Note: The output shown below is from the Communication Access 

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

unedited, except the correction of some participant names. The 

CART system was used to provide an accommodation to persons with 

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

and available to the public on the internet during the meeting.

Rail Vehicles Access Advisory Committee (RVAAC) meeting

U.S. Access Board

Thursday, April 10, 2014

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Good morning, everyone. 

Thank you for coming to Washington in the height of 

cherry blossom season. I hope that tonight you get to 

walk around and see it before sunset and enjoy the cherry 

blossoms. The Access Board appreciates your attending 

and involvement in the RVAAC committee. We have 

access for public members and we continue to have new 

faces in the room. As you know, it's been the effort some 

would say is long over do but we are making major 

headway. And for those of you who have participated 

over 8 subcommittees, teleconferences over the last two 

months, you know it is quite a good deal of work and 

discussion. So, with that, I want to have everyone 

introduce themselves and then we will we are going to 

turn it over to Billy and have a couple of presentations this 
morning. And then go into subcommittee meetings for 

the rest of the two days. So, thank you all for coming. 

Please start off.

>> I am Stanton, with Ricon Corporation and here with 

many, many years’ experience in accessibility systems 

thank you. 

>> Josh Coran with Talgo, the Spanish high-speed train 

builder

>> Tom Peacock, I am representing Stan Hunter at 

Cal Trans

>> Janice Schacter Lintz. 

>> Robert Carlson, transportation association.

>> Ed Hoff, New Jersey Transit

>> Blair Slaughter, Amtrak.

>> Marilyn Golden, Disability Rights Education & 

Defense Fund.

>> Andre Gagne, Bombardier Transportation.

>> Terry Soesbee, RailPlan International.

>> Jon Holbrook.

>> Linda Martin, Federal Railroad Administration

>> David Hughson, Maryland Transit Authority.

>> Francis Mascarenhas, Metra in Chicago. I have been 

working with Metra for 18-plus years as a mechanical 

engineer now I am the senior mechanical engineer. I have 
worked on several coach car rehabilitation programs as 

well as project engineer for the electric cars. I am here 

because Justin left our employment. I was the alternate 

for the last two meetings. Now I guess I am stepping up. 

Thank you.

>> Welcome.

>> I am Andrew Phillips with the National Association of 

the Deaf.

>> Lisa Hamlin, Hearing Loss Association of America.

>> Ed Steinfeld with the IDeA Center at University of 

Buffalo.

>> Jim Weisman, United Spinal Association.

>> Crystal Lyons representing the South West Transit 

Association.

>> Clifton Perez representing National Council on 

Independent Living.

>> Larry Scott representing the National Association of 

Railroad Passengers.

>> Uwe Rutenberg, International Centre for Accessible 

Transportation

>> Frank Maldari, representing MTA New York.

>> Dennis Cannon, National Disability Rights Network.

>> Terry Pacheco, American Council of the Blind.

>> Harold Weisinger, Federal Railroad Administration.
>> Good morning, Billy Altom, programs of 

independent living.

>> Paul Beatty, Access Board staff. If we could start 

first with the folks --

>> Melissa Anderson.

>> Jim Pecht, Access Board staff. 

>> MARSHA MAZZ: Marsha Mazz, Access Board staff.

>> Lisa Fairhall Access Board staff.

>> PAUL BEATTY: If somebody would bring the mic 

around to those in the audience.

>> Ken Shiotani, National Disability Rights Network.

>> Gurmit (inaudible) transportation systems.

>> Bob Reuter, Access Systems Baltimore Transit 

Association and ADAPT.

>> Keith Wartzman, guest.

>> Mike Martino, Association of American Railroads.

>> Pierre, City of Alexandria transit. 

>> Lou Walner, Virginia Railway Express.

>> Calvin Gibson, FRA.

>> Melissa Sharlin, FRA.

>> Sid Goldstein, editor of Transit Access Report.

>> MARSHA MAZZ: Okay.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Okay. Now, this is Paul Beatty we 

will go to those on the conference line I unmuted all lines, 
so if you could introduce yourselves and what organization 

you might represent? just go ahead charge in.

>> Mike Wetherell with MTA.

>> Glenn Willis, Washington, DC Metro.

>> Kimberly Jackson, University of Kansas.

>> Frank Parson, Brinckerhoff

>> Dick Cogswell, FRA.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Okay. Those on the line I will turn 

everything over to Billy.

>> Paul, before we unmute it's Mike Wetherell, if I could 

say a couple of words I am going to be on the call but this 

is my last meeting my duties changed I am no longer with 

New York City Transit, I am with MTA headquarters, Frank 

Maldari is going to be the MTA representative as Gricelda 

Cespedes from New York City is going to be the alternate I 

wanted to thank you for the opportunity to participate. 

And hope to see you around in the industry.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Thank you Mike. And just to let 

those on the conference call I am leaving your line 

unmuted for some reason you are trying to communicate 

to us to say something you can also use the RVAAC E-mail 

site RVAAC @ access-board.gov if you can't get through 

the noise we are not paying attention et cetera. I will turn 

it over to Billy.
>> BILLY ALTOM: All right. Man, it's great to see 

everybody out here. What a beautiful morning. I came 

out from across the road and had a jacket and coat 

thinking it was wintertime and said awesome. You are 

going to be hard pressed to keep me inside today it's nice 

out there. We want to do general housekeeping if you 

have a cell phone, put it in vibrate mode or silent mute 

whatever you want to do to it so it doesn't go off while we 

are meeting. Also, if you are with us today using the 

CART system the chat box is not available for the 

participants who are using CART if you would please 

E-mail any questions that you have to RVAAC @ 

access-board.gov. And we will get to those as quickly as 

we can. And, also, you may have noticed we do not have 

your name tents today which is going to be tough for me I 

tried to write everything down that's hard to remember my 

own name. We are working on it please if you have a 

question or whenever you speak, identify yourself for all of 

us so that we can keep track and keep our program on 

track. Also, then what I want to get into is get this baby 

rolling, in January we had our meeting we mailed out the 

minutes from that January meeting on February 12th. No 

comments were received back from -- to the staff. So, 

what I would like to know is if I could get a motion to 
accept the minutes from our January meeting? 

>> So moved? Dennis Cannon, second was Stanton, 

thank you. All those in favor say aye. Opposed? No? 

Abstentions? Hearing none, first order of business is 

good we have completed our approval of the minutes so 

thank you very much. What I would like to start off with 

too to give you a brief report on where we are going to go 

to with our subcommittees and what we have done. Then 

we have several presentations that we are going to do 

today I am looking forward to a loft these presentations. 

Then we will do our public comment at the end of the day 

and break into subcommittee meetings what I am going to 

do first is give you a brief report on where we are add. 

Access Board send E-mail out on the 27th that 

recommended to bring greater focus to our committee 

work that we dissolve the committees that we had and 

form new ones. So, we dissolved the two existing ones 

the recommendation -- I can't read my stuff. It was 

accepted by the committee. With this committee approval 

four new subcommittees were created. These are first the 

boarding alighting committee. The onboard circulation 

and seating. Rooms and spaces and lastly 

communications. At the moment, we have Terry Pacheco 

who had been the chair of the dissolved signage 
subcommittee transitioned into the chair of the 

communications subcommittee so thank you very much. 

At the first meeting of the onboard circulation and seating 

subcommittee, during conference call on the 20th Blair 

Slaughter was elected to chair that committee. So thank 

you Blair for that. I appreciate that. Did you remember 

when I volunteered you to chair that.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> I don't remember that.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Also, as you notice, in the agenda 

tomorrow afternoon the boarding and alighting 

subcommittee will meet one of the first order of business 

is to elect chair for that committee. Currently we have Ed 

Hoff Crystal Lyons Michael Wetherell and Stanton who 

served to chair that committee. If you are there and you 

would like to put your name in the hat we can still have 

people put their name in since according to our bylaws or 

rules the committee alternates may also serve as 

subcommittee chairs. We'll elect a chair for that 

tomorrow or this afternoon, whatever I just said. The 

room and spaces subcommittee is not scheduled to meet 

the Access Board is not prepared to administratively 

support them during the two-day meeting today for that 

subcommittee, currently we have Uwe and Dennis 
volunteered to be chairs. So, we had a pause there for 

just a moment with background noise from our phone 

participants.

So, as you can tell we have a big job that was put ahead 

of us we thought we were going to accomplish this is the 

matter of 12 months which is not going to happen. So, 

we are looking at extending this at least getting in a few 

more minutes or few more meetings. What we need to do 

is that pull out our calendars if we have those and let's 

knock some meeting dates out.

The Access Board request they select two meeting dates 

between October and June. October of 2014 and June of 

2015. These would be like these meetings two-day 

meetings.

>> Do we have a meeting schedule for October?

>> Do we have a meeting scheduled.

>> We don't have one yet those are the target dates any 

time between October and June we want two more 

meetings.

>> We had a next meeting scheduled.

>> September.

>> We want to put distance between the September 

meeting and the next meeting I suggest. And not make it 

October but I don't know.
>> BILLY ALTOM: I -- we just threw the date out there 

because it was an available time the committee can choose 

to meet January, February, whatever the -- whatever 

people's calendars allow us to do. Normally this would be 

run by the good friend Rose she is not with us today so I 

will be playing -- sharing the role of Rose with Paul. I am 

kind of with what you just said, October doesn't look good 

for me my annual conference is October it's just a month 

later from September. Paul, do you have any input that 

you would like to give us on this?

>> PAUL BEATTY: No, I gave Billy a calendar when the 

room is available October through June. And so, it's a 

matter of what selecting two dates convenient for a 

maximum number of committee members. Unless -- this 

is Paul Beatty speaking unless you guys want to bust your 

butt between now and September and have everything 

wrapped up in September we are all for that.

>> First two weeks of November?

>> BILLY ALTOM: Let me give you a quick one here 

December 1, 2 and 3. December 8, 9 and 10. And 

December 15, 16, 17 or 18 are available here in the 

Access Board room. In January the week of the 5th is 

available. The 15 and 16 is available. The 20 through 

23rd is available and 26 through 30th is available.
>> Billy?

>> BILLY ALTOM: Yes?

>> This is Kim Jackson with University of Kansas. The 

Transportation Research Board meeting for next year is 

January 11 through the 15th. So, if you guys had the 

meeting the 15th and 16th there might be maybe some 

university participants that could come to the meeting as 

well to coincide with the TRB annual meeting.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you. Terry asked when is 

Martin Luther King day that's the 19th. Did I hear any 

recommendations of those first couple of months that I 

have thrown out there anything sound good? Appealing?

>> November sounds good to me.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Back up to my November calendar 

November was 17 and 18. 

>> UWE RUTENBERG: (Nods head up and down.)

>> BILLY ALTOM: That's a Monday-Tuesday.

>> Thanksgiving is the 27th. Yes? Crystal?

>> CRYSTAL LYONS: Billy, this will be these types of 

meetings, all of the whole board or are they broken down 

into subcommittees? What -- what is the -- are they just 

subcommittee meetings

>> PAUL BEATTY: This is Paul Beatty. To some degree 

we can't predict the agenda until we have our September 
meeting. We want those days available.

>> CRYSTAL LYONS: Can I throw something out Billy?

>> PAUL BEATTY: Essentially we don't have anything 

available for the month of November.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Sorry about that.

>> CRYSTAL LYONS: Do we have to meet here?

>> PAUL BEATTY: I guess probably in order to provide 

all of the accommodations necessary. And

>> (inaudible)

>> PAUL BEATTY: We are not budgeted -- so no you 

are meeting here.

>> CRYSTAL LYONS: I will still throw out my idea 

anyway just in case. The APTA expo, you know quite 

often I don't know this year, I haven't been able to find out 

yet if there will be rail cars on the floor quite often there is 

quite a rail presence at the APTA expo Houston in October. 

Like October 12 through 15. I just wanted to throw it out 

that I was told APTA could probably find space. If there is 

no budget there is no budget I wanted to throw it out 

anyway. It might be an opportunity.

>> We like it here.

>> Could we narrow it down to either the first week in 

December or the first week in January? Is there a problem 

with either one of those for anyone?
>> BILLY ALTOM: Okay.

>> Terry Pacheco: I think it's the 4th or 5th it gives us 

3 months between meetings

>> January work better for me if -- if anyone else has a 

problem.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Isn't the TRB in January, so for 

those of you who eat sleep and breathe transportation, 

you may not necessarily want to be here twice in January if 

you are there for ANSI and other meetings that occurred.

>> CRYSTAL LYONS: We piggyback on last year this 

year.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Yes. Just keep that in mind.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Right now again we are looking at 

Terry mentioned the first week in December which would 

be those are not available for the room it's the 1, 2 and 3 

we would have to change routine of Thursday-Friday.

>> That sounds good.

>> January 8 and 9 is our usual Thursday-Friday style 

meeting what does it sound like to folks.

>> I have a comment. I think that earlier December is 

better for me just because I have a lot of conflicts 

otherwise.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Early December?

>> at beginning of January I have conflict it's closer to 
the holidays.

>> BILLY ALTOM: I understand there is a group this big 

we are going to have somebody going to be a little 

twisted. So we try to find the one that works for the 

biggest group. Ed?

>> I would like to just do this off line if we could just 

have people suggest or have the -- have you guys suggest 

good dates and then maybe we could do a doodle poll to 

pick the ones best for everybody? Because we could go 

around the table everybody is going to have their own --

>> PAUL BEATTY: I don't know whether the doodle poll 

is accessible we may be restricted on using it

>> However you want to do it is fine with me.

>> Just not this way.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> MARSHA MAZZ: Paul, that is something I had Bruce 

check I understand it is accessible.

>> PAUL BEATTY: All right. So, this is Paul Beatty I 

hear the consensus of the committee is worry about it 

after the committee meeting all right we will send 

something out. But I am hesitant to ask Billy had another 

thing that he was going to have me do, that is, which I will 

do it now right? Okay. Between this meeting and 

September we wanted you to hold a number of conference 
calls. We had some concern if we left it to the 

subcommittees to set up the conference calls since the 

first subcommittee meeting is communications, they 

would take all of the good dates and the last 

subcommittee meeting which isn't scheduled for the two 

days rooms and spaces would have very little to choose 

from. Second we know there are some committee 

members that have been participating in the two current 

subcommittees, and we appreciate their participation. 

And one or both pointed out to us being able to 

participate in a conference call more than once in a week 

is extremely difficult for them. So, because of that, we 

were going to propose to the full committee during this 

time we look at the dates between now and the September 

meeting. And schedule conference calls for the four 

subcommittees meeting only one conference call per week 

and hopefully each subcommittee would only be meeting 

once a month. And get through the schedule. We do 

that because not everybody must participate in a 

subcommittee. The subcommittees cannot make 

decisions for the full committee. So, whatever the 

subcommittee decides has to be brought before the full 

subcommittee that ties in with Crystal's question about 

what the two full committee meetings are for. We 
anticipated per the schedule that the subcommittees 

would complete their work sometime in October of this 

year. You know, there is fine-tuning. Those reports 

would be presented to the full committee and discussed 

by the full committee probably at last two meetings and 

finalized their report to the board. So, now, if we can 

have you look at the schedules, and we don't know of any 

simple way to do this online. So, if possible, the 

committee agrees can we set up conference calls for the 

subcommittees between now and --

>> MELISSA ANDERSON: I was going to do this private 

tee with Paul but I was thinking since we are already 

meeting this week if we start communications and then 

circulation and then boarding alighting I don't know when 

Jim wants to pick a day of the week every Thursday or 

Wednesday and just alternate down the row and people 

will be able to make it people won't. But -- you can be 

consistent that way pal pallet the proposal a day always 

the same time alternating as we go through the months. 

Everybody in agreement with that? All right

>> I want to say if we could avoid Mondays would be 

great.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Use the microphone, please.

>> Avoid Mondays would be awesome any other day 
would be fine.

>> PAUL BEATTY: We need at least two weeks to 

arrange the CART, et cetera. We are really starting first of 

May second of May okay? Which is a Thursday-Friday. 

Thursdays have been working good. So, why don't we 

aim for maybe the 1st and the question is: Do we start 

off with communications on May the 1st and I will ask the 

chair of the communications subcommittee Terry, whether 

May the 1st is go for you because --

>> Terry Pacheco: Of course I am yielding to my 

committee my suggestion is that we just go with the 

first --

>> I am not hearing, I'm sorry.

>> Sorry about that.

>> Terry Pacheco: My suggestion of course is we go 

with the first Thursday of each month. But that's I would 

like to see some affirmation or if that's a somebody with 

my committee first.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Terry proposed the communication 

subcommittee meet the first Thursday of every month the 

time slot would be the same 1 to 3 p.m. east coast time. 

Everybody, I see no objections to that okay so that's 

simple. Make sure we don't run into any --

>> 1 to 3 eastern.
(Discussion off record.)

>> What time is that going -- phone call going to be for 

the communications meeting for the first of the month 

Terry, I'm sorry, will the call be for the communications 

meeting be on the first of the month not the first

>> PAUL BEATTY: It's the same time 1 to 3 p.m. east 

coast time all right? So, all right so now following that, 

for those the next committee that's been meeting is 

boarding onboard circulation. Blair since you are the 

chair do you want to make a proposal as regards to your 

committee subcommittee meeting?

>> Blair Slaughter: Personally, I think the Thursdays 

work quite well. And if we could do just to follow Terry 

we want to do the second Thursday of every month just to 

keep that up

>> PAUL BEATTY: This is Paul speaking believe it or 

not there is juggling in space there are a number of staff 

members participating there are certain things that we 

need to be able to run the meeting and not every space 

that we have available is available you know whenever I 

want it. So, at this point it looks like the first Thursday of 

every month is open. Between now and September but 

the second Thursday has --
>> Blair Slaughter: Paul, Ed made a good suggestion 

where there is a conflict switch it to answer, does that 

work? Second Wednesday I'm sorry. So second 

Wednesday or Thursday depending on availability from 

your side? If we need to go back earlier in the week make 

it Tuesday-Thursday .

>> That works shift it to Wednesday the primary date 

would be Thursday 1 to 3 p.m. east coast time. But if 

there is a conflict looks like we could shift it to Wednesday 

we will send you out an E-mail letting you know. But at 

this point assume it's the second Thursday of every 

month. Again same time slot 1 to 3 p.m. east coast time, 

Ed?

>> Ed Steinfeld are we going to keep the skied dual for 

the rest of the time of the committee are assembled.

>> PAUL BEATTY: This is just to set up conference 

calls between now and September if the committee 

decides to continue for future conference calls that's up to 

them.

>> Okay.

>> PAUL BEATTY: But that's probably a good idea, let 

me make notes so I don't forget.

>> I was just concerned it's not a good idea for me, I 

teach on Thursday afternoons all afternoon so starting in 
the end of August I won't be available at all.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Okay. Well, let's -- between now 

and September now and the end of August you are good?

>> Yes.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Okay. Thank you.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Can I just politely remind you 

that we are hoping you guys are going to make great 

headway so you guys are not continuing all through the 

fall. That's our hope.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> PAUL BEATTY: Okay. Moving on, I guess the next 

group that is going to meet is boarding and alighting. 

And since we don't currently have a chair, may I suggest 

building upon what Blair will go with the third Thursday of 

every month? But if there is a conflict with the room 

space, we will move to Wednesday. And there does 

appear to be a number of conflicts. So then could we 

move to Tuesday?

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Not for me.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Okay. That will be -- then for 

rooms and spaces. We will just follow the same 

procedure. I think for purposes as we move forward 

these could be tweaked. But for purposes of moving 

forward marlin
>> Marilyn Golden: Now you are on the first Tuesday 

in May?

>> PAUL BEATTY: No, third Thursday in May will be 

boarding and alighting subcommittee conference calls. 

If --

>> MELISSA ANDERSON: Paul, the third Thursday in May 

is the out of town board meeting. So, and the it's 

Wednesday Thursday Friday.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Did I say May? I mean third 

Thursday in the month there is an M word month. Third 

Thursday in the month. We are talking now Melissa 

points that we have the out of town meeting for our board 

so, that creates a conflict. And they are pretty much that 

whole week. Thank you Melissa.

So, they --

>> MARSHA MAZZ: (inaudible).

>> PAUL BEATTY: Okay. But I know at least one 

person said Mondays is really bad for them. Blair were 

you plan to go participate in boarding and alighting 

subcommittee. I

>> Blair Slaughter: I think I put my name in spaces 

communication and circulation. I may have put it in 

alighting as well. I would call in. And my only reason for 

saying that Monday mornings on the railroad can be a 
little crazy we are talking in the afternoon if it needs to be 

on Monday it's Monday.

>> PAUL BEATTY: All right. At this point boarding 

alighting is the third Thursday in the month. If we have a 

probably scheduling our space we move to Wednesday. If 

we have a problem scheduling for Wednesday we move to 

Tuesday. And now, worst case scenario we know for the 

purposes of May it will be Monday. We will send you out 

an E-mail, we can tweak things. But we need to get 

something rolling so I can reserve spaces and they don't 

get occupied by other people. For purposes of the last 

subcommittee rooms and spaces, I assume we will meet 

the fourth Thursday of the month. And we will go 

through that progression if there is conflicts for us 

scheduling spaces to run the meeting in Thursday of 

Thursday, Wednesday, Tuesday, and Monday. So, there is 

nothing scheduled for a Friday you can scratch it off at this 

point in time.

>> Marilyn Golden: For some of us time matters taking 

time zones into account

>> PAUL BEATTY: 1 to 3 p.m. that hasn't changed.

>> Okay, sorry. So, you have done -- sorry go ahead.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Okay. So, in summary, the first 

Thursday of every month is communications. And of 
course all of these if Thursday doesn't work we work 

Wednesday Tuesday and Monday. The second Thursday 

of every month is on board circulation and seating 

subcommittee. The third Thursday of every month is 

boarding and alighting subcommittee meeting. And the 

fourth Thursday of every month is rooms and spaces. All 

committee subcommittee conference calls will be between 

1 and 3 p.m. east coast time. I think we have -- is there 

anything I have over looked? Okay so, that's the rough 

plan right now. Marilyn?

>> Marilyn Golden: Sorry. The second is --

>> PAUL BEATTY: Onboard circulation.

>> Marilyn Golden: Okay.

>> PAUL BEATTY: I will try to send out something 

today E-mail wise, all right, so you can nail down your 

things and lock down the room reservations today or this 

afternoon. Okay. I think that takes care of the 

conference calls, thank you. Billy?

>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you do we want to do the up 

dates from these?

>> BILLY ALTOM: I would like to introduce and welcome 

a couple of our new folks they have introduced ourselves 

we have changes in representatives for the meeting we 

welcome Francis who introduced himself earlier thank you 
very much. We replaced Justin as the committee from 

Metra. And Larry Scott who replaced Ross Capone as the 

committee representative for the National Association of 

Railroad Passengers. For Amtrak Gary Talbot is the new 

alternate representative and June Kailes, proud to see her 

name, is the new alternate for DREDF, so very cool. 

Perfect, awesome. That puts us now into our educational 

portion do you have something Chris?

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Larry, I don't know you might 

want to say a few words so folks know your background 

for folks that don't know you.

>> LARRY SCOTT: Okay. As many of you may have 

known Ross Capone, he served as president and CEO for 

39 years I am an active president 6 months why we do a 

nation-wide search to replace Ross recognizing we will 

never get someone with that amount of knowledge. But I 

am pleased to be here today. I wanted to make sure that 

AARP had continuity in this committee.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you. Any other 

announcements anybody needs all look good? Awesome I 

am looking forward to today we have several presentations 

for us. I want to get right into it we are going to have our 

first presentation is from the Federal Railroad 

Administration doing a Rail 101. And we have Harold 
Wisenger with us. Take it away.

>> Good morning, I am mechanical engineer with the 

mechanical division of FRA one of my former railroad lives 

I was the mechanical department liaison to Amtrak 

consumer advisory board in the mid 1990's. One of my 

projects using a grant from Department of Education we 

installed wheelchair lifts on two coaches for testing and 

evaluation. I would like to give a rudimentary description 

of the type of passenger cars that are out there in service 

right now. And then talk about the external influences 

which result in the interior volume available in the car for 

outfitting with the interior.

First up is commuter cars. They are configured for 

greater capacity than ininter-city or long distance trains. 

Commuting times are hopefully less than an hour or two 

hours. Hence the capacity is higher you are not expecting 

as much comfort. The designs are to accelerate and 

decelerate quicker to accommodate more stops along the 

route.

Doors are configured for quicker loading and unloading 

of passengers. This is a single level commuter car with 

high and low level boarding. This type of car 

arrangement is used in the northeast corridor due to the 

tighter clearances as opposed to a bi-level car there are 
bi-levels car on the northeast corridor also or multiple 

level cars. The entrances can be from one or multiple 

doors from a higher or low level platform. The cars are 

generally 12 feet 6 inches in height can seat up to 117 

passengers we call two times three seating two seats on 

one side three seats on the other side of the aisle. That's 

the general type of configuration for this type of car.

this is a single level commuter car with high level 

boarding only. This type is used on commuter lines that 

use high level platforms. Commuter agencies when they 

employ this type of car have to have a system safety plan 

to address evacuation of the trains and nonplatform 

territory. I believe the Acela uses a ladder when they have 

to take people off the train in spots where there aren't 

any --

>> There is a stepladder.

>> There is a rescue stair as well.

>> Okay.

>> Blair Slaughter: And train to train bridge as well.

>> Right, right, in any case all railroads have to have or 

agencies have to have a system safety plan to address as 

part of an evacuation of the trains.

The seating for this type of car is typically 2 times 32 on 

one side 3 on the other. This is a multilevel commuter 
car with high level boarding. Again, it has to have an 

evacuation procedure available for the system safety plan. 

These cars are normally operate in the northeast corridor 

also they are configured the agencies have start today go 

to these because platform length is not available for the 

increased capacity. The single-level cars for the same 

amount of people need a longer platform length and the 

stations don't have that availability anymore. So the cars 

allow greater capacity with less train length and also the 

economy of operation with less equipment. This is a 

bi-level commuter car with low level boarding. This type 

of car has been in service since the late 1950's is referred 

to as a gallery car due to its specific configuration. The 

entrance can be from one or multiple doors per side on 

the low level platform. There is no high level boarding 

with this type of car.

The height can be up to 16 feet 2 inches the seating 

capacity is up to 182 passengers generally they have 2X2 

seating on the bottom and then in the upper gallery part 

of the car they are actually aisles that look like they are 

suspended from the seating there is one seat per side of 

the car.

This type of car is used generally in the Chicago hub 

area. I think there may be cars like this in the west, I am 
not positive.

I meant gallery cars specifically in the west.

Another multilevel commuter car this is a northeast 

corridor car this has boarding from high and low level 

platforms in the major cities usually you will have a high 

level platform and out in the suburbs low level platforms. 

This car gives the option. Noted also it has four doors 

per car which allows for faster loading and unloading. 

Also, the on board crew can pick which doors they open 

based on the flow of passengers in and out. This car is 

typically 2X2 seating on all levels. This car you board on 

the high level platform you board in the middle you have 

the choice of going up or down. The Marc service has 

cars like these.

Here we have inter-city and long distance trains. The 

trains can operate from a few hours between cities to two 

or three days between different regions of the country. 

The cars are configured for seating comfort, food service, 

baggage cars, and sleeping accommodations. Seating in 

the revenue cars is typically 2X2. The pitch between the 

seats is lengthened to give the passengers more comfort 

because they may be on for two or three days. The term 

"revenue car" relate to the cars that actually generate 

money on the train the coaches the sleeping 
accommodations are revenue areas. The dining car is 

considered revenue during dining there is a lounge car 

which there is no fee to enter it it's it's a nonrevenue car.

>> May I ask a question. I don't have familiarity with 

anything to do with trains. What is the difference 

between a long distance train and the commuter train like 

what makes why can't you use the same train for 

everything I understand it's the -- what about it physically 

makes you it long distance train versus the other trainings 

like and I don't understand light rail and these other 

trains.

>> Light rail is a different animal the vehicles are 

lighter, smaller. You could consider them streetcars or 

troll lease. They are built to different structural 

standards. They could be -- think of them as buses on 

rails. And that's a very generic simplified explanation of a 

light rail vehicle.

>> That's what I need.

>> These are considered heavy rail vehicles.

>> Commuter or inter-city FRA heavy rail is Metro. 

That's commonly misused term.

>> Still misused.

The commuter vehicles the commuter cars are built to 

accommodate more people and for master flow in and out 
of the commuters. The long distance and inter-city 

equipment is generally more comfortable the seats are 

different they are different material. Different pitch for 

less passengers per car. A good example of inter-city 

train is Amtrak's Acela. Washington, New York, New York 

to Boston. Maximum trip you see on that would be 8 

hours. Hopefully.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Hopefully six. The long distance trains the seat 

pitch is greater than you find on the Acela because people 

may be on there for days. Of course on there you find 

sleeping cars baggage cars for luggage, dining cars as a 

restaurant. There is a lounge car typically with a cafe in 

it.

>> Thank you.

>> Terry Pacheco: Quick question, wouldn't something 

like the northeast regional be in the same category as the 

Acela as far as your purposes are concerned?

>> Yes, yes. Inter-city commuter trains usually make 

every stop inter-city trains major stops. Long distance 

stops they make -- Amtrak longest train takes three days I 

don't think there is a train that runs coast to coast

anymore. You take Washington Chicago change Chicago 

to sootal tell for L. A. that takes three days. Those are 
configured for the greatest comfort.

They even have showers on them.

>> LINDA MARTIN: But the shelf a commuter car and 

inter-city car are essentially the same?

>> Yes, they all have to meet the same structural 

standards at this point.

>> What we are talking about is comfort level not 

structural level difference?

>> These are all what is called tier 1 compliant cars. 

They all meet the same structural standards

>> Even light rail?

>> No.

>> Heavy rail is all tier 1 it's all about the comfort and 

amenities but light rail is different

>> Light rail is different. And I have to admit I do not 

know enough about light rail I am sure there are people 

that do.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Heavy rail is typically thought 

of as subways, okay? What you have in New York or here 

in DC. And then you got -- you really really heavy 

equipment which is commuter inter city. If you think 

about a typical subway car, that's kind of the way, Blair 

help me out 50% less than a typical commuter rail or 

Amtrak coach. And a light rail car is going to weigh 50% 
less than a subway car.

>> This is Melissa Anderson Access Board I wanted to 

remind for the benefit of the people on the phone we need 

to introduce ourselves before we speak. The definitions 

for each one of these terms are in the beginning of the 

current vehicle standards.

>> I understand that it's easier with pictures and you 

know like reading something and understanding it for 

someone who is a a layperson other than taking the train I 

have to comprehend so I can understand how to 

implement the access what is possible and not possible 

>> MELISSA ANDERSON: The definitions some of them 

are based on operations like the commuter rail operates at 

peak like the VRE and the Marc so the definitions are 

pretty useful in helping because they are more descriptive 

and kind of operational terms. 

>> MELISSA ANDERSON: For future reference they are 

there.

>> Yes, okay.

>> MELISSA ANDERSON: That's fine I have read through 

them several times to get them all straight too.

>> LINDA MARTIN: This is Linda Martin the other 

difference too Harold light rail doesn't operate on the 

same as commuter or inter-city given the --
>> Harold: Typically they don't because it's different 

structural standards. They may with temporal separation. 

I know there is arrangements for some systems where they 

won't run regular trains while the light rail is running.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Which is different than the rest 

of the world. In the rest of the world it's a lot more 

mixing of equipment on the rail lines. We won't go into 

that discussion as to why FRA, FTA won't allow that. Is 

there a question from the audience 

>> I'm sorry, Bob Reuter, I have 80,000 photographs of 

rail vehicles if you give me your E-mail address I can send 

you photographs of every different kind you could 

possibly imagine.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> You only want about 70,000.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> That's all I have scanned right now.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: You know, Bob, I think we kind 

of --

>> Blair Slaughter from Amtrak. A note about capacity 

issues, capacity issues Harold you probably weren't going 

to touch on this it's not just for the vehicle or a certain 

length of train you get into capacity issues for the railroad. 
Because of the way you can only put so many trains on a 

given length of railroad at a certain time. So, that that is 

another reason for trying to increase capacity within a 

train because another train is another -- another 

operating blip on the screen that has a lot of rules and 

regulations that go with it.

>> This is Harold Weisinger. For example CSX only 

allows 15 cars on the capitol limited. 15 single-level cars 

with the same capacity would be, would not carry nearly as 

much as 50 super liners with the same capacity they are 

the bi-level cars you can see in some of the these pictures.

>> Uwe Rutenberg. Isn't there a difference between 

heavy and light rail in terms of what passengers do. 

Heavy rail they have to be seated where as in light rail 

streetcars and lighter rail people have can also stand.

>> Harold: That is probably true. I can't say for 

certain because that's not my --

>> JOSH CORAN: I have spent plenty of time standing 

on inter-city trains it's just a principle not requirement

>> David Hughson from Marc, we have standees on our 

commuter trains.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: This is Chris Hart put it this 

way, any time it snows in the northeast corridor or any 

time there is thunderstorm in the northeast corner there 
are plenty of standees going up and down the corridor.

>> Harold: Here I have a picture of some Amtrak fleets 

and view liners. The Amfleets are the view cars the view 

liners are sleeping cars. Soon there will be new baggage 

cars and diners coming online. I have to say they look 

very nice. These single-level cars operate overnight 

trains that enter station with low clearances like Boston, 

New York, Penn Station, Philadelphia, Washington. 

Amtrak operates the Amfleet II coaches with cafes and 

sleeping cars they have older cars from the 1950 cars cars 

used as baggage and dining cars. The same cars on the 

left the view liner the cylindrical shell Amtrak operates the 

inter-city trains with the style cars with a different seating 

configuration for inter-city service. Here we have the like 

I was just describing, the inter-city car high and low level 

boarding. And these cars are typically in a corridor 

service such as northeast corridor or hub service out of 

Chicago, chick to Detroit or to Milwaukee or St. Louis. 

They have a higher passe tee than the overnight service 

equipment. But not as high capacity as computer car.

>> Blair Slaughter: It's important to point out on this 

slide the right-hand side is what Amtrak refers to as 

horizon car which was purchased in order to increase our 

coach car count on the back end of a Jersey transit I 
think -- the big difference is there is different trucks 

which are the wheels and suspension and different seating 

so that they are comparable to our other longer distance 

trainings versus a commuter style. 

>> Harold: What Amtrak called the horizon cars have 

different terms at different commuter agencies they have 

the same style or type of car configured for commuter 

service Amtrak configured them for inter-city service. 

The car on the right is the style of car I put two wheelchair 

lifts on two cars. And the reason the original -- I will 

divert here the original task for the project was to install 

wheelchair lifts on the Amfleet car on the left the 

vestibules were so tight as we know you can't make the 

turn into the car body from the vestibule. And in 

researching the cost of moving the bulk head wall for 

where the interior door is it would have cost half as much 

to redo the car as to buy a new car. That's how integrated 

the structure is. So we went looking for other cars on 

Amtrak and found the horizon cars which have enormous 

vestibules. I have to sate wheelchair left test did not do 

well on the car because the car itself does not have a body 

and door so the wheelchair lift was exposed to every type 

of dirt and debris and bad weather it could see and that's 

really what we wanted to test. And, unfortunately, the 
design that we picked could not endure all of that. I put it 

on the Chicago will walk key service it would get a beating 

and it did.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: What is interesting, just on the 

horizon car is that several transit agencies, including the 

MBTA in Boston bought several hundred of these cars 

post-91 and so the vestibules never actually met in 91 

requirements even though they are brought and built after 

91. It's interesting conundrum because these cars still 

have 15 to 20 years of life in them if not more.

>> Harold: This is the Amtrak inter-city bi-level 

superliner these have low level boarding like the gallery 

commuter cars and the San Francisco -- the California 

cars.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: And, Harold, correct me if I am 

wrong, 17 inch top of rail?

>> Harold: Is that right?

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: I want to be clear thinking 

about what the low level boarding height is. So, when we 

talk about 17 inch top rail platforms that's the equipment 

that it's designed for.

>> Harold: These operate outside of the northeast 

corridor where there is greater clearances and Amtrak 

operates superliner coaches, dining cars and sleepers. A
variation of the car is the transition sleeping car shown on 

the left. As you can see, it has a low level passage that 

allows passage into low level cars. The superliner is 

related to an older design for the Santa Fe Railroad. And 

the design was to the equipment room at end of the car 

prevented the lower level passageway. So the passageway 

were raised to the upper level.

This is an example of inter-city train Amtrak's Acela. 

It's a single level train with high level boarding. It has an 

active tilt system that leans the trains in the curves to 

maintain comfort at higher speed in the north east 

corridor. This is Talgo inter-city train single level train 

with low level boarding. The train set is articulated where 

each car is semi-permanently attached and shares a truck. 

That's the wheel assembly. It has a passive pendulum tilt 

system as opposed to the Acela which has active or 

mechanical tilt system. Talgo train sets are operated by 

Amtrak in the Pacific Northwest cascades corridor between 

Eugene, Oregon and Vancouver British Columbia. This is 

the part where I talk about influences on the design of the 

car body. I don't think I could have found a better 

picture.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Harold: Here we have what looks like European 
subway or transit car. Is it the London? Right the roof is 

cylindrical and the tunnel is almost perfectly cylindrical 

with just a few inches of clearance.

The loading gauge or clearance defines the maximum 

height and width for railway vehicles and their loads to 

ensure safe passage through bridges, tunnels and other 

structures. So, if you have a railroad that's only so wide 

or so high, you are not going to build a vehicle that 

exceeds that -- those dimensions. This is an illustration 

of three different cross-sections that run on the same 

tracks but have different external dimensions. The shape 

of a car can be influenced by how fast the train will go 

through a curve and how far it will lean at speed.

So, while it may not be a physical limitation, you have 

to -- you have to see the volume that it occupies while 

traveling.

This is a cross-section or end view of the Amtrak view 

liner. The shape of this cross-section allows for more 

width at shoulder height. The shape also allows the car 

to lean in the curves, and the area it would occupy in the 

curve is called a dynamic envelope. Without intruding to 

the space occupied by an adjacent train. Consider that 

while the train sits still it occupies you know X and Y at 

one time and while it's traveling it may not fit into that 
box, and it has a moving clearance box.

It's another picture of the view liner. The design takes 

advantage of the clearance available above a high level 

platform without it exceeding the constraints of the 

dynamic envelope. So, you can see where the floor is on 

the vestibule is where the high level platform would be. 

The older vehicles built the wall straight up, this vehicle 

comes out at we will say the shoulder line it gives you 

more interior width.

Using a cross-section -- end view of the Acela car, it 

has the same type of shape. It allows the train to tilt in 

the curves for quicker schedules.

Here is an interior view of Amtrak’s view liner baggage 

car. And you can kind of make out that same shape on 

the inside. That is without the shelves there that is the 

interior volume that is the result of all of the external 

influences on the car body design. If you imagine taking 

those baggage shelves out. Ultimately the interior shape 

is determined by the car structure which must meet 

crashworthiness standards as well as APTA standards and 

the other influences that we just talked about.

High platforms in the northeast are standardized as far 

as Amtrak is concerned at 48 inches from top of rail 5 foot 

7 from the center line of the track. Some commuter 
agencies may have different ones. These dimensions are 

influenced by freight traffic.

Amtrak operates where freight trains operate. There 

are freight trains on the northeast corridor there are 

commuter agencies that don't see freight trains so the 

clearances may be tighter. Freight cars are typically 10 

feet 8 inches wide at -- with the floor height 3 feet 4 ins 

from top of rail. Not all passenger trains stop at all 

stations commuter versus inter-city. stations may be 

different. FRA is trying to standardize platforms outside 

the northeast at 15-inches from top of rail with 5 foot 5 

inch center line.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Is that where you are at 17?

>> Harold: Linda, you want to address that?

>> LINDA MARTIN: No, it actually is 15, the idea of a 

17-inch car with the wheel wear are the other factors.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: I just wanted to be clear, okay? 

That's where we are at.

>> Harold: There are multiple passenger car door 

thresholds in the U.S. today that would be the different 

types of equipment low level platforms have different 

floors.

Excuse me. Periodic track surfacing alignment changes 

and car door thresholds as the track wears or shifts due to 
ground conditions, the clearances can change. The 

vehicle height can change due to wheel and suspension 

where this causes variations in the loading height.

This is the graphic of different platform heights around 

the country and in Europe.

The interior design envelope of the passenger rail car 

with many possible con fissions is a result of clearances 

speed of operation, vehicle -- why would you use a single 

or bi-level car or what the railroad will allow the train.

>> THOMAS CORFMAN: Service to pull, type of service, 

type of space needed, do you need a baggage car a 

sleeper or a commuter coach do you need an inter-city 

coach. Schedule time for unloading or loading. 

Generally, the Amtrak inter-city trains, they have doors at 

each end of the car. The Amtrak long distance trains 

have doors at one end of each car because they don't have 

as many passengers in each car. Commuter cars have 

more doors to increase the flow. Structural requirements 

influence the design of the car. Accessibility standards. 

Industry standards and federal safety standards. And I 

appreciate your time. Any questions? There is a lot of 

people with vast amounts of rail car experience. So I 

welcome anybody to participate in answering questions.

>> Harold, I was wondering if you could mention 
crashworthiness issues inside cars. They have external 

questions but there are also requirements for internal 

tables and the like.

>> Harold: I would if I knew a lot about it.

>> LINDA MARTIN: Okay. Well, there are --

>> I am a structural engineer I deal with the external or 

the structure of the car. I know there is requirements. 

Blair? >> Blair 

Slaughter: This is Blair Slaughter from Amtrak. 

The -- and I will lean on Josh and some of our car 

builders as well in case I say something wrong. But 

typically an inter-city train a tier 1 type car is anything that 

you attach to the inside that becomes part of the train has 

to meet the AG longitudinal 4G lateral 4G vertical 

requirements. You weigh anything you put in whether 

microwave or seat and that's the forces it has to withstand 

in its normal operating situations when you go to tier 2, it 

is 6, 6 and 12, right?

>> Yes.

>> Blair Slaughter: 6, 6 and 12. Tier 2 to add 

complexity is Acela high-speed trains fall into that they 

meet a whole other level of requirements because of the 

speeds they operate at. Obviously if something occurs, 

everything is coming at you at those higher speeds.
>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Just so you know these 

requirements are not aligned with what the rest of the 

international crashworthiness requirements are. When 

you look at European and aging force requirements 

particularly there is a slightly different approach to the G 

rating.

>> Blair Slaughter: The ideal situation is you never let 

trains get into the position where it becomes an issue. 

But what you typically find when you look at international 

accidents, is when the force loading in the United States 

for example we require 800,000 pound buff loading if you 

push two cars together the cars don't become one at that 

kind of load. And internationally typically it's about half 

of that. Oddly enough those original numbers came from 

the U.S. Postal Service. But when they found out that the 

mail car was surviving on the passenger trains in the 

United States and the passenger cars were telescoping 

which in very graphic terms means you take 80 foot car 

you compress everyone in it to a 10 foot space which 

never works out well. The mail and mail clerks were 

surviving on the on the trains so the railroads adopted that 

as a go by standard. It's become, I assume, I think it is 

rule now is it rule

>> Yes.
>> Blair Slaughter: It was industry standard for a lot of 

years.

>> This is Tom Peacock. There is other less obvious 

crashworthiness features too the back of the seats have to 

be designed to bend but not break when the person sitting 

in the seat in front strikes it. Edges are supposed to be 

rounded. Seats are compartmentalized which means the 

person shouldn't fly out of the seat he should stay in the 

seated area. There is quite a few things like that that are 

less obvious than the big crashworthiness features.

>> This is Dennis Cannon, I want today clarify 

something that I asked at one of the subcommittee 

meetings. When I was working with the (inaudible) here 

on writing subtitle B of Title II, we had a bunch of people 

some from FRA and some from various committees 

Amtrak and so forth. One of the issues had to do with 

the clearance on the end door. At that time we were told 

that you could not get more than 30 inches of clear space 

because of the position of the -- of collision posts. When 

I raised this issue at one of the subcommittee conference 

calls, somebody said that that was not true today with 

current designs we can get 32; is that correct?

>> Blair Slaughter: Blair Slaughter from Amtrak. Yes, 

Dennis, going back that's in the late '80s and early '90s 
when all of that was going on. I think the big driver then 

was looking at a lot of the existing equipment because if 

you tried to move those collision posts in an existing car it 

was -- it was disastrous. But no, I -- we have worked to 

manage the configuration of those things so that they still 

stay sort of in a almost the same place, but manage the 

passageway through it. So, it can be worked out.

>> Dennis Cannon: I wanted to clarify we are no 

longer limited strictly to the 30-inch max.

>> Not on new builds the newest cars we are building 

32 clear between the collision bust

>> JOSH CORAN: This is Josh. Let me add something 

to that. All of this discussion is static. And you will have 

your 32 inches when the train is standing still on straight 

track when you enter a curve you get a Gil low teeing 

effect where you get lateral displacement and you lose a 

lot of that, that pardon the commercial message it doesn't 

happen on Talgo trains because we are articulated at that 

point.

>> We have two more questions Ken and Ed and Ken if 

we go get a microphone for you there.

>> Just a couple of sort of clarifying points if I am not 

mistaken. The just so that everybody knows, the Talgo 

cars have a different -- don't have a 15-inch floor height; 
is that correct? And Bombardier bi-level commuter cars 

also have a unique floor height, is that correct? Do 

people around the room --

>> JOSH CORAN: This is Josh I can answer that. Until 

January 1st I could say that the Talgo equipment in U.S. 

had 24-inch high floor. The new stuff we are running 

there now has about a 30-inch floor it's a European 

platform standards right height. The Bombardier bi-level 

which by the way has three levels it's a registered 

trademark bi-level has a 24-inch high floor but the 

outside step the threshold of the door is at about 17 

inmuchs so it's two step up for standard 8 inch platform.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: And if you are confused join 

the world.

>> Ken: This is something in the folks in boarding and 

alighting needs to know when there is commuter cars 

Amtrak cars of different kinds there is going to be 

different boarding heights it's additional confusion for 

thing that needs to be taken into consideration. One 

question to the FRA person, I'm sorry, I didn't get your 

name. Has there ever been any research done on possibly 

doing a center door on existing Amfleet cars or horizon 

cars as improved accessible entrance? We saw pictures of 

some commuter cars that use them and, again, three sets 
of doors in inter-city train may not be the most practical in 

terms of lost revenue but it does seem like with, again, a 

bunch of people in the room were at an Amtrak boarding 

platform demonstration and design thing yesterday, and it 

was pretty enlightening to see that virtually everyone in a 

wheeled mobility device except people with extremely 

short wheel bases had a whole lot of difficulty if not 

almost impossible time making the turn in the existing 

Amfleet cars thinking a little outside the box would a 

center door would a center door be something that -- that 

has ever been researched might that be something that 

could make the older cars that are probably we are still 

going to be writing when my 20-year-old kid turns 40, 

you know, be something that could be in the works? I

mean it's a little off topic to our discussion but --

>> No, no, actually it isn't off topic that's one of the 

things we explored when we put the trying to put the 

wheelchair lifts on the Amfleet cars seal up the end doors 

or keep the end doors and put a door in the center of the 

car. One of the issues as you mentioned was loss of 

revenue service of space. The other one was weather 

intrusion into the passenger space. So, effectively you 

would have to put -- you would have to have walls on 

either side of the center entrance which would cut down 
on refuse knew space but put the walls or 

ethnographer -- weather intrusion so you cut down on 

interior. You have two passenger come part 

789s -- compartments instead of one the price was 

prohibitive. When you talk about when you are getting 

close to 1/4 to 1/2 the price of the new car you stop right 

there. You are better to invest the money into new 

equipment. I don't know -- I don't know what the 

predicted life is for the Amfleet cars. And they 

are -- those are designs from the 1960's. The agencies 

that operate the horizon type cars they have center doors 

on them. So they are in existence.

>> BILLY ALTOM: You have a question.

>> I have two questions. One has to do with might be 

useful for everybody to hear why rail does not require 

seatbelts like in a plane. And why wheelchairs are not 

secured.

>> Harold: Linda, you want to take that?

>> LINDA MARTIN: Um, I mean I actually don't know. I

mean, I do know generally why, but I know that it's 

not -- it's in the rule that way. But I don't know why that 

decision was made. This is before my time.

>> I am not expert --

>> I think I know but I want to make sure that I am not 
saying things that aren't right.

>> Dennis?

>> I can tell you where they came from originally 

research basically said that had to do with the G forces, 

when you -- as far as the seated passengers are 

concerned, there is the compartmentalization kind of 

concept sort of keeping people in between seats. As far 

as wheelchair securement was concerned the research that 

we looked at when riding -- writing the rule originally was 

that as opposed to buses, which can stop quickly, sort of. 

Trains don't stop quickly. No matter what they hit for the 

most part. The -- so there wasn't any need it was seen to 

secure a wheelchair the same as there is in a bus which 

can make a quick turn a quick stop or go over a curb. We 

hope that trains don't hit potholes. The others are 

practical issue in a bus you have a driver in the bus. In a 

train if you decide that you want to assuming that you can 

get secured originally if you decide you want to use 

restroom unless you are traveling with a companion you 

are sort of out of luck until the conductor comes 

wandering through. As a practical matter, securing 

wheelchairs in especially inner-city train cars doesn't have 

any practical effect. It seems kind of silly. In most cases, 

there is also isn't such thing as a universal securement, 
and if you have a train wreck like the one in recently up in 

New York, where the trains derailed, it won't make any 

difference whether you are secured or not. You are going 

to be crashed and probably killed in the process. So, 

from a practical standpoint, that's why there aren't any 

requirements for securement of wheelchairs in rail cars.

>> One more question.

>> I am curious about innovations on the horizon where 

things are going in the rail industry what are the leading 

edge developments in the design of rail cars.

>> Harold: I think that's a discussion for another time. 

I will put another 100 slides together for that one.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> I think it would be interesting to see that even if it's 

not a part of the meeting if there is a document we can 

circulate that.

>> Herald: If you would like to request that we can 

pout a presentation together.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Just so you know we were not 

able to get on every call, some have tried to raise the issue 

of what the rail overseas sort of -- so that people are 

aware -- because also Bombardier and Talgo all are big 

players around the world. And the U.S. market doesn't 

see the same level of innovation because the economy of 
scale hasn't driven it yet. So, but I think if people request 

it, it will get more.

>> Blair I will let you have the last word and move on.

>> Blair Slaughter: I am expecting a call to take me out 

of the room in a second. I just wanted to go back to Ed's 

question about seatbelts when the Acela was developed 

there was a lot of discussion about seatbelts on the train. 

The difficulty was there was no real way of enforcing 

seatbelts, like you have on the airplane. The airplane 

nobody moves nothing happens until everyone is all 

buckled up. With a train, when you look at 

crashworthiness issues you could have a condition where 

someone is using their seatbelt, and someone in the seat 

behind them is not, so if you have a crash and they are 

thrown and stopped by the seat in front of them. Except 

someone is tied to the seat. Now, you put a multiple load 

on the seat, and now it may break and go into the seat in 

front of it and so on and so on. So, it just -- it was like 

the original issues over wheelchair securement. It was 

just not seen as something that really had a practical 

advantage because of the decelerations that you see on 

passenger trains versus moat tier vehicles and aircraft.

>> Just real quick I think it was a great presentation, 

thank you.
>> Thank you.

>> Tons of information that will be very important to 

the boarding alighting subcommittees specifically with 

regard to structure. Assuming that the regulations 

requiring certain structural elements be there and meet 

certain force resistances what is up for grabs in the way of 

the size and structure of the members from the point of 

view of the boarding threshold and the structural 

members that are very near that threshold for things like 

lift installations, like integrated bridge plates on the floor 

of the vehicle that can come out underneath but try to give 

a smooth transition. I know in some cases when we try to 

do automated bridge plate we have to go over the 

threshold there is a structural member very near. Is there 

a way around that since we have materials around with 

much greater strength given weight and size. Specifically 

for the subcommittee, who we are looking at vehicles in 

the future we are not looking to modify today's vehicles it 

was a great presentation telling us what is in place today. 

But where can we go with the new vehicles in this area?

>> Harold: Well for future vehicles anything that you 

would request would be part of the performance based 

specifications. So, if the builder has to build that, they 

will find a way to do it. As far as materials are concerned 
there is always a trade-off between harder and milder 

materials. If it can be thought of, it can be built. And as 

long as there is money to do it. So, that's about all I 

could say. There is always ways of doing it. And I 

appreciate your time. I appreciate the opportunity to 

make this presentation Mr. Beatty has my information 

should anybody wish to contact me. And we would be 

happy to give additional presentations, thank you.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you appreciate it.

 (APPLAUSE)

>> BILLY ALTOM: All righty. As typical with this group 

we like to run a little longer than we normally would we 

need to take a break so that our CART can keep up with us 

and rest her fingers for a moment. Let's say how much 

we will go for 10 minutes. If we are back here at 10 to 12 

we will do the next presentation and break for lunch after 

that. And we will go from there so you got 10 minutes till 

12 I expect you all right back here.

(Short recess taken.) 

U.S. Access Board

RVAAC meeting

Thursday, April 10, 2014

(Short recess taken.)
>> BILLY ALTOM: If we can all reconvene. Great to see 

everybody here today. Looks like we have a lot of energy 

in the room. That's awesome. We need it in here 

because if it gets low in here I am going to want to go 

outside be a lizard and soak up some sun, it's nice out 

there. All righty, we will kick it off here in just one 

minute. We are back we have another presentation this 

time coming from one of our participants on the phone we 

have with us the American public transportation 

association streetcar subcommittee maximizing 

accessibility for modern streetcar systems we have Paul on 

the line with us are you there?

>> I am here. Am I coming through okay?

>> BILLY ALTOM: I can hear you take it away the floor is 

yours.

>> Okay. Thank you very much. I apologize for not 

being in Washington at the meeting in person. But travel 

budgets are what they are. And we will start with slide 1 

of the presentation. The cover slide. What the objective 

of this presentation is, is to provide a background and a 

primer on some of the situations associated with the 

national in developing modern streetcar systems. And 

some of the challenges that project sponsors are having in 
implementing systems that maximize accessibility under 

the current rules which as everyone knows date back to 

the early 1990's. Next slide, slide 2. Little background 

on the APTA street car subcommittee. It's within 

the -- within the it's a younger committee it's been around 

I think less than 10 years. And really as a result of the 

fact that the streetcar as a mode is really coming back in 

cities and the United States.

We -- the subcommittee is comprised largely of APTA 

members but also other groups since a lot of streetcar 

systems are being developed by both city governments, 

transit authorities, and also business improvement 

districts and others that have an interest in down town 

finalization. Hello?

>> You are still here Paul, I hear a phone ringing 

making sure it's still connected.

>> Sorry about that.

>> Paul: We have a working group on the 

subcommittee that has been dealing with not necessarily 

writing standards but looking to provide education at a

technical level to folks that are planning or designing 

streetcar systems. There are modern streetcar vehicle 

guidelines available on the APTA website and other places. 

That is an excellent document for anyone who is 
interested in learning more about the development of 

modern streetcar vehicles.

But a major issue that has come up with project after 

project with vehicle manufacturers and others is 

compliance with ADA I will get into what some of the 

issues are that are challenging us.

Specifically, for accessibility some of the parts of 

subpart D which is the part that we live under we are 

considered light rail. Again, the regulations did not 

foresee the current technologies and changes in light rail 

and streetcar. So we will get into that. Moving on to

slide number 3.

A little bit of background. In the accessibility of 

streetcar vehicles, up until about 1980, there was little 

consideration given to accessibility and the design of 

streetcar vehicles. Then following that, you know most of 

the vehicles were what we call high floor vehicles which 

were either high floor with a high platform where similar 

to the Los Angeles light rail system and some of the others 

like Metro and Washington, DC, where patrons can board 

the vehicles from a high platform into a high floor. Or 

what most of the vehicles around the country light rail and 

streetcar were high floor with a low platform similar to 

older style buses had three to four steps to gain entry to 
the floor of the vehicle from a low-level platform that was 

usually 6 to 8 inches high. Moving on to slide 4.

Then moving into the third era where we are now the 

introduction of low floor vehicles began in this country. 

This is a technology that originated in Europe where 

initially part of the floor of the vehicle is low floor. Some 

of the vehicle started with either just a small section of the 

vehicle where there are either just one step or no steps to 

enter the vehicle. And then increasing from just a small 

part of the vehicle to 50% low floor many cases now 70% 

low floor and even now there are vehicles coming into the 

U.S. market for which orders are placed that are 100% low 

floor. You can see on the time line on the slide you know 

times when this technology emerged in the U.S. market 

part of the challenge that we are facing is that the subpart 

D rules were written for the previous high floor vehicles 

and we will get into why that's causing issues with 

accessibility today. On slide 5, some pictures depicting 

the different types of alignments that we deal with trying 

to differentiate light rail from streetcar a little bit. At the 

top is a picture showing a light rail vehicle operating in 

right-of-way that is shared with freight trains, and you 

know, so you are on open track, but a light rail of course 

can operate in the street. You see a picture on the right, 
San Francisco muni system where it's an imbedded track in 

the street. And streetcars is much more to that end of 

the extreme of light rail. The lower two photographs 

show streetcars operating both in Europe and I believe the 

other picture is Portland in mixed traffic almost ascribed in 

the previous presentation as a bus on rails.

So, why we don't want to paint too broad brush light 

rare has a degree of separation from traffic. As you can 

see in the supper right it's given exclusive lanes or its own 

right-of-way. Moving to slide 6. Depictions that are 

more specific for streetcar. You can see here that even 

streetcar the alignments vary widely. Very often it's a in 

mixed traffic because we are operating in downtowns or in 

dense urban areas there is no other place to put us. And 

we compete for space on street with other traffic.

And so the tracks are designed to be driven on. They 

are just basically another lane. And that will also impact 

the stops which are infrastructure light, I guess is the best 

way to put it. Where it's a very simple platform, minimal 

amenities and the understanding is that individuals don't 

have to wait very long for a vehicle. Moving on to slide 7, 

some examples of those platforms, we use most vehicles 

for modern streetcars particularly newer systems the 

vehicle has doors on both sides. It's a bidirectional 
vehicle equally happy running in either direction. So, we 

use both side and center platforms. Side platforms, as 

you can see in the large picture on the left are basically 

just extensions of the sidewalk into the street to meet the 

rails where the vehicle will be. And there is other 

arrangements the upper right shows an island or center 

platform where the -- which is often used where the track 

is in the middle of the street or you have tracks operating 

in both directions so you can share a single platform. In 

the photograph on the lower right is intended to depict 

creativity is required in the designs.

When you are trying to accommodate on-street parking, 

traffic regular car traffic, buses, bicycle lanes, sidewalks, 

this shows a stop in Portland where they actually had to 

run the bicycle lane around the rear of the streetcar 

platform so it just shows that we are in a constrained 

environment and creativity is required.

The next few slides starting with slide 8 show some 

charts that vary the different types of streetcar platforms 

with a specific emphasis on how we provide accessibility. 

And I won't go through all of these in detail, but they are 

here in the presentation just to show how -- how we 

handle different stops and different accessibility. Moving 

on to slide 9.
There is some additional types there some diagrams, 

some mixing with bus and streetcar. Slide 10 some other 

types. I do want to emphasize some of these are 

overseas, and they are not currently in use in the U.S. but 

do have some design attributes in terms of ADA 

compliance that could be utilized on future projects. 

Starting on slide 11, I would like to point out that the 

vehicles themselves also differ to a degree. In the U.S. to 

date typically we have been using what are called 20 meter 

long vehicles which are on the shorter end of the modern 

streetcar vehicles available on the global market. There is 

some projects in the pipeline in even in the Arlington 

project in suburban Washington and Virginia the 

San Antonio project and others that may use longer 

vehicles. And this is one of the areas where light rail and 

streetcar differ. And light rail typically the way capacity is 

added to carry more people, they couple very similar to 

like an Amtrak train or others or the Washington Metro 

you couple multiple light rail trains together through 

multiple unit control. You have one controlling the train 

from the front there may be four light rail trains coupled 

together to add capacity. With streetcars it's very 

different the vehicles aren't designed other than for 

emergency towing to be coupled. The way capacity is 
added is by lengthening the vehicle. The vehicles can 

handle very tight curves, which are often found in urban 

areas. And so, there are frequent articulations, as you 

can see in the lower picture I believe that's 7-section 

vehicle that operates in Germany. With all of the points 

where it can bend like an articulated bus it can go around 

a tight turn and some folks have even described some of 

these longer vehicles in Europe as urban cater pillars 

because or worms because they kind of weave there way 

through the tight turns and urban streets. The other 

important take away that you can see on the diagram on 

the right is that with the varying lengths and types of 

vehicles, with floor height issues, with -- where the 

location of the articulations the location of the wheels, the 

door arrangements can vary greatly as well.

Moving on to slide 12. We start to get into what are 

causing some of the issues with accessibility which is 

when we start to attempt to mix buses and streetcars 

sharing the same platform.

As I mentioned before, some of the new technology with 

low floor have provided the ability to do what we call fully 

level boarding which is very similar to the Washington 

Metro or other heavy rail or high platform light rail 

systems where we are able to meet the ADA gap 
requirements both horizontal and vertical with a 14-inch 

low floor vehicle and through an active suspension that 

reacts to the weight of the vehicle, it maintains that vehicle 

floor height at exactly 14 inches. Even taking into 

account wheel wear and other issues. We are able to do 

fully level boarding. The issue is that with 100% low floor 

or 70% low floor vehicle that 14 inches is basically as low 

as you can go. And that presents a major challenge for 

buses which oftentimes the bus whether it's kneeling or 

not a low floor bus cannot deploy a wheelchair ramp up to 

a 14 inch high platform. So, additionally the rear doors of 

buses I am sure Washington, DC the Metro bus system is 

similar. Some of them have designs where the bus doors 

fold outwards they will co-lied with a 14 inch high curb 

which doesn't allow you to use those. At any point in 

time where a streetcar platform height is above 8 inches 

we get into challenges integrating with buses. So, slide 

13 shows instances where we have been able to integrate 

bus and streetcar or light rail in this case, the best 

example in the United States is the Seattle transit tunnel 

through which there is both light rail and bus. The buses 

there have had special accommodations to interface with 

the light rail platform that's at 14 inches you can see a bus 

barely able to deploy the wheelchair ramp a low floor bus 
on to the light rail platform. The buses there have extra 

large tires, and the bus operators are instructed not to 

kneel the bus before deploying the wheelchair ramp which 

is an unusual feature. Most transit buses have an 

interlock where the wheelchair ramp will not deploy unless 

the bus has first been kneeled. In this case they made 

design modification among many to their buses to allow 

them to do that.

The right hand picture shows a curve which is not in use 

in the U.S. yet but helps facilitate a bus bumping its tire up 

against light rail or streetcar platform. The lower left is a 

photograph of a Kansas City transit authority bus where a 

test was done with a simulated 10-inch platform showing 

the existing bus fleet could not be compatible with the 

height. You can see the wheelchair ramp fails to deploy 

properly. The lower right hand photograph is 

Washington, DC Metro bus they were testing the rear 

doors of the bus with some of the DC treat car platforms 

being built at a 14-inch height the rear door of the bus is 

not able to open. Moving to slide 14.

There is really two different ways to accommodate 

accessibility on streetcar systems. The first is near level 

boarding, which is really the compromise approach. 

Which is when the vehicle floor is at about 14 inches and 
the platform is between 8 to 10 inches, we then because 

there is that step from the platform into the vehicle, that is 

not fully level, we require a bridge plate to maintain 

compliance with subpart D. Now, this has advantages in 

that the vehicle does not require to have active 

suspension, the construction and design tolerances of the 

platforms and the tracks are not required to be as precise. 

We can share with buses oftentimes, it makes it easier to 

blend the stops into the sidewalks and maintain 

accessibility to the platform. And sometimes you can 

even place stops on a slight curve rather than having to 

have it on tangent track with this approach. But there are 

significant disadvantages. The bridge plate devices 

themselves are prone to failure although the reliability is 

high. They are a maintenance issue. These are not 

manually operated the bridge plates are automatic and 

may only be located at one door on the vehicle. And 

there is a special ADA pushbutton that activates the bridge 

plate device. They have not really been -- there is issues 

with them in colder weather as well with the bridge plate 

devices requiring heaters. And they also extend the dwell 

time in the vehicle when you are already in mixed traffic 

deploying and retracting of the bridge plate particularly if 

the door has already been open before the bridge plate is 
deployed adds time to the vehicle dwelling at the stop. 

Moving on to slide number 15, this is as I described before 

the fully level boarding. This requires the vehicle to have 

an active suspension that regardless of whether there is 

several hundred people on the vehicle weighing and 

compressing the suspension or one or two people 

providing much less load on the suspension that either 

through a hydraulic system or otherwise it keeps that 

vehicle floor at exactly 14 inches within the ADA vertical 

and horizontal gap tolerances. Bridge plates are not 

required. And the platforms are soon to be at 14 inches 

so just like getting on to or off of the Washington Metro 

system, it's a fully level scenario. So, the advantages are 

that we can load and unload the vehicles quickly. There is 

benefits not just to individuals with mobility issues or 

wheelchairs but also bicycles luggage, groceries those 

kind of things fully level boarding provides significant 

advantages there. But the disadvantages are that if we 

are trying to integrate accessibility between bus and the 

streetcar vehicles. That becomes a challenge because 

buses cannot use the 14-inch platforms we have 

challenges creating a 14-inch platform in a dense urban 

environment which can create drainage issues with 

buildings and other related accessibility issues with having 
to have ramps to get up on to the platform. And it's 

basically impossible to do on a curve. If the track has to 

be tangent.

Moving on to slide 16. Start to look at the current 

regulations regarding bridge plates. When subpart D was 

written, the term bridge plate really meant going 

from -- into a high floor vehicle as I described before. 

And often times this meant that there would be mini high 

block or some other lift device to -- for an individual with 

disabilities to load into a high floor vehicle. So there was 

a bridge plate that was carried on the vehicle or was 

located on the high block that was deployed by the train 

operator oftentimes these are located at the very front of 

the light rail or streetcar vehicle. That bridge plate is 

used at about three feet in the air to -- for an individual to 

board. And there is some photographs depicting both 

older style light rail streetcar vehicles where such bridge 

plates are in use. So, really these were focused on high 

floor vehicles when the ADA was written I want to 

emphasize the low floor technology did not exist. Going 

to slide 17. Bridge plates on the current vehicles on the 

low floor vehicles are very, very different. They are much 

smaller, they are transitioning a gap that is usually just a 

matter of inches rather than the three feet described in the 
previous slide. And are really accessing this low floor 

vehicle with a full length platform rather than just with 

some of these early light rail and streetcar stops where 

there wasn't a platform it was in the street at the very end 

there was this high block that was used for accessibility. 

Slide 18 this is where we get into some of the issues 

associated with some conflicts in the existing regulations. 

We are required to have on the edges of our platforms now 

even in the low level platforms truncated half domes to 

signal to individuals who may have a visual impairment 

that they are reaching the edge of the platform. But when 

you have bridgeplates low floor bridgeplates located at 

various doors along the side of the light rail vehicle which 

may stop at different places, those will land on those 

truncated half domes. And there is currently no provision 

within the ADA for us as you see in the picture on the 

right, to remove a small number of the truncated half 

domes to provide a safer and better landing zone for 

those low floor bridge plates. That's the first issue that 

we have identified. The other substantial issue which is 

becoming a safety issue and a barrier to better 

accessibility with these low floor vehicles is that these 

bridge plates the requirement in the current regulations 

requires a barrier on the side of each side of the bridge 
plate which in the context of a high floor vehicle makes 

sense because if an individual in the wheelchair were to 

steer off or somehow accidentally go off the bridge plate 

they would have -- there is a three foot drop in between 

the high block platform and the high floor rail vehicle. It's 

a very dangerous situation. On a low floor vehicle where 

you are just bridging an inch or two with a short short

ramp putting a side bar yes, sir has now creating 

a -- created a tripping hazards or hazards for people with 

a visual impairment and really doesn't make sense in the 

current context.

And almost all systems in the U.S. has gone through 

equivalent process to remove the side barriers after 

conducting the appropriate public involvement with their 

local disability community.

And they really -- these pictures that I show the point of 

the slide is to show another of these solutions comply with 

subpart D in terms of accessibility because either the side 

barrier issue for the truncated half dome issue and both 

had to go through the equivalent facilitation process. 

Going to slide 19. The other thing that is starting the 

project that I work on here in Cincinnati ordered vehicles 

and Kansas City ordered vehicles with 100% low floor there 

is no steps either on the outside of the vehicle, boarding 
the vehicle or anywhere on the interior of the vehicle. So, 

these vehicles may have end doors that are also at a 

hundred percent low floor section. There are some 

interior circulation, and other issues that come about with 

the hundred percent low floor that are some challenges 

within the ADA regulations that you can get into in more 

detail. On slide 20, we get into another situation in the 

regulations where the new 100% low floor technology 

designed to maximize accessibility runs into some legacy 

issues within the existing subpart D where if you look at A 

under the on the diagram where the platform height has 

been tapered on the ends, that is compliant fully 

compliant with the current ADA. Because the -- it's kind 

of unclear whether the current subpart requires all doors 

on level entry vehicles to have a 32-inch route to the 

wheelchair area which we do not because of the way the 

seating is configured on the interior of the vehicle. Under 

B, where we have fully level platform where an individual in 

a wheelchair could use any of the doors that we believe 

might not be compliant in some places -- in some cases 

with the ADA because it's -- it's a level entry vehicle is the 

question. And, again, this gets back to the fact that the 

low floor vehicles did not exist when the ADA was written.

Moving to slide 21, just a reference that FTA is currently 
in the process of writing a chapter in a circular on 

equivalent facilitation. And just the point here some 

excerpts that folks can look at at their leisure the 

equivalent facilitation was really meant as a process by 

which a project could find some exception to the ADA 

rules in order to bring innovation to accessibility. What 

we are discovering now is that all of these projects are 

applying for the exact same equivalent facilitation over 

and over and over again. And it's no longer innovation 

it's just that the technology has evolved since the 

regulation were written. Then the concluding slide, 22, 

basically what is kind of the point of all of this? What we 

would like to do is -- I know a lot of the activities of the 

rail vehicle access advisory committee has been focused 

on what I will call the FRA modes inter-city rail commuter 

rail all of the passenger rail accessibility issues, but we 

would like to request that in the boarding alighting 

subcommittee that we get the opportunity to discuss and 

look into some of the subpart D issues specific to 

streetcar. The APTA street car subcommittee and the 

technical working group have identified this as an issue 

are willing to make technical resources available to assist.

And that--we would like recognition that accessibility in 

these instances is a system. It really depends on whether 
or not in the specific instance we want to create 

accessibility between bus and streetcar or whether in the 

specific city we want to separate the streetcar and bus 

stops and other issues. And perhaps talk about a 

performance-based approach within subpart D to 

maximize accessibility. Given we know fully level 

boarding all the time is the optimal approach it may 

require accessibility compromises elsewhere. Other 

systems are building streetcars that may be used with light 

rail and we want to capture innovation after the rules are 

written and is facilitation really the right way to do that. I

would be happy to answer questions first

>> Thank you. First question, Dennis.

>> The slide maybe third from last where you have the 

A and B options you talked about A as having a platform 

that I guess is tapered at the end and then B is a fully 

level. And you said there may be some issues. Why do 

you think B is not compliant?

>> Paul: It has to do with interior circulation in the 

vehicle. With 100% low floor vehicle, the running gear, 

the traction motors, and the wheels and all of those things 

are in the side wall of the vehicle. And there is kind of 

the motors rather than being on the axles between the 

wheel these vehicles oftentimes do not have a solid axle. 
Because in order to keep the floor low. So there is a 

wheel with a gear box and traction motor in the wall of the 

vehicle. That intrudes into the passenger space. And so, 

these vehicles even though they are 100% low floor we 

cannot create a wide enough aisle because of the location 

of the equipment to provide passageway from all of the 

level boarding doors on the interior of the vehicle. So, if 

we -- if we were to consider this is fully level entry vehicle 

under the ADA, the path restrictions basically if we use the 

tapered platform it would not be considered a level entry 

vehicle and we would have those pathway restriction 

issues in the ADA. That's where we concerned under the 

existing rules B would not be compliant.

>> Dennis: But there is no requirement to move 

throughout the car, the only requirement is from the 

accessible door to the space where the wheelchair sits, 

period. There is no requirement to move from one door 

to the other anywhere in the rule.

>> Paul Beatty: Well, the issue would be if an 

individual in a wheelchair boarded at one of the end doors 

there is not accessible way to the wheelchair area of the 

car. The individual could stay near the door there would 

be room to that that's not a designated wheelchair 

location.
>> Dennis: Not required under the current rule.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: On another note, in the room 

we have light rail manufacturers represented and at some 

point it would be probably very helpful for each of you to 

present your current stock available worldwide as well as 

what you can only offer in the U.S. currently. I know, 

personally, there are 100% low floor cars that can never 

get end to end on the cars. So, there may be certain 

models are cars where there are issues. But I think for the 

purposes of the committee, it would be very -- it would be 

beneficial to engage our friends from Siemens and others 

to present and obviously if we can get the Japanese and 

Korean colleagues to ever be involved in RVAAC and have 

them present as well for light rail. I know that you have 

questions on the Bob and from Gary, and --

>> Bob Reuter here. In the forward looking part one of 

the things we need to do is forward looking is two options 

that are starting to show up in other countries, two cities 

in Germany are playing with the ultra low floor car, which 

only has a two-inch floor to street clearance which is 

unreal. But they are doing it. And I think I just -- okay. 

It is working. The other thing is in Melbourne they are 

playing with something called they call a super stop. And 

if any description would be the Kessel curb on steroids 
that's the -- KESSEL -- there is a 14-inch variance 

between the two lanes. It's usually the center lane that's 

the lower lane. So, it gets really interesting trying to drive 

in that area.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you Gary. Did you have a 

question? Paul, we have Gary Talbot coming up.

>> I thank you very much. Gary Talbot, Amtrak. Just 

to comment about the coordination of the floor height and 

the platform height given that we have got technology 

today as was described, Tim interested in a follow-up to 

Dennis' question. If the doors are able to board and 

alight to that level boarding section is it a seating issue or 

something else? I mean for the 32-inch wide path of 

travel? As Chris stated there are several hundred percent 

low floor drawings that I viewed that do show path of 

travel. I am interested why there would not be a path of 

travel from end to end if all of the doors alight to the 

platform it signs like it's an interior design issue I can't 

imagine the motors would extend that far. Thank you.

>> Paul Beatty: The motors and wheels and running 

gear intrude into the passenger compartment on the--in 

the case of the diagram on slide 20. The trucks are on 

the ends on the end modules. So, the motors, gears, 
those things intrude in. And essentially eliminate one set 

of seats on each side. With the remaining seats even if 

they are narrowed, with having appropriate stanchions in 

place for folk toss reach so that you know folks on the 

interior of the vehicle always have a stanchion within reach 

we get into a situation where there is not a 13 

inch --32-inch path of travel. The current regulations at 

least as we understand them the only way to avoid it is to 

say this is not a level entry vehicle and the platform should 

be tapered at the end, and the two doorways in the center 

of the vehicle which are where the wheelchair locations are 

those then become the designated entry spots.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: So, Paul, to make that clear, 

but I would, again, say ultimately we need to hear from the 

manufacturers of the vehicles. And I would just note that 

in December I was sent down to Mexico City working at 

(inaudible) transit and these platform coordination issues 

are the same issues that you are deal with in bus -- bus 

traffic transit. When I think about the various systems 

around the world, all of the issues which I think Paul 

rightfully has raised are out there. But they are also all 

solvable. So, the committee should be aware that nothing 

is actually unsolvable. It's just a question of actually how 

you solve it.
>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you Paul. We have --

>> Paul Beatty: I agree. This is certainly the platform 

height and design issue is interior circulation is one of the 

issues. But the big -- that specific just to the 100% low 

floor vehicle which is coming. Which hasn't arrived yet. 

But our systems are under construction. But the biggie 

for us is the issues of the bridgeplates. When should a 

system be fully level boarding when should a system be 

near-level boarding. Should the requirements for side 

barriers on bridgeplates be eliminated for low floor cars 

because it's -- in our opinion, and based on the research 

that all other systems have done is those hinder 

accessibility rather than assist. And then the issue the 

truncated half domes on the platform vs a little landing 

area for when you do use a bridge plate it provides a 

better more accessible experience for accessibility in our 

opinion. Those are really the areas that we would like to 

explore.

>> This is Lisa Hamlin from Hearing Loss Association. 

I am wondering if you can speak at all about 

communication accessibility on streetcars, so for people 

who are blind or have low vision or people who have a 

hearing loss or are deaf, how do -- how do they get 

access on these vehicles?
>> Paul Beatty: Well, we I believe the same 

requirements as on the bus side. We have both audio and 

visual public address systems that are required. So, the 

announcement -- many of the systems on the modern 

vehicles the announcement are all automated and 

triggered by a GPS system at least the station stop 

announcements. If there are special announcements 

made related to service delays or interruptions or other 

unusual things, there is a list of those pre-programmed 

into the system that streetcar operator can actuate. The 

operator always has ts ability of just making regular PA 

announcements. But the majority of the announcements 

will have both the visual and audio public address.

>> This is Lisa again. So, you are saying even if it's a 

special announcement there is a visual that somebody who 

has a hearing loss can see what the announcement is 

about?

>> If it's a special announcement that has been 

participated -- has been anticipated, then -- I will give 

you an example that's another streetcar but is -- but is 

kind of a similar scenario. I forget which line it is. But 

there is a couple of the CTA heavy rail lines that cross over 

a bridge that all cross the Chicago river that opens 

occasionally. If the bridge opens the operator can select 
Andraea nounsment saying, you know we apologize for 

the delay it's automated announcement we apologize for 

the delay the bridge is open, please bear with us whatever. 

That announcement is both audio and visual. There is 

certain pre-programmed delay and unusual -- you know 

or this vehicle is going out of service please all passengers 

exit the vehicle due to mechanical problem sore 

something those are all pre-programmed into the public 

address something that the operator can call on.

>> Thank you.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Janice

>> Janice Schacter, Hearing Access Program. What 

happens if it's not anticipated delay. I know I have been 

on Amtrak twice where there is issues whether snow storm 

or the train broke down. And they were not anticipated 

types of delays. And the conductor was busy dealing with 

the issue. We had no idea what was going on. One was 

a snow storm. And everything was whited out. And so, 

we were delayed 7 hours. How does -- is this dealt with 

when it's not an anticipated delay (inaudible)

>> ... in the sense that there is only one vehicle so we 

haven't -- unlike Amtrak where you coupled you have a 

couple train of vehicles together we only have the one 

vehicle there is an operator much like a bus there is 
operator at the front of the vehicle. If there is a situation 

where something happens, the operator has closed circuit 

TV cameras that cover 100% of the interior of the vehicle. 

Those come up on the screen any time an alarm is ack 

waited. So the operator is constantly aware is who is on 

the vehicle much like a bus. So, if there is a situation like 

that, the operator will simply remove the key out of the 

master controller, and step into the passenger 

compartment and individually assist any passengers that 

require it.

>> But the problem is, people with hearing loss don't 

self identify. And you can't see a hearing loss. You can't 

see when someone is wearing hearing aids. So, the 

person -- the operator would not know that in advance. 

The person might not speak up because they don't want to 

be stigmatized. So, how do we deal with having the 

information communicated. Also a person with a hearing 

loss you are asking permission to get information versus 

receiving the information just like every other passenger.

>> Paul Beatty: Sure. I mean the only situations that 

we run into in streetcars essentially is that if the vehicle 

goes out of service prematurely, then what would happen 

is the operator would see that there is someone who has 

not exited the vehicle and they would go and see do they 
require assistance.

>> I think this is an area the committee needs to 

address. Because while that sounds great and plausible in 

theory having experienced it I am sure Andrew and Lisa

can expand upon it, but there are many situations that are 

not anticipated, and it is very scary to be to be in a 

situation not receiving information being dependent on 

other passengers. And the conductor obviously being 

busy or the driver being busy because of the emergency. 

You don't want to be in a situation where you are like oh, 

my God I don't know what to do. So, I think this -- this is 

an area we make sure induction loops and visual alerts are 

timely not just pre-programmed if there is a way based on 

the GPS there is a way of someone inputting the 

information on a timely basis.

>> Cool. Duly noted. First off, Ed and Clifton?

>> ED HOFF: Just point of clarification the visual 

equivalent to the audible message that is required on bus, 

is not yet adopted. And, also, there is no at present 

requirement for visual announcement on board the rail 

car. True?

>> True.

>> ED HOFF: So, although there may be some visual 

signs on vehicles, they are not at present required to 
mimic the public address System. National Council of 

Independent Living in terms of what we are talking about 

we have technology to put voice to text why not have the 

technology when the person makes an announcement, and 

the person who can't hear can read it. I don't know what 

is so difficult about that. 

>> This problem has been discussed many times before 

you are right. Whatever is recorded is not always enough 

for what is required. Ideally, you would have a real time 

system that provides visual and audio information at the 

same time. Not only on a display in the vehicle but at the 

same time on your mobile device. That's easier said than 

done because as we know this technology is not that easy 

speech to text in a commercial environment is not 

developed fully yet. But ideally, yes, real time information 

audio and visual would be very helpful.

>> BILLY ALTOM: One from the audience? Find your 

way to a microphone.

>> John Day.

>> Thanks. John Day with FTA. I wanted to make a 

few comments on the presentation I don't want the 

committee left that the existing rules are hopelessly out of 

date with respect to streetcars. There are provisions in 

subpart D that speak to light rail that operates on cities 
streets transit malls other areas where -- the streets that 

is basically a streetcar. And so, because they can be 

equipped with a lift ramp or level change mechanism there 

is really no reason to build a 14-inch curb unless you want 

to. So a lot of the images of conflicts between 14 inch 

curb you can't open the door of the bus, those are more 

operational issues, I think, than standards issues. 

Certainly if you want to have level boarding on the 

streetcar system you can do it but you have to recognize 

you can't use the light rail stop as a bus stop. If you want 

to use the light rail stop as a bus stop don't build 14-inch 

curb and recognize you need a lift ramp or level change 

mechanism on the streetcar fleet. So, I just wanted to 

make sure everybody was clear on -- I see some 

differences between you know, vehicle standards versus 

operational considerations. I just want to put it out there.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Excellent point. Thank you.

>> Janice: Just to expand on what Edward and you, we 

need to make sure it's mandated MTA indicated that they 

will not comply with real time anything or induction loop 

and this came from the chairman of the MTA Thomas 

Pendergraf, unless it's regulated they eliminated 

announcements from the buses going in induction loops 

in the buses and they when the bid came in on the 
Long Island Railroad a little higher than he allocated but 

not high he said he would not -- he told me this directly 

he would not put it in unless he was required by 

regulations.

>> Good point.

>> Paul Beatty: This is Paul, if I can jump in for a 

minute.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Yes, do it Paul.

>> Paul Beatty: In response to what Mr. Day said he is 

absolutely correct. The only issue is that when we do use 

a lower level platform and do not usefully level boarding 

we are still dealing with some of the issues in subpart D 

related to the side barriers on the bridge plate and the 

trunk indicated half tubs that's really some of the 

properties are struggling.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Gary?

>> Gary: Thank you Mr. Chair. Gary Talbot, Amtrak. 

Follow-up on the side edge guards. I would urge the 

committee to consider a distance-based requirement 

where if it's a very short distance horizontally that you are 

try to go bridge out the side edge guards would be a 

hindrance to accessibility or to anyone else for that matter. 

I also think, and Dennis can speak to this, in redesigning 

bridge plates we found cases where there are section of 
the bridge plates at the end where maybe having the side 

edge guard hurts you especially if you are in existing 

stations and you have got obstructions with head houses, 

pillars and things like that and you don't have free length 

and you have to have to have the ability to make a tight 

turn. Unrelated to that, I would bring up to the 

committee there is a lot of design issues with the doors as 

well. We had a situation at the team in Boston where the 

accordion style exterior doors on the type A car we wanted 

level boarding platforms for the cars because we had a 

steep ramp because of the door design they accordion you 

couldn't bring the platform up to the side of the car. 

While cheaper to manufacturer initially when we went to 

do some really good stuff on level boarding we were not 

able to do that because of the door design, something for 

the committee to consider thank you.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you. Ed, then Dennis.

>> Just to piggyback on that comment. It is a 

function -- before we do anything with bridge plates we 

should look at the function of the door width as well. 

Obviously if you have a narrow door width or bridge plate 

you got a little room for error there you have to consider 

side guards as opposed to a 10-foot wide door where your 

room for error is much greater. There is less of an issue. 
Also, depending on if you have a light rail in the same 

territory perhaps freight you can't build the platform as 

close to the train car as you would like the bridge plate is 

actually bridging a horizontal gap. Maybe only a couple 

inches to the height but there maybe a big hole on the 

other side. When you fall off you are falling off. So, we 

need to consider the length of the bridge plate as well as 

width of the bridgeplate as height of the bridgeplate, the 

gap that you are bridging. And also consider suspension 

systems and the technology and cot of the suspension 

systems. I can't imagine they are cost prohibitive to 

perhaps if you wanted to do both bridgeplates and have 

suspension system, I would imagine that that would be 

doable because you do always want to provide as 

close -- less a gap as possible. You want to match try to 

match the level boarding with the platform and the floor 

height as much as possible, thank you.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Good comment. Dennis. 

>> Dennis: Yes, this is Dennis Cannon. When we 

worked on Portland to not have the side guards part of the 

issue was they provided a much wider bridgeplate than the 

30-inch -- minimum, and therefore the issue was you 

could hit the center of it very easily without having to 

worry about it. We also talked about the difference in 
height from the edge that if the height was small, you 

probably would not need it. When you are talking about 

bridgeplates on things like trains where you need to turn 

immediately off we talked about this during 

the -- yesterday's demonstration about the idea of type 

perking that half inch or two inch requirement. Down to 

zero. Secondly, as far as the detectable warning issue is 

concerned, I have ridden on light rail vehicles which have a 

bridgeplate it has a fairly wide rubber edge at the bottom 

it conforms quite nicely to the detectable warning. There 

is no need to eliminate detectable warnings that might 

mean that a mind person steps off the platform. All you 

need to do is get the right technology and the right 

equipment for the bridgeplate in the first place.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Perfect. Thank you. Jim Weisman is 

up next, he is the final question, so we can --

>> JIM WEISMAN: I had a question for people that 

operate bridgeplates now I was aware at Disney the 

monorail pedestrians were falling off the side of them 

turning ankles and things like that does edge protection 

stop it it from happening there is a big crowd you are 

looking and straight ahead where you are going you are 

not looking down. And the people in front of you so you 

want to get around them you step off the side of the 
bridgeplate. Thinking that you are going to beat the 

crowd why is everyone going in this little three-foot wide 

or 30-inch wide path when they could step around and 

they turn ankles I am wondering if that is a problem to 

people who operate systems like that. Disney was telling 

me they were getting sued for it.

>> Dennis: People can trip on the side too.

>> JIM WEISMAN: That's true.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Not sure there is a good answer for 

that. Like what you said people are going to trip on 

almost anything. All right. Thank you Jim for bringing 

that up. Paul, thank you so much for the presentation we 

really appreciate it.

>> Paul Beatty: My pleasure. Thank you very much 

for the opportunity.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Let's give Paul a round of applause, 

even though he is not with us.

 (APPLAUSE)

>> BILLY ALTOM: Having said that we will break for 

lunch we are back here at 1:45. We will be back at 1:45 I 

expect you right back in here don't let the sunshine out 

there steal you. I want you back.

(Lunch recess taken.) 

>> BILLY ALTOM: All right. We have folks back. We 
will start with the next presentation. I will a quick 

announcement. Remember, when using your cell phones, 

use them back in the back or perhaps go down to outside 

our neighbors next door not the ones hammering but the 

National Council on Disability can hear through their walls 

of our conversation. Ask we talk back here. We have a 

couple of rooms back here behind me where you can be 

on the phone. Just remember that in June, we have the 

APTA rail conference going on in Montreal and I think Paul 

if we could include that when you mail out the minutes 

from this the dates for that conference. And if anybody is 

interested in attending there should be a lot of rail 

vehicles there. A great opportunity to show and tell see 

and touch smell all of that good stuff. Being around 

different styles of rail cars. So, we have that. All right. 

We got most of the folks back it looks like. I didn't lose 

too many to the sun yes go ahead.

>> UWE RUTENBERG: Sorry to interrupt. At the rail 

conference, APTA rail conference, we are holding a 

workshop investigating the impacts of rail car and 

platform safety interfaces. I think this is an issue that has 

come up here in our committee as well. So, if anybody is 

there at the conference anyway, we would love to see you 

there, and give your input into these issues which we will 
discuss. It's TCRP project, and we are looking forward to 

have as many representatives from the industry there as 

well.

>> BILLY ALTOM: You are welcome, thank you. 

Melissa, do me a favor, twist that blind. I can't see 

anything --

>> CRYSTAL LYONS: I wanted to add there won't 

necessarily be rail vehicles at the conference but there is a 

technical conference there will be a lot of technical 

sessions. If someone was thinking about going and 

hadn't made their plans I recommend going. The other 

thing that happens there are a lot of committees you know 

the rail committees meet during that time. So, that's also 

something to -- if you happen to be there. You don't 

have to register to attend the committee meetings. You

can go and attend the committee meetings. As far as 

vehicles being there there won't be by representatives 

from the --

>> BILLY ALTOM: I read that wrong I thought there 

would be rail vehicles there. I wanted to touch stuff that's 

what I like to do.

>> Hi Crystal, Kim Jackson, University of Kansas. I am 

currently doing my research on accessibility for commuter 

rail. And obviously it's not in my budget because I am a 
poor college student to attend the conference. Will any of 

those handouts from the technical sessions be available 

after the conference is over?

>> CRYSTAL LYONS: I don't know. I know they are for 

the conference attendees. I don't know -- do you have a 

list -- do you have our roster of our contact information?

>> For this meet meeting?

>> PAUL BEATTY: When you said contact information 

to -- I only send out contact information to committee 

members.

>> CRYSTAL LYONS: I would say contact APTA and ask 

them about getting access to the presentations.

>> All right. Great. Thank you.

>> BILLY ALTOM: One other quick point of business 

before we hit Stanton's presentation. We always allow 

time for public comment. As looking out into the 

audience today. Is there anybody that is going to want to 

make a public comment so I can help plan my time how 

much for these presentations? We are going to have a 

committee meeting afterward. See anybody that -- would 

like to make a statement? I don't see any hands or 

nodding of the head. So, awesome, thank you. Paul?

>> PAUL BEATTY: Paul Beatty anybody on the 

conference call line wanting to make a public comment 
please let me know not to make it now but so Billy can 

plan for later during the public comment time there are 

currently four people on the line. Okay. This is Paul 

Beatty I hear no one indicating that they want to make 

comment later. Okay Billy?

>> BILLY ALTOM: Awesome. All right. Here we go our 

first presentation after lunch is going to be from the Ricon 

Corporation overview of vehicle Access Systems. What we 

want to try to do is get through each of these in about 30 

minutes. I got a stick over here Stanton.

 (LAUGHTER) 

But having said that, Stanton, let me turn it over to you.

>> Stanton: Thank you very much, and thank you for 

the opportunity. I think before I get too far into this there 

is certainly a little bit of bias associated with the 

presentation first and foremost it's really specifically for 

vehicle-born systems not anything that might be on the 

platform or words to that effect. And similar three there 

is Ricon bay bias to the whole thing as well. That said 

moving right along, a little bit of history. We are not 

anywhere near as old as railroad, Ricon only goes back to 

sort of the early '70s, which is really sort of the beginning 

of what we might call the accessibility or mobility products 

industry. The dual arm parallel arm lift which is the main 
stay of paratransit service was introduced in the middle 

80's. We introduced and under floor lift in the early 90's 

it's not necessarily the first under floor lift ever introduced 

that's when we did it. We introduced powered folding 

ramps just before the millennium they acquired the 

Stewart and Stevenson lift division I mention this because 

quite a number of cars were made accessible using one of 

their systems and that system continues to be available 

today and we have refined it and are doing more things 

with it now. We are required by Wabtec in June of 2007. 

We do 12,000 accessibility systems a year. Our install 

base is pretty much all over the planet. We have 30,000 

odd in Europe and Asia. Somewhere in the neighborhood 

of 100,000 in North America I need to be conservative. 

And then urban transit and motor coach accessibility is a 

newer thing over paratransit. The install base is a little 

smaller, yet and of course as far as rail vehicle accessibility 

is concerned, we do have some 1600 units or 1600 

disitems deployed worldwide.

The beginning of the industry as we sort of know it 

today, goes back to -- hello. Two patents. One filed by 

a gentleman called Scott Decon back in 1973 and a 

another gentleman called Pierre in 1984 these for offed 

into what become the dual parallel arm lift which is the 
main stay of most paratransit fleets largely around the 

world. In small personal mobility access light commercial 

and paratransit as well as school buses. This is typically 

where you find this type of equipment. Our S and K 

series lifts are some of the most prevalent.

This slide contains data I shared last year when looking 

at sizes of platforms and capacities of units and what was 

popular and I think thought it would be relevant to the 

conversation here. Just as a point of -- a data point, you 

can see there the first line of data you see 26, 30, 32, 34, 

39.5. Those are platforms widths in inches the most 

popular model is 34 inches wide. Almost 42% of the units 

produced for the timeframe that this was measured almost 

42% were 34 inches wide. A very similar percentage were 

54 inches in length. So, is it common to have a platform 

size larger than the size that's currently part of the 

regulation, it absolutely is. Similarly all of those units 

that were produced to these sizes had capacity of 800 

pounds. We do offer a system today with capacity of a 

thousand. But do our systems available that exceed 600 

pound limit there certainly are.

The other type of system that I wanted to wanted to 

make sure we touched on was the under floor cassette 

type solution. I bring this up primarily because this is one 
of the more widely deployed units in the rail fleet in North 

America.

A couple of other systems over here on the right is our 

bay lift fairly common in motor coach fleets. Over on the 

left-hand side is the rotating column lift that -- well is 

probably some of the most widely deployed systems in 

north American rail today.

Here is some examples. This is our Mirage type 

cassette lift in application with New Jersey Transit motor 

coach. And then over on the left-hand side is a very 

similar yet different variant of the system installed in the 

step well of an older urban transit bus in Orange County 

California.

Again, a couple of similar systems in motor coach 

application. The units over on the left is our -- a latest 

offererring to motor coach fleets. Again, the primary 

benefit or the primary aim of the product over on the left 

is to provide the automatically deployable platform that 

sits under the floor of the coach but to do so in a way it 

sits down on the floor of the luggage bay and allows 

maximum use of the luggage space. Where you see the 

unit on the right, it deploys for more or less the middle 

area of the luggage bay and significantly reduces the 

capacity of that particular luggage bay. Like in New York 
City Transit coach or New Jersey Transit coach, they are 

largely what you might refer to as suburban application. 

They are typically not going to load the luggage bays. 

Pardon the technical difficulties.

So, available luggage space isn't an issue. Certainly for 

the longer haul line haul like gray hound the unit over on 

the left is more to their liking. Again, a couple of 

examples of coach accessibility solutions. The one over 

on the far right is vehicle operating in Australia, that's an 

example of our bay lift. You see this fits in a 

compartment typically mind the drive axle on one side or

the other of the engine. And provides access to the coach 

that way. The unit over on the left is our rotating column 

lift. The one we acquired from our friends at Stu art 

Steven son. This is the one you find in most applications. 

The advent of the low floor bus the 2000's or urban transit 

went toward low floor. Really obviating the use of a 

lifting device for something automatically deployable 

ramp. So drawing that I have here is a simple powered 

fold over type ramp typically used in the low floor urban 

transit bus.

As far as what is the latest and greatest thing coming 

out as far as urban transit buses are concerned, some of 

these have been displayed already in trade events like 
appear at that -- like APTA, if you look at the slope of the 

floor from the ramp tray on to the ramp itself up into the 

vehicle you will see that it's adjusting as the ramp slope 

increases. So, in the upper frame there, the unit is 

deployed to 8 and a half inch curve. But the transition 

from the ramp plate on to the ramp surface and then into 

the vehicle is a smooth and level surface all the way in. 

You can see as the curb reduces in height, the slope 

increases but it increases all the way into the vehicle.

Now, as far as rail applications of 1078 of 

these -- some of these systems is concerned you saw in 

the earlier presentation this is the San Diego trolley there 

is a couple of systems deployed over the years. The unit 

on the left is lighter style aluminum unit. We deployed S 

and K product into that application. In that case you are 

talking about a relatively high floor vehicle, and typically a 

street-level type of platform access.

The unit that we are looking at here in the lower left 

and sorry lower right and upper left. The actually the 

picture here in the lower right is right here in town our 

friends at VRE use a variant of our cassette type wheelchair 

lift in the mid vestibule of the bi-level gallery car. This is 

also the main stay unit at northeast Illinois commuter rail 

or Metra in the Chicago area. The combined fleet is 
somewhere in the neighborhood of 1500 units. In the 

gallery car it works kind of nice in that it's installed in the 

middle part of the car. Away from the trucks and the 

draft gear.

Another reason why the column lift is preferred in other 

cars you don't have this space available under the 

doorway, because of the draft gear and in the truck.

This is examples of the restating column lift in service 

this is one of the longest serving applications of this type 

of equipment in some cars operated by Amtrak in 

California. This system was deployed over 15 years ago. 

There was an overhaul done to them a few years back. 

But the equipment is still doing its thing.

More recently, we have deployed systems with our 

friends at Bombardier into north star as well as another 

new commuter rail service in Florida I believe they are 

referred to as sun rail. This, again, is a variant of the 

rotating column lift for the benefit of maybe some of the 

operators in the room, one of the things that we have 

done with the rotating column lift is we have made it 

modular so there is no longer a hydraulic interface 

between -- that is part of the installation. The hydraulic 

power pack is all integrated into the unit so the only 

interface that you are dealing with now are mechanically 
bolting it to the side of the car and putting power to it and 

a few signals.

And more recently with our friends at Talgo, 

deployment of column lift, one of the things that makes 

this unit kind of unique, there is an automatically 

deploying step so the integration with this particular 

system posed a few challenges with regard to when the 

step should deploy or not based on the position of the 

wheelchair lift but working with our colleagues over there 

through their engineering organization ended up with a 

very nice application.

And finally, the most recent, this is a photograph of the 

mockup for the new PRIIA cars built by our friends at 

Nippon deployed in California in the midwest. And just 

for the record, the platform size on the that's part of the 

PRIIA build is 54 inches in length 30 inches in width 

800-pound capacity.

Lastly, of course, there is discussion about bridgeplates 

I wanted to point out we got one too. But there is not 

much that I can offer than what is already presented by my 

friends at APTA on the current state of affairs on the use 

of automated bridgeplates in various service. I am pretty 

much done. I know you are trying to go fast. So, are 

there any questions that we could entertain at this point?
>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Stanton, can you go back to 

slide 15, it's a non -- for the nonrail folks. Yes. No, 16. 

This is a great example of why when gallery cars you can 

never actually provide level boarding. There is simply no 

way to get to level -- there is simply no way to get to level 

boarding with the style of entry on this type of car. I

know in previous meetings we didn't have a good photo of 

that, this is why. That's all I wanted to point out. And 

the PRIIA lift is very helpful for folks who have been 

involved with PRIIA to know that that is evolving.

>> That's right. Certainly --

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Thank you for your good work.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Stanton: Thank you very much.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Awesome. Any other questions?

>> Blair Slaughter Amtrak curious do you see issue in 

taking the PRIIA lift for the bi-level into a single level 

condition?

>> Stanton: Shouldn't be a problem there. 

The -- what has -- well, actually the bi-level car 

that -- the bi-level cars that we did with our friends at 

Bombardier for both north star and for sun rail, I am just 

going to flip back a couple of slides here just to one of 

the -- those photographs. Bear with me. There. If you 
look -- I am going to make use of the laser pointer. But 

you see here there is a column, the structure of the 

bi-level car is a delicate thing as I am sure you are well 

aware. The -- in normal application with that rotating 

column lift we are typically loading the door post and we 

end up with a pretty significant reaction right sort of mid 

post. Because of the concerns associated with the 

bi-level car, what we ended up doing was making a nice 

big long post. It did add to the weight of the system but 

it allowed us to put the reactions into the structure at the 

floor you know basically at the sheer planes. And you 

know really made for a relatively simple alteration of the 

vehicle body to make it work.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Dennis and you Janice.

>> Dennis Cannon: The gallery car problem is the 

steps are integrated if they had a trap over the steps you 

could do level boarding.

>> Stanton: Sure you could.

>> Janice: Can I ask is there anything new on the 

horizon we have issues with gaps between the car and the 

subway station. Do you know why these haven't been 

used at the New York City subway stations?

>> Stanton: I think that would be a better question to 

ask my friends at New York. There are certainly systems 
available at least from a technical standpoint that could be 

used probably the most likely -- I am going the wrong way 

aren't I? Sorry about that.

All the way at the end. But yes, the issue is going to be.

>> Janice: Like that could work for subways how does 

that works it fields in?

>> Stanton: That's an automated bridgeplate. It 

withdraws into the floor. I got one frame here that shows 

the plate deployed and then another example here this is 

in the Beijing Metro where the unit is stowed under the 

floor.

>> Janice: So I understand it slides back in.

>> Stanton: I will send you a link to YouTube, you can 

see how it runs in and out.

>> Maybe MTA -- has this been considered?

>> This is Frank Maldari. I am not that familiar with 

everything MTA has looked into. I do see some problems 

looking at it quickly. People at the -- on the New York 

City subway system are usually crowding the doorway and 

if that was deployed they probably stand more of a risk of 

tripping over it whether it's any time that it's out. Now, 

that being said, like I said, I haven't been that involved in 

what the France sit authority is trying to do in this area, I 

know that they had a movable platform to address gaps 
and gone through great lengths to make them as small as 

practical. The thing to keep in mind, with any of the 

subway systems, is things have to happen quickly. And 

you know, getting on and off the train or subway car with 

a crowd of people is not consistent with movable floor 

that's going to move in and out of the car. So, majority of 

the focus has been reducing the gap as far as it possibly 

can, putting fillers in there, otherwise controlling it so that 

you can go over it with a wheelchair if you have to.

>> BILLY ALTOM: David then you Jim.

>> David: Yes, I am David from Amtrak. I wanted to 

talk about the automatic bridgeplate for a second. I am 

very interested in that a lot. It seems like with the low 

floor and the platform they aren't level. And that causes 

problems. And so we do need something that will help 

people to go up and bridge that gap. And you know, 

there are many reasons why that can be a problem. You 

have weather, and what not. And sometimes wheelchairs, 

you know, it seems like their wheels are actually getting 

smaller and that also causes for replacements often. And 

I am sure that we, you know, will hopefully continue to 

evolve in the future.

>> Stanton: Certainly Stan again the typical use of the 

automated bridgeplate is going to be an application where 
the vertical gap is relatively small on the order of a couple 

of inches. And, again, it's I should say I will call it a 

negative vertical gap. In other words, the vehicle floor 

height is higher than the platform. Because in the other 

direction you are going to end up in a situation very 

similar to what was shown earlier by my colleague where 

the bus ramp was deployed out on a simulated high curb 

of course you know, it left the ramp sort of hanging out 

there in fresh air no way to get a wheelchair across it. In 

cases where there is relatively small vertical gap and a 

horizontal gap that's appreciable mentioned by some of 

my colleagues earlier the situation that exists with 

commuter rail. You have a long-ish horizontal gap to 

transition. This particular piece of equipment and the 

slide here is good for vertical gap of about 2 and a half 

inches horizontal gap of about 7.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Jim keep it just to a couple of more.

>> JIM WEISMAN: About the bridgeplates in New York 

City we have been dealing with this issue since the late 

'70s, early '80s, there was no real technology then. But 

there are several problems. One is many times the train 

when it's fully loaded is too low to use a bridgeplate. 

They have been feathering up platforms to embrace the 

train when they are low. And building out with actual 
wood boards, even, along the sides of the platforms to 

close gaps. But it's a huge problem. And it's the most 

significant disincentive to wheelchair users on the system. 

Fear of crime and all of that stuff is mine nor these 

people are living in New York City.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> It's not that different. It's just a flight down. It's 

not that different. The issue is front wheel casters and 

giant gaps and sometimes the vertical gap is way above 

what it should be. You know, it's just an old system. 

And it's really difficult. The other thing is that the 

expense is staggering. And people will come to expect it. 

It's like truncated domes, you know, if you put them only 

in key stations they become useless because people are 

using every station. People are going to want this on 

every car at every stop. And it's going to have to be 

phased in in a new car way it will never be retrofit it have 

to be car-borne and adjusted to whatever the differential 

is. Somebody is going to get very rich when they invent 

one MTA buys we are talking about a lot of cars that are 

going to get this. Right now virtually all of the stations 

have some part of the platform that is not compliant with 

accessibility standards now. And bridgeplate is probably 

the only answer.
>> BILLY ALTOM: Awesome 5 minutes left in Gary's 

time, let me get Ed.

>> Ed Steinfeld, a question for Stanton. I have seen 

telescoping approaches that -- where the device is coming 

out from under the floor, so people can still be standing 

on top of it. And I say saw -- I know there is a video 

online from London transport which shows this in a bus. 

And then I have also seen a design that isn't implemented 

yet but it's -- seems to be an interesting system for rail 

too that goes either way it goes like if you have doors on 

both sides it can go out one way and out the other you 

might be familiar with that. Any chance these hitting a 

market soon or what are the problems with them?

>> Stanton: Well London is a very interesting example. 

They -- and with deference to Frank's comment earlier has 

a lot to do with how often the system is demanded. If you 

were to look at the ridership in London and in New York or 

the Rydership in other cities that I have had an opportunity 

to look at the numbers, the number of times that the 

system is actually deployed is on the order of a tent of 

what it is -- 10th of what it is our disabled 

community -- maybe the term is more politically 

organized I am not sure what it is. But there are more 

demanding lot and they get what they -- you know, they 
get what they are asking for. And maybe not in all cases 

and maybe not to the standard that they maybe should do 

but relative to other cities in the world. You know, there 

is a voice there that -- there is a voice here that isn't 

necessarily there.

With specific regard to technical problems associated 

with what they do in London versus here, the sliding 

solution is we used to do one, we got out of it just for the 

simple reason that you know it wasn't as reliable as other 

alternatives. The by far the most common thing used in 

urban transit bus is a fold-over type of ramp. Given there 

are more lawyers here than people in a lot of cases, that 

became the standard is really a bit mind boggling a lot of 

the objections in Europe it's going to hit somebody it's 

going to hurt somebody but it's still by far the sidest used 

system in Northern America today. It does provide a nice 

balance between you know the demands of the community 

for its use, and the reliability of the system when you put 

the bloody button the things works.

What you do find much more frequent use of it it's not 

just for those with mobility impairments. You know, I had 

occasion I broke my legs a couple years ago playing soccer 

and road a wheelchair and had an interesting experience. 

Rode on some of the systems in Los Angeles found wow 
they do use these things people get out of the way. You 

know, there is -- the education level of the other riders 

has an awful lot to do with how well the system works. 

But having had the opportunity to actually to do it, 

it -- well, that -- when the system is deployed at a bus 

stop, you know, people get out of the way to make 

you -- to make space for to you get on it does work. As 

far as where things are headed, certainly lowering the 

slope is you know what most folks are asking for these 

days. We do have a new system that we have just recently 

deployed that we call a self aligning type of slope. But as 

far as anything that deploys from under the door. A lot of 

those things go back to -- well, in the very early days, 

yeah you can do anything you want to my bus, just you 

know don't change it. So, some of the really early 

systems were bolt ons. And you really don't get a good 

technical solution until you start talking about integrating 

it into the vehicle. So, yeah, the fold-over ramp is where 

things are in urban transit buses I am not sure if a sliding 

solution is the right -- somewhere between educating the 

rested of the public that also ride the vehicle and the 

system, is where the solution is going to be. Because the 

sliding solution you know yeah you can keep the door 

closed and manage the crowd but you have a system that's 
inherently less reliable because there are more moving 

bits. The folding, ramp, okay you need for folks to stay 

out of the way while the device goes through its paces but 

the experience we have had with urban transit buses 

suggest it is possible to do that. The rest of the 

community will eventually get it. And the thing will work.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Actually time for two more Blair 

Dennis and Ed you will be up next.

>> Blair Slaughter: Thank you Billy. Stanton, when 

you get out of the sort of almost perfect world of level 

platforms or level to the earth not level to boarding, and 

you have stations that are in curves or maybe you have a 

situation that we could encounter on our railroad where 

we need to off load folks in a less than perfect spot, do 

you have or do you have in your think tank something that 

would self level the platform even if the car itself isn't level 

or the ground below isn't level so you can tolerate the 

super elevations and things like that

>> Stanton: You hit it. I mean, as far as, you know 

the single biggest challenge with some of the things in the 

current reg I brought this up when the -- when we were 

having the NGC subcommittee. Yeah the super elevation 

requirements, we could do this. You know, to -- well, in 

point of fact, we offered a system some time ago that 
ended up you know with fairly wide am indication freight 

applications where you know the ramp had a powered tilt, 

you know, essentially, you know you could toe it up or 

down depending on the conditions that you were trying to 

load in. There is some cost associated with do it -- with 

doing it for certain. But at the end of the day, when you 

start looking at the floor in the vehicle in that super 

elevated condition is it really okay to be loading under 

those circumstances.

So, I mean I think somewhere in between there has got 

to be a right spot. Because I mean from an operating 

perspective, look, I mean half the train is stretching 

around the curve, and the curve is you know 5 inches 

different rail height that's a reality. And either we are 

going to offer the service, or we are not.

And if we are going to then there are these conditions 

that we need to be aware of. So, yeah, from the 

standpoint of can a piece of equipment be developed that 

can level itself, well, absolutely. That is not a technical 

problem. But the question is, you know, should folks be 

boarding and alighting under those conditions is that 

really the right thing to do. And I -- I would hope that 

you know there could be -- would be some members of 

the community here that might have insight as to how far 
we push that. Is a full on, what is it, 7-degree super 

elevation are those conditions conditions under which it's 

okay to be loading and off loading. I am -- I am 

personally I don't know.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Dennis you had the final question.

>> Dennis Cannon: Some of the -- we have to 

remember what we are dealing with now is regulations 

that are covering new -- new vehicles. And some of the 

things that are solutions are probably station based. This 

committee isn't working on that issue at the facility side. 

I can tell you all of the horror stories back in the early days 

you couldn't have lifts on buses people would dash off 

when the lift was down. You couldn't have a low floor bus 

in the area it requires a step in the rear to get up over the 

engine and that would never be permitted because of 

liability and people would trip and sue the agency. And 

there were hundreds and hundreds of horror stories about 

how all of these things couldn't possibly work. Things 

that working very well today. I don't recall -- I didn't see 

it but when Amtrak was thinking about bringing in 

high-speed rail it brought in an ice train I believe from 

Germany and Swedish train the Swedish train had a lift. I

remember checking that out. I was told but not -- but 

did not see the ICE train had at each door essentially a 
drawbridge that folded out when the door opened. And it 

was automatic. It didn't slide out from under the floor or 

anything. It just flipped out and closed the gap. The 

other thing is there are lots of other gaps that we were 

told when writing the early reg you couldn't get in a rapid 

rail for instance anything better than a 3-inch horizontal 

we know it's not true both March at that and WMATA have 

gotten down to 2 and less than 2 with significant 

nonmechanical mechanisms. Remember the light rail 

muni system the streetcar in San Francisco operates part 

of its route in a tunnel with level boarding and then has 

steps that fold down for its operation on the street. When 

you are in the tunnel, this is raised earlier about the gap 

between the vehicle because the -- because of the plug 

doors opposed to sliding doors. Plug doors move out and 

around. There is a big gap between the platform and the 

car of the muni system in San Francisco. There is a little 

device under the step that simply folds out and plugs the 

gap. There are lots and lots of solutions. All we need to 

do, basically, is set the parameters which in my opinion 

should be a very simple thing that when the gap exceeds 

X, horizontally and or Y vertically, you have to do 

something. Ramp, lift, bridgeplate, whatever. Set the 

standards for the bridgeplates set the standards for the 
lifts set the standards for the ramps and let the operators 

decide which of the things that they have to do. Instead 

of having the complicated thing we have in the current reg 

if it's old, new equipment. Old station equipment new 

station et cetera, et cetera. Just set the parameter that 

says greater than 2 inches do something, period. 

Incidentally a lot of things -- something that people don't 

quite realize sometimes is under the current ADA facility 

regulation, new platforms cannot be curbed. I know we 

have old platforms out there that are. But under ADA 

current regulation if you build a new station it has to be 

straight.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you. I am sure Stanton will be 

around with us rest of the day if you have questions he will 

answer. Let's give him a round thank you I appreciate it.

 (APPLAUSE)

>> BILLY ALTOM: Edward, ready? We will roll into the 

next presentation thank you. 

>> Ed: I am going to make presentation on research 

that -- some of which is old, some is new. This work 

is -- about it was done -- completed in 2010. But the 

first part of it but it took 10 years to get it all done.

The second part is relatively new, we haven't published a 
lot on it. Basically, the work that we have been doing at 

the idea center is focused on getting better information on 

the sizes and abilities of wheeled mobility users. And the 

reason for that is that the research -- that the standards 

that we currently use are based on research that I directed 

in the '70s the late '70s and it was really done with less 

than 60 people. 60 wheeled mobility users. In those 

days, 90% of the wheelchairs were made by Ericson 

Jennings wheelchair they were all the same size. So, the 

requirements that are based on wheelchair size are -- also 

things like reach and it's more about the people. People 

have changed I should say too. The most obvious one 

being they have gotten bigger. And so that the 

requirements that you see in accessibility codes today may 

not apply because of the increased diversity of wheeled 

mobility users and body sizes of people who use wheeled 

mobility devices. I am talking about manual chairs power 

chairs and scooters. There are also a lot of new 

technologies, different ways of purchasing wheelchairs 

that result in different kinds of products. And if you take 

a look at Chris's chair you will see that people do things to 

their chair. They add accessories, they have postural 

supports and other kinds of things that are customized. 

Then finally there are changes in transportation 
technologies and consumer expectations that have 

occurred.

So, the first study I am going to talk about is 

anthropometry of wheeled most users it was through a 

grant of the RERC on universal design in the built 

environment. And the U.S. Access Board funded it for 

another five years. So that work was done from 1999 that 

should be 2010 not 2019 we haven't gotten there yet.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Ed: I am going to talk after that about a study we 

are doing in our lab, a study we did in our lab on buses. 

But you will see it had relevance to work we are doing 

here. That was funded by NIDRR as well through another 

grant we have called the RERC on accessible public 

transportation. That grant ended in 2014. But we got 

refunded and we are now -- in that work we are doing 

research on large buses and in this new five-year cycle we 

are continuing that work and will be working on small 

buses as well. So, starting with anthropometry research. 

These -- this slide shows how we did our data collection. 

We used a -- for much of the work we used what is called 

three dimensional probe. It allowed us to take 

dimensions -- this thing keeps going on and off. So, that 

allowed us to -- that allowed us to take measurements of 
people's bodies using a standardized set of landmarks you 

see in the left-most picture a person being measured 

sitting still. And then we also were able to take 

measurements of the reaching abilities in the second 

picture to the right we took dimensions of reaching ability. 

Then we also did a series of studies where we set up -- we 

could move walls and find out what the minimum 

clearances were for doing different kinds of maneuvers 

which you see in the third picture. And then the last 

picture I won't get into it we took measurements of 

gripping and grip strength.

We studied -- actually, we eventually reached 500. 

This slide compares the demographics of our population 

compared to what the statements are are the wheeled 

mobility user population and rather than going through all 

of the details recognize basically we had more men than 

women because we -- we and our colleagues in Pittsburgh 

collected data from Veterans hospital where they are 

mostly men. But only -- not very many people were 

actually collected from that. But we tended to have more 

men. We also over sampled power chair users and 

scooter users mainly because -- powered chair users 

mainly because we wanted to get sufficient numbers in the 

powered chair category in order to make some 
generalizations.

And we were not able to get as many scooter users 

estimated to be in the general population we find scooter 

users find it difficult to get to our laboratory or wherever 

we set up to do the research they can't transport their 

device. They often use them only at home and don't use 

them when they travel away from the home.

Or the neighborhood. We had a very diverse 

population. I won't go into that. But our research 

reports are available if people are interested they can look 

into them.

We developed a software application to take the data 

and put it together so we could analyze it and study it in 

many different ways. And we have done -- we have only 

scratched the surface of what we can do. For most people 

in the sample we construct a three dimensional model like 

you see in the illustration. And then take measurements 

that we actually didn't take in the field because we can use 

the model to take -- to take additional measurements. 

And for every person we have videos -- well I wouldn't say 

for everyone some of the cases we couldn't do it. We 

have video and still photographs of the people and who 

they are. And we set up the database so we could do 

analysis like you see -- let me go back here. Like you see 
on the right (indicating) that histogram. And let's see this 

thing doesn't point does it? Okay. We can select the 

extreme parts of the histogram where there are only a few 

people. And we can say who are those people there. If 

we set standards that are excluding certain people we 

could say who are we excluding. We can drill down and 

get the individuals from the sample that we would exclude 

and find out why it is that we might be excluding them.

And so, for example, if you set the standards for 30 

inches we could go -- for a platform lift we could go back 

and see what is excluded and who are those people, you 

know, how many and what is the nature of their -- their 

wheelchair or their whatever is causing them to be wider 

than 30 ins. -- 30 inches we are talking about chair 

dimensions. Some of our findings. The first one is 

cleared floor space. What we found and what you are 

seeing here is illustrations showing the manual chairs the 

power chairs and the scooters. And we belief in not 

separating those three devices. Not putting them all 

together. Because if you set standards based on overall 

numbers, then you are going to favor the manual 

wheelchair user population. It's the power chair users 

and the scooters that -- that have the largest -- so we 

have to look.
>> It's blinking red.

>> Maybe it's going down in battery.

(Discussion off record.)

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Ed: Okay. So, what we do is we present our 

findings in the three different categories. What we find 

for clear floor space if we use the current dimensions for 

clear floor space used in the standards 30 by 48, you will 

find that we are excluding about 25% of manual wheelchair 

users, 50% of power chair users and 50% of scootedders. 

That's -- scooters that's the numbers that exceed those 

dimensions. The length is the most important dimension.

The limitation of the clear floor space also it doesn't 

really consider the differences in how a task might be 

performed whether left or right landed forward or side 

ways. The illustration shows in graphic form the extent 

of the people who are excluded. I will show you more 

illustrations but you can see these -- the red boxes that 

are sliding on to the screen, show the part of the 

population that is excluded. There are four numbers in 

each dimension, the lowest one is the 50th percentile, the 

second one is 75th percentile and then the third is the 

90th and the fourth is the 95th percentile.
Okay. Now this chart looks at clear floor space in 

relation to the thing that you are reaching to. What we 

found was that the best reaching condition is in the plane 

of the shoulder whether it be the plane that goes through 

the body front to back or the plane that goes across the 

shoulders. And that's what people can reach the furthest 

not die ago gone alley or backgrounds or things like that 

die ago began -- diagonally. This chart is looking at 

universal space. Now it gets pretty big. So, we are not 

suggesting that we require such a space but we just want 

to point out, that unlike current standards that sort of in 

housing that assume that the reaching target is in the 

center, that's not really where the best location is in terms 

of relationship of the clear floor space to the object. So, 

these are the these are the different ways people might 

approach an object to reach to it in the most optimal way.

And this chart graphic shows functional reach forward. 

And this one is only really manual wheelchair users we 

have similar charts for the other groups. If we just look at 

manual wheelchair users who tend to be those who are 

more likely to have functional reaching abilities about 85 

percent of the manual wheelchair users we measured had 

some reaching capability. And 77% of those users could 

reach beyond their toes. Greater percentage could reach 
at closer distances. If you look at the -- wait a minute. 

77% could not -- that should be could not reach beyond 

their toes.

And the -- if you look at the chart, which shows the 

percentage of people could reach to any cell in that 

matrix, you could see that people can reach over their 

knees much easier than they can over their toes. So, what 

we conclude from this is that if you have forward reach if 

you want to make it functional you have to have a knee 

clearance. You have to have space to get -- that the 

knees and toes underneath it in order to make it really 

functional.

And you can see on the 69% of the manual wheelchair 

population that we measured can actually reach to the 

limit of reach that are allowed by current standards.

And this is a sweet spot it goes higher than the 48 

inches. You have to remember that the 48 inches is also 

people of short stature. Not just for wheelchair users. 

And this is the side ways reach similar data showing side 

reach. And you can see that the -- it's much easier to 

reach from the side a lot more people can reach in this 

direction. At a higher point and closer to the -- closer to 

the body. And but when the -- when the reach targeted 

reach goes beyond -- too far out, then the reaching ability 
drops significantly, and the data shows that current 

standards say side reach over a countertop are really not 

adequate. Let's see.

So, there is the sweet spot close to the body about 8 

inches away from the body, beyond that things start tailing 

off. The ability of people to reach starts decreasing

>> What is -- this is Blair from Amtrak. What is the 

measurement point for in a 8 inches center line --

>> 8 inches from the side of the wheelchair.

>> Blair Slaughter: Okay, okay, wasn't sure that.

>> Ed: The -- so you can see that on the chart, the 

wheelchair is lined up with the 0 point, you see that?

>> PAUL BEATTY: This is Paul Beatty. First, my 

understanding on using the mic, the closer you get to it 

the more it cuts off.

>> Ed: I don't know what was going on I have a habit 

of getting too close.

>> PAUL BEATTY: The second thing is, I found out that 

the batteries for the microphone should have been 

charged for lunch we know that the communication 

subcommittee would like too use the assistive listening 

system I am going to ask you to do an additional task if 

you could all turn off your mic, except when you are speak 

there is a little button at the very end if you press it the 
flashing light will go from green to red. And this way we 

will save some juice and we have a few extra batteries if 

things really go bad we will pass around one mic. So, I 

learned you guys learned back to you Ed. Thank you.

>> Ed: This slide shows knee and toe clearances. 

What you see here is similar, findings that the current knee 

and toe clearances are not accommodating the range of 

people that we have using wheeled mobility devices today. 

And the illustrations shows the 20 -- the different 

percentiles as I mentioned before. Even the 95th 

percentile doesn't quite make it clear of this. But of the 

dotted line which is the current standards. But it also 

suggests a different maybe a different way of developing 

these standards too.

And these are all with people lined up according to their 

toes. Using the method that we developed we can line 

people up by their toes or rear of the wheelchair or move 

the chairs around in a mathematical space or virtual space 

to get these different kinds of dimensions. To analyze 

these different kinds of issues. Okay.

Just going to skip through that. And one of the things 

that people always ask, well is it the larger people causing 

the larger knee clearances? Actually it isn't. It's the 

postural it's the posture device -- the positioning devices 
that we have in modern wheelchairs. So, you can see in 

the second person from the on the top right these are 

several sets of photographs that are up on the screen now, 

of people who -- people in our sample, and on the top left 

the second one in, that's a very short individual but he is 

being positioned very high up in the chair so he can have 

better eye contact with people he is talking to and reach 

all of the things in the environment. His knees are way up 

in the air, he needs high knee clearance down on the right, 

you see a very large man, he has fused knees, so 

his -- through procedures he has had. He has legs 

extended way out. So, he requires a very deep knee 

clearance. There are a lot of different reasons why people 

require these knee clearances. I am going to move on to 

maneuvering clearances. We found to do a complete 

turn, a person needs a lot more space than the 60 inches 

we associate with the turning diameter today. And the, 

it's only the manual wheelchair users who are 

accommodated by the 60-inch turning space. But more 

than about 50% of the power chair users and more of the 

scoot -- scooter users could not turn in the 60-inch 

space. Before I switch to another subject does anybody 

have questions?

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: For short on time.
>> Ed: In the bus simulation research we set up a 

simulated low floor bus just the front part of it. And 

it's -- and we have adjustable height platform to study 

different ramp slopes. And we did studies a number of 

different kinds of studies in this bus including we did 

ramp slope study. We did a study of the front end of the 

bus with the fair payment getting through the wheel wells. 

We studied the width between the wheel wells she also 

studied different access from the back. We did three 

different -- we studied three different layouts and studied 

them both under empty and crowded conditions or light 

load crowded conditions we put mannequins in the seats. 

And we studied where -- how people could use these 

different kinds of entries. So we have a front entry like 

the standard front entry. Layout 2 is a rear entry with 

front egress. And the last one is rear egress and entry. 

These aren't really rear because there is a second part of 

the bus up stairs in the back. They are mid entry, it 

would be the way to really talk about it. 

And we were able to talk about how much time people 

needed for different aspects of the tasks of riding a bus. 

We have a statistical model of the different times it takes 

for people to do things in a laboratory setting anyway. 

And we can estimate the savings in time and dwell time for 
different kinds of accessibility devices.

For example, ramps versus lifts versus different 

securement systems. We had a diverse sample with blind 

and visually impaired individuals and this is a photograph 

of the bus simulation from the top some of the findings 

were -- these are findings of issues that we identified and 

then solutions. I am going to highlight some findings 

that don't -- that aren't about wheelchair use some are 

but others aren't just to give you and indication of some of 

the things we discovered for rear entry, people had 

visually impaired people had difficulty identifying where 

the aisle was once they got off the ramp where do they 

turn? We have -- I am not going to get into the 

recommendations, these are really specific to a project we 

are doing where we are working with a bus manufacturer. 

And transit agency.

Another problem with certain wheelchair seating 

positions, the wheelchair users were rolling over people's

feet. Luckily they weren't real people. But they were. 

And there wasn't enough aisle width to get by with a 

securement location where you had to actually pass by it.

We found people with walking aids had difficulty sitting 

in a forward-facing seat. There wasn't enough width to 

get in. And also had trouble getting down the aisle. 
Without squeezing through.

We found visually impaired people had trouble finding 

stanchions and handholds, you can see this in the person's 

photograph bumping into it. And the seats, the seats that 

flip up were difficult for people to find out how to do that. 

There was no way to know where they had to use 

the -- there is a latch release and there was really no way 

to see it. And so that was a problem.

These are just some recommendations. The force of 

opening the latch was difficult. It was too hard. And 

there was not enough leg room for in the forward-facing 

seats for the walking aid users and visually impaired 

people. Getting up from the seat in the longitudinal 

seating was also a problem. So, the reason why I showed 

you this bus simulation work we can simulate rail cars as 

well. We can just mockup a -- if there are things that 

need to be studied, that is fairly easy for us to set up 

the -- set up a simulation to do something. I think it's 

valuable because some of the things that we found I didn't 

get into all of the findings were things found in the field if 

simulations had been done before the technologies were 

launched into the marketplace that would have solved that 

would have addressed the problems that we found before 

they were implemented. And I think in developing 
standards that might be in existence or 30, 40 years it 

would behoove us to test things that we are not sure of 

effectively to make sure they were effective.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Awesome. Thank you, Ed. We have 

time for maybe a couple of questions, if anybody has 

anything.

>> I just have one comment we talked at an earlier 

meeting about space particularly lavatories bathrooms on 

board and possibly doing innovative things with the 

lavatory in conjunction with the water closet and proximity 

and different grab bars might sit. Because of the very 

tight confines of a rail car, and wanted to go provide as 

much maneuverability within a lavatory as possible, I think 

we should consider some innovative approaches while you 

probably using a lot of this information and including 

especially the maneuverability portion where we can it will 

be most useful, I think.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Ed, you can corral DOT to help 

fund that?

 (LAUGHTER)

>> No.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Speaking for (inaudible) and 

David the board research budget is basically consumed by 

OMB regulatory assessments. So, funding research going 
forward is a significant challenge for us. So, it's going to 

require some cross agency cooperation.

I have a question but -- if you have questions we need 

to move on.

>> UWE RUTENBERG: I just want to add to what Ed 

mention we came to the same problem in terms of 

dimensions. One of the things which is very important 

when we are dealing with scooters especially with 

four-wheeled scooters they might still fit into the kind of 

common footprint of 30 by 48 but the turning radius can 

be tremendously large so even if you get somebody on 

board let's say into the train vestibule the turning radius is 

such that you are not able to get there to the interior of 

the car. And the longer the scooters become we are 

seeing trends more and more people are using the 

scooters especially when the baby boomers are coming 

along they are losing their driver's license and the next 

step is a scooter to have some kind of a mobility we will 

see tremendous amount of scooters coming into the 

environment and probably wanting to have access to 

public transportation as well.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Perfect. All righty. In the interest of 

time, we have to keep moving on. I want to thank you 

very much Ed. Thank you for that presentation appreciate 
it. 

 (APPLAUSE)

>> BILLY ALTOM: Up next a presentation from Amtrak 

on our gap mitigation and elimination program turn it over 

to Gary Talbot at the moment let me get you up here Gary.

>> Gary Talbot: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Gary Talbot, Amtrak. I am going to speak for a couple of 

seconds. First of all, thank you so much to the advisory 

committee to allow us to come mere. Today we have our 

contractor from the Detroit Metro area, they are going to 

go through a brief presentation on our gap program we 

have a couple of the bridgeplates we tested yesterday, 

thank you to everybody who participated yesterday, those 

are in the back of the room if you get a second. As soon 

as we get through the presentation that Chris will do, we 

have just a couple of video clips about a minute a piece. 

With that, I will turn it over to Chris and ask him to take us 

through the presentation. Thank you.

>> Thank you very much Gary. Thank you very much 

for having us here today and allowing us the opportunity 

to talk about our work with Amtrak on the gap mitigation 

program. RLE International is a research design and 

engineering development firm, we specialize in 

transportation related items. We are located in the Metro 
Detroit area. This is a bit of a wordy slide. The current 

situation, the problem now is that there are locations 

where the right-of-way is not publicly owned, not by 

Amtrak, by a Title III entity, which we refer to as a host 

railroad. And the passenger traffic is run through there 

with Amtrak. And they currently only have the ability or 

only want any platform to be 8 inches above top of rail. 

When you have trains that need 48-inch platform we end 

up with significant issues and getting people in mobility 

devices up into the train. So, to alleviate that problem, we 

have come up with a setback platform solution that's 

going to be setback 9 feet from the center track of the rail. 

And there would be approximately a 48-inch gap between 

the edge -- between the edge of the platform -- further 

back when you get close it shuts off.

>> Okay.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Between the edge of the platform and the edge of 

the train floor.

The current FRA regulations are that the platform can be 

at 5 feet 7 inches from the center line of track so that now 

we would end up with a gap of about 6 to 7 inches. All of 

the boarding areas are -- you see the gap 6 to 7 inches 

sometimes the height varies on the gap could be 7 inches 
above the platform or one or 2ness below the platform.

So, in these situations, we needed to come up with a 

solution that our host railroads the freight railroads would 

allow us to develop.

So, basically what we are hoping -- what we are 

developing are the setback platforms that are going to be 

setback 9 feet from the center line of the track. They will 

be undeployed part of the gap mitigating device. You will 

see a gap mitigating twice that will deploy from center line 

of track and leave a 6 to 7 inch gap that will be mitigated 

with a bridgeplate similar to the ones you see in the back 

of the room today. This allows us to respot the train if 

need be. So, we had to get the train on to more than two 

doors let's say of an Amfleet car on to this platform, we 

would be able to respot the train with the gap.

>> (inaudible)

>> Chris: We can move the train with this deployed, 

we wouldn't have to retract it.

>> Janice: Does that device require it always to have 

assistance -- sorry. Does that device require people to 

always have a have assistance being able to use -- to do it 

themselves?

>> The device will be deployed by train conductor he 

will be able to -- the person in the mobility device will be 
able.

>> THOMAS CORFMAN: Get on the platform without --

>> Janice: But they need somebody then -- it's not like 

they press the button themselves and they get on.

>> No. There must be a train present and --

>> Janice: I understand the train is present, that I 

understand. What I am saying is, is there a way of making 

the device so you don't need someone to help you so you 

don't always need assistance.

>> (inaudible)

>> Well, I think when we get through this you will 

understand better. It's not -- it's more of a safety 

concern of the railroad, there will always be a conductor at 

the road and the conductor has to facilitate the boarding 

and alighting of all passengers, as we go through it, you 

may answer some questions. The program objectives 

were to full till all of the specifications in a very detailed 

design requirement specification sheet. So, basically of I 

think more than of a year's worth of research was done 

Gary and folks at Amtrak and government affairs. We are 

going to deliver the self contained gap mitigating 

solutions. These the systems will be integrated into 

newly built stations. Now due to Amtrak level boarding 

policies these devices are required at all of the stations 
with ridership greater than 7500 passengers were year 

where Amtrak has a sole or shared ADA obligation. 

Currently there are 202 of those stations in the system.

And when we developed the devices, we developed 

these devices so that there is something that anyone could 

use or anyone would want to use. Anyone who wants to 

board a train without climbing upstairs or trying to get a 

baby stroller through or something like that would board 

this way. Also, we put a very high amount of concern into 

the safety and cost and durability, we are looking at 

lifetime use 30 years without any major maintenance on 

the systems.

In addition, we are developing and designing state of 

the article bridgeplates and ramp solutions for the bi-level 

cars these are going to be carbon fiber construction, 

composite construction, and that's what you see in the 

back of the room today.

We have been working I think we had a successful 

workshop working with Amtrak crews and community 

advocates and some users to test these devices out. What 

we are looking at now is a timing slide of the entire 

program. And what you see is the timing where we 

started in the middle of November of last year on this 

program and about 22 weeks have elapsed. The release 
phase is scheduled end of September this year we will 

have two technical demonstrators with fully functioning 

components. We move into a preliminary design phase 

and detailed design phase. Right now we would be set to 

install 10 of these in the field as pre-production 

prototypes towards the end of March 2017 we are going to 

compress the time and get them into the field towards the 

end of June 2016. There is rigorous validation testing 

and development process that we are going through to 

ensure these products are ready for everyone to use.

So, what the current proposed use of these devices, you 

would see here we have this setback platform with a gap 

mitigating device in the middle. A train pulls into the 

station when it pulls into the station a conductor make 

sure the platform is clear in addition there is a radar 

system and sonic detection to make sure nobody is on the 

platform when deployed through mobile device that they 

use, they will hit the deploy button once they do that, they 

will be able to open the gates and allow anybody to boar 

through this device they need to put a bridgeplate down to 

mitigate the last 6 or 7 inches.

Yes, ma'am?

>> So, my question I guess it comes back to what she 

asks too what happens when there is no -- I'm sorry. I
guess it goes back to her question as well. What happens 

when there is no staff available. And I am asking this 

question for a reason. I twice recently went to get an 

Amtrak train at 3:15 a.m. and the staff at Union Station 

told me I shouldn't be trying to get any kind of accessible 

assistance any assistance on that train because they don't 

have anybody to do any kind of pre-boarding or 

assistance until after 5 a.m. what happens to somebody 

who needs to get 3:15 train as an example?

>> Gary Talbot: Hi there, Gary Talbot, if I could answer 

that. This device is a device that everybody would use. 

And if you don't have station side crews, then the on board 

train crew would actuate the device and allow you to board 

and alight. This wouldn't be a pre-boarding type of a 

thing it -- it's a boarding instrument, a boarding solution 

for everybody to use. Train pulls up, the conductor hits 

the button if there is station side crews they could 

pre-deploy this before the train rolls in because this is set 

at a distance that allows the train to pass by at the same 

distance you have for like Washington Union Station level 

boarding platforms it's the same thing.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Just to remind you, if people 

have problems, it's important to file your complaints. 

Because otherwise, the operator and DOT have no record 
of the issues.

>> BILLY ALTOM: If it's not written down, it didn't 

happen.

>> Don't worry. I file complaints on my various issues, 

no issue. So, if I understand this correctly, every person 

who is getting on the train is using this it's not like the 

person in the wheelchair is having special device.

>> Chris Hart: Well, they have the option of whether to 

board from a different door or not. But it's likely that 

once they see that you are able to board through a level 

boarding device the transportation of Amtrak has 

indicated more likely people will want to board this way.

>> It's not like something special that distinguishes you 

from everybody else on the train

>> Chris Hart: That was one of the reasons we chose 

this design because it looks like a platform.

>> Okay, perfect.

>> Once everyone has boarded the train or alighted the 

conductor is able to take a look out the door and make 

sure the gates are closed the sense sores on the system 

would turn green letting him know everything was good. 

He retracts the platform the same way through a mobile 

device. And the train could be on its way in the event the 

procedure is not properly followed there are fall back 
systems where it's pulled back automatically. If there is 

no power at the station or something happens, this is 

designed to be deployed manually, I think there is some 

people in the room have actually deployed our mockup 

manually it's very simple to do very quick and easy to do.

>> UWE RUTENBERG: I have a question. Is this a 

concept or have you built something like this? 

>> We built something.

>> UWE RUTENBERG: In Northern part regions of the 

country, you could have like, I don't know minus 20 

degrees. And ice buildup on the platform, is it still 

working?

>> We haven't done all of the environmental testing yet. 

These will be heating testing geothermal or electric right 

now all of the components are rated for minus 40C and 

plus 45C. 120.

When we go to construct the new setback platforms, 

we -- once the ground is prepared and the site is prepped 

we are going to go to a modular type system. We are 

going to develop probably a steel superstructure clad in 

pre-pressed concrete. This is going to be modular. The 

gap mitigation device will be shop built they going to be 

deployed on a train or semi trailer. Put down in a crane 

plugged in calibrated and ready to go. The same device 
will work in a 48 inch platform and 15-inch platform it's 

one device. Once we have the superstructure down it's 

clad in concrete. The gap mitigation device is installed. 

A walkway is installed right behind it. And you have a 

setback platform ready for use at a shared use track 

station. This is a rendering of what we think these may 

end up looking like.

>> That looks like everybody is entering one door.

>> Well, these -- the gap mitigating device, the shuttle 

platform is only 20 feet in length. So, most of 

the -- most of the passenger rail traffic coming through 

there are going to be Amfleet 1's and 2's correct? We 

would get to two doors.

>> Gary Talbot: If I could answer the question for the 

48-inch equipment, we envisioning we designed it so we 

can board and alight two doors of doo cars the two end 

are accessible doors of two cars on the 15-inch equipment 

one door per car and the train set can be respot if 

necessary. We are envisioning -- we are showing a quick 

video clip of the mockup hardware, the top of it is all clad 

in concrete with the steel superstructure. Early mockup 

10-foot long section in production it will be twice that 

length. And we have two simulated car bodies adjacent to 

it now that we built just for testing. We will play this a 
couple of times and then I have a second clip that will just 

show the manual feature that several of the folks here 

have already been able to use.

>> I mean, it's a matter of time to deploy and into the 

field and everything but once these are up and operational 

we think that, you know, it may beneficial to have multiple 

ones out there again, it's a decision for the customer to 

make.

>> There is no way to make the whole platform move 

out like that?

>> There are always ways but there would be a lot of 

complication and cost that wouldn't be necessary.

>> These are 20-foot-long sections that will translate 

over almost four foot like Chris said to the car side so you 

that you can board and alight. We are showing a quick 

video clip of Rob just cranking the platform in it has a 

hand crank with 5 pound force of effort required to deploy 

that. It's real simple to do real quick it takes 10 seconds 

in the automated mode to run the platform out. About 10 

seconds to retract it. You can put as many of these as 

you would want on a thousand-foot long platform is that 

was the case. We envision putting one per platform until 

we get the system deployed and as we do further testing 

we can do additional if we choose.
>> My concern is making things use special people 

don't want to use things special for the special needs 

person.

>> We were sensitive to that.

>> This, to me, looks like special needs versus 

everybody having universal access. I guess what I am 

trying to understand is it seems like a great concept, why 

can't you make the whole thing, I understand it's a cost 

issue, it seems to me why can't the whole -- if there is a 

gap, aren't you going to have people who are walking on 

full length of the gap or am I not -- on the rest of the 

station

>> If I could comment on that, please. You don't want 

to slide the platform out on a setback platform where you 

don't have a door. These are 75 foot in length that's how 

long the platforms are and the section is 20 foot long that 

slides over to the train. You can do multiples of that if we 

choose to do so. It's not a special thing, as a matter of 

fact we had many comments from the community people 

with disabilities were thrilled for the first time it wasn't a 

special boarding and alighting thing it was just a great way 

to get on and off the train that's what we were developing. 

If I could go I know I have another question. Linda, I'm 

sorry, I didn't see you.
>> LINDA MARTIN: I just have a comment, which is, this 

is not a replacement for level boarding this is where level 

boarding is not required. Level boarding platforms are 

required where they are required this is where they are 

not. Where Amtrak is seeking to do something beyond 

the 8 inch platform. So that's real important. Also, the 

other point is that platform device is not the -- I mean the 

Access Board people can point this out but it's not really 

the purview of this committee because it's a station-based 

device but I think they just wanted to show it to folks to 

give you an idea.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: One, just to be clear, right now 

it's the -- the equipment is a -- for all of us who do 

actually want to use the train, the last thing that we want 

to board with is a mobile lift. Second to the last thing we 

want to board with is a car-borne lift because -- because 

going up and down has much more mechanical failure 

points than something like a transfer table where you can 

really move a million pounds on a transfer table. It's 

being used all over the world in all kinds of heavy industry, 

so, I think for -- we were asked to come look at this given 

the option of a mobile lift or a car base lift versus this, this 

was the hands down winner.

>> Blair Slaughter, Amtrak. Just to add to what Gary 
said, a lot of us in the room think about what happens 

with the train or transit in terms of where we are in the 

northeast. And when you get out into the woods as I say 

on Amtrak, there are a lot of places where -- even in 

Richmond, Virginia, which is a fairly busy station everyone 

is held by the gate until it's time to go to the train. If you 

go to other stations Fayetteville, North Carolina everyone 

is boarding the train in two places. You have this device 

where everybody is boarding. Everyone is going not to a 

special place but to the same place they are going anyway, 

but you have got something that lets everyone board the 

train arguably in a much safer fashion it doesn't, it doesn't 

segregate people and point out that there is 

something -- some special activity going on it's just a 

better way all the way around to get people on the train 

regardless.

>> Janice: I guess what I don't understand is why 

would you not be required sometimes to not have level 

boarding but the other times you are if it's new 

construction you are required to have level boarding so is 

this being used in a way that to fix old -- old stations? 

Or is this being used to get -- when you do -- when you 

do alteration to a station you have to make it level 

boarding. What -- is this thing used -- I am not sure if I 
am 

understanding -- 

 >> Level boarding is not required anywhere when 

you are altering or building a new platform. But where 

the track that goes by the platform is shared with freight 

you are not required to put in level boarding. So, at those 

platforms an 8-inch platform would be used for someone 

in a wheelchair that means a crank up lift currently or a 

car-borne lift those are the two options from 8-inch 

platform currently this is an alternative to the lift where a 

level boarding platform is not required. And, also, the 

level boarding platform rule takes effect if you are altering 

or building a new platform existing platforms don't have 

to be retrofitted. So, there is a lot of older platforms that 

will be 8 inches or less for a long time.

>> Gary Talbot: If I could add to that thank you very 

much to Blair and Linda for that. Again, this is Gary 

Talbot. You know, this is something that we feel there is 

just so many locations where we could benefit based on 

high ridership where we can create setback level boarding 

at stations where otherwise there isn't a whole lot of other 

options it's going to be probably 50 years before we get in 

there and do something massive on the platform for the 

extra extra -- the infrastructure or something like that 
where this is something that could be added. Any other 

questions? Yes, sir.

>> Hi, Frank Maldari, the 40-foot length of the platform 

is the only part that's raised. So, passengers can get on 

from in other cars that are adjacent to the platform right?

>> Gary Talbot: Correct. We are envisioning 75 foot 

long 9 foot back but 75 foot in length. Within that 75 

foot most likely in the center of that you position this 20 

foot mitigation device. Then it's fully ramped 12 foot 

width ramp leading up to the platform at 15 and 48 and in 

the backside ramps coming down.

>> I want to be clear. You can walk on to the other 

cars otherwise you have to build a platform hundreds of 

feet long not just 70 feet long.

>> Gary Talbot: To answer that two ways: If you only 

had one of the guys per platform let's say but the train 

was several hundred feet long everybody could walk up 

the tracks if they wanted to. At some stations where you 

have really, really high ridership we envision we could put 

multiples of that with continuous boarding level setback 

form deemploy them all at once retract them at once

>> It's good. Chris pointed out if you have one there 

it's significantly better than what you had before. And I 

think it's great if you are able to improve things and you 
don't necessarily -- it doesn't have to be perfect it doesn't 

have to be the whole train and the less mechanics involved 

to getting the person in the car, you know, with devices 

attached to the car and to the platform I think is great. At 

Long Island Railroad 15 years ago we decided to raise the 

platform in diesel territory in anticipation of ADA. The 

idea was most of our platforms are raised we will raise 

them all only have level boarding almost everywhere. 

Unfortunately you still have to deal with bridgeplates. 

And unfortunately, some areas you have to deal with 

curved platforms which make it even worse. But a 

manually operated ramp like you have on a high level 

platform. I got to believe is significantly better than 

anything else. And it's definitely a step in the right 

direction.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: Can I -- if I might just share. 

Out in Boston we found that your typical mobile lift added 

four to five minutes of down time for commuter rail or 

light rail application. Now, for Amtrak, four or 

five-minute stops isn't necessarily that bad. Except when 

you bring the mobile lifts 8 or 9 times down the plat form 

and then bring it 800 feet back when you are done. So, 

now you just stopped the train 15 minutes. And 

you -- they are calling and asking why is the -- why is the 
train still there at the station. And meanwhile everybody 

is looking at out the window at Linda at me and Gil -- at 

billy saying what the heck are you doing we are already 

four hours late.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> LINDA MARTIN: Right.

>> CHRISTOPHER HART: And now you just want to get 

to the dining room car to get dinner.

>> Gary Talbot: I just really appreciate the support 

from my brother Chris on our effort to improve inter-city 

rail transportation.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> We are really excited. Jim, please.

>> JIM WEISMAN: I got a question. The 75 foot length 

that's just to accommodate people waiting?

>> Yes, sir. Just to make it more of integrated 

approach it's not -- you know it's not the old, small, little 

platform someplace but rather a very large platform that's 

envisioned that anybody that wants to board and alight 

from there can.

>> JIM WEISMAN: Just about the stigma for Janice sake. 

The wheelchair user is already in the wheelchair.

>> We can't hide

>> JIM WEISMAN: He is identifiable. The best he can do 
is minimize dwell time and individual stigma letting 

everybody board together.

>> That's right that's it.

>> My issue is what Chris was saying, I didn't articulate 

it quickly, why are you taking so long, you are late, you are 

annoying us, get on the damn bus, it's irritating. I am 

saying how to make it so everybody is getting going 

through the same door. The person is not -- the rest of 

the people are not getting annoyed at the person in the 

wheelchair which further stigmatizes the person.

>> We tried to be very sensitive to that situation, I mean 

we have done our own research ridden the trains and saw 

the use of the station base mobile lift. We see the person 

that needs to use it as the last one getting on waiting in 

the cold and things like that this is something where it will 

be deployed. Generally not all of the doors are open they 

are open where the conductor needs to open them. It will 

be at these platforms so someone in mobility device will 

be able to board any time just like anyone else is. 

>> And just one last thing, so the folks in the room are 

aware, is this under patent?

>> Yeah, this is patent pending. The shuttle platforms, 

the ramps and the bridgeplates, yes. Amtrak owns the 

patents.
>> Frank?

>> I just had a quick question. Rough order of 

magnitude how much does something like that cost on 75 

foot platform, piece of equipment.

>> Gary Talbot: If I could answer that. This is Gary 

Talbot. You know, the cost estimates are so rough today 

that I would really hate to put down a number. We are 

really trying our best to -- we believe the cost is going to 

be very reasonable especially when considered what like a 

full length level boarding platform or even a station base 

mobile lift with a hub and section to pour we think it's 

comparable. We don't have good cost numbers yet. As 

Chris said, we are 22 weeks into roughly a 36-month 

process. We are hoping to take some of that time out and 

hopefully in about two years time will have the first 

prototype out. At the end of the detail design phase post 

DDR we have 10 technical -- excuse me, 10 production 

and 10 prototypes built and installed that will give us a 

wonderful opportunity then to bring the information in at 

a later date.

>> It does do a really good job of minimizing dwell time 

I see that and allowing other passengers to get on parallel 

is not slowing anybody down it's really a good idea you 

have there.
>> Thank you very much. If I could close with we 

brought three of the bridgeplates from yesterday. Again, 

thank you to everybody. Amtrak had a private train 

yesterday that went from Washington, DC stopped at 

Baltimore and Wilmington and Philadelphia, we got crew 

feedback on our prototype bridgeplates, it's really 

mockups not prototypes yet and we had end user 

feedback at four stations. Everybody pitched in and 

pulled a whole bunch of folks for us so we could evaluate 

where we are at on the design and give us ideas for 

changing and really appreciate that we have one with 

handrails, so you might want to look at that for some of 

the units on a curve. We have the same problem today 

where the built environment already has that thank you so 

much to the committee. Thank you.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Thank you Chris for the presentation. 

Give them a hand.

 (APPLAUSE)

>> BILLY ALTOM: What I need to do next public 

comment? Anybody had anything that they wanted to say 

for public comment? And anybody on the conference call 

line that would like to make a comment? Hearing and 

seeing nothing. It is time for us to take a break and what 

we will do Paul would you like to tell folks what we are 
going to do. We are going to do a committee meeting 

and where.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Per agenda the next thing is the 

subcommittee meeting on communications for those that 

desire to participate in that for those that are not 

participating, if there is anything of value take it with you. 

If you don't care about its value Lee it here for tomorrow. 

Remember we have two subcommittee member meetings 

onboard circulation seating in the morning and boarding 

alighting in the afternoon after you adjourn now there is 

no further meeting of the full committee. The 

subcommittee meetings are voluntary so that's all I have.

>> BILLY ALTOM: That was it for me.

>> PAUL BEATTY: So, Terry, when do you want them 

back for the communication subcommittee meeting? 

4 o'clock. Okay. So those in the communication 

subcommittee 4 o'clock will be your start time.

>> BILLY ALTOM: Awesome.

>> PAUL BEATTY: Subcommittee meeting as well as 

other subcommittee meetings will be occurring here in the 

room.

[End of RVAAC Meeting]