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 Gartrell2

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 remarks4

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 in7

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. Is9

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 of10

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 recuse11

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 committee12

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 not16

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 the18

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 the19

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 we23

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 we24

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 top25

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 are27

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 not29

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 and30

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 visual31

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 is32

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 braille33

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 we34

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 something35

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 a36

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 a37

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 to38

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 should39

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 when40

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 always41

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 because42

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 technical43

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 located44

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 you45

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 for47

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 the49

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 the50

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 and51

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 than53

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 I55

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 has58

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 the59

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 offline61

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 as62

soon as we possibly can. So thank you, very much. (Whereupon, at 2:55 p.m. the meeting was adjourned)