Note: The output shown below is from the Communication 

Access Realtime Translation (CART) system used in the 

On-Board Circulation and Seating Subcommittee meeting #10

and is generally unedited. The CART system was used to 

provide an accommodation to persons with hearing loss and 

persons who are deaf, and was streamed in real-time and 

available to the public on the internet during the meeting. 

UNITED STATES ACCESS BOARD

RAIL VEHICLES ACCESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE

ON-BOARD CIRCULATION AND SEATING MTG #10

SUBCOMMITTEE TELECONFERENCE

 

Wednesday, November 12, 2014 

1:00 p.m.

Staff Location: United States Access Board

 1331 F Street, NW, Suite 1000

 Washington, DC 20004 

Reporter: Sandra Gartrell
ATTENDING VIA PHONE

BLAIR SLAUGHTER, CHAIR

BILLY ALTOM

DENNIS CANNON

MARILYN GOLDEN 

DAVID MARTINEZ 

FRANCIS MASCARENHAS

DON MEBIUS

JONATHAN MICHEL 

MICHAEL PORTER

STEVE ROMAN

KEN SHIOTANI

MELISSA SHURLAND

GARY TALBOT

JOSE VEGA

AARON WEINSTEIN

STAFF 

MELISSA ANDERSON

PAUL BEATTY 

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

PAUL BEATTY: Good afternoon. This is Paul 

Beatty speaking. Welcome to the 10th meeting of the 

onboard circulation and seating subcommittee.

As you know, anyone may participate in 

subcommittee discussions. No time for public comment 

has been scheduled for this two-hour call.

It appears it looks like we have the chatbox, 

at least at one point I had the chatbox. So we will 

be monitoring the chatbox for those participants who 

are only using CART to participate and if you desire 

to raise a question or make a statement, please put 

it in the chatbox and I will communicate it to the 

subcommittee chair.

When speaking on the line, please remember to 

use your name when speaking. As a reminder, our next 

meeting is currently scheduled for December 10, which 

is a Wednesday.

All support staff are working from remote 

locations because our conference phone system is still 

having problems. I know Melissa is on the line and 

there is Melissa Anderson and Jim Pecht. That is all 

from Access Board staff.

Those on conference call, in a random order, 
give us your full name and the organization you are 

representing. And, Sandra, please indicate whether 

you can hear them. We will just assume you can hear 

them, unless you say otherwise. 

ROBERT CARLSON: Robert Carlson with 

Community Transportation Association.

PAUL BEATTY: Thank you, Robert. 

BILLY ALTOM: Billy Altom. 

PAUL BEATTY: Okay.

GARY TALBOT: This is Gary Talbot from 

Amtrak.

PAUL BEATTY: Thanks, Gary. 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Blair Slaughter from 

Amtrak.

PAUL BEATTY: Thanks, Blair. 

JONATHAN MICHEL: Jonathan Michel from 

RailPlan International.

PAUL BEATTY: Okay, Jonathan. You seem a 

little quiet. Hopefully that is just my phone. 

DAVID MARTINEZ: David Martinez and Francis 

Mascarenhas from Metro in Chicago. 

MELISSA SHURLAND: Melissa Shurland.

AARON WEINSTEIN: Aaron Weinstein from San 

Francisco BART. 
MICHAEL PORTER: Michael Porter, Amtrak. 

PAUL BEATTY: Thank you, Michael. 

MARILYN GOLDEN: Marilyn Golden, Disability 

Rights Education and Defense.

PAUL BEATTY: Thank you, Marilyn. 

KENNETH SHIOTANI: Ken Shiotani, National 

Disability Rights Network. 

DON MEBIUS: Don Mebius with LTK. 

STEVE ROMAN: Steve Roman with LTK.

PAUL BEATTY: Thank you, Steve. 

JOSE VEGA: Jose Vega, National Disability 

Rights Network.

DENNIS CANNON: Dennis Cannon, National 

Disability Rights Network. And I'm going to have to 

leave early because of a doctor's appointment.

PAUL BEATTY: Okay. And someone else was 

speaking the same time with Dennis. 

JOSE VEGA: Jose Vega of MTA Long Island 

Railroad.

PAUL BEATTY: Thank you, Jose.

JOE VEGA: You're welcome.

PAUL BEATTY: I think that is everybody on my 

list except for Sid Goldstein.

We are ready to proceed and I will turn the 
meeting over to the chair, Blair Slaughter.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Hello, everyone. I 

didn't hear Marilyn Golden.

PAUL BEATTY: Yeah, she is on.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Oh, she is. Okay. I hope 

everyone is doing well.

First order of business is to approve the 

agenda. Anyone has any questions, please let me know, 

otherwise I will consider it approved. I like the 

silence.

Since Marilyn is on the line, she indicated 

that she has to leave early for an appointment as well. 

So what I would like to do is go to Item 4 and look 

at the images provided by BART and that sprung out of 

the last meeting where we were discussing the issue 

of the clear floor space across transit cars and doors 

located across from each other.

And so Aaron Weinstein sent these in to help 

us with our discussion.

So if everyone scrolls down to that, everyone 

can see that. I'm trying to zoom it in myself.

What we had initially talked about or I 

originally written was 44" clear across the car with 

the idea that that would guarantee a degree of mobility 
freedom getting on and off the car.

So what Aaron has done is laid this into a car. 

There are three conditions that are shown. The first 

is just a clear 44 push straight across the car with 

a stanchion on the edge of that. And that creates, 

looks like, a 32.6-inch pinch point there. And then 

he shows one where the pathway is 44" but it is sort 

of a chevron shape and swoops to one side, but then 

that opens up the hinge point between the closest 

object and 40.2", which seems a lot more navigable than 

the 44" pushed across the car.

And the third one, which I believe is closer 

to what BART is working on now, shows right in the 

middle. I guess that is the idea that gives you a more 

flexible space. Again, you can't push 44" across the 

car, but the pathways on all the quadrants around that 

stanchion are larger.

So the idea was to facilitate, hopefully, 

some discussion and come to some closure on how we want 

to handle the clear space across transit cars with 

opposing doors and at the same time accommodate 

ambulatory folks who need something to hang onto and 

maybe not create choke points of folks congregating 

too heavily. 
I know the gentleman from Metro in D.C. had 

indicated they had some real success in removing or 

otherwise handling stanchions that open things up and 

help the congestion.

So with that, I will open it up for 

discussion.

DENNIS CANNON: Let me, right off the bat, 

say that that third one is terrible. And the reason 

for that is -- well, the reason you need -- single one 

is not horrible, but not real good either. 

The problem you have typically in a subway 

car, you have openings side and center platform. So 

you are basically moving from one door getting on and 

getting off of the other one frequently all the time. 

That stanchion in the middle, while it looks nice like 

there is a path to get from the door to the place you 

are supposed to sit with a wheelchair, the reality is 

that in a crowded situation what people in wheelchairs 

typically do is move into the door and stay there. 

They haven't gotten a lot of maneuverability. This 

is a nice idea if the car is empty.

But that stanchion in the middle means that 

you have to get on one side and you are getting off 

the next stop. To get around that with crowds and 
people clustered around the center pole and people 

hanging on there, you need to get places for people

to hang on out of the pathway.

So just inside the door on both sides is a 

great place. If there is a windscreen there at the 

end of the windscreen is fine. D.C. Metro has a lot 

of their 6,000 cars that have handrails right on the 

wall just inside the door. And they get people who 

are outside can actually reach the handrail before 

they can even board the car. And it gets them around 

the corner, around from the doorway so they are not 

in the doorway.

This stanchion in the middle is going to be 

a cluster point.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Might be worth scrolling 

down. My apologies to Jose from Long Island. I did 

get all the uploads. The Long Island M3 car, which 

I erroneously referred to as a subway car and not being 

in the New York environs, are dark outside. You 

assume it is in a tunnel, therefore it must be a subway.

So my apologies for being -- the entry 

commuter car --

JOE VEGA: Blair, there is no need to 

apologize. I accept it 100 percent. You are right; 
it is a tunnel environment and doesn't apply to subway 

car. But we have a lot of underground rail systems 

within a tunnel environment.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: These are not what we 

normally think of as subway cars.

If you look at the doorway here on the M3, by 

parting doors, there is a horizontal handrail on 

either side, on the windscreen, and you don't get a 

stanchion until you are well inside the car.

GARY TALBOT: Blair, can I say something on 

that? 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Absolutely.

GARY TALBOT: I can launch off of what Dennis 

just said. Two things; we need to get away from the 

immediate door opening; and, to Dennis' point, I think 

the second and third option to me just would be brutal 

because of where that pole is located.

The other thing is too I don't think folks 

really realize that many of us require a handhold. We 

need some type of stanchion to grab onto to stay in 

our chair.

The horizontal ones to me that are shown in 

the first M3 picture, a great idea but in a subway 

environment, I think that would be the worst possible 
place you can be, to be a little further into the car 

and that's where the vertical one would come in. 

I agree with Dennis. The windscreen usually 

helps a lot. If you can get just inside the windscreen 

and if you need to grab onto something you can. That 

is where I think the first drawing, the first 

illustration to me would be a better solution.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Gary, to that point, again 

looking at the M3, the vertical stanchion is well 

within the car, but the horizontal looks like it can 

be useful for someone who is ambulatory and stepping 

into the car.

We had that discussion as well and the worry 

has been having too many handrails near the door and 

that could be a conflict. People may congregate there 

and not get out of the way. Also when you are stepping 

into the car having something to hold onto could be 

critical for somebody who is ambulatory. So I think 

we have to strike some type of good balance here.

If this M3 car were -- let's pretend for a 

moment it was a subway car, once you got into the car 

a little ways, you would have a vertical stanchion, 

but you still have the horizontals for other folks.

I see the point and I wondered about the 
material from Aaron. When you have people around the 

stanchion, assume there are four or five folks, at 

least four people holding onto that stanchion, that 

immediately bites into any open space that you have 

for mobility.

MARILYN GOLDEN: I just want to take off from 

Dennis and Gary's comments. I'm actually in transit 

myself to a medical appointment that I was unable to 

reschedule. So I'm not on top of the photos.

I did look at them before I left and I agree 

with Dennis that none of them are really acceptable. 

If the role of our committee is to think toward future, 

the best possible accessibility and not hamper it, 

especially at this early stage, at this early idea 

stage -- we know that Washington Metro has had their 

well times reduced by not causing, you know, 

congregation of folks in these open areas at either 

end of the car. And, as Dennis was saying, the 

windscreens. 

There was also a discussion of a handrail on 

the side of the car as soon as you get in. Gary maybe 

didn't like that one. Maybe you can reply, Gary, if 

I understood you right afterwards.

But our point is no pulls in that open area. 
And, again, I'm not on top of any of the photos. I 

would certainly not want to say one of them is okay. 

They didn't strike me as -- I, personally, thought we 

did reach consensus at the last meeting. Marsha Mazz, 

who is also not able to be here today at all, I think 

she is in training, spoke very well to the multiple 

issues that surround this problem.

But we do want to have stanchions. It is not 

an issue of wheelchair users against other riders 

because people with disabilities also need 

stanchions. But we have to get them out of the flow 

area in that open area at the end of the cars, which 

I believe we reached consensus on last time.

This is a very important issue to the 

disability community that is becoming very 

controversial in at least one geographical area where 

I happen to live in in Northern California where BART 

is. We see these poles as a big problem.

GARY TALBOT: My only comment on the first 

one, we maintain that 44" clear space adjacent to it 

so you can get in and out of the car. The other two 

examples are really problematic. I agree with 

everything you said. It is a tough deal. It is not 

wheelchair users versus ambulatory folks who have a 
handhold, but if you put a horizontal handhold there 

that is where people will have to be. 

ROBERT CARLSON: They have to move for the 

person coming in with a wheelchair. My general 

policy, once I see you at the door, I'm coming on and 

they have to step back, out of the way. And if they 

are leaning up against the handrail, it well just make 

the handrail accessible.

The point is, those handrails by the door are 

essential because you never can rely on an actual level 

boarding situation where you are not going to need some 

kind of leverage in order to get over the threshold 

into the car.

People are generally going to have to move. 

It is a crowded car. People have to move to 

accommodate a person with a wheelchair.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: If you could take a moment 

and look in the matrix. There is Note 6-C and that 

is where I added this wording to try to address some 

of that. Railing intended as boarding aids that 

project into the clear door opening should terminate 

no lower than 34" from the floor. This is to address 

concern that handrail or stanchions close to the door 

would encourage congregating near the door. 
Handrails critical for safe boarding.

There was also a concern that I recall that 

if you had a stanchion, something that goes from the 

floor up, that it is within the clear door opening that 

you sort of encumbered the clear door opening. So I 

added the 34" in there. So it keeps it out of 

the -- keeping it above the range of hitting it in the 

wheelchair but leaves it with a handhold to step into.

Doesn't mean that someone couldn't stand 

there and hold the handhold too. These are the very 

annoying soft issues that I am not sure we can 

completely solve with mechanical devices and not 

create another problem.

On Amtrak I have experienced -- and it only 

seems to be on the train going to New York where I am 

getting off in Philadelphia. The folks going to New 

York will crowd right against the door when the door 

opens. And I looked at a fellow one day and I said, 

"You know, you want to go to New York and I want to 

go to Philadelphia and you're not going to New York 

and I don't care unless you get out of the way." He 

stepped aside and let us off the train. That is just 

one of those moments.

And I think that is the phenomena -- one of 
the things we are struggling with is how passengers 

are behaving when they get on the car.

To some extent you can manage that with 

physical devices and that is the conversation, but my 

worry is somewhere in there we have to strike a 

balance.

Forty-four inches is getting back to that 

notion of being clear across the car. My original 

thinking on that was if we have 44" vestibules on an 

intercity car or regular commuter car, those go all 

the way across the car. There is nothing that should 

be hidden across the car. Not that you would go in 

there and sit in the vestibule. But the idea was to 

not put anything in that path. If it worked for 

intercity car, that should be sort of a minimum for 

a high turnover transit car.

So sounds like to me what I'm hearing that we 

need to hold tight to the 44" clear across the car and 

let the chips fall where it may.

Does anyone from the industry, from LTK or 

something like that or Long Island have any thoughts 

on that? 

AARON WEINSTEIN: Maybe it makes sense for me 

to speak to this, unless there is someone from Long 
Island who wants to weigh in.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Sounds like you're up, 

Aaron. 

AARON WEINSTEIN: Okay. For the benefit of 

those who were not on earlier calls, I do want to repeat 

a little bit on how we got to the idea of having a pole 

somewhere in the vestibule area and what steps we have 

taken to address the needs of people with disabilities 

in regards to that.

So we have started our outreach about four 

years ago on this project to define our new fleet 

design and had done a lot of outreach to accessibility 

organizations as a component of that.

What we were hearing is a lot of people get 

stuck in the middle of a vestibule without something 

to hold onto, including people with some types of 

disabilities. And we were also hearing that for 

others having a vertical pole in the vestibule is 

problematic because it effects the maneuverability. 

So we were trying to see if we couldn't figure 

something out that addressed both needs.

When we did put a vertical pole right in the 

middle of the vestibule, we did a survey of over 500 

senior citizens and over 900 people with disabilities 
and we found that there was 72 percent support for the 

vertical pole.

That being said, it was obviously serving a 

lot of people who wanted something to hold onto as the 

train accelerates and decelerates and it addresses the 

current sort of gap that we have now because we don't 

have a vertical pole.

On the same hand, we -- or on the other hand, 

we did hear from, especially constituents who use 

wheelchairs and blind constituents, that they were 

concerned about the pole. So we have been trying to 

modify the design to address the concerns while still 

retaining the benefits for folks who feel the handhold 

in that location is important.

We did examine moving handholds to other 

locations and I know that has come up on a number of 

phone calls. Why not eliminate that vertical pole and 

put vertical poles at the corners of longitudinal 

seats near the doors. And we have looked at that and 

are planning to actually test that as an alternative 

and remove that pole and we are not planning that test 

for a couple of years but we will be involving the 

disability community in trying it both ways.

The reason we did not put our full stock in 
that idea is it really doesn't address the initial 

complaint we had about someone who is smack in the 

middle of the vestibule without something to hold 

onto.

What we found in operation is there are many 

cases where the trains, at least the BART trains, are 

very crowded in the peak periods and people do get 

stuck in the middle of the vestibules and can't reach 

anything overhead and it is an issue for them.

So we have been trying to meet the needs of 

all the different diverse groups and even within the 

disability community, we found there is quite a bit 

of diversity.

So A and B in the materials we provided were 

an attempt to try to find something that might meet 

all needs.

When we have a 46" accessible path that is 

almost as wide as the door itself, I didn't put that 

dimension in, but our doors are 54". So it would be 

a path that is almost four feet wide and almost the 

width of the door itself.

I certainly understand the reservations 

folks have about allowing a pole in that area, but I 

did want to at least explain what our thought process 
was.

We started with the pole in the middle and 

then moved towards offsetting it from the middle, 

further away from the wheelchair area, again, to try 

to address the needs of people who use wheelchairs but 

also retain the pole feature for folks that need 

something to hold onto. And that wouldn't include 

folks who have, you know, arthritis or certain other 

conditions where it is important to have something to 

grab onto.

I hope that information is helpful. 

SID GOLDSTEIN: Can I jump in here. This is 

Sid Goldstein from Transit Access Report. 

Either for Mr. Slaughter or Mr. Weinstein, 

do I understand correctly the word "vestibule" has a 

completely different meaning from the BART context 

than what it has in an intercity rail context?

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I have to be careful in 

using "vestibule." The vestibule is really something 

that only occurs in commuter cars and intercity cars 

and end of the car. Sometimes in the middle we will 

use that term as well.

But it is generally an area that is used 

purely for getting on and off the train and not a space 
that would ever be occupied. And in the process of 

trying to develop this clear floor space on transit 

cars, if appropriate, we define 44" for the vestibule 

for intercity as sort of the minimum. That seemed a 

logical number to start with. So that was 

really -- point of departure to say 44" is an intercity 

vestibule and that it is a clear path all the way across 

the car. 

And now let's talk about transit cars and 

issue of clear path across the car. More critical 

because of the frequency of stops, the fact that people 

are standing or sitting in spaces, you know, defining 

that space, that minimum space becomes ever more 

critical.

It sounds like -- and I would like more 

comment from some of the other industry folks or people 

who are close to it, that if we stuck with the 44" 

projection across the space, that there is always the 

potential that a particular provider is going to have 

a condition that is if you are on top of things and 

reviewing things as the designs are developing, that 

in a particular locality folks may decide something 

works for them.

And we don't know within the context of the 
rules and the guidelines how you deal with that. But 

at the end of the day we have to get to something that 

is going to work in most situations and then if it needs 

to go to an equivalent facilitation for certain 

services or regions, maybe that is not inappropriate.

The problem is obviously every city, every 

provider's conditions are somewhat different and very 

much the same. How do we address that? I don't know. 

What works in San Francisco might not work in New York 

City, for sure. 

STEVE ROMAN: The trends in the northeast for 

rapid transit is getting away from putting the 

stanchions in the center of the doorway area, mostly 

because that is where the people congregate when they 

get on the train. They have a tendency not to move 

to the doorway. And the authorities see they are 

leaving a lot of unhappy folks on the platform when 

they see the empty space in between the doorways.

They provide vertical stanchions. NCCP 

provides handrails projecting down from the ceiling 

in the aisles away from the doorway areas so people 

can have something to hang on to. But for the most 

part they are doing away with the stanchions in the 

center of the doorway areas. 
AARON WEINSTEIN: Again, I did want to 

mention there has been the notion that a vertical 

stanchion serves as a magnet and I think that is kind 

of what you are referring to. 

STEVE ROMAN: Right. 

AARON WEINSTEIN: We don't currently have 

vertical stanchions on our roughly 70 cars at BART. 

And we get incredible congestion in the doorway and 

really the same phenomenon you are talking about where 

people don't tuck into the center of the car and people 

are standing in that middle vestibule and that is 

without the stanchion.

So I think there is a magnet for that 

vestibule that is independent of this issue of the 

vertical stanchion. The best understanding we have 

of it is under crowded conditions. A lot of people 

want to be close to an exit because they are fearful 

that they won't be able to make their way there when 

the time comes and people space themselves out 

depending on how long a trip they are taking.

So folks taking a longer trip may be more 

willing to tuck in, whereas folks taking a shorter trip 

want to make sure they have a closer path to an exit. 

And that seems to be what is driving the bunching in 
that area. Again, that bunching seems to happen 

regardless of what kinds of hardware is there. 

STEVE ROMAN: Right. It doesn't eliminate 

it completely. They still have a problem with the 

bunching there. And, you're right, for people going 

one or two stops, they are not going to go away from 

the doorway. 

AARON WEINSTEIN: For us, the clearest 

thinking we can get from the issue is that we just need 

to greatly expand capacity. We set a goal to increase 

the number of cars in our fleet by about 50 percent 

to provide relief on the whole issue. 

SID GOLDSTEIN: I'm still not getting it 

about the use of terminology. My understanding 

earlier -- in earlier sessions and my understanding 

from regulations, when we use the term "vestibule," 

the regulatory issue or the accessibility issue has 

to do with making the right angle turn from a vestibule 

into the coach of the car.

So what I'm asking is, is the term "vestibule" 

being used in these discussions in two totally 

different meanings? Is the use of vestibule by BART 

in this conversation today unique to BART? 

(Simultaneous Discussion)
DENNIS CANNON: ...the end of the car 

originally and we didn't think of those things in 

writing the regs between doors on subway cars being 

vestibules, but the concept is similar. 

So, you're right, we probably should be using 

the -- should not be using the term "vestibule" and 

talking about door area. If you have two doors, one 

on each side of the car, as some of these photographs 

show, and you have a fairly wide windscreen on both 

sides of the door, you have a relatively narrow opening 

on the side of the car. So, in a sense, it is very 

much like a vestibule. 

And if the wheelchair space is down the aisle 

somewhere, yeah, you have to make the same kind of 

maneuver as you would in a vestibule in the end of an 

intracity rail car.

But the issue here is not the turning issue; 

the issue is getting on the car and basically going 

off to the side because most subway systems have both 

center and side platforms. The idea is to get across 

the opening without having to mow down passengers.

And Bob is correct, passengers move but there 

are some cases where it is very difficult and takes 

time.
The center stanchion, you're right, the 

experience -- and I ride Metro all the time in D.C. 

People congregate around the door anyway because they 

don't want to be left. They want to be able to get 

off if they are getting off at the next stop.

So the stanchion is not the driver 

necessarily but it does contribute to some extent. 

In the case of BART, if you ask people whether 

they like -- you show them the center pole and you ask 

them if they like it they will probably say yes and 

you might get a very large number of people who use 

it.

The question is not whether they like it; the 

question is whether there is a better or at least an 

equivalent orientation of grab handles, bar, whatever 

you want to call them, around that area that would do 

just as well.

So if you show somebody a center stanchion in 

the car and you ask them about it, I'm sure they would 

probably say, "yes, it is a good idea," but they are 

not in the wheelchair and they are not thinking about 

going across the car.

If you show them other configurations at the 

same time, like the ones here at Metro -- I complained 
about Metro for years but I also happen to think they 

are doing a pretty good job. And in this case with 

a lot of the newer cars, starting with the 6000, they 

have done a much better job.

I think if people actually saw the difference 

between a center pole and these other kinds of 

configurations, they wouldn't be so happy to say, 

"yeah, that is a good idea." If you do a test of 

something and you only show them without a pole and 

with a pole, that is not necessarily a very good test 

of the configuration, unless you show them other 

configurations simultaneously. And I know that is a 

big testing problem and the program that will probably 

not happen very often.

Be careful about saying it when you show them 

the center pole. Seventy-five percent of the people 

like it because they didn't have anything else to do.

MARILYN GOLDEN: I'm going to have to leave. 

I appreciate the industry statement that they are 

getting away from poles in that area at all. And I'm 

interested in the fact that Washington Metro has done 

this and has not -- not only (inaudible) a problem but 

has defended that divide.

So if we go away from keeping that area clear 
or it looks like we are going to, I would request that 

we don't resolve it today at all but we have a further 

chance to consider it.

Because we would certainly be unhappy to see 

anything in that clear area. I'm sorry I have to sign 

off. 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Marilyn, thank you. I 

don't think the gentleman from D.C. Metro is on today, 

but I will see if I can get in touch with him and get 

some information on what they have done in a diagram 

to look at. And to avoid getting into a design process 

here, it looks as if -- this could be catch 22 as 

well -- in that space if there were four stanchions 

that were relatively close to the seats or three 

stanchions so you are not invading the wheelchair 

space, that you could create places for people to 

collect and still not effect the clear path across the 

car or the path to accessible seating space.

Yes, it adds some encumbrances but that may 

be one way of managing it, other than a single pole.

And, Aaron, I guess your single pole has the 

four poles around it as well for people to hold onto. 

It seems to be pretty common these days.

So I think that Marilyn's point -- I don't 
want to close this out, but I would like to get more 

information to understand what D.C. Metro has done. 

Again, write this so it achieves what we need it to 

achieve from an accessibility standpoint, but gives 

the authorities some flexibility in the design. But 

I can see where in a crowded subway when you start to 

make the other than straight pathway across, you are 

going to have problems.

The only person in the diagram, and we are all 

guilty of this, is the person in the wheelchair, apply 

people around the stanchions to see what it does to 

the space to talk about it in the next go-around.

Does anyone else have any other thoughts on 

this? I was hoping we could nail the lid down on this. 

But it sounds like to me that the majority voice right 

now is toward maintaining the 44" across with nothing 

in that extruded space across the car. I think we 

should look into D.C. Metro stuff before we nail that 

down.

Anyone else have any other thought on that? 

MELISSA ANDERSON: Gary, do you know if a 

report has been written up on the work that BART has 

been doing on trying the different configurations or 

surveys. 
AARON WEINSTEIN: Hi, Melissa. The answer 

is, yes, we have reports published online. If it 

suits you I can send links. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: That would be really 

great if you can do that. I think that would help 

everybody to look at that, what the research results 

were and how it was the -- kind of the methodology of 

the research also. If you could send that to RVAAC.

Also I've forgotten that I ride the D.C. Metro 

to work every day and I just happen to get on one of 

their brand new cars that was totally empty a couple 

of months ago and I took some pictures. I just emailed 

them to Blair, get an actual design drawing. But we 

can certainly share those pictures after the meeting.

DENNIS CANNON: Are you referring to the 7000 

or 6000 cars? 

MELISSA ANDERSON: I believe it is the 7000 

cars, but I don't actually know. Does that make 

sense? I didn't know they were online yet. It was 

a car I was not on before and it was completely 

different. 

DENNIS CANNON: The 7000s are not in service 

yet. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: Didn't they link them in 
randomly to make sure they were working? 

<<<: They are running them on tests but no 

passengers are on them yet. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: Then I would say it is 

probably a 6000 car. It illustrates the clear 

passageway between the doorways and nothing to hang 

onto.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: There is a very 

interesting --

<<<: There is a horizontal bar.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: There is horizontal bar 

added on there and the vertical handholds on the door 

for assisting boarding. But they don't go all the way 

to the floor, which is nice. That is interesting to 

see.

Let me see if I can contact Glenn and see if 

we can get any diagrams from them. 

KENNETH SHIOTANI: Just a question for the 

BART people. Are the research you have done surveys 

of questions like Dennis was referring to, or is it 

just sort of observational research on how people 

actually use the cars in practice? 

AARON WEINSTEIN: Ken, the answer is it is 

both. We did do some observational research on two 
occasions with the pole. In some cases we offset the 

pole for part of those observations to create a wider, 

accessible path. And, generally speaking, the 

results were pretty good.

That being said, it wasn't revenue service. 

It was sort of a staged condition where we use people 

hanging onto the pole and they generally moved out of 

the way.

KENNETH SHIOTANI: On their best behavior. 

AARON WEINSTEIN: Yes. So we did intend to

do a fuller test in revenue service in 2016. And 

addressing the point made earlier, we will be testing 

both with the center pole and also with the center pole 

eliminated in favor of corner poles that are attached 

to seats near doors.

KENNETH SHIOTANI: Okay. 

DON MEBIUS: In addition to the pole in the 

middle, I have become a very strong 

proponent -- Blair, just indicated what WMATA had done 

with some non-full length vertical poles in the 

entranceway. Having the need to use crutches for the 

last week and a half, maneuvering into a vestibule, 

getting in and being able to grab something to help 

pull me in and get out of the way, that is a huge plus.
DENNIS CANNON: In trying to keep things 

clear, let's try not to use the word "vestibule." 

Let's try to avoid that. 

DON MEBIUS: I stand corrected.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Let me see if we can get 

information from Metro to see what they are doing. 

And I had lost the wording in the matrix notes because 

last time I -- path does not have a straight line 

across the doorways intended to ensure people in 

mobility devices can quickly move onto the vehicle but 

at the same time not overdefining vertical stanchions 

to the point that ambulatory is compromised.

So I think I will take that back out. That 

is why I left it highlighted in the text because it 

was not resolved before. But if we can make a promise 

to ourselves to nail this one down in the next call, 

that would be awesome. I have a funny feeling if I 

have to predict that we will go for the 44" minimum 

and have to come up with other alternative ways of 

providing, you know, stanchions, or handholds outside 

of that space.

I think at the end of the day, it is probably 

the easiest solution and maybe it is the lesser of all 

the evils at the end of the day.
I think, Aaron, what you said about the 

stanchions and the posts near the seats, that -- let 

me throw this one out. If you have a stanchion near 

a seat and let's say it is an ambulatory person has 

moved in and, boy, those handrails are really 

important, having that stanchion right by that seat 

could be a real benefit for folks that need some 

assistance because now they have got a stanchion right 

by their seat to pull themselves up to get out. So 

that could be the best of both worlds. Maybe stew on 

that a little bit between now and the next meeting.

Okay. Unless someone else has something 

else to say about this, if we could move on. Any other 

thoughts? Okay.

I did add to the matrix a note about seat 

handles and railings. And that -- it is plugged in 

the matrix and it becomes Note Number 22. So I put 

down some words to try to get a grip on that.

So what it says is handrails, handholds or 

similarly functional devices should be included on 

passenger seats. The purpose of such devices are, A, 

provide a discrete firm point for passengers to safely 

navigate to their seat through other amenities while 

the train is in motion; B, provide a safe condition 
for standees when other rails loops and stanchions are 

unavailable and; C, assist passengers from standing 

up on their seat.

Depending on the mode vertical stanchions 

should be included as a -- at every other seat. Modes 

not subject to standee condition as part of normal 

operations where rotating or chargeable seats are not 

required to include vertical stanchions. I know 

that's a lot to ingest all at once. Anyone have any 

thoughts on that? 

I will point it to Dennis first because I know 

Dennis was working on these kinds of things for the 

buses.

DENNIS CANNON: Right. That is the issue 

that -- what we said, there should be a bar, handrail 

across the back of the seat so people standing in the 

aisle can grab onto it but also people standing up in 

moving trains. And there are reclining seats which 

have bars across the back of each individual seat too. 

And in the buses we had said in alternate, actually 

it is not necessarily every other seat. It is like 

alternate from one side to the other and skipping a 

seat, if that makes sense.

Say the first seat on the right would have a 
bar across the back and attached to the bar would have 

a vertical stanchion going up to the ceiling.

The second seat on the left would have a 

similar vertical grab bar and then the fourth seat on 

the right would have so on. It would go back and 

forth. Alternate from one side to the other. This 

is actually the configuration that is in a lot of the 

Metro cars. And it is very useful to have that 

vertical stanchion right there that you can grab onto, 

plus the seat back itself. 

It wouldn't across -- the stanchion going 

from the seat to the ceiling, wouldn't apply to 

reclining seat or rotating seats or any of those seats 

from forward facing to rear facing, the way they do 

on some Amtrak cars. I don't know if that is still 

the model. Some of them you look back from the front 

of the seat and back of the seat and change directions. 

So that wouldn't apply. It would only apply to fixed 

seats.

That was in the proposed bus rule and, as I 

say, it is also being used in many of the Metro cars. 

I don't know about the new ones, but I think the 6000s 

have that and even some of the older ones in Metro have 

it. 
STEVE ROMAN: Dennis, you're right. It has 

been the configuration for the most part that has been 

in most of the recent rapid transit and light rail 

acquisitions where they have the handrails either 

across the back or with stanchions going up to the 

ceiling off of them or they have stanchions and 

handrails going off the ceiling so people can have 

something to grab onto.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: From the intercity side, 

from the Amtrak side, one of the concerns we will have

from adding railings is -- and, again, that is why I 

put the blurb in there about the modes.

If you think about what happens on a bus 

versus -- or even some transit cars, maybe some of the 

rapid rail things, you can get jostled around quite 

a bit. Where when you get to heavier rail, intercity, 

that sort of thing, we hope we don't jostle folks 

around quite as much. That kind of intense handholds 

everywhere is reduced. So that was a concern I had 

in trying to come up with some clever way of drafting 

this. And that is why I included A, B and C to try 

to make sure what the railing or device was intended 

to do. And including handrails or handholds or 

similarly functional devices and I put that in there 
because I didn't want to preclude any creative designs 

that would let you mesh the device into the seat 

design. Not to belittle our folks in transit, on the 

intracity side. We are trying to sell something. It 

is a little more than a transit ride and that is why 

the tickets cost more. So we don't want to look like 

a transit vehicle.

There again I thought there is a functional 

need for how we best address that.

One of the things we have heard in the past 

and with our rotating and reclining seats is, you know, 

people will reach out and grab the seat in front of 

them to start up. The need to do that is lessened if 

the seats are further apart, which we tend to have, 

largely in long distance trains. So reaching way out 

there may not work, but the space configuration is a 

little more accommodating to move out of the seat.

If you are in a very tight area where you are 

sitting closely, taking the first effort to stand up 

can be tough and having a handrail or something can 

be very beneficial.

DENNIS CANNON: I'm going have to leave so I 

just wanted to add one quick little thought.

Riding in Amtrak, I know there is kind of an 
overhead rail that is sort of part of the luggage or 

whatever rack up at the top and so forth.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Yes.

DENNIS CANNON: My biggest problem sitting 

in the seat and anytime someone comes back from the 

cafe car with a Coke or hot coffee, I kind of hold my 

breath as they are passing by me because people are 

often very close to dumping everything on me. So I 

think it would be very good to have some handrails, 

other than the one right up above over your head that 

is hard to reach, so people can at least steady. 

I have seen people go by and put their hand 

on the back of each of the seats as they go by, which 

can be a little disconcerting if you are laying back 

trying to sleep and someone puts their hand there. 

That is one of the reasons I think it is important in 

intercity rail.

I have to go and I will leave you with that 

thought and let you folks think whatever.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Thanks, Dennis.

Okay. Does anyone have any comments on the

way I wrote that up? I'm glad to entertain changes. 

STEVE ROMAN: Blair, what you have down there 

pretty much covers the vast range of different types 
of devices that could be used. And just a quick note 

on commuter rail. At least on Long Island on M7 and 

Metro North on M8, they have short grab bars in between 

the headrest to help people get up out of their seats. 

New Jersey Transit have corner grab handles on their 

seats to help people going through the aisle. So you 

pretty much are covered on every mode.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Steve, the only place I can 

imagine it could be a little dicey is with reclining 

seats. If they don't know how the recline works, if 

it is a -- where the seat back itself moves into your 

space in front, some of those. If you grab most of 

our seats today, if you pull on them enough, they will 

recline, which could really upset the person that is 

using the seat in front of you.

So, again, I don't know. I think we have to 

have something in there for sure. And one of the things 

that sort of pointed it out to us years ago when 

everyone got on the train with a newspaper is that the 

corners of the seats were turning black from the 

newsprint coming from people's hands onto the corner 

of the seats. And we are looking at the seats saying, 

"Why are the seats getting dirty?" Because people need 

something to hold onto. Duh. 
STEVE ROMAN: It is a fine line what you can 

do, especially on an intracity. So you don't want it 

to encroach on an already narrow aisle.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Right, right. The nice 

thing about this is we are talking about future orders 

and we know we need a different basic seat 

configuration for intercity. So I think if we can get 

this somewhat flexible, and again, that is why I 

included the words "or similarly functional devices," 

so that leaves it open for some creative but workforce 

intercity cars as well as everyone else.

In some cases it makes sense to put a railing 

because it is just logical and you have a seat and folks 

are on it for 45 minutes or so, other situations that 

is not the way to go.

Some people, to Dennis' point, cannot reach 

the railing because they are not tall enough or they 

can't reach, cannot physically get their arm up there. 

Having something at the handrail height or thereabouts 

on the back of a seat, seems very logical.

If no one has any trouble with the wording 

that I have got there, I will let that stand and we 

will -- when we put this all in one before it goes 

forward -- there it is. If someone comes up with 
something they think is an issue, please let me know 

and I'll add it to it for a comment for the next 

meeting.

I'm sure our friends at the Access Board will 

wordsmith this stuff so it actually makes sense.

Okay. While we are right here on Note 22, if 

we could look right above it on Note 21, there has been 

this discussion for a while about semi-permanently 

coupled or articulated vehicles having accessible 

seating areas with no accessible restrooms, if you can 

easily get to the accessible restrooms in the 

adjoining vehicle or couplet, however you want to 

think about that.

One of the things that Dennis found out in 

talking to Linda Martin at the FRA and we looked back 

at this, the statutes intercity defined as Amtrak, you 

must have a restroom in each car. If you have 

accessible seating, you have an accessible restroom 

in the coaches, otherwise, if you have one you must 

have one that is accessible in the case of, say, a diner 

or something like that.

Anyway, I thought that that concept was 

valuable and there are a lot of things that are coming 

about now that didn't exist when the statutes were 
generated. So I didn't want to lose that as an 

opportunity for other modes. So I added to this and 

I signed it in the statute, because intercity these 

days, despite it saying Amtrak, because of changes 

that may not always be the case, I added to the 

statement, "This does not eliminate the possibility 

of a car builder or Amtrak" and I should put "or other 

provider for applying for equivalent facilitation." 

Because the same rules apply, if you can show it is

equivalent or better, or you create a better 

condition. Maybe you have a really nice accessible 

restroom and it is bigger and it is more efficient to 

have it in one vehicle as opposed to two and you can 

have a nice pathway, then the burden is still back on 

the manufacturer or the provider to prove that 

equivalent facilitation.

Okay. Quick look for the agenda.

Okay. All right. Looks like the list, once 

we got away from the door areas, was moving back 

through to the agenda. 

If you look at Note Number 9, what I added in 

there -- because there was some conversation, 

streetcars and replica and rehabilitated cars and how 

do you define those as far as size or capacity or 
whatever. What I added in parenthesis, industry 

comments or recommendations are requested to generate 

a valid capacity and/or vehicle size. This should 

include recommendations for loading definition such 

as normal crush loading, et cetera, and we can go from 

that if everyone is okay with it.

KENNETH SHIOTANI: Just a quick question. 

Who determines the industry heritage streetcars or is 

that not what they use?

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Ken, I'm going to point at 

Steve, because he is close to a lot of those things. 

STEVE ROMAN: What is the right term? I'm 

sorry, Blair. I was distracted by something else.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: You were multitasking 

Steve. 

STEVE ROMAN: That is it.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Note Number 9 in the 

matrix, Ken had a question about the proper term. We 

mentioned replica and rehabilitated cars. So is the 

right term heritage cars? 

Does a -- for Amtrak the heritage car is an 

old car we inherited from the previous railroads. In 

a transit situation, is a heritage car a vehicle that 

may be old or is it one that is made to look like an 
old vehicle? 

STEVE ROMAN: Made to look like an old 

vehicle or they also call them historical.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Okay. 

STEVE ROMAN: And it really only applies to 

the streetcars because most of the -- light rail is 

relatively new, but rapid transit you don't get many 

old restored rapid transit cars. When they are used 

up, they are used up.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: So historical or heritage? 

STEVE ROMAN: Steve: Correct.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Okay. Ken, thanks for 

pointing it out. My apologies for going backwards. 

I started at the bottom of the list. If we can go to 

Note Number 6. Obviously we have been talking about 

that a lot today, in 6C where I have defined the issue 

of railings intended as boardings aids and I added that 

they should terminate no lower than 34" from the floor, 

is that -- everyone think that is a good thing to leave 

in there? The idea was that it took away any worries 

over the handrails of impeding someone's entrance with 

a wheelchair.

KENNETH SHIOTANI: I think all our 

wheelchair users have gone off to meetings. I don't 
know if the measurement is the right measurement. 

That is obviously the concern, is to have the clear 

space. But I think Marilyn, Gary and Dennis all have 

left the call today. 

ROBERT CARLSON: I'm Bob. I'm here.

KENNETH SHIOTANI: Sorry. 

ROBERT CARLSON: You know, part of the idea 

is that one's feet is always out in front of you. 

Anything that would impede the turning radius or 

sitting area close to the floor is always a problem. 

The idea of terminating railings above a certain 

height is an important consideration. And 34" is 

typically above the height of any desk so that knees 

would be included in that height. I believe that in 

most cases even like kitchen counters are like 32/33" 

high. The idea is to have enough room to get your 

knees under and not banging into it.

My biggest pet peeves about desk at work, I 

have to set them up on a block about 3⁄4". 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: The 34" came from the 

architectural side where you have definition 

protrusions from it to the clear aisleway. I just 

tapped that number. It wouldn't preclude you from 

grabbing it. If you were using that to help your 
boarding, you would still be in your reach range, but 

it shouldn't hit anything like the armrest of your 

chair or anything like that. 

ROBERT CARLSON: Right. Anyone standing, 

unless they were exceedingly short themselves, would 

still be able to reach up to 34". 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Okay. If we are okay we 

will leave that as it is. I think that addresses the 

concerns all the way around. 

STEVE ROMAN: Can we change "railings" to 

"vertical grab rails"? What you intended, correct?

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Yes. 

STEVE ROMAN: Because railings are typically 

horizontal.

<<<: Yes, I would agree with that. 

JONATHAN MICHEL: A comment about the no 

lower than 34". I was looking at the new 7000 Metro 

cars pictures and it looks like the railings is 

underneath the seat pan or they are welded on there 

or there is maybe a fixing point and that can't be more 

than 2 feet. So I'm just wondering if there 34" might 

be -- I understand might be a little high. 

STEVE ROMAN: I think these grab rails that 

Blair is referring to are strictly in the doorway, 
exiting and entering the cars. Is that correct?

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: That is correct. 

STEVE ROMAN: And the stanchions you are 

talking about are mounted underneath the seat, the 

longitudinal seats. They are in the cone area of the 

car, not the doorway area.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: As long as they are not 

intruding on the 32" clear pathway, it is not an issue. 

And for the side doors, I don't think we will ever 

see -- well, you always have the 32" minimum pathway 

and there is no going over to that.

But even if you had a door that was, say, 54 

or 60" wide, I think the thought was that if you are 

boarding in these crunch conditions, having something 

protruding into the wheelchair path could be a 

nuisance at best, and maybe worse. And, again, the 

offset would take care of it and you still have the 

handrail for ambulatory and to assist to pull yourself 

in with a wheelchair, if that works.

I know Gary has said in the past in getting 

cars where it is not level boarding, being able to grab 

the vehicle to assist himself in is very handy.

Okay. So we are going to change railings to 

vertical handholds? Handhold or handrails? What do 
you want to call that?

<<<: Handholds. 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Note number 3. We had a 

lot of conversation about the end opening on transit 

car because of the operator space and narrow doorway. 

I included a note there, a question so we can hit it. 

Should we leave this visual, that is if the 

aisle length is available up to the cab, then 30" 

minimum would apply...

I think in the reg it has a similar type 

provision, if the path exist, if the vehicle design 

allows that, then you must have a pathway that will 

let you get through. And the 30", from what I 

understand, is really driven by the need, the vehicle 

dimension and the need to have -- to not overencumber 

the cab windows and sight lines and things like that.

Okay. To leave it provisional and I will 

write it up that way. 

STEVE ROMAN: I think it should be left 

"provisional."

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I will write that up and we 

will have the opportunity, obviously, to agree as a 

subcommittee to push this forward. And if there is 

anything that comes up between now and us doing that, 
we will consider it for sure.

Okay. I think I have covered everything that 

was in the matrix that was not all ready dealt with.

Okay. Anyone have anything else they want to 

bring up today or have we lost too many folks? 

ROBERT CARLSON: I have nothing more. 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Okay, Bob. Okay. We are 

set for the next meeting, which is on December 10. 

Conversation about the January meeting shifting a day 

or so, one way or the other, but I don't know the 

details on that. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: We need to shift the 

meeting in January. The 14th actually falls on one 

of the days of our board meetings. So instead of 

meeting on January 14, we would switch the call to 

January 15.

Anyone have any objections to doing that? 

ROBERT CARLSON: I don't. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: So from Wednesday the 

14th to Thursday the 15th? 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I don't have a problem with 

it, Melissa. Why don't we plan on doing that. I 

assume Carl is still listening. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: Since Marilyn and Dennis 
are not here, we as a staff can shoot an email. Dennis 

and Marilyn left and anyone else? Gary left?

<<<: Gary left. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: I can't think of anyone 

else and we can shoot them an email and make sure it 

is okay with them.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: One of the things we have 

not talked about -- and I think we are now at the 

original issues list. I had gone back through the 

list. Does anyone know of anything that we have 

missed? I think we captured what we needed to capture 

in this committee, but I know that we had the big list 

and the subcommittees.

Is there anything that anyone is aware of that 

has slipped through the cracks that we need to pick 

up in this committee? Then does the Access Board have 

anything about that? 

MELISSA ANDERSON: I think we need to get all 

the subcommittee chairs together and go through the 

list and see if everyone agrees everything is covered 

or we have some overlap, just to make sure we are not 

missing anything. Paul and I will talk about that. 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I wanted to make sure there 

was no gaping wounds in what we were doing. I went 
back and I think you could argue what committee is 

doing what, but I think everything is pretty well 

covered.

For this subcommittee, one of the hot topics 

that we need to pick up again and finalize is how we 

are going to line up the vertical movement. And I have 

got all the notes for that to redraft that.

So what I will propose, I will clean up the 

matrix. I think the holdout on the matrix will be 

around the entrance areas and the clear space across 

on the transit cars, which I think we are just 

going -- we will have to come to some point of 

reasonable compromise. But I think, as I said before, 

that the notion of just pushing 44" across the car is 

not a bad idea at the end of the day. And, Aaron, no 

offense to BART, but I think we will have to have some 

conversation about that.

We will get some drawings of what Metro is 

doing and see if it makes sense.

And, again, keep in mind we are talking about 

cars that are going to be bought in a few years. There 

is opportunity in the time frame to sort out what works 

best and do some testing and things. I think at the 

end of the day, understanding what happens, just 
watching on D.C. Metro of folks getting in and off the 

train, anything you do to disrupt the path on a heavily 

loaded train can make their plight that much worse in 

trying to get off on the other side to the point that 

Dennis made before. 

It is bad enough -- I get on Metro and if I'm 

going two or three stops, I'm as guilty as anyone else; 

I don't want to get too deep in the train because 

getting people to get out of the way so you can get 

off the train can become quite the chore. And I think 

everyone has made stops they didn't intend to make as 

a result of that. Maybe we need to start teaching 

children at kindergarten how to ride the subway, 

because that is what it all comes down to. Anything 

you really needed to know you should have learned in 

kindergarten, as far as getting along with folks. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: I think a lot can boil 

down to educating the riders. Metro makes a point of 

telling everybody to move to the center of the car and 

they do fairly well most of the time, not all the time.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Does everyone remember the 

little song when you were a kid, "the wheels on the 

bus goes round and round." Remember what the driver 

on the bus said? "Move on back."
(Chorus of Laughter) 

MELISSA ANDERSON: There we go. We have a 

new theme song.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I think that was 

kindergarten. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: On the issue of the 

vertical stanchions, it may be something -- because 

I can see the point from both directions and I think 

there is a lot of feelings in both directions and it 

may be that in the report you address the benefits and 

pitfalls of each and leave it up to Access Board when 

we put up another set of proposed rules we go to 

industry and ask questions of them and riders on their 

experiences and designs. And we can get that 

information later and based on national comment, maybe 

make some decisions.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I think the greatest 

challenge is defining things enough so if someone does 

even the minimum, then we are better, but not 

precluding creative situations in the future. 

We have seen already with some of the 

well-intended things that have come out with the 

statutes and the regs, the thinking of the day was 

perfectly logical but it boxed us in in the reality 
of the future.

That is the biggest struggle; making sure we 

achieve accessibility but we don't eliminate 

accessibility in the process in the future. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: We definitely don't want 

to do that.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: We look at what Dennis said 

about the (inaudible) syndrome, which is there for one 

no more than two positions in any one car for intercity 

so you get one in every car because it is logic cap. 

But if you are traveling with someone you are out of 

luck. If you have multiple people riding, but it was 

written to prevent a negative thing from occurring and 

what happens it prevents a positive thing from 

occurring and no one intended that unintended 

consequences. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: You had time left did you 

want to talk about the (inaudible) space? 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Yes. I'm glad you said 

that because I would have skipped right over that. 

Melissa, thank you, so much.

There was a question from the last meeting 

about service animals because the notes said allow for 

some overlap of the service animal space with other 
spaces. And to address that, there is a diagram. Get 

back to the right document here. 

There is a diagram at the very end that shows, 

just hypothetical layout that shows two accessible 

spaces and where service animals might occur. There 

is space allowed for them and this doesn't assume they 

will be sleeping under the seat. A seat design may 

well allow overlap there as well. What this does show 

is to say the upper seating position where that is the 

new 34 x 54, I think that is right. Sorry if I'm 

incorrect.

Part of what drives that big dimension is 

maneuverability to get into the space. So you could 

have -- this is shown a 6" overlap of the service 

animal into that space, what that would look like. 

And then in the lower condition where the animal might 

be against the wall, which is where some folks prefer 

to have them so their tail doesn't get stepped on, is 

the same condition as shown. That is just to consider 

how that might look in this case. There is also a 

transverse position shown for the service animal as 

well as parallel conditions against the single seats. 

But the point was do we allow some overlap, 

or as I misspelled here "overlape". I should try 
spell check before I send it out. My apologies.

So any thoughts on allowing for overlap? 

This could include -- we have a new definition for 

overlap of accessible space by fixed objects we 

redefine that as well. So that could apply possibly 

to the service animal space as well. 

ROBERT CARLSON: Blair, I think the 

overlapping of areas is so very specific to a 

particular -- what is overlapping? What it would 

probably need is more discussion before we could say, 

yes, we will allow this overlap.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Okay. 

ROBERT CARLSON: I mean, we wouldn't want to 

have overlapping in service animals and aisles.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Right. Yes, well, 

that --

ROBERT CARLSON: That is one absurd example, 

but it is the kind of thing you need to try to identify.

<<<: What is and isn't able to be combined 

or allowed to be multiple use kind of area. 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Any other thoughts on 

that? 

Let me ask the question, since you brought it 

up, Bob. What would you do -- and maybe it changes 
the allowable overlap, but what would be defined as 

the sort of "no man's land" or do we decrease those? 

If there is an overlap allowed by a fixed object that 

is already in the regs, that is okay, whatever that 

dimension is and look at the different condition of 

the overlap of the clear seating?

<<<: There is a certain amount of 

maneuverability of a full size, like a Labrador 

service dog to be on the floor and partially under the 

seat in front of him. So you don't necessarily need 

to have an exact width. We will jump into whatever 

space that is there, if it is possible to do, or if 

the person he is with will encourage it. 

The other thing, I have seen a lot of service 

animals like lying on the feet, so the footrest of the 

people they are with. That is a close relationship 

so that in that case is an acceptable situation. And 

it was not necessarily driven by the available space. 

It was just the immediacy of the comfort.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: The way the Note 20 reads 

right now is service animals space may be overlapped 

by fixed objects, by 6" x 12" high and 12" by 16" high. 

Service animal may overlap defined floor space by a 

maximum of 6" longitudinally and transversely. 
ROBERT CARLSON: Those kind of numbers would 

apply, I think, or reasonable from my perspective of 

service animal. Other people may have a different 

opinion on that, who are using them. But that kind 

of clear area like a seat being able to be over the 

top of where a service animal might be trying to be 

specific without being too specific is the problem in 

this particular situation.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Right. The hope was, Bob, 

that we would have, rather than having the vast areas 

of almost unused space that really is not practical 

nor really needed, that it would give some leeway. 

But I didn't want to leave it -- we saw what happened 

before when we had the clear floor space defined, that 

is what you got. And suddenly that is all you had for 

maneuvering and everything else. It is part of what 

drove 54 or 59" for maneuvering because then you have 

a guaranteed floor space for maneuvering.

The thinking was, okay, some of that space is 

consumed while the person is maneuvering. And once 

everyone is settled and the dog lays down or whatever, 

who is to say they wouldn't overlap that space that 

was used for maneuvering. And maneuver back over 

again because he is going to get up when it is time 
to go.

The point was we have enough definition that 

we ensure that we get enough space and don't leave that 

to chance but try to give it some maneuverability.

The best thing to do is to mock this up and 

try it out and see how a dog will nestle down, a dog 

or service pony, whatever you might be traveling with 

these days. 

ROBERT CARLSON: We have some in-house 

service animals we work with. All we need is some 

seating area to --

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: To mock that up. That 

would be ideal.

Melissa, let me ask you the question. What 

is going to be a good way of managing now that we have 

thrown some numbers in it? 

MELISSA ANDERSON: I think if you write up a 

proposed solution and it gives people an opportunity 

to comment on it. And I suspect Dennis and maybe some 

others would have some insight in the reality of the 

situation.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Okay. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: Kind of based on common 

sense. If you put something together it 
shouldn't -- get people comment.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Okay. Any other thoughts 

on service animals?

It is interesting we are sort of breaking new 

ground here, even defining the space that should be 

allowed for animals and transportation. So I 

think -- whatever we do, we are doing more than has 

been done but we have to make sure it is enough. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: I think this is also an 

area where we need a fair amount of public comment to 

actually come up with the right answer.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I think there are some of 

these things that maybe they have not done in a formal 

way. It would be really handy to spend some of the 

FRA's R&D money to mock up some of these things and 

sort them out. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: You have the Access 

Board's full support.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I am all for spending the 

money. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: We don't have any.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: But I have had indication 

from some of the folks at the FRA there is some 

available funding to do some research on some of these 
things and we are not talking about bank breaking 

earthshattering research. We are talking about 

pretty basic stuff here, and building mockups and 

trying them out and see what works. You can honestly 

say what ends up going into the proposed rulemaking 

is based on facts, tested facts, versus what we think.

Okay. I will write something up on that for 

consideration and correct my misspellings as well and 

I think it would probably be good to try to plug in 

some portion that indicates what the overlap of the 

vertical conditions would mean to Labrador retriever 

size animal. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: I have one other issue. 

I realize our next meeting is scheduled for December 

10, but we have an internal conflict for that date too. 

That is on a Wednesday. Is there any objection moving 

it to December 11, which is a Thursday? 

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Originally we were always 

targeting Thursdays but I think something had come up 

that pushed this December date. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: We put some on Wednesdays 

because we were trying to get more participation but 

we have not gotten any additional participation even 

after changing dates. 
BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I'm okay. I have a CPR 

class that runs. I may have to leave before we get 

to the fun stuff. The last 30 minutes that overlaps 

into this, but that is okay. 

ROBERT CARLSON: I personally have no 

problem with the 11th. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: I think Paul and I will 

both be out that day. I will be off and our office 

staff will be busy.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: On the 10th or 11? 

MELISSA ANDERSON: On the 10th.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Melissa, same thing as the 

other date; if you can run it past the folks that left, 

that would be good because I don't think we are hearing 

any disagreement from anyone else here. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: Okay.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Anyone else have any 

concerns? Feel we are off to the weeds? We are 

making good progress? Everyone scared to death or 

frustrated? Any thoughts?

<<<: Good job, Blair.

<<<: Yeah, good job, the matrix is looking 

really good. Makes sense, despite the typos.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I will run a grammar check 
because I saw other grammatical errors on there as well 

as I was reading through the notes.

Anyone from the railroads have any lingering 

concerns or things that they are really worried about 

in what we are talking about so far? 

JOE VEGA: I have no concerns at this point. 

If anything comes up later, I can always talk with you.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Okay. Jose, I appreciate 

it. 

Long Island, you guys have been very vocal and 

involved and I really appreciate that. Is the 

gentleman on from Metro in Chicago. 

DAVID MARTINEZ: Yes, Dave Martinez here.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Any thoughts from the 

great Midwest? 

DAVID MARTINEZ: Francis and I were 

talking -- Frances Mascarenhas is also here with 

me -- and currently we do not have any comments for 

you, Blair.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Yeah, take a close look and 

if there is anything that worries you take an 

opportunity to -- heard from the left coast and the 

right coast but not in the middle. 

DAVID MARTINEZ: Absolutely. Will 
certainly do that.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: We will look for sanity and 

reason from the middle of the country. How is that? 

<<<: Nobody in this country has got to be in 

the center.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: I think we all would be 

better off in the middle.

I don't have anything else. Anyone from the 

Access Board have any thoughts? About to finish up 

10 minutes early. 

MELISSA ANDERSON: We're good.

BLAIR SLAUGHTER: Okay. I feel we are 

missing something. Well, if there is nothing else, 

if there is a motion to adjourn, we will call it today.

<<<: Thank you, Blair.

PAUL BEATTY: Okay. Operator that 

concludes our call.