Note: The output shown below is from the Communication

Access Realtime Translation (CART) system used in the Boarding and Alighting Subcommittee Meeting # 5 and is generally
unedited. August 28, 2014 Rail Vehicles Access Advisory Committee Boarding and Alighting Subcommittee Meeting #5

>> PAUL BEATTY: Good afternoon. T his is Paul Beatty. Welcome to the 5th meeting of the boarding and alighting subcommittee. A s you know since anyone may participate in subcommittee discussions, no time of public comment has been scheduled during this two - hour call. I t appears we do not have a CART chat box therefore if anybody

-- if you are only using the CART system to participate you want to raisea question or make a

statement. U se the RVAAC E

- mail address at RVAAC @
access - board.gov. We will
comm unicate your question. When speaking remember to give your name as a reminder. Your next subcommittee meeting will probably be sometime during the full committee meeting scheduled for September 11 and 12. Here in Washington, DC. I n this room we have myself, Lisa Fairhall Jim Pecht Melissa Anderson on and the CART reporter in the interest of time on the line, we have Francis, Paul, Blair, Kenneth, Paul Smith, compared to Paul (inaudible). Crystal Lyons

. B illy Carrie , Mary , Andre Gagne. S id Goldstein , Glenn Millis , Michael Chisena-- I am butchering people's name. Ken

Shiotani

-- Ken

-- sorry Ken. I f I missed anybody >> Is Marilyn?
>> PAUL BEATTY: Anybody that I missed? O kay. What I am going to do is turn the call over to the chair of the subcommi ttee which is Marilyn go ahead. >> Thank you Paul. A m I audible here?
>> PAUL BEATTY: You are good.
>> Yes.
>> Okay. T hank you. Well, so approval of our agenda, thank you for introductions Paul, our agenda is essentially a consideration of this proposa l for the small group. A nd the hope the ardent hope is that we can reach consensus on it today. S o, it can be presented from our subcommittee at the in

- person meeting coming up very
soon. I am go to go try to museum us

-- I am going to try to move us fo rward promptly to the goal on the call. I tried to stay in touch with the small group while they were working and they worked very hard to get everything right. A nd it's

-- I think it represents a lot of our discussions. A nd you know, pretty well. S o, I hope that we can get through it today. Let me thank Dennis Cannon, Ed Hoff and Ed Steinfeld for their work on this proposal. I heard Dennis' name are either of the Ed's on?>> I just joined >> That's Ed Hoff.
>> Yes >> Ed Steinfeld are you on? I don't think

-- I think he expected not to be able to come on. B ecause their new academic year, I think he has a class. O ne other thing before we start, over the last few meetings I noticed sometimes our discussion was getting bogged down where we were repeatin g the same points over and over. S o, I just want to encourage everyone to say your point we don't need to repeat it too often. I f you are not convincing others repeating isn't probably going to help. So, let's try to move pretty quickly. I f we can. I f there is, you know, somebody disagrees with what appears to be otherwise a consensus there may be a need to move ahead, and you know, anyone disagreeing will certainly have ample opportunity to bring it up to the full committee this being only a subcommitt ee. If we don't have a pretty solid consensus we may need to vote. T he draft of the proposal that the staff distributed thank you staff I think you did some things that needed to be done to make it an acceptable format for everyone. What the small group said in red is showing up in my computer anyway in light purple. S o, I hope everyone cansee it. I t reflects

-- I am pretty sure it reflects all of the

changes I went through it really closely. S o, I think it's all there. A s we move to content, I just want to remind everybody that this proposal is for new cars. S o, what I would like to do is see who has changes or questions. First, I want to get a list of people and then have you present them not necessarily with discussion. B ecause I want to get a s ense of what all we have. B efore we go back and actually talk about it. I s that approach acceptable? I s there anyone to whom that approach is not acceptable? Okay. S o, who

-- I realize people didn't get this until fairly recently. I hope that you did have a chance to go over it. Much of it are things that we have discussed at previous meetings. I s there anybody who has changes

-- I want to get an answer to that. A nd after that I want to ask is there anybody who has questions. S o first of all is th ere anyone who has changes? >> This is Ken Shiotani I just

-- I have sort of a question or change that in the very beginning of rapid rail or high

- speed rail I don't think you need to say it for new
cars. I think by definition rapid rail, you know, in the original 37.3 says rapid rail is

-- needs level boarding cars. That runs on separate roadways or I mean rails or something like that. A nd then on the light ray andcommuter rail in the second thing I just want a little

explanation of that I am not quite sure I understand exactly what is being intended particularly for light rail in

-- when there is some level boarding but there is some not level boarding so I want a little explanation of that. >> Okay. Ken in terms of your first question, whether someth ing that was said was necessary, I may

-- we may say let the Access Board staff sort that out, because these are just

-- these are recommendations, these aren't in certificate of specification language, all of it, and if some things were redundant of the regs it won't be said if you have questions about the scoping that's a question that we should address. A nd I think the small group can explain what they meant. T hat's a perfectly good question. Other people have changes

-- let me just get a list. >> Mar ilyn this is Blair. I would just say, particularly with where there is dimensions

-- rather, that you use the primary reference in inches because, for example, where we say 800 millimeters or 32 inches 800 millimeter is more like 31 and a half inches so

- - we should pick one and stay with it. A nd maybe

-- >> They should mean the same thing, first of all. B ut I think that's a good question. Yeah primary inches >> This is Dennis Cannon could I say something aboutthat?>> I would rather list them and go b ack I don't want to

get bogged down in one thing I want to see what everything is we have one immediate to go get through it so I am taking a list I he won't forget. Anybody else with changes? >> Yes, M arilyn this is Don Mebius with LTK I have a question on the second page where operation, is that strictly for people movers? O r -- because it says car doors open automatically in platforms designed for (inaudible) prior to door opening. T hat's still auto matically after doors close.
>> Marilyn: N o that's not just people moves I don't think that's everything. A nd >> Mr. Mebius: T hat probably needs to be discussed for the you know, how realistic that approach would be. >> Marilyn: O kay: I t's on the list

. Others? A ll right. Well this is not people's last chance at all.

(LAUGHTER) >> Marilyn: B ut it sounds like the only people who have

-- who are prepared to speak up right now just let me ask one more time, changes especially or questions? A nd, ag ain, of course you can think of it later if you have a question later.>> This is Ken Shiotani again. O n the second page on

the advisory clear width, I sort of a question or the issue is, is that

-- the wider ramp recommended is that going to be only for ramps attached to new cars or something? O r could that apply to ramps that might access older cars because I think I have heard Dennis say in the past, you know, the ramp width needs to not be wider if you can't maneuver within the car. S o, it may just b e a clarification issue that it's ramp that is

-- comes out of a new car or attached to the new car or something which is a clarification issue.
>> Marilyn: O kay. G ot it. T hanks Ken. I think we should start with Don's question. D on, you were -- you wa nted to raise questions about the practice cast of automatic operation? >> Don Mebius: N ot so much

-- on the automatic nature of it. B ut that it needs to be deployed before a door opens. >> Can you speak up please >> I can barely hear him >> Don Mebius: Is this any better >> Yes. >> Don: O kay. M y question is: T hat it needs to be activated before the doors open and then retracted after thedoors are closed. T his

-- you know, that's structurally a

critical area of the car, and to hold that up to have
s omething obviously that has to sit below the floor becomes a little bit of an issue. S o, it's

-- >> Marilyn: I think the members of the subgroup thanks Don the members on the subgroup with us are Dennis or Ed either of you want to address why it has to b e after and before the way that's written that actually occurred to me as well.
>> This is Dennis. T he idea is that you don't want

-- this is from the ICE train for example in Germany which has a draw bridge kind of deployment. T he draw bridge that is ra ised it's not slides in under but raised in front of the door. You don't want that to be

-- you don't want the doors to open with that to be where people will trip. S o, you want to make sure that that it deploys prior to the doors or as the doors are ope ning it doesn't have to be a long time prior just make sure that when the doors open the bridgeplate is in place. We have seen this on the

-- on a couple of videos that are sent around from the high speed log in California that shows operation in light be g is Stuttgart and I think Wutenberg also mentioned I can't railroad where he saw another one where a bridgeplate deploys. Remember, this is only the case where you gota -- you have to deploy a bridgeplate. You already said if

you get the gap down to two inches as you can do with sill extension like they did in Marta with rapid rail there is no bridgeplate. I t doesn't apply, unless you have got the clearance issue greater than two inches.
>> Okay. T hat's fine you said a key point here. Because the way this was worded was shall deploy automatically prior to door opening, would it make sense to say "prior to or as the door is opening"? >> Yeah. I just wanted to make sure that it didn't

-- the door didn't open and then, you know, then the gap and then it would suddenly

-- but yeah that can finesse it that's fine.
>> Okay.
>> This is Blair. To that point, thinking about winter operations and ice and snow and all how horrible things can be in the winter conditions, and getting things to deploy properly. O bviously if it lived inside the door and it's out of the ice and snow that's its deployment would be more predictable. I see your point Dennis about people tripping over it. B ut to Don's point if the

-- to be absolutely

-- it's absolutely integral to the door

-- if you had one of those things deployed on the outside and they deployed or something as the train was coming in it could be quitehazard or going out with these wings sticking up. So, you know, as the door is opening, so that it's maybe the door is part way open for the things deploy, might be a good thing.
>> Marilyn: O n the

-- >> That is something for the designers and engineers to sort out. B ut I would just to that point try not to box it in too tight.
>> This is Dennis. I think maybe we cou ld say something like "should deploy

-- the deployment should be integrated with the door opening and closing," something like that. >> We could add something like what the intention is so that it should be integrated in the words you just used. And in a way that people will not be able to exit or enter while the bridgeplate is deploying. >> Sounds good to me.
>> Yes, that's

-- that reduces my concern, thank you. (Dog barking heard.) >> Was that a comment? (LAUGHTER) >> Marilyn: I just noti ced I am talk and my mute button is on that's not going to work. T he dog may be trying to take over the chairperson position.(LAUGHTER) >> Marilyn: We may have to vote on that one and I am nervous how it's going to come out.

(Laughter)
>> Marilyn: Let's see thank you Don it sounds like your concern was resolved. I think that was

-- I love how easy that fix was. I t seems like maybe Ken do you want to go to your questions? >> Ken: Let's see advisory one or the definition one is just I sho uldn't worry about the language because the staff will deal with it. >> Marilyn: T he one you said you thought was redundant of the regulation. You could say >> Ken: R ight. I think that in the regs rapid rail is defined as you know, retrain

-- I think t he wording is like subway

- like car and have a different (inaudible) right

- of

-way something like that. I just don't know if that is necessary to say. >> Melissa: Ken can you speak up please. >> Ken: I 'm sorry. >> Melissa: I think we got mobility of that as you are talking. >> This is Dennis Cannon. Yes, you are right rapid rail is talked about in the definition of subway but myrecollection is high speed rail doesn't say that in the

definition but in the provision for highspeed rail it does require leve l boarding. S ome of that may be redundant. But I think that's an issue that can be worked out with the

-- or maybe the

-- redefine high

- speed rail to be level boarding. B ut I think the board can work it out.
>> Okay. >> Linda: Yes this is Linda at FRA the definition of rapid rail is in (inaudible) and but what you guys are working on today would end up in Part 38 it's not a bad thing to repeat

-- repeat it. >> Ken: G ood point. >> Marilyn: O kay. A nd Ken you had a question about advisory clear width?
> > Ken: I am getting more static I am trying to mute as much as possible. I rrelevant guess my

-- just the question was: T he advisory

-- you know, wider

-- we all sort of know wider is easier makes it easier for people to get on. B ut I guess the question that I had was: I think that something that Dennis has talk beside in previous meetings, you don't want a bridgeplate or ramp that is wider than all of the clearances in the car. A nd so, I just

-- I didn't know whether this advisory was intended for bri dgeplates or ramps that are connected to new cars sothat you know the access would be great. T he

-- one thing

the visioning is that you have a nicely designed new wide bridgeplate going on to an Amtrak Amfleet car which is pretty tight in all sorts of di mensions. Just so it was just how to clarify that so you are not having a portable bridgeplate that would sort of allow a person to get on but then won't get the person

-- the person will get stuck. >> Dennis: Well this is Dennis first of all advisory lan guage is kind of interesting but not very useful.

(LAUGHTER) >> Dennis: I mean it's kind of

-- this is kind of nice thing to do but it is really not a regulatory requirement. I t doesn't have any force of anything other than just to say that. T he bri dgeplate has to fit in the door. S o, if the door is 30 inches wide, you will have a 30

- inch wide bridgeplate it doesn't matter really that if the door is wider you have a lot more room wider bridgeplate may be fine. But I don't think it means anything wi th respect to how it's used or what cars there are or any of those kinds of things. If you can fit the a 36

- inch door and you put in a 36

- inch bridgeplate then that's fine.
>> Ken: O kay. >> Marilyn: D ennis, it shouldn't exceed the doorwidth is that

-- >> Dennis: Yeah, I am not sure that it can but

-- >> Chris: H ey guys >> Marilyn: H ey, welcome Chris.
>> Chris: I 'm sorry I got kicked out a couple of times. At any rate just a little note, that yes the bridgeplate will always be slightly (inaudible)

- - slightly less than the door width. J ust because you need space to maneuver that bridgeplate into the door. S o, if you got

-- if you have a different door and bridgeplate following, it won't be more than 35 and a half or 35, just to give folks a little wiggle room to get in to place. T hen

-- >> Marilyn: U nderstood.
>> Dennis: Remember we say in the scoping
car- borne bridgeplate. T his is talking about something that is actually on the car, the new cars it's not a separate device that you might use for an existing car. T his is part of the new car. >> Chris: U nderstood. A nd I was just, again, say that I am not aware of any

-- anything on the market today that is that dimension of the door. >> Dennis: R ight.
>> Marilyn: G ood point, good point this is Marilyn. Okay. C hris just to catch you up, what we did was, just listpeople that had changes or questions about the proposal.

And we have been through several questions and short discussions about different parts of it. B lair, I think you were the ot her person on the list with a point to make about primary reference in inches. >> Blair: Yes, or in

-- in English dimensions including the way as the primary or the initial because we see in some places Marilyn that it's like 5/8 of an inch there is no me tric equivalent. M y recommendation is we stay with inches and pounds to keep everything ancient and backwards.

(LAUGHTER)
>> And use metrics as a secondary reference just so we keep it consistent with the old rules and where people are making comparis ons. B ecause as we see with 800 millimeters as a railroad I vote that that but I think you be disappointing it's not 32 inches. I was -- (inaudible) >> Oops.
>> Blair, are you still there? >> Yes.
>> We lost him. >> Are you still talking? >> No I

-- where did you guys lose me? >> Marilyn: S o, I

-- okay. S o I think that makes sense to switch them. I would also either thesubcommittee or the full committee or the staff, somebody

has to make sure that they are really the same. I f 800 millimeters is 31 an d a half inches millimeters are awfully small we should get a number very close to 32 inches.
>> Marilyn? T his is Marsha. We do have a metric policy here for our conversions. A nd we can share that with the committee. We don't want to interpret millimet ers in one way in one document and another way in a different document. Particularly when it's the same number of inches but we will get to that to the committee, and

-- and share that with you. O kay? >> Marilyn: T hank you. T hanks Marsha. >> Blair: M a rilyn, this is Blair. I f I could throw out one more things I

-- thing I forgot to put it in the list but you hit on a little bit. W hen we look under the scoping the general rapid rail and high

- speed rail cars and the full length level boarding,, whenever you are dealing with rail cars you know manufacturer of things there is a certain degree of tolerance in construction but there is also the wheels and things wear down as you move down the railroad. W hat is the assumed tolerance for level? T here has to be some

-- there has to be some allowance for mechanical realities, you know, moving up and down the railroad.>> Marilyn: You know, the standard is for new cars

but does anyone want to address Blair's question beyond that?>> Dennis: Yeah, this is Denni s. T hat issue was come up before, one thing as happened here in DC the (inaudible) platform after it was built sank four inches because the engineers didn't do a good job and it had to be raised and wheels do wear and the suspension gets tired and a whole variety of things like that. W hat we had said early on in the current reg and it's not, maybe needs to be clarified here is you first of all you measure the gaps when the car is at rest because obviously when people are getting on and off it rocks back a nd forth and it doesn't (inaudible). And you also have to specify a passenger load. B ecause even with the best pneumatic suspension and self correction it's not perfect to get it aligned all the time no matter what the load is. S o, it will change. We p robably need to say that

-- I think I said it somewhere I am not sure if it's in here. T hat the measurements the two inch gap and the 5/8 is done when the train is at rest with a set say 50% passenger load or something like that. To make sure when you me asure it, obviously it will change because the cars rock and they have degrees of freedom that you don't have in the middle except in California.(LAUGHTER) >> The issue of where however is one that needs to be looked at periodically and it may mean th at at some point it's wear so bad that you have to put in a bridgeplate where you didn't have to before. S o, I don't know what the tolerances are because prior to the

-- part of the problem is tolerances vary for all kinds of things and they are different for all kinds of things. S o, we have been

-- the board has been struggling with this issue of construction tolerances for years. A nd I am not sure how to address it if anybody has a good idea. B ut when the first

-- one of the second sets, I guess, of rail cars that Metro ordered, there was a delay in a part somewhere so the delay you know the whole train cars didn't arrive. M etro was very anxious to get them on so it accepted them and put them into revenue service but it

-- before it had gone through i ts verification that is met the specs. A nd the cars were quite a bit higher than the platform. T he manufacturer could have been forced to fix that if they hadn't accepted them but they did anyway. A nd the argument was, well, you know, within a couple of years the wheels will wear down and we won't have to worry about that. I don't think that's an acceptable answer you have to be careful of the sit. B e sure it meets your spec before you accept them and make sure that themanufacturer corrects any defect s. B ut you are right,

over time it's going to change, and I don't know how you deal with that. F irst of all

-- how you deal with that personally.
>> This is Blair again Dennis. I know that in

-- typically in heavy cars like the Acela high

- speed train yo u are allowed for a mismatch of wheel size from side to side within the same truck and obviously from end to end of the car. B ecause they do wear at different rates wheel gets they are very expensive when they wear you turn them down and reface them so th ey track properly and ride well. And you can

-- and you continue that until the wheel is condemnable you replace the wheel and you are back to a new standard. B ut I don't know of

-- you would actually be looking at something that would level the vehicle based on its height above the track. A nd the relation to the platform. A nd then in a heavy train like that I don't know what predictability you could have. M y only point is that it needs to be realistic. You know anything is achievable but with the heavier trains it does need to be a realistic, you know, tolerance. A nd obviously we want to maintain the trains properly and so they come in and they do what they are supposed to do. B ut we don't (inaudible) wheels every day. T hank God.>> Dennis. T his i s Dennis. W ith respect to things

with rapid rail that may be more of a problem. T he issue with something like the Acela

-- inner

- city rail and commuter rail. We already know we are not going to get a two inch gap we are automatically going to have a bri dgeplate. S o the bridgeplate is going to solve that problem even when it sinks. Even when it moves quite a bit up and down. O nce the bridgeplate is there, once you already required a bridgeplate to be there. T he fact that the train moves up and down or side to side isn't going to affect

-- unless you had a bridgeplate that was just exactly the right length to get from the cell to the platform and then with some shift in ballast or something it ended up with a gap. B ut that's not likely to happen. >> Ma rilyn: I hope not.
>> So I don't think it's going to be an issue in most of the cases because we are going to have a bridgeplate anyway. >> Right. B ut when flow in the word "level" you could argue level is level. B ut there obviously has to be some deviation allowed for all of those realities.
>> I think level boarding is the way it's defined in the DOT reg I don't know that DOT has any definition of tolerance within that framework.>> Okay. >> Marilyn: B lair, with reference to the word "level" was the o ne that concerned you? >> Blair: Well, on the first page, where under scoping where it says general

-- rapid rail and high speed cars purchased after the effective dates of these requirements shall be designed for full length platform level boarding to
me et the provisions of this section. S o, that was again, just to make sure that we don't get it into box that's not reasonably achievable. >> Marilyn: R ight. You are talking about

-- I am not saying that you are

-- that since you work in inner

- city your concerns about to be limited to inner

- city. I nner - city has a slighter different standard a little lower. B ut you are talking about your concerns of rapid rail and high speed.
>> When you say high

- speed rail. We run high speed inner

- city rail the Acela i s an inner

- city train. T hat's my
concern. W hen I look at rapid rail I think about subways and things like that, you know, there is a whole other element of control that you have because people I am
sure -- I am sure some folks on the rapid rail side migh t argue with that. B ut versus inner

- city trains. A nd when I think of that, today, I think of the Acela and future trains like that operating in inner

- city conditions. W hen you arebuilding whole new systems you can do a lot more to keep

that under control and that's what we are talking about hopefully new stations and platforms and all of those things that eventually

-- but there is mechanical realities of how things wear and behave. >> Dennis: T his is Dennis. I think what we

-- what we might want to d o and suggest the Board do is look at the what the DOT the latest iteration of the DOT regs that talk about level boarding. I am not sure but it occurs to me that they say something like, where the

-- the platform height is generally at the same level as the frame car. T hat vaguely sounds like it might be. I t may be in the definition of taking whatever the DOT reg said the newest one says how it defines level boarding and make sure that we are consistent with what level boarding means and don't invent
so mething

-- don't take that term and try to change it when it's already in the regulation that DOT just put out.
>> Right.
>> This is Linda. >> My >> Marilyn: G o ahead Linda and Blair.
>> and David Nelson has a question also.
>> Marilyn: Let's do Linda David Nelson then Blair then back to you if that's all right.>> the recent regulation back in 2011 it does include a

definition of level boarding, and we

-- we refer to it as level entry boarding as opposed to level boarding to hopefully get out of the litt le bit of that confusion about it literally doesn't mean level boarding in most cases. A nd that

-- that is 37.72F that applies to high speed commuter and high

- speed rail it defines level boarding to a means of boarding platform design in which the horizon tal gap between the car at rest and the platform is no more than 10 inches on tandem track and 13 on curved. A nd where you -- and more

-- not more than 5.5 inches above the boarding platform. W here you can't meet that, then you have to have a bridgeplate ramp or other means to get across it. >> Marilyn: O kay.
>> I know it sounds tremendously large this is based on Dick Cogwell's tolerances that you were talking about in terms of wheel wear and track

-- track, um, sinking and all of that stuff. >> Marilyn : T hank you. D avid Nelson. >> Yes David Nelson here apologies got kicked out of the conference room I was in I switched over I am not sure how far along we are in the discussion I was thinking about the future just technology and stuff that might come in tothe picture sometime down the road. M aybe it might be

best to go ahead and put in proposal as possible, I know we were talking about the level

-- level boarding problems due to the wheels being worn down, different sizes. I don't know, I was kind of h aving the thought process maybe if we could have what I am calling maybe a car lift or some kind of lift that when the train does arrive at a station platform, the car lift itself would kind of automatically raise or actually lower it would just adjust the train car to be the same level as the platform. S ay like with modern buses speed buses they have kind of the knee

-- I am not sure exactly what it's call knee lift or knee level where the bus drops down to ground level so people can board and unboard. W hen it's time to move the vehicle the bus will go ahead and raise back up to the normal height, normal level (inaudible). M aybe it's best to me the technology is not currently available not but it might be ready some time 10 years from now. We know this stuff takes so long to go through the rulemaking and the process of regulation, so I would like to see that maybe some kind of language that would be put in that when feasible or in the future when the technology is a available

-- that the technology is available, this rail car would have some kind of lift or some kind of adjustment lift to help make sure that it would bethe

-- that is would be safe for boarding. T hat goes with

writing the specific language. I wanted to throw it in that's the end of my l ong, boring spiel.

(LAUGHTER) >> Marilyn: T his is Marilyn not at all David thanks. Blair, you had a response before? >> Blair: N o, I just wanted to make sure

-- and I think Linda covered it, but the

-- obviously the intent is concept of level boardi ng is that you can make a reasonable

-- a reasonable safe transfer from the platform to the car or the car to the platform and that may not be dead level. B ut it's very close to level that is within a safe range to traverse. E ither with or without a plat e. >> Linda: T his is Linda again I want today clarify what I said because I skipped through some things. Basically, with the maximums are the 13 and 10 inches, but where you can't meet the 3 inches and 5/8 inch use a boarding device like a ramp or platfo rm. A nd I think you guys are suggesting that that be two inches not three, I am not sure. In any case I didn't want to leave that with a big giant thud which is 10 inches and 13 inches is acceptable. >> Blair: T his is Blair. T hose numbers come from, I think used to be the AREA it's now AREMA but those govern the platform setbacks where there is freight and thingsmoving through the same platforms. A nd take into

account all kinds of wiggles and jiggles in the cars. >> Chris: Yeah. B lair, this is Chris

. I think I wanted to point out Areva it's worth while to recall the (inaudible) institute with the (inaudible) research project at (inaudible). Basically says that nothing used by the (inaudible) was below 15 inches. I think. O r 17 inches. A nd of cou rse that makes sense because of your typical rail car wheel is 14

-- is in 28

- inch or larger diameter. A nd (inaudible) is actually on the car it's going to be at the

-- at 14 or higher. So, the work that we did in some ways (inaudible) is the point that the 8 and 10 inch height of platforms could actually go up significantly. T hat was dealt with at DOT. Last (inaudible). B ut it is worthwhile to note that a 8 and 10

- inch platform height doesn't actually have a lot of width when you look at the (inaudibl e) freight car infrastructure.
>> Yeah, Chris, when you are looking at the height of the platform above the top of rail you are correct. B ut I think what Linda was referring to was the edge of the platform to the edge of the train. A nd what that was or tangent track versus in curves. A nd I think that that was driven by wide loads on freight railroad cars such as tanks and military apparatus those types of things. B ut, again, my only point I was more concerned about the level issuethan the setbacks. B e cause, obviously, there is work going

on to deal with that. B ut, also, just to make sure that there was an understood

-- that there are tolerances in the railroads and the manufacturing and the wear and tear and those kinds of things. S o, and that we get what we want, which is that you can safely board and detrain but it may not always be on the bubble level. A nd I think that that's been discussed. S o, I am good.
>> Chris: B lair, I am just curious I know that you talked in the past about the trouble wi th maintaining the older cars (inaudible) and I wonder if the newer air bags, ancient systems, might begin to point us to a better solution for (inaudible) compliance. C ontinually in rapid rail, where because you are try to go get a lot of people on board , you don't ever really want a step up or step down. (Ringing.) >> Yes, this is Blair. To that point Chris the technology is always changing. A nd we

-- we do base a lot of our thinking on what we know works today. B ut if

-- I remember having the discus sion with engineers 15 years ago about the tilting trains and they were scared to death of tilting trains. A nd I use the comparison to agricultural machinery that has very high

- tech sensing devices and things like that. A nd still though when you add all of thetechnology in the world to very dynamic vehicles, there is

always a chance for things to go awry. B ut I don't want to discount that things should continually get better. B ut at the same time, you know, as things wear you need to have some allowanc e. B ecause you could have a system theoretically that as the train rolls in no matter what it's

-- its running condition is that it looks at some element on the platform and something and lifts itself up to match. Now, throw in snow and ice and other var iables you know, okay predictability goes away. T hey are not sun surmountable I want to make sure whatever we are requiring had a reasonable left of

-- level of tolerance that didn't push it out of what we anticipated, and that is when the train comes in that whatever devices or mechanisms it uses to bridge the horizontal gap that the vertical difference for level boarding is manageable. T hat it's safe and reasonable for people to make a transfer either walking or wheelchairs or how ever. A nd then again that was my only point. >> Dennis: T his is Dennis, I think the issue that we could do is say, where it says, full length platform level boarding insert "as defined by DOT in whatever the regulation

-- latest regulation is.">> Marilyn: O kay. Very good

. >> David Nelson here.
>> Marilyn: G o ahead David.
>> David: J ust had a quick question maybe it might not be relevant in the current discussion. I just wanted to go ahead and throw it out there. I was in California just recently, I just

-- I found out that two commuter trains out there are not using the 15

- inch (inaudible) top rail level they are doing 18 or 19. A nd one of them

-- one of them purchased a new car it was still 18, 19 inches of topper rail. And some people with disabilities complained a bout why we are not have to have the same level platform. T hey asked me if there was any standard for train platforms. I I'm sorry for train floors. I told them that I didn't know of one. So, my question is

-- well this level boarding as you define it as 15 to 48 inches above top of rail. I s there going to be a guide for future passengers, future passenger train cars including commuters or would we need to have a separate regulation made for the train standards for consistency? >> Marilyn: T hi s is Marilyn anybody want to address that question? >> Dennis: Yeah, this is Dennis. T here are train
cars -- there is no standard because the design varies. I mean, we have got trains

-- the train car floors that are 48inches above top of rail. A nd yo u have got some that are

20. You have some that are like the some of the Bombardier cars that essentially are

-- have a low section between the trucks so the ends of the

-- of the car, the floor is higher to go over the truck. B ut then it drops down. A n d there is a low section in the center. A nd so, you can board from a fairly low platform. T he same is true with some of the soup pare liners

-- superliners that Amtrak is running. W here you board in the center platform essentially with a fairly sloping

-- not very steep ramp. The sleepers and double deckers so there is a whole bunch. And what you actually run depends in large part on the

-- where you are running them. T here are places, for example, that

-- where the double decker cars can't run. They run the Chicago but can't run up and down northeast corridor I can't remember. B ut there are all sorts of restrictions with tunnels and bridges and clearances and what not that you can't run some of the cars that you have to use only some cars and some p arts of the country, so I don't think there is going to be a standard floor height ever as long as the technology keeps evolving and people keep trying to redesign the trains. T hat is one of the things about the scoping that says you have a car

- borne brid geplate or a car

- borne left because

-- lift because youbuy all of these brand new cars, I guess the idea would be

to have the highest floor possible but not really. And

-- they are going to have to operate in stations that are existing they won't have to be rebuilt in the foreseeable future. You have to have a way to get on and off the car when you can't have level boarding. H igh

- speed rail for the most part is being designed with dedicated right

- of

-way. T hey are not running these things with the exception of the Acela like the Texas train is going to build its own track its own stations and whatever they can control all of that. W hen you are running your trains on somebody else's rail, you have to contend with all of the barriers that are there are th ere in terms of tunnel height and bridge width as all of that stuff I don't think you are going to get a standard quote unquote level train floor level for that's going to work anywhere except in small pieces of the country. >> Marilyn: T his is Marilyn I actually had a couple of things that I wanted to ask the group. At the risk of upsetting the apple cart. B ut I think this is a very good discussions that we are having, stop me if I, you know, go too quickly over a point that we haven't exhausted. B ut I was talking to Dennis about what the small group did, and he acknowledged to me and this is by the way, on page 2,the last

-- very close to the end of the section just before

ramps and bridgeplates starts. T hat there is a 12

- inch standard or specificati on here that manually (inaudible) shall be permitted horizontal gap exceeds in essence 12 inches." Dennis, do you want to say what you told me about that?>> Dennis: Yeah. T he issue was there are some places where, and you got existing stations where the gap is very big. S omebody actually said there was a gap that was as big as 24 inches or something in someplace. T here is not likely to ever be a bridgeplate that's stowed on board that actually going to work in that situation. You think of the bus ramp s, for example, which fold out from the floor of the bus. T here is a limit on how long the ramp can be it has to fit into the

-- the front of the bus area. T he same is true with the vestibule of a train car. You are not going to be able to have a ramp o r bridgeplate that is four feet long, for example, in that situation. A nd in those cases it's almost absolutely necessary that you have a manually deployed bridgeplate that may or may not be on the platform. Remember, we are going to operate these cars i n a whole bunch of existing stations that are not going to be modified. T he idea that people are going to builthigh

- level platforms is not realistic it's not going to

happen. S o, we have to assume that we can

-- there will be cases where the short bridg eplate that deploys automatically simply isn't going to work. I t is going to have to be a manually operated device. T he idea was where the doors are open by personnel in the train, many cases when it pulls into the station not all of the doors open. T he only ones that are opened by conductors. S o that people are shepherded out of the door. I n that case it seems reasonable to say that it was deployed a manual bridgeplate in that case where you have got some control of the doors the doors open people can board but there is actually a person at that door that is opening it. A nd the 12 inches I picked off the top of my said saying that

-- top of my head saying that the top of the platform and the rail is more than 12 inches you may have to have a manual de ployed bridgeplate to take care of that. T he 12 inches is the number I picked up off the top of my head and we can argue whether that's the correct number or not. T hat's the rationale where it came from. >> Marilyn: T his is Marilyn does anyone want to
a rgue about whether that is the right number or not? >> This is David here. N o, we have

-- I think we had that problem in Maine if I remember correctly. B ecause thetrain stops on a curve at that station. A nd so, that is where

we ended up with a wider ga p. A nd I know that there are some other stations where that occurs, but there are smaller stations that use the superliner. B ut in Maine, I know that it happens with all of the single

- level cars where you have a gap, I think the biggest gap that we found were 35 inches. S o, completely to my dismay and surprise the new station I am not sure why they built the station with a
curve. B ut I know the future regulation needs to account for that. T hat you know, there needs to be a direct platform so that you w ill avoid that gap. >> Marilyn: T his is Marilyn I think the suggestion in the proposal

-- I mean, I think David what you said is ideal. But the suggestion in the proposal provides for when you can't avoid a big gap. F or whatever reason. I mean, especia lly given that we are not talking about you know this is not a platform standard this is a car standard. Other

-- other

-- does anyone else have comments on this? >> Ken: T his is Ken. I guess the only comment is that the difference should be, you know, what is a realistic gap that a car

-- automatic car

- borne lift can car

- borne ramp or bridge plat goes out that maybe that's 10 or 11. When it's beyond that then it should be the manual deploy lift, you know, when the doors don't open automatically.But, you know, it's just

-- I don't know if 10 or 12 is the

right number. You know, it's

-- it's

-- I assume that you are conceding it's when the bridgeplate that's attached to the car and deploys automatically just can't reach then you use the manual bridgepl ate. >> Chris: Well, Ken, I think the bigger question here is let's just say that you have got a gap or if we want to pick on the two

- foot gap of the (inaudible). W hen you are above the track bed should anybody be crossing that gap without handrails, and without edge protection. A nd my gut says, no way in heck would I want someone crossing 18 to 24 inches out four feet above the ground without handrails and without edge protection. A nd if that is the case, then you are only going to get that with a manu al bridgeplate. N ow, you are not going to design similar with a 12

- inch horizontal gap, except for a couple of random (inaudible) where you have movable platforms edges or (inaudible). B ut

-- >> Chris, this is Marilyn you have actually a few paragraphs l ater I should have said this, a provision for handrails

-- I put

-- I sort of coordinate a coordinating

-- a coordinating provision for handrails on bridgeplates where the gap is greater than 12 inches.
>> Chris: Yeah.>> Marilyn: T hat's in either of the gang planks that

you were talking about.
>> Chris: I think, Marilyn just from operational standpoint, the more you have to design with personnel the more likely things go wrong. A nd so, as the rail advisement say they don't have enough bodies as it is t oday on the trains. S o, they don't really want to add more things or people

-- for people to do. >> Dennis: T his is Dennis. T he idea of handrails is probably one of the automatically deploying bridgeplate like the one that they have in the buses and so forth that you can put in the rail car, maybe. T here is no way that you can really deploy handrails that is almost automatically something that you would have to do manually. A nd as far as personnel, the more personnel that you have that can go wrong it' s true but you can have failures of the automatic systems just as well. T he provision here is that you have to have all of the ramps and bridgeplates have to have edge protection but in addition to that where the gap you are spanning is greater than 12 in ches, you must have handrails and that's automatically going to be a manually deployed lift ramp excuse me for bridgeplate. B ut the issue then is in most of these systems, as opposed to rapid rail and things, they open door

-- this is true of lots ofplatforms not just where the gap is large. T hat they only

open certain doors because there is some kind of obstruction or something on the platform. S o, in inner

- city rail, typically, they don't open all of the doors automatically, the doors are opened indiv idually and people are taken through a car which is why it's important when we do the accessible route issues that we make sure that we have got an accessible route to whatever the door is. >> Marilyn: D oes that require another provision? >> Dennis: N o t hat is part of the accessible route issue.
>> Marilyn: O h, I see okay. T hat's a good point.
>> Chris: You know, I would also suggest to you all that you may not want to make your recommendation on a very small number of oddball locations where we have
e xtreme gaps. I think that you better think about as you got new systems, you have got new cars, what is the (inaudible). A nd for the oddball location, you are going to have to figure out alternative options. >> Marilyn: Well, language is welcome. B ut I haven't heard a lot of

-- this is a good discussion. I haven't heard anything that suggests a change of the language in the proposal, I don't think. O ther than

-- well, no I

-- I don't think it has.>> Chris: M arilyn, I would suggest that maybe folks

n eed to digest it a little more and ponder before you call it closed. >> Marilyn: R ight. Well there is no really closed on the subcommittee because it will be discussed by the full committee. C hris before you got on we are talking about this is the last committee commit

-- meeting before the fall committee meeting. I n a couple of weeks, and we just want to get this proposal done to present to them with the understanding that of course the full committee can make whatever changes. B ut just to show

-- jus t to show that we have been doing something. T he other

-- the other point that I wanted to raise is that there is a storage section

-- I am going to find it and then tell everybody where it is on my computer although I added changes, so, it's bottom of page 3 or near the top of page 4. I think. R ight before lifts the section of lifts starts. And it wasn't in red or purple or whatever, but I think it does include some new language. I t's reflecting the shift that we are

-- that our subcommittee appears to be trying to bring forward for the future of emphasizing on board devices whether they are automatic, and integrated with automatic doors, or whether they are simply stowed on board and we discussed why, Ed Hoff a number of reasonswhy you recommended that I think you were the person

who kicked that

-- you know, brought that proposal forward and you can repeat those points if people need to hear that. B ut I just I noticed this morning that that paragraph wasn't highlighted and it should have been highligh ted. I believe. B ecause -- if it's not the same as the current it looks like it should be highlighted.
>> Dennis: T his is Dennis the storage provision that you are saying is where portable ramps and bridgeplates
are -- securement or other methods is that the part you are talking about? >> Yes.
>> That is the current regulation.
>> Even the vehicle part? >> Dennis: Yes, the thing that Ed raised in a note to you was it says where portable ramps bridgeplates are permitted, his question was: We didn't say where they are permitted. T hen I just realized when we just got through talking about this operation issue is that, yes, we did. T he issue is they are permitted when you got more than a 12

- inch gap. >> Marilyn: T hat's right. A nd

-- well, I mean, I thin k whether manual operation manual deployment is the same as portable. Ed and I were talking about that yesterday.We had thought manual deployment met still attached.

And it could include pushing buttons or attached to the car but deployed by personnel. You are suggesting that manual deployment could be a platform

- based thing for large gaps and really is the same as portable. T hat sometimes portable will be on board but other times for example if it have handrails you felt portable would mean platform

- based.
>> Dennis: Yeah. >> Marilyn: A ny comments or any discussion on any of that? >> Chris: I f Gary is on the phone, he can speak to the bridgeplate if he has worked out handrails. A nd it will be kept on board the train. >> Marilyn: T his is Marilyn. That was Chris I don't think Gary is here. G ary are you here? I don't think Gary is here.
>> Dennis: S ome of us went to Union Station a few weeks ago and saw the new design ramp. Yeah it folds up it has Rand rails that detach and there will be a compa rtment for it to fit in inside the door somewhere. They haven't designed that I don't think. T hat would meet this provision. >> David here I'm sorry to interrupt you yes that was aramp that we are planning on stowing on the train car I am

not exactly su re what is going on with the bridgeplate. Gary told me he was going to be on the conference call today. B ut I will send him a quick text and see if I can jump on this call and answer that question. >> Blair, I think we are

-- we are -- I know Gary has be en working on our down eastern service cars where we have the long setback from the tracks. A nd I think his idea was that that bridgeplate would go along with the cars. Let me just throw out that I know Linda experienced the situation and most unfortunate situation at one of the stations where the bridgeplate was to be kept at the stations and train pulls in everyone was scrambling trying to find the bridgeplate that evidently someone had put somewhere else or something so I think the idea is that if you have the plates on the cars, and it's part of the daily condition of the vehicle then you stand a pretty good chance of having a bridgeplate where you need it when you need it rather than chasing it down at the station. W here if you require both, then you have a much better chance of actually having the bridgeplate when you need it. >> Yes, this is Dennis. You know, the idea that you don't find it on the platform is one thing but I have also been in the situation when I went up to Baltimore on theMARC train we came across the bridgeplate stowed in the

car wasn't there either. T hey can disappear from either place.
>> Chris: A nd I

-- >> and they have to get it out of another car to get me in the car.
>> Chris: A nd (inaudible) I would push that and say, i f I have got 6 cars in my train and I have a bridge plate on each car, it's pretty unlikely that all 6 of those would be missing. N ow, if I have one platform, in Podunk USA where the bridgeplates are, where (inaudible) a teenager or skateboard guy can att empt to

-- can potentially walk off with the bridgeplate. I got a lot less guarantee. >> That point is right on the mark I wanted one little thing it's something that is unfortunately more common than not when you have the platform based bridgeplate. Bec ause there is no as Chris just mentioned, there is no determination as to how many you need on a platform relative to how many cars are on a train usually combined. If we require at least one bridgeplate on every car, perhaps we can do even better if you have two ends of a car that are accessible perhaps we should tie the bridgeplates to being stowed on the car relative to their distance from an accessible door where you might require two bridgeplatesper car that point is well taken once you tied them to the

car and you have that many that the likelihood is much, much less that you are not going to

-- that your going to run out of a bridgeplate at the time that you need one. We have had the experiences not so much with vandalism skate borders you don't si mply walk out of the station with one of ours they are 30 by 30 inch bulky thick alum number what is normally the case is my experience is, crew member will take one put it down, be afraid he gets to the destination there might not be one easily available to them they will keep it on board. A nd in a noncontainer where there is nothing to hold it against the wall anything when they get to the end they leave the bridgeplate somewhere on the platform not secured in a box or what have you. S o you have a haphazard inventory of the plates. We have controlled it to a certain extent I know it still occurs. I f we have it stowed on the car, and better yet tethered to the car or integrated with the car somehow, as manual as it may be, you bring down the likelihood that much more. >> This is Dennis. We do

-- I wasn't arguing against
car- borne. We do this provision in fact requires car

- borne ramps or bridgeplates or a car

- borne lift. >> I understand it was simply because we understood the

-- the cumbersomeness and b ulkiness of the handrailsand that it might be not be achievable to stow that type of

bridgeplate on the car. S o, I fully understand that.
>> Right. >> This is David here. >> Go ahead David.
>> I am not able to find the dimension about the
car- borne bridg e plate on page

-- >> Under gaps >> Does it say.
>> It's in the scoping provision under gaps. >> It's called >> This is Marilyn that's the storage section before the lift? >> No, no, no. I n the

-- it's in the scoping provision at the very beginning. U nde r gaps. >> Oh, I see. I t's the third

-- >> David Nelson I see it now. T hat's the word "automatic." >> Yes. We have been talking at least one or two meetings about automatic deployment. T his is Marilyn. >> Chris: J ust to be clear, the automatic deploym ent is really an issue for rapid rail and for people movers where you don't really have the luxury of waiting (inaudible) for someone to just show up with a manual plate.>> I don't know. I think

-- I think you are right.

That's probably where it's going to end up. H owever, you could use it on another railroad if the railroad was so ambitious to use one automatic bridgeplates. >> Chris: I am sure anyone does that Ed it might be you. I t's more work for you guys. >> Marilyn: Ed you are already do ing it aren't you? >> Ed: I am working on it not doing it yet but I appreciate the compliment though >> Ed, this is Blair, then everybody goes well Jersey Transit is doing it.

(LAUGHTER) >> Ed: I have used that against myself sometimes too. >> Well, we have done some things that you guys have had to live with that as well. Well just because Amtrak does it, you know?

(LAUGHTER) >> Well, that's a race to the top is better than a race to the bottom that's for sure. G ood. S o, other discussion of
an y of these issues? We have had a lot of good discussion not a lot of avoiding changes but a few. S hould I go over the ones that I wrote down? >> Chris: M arilyn, this is Chris. D id you guysdiscuss the 20 mile an hour people mover language in

scoping?
> > Marilyn: N o. We have not just today discussed that. We may have discussed it in previous meetings though.
>> Chris: I n case (inaudible) plenty of people movers available around the world that operate at much higher speeds. A nd I don't know the histo ry of that 20 mile per hour, but really want to think about just (inaudible). >> This is Dennis. T he provision currently says, people

-- slow moving people movers shall have a gap of 1 inch it doesn't define in the regulation itself doesn't define what "s low moving" means. T he 20 mile an hour came from a discussion with the folks from the advanced transit association that are sort of

-- advanced transit association the people that run all of these people movers around the country. A nd also from a standard that's being developed by ASCE, I think? F or the (inaudible) systems. A nd the issue was that the two or the 3 or 2 inch gap for currently existing for rapid rail was okay trying to meet a 1

- inch gap was not conceivable on something that came in out of stations rapidly.
>> Chris: A ll right.
>> So the suggestion was the 20 mile her hour was thestandard that's being used by AGT systems for the 1

- inch

gap that's where the 20 mile

-- it was in an advisory document put out by the board for the people mover section. I t does not

-- it did not appear in the regulation. The regulation only said slow moving.
>> Okay. Yeah. I am just aware as more rapid rail essentially becomes (inaudible) and you have a lot faster, let's say airport styled people movers it may come back to bite us. >> It only means that you have to meet a tighter standard in the slow moving you still have the 2 inch standard.
>> Marilyn: T hat's right. I f they go faster, then they have to do

-- they have to meet what do they have to meet Denn is? >> The 2 inch and 5/8. T he maximum horizontal gap 2 inches the same as rapid rail if it goes faster than 20 miles an hour they have to meet rapid rail standard 20 miles or less they have to meet a 1

- inch gap. >> Hi, Marilyn, Gary Talbot. I 'm sorry I have been trying to call in and had connectivity problems I am on the call. I will mute myself. B ut sorry about that.
>> No, welcome Gary. T his is Marilyn. Welcome Gary. We had a question for you a while back I can'tremember what it was. >> Blair: T his is Blair. I think it was Gary the situations that you have run into with the platform setbacks up on the main service? A nd your intent on having the bridgeplates carried on the car versus living at the station. >> I think he muted himself again. >> We cannot hear you Gary.
>> Gary: I 'm sorry. Yeah that was

-- that was really an eye opener for us. W hen we went out the first time and Chris was with us Chris Hart the gap is so huge the horizontal gap is so huge it would never be safe for a crew member to actually like jump across the gap to get a plate that's on the platform. A nd likewise, you could never have any ambulatory person let alone a wheeled mobility device wouldn't stand it. A s a result what that service does they carry the plate with them on the car. N ow, because they currently carry the plate on the car that was one reason that they made the plate so small. B ecause they have to carry the plate through the car depending which car lands at the setback platform. T he set back platform is 4 5 foot in length except on a couple of locations. A nd so depending on which car is going to land there. T hey have to walk the bridgeplate through the cars. S o the bigger that plate becomes, the more difficult it is to get it through the carand then they just stand it up in the vestibule wherever they

use it or wherever they get ready to deploy. S o, it was a much more difficult design effort for us. N ot only did we have, you know, proper engagement length in the car and trying to get the slopes of the actual bridgeplate right, but we also had to try and figure out, okay, how are we going to do this keep it on the car make sure it has foldable handrails so it's safer for everybody, especially your ambulatory users that's mentioned somebody in a wheeled
m obility device when you have a two

- inch side guard and no handrail. A nd then the ability to walk it through the car. And that's really why we had to go back on numerous occasions we just made another series of changes, we know we are getting closer but i t has been quite the challenge because as that gap gets bigger the only place you can keep it is on the car you have to deploy it from the car. I t's kind of like backwards if you think about it. S o, I hope that answers the question. >> This is Marilyn. Does that answer the question? >> Lets us know it's achievable how ever difficult and cumbersome to stow a long bridgeplate with handles on the
car. T his is

-- this goes back to what Blair says Amtrak is doing it why can't we do it? >> Chris: A nd keep in mind I think Gary is trying toget that thing down to 18 or 15 pounds which is about 10

pounds less than what their current bridgeplate is.
>> Yes, yes, if I could follow

- up on that. I mean, it's really quite amazing the current plate for a 34

- inch gap t he current plate is about 36 inches long. S o, we are changing that considerably because we have to have engagement into the car so that the plate can't become dislodged and just fall and someone who is whether a walky or someone in a chair could fall. T h at means the overall length of the plate has to increase which is has. T hen add into it the foldable handrails as well. A nd we are going to end up about 50% of their

-- the mass of the current bridgeplate with the updated current and fiber unit and it wi ll be probably 35% longer, I think it is. A nd have handrails as well. A nd yet be about half the mass of the current one. S o, we do think it's much more feasible. F or their system for the down Easter system. I think it actually works okay for them. B u t the key piece of it is the bridgeplate. A nd having a good and safe bridgeplate one that works for the staff as well as the passengers. I think this is going to be a huge step in the right direction on that.
>> Yes, this is Blair. A nd, Gary, to add to that, one of the things that when we talk about new vehicles and hopefully new stations everything is designed as it shouldbe, in the U.S. right now, it's really critical woo have inroads

into places that have passed for years, and if we can have the flex ibility that device like Gary is working on gives you to go into places that haven't seen train service in years, and start up without all of the prerequisites, then everybody wins because now we have, you know, trail transportation where there was none an d we have a way of making it accessible safely. A nd I think those are critical things to keep in mind that we are not always so fortunate to be able to build when you are building new cars, to be able to put them on, you know, new

-- new rights

- of

-way and things like that. S o, just wanted to throw it out. T he last thing in the world that you want to have happen is that people make decisions about offering service because they feel the accessibility aspect becomes too cumbersome. You know, lets take thos e excuses away wherever we can. >> Yes, agree with that. T his is Gary. I would even add to that, you know, you look at flag stops. To me, we really shouldn't have any flag stops in America today. I f we do my goodness they should be so, so limited. I n addition to flag stops there are seasonal stops where you have like even a county fair kind of thing or a state fair where you have different systems that have a two

-week stop something like that. A nd I think the whole setbackstrategy, and in some cases with the larger bridgeplates on

board the vehicle, may open up some options like that where today there is a carve out in the rule where because it doesn't

-- it doesn't explicitly say that a seasonal or anything like that is required to be accessible, the n it just calls

-- falls on DOT. I f it's a short duration type of thing like Blair said often folks are just using a little strip of dirt someplace and taking people in and out which for us as a community, to me it's just outrageous we wouldn't be include d in that. A nd maybe, you know, I think it's back to the tools in the tool box. I t's never going to be a one

- size fits all. At least not for inner

- city. F or heavy rail light rail rapid transit it's pretty much level boarding those things the automated gap filler stuff things like that for inner

- city it's kind of a different thing. A nd commuter rail fits into that as well. W hen commuter rail is used for something other than just your standard commuter. You have some commuter rail systems that are goin g to crank up things in the summertime or during ski season something like that add additional things that hopefully at some point we can get creative and find ways to make those accessible for us. >> Ken: T his is Ken. G ary's comments about the bridgeplate in Vermont

-- not Vermont in Maine just reminded me that I have a question about a wording issueon the top of

-- the hard copy page 3, the section that says

"attachment" and it's

-- it says attachment when used or boarding and alighting much be firmly attached in the vehicle and shall not overlap the platform. I s attachment the right word or

-- because Gary used the term engagement just now. I just

-- again, this may be not necessary at this stage it may be, you know, more in the reg language. B ut I just had had a question about whether attached was too restrictive a word or is the word what needs to be used.
>> if I could comment on that, Ken, this is Gary. To me, I think that is critical. I would even add to it that if you -- depending on how are either engaged or attached, whatever the right word is, it should be done so in such a way that it's

-- it's structural it's meant to be there. I f it's not done that you have to come up with other means so that you

-- so that you get what we commonly refe rred to as a secondary engagement. W hat often happens today you will have someone that use a part of the car, a lip of the car, or something like that and they will put something in it that's structural into an area that's not structural, and if the least little bit of shifting on it the thing can fall. T hat's where we have taken that and said wait a minute, we want a secondary means of engagement where this thing you cankick it and it can't fall out of the way. S o, if somebody in a

very heavy

- power cha ir hits it just a little bit wrong the spaces are so dog gone tight you know that's going to happen every day or every time it's used for that purpose. And so, how do we design it in such a way if you do hit it like that it can't get dislodged. I don't k now, you know, rulemaking wise I am not exactly sure what word to use I saw when you read it out I was in a meeting I didn't get a chance to respond, I think you are right, I mean, I do think that's an important piece. N ot only how do we refer to it, and to me, like on the superliner ramps, we have lugs in the floor that I think Blair and others put in. T hose are structural lugs. We know that we can attach to those, they can handle all of the loading that we can give them. A nd that's how we have designe d the ramps to interface with the superliner car. I think that's appropriate. B ut if we were then to go to a car like an Amfleet car, use an element that wasn't ever intended to hold the structure or load, use that as our only means of attachment that's where I think you run into trouble. I am not sure how to word it from a rulemaking, but I do think that's a very critical piece. These things ought to be there in such a way that you can't

-- they are fixed in such a way they can be used the way they are supposed to be used and people can't nudgethem with their foot hit them with the tire and become

dislodged. A nd that's happened.
>> Chris. T his is Chris. You look at commuter rail, where you (inaudible) with a sack key or (inaudible) car. When you lo ok at the existing bridgeplates that are being used across the country, they typically only have a half

- inch engagement with the car. A nd (inaudible) the thing that is wet

-- if it gets wet or you hit it the wrong way, you can move that engagement that yo u had and the bridge plate either stay on or they fall into the gap. A nd so, (inaudible) appropriate to think about point crossing of is it one point of engagement or is it multiple points of engagement. >> Dennis: T his is Dennis. T his is straight from the current regulation it says, shall not be subject to displacement from the vehicle. You can't kick it and nudge it to make it (inaudible).
>> Chris: T here is a problem, now what you have got (inaudible). W hether it's (inaudible) or Kawasaki or Hyunda i. You have bridgeplates that have hatch

- inch tooth and that half

- inch tooth drops into a slot on the trapdoor floor. O kay? A nd if that tooth is bent, if there is any kind of slight error putting it in, it doesn't actually drop in. >> Gary: Yeah this i s Gary. I agree with ChrisDennis. I think the intention of the current rule is fine.

But it's not prescriptive enough. B ecause we are ending up with exactly what Chris said. A nd boy, I tell you, you look at some of the gaps at the train or some of th e gaps at the platforms and you see the engagement or lack of engagement in the car and no secondary means, if that thing for whatever reason if you have trash in that little troph or birth piled up any reason you can drop it in think it's fine have it not be fine then 650, 700

- pound package to get across that oh, my goodness you would not believe

-- Chris almost knocked the plate out accidentally trying to get on the plat and I guarantee you that plate they would consider it compliant to the current rulema king because they can drop it in and it will say, you know it's fine. T here is nothing wrong with it. A nd yet one of the folks we are working with accidentally just kicked it with his foot and it popped up and almost fell between the gap and it was just we had quite a few of us around the opening of the car we were working on the car it was one of the things. We used it as that's why we are designing the one that we are designing. I think somehow the requirements in the language need to direct folks that they can't do what Chris just said. T hat's what almost everybody does.
>> What is the language, what should it say?>> It almost seems to me that you want to prescribe

some, you know, minimum engagement. S o type of shell pea -- have a distance or somet hing like that that you have to be engaged.
>> This is Blair. Let me throw out an option here I have been sitting and listening to everyone. I f you word it so that it said, the bridgeplate however you want to say it, shall engage the car in such a manner that the plate may not be dislodged by horizontal or vertical movement during use, (inaudible) actively disengaged by a member of the
crew. >> Chris: I think that you have a provision that also included, it will say where if this is dislodged it cannot m ove more than, you know, a half an inch forward or backward, that fight get you where you need to go. >> Gary: Yeah this is Gary. I agree with that. I am thinking about the design changes we just put into the down Easter plate. We are going

-- we are d esigning in about a half inch maybe 3/4 inch of slot there is going to be ears on the inside that you will be able to kick it from any direction that you want and it's wedged on the outside it only goes half an inch or inch it stops it has to because the p late is wider than the door opening on purpose. F rom the inside of the car we have the two ears that will pick upthe inner edge and you will be able to, you know, kick it,

whatever you want, you could hit it with as big a chair on the plate. A nd there i s no place for the plate to go. S o, but the fact that it can move a little bit we have to have otherwise it's a precision fit and you know, you wouldn't

-- I don't think it's not the movement so much as it just can't go anywhere. S o, if we have a longer plate if we had two inches of movement that wouldn't matter it wouldn't have impact as long as it can't fall in the gap or come out of the car or something like that. >> Marilyn: Well I got the language I think. M aybe I will read it and Gary will offer o r whatever offer

-- whoever offer amendments engage in the car in such a manner that the plate may not be displaced by horizontal

-- it says it can't be dislodged from the movement and actively disengage from by a member of the crew I think that's what you satisfied Blair. P lease have at it. >> Melissa: T his is Melissa I want to remind you guys you have 8 minutes to finish up. >> Marilyn: Yeah, thank you.
>> I apologize this is Gary I know I goofed that up you had this question. M arilyn, I would say thi s, could we work on Blair's language? I think that's a great start. A nd I do agree with Chris, I think we got to

-- to me the one thingthat would make it better is if we could either put a

maximum movement or language that would say, you know,

-- and maybe it's all right the way it is. B ut I mean jut the chance to look at it and respond to you. >> Of course I can circulate this. >> Chris: A nd maybe it would be helpful if I brought a couple of our current commuter rail bridgeplates down so, folks can se e what little engagement is built in to the plates now. A nd you know, maybe Ed could springboard his (inaudible), basically you are kind of hanging there on very -- very little steel or aluminum. >> I can bring one down.
>> Chris: I know, people need to see how

-- what we have got, to understand what is wrong. >> I agree. Actually I got some photographs that might be better where you can see one in action where we are boarding somebody or deboarding somebody using a bridgeplate you can actually see clos e up how the bridgeplate engages with the car it might be better than bringing it down it's better for me anyhow.
>> I am wondering about disengaged about the number of the crew the fact I think the ones you are talking about are moved and engaged by the c rew. B ut this proposal also talks about automatic deployment. A nd thisattachment section applies to that as well. S o, I don't want

to introduce a crew member's intervention necessarily for every bridgeplate. B ecause we want some to be automatically de ployed. I t still has to meet a good at tap.
>> This is Dennis. I t works anyway because if it's automatically deployed it's going to be mechanically attached to the vehicle and it cannot be

-- cannot be detached without a crew member.
>> Marilyn: B ecause the crew member would inter gait. C losing of the doors might instigate disengagement? >> Right.
>> it's still attached even though it folds up retracts or something it's not detached if it's coordinated with the door opening, it's still part of the structure of the vehicle. I t can't be detached accidentally. I f you want to service it, then a crew member will have to take it off.
>> Oh, I see because we are only talking about the vehicle here we are not talking about the platform, okay. I see your point

. T hen it does work. O kay. W ho wanted to say something? A nd then we have

-- it has to be quick. And by the way, let me just say, actually, let me add one more thing, sorry. J ust thinking about our process, it may be that this has to be place where th e language

-- that changes are still very possible, but they may have to beafter, you know, at or after the in

- person meeting.

Because we can exchange language before but we can't really

-- we won't have another time to all talk to reach
consensus. >> Me lissa: You will have time >> Marilyn, this is Gary. I f I could add a couple of quick things. O ne thing Chris and I added on heavy rail was no human intervention to actuate. S o, on the automated one, you would want to just it to be automated. The do or opens like Dennis says door goes to close it shows itself. T hat way a person used a wheeled mobility device who needs it it's just there it gets use understand. The

-- and then the other thing that I wanted to just mention is: F or those that are comi ng to the gap and accessible boarding and technologies thing in Detroit, we will have the new down Easter bridgeplate there and we have a mockup so we will be able to deploy that and you will see exactly what I am talking about. You will see the current version and then the latest design iteration for the down Easter plate the ramps et cetera just to let folks know that as well.
>> Marilyn, one quick comment >> Sure Ed, go ahead.
>> I wanted to know also we talked about theautomatic and manually deployed and portable. A lso

something I envision that I don't think the requirement

-- the recommendations preclude is a possibility of a powered and attached device that is deployed by a crew member by a button push so that it's not automatic the door operation b ut perhaps based upon need where simply a button pushes and a powered bridgeplate is then deployed. >> Chris: A nd that might be appropriate for inner

- city, I don't necessarily think you want to go that way for rapid transit. >> Yeah, I agree

-- this is Ga ry. I agree with Chris on that. T he other thing I meant to mention Marilyn is the plat form itself. N ew York has done a really cool thing several people have where the plat form will fold out or move to fill the gap from the platform side on heavy rail. So, I am not sure it would be applicable to inner

- city but it might be. You may not want to preclude something happening on the platform side as well.
>> No we certainly do not want to preclude it does this language preclude it? T his is Marilyn.
>> No, because this is just for the vehicle. A nd I think the people in New York, at least that I talked to would say, the last thing that you want to do is use the system thatthey have in New York. >> All right. Ed, this is Marilyn, Ed to your question, I know Melissa we need to end, to your question, I think this is a

-- this is another thing that we need to refine after

-- at and after the full committee's meeting in person. Because I mean, the difference between portable and manually deployed got blurred at this meeting today because

-- said it could be platform based for situations with big gaps and Blair and David pointed out that Amtrak is developing bridgeplates with handrails that are stowed on the car. S o, I sense that we are releasing manually deployed some of that is portable actually. We may need to develop a distinction between

-- I don't know when

-- I don't know when normal deployment can be required if it's not allowed to be portable.
>> It's not required but it may be an opportunity for where you might find, again, the rare ambitious railroad that figures out that, hey, I can integrate this thing I can power operate it and I don't need to deal with making the portable anywhere. T hat's way further down the road I appreciate that. H aving one s towed on board portable close to the door might be easier if I had them at every door it was reliable in service that might be a better solution. >> I

-->> That would be great go ahead Dennis this is

Marilyn.
>> in closing I think we should take the langu age that you just said put it in the attachment portion and that's what we will agree on for the committee's submittal, a couple of people can look at language before the full committee meeting and then during the presentation at the committee meeting, if those folks have a better finesse but I don't think we want to spend a lot of time in wordsmithing, okay if they have a better finesse for fixes it, it could be raised at the meeting. F or the sake of the subcommittee the language as you wrote down from Bl air, basically, is the baseline. >> Marilyn: Yeah that's (inaudible) I think Ed is talking about a different point I like your rare ambitious railroad that develops a deployment. I don't know how to make that fit into the proposal. O r Ed if you think th ere is a way. >> I don't think it's precluded.
>> That's all I was looking for we don't preclude it, it may be achievable you could have a car manufacturer say I can do it better it cuts down on dwell time make it easier you don't have to manage a portable bridgeplate you hit a button it comes out and you go.>> I think the automatic requirement

-- I think you are

suggesting other systems could develop a pushbutton deployment for a large gap is that your point >> Yes just so we don't preclude it from happen ing where full automation is infeasible or not achievable. Instead of going into a fully portable bridgeplate whether stored on board or someplace else I didn't want to preclude the possibility >> Melissa: O kay guys we need to wind down.
>> Marilyn: E

- m ail me language that you think precludes it we will see if we can play with it I don't know where it would be yet. T his is great. A nd we are

-- we will next meet at the in

- person meeting thanks everybody. >> Thank you. >> Thank you guys.
>> This is Melis sa quick reminder to the committee chairs we are going to have a conference call tomorrow.
>> Yes, yes.
>> Okay.
>> What time was that again Melissa? >> It's at 1 o'clock eastern time it should be fairly short. >> It's a different number than this right?
> > Right.>> PAUL BEATTY: This is Paul speaking I sent out

E

- mail with the number which is different. >> Okay.
>> PAUL BEATTY: Okay. O perator this concludes the conference call you can shut us down.
>> Melissa: T hank you >> I hope you have a great day. ( End of meeting.)