Note: The output shown below is from the 

Communication Access Realtime Translation 

(CART) system used in the On-Board Circulation 

and Seating Subcommittee meeting #8 and is 

generally unedited. The CART system was used 

to provide an accommodation to persons with 

hearing loss and persons who are deaf, and was 

streamed in real-time and available to the public 

on the internet during the meeting. 

UNITED STATES ACCESS BOARD

RAIL VEHICLES ACCESS ADVISORY COMMITTEE

ON-BOARD CIRCULATION AND SEATING MTG #8 

SUBCOMMITTEE TELECONFERENCE

Thursday, August 14, 2014 

1:00 p.m.

>> Okay we will begin to start good afternoon this is 

Paul Beatty welcome to the 8th meet of the on-board 

circulation seating subcommittee. As you know since 

everybody -- anyone may participate in subcommittee 

discussions no time for public comment is scheduled 

during this call. The CART chat box is not available. For 
those participants who are only using CART to participate 

and you desire to raise a question or make a statement. 

Use RVAAC @ access-board.gov. When talking on the line 

remember to give your name. As a reminder the next 

meeting will most likely occur during full committee 

meeting time September 11-12 specific time slot not 

established yet. Let's introduce those in attendance 

starting with Access Board staff in the room Melissa 

Anderson Jim Pecht myself and Rose Bunales. Let's go to 

Rose you indicated who is on the conference call?

>> I will do that now. Operating, I am going to call 

out their names I will have them respond with their name 

and organization, and we are going to do that as a line 

check. Could you listen out for those lines that need 

whose volumes need to be boosted? And I do have Blair 

Slaughter in the room now. Okay. Starting with Eloy 

Martinez. Can you restate your name please and agency 

you represent?

>>Eloy Martinez with engineering services supporting 

Texas Railway.

>> Please boost, Martinez' line.

>> Glenn?

>> (inaudible)

>> Glenn Millis are you on the line?
>> Yes. Glenn Millis Washington Metropolitan Transit 

Authority.

>> The line is good Robert Reuter.

>> I apologize, is this was a life meeting we had a 

major thunderstorm that knocked out our phones

>> Please boost Mr. Reuter's line, please.

>> Michael Porter.

>> Michael Porter, high-speed rail.

>> Please boost Mr. Porter's

>> Don Mebius.

>> Don Mebius in Pennsylvania.

>> Operator, please boost Don's line please. And Don 

could you spell your last name, please?

>> You bet. M as in Mary, EBIUS.

**NOTE: MEBIUS.

>> Uwe Rutenberg.

>> Yes. I am here representing ICAT from Montreal.

>> Please boost his line please. Andre Gagne?

>> Andre Gagne with Bombardier.

>> Boost his line please, operator.

>> Emily Bacque. 

>> Hi Emily for the Area Rapid Transit.

>> Boost her line, please.

>> Marilyn Golden.
>> Hi, Marilyn Golden, Disability Rights Education and 

Defense Fund or DREDF

>> Jonathan Michel.

>> Representing (inaudible)

>> I can hear him through assistive listening but it's 

not coming through the air.

>> Please boost his line, please.

>> Francis Mascarenhas 

>> Yes, representing Chicago.

>> the line is good.

>> Ken Shiotani.

>> Ken Shiotani National Disability Rights Network.

>> Please boost Mr. Shiotani's line, please.

>> Linda Martin? Hi, this is Linda Martin. I am with 

the Federal Railroad Administration.

>> Jennifer Hu.

>> Yes, Jennifer, I am with Texas Central Railway.

>> Please boost Jennifer's line. Blair Slaughter is oh, 

disconnected again. Okay. Aaron Weinstein

>> Aaron Weinstein with BART. 

>> PAUL BEATTY: This is Paul speaking, since Blair is 

not currently on the line, I will turn it over to Melissa.

>> Okay. This is Melissa Anderson with the Access 

Board, hopefully Blair will be back with us shortly so we can 
keep moving we will get started with the agenda. Does 

anybody have any comments or additions to the agenda?

>> I will note Dennis Cannon is also on the line now.

>> Do you want to do sound check

>> Dennis Cannon could you state your name and 

agency please?

>> Dennis Cannon National Disability Rights Network.

>> The line is good okay.

>> Thank you Dennis. Okay. So, we are going to go 

ahead an get started on the agenda, and I think Blair's main 

goal is to try to complete as much of the matrix that we 

started last time as possible. And the matrix that was sent 

out and the -- it's available on the website. The numbers 

that are in red or the ones that don't have anything in 

parentheses are the ones -- the things that we decided on 

at the last committee meeting. The numbers that show up 

in green or say discuss after them are things that Blair went 

through and filled out just so we would have it's kind of our 

strawman so these are the numbers that we have to discuss 

and negotiate. And then, the numbers that are in blue, and 

say new in parentheses are things that have been added. 

And that you haven't seen before. So, is Blair still not with 

us? Okay. Last month we talked about the doorway 

widths between the cars. And the decision was made 
to -- for rapid rail to go with 32 inches in width except the 

cab ends of the cars that would be 30 inches. There are 

extensive notes with these. He has note 2 an explanation 

that the 30 inch clear opening is a legitimate -- a legitimate 

compromise for the operator viewing area.

And then note 7, that there may be safety devices used 

by the railroad crews at the ends of the cars which may also 

reflect some of the dimensions that he woo can have in the 

doorway. 

So, now he has gone down and filled in 32 inches 

minimum for the doorways for both for light rail commuter 

rail inner-city rail and that's also with PRIIA single level and 

bi-level inter-city cars have. Does anyone have any 

comments or suggestions the 32 inches is larger than the 

current 30 inches on light rail commuter rail. And is 

consistent with the current inner-city rail. Any discussion 

from anyone, any desire to make it wider or objections to 

making it that width?

>> This is Dennis Cannon. The 30 inches was based 

on the discussion about from rail car manufacturers that 

the collision posts, vertical posts on each side of the door, 

that was the maximum you could get. And that those were 

not things that you could take out or move or whatever. 

But we have heard from both FRA and I guess Linda and so 
forth that the current rail the collision posts are spaced 

wider so it's now possible to do a 32 inches. As I said the 

30 inches was only because we were led to believe that 

there was -- you couldn't make it any bigger.

>> Bob Reuter, I missed some of -- all of the last 

meeting. One of the things that on the matrix that seems 

to be missing is the part H starting the 49 part 38 subpart 

H other vehicles. The monorails, automatic guide way 

(inaudible) actually

>> Can you speak up please?

>> I'm sorry in 49 CFR 38 subpart H there is other 

vehicles monorails tramways automated guide ways and 

this thing. We need to make sure that we include those 

into your guidelines. And probably should be included in 

the matrix.

>> And we will include those in our recommendations. 

I don't know if we want to add them right now or if we want 

to try to get through the matrix so we can get this done and 

then come back and address those. There is quite a variety 

in those types of vehicles.

>> Bob: That's right I don't think we should do it now 

but I don't think we can ignore those because they are 

becoming popular now.

>> Melissa: Right. He is. Let's add those later. 
>> Marsha Mazz: Is the question --

>> Melissa?

>> Hi, this is Blair.

>> Melissa: Great.

>> He is back.

>> Rose: I was trying to give the hand signal to 

Melissa.

>> Blair: I have to apologize, we are in 

North Carolina, I can literally see a cell phone tower from 

where I am at. I have the most horrendous reception on 

Verizon and AT&T. My apologies. The Internet is not 

working at all through the phones or anything I don't know 

what is going on. I printed everything out before I left 

yesterday but I don't have access to the photo that was sent 

out this morning. I am trying to download that on 

the -- on another phone to see if I can see it. As far as 

adding those items that's a very good point, Bob. When 

we -- because I have -- you know, you and others have 

sent in floor plans of some of the other vehicles like

monorails, and so I have that information, I have scaled it. 

I think it would be wise also to add that to the matrix so we 

can feed that back ultimately to the larger committee. But I 

will take whatever we generate out of this and plug it into 

those vehicles to see how it works. With the thinking that 
you know, restricted dimensions are just that, and it's -- it 

should be as close to the same for all vehicles but, of 

course, as we see with like rapid rail, because the vehicle 

itself and monorails can be very narrow it may be very 

difficult to accommodate all of those larger dimensions and 

still have a vehicle that will work. So, it will certainly do 

that. And thanks for plugging that in.

So, Melissa I have to apologize, I came in and you were 

beginning to talk about the doorway width. So, what else 

did I miss?

>> Melissa: You didn't miss anything. We started on 

the agenda I gave them explanation of the colors and notes 

in parentheses. And then we started -- I started down 

doing door widths and we didn't seem to have a lot of 

objection. Dennis explained the 30 inch collision post 

restriction that was in in the past but is changed.

>> Isn't this -- this is Marilyn from DREDF that's the 

second aisle right Melissa? As I understand it, there is a 

good reason to change that to -- all of those to 32. The 

ones that aren't 32.

>> Melissa: Right. 32 gives people enough room to 

get through a doorway. And that's consistent with the 

building standards. So, you know, I don't think we want to 

be any less than that unless there is a legitimate structural 
reason.

>> And Melissa, this is Blair again. I think that 

the -- where it becomes an issue we talked about it at the 

last call was with some of the rapid rail, some of the smaller 

width vehicles that have cabs on the end and yet they have 

a doorway connecting the car that the 30 inch minimum 

reduces the field of vision for the driver.

Andre Gagne put together some notes on vehicles that 

Bombardier had information on to give an example of what 

happened to the field of vision with that. And 

that's -- that's attached on the back of the agenda. So, 

what I had put in from last time was that note 32 inches 

except at cab end of transit cars. And then, of course 

there is note 2 and note 7, that expound on that. So, if 

you want, we can -- we can jump over and look at 

that -- the information that Andre sent or if everyone is 

okay with leaving it with that caveat of 30 inches for the cab 

ends, we can do that. It's -- what's the thinking there folks

>> Bob Reuter most of the rapid rail comes with cab it 

wouldn't have the problem of limited visibility. I think this 

should only apply when there is a half-size cab.

>> This is Andre Gagne from Bombardier. I think it 

depends you can make cabs half width or also a smaller 

cab. That's a half width or full width con figure it. What 
you see I look at the matrix I see 32 inches except at cab 

ends which would be 30 inches. But for some to 

authorities it could be an issue when I look at Chicago they 

have very small vehicles, and the ends are narrow as well 

and they are lower than the regular car bodies. So, this 

would be a very, very big issue for them.

>> That's why I am saying Bob Reuter again 32 inch 

should apply in full cab not the half width cab.

>> Andre: The driver is on the right side.

>> Some places it's on the left side

>> Still, the collision post spaced too wide you don't 

have (inaudible) you are going to have nothing (inaudible)

>> Bob: It has awful windows.

>> Andre: What I suggest the cab leave it as open as 

possible on the other end leave it at 32 inches.

>> Andre can you speak up please?

>> Yes, I will try to.

>> Thank you.

>> Andre: And another thing also that you have the 

cab door it's not just the end door but the cab door 

separates the cab area from the passenger area. That door 

also would have to be made 32 inches it reduces the actual 

width of the cab. So, that's -- there is two issues there.

>> Bob: That wouldn't apply in a full width cab
>> Andre: You have full width cabs I have half cabs

>> I am only talking full width cabs.

>> We have to have rule for all not just some types of 

vehicles.

>> Bob: The United States I think everything is full 

width cabs in the last few years.

>> Andre: You have to look at it again.

>> Bob: Other than Chicago, who hasn't gotten full 

width cab, Philadelphia are getting them in and the port 

authority of putting them into their cars.

>> Andre: When you say full width cab, there is a 

door in the middle at the front end and you still have to go 

through and the driver is on the right side. So there is 

limited visibility if you space out the collision posts. That's 

the problem. The driver is never in the center. For 

instance, Montreal subways the new vehicles with full width 

cab there is a single windshield that covers pretty much the 

whole end in this particular case I agree with you. There is 

no door owe there is no issues there if you have a full width 

cab and that's the configuration because there is no door 

there is no front end door. Even though you have a half 

width -- full width cab you are still going to have a door 

small windshield if you make the door wider. The main 

function of this door is to get the driver out, not necessarily 
to get the passengers out. And the main function of the 

cab to is to make sure that the driver can driver drive the 

vehicle and see in front of him.

>> The end door is an emergency exit from rapid rail 

vehicle.

>> There are many more doors to exit

>> Not in an emergency.

>> This is one of them.

>> Melissa: Are there any other comments on topic? 

Some of these things we can -- the committee can make 

recommendations as we sent them out to industry -- I 

mean, if there are 19 inches and 32 inches is a big 

difference. So, we need to resolve that at some point. But 

we can make -- we can make recommendations to the full 

committee and then if we don't really resolve it we can send 

questions out to the industry with the notice of rulemaking 

to get more input.

>> Andre: --

>> If I could ask, is Don Mebius, what is the scenario if 

a person in a wheelchair goes through the cab area and 

through the end door in case of an emergency what then? 

Because that's quite a height from the top of rail.

>> This is Ken Shiotani. I mean, sometimes the 

evacuation will be through a, you know, an adjacent train. 
I mean, it depends on the type of emergency it is.

>> Yes.

>> This is Dennis Cannon. One thing that -- in many 

cases we are going to assume that the wheelchair doesn't 

make it. I mean, you want to get somebody out you are 

going to carry them out probably that's what happened in a 

lot of -- in WMATA they developed a thing EJAC I don't 

remember what it stands for emergency something or 

other. They developed it years ago and we had Florida 

crash and air Florida crash and tunnel crash and so forth. 

It's a platform that folds up on legs that has wheels that fit 

on the track. There are several that you can see, there is a 

box in most of the transit stations, if you look for it one of 

the ends. That device is a level platform that purpose was 

to be able to put at least two stretchers on it and maybe 

three. It's the same level as the car for -- you deploy it on 

to the track, you roll it up to the end of the car, and you 

evacuate people on to it. And in theory you could evacuate 

somebody with a wheelchair on to that device. And you 

hand roll it down to the station. It's not powered or 

anything.

>> Bob Reuter. The new Toronto cars the whole front 

of the center drops down and becomes a ramp step item to 

the center of the tracks.
>> Andre: That's correct because it's fairly narrow 

because you have a driver again on the cab side. Two wind 

shields to exits to evacuate people

>> It meets the Ontario accessibility laws I am not sure 

what they are up there.

>> Do we know the width of the Toronto cars?

>> I have there specs here somewhere it will take me a 

if you minutes to find it.

>> Andre: I can check that as well.

>> And as far as always be on the right side of the cab, 

I was just looking here I thought so Baltimore runs on the 

left side because they have all island platforms. So, it is 

not universal.

>> Andre: You have left and right mostly right and 

some drivers are in the center of the vehicle.

>> That's true.

>> Andre: It's mostly right mostly right side there are 

a few exceptions though, you are correct. This is Andre 

again. Regarding the evacuation one way of doing it I think 

the question was pertinent. What then? So, if you get the 

wheelchair through that door, let's make it 32 inches I think 

the front end, what then? Okay. If you have a ramp what 

then? You are still on -- still on the ties, right? Rail ties. 

So, one way of dealing with this right now there is nothing 
that I believe you may have stretchers but something like an 

evacuation chair like they have in buildings could be 

interesting as well. Provide a device to get people out 

safely of the vehicles.

>> This is Blair. Andre, you bring up a very good 

point. I was thinking about that earlier is if the issue for 

the end of train is primarily for evacuation it's not a car to 

car circulation convenience, really, I know in 49 CFR 38 and 

elsewhere the FRA has requirements for emergency 

preparedness, those kinds of things. I don't know if it's 

within the Access Board's arena to require that as part of 

accessibility that the authorities have evacuation plans that 

include, you know, evacuation chairs or other methods that 

allow for you know safe evacuation from the train in an 

emergency.

>> This is an operational issue that would be handled 

by the DOT reg.

>> This is Bob Reuter again. Most systems every car 

is a married pair. With a cab at either end. So, they would 

be in the center of the train. And you could need that door 

for car to car evacuation. Which would extend the chair 

for. If a disabled train came down and a working train 

backed into it and they transferred through the end doors 

on to the working train, so that they could take 
them -- take people to a station. So, those doors are not 

just at end of the train.

>> Well, Bob this is Blair. In that case with married 

pairs, Andre typically there is a blind or F end or B end of 

the cars. So the B ends are always coupled and so 

cab -- there is no -- they are not cab to cab they are B end 

to B end with the cabs pointing the opposite directions, 

right?

>> Right. When you pull a 6 or 8-car train together 

you will have three or four A end to A end connections.

>> Right, right, okay.

>> This is Linda at FRA. I am not an expert on part 

238. I don't think it applies to rapid transit you know 

Metro type trains configurations in any case. It applies 

to -- it applies to inter city and commuter and maybe some 

others. But generally not Metro type.

>> You are referring to collision posts?

>> No, the emergency dress requirements is what 

Linda is talking about it's applicable to inner-city passenger 

rail and commuter rail. It's not applicable to heavy rail, 

light rail vehicles or people movers things are that nature 

those fall under different requirements.

>> This is Blair. They fall under FTA versus FRA are 

there requirements there and if I remember correctly, there 
aren't specific requirements that talk about removing 

people with disabilities or using wheelchairs. Though, 

certainly, you know, you would think that that would be 

included by fault but not necessarily without saying it.

>> Yeah, I am not saying that there aren't 

requirements part 238 I think just applies to inner-city and 

commuter.

>> Certainly, certainly. I just -- and I should that 

because I didn't know if the FTA had similar language in 

their documents or not. But, again, I just -- I was curious 

if it was within -- since we are talking about accessibility, in 

this group, is it within the Access Board's realm to address 

that. I realize from what Dennis said it's an operational 

issue but it's a disparate of it don't -- don't really 

accommodate the operational issue then it's almost a moot 

point.

>> We can certainly regulate, and we do the door 

width is now 30 inches and assume that you can evacuate 

people in that direction, the plan of have you -- the plan of 

how you get people down to the track bed and then move 

them across the ties or whatever, that is not an issue that 

that has anything to do with what we are working on. We 

can talk about the door width itself. I guess we 

could -- we could mandate a ramp if we wanted to do that, 
that doesn't seem to be very practical to me. Because you 

have the same problem as -- say you get a person in a 

wheelchair down on to the track bed, then what? The 

assumptions here is that in most cases, we hope that you 

are going to be met by rescue personnel, fire and what not, 

and that they are going to essentially if they have to carry 

you out.

>> That may be the only way that you are going to get 

out of that tunnel, for example.

>> Unless you happen to be in Vancouver. Which if 

anybody is familiar with -- they had two major shut downs 

and everybody got out of the cars and walked out.

>> Wheelchair users?

>> I didn't see any.

>> Yeah. I mean that's the issue. We don't --

>> That's the issue and I have no idea what happened 

to those folks in Vancouver when the whole system shut 

down. It happened twice two weeks ago. So, but my 

concern here is not getting down on to the track, but the 

preferred method of rescue is to send a rescue train out if 

at all possible. Then you go train to train.

>> Right. If it's just a stalled train, that just can't 

move you bring a rescue train. If there is a crash, you 

know it's a different kind of situation. And then you are 
going to get carried out and ambulatory people is going to 

get carried out it's different.

>> I am just referring to the car to car transfer. And 

that would even occur in a regular subway train. If you go 

down into the Metro there in DC you have cab cars to cab 

car almost three or four times in every train.

>> Okay. Well, I am not sure that -- what we are up 

against, I think though is that we had a vehicle when we 

start getting to the smaller vehicles like the subways, and 

more restrictive over systems that have physical not just 

vehicle issues but there is the overwhelming system that 

affects the vehicle size, and we are going to get down 

always to the same problem.

>> This would have to be a case by case exception. 

Chicago and month real might be the same of--type of 

systems that are exceptions.

>> This is Dennis Cannon. We can debate this all we 

want, and we are not going to have enough information. I

think that we should leave it the way it is for now. And ask 

as part of our report that the Access Board during the 

comment period request specific information on the 

feasibility of making the indoors 32 inches.

>> The end cab doors versus the --

>> Yeah.
>> The end inter car doors. I mean, sometimes you 

might have a situation where something goes wrong with 

the lead cab car but the rest of the train is good and you 

want to get between -- you want to get to the other pair 

matched pair car, you know, person in a chair should be 

able to do that, you know, with -- with --

>> Cab (inaudible)

>> Pardon?

>> If you go to the next matched pair you have to get 

to a cab.

>> I meant to the neck -- to the other end -- the 

other car of the pair.

>> Um-hmm.

>> Again, you know, there are all of these scenarios 

where a train could stop, one car out of the station versus 

two cars out of the station in the middle of the 

tunnel -- there are all of these different scenarios but I 

think that there is no barrier to making the noncab end 

doors 32 inches.

>> I agree with you.

>> That is what it says. There is a question about 

whether it's an issue on the cab ends with the operator et 

cetera.

>> This is Melissa.
>> Okay.

>> Is that you Blair?

>> Yes that's me go ahead Melissa.

>> I was going to suggest these are draft numbers at 

the moment. When we look more at how everything fits in 

the car plans we will revisit these. I would encourage you 

guys to move on.

>> This is Ken, could we move back to the side doors

on rapid rail though? I know this was a bit of a 

conscientious discussion last time and I was on one side of 

the issue. But I think that I am switching towards the other 

side of the issue given that I have seen some rail -- some 

rapid rail cars with fairly wide door openings. I asked 

Andre, you know, to give me some information and this is 

not information -- this is information he just gave me this 

morning. But there are, you know, the typical side car 

width for double doors in rapid rail is in the 50 inch range. 

And that was something that I think Frank Maldari stressed 

quite a bit the last time. But there are systems that have 

wider openings and we have on the phone people from 

BART and they have 54-inch clear openings with twin 

doors. And the example that I had found on the web was, I 

think either San a Polo I sent picture to people in the group 

or Rio De Janeiro, I forget which city, I am sorry, I am not 
that familiar. They are -- I did find that some rapid transit 

systems have chosen to do fairly wide door openings and 

Andre sent me an E-mail this morning saying that in Santo 

San Paulo, they have 63-inch openings with twin doors 

Puerto Alegre Lima is 55 and Santiago they have 55 and 

63-inch clear openings. I want to revisit the discussion 

that we had about the possibility of -- the board 

recommend that each leaf in a double door, side door, rapid 

rail car, be 32 inches. So that would be a 64-inch wide 

opening. You know I was a little reluctant about it in the 

last call but I have rethought this, given that I have done 

some research and I have this new information that it is 

done. You know, I do think that you know it helps 

everybody. It makes boarding and alighting for ambulatory 

people and wheelchair users easier to have a wider door 

opening.

The one caveat that I see there are some rapid rail 

systems that use awfully short train cars. I don't know 

whether a 64-inch wide clear opening in those cars 

make -- I mean, whether in those cars the trade-off of 

other space might be too great. I mean, the path cars the 

click go transit authority cars and the New York City IRT 

cars I think they use a different jargon now for the shorter 

cars. But when I was growing up it was the IRT cars. And I 
think the Boston blue line cars are all pretty short around 

50 feet long give or take?

>> That's correct.

>> So, you know 64-inch doors on those cars might 

be an issue for most other rails that use 60 or 75-foot long 

cars I don't think a 64-inch door width you know so that 

each leaf is 32 so a wheelchair user can get out when one 

door fails. That was the issue, was, um, doors do fail 

sometimes and they sometimes one door fails. And if you 

are in a 50-inch door width and a 25-inch door opens the 

wheelchair user is struck and has to go to another door 

which they may be not I believe to maneuver to another 

door in a crowded train. Or they end up at the next stop or 

next stop after that. If it's not across the board transfer. 

It is a very different experience if you can't get off at the 

stop that you want to get off on or can't get on at the stop 

you want to because a leaf in a 50-inch-ish or 55-inch even 

door fails. And you are a wheelchair user. So, again, I 

don't know how you do it in a rulemaking. When there are 

long rail cars where I think it's very practical and a bunch of 

shorter rail systems where I can see that it is a concern 

whether 64-inch doors two or three sets of 64-inch indoors 

in train or blue line train whether that really comes into the 

rest of the space in the car or not. But it does seem like it's 
you know it is done in other systems, I don't think that the 

Frank's concerns about doors being too heavy and not 

moving or you know reliability. I just don't -- I don't buy 

that. I just -- you know, I do think there is a concern 

about it does take up more of the length of the car but I 

think in the longer rapid transit cars it can help everybody 

get on and off quickly.

>> Well, Ken, this is Blair. And I understand where 

you are coming from. And there are some very short 

vehicles where you end up with all doors pretty much. All 

of them. That's exaggerating. But that's why I refer to 

note 1 to cover some of our discussion last time. One of 

the comments was 32-inch single door would be prohibitive 

for door system design. We do see we got them out there 

at 63 inches. There was talk about the door leafs being air 

locked so you wouldn't get a single failure. You could have 

a dual failure. And then having both leafs with emergency 

capability for release, because you could in theory no 

matter what the operating system was, you could have both 

doors fail and it wouldn't matter how wide the door was 

they would both be in failure mode you couldn't get out 

until someone pulled the emergency release for those 

doors. And then I think -- a key elements regardless of 

what the door size is, and maybe that's the thing that part C 
and part D of note 1 or what ultimately would take care of 

it. That communication method or device provided at the 

door area to alert the driver or operator to ensure that 

passengers do not get stuck on the car because of 

inoperative doors. The device location must (inaudible). 

And then that coupled with both leafs must have emergency 

release feature if the doors in failure mode, maybe the only 

way that you open that door is to pull a release that relieves 

it mechanically and lets it be pushed open. I think those 

two items regardless of the door width are key to making 

sure that people don't get carried to the next stop or you 

know to the end of the line because they can't get out of the 

door can't maneuver to the next set of doors because of 

other restrictive passageways. So, I don't know that 

we -- if we want to, you know, belabor the 32-inch single 

leaf, that could be something that we could write up so we 

are recommending that and asked for industry response 

there may be some other structural issues that I am not 

aware of. And that apply in states that don't apply in other 

countries and cities, cars. I don't know. But that's one of 

the what if's. And so if that -- if we lean on those -- if we 

lean on note 1, and particularly part C and D do that cover 

the majority of the concerns for getting stuck on the car?

>> This is bob Reuter. Probably the concerns of 
getting stuck on the car however some systems are starting 

to run very late night service and off hour service. And the 

operator actually collects the fares and check the fares they 

are only using a single leaf right behind the driver's cab.

>> but they have to be accessible right? Whatever 

they are doing they have to be accessible

>> They use a single leaf that would have to be 

accessible. I am not sure how they are doing it at the 

moment. The only time I used they opened all the doors. 

They were using it out further out on the line where the 

stations weren't manned I was opening -- I was observing it 

in Cleveland

>> My guess is they are not complying.

>> I suspect talking to the operator he has the choice 

of opening just the first leaf or all of the doors. He didn't 

have a choice of opening both leafs at the first door.

>> Well, there may be -- someone pointed out to me 

yesterday that depending on the time of operation and they 

actually have seen this occur in the summers, that time of 

day and things like that you may not -- the operator may 

not want to open all of the doors fully because it begins to 

mull up the heat systems if you are having implement 

weather having flexibility to open up. But never being able 

to deny access or sex sit -- deny access or exit because of 
that, I think, would be critical. You know, some of the 

systems can be -- in high temperatures you open all of the 

doors, you get this great inrun some time off in the future 

the car cools down again. I mean, there are other pass 

nerve comfort issues that come into play. But for us I think 

the key is that we -- we stick to making sure that the 

vehicle can accommodate people on and off no matter what 

the situation is. And without overly restricting the design 

of the vehicle. And I hear what Ken is saying. Again, I 

don't know all of the ins and outs of providing big door 

openings

>> I would suspect in the future that based on some of 

the wrecks that we have seen, in recent times, structural 

requirements for vehicles are going to get tighter not 

looser. They probably won't stay where they are. And 

those things tend -- the bigger the doorways are the bigger 

the structural issues keep the integrity of the vehicle. So, 

again, I am not -- I am not making excuses but I am trying 

to think about holistically the vehicle. But I think the key 

thing is, no matter where we leave this as far as the door 

width goes and maybe the way of dealing with that we 

recommend a 32-inch leaf and ask for industry comment. 

But that we are pretty hard-nosed about the emergency 

communication and stop and the ability to unlatch those 
doors independently of one another from the door operator. 

And that -- that in fact can be very critical forgetting out. 

If you have a place where the car body is twisted or 

damaged those kind of things -- and it gives at the doors. 

When you begin to rely on big single leafs. The chance of 

that big single leaf getting inhibited is probably more than 

a smaller leaf. But you still want to be able to unlatch 

those leaves independently and push them open as much as 

you can to get out. So, I think that is a key element for 

sure

>> This is Bob Reuter I thought that requirement was 

already in the regs.

>> You know, Bob, I would have to go back and dig up 

you know FTA information and see what their -- Dennis 

maybe you are aware of something? And maybe that's part 

of the research that happen when is we get further into this. 

But I think for me the answer is -- it answers the concern of 

getting off the train and not getting stuck. I know there is 

stop request buttons and those kind of things but do they 

also have the same functionality. I press a stop request for 

a door open and the door doesn't open is there something 

that I could do to say hey the director couldn't open I am 

still here or does the driver think well the door opened 

people left here we go.
>> I think you have to have the communication device 

but I think every door currently has the independent release 

where you have to get up and move a lever or push a button 

or something like that to unlock the doors they can be 

manually pushed open. I think the communication of the 

operator device is key.

>> I don't believe that true Metro only the center door 

has the release mechanism

>> Only the center door?

>> Yep.

>> Okay.

>> This is Andre Gagne from bomb become I looked at 

the width of the device that we have on the TTC rocket. 

And it is ramp is 28 inches wide.

>> Okay.

>> Andre: A few inches short of 32 inches.

>> Which car was that Andre?

>> That's the rocket Toronto rocket

>> The new subways in Toronto.

>> the cars in Toronto

>> What?

>> the newest subway cars used in the Toronto 

system.

>> That's correct.
>> I have a picture of the one of the ramps deployed if 

anybody wants to see it.

>> Okay.

>> Bombardier has a lot of them I am sure.

>> Okay. Just -- do we want to recommend 

or -- recommend that the 32 ink gel leaves or the 30 inch 

single leaf as minimum and ask for industry comment back 

on this.

>> This is Ken, I could live with that.

>> That sounds good.

>> That's a good idea.

>> Good.

>> And do we want to go to 32 or 30? Someone that 

is a 63-inch door they have 63

>> That's the largest that Andre said exist that he can 

find.

>> This is Andre again. What I did just to explain 

what I -- the information that I provided. I sent Ken 

information about existing systems in not existing systems 

but technical specifications for newer vehicles in the south 

American market. They may have different door openings 

on their existing cars. But what I found is that in the 

recent RFPs for Sal Polo and (inaudible) they came up with 

63-inch clear opening and same thing for Santiago they 
require 55 and 63-inch clear opening with twin doors. 

With close to 64-inch opening that would be required if we 

want to have a 32-inch single leaf door open willing.

>> Remember one -- this is Dennis remember one 

thing too, a 64-inch double leaf door requires 128 inches 

of wall space. Because the doors have to retract. And that 

means that that wall space doesn't have any windows in it 

too. So, it's not just the case of --

>> (inaudible).

>> Excuse me?

>> There are some car designs that I think have 

windows. You know, they are not clear windows but there 

is a window, the door slides into the slot and there is a 

window on the outside. I think I have seen photos of that. 

It's not adds clear as a regular window. I can see that the 

issue is the floor space is for seating and wheelchair spaces, 

you know, you make 64-inch wide door you lose side much 

car space. I know think in the larger cars, the longer cars 

it's -- it makes sense to try and advocate for that and see 

what the industry says in terms of you know, stresses, car 

strengths and other stuff. Because obviously a bigger door 

means more you need more framing to make the car more 

secure. But I just -- you know, it's, I think it's not the 

windows it's the fixed floor space. Because I have seen 
designs where, you know, there is glass. You know, --

>> (inaudible)

>> the door you see the door so it's not like a clear 

window. But you do get the light and you do -- you can 

see you know whether you are in a station, what station you 

are in, and you know, again, it depends on how clean they 

keep the windows, but I have seen that design. So, I think 

the real issue is fixed floor space available for seating and 

wheelchair cases and all of that. But in a longer car, I 

am -- you know, I think that it makes sense. I am -- I can 

see in the shorter cars it may be an issue. It may be 

difficult.

>> This is Bob Reuter. I think if I was running a 

system that wide a car I needed that wide a door I would go 

from 3 doors to 2. Do you have fewer door sets.

>> Look, what I will do this is Blair. I will -- I will 

write something up to go with these conditions. And 

circulate it to everyone for comment. But I think the idea is 

that we are going to go for a wider single door leaf, ask for 

industry comment, we will add the safety caveat that we 

discussed about communications and --

>> Right. Those are very important. And that's --

>> Right. As an operator my only concern with a 

larger door it takes longer to open and close.
>> True. True. That's the sort of comments that I 

think we need. And with the goal, of course, being that 

we -- at the end of the day the doors open and close as 

they should or there is a way when they don't and we always 

be times when they won't. This that you don't get stuck. 

There is nothing for frightening especially if you are not 

familiar with the system than being carried off to the next 

stop you don't know what is going on there.

>> Right. I think that's what made me change my 

mind was some import about that issue.

>> Yeah. I mean, it's -- yeah. Especially if you are 

new to a system, or you know that the next station doesn't 

have cross platform and the elevators might not work. 

There are a whole host of things that come into play. And 

you may, actually, make a conscious decision to go to 

certain stations because of other accessibility and they may 

not be the ones closest to where you want to be. Suddenly 

you are headed off to another station, and you didn't want 

to go there. So --

>> That impairment that would be a serious concern.

>> Yes.

>> So, with that in mind let me write it up. And I will 

give background information and that will be note number 

8 I suspect to go along with this. If we could, though, on 
the subject of the notes, because everyone sees that there 

is note number 7 that's mentioned now 

these -- these -- I'm sorry let me go back over to the 

doorway width between cars. Note number 7 refer toss the 

overlap of clear path between cars. I apologize I was going 

to try to cite the specific reference from the architectural 

guidelines, right now we say 32 inches clear, but there is no 

provision for any device overlap at any point. You know, 

any vertical dimension. And I believe in the architectural 

guidelines there is allowance for up to 4-inch protrusion up 

to 34 inches. And so, that is something that it 

was -- there wasn't anything specific in rail before, it would 

be nice to add that in the specific. I don't know you know, 

do we use the D. O. T. guidance letter that came out a

couple of years ago to lean on the architectural side, or 

should we go ahead and put something in there just to 

avoid confusion in the future.

>> This is Bob Reuter. Question --

>> You need to put it in there, because a lot of people 

designing cars aren't going to have copies of the ABA, ADA 

guideline handy. It's not going to be that easy for them to 

refer to.

>> That was my thinking Dennis, the more things that 

we can very clearly state for rail the better the chances are 
that we won't have conflict and confusion down the path.

>> This is Bob Reuter how often or ever would those 

devices be left in a position where they would be blind? I

mean the lever type hand brake that you mentioned when 

you are do using it, it goes back into the recess.

>> Well, in that case, Bob, I can give you an example 

where we have -- the lever type hand brakes that we 

pushed the collision post out, you know, to get the clear 

path through the collision post and make that doorway 

bigger. And yet you know there are other devices that 

have to live in that area, and be respectful of the 

geometries of the operation of the hand brake. And 

that's -- that's where that came into play. And it's not that 

it would stay deployed but the device itself without 

spreading the collision post yet further apart, you know out 

toward the corners that the hand brake or some other 

device it might be another you know, railroad safety 

appliance that's more exterior issue would need -- would 

have a chance of protruding into the pathway. But I just 

wanted to take the opportunity to establish that point. It 

may have some affect even in things where there is a need 

for a railroad employ -- Brad handle or something else 

that's well above the pathway of someone in a wheelchair. 

But if we have some definition, then it gives some -- it 
gives everyone a target to work for and avoid. Because 

right now there is nothing firm in the rail regs.

>> Yeah, this is Dennis. Explain that those numbers 

from the architectural side refer to things like, when you 

talk about the width of a door you measure it whether it's 

90 degrees from the face of the door to the opposite stop. 

But if you think about it, remember those panic bars on the 

long side or even, you know, a lever handle sticks out from 

the face of the door.

And also the closer that might be up at the top 

protrudes into some of that space. Those numbers those 

exceptions and building standards are to accommodate for 

those kinds of things. Otherwise if you didn't do that you 

could never have a 32-inch door you would always have to 

go to a 36-inch door to get all of that stuff out of the way. 

There are things that peculiar to the train it's things like the 

actual door handle and the closer mechanism that might be 

in the way. 

>> Marsha Mazz: Dennis is this is Marsha Mazz I will 

add in the building standard when dealing with sliding 

doors the hardware is not permitted to protrude into the 

opening.

>> Right.

>> Okay. So, I will write that up with more detail but I 
think at that should be include for clarity whether it's 34 or 

35, I use 34 because it's out there in the architectural regs 

already. And inside case of -- like the lever type hand 

brakes that runs up against and actually pushes the pivot 

which is critical to the amount of force that you can apply to 

the hand brake you where that space makes a difference 

depending on the stature of the employee who is ratcheting 

the thing down. So, it's all -- it's all right there in the 

34-inch realm that seems to work. If we want to push it 

higher then I would say yeah push it a little higher we 

should have some definition there.

>> So, if it's okay I will write it autopsy at 34. If we 

need to change it we will change it.

>> Okay.

>> I lost you. Hello?

>> No you are there. Where are we on the footnote 

what number are you working on?

>> Number 7 in the notes. Dennis?

>> Is this on the matrix?

>> It's the notes attached to the matrix.

>> Right on the second page, right Blair?

>> Yes.

>> Thank you.

>> Fourth page by the time you get to mine.
>> Let me ask, raise an issue. Number 3 -- issue 

number 3 talks about 32 by 59 that's because of adequate 

maneuvering space.

I am not sure where the 59 came from if you look at 

the alcove provisions in the building standards and you look 

at the proposal in the bus reg that number is bigger. And 

it's -- instead of setting a specific number it says that you 

have to add X number of inches to a length whenever you 

have it confined on three sides. And then the confined is 

defined how much. A two-inch protrusion isn't probably 

going to be a problem. But a 12-inch will be a big deal. I

am not sure if -- I know the 59 comes from free I 

can't -- PRIIA. And I think Linda last time a while back said 

that she thought that the 59 was to include the 

maneuvering space. I am not sure that 59 is the number 

that we want to stick with though.

>> Yes, Dennis this is Gary. I mean, I participated on 

that. That was just a negotiated thing where we were 

trying to make it bigger and better than what it was. So, if 

there--if the bus reg has a better formula that would tie 

that to those -- to that alcove then I think you are right.

>> And we could be bigger and better.

>> All right. We just had weeks to try to bang 

something out we didn't want 30 by 48.
>> We just copied the provision for alcoves from the 

ABA, ADA for the bus thing it's essentially consistent with 

that.

>> This is Marsha Mazz. I am going to, again, caution 

you not to assume that what was in the NPRM will be in the 

final rule.

>> for the buses.

>> for the buses.

>> Somebody is saying that -- nobody is saying. We 

are saying that the provision that's written in the current 

proposal works.

>> I guess just read my lips okay?

 (LAUGHTER)

>> (inaudible).

>> This is Melissa Anderson.

>> This is Marilyn from DREDF sometimes the larger er 

dimensions the state of the Carolina way -- the state of the 

art in a way document now is the proposed ANSI standard. 

Which has a larger clear floor space as a building block, 

which is driving specs to be bigger.

So, I don't think it's actually an Access Board document 

yet. But I think we are trying to make new specifications 

consistent with that. Because historically improved 

specifications on the ADA side have tended to be adopted 
into the ANSI which is private consensus standard that 

serves as the basis -- which ends up serving as the basis 

for something which in turn serves as the basis for state 

codes. Anyway, and then what -- what you know, when 

the ANSI takes the leap ahead and provides specification 

that's more accessible, then when the ADA, you know, 

standard is updated it tends to harmonize with it. So, the 

RVAAC I think is based on that. And the PRIIA it seems to 

DREDF is important because it's really negotiated in a rail 

context.

>> That's -- Marilyn, this is Gary. That last point is 

so important. I mean, we -- that was not a gimmick. We 

worked really, really hard to try and make it -- make the 

cars more accessible and to create more clear space. That 

was negotiated. Big time.

>> And I -- yeah. Thanks Gary. Just to add a PS, I 

mean, I would hope that the RVAAC would shoot for 

consistency with at least PRIIA.

>> What are you suggesting Marilyn?

>> Just not that it be less anyway.

>> Would you think -- Marilyn this is Gary. Like 

Dennis, I think, was trying to say why wouldn't we be 

consistent with the bus rule at least the advanced notice. 

And which to me kind of made sense we did -- when you 
think about all of the negotiations that took place in a rail 

environment, this thing was -- it was not a gym me by any 

stretch Melissa Shurland worked hard to get -- I think we 

had 5 things we changed this was one of them.

>> Well, the bus -- the bus rule -- I don't remember 

when it was said it said actually. The clear floor space then 

there is some other thing that is also for maneuvering or is 

it all built into the clear ground space?

>> No, what it starts out with is the clear floor space, 

which is 30 by 48 then it says if you are confined on three 

sides up to -- sides you have to add this to that number.

>> That's right. And if you go by the Seinfeld but Ed's 

the spoke person for the study the state of the art clear 

floor space study it's 34 by --

>> Like 56 or something.

>> 50 something like that. So, but Ed's not on the 

call is he?

>> A bus is only 54 foot long 200 inches wide

>> Anyway we are not doing buses I want to give 

context for some of the numbers, some of the numbers. 

With -- with you know, sort of a bias towards PRIIA, 

assuming that we are going to stick with 32. I would hope 

that -- well Ed will be around at some point at least on the 

full committee and he can speak to the reasons for the 34.
>> Marilyn if I could -- this is Gary. If I could 

follow-up on your comment. The one thing that I do like 

about the actual number is if there is anything that I have 

seen get goofed up in the rail environment, it's when you 

list something like, you know, can't be less than this, and if 

you do these other things, it has to get bigger and almost 

never does it get bigger. It kind of from that perspective, I 

mean, 32 by 59 perfect or not you can measure it. 

Regardless of three sides or open space. And often these 

spaces are often a side like you have seen when you have 

helped me. You go down the aisle and accessible space is 

maybe to the right, and you know, the distance to the side 

wall to the aisle width is the width of the space. And you 

are constrained with -- but the length of it can be much 

more gracious. And that's where I think the 59 came from. 

Because people have back packs and luggage and stuff like 

that. Because it's inner-city or whatever type of vehicle, 

you would want to keep your stuff near you, and the only 

way you would be able to do that is have you maybe a 

backpack and maybe something else that's where the 59 

kind of came from.

>> I am thinking here the only time I rode in the diner 

it was like the last table and there was a bulk head behind 

you, you fit it behind the bulk head and table and you had 
to get into that space.

>> Right. I know the car. And there is no space 

really to maneuver to get into it. This would, you know, 

this would definitely impact that to where you may have to 

go to like gain access to a second inboard table. Because 

that is the only way that you would get the 59-inch length 

which would give you a space like Dennis was saying to cue 

yourself up and get into the space properly.

>> I actually had to transfer into a seat opposite on the 

other side of the island just push my chair back in that hole. 

It was that tight. And I have a very small chair.

>> Well, this is Dennis, I -- I mean one of the issues 

was I really appreciate the fact that this was a negotiation 

and PRIIA is -- is you know was hard fought in many areas. 

I was simply thinking that we should maybe move to bigger 

and see whether PRIIA can accommodate that or the new 

cars or whatever. I guess my question is: I know it's 

easier if you just put a number in there. It's easier and you 

write absolutely -- and you are right you are absolutely 

right if you do that you get more compliance. I am just 

reluctant to say we shouldn't even try to see whether we can 

get it any better than that. But I am not sure how you 

frame that. You can't -- you can't frame a regulation that 

says, we shall do this, and you should do that. Because 
that is -- that doesn't work in regulations.

>> This is Bob Reuter again maybe we should put 

something like 34 by 62 and see what we get back from the 

comments on the NPRM.

>> Well, this is Blair. I thought I got back online again 

my apologies I feel like I am in the middle of nowhere --

>> We got it pretty much all done Blair.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> I am 18 miles I am in one of the fastest growing 

areas in the country, and you would think I was in the 

desert somewhere.

>> They want to build a light rail and commuter rail 

down here.

>> Yes, I would say hurry up.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> if I could, this is Gary if I could comment back to 

what Dennis said. Dennis I completely support you. I

think that is what Marilyn was alluding to as well on the 34 

width. That's what Ed's data said. I am with Marilyn I 

don't really remember -- I thought it was less than 59 his 

data showed. But there is the place where at least you 

have data I do agree if you pick a number why don't you 

pick pun that you think is better. I don't think 32 is the per 

number by -- perfect number by any stretch that's what we 
could negotiate --

>> Remember, all of this stuff is tied together because 

you could say 34, I mean if you wanted to talk about the 

issue that that provides more maneuvering room that's 

okay. But, remember, we are talking about aisle width and 

doorways whatever. We have to make sure that we -- that 

we don't essentially get somebody -- this is what the 

problem is something like defining the standard wheelchair 

the common wheelchair was. Is that it was -- you could 

have a common wheelchair that wouldn't fit in the door. 

But --

>> (inaudible)

>> The doorway for accessible building I have a 

friend -- I had a friend who had a 36-inch wide wheelchair 

she could get in my place because I had 36-inch wide 

doors. She couldn't get into places that were considered 

accessible.

>> This is Bob Reuter wasn't this dimension just for 

alcoves though?

>> No, it's -- well, it is written as alcoves actually yes. 

It's written as three sides. On rail car you are always going 

to have three sides just about right?

>> Not always. I have seen places where the dining 

room you come in from the, you know, the vestibule area 
and you pull straight into a table. So, you are not --

>> the back wall is your end wall. The side wall is 

your second wall. And then the obstruction in front is the 

third wall. So it will function like an alcove is what I mean.

>> Yeah but it would be bigger than the 34 by 62 or 

whatever dimension is. Just by the nature of its design.

>> This is Blair. The thing that -- that might help, 

you know, from the railroad side is when we are talking 

about maneuvering and we have the 6-inch overlap at I 

think we projected at 12 inches we moved it up. That's a 

key thing that when we start getting into some of these big 

cubic areas, I think that's where you are going to get the 

most push back from the railroads because the width 

across the vehicle. The 32, the 30, 32, and 34 in most 

situations is less of an issue because passengers are 

accommodated typically in seats that are as much as 46 or 

50 inches wide so that space is sort of you know cordoned 

off for passengers having it 32 or 34 probably isn't the end 

of the earth. But when you start extending out the length 

of the car then you quickly start impacting revenue space. 

And that's where you are going to get most of the push 

back. Because adding -- adding inches unless it's 

provisions for overlap, say parted of your maneuvering 

inches are allowed under a table we still have a fixed, pure, 
clear cubic space as well, then it, you know, it makes it a 

little bit easier to push through.

>> I think a certain amount of overlap is almost given 

here.

>> Well it is and it isn't.

>> We have to define it.

>> Yeah, maybe that -- that's why I am saying if we 

are looking -- what I put in there was 32 by 54/32 by 59 if 

it's counted on all three sides, if there is some caveat in 

there that allow for some overlap that's reasonable then 

let's utilize maybe cantilever tables and those sort of things. 

But, again, at the end of the day we truly should expand the 

absolute clear cubic space with no encumbrances I think 

that's important. But I think you need to leave -- you need 

to leave the authority some -- some leeway through 

hopefully or we will get far more push back. I have taken 

numbers from PRIIA and applied them to the Acela is pure 

ways what I get back out is we run 20 train sets we own 20 

train sets we need 21 train sets plus some to have the same 

number of seats that we run today. And then that becomes 

a very serious conversation. But it doesn't hurt to put the 

bigger numbers out there. It's like buying a car. You 

know, you go for -- you throw some numbers out and see 

what happens.
>> Well folding seats are always an option.

>> They are.

>> They are not always in the accessible space. We 

have that issue today. And that's not generally a good 

idea.

>> Well, and Gary, I think it's important from my 

opinion that the folding seat is never the transfer seat. 

Maybe the folding seat is the seat that is there when there 

is no one there who needs the space and they can sit there. 

To me, that's where a lot of people get balled up on, on 

these issues they think the put down seat is also the seat 

you transfer into. In the inner-city world I argue, no, that's 

the seat that someone sits in when there is no one there 

using a wheelchair and there is none of the other seats 

available. It becomes the sort of the last resort. Not the 

place that we insist someone who wants to transfer goes to. 

That's -- that's maybe something that we should clarify in 

our -- in our recommendation as well.

>> But the issue I was trying to get at Blair was the 

issue we have in California where we have people with 

wheeled mobility devices that can't get on a com sys 

because all of the spaces are taken and that's because all of 

the jump seats are occupied.

>> That's what conductors are for.
>> Someone can sit there saying I have a need for the 

seat you can't force them legally to move. There has to be 

some space that's sacred space. Clearly the transfer seats 

people can sit in it our conductors are I think very good that 

they will go over and say I have a person with a disability, 

they have -- they have a reservation for this seat, and so if 

you have--if your ticketed or the accessible transfer seat I 

have had them show my ticket to someone sitting there, 

and in all but one case in about five years I have had people 

always move except one time. And you know, so they do 

well with that. A clear space is a much more difficult thing. 

Because as you start to put luggage there, or you know, 

jump seats and things like that, it's -- they are often in an 

area that's larger, because it's clear space. And people like 

that. So they are like oh, I will sit in the jump seat I don't 

have to sit so close to somebody else. Somebody comes in 

that has to have it and there is no guarantee they are going 

to get up and leave.

>> It's accessible stall in the restroom everybody uses 

it.

>> That's a really good analogy. It is. I mean, I think 

there is some places where you can do that. I am just 

suggesting that the more you try and double use the space, 

the more problems that we push on the community of 
people with disabilities.

>> Amtrak has the ability of having reservations.

>> You don't have a reserved seat the only person with 

a reserved seat choose the transfer seat accessible space 

for the stowable space and the transfer seat. 

>> But they have the reservation for the space.

>> They would have to for a space on the train, you 

are correct. But nobody on the train beyond that has an 

actual ticket tore a specific seat.

>> That's correct. Yeah.

>> And that's what -- that's what hurts us.

>> The exception to that Gary would be typically on 

long distance trains the car attendants will at train side 

assign people. Because keeping up with where -- because 

of the nature of long distance travel, they have to keep up 

very closely where every one is so they make sure they get 

off the train in the middle of the night.

>> Blair raises an excellent point on long distance. 

Long distance inner-city is completely different than on the 

corridor. Anywhere you have a corridor like the Wolverine 

in Michigan or the new high speed line from Chicago to St. 

Louis or out in California or northeast it's run like commuter 

rail or heavy rail. Where the long distance stuff like Blair 

said they will have maybe one or two cars you can get into. 
Like when I got on the train to Savannah I couldn't get on 

anything but my sleeper car or a coach car that they wanted 

me in so that they know where I was getting off.

>> Right. That's true of Gary it's important to note it's 

true of everyone on the train

>> That's true it wasn't just me. I didn't realize it until 

I had gone on the trip I didn't realize that I thought -- wait 

a minute all cars are accessible. You can go anywhere that 

you want. Well, you can. I suppose I could have made a 

sting and went to the third car whatever it was. But the 

crew z are like this is my car for Savannah.

>> The crews can be pretty persnickety about that.

>> It does raise the issue. The only thing I am trying 

to raise when you multi purpose accessible space you are 

really asking for problems

>> Getting on a corridor train and trying to get 

everybody to move the luggage is always in the accessible 

spot.

>> It's a nightmare it's really, really tough. Many 

times our high-speed train and regional trains are just full. 

If you are online going, you know you might be going from 

Philadelphia to New York. It's what an hour and 15 

minutes hour and 30 on the Acela two hours regional. It 

could take you 30 minutes to get enough stuff moved to 
get into the space.

>> Um-hmm.

>> (inaudible)

>> It's going to be harder.

>> This is Blair (inaudible) are the frustrating 

operational issues that obviously like Chris always said we 

can only control what is in the car. And one way of 

influencing the operation is by the vehicle. But I think the 

other reality is the operational side has to tighten up there 

act you know, the Amtrak example is we have a baggage 

policy that should prevent the quality of bags that become 

an issue and end up stacked up where you are supposed to 

be able to access with the wheelchair. If we enforce all of 

those policies it probably wouldn't be an issue on most 

trains

>> Well maybe that's something else that needs to be 

put a sign wheelchairs only or no baggage here.

>> I think that's -- that is certainly you know, under 

the communication flag of what we are doing, we need to 

add stronger language and mandate what the language is. 

So, people can't -- there is no argument. That's what that 

space is for. And that give the conductors quite honestly 

some of the conductors I feel sorry for them they are try to 

go follow the rules and do the right thing you have 
belligerent passengers who will do what they please just 

because. The more teeth that we can give them, and I 

would say go so far as to cite the regulation, if, for 

example, the FRA requires us to put a sticker on the car, 

and on all of the windows that proclaim that the windows 

are FRA type II windows. And it has to, by rule, it has to be 

on the car and on the windows. So, why not you know, 

have a placard that says what we want it to say. And cite 

the federal regulation that covers it. And then the 

conductors can point to that no you can't put your bags 

there. If we can --

>> Player if I could say one last thing about the clear 

space. If you remember, the single level long distance cars 

that we have been working on the mockups that we saw we 

had a flit down seat in the clear space and in the dining car 

and we took it out.

>> Yep.

>> and it should have been taken out. And that's all I 

am saying. I am saying that I agree with you on everything 

else I am just saying that flip down seats are very 

problematic. When I looked at the Talgo car the flip down 

seat, when I talked to the crews if somebody is sitting there 

those trains are small trains they don't have a lot of revenue 

seats to start with, if you come in and you are in an 
occupied wheeled mobility device that seat is occupied, 

there is just not enough space for you.

>> Right.

>> Talgo cars in and of themselves are a problem. At 

least used in the cascade service.

>> Idea, we want you to get into the -- we won't get 

into the Talgos. Hey Gary just a note on the final solution 

on the diner. We took the whole first table and half of the 

next booth out.

>> I know I saw (inaudible).

>> Well every diner I have been in that's where they 

store silver ware table ware I have never get them to move 

it.

>> Well, as I said about some of our dining car folks if 

we took out every table and put in storage except for last 

two one of those tables they would use it for doing their 

paper work. That's neither here nor there.

>> This is Melissa Anderson I just I am poking you 

with a sharp stick reminding you how much stuff you have 

to do you have about 30 minutes.

>> All right. Yes we are according to my clock even 

tighter than that. So, okay. What number do we want to 

put in as the lightning rod for the clear space?

>> I would suggest 34 by 62 and see what kind of 
lightning hits it. Hey if nobody comments on it, I mean 

what the heck. We got a winner.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Okay. Well, I mean I will write it up like that. 34 

by 62. Okay.

>> Question on that, this is Don Mebius with LDK is 

that also a part of the clear space for an ADA toilet?

>> Hum? Inside of a -- restrooms have their own 

regulations.

>> Well they do, now -- and I would like to say this, 

when we start looking at going back to platform clear space 

on lifts for cars, and if we are looking at vertical movement 

between levels, what is the -- what is the 

impact -- honestly they are different functions but what is 

the impact of this? That's one of the places where the 

lower number, the 32, 34, whatever becomes a bigger 

issue.

>> This is maneuvering space in an enclosed area 

alcove.

>> Okay. All right.

>> Say the space on the left would tell you who could 

get on your train and you want to stop people to 

not -- they get a big chair on the train that can't move. So 

the lift platform all of that stuff would essentially say if your 
chair is bigger than this, I am sorry but you have to find 

another way. Just like in the building, if you got a 36-inch 

wide wheelchair you can't get in an accessible door.

>> Right.

>> That's just life.

>> All right. Well look, I will write that up as 34 by 

62. My intention is to revise the matrix and circulate it for 

comment if that's okay. So we can move ahead and try to 

work through to the end of it real quick.

What about the overlap of clear space? I have it 

written in as 6 inches and 12 inches which is 3 inches more 

than it is now?

>> Is that the 12 inches high or the 6 inches I think?

>> the overlap the 6 inches is the same. But

>> (inaudible)

>> But the (inaudible) is clear vertically instead of 9 

inches clear

>> 6 inches is the vertical of the length can it be 

accommodated under an object if you have at least 12 

inches of vertical clearance.

>> That's been the problem lately, a lot of wheelchairs 

are sitting higher and --

>> That's why we changed it to 12. It's not 9 in all of 

the current regulations. As a result of what Ed said and 
some other folks on a couple of talks back we decided to 

make it 12. Frank I think was concerned 12 might be 

pushing it and it might be better at 11. I am inclined to 

say try 12 and see what happens. But, yeah, the 9 inches is 

not good enough.

>> 9 is no way.

>> This is Frank, yeah, I mean no I am listening here 

and we are going 34 by 62 we are going from 9 to 12. I

think the 12 inches is really pushing the envelope of the 

seating -- room for seats if you want to try to use the 

bottom of that. So, you really are increasing the space 

pretty dramatically when you keep adding all of these 

numbers up. I know that you want to put it out there and 

see what people come back with but the question I want to 

ask is: Where is the justification for 34 by 62? I mean you 

could argue that 40 by 80 is even better but why 34 by 62?

>> Because it's based on the research that Ed Seinfeld 

did. Those are hard numbers. That's all.

>> How many -- I intend to be at the public transit 

expo all of the seat manufacturers have seats displayed 

there. So I will certainly measure the under side of seats 

while I am there.

>> This is Blair. Yeah, the thing that gets most critical 

with the seats is the under frames and the cushions and 
things like that. Because you are also running up against if 

you take the compressed surface of the seat you know 

somewhere in there, there has to be a frame. And 

depending on whether the seat is a simple fix commuter 

type seat or more complex long distance type seat the 

amount of space becomes more critical. And obviously 

again ins are ins on the -- inches are inches on the train 

any inch that doesn't have an overlap condition -- more 

clear floor space which impacts the revenue seating space 

on the train again. It all cascades.

And those are the kinds of things that we are going to 

get back from the industry. I know it will come back from 

Amtrak they will probably make me do the work.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> I mean, I think Frank I understand, we share a 

common struggle in our railroad worlds, but I think what we 

have to do is look at -- because I can honestly say I haven't 

gone back and look at what 12 inches does on different 

seat times. I know on the seats we have today it's a little 

prohibitive but we are looking at trying to get away from 

some of these big heavy clunky frames. Yet the seats have 

their own crashworthiness criteria that they must meet 

driven but another set of standards. Somewhere in there 

those things have to -- to live with one another
>> I imagine American standard in all of the other 

folks that make the fancy rail seats and they are (inaudible) 

I imagine if you (inaudible).

>> Yeah any information that you can glean would be 

awesome.

>> Are you not coming?

>> To the after show?

>> Right. No I am going to probably be too busy 

doing stuff on this.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Well, I certainly will be at the after show I will have 

my camera and tape measure.

>> Okay. Let's see the number of mobility aid spaces, 

I think inner-city was the only one that always has just one 

so I plugged in two.

>> This is Uwe Rutenberg, can I just -- before we go 

to the next item there, I have a question regarding the 

wheelchair spaces since we have talked about this at length 

now.

The issue that has come up with many operators is the 

issue of wheelchair securement on the inter-city trains. 

Now, most countries in the world do not use securement 

systems in their inner-city trains

>> Nor do the U.S.
>> We don't use any rail vehicle there is no wheelchair 

securement.

>> In Canada there are pre traitors one is a rail one is 

Rocky Mountaineer, which is a tourism train on the west 

coast, and there is go train in Toronto like a commuter 

train.

>> They never tied me down when I was Ride N Go. 

>> I think the issue came up under normal operating 

conditions, and I think I talked with very shortly on this, 

that the operating environment is low G. You know, very 

small forces due to large masses.

The problem is when we have a crash, a collision 

derailment role offer, et cetera. The forces can be much 

higher. And what can happen then if the wheelchair is not 

secured it can become a project tile to injury other people.

>> Roll over.

>> The question is --

>> All of the other luggage and all of the other stuff 

(inaudible)

>> Should we tie them down or not?

>> No.

>> No.

>> I just want to bring it up and should this be 

included in your matrix or not?
>> No.

>> The only people that I know in the United States 

that absolutely mandate tie down have the lowest speeds 

that New Orleans.

>> I have never seen anything in this country for 

securement.

>> New Orleans is almost anal about it they are 

absolutely you don't move the car without being tied down.

>> Well, what is, prior to ADA coming into effect, I 

know Amtrak had the old single wheel clamps that you back 

into and they latch you hit a lever and you got out of it. My 

understanding was that, that only works on the wheels that 

are open spoke arrangement it doesn't work on scooters or 

whole litany of vehicles. There was activity around making 

common attachment points, the industry the wheelchair 

manufacturers at the time I understand put up a real fuss 

about that. The -- there is -- I don't think the community 

is ever going to sign up for any kind of securement.

>> The manual wheelchair user every ounce on the 

chair is important. You don't want anymore extra weight 

on there than you have to.

>> You don't want to be tied down on something 

people are trying to get off of and you are trying to untie 

yourself.
>> That's true too.

>> The real issue is there is no universal securement. 

It doesn't matter what you design there are going to be a 

whole bunch of chairs that you can't secure by it. Secondly 

maybe all of the test of wheelchair securement the 

wheelchair is the weakest link the belt with hang on the 

chair but the whack disintegrates. It stays attach to the 

belt the rest of the chair is flying all over the area. All bets 

are off in a collision or derailment. There is no securement 

device made that's going to protect you for that. The idea 

that you providing this for that emergency or rare situation 

people are kidding themselves if they think that that really 

has some meaning.

>> I haven't seen any wheelchair manufacturer 

nowadays that doesn't have a caveat in the owner's manual 

that says not intended adds a (inaudible) in a wheeled 

motor vehicle.

>> That's the legal way of avoiding liability. But if my 

device disintegrated I would go after them anyway.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> The test that was done years ago with the old 

single clamps was yeah they loaded a wheelchair up

clamped it down and accelerated it, and what you ended up 

with was a wheel crumbled up wheel the rest of the device 
was gone. So, that was the thinking well it doesn't -- it 

doesn't do anything for you in most situations. So, 

especially the more severe.

>> No one has ever seen the video would never get on 

a vehicle again.

>> In the corporate world, the -- the burden would be 

on the manufacturers and the providers to get their heads 

together and make something that would create a safety 

situation that would be universe Sal not just a train but to 

buses and people (inaudible) and things like that. But the 

tragedy is I don't think we can affect that here.

>> The only thing that seems to work universally and 

works well is the one thing that nobody will use that's riding 

backwards.

>> Right.

>> Nobody -- I know nobody that will is willing to ride 

backwards across the country or pretty much anywhere 

else. In fact when I get a car out of the country or 

something that has those I am usually facing forward with

my footrest and forehead against the pad.

>> I would -- I would -- so, if we can go ahead and try 

to move introduce through the matrix in the last several 

minutes we have got here. Is there an issue over the 

number of mobility aids seating locations? Again I have 
them as two that I cascaded down. PRIIA abdicated two. 

And then that's for people who wish to stay in the 

wheelchairs, correct?

>> Right.

>> Those two for each.

>> Right.

>> Two each right?

>> Two for each vehicle? For each car

>> Two for each car. I have to doublecheck I thought 

we -- I don't remember if that was one transfer space and 

one clear space for occupied.

>> I wasn't sure either Gary but the way I read it, it 

implied two of each. And again, that's what I applied to 

the -- see what the effect PRIIA was on existing train like 

Acela. And that's --

>> If you look at that spec then Blair did you see did 

we address two transfer seats and two occupied spaces in 

each car?

>> Transfer seats are not a problem all you need is the 

armrest basically to be able--

>> You need a similar space for the unoccupied 

device.

>> So it can't be the same as the occupied space. So 

it is quite an impact, actually.
>> Yep. It is. I mean I will -- when I take the 

information from the matrix and apply it to vehicles and 

share that back we can see it.

>> Okay.

>> And you know if we want to -- if we want to 

change something we can. But I thought, you know, for 

the moment let's leave it at two. I will go back and clarify 

what free I can't -- what PRIIA says to make sure.

>> One plus one with one always flip up seat or always 

transfer seat. One always wheelchair seat and one 

convertible space whether it's a flip up seat or something.

>> Right. Yeah. I am not sure -- I will have to go 

back and look at that. If it's okay now leave it at two I will 

get detail back on that for everyone. All the handrails and 

stanchions personally we say stay at inch and quarter inch 

and a half I see there was no before about architectural 

going up to two inches. Two inches for a lot of situations I 

think all of those ergonomically can begin to go the other 

way for something that you are grabbing.

>> For a small person two inches is too big.

>> Yeah.

>> So the one and a quarter one and a half is perfect

>> Yes, that's correct. Bigger is not necessarily better 

in that dimension.
>> Right. You want to be able -- the issue is I will 

use the quick example, Melrose safety appliances, like 

handrails are typically like 5/8 of an inch they have been 

that way forever. But those are the ones that the railroad 

workers with gloved hands are using on the outside of 

trains. That dimension is very small for someone to grip in 

a more normal situation.

>> That would be the one (inaudible)

>> There is an exception.

>> Dennis?

>> In the current regulation there is an exception for 

those handrails which are basically required by FRA. They 

don't have to comply with that handrail spec.

>> I was just making the point that there is reasons 

why the smaller ones would not work and the bigger 

ones -- part of the issue is being able to grip. And people 

can't necessarily grip the smaller ones. They can't get their 

hands far enough around the bigger ones to have a safe 

grip. Again, my thinking was we stay at inch and a quarter 

to inch and a half.

>> The only thing I can think of where it would be 

issue might be on the folding step well on the track. The 

one that is attached to the bottom of the track.

>> Right. Well that -- that comes -- that one is on 
newer cars bob we have made that a minimum of an inch 

and a quarter or inch and a half. Because that brakes the 

plane between the outside where it's sort of the FRA safety 

appliance world versus passenger access.

And so we treat that as inside passenger access now. 

So it has to comply with ADA. That's --

>> (inaudible).

>> Okay. Clearance is inch and a half anybody see a 

need to change that

>> That's critical for -- they don't grab it they stuff 

their fist down in there.

>> I would make it any smaller to for any reason

>> No bigger either.

>> Okay.

>> Blair, this is Marilyn from DREDF are you talking 

about the distance between the grab bar and the wall?

>> Yes. The clear (inaudible)

>> I want to encourage you to put it -- you might 

want to call it what -- you know, clearance between X and 

Y. I mean there is any number of reasons. I mean, can 

your arm -- there is any number of reasons that the staff 

could expound. I never heard something called that 

before. I think we may have made it up.

>> In fact, your PRIIA regulations say inch and a half 
minimum, I think it should be taken out. It should be inch 

and a half normal I suspect. For inch and a half, inch and 

3/4.

>> You know what I will do, I will write it up so it's very 

clear it's measured from the surface of the railing not from 

the center line. So there is no -- there is no confusion 

about that.

>> Yeah. That's good. And it shouldn't make sure it 

doesn't say minimum because you know those ones with 

four or five or 6 inches a lot of people with poor hand 

control will not be able to hang on.

>> Say that again Bob?

>> People with poor hand control.

>> Right.

>> Cannot hang on. They actually rest their wrist 

against the back wall.

>> Okay. So you are saying having it too big could be 

a problem as well?

>> Yes, it is.

>> Okay. You make a very good point there. Okay. 

Because it actually falls between the railing and the wall if it 

was too far.

>> A number of people I have known had the problem 

and gotten their hand stuck between the railing and the 
wall.

>> Okay.

>> Lean on their arms instead of their hands.

>> Okay.

>> This is Andre. We have stairway banisters they 

have to meet this requirement, but there is no wall 

necessarily next to them. We just to have be careful the 

way this requirement is written.

>> If there is no wall behind it there is nothing you 

could do.

>> That's right that's why the rules should be written 

properly.

>> When against the wall or when against the surface.

>> There is two -- this is Marilyn. I think a handrail 

such as on a stair or a ramp from the wall might be 

different than a grab bar in the restroom. I mean I 

just -- yeah. Staff or Dennis or someone could comment 

perhaps.

>> We aren't addressing grab bars in restrooms in this 

committee. 

>> Marsha Mazz: But I think Marilyn's point this is 

Marsha is what the way they are used are different and 

therefore they have different characteristics in the building 

standard. In the building standard handrails have a one 
and a half inch minimum requirement whereas grab bars 

are not quite the same. 

>> These are handrails I would like the knuckle 

clearance to be linked back to handrail stanchions from the 

wall or something like that.

>> Okay.

>> and then -- and then I -- yeah. And then just 

make sure it's consistent with what the staff thinks it should 

be as well as us who are --

>> Maybe the appendix there needs to be a little 

elaboration this is what a grab bar is this is what a handrail 

is.

>> Okay.

>> You guys have 5 minutes.

>> Marsha: This document is not likely to have the 

same kind of appendix as others because of changes in the 

federal register rules.

>> That's right I forgot about that yet

>> (inaudible) one question on that that handrail we 

are talking about would it also include the one when you 

board the train that you would hold on to those handrails

>> That would be handrails.

>> Because those are often now increasingly used by 

FRA as a requirement for safety appliance to board the 
train. Which requires a two and a half inch clearance

>> Well they are handrails not grab bars.

>> Right. That's the question I am saying are these 

handrails or grab bars

>> I think we have to define them.

>> Yeah, I will -- whale do I will go back and look at 

AFTA and FRA, AFTA has taken FRA regs and done a very 

good job of illustrating what the FRA has been trying to 

take us understand for a hundred years. And so, that's the 

true picture which helps. I will look at that and see, again, 

when you brake that between the outside and safety 

appliances and inside and passenger circulation and 

accessibility, maybe we need to help define that break so 

it's clear. Again, that just means that going forward that 

when a car rail or car owner writes specs and works on 

things it leaves less for argument by different regulating 

agencies. If I could, let's see, the fair box guard -- fare 

box guard it looks like the only place that had application 

was -- was on the light rail I really didn't do much research 

on that to try to add it to anything else. But that seems to 

be appropriate for services that are treated like a bus where 

you come on and you pay your fare when you go.

>> Yeah, fare box have to be regulated to a point. I

mean, even commuter -- not commuter rail but subway 
cars are using boxes -- Philadelphia and Cleveland are 

using fare boxes at night.

>> I will -- what I can add then I will add back where 

they are used regardless of the mode.

>> Right. When used.

>> Okay. So, (inaudible).

>> All right. (inaudible).

>> Maneuverability near doors? There was -- you can 

look at notes, let's see.

>> That is -- that has more than one number. I mean 

there is different kinds of -- if you are on the strike 

side -- there is -- I am not sure how to boil that down so 

much. Of course I am not looking at your end notes you 

may do that.

>> Yeah, I think the notes are critical because what we 

discussed last time, for example, will give us some 

way -- you know it's an open car pretty much it has 

stanchions and things and eventually maybe separation 

panels. But the thing across the width of the subway you 

are going to have -- it's going to be the width of the doors 

all the way across. You have a built in maneuverability. 

What I tried to do is break it up into cars with vestibules 

that have designed hard spaces versus cars that are more 

open. And that's what the note 5 with A, B, and C was 
trying to address. I don't think that we have got time. We 

are right up against the wall for the end of the call. But if I 

could ask people look at note 5. Send me your thoughts 

on that. I will wrap them back into -- into this as best I 

can. But, again, I thought to Marilyn's point that can't be 

just one number because of all of the different 

arrangements next to the doors on the different modes.

>> And some of them -- remember, most of those in 

fact all of them in the building that refer to maneuvering 

clearance in doors refer to manual doors. So, if the door is 

automatic when the pushbutton or with a sense sore, none 

of those things apply.

>> Right. The rail doors are power doors.

>> It has to be in the right place and meet the controls 

and operating mechanisms standards for placement. But 

those -- you don't need maneuvering clearance like you do 

for a swing door if there is a door that parts or whatever 

most train, they are power operated and open when you 

approach.

>> Blair, you can make changes on your matrix and 

you guys can pass this around before the -- before the in 

person meeting in September to come up with some final 

numbers. But we need to close out our meeting today.

>> Blair, maybe you and I ought to get together on the 
monorail and we will can talk privately

>> Sure that would be fine Bob.

>> We need to cover personal rapid transit too

>> That's what I was thinking ALRT, CRT guide ways 

monorail tramways all of those little other oddballs.

>> Personal rapid transit.

>> Right.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Jet packs okay.

>> Hey there we go I want one of those.

>> Suddenly our vision of Wyle E. Coyote.

>> and animals coming from the sky.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Yep, yep. Okay. All right. Bear with me just a 

jiffy I am literally sitting in a car, I drove to where the phone 

service was better. Crazy.

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Let's see. Well, for September it looks like what we 

are going to be up against is giving a status of where we 

are. What I will do is update the matrix according to what 

we have today, and if I can if it's all right with the folks at 

the Access Board I will circulate it by E-mail for any 

comments if there are things we are solid on is it 

appropriate for us to present those as, and that's our 
recommendation at the September meeting Melissa?

>> I would say that it should be put up for discussion 

maybe by the full committee. I mean get input from them. 

I don't know that -- until you run some of these things 

through the car plans and work with the other committees 

also, I don't know that you we are really ready to make solid 

recommendations to the committee again.

>> Okay.

>> For the matrix up and give everybody a chance to 

look at the matrix I think that's excellent

>> Here is what I will do, I have lined up a recruit at 

Amtrak to help me come up with based on existing vehicles 

could come up with generic floor plans for modes that are 

not you know the property of any particular agency or 

manufacturer right now. And apply this information from 

the matrix to that. Before I do that I will update the matrix 

and try to get it out to everyone by Wednesday of next 

week. 

>> If there is a general consensus that's okay based on 

the discussion today I will apply to all of the vehicles. And 

then get that back out to everyone. So we can be in a 

position to either revise totally revise if necessary or have it 

as a more formal discussion at the September meeting.

>> Melissa: Sounds good thank you. Thank you 
everybody today for being with us today. And we will see 

everybody in person September 11 and 12.

>> The only assignment that I have right now is for 

Bob Reuter to measure and photograph all of the seats at 

the --

 (LAUGHTER)

>> Yes, but that's not until October.

>> Oh, okay. Well, good.

>> I will be sure to tell you I will do it in October.

>> Okay. It does work out well right now we are 

looking at different seat types at Amtrak so we are by 

default going to need information as well. I will hopefully 

with share that.

>> Yes, vehicles I will measure some but the show 

where you get to talk to the manufacturers and see what 

they can and are producing.

>> Thank you everybody.

>> Check on the vehicles. Thank you.

>> Thank you.

>> Operator thank you for all your help today please 

disconnect all lines. (End 

of meeting)