ࡱ> WV \pmasda Ba==xX/#8X@"1wArial1wArial1wArial1wArial1wArial1 wArial1$wArial1.@wTimes New Roman1.wTimes New Roman1.wTimes New Roman1.wTimes New Roman1.@wTimes New Roman1.wTimes New Roman1.wTimes New Roman1.wTimes New Roman"$"#,##0;\-"$"#,##0"$"#,##0;[Red]\-"$"#,##0"$"#,##0.00;\-"$"#,##0.00#"$"#,##0.00;[Red]\-"$"#,##0.005*0_-"$"* #,##0_-;\-"$"* #,##0_-;_-"$"* "-"_-;_-@_-,)'_-* #,##0_-;\-* #,##0_-;_-* "-"_-;_-@_-=,8_-"$"* #,##0.00_-;\-"$"* #,##0.00_-;_-"$"* "-"??_-;_-@_-4+/_-* #,##0.00_-;\-* #,##0.00_-;_-* "-"??_-;_-@_-"Yes";"Yes";"No""True";"True";"False""On";"On";"Off"],[$ -2]\ #,##0.00_);[Red]\([$ -2]\ #,##0.00\)                + ) , *            8@ @  8@ @   <@ @      8@ @     8@ @   8@ @  8@ @ 8@ @  `hSheet1ԉSheet2ۊSheet3=  ;" Exemption: Disagree 27.4.1 It is not appropriate for ARA members to decide on 'essential travel information' for passengers with disabilities. Exemption: Disagree 27.4.2 This exemption proposal achieves no net change in the access requirements of the Transport Standards. Currently, if the specifications in the Transport Standards cannot be achieved, then 'equivalent access' can be used to provide access for people with disabilities.  Exemption: Disagree The exemption proposal on 'assistance dogs' was not accepted. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree This item was subject to considerable debate by APTJC. Trains have allocated spaces along their length. The ARA are seeking additional protection and not requesting an exemption. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  Exemption: Agree In order to be internally consistent with Clause 2.1 the exemption for 6.1 is agreed. Exemption: Disagree 6.1.1 Exemption: Disagree 6.1.2 The exemption should not include 6.1.1 and 6.1.2. These issues should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  q Exemption: Disagree Alternative hazard barriers, such as fences, walls or architectural solutions are tactile indicators and provide tactile cues for people with vision disabilities. Existence of other tactile cues reduces the requirement for TGSIs. It is unclear what the problem or the proposed solution is. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards and would be better considered in the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree This is an editing issue which would be better considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. There is no need for an exemption as the editing is just adding content from the Transport Standards Guidelines. Exemption: Disagree This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards and would be better considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. There is little evidence to support the claim for exemption. Exemption: Disagree This is an editing issue which should be considered during the 5- Year Review of the Transport Standards. The requirement for TGSIs in conveyances is an inaccuracy in the Transport Standards. ]Exemption: Disagree This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards and would be better considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. The changes to the height and width of the barrier opening would disadvantage people with disabilities. This is an issue that cuts across all modes of public transport. Exemption: Disagree There is a need to require operators to make food and drink outlets in the rail environment accessible. This can be overcome through contractual requirements. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  Exemption (New Part): Disagree It is inappropriate to consider new parts during an exemption process. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree This is an issue of editing and referencing of the Australian Standards and would be better considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards. It is more appropriately considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. mExemption (New Clause) (HREOC Outcome): Agree This new material formalises the HREOC Queensland Rail Outcome.. Exemption: Agree 2.5.1 Exemption: Disagree 2.5.2 This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards. It is more appropriately considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. There is not enough argument at this point to change the requirement.  Exemption: Disagree These are operational concerns and not reasons to provide a temporary exemption from the Transport Standards. The proposed Clause is unnecessarily restrictive. The issue would be more appropriately considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption (Deleted Clause): Disagree This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.% Exemption: Agree This formalises the HREOC Queensland Rail Outcome.  Exemption: Disagree The problem and solution are not clearly defined therefore it is not clear what exemption is being sought. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  4Exemption: Disagree The ARA is seeking to clarify the requirements of this Clause and allow members to only put in resting points where infrastructure permits. This has implications for all passengers and modes of transport. The issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. hExemption: Disagree This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. xExemption (Delete Clause): Disagree This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.$ Exemption (Delete Clause): Disagree This is an editing issue and should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.$ Section Description Comment Access path1.11AXAssistance Dog1.11BXBoarding Point1.11CXBooked Services on Trains1.11DXUnbooked Services on Trains1.15XDisability AidInfrastructure1.18XLevel Crossing1.19AX Mobility Aid1.19BX#Nominated Accessible Boarding PointPremises1.23XSleeping berthPart 1X Mobility Aids"Access paths - Unhindered passage(Access paths - Continuous accessibility)Access paths - Minimum unobstructed width2.4X?Access paths - Minimum unobstructed width for railway platformsPoles and obstacles, etc2.5AXLevel crossingsAccess paths - Extent of pathAManoeuvring areas - Circulation space for wheelchairs to turn inPassing areas - Minimum width4Passing areas - Two-way access paths and aerobridges5Resting points - When resting points must be providedRamps - Ramps on access pathsBoarding rampsRamps - Minimum allowable width$Boarding - Boarding points and kerbs1Boarding - When boarding devices must be provided0Boarding - Width and surface of boarding devices/Maximum load to be supported by boarding device4Boarding - Signals requesting use of boarding device@Boarding - Notification by passenger of need for boarding device2Allocated space - Minimum size for allocated space3Allocated space - Consolidation of allocated spacesGAllocated space - International symbol of accessibility to be displayed.Surfaces - Compliance with Australian Standard10.1X BHandrails and grabrails - Handrails to be provided on access paths,Handrails and grabrails - Handrails on steps6Handrails and grabrails - Handrails above access paths2Grabrail to be provided where fares are to be paidFHandrails and grabrails - Grabrails to< be provided in allocated spaces*Doorways and doors - Doors on access paths7Doorways and doors - Weight activated doors and sensors.Doorways and doors - Clear opening of doorwaysILifts - Compliance with Australian Standard premises and infrastructure.Stairs - Stairs not to be sole means of access(Toilets - Location of accessible toiletsEToilets - Unisex accessible toilet ferries and accessible rail carsCompliance with AS2899.1 (1986)ASymbols - Accessibility symbols to incorporate directional arrows@Symbols - Accessibility symbol to be visible on accessible doors;Signs - Destination signs to be visible from boarding pointSigns - Electronic notices5Signs - Raised lettering or symbols or use of Braille+Tactile ground surface indicators -Location8Tactile ground surface indicators - Style and dimensionsBTactile ground surface indicators - Instalment at railway stations"Alarms - Emergency warning systemsCControls - Passenger-operated devices for opening and closing doors7Furniture and fitments - Tables, benches, counters, etcStreet furniture - Seats!Gateways - Gateways and checkouts#Payment of fares - Vending machines@Payment of fares - Circulation space in front of vending machine<Information - Access to information about transport services Direct assistance to be provided)Information - Size and format of printing2Information - Access to information about location=Booked services - Notice of requirement for accessible travelGBooked services - Period of notice of requirement for accessible travelDBooked services - Location of carers, assistants and service animalsUBelongings - Disability aids and mobility aids to be in addition to baggage allowancePriority - Priority seating)Access paths - Access paths- conveyances+Passing areas - Passing areas- conveyances;Number of allocated spaces to be provided- train cars, etc[Handrails and grabrails - Compliance with Australian Standard- premises and infrastructure;Stairs - Compliance with Australian Standards- conveyancesLControls - Compliance with Australian Standard- premises and infrastructure<Furniture and fitments - Accessible sleeping berths- trainsOHearing augmentation  listening systems - Public address systems- conveyances=Handrails and grabrails - Compliance with Australian StandardVDoorways and doors - Compliance with Australian Standard- premises and infrastructure@Toilets - Unisex accessible toilet- premises and infrastructurePToilets - Requirements for accessible toilets- ferries and accessible rail cars;Lighting - Illumination levels -premises and infrastructureUAPTJC Comments on the Exemption Application from the Australasian Railway AssociationExemption: Disagree This is an editing issue and is more appropriately considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  Exemption (New Clause): Disagree It is inappropriate to consider new clauses during an exemption process. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards." Exemption (New Clause): Disagree It is inappropriate to consider new clauses during an exemption process. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.! Exemption: Disagree The proposed amendment results in no net change. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree The reason provided does not give sufficient justification for any adjustment. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. s Exemption Conveyances, Exemption Infrastructure/Premises see 10.X : Disagree The change of reference is incorrect. M Exemption: Agree This exemption should be limited to rail platforms only. The rest of the issues should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  Exemption: Disagree This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards and would be better considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree There is no need to incorporate the Transport Standards Guidelines into the Transport Standards. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  |Exemption: Disagree This is an editing issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption (New Clause): Disagree It is inappropriate to consider new clauses during an exemption process. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree The change of definition from 'assistance animal' to 'assistance dog' was not agreed. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. ij Exemption: Disagree The reduction of door and ramp width was not agreed. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards and would be better considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. There is no Clause 13.1 in AS1735.12 (1999). LExemption: Agree The argument provided by ARA members seems very reasonable. Exemption: Agree This exemption addresses the problems with the gap between the train and the platform. The gaps specified in the Transport Standards are not achievable in a rail environment. The application to 'Premises' must be deleted.  }Exemption: Disagree This information is already contained in the Transport Standards Guidelines. It is unnecessary to include it in the Transport Standards. Many people have multiple disabilities. It is not appropriate to only specify access for passengers with mobility disabilities. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree This is both an editing and referencing of Australian Standards issue. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree It is important for passengers with disabilities to be able to identify accessible doors, both inside and outside of the conveyance. Exemption: Disagree The issue of the nominated accessible boarding point was not agreed. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree Passengers need support where they pay fares, even if there is no need to exchange money. There is insufficient justification to agree to an exemption at this point. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. PControls - Location of passenger-operated controls for opening and locking doorsExemption: Agree 27.3.1 The exemption is agreed because it provides a clarification of the existing requirement. Exemption: Disagree 27.3.2 There are many views on best practice for providing contrast in printed materials for people with disabilities. This is an issue that would be best considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  Exemption: Disagree This is an issue which effects all modes of public transport. It is unnecessary to include content from the Transport Standards Guidelines in the Transport Standards. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Agree Rail operators and providers have no control over certain types of vending machines found in the rail environment< e.g. snack and drink machines. This exemption is agreed, subject to a suitable redrafting of the requirements being endorsed by people with disabilities and HREOC. This is partly an issue of editing and referencing of the Australian Standards and would be better considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  AFood and drink services - Equal access to food and drink servicesExemption: Disagree The specification only applies if the handrail is installed. There is not sufficient justification to agree to an exemption at this point. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  Exemption: Agree This exemption is agreed because of the technical and operational impossibilities of providing compliant stairs in conveyances. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  Exemption: Disagree This is an editing issue and is extending the requirements of the Transport Standards. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption (Delete Clause): Agree The exemption is accepted as ARA members need time to prepare for people with disabilities to use their services. This would include preparing seating arrangements and on-board manifests on passenger requirements.! Exemption: Disagree This exemption proposal creates no net change to the requirements of the Transport Standards. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree This proposal doesn't have substance as it has misquoted the Transport Standards. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree The submission does not provide sufficient evidence to warrant an amendment to the requirements of the Transport Standards at this point. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Agree 9.10.1 Exemption: Disagree 9.10.2 This is an editing issue, which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.   Exemption (New Clause) (Infrastructure): Disagree It is inappropriate to consider new clauses during an exemption process. This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards. This issue should be dealt with during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.3 Exemption: Disagree The issue of the compliant mobility aid was not agreed. Due to hygiene considerations, there is a health requirement to have only toilets with airlocks in dining railcars. bExemption: Disagree The proposed Clause exceeds the minimum Transport Standards requirements. The Transport Standards require the minimum level of accessibility. The ARA can always exceed the Transport Standards. The issue of the force required to open the door can be overcome by not fitting a door closer and using another door type eg. a sliding door. IExemption: Agree The exemption is agreed, provided that consultation with people with disabilities supports the revised requirements for accessible toilets on rail conveyances. It is suggested that the ARA negotiate with HREOC and the disability sector to develop revised requirements for accessible toilets on rail conveyances.   5Exemption: Disagree The proposed Clause exceeds the minimum Transport Standards requirements. The Transport Standards require the minimum level of accessibility. The ARA can always exceed the Transport Standards. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Agree The exemption is agreed, on the condition that the ARA consult with people with disabilities and HREOC to determine the appropriate length of time for electronic notice information to be visible. Exemption: Agreed The exemption is agreed, on the condition that the ARA consult with people with disabilities and HREOC to determine the appropriate height of the raised lettering and Braille.  fExemption: Agree The ARA has already initiated a process of consultation on the proposed requirements with AFDO. Agreement to the exemption is conditional on consulting with people with disabilities and HREOC to ensure that the proposed solution is appropriate. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree This is an issue of both editing and referencing of the Australian Standards. This is an issue which should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards.  Exemption: Disagree This application for exemption lacks relevant justification. The rationale does not substantiate the claim. Comparing accessible parking spaces to accessible sleeping berth usage does not make sense. An ageing population will result in a large increase in the number of people with a disability. This counteracts the argument to reduce the level of accessible sleeping berths. pExemption: Agree The ARA has a strong, well researched supporting case on this issue and an exemption is agreed.  $Exemption: Disagree 28.1.1 It is inappropriate to make the Transport Standards Guidelines part of the Transport Standards. It is also inappropriate for ARA members to decide on what period of time is 'reasonable advance notice'. Exemption: Disagree 28.1.2 It is inappropriate to make the Transport Standards Guidelines part of the Transport Standards. Exemption: Disagree 28.1.3 This exemption proposal would add a new condition on people with disabilities that is not already part of the Transport Standards. This issue should be considered during the 5-Year Review of the Transport Standards. n 2< =L &Exemption: Agree 2.1.1 Subject to condition (Must include criteria for multiple access paths) The Transport Standards don't require universal access, however this Clause specifies universal access. In a large building, it is not appropriate to have only one access path. There is a need for the ARA to develop criteria on how access paths are decided on and when there is a need to have more than one accessible path of travel. Exemption: Agree 2.1.2(a) Add the following requirement: 'If a pedestrian rail level crossing is used as an access path it may include a flange gap of 75mm wide at the rail track as defined in AS1742.7'. This is a real issue for ARA members and a lot of research has been done about the minimum width of the flange gap. The gap cannot be safely reduced further at this time. Exemption: Agree 2.1.3      =x !\h"P##J$:%ub&'R)l+`-w. 0255L :w@aHxPPCFY9cc   dYp+x߈  dMbP?_*+%!F&C &PM\\cbrpq01\cbrpr051 3dX)L@'''',,<-XX<-j-XX<-(None)(None)(None)(None){ <)" dX,??U} } } I]} I} $ d I@<@5@5@<@5@ @ G@ <@ S@ @^@i@@@@@@<@5@@@]@5@@@s@@@    ~ g@  !   !   ! ! " ! # $ ! % & !~ ]@ ' ! ( ) ! * + ! , - !~ @^@ . ! / 0 ! 1 2 ! ~ @j@ 3 !~ k@ 4 !~ n@ 5 ! 6 7 !~ @ 8 ! 9 : !~ @p@ s !~ "q@ #; $ "##~ `s@ < !~ y@ = !~ @z@ > !~ z@ t !~ @ ? !~ @ @ !~ `@ A !Djl **************************** @!@"`#5@$5@%G@&5@'@(<@)]@*G@+@,@-@.V@/`0@1@25@3`4<@5]@6@7@85@9@:@;@<@=@>@?@~ @ B !~ !"P@ !#C !$ ""##~ #@ #D #!~ $!@ $E $!~ %@ %F %!~ &0@ &G &!~ '@ 'H '!~ (p@ (I (!~ )@ )u )!~ *P@ *J *!~ +p@ +K +!~ ,@ ,L ,! -M -L -!~ ."X@ .#v .$ /"##~ 0"@ 0#N 0$ 1"##~ 2"@ 2#O 2$ 3"##~ 4Б@ 4P 4!~ 5'@ 5{ 5!~ 6 @ 6Q 6!~ 7H@ 7R 7!~ 8@ 8S 8!~ 9@ 9| 9!~ :8@ :T :!~ ;`@ ;U ;!~ <x@ <V <!~ =@ =W =!~ >X@ >w >!~ ?"@ ?#} ?$DXl***************************@`A@Bs@C@D@E@F@G`HG@I5@J5@K^@Ll@M@NS@O@P@Q@R@Ss@T@U5@V@W<@XU@Y^@Z@[5@\@]x@^@ @_@ @"##~ A@ AX A!~ B@ BY B!~ C@ C~ C!~ DP@ DZ D!~ Ex@ E[ E!~ F"0@ F#\ F$ G"##~ H0@ H] H!~ I1@ I^ I!~ J@ J_ J!~ KH@ K` K!~ Lp@ La L!~ M@ Mb M!~ N؝@ Nc N!~ Oh@ O O!~ P|@ Px P!~ Q@ Qd Q!~ R@ R R!~ SD@ Se S!~ T6@ Ty T!~ U @ Uf U!~ VԢ@ Vg V! ~ Wģ@ Wh W!~ Xأ@ Xi X! ~ Yx@ Yz Y!~ Z,@ Zj Z!~ [@@ [k [!~ \T@ \l \!~ ]h@ ]m ]!~ ^@ ^n ^!~ _@ _o _!Dl*****************************`@a@b@c^@~ `@ `p `!~ a@ a a! ~ b@ bq b!~ cL@ cr c! <***>^@^^^FGFGFG?@?@?@232323./././010101!"!"!"7    dMbP?_*+%"FG??U>@7    dMbP?_*+%"??U>@7 Oh+'0HPhx Liz BerrymanmasdaMicrosoft Excel@gbtb@o Ԧ@(7^՜.+,0 PXh px DOTARS Sheet1Sheet2Sheet3Sheet1!Print_Titles  Worksheets Named Ranges  !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEGHIJKLMOPQRSTURoot Entry FlWorkbookSummaryInformation(FDocumentSummaryInformation8N