>> This is Blair Slaughter from Amtrak. So, if I 

understand what we are talking about, there is two 

things: One is that any communication system 

should be backed up and independently powered and 

in case there is a loss getting power from the 

locomotive just as we have back up power for 

emergency lighting. And that makes a lot of sense. 

You can have multiple conditions, situations where 

you could lose power -- let's see how I say that there 

is provision for emergency lighting in new vehicles so 
that if the -- if the car derails the train derails and the 

batteries are attorney away or disabled that there is 

some level of lighting left in the car by discrete self 

contained power units, battery power units. So it 

would seem to make sense maybe we want to go a 

little further and talk about the communication 

system assuming that the train is not -- it's just 

derailed and maybe suffered damage, capacity and 

everything works because if we are talking about 

some of the other emergency communication devices, 

they have to be powered as well. Beyond just the 

normal PA and VMS system. But I could imagine that 

trying to have communication between cars scattered 

all over a field in the derailment would be impossible 

one of the challenges has to be if you are 

communicating wirelessly within a train, is there spill 

over to adjacent trains within a system and those kind 

of things so -- because you are not talking about just 

wireless Internet systems which is you know a sort of 

general portal now you are talking about discrete 

information that is particular to a train that you could 

potentially spill over to other trains or have other 

interference that could render that less useful.

>> Yes, and that's one of the issues that we ran 
into during your research is how do you keep it to just 

that one particular train and have it answer back to 

you. It was a little bit complicated to accomplish. I

just wanted to clarify that the emergency 

communication system can be reviewed as a localized 

system it's a car to car basis. So the communication 

it's not the engineer in the locomotive talking on 

the -- using the system and all the cars can hear. 

You have to be in that one hear to actually mute the 

emergency communication system.

>> Right, Melissa, this is Blair from Amtrak. Not 

to belabor the point but in a situation like this maybe 

there is sanity in going back in time and having the 

emergency communications via the railroad's radio 

system. And because there is not -- there is not 

going to be an individual with a radio in every car all 

the time. And in some systems there may only be an 

engineer and conductor for multiple cars. Maybe 

there is some logical way of taking that sort of old 

fashioned radio technology for emergencies, and 

having -- it could be a particular challenge that the 

railroad has on its system that you would go to and 

that would broadcast emergency messages to people 

within the train. And then that could come from the 
conductor or the engineer or the -- you know 

whoever else is surviving the incident, communicate 

within that to each car and then they could broadcast 

through the discrete self powered on board 

communications.

>> That's an idea to consider thank you for that. 

(inaudible) we will see what --

>> It could be a nice marrying of old technology 

with new to get the job done.

>> and the reliability of the radio systems because 

those systems are pretty robust.

>> Yes they are very robust.

>> This is David Nelson Blair if you could clarify 

for me about the radio thing, the -- sometimes old 

technology is the best. So, would they be able to do 

data transmission through radiofrequency or is it 

going to be a voice only type of system?

>> This is Blair. I would think that -- I mean I am 

no electronic person by any means I don't -- I would 

expect that initially doing the voice only would be very 

easy to do. I think in an emergency situation if you 

are trying to transmit an emergency message that's 

different from canned messages and things, that may 

not be very practical because the place where the 
keyboard or device is that lets you transmit that 

message clarity may very well be destroyed. Or 

inaccessible at that point. So, I would say certainly 

the voice, voice recognition where it really works 

really well. You know, that would be an easy step to 

do that. But I think as you know, from your 

experience, that the voice recognition and 

technologies --

>> This is Marsha Mazz. I have a question it 

sounds to me like we are kind of dealing with two 

different problems. And I think Jim kind of alluded to 

that earlier. You have the situation when 

communication for anybody on the train can be 

disrupted that's not really an accessibility issue 

everybody is in the -- having a problem at that point. 

So, by using the radio and having voice 

communications you wind up still having 

inaccessibility issue inaccessibility problem in that you 

don't have any kind of individual communication to 

compliment it. With the understanding that the 

speech to text is not there yet for that. Does it sum 

it up? Is that where we are at?

>> Marsha, this is Blair. I think there is another 

part and I think this is more what Melissa -- Melissa 
was alluding to is that the communication system that 

includes voice and visual you know information, needs 

to have a back up power supply as a key feature so it 

doesn't. If you simply lose train power, regular 

power that that system will still function assuming 

that the train is intact. So that's one piece of it that 

seems completely logical to tack that on to emergency 

or some other discrete uninterruptible power source.

>> I understand that. It's when the train is not 

in--i was trying to understand what problem we are 

trying to solve. Whether we are trying to solve the 

general problem for everybody or we have an 

accessibility solution on when the train is not intact.

>> When the train is not intact then yes it 

becomes interest there is an issue. But the issue 

right now is for everyone. Right now there is 

no -- the only communication once a train breaks up 

or becomes uncoupled and the cabling is broken is, 

you know, s or maybe laying in different places, the 

only communication that's left at that point is within 

the railroad's radio system between the engineer and 

conductors. And you know at that point they have to 

go into their emergency mode of doing what they are 

trained to do in emergencies. So, that's all that's left 
at that point. There is no other communication 

system left.

>> Blair this is Jim basically what you are 

describing is a situation where you have radio 

communication between staff. You don't -- you are 

not really sending radio communications to the -- to 

passengers in a separate car someplace is that 

correct?

>> That's correct yes.

>> So, it's still up to staff to sort of take command 

and herd people and give them information rather 

than -- we are not really sending communications via 

radio to the passengers correct?

>> That's correct Jim. But the other point that I 

was making was -- maybe this addresses part of it 

from an accessibility standpoint or maybe something 

that the FRA wants to take back into RSAC and discuss 

again is you could conceivably have joined with the 

radio system receivers in the cars that are tied into the 

PA system that would let, let's say, an engineer or 

conductor dial to a channel, use a number of key 

flashes like they use to light the airports and those 

things and make an announcement that is in 

fact -- or broadcast into each car. Because you don't 
have -- you typically don't have enough employees to 

have someone in every car you are never guaranteed 

they are always there so that could be one thing that 

you -- you wouldn't have the visual system you would 

only a voice, that's really, you know, the committee 

want to take that? Is that something that Melissa 

maybe wants to take back to the FRA consideration. I

suppose you could say we recommend that the FRA 

takes this up, or we could make the more in-depth 

recommendation themself.

>> I would think -- this is Marsha. I guess, you 

know, I would like to see -- have discussion with the 

FRA about where we drew the lines between 

accessibility requirement and a general safety 

requirement because the thought here is FRA is 

responsible for the general safety for sure. And 

accessibility is piggybacking on that.

>> This is David Nelson here. So, thank you for 

pointing that out. That was Marsha, regarding safety 

and accessibility. So, this is a big "if" I don't know if 

Andrew Phillips want to chime in whether he disagrees 

or agrees with me. But apparently there is no way to 

send a visual message data through a radiofrequency 

so if the LED site itself, is there a way to say, 
something of the nature of help is on the way, when 

there is disruption like that, that would be activated 

only when signals are sent to (inaudible) and 

(inaudible) can acknowledge it and send a message 

back that's where that kind of message would alert?

>> This is Janice Schacter Lintz I have a question. 

I am not clear what -- what basis are we making this 

decision that the message --

>> I wasn't quite finished with my comment.

>> I'm sorry I apologize I thought you had 

finished.

>> Um, so, I think that that is something if that 

was a possibility or some type of access solution it 

could be done. And that way it could kind of be two 

birds with one stone. There could be a message after 

a disruption a message would be sent automatically to 

SENAC and then in turn they could send a message 

through the message board saying help is on the way. 

Obviously that might be a situation where the 

technology isn't there. But if the technology was to 

come up maybe that is something that could be 

brought in that is just kind of my comment, I am 

done.

>> Sorry I apologize. This is Janice again. My 
concerns are when we talk about things could we not 

use abbreviations because not all of us know what 

SENAC FRA is if we said it a couple of times it's helpful 

for those of us not in the industry to understand who 

we are talking about. But the other issue is I am not 

sure that technology is not there because we 

are -- you are sitting on city buses they are able to 

send technology and signals on the new visual 

displays. And maybe sending a WI/FI signal to the 

display. But I think any time you are putting people 

with hearing loss dependent on other people and 

relying on people I have personally been on a train, in 

a mini disaster where it was delayed 13 hours because 

of snow. And I could hear and I could not get any 

information from any conductor who was dealing with 

crisis to answer my questions or anyone's questions. 

So, I think when we keep putting people with 

disabilities dependent on other people because it 

seems like they should be able to help, they can't. 

They are too busy. Even when there is not a disaster 

there are too many instances when I have asked a 

question and the person doesn't know doesn't care 

and just ignores the question.

>> This is Andrew speaking, I very much agree 
with what Janice and David have already said I would 

like to add that if we are able to send a message to 

someone's smartphone through telephone wireless 

network, I don't see why you can't set up a receptor in 

the rail vehicles that would then connect to an LED 

screen to their wireless network and when they have 

an emergency you could send a text message to the 

LED screen. And then also notify people not only 

those who are deaf and hard of hearing but those who 

are hearing on the train that you know telling them 

help is on the way. Explaining about what is going 

on. Giving important information. I know a lot of 

times when I am riding on the train, with people that 

are hearing, you know, they will have announcements 

on the PA system. And oftentimes a hearing person 

that I am traveling with they oftentimes they can't 

understand it. They want the visual information too. 

So my point is, if you could send a text message from 

one state to another state through telephone through 

the telephone network why not just hookup an LED 

screen in the train car to do the same network and 

you know, a remote operator who works for the train 

company could then send that message, especially if 

the driver is not able to.
>> This is David Nelson. I wanted to clarify one 

thing real quick. Blair had raised a question -- I'm 

sorry Blair I'm sorry made a question about what if we 

lose any type of back up battery of power, et cetera. 

I know currently our cars have their own lights there is 

a built in battery that might last for a short-term and 

so that's what I was talking about. What if our visual 

messaging just lost the connection to the back up 

battery I would think that maybe we could have some 

type of short-term maybe 30-minute life cycle where 

it would be able to stay up for 30 minutes after 

disconnecting from the power.

Does that make sense?

>> This is Melissa Shurland. That was the sense 

of the initial question I took back to the FRA currently 

once you lose power from a car as an individual 

(inaudible) communication in the system and the last 

minute on the PA system you are allowed to have 

ability to talk the last 15 minutes of the 90-minute 

period. So that was the discussion with whether or 

not we could tie the VMS system into that back up 

power system.

>> Hi this is Janice Lintz again. I don't know what 

the FRA is and I apologize maybe I should could we 
please not use initials? Or lingo from industry 

because there are many of us on the car that aren't. 

But I am still confused I agree with Andrew. I think I 

don't think I explained it clearly. I don't understand if 

we have text devices and I can get text E-mails from 

the airlines about delays when I am on the TARMAC 

why I can't get the same one on the smartphone and 

why even that text can each automatically go to a 

board if they can text it to the phone can't you make 

the board tie into a phone? I don't know how to do 

things like that but other people would. Make the 

board on the train like a giant smartphone so it 

receives texts automatically. And then you don't 

have to worry about someone inputting. You should 

be able to link the two together. In terms of back up 

batteries there has to be back up something for 

lighting because of an emergency you have the little 

light strips on the floor. So, wouldn't this be the 

same? I tout it uses that much energy again I am not 

a technical person.

>> Janice FRA stands for Federal Railroad 

Administration. The FAA Federal Aviation 

Administration FRA is responsible for all of the 

regulations within the railroads industry.
>> That's great. I think there is too many letters 

flying around like alphabet soup. So for some of us 

who are unfamiliar if we could just say things out just 

so that you know it doesn't become an assumption 

that everyone understands it and sometimes people 

are uncomfortable saying what they don't know I 

clearly have no qualms about doing this.

>> This is Melissa Shurland before I leave the call I 

want to give you reasons the wireless system 

considered back in 2000 -- there was an issue with 

using that on the locomotive. One of the issues is 

once you make a train up you have a locomotive or 

two or three locomotives and then you have the 

passenger cars the issue is once you have the train 

the train consist is changed along the route and Blair 

and David can speak to this you have electrical 

locomotive it changes to December sill when you 

make changes to the system communication is lost 

between the lead locomotive and the trailing cars 

when you go into tunnels you may lose the 

communication system with the wireless system. 

These are some of the issues we saw when we looked 

at possibly having a wireless system to provide back 

up communication for -- for communication in case 
of emergencies. Another issue is how to initialize the 

wireless system once on a daily basis as the trains are 

made up and they go out on the route as you finish 

change in the railroad yard et cetera. It could be 

dynamic some of the changes if we say we use our cell 

phone and get information about our flight, the 

railroad it's different from that technology may have 

improved the last five years there are issues tunnels 

moving signals and as we discussed earlier any of the 

equipment on the train is damaged, then how do we 

communicate with that car even a wireless system. 

We are going to have to have some type of antenna 

and routing and receiver on each car to receive the

information appeared relay is to the video messaging 

system and if those are damaged, we are pretty much 

right back at square one. I think it's something that I 

could definitely take back for consideration now with 

new technology. And any knowledge that we have. 

But it may not be as simple as making a phone call.

>> This is Janice Lintz. I don't know what RSAT is 

we are talking about the evaluated in 2009 almost six 

years ago. In that time we have added a wireless 

Internet to trains which didn't previously exist. So 

this is about keeping up with technology on all 
aspects of the train including people with disabilities. 

I'm sorry whoever RSAT everybody they need to, as 

technology improves, then it has to be upgraded for 

all including people with disabilities and back up 

systems. And so I am I'm sorry, I don't find that as an 

acceptable answer saying you evaluated something six 

years ago. Six years ago there was no wireless 

Internet on Amtrak. That seems like a ridiculous 

answer. I hate to be so pointed. That just seems 

ridiculous. Technology is evolving so quickly. I

think things have to be evaluated and a regular basis 

and things have to be added so if you are telling me 

you are going through a tunnel then -- somehow 

Washington, DC is able to receive cell signals in their 

trains but --

>> This is Marsha. 1 r excuse me for interrupted 

I think Melissa was just telling us by way of history not 

by way of saying we have studied it and we are done. 

I think that in fact it -- she was offering exactly what 

you are suggesting which is to take this issue back 

and reinvigorate it with the appropriate people at the 

Federal Railroad Administration. Did I get that right 

Melissa?

>> Marsha, thank you. That is correct. And that 
is the intent if we can, as you say reinvigorate the 

study with new technology that we have now. To see 

if ear able to communicate in all circumstances.

>> Marsha I appreciate you clarifying that because 

it was not coming off that way to me. And it sounded 

like we did this six years ago and it can be 

done -- you know, so I am glad that that is what was 

intended I just misunderstanding it. But again I need 

to reiterate not use initials Melissa I don't know what 

the initials are.

>> Maybe you can --

>> I don't know what it is.

>> Okay. This is Melissa I have to jump off the 

call if there are other questions or comments please 

feel free to send me an E-mail and I will definitely 

check about prior research and see what can be done 

to update it.

>> What were the initials that you just mentioned 

you mentioned two different sets. RAST and RAC.

>> It's rail safety advisory committee RSAC.

>> Thank you.

>> This is Blair from Amtrak. I think it's 

important that we come back to the -- because we 

talked about multiple things we come back to the key 
features. And that would be you know, if a train is 

equipped whether it's a subway or light rail or 

inner-city or whatever it might be if it's equipped with 

the communication system that is dependent on 

electric power unless it's a string and two soup cans 

it's going to have electric power that system including 

a visual system needs to have back up power for you 

know some reasonable amount of time. And 

indication is maybe the time may already be defined 

elsewhere within the industries, you know, in 30 

minutes or 60 minutes or a multiple of hours I am not 

sure. So, this is that aspect. So, the system, 

whatever it is, can't be subject to being lost because 

you lose power. And so that -- that's one section I 

would mention. The other is in an emergency 

situation, how do you maintain communication within 

the train when in fact it may no longer be a train but 

separate cars laying about. It's easy for those of us 

that live on the northeast corridor and heavily 

urbanized areas to think about wireless. Right now 

we have trains that go into the mountains and you 

won't have cell service for hours at a time. It's just 

suddenly the cell phone is a game machine it's 

useless. So, we do have to keep -- there are some 
things right now and for the foreseeable future you 

could have all the technology in the world if you can't 

bunch can be--punch the signal for a mountain it 

won't work. You have to think about the various 

scenarios. Some things will work well in some areas 

but if we come back to and define maybe in very 

broad terms what we want to achieve, and not try to 

solve the technological problems, then that becomes 

something that we can begin to get our hands and 

heads around. To make the most of this. And have 

something that reliable and consistent day in and day 

out so that people will -- can trust and rely on the 

system to give them the information that they need.

>> This is Frank from the FRA --

>> Hi, this is Andrew speaking. I wanted to say 

that I completely understand where Blair is coming 

from. And I too want a reliable, good well running 

system that can give important emergency 

information to those that are deaf and hard of 

hearing. Those passengers. As well as hearing 

passengers. Through visual means. I know that 

maybe we have some technology limitations, but I feel 

confident that we can come up with a way to satisfy 

the technology needs in almost all situations. Of 
course we may have a few situations where it's not 

perfect. But to be perfectly honest I often approach a 

lot of situations in my advocacy work where I 

recognize that some situations may not work. 

However, I don't allow that to prevent us from not 

doing anything. A good example is text to 911. 

Some of you may be aware that the FCC is not 

requiring all wireless carriers the phone companies to 

support text to 911. However, in many areas, in fact 

most of our country, it doesn't work. We can't text to 

911. However, I hope with what we have in place, we 

can build on that. Here we are going to come up 

with, you know, we come up with a perfect situation? 

Maybe not. But I hope that we come up with a good 

reliable system that future generations can build on 

our technology. Our technology has changed so 

much in the past six years that I feel confident that 

technology will be ahead of us as we work on this 

recommendation.

>> This is Blair from Amtrak. Andrew, you are 

correct. I mean, there is -- there have been 

technology is changing faster than we can think about 

it. Part of what holds us back today the products that 

are getting made and handed to us are already 
obsolete by the time they are in production. We have 

had -- we have been able to solve tremendous 

technological problems by using smartphones for fare 

collection and things like that at Amtrak. We know in 

a split second if a passenger didn't get on in the 

station we can tell you the manifest of the people on 

the train. So, again, I think that's why it's critical 

rather than necessarily solving the technological 

problems we try to define what it is that we want to 

achieve, and at the rate that -- that the regulations 

and things change the technology may catch up and 

actually exceed what it needs to be to achieve what we 

are talking about. Hopefully in the near future.

>> This is Frank from the MTA. Just to chime in 

on this a little bit. It seems like we are getting a little 

disjointed or distracted about exactly what the 

comments were and where we started from. Right 

now there is a regulation which requires you to have 

and Melissa mentioned it, on board communication 

for a period of time as well as emergency lighting.

The on board communication applies to the PA. If 

we want to do something to address the accessibility 

issue and VMS is what's going to provide the 

accessibility, then I think what we should be 
recommending is that the VMS system be included in 

the requirements for the PA and the time that's 

currently listed there. The conditions -- the--that 

should handle normal conditions it should handle 

most emergency conditions or those conditions when 

you lose electrical power you will be covered by a back 

up battery you will see it via the VMS. The other 

conditions where you have a broken communication 

system from car to car, I think that's rather extreme. 

And there is a lot of things that are going to be 

happening to the equipment outside of losing 

communication from car to car that may prohibit you 

from using whatever is op the car anyhow. So, I think 

the focus we could use, I think, Marsha mentioned it 

before, focus on what is currently regulated an 

making sure there is accessibility provided for what 

we are currently have, and then let the FRA work on 

the other conditions which aren't covered by them yet. 

So, the first step would be to make sure that the 

emergency communication system as currently written 

includes the VMS system on battery back up then we 

have achieved a large amount of what we are talking 

about for the last year. 

>> I definitely agree that we need to focus on what we 
want to see and that I believe that technology experts will 

figure out how to achieve what we want to see (Andrew.)

>> We might have lost our bridge.

>> It sounded like we lost a lot of folks

>> Would you like me to open you the Rose Marie's line.

>> Hello this is Rosemarie.

>> Are you there?

>> Her line is open.

>> This is Janice Lintz. I agree with what Frank said I 

think that's a good way to proceed

>> Yes, Rose Marie is here is there a question?

>> The operator was asking for you.

>> I believe they wanted your line opened I opened up the 

line

>> Was there a question for me then I did have my line 

muted I was moving around here in the conference room. 

And I am getting dead air I just

>> This is Blair from Amtrak can you guys hear me? This 

is Frank I can hear you fine

>> It sounds like there are some people missing but 

maybe not everybody

>> It sounded like we jettisoned a group of folks it got 

quiet all of a sudden.

>> I disagree with that. I said I agree I had myself on 
mute I probably didn't realize I was on mute.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> The phone line cleared up. I don't think we lost 

anybody else.

>> It's just working correctly now.

>> I think we are all on mute and didn't have anything to 

say that's why it was quiet.

>> That's unusual for this group we should mark that 

down.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Blair again. So, I will just ask the question to Jim, 

have you captured do you feel like you captured the meat 

and potatoes of the discussion?

>> I think so. I think -- my Guthrie action is basically 

you have got emergency situations where you have power or 

at least back up power is available. In that situation the VMS 

and the PA system should be working, should be accessible. 

Should be doing their job. Then you have these other 

situations where you have a catastrophic incident where, to 

me, all bets are off in that situation. If you have got 

car -- cars laying on their side on the side of the rail line, I 

mean that's a -- issue from what we are talking about here 

mostly. Mostly what we are talking about there is a--there 

is a mechanical problem with the vehicle itself, that 
needs -- that it can't move. Or there is a problem with the 

line you are having to wait for. Or something like that, that 

people need to be informed about. And that we are saying 

that that needs to be accessible. Is that about capture 

where we are going?

>> I think that's exactly right Jim. That's what I was 

trying to say. You know, the focus should be making sure 

that we have access for the available systems that we have. 

Add the -- and the only thing missing from the 

communication system right now as written it only talks 

about the PA it doesn't say anything about VMS that's the key 

that needs to be added.

>> This is Blair. Along those lines when we start looking 

at the more catastrophic situations, I think that 

that's -- that's something that Melissa alluded to they 

started looking at and found that the technology at the 

moment six years ago want there. That's why I mentioned 

maybe there needs to be melding of old radio technology 

and something more exotic today to work. I think those 

things can be made to work. I think that one of the things 

that I hear and it seems to be systemic problem in our 

industry. Amtrak is absolutely guilty of it. That is, you can 

be in a nonlife threatening situation, a situation that isn't 

emergency that can become or feel like an emergency 
because you are not getting information. And that spills 

over to -- to the hearing as well as hard of hearing. And it 

may be that, again, reaching back to the FRA or the FTA that 

that is something they could pick up. There are 

requirements within the rail industry for other things, you 

know, you can't have a train worked -- parked on a crossing 

for a certain amount of time. You have to have an 

emergency plan. So, maybe it's not unreasonable that there 

needs to be from the regulatory side of the railroads, 

something that says, you know, you sit for a certain amount 

of minutes you have got to update the passengers. You 

would think that that is common sense it doesn't always go 

with the railroads. But that's not -- I don't know that that is 

within -- because as Chris always said we are talking about 

the things this you can -- if you shake the car the things fall 

out. Obviously the VMS the PA the -- all of that stuff 

counts. But I think if the railroads took care of that and 

solve a lot of their problem right off the bat.

>> Jim I have a question with that --

>> This is Marsha. You said that they have to have an 

emergency plan. Is there a standard for that emergency 

plan or guidance for that emergency plan that goes to all 

companies. I know for buildings for example we have code 

requirements.
>> Marsha, I believe it's in --

>> 16 whatever it is.

>> I believe it's 49 CFR 238 Frank each railroad has to 

issue an emergency preparedness plan that takes into 

account evacuating passengers and all of those things from 

disabled trains?

>> Interesting because it seems to me that that may -- if 

that is -- if there is a part of a standard or comment 

standard for the plan itself, members of the committee may 

want to take a look at that standard and see if it adequately 

addresses the needs of people with disabilities. Not for this 

advisory committee it does seem like something worthwhile 

to do.

>> This is Frank again. The section I was talking about 

with respect to the emergency -- emergency lighting I don't 

know if Melissa mentioned it before it is not 238. It's 

238-#- 1 is emergency communications section. That's one 

specific where we can make a recommendation VMS be 

included as part of the PA system.

>> This is Jim I just wanted to go back to one thing that 

Blair alluded to I think is important. What this guideline is 

going to be doing is basically the hardware. I can't -- the 

guidelines can't force the industry to make an announcement 

I can't tell the industry what announcements they have to 
make and what they can't make. I can say when they make 

an announcement it has to be accessible that's what we need 

to look at. In other words, if the train has an emergency, 

they choose not to tell the passengers anything, that's not 

something that this guideline is going to be able to deal 

with. That's an operational policy issue that maybe the 

DOTs regs need to look at but not the stuff from us.

>> This is Janice Lintz, we want whatever announcement 

is being made to the passengers is both visual and then 

through an induction loop.

>> and we have that in our -- in the bag already that's 

already in the bag as far as what the committee wants to 

present to the full committee as a requirement. Any time 

that you make any kind of announcement it has to be in 

audible form it has to be visual form it -- form it has to be 

where the PA system is used it has to have a loop system at. 

That's already --

>> Perfect, then we are happy.

>> This is David Nelson here. So, Jim raised a comment 

about the messaging. I think instead of saying or instead of 

putting down what the language needs to be used in the 

guideline, I think we should be putting down suggestions 

that the FRA needs to review every -- every operating 

procedures because in our operating procedures manual we 
have language in there on what should be said to the 

passengers. So, I would like to see that FRA should review 

that Andraea -- on an annual basis to make sure that the 

messages are current and accurate. The reason why I am 

bringing this up is because the FAA the Federal Aviation 

Administration requires to review all flight safety manuals on 

Andraea newly basis for every single airline. If an airline 

wants to change something in the middle of the year the FAA 

has to approve it. Which I why I think we should have 

language in the guidelines saying the FAA federal -- FRA 

Federal Railroad Administration has to review the procedures 

on Andraea newly basis and also review any revised requests 

by the operations.

>> Again, this is Jim that's outside the purview of the 

committee. I think you are welcome to sort of get together 

and I think one of the things on the list here is possible 

volunteers for potential listed of recommendations to DOT 

and FRA with regards to things that they need to look at in 

their regulation. That really aren't covered by the standard 

or the guidelines. And if you are volunteering to start that 

list, thank you. Otherwise, I think we need to sort of move 

on if we are done with this issue.

>> Jim, you are right. Thank you for reminding me, I'm 

sorry. Sometimes I get off track. I think too big.
 (LAUGHTER)

>> Any other discussions about back up power? Which is 

where we were to begin with. All right. Hearing none, 

what's the world look like, do you want to go back through 

the brief discussion of the October meeting stuff or do you 

want to go with some of the new things that we need to look 

at down the road? Hearing no comments --

>> This is Andrew no, no, no this is Andrew here I want to 

let you know at the last meeting, I was contacted -- the 

gentleman's name is Christian the last Vogler, and he is a 

researcher at Gallaudet University. And is a major in 

engineering technology and so forth. I was wanting him to 

get involved with our call here to kind of give you some 

perspective in regards to the technology, in regards to the 

visual communication that is available out there. And he 

was not able to join in on the call today, so -- but he was 

saying that he was wanting to go ahead and join our 

December 4th call and join in on that. So, yes, and he 

wanted to do that at the December 4th meeting if he could 

go ahead and participate in the December meeting that way 

you have the opportunity to ask different questions with 

regard to visual communication access he is really on the 

cutting edge in regards to that area. And so, you know, 

basically trying to confirm to have him there.
>> He is more than welcome to join the discussion for 

sure.

>> Okay. Thank you.

>> Okay. Anything else from anybody on the committee? 

I really hate the way it goes dead silence it sounds like the 

call has just stopped. Okay. I have got a couple of things 

on my list with regards to questions about how you want to 

proceed. With regards to signage, in the current standard 

the only place the international symbol of accessibility ISA is 

required is on the outside of vehicles that are quote 

accessible. That's the only place that the ISA is required.

>> This is Janice Lintz, my concern which I have 

mentioned before our meeting, is the international symbol of 

access is a wheelchair which doesn't tell anyone that there is 

captioning which is the visual system if or induction loop we 

need to make sure that the appropriate specific symbols are 

included. And the perfect example of why this is, is I sent 

around to the committee -- I believe I sent around to the 

committee an issue we recently had not related to rail but 

taxi where the TLC installed an induction loop on the entire 

fleet of taxis in New York and 3% of the taxis about 300 taxis 

without the symbol, nobody knows the induction loop is in 

the taxi there is no stories on it. No one except my family 

anyone who worked on the project is aware of the access. 
And because the induction loop is invisible wires you can't 

see them. It's not like you can physically see a ramp. It will 

be completely forgotten. And now, the TLC is scrambling to 

fix it it's a disaster because it turns out in this project it has 

to do with pricing issue who bears the cost of the fine Nissan 

or the taxi on nerves it's a disaster. We need to learn from 

this experience. But it has to have the specific symbols and 

not the -- you know the international symbol was great at 

one point. But it doesn't fit visual impairments and doesn't 

fit hearing loss. It does fit wheelchair access.

>> You are referring to the international symbol of 

hearing loss T-coil.

>> I was referring to the wheelchair symbol.

>> for the loop.

>> if we are talking because that's technically the 

international symbol of access for some bizarre reason if we 

are talking even hearing loss, there are different symbols for 

different types of access. If for example you are talking 

visual alert, and let's say it's captioning, which is can at that 

mount to captioning if you have to turn on the captioning 

you would--that would be considered closed captioning two 

C's if it's always there OC open captioning. If it's assistive 

listening system where it's not an induction loop it's ear with 

an I. If it's induction loop it's induction loop with a slash 
through the T. I will be the first to admit these symbols are 

ridiculous many similar and most people outside of the 

hearing loss world don't understand the and mistakes are 

made repeatedly throughout. I want to make sure when we 

are discussing the symbol we are always for induction loop 

we are always talking with the ear with the slash with a T. 

Whether we agree that that is a good or bad simple it's 

irrelevant that's the international symbol for induction loop 

there is a debate whether it's a good simple whether it 

should be slash or dot. But I wanted to make sure we are 

clear we are discussing that symbol versus the wheelchair 

symbol.

>> Right. For the this is Jim. For the loop system we are 

requiring the loop system I am assuming that you are 

advocating to require that symbol as well to let people know 

the loop system is present correct?

>> Yes. What I would recommend is put it on the outside 

of the car so people know to get into that specific car. And 

then I had sent around a photo a while ago because the 

problem is you don't know if there is an announcement if 

you can't hear the announcement. There was similar in 

Switzerland when the announcement is made they -- I may 

not be describing it properly, but it was like a clear 

plexiglass they used a speaker. When this was drawn on top 
of the clear plexiglass. When announcement was made 

there was light going on. I would recommend doing a 

speaker picture to do ear with a T on the same type of light 

so it indicates when there is an announcement and that the 

T-coil is now activated. And that people should activate 

their T-coils. We sent that around a while ago. The picture 

is the way I just described it.

>> This is Jim again let me did a question of the railroad 

folks. When you have cars together and you have PA 

systems is there ever a condition where there isn't a car with 

a PA system?

>> This is Blair from Amtrak. Every occupied passenger 

car has a PA system. In it. If there is a problem with the 

system, and there are problems with the systems from time 

to time, it's usually localized to a vehicle. So, yeah, every 

occupied car even baggage cars I think have them because 

the crew may communicate within the train with the PA.

>> Frank how about your systems?

>> As far as Long Island goes yeah we have all PAs in the 

car I am pretty sure Metra is the same I am not 100% sure 

about the TA -- PA but you have to have PA system to 

communicate with passengers. If you are making station 

announcements you have PA I am not 100% sure but I am 

sure TA Metro Long Island north all do.
>> the reason I am asking this question is all of the cars 

have the PA system wouldn't it be better to have it on the 

inside of the car? Because putting it on the outside of the 

car could tell you every car has one. I mean it's -- does it 

make it difference it has to be inside or outside?

>> I think it should be Beth. Because I think one -- you 

have an inside you may notice it when you are going in. 

And the second is we need to make sure we can put 

induction loop in every car if we are going there that's great I 

am not sure we are going to be there. But it does indicate 

to people and tells people that it's available. Becomes 

awareness campaign. So, that you are aware of it when you 

see it going by in your town, the train. You might not ever 

get on the train, if you think you can't hear. It becomes 

almost a public awareness campaign beneficial to the trains 

themselves to get more passengers with hearing loss actually 

on the train.

>> This is Blair from Amtrak. I think -- there is some 

logic in having whatever accessibility features are included 

because right now, bought a brand new car it came clever 

delivered with the hearing coil system. The hearing loop 

system. And an active visual messaging system, it might be 

worthwhile if that car is going to be coupled with other 

vehicles to Janice' point that you have the international 
symbol but you also have the other, so that I may need to go 

to the car that I know has the T-coil but it may be coupled to 

one without one. So, I think there is some logic there. 

Hopefully, you know, as time progresses maybe there is 

some other yet to be determined accessibility symbol that 

you know it's there you know it's fully equipped with all of 

the features and so we don't need lots of little stickers. But 

as far as inside the train, having some visual indicator that 

lets you know, that, hey, the PA systems is making an 

announcement, if it's part of -- it could be part of the visual 

messaging system when that goes active there is a corner of 

the screen that lights up or shows you a display or it could 

be something that's has a light. Perhaps if someone simply 

is using a hearing aid, they don't have anything more exotic 

than that they have it turned down if the light goes on they 

might turn their hearing aid up or miss something. I don't 

know how specific we want the internal indicator to be as to 

what technology is now available and working. But I think 

an indicator of some sort makes perfect sense.

>> Blair, that's a really good point. You are right if we 

are coupling different cars together I hadn't thought about 

looking up -- this way we will be able to keep track which 

cars have the loop and which don't. Right. There is going 

to be a point where you bring in different cars. You know, 
adds cars in and out of service some will have loop some 

won't. Indicator some of my issues trying to keep the 

number of signage down so it doesn't become a patchwork 

quilt internally of lines -- signs priority people with visual 

impairments need them at a place where they could punch 

them. Where people with hearing loss don't have the same 

issue. That's why putting the symbol on the light as it's lit 

up it kind of saves space and communicate at the same time 

activate your T-coil we are making an announcement. You 

have a two for one deal here.

>> This is Frank let me make a quick comment indication 

that a comment is made is the VMS sign. In other words, 

you are not going to be getting a hearing loop message 

unless it comes up on the VMS sign. I think it may be a 

good idea to have an indication that there is a hearing loop 

but I don't think it's necessary to have an additional light just 

to indicate that a message is coming when there is already 

an indication that the message is coming we want to keep 

down the amount of indicators in the car you seen from the 

presentation we have more than decals and signage in the 

cars as it is now not all are necessary. We should limit it to 

necessary signs and indicators. I think indication of a 

message is there in the visual sign.

>> Frank you may realize that because you are coming 
from it at engineer and you know what you are put in the car 

and you are aware of this. We see this a lot on building 

plans with architects. Where they know what they put in. 

That's not people with hearing loss are not aware. They 

don't know that just because there is an indication of the 

loop outside symbol first of all they are rushing to get in the 

car they may not notice it on the outside or when they are 

sitting in the car they finally put the bags coat everything 

and they are sitting there they see it because there may have 

been somebody blocking it on the outside. We saw there is 

a museum downtown I can't disclose the name but they have 

the loop in the museum. The sign is only on the way finder 

when you walk in. Not only does no one know the loops are 

throughout the museum which is like incredible and 

unbelievable, but staff doesn't even know they exist. 

Because unless you see that flashing symbol as you rush into 

the museum when you are excited to get in, you don't see it 

when you are actually at the point of needing it. So, you 

have to think of like as a person who doesn't have all of this 

information. Isn't on the committee. No one will know. By 

putting the symbols on the light indicating this is sound, 

maybe will know. It sounds obvious for people with hearing 

loss you can't tell what you can't hear. You might see the 

visual, but that won't tell you there is actually life. If you 
can't hear you may think there is only visual. I have seen 

the reverse too. There can be a video let's say in a museum 

that has no sound, and you see people pressing their ears 

next to the video and you need to literally put a symbol up 

showing a speaker with a slash indicating no sound they 

don't know there is no sound they think it's because they 

can't hear it. We need to have redundancy I think putting 

the light up that independent indicates this is sound to 

everyone there is an announcement and putting the symbol 

over it follows it. Clearly, they have thought about it they 

thought it was important to have an indication and a light 

going on when there is sound. It's like overlay instead of 

speaker with the ear symbol we have a two for one deal.

>> This is Blair from Amtrak. We have situations on our 

trains where there is the scrolling message sign that involves 

no sound at all. So I could see where if we--if we then had 

a visual message system for you know announcements that 

occur and we are still using the visual just the visual sign or 

the visual scrolling sign that's just you know spewing 

information endlessly until the PA announcement breaks in, 

that immediate message, I could see where you have the 

condition Janice described, and maybe either there should be 

some -- some delineation in the VMS if it's on the sign or a 

separate twice with certainly with the electronics today you 
could have a symbol could pop up so that you know if not 

the same boring scrolling sign it's now something that you 

need to tune into. I could see where that could be a 

valuable thing.

>> Blair --

>> You know, Blair that's a great idea. You know what a 

another way to do it on the scrolling VMS sign you could put 

the ear with the T on it.

>> That's a possibility. Let me ask a quick question: I

don't think that you could have Blair a scrolling sign that's 

not having accompanied by audio message. And meet the 

requirements that were outlined. Why would you only be 

providing the information in one means?

>> Well, what you -- typically this is Blair again. What 

you will find is the information that's on the scrolling signs is 

something that's already been announced or will be 

announced it's a repetitive thing. But the sign continues to 

go. You say next station Washington, DC. Well the PA 

announcement is also been made. The problem is right now 

they are not directly connected. So, they don't necessarily 

occur at exactly the same time. But I think what we are 

talking about now is that I think there is a PA announcement 

going on that is going to kick in and all be happening at 

once. Maybe the scrolling sign as a -- an information 
endless information device has to go away. We may 

regulate ourselves out of that so it's just a blank sign until 

there is something being communicated specifically and then 

it comes on, I don't know.

>> I thought that was the intent of what we were trying to 

regulate here that all of the information would be provided in 

all modes whether it's visual and audio. Or visual audio 

hearing loop they are supposed to be provided 

simultaneously. I don't think I am not sure I thought that 

was the intent that we used to provide the same information 

not providing different information via different means. I

would think you would want to tie the two together.

>> This is Blair again. I would assume that in a condition 

based on what we are doing here, yes, that would be in fact 

the case. That if there is a voice communication that the 

upcoming station is Baltimore please gather your things 

simultaneously that message is being scrolled on the digital 

device broadcasting to the hearing loop by default. But 

what we -- when we see now, you guys probably it's less of 

an issue on a fast-based -- fast-paced transit system they 

don't have time for frivolous message to come up

>> That is a big problem.

>> Yeah, if you ride the Acelas there are messages out 

there I am not sure Jersey Transit had their stuff or not. 
There are messages it's the same thing that's broadcast by 

voice it may just be on a sort of endless loop. It's over and 

over again. You wouldn't want to hear that all through your 

trip.

>> Oh, my God no. Please don't we can't -- we can't 

regulate that or you will have people jumping from the train.

>> We may by default regulate that aware. That is 

something that needs to be considered and I will throw that 

one to Jim to think about, are we -- we have voice 

messaging we have visual messaging and we have the 

hearing loops assistive devices. Are we going to say that all 

messages occur simultaneously and there is no reference for 

repeating of messages visually that don't have that you know 

the endless effect of voice.

>> but I will say Frank the New York City Transit have that 

they have the time and next stop like Amtrak they are not 

repeating it incessantly whether that goes away. You have 

to remember the passengers are not aware of what the 

regulations are, nor should they have to be. So, while it may 

seem obvious to everyone on the committee and we will 

know that when there is voice there is visual, the consumer 

is not going to know that. So we have to provide 

information for the uninformed consumer as well. Which is 

most of America. I mean, I will tell you when you go on an 
airline I can pretty much tell you most people don't know 

what the FAA regulations are nor do each the flight 

attendants. I remember being on the train with my 

daughter as a child with FAA regulated stroller I was told not 

permitted. I had to fly with the regulations which I did. It 

was allowed. Every flight attendant was shocked they didn't 

know the FAA regulations.

>> Once you put a sticker on the car you are going to 

apply there is going to be messages on the hearing loop. 

You don't have a sticker then you might know.

>> You can't imply because I am telling you, one, 

sometimes one system is down and the other isn't. And so 

it's a visual -- if the visual alert is not working the induction 

loop could be working and people don't make the connection 

that you are making because you are involved in the process, 

I will be happy Frank to show you the museum downtown 

there is a sign right when you walk in, not one person in the 

museum knows the system is in place. Not one. Except the 

person involved in install it. According, based on that 

theory you shouldn't need it there is visual alert. The sign is 

there nobody knows it's there. So you have to kind of like 

spoon feed people the information if we are going to the 

effort of doing this and spending all of the money we want to 

make sure the system is actually used and it's form and 
function. Otherwise we are regulating for the sake of 

regulation rather than for customer service which is how you 

have happy customers and you get them on the train it 

should be win-win situation it's about getting bodies in the 

seats. If you get more bodies in the seats of people with 

disabilities you see the benefit of doing it then it's a win-win 

for everybody. It won't be about requiring all of this stuff 

because that's what the law is, I want this to be about 

providing excellent customer service when you do the extra 

little things and connect the dots for people because people 

are too busy -- half the time they are going on the train they 

are on the phone they are not even looking up. I am not 

sure they ever look up until they see something sitting in the 

seat they take a moment. That's when you see the sign 

inside the trains they are not noticing it going in. It's 

amazing there are not more people choked getting on to 

trains.

>> Let me make another suggestion variable message 

signs are working hopefully every time announcement is 

made. If you put the hearing loop indications adjacent to 

that it's the same thing as lighting up the hearing loop sign 

every time communication goes on.

>> the problem is you are not going to leave the induction 

loop on the whole time safety issues about that because it 
blocks out the people around you. You need to know when 

it is actually activated.

>> Okay. It's activated when the sign is scrolling. You 

are looking

>> You think that I am telling you having done this now 

12 years, there is a disconnect. And things that seem 

obvious are not obvious. Even within the hearing loss 

community the things that I would think would be obvious 

are not.

>> All right.

>> It's shocking. It's truly shocking it's not to imply there 

is a problem with the people with hearing loss. I think the 

disconnect is sometimes we get so involved in doing this --

>> Wait.

>> You know the museum from the architects, they know 

where everything is they put the signs -- you really need to 

connect the dots. Think of like GAR animals every time you 

connect the dots the pants and shirts it connects together 

the more you make it easier this little bit is providing 

excellent customer service you don't want to cut the last little 

bit off so it's not used then you have a TLC commission issue 

which is now a disaster they have egg on their face they put 

in expensive system and nobody in New York knows about 

this.
>> Let me make another suggestion there is another way 

to address the issue of enunciating the use of hearing loop. 

I don't think it has to be lit up. You can make the sign 

actually state on it that hearing loop act rated -- activated 

when sign is scrolling you can say that accomplishes the 

same thing I don't think it's a good idea to be adding 

additional indication lights which is additional maintenance 

and extra work when it can be done in a more reliable 

fashion without the need for additional light. That being 

said, that is my suggestion, and I do want to ask Jim the 

same question that I think Blair was asking, that has to do 

with, do the signs have to exactly match the VMS signs do 

they have to exactly match the PA announcements or is it 

possible for the signs to repeat something that's already said 

on the PA? You say if that's been addressed or are we 

talking about that in any detail.

>> This is Jim irrelevant don't think we talked about that 

specifically no. I think we basically had the premise if you 

provide the information audibly it has to be provided visual 

leach. If you provide the information visually it has to be 

provided audibly. And if it's audible it has to be true loop.

>> Okay.

>> the principles that we said.

>> if it's repeated visually not audibly I think we are okay.
>> It I mean to me -- yeah, well, there is --

 (LAUGHTER)

>> I am thinking in terms of if you -- let's think in terms 

of stop announcements. In other words, if the next stop is 

Charleston, and you put up the sign and it says Charleston 

and it stays there the sign stays lit it doesn't move it stays on 

and then you sort of announce it there or four times next 

stop is Charleston but you sign doesn't move it stays there 

saying Charleston while you are making the same 

announcement that seems to be equivalent. When we talk 

about I don't know if you want to talk about equivalent 

facilitation and all that good stuff but that's the regs and all 

of that kind of good thing. But that may be something we 

need to talk about so we don't have noise pollution and 

things like that to have it specified over and over again in 

voice if you are scrolling it over and over again in visual 

format. Probably I'd have to defer to the committee and see 

what they want to do about that

>> I think you bring up a good point. One of the things 

that happens. I noticed you can hear faster than you can 

read. You are trying to cram the announcements in quickly 

you can say and exit adds you train but you can't see. Once 

you pass the VMS sign you are not seeing it anymore. It 

seems to me they don't have to match 100%. At times there 
is going to be spill over or overlap. I think it's a good idea 

to allow for that and not restrict it because then you are 

restricting the amount of information that can be provided. 

I was thinking about up with aking the gaps we can 

incorporate other announcements and watch the gap on the 

PA or on the VMS sign to keep people aware. And you 

know, I do -- I don't think if you say it once or twice maybe 

you want to keep scrolling or leaving it on as you go down 

the road. You might want to leave the watch the gap sign 

on there. Every time a new message comes up it comes off. 

I don't see the harm in that that's my suggestion you allow 

them to be different as long as the same information is 

provided overall.

>> Frank, this is Janice. Going back to the previous 

issue, I don't think the sign has to be lit up if you do push 

information. But we already have like Blair on the subway 

says activating you need to switch your hearing aid to the 

T-coil under the ear symbol. We want to make sure there is 

not so much verbiage. That was just coming up with more 

creative solutions to indicate to people when the 

announcement is actually on. If you put the wording 

underneath the sign that would work. In terms of the 

duality of the visual message and hearing, I think that you do 

need to have the redundancy. Sometimes even though 
people are exiting the train, you have still people sitting in 

their seat remaining on the train. You have people waiting 

in the aisles to exit the train. So, I think we shouldn't 

assume where people are and just are the redundancy so no 

one is omitted the information. Sometimes you don't hear it 

the first time. I know I may need the second time it's heard 

because it may be muffled. Not that I want to hear any 

announcement over and over as Blair indicated before that 

would be dreadful.

>> This is Jim. I want to say one thing --

>> Our meeting with Jim meeting with Blair definitely 

don't want to hear whoever it was don't want to hear an 

announcement repeated over and over date and time that 

would be irritating.

>> This is Blair. One of the things that we have had on 

cars before it was -- we replaced a lit sign that said it was a 

fixed lit sign that said cafe this way or cafe the other way an 

you -- and you flip the switch accord to go where it was and 

exit this way. We went to a scrolling sign it would give you 

messages but then it would default every so many second or 

minutes to those traditional messages again. So, it 

might -- it would stay that way a while. So you know that 

message that people needed throughout their trip of which 

the cafe was and which way the exit was back to like a fixed 
sign. Then it goes into a message. But you -- I could tell 

we had just painted Jim into a corner that if an 

announcement is made once verbally, and that sort of an 

accepted amount that's okay, does that necessarily 

preclude -- I think that's something that we need to have 

understood so we don't have the ambiguity going forward 

does it preclude that message being repeated on a scrolling 

sign throughout the trip.

>> This is Jim. I think you guys need to think about that. 

You need to think about it in terms of okay what frequency 

will you allow it. If the visual sign is specified every 5 

seconds clearly you don't want to have an audible 

announcement every 5 seconds. I think if there is a 

sufficient amount of time between when you say the same 

thing -- in other words, if it's half an hour later you are 

going to say the same thing I think you need to do it in both 

mode. That is something that you guys need to sort of 

discuss amongst yourselves to get an idea where you want to 

go. Let me sort of jump in with one quick thing Janice said 

something that triggered something in my mind. She talked 

about when one system was broken versus another one. 

Keep in mind, that the guidelines the standards are kind of 

assuming that everything is in good working order. This is 

the requirement you have to have this. Let's assume it 
works.

It doesn't really talk about when a system or some element 

of what we are talking about is broken. That is sort of a 

main accessible features in the regulation not in the 

standards or guidelines.

>> Interesting. So what do we do if let's say for example 

because what happens, that's just part of life things brake 

what do we do if one is broken. That's my fare having one 

broken and then not having the other-- the person being 

aware that the other system is there?

>> I know that -- that DOT has it in the regs somewhere I 

can never really find it. I can give you what Justice does in 

their building's requirements if you give me two second to 

find it. It's basically -- it requires, if I can find it here hang 

on a sec. Here it is. It basically requires maintain operable 

working condition equipment required to be readily 

accessible with persons with disabilities. It then goes on to 

say the distinction does not prohibit temporary interruption 

of service due to maintenance or repairs. It says you have 

to maintain it and keep it in good working order but it's 

going to give you a little bit of time to sort of fix it. But you 

can't let it sit around six months and not do anything about 

T. I believe there is something similar it DOT's regs. Like 

I say, I can't remember where it is I think it's in there.
>> (inaudible)

>> It's in the recommendations to DOT.

>> (inaudible) it's definitely in here because the provision 

was put in here because there were transit providers of 

section 504 that locked down the regs.

>> What?

>> They made the (inaudible) inoperable this provision 

which is written to make this an option again there was a 

case involving lifts where my recollection is that the judge 

said they have the lift nobody in the law makes them be 

operable.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> You can't make this stuff up. This is why you have to 

over regulate.

>> The maintenance accessible features were born 

because of the frustration of people offer that incident.

>> Crazy.

>> This is Jim. Folks we have about looks like about 7 

more minutes on the call. So, I am going to put out the next 

meeting is going to be December 4. And the other 

gentleman who wants to invite the folks from Gallaudet to 

come in please do. If you can send us an E-mail with 

regards to what they want to talk about maybe how much 

they want to talk might be able to put it in the agenda. If 
that's your preference --

>> This is Andrew, sure that would be fine.

>> Okay. I would like to throw out a couple of things for 

you to chew on and think about for next time that we haven't 

really gotten into in fairly any depth. And one of them is the 

ISA I want to go back to the ISA it's the only place that's 

required currently in the standard is on the outside of certain 

vehicles that are required to be accessible. That's it. It's 

not required at the priority seating even though a lot of 

people put it there it's not required at wheelchair locations. 

It's not required on toilet rooms as I recall, I would have to 

go look specifically. I don't think it's required there either. 

There might be certain places that you might want to require 

it be placed and think about that. The other couple of 

issues is alarms. In other words, if you have in like a sleeper 

car you have a fire alarm what -- you want to talk about 

requirements for those, are they something that the industry 

puts into their vehicles or is it all done through 

communication via the PA system. If they are provided, you 

know, what requirements do you want to provide -- have 

them require. The building standard requires NFTA 72 the 

national fire association standard for fire alarms which is 

mass notification now which is what 72 is. And then the 

other thing is with regards to audible announcements, do 
you want to get into the issue of the clarity of those 

announcements in other words, speech intelligibility I don't 

know if there is anything out there for rail vehicles that could 

be something for the board to look into some research 

projects down the road or how ever you want to do that. 

But that is where I am going with some of this stuff. Is there 

anybody else that wants to bring up anything for the good of 

the cause or are we about done today? I know I am about 

done. I think you could stick a fork in me.

>> Again, dead air.

>> Everybody is just trying to figure that one out.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> This is Blair, Jim you are too big of a fella for me to 

stick a fork into.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> This is Janice I am laughing too hard on mute I'm sorry 

that was just too funny.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Yeah I have got one of the turkey pop up things it went 

off about 5 minutes ago, so yeah.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> I think the intelligibility is very critical I think that's 

something that benefits every person and I think we really 

should consider that. And also on the rooms, my concern is 
for people who are deaf who have hearing aids out. 

Developing--Andrew would know about that, but what to do 

when someone's hearing aids is removed in the middle of the 

night and there is an emergency. And --

>> This is Blair. One of the things that David and I talked 

about is bed shakers and we also for fire alarms and things 

strobe lights those kind of things. But I had never -- I had 

never heard of bed shakers until David told me about them 

shall--wow not only for alarms but connected to the room 

doorbell, you know, if you are to get off in Iowa we don't 

make a big announcement the attendant wakes you. You 

know, you will be awakened they don't have to tear your door 

down.

>> As long as they are not -- they have to be hard wired. 

The problem when you do them as I am blanking on the 

word where it's remote. If someone mass-- passes your 

door on the middle of the night we saw it on the passenger 

vessel committee I am blanking on the word. Our family 

tested them at 3 o'clock in the morning any person who 

passed out our door the room shook the lights went off it 

was so horrible. Those bed shakers sound really great until 

you necessarily have to use them there are people in the 

room that don't need them you could have deaf Oriental 

Express on the train the murder on the Oriental Express. 
Especially when there is not emergency and someone is 

walking past your room repeatedly.

>> Were they proximity sense sores I am thinking of the 

button outside the room.

>> That's right. As long as you don't have kids passing 

the room, having fun and they are drunk in the middle of the 

night.

>> They put the drunks off at the next stop--

>> This is Jim let me jump in here real quick to give you 

information. One of the things the FDA did in the recent 

cycle they considered bed shakers rejected it because they 

are not certified or if you will they don't have a underwriter's 

laboratory label they are not tested. They were hesitant to 

sort of talk about bed shakers for that reason. What they 

did do is put in a new requirement which goes into effect in 

the very near future for a low frequency alarm. And that's 

basically a requirement for specifically for folks who are hard 

of hearing, or hearing impaired in some way but not 

completely deaf. Most frequency alarm is basically if 

you -- the example if you are driving down the highway and 

a kid comes along in the car even though the windows are 

up. He has his stereo really loud, but all you can hear is the 

bass drum it's like a vibration that's a low frequency alarm. 

They are going to -- they propose to put it in in sleeping 
areas in buildings that are required to have an alarm system 

in it you might want to consider that.

>> Jim this is Blair from Amtrak. And I will make this 

quick. We have to -- we have a requirement to have I'm 

sorry not a requirement but a recommendation long standing 

for fire and smoke alarms, and obviously a need to be able to 

wake people up and of course very close quarters like a ship 

or a (inaudible) you run the risk of waking up everyone. If 

it's an emergency that's grit that's the idea. But we have to 

balance that. And we tend it get outside on the railroad of 

some of the things, we put stuff through our own tests that 

exceed UL. So, we can certainly think about that.

>> on that note that's the last thing that we can say 

because we are now over 3 clock by my computer thank you 

everybody for the participation and we will talk to you on 

December 4th.

>> Thank you.

>> Thanks Jim.

>> Okay. Thank you very much everybody. Operate are 

thank you for your help today, we get to do it all again next 

week.

>> Thank you very much. Pleasure working -- pleasure 

working with you. Have a good day.

>> All right. You too.
(End of meeting.)