Note: The output shown below is from the Communication Access Realtime

Translation (CART) system used in the Signage Subcommittee meeting and is 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.

1

x--------------------------------x

UNITED STATES ACCESS BOARD

RAIL VEHICLES ACCESS

x--------------------------------x

SIGNAGE COMMITTEE TELECONFERENCE

*DRAFT*

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2014

1:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m.

Location: United States Access Board

1331 F Street, NW, Suite 1000

Washington, DC 20004

Reporter: Sandra Gartrell
2

AGENDA

1.0 Introductions

2.0 Election of chair

2.1 Nominations

2.2 Vote (instructions to be provided)

3.0 Review subcommittee scope and

objectives

4.0 Report on February 6 conference

call (staff)

5.0 Review subcommittee suggestions for

and categories of various types of signs

6.0 Discussion

6.1 Determine how each type of

information should be conveyed (accessible sign or

another format)
3

6.2 Determine what technical provisions

(raised letters, braille, visual access only) should

apply to each type of sign

7.0 Public comment period

8.0 Closing remarks
4

P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S

MR. BEATTY: Good morning, everyone. This is Paul

Beatty with the Access Board. I want to welcome you to

the second conference call on signage.

At this point I'm going to ask the operator to

read off who is currently on the line.

OPERATOR: At this time I would like to confirm

all participants on the phone line. We have Marsha

Mass? Please respond when I state your name.

MS. MAZZ: Yes.

OPERATOR: Ed Hoff?

MR. HOFF: Here.

OPERATOR: Jackson Xue?

MR. XUE: Here.

OPERATOR: Janice Lintz Schacter?

MS. SCHACTER: Here.

OPERATOR: Marshall Lucier?

MR. LUCIER: Here.

OPERATOR: Melissa Anderson?

MS. ANDERSON: Here.

OPERATOR: Lise Hamlin?

MS. HAMLIN: Here.

OPERATOR: Crystal Lyons?

MS. LYONS: Here.

OPERATOR: Marilyn Golden?
5

MS. GOLDEN: Here.

OPERATOR: Robert Carlson?

MR. CARLSON: Here.

OPERATOR: Billy Altom? Billy? Looks like his

line is disconnected.

Monica London?

MS. LONDON: Here.

OPERATOR: We have Kenneth Shiotani?

MR. SHIOTANI: Here.

OPERATOR: Jonathan Michel?

MR. MICHEL: Here.

OPERATOR: David Nelson?

MS. NELSON: Here.

OPERATOR: Frank Maldari?

MR. MALDARI: Here.

OPERATOR: Terry Pacheco?

MS. PACHECO: Here.

OPERATOR: Christopher Hart?

MR. HART: Here.

OPERATOR: Lisa Fairhall?

MS. FAIRHALL: Here.

OPERATOR: And Gary Talbot?

MR. TALBOT: Here.

MR. PECHT: Jim Pecht for the Access Board who is

also here.
6

MS. BUNALES: Rose Marie Bunales with the Access

Board who is also here.

MR. BEATTY: I think this is everybody.

Before we turn it over to Jim Pecht, our first

order of business is the election of a chair of the

subcommittee. I will turn it over to Paul to run that.

MS. HAMLIN: I have a little trouble hearing you.

I do have the CART. She is doing a great job. But it

is hard to hear. I also want to let you know that

Andrew Phillips is trying to get on the line.

MR. BEATTY: Can you hear me also?

OPERATOR: Billy Altom just joined as well.

MS. BUNALES: Operator, I do know I did request 30

minimum lines. I'm sorry.

OPERATOR: That is okay. Take the time you need.

MS. BUNALES: I requested 30 other lines. If

there are any other subcommittee members coming in,

will you please let those through.

Ladies and gentlemen, I apologize, we are back to

the script.

As you know, ladies and gentlemen, we are asking

for nominations for the position of subcommittee

chairman. And for the members on CART, if you wish to

submit your name, please email me directly. For

teleconference, Operator, those interested in
7

subcommittee chairman, please -- Operator?

OPERATOR: It will take a moment. I need to put

them on a "listen only" mode and we can go to the

voting.

MS. BUNALES: Okay. Thank you.

OPERATOR: One moment, please.

At this time all those participants interested in

the office of subcommittee chair, please press star 1.

This is the operator.

MS. BUNALES: I'm not seeing anyone responding.

OPERATOR: I do have two votes that came through.

MS. BUNALES: Now I see it. Do you have their

names?

OPERATOR: Yes, I do. Do you want me to verbally

say it?

MS. BUNALES: We will give them another 30

seconds. The polls are still open, if you are still

interested. And people on CART, please private message

me through the chat area.

Operator, if you could announce who is in the poll

right now.

OPERATOR: We have two parties. That is Gary

Talbot and Terry Pacheco.

MS. BUNALES: To confirm it is Gary Talbot and

Terry Pacheco for RVAAC subcommittee chairman.
8

If there are any other interested parties, please

indicate so right now.

OPERATOR: As a reminder that is star 1.

MS. BUNALES: Thank you for your patience,

everybody. Without further objection, nominations are

now closed. The candidates now Gary Talbot and Terry

Pacheco --

OPERATOR: We do have one more that cued up. We

have Jonathan Michel, who has cued up as well.

MS. BUNALES: So we have Gary Talbot, Terry

Pacheco and Jonathan Michel.

Without further objections, the nominations are

now closed.

Ladies and gentlemen, we will all hear statements

from the candidates, giving each an opportunity about

why they would like to run for the chair.

Operator, will you go ahead and take over the

call. Cue the first candidate, please.

OPERATOR: I will open up the line for our first

candidate, correct?

MS. BUNALES: Yes.

OPERATOR: Jonathan, your line is open.

MR. MICHEL: I can't seem to hear anything on this

call right now. It is just all scrambled. I think I

am going to try to call back in on a separate line. Is
9

everybody else hearing me loud and clear?

MR. BEATTY: I can hear you.

OPERATOR: Do you want me to go to the next

candidate and Jonathan is dialing back in, correct?

MR. MICHEL: I'm going to try to call back in. I

can't hear anything.

MS. BUNALES: Okay.

OPERATOR: Did you want me to go to the next one,

then?

MS. BUNALES: We will go to the next one.

OPERATOR: Terry, your line is open.

MS. PACHECO: Please pardon me. I have a terrible

upper respiratory infection today, so I'm not sounding

my best.

I'm Terry Pacheco. I think I met most all of you

in the last few meetings. I'm also on the committee

representing the American Council for the Blind. I

myself am a person with low vision. I have also worked

for most of my life with the needs of people who are

totally blind, legally blind, have some cognitive

disabilities. Signage has always been a major issue to

me. I worked for seven years as the affiliate services

coordinator to coordinate 72 local and state affiliates

of consumer advocates throughout the country. I'm

working with some others right now on a couple of
10

issues that also have to do with rail transportation.

I'm sorry. I'm going to start coughing any second.

I have the time to put into this right now over

the next year and I also am a braille and large print

and other alternative formats specialist by profession.

I guess that -- anybody have any questions? About all

I have to say right now.

MS. BUNALES: Operator, will you cue up the last

candidate, please.

OPERATOR: Jonathan did dial back in. I can go to

Gary and come back to Jonathan. One moment.

Gary, your line is open, sir.

MR. TALBOT: Thank you, very much. My name is

Gary Talbot. While I'm interested in being a chair in

one of the subcommittees, I would very much like to

support Terry's nomination for chair. I would like to

withdraw my name. I appreciate it very much and hope I

get considered for some other position. Thank you.

MS. BUNALES: Thank you.

Operator, Jonathan next please.

MR. MICHEL: Yes. I actually would like to second

Gary Talbot's nomination for Terry. I feel like I'm

pretty new to the rail industry. And I think her

expertise in everything associated with signage would

best serve the subcommittee and therefore I will recuse
11

myself from the nomination as well.

MS. BUNALES: Okay. In that case, Operator, would

you please open all lines.

OPERATOR: One moment.

MS. BUNALES: Yes, everybody unmuted. And I do

have Billy Altom in the room.

MR. ALTOM: Yes.

MS. BUNALES: Billy Altom, we had two candidates

withdraw -- I guess at this point I will hand it over

to you now and I guess that is Terry Pacheco.

MR. ALTOM: Thank you, thank you, very much,

Terry, for your position. I think you will be

absolutely wonderful in it. Thank you, Gary and

Jonathan, for your consideration.

I would like to on behalf of the committee appoint

Terry as our subcommittee chair for signage. Anything

more formal than that?

MS. BUNALES: I leave it to -- we need a motion on

the floor.

<<<: Hello?

MR. CARLSON: This is Robert Carlson. I agree we

should do this by acclamation.

MR. BEATTY: The committee has voted. There is

only one person.

MS. MAZZ: Do the protocols call for the committee
12

to elect the chair?

MR. BEATTY: Right.

MS. MAZZ: And the chair must be a member of the

full committee, is that not correct?

MR. BEATTY: Right.

MS. MAZZ: Thank you.

MR. BEATTY: Since there was only one full

committee member running, I guess we will go with

Robert's suggestion. We have Terry in the position

being the only person.

MS. MAZZ: It is election by acclamation. Hearing

no objections.

<<<: Hello?

MR. BEATTY: So, Terry, you are the chair. There

is one other administrative matter before you turn it

over to Jim Pecht.

I sent out an email saying we are going to elect

the chair and I also indicated who was a member.

Now, I would ask for people -- the Chair had

appointed everybody who was a full member of the

committee as well as an alternate to the subcommittee.

He did not appoint anybody else. However, the email

said that people could apply now. With the snow and

not having access to the RVAAC email access, people may

have applied.
13

So my recommendation to the full committee chair,

Billy, is to appoint everybody that is on the line that

is not a member or representative, because they are

already a committee member.

So people like Gary Talbot and David Nelson, et

cetera, who are not alternates or members of the

committee would then be appointed to be members of the

subcommittee.

MS. MAZZ: Paul, they need to indicate that they

are interested in being members. They may simply be

attending a single meeting. It would make more sense

for them to indicate their interest in being a member.

MR. BEATTY: I will take two steps. I will first

have the chair appoint them and like we did for full

committee members --

MS. MAZZ: Yeah, doesn't make sense to appoint

people who don't have an interest in it.

MR. BEATTY: Well, I guess the question -- all

right.

And at this point since there is going to be no

other voting and I am just turning it over to Jim

Pecht. I give it to you to run the meeting to the end.

MR. PECHT: Paul, did you want to go over the

scope and the subcommittees and the objectives first?

MR. BEATTY: No, I will let you do that.
14

MR. PECHT: This is Jim Pecht with the Access

Board. I assume everyone got a copy of the email. I

can read it out, if you need me to. "Recommend

proposed revisions to the guidelines as may be

necessary and appropriate to update, improve or expand

the scoping and technical criteria in order to ensure

an acceptable level of access for individuals with

disabilities, particularly those who have low vision or

who are blind."

So if there is any discussion on that, I need to

hear it now, but I just as soon move on, if not.

Hearing none, moving on to report on February 6

conference call. Subcommittee met on February 6 and

discussed and listened while staff went over and

answered questions about the current requirements in

the building standards with the Americans with

Disabilities Act with signage with regard to scoping

and technical criteria.

We also looked briefly at the requirements in the

ANSI A.117.1 document with regard to the new

requirements regarding the message signs and touched

briefly on what is currently required in the vehicle

standard, which is pretty slim. It is on cars that are

required to be accessible and signs with priority C and

that was about it.
15

And I then asked to sort of go out and make a list

of type of signs they wanted to look at and try to put

them in categories. And asked them to get back to this

committee so we could talk about it. We then had

public comment, but there were no comments offered.

So for today's meeting, I'm hoping everybody got

the list that Paul sent out that I had sort of cobbled

together with everybody's homework assignments. I

probably missed some because -- let me step back for a

minute.

In the future, when we ask folks to send us

something or if you want to send us materials that are

going to be passed to the committee, we really need it

to be in that accessible format or something so we

fairly easily make it into accessible format, otherwise

we can't really send it out.

If you are sending PDFs with huge tables that are

very complex, I will probably not be sending those

things to the committee because they are really not

accessible and really hard to make accessible.

We have a lot of photographs, which would -- I

know some of them had alt tags and some did not. We

have to do alt tags for just about all of them. We

just did not have the time to do that.

There was also an Excel spreadsheet that is not
16

really accessible either.

I guess I will take responsibility for not being

more specific when I asked for a list. What I really

wanted was a Word file with a list of words on it.

But, anyway, it is not here or there.

You have before you a list of categories we put

together with minor modifications and a list under each

one of those of what I thought the responses from you

folks were with regard to the various types of signs

and where they should go.

What we want to do is basically look through that

list and sort of get an idea -- well, actually start

making determinations as to what signs should be

accessible and what signs don't need to be made

accessible. And if the signs should be accessible,

what level of access should be applied to that sign.

In other words, visual, tactile and braille altogether,

should it be only visual or should it be conveyed as a

variable message sign.

The last thing is can these type of signs be made

accessible and placed appropriately as they should be.

So without further ado, I will just sort of start

asking folks to give me their opinions about what

categories -- did you think the categories work well?

Was there something that we missed and should add.
17

MS. SCHACTER: I was on the call and then jumped

off the call last time because the issue I needed to

address was not going to be addressed in that call.

I'm still not sure where it fits in. But under the way

the Access Board handles currently hearing

accessibility, there is the sole use of an ear with a

slash, which is the umbrella symbol for access and does

not use the commonly used best practice method of

specifically identifying the access available.

I'm not sure where this conversation should come

up. And I'm happy to stick it in the right place, but

I am not sure where that should be on the agenda. But

it needs to be added to the agenda.

For example, if there is an induction loop on the

train, if someone does not see the induction loop

symbol they would not turn their hearing loop to the T

and it would not occur to them that the induction loop

is on the train. Same as the sign language or a light

that doesn't go on if there is no announcement.

I don't know where that would fit in and I want to

put that on the horizon.

MS. NELSON: Janice, is what you are trying to

say, like maybe redesign, for redesign of the symbol?

MS. SCHACTER: No, that is not it. Because the

symbol is already being used everywhere, except by the
18

Access Board. So when you go to museums and

theaters --

MS. NELSON: I personally don't care for that

symbol.

MS. SCHACTER: Which symbol? The ear with the

slash?

MS. NELSON: Yeah, the ear with the slash.

MS. SCHACTER: It is not a redesign because the

symbols I'm requesting are already designed by the

Graphic Artist Guild that was underwritten by the

National Endowment for the Arts. So used over the

world. It is incorporating the specificity that people

with hearing loss use but somehow people without

hearing loss don't seem to know it exists. Without it,

it is just basically an umbrella symbol that says there

is some sort of access; good luck in figuring out what

it is. I can't believe that is what the ADA meant but

somehow -- I don't know how we change it.

But there has to be specificity, especially if an

induction loop will be potentially used because no one

will have a clue and then it can't be used and that is

pointless. We need to insert a level of common sense.

And I'm happy to send an article that was written by

the League of the Hard of Hearing about the various

symbols and explaining it. They are used all over the
19

world and they are just not in the ADA, and I don't

know why.

MR. PECHT: Ms. Schacter, I think what you are

asking for a requirement that when these systems were

used the appropriate symbol should be placed in the

vehicle so that people know that is the system that is

being used; is that correct?

MS. SCHACTER: Exactly. It is kind of inserting

common sense.

MR. PECHT: What I would need from you is send us

your recommendations: "These are the symbols, these

are systems they denote and I recommend these provide

the systems and these are the" --

MS. MAZZ: I think you have that already. It is

the ear with a slash through it with a T in the bottom

right-hand corner.

MS. SCHACTER: That is probably the only symbol

that will be relevant. I don't know -- depending on

what we agree to, what symbol will be necessary to be

added. And it is kind of the type of thing that at the

end when we figure out what access we put it, then we

can kind of figure out what symbol should be used.

But, yes, Marsha, I think that is probably the

most likely symbol to be needed.

MR. PECHT: Okay. So noted.
20

MS. SCHACTER: Thank you. That is all I needed.

MR. PECHT: Back to the discussion of the

categories. Is everybody happy about the categories?

Are they expansive enough? Inclusive enough?

MS. GOLDEN: I have a question. I am sorry I

don't have full view of the document. But do we have

that interior card numbers and door IDs should be

raised character in braille?

MS. MAZZ: We have not gotten to that point yet.

MR. PECHT: We have not gotten to that point. We

are just talking about categories and then we will go

to the types of signs under those categories and what

level of access should be applied to those signs.

MS. GOLDEN: Okay. Thank you.

MR. SLAUGHTER: It looks like in some cases there

is -- obviously because multiple folks have given signs

in categories, it looks like there is a lot of overlap

where some of the signs fall into multiple categories.

Was that intended?

MR. PECHT: It was probably because I was trying

to put together something as quickly as I could.

MR. SLAUGHTER: I understand.

MR. PECHT: Various things got overlapped and

those are things that need to be rooted out and changed

and all that stuff.
21

MR. SLAUGHTER: I think it is important as we move

through in looking at the categories and saying, yes,

things that fall into these categories need to be made

accessible. There are going to be conditions,

obviously, where provided situations -- because

everything doesn't apply to every mode. So we need to

be conscious of that.

MR. HOFF: We also in the last meeting discussed

the possibility of -- you mentioned at the beginning of

the meeting of this call we should consider whether to

make raised braille or some other means of

accessibility, including, and this is what we discussed

in the last conference call, an audible equivalent. We

did not discuss them all, but obviously the conductor

can explain what the signs say or what a sign says or

we can have, somehow, audio availability, personal

audio availability or persons for some new signs

perhaps even a broadcast of audible messages.

MS. MAZZ: Ed, I'm going to refer you to the

agenda. We are on Item 5.0 and that is to review the

subcommittee suggestions for categories in various type

of signs. The next task you had here is to determine

how each type of information should be conveyed,

accessible sign or another format. And that may --

that is in another format.
22

I think Jim is just trying to get some agreement

with the categories, at least for now. We know they

are flexible, are working and once that happens we can

start working through the list in each category under

6.1 to determine how each type of information should be

conveyed. And then, secondly, talk about the technical

of raised letters, braille, visual access, all of that

that is in the current ADA standard and the need to

make some recommendation for some change.

MR. HOFF: My point is only to say as we are going

through the list, to keep in the back of our minds that

it is not simply a visual sign we are talking about.

How to make it also audibly accessible, to keep that in

the back of our minds.

MS. MAZZ: Another format. So it may be that

sometimes it won't lend itself to tactile letters.

MR. HOFF: Exactly. I just wanted everybody to be

aware when they see one of these signs, they say, "Wow,

we could not do that."

MS. MAZZ: If we could back up to 5.0 and deal

with the categories first, I think that will help us to

proceed more efficiently.

MR. SLAUGHTER: To that point in the categories, I

think that we should have -- I know Jim had broken out

nonemergency versus emergency. But I think that we
23

should have a limit as simply safety. It will

eliminate some of the overlap because there are just

some safety information, the caution type signs or

there is not an emergency, there is not an immediate

danger but it is a safety advisory.

I think from a hierarchy standpoint, if we could

have that designation as we move through what we want

to require, what we want to leave is some leeway to the

authorities. Safety items I think should be required.

So if we could maybe break that out as a category,

safety but nonemergency, like category.

MS. MAZZ: Okay.

MR. PECHT: So basically you are talking about

things like watch your step, mind the gap, those kinds

of signs?

MR. SLAUGHTER: Yes. So we bracket those. Those

are critical but they are not an emergency, but they

will avoid an emergency if they are careful.

MR. PECHT: I will add that category now and break

that out on the list.

Any other comments on the categories?

Not hearing anything, I'm going to assume you are

happy with it.

MS. PACHECO: First of all, let me thank everybody

for making me chair. I had no intention of it when we
24

started. I thank you all for your support and I hope I

can live up to your expectation.

My thought on this, I am thinking about redoing

your file into an Excel spreadsheet, because I'm

thinking it might be sensible to take these categories

and then do subcategories under them of the various

type. Might be subways in the inner-city. Because

some of them are going to be different, I think,

depending on the type of vehicle. I think we will have

some different issues, perhaps some different needs for

the same signs in different types of vehicles.

I think we might need to do a subcategory break

down.

MS. MAZZ: Terry, I think in the end, all the

bullets are merely examples. We want the categories to

be well developed enough so that you can scope to those

categories. So you will have a scoping provision that

says something like, you know, "Where directional signs

are provided, do this." So you want to make sure that

you have categories that will capture not what is just

in your list, but things -- because there is no way in

the world in a standard you can list every kind of sign

that might possibly be put on a vehicle.

MS. PACHECO: I understand that, Marsha, that is

exactly my point. I think we have gone over the top
25

here. I think there is a way we can streamline this.

MS. MAZZ: Yeah. In the end what you want to come

out with are some scoping statements of various

categories of signs.

MS. PACHECO: Yeah, absolutely.

MR. BEATTY: Operator, Frank Maldari has indicated

that he is muted. Can you activate his line? Thank

you.

OPERATOR: Frank, your line is open.

MR. BEATTY: Frank, are you there?

MR. MALDARI: Yes, I am.

MR. BEATTY: Sorry for interrupting. Go ahead,

Terry.

MS. PACHECO: I'm finished. That was my only

point. I just think we can streamline this

considerably.

MS. GOLDEN: I think the categories are fine --

MR. PECHT: Is this Marilyn?

MS. GOLDEN: Sorry. Marilyn Golden. I think the

categories are fine. At some point we had talked about

what comes under which category and certain things

should be recategorized.

MR. PECHT: That is perfectly fine. I put things

where I thought. If I miscategorized them, we can move

it from one place to the other.
26

MS. GOLDEN: I think it is a great first draft and

I think the most important thing in it was to be

comprehensive and you have done that and then we can

start to, you know, to whatever, edit it a bit. But

thanks for your effort, Jim. sounds like it is not the

time for that but just wanted to mention that.

MR. PECHT: Sure.

MS. GOLDEN: According to the agenda, we are

looking at how each type of information should be

conveyed and what technical provisions should apply,

then we go to the categories. And that might be the

right time to say, "Hey, X signs belong in a different

category" or it may be before that we should do it. I

don't know.

MR. PECHT: At this point, if you have looked

through the list, I guess what I sort of like to see is

a discussion of going under each category and sort of

giving me a sort of general sign type of what we are

talking about and make a list from there as to what --

using the specific examples of the different types of

signs and see what you guys think would be a sort of

good generic way of describing these types of signs

under the different categories.

If that is acceptable, can we look under way

finding signs and have a discussion of what we are
27

talking about there?

MS. MAZZ: Can you explain what the initials are

under everything, Jim?

MR. PECHT: The initials are the initials of the

individual who sent me the --

MS. MAZZ: Okay.

<<<: Oh, okay.

MR. PECHT: Brian Slaughter, Ed Hoff --

MS. MAZZ: Okay. I thought it stood for rail

cars.

MR. PECHT: No, no. Those were the individuals

who sent me the homework. It is just a note for

myself. I apologize for not explaining it.

<<<: I was trying to figure out what AT meant.

MS. MAZZ: So you are starting with the way

finding signs?

MR. PECHT: Yes.

MR. MALDARI: A question to Marsha again.

MS. MAZZ: Yes?

MR. MALDARI: Hello?

MS. MAZZ: Yes.

MR. MALDARI: I had a question for Marsha again.

The ADA for buildings right now requires essentially

only one sign, which is the identification of a room.

And the reasoning behind this, correct me if I'm wrong,
28

because that is the only location where you know a sign

is supposed to be. And when we are looking through all

these things, which if you look at the entire list is

essentially every detail in the car, you don't

necessarily know that a sign exists with a train car

number or other information. So how would you know to

look for it?

And I know the information may be useful at some

point, but it has to be practical and the person has to

know to look for a sign before you are going to put a

sign there that the person can read.

MS. MAZZ: Frank, I think this goes back to what

we were talking about before. The ADA actually has

several different types of signs. The one you're

talking about is a sign with raised letters and

braille. So signs with raised letters and braille go

to the left side of the door to a space. And the door

opening gives someone who is blind or has very low

vision a cue as to where to look for the sign. And

sometimes the sign is on the space and there are

instructions for that, but essentially it is the door

to the space that gives that cue.

And other types of signs such as signs that give

you an arrow and say, "North wing this way" are

directional signs. Those directional signs are not
29

required to be raised letter or braille, but they are

required to have certain visual characteristics for

people with low vision who will be using those way

finding signs.

Does that help?

MR. MALDARI: That helps out a lot because when we

are going through these and characterizing them, I am

not sure if that is what you meant by accessible sign

or another format determined for visual access only.

Okay.

MS. MAZZ: Yeah. There is essentially in my view

now three types of accessible signs in the standards

that are available to us from existing standards. From

the ADA you get the raised letter and braille signs

which also have to have visual components because

typically it is the only sign. And then you have the

visually accessible signs for people with low vision.

And from ANSI A.117 you get the variable message sign

which at the moment are (inaudible). And the committee

has talked about pairing audible messages with certain

types of access sign, the variable message sign. That

is sort of a different subject of signs that is already

on the committee's list.

So it strikes me that you kind of want to go

through and look at these various types of signs and
30

say raised letter and braille, variable message signs,

potentially or visual only, or if you have items of

another format, such as a particular kind of icon that

you can develop to indicate a light switch, for

example, above your head or something like that, then

you could go there.

MS. NELSON: I have a question for you, Marsha.

Talking about the arrows in the hotel, do the arrows

have to be raised as well? The braille with a sign to

the room, does that need to be raised as well?

MS. MAZZ: Directional signs are not required to

be raised letter in braille. So if you have a room in

a hotel that says "Room 304 to 324 to the left" with a

left facing arrow, that is a directional sign and it is

not required to be raised letter in braille, because it

is typically somewhere in the elevator lobby and it is

not a predictable location where a blind person would

go to look.

That sign does actually meet the requirements for

a visually accessible sign, because it has to comply

with style requirements as well as contrast

requirements.

MR. MALDARI: I have another question for Marsha.

For each one of these categories raised letter

braille -- access to raised letter braille and visual
31

access only, there is another list of requirements that

is associated with that designation that is listed in

703, right?

MS. MAZZ: Correct.

MR. MALDARI: Once you say a visual sign, 5/8"

letters and once you say raised letter and braille, you

have the spaces laid out. The concern I have is having

all the information could be very useful when you look

at 5/8" letters and the signs with braille. You start

to look in a rail car and you run out of space real

quickly. So when we are going through this, you have

to be cognizant of this problem.

MS. MAZZ: I would absolutely agree. You also

have to know there are certain common features of rail

cars that would enable someone who doesn't take the

train every day to locate the signs. I will give you a

good example.

The restroom signs, they can go on the door or

adjacent to the door. They will be locateable because

you will find that that restroom door opening with your

cane or visually if you have low vision. But there may

be other types of signs that if you made it raise

letter in braille, the chances of someone actually

finding it would be, you know, not so good.

MR. MALDARI: That is a great example and that is
32

kind of the criteria that I would like to use when we

are going through this and deciding whether we have

raised letters in braille.

MR. CARLSON: I would like to make an observation.

There are people who are quite capable of seeing

signage and information how to open a door. And if

they are not looking for it in the right place, they

are going to miss it. The number of people that I see

not being able to press the button that says "press

door to open door" on the automatic doors on the MARC

trains, for example, they are trying to pull a door

open that is not going to move until they press that

button. And it is right there but it is not in their

field of view and therefore they are missing it. It is

down around hip level rather than down around elbow

level. Just the misplacement of some kind of important

information like that will make someone miss it

entirely.

MR. MALDARI: That is a good point. If we wind up

having raised lettering on braille signs, a requirement

for the location is going to be an important part of it

as well.

MS. PACHECO: It absolutely is. I think one of

the most classic examples of mismarking took place back

several years ago when they started putting braille
33

markings on ATMs. And I know I went to a bank one day,

the only one with the braille marking was the one in

the drive through. The one in the lobby didn't have

it. "No, you have to go outside and use the drive

through." Probably because it was the newest one.

(Chorus of Laughter)

MS. PACHECO: My point, logic needs to come into

play with that.

MR. SLAUGHTER: Terry, we have been applying

raised letter and braille signs, right, wrong or

otherwise, for, I want to say, 13 years on our cars and

it has been an ongoing process as cars went through

overhaul and as signs got replaced, replaced the

current version.

As part of that process we have developed

application drawings that they are quite pictorial and

I don't know if we want to do this or maybe it would

help. I would be glad to provide those to the

committee to use as sort of a benchmark. You may see

things that we have done that were completely off base

and I would appreciate that comment as well.

But it might just help folks orient what happens

in a rail car at the various points; at the entrance,

going toward the end of the car, those kinds of things.

And, again, it is very pictorial information because we
34

had to do that so our folks in the field would know

where to put signs. And as part of our daily

inspections, some signs fall under the FRA inspections

so they need to be able to see the signs, see what it

says, see the part numbers, all those things.

I would be glad to provide what I think might be a

good example, if you think that would be worthwhile, to

use as a tool going forward.

MR. SHIOTANI: That sounds like an excellent idea.

MS. PACHECO: I think it would be a great thing.

My only question, is there anyone on the committee --

there is not a reason to stop. I'm just trying to see

what we can do to deal with that. Is there anyone on

the committee that would need it in an accessible

format, other than to enlarge the picture? Anyone

would need an audio description of it? If not, then I

think it would be --

MS. MAZZ: Let me jump in here and say that, you

know, our materials end up getting posted to the web

for anybody who wants to look at them. So we may have

to have some more discussion about the formats and I

would like to have that with Paul and Lisa Fairhall,

our general counsel, before we say -- if nobody else

needs the format, it is okay to distribute it.

MS. PACHECO: My only question if it is something
35

we are using as a tool for the committee, it has to go

on the website?

MS. MAZZ: I understand that and it is a

discussion that we have to have with our General

Counsel's Office.

MS. PACHECO: Okay.

MS. MAZZ: Okay?

MS. PACHECO: Okay.

MS. MAZZ: We will do that first thing back in the

office.

MR. SLAUGHTER: I would suggest that if we do

that, I can strip away anything that would identify it

as being particular to Amtrak. So it would be a

typical, if you will, a typical coach or a typical car,

something along those lines, if that would help in the

discussions with your counsel.

MS. MAZZ: I don't know that is the issue, so

much, Blair. It is whether or not it is accessible

format and what it will take to make the format

accessible.

MR. SLAUGHTER: Would you me to send you an

example to work with?

MS. MAZZ: That would be great.

MR. SLAUGHTER: It will be in a PDF format, but I

can export it any way you want it. I will send you a
36

page as an example to give you something to work with.

MS. MAZZ: Paul and Lisa and Jim and I and Melissa

will talk about what has to go on the website, what has

to go on the dot gov site and what format it has to be.

I do understand the point there may not be a committee

that needs the access, but this is an open process.

MR. SLAUGHTER: I understand.

MR. BEATTY: Is this similar to the two documents

you have already sent me?

MR. SLAUGHTER: The documents I sent you were

primarily the sign drawings themselves.

MR. BEATTY: All right.

MR. SLAUGHTER: And then we have application

drawings as well that draw from those packages. But

what it does, as an example, there is a line drawing, a

three-dimensional line drawing of a coach and it shows

with call-outs where the signs go and then off to the

side it also has a list of material of the part number

for our use. It is very pictorial and I thought --

since everything we are dealing with here is -- except

for the visual signs, have tangible things in tangible

spaces. So it might be of value.

But certainly I will send you guys examples of

them and then let me know. And if it is something we

can go forward with, I will put together a package of a
37

couple of relevant car types for distribution.

MS. PACHECO: Thank you. Unless it is a few

hundred photos, I'm thinking it may not be too

difficult.

MR. SLAUGHTER: It would not be a huge document.

There are perspective views looking at the ends of the

car, there is longitudinal sections of the car so you

can see where to put the seat signs and those sort of

things and detail information for restrooms and

vestibules in the car.

But I think it gives a good rounding out of what

occurs inside of a rail car. It will apply certainly

to Amtrak because it is our cars, but I think it has a

lot of overlap with most of the other folks as well.

MR. SHIOTANI: I think if there is someone on the

transit side like subway cars and light rail -- you

don't need as many. You don't have restrooms you don't

have cafe cars or whatever. But it does seem like if

there is anybody on the committee that has access to

some of the different kinds of signage that applies to

light rail cars and subway cars, they are different,

some basic information, way finding information

probably is necessary. But, again, all subway cars

different from light rail cars, but having some

examples might be helpful if anybody has access to
38

charts or, you know, signage, instructions that Blair

is describing from subway cars.

<<<: I did that for the commuter rail cars and I

apologize. I'm going to do my best -- certainly it

would be easier to do the light rail cars. I will take

pictures of interior and exterior light rail cars and

signage and I will do my best to give a narrative

description of each one of those signs and send it

along to Jim. Shouldn't be that many on the light

rail.

MS. NELSON: Quick interjection and I apologize.

I had to step out for just a minute there, but I wanted

to comment on what was going on in terms of the

different signage for transit. I'm wondering -- the

thing that is kind of nagging at me in terms of

standardization, I'm wondering -- how do I say this?

For example, people who use wheelchairs on the

trains, I believe there is going to be standardization

with that type of thing, for example. So I would think

whether it is a subway or a bus or whatever, the

transit situation might be that is occurring, the

signage is going to be the same in a lot of areas. And

if there is not, we can, you know, try to create that

uniformity as well.

MR. SHIOTANI: This is something that I should
39

know but I don't know. My recollection is that there

is different accessible seating positions, signage for

rail cars versus light rail and subway versus buses?

Maybe the Access Board person, Marsha or somebody --

because on buses you are supposed to be secured but on

rail cars and light rail and subways you don't need to

be secured? Is that --

MR. PECHT: Yeah, field vehicles make turns so

there are requirements for tie-downs and securement and

seat belts and things like that. To my knowledge, in

the current standard there is not any signage

requirement designating those locations. The only

signage in buses, rail, any type of rail you are

talking about is basically inside the car. To my

knowledge, there is the sign which says, "These are

priority seats for people with disabilities." And it

doesn't tell you what to say about them, doesn't

require the international symbol that is used for those

seats. To my knowledge, that is pretty much it.

As far as the securement location on a bus or a

wheelchair location on a rail car, there is not a

signage requirement to label those as such because it

is pretty obvious what they are.

MS. NELSON: Just interjecting, yeah, I do know

the buses require some sort of security but when
40

looking at the rail cars, I think -- I don't know if I

recall seeing the priority seating. Anyway, I don't

recall the exact wording, but there is something.

But people tend to ignore that and I don't know if

maybe there is a need to increase the font size on the

print so that it is not just for in person with the

disability to see it, but it is for any passenger to

see it well. So it is made clear that is not for the

average traveler.

MR. TALBOT: If I can just chime in on the

priority seating signage. I'm not sure -- I'm actually

looking at part 38 under DOT regs to see if it is

listed. But almost all rail cars do have it and I

think it is really important that they not only be in

place, but they are accessible so everyone knows what

they are, whether it is the transfer seat or the clear

space for persons who want to stay in the occupied

device.

Right now it says "folded wheelchair." It has to

be a space for that adjacent or near proximity to the

transfer seat. That should also be signed because

otherwise it becomes stowage location for luggage in

inner-city application or just a place wherever people

would be in a commuter rail application.

MS. SCHACTER: I have to tell you I have always
41

seen the garbage and the luggage in that location.

MR. TALBOT: I couldn't agree with you more.

MS. SCHACTER: I have never been on a train where

it is not a place for the cardboard box and luggage. I

can tell you I didn't know until these calls and this

committee that it was not for that space.

MR. TALBOT: I completely agree with you. And I'm

not suggesting signage will fix that. But it does at

least offer more information to the riders about where

a space is that is supposed to be a priority space or a

transfer location or something like that and then

hopefully the other stuff can follow.

MS. NELSON: I guess what I'm trying to say, I

would like to see more uniformity with signage.

For example, with the priority seating, as we

already discussed, whether it is subway or light rail,

that it says the same thing, it looks the same way, I

think it will increase awareness, not just with the

consumers who have disabilities, but it will provide

more information to the average nondisabled rider to

understand exactly what is going on and what is

expected of them. I think if the uniformity is

occurring in all of the transportations, then they will

become more aware of what things mean, there won't be a

guessing game. They will know what it means because
42

they will see it whether they are on a light rail,

subway, bus, Amtrak, whatever the case may be, it is

all the same signage. Does that make more sense?

<<<: Absolutely.

MR. MALDARI: The same thing and being exactly the

same sign is not exactly the same thing. You do want a

clarification on what priority seating means because it

is not always clear to the average person because they

want to use that space.

If you make it clearer, that is fine, but to

define the exact wording and size of the sign limits

where you can put it. So if you want to make a rule, a

rule saying you need to add some clarity in these words

of who it is used for is a good thing. But putting too

many requirements and restrictions creates a problem

when you go to implement the sign, put it in the car

when you can't find a place to put it. So consistency

is good, but you have to have some flexibility so that

people can do what they are trying to do in a space

that they have.

MR. PECHT: I think that's part of the analysis

you folks need to look at when you look at these signs.

In other words, is this a sign we want to make a

specific requirement of what it actually says, that and

nothing else, or do we just want to give the technical
43

requirements of what the sign looks like with regard

to -- doesn't have to be visual. What is the minimum

character height size. Those kinds of things. And let

whoever is doing the sign for whatever type of vehicle,

just describe the text, let them do that.

The same thing with regards to going back to

Frank's original question about braille. You have to

be able to find braille in order to use it. If you

can't find it, it is not usable. And there is no sense

requiring a sign to be braille when it can't be found.

One of the questions you have to ask, if we are

going to require this sign -- this is important enough

to be raised and brailled and tactile, is there a

location we can put it that is consistent -- can be

found on a consistent basis and is that possible. It

may not be doable in certain circumstances for certain

types of signs.

If you have a requirement to put a description of

how to remove a window on the window, that is a

question you have to make. Is there a consistent

location. If it is important enough to put in braille,

should you do that or not.

Those are the kinds of analysis that you have to

look at on these different types of signs. This is the

type of sign, directional sign that can be located
44

anywhere. Therefore it is not really easily done as

far as finding the thing so it is probably not a good

sign to apply the various braille requirements to. But

the visual requirement is going to be important. You

still may want to specify certain types of visual

signs, the height range, so it can be in certain height

ranges so you can see it. Someone was talking about

the automatic door sign. If it is down low where I

can't see it, it should be in my view range and what is

my view range and should it be placed there.

That is the kind of analysis I hope the committee

will apply to these type of signs.

MR. SLAUGHTER: If you --

MS. NELSON: David would like to make a comment

too.

MR. SLAUGHTER: Go ahead.

MS. NELSON: You go ahead.

MR. SLAUGHTER: There are some issues where excess

signs where APTA and the FRA have determined where they

need to occur on exit doors and they occur typically

higher up. And then down fairly close to the floor,

the assumption being in a smoke filled car someone is

crawling out.

As we look at the placement of these things, they

are not always -- you are not always as logical as you
45

would think in a normal situation, but they are

perfectly logical in possibly an emergency situation.

And it may be that we end up adding more

duplicates. Right now if you look indoor on the coach,

the exit sign occurs at least in two places. Maybe

there is sanity to having it occur in a third place so

it fulfills all of its functions, both for emergency

conditions and for the people who are visually

impaired.

<<<: That has got to be part of analysis, a

requirement of the rule that requires a sign to be in a

specific location and that location is really not

conducive of being accessible. Maybe that is a sign we

want to duplicate someplace else or not have to meet

requirement of certain accessibility issues.

MS. GOLDEN: On the issue of -- I mean, I do think

that Jim and -- Jim is right, that certain signs need

have location specified and size specified. I think

Blair is right to the extent we need to consider the

limitation in train cars so that analysis can happen.

I wanted to say on something discussed a few

minutes ago about so-called priority seating signs. I

think the bus is an interesting context to compare this

to. It is not exactly the same, but it has a lot of

parallels.
46

DOT ADA regulation requires pretty specific

language for priority seating signs. And the

language -- when a person with a disability needs those

seats, they are asked to move. And so while you get

people that won't move, to the citizenship commitment

that, you know, many and hopefully most riders will

move.

I don't remember -- I don't think the DOT

specifies a size. Those letters were the size of, you

know, 12 point type on a page. It would not be visible

on a bus to passengers. It has to be a reasonable size

too. I don't know how much we specify that. DOT did

not have to specify that to buses, I don't think, to

get the signs usable.

The spaces on the train cars, I agree always

occupied by boxes and luggage, should have a similar

system. There may not be a wheelchair user that needs

it, but when there is, that space needs to be vacated

for that purpose. That is probably the main mandated

reason that the space is there. It seems it is the job

of the ADAAG to specify the sign for that, to

underscore the priority seating is important.

MS. MAZZ: Essentially what the ADAAG requirements

currently say is that each vehicle contains signs that

indicate the current seats are priority seats for
47

persons with disabilities and other passengers should

make such seats available for those who would like to

use them.

Then there is second provision that characters

require on paragraph, A, shall have the height ratio of

3:5 and 1:1 and a (inaudible) ratio -- very similar to

the ADAAG signs that we all know and love, and 5/8-inch

wide spacing.

So basically it is the visual sign criteria. It

is not the raised letter and raised sign criteria,

however. That is the current requirement. Just point

of information.

MS. GOLDEN: Thank you.

MR. PECHT: Can we go back to the categories and

we will just start looking at those a little bit.

MR. HART: The FRA could share the required

signage and I would ask if they are required by the

standards that would be helpful.

MR. SLAUGHTER: Chris, I think that is a good

idea. The sign application drawings that I would

provide will show signs that are governed by the FRA

and APTA. But I can also dig that technical data up as

well and provide that to the committee e.

MR. HAR: Technical standards of DOT. So we

should be aware of what that is.
48

MR. SLAUGHTER: Okay.

MR. HART: Thank you.

MR. PECHT: You look at the first category and let

it give you an idea of how I would sort of look as

these categories. I would like way finding signs that

are directional and informational and say these are

signs which are placed at various locations in the car

to give me direction or location of a specific thing or

to another car; the exit doors at the end the car, the

restroom is that way with an arrow, fire extinguishers

are found in the rear section under the last seat.

Those are the kinds of things I would look at as far as

informational signs and I would say they should

probably have the visual requirements applied to them,

probably not the tactile requirements. I don't know

there is anything in here that would warrant. That is

the kind of analysis I would do for that first

category.

How do you guys --

MR. MICHEL: I think the discussion we were having

last week was as far as these way finding signs having

an icon, being able to visualize exactly what they are.

For example, the stairs, I know Amtrak signs do have

the staircase in the -- I guess as a small icon. Now

that icon is not per the, I guess, the signage or the
49

size requirements for an icon, but I think those should

be considered for all applications in all transit

areas.

MR. PECHT: Remember that the pictogram

requirements in the building standard, the size

requirements only apply to pictograms that are part of

a sign that is required to be raised in braille and in

a specific location.

Like a women's room sign pictogram is an

international symbol. Can be pretty much any size you

want it to be and placed any location you want it to be

because it gives you information about the space.

Doesn't designate a permanent room of space.

Again, that is sort of a level of detail we can

get down into after you get the general idea of what we

are looking for and say, okay, the way finding sign if

you use a pictogram or icon, what is an appropriate

size? Do you want to designate that? A minimum of 2"

or 1", depending on the visual range you will be

viewing it from.

MR. MICHEL: Unfortunately I think each sign would

be a case-by-case study depending on how big the font

is because stairs is only six letters long versus

emergency exit.

MR. PECHT: But I may not want to make the
50

requirement apply to those types of icons.

MR. MICHEL: Yeah.

MR. PECHT: That is a decision the committee has

to make, all I'm saying.

MR. MICHEL: How does everybody else feel about

that application?

MS. MAZZ: So you would apply the pictogram

requirements to a sign that a (inaudible) to a stair

and point to any direction, not at the stair itself.

You are not labeling the stair. But you would say

"this way for stairs," is that my understanding?

MR. MICHEL: That is correct. I do think current

Amtrak signs already detail this. I believe there are

a few signs on the Superliner that already have this.

So I think when Blair provides the committee with the

location sign, that should be visible as well.

MR. MALDARI: I think you have to be careful with

the specific location in the rail car. There may not

be a consistency with where to put the sign. Look at

what he has and look at the car design. And this goes

for a lot of suggestions. Make sure we can put these

in a consistent location so they can be identified

somehow before we say they have to be raised letter and

braille, specific visual signs or something else. But

raised letter and braille should be located signs and
51

have to be consistently located in order to be useful.

MS. MAZZ: Jim, we are getting close to the time

where we probably need to take public comment, if there

is any, and maybe begin to wrap up.

What I would suggest is you have some volunteers

who have said that they will try and round up some

additional materials. Maybe there is someone on the

committee who is willing to kind of take a first stab

at organizing the information that we have, developing

categories with recommendations for which types of

signs should be accessible in accordance with which

type of, you know, raised braille versus visual, if

provided. In other words, you probably are not going

to require a variable message sign, but if provided you

would want it to comply with -- you would want it to be

accessible. That kind of thing.

Is there somebody on the committee that wants to

take that first stab and let that get circulated to the

subcommittee to chew on?

MS. PACHECO: Am I on?

MS. MAZZ: You're on.

MS. PACHECO: Okay. I can't hear myself. My ears

are plugged.

MS. MAZZ: I hear your cold. It is painful.

MS. PACHECO: On my end too, unfortunately.
52

I would be more than willing to work on it. If

anyone else that wants to give me input, I would love

to get it. If someone who wants to contact me

directly, and we will work on it as a little

subcommittee, my email address is

TERRYPACH@verizon.net. I would be more than happy to

put something together. If we want to be a sub

subcommittee we can put something together before the

next call.

I would like to see us do that and try to get

things lined up and we can either split up in small

groups and take a section. Maybe it is just me. I

just don't feel right now that is manageable to pull

apart.

<<<: I agree.

MS. PACHECO: I will do my part to see if I can

make it this way. No reflection on you, Jim. I am

impressed you got it this far.

I would be happy to get started on it and anyone

who has thoughts and include it in, we can start

working on it.

MS. GOLDEN: I don't like to ask other people to

do work, but here I go.

Gary, are you able to help?

MR. TALBOT: Absolutely. I would be more than
53

happy to.

MS. GOLDEN: Good. Thank you, Gary.

MR. TALBOT: I can work with Terry and we can

certainly work with anyone else who would want to work

with that.

<<<: That would be me, Jim.

MR. SLAUGHTER: I will volunteer.

MS. PACHECO: I was hoping you would say that.

MR. SLAUGHTER: In our existing files we may have

something like that already broken out that may help as

well.

MR. PECHT: I will take as one of my homework

assignments to try to get a strawman table with

categories and items to sort of check off or add to or

put in and give it to you guys as soon as we can. If

we can get dug out from under this snow and back to the

office.

MR. SLAUGHTER: Jim, I am the guilty one that sent

you the spreadsheet, the Excel spreadsheet. When I

started putting that together, I was sort of thinking

along the lines of what Terry was describing using

categories to drop them in categories both from a

signage category and also potentially into required

versus recommended, and segregated them by modes as

well in sort of a graphic way.
54

So feel free to plagiarize any of that information

if it helps as a starting point.

MS. MAZZ: Jim, you can forward that to Terry.

MR. PECHT: I will do that.

MR. SLAUGHTER: I already forwarded what I had

done to Terry as well, since she mentioned the Excel.

MR. TALBOT: Jim, if you can send me whatever you

want, either you or Terry, I would appreciate it.

MR. PECHT: There will be a group email.

MR. SLAUGHTER: Gary, the information I was

discussing before with the cars, I will send to you

since we are on the same team. There is no worry.

MR. TALBOT: Sounds good. Thank you.

MS. PACHECO: Blair, if you wouldn't mind sending

me that Excel spreadsheet that might be a good place to

start from. Most Excel spreadsheets can be made pretty

accessible these day.

MR. SLAUGHTER: It is already in your email,

Terry.

MS. PACHECO: Okay. Thank you.

MR. PECHT: Is everybody happy with that direction

that we are going at the moment?

<<<: Yes.

<<<: I am.

MR. PECHT: All right. At this point, I think I
55

will open it up and ask for public comment.

OPERATOR: It will just take one moment, sir.

At this time anyone interested in providing public

comment, please press star 1 on your touchtone phone.

Once again, anyone interested in providing public

comment, press star 1.

We are getting no response.

Again, anyone interested in providing public

comment, press star 1.

MR. PECHT: Okay, Operator. Thank you, very much.

Committee, is there any other comments for the

good of the cause before we adjourn.

OPERATOR: All lines are open and interactive.

You may respond.

MR. ALTOM: I would like to first off say thank

you to Jim for running the meeting for us today and

also to Marsha and Lisa and yourself for all your

support that you give this group.

And, Terry, thank you for being the subcommittee

chair. I have a whole list of thank yous, like the

Oscars. And I would like to thank the sub

subcommittee, Gary, Jim and Blair. I just want to make

sure I publicly thank you guys for the hard work and

input you have given to this project. So thank you,

very much.
56

MS. MAZZ: Nice note to end on.

MR. SHIOTANI: Again, it was the purpose from New

Jersey Transit that said that they could do some

pictures of light rail cars. It may be helpful to get

those sent to the subcommittee.

MR. HOFF: I was thinking the same thing. I will

take care of that. I will send it to anybody who wants

to see and wants to see the photograph that I will send

out.

MR. SHIOTANI: I want to make sure other rails,

other than inner-city, are covered.

<<<: Absolutely.

MR. SLAUGHTER: A question for the Access Board

folks, what are the requirements for a sub subcommittee

for accessibility?

MS. MAZZ: I'm going to give you the same answer

we gave before and we are going to talk to Lisa.

MR. SLAUGHTER: I just wanted to make sure if we

were sending information around, that we were not

shortcutting processes that could not be shortcut.

MS. MAZZ: Some questions are better not asked.

MR. SLAUGHTER: Yeah, okay.

MS. MAZZ: Sometimes it is always handy to ask for

something on a personal basis.

MR. SLAUGHTER: Understood. I yield to the chair.
57

MR. PECHT: I'm going to go out on a limb and call

it us a task group of the subcommittee and call it a

day. And with that, if there are tho other comments --

MS. PACHECO: I have one other issue I wanted to

bring up.

On our next call can anyone think that maybe we

should look as an agenda item at additional modes of

signage, like I-Phone apps, beyond large braille and

raised lettering; the things that might be available

and they are kind of coming down the line where we are

getting far more moveable electronic messaging, that

kind of thing? We need not ignore it, I guess my

concern with it.

MR. MICHEL: I would second that just because

there are so many options nowadays to make things

accessible, audio/visually as well as auditively. It

would be something to bring into consideration. It

might be of use if we can get some input from members

of the public who may have hearing or who may be using

applications already in use. I don't know where that

documentation would be found or how we can get input

within the next week to discuss this, but I do think it

is worthwhile.

MS. MAZZ: I would like to caution you. You need

to stay within parameters of what the Access Board has
58

control over and what we don't have control over. Our

guidelines are the physical environment, the structure

itself of the vehicle, not to programs or services that

are provided within the vehicle.

Now, it may be that in order to do that you need

WiFi or something, you know, and there may be some

working together of those things. But the Access

Board, I don't think, can go so far as to say, you

know, "Amtrak will develop an app." You see what I'm

saying?

MR. MICHEL: I definitely agree with that. I

think that from the standpoint if we are making

regulations for the next 10 maybe 30 years, I think it

would be naive to think we are not going to think about

these things.

MR. SLAUGHTER: I might interject an example. For

years we had large signs on our bulkheads that had all

the pertinent emergency information about how to open

windows and those kinds of things. And back, oh, in

maybe '96, '98 along in there, Amtrak and the FRA came

to an agreement where we removed those signs with the

caveat that we provide the seatback cards you find on

the aircraft. That was done to make sure the messages

were distributed more thoroughly through the train, not

to the first couple of rows of seats that could see the
59

sign. It is a little odd that you have to go

somewhere --

MS. MAZZ: Perfect example of where the line gets

drawn between the Access Board's authority and DOT's

authority.

MR. SLAUGHTER: Right.

MS. MAZZ: The Access Board can require the sign

at the bulkhead, but we can't require the seat back

sign.

MS. FAIRHALL: I want to agree with Marsha's

comment. It would be in the purview of the committee

to make a recommendation that these other things be

(inaudible), but it is not really within the

jurisdiction of the advisory committee.

MS. MAZZ: The committee could say, for example,

that all this information should be accessible on the

train and could recommend that there be no signage

requirement if there is an FRA requirement to provide

this information via an app or some other mechanism.

But we can't compel FRA or DOT. We can't require a

seat back sign that is out of our jurisdiction.

MR. SLAUGHTER: Is there any logic in treating

some of these things almost like an equivalent

facilitation but not that complex? If we say from our

committee here that we should have this information,
60

this grouping of information, it can either be

presented in a static mounted sign or as an option it

can be presented in another mode, in another form that

is equivalent and equivalently distributed on the

vehicle as far as the Access Board is concerned.

MS. MAZZ: Equivalent facilitation is already

there for the whole rule. So you can already do that.

MR. TALBOT: Wouldn't the Access Board have

jurisdiction like, let's say there is an app that is

provided and it is specific to the train, whether it is

for buying tickets or information about the travel, the

route or something like that, if that is provided,

couldn't the Access Board then say that that has to be

accessible and define what accessible is for that

device or that thing? It is just another thing, isn't

it?

MS. MAZZ: I don't think so. It is more akin to a

service or a program. But we can have some discussions

with our friends at FRA and see where they would like

to draw that line.

MR. TALBOT: I mean they do that on -- we do that

on websites today, right?

MS. MAZZ: We don't regulate the websites through

the ADA.

MR. TALBOT: Okay. I will hold off. And offline
61

I will ask you.

MR. HOFF: I was thinking of these things earlier.

It needs a larger discussion. I am thinking perhaps

audio program. Say for orientation purposes, I want to

know where the bathrooms are and where I am relative to

exit signs. If an audio program can be provided on

board and available through an earphone jack at my seat

or, as an alternative, through some other audible means

through a phone app or something, if we type in the

vehicle somehow, if it is available for the vehicle

without you having an app or a phone necessarily, or

you have earplugs.

MS. MAZZ: That is a possibility.

MR. HOFF: The audio program itself we can

probably require that, but how it is exported, we can

talk about it further.

MS. MAZZ: Like an ATM now. We say you have to

have a speech enabled ATM and --

MR. HOFF: Exactly.

MR. PECHT: It is 2:52. Unless there are any

other comments I would recommend we adjourn.

<<<: I second that.

MR. PECHT: Hearing none, thank you, very much,

for spending your time today. We will get our little

task group together and try to get you something as
62

soon as we possibly can. So thank you, very much.

(Whereupon, at 2:55 p.m. the meeting was adjourned)