[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 21, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35850-35886]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-12269]



[[Page 35849]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part II





Department of Transportation





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Federal Highway Administration



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



23 CFR Part 655



National Standards for Traffic Control Devices: Manual on Uniform 
Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways; Revision; Proposed 
Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 98 / Tuesday, 
May 21, 2002 / Proposed Rules  

[[Page 35850]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

23 CFR Part 655

[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2001-11159]
RIN 2125-AE93


National Standards for Traffic Control Devices: Manual on Uniform 
Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways; Revision

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed amendments to the Manual on Uniform Traffic 
Control Devices (MUTCD); request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The MUTCD is incorporated by reference in 23 CFR part 655, 
subpart F, approved by the Federal Highway Administration, and 
recognized as the national standard for traffic control devices used on 
all public roads. The purpose of this notice of proposed amendments is 
to revise standards, guidance, options, and supporting information 
relating to the traffic control devices in all parts of the MUTCD. The 
proposed changes are intended to expedite traffic, promote uniformity, 
improve safety, and incorporate technology advances in traffic control 
device application. These proposed changes are being designated 
Revision No. 2.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 19, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver comments to the U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Dockets Management Facility, Room PL-401, 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001 or submit 
electronically at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit. All comments should 
include the docket number that appears in the heading of this document. 
To facilitate documenting comments, please include the applicable MUTCD 
section number with each of your comments. All comments received will 
be available for examination at the above address between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Those 
desiring a notification of receipt of comments must include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard, or print the acknowledgement 
page that appears after submitting comments electronically.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ernest Huckaby, Office of 
Transportation Operations, Room 3408, (202) 366-9064, or Mr. 
Raymond Cuprill, Office of the Chief Counsel, Room 4230, (202) 
366-0791, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway 
Administration, 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Office 
hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access and Filing

    You may submit or retrieve comments online through the Document 
Management System (DMS) at http://dmses.dot.gov/submit. Acceptable 
formats include: MS Word (versions 95 to 97), MS Word for Mac (versions 
6 to 8), Rich Text File (RTF), American Standard Code Information 
Interchange (ASCII)(TXT), Portable Document Format (PDF), and 
WordPerfect (versions 7 to 8). The DMS is available 24 hours each day, 
365 days each year. Electronic submission and retrieval help and 
guidelines are available under the help section of the web site.
    An electronic copy of this document may also be downloaded from the 
Government Printing Office's Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202) 
512-1661 by using a computer, modem and suitable communications 
software. Internet users may also reach the Office of the Federal 
Register's home page at: http://www.nara.gov/fedreg and the Government 
Printing Office's web page at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.

Background

    A list of the items of Revision No. 2 and the text of the 
Millennium Edition of the MUTCD with Revision No. 2 text incorporated 
are available for inspection and copying, as prescribed in 49 CFR part 
7, at the FHWA Office of Transportation Operations, Room 3408, 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590. Furthermore, the list of 
items of Revision No. 2 and the text of the 2000 Millennium Edition of 
the MUTCD with Revision No. 2 text incorporated are available on the 
MUTCD Internet site http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov. The current version of 
the 2000 Millennium Edition of the MUTCD with Revision No. 1 text 
incorporated is also available on this Internet site.
    This notice of proposed amendments is being issued to provide an 
opportunity for public comment on the desirability of these proposed 
amendments to the MUTCD. Based on the comments received and its own 
experience, the FHWA may issue a final rule concerning the proposed 
changes included in this notice.
    The notice of proposed amendments is being published in response to 
many comments received after the final rule creating the Millennium 
Edition of the MUTCD was published on December 18, 2000. About 150 of 
the 7100 comments that were received on the eight notices of proposed 
amendments leading to the creation of the Millennium Edition of the 
MUTCD, while extremely worthy, were deemed to result in too significant 
a change from the text in the notices of proposed amendments to be 
incorporated in the final rule without allowing the public an 
additional comment period. Also, this notice addresses the many 
advances in technology, and the traffic and safety management 
strategies that have occurred since the beginning of the updating 
process of the 1988 edition of the MUTCD in 1997.
    The FHWA invites comments on these proposed changes to the MUTCD.
    The FHWA proposes giving figure numbers and titles to all pages 
that did not have a figure number for images of traffic control devices 
in the Millennium Edition of the MUTCD, to facilitate easy reference. 
The FHWA also proposes changing the titles of a number of figures to 
clarify a figure as either "typical" or "example(s) 
of." In general, the FHWA proposes using the word 
"typical" in the title if the figure portrays preferred or 
recommended practice, and the words "example(s) of" in the 
title if the figure portrays one or several of a variety of things that 
would be acceptable practice with no recommended preference. Also, 
where appropriate, the FHWA proposes modifying figures to reflect 
proposed changes in the text.
    Additionally, throughout the MUTCD, minor changes in text are 
proposed for grammatical or style consistency, to improve consistency 
with related text or figures, to improve clarity, or to correct minor 
errors. Where the FHWA proposes to add new sections within a chapter of 
the MUTCD, the sections in the chapter that follow the proposed 
addition would be renumbered accordingly. All Tables of Contents, Lists 
of Figures, Lists of Tables, and page headers and footers would be 
revised as appropriate to reflect the proposed changes.
    The FHWA is aware that Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 
U.S.C. 794 (2001), requires that certain electronic and information 
technology ("EIT") be accessible to individuals with 
disabilities. By regulation, 36 CFR 1194.4 (2001), EIT includes 
information contained on world wide websites. Because the FHWA 
distributes the MUTCD via the Internet site (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov), it is aware that it must comply with Section 508, 
and it will do so by providing, in addition to the PDF file format, an 
alternative

[[Page 35851]]

format (hypertext markup language-HTML), that is accessible to 
individuals with disabilities. Included within those HTML files will be 
narrative descriptions of the illustrations (figures) that are 
contained within the affected non-accessible format electronic files. 
However, because of the very large number of figures of traffic control 
devices and of their possible applications in the 1150 page MUTCD, it 
was determined that the FHWA would be tentatively exempted from meeting 
this regulation due to onerous and costly effort resulting in a 
fundamental alteration of the electronic version of the MUTCD. The FHWA 
does have a contractual task underway, that will be completed 
approximately in a year, to develop the hypertext markup language tags. 
Furthermore, the FHWA determined that this notice of proposed 
amendments go forward immediately as the proposed changes would be 
beneficial to the traveling public, including those with visual 
disabilities.
    A summary of the significant proposed changes for each of the parts 
of the MUTCD is included in the following discussion.
    1. On Page i the FHWA proposes including addresses for several 
additional organizations whose publications are referenced in the 
various parts of the MUTCD.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to the Table of Contents

    2. The FHWA proposes condensing the Table of Contents to include 
only the list of Parts and Chapters. Each Part will continue to begin 
with a "table of contents" that contains the page number of 
every section, figure, and table. This change will simplify the search 
for an item by those with visual disabilities by enabling them to 
advance to the appropriate Part and then page more quickly and easily.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to the Introduction

    3. In the Introduction, the FHWA proposes adding a fourth SUPPORT 
statement to clarify the organization of the MUTCD and explain how one 
could reference portions of the MUTCD.
    The FHWA also proposes adding a new section that lists special 
compliance dates for various portions of the MUTCD. The purpose of this 
list is to provide a convenient reference guide to the user of special 
compliance dates for various portions of the MUTCD.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 1-General

    4. In Section 1A.05 Maintenance of Traffic Control Devices, in the 
second paragraph of the GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes revising 
the text to eliminate redundancy.
    5. In Section 1A.10 Interpretations, Experimentations, and Changes, 
the FHWA proposes changing the first GUIDANCE statement to a STANDARD 
statement to ensure that these requests come to the FHWA's Office of 
Transportation Operations.
    Additionally, following the fourth GUIDANCE statement the FHWA 
proposes adding STANDARD, GUIDANCE, OPTION, and SUPPORT statements 
describing a new "interim approval" process for the FHWA 
approving the use of new traffic control devices pending official 
rulemaking. Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying Figure 1A-2 
to reflect the "interim approval" process.
    6. In Section 1A.11 Relation to Other Documents, the FHWA proposes 
modifying the STANDARD statement to update the documents to the latest 
editions. Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding additional sources of 
information in the SUPPORT statement. The FHWA also proposes revising 
the order of the sources of information, alphabetizing first by source, 
then by the title of the document.
    7. In Section 1A.12 Color Code, the FHWA proposes adding to the 
STANDARD statement the assignment of the color fluorescent coral to 
incident management to make it easier for road users to follow 
directions relating to traffic incidents. The items will be reordered 
so that the colors appear in alphabetical order. The color coordinates 
for the color coral are indicated below.
    The Commission Internationale de l'Eclairage (CIE) (English: 
International Commission on Illumination) chromaticity coordinates (x, 
y), defining the corner of the Fluorescent Coral daytime color region 
are as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                X                                    y
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.450...........................................................   0.270
0.590...........................................................   0.350
0.644...........................................................   0.290
0.536...........................................................   0.230
------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Luminance Factor Limits (Y)
                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    D65                                  D150
                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Min                Max                 YF      Min           Max
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fluorescent Pink.....................      25  None.........................      15      25  None.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fluorescent materials differ from non-fluorescent materials in that 
the total luminance is the sum of the luminances due to reflection and 
fluorescence. The luminance factor Y of such materials is the sum of 
the luminance due to reflection (YR) and the luminance due 
to fluorescence (YF). Therefore, 
Y=YR+YF. If the value YF is greater 
than zero, the material is fluorescent; if YF equals zero, 
then the luminance factor Y is equal to YR.
    These four pairs of chromaticity coordinates determine the 
acceptable color in terms of CIE 1931 Standard Colorimetric System (2 
degree standard observer) measured with CIE Standard Illuminant D65 in 
accordance with ASTM E991. In addition, the color shall be fluorescent, 
as determined by ASTM E1247.
    8. In Section 1A.13 Definitions of Words and Phrases in This 
Manual, the FHWA proposes in the STANDARD statement revising 
definitions for: "Active Grade Crossing Warning System," 
"Average Day," "Beacon," 
"Crosswalk," and "Highway Traffic Signal" to 
better reflect accepted practice and terminologies.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding definitions for 
"Crashworthy," "Detectable," "Inherently 
Low Emission Vehicle (ILEV)," "Pedestrian 
Facilities," and "Roundabout Intersection" since they 
are used in the MUTCD.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the definition for 
"Preferential Lane Marking" since it is no longer used in 
the MUTCD.
    9. In Section 1A.14 Abbreviations Used on Traffic Control Devices, 
the FHWA proposes in the first STANDARD statement revising the text to 
clarify that the abbreviations shown in Table 1A-1 are not the 
only word messages that can be abbreviated.
    The FHWA also proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement at the end of 
this section to give guidance regarding the consistency of 
abbreviations within a single jurisdiction.

[[Page 35852]]

    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising Tables 1A-1 and 
1A-2 to include additional abbreviations, delete some 
abbreviations, and modify some abbreviations, based on research on 
driver understanding of abbreviations.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 2-Signs

    10. In Section 2A.06 Design of Signs, the FHWA proposes adding to 
the SUPPORT statement that the "general appearance" of the 
sign legends, colors and sizes are shown in the illustrations and do 
not exactly correspond to the letter brush stroke widths of the 
"Standard Highway Signs" \1\ book and the FHWA 
central values and tolerance limits of colors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ "Standard Highway Signs," FHWA, 2002 
Edition is available for purchase from the U.S. Government Printing 
Office Bookstore, Superintendent of Documents, Room 118, Federal 
Building, 1000 Liberty Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15222. Internet web 
site at http://bookstore.gpo.gov. It is also available on the FHWA's 
web site at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov and is available for 
inspection and copying at the FHWA Washington Headquarters and all 
FHWA Division Offices as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the STANDARD statement 
that, unless otherwise stated in the MUTCD for a specific sign, phone 
numbers or Internet addresses shall not be shown on any sign to reduce 
the possibility of driver distraction.
    11. In Section 2A.07 Changeable Message Signs, the FHWA proposes 
revising the GUIDANCE statement to include safety messages as one of 
the types of allowable displays for changeable message signs.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding at the end of the section 
OPTION, SUPPORT, GUIDANCE, and STANDARD statements regarding the use, 
design, and format of safety and other messages so that they do not 
adversely affect the usefulness of the sign.
    12. In Section 2A.08 Retroreflectivity and Illumination, the FHWA 
proposes clarifying Table 2A-1 by replacing "Patterns of 
incandescent light bulbs" with "Incandescent light 
bulbs" and by adding "Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)" 
to the listed Means of Illumination under Other Devices to reflect 
current technology.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new SUPPORT statement at 
the end of the section referencing information contained in Section 
2A.22 on the use of retroreflective material on the sign support.
    13. In Section 2A.10 Shapes, the FHWA proposes clarifying Table 
2A-3 by removing the Emergency Evacuation Route Marker from the 
listed signs for the circle shape as the FHWA proposes that the design 
of this sign be a rectangular plate in accordance with other guide 
signs, as indicated in Section 2I.03.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes clarifying the information for the 
Trapezoid shape signs to be "Recreational and Cultural Interest 
Area Series" and "National Forest Route" signs.
    14. In Section 2A.11 Sign Colors, the FHWA proposes modifying the 
STANDARD statement to read "The colors to be used on standard 
signs and their specific use on these signs shall be as indicated in 
the applicable sections of this Manual. The color coordinates and 
values shall be as described in 23 CFR, Part 655, Subpart F, 
Appendix." This proposed modification will clarify that the color 
requirements apply to all signs in the MUTCD, not just those in Part 2, 
and would refer to the correct location of the color coordinates and 
values. The FHWA also proposes modifying the SUPPORT statement by 
deleting the color coral from the reserved colors, because FHWA 
proposes that the color coral be assigned for incident management uses. 
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the SUPPORT statement that 
information regarding color coding of destinations on guide signs is 
contained in Section 2D.03. The FHWA also proposes modifying Table 
2A-4 by adding a new column on the right hand side for the color 
coral, by adding a new row "Incident Management" to the 
bottom, by adding a second new row at the bottom, following Incident 
Management, "Changeable Message Signs**" and by adding or 
revising color designation and note to reflect proposed changes in 
other parts of the MUTCD.
    15. In Section 2A.12 Dimensions, the FHWA proposes adding a second 
paragraph to the SUPPORT statement describing and clarifying the 
different sizes of signs, as detailed in the Standard Highway Signs 
book.
    16. In Section 2A.14 Word Messages, the FHWA proposes modifying the 
first GUIDANCE statement to clarify that the specific ratio of 25 mm (1 
in) of letter height per 12 m (40 ft) of legibility distance should be 
a minimum.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new SUPPORT statement 
after the first paragraph of GUIDANCE to provide additional information 
that some research indicates that a ratio of 25 mm (1 in) of letter 
height per 10m (33 ft) of legibility distance could be beneficial for 
addressing the needs of older road users. A new GUIDANCE heading would 
be added after the new SUPPORT statement.
    17. In Section 2A.15 Sign Borders, the FHWA proposes modifying the 
STANDARD statement to clarify that the corners of all sign borders, 
except for STOP signs, shall be rounded. The FHWA also proposes 
modifying the GUIDANCE statement to clarify that, where practical, the 
corners of the sign should be rounded to fit the border, except for 
STOP signs.
    18. In Section 2A.16 Standardization of Location, the FHWA proposes 
relocating Figures 2A-3, 2A-4, 2A-5, and 2A-6 
to Section 2B.32 and removing Figure 2A-7. These relocated 
figures are more appropriate in Chapter 2B. The first SUPPORT statement 
would be revised to reflect these changes.
    19. In Section 2A.17 Overhead Sign Installations, the FHWA proposes 
modifying the GUIDANCE statement to clarify that overhead guide signs 
should be used on freeways as well as expressways, under certain 
conditions.
    20. In Section 2A.18 Mounting Height, the FHWA proposes relocating 
the first OPTION and SUPPORT statements so that they appear after the 
second paragraph of the first STANDARD statement. This proposed change 
will improve the clarity of the section.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the last 
OPTION statement heading to state that if the vertical clearance for 
the design of other structures is less than 4.9 m (16 ft), the vertical 
clearance to overhead sign structures or supports may be as low as 0.30 
m (1 ft) higher than the vertical clearance for the design of the other 
structures. These lower clearances for the sign structures are 
sometimes needed to maximize the visibility of the signs when low 
bridge structure or tunnel clearances limit the sign visibility.
    21. In Section 2A.19 Lateral Offset, the FHWA proposes dividing the 
first STANDARD statement into a STANDARD and a GUIDANCE statement. The 
proposed STANDARD statement will deal with the lateral offset of 
overhead sign supports, and the proposed GUIDANCE statement will deal 
with the lateral offset of roadside-mounted signs. This will provide 
additional flexibility to jurisdictions for roadside-mounted signs.
    22. In Section 2A.20 Position of Signs, the FHWA proposes to 
removing the second sentence under the SUPPORT statement as the 
references to the figures duplicates other references elsewhere.
    23. In Section 2A.22 Posts and Mountings, the FHWA proposes adding 
an OPTION statement after the

[[Page 35853]]

SUPPORT statement, indicating that a strip of retroreflective material 
may be used on the supports of regulatory and warning signs to draw 
attention to the sign during nighttime conditions.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a second STANDARD statement 
after the OPTION statement specifying the size, location, and color of 
the strip of retroreflective material if it is used. This will provide 
for uniformity of application.
    24. In Section 2A.24, the FHWA proposes changing the title of the 
section from "Wrong Way Traffic Control" to "Median 
Opening Treatments for Divided Highways with Wide Medians," to 
better clarify the content of the section.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the existing GUIDANCE 
statement and to change the STANDARD statement to a GUIDANCE statement, 
to clarify that at the median opening of a divided highway with side 
streets and driveways, where the median width at the median opening is 
9 m (30 ft) or more, the median openings should be signed as two 
separate intersections. This will provide additional signing 
flexibility to jurisdictions.
    25. In Section 2B.02 Design of Regulatory Signs, the FHWA proposes 
adding OPTION and GUIDANCE statements at the end of the section 
regarding the use of Changeable Message Signs to provide for the 
display of regulatory signs.
    26. In Section 2B.03 Size of Regulatory Signs, the FHWA proposes 
modifying Table 2B-1 by adding and removing signs to reflect 
proposed changes in Part 2, and by adding additional sign sizes. These 
new sign sizes reflect proposed changes in Part 2, are values from the 
"Standard Highway Signs" book, and reflect regular use by 
highway agencies.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes that the ONE WAY (R6-2) sign 
and the DIVIDED HIGHWAY CROSSING (R6-3, R6-3a) signs be 
increased in size for all roads based on the research addressing the 
needs of older road users. The FHWA proposes adding sign sizes in the 
"Expressways" and "Freeways" columns for these 
signs and the R6-1 ONE WAY sign, since these are the main signs 
to alert road users of the divided highway.
    The FHWA proposes that the new sizes of these signs become 
effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing sign 
installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 
years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on 
State or local highway agencies.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement that 
signs larger than those shown in Table 2B-1 may be used. 
Sometimes there are special conditions that warrant much larger signs 
and this flexibility is needed.
    27. In Section 2B.06 STOP Sign Placement, the FHWA proposes 
correcting an error in the STANDARD statement by changing the word 
"correct" to "right" so that the statement 
reads, "The STOP sign shall be installed on the right side of the 
traffic lane to which it applies."
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding that other than a DO NOT 
ENTER sign, no other sign shall be mounted back-to-back with a STOP 
sign, to assure that the shape of the STOP sign is visible to road 
users on other approaches to the intersection. The proposed exception 
for the DO NOT ENTER sign is to allow flexibility in urban areas where 
there may not be enough room to install separate poles for each sign 
and both signs must be installed at the corner.
    28. In Section 2B.09 YIELD Sign Applications, the FHWA proposes 
clarifying the OPTION statement by adding a reference to STOP signs. 
The proposed change states that instead of using a STOP sign, a YIELD 
sign may be used if engineering judgment indicates that one or more of 
the conditions listed exist. The conditions for using a YIELD sign are 
not being changed.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement after 
the OPTION statement to require the use of a YIELD sign to assign 
right-of-way at the entrance to a roundabout intersection. An essential 
design feature of a modern roundabout is "yield-on-entry" 
so a YIELD sign is necessary at all entrances to the roundabout.
    29. In Section 2B.10 YIELD Sign Placement, the FHWA proposes 
correcting an error in the first paragraph of the STANDARD statement by 
changing the word "correct" to "right" so that 
the first sentence reads, "The YIELD sign shall be installed on 
the right side of the traffic lane to which it applies." 
Additionally, FHWA proposes adding a new sentence after the first 
sentence of the STANDARD statement to require that YIELD signs shall be 
placed on both the left and right sides of the approaches to roundabout 
intersections with more than one approach lane. This is in concert with 
best practices of modern roundabout design and to assure adequate 
visibility of the YIELD signs.
    The FHWA also proposes adding a paragraph to the STANDARD 
statement, which states that other than a DO NOT ENTER sign, no other 
sign shall be mounted back-to-back with a YIELD sign.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the GUIDANCE 
statement stating that, at a roundabout intersection, the face of the 
YIELD sign should not be visible from the circulating roadway. This is 
recommended to prevent circulating vehicles in the roundabout from 
yielding unnecessarily.
    The FHWA also proposes adding an OPTION statement at the end of the 
section to allow the installation of an additional YIELD sign on the 
left side of the road and/or the use of a YIELD line at wide-throat 
intersections. This will provide for improved visibility of the YIELD 
signs where needed.
    30. In Section 2B.11 Speed Limit Sign (R2-1), the FHWA 
proposes modifying the STANDARD statement to reflect that as indicated 
in Figure 2B-1, the FHWA proposes a new unique design for the 
metric speed limit sign. The sign will have a red circle around the 
speed value with a "km/h" legend below. Based on this new 
design, the FHWA proposes removing the first SUPPORT statement, as it 
is no longer needed. The new design of the metric Speed Limit sign will 
better differentiate a metric speed limit sign from an English units 
speed limit sign, and will also remedy the possible situation where the 
"METRIC" plaque used in the old design is damaged or stolen 
and the sign appears to be an English units Speed Limit sign with a 
higher but erroneous value.
    The FHWA also proposes clarifying the third paragraph of the 
GUIDANCE statement to differentiate the rounding of a speed limit on a 
sign located on a non-residential street from a sign located on a 
residential street. The proposed GUIDANCE states that when a speed 
limit is posted, it should be the 85th-percentile speed of free-flowing 
traffic, rounded up to the nearest 10 km/h (5 mph) on non-residential 
streets and rounded up or down to the nearest 10 km/h (5 mph) increment 
on residential streets. Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a 
paragraph to the beginning of the GUIDANCE statement, which states that 
States and local agencies should reevaluate their non-statutory speed 
limits on their streets and highways at least once every 5 years to 
determine whether adjustments would be appropriate.
    The FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the end of the OPTION 
statement, which states that a changeable message sign that displays to 
approaching drivers the speed at which they are traveling may be 
installed in conjunction with a Speed Limit sign.

[[Page 35854]]

    The FHWA also proposes adding, following the OPTION statement, a 
GUIDANCE statement, which states that if a changeable message sign 
displaying approach speeds is installed, the legend YOUR SPEED XX KM/H 
(MPH) or similar legend should be shown. Changeable message signs 
displaying the actual speeds of approaching drivers have been shown to 
be valuable tools to enhance driver compliance with speed limits.
    31. Following Section 2B.14 Minimum Speed Limit Sign (R2-4), 
the FHWA proposes adding a new section numbered and titled 
"Section 2B.15 Fines Higher Sign (R2-6)." The 
proposed Section 2B.15 will consist of OPTION, GUIDANCE, and STANDARD 
statements on the uses of the FINES HIGHER sign; namely, to advise road 
users when increased fines are imposed for traffic violations within 
designated roadway segments; and on the installation of the FINES 
HIGHER sign; namely, below an applicable regulatory or warning sign in 
a temporary traffic control zone, a school zone, or other applicable 
designated zone. The sections following Section 2B.15 will be 
renumbered accordingly.
    32. The FHWA proposes removing existing Section 2B.16 Reduced Speed 
Ahead Signs (R2-5) Series, as these signs are proposed to be 
revised to be warning signs and added to Chapter 2C. The FHWA proposes 
this change because the intended message is more properly categorized 
as a warning message rather than a regulatory message. The FHWA 
proposes that this change become effective immediately for new or 
replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a 
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good 
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    33. In Section 2B.17, the FHWA proposes retitling the section from 
"Turn Prohibition Signs (R3-1 through R3-4)" to 
"Turn Prohibition Signs (R3-1 through R3-4, and 
R3-18)" to include a new symbol sign which combines the No 
Left Turn and the No U-Turn symbol signs into one symbol sign, and to 
add to the OPTION and GUIDANCE statements information on the proper use 
of the sign. This proposed new sign will reduce the sign clutter at an 
intersection where both movements are restricted and make it easier for 
road users to understand the multiple turn restrictions.
    34. In Section 2B.19 Mandatory Movement Lane Control Signs 
(R3-5, R3-5a, and R3-7), the FHWA proposes clarifying 
the GUIDANCE statement that the lane control pavement markings 
mentioned are lane-use arrow markings.
    35. In Section 2B.23, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Reversible Lane Control Signs (R3-9c through 
R3-9i)" to "Reversible Lane Control Signs 
(R3-9d, R3-9f through R3-9i)" and removing the 
R3-9c and R3-9e signs and all of their references in the 
section. Using just the R3-9d sign will improve uniformity and 
maintain consistency with the red X symbol used in reversible lane 
signal systems. The DO NOT ENTER symbol is intended to be used to 
prohibit entry into a roadway or ramp, and using this symbol to 
prohibit use of a single lane of a roadway that is otherwise available 
for travel is inconsistent and degrades the meaning of the symbol.
    The FHWA proposes clarifying in the first STANDARD statement that 
the barriers mentioned are physical barriers.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying item B of the second 
OPTION statement to read, "An engineering study indicates that 
the use of the Reversible Lane Control signs alone would result in an 
acceptable level of safety and efficiency." This is proposed to 
clarify the specific types of signs used for control of a reversible 
lane operation that the study needs to evaluate to determine whether 
such signs alone, without reversible lane signals, would be acceptable.
    The FHWA proposes that these changes in Section 2B.23 become 
effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing sign 
installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 
years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on 
State or local highway agencies.
    36. In Section 2B.28 Keep Right and Keep Left Signs (R4-7, 
R4-8), the FHWA proposes adding to the first OPTION statement 
that the Keep Left (R4-8) sign may be used at locations where it 
is necessary for traffic to pass only to the left of a roadway feature 
or obstruction.
    The FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement to clarify that 
the Keep Right sign should be mounted on the face of, or just in front 
of, a pier or other obstruction separating opposite directions of 
traffic in the center of the highway such that traffic will have to 
pass to the right of the sign.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new STANDARD statement 
following the GUIDANCE statement that the Keep Right sign shall not be 
installed on the right side of the roadway in a position where traffic 
must pass to the left of the sign.
    The proposed changes in Section 2B.28 are to clarify the proper 
uses of Keep Right and Keep Left signs.
    37. In Section 2B.29 DO NOT ENTER Sign (R5-1), the FHWA 
proposes modifying the GUIDANCE statement by clarifying the placement 
of the DO NOT ENTER sign. The proposed GUIDANCE states that, if used, 
the DO NOT ENTER sign should be placed directly in view of the road 
user at the point where a road user could wrongly enter a divided 
highway, one-way roadway, or ramp, and includes a reference to Figure 
2B-8.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes renumbering and retitling Figure 
2B-2 from "Typical Wrong-Way Signing for a Divided 
Highway" to "Figure 2B-8. Example of Wrong-Way 
Signing for a Divided Highway with a Median Width of 9 m (30 ft) or 
Greater."
    38. In Section 2B.31 Selective Exclusion Signs, the FHWA proposes 
changing item H in the SUPPORT statement from "Hazardous 
Cargo" to "Hazardous Material" to reflect the changes 
proposed in Section 2B.46.
    39. In Section 2B.32 ONE WAY Signs (R6-1, R6-2), the 
FHWA proposes relocating four figures from Section 2A.16 to Section 
2B.32. Figure 2A-5 will be renumbered and retitled "Figure 
2B-10. Examples of Locations of ONE WAY Signs"; Figure 
2A-6 will be renumbered and retitled "Figure 2B-11. 
Examples of Locations of ONE WAY Signs"; Figure 2A-4 will 
be renumbered and retitled "Figure 2B-12. Examples of ONE 
WAY Signing for Divided Highways with Medians 9 m (30 ft) or 
Greater"; and Figure 2A-3 will be renumbered and retitled 
"Figure 2B-13. Example of ONE WAY Signing for Divided 
Highways with Medians Less Than 9 m (30 ft)." The FHWA also 
proposes to add a new figure, "Figure 2B-14. Examples of 
ONE WAY Signing for Divided Highways with Medians Less Than 9 m (30 ft) 
and Separated Left-Turn Lanes." These figures are most directly 
associated with ONE WAY signs and should be located adjacent to Section 
2B.32, which contains the text about ONE WAY signs.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes showing the optional Keep Right 
signs on the medians on Figures 2B-13 and 2B-14 at a 45 
degree angle facing the road users on the cross street, to make it 
easier for them to determine the location of the median nose and to 
enter the proper roadway of a divided highway.
    40. In Section 2B.35 Design of Parking, Standing, and Stopping 
Signs, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement that where 
special parking restrictions are imposed

[[Page 35855]]

during heavy snowfall, Snow Emergency signs should be installed, and 
that the legend will vary according to the regulations, but the signs 
should be vertical rectangles, having a white background with the upper 
part of the plate a red background. This GUIDANCE was inadvertently 
left out of the current MUTCD. However, signs of this type are used by 
many jurisdictions.
    41. In Section 2B.39 Pedestrian Crossing Signs (R9-2, 
R9-3), the FHWA proposes modifying the second OPTION statement by 
changing the "PEDESTRIANS PROHIBITED" to "NO 
PEDESTRIAN CROSSING" as the proper word message sign to be used 
as an alternate to the No Pedestrian Crossing (R9-3a) symbol 
sign. "NO PEDESTRIAN CROSSING" is the intended meaning of 
the symbol and more clearly describes the actual restriction of 
pedestrian movement.
    42. In Section 2B.40, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Traffic Signal Signs (R10-1 through R10-13)" 
to "Traffic Signal Signs (R10-1 through 
R10-21)" to reflect proposed additional traffic signal 
signs. These signs are shown in new Figures 2B-17 and 
2B-18.
    The FHWA proposes adding to the second OPTION statement that the 
R10-3d sign may be used if the pedestrian clearance time is 
sufficient only for the pedestrian to cross to the median. This sign is 
similar to the existing R10-3b sign except that next to the DON'T 
WALK symbol is the message "START CROSSING TO MEDIAN WATCH FOR 
VEHICLES." The FHWA also proposes modifying Figure 2B-17 to 
add illustrations of the R10-3d sign and the R10-3e sign. 
The R10-3e sign is a variant incorporating "time remaining 
to finish crossing" and is consistent with countdown pedestrian 
signals as proposed in Part 4.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising and relocating the third 
OPTION statement to follow the second STANDARD statement to indicate 
that a symbolic NO TURN ON RED (R10-11) sign may be used as an 
alternate to the R10-11a and R10-11b signs. The symbolic 
sign is proposed to have a symbolic red ball rather than using the 
"No Right Turn" symbol, to avoid confusion with the 
R3-1 (No Right Turn) sign.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes relocating the last item in the 
second GUIDANCE statement to the first paragraph under the third OPTION 
statement (new fourth OPTION statement) and changing it to read that 
when right turn on red after stop is permitted and pedestrian 
crosswalks are marked, the TURNING TRAFFIC MUST YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS 
(R10-15) sign may be used. This proposed change is necessary to 
prevent potential overuse and reduced impact of the sign. Additionally, 
the FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the third OPTION statement (new 
fourth OPTION statement) allowing the use of supplemental plaques 
showing times of day or with the legend WHEN PEDESTRIANS ARE PRESENT 
below a NO TURN ON RED sign, to allow the flexibility to restrict turns 
on red only during certain times or when a pedestrian conflict is 
present.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second GUIDANCE 
statement that where turns on red after stop are permitted and the turn 
signal indication is a RED ARROW, the RIGHT (LEFT) TURN ON RED ARROW 
PERMITTED AFTER STOP (R10-17 or R10-17a) sign should be 
installed adjacent to the RED ARROW signal indication to conform to the 
"Uniform Vehicle Code and Model Traffic 
Ordinance" \2\ (UVC) as revised. The revised UVC prohibits 
turns on a RED ARROW after stop unless a sign specifically allowing the 
turn is in place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The "Uniform Vehicle Code and Model Traffic 
Ordinance," 2000 edition, is published by the National 
Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances, 107 S. West 
Street, #110, Alexandria, Virginia 22314. It is available for 
inspection as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7. Purchase information is 
available on the web site for the National Committee at http://www.ncutlo.org.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the third STANDARD 
statement that the EMERGENCY SIGNAL-STOP WHEN FLASHING RED 
(R10-14) sign shall be used in conjunction with emergency beacons 
and that the U-TURN YIELD TO RIGHT TURN (R10-16) sign shall 
be installed near the left-turn signal face if U-turns are allowed on a 
protected left-turn movement from which drivers making a right turn 
from the conflicting approach to their left are simultaneously being 
shown a right-turn GREEN ARROW signal indication, to correspond with 
proposed changes in Part 4 of the MUTCD, which will require the use of 
these signs with Emergency Beacons and when right turns conflict with 
U-turns, respectively.
    43. In Section 2B.46 the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Hazardous Cargo Signs (R14-2, R14-3)" to 
"Hazardous Material Signs (R14-2, R14-3)" and 
revising the OPTION and GUIDANCE statements to replace 
"cargo" with the word "material" and to revise 
the symbol for the Hazardous Material sign (R14-3) sign to be HM 
rather than HC, to correspond with Section 2B.31 and to reflect the 
change in terminology in the industry. The FHWA proposes that this 
change become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged 
existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance 
period of 5 years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any 
impact on State or local highway agencies.
    44. In Section 2B.48 Preferential Lane Signs (R3-10 through 
R3-17), the FHWA proposes modifying the first paragraph of the 
third GUIDANCE statement to include light rail transit in the list of 
preferential lane signs for which the diamond symbol should not be 
used, because the diamond symbol is intended to be used only to denote 
HOV lanes. The FHWA also proposes changing the last paragraph of the 
third GUIDANCE statement to a second STANDARD statement because 
changeable message signs serving as HOV signs shall be the required 
sign size and shall display the required letter height and legend 
format that corresponds to the type of facility and design speed as 
articulated in Section 2A.07. This proposed change from a recommended 
practice to a required practice is being made to preclude the use of 
insufficiently sized or designed changeable message signs to display 
these important regulatory messages for HOV lane use.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new GUIDANCE statement at 
the end of the section that the Inherently Low Emission Vehicle (ILEV) 
(R3-10b) sign should be used to indicate that it is permissible 
for a properly labeled and certified ILEV, regardless of the number of 
occupants, to operate in the HOV lanes and that the ILEV signs should 
be ground mounted in advance of the HOV lanes and at intervals along 
the HOV lanes based upon engineering judgment. A uniform sign design 
and application are needed to enhance driver understanding and 
compliance regarding ILEV use of HOV lanes and also to correspond to 
proposed changes in Section 2B.49.
    45. In Section 2B.49 High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes, the FHWA 
proposes modifying the STANDARD statement to allow motorcycles to use 
HOV lanes that received Federal-aid program funding.
    The FHWA also proposes three additions to this STANDARD statement. 
The first addition requires agencies to allow a vehicle with less than 
the required number of occupants to operate in the HOV lanes if:
    A. The vehicle is properly labeled and certified as an ILEV and the 
HOV lane is not a bus-only HOV lane; or

[[Page 35856]]

    B. The HOV lanes are part of a project that is participating in the 
FHWA Value Pricing Pilot Program.
    The second addition requires that the requirements for a minimum 
number of occupants in a vehicle to use an HOV lane shall be in effect 
for most, or all, of at least one of the usual times during the day 
when the demand to travel is greatest (such as morning or afternoon 
peak travel periods) and the traffic congestion problems on the roadway 
and adjoining transportation corridor are at their worst. The final 
addition requires a Federal review prior to initiating a proposed test 
or demonstration project that seeks to significantly change the 
operation of the HOV lanes for any length of time.
    The last major change that the FHWA proposes to this section is the 
addition of a SUPPORT statement at the end of the Section. The SUPPORT 
statement states that the Inherently Low Emissions Vehicle (ILEV) 
program requirements, certification program, and other regulatory 
provisions are developed and administered through the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Administration (EPA). The U.S. EPA is the only 
entity with the authority to certify ILEVs. Vehicle manufacturers must 
request the U.S. EPA to grant an ILEV certification for any vehicle to 
be considered and labeled as meeting these standards. According to the 
U.S. EPA, 1996 was the first year that they certified any ILEVs. The 
U.S. EPA regulations specify that ILEVs must meet the emission 
standards specified in 40 CFR 88.311-93 and their labeling must 
be in accordance with 40 CFR 88.311-93(c).
    The proposed changes in Section 2B.49 are to assure consistency 
with the provisions of Titles 23 and 49 of the United States Code 
(USC), with commitments made by FHWA during the National Environmental 
Policy Act process, and with requirements under the Clean Air Act.
    46. In Section 2B.50 High-Occupancy Vehicle Sign Applications and 
Placement, the FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement after the 
GUIDANCE statement, which states that Figures 2E-44 through 
2E-48 show application and placement examples of HOV signing for 
entrances to barrier-separated HOV lanes and direct entrances to and 
exits from HOV lanes. This figure reference will clarify the intended 
use of these signs.
    47. The FHWA proposes redesignating current Section 2B.51 Other 
Regulatory Signs, as Section 2B.54 and revising the STANDARD statement 
to indicate that the symbol for the seat belt symbol is in the 
"Standard Highway Signs" book.
    48. The FHWA proposes adding a new Section 2B.51 Photo Enforced 
Signs (R10-18, R10-19). The purpose of this new section is 
to provide guidance to State and local agencies on the use of the photo 
enforcement signs to alert road users of this type of traffic 
enforcement. The FHWA proposes including an OPTION statement with two 
paragraphs. The first paragraph states that a TRAFFIC LAWS PHOTO 
ENFORCED (R10-18) sign may be installed at a jurisdictional 
boundary to advise road users that some of the traffic regulations 
within that jurisdiction are being enforced by photographic equipment. 
The second paragraph states that a PHOTO ENFORCED (R10-19) sign 
(see Figure 2B-1) may be mounted below a regulatory sign to 
advise road users that the regulation is being enforced by photographic 
equipment.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes including a STANDARD statement, 
which states that if the PHOTO ENFORCED (R10-19) sign is used 
below a regulatory sign, it shall be a rectangle with black legend and 
border on a white background.
    The FHWA proposes that these signs become effective immediately for 
new or replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA 
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs of 
different designs that are in good condition to minimize any impact on 
State or local highway agencies.
    49. The FHWA proposes adding a new Section 2B.52 Yield Here To 
Pedestrians Signs (R1-6, R1-6a). These proposed new signs 
alert road users of the presence of an unsignalized midblock pedestrian 
crossing. The FHWA proposes including a STANDARD statement, which 
states that if YIELD lines are used in advance of an unsignalized 
marked crosswalk, the YIELD HERE TO PEDESTRIANS (R1-5 or 
R1-5a) signs, shall be placed 6.1 to 15 m (20 to 50 ft) in 
advance of the nearest crosswalk line. The purpose of the STANDARD is 
to provide for the uniform use and placement of these signs and 
improved pedestrian safety.
    The FHWA proposes that this change become effective immediately for 
new or replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA 
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in 
good condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway 
agencies.
    50. The FHWA proposes adding a new Section 2B.53 In-Street 
Pedestrian Crossing Signs (R1-6, R1-6a). These proposed new 
signs remind road users of the laws regarding right-of-way at an 
unsignalized pedestrian crossing. The FHWA proposes including OPTION, 
GUIDANCE, and STANDARD statements describing the proposed use, design 
and application of the In-Street Pedestrian Crossing (R1-6, 
R1-6a) signs. These signs are proposed in order to provide for 
uniformity of these regulatory messages and for improved pedestrian 
safety.
    The FHWA also proposes adding a new figure numbered and titled 
Figure 2B-22, "Unsignalized Pedestrian Crosswalk 
Signs" to illustrate the design of the R1-5, R1-5a, 
the R1-6, and the R1-6a signs.
    51. In Section 2C.02 Application of Warning Signs, the FHWA 
proposes modifying the SUPPORT statement to reflect that 
"categories" not "applications" of warning 
signs are shown in Table 2C-1. This change is necessary to make 
the text and Table 2C-1 consistent.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the title of Table 
2C-1 from "Application of Warning Signs" to 
"Categories of Warning Signs" and to add new roadway 
related and traffic related signs and supplemental plaques to the table 
based on proposed changes in other sections of Chapter 2C. The change 
in the title of the table is being proposed to better reflect the 
actual content of the table.
    52. In Section 2C.04 Size of Warning Signs, the FHWA proposes 
changing Table 2C-2 to add sizes for the Expressway W1 series 
Arrows signs, sizes for the Expressways and Freeways W7 series truck 
runaway signs, sizes for the Expressways and Freeways W12-2P low 
clearance signs, and increasing the sizes for all roadways except 
Freeways for the W10-1 advance grade crossing sign, to enhance 
visibility of this sign for all road users, including older drivers. 
The FHWA proposes that the larger sizes become effective immediately 
for new or replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA 
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in 
good condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway 
agencies.
    53. In Section 2C.05 Placement of Warning Signs, the FHWA proposes 
changing Table 2C-4 so that the distances for the placement of 
advance warning signs correspond to the values in the 2001 AASHTO 
"A Policy on Geometric Design of Highway and Streets"\3\ 
book and to make the table easier to use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and 
Streets," 4th Edition, 2001, in both hardcopy and 
CD-ROM, is available from the American Association of State 
Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) by telephone (800) 
231-3475, facsimile (800) 525-5562, mail AASHTO, P.O. 
Box 96716, Washington, DC 20090-6716, or at its web site 
http://www.transportation.org and click on Bookstore.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 35857]]

    In Table 2C-4, the FHWA proposes combining the 
"Condition B" and "Condition C" columns and 
labeling them "Condition B". The FHWA also proposes adding 
columns for 90, 100, and 110 km/h and 60 and 70 mph for the 
deceleration to the listed advisory speed and rows for 70 and 75 mph 
for the Posted or 85th Percentile Speed. Finally, the FHWA proposes 
revising the Notes to reflect the proposed changes throughout the 
MUTCD. These changes to Table 2C-4 are proposed to reflect the 
needs of older road users, and to improve the clarity of the Notes.
    54. In Section 2C.06, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Horizontal Alignment Signs (W1-1 through 
W1-5)" to "Horizontal Alignment Signs (W1-1 
through W1-5, W1-10, W1-11, W1-15)" to 
reflect the proposed Hairpin Curve (W1-11) sign and the 270 
Degree Loop (W1-15) sign.
    In the first OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes recommending the 
use of the Hairpin Curve sign and the 270 Degree Loop sign based on the 
change in horizontal alignment. These new signs would better portray 
the severe curvature for these types of alignment changes.
    The FHWA also proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement. The 
proposed addition recommends installing a One-Direction Large Arrow 
(W1-6) sign or Chevron Alignment (W1-8) sign on the outside 
of a turn or curve when the Hairpin Curve sign or 270-Degree Loop sign 
is installed. The reason for this recommendation is to provide for 
enhanced warning to road users of the severe alignment change and 
reduce run-off-the-road crashes.
    The FHWA also proposes adding a second GUIDANCE statement following 
the STANDARD statement. This proposed GUIDANCE recommends that the need 
for additional curve warning signs or advisory speed reduction warning 
plaques be based on an engineering study or on engineering judgment. 
The reason for this recommendation is that highway curves tend to be 
high crash locations with the crash rate about three times the rate for 
highway tangent segments and with the run-off-the-road crash rate about 
four times the tangent segment rate.
    The FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement that provides a method 
that may be used to determine the need for additional speed reduction 
warning signs. The FHWA proposes these optional criteria for 
determining the need for additional recommended speed reduction signs 
to mitigate the high number of run-off-the-road crashes along curves 
and ramps. Most curves are very well outlined with delineators or 
chevron signs. Since crashes are still occurring, the FHWA believes 
that there is a need to remind drivers of the recommended reduction in 
speed as they proceed along the curve or ramp.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to Table 2C-5 to show 
the metric speed value of less than or equal to 50 km/h along with the 
English unit of less than or equal to 30 mph and showing the metric 
speed value of greater than 50 km/h along with the English unit of 
greater than 30 mph. The metric values were inadvertently omitted from 
the Millennium Edition of the MUTCD.
    55. In Section 2C.07, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Combination Horizontal Alignment/Advisory Speed Signs 
(W1-9)" to "Combination Horizontal Alignment/Advisory 
Speed Signs". The FHWA also proposes changes to the first OPTION 
statement to allow the combination into a single sign of any Horizontal 
Alignment sign with an Advisory Speed (W13-1) plaque. The 
resulting sign number for the combination sign would be the Horizontal 
Alignment sign number with an "a" added. This change will 
provide additional flexibility to jurisdictions.
    The FHWA proposes revising the STANDARD statement. When a 
combination Horizontal Alignment/Advisory Speed sign is used, the 
proposed revised STANDARD statement will require that the advisory 
speed match the advisory speed on the Advisory Speed plaque mounted 
with the advance warning sign and that the sign also be installed as 
near as practical to the beginning of the turn or curve, as depicted on 
new Figure 2C-2. When the recommended reduction in speed is 20 
km/h (15 mph) or greater, the proposed revised STANDARD will require 
that the combination Horizontal Alignment/Advisory Speed sign 
supplement other advance warning signs.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement, which 
states that when the recommended reduction in speed is less than 25 
 km/h (15 mph), instead of installing other advance warning signs, 
the combination Horizontal Alignment/Advisory Speed sign alone may be 
installed just before the point of curvature. The combination 
Horizontal Alignment/Advisory Speed sign may be used throughout the 
turn or curve.
    The proposed changes to Section 2C.07 provide for enhanced 
uniformity of application of these types of signs and improved safety 
on curves and turns.
    56. In Section 2C.10 Chevron Alignment Sign (W1-8), the FHWA 
proposes adding to the STANDARD statement that a border shall not be 
used on the CHEVRON ALIGNMENT sign. The purpose of this change is to 
correct an error in the current edition.
    57. In Section 2C.11 Hill Signs (W7-1, W7-1a, 
W7-1b), the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement to 
clarify that on longer grades, the Hill sign with distance 
(W7-3a) plaque or the combination distance/grade (W7-3b) 
plaque at periodic intervals of approximately 1.6 km (1 mi) spacing 
should be considered. This change is proposed to clarify that the 
plaques should not be used alone but should supplement the Hill sign.
    58. In Section 2C.12 Truck Escape Ramp Signs (W7-4 Series), 
the FHWA proposes adding to the STANDARD statement to indicate that at 
least one of the W7-4 series warning signs shall be used when 
truck escape ramps are installed. This change clarifies that additional 
warning signs may be used as conditions warrant.
    59. In Section 2C.13, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"ROAD NARROWS Sign (W5-1)" to "ROAD NARROWS 
Sign (W5-1, W5-1a)" to reflect the new symbolic Road 
Narrows (W1-5a) sign. The Narrow Bridge (W5-2a) symbol sign 
would be renumbered and retitled as the new Road Narrows (W5-1a) 
symbol sign. The Road Narrows (W5-1a) symbol sign may be used as 
an alternate to the word message ROAD NARROWS (W1-5) word sign. 
The FHWA proposes these changes because the road user's understanding 
of the symbol is not exclusively as "narrow bridge ahead," 
but rather as symbolic of any narrowing of the road, such as the 
presence of curb bulb-outs or chicanes.
    60. In Section 2C.14 NARROW BRIDGE Sign (W5-2), the FHWA 
proposes removing the reference to the Narrow Bridge symbol 
(W5-2b) sign from the OPTION statement. This change reflects the 
proposed change of the Narrow Bridge symbol (W5-2b) sign to the 
Road Narrows symbol (W5-1a) sign.
    61. In Section 2C.17 Divided Highway (Road) Ends Sign (W6-2), 
the FHWA proposes modifying the GUIDANCE statement to clarify that a 
Divided Highway Ends (W6-2) symbol sign should be used in advance 
of the end of a section of physically divided highway (not an 
intersection or junction) as a warning of two-way traffic ahead. The 
reason for this change is that the

[[Page 35858]]

warning sign should be placed in advance of, rather than at, the start 
of the divided highway section.
    62. In Section 2C.19 DEAD END/NO OUTLET Sign (W14-1, 
W14-2), the FHWA proposes modifying the STANDARD statement to 
clarify that when the W14-1 or W14-2 sign is used, the sign 
shall be posted as near as practical to the entry point or at a 
sufficient advance distance to permit the road user to avoid the dead 
end or no outlet condition by turning off, if possible, at the nearest 
intersecting street. The change is proposed to give additional 
flexibility to jurisdictions when posting the sign at the exact entry 
point is not practical due to obstructions or other factors.
    63. In Section 2C.20 Low Clearance Signs (W12-2 and 
W12-2P), the FHWA proposes clarifying the STANDARD statement by 
removing the words "or minimum structure height". This 
change is proposed to clarify the proper application of Low Clearance 
signs.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes clarifying the GUIDANCE statement 
by changing the phrase "legal limit" to "legal 
maximum vehicle height" to reflect more precisely the proper 
dimension.
    64. In Section 2C.21 BUMP and DIP Signs (W8-1, W8-2), 
the FHWA proposes modifying the second GUIDANCE statement to clarify 
that a short stretch of depressed alignment that might momentarily hide 
a vehicle should be treated as a no-passing zone when centerline 
striping is provided on a two-lane or three-lane road. The proposed 
change replaces the word "may" with "might" to 
avoid possible confusion of this as an OPTION statement, and clarifies 
that the use of a no-passing zone in this situation only applies when 
centerline striping is provided on the road.
    65. In Section 2C.22 SPEED HUMP Sign (W17-1), the FHWA 
proposes adding a sentence to the OPTION statement to allow the use of 
the legend SPEED BUMP instead of the legend SPEED HUMP on the 
W17-1 sign. This proposed addition provides additional 
flexibility to jurisdictions and to reduce sign inventory.
    66. In Section 2C.24, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"SHOULDER Signs (W8-4, W8-9, W8-9a, and 
W8-11)" to "SHOULDER and UNEVEN LANES Signs 
(W8-4, W8-9, W8-9a, and W8-11)". This new 
title is more accurate since the UNEVEN LANES (W8-11) sign is 
distinguished from the Shoulder signs.
    The FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement just before the 
GUIDANCE statement. The proposed STANDARD statement requires the use of 
the SHOULDER DROP-OFF (W8-9a) sign when a shoulder drop-off, 
adjacent to the travel lane, exceeds 75 mm (3 in) in depth and is not 
protected by portable barriers. The FHWA also proposes removing the 
part of the GUIDANCE statement concerning the use of the SHOULDER DROP-
OFF sign since it is covered in the proposed new STANDARD statement. 
This STANDARD statement is identical to the STANDARD statement in 
Section 6F.41 (Shoulder and UNEVEN LANES Signs). This proposed 
requirement is to represent the state-of-the-practice.
    67. In Section 2C.26 Advance Traffic Control Signs (W3-1a, 
W3-2a, W3-3, W3-4), the FHWA proposes clarifying that 
the reference to a beacon in the second OPTION statement and the second 
GUIDANCE statement is a reference to a warning beacon. This 
clarification is necessary to be consistent with prescribed use of 
warning beacons in Part 4 of the MUTCD.
    68. In Section 2C.27 CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP Plaque 
(W4-4), the FWHA proposes replacing the entire section with new 
OPTION and STANDARD statements. The OPTION statement specifies that the 
CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP (W4-4) plaque may be used in 
combination with a STOP sign when engineering judgment indicates 
drivers frequently misinterpret the intersection as a multi-way stop 
condition. The STANDARD statement specifies that if the W4-4 
plaque is used, it shall be installed below the STOP sign. The proposed 
new text for this section is necessary to provide for more uniform 
application of this plaque.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the arrow from the design 
of the plaque to reduce potential confusion and misunderstanding as to 
whether the arrow denotes the direction cross traffic is flowing or the 
direction toward which the driver is to look for cross traffic.
    69. In Section 2C.28 Merge Sign (W4-1), the FHWA proposes 
changing the title to reflect the addition of the new Entering Roadway 
Merge (W4-1a) sign. In addition to the title change, the FHWA 
proposes adding a recommendation to the GUIDANCE statement, which 
states that when a Merge sign is to be installed on an entering roadway 
that curves before merging with the major roadway, the Entering Roadway 
Merge (W4-1a) sign should be used. This sign is recommended for 
this condition because it would better portray the actual geometric 
conditions to road users on the entering roadway. The FHWA proposes 
that this change become effective immediately for new or replacement of 
damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in 
compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good condition to 
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    70. In Section 2C.29 Added Lane Sign (W4-3), the FHWA 
proposes changing the title to reflect the addition of the new Entering 
Roadway Added Lane (W4-3a) sign. In addition to the title change, 
the FHWA proposes an addition to the GUIDANCE statement, which states 
that when an Added Lane sign is to be installed on a roadway that 
curves before converging with another roadway that has a tangent 
alignment at the point of convergence, the Entering Roadway Added Lane 
(W4-3a) sign should be used. This sign is recommended for this 
condition because it would better portray the actual geometric 
conditions to road users on the entering roadway. The FHWA proposes 
that this change become effective immediately for new or replacement of 
damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in 
compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good condition to 
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    71. In Section 2C.30, the FHWA proposes changing the title of the 
section from "Lane Ends Signs (W9-1, W9-2)" to 
"Lane Ends Signs (W4-2, W9-1, W9-2)." 
This title change reflects the addition of the Lane Reduction 
(W4-2) sign, which was included in previous editions of the MUTCD 
but not in the Millennium Edition.
    The FHWA proposes changing the design of the Lane Reduction 
(W4-2) symbol sign to improve the comprehension by road users. 
The new design has been developed by human factors research studies and 
will be similar to one being used successfully in Canada. The FHWA 
proposes that this change become effective immediately for new or 
replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a 
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good 
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding the Lane Reduction 
(W4-2) symbol sign to the first and second GUIDANCE statements 
and to the OPTION statement, indicating that the W4-2 symbol sign 
is an alternative to the LANE ENDS MERGE LEFT (RIGHT) (W9-2) word 
sign. This will provide additional flexibility to jurisdictions.
    72. In Section 2C.33 Advisory Exit, Ramp, and Curve Speed Signs 
(W13-2, W13-3, W13-5), the FHWA proposes

[[Page 35859]]

changing the design of the metric exit speed, ramp speed, and curve 
speed signs, and advisory speed signs/plaques so that the metric speed 
value is within a black circle with "km/h" below. This new 
design will better differentiate between signs and plaques with metric 
units for speed from those using English units for speed.
    The FHWA also proposes adding "Figure 2C-8 Example of 
Advisory Speed Signing for an Exit Ramp". This figure illustrates 
the use of the Exit Speed sign along the deceleration lane and the use 
of the Ramp Speed signs along the actual ramp. The figure will clarify 
application of these signs to jurisdictions.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement at 
the end of the section, which states that the 85th percentile speed, 
which is equivalent to the 16 degree ballbank indication or an 85 mm/
second (0.28 ft/second) reading on an accelerometer, may be used to 
determine the recommended speed along the ramp or curve as it is the 
speed at which most road users' judgment recognizes incipient 
instability along a ramp or curve. The FHWA proposes this OPTION 
criteria to enhance the uniformity of determining the recommended 
advisory speed and to provide additional warning to motorists since 
highway curves have a crash rate about three times the rate for highway 
tangent segments and a run-off-the-road crash rate about four times the 
tangent segment rate.
    73. In Section 2C.34 Intersection Warning Signs (W2-1 through 
W2-6), the FHWA proposes changing the design of the CIRCULAR 
INTERSECTION (W2-6) sign to a symbol sign with three rotating 
arrows to better portray the operations at circular intersections. The 
FHWA proposes that this change become effective immediately for new or 
replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a 
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good 
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying the GUIDANCE statement. 
The proposed changes clarify that the recommendation to not use 
Intersection Warning signs on controlled approaches does not apply to 
the use of the Circular Intersection Warning symbol (W2-6) sign, 
and add a recommendation that this sign should be used on the approach 
to a YIELD sign controlled roundabout intersection. These changes are 
proposed to reflect state of the practice regarding roundabouts.
    74. In Section 2C.36, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Motorized Traffic Signs (W8-6, W11-5, W11-8, 
W11-10)" to "Motorized Traffic Signs (W8-6, 
W11-5, W11-5a, W11-8, W11-10, W11-10a, 
W11-12)" to include the optional Farm Machinery 
(W11-5a) symbol sign which was inadvertently omitted, and to 
reflect a proposed Dump Truck (11-10a) sign for use in work zones 
and other locations where there is a concentration of dump truck 
crossing or entering the roadway, and a proposed Emergency Signal Ahead 
(W11-12) supplemental plaque for use with the W11-8 sign.
    In the first OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes adding a statement 
that the TRUCK CROSSING (W8-6) word message sign may be used as 
an alternate to the Truck Crossing symbol sign, to provide additional 
flexibility.
    In the second OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes adding that a 
supplemental plaque with the legend SHARE THE ROAD may be mounted below 
Motorized Traffic warning signs. The purpose of this addition is to 
allow the use of this sign to provide additional warning to road users.
    75. In Section 2C.37, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Crossing Signs (W11-1, W11-2, W11-3, 
W11-4, W16-7P)" to "Nonvehicular Signs 
(W11-1, W11-2, W11-3, W11-4, W11-11, 
W11-14, W11-14a, W11-15)" to reflect the 
addition of the following proposed signs: Golf Cart (W11-11) 
symbol sign, Horse and Buggy (W11-14) symbol sign, Horse and 
Carriage (W11-14a) symbol sign, and the Waterfowl Crossing 
(W11-15) symbol sign. Many variations of these symbol signs are 
currently being used and these designs will create a set of uniform 
symbol messages for road users. The FHWA proposes that these changes 
become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing 
sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 
10 years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on 
State or local highway agencies.
    The FHWA also proposes clarifying the first OPTION statement to add 
golf carts and horse-drawn vehicles to the list of crossing activities 
for which Nonvehicular signs may be used to alert road users. This 
reflects the addition of new signs for this purpose.
    The FHWA also proposes clarifying the second OPTION statement to 
clarify that the supplemental plaques such as AHEAD or XX METERS may be 
used with the Nonvehicular warning signs, when used in advance of a 
crossing. These plaques are specifically intended to provide advance 
notice to road users of crossing activity.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying the STANDARD statement to 
clarify that when Nonvehicular warning signs are used at the crossing, 
the signs shall be supplemented with a diagonal downward pointing arrow 
(W16-1) plaque showing the location of the crossing. This 
proposed modification reflects the fact that Nonvehicular warning signs 
can be used either in advance of or at the crossing, and is consistent 
with the practice of using the diagonal downward pointing arrow with 
other crossing signs.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the third OPTION 
statement to clarify that Pedestrian, Bicycle, School Advance Crossing, 
and School Crossing signs and their related supplemental plaques may 
have a fluorescent yellow-green background with a black legend and 
border. This proposed change reflects the common practice for 
supplemental plaques to be of the same color as the signs they 
supplement.
    76. In Section 2C.42 Advisory Speed Plaque (W13-1), the FHWA 
proposes adding to the first OPTION statement to clarify that the 
Advisory Speed (W13-1) plaque may be used to supplement any 
warning sign to indicate the recommended speed for a condition. This 
will provide additional flexibility for jurisdictions.
    In the STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes requiring the use of 
the Advisory Speed plaque where an engineering study indicates a need 
to advise road users of the recommended speed for a condition and if 
they are used, the speed shown shall be a multiple of 10 km/h (5 mph). 
This change is needed to clarify that engineering studies are needed to 
determine the need for an Advisory Speed plaque and to determine what 
the recommended speed is for the condition.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement at the 
end of the section, which states that the 85th-percentile speed, which 
is equivalent to the 16 degree ballbank indication or an 85 mm/second 
(0.28 ft/second) reading on an accelerometer, may be used to determine 
the recommended speed along the ramp or curve as it is the speed at 
which most road users' judgment recognizes incipient instability along 
a ramp or curve. This provides jurisdictions with several optional 
methods of determining recommended speeds, reflecting current 
practices.
    77. In Section 2C.43, the FHWA proposes changing the title from

[[Page 35860]]

"Supplemental Arrow Plaques (W16-5P, W16-6P)" 
to "Supplemental Arrow Plaques (W16-5, W16-6, 
W16-7)" to remove the "p" suffix and to reflect 
the existence of the diagonally pointing down arrow plaque and include 
the designation in the section text.
    78. In Section 2C.46 DEAD END/NO OUTLET Plaques (W14-1P, 
W14-2P), the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement to 
clarify that DEAD END (W14-1P) or NO OUTLET (W14-2P) 
plaques may be used in combination with Street Name (D3) signs to warn 
turning traffic that the crossroad ends in the direction indicated by 
the arrow on the plaque and that where there the cross street has no 
name, the plaque may be used alone in place of a street name sign. The 
proposed change will clarify the proper use of these types of plaques 
with street name signs or alone.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the STANDARD statement, 
which requires the use of the DEAD END or NO OUTLET plaque where 
traffic can proceed straight through the intersection to the dead end 
or no outlet street. This STANDARD is proposed for removal because it 
is no longer appropriate. The preferred practice under the conditions 
cited is the use of the DEAD END (W4-1) and NO OUTLET 
(W4-2) warning signs rather than the plaques.
    79. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled 
"Section 2C.48 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Plaque 
(W16-1)." This proposed new section includes an OPTION 
statement on the use of the proposed High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) 
Plaque. Specifically, an HOV (W16-1) plaque may be used to warn 
drivers in an HOV lane of a specific condition and to differentiate a 
warning sign specific for HOV lanes when the sign is also visible to 
traffic on the adjoining general purpose roadway. Additionally the 
diamond symbol may be used instead of the word message HOV and, when 
appropriate, the words LANE or ONLY may be used. This will enhance road 
user understanding of which signs apply to which lanes.
    80. The FHWA proposes adding a new section numbered and titled 
"Section 2C.49 PHOTO ENFORCED Plaque (W16-10)." This 
proposed new section includes an OPTION statement on the use of the 
proposed PHOTO ENFORCED plaque in advance of locations of photo 
enforcement of traffic laws, thereby, alerting motorists of the use of 
cameras as an enforcement tool. This change is proposed for consistency 
with the proposed addition of the PHOTO ENFORCED plaque for use with 
regulatory signs, as described in proposed Section 2B.51. The FHWA 
proposes that this change become effective immediately for new or 
replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a 
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good 
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement to 
require that, if used below a warning sign, the PHOTO ENFORCED plaque 
be a rectangle with a black legend and border on a yellow background. 
This STANDARD is proposed to make the color of the plaque consistent 
with the color of the warning sign it supplements.
    81. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled 
"Section 2C.50 HILL BLOCKS VIEW Sign (W7-6)." This 
proposed new section includes an OPTION statement on the use of the 
proposed HILL BLOCKS VIEW sign in advance of the crest of a vertical 
curve to advise road users to reduce speed and to look for vehicles and 
other roadway users as they approach and traverse the hill as only 
limited sight distance is available. The FHWA proposes adding this sign 
because it is in use, fulfills an important need, and has been found by 
research to be well understood by road users.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes including a GUIDANCE statement, 
which states that when a HILL BLOCKS VIEW sign is used, an Advisory 
Speed plaque based on available stopping sight distance should 
accompany it. This is proposed because road users should be advised of 
the recommended speed for traversing the hillcrest.
    82. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled 
"Section 2C.51 Speed Reduction Signs (W3-5, 
W3-5a)." This proposed new section includes a GUIDANCE 
statement, which recommends using the proposed Speed Reduction signs to 
inform road users of a reduced speed zone when engineering judgment 
indicates the need for advance notice to comply with the posted speed 
limit ahead. These proposed new warning signs replace the R2-5a, 
b, and c signs because the intended message is more properly 
categorized as a warning message rather than regulatory message. The 
FHWA proposes that this change become effective immediately for new or 
replacement of damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a 
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good 
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes including a STANDARD statement, 
which requires that a Speed Reduction sign be followed by a Speed Limit 
(R2-1) sign installed at the beginning of the zone where the 
speed limit applies and that the speed limit displayed on the Speed 
Reduction sign shall be identical to the speed limit displayed on the 
subsequent Speed Limit sign. This is needed to provide for uniform 
application of these signs.
    82. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled 
"Section 2C.52 BRIDGE ICES BEFORE ROAD Sign (W8-13)." 
This proposed new section includes an OPTION statement on the use of 
the proposed BRIDGE ICES BEFORE ROAD sign, which states that the sign 
may be used in advance of bridges to advise road users as they approach 
and traverse the bridge during winter weather conditions.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes including a GUIDANCE statement, 
which recommends that the BRIDGE ICES BEFORE ROAD sign be removed or 
covered during seasons of the year when its message is not relevant.
    This proposed new section will provide for uniform design and 
application of a sign for warning of the specific condition.
    84. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled 
"Section 2C.53 Traffic Signal Signs (W25-1, 
W25-2)." This proposed new section includes a STANDARD 
statement on the use of the proposed CAUTION ONCOMING GREEN EXTENDED 
(W25-1) and CAUTION ONCOMING GREEN MAY BE EXTENDED (W25-2) 
traffic signal signs. The STANDARD statement requires that unless a 
separate left-turn signal face is provided and is operated as described 
in Section 4D.06, if the possibility exists that a CIRCULAR YELLOW 
signal indication could be displayed to an approach from which drivers 
are turning left permissively without the simultaneous display of a 
CIRCULAR YELLOW signal indication to the opposing approach (see Section 
4D.05), either a W25-1 or a W25-2 sign be installed near 
the left-most signal head. The FHWA proposes adding this new section 
because these signs are proposed in Chapter 4D as one of several ways 
to eliminate or reduce safety issues associated with the "yellow 
trap" in some traffic signal phasing sequences.
    85. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled 
"Section 2C.54 Truck Rollover Warning Signs (W1-13, 
W1-13a)." This proposed new section includes OPTION and 
STANDARD statements on the use of

[[Page 35861]]

the proposed Truck Rollover Warning signs to warn driver of vehicles 
with a high center of gravity of a curve or turn having geometric 
conditions that are prone to cause such vehicles to lose control and 
overturn. This proposed new section will provide for uniform design and 
application of signs for this purpose. The FHWA proposes that this 
change become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged 
existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance 
period of 10 years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any 
impact on State or local highway agencies.
    86. In Section 2D.03 Color, Retroreflection, and Illumination, the 
FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement following the STANDARD 
statement, which states that color coding is sometimes used to help 
road users distinguish between multiple potentially confusing 
destinations. The SUPPPORT statement gives examples of valuable uses of 
color coding including guide signs for roadways approaching or inside 
an airport property with multiple terminals serving multiple airlines, 
and wayfinding signs for various neighborhoods, business areas, or 
traffic generator destinations within a community or area.
    The FHWA proposes adding a second STANDARD statement that prohibits 
the use of different color sign backgrounds to provide color-coding of 
destinations and that requires that the color-coding shall be 
accomplished by the use of different colored square or rectangular 
panels on the face of the guide signs.
    The FHWA also proposes adding an OPTION statement, which states 
that the different colored panels may include a black or white 
(whichever provides the better contrast with the panel color) letter, 
numeral, or other appropriate designation to identify the airport 
terminal or other destination.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement, which 
states that two examples of color-coded guide sign assemblies are shown 
in Figure 2D-1. Figure 2D-1 is a proposed new figure titled 
"Examples of Color-Coded Destination Guide Signs" and 
illustrates two overhead guide signs examples of color-coded airport 
terminal destination guide signs and an example of a color-coded 
community destination guide sign.
    The proposed changes to Section 2D.03 will provide for enhanced 
uniformity of design and application of color-coding of destinations in 
guide signs.
    87. In Section 2D.04 Size of Signs, the FHWA proposes rephrasing 
the first OPTION statement to clarify that reduced letter height, 
reduced interline spacing, and reduced edge spacing may be used on 
guide signs if the sign size is limited by factors such as lane width, 
and vertical and lateral clearance.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement that 
prohibits the use of reduced spacing between the letters or words of 
the legend as a means of reducing the overall size of a guide sign.
    The proposed changes to this section will provide for enhanced 
legibility of guide signs, especially for older road users.
    88. In Section 2D.06 Size of Lettering, the FHWA proposes removing 
the last paragraph in the STANDARD statement, which required sign 
panels to be large enough to accommodate the legend without crowding. 
That information has been modified and included in Section 2D.04, where 
it is more appropriately located.
    89. In Section 2D.17 ALTERNATE Auxiliary Signs (M4-1, 
M4-1a), the FHWA proposes adding the qualifiers of time or 
distance to the word "shorter" in the GUIDANCE statement. 
This addition clarifies that the shorter (time or distance) or better-
constructed route should retain the regular route number. This will 
clarify that the shorter route can be defined in terms of either time 
or distance, and will provide additional flexibility.
    90. In Section 2D.23, the FHWA propose changing the title from 
"TEMPORARY Auxiliary Sign (M4-7)" to "TEMPORARY 
Auxiliary Sign (M4-7, M4-7a)" to reflect the addition 
of the new TEMP (M4-7a) sign and to add the TEMP (M4-7a) 
sign to the OPTION and STANDARD statements. The TEMP sign is proposed 
for improved legibility.
    91. In Section 2D.26 Directional Arrow Auxiliary Signs (M6 Series), 
the FHWA proposes removing the M6-8 and M6-9 multiple 
direction advance arrow auxiliary signs. These specific arrow signs are 
not consistent in design concept with the other Directional Arrow 
Auxiliary Signs, and the M6-6 and M6-4 signs or separate 
assemblies for each route direction should be used instead to provide 
enhanced clarity to road users.
    92. In Section 2D.27 Route Sign Assemblies, the FHWA proposes 
renumbering Figure 2D-2 to become Figure 2D-6 and modifying 
all three sheets of the figure to make the sign assemblies illustrated 
in the figure consistent with requirements in Section 2D.15 regarding 
the size of the initial letter of the Cardinal Direction Auxiliary 
Signs, and to illustrate directional assemblies that reflect the most 
recent state of the practice.
    93. In Section 2D.31 Confirming or Reassurance Assemblies, the FHWA 
proposes removing from the STANDARD statement the requirement that, if 
used, the Confirming Assembly be installed just beyond intersections of 
numbered routes.
    Additionally, in the first GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes 
recommending that a Confirming Assembly should be installed just beyond 
intersections of numbered routes.
    These changes are proposed because use of the confirming assembly 
beyond intersections with numbered routes should be a recommended 
practice rather than completely optional. The confirming assembly 
provides highly desirable information to road users. These proposed 
changes allow flexibility in installing the signs to adjust to roadside 
conditions.
    94. In Section 2D.34, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Destination Signs" to "Destination Signs (D1 
Series)" and to add the sign number designations to the section 
text to clarify which signs are applicable to the material in the 
section.
    The FHWA proposes moving material concerning the use of a sloping 
arrow at an irregular intersection from the second GUIDANCE statement 
to a new second OPTION statement. This proposed change removes unclear 
language and clarifies that the sloping arrow use is optional.
    95. In Section 2D.36, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Distance Signs" to "Distance Signs (D2 
Series)", adding the sign number designations to the section text 
to clarify which signs are applicable to the material in the section, 
and adding the D2-3 (3 destination distance sign) to the text, to 
reflect all the signs included in the series.
    Additionally, in the first GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes 
adding a recommendation that the distance shown on the sign be the 
distance to the center of the central business district, or to the 
point where the major north/south and east/west routes serving the city 
intersect, or to some point near the center of the city. The FHWA 
proposes this addition because this distance measurement is the general 
practice used by State and local agencies.
    96. In Section 2D.38, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Street Name Sign (D3)" to "Street Name Sign 
(D3-1)". In the first GUIDANCE statement the FHWA proposes 
adding a recommendation that on multi-lane streets with speed limits of 
60 km/h (40 mph) or more the minimum letter size should be 200 mm (8 
in). Larger letter

[[Page 35862]]

sizes are needed to improve sign legibility and safety for older 
drivers. In this same GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes deleting 
the recommendation that larger letter heights be used for Street Name 
signs mounted overhead, because more specific guidance is being 
proposed to be added elsewhere in this section.
    The FHWA also proposes adding a clarification to the first OPTION 
statement. Currently the OPTION statement generally states that a 
symbol or letter designation may be used to identify the government 
jurisdiction. The proposed paragraph provides more specificity by 
stating that a symbol or letter designation may be used on a Street 
Name sign to identify the governmental jurisdiction, area of 
jurisdiction, or other government-approved institution. This change is 
proposed to provide additional flexibility for jurisdictions that 
install Street Name signs.
    The FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement that if a 
symbol or letter designation is used, the height, in addition to the 
width, of the symbol or letter designation shall not exceed the letter 
height of the sign. This proposal will provide for more uniform Street 
Name sign design and assure that the name of the street will have more 
prominence on the sign than the jurisdictional symbol or letter 
designation.
    Two changes are proposed in the second OPTION statement. First, the 
FHWA proposes eliminating midblock locations from the provision 
concerning locations where Street Name signs may be installed, because 
Street Name signs are not appropriate at non-intersection locations. At 
midblock locations, Advance Street Name signs, as described in a 
subsequent section, are appropriate to provide advance notice of the 
next intersection. Second, the FHWA proposes eliminating the provision 
allowing the installation of a supplemental Street Name sign separately 
or below an intersection-related warning sign on intersection 
approaches, because this is an inappropriate use. Instead, the Advance 
Street Name plaque, as described in Section 2C.45, is appropriate for 
this purpose.
    The FHWA proposes changes to the fourth GUIDANCE statement. First, 
the FHWA proposes eliminating the recommendation on the color of the 
supplemental Street Name sign when it is combined with a warning sign, 
because this is now termed an Advance Street Name plaque and is 
discussed in Section 2C.45. Second, the FHWA proposes recommending that 
in urban and suburban areas, especially where Advance Street Name signs 
are not used, overhead-mounted street name signs be considered. If 
overhead Street Name signs are used, the lettering should be at least 
300 mm (12 inch) high in capital letters or 300 mm (12 in) upper-case 
letters with 225 mm (9 in) lower-case letters. This proposal reflects 
the need for enhanced visibility and legibility of Street Name signs 
for road users, especially older people, in the complex driving 
environments of urban and suburban areas.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement at the 
end of the section referencing Section 2C.45 for information regarding 
the use of street name signs as supplemental plaques below 
intersection-related warning signs. The FHWA proposes that these 
changes become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged 
existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance 
period until January 9, 2012, for existing signs in good condition to 
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies. This date 
corresponds with the existing compliance period for increasing the 
letter height to 150 mm (6 in) on all street name signs.
    97. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled 
"Section 2D.39 Advance Street Name Signs (D3-2)" 
immediately following Section 2D.38. The FHWA proposes SUPPORT, 
STANDARD, OPTION, and GUIDANCE statements to describe the uses, 
placement, legend, and lettering sizes for Advance Street Name signs. 
The proposed new section is needed to provide for uniform design and 
application of Advance Street Name signs. The following sections would 
be renumbered accordingly. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance 
period until January 9, 2012, for existing signs in good condition to 
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies. This date 
corresponds with the existing compliance period for increasing the 
letter height to 150 mm (6 in) on all street name signs.
    98. In existing Section 2D.44 (new Section 2D.45) General Service 
Signs (D9 Series), the FHWA proposes adding Electric Vehicle Charging 
to the list of services, one or more of which General Services signs 
must carry, in accordance with the second STANDARD statement.
    The FHWA proposes removing references in the fourth OPTION 
statement to the Road Conditions Dial 511 (D12-5) sign and adding 
new OPTION, STANDARD, and GUIDANCE statements regarding the use and 
design of the redesigned TRAVELER INFO CALL 511 (D12-5) sign. 
These changes reflect the assignment of 511 as the nationwide traveler 
information telephone number.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the words "CB 
Monitoring" in the existing fifth OPTION statement to 
"Channel 9 Monitored" and to make a corresponding change in 
item C of the following GUIDANCE statement. These changes reflect 
current practice and terminology. The FHWA proposes that this change 
become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing 
sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 
10 years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on 
State or local highway agencies.
    99. In existing Section 2D.45 (new Section 2D.46), the FWHA 
proposes changing the title from "Reference Posts (D10-1 
through D10-3)" to "Reference Location Signs 
(D10-1 through D10-8)" and to change the term 
"reference posts" to "reference location signs" 
throughout the section to correspond to terminology used throughout the 
MUTCD.
    The FHWA proposes two changes to the first STANDARD statement. 
First, the FHWA proposes distinguishing between use on conventional 
roads and freeways. The design of reference location signs used on 
conventional roads is the same as currently listed in the STANDARD. If 
reference location signs are used on freeways or expressways, the FHWA 
proposes requiring that the reference location signs be designed in 
accordance with the STANDARDS contained in Section 2E.54, for 
consistency with other signs used on expressways or freeways. Second, 
the FHWA proposes requiring the installation of reference location 
signs on the right side of the roadway, except where conditions limit 
or restrict the use of such signs on the right side of the roadway. 
This is proposed for enhanced uniformity of location of these signs.
    The FHWA proposes two changes to the last OPTION statement. First, 
the FHWA proposes changing the suggested spacing of intermediate 
reference location signs from one, two, or five tenths of a kilometer 
(or mile) to one-tenth of a kilometer (or mile) or some other regular 
spacing, for enhanced consistency and uniformity. Second, the FHWA 
proposes that to further enhance the reference location sign system, a 
new enhanced reference location (D10-7) sign and a new enhanced 
intermediate reference location (D10-8) sign may be installed at 
one-tenth of a kilometer (mile) interval, or at some other regular 
spacing. Evaluation of experimental systems indicates that this

[[Page 35863]]

type of sign greatly assists road users in reporting a more precise 
location of an incident or other emergency.
    The FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement describing the design 
of the enhanced reference location signs and the enhanced intermediate 
reference location signs. The proposed STANDARD requires that the signs 
shall be vertical panels having green backgrounds with white numerals, 
letters, and borders, except for the route shield which shall be the 
standard color and shape. The top line shall consist of the cardinal 
direction for the roadway; the second line shall consist of the 
applicable route shield for the roadway; the third line shall identify 
the units in metric or English; the fourth line shall identify the 
kilometer (mile) reference for the location; and for the enhanced 
intermediate reference location sign the fifth line shall give the 
tenth of a kilometer (mile) using a decimal point.
    Although a blue background has been used in some experimental 
projects, the FHWA believes that the standard green background of the 
30-year old "mile marker" system should be used. Although 
most of the signs of experimental projects use an abbreviation and do 
not spell out the cardinal direction, the FHWA believes that most road 
users do not understand the abbreviations, thus spelling out the 
cardinal direction would assist road users in reporting incidents. 
Likewise, most of the signs of experimental projects do not use a 
decimal point before the tenth of kilometer (mile), however, recent 
research indicates that road users better understand that the location 
is a fraction of a kilometer (mile) with the decimal point.
    The FHWA proposes that the design of this optional enhanced 
reference location sign become effective immediately for new location 
referencing system installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in 
compliance period of 10 years for existing signs of existing systems to 
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    The FHWA also proposes requiring the installation of the enhanced 
reference location signs on the right side of the roadway in rural 
areas except where conditions limit or restrict the use of enhanced 
reference location signs on the right side of the roadway.
    Finally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement, which states 
that in urban areas, enhanced reference location signs may be installed 
on the right side of the roadway, in the median, or on ramps to replace 
or to supplement reference location signs. This will provide 
flexibility to jurisdictions.
    100. In existing Section 2D.47 (new Section 2D.48) General 
Information Signs (I Series), the FHWA proposes removing all references 
concerning Adopt-a-Highway signs from the MUTCD. Current State and 
local practices pertaining to Adopt-A-Highway signs vary widely and, in 
some cases, include the use of commercial logos for indicating Adopt-A-
Highway sponsors. The use of logos has raised deeper policy issues 
regarding Federal and State laws concerning advertising along the 
right-of-way, general commercialization of the right-of-way, the safety 
to motorists and workers, and the ability to raise revenues for 
activities such as litter removal.
    Recent discussions of the signing criteria in the MUTCD, along with 
dialogue of several American Association of State Highway and 
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) subcommittees, have highlighted these 
deeper issues that go beyond the simple standards included in the 
MUTCD. For example, the AASHTO Subcommittee on Maintenance has argued 
that several States have existing contracts that allow a commercial 
entity to exchange maintenance and litter pickup services for signs 
acknowledging the commercial sponsors who pay for the services. These 
contracts supplement scarce maintenance resources for these States. The 
Subcommittee also noted that the use of more experienced crews used in 
such arrangements is safer than using volunteers.
    The AASHTO Subcommittee on Traffic Engineering, on the other hand, 
has argued that these acknowledgements of the commercial sponsors is an 
opening for other types of advertising (including electronic 
advertising on overhead dynamic message signs along freeways and at 
signalized intersections) and raise serious concerns over driver 
distraction, confusion, and crash potential and liability. At the 
request of the Subcommittee on Maintenance, the AASHTO Standing 
Committee on Highways has established a task force to consider 
commercialization within the right-of-way, including, but not limited 
to, signage for the Adopt-A-Highway program.
    Until the AASHTO study is completed, the FHWA is proposing the 
removal of all references to Adopt-A-Highway signs in the MUTCD.
    In this section, the FHWA also proposes adding new OPTION, 
GUIDANCE, and STANDARD statements regarding the use of signs to display 
safety or transportation-related messages. These messages, such as SEAT 
BELTS BUCKLED? and DON'T DRINK AND DRIVE, are in common and widespread 
use in many jurisdictions and they provide valuable reminders to road 
users of important laws. The proposed additions to this section provide 
for consistency in application of these types of messages on General 
Information signs and reduce the possibility of such signs being 
misused.
    Finally, the FHWA proposes in the second STANDARD statement 
replacing the words "jurisdiction logos" with 
"boundary" to provide additional flexibility highway 
agencies to use different colors for political boundary signs.
    101. In existing Section 2D.48 (new Section 2D.49) Signing of Named 
Highways, in the first STANDARD statement the FHWA proposes adding 
additional requirements for installing memorial signs on the mainline. 
These requirements prohibit the use of memorial names on the 
directional guide signs, interference with necessary highway signing, 
and placement which compromises the safety or efficiency of traffic 
flow. The proposed STANDARD statement is identical to the STANDARD 
statement in Section 2E.08. The FHWA proposes this addition for 
consistency and to clarify the acceptable locations to install memorial 
signs.
    102. The FHWA proposes adding a new section, numbered and titled 
"Section 2D.52 National Scenic Byways Marker (D6-4)." 
The FHWA proposes including SUPPORT, OPTION, and STANDARD statements 
that describe the National Scenic Byways program and the markers that 
may be placed on roads designated as National Scenic Byways or All-
American Roads by the Secretary of Transportation of the U.S. DOT. As 
of January 2002 there were 72 such designated byways in 32 States. This 
new section is proposed to provide for uniformity of design and 
application of markers on designated National Scenic Byways.
    103. In Section 2E.10, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Number of Signs at an Overhead Installation" to 
"Number of Signs at an Overhead Installation and Sign 
Spreading" and relocating the SUPPORT and GUIDANCE statements on 
sign spreading from Section 2E.11 because they are more appropriately 
associated with sign location installation.
    104. In Section 2E.11, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Sign Spreading and Pull-Through Signs" to "Pull-
Through Signs" to reflect the proposed relocation of the sign

[[Page 35864]]

spreading SUPPORT and GUIDANCE statements to Section 2E.10.
    In the first GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes replacing the 
words "only when" with "where" to broaden the 
use of Pull-Through signs. The FHWA proposes this change to recognize 
that Pull-Through signs can be beneficial in congested traffic for road 
users, especially older drivers, at many locations. The FHWA also 
proposes recommending that Pull-Through signs with down arrows be used 
where alignment of the through lanes is curved and the exit direction 
is straight ahead, where the number of through lanes is not readily 
evident, and at multilane exits. This will enhance the information 
provided to road users.
    105. In Table 2E-3 Minimum Letter and Numeral Sizes for 
Freeway Guide Signs According to Interchange Classification, the FHWA 
proposes adding dimensions for the "Action Message Word" 
row and adding a row with dimensions for the sizes of "Numerals 
and Letter" for Gore signs. These were inadvertently omitted from 
the current edition.
    106. In Section 2E.19 Diagrammatic Signs, the FHWA proposes to 
adding to item A of the first STANDARD statement the option of showing 
each individual lane arrangement. Research of the needs of older road 
users indicates that it is easier to comprehend a diagrammatic sign 
with one arrow for each lane than one arrow for all lanes as the width 
of each lane on a single arrow is too small. Additionally, the FHWA 
proposes adding a second illustration to the Diagrammatic Sign for a 
Single-Lane Left Exit (Figure 2E-3) which shows two diagrammatic 
arrows instead of just one.
    107. In Section 2E.20 Signing for Interchange Lane Drops, the FHWA 
proposes clarifying the second STANDARD statement that an EXIT ONLY 
(down arrow) (E11-1) panel shall not be used on an Exit Direction 
sign that contains an arrow in its design.
    108. In Section 2E.28 Interchange Exit Numbering, the FHWA proposes 
relocating the second OPTION statement to the first GUIDANCE statement. 
Because road users might not expect a left exit and have difficulty in 
maneuvering to the left, the FHWA is recommending that the word LEFT be 
added to the exit number plaque. The FHWA is proposing this change 
because of numerous complaints of the difficulty that road users have 
in knowing when an exit is on the left. Very few road users know that 
when the exit plaque is installed on the top left edge of the sign, it 
means the exit is on the left. The FHWA proposes that this new GUIDANCE 
become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing 
sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 
15 years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on 
State or local highway agencies.
    The FHWA proposes adding a new OPTION statement following the first 
GUIDANCE statement, which states that the portion of the exit number 
plaque containing the word LEFT may have a black legend and border on a 
yellow background. This proposed OPTION statement mirrors other similar 
uses of the black on yellow color pattern for signs and panel 
associated with left exits in the MUTCD.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the EXIT 13 sign from 
Figure 2E-3 to reflect the changes in Section 2E.28.
    109. In Section 2E.34 Exit Gore Signs, the FHWA proposes adding an 
OPTION statement to allow the mounting of a panel under the Exit sign 
indicating the advisory speed for the ramp. This option provides 
jurisdictions additional flexibility for reminding road users of the 
recommended speed for an exit ramp.
    110. In Section 2E.49 Signing of Approaches and Connecting 
Roadways, the FHWA proposes removing the entire text of the section and 
adding new SUPPORT, GUIDANCE, STANDARD, and OPTION statements, as well 
as five new figures. The proposed new section addresses sign sequences 
and sign design for conventional roads with one lane and those with 
more than one lane of traffic approaching an interchange. The proposed 
new section also clarifies the use of signs for approaches and 
connecting roadways in order to better convey to road users the ramp 
configuration and the maneuver that a road user would have to make to 
get on the desired connecting roadway.
    111. In Section 2E.51 General Service Signs, the FHWA proposes 
changing from 3 to 2 the number of meals per day for which a food 
establishment should have a continuous operation to serve in item B.2 
in the first GUIDANCE statement. The FHWA proposes this change to 
accommodate more food businesses.
    112. In Section 2E.54, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Reference Posts" to "Reference Location Signs" 
to reflect the new enhanced reference location sign and to be 
consistent with changes in other parts of the MUTCD.
    The FHWA proposes clarifying that the sign sizes in the STANDARD 
statement refer to reference location signs placed on freeways or 
expressways, and that the abbreviation KM (MILE) shall be in 100 mm (4 
in) white letters.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the OPTION 
statement at the end of the section, which states that intermediate and 
enhanced reference location signs may also be used on freeways and 
expressways. It is on those types of facilities where such signs have 
the most common application.
    113. In Section 2E.56 Radio Information Signing, the FHWA proposes 
adding OPTION and STANDARD statements at the end of the section 
describing the use and design of a TRAVELER INFO CALL 511 (D12-5) 
sign. With the adoption of 511 as the nationwide traveler information 
phone number, a uniform sign design is needed. The proposed changes in 
this section are consistent with the proposed changes in Section 2D.45.
    114. In Section 2E.57 Carpool Information Signing, the FHWA 
proposes adding to the OPTION statement that Carpool Information signs 
may include Internet addresses or telephone numbers within the legend. 
The proposal reflects common current practice and provides for 
additional information to road users.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the size of the maximum 
vertical dimension of the logo or symbol in the STANDARD statement from 
900 mm (36 in) to 450 mm (18 in), to enhance the legibility of the 
primary message.
    115. Following Section 2E.58, the FHWA proposes adding a new 
section, numbered and titled "Section 2E.59 High-Occupancy 
Vehicle (HOV) Signs." This proposed section includes STANDARD, 
GUIDANCE, OPTION, and SUPPORT statements regarding the use and 
placement of signs for HOV lanes and facilities. The FHWA also proposes 
including five figures illustrating examples of HOV signing 
applications. This proposed section reflects current state-of-the-
practice.
    116. In Section 2F.01 Eligibility, the FHWA proposes changing from 
3 to 2 the number of meals per day for which a food establishment 
should have a continuous operation to serve in item B.2 of the fourth 
GUIDANCE statement. The FHWA proposes this change to accommodate more 
food businesses. This proposed change is consistent with the proposed 
change in Section 2E.51.
    117. In Section 2F.04 Number and Size of Logos and Signs, the FHWA 
proposes changing the second STANDARD statement to require that a logo 
panel on signs for conventional roads and ramps not exceed 750 mm (30

[[Page 35865]]

in) in width instead of 600 mm (24 in) to be consistent with the 
proportions of panels for freeways and expressways.
    118. In Section 2F.08 Double-Exit Interchanges, the FHWA proposes 
adding to the OPTION statement that at a double-exit interchange where 
there are four logo panels displayed for one of the exits and one or 
two panels to be displayed for the other exit, the logo panels may be 
arranged in three rows with two panels per row, to make the layout of 
the sign more logical.
    119. In Chapter 2G TOURIST-ORIENTED DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, the FHWA 
proposes changing from "Typical" to "Examples 
of" in the titles of Figures 2G-1 and 2G-2 because 
the information shown is only an example of many acceptable 
arrangements of signs.
    120. In Section 2G.01 Purpose and Application, in the second 
STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes prohibiting the placement of 
tourist-oriented directional signs on conventional roads in urban 
areas. This proposal will clarify and strengthen the current 
requirement that such signs shall only be used on rural conventional 
roads.
    Also, the FHWA proposes relocating the current first paragraph of 
the GUIDANCE statement to become a new second paragraph of the second 
STANDARD statement. This proposed change would require, rather than 
recommend, that tourist-oriented directional signs incorporate 
information from and be used in place of Specific Service signs where 
both types of signs are needed at an intersection. The FHWA is 
proposing this change in order to reduce sign clutter at intersections 
and enhance road user safety.
    121. In Section 2G.07 State Policy, the FHWA proposes changing the 
phrase "State or Federal laws" to "State and Federal 
laws" in the STANDARD statement, to clarify that both types of 
laws must be heeded.
    122. In Section 2H.09 Destination Guide Signs, the FHWA proposes 
clarifying the second STANDARD statement that linear parkway-type 
highways that primarily, rather than merely, function as arterial 
connectors, even if they also provide access to recreational or 
cultural interest areas, shall not qualify for the use of white-on-
brown destination guide signs. The FHWA proposes this change to improve 
uniformity of guide signing on these important arterials.
    The FHWA also proposes adding illustrations of trapezoidal-shaped 
directional guide signs to Figure 2H-2 to correspond with the 
optional use of this shape for recreational or cultural interest area 
directional signing as provided for in Section 2G.09.
    123. In Section 2I.03 EVACUATION ROUTE Sign (EM-1), in the 
first STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes changing the design of the 
EVACUATION ROUTE (EM-1) sign to a rectangle sign with a blue 
circular symbol with a directional arrow and the legend EVACUATION 
ROUTE. The proposed minimum size is 600x600 mm (24x24 in) 
and the proposed circular symbol diameter is 2.54 mm (1 in) smaller 
than the width of the sign. This change reserves the circular shape 
sign exclusively for rail grade crossings and enhances the conspicuity 
and legibility of the EVACUATION ROUTE sign. The FHWA proposes that 
this change become effective immediately for new or replacement of 
damaged existing sign installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in 
compliance period of 10 years for existing signs in good condition to 
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    In the second STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes changing the 
detail regarding the colors to be used on the EVACUATION ROUTE 
(EM-1) sign and requiring that the entire sign be 
retroreflective. This proposed change corresponds with the proposed 
design changes required by the first STANDARD statement.
    The FHWA proposes adding to the second OPTION statement that the 
legend on the EVACUATION ROUTE sign may be modified to describe the 
type of evacuation route, such as HURRICANE, to provide additional 
information to road users.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to Figure 2I-1 
illustrations of the HURRICANE EVACUATION ROUTE, AREA CLOSED, TRAFFIC 
CONTROL POINT, MEDICAL CENTER, and HURRICANE SHELTER signs and 
illustrations of six new directional signs for EMERGENCY SHELTER, 
FALLOUT SHELTER, CHEMICAL SHELTER, WELFARE CENTER, REGISTRATION CENTER, 
and DECONTAMINATION CENTER signs.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 3-Markings

    124. In Section 3A.04 Colors, the FHWA proposes revising the 
STANDARD statement to clarify the use of black markings. Black markings 
can be used in conjunction with any other color marking to add contrast 
to it. The FHWA proposes removing the existing reference to object 
markers because it was not an appropriate reference.
    125. The FHWA proposes changing the title of Section 3A.05 from 
"Colors of Longitudinal Pavement Markings" to "Colors 
of Pavement Markings," because this section defines the use of 
colors for all pavement markings, not just longitudinal line markings. 
The FHWA also proposes revising this entire section to clarify the 
function of each color of pavement marking.
    126. In Section 3A.06 Widths and Patterns of Longitudinal Pavement 
Markings, the FHWA proposes removing item A of the STANDARD statement, 
which states that a solid line prohibits or discourages crossing. This 
item does not describe the width or pattern of longitudinal lines. The 
remaining items would be renumbered accordingly.
    In existing item D (new item C) of the STANDARD statement, the FHWA 
proposes replacing the word "normal" with 
"parallel" to clarify the pattern of a double line.
    In existing items D, E, and F (new items C, D, and E) of the 
STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes removing the last sentence of 
each item, since these sentences describe the function of various 
markings, rather than the width and pattern of longitudinal markings.
    The FHWA proposes revising the GUIDANCE statement to clarify that 
this guidance refers to all roadway types, not just rural highways.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the OPTION statement to 
differentiate between the dimensions for dotted lines used for line 
extensions and lane drop/add markings. The dimensions for the line 
segments and gaps for each are also proposed, for consistency with 
other sections in Part 3.
    127. The FHWA proposes changing the title of Section 3B.01 from 
"Yellow Centerline and Left Edge Line Pavement Markings and 
Warrants" to "Yellow Centerline Pavement Markings and 
Warrants," and moving the fourth STANDARD statement of Section 
3B.01 to Section 3B.06 since edge lines are appropriately covered in 
Section 3B.06.
    128. In Section 3B.02 No-Passing Zone Pavement Markings and 
Warrants, the FHWA proposes revising the second STANDARD statement to 
clarify that no-passing zone markings on approaches to highway-rail 
grade crossings shall conform with Section 8B.19, and eliminating the 
requirement that no passing zone markings be used at other appropriate 
locations, to be consistent with Part 8 and eliminate overlap with more 
specific requirements for no passing zone markings elsewhere in Section 
3B.02.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the third STANDARD 
statement

[[Page 35866]]

to clarify the dimensions of a no-passing buffer zone, and eliminating 
the buffer zone dimensions specific to areas where no passing zones are 
required because of limited passing sight distance. The proposed 
dimension of "at least 15 m (50 ft) in length" is suitable 
for all no passing zone buffers regardless of the reason for the 
buffer.
    129. In Section 3B.03 Other Yellow Longitudinal Pavement Markings, 
the FHWA proposes revising the text in the first paragraph of the first 
STANDARD statement to substitute the phrase "normal double" 
for "two double" in the description of the pavement marking 
requirements for reversible lanes. In the third paragraph of the first 
STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes clarifying that the pavement 
marking requirements for a two-way left turn lane applies to such lanes 
that are never operated as a reversible lane. The FHWA proposes these 
changes to improve the clarity of the requirements and for consistency 
with requirements elsewhere in Chapters 3A and 3B.
    130. The FHWA proposes changing the title of Section 3B.04 from 
"Edge Line Pavement Markings and Warrants" to "White 
Lane Line Pavement Markings and Warrants," and moving the fourth 
STANDARD statement of Section 3B.04 to Section 3B.06 since edge lines 
are appropriately covered in Section 3B.06.
    131. In Section 3B.05 Other White Longitudinal Pavement Markings, 
the FHWA proposes changing the gap length for lane drop markings from 
3.6 m (12 ft) gaps to 2.7 m (9 ft) gaps in the third OPTION statement 
to be consistent with the spacing of other marking gaps.
    132. In Section 3B.06 Edge Line Pavement Markings, the FHWA 
proposes adding to the STANDARD statement text the requirements that 
are being relocated from Sections 3B.01 and 3B.04 pertaining to left 
and right edge lines. These proposed changes would result in all edge 
line pavement marking information being contained within one section.
    The FHWA also proposes adding an OPTION statement, which states 
that wide solid edge line markings may be used for greater emphasis. 
Wide edge lines can sometimes be useful in reducing run-off-the-road 
crashes at curves and this proposal will provide additional flexibility 
for jurisdictions to use these markings where needed.
    133. In Section 3B.08 Extensions Through Intersections or 
Interchanges, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement on the 
placement and dimensions of pavement markings that are continued 
through intersections and interchanges. The FHWA proposes recommending 
that edge lines not be extended into or continued through intersections 
or interchanges. This guidance is needed so that pavement marking 
extensions through intersections and interchanges do not confuse 
drivers in adjacent or opposing travel lanes.
    134. In Section 3B.11 Raised Pavement Markers, the FHWA proposes 
clarifying in the first SUPPORT statement that the 10 mm (0.4 in) 
height of a raised pavement marker is for the retroreflective surface 
and that this height is the actual height or optical height. The FHWA 
also proposes clarifying the first SUPPORT statement to include marking 
the position of fire hydrants as one of the uses of raised pavement 
markings, for consistency with other proposed revisions in this 
section.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement after 
the STANDARD statement, which states that blue raised pavement markers 
may be used to mark the positions of fire hydrants. This is common 
practice in many jurisdictions.
    135. In Section 3B.12 Raised Pavement Markers as Vehicle 
Positioning Guides with Other Longitudinal Markings, in the first 
SUPPORT statement, the FHWA proposes revising the spacing used between 
raised pavement markers along longitudinal line markings from 2N to 3N 
because this is an acceptable spacing for most applications. The value 
"N" is equal to the length of one line segment plus one 
gap.
    Additionally, in the second OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes 
changing from "N or less" to "2N or less" for 
the reduced spacing that may be used where it is desired to alert the 
road user to changes in the travel path, because this is an acceptable 
spacing for most applications.
    136. In Section 3B.13 Raised Pavement Markers Supplementing Other 
Markings, the FHWA proposes revising item B1 of the GUIDANCE statement 
to indicate that raised pavement markers should not supplement right 
edge line markings unless they are spaced closely enough (no greater 
than 3 m (10 ft) apart) to approximate the appearance of a solid line. 
This proposed exception is needed to give jurisdictions the ability to 
use raised pavement markers to supplement edge lines in situations 
where additional wet-night delineation is needed, such as on curves.
    In item B.2 of the GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes revising 
the recommended spacing to be used between raised pavement markers 
along broken line markings from 2N to 3N because this is an acceptable 
spacing for most applications.
    Additionally, in item B.5 of the GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA 
proposes revising the recommended spacing to be used between raised 
pavement markers that supplement edge line extensions through freeway 
interchanges from N/2 to N because this is an acceptable spacing for 
most applications.
    137. In Section 3B.14 Raised Pavement Markers Substituting for 
Pavement Markings, in the first STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes 
revising the required spacing between raised pavement markers when 
substituted for broken line markings from N/12 to N/8 and revising the 
required spacing between raised pavement markers when substituted for 
solid lane line markings from N/8 to N/4. In the third STANDARD 
statement, the FHWA proposes revising the required spacing between 
raised pavement markers when substituted for dotted line markings from 
N/8 to N/4. The FHWA proposes these changes because these spacings are 
acceptable for most applications.
    The FHWA proposes that these changes become effective immediately 
for new raised pavement marker installations. The FHWA proposes a 
phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing raised pavement 
markers in good condition to minimize any impact on State or local 
highway agencies.
    138. In Section 3B.15 Transverse Markings, in the first STANDARD 
statement the FHWA proposes adding "yield lines" and 
"speed hump" markings to the list of transverse markings 
required to be white markings.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the second paragraph of 
the GUIDANCE statement to a STANDARD statement, which requires that 
pavement marking letters, numerals, and symbols be installed in 
accordance with the "Standard Alphabets for Highway Signs and 
Pavement Markings" to correct an oversight in the Millennium 
Edition of the MUTCD.
    139. In Section 3B.16 Stop and Yield Lines, in the second paragraph 
of the first GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes clarifying that 
YIELD signs are an exception to the recommendations on the use of stop 
lines, to be consistent with the intended use of yield lines.
    The FHWA also proposes modifying the OPTION statement to clarify 
that yield lines may also be placed at locations where vehicles are to 
yield to pedestrians in compliance with a YIELD HERE TO PEDESTRIANS 
(R1-5 or R1-5a) sign, to correspond with the

[[Page 35867]]

proposed addition of this new sign to Chapter 2B.
    The FHWA proposes revising and adding to the second GUIDANCE 
statement to clarify the recommended placement of yield lines at 
unsignalized midblock crosswalks, to enhance pedestrian safety. The 
FHWA also proposes adding a new paragraph to the second GUIDANCE 
statement regarding placement of yield lines at midblock crosswalks. 
The FHWA also proposes adding a new figure numbered and titled 
"Figure 3B-15 Examples of Yield Lines at Unsignalized 
Midblock Crosswalks" relating to the new text. All of the 
following figures in the chapter would be renumbered accordingly.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new SUPPORT statement at 
the end of the section to emphasize that drivers who yield too close to 
crosswalks on multi-lane approaches place pedestrians at risk by 
blocking other drivers' view of pedestrians. The FHWA proposes this to 
clarify the reasons for the recommended locations of stop and yield 
lines.
    140. In Section 3B.17 Crosswalk Markings, in the second GUIDANCE 
statement the FHWA proposes increasing the upper limit of the range for 
spacing diagonal or longitudinal crosswalk marking lines from 300 to 
600 mm (12 to 24 in) to 300 to 1500 mm (12 to 60 in) and to specify the 
relationship between marking spacing and line width, to provide more 
flexibility to jurisdictions.
    141. In Section 3B.19 Pavement Word and Symbol Markings, the FHWA 
proposes modifying the third STANDARD statement to allow the use of 
STOP markings at the ends of aisles in parking lots even though there 
is no STOP sign. In parking lots, often there is no practical way to 
install a stop sign at the end of the aisles, so the STOP legend 
pavement marking is needed to clarify right-of-way.
    142. In Section 3B.21 Curb Markings, in the first paragraph of the 
STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes clarifying that the requirement 
for signs to be used with curb markings does not apply if the no 
parking zone is controlled by statute or local ordinance, to minimize 
unnecessary sign clutter.
    The FHWA also proposes adding a new OPTION statement immediately 
following the first item in the first GUIDANCE statement to clarify the 
use of signs and word markings when curb markings are used to convey 
statutory law.
    143. In Section 3B.22 Preferential Lane Word and Symbol Markings, 
the FHWA proposes adding to the second STANDARD statement that more 
than one symbol or word marking can be used to mark a preferential 
lane, that the word message HOV is acceptable as a preferential marking 
(relocating this from the OPTION statement), and that the 
"T" marking be the light rail transit preferential lane 
symbol. Additionally, in the same STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes 
requiring that symbol or word markings for each preferential lane use 
be installed if two or more preferential lane uses are permitted in a 
single lane. The FHWA proposes these changes to provide uniformity for 
marking of multi-use preferential lanes and to provide a distinctive 
symbol for light rail transit.
    144. In Section 3B.24 Markings for Roundabouts, the FHWA proposes 
adding a new STANDARD statement, which prohibits marking bicycle lanes 
on roundabouts. The FHWA proposes the prohibition to enhance bicyclist 
safety by avoiding giving bicyclists a false sense of security when 
traveling through the roundabout with conflicting and turning traffic. 
This proposed change is consistent with state of the practice for 
roundabout design.
    145. In Section 3C.01 Object Marker Design and Placement Height, 
the FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement that the 
minimum width of both the yellow and black stripes on a Type 3 striped 
marker shall be 75mm (3 in), to provide for uniformity of appearance of 
these markers. The FHWA proposes that this change become effective 
immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing sign 
installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 
years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on 
State or local highway agencies.
    146. In Section 3D.01 Delineators, the FHWA proposes changing the 
STANDARD statement indicating that delineators are considered guidance 
devices rather than warning devices to a SUPPORT statement to be 
consistent with other parts of the MUTCD.
    147. In Section 3E.01 General, the FHWA proposes several changes to 
reflect that red colored pavement is no longer being considered a 
traffic control device. Accordingly, the FHWA proposes adding to the 
SUPPORT statement that colored pavement located between the crosswalk 
lines is not considered to be a traffic control device, removing 
existing item A of the STANDARD statement concerning when the color red 
is used, and removing the second GUIDANCE statement concerning how the 
color red is used. These proposed changes will provide additional 
flexibility for jurisdictions to use colored pavements as aesthetic 
treatments, such as in redevelopment areas, as long as the crosswalk is 
marked by standard, retroreflectorized, white lines.
    Additionally, in the first GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes 
recommending that colors that degrade the contrast of white crosswalk 
lines, or that might be mistaken by road users as a traffic control 
application, not be used for colored pavement located between crosswalk 
lines. This proposed change is needed to reduce the possibility of uses 
of colored pavements in ways that might confuse road users or reduce 
pedestrian safety.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 4-Highway Traffic 
Signals

    148. In Section 4A.02 Definitions Relating to Highway Traffic 
Signals, the FHWA proposes revising the definition for "Average 
Day" and "Flashing" and adding a new definition for 
"Flashing Mode". These definitions would be identical to 
the proposed revised definitions in Section 1A.13 and are repeated in 
Section 4A.02 because they are especially pertinent to Highway Traffic 
Signals.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the definitions for 
"Backplate" (change to "Signal Backplate"), 
"Detector," "Louver" (change to "Signal 
Louver"), "Signal Face," "Signal Head," 
and "Visibility-Limited Signal Face or Section" to better 
reflect accepted practice and terminologies.
    The FHWA also proposes revising the definition of "Pedestrian 
Clearance Time" to correspond to proposed changes in the 
standards contained in Section 4E.10 (formerly 4E.09).
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding new definitions for 
"Dual-Arrow Signal Section," "Emergency 
Beacon," "Moveable Bridge Signal," "Separate 
Left Turn Signal Face," and "Shared Left Turn Signal 
Face" because these terms are frequently used in Part 4. The 
entire list of definitions is renumbered accordingly.
    149. In Section 4B.02 Basis of Installation or Removal of Traffic 
Control Signals, the FHWA proposes revising the first GUIDANCE 
statement to more specifically define the elements that should be 
considered as traffic conditions, because vehicles, pedestrians, and 
bicyclists are all considered to be traffic.
    In the SUPPORT statement, the FHWA proposes changing the word 
"intersections" to "locations," since traffic 
signals are not always located at intersections. Traffic signals can be 
at shopping center driveways and other locations that are not legally 
considered

[[Page 35868]]

intersections. This proposed revision is carried throughout Part 4.
    The FHWA proposes adding a paragraph to the beginning of the second 
GUIDANCE statement, which states that engineering judgment should be 
applied in the review of operating traffic control signals to determine 
whether the type of installation and the signal timing meet the current 
requirements of traffic. This information is relocated from Section 
4B.03.
    Additionally, in item E of the OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes 
removing the maximum time limit of one year for signal poles and cables 
to remain in place after removal of the signal heads, since it is too 
restrictive.
    150. In Section 4B.03 Advantages and Disadvantages of Traffic 
Control Signals, the FHWA proposes revising item B of the second 
paragraph of the SUPPORT statement, to clarify that signal timing 
review and updating be conducted if needed and to clarify that every 
two years is just one of several possible frequencies of review.
    151. In Section 4C.01 Studies and Factors for Justifying Traffic 
Control Signals, the FHWA proposes adding a recommendation to the 
GUIDANCE statement, which states that a traffic control signal 
installed under projected conditions should be studied again within one 
year after placing it in stop-and-go operation to determine if it is 
still justified and, if it is not justified, it should be taken out of 
stop-and-go operation or removed. The FHWA proposes this addition 
because it reflects best practice to prevent continued operation of 
unjustified signals. Additionally, the FHWA proposes categorizing a 
wide median (for purposes of signal warrant analysis) as one with a 
width greater than 9 m (30 ft), for consistency with other parts of the 
MUTCD.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a paragraph at the beginning 
of the OPTION statement, which explains the option of using the left-
turn volume on the major-street as the minor-street volume and the 
corresponding single direction of opposing traffic as the major street 
volume. The proposed change reflects commonly used and accepted 
practices and provides additional flexibility to practitioners in 
analyzing a location for a traffic signal.
    The FHWA proposes adding an item H to the existing first (new 
second) paragraph of the OPTION statement to indicate that bicyclists 
may be counted as either vehicles or pedestrians when studying the need 
for a traffic control signal. This proposed change provides a more 
complete listing of recommended data for the engineering study.
    Additionally, in item A of the existing second (new third) 
paragraph of the OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes removing the 
reference to the Peak Hour Warrant to correct an error in the previous 
edition.
    152. In Section 4C.02 Warrant 1, Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume, in 
the first OPTION statement, the FHWA proposes changing the phrase 
"exceeds 70 km/h (40 mph)" to "exceeds 70 km/h or 
exceeds 40 mph" to clarify that, for purposes of evaluating 
warrant satisfaction, either 70 km/h or 40 mph (depending on whether 
metric or English units are used for speeds, and regardless of metric-
English conversion factors) is the speed above which the 70% factor may 
be used. This change is carried throughout the applicable text and 
figures in Chapter 4C.
    The FHWA proposes adding a new GUIDANCE statement following the 
first OPTION statement, and a new SUPPORT statement at the end of the 
section to better clarify the intended use of the combination of 
Conditions A and B under Warrant 1.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new OPTION statement after 
the second STANDARD statement to explain the use of 56% traffic volumes 
under certain conditions and modifying Table 4C-1 to include 
additional criteria for a combination of Conditions A and B as 
reflected in the text. These changes will better reflect commonly 
accepted practice that was implicitly allowed in the 1988 MUTCD.
    153. In Section 4C.08 Warrant 7, Crash Experience, the FHWA 
proposes adding a new OPTION statement at the end of the section to 
explain the use of 56% traffic volumes. This proposed change is 
consistent with similar proposed changes in Section 4C.02.
    154. In Section 4D.01, General, the FHWA proposes removing from the 
STANDARD statement the requirement that a traffic control signal be 
operated in either a steady (stop-and-go) mode or a flashing mode at 
all times. This change is proposed because it is in conflict with other 
STANDARD statements in Chapter 4E that require flashing indications 
(flashing UPRAISED HAND pedestrian signal indications) to be displayed 
during an otherwise steady mode of traffic control signal operation. 
This change also allows practitioners the flexibility to use flashing 
indications along with steady indications where appropriate in a signal 
sequence to improve the efficiency or safety of the intersection. 
Additionally, the FHWA proposes reordering the paragraphs in this 
STANDARD statement so that existing last paragraph will become the 
first paragraph. This revision is proposed to improve clarity.
    The FHWA also proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement that the 
location of signalized midblock crosswalks should be at least 30 m (100 
ft) away from adjacent stop or yield controlled driveways or streets. 
The purpose of this proposed change is to reduce potential conflicts 
and improve safety, and to codify previous official interpretations of 
the MUTCD on this subject. The FHWA proposes that this guidance become 
effective immediately for new signalized midblock crosswalks. The FHWA 
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 years for existing 
signalized midblock crosswalks in good condition to minimize any impact 
on State or local highway agencies.
    155. In Section 4D.04 Meaning of Vehicular Signal Indications, the 
FHWA proposes removing the phrase "unless otherwise determined by 
law" from the beginning of the STANDARD statement to conform to 
the Uniform Vehicle Code.
    The FHWA proposes adding to item A.3 that the pedestrian does not 
automatically have the right of way when starting to cross on a green 
signal to conform to the Uniform Vehicle Code.
    The FHWA proposes adding to item C.2 that a turn on a RED ARROW 
signal indication after stopping is allowed when a sign is in place 
permitting the turn on red arrow to conform to the Uniform Vehicle 
Code. Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the existing OPTION 
statement at the end of the section dealing with right-turn on a red 
arrow to eliminate redundancy with the change in the STANDARD 
statement.
    156. In Section 4D.05 Application of Steady Signal Indications, the 
FHWA proposes adding protected/permissive mode left-turn operation with 
separate left-turn signal faces as an exception to when a steady 
CIRCULAR RED signal indication is required to be displayed with the 
appropriate GREEN ARROW signal indication. This proposed change 
clarifies the proper display with the "Dallas" type left 
turn phasing.
    The FHWA proposes adding a new item B.4 to the STANDARD statement 
to prohibit signal displays that result in what is referred to as the 
"yellow trap" unless certain ameliorating measures are 
taken. The "yellow trap" is a potentially adverse safety 
situation inherent in some signal phasing sequences involving lagging 
left turns in one direction. A left turning driver, in the intersection 
waiting for gaps in oncoming traffic in order to turn left on

[[Page 35869]]

a permissive green signal indication, sees the signals for adjacent 
through traffic change from green to yellow and mistakenly assumes that 
oncoming through traffic also has yellow signals at the same time and 
will be soon coming to a stop. The proposed new text reflects current 
best practices and addresses the safety concerns. The FHWA proposes 
that this standard become effective immediately for new or replacement 
of damaged existing traffic control signal installations. The FHWA 
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 5 years for existing traffic 
control signals in good condition to minimize any impact on State or 
local highway agencies.
    The FHWA proposes revising item D of the STANDARD statement to 
correspond with changes to Section 4D.04 that a turn on a RED ARROW 
signal indication after stopping is allowed when a sign is in place 
permitting the turn on red arrow, to conform to the Uniform Vehicle 
Code.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to item F.2 of the STANDARD 
statement to require the use of a "U Turn Yield to Right 
Turn" sign when U-turns on a green arrow signal conflict with 
right turns on a green arrow signal. This proposed change is necessary 
to establish right-of-way of one movement over a conflicting movement, 
and to provide for safe operations.
    157. In Section 4D.06 Application of Steady Signal Indications for 
Left Turns, the FHWA proposes replacing the existing item A in the 
STANDARD statement with new text that provides for the use of separate 
or shared left turn signal faces and the use of "Dallas" 
type displays and sequences for "permissive only" mode of 
operation. This revision is proposed in order to make this type of 
solution available to practitioners to eliminate the "yellow 
trap" situation for "permissive only" mode left turns 
as well as for "protected-permissive" mode.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the text of item B.2 of 
the STANDARD statement for clarity and to correct an error from the 
previous edition. The proposed change reflects the fact that a 
visibility-limited CIRCULAR RED signal indication is considered not 
readily visible to drivers in the through lane(s).
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes to revise the text of item C of the 
STANDARD statement to remove the requirement that the left-turn signal 
face simultaneously display a CIRCULAR RED signal indication with the 
left-turn GREEN ARROW signal indication during the protected left-turn 
movement in Protected/Permissive Mode, if a separate left-turn signal 
face is provided. This proposed change corrects an error from the 
previous edition.
    158. In Section 4D.07 Application of Steady Signal Indications for 
Right Turns, in item B.2 of the STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes 
correcting an error in the previous edition on the proper use of the 
RIGHT TURN SIGNAL sign and revising the statement for clarity. The 
proposed change reflects the fact that a visibility-limited CIRCULAR 
RED signal indication is considered not readily visible to drivers in 
the through lane(s).
    159. In Section 4D.09 Unexpected Conflicts During Green or Yellow 
Intervals, the FHWA proposes revising item A of the STANDARD statement 
to add an exception for the situation regarding U-turns as described in 
item F.2 of Section 4D.05 to the prohibition of displaying a steady 
GREEN ARROW or YELLOW ARROW signal indication to vehicular movements 
that conflict with other vehicles moving on a green or yellow signal 
indication. This proposed change corresponds to the change proposed in 
Section 4D.05.
    160. In Section 4D.12 Flashing Operation of Traffic Control 
Signals, the FHWA proposes revising the GUIDANCE statement to eliminate 
the word maximum in describing the duration of six seconds for a steady 
red clearance interval in the change from red-red flashing mode to 
steady (stop and go) mode. This change is proposed because six seconds 
has been found by practitioners to be a reasonable and practical 
duration to provide for safe operation in the transition of modes. 
Since this specific duration of six seconds is a recommended condition, 
this proposed change allows agencies to use longer or shorter durations 
if justified by unique conditions. The FHWA proposes that this guidance 
become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing 
traffic control signal installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in 
compliance period of 5 years for existing traffic control signals in 
good condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway 
agencies.
    161. In Section 4D.13 Preemption and Priority Control of Traffic 
Control Signals, the FHWA proposes changing the first paragraph of the 
SUPPORT statement to an OPTION statement to be consistent with similar 
conditions in other parts of the MUTCD.
    The FHWA proposes revising the remaining portions of the SUPPORT 
statement to clarify that boats and trains are not 
"vehicles" under accepted definitions. The FHWA proposes 
adding light rail transit to the list of modes that typically get 
preemption control, to reflect current typical practice. Additionally, 
in the last paragraph of the SUPPORT statement, the FHWA proposes 
switching the first two items in the order of priority from 
"boat, train" to "train, boat" because trains 
typically cannot be stopped as easily as boats.
    162. In Section 4D.15 Size, Number, and Location of Signal Faces by 
Approach, the FHWA proposes revising item D in the second STANDARD 
statement to change from 45 m (150 ft) to 55 m (180 ft) the maximum 
distance beyond the stop line that a signal face installed to satisfy 
the requirements of Items B and C in this STANDARD and at least one and 
preferably both of the signal faces required by item A in this STANDARD 
be located unless a supplemental near side signal face is provided.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new item D.2 to the second 
STANDARD statement to require the use of engineering judgment of the 
conditions, including worst-case visibility conditions, to determine if 
the provision of a supplemental near-side signal face would be 
beneficial, if the nearest signal face is located between 45 and 55 m 
(150 and 180 ft) from the stop line. The FHWA also proposes changing 
Figure 4D-2 to reflect the text.
    The proposed changes to the second STANDARD statement and to Figure 
4D-2 better accommodate signal design at large intersections.
    163. In Section 4D.16 Number and Arrangement of Signal Sections in 
Vehicular Traffic Control Signal Faces, the FHWA proposes revising the 
seventh paragraph of the STANDARD statement to change the phrase 
"variable indication" to "dual-arrow" to 
clarify that single sections that display green and yellow arrows are 
permissible. Single section heads capable of displaying red, yellow, 
and green indications in the one section are not allowed due to color 
blindness and other issues. This proposed change is carried throughout 
the MUTCD.
    164. In Section 4D.18 Design, Illumination, and Color of Signal 
Sections, the FHWA proposes removing the last GUIDANCE statement 
concerning the color of signal housings as there is no consensus that 
yellow signal housings are universally best in all of the various 
environments. In actual practice, far fewer than 50 percent of the 
signal heads in the United States are highway yellow. California, New 
York, and many other very large jurisdictions require signal heads to 
be other colors, such as green, black, gray, brown, etc. Some states 
require the front

[[Page 35870]]

surfaces of the housings to be black while painting the back surfaces 
of the housing yellow.
    165. In Section 4D.21 Traffic Signal Signs, Auxiliary, the FHWA 
proposes revising the first paragraph of the STANDARD statement to 
specify that the required minimum clearance of the total assembly of 
traffic signal signs is the minimum vertical and horizontal clearances 
of sign assemblies.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the GUIDANCE statement to 
clarify that traffic signal signs should be located adjacent to the 
signal face to which they apply.
    166. In Section 4E.02 the FHWA proposes changing the title of the 
section from "Meaning of Pedestrian Signal Indications" to 
"Meaning of Pedestrian Signal Head Indications" to make it 
clear that what is being referred to are the "walk-don't 
walk" pedestrian signal heads, and not the red-yellow-green 
signal heads that may serve as indications for pedestrians at some 
locations. This proposed change is made throughout Chapter 4E.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising item A of the STANDARD 
statement to indicate that a pedestrian does not automatically have the 
right of way when starting to cross on a WALK signal. This proposed 
change conforms to the Uniform Vehicle Code.
    167. In Section 4E.03 Application of Pedestrian Signal Heads, the 
FHWA proposes removing item D of the STANDARD statement because it 
implies that pedestrian signal heads are required at all locations 
where split phase timing is used without regard to the presence or 
absence of pedestrian activity. That is not the intent of this section.
    168. In Section 4E.04, the FHWA proposes changing the title of the 
section from "Size, Design, and Illumination of Pedestrian Signal 
Indications" to "Size, Design, and Illumination of 
Pedestrian Signal Head Indications" for consistency with the 
proposed change in Section 4E.02. The FHWA also proposes specifying in 
the first paragraph of the STANDARD statement that symbolized messages 
for pedestrian signal heads are required to be solid and disallowing 
use of "outline style" symbols. The FHWA also proposes 
changing Figure 4E-1 to reflect the text and to eliminate the 
illustration of the "outlined symbol." These changes are 
proposed because of the difficulty that elderly people and people with 
diminished visual acuity have in seeing the outline style symbols. The 
outline style symbols are also often occluded when used with egg crate 
baffles. Solid symbols provide the necessary luminous intensity and can 
be economically manufactured using light emitting diodes (LEDs) or 
other technologies. The FHWA proposes that this standard become 
effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing 
pedestrian signal faces. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period 
of 10 years for existing pedestrian signal faces in good condition to 
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    The FHWA also proposes adding a seventh paragraph to the STANDARD 
statement to specify the flash rate for the flashing upraised hand 
pedestrian signal head indication. The FHWA proposes this change to be 
consistent with flash rates specified in other sections of Part 4.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement and a 
STANDARD statement at the end of the section to allow and describe the 
use of an animated eyes symbol on pedestrian signal heads. The FHWA 
proposes adding the animated eyes traffic control device because 
research has documented benefits to alerting pedestrians to look both 
ways for approaching vehicles.
    169. In Section 4E.06 Accessible Pedestrian Signals, the FHWA 
proposes adding to the second paragraph of the fourth GUIDANCE 
statement how sound pressure levels of the accessible walk signal tone 
should be measured, to reflect typical industry practices.
    170. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following Section 4E.06 
Accessible Pedestrian Signals. The proposed new section is numbered and 
titled "Section 4E.07 Countdown Pedestrian Signals" and 
contains OPTION, STANDARD, and GUIDANCE statements on the design, use, 
and operation of countdown pedestrian signals. The remaining sections 
in Chapter 4E would be renumbered accordingly. Countdown pedestrian 
signals have been shown by research and experimentation to be 
beneficial to pedestrians by providing additional information to help 
pedestrians judge the time remaining to cross the street. Uniformity in 
the design and operation of countdown pedestrian signals is needed to 
minimize pedestrian confusion. The FHWA proposes that this section 
become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing 
countdown pedestrian signal installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in 
compliance period of 10 years for existing countdown pedestrian signals 
in good condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway 
agencies.
    171. In existing Section 4E.07 (new Section 4E.08) Pedestrian 
Detectors, the FHWA proposes removing from the last STANDARD statement 
the statement that instructional signs are not required if special 
purpose pushbuttons are used. The current design of special purpose 
pushbuttons does not require a sign to make users aware of their 
intended purpose. Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the third 
GUIDANCE statement comparable text that the special purpose pushbuttons 
do not need an instructional sign.
    The FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement at the end of the 
section to allow the use of special pedestrian detectors to provide 
additional crossing time for pedestrians with special needs. This 
proposed change reflects the availability of new technology and can 
improve safety for pedestrians with special needs.
    172. In existing Section 4E.08 (new Section 4E.09) Accessible 
Pedestrian Signal Detectors, the FHWA proposes changing the SUPPORT 
statement to a STANDARD statement for consistency, since other 
definitions in the MUTCD are STANDARDS. Additionally, the FHWA proposes 
relocating the existing first STANDARD statement to become part of the 
new first STANDARD statement at the beginning of the section.
    The FHWA proposes retitling Figure 4E-2 from 
"Recommended Pushbutton Locations for Accessible Pedestrian 
Signals" to "Typical Locations for Accessible Pedestrian 
Signals" to be consistent with terminology used throughout the 
MUTCD for figures. The FHWA also proposes clarifying the arrows 
symbolizing push buttons in Figure 4E-2.
    173. In existing Section 4E.09 (new Section 4E.10) Pedestrian 
Intervals and Signal Phases, the FHWA proposes removing from the first 
OPTION statement the desire to favor the length of an opposing signal 
phase as a condition for using walk intervals as short as 4 seconds. 
This change is proposed to encourage enhanced consideration of 
pedestrian timing needs.
    In the second GUIDANCE statement the FHWA proposes increasing the 
pedestrian clearance time so that it is sufficient to allow the 
pedestrian to clear the full width of the traveled portion of the 
roadway. The current pedestrian clearance time is sufficient to allow 
the pedestrian to clear just to the center of the farthest traveled 
lane. With the increases in the number of coordinated signal systems, 
and with platoons of vehicles potentially arriving at the intersection 
at the start of the

[[Page 35871]]

green indication, it is a significant safety concern for pedestrians to 
be given only enough clearance time that they are in the middle of a 
travel lane when the platoon arrives at the start of green. The 
proposed change will result in only a very small increase in the 
pedestrian clearance time but will significantly enhance pedestrian 
safety. The FHWA proposes that this guidance become effective 
immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing signal 
installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 5 
years for existing traffic control signals in good condition to 
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the first paragraph of 
the last OPTION statement the option of containing the pedestrian 
clearance time within the vehicular green and yellow change intervals. 
This proposed change reflects common practice of many jurisdictions.
    174. In Section 4F.01 Applications of Emergency-Vehicle Traffic 
Control Signals, the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement the 
choice of installing an Emergency Beacon instead of an emergency 
vehicle traffic control signal. This proposed changes corresponds to 
the proposed new Section 4F.04 that adds Emergency Beacons as an 
alternative to Emergency Vehicle Traffic Control Signals.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the GUIDANCE statement to 
recommend following the provisions of Chapter 4D not only if a 
numerical signal warrant is met, but also if a decision is made to 
install a signal after an engineering study, for consistency with 
Chapter 4C.
    175. In Section 4F.02 Design of Emergency-Vehicle Traffic Control 
Signals, the FHWA proposes revising the GUIDANCE statement to indicate 
that two signal faces are required for each major street approach, and 
that at least one of those two signal faces should be located over the 
roadway. This proposed change is for consistency with Chapter 4D.
    176. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following Section 4F.03 
Operation of Emergency-Vehicle Traffic Control Signals. This proposed 
new section is numbered and titled "Section 4F.04 Emergency 
Beacon" and contains STANDARDS, SUPPORT, GUIDANCE, and OPTIONS 
concerning the design, use, and application of Emergency Beacons. The 
FHWA proposes adding the Emergency Beacon to the MUTCD to provide for 
uniformity in the design and operation of this type of device. Research 
and experimentation has indicated that, under certain circumstances, 
the Emergency Beacon is more effective than an Emergency Vehicle 
Traffic Control Signal in terms of capturing the approaching driver's 
attention and achieving compliance with the requirement to come to a 
stop when emergency vehicles are egressing. The Emergency Beacon is 
typically less costly to install and thus imposes less of a burden on 
jurisdictions in providing safe operations at locations where emergency 
vehicles cross or enter a major road. The FHWA proposes that this 
section become effective immediately for new or replacement of damaged 
existing emergency beacon installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in 
compliance period of 10 years for existing emergency beacons in good 
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    177. In Section 4G.02 Design of Traffic Control Signals for One-
Lane, Two-Way Facilities, the FHWA proposes changing the GUIDANCE 
statement, concerning the applicability of provisions of Chapter 4D to 
traffic control signals for one-lane two-way facilities and exceptions 
to these provisions, to a STANDARD statement. This change is proposed 
to enhance safety and operation for road users, who do not readily 
distinguish signals for one-lane, two-way facilities from any other 
type of highway traffic signals.
    178. In Section 4I.02 Design and Location of Movable Bridge Signals 
and Gates, the FHWA proposes removing from item A of the STANDARD 
statement the explanation that then three-section signal faces with 
red, yellow and green signal lenses are generally used if movable 
bridge operation is quite frequent. The FHWA also proposes adding 
comparable text in a proposed SUPPORT statement, which follows the 
third paragraph of the STANDARD statement. The FHWA proposes this 
change because the statement is too vague for a STANDARD.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the phrase "on long 
bridges or causeways" from the eighth paragraph of the STANDARD 
statement because two sets of gates may be used on bridges or causeways 
of any length and what constitutes a long bridge or causeway is not and 
cannot be readily defined.
    179. In Section 4J.03 Design of Lane-Use Control Signals, the FHWA 
proposes adding to the OPTION statement to allow the use of smaller 
size lane-use control signal faces for one-way and two-way left turn 
arrows in areas with minimal visual clutter and low speeds. The FHWA 
proposes changing the definition of low speeds from 70 km/h (45 mph) or 
less to 60   km/h (40 mph) or less to be consistent with similar 
criteria regarding signal lens sizes in Chapter 4D. In these 
circumstances, the use of smaller sizes provides a cost savings and 
improves aesthetics without compromising effectiveness.
    180. In Section 4K.04 Speed Limit Sign Beacon, the FHWA proposes 
adding to the STANDARD statement a requirement that a Speed Limit 
Beacon be used only to supplement a Speed Limit sign. This change is 
proposed to reinforce proper use of the different types of beacons.
    181. In Section 4L.01 Application of In-Roadway Lights, the FHWA 
proposes revising the SUPPORT statement to include marked crosswalks in 
advance of roundabouts, highway-rail grade crossings, and highway-light 
transit rail grade crossings as additional situations for possible use 
of in-roadway lights. The state-of-the-art in designing modern 
roundabouts calls for pedestrian crosswalks to be located about one 
vehicle length in advance of the "yield line" where 
approaching vehicles enter the roundabout. A crosswalk located in this 
position operates essentially as a mid-block uncontrolled crosswalk 
because the yield sign controlling vehicle entry into the roundabout 
does not also control the vehicles at the crosswalk. The proposed 
reference to grade crossings is added due to the proposed new Section 
4L.03.
    182. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following Section 4L.02 
In-Roadway Warning Lights at Crosswalks. The proposed new section is 
numbered and titled "Section 4L.03 In-Roadway Lights at Highway-
Rail Grade Crossings and Highway-Light Rail Grade Crossings" and 
contains STANDARD, GUIDANCE, and OPTION statements describing the 
design, application, and operation of in-roadway warning lights and in-
roadway stop line lights at highway-rail and highway-light rail transit 
grade crossings. Research and experimentation has indicated that red 
in-roadway lights at the stop line of an approach to a grade crossing 
controlled by active grade crossing warning systems can provide 
effective additional emphasis of the need for road users to stop and 
remain stopped for the passage of a train or light rail vehicle. Also, 
the use of yellow in-roadway warning lights in advance of the grade 
crossing provides further warning of the crossing to approaching road 
users, supplementing advance warning signs and pavement markings. The 
FHWA proposes that this section become effective immediately for new or 
replacement of existing in-roadway lights at highway-rail and highway-
light

[[Page 35872]]

rail transit grade crossings. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance 
period of 10 years for existing installations of in-roadway lights at 
highway-rail and highway-light rail transit grade crossings in good 
condition to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 5-Traffic Control 
Devices for Low-Volume Roads

    183. In Section 5A.03 Design, the FHWA proposes revising Figure 
5A-1 Minimum Sign Sizes on Low-Volume Roads to reduce the minimum 
size of the W20-1, W20-7a, W20-7b, W21-1a, and 
W21-6 signs from 900 x 900 mm (36 x 36 in) to 600 
x 600 mm (24 x 24 in) to be consistent with minimum sizes 
of other signs of comparable design.
    184. In Section 5B.03 Speed Limit Signs (R2 Series), the FHWA 
proposes revising the illustration of the metric speed limit sign to 
correspond to a similar proposed revision in Chapter 2B. The proposed 
design of the metric speed limit sign includes the metric speed value 
within a green circle with the legend "km/h" below it.
    185. In Section 5B.04 Traffic Movement and Prohibition Signs (R3, 
R4, R5, R6, R9, R10, R11, R12, R13, and R14), the FHWA proposes adding 
an illustration of the PASS WITH CARE, (R4-2), sign to accompany 
the DO NOT PASS (R4-1) sign, because this sign is commonly used.
    186. In Section 5C.05, the FHWA proposes retitling the section from 
"Narrow Bridge Sign (W5-2a)" to "NARROW BRIDGE 
Sign (W5-2)" because in Chapter 2C of the MUTCD the FHWA 
proposes removing the symbol version of this sign and requiring the use 
of only the word version of the sign.
    187. In Section 5C.10 Advisory Speed Plaque (W13-1), the FHWA 
proposes revising the illustration of the metric advisory speed plaque 
to correspond to a similar proposed revision in Chapter 2C. The 
proposed design of the metric advisory speed plaque includes the metric 
speed value within a black circle with the legend "km/h" 
below it.
    188. In Section 5F.04, STOP and YIELD Signs, FHWA proposes removing 
the words "State or local" from the OPTION statement, to 
reflect that jurisdictions responsible for grade crossings may be any 
level of government or may be quasi-governmental or non-governmental.
    189. In Section 5G.03 Channelization Devices, the FHWA proposes 
replacing the phrase "temporary traffic control zone" with 
"work space" in the OPTION statement to correspond with the 
appropriate terminology in Part 6.
    191. In Section 5G.05 Other Traffic Control Devices, the FHWA 
proposes adding a SUPPORT statement referring to Figure 5G-1 for 
some of the signs that might be applicable in a temporary traffic 
control zone on a low-volume road. The FHWA also proposes revising 
Figure 5G-1 Temporary Traffic Control Signs on Low-Volume Roads, 
to change the W20-7a Flagger sign to conform with the correctly 
designed sign in Section 6F.29 and to change the metric version of the 
W13-1 Advisory Speed Plaque to conform to the use of the black 
circle for metric speed values as proposed in Chapter 2C.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 6-Temporary Traffic 
Control

    192. In Section 6A.01 General, the FHWA proposes adding to a number 
of places in this section, and in a number of sections in Part 6, 
references to ensure that temporary traffic controls involving or 
impacting pedestrian walkways and paths account for the needs of 
pedestrians with disabilities. These proposed additions follow the 
accessibility requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 
1990 (ADA) (Public Law 101-366, 104 Stat. 327, July 26, 1990. 42 
USC 12101-12213 (as amended)). In this regard FHWA proposes a 
SUPPORT statement identifying the Act following the first STANDARD 
statement.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to this section and in a 
number of sections in Part 6, references to ensuring that the needs of 
bicyclists through temporary traffic control zones are met, as many 
temporary traffic control plans affect a substantial amount of bicycle 
activity.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to a number of places in 
this section and a number of sections in Part 6 statements that 
temporary traffic control principles are applicable to managing traffic 
incidents along the roadway, as incidents are temporary road or lane 
closures and are one of the major causes of congestion. In this regard 
the FHWA proposes adding a new chapter titled "Chapter 6I Control 
of Traffic Through Incident Areas."
    193. In Section 6B.01 Fundamental Principles of Temporary Traffic 
Control, the FHWA proposes adding to a number of places in this section 
references about accounting for the needs of pedestrians with 
disabilities, bicyclists, and traffic incident management responders.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the first and second 
GUIDANCE statements that the needs of pedestrians with disabilities 
should be considered when planning, designing and establishing a 
temporary traffic control zone. This is in accordance with ADA, Title 
II, paragraph 35.130.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second GUIDANCE 
statement that the needs of operators of commercial vehicles should be 
assessed and appropriate accommodations made when developing a public 
relations plan for a temporary traffic control zone.
    194. In Section 6C.01 Temporary Traffic Control Plans, the FHWA 
proposes adding to the first GUIDANCE statement that planning for all 
road users, including pedestrians (especially those with disabilities) 
and bicyclists, should be part of the planning and design of the 
temporary traffic control plan. The FHWA also proposes adding to the 
first GUIDANCE statement that provisions for effective continuity of 
accessible circulation paths for pedestrians should be incorporated 
into the temporary traffic control process.
    These proposed changes will enhance the quality of traffic control 
plans in terms of addressing the needs of all road users.
    195. In Section 6C.02 Temporary Traffic Control Zones, the FHWA 
proposes adding to the SUPPORT statement that the incident area begins 
at the first warning sign or vehicle with a rotating/strobe light and 
extends to the last temporary traffic control device or to a point 
where road users are allowed to return to the original lane alignment. 
This proposed change is needed to clarify the limits of an incident 
area.
    196. In Section 6C.06 Activity Area, the FHWA proposes adding a new 
table numbered and titled "Table 6C-2 Stopping Sight 
Distance as a Function of Speed." This table is identical to 
Table 6E-1. The current Table 6C-2 is renumbered as Table 
6C-3, Taper Length Criteria for temporary Traffic Control Zones. 
The FHWA also proposes adding a reference to new Table 6C-2 to 
the second OPTION statement, as these distances may be used to 
determine the length of a buffer space.
    197. In Section 6C.07 Termination Area, the FHWA proposes adding to 
the OPTION statement that a longitudinal buffer space may be used 
between the work space and the beginning of the downstream taper, to 
provide flexibility to jurisdictions.
    198. In Section 6D.01 Pedestrian Considerations, the FHWA proposes 
adding a new GUIDANCE statement at the beginning of the section to 
indicate that pedestrians of all ages and abilities should be provided 
a detectable and usable travel path.

[[Page 35873]]

    Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying the first SUPPORT 
statement to include information on other publications that can provide 
useful data for assisting the planning for, and the design of 
pedestrian facilities.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD 
statement that in addition to visual signage, equivalent information in 
alternate formats for pedestrians who have visual disabilities shall be 
provided so that they are not trapped on a closed facility.
    Additionally, in the existing first, second, third, fourth, fifth, 
and sixth GUIDANCE statements the FHWA proposes adding information 
about the general needs of pedestrians with visual disabilities; the 
desirability for providing a channelized pedestrian route through or 
around the activity area as opposed to closing the walkway; the 
possible need for audible warnings and directions; the need for fencing 
or barriers with a continuous edging at the bottom for assisting a cane 
user; the need to minimize abrupt changes in grade or terrain; that 
temporary traffic control devices and any ballast or mounting equipment 
should not intrude into the minimum 1500 mm (60 in) width of clear 
accessible passageway; and that lining a walkway with tape, rope, or 
plastic chain strung between devices is not detectable to pedestrians 
with visual limitations.
    The FHWA proposes the changes to this section to enhance the 
consideration of pedestrian needs in temporary traffic control zones. 
The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 5 years for these 
changes in order to minimize any impact on State or local highway 
agencies as they design and advertise new projects, and as they 
undertake maintenance activities.
    199. In Section 6D.02 Worker Considerations, the FHWA proposes 
adding to the SUPPORT statement information on the need to separate 
workers on foot from moving construction vehicles.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement 
that workers exposed to the risks of moving roadway traffic or 
construction equipment should wear high visibility apparel meeting the 
requirements of the American National Standard for High Visibility 
Safety Apparel \4\ and labeled as meeting ANSI 107-1999 
Standard Performance for Class 1, 2, or 3 risk exposure. The FHWA 
proposes a phase-in compliance period of 5 years for this change in 
order to minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ American National Standard for High Visibility Safety 
Apparel,'' ANSI/ISEA 107-1999, 1999 edition, is available from 
ISEA-The Safety Equipment Association (ISEA) by telephone 
(703) 525-1695, facsimile (703) 528-2148, mail ISEA, 
1901 North Moore Street, Suite 808, Arlington, VA 22209, or at its 
web site http://www.safetycentral.org/isea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, in the same GUIDANCE statement, the FHWA proposes 
adding "Activity Area" and "Worker Safety 
Planning" to the list of key elements of worker safety and 
temporary traffic control management that should be considered to 
improve worker safety. The FHWA proposes that the worker safety plan 
should be in accordance with the Occupational Safety and Health Act 
"General Duty Clause" Section 5(a)(1) " Public Law 
91-596, 84 Stat. 1590, December 29, 1970, as amended, and with 
the requirement to assess worker risk exposures for each job site and 
job classification as per 1926.20(b)(2) of the Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration (OSHA) Regulations as contained in 29 CFR.
    These proposed additions are expected to improve worker safety by 
reducing the conflicts between vehicles and workers, by making workers 
more visible to road users, and by recommending a thorough risk 
exposure analysis as part of the worker safety planning process.
    200. In Section 6E.01 Qualifications for Flaggers, the FHWA 
proposes rewriting the GUIDANCE statement in its entirety to describe 
in terms more appropriate to a temporary traffic control zone 
environment the recommended skills and abilities for a flagger. This 
proposed change is needed to reflect the state of the practice in 
flagger selection and training.
    201. In Section 6E.02 High-Visibility Clothing, the FHWA proposes 
adding to the first STANDARD statement the requirement that flaggers 
wear safety apparel meeting the requirements of the American National 
Standard for High Visibility Apparel and labeled as meeting ANSI 
107-1999 Standard Performance for Class 3 risk exposure, to 
improve worker visibility to approaching road users. The FHWA proposes 
a phase-in compliance period of 5 years for these changes in order to 
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    202. In Section 6E.03 Hand-Signaling Devices, the FHWA proposes 
adding to the OPTION statement other design configurations for adding 
white lights to the STOP/SLOW paddle to improve conspicuity. These 
additional design configurations of white lights will provide 
additional flexibility in improving visibility of the paddle.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes to add to the second STANDARD 
statement requirements for the performance of flashing lights that are 
used on the STOP/SLOW paddle. These flashing rate values are identical 
to the flashing rate used in other parts of the MUTCD. This is proposed 
for consistency.
    203. In Section 6E.05 Flagger Stations, the FHWA proposes adding a 
GUIDANCE statement following the first STANDARD statement to indicate 
that flagger stations should be located so that an errant vehicle has 
space to stop without entering the work space, to enhance worker 
safety.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the title of Table 
6E-1 from "Distance of Flagger Station in Advance of the 
Work Space" to "Stopping Sight Distance as a Function of 
Speed" and changing the distance values to be in agreement with 
AASHTO's "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and 
Streets" book.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the GUIDANCE statement to 
a STANDARD statement to indicate that flagger stations shall be 
preceded by an advance warning sign or signs, and that flagger stations 
shall be illuminated at night. The FHWA believes that anytime a flagger 
is active at night, illumination of the flagger station is important to 
make the flagger more visible to approaching road users.
    204. In Section 6F.02 General Characteristics of Signs, the FHWA 
proposes adding to the first OPTION statement that warning and guide 
signs used for temporary traffic control of incident management 
situations may have a black legend and border on a fluorescent coral 
background. This change is proposed based on research and 
experimentation conducted in Virginia.
    205. In Section 6F.03 Sign Placement, in the first STANDARD 
statement, the FHWA proposes adding "bicycle movements" to 
the list of reasons why in urban areas the distance between the bottom 
of the sign and the top of the near edge of the traveled way shall be 
at least 2.1 m (7 ft), to enhance safety for bicyclists.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding language requiring signs to 
be mounted and placed in accordance with Section 4.4 of the 
"Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines for 
Buildings and Facilities (ADAAG)." \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ "American with Disabilities Act Accessibility 
Guidelines for Buildings and Facilities," as amended through 
January 1998, is published by the U.S. Architectural and 
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 1331 F Street, NW, Suite 
1000, Washington, D.C. 20004-1111. It may be obtained from the 
Access Board, or viewed electronically at http://www.access-board.gov.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 35874]]

    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second GUIDANCE 
statement that signs mounted lower than 2.1 m (7 ft) should not project 
more than 100 mm (4 in) into pedestrian facilities, in accordance with 
the "Americans With Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines For 
Buildings And Facilities (ADAAG)".
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement at 
the end of the section that sign supports that are approved for use 
with longer-term signs may be used for shorter-term signs.
    206. In Section 6F.06 Regulatory Sign Design, the FHWA proposes 
changing the first sentence of the SUPPORT statement to become a new 
STANDARD statement at the beginning of the section, stating that 
temporary traffic control regulatory signs shall conform to the 
standards for regulatory signs presented in Part 2 and in the FHWA's 
"Standard Highway Signs" book. This sentence currently 
contains a "shall" but is inadvertently in the SUPPORT 
statement. The remainder of the SUPPORT statement will remain a SUPPORT 
statement.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes identifying the three existing page 
images of regulatory signs that follow page 6F-7 as Figures 
6F-3, 6F-4, and 6F-5 and titling them as 
"Regulatory Signs in Temporary Traffic Control Zones," 
"Additional Regulatory Signs in Temporary Traffic Control 
Zones," and "Regulatory Signs for Road Closure and Weight 
Limits in Temporary Traffic Control Zones." Additionally, on the 
figure proposed to be identified as Figure 6F-4, Regulatory Signs 
in Temporary Traffic Control Zones, the FHWA proposes to increase the 
size of the PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK sign from 600 x 300 mm (24 
x 12 in) to 900 x 450 mm (36 x 18 in), increase the 
size of the SIDEWALK CLOSED sign from 600 x 300 mm (24 x 12 
in) to 750 x 450 mm (30 x 18 in), increase the size of the 
SIDEWALK CLOSED USE OTHER SIDE and SIDEWALK CLOSED CROSS HERE signs 
from 600 x 300 mm (24 x 12 in) to 1200 x 600 (48 
x 24 in), and increase the size of the SIDEWALK CLOSED AHEAD 
CROSS HERE sign from 600 x 300 mm (24 x 12 in) to 1200 
x 900 mm (48 x 36 in), to make it easier for a pedestrian 
to read these signs from across a wide street.
    207. In Section 6F.12 PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK Sign (R9-8), the 
FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement following the OPTION 
statement that if a temporary crosswalk is established, it shall be 
accessible to pedestrians with disabilities. This proposed change 
reflects the need to provide accessibility for disabled pedestrians.
    208. In Section 6F.13, SIDEWALK CLOSED Signs (R9-9, 
R9-10, R9-11, R9-11a), the FHWA proposes adding to 
the first GUIDANCE statement that Bicycle/Pedestrian Detour 
(M4-9a) or Pedestrian Detour (M4-9b) signs should be used 
where pedestrian flow is rerouted, to provide adequate route guidance 
information to pedestrians.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the SUPPORT statement 
that printed signs are not useful to pedestrians with visual 
disabilities. Nearby accessible pedestrian signals can provide 
temporary audible information about closures and alternate routes. 
Tactile map modules available on some accessible pedestrian signal 
housings can also provide information about closures and alternate 
routes. These proposed changes are to enhance the provision of 
information to pedestrians with visual disabilities.
    209. In Section 6F.14 Special Regulatory Signs, the FHWA proposes 
adding a SUPPORT statement referencing Section 2B.15 for information 
regarding the use of the FINES HIGHER sign, since this sign can be 
useful in enhancing speed enforcement in temporary traffic control 
zones.
    210. In Section 6F.15 Warning Sign Function, Design, and 
Application, the FHWA proposes adding to the first OPTION statement 
that warning signs used for temporary traffic control incident 
management situations may have a black legend and border on a 
fluorescent coral background, as an alternative to black on orange. 
This is consistent with proposed changes in Section 6F.02 and the 
proposed new Chapter 6I.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement 
that where road users include pedestrians with hearing or visual 
disabilities, the provision of supplemental audible or tactile warning 
information should be considered to alert pedestrians.
    211. In Section 6F.17 ROAD (STREET) WORK Sign (W20-1), the 
FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement indicating that, where traffic 
can enter a temporary traffic control zone from a crossroad or a major 
(high volume) driveway, an advance warning sign may be used on the 
crossroad or major driveway to alert road users. This proposed change 
allows jurisdictions additional flexibility to provide warning signs 
when needed.
    212. In Section 6F.24 the FHWA proposes changing the title of the 
section from "Lane Reduction Sign (W4-2)" to 
"Lane Ends Sign (W4-2)" to reflect the sign's name 
change and to be consistent with Part 2.
    213. In Section 6F.28 EXIT OPEN, EXIT CLOSED Signs (E5-2, 
E5-2a), the FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement indicating 
that when an exit ramp is closed, a black on orange EXIT CLOSED panel 
should be placed diagonally across the interchange/intersection guide 
signs, to enhance the information provided to road users.
    214. In Section 6F.41, the FHWA proposes changing the title of the 
section from "SHOULDER DROP-OFF Sign (W8-9a)" 
to "Shoulder and UNEVEN LANES Signs (W8-4, W8-9, 
W8-9a, and W8-11)" to reflect the additional signs 
added to this section.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement to allow 
the use of the SOFT SHOULDER sign to warn of a soft shoulder condition 
and the LOW SHOULDER sign to warn of a shoulder condition where there 
is an elevation difference of less than 75 mm (3 in) between the 
shoulder and the travel lane. This is proposed to differentiate from 
shoulder drop-off conditions, which exceed 75 mm (3 in).
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving the text from Section 6F.42 
UNEVEN LANES Sign (W8-11), in its entirety to this section. This 
information will become a GUIDANCE statement regarding the use of the 
UNEVEN LANES Sign. With the proposed deletion of Section 6F.42 the 
remaining sections will be renumbered accordingly.
    215. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following existing 
Section 6F.43 (new Section 6F.42) NO CENTER STRIPE Sign (W8-12). 
This proposed new section will be numbered and titled "Section 
6F.43 Double Reverse Curve Signs (W24 Series)" and will provide 
information regarding the use of the new Double Reverse Curve signs. 
The FHWA is proposing these new signs to provide a better depiction of 
actual roadway conditions when the tangent distance between two reverse 
curves is insufficient for a second Reverse Curve sign to be placed 
between the curves.
    216. In Section 6F.47 Guide Signs, the FHWA proposes adding to the 
OPTION statement that guide signs used for temporary traffic control 
incident management situations may have a black legend and border on a 
fluorescent coral background, as an alternative to black on orange, to 
correspond with the proposed change in Section 6F.02.
    217. In Section 6F.50 the FHWA proposes changing the title of the 
section from "Detour Signs and Markers (M4-8, M4-8a, 
M4-8b, M4-9, and M4-10)" to "Detour Signs 
and Markers (M4-8, M4-8a, M4-8b, M4-9, 
M4-9a, M4-

[[Page 35875]]

9b, M4-9c, and M4-10)" to include signs specifically 
for detouring pedestrians and bicyclists.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the first OPTION 
statement that signs used for temporary traffic control of incident 
management situations may have a black legend and border on a 
fluorescent coral background, as an alternative to black on orange, to 
correspond to proposed changes in Section 6F.02.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement 
following the first GUIDANCE statement that the Pedestrian/Bicycle 
Detour (M4-9a) sign shall be used where a pedestrian/bicycle 
detour route has been established because of the closing of a 
pedestrian/bicycle facility to through traffic. If used, the 
Pedestrian/Bicycle Detour sign shall have an arrow pointing in the 
appropriate direction.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second OPTION 
statement that an arrow may be on the sign face or on a supplemental 
plaque. The Pedestrian/Bicycle Detour (M4-9a) sign or Bicycle 
Detour (M4-9c) sign may be used where a pedestrian or bicycle 
detour route (not both) has been established because of the closing of 
that particular facility to through traffic.
    218. In Section 6F.52 Portable Changeable Message Signs, the FHWA 
proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement that each character 
module shall use at least a five wide and seven high pixel matrix, 
based on research regarding visibility and legibility of changeable 
message signs.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the first GUIDANCE 
statement that for a trailer or large truck mounted sign, the letter 
height should be a minimum of 450 mm (18 in). For a service patrol 
truck mounted sign, the letter height should be a minimum of 250 mm (10 
in). The message panel should have adjustable display rates (minimum of 
3 seconds per phase) so that the entire message can be read at least 
twice at the posted speed, the off-peak 85th percentile prior to work 
starting, or the anticipated operating speed. Since the FHWA is 
proposing to retain the current guidance that road users should be able 
to read the entire message twice, there may be a need in some temporary 
traffic control zones to use more than one portable Changeable Message 
sign. The FHWA proposes these changes in response to research 
addressing the needs of older road users.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving the GUIDANCE information 
regarding the factors that should be taken into account when designing 
changeable messages from the end of the section to the end of the first 
GUIDANCE statement, for better clarity.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing and relocating from the 
first GUIDANCE statement to the following OPTION statement that smaller 
letter sizes may be used on a sign mounted on a trailer or large truck 
provided that the message is legible from a minimum distance of 200 m 
(650 ft), or a sign mounted on a service patrol truck provided that the 
message is legible from a minimum distance of 100 m (330 ft). This 
proposed change will provide flexibility to use smaller letter sizes as 
long as the legibility distance can be maintained
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second STANDARD 
statement to clarify that the mounting of Portable Changeable Message 
signs on a trailer, a large truck, or a service patrol truck shall be 
such that the bottom of the message sign panel shall be a minimum or 
2.1 m (7 ft) above the roadway in urban areas and 1.5 m (5 ft) in rural 
areas when it is in the operating mode, to correspond with mounting 
heights for post-mounted signs.
    219. In Section 6F.53 Arrow Panels, the FHWA proposes adding to the 
first GUIDANCE statement that an arrow panel in the arrow mode should 
be used to advise approaching road users of a lane closure along major 
multilane roadways in situations involving heavy traffic volumes, high 
speeds, and or limited sight distances, or at other locations and under 
other conditions where road users are less likely to expect such lane 
closures. This change is proposed to enhance the information provided 
to road users.
    220. In Section 6F.55 Channelizing Devices, following the first 
SUPPORT statement, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement, 
GUIDANCE statement, and another STANDARD statement defining the use of 
channelizing devices to channelize pedestrians and that they have to be 
detectable to users of long canes.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a note to Figure 6F-14 
(Sheet 1 of 2) that where drums, cones, or tubular markers are used to 
channelize pedestrians, they shall be located such that there are no 
gaps between the bases of the devices, in order to create a continuous 
bottom, and the height of each individual drum, cone, or tubular marker 
shall be no less than 915 mm (36 in) to be detectable to users of long 
canes.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a note to Figure 6F-14 
(Sheet 2 of 2) that where barricades are used to channelize 
pedestrians, there shall be continuous detectable bottom and top rails 
with no gaps between individual barricades to be detectable to users of 
long canes. The bottom of the bottom rail shall be no higher than 150 
mm (6 in) above the ground surface. The top of the top rail shall be no 
lower than 915 mm (36 in) above the ground surface.
    These proposed changes are needed to assure detectability to long 
cane users of devices used to channelize pedestrians in temporary 
traffic control zones. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period 
of 5 years for these changes in order to minimize any impact on State 
or local highway agencies.
    221. In Section 6F.56 Cones, the FHWA proposes adding to the 
STANDARD statement that retroreflectorization of cones that are more 
than 900 mm (36 in) in height shall be provided by horizontal, 
circumferential, alternating orange and white retroreflective stripes 
that are 100-150 mm (4 to 6 in) wide. Each cone shall have a 
minimum of two orange and two white stripes with the top stripe being 
orange. Any non-retroreflective spaces between the orange and white 
striped shall not exceed 75 mm (3 in) in width. These proposed changes 
will enhance the visibility of cones and improve safety in temporary 
traffic control zones. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period 
of 5 years for these changes in order to minimize any impact on State 
or local highway agencies.
    Additionally, in the first GUIDANCE statement the FHWA proposes 
adding that cones should not be used for pedestrian channelization or 
as pedestrian barriers in temporary traffic control zones on or along 
sidewalks unless they are continuous between individual devices and 
detectable to users of long canes. Non-continuous, non-detectable 
series of cones have been found to be safety problems for pedestrians 
with visual disabilities.
    222. In Section 6F.57 Tubular Markers, the FHWA proposes adding to 
the GUIDANCE statement that tubular markers should not be used for 
pedestrian channelization or as pedestrian barriers in temporary 
traffic control zones on or along sidewalks unless they are continuous 
between individual devices and detectable to users of long canes. . 
Non-continuous, non-detectable series of tubular marker have been found 
to be safety problems for pedestrians with visual disabilities.
    223. In Section 6F.58 Vertical Panels, the FHWA proposes adding to 
the first STANDARD statement that vertical panels shall be mounted with 
the top a minimum of 900 mm (36 in) above the roadway and a minimum of 
1050 mm

[[Page 35876]]

(42 in) above the pedestrian travel way, so as not to interfere with 
pedestrians.
    219. In Section 6F.59 Drums, the FHWA proposes adding to the 
GUIDANCE statement that drums should not be used for pedestrian 
channelization or as pedestrian barriers in temporary traffic control 
zones on or along sidewalks unless they are continuous between 
individual devices and detectable to users of long canes. Non-
continuous, non-detectable series of drums have been found to be safety 
problems for pedestrians with visual disabilities.
    220. In Section 6F.60 Type I, II, or III Barricades, the FHWA 
proposes adding a STANDARD statement following the first GUIDANCE 
statement that barricade supports shall not project into circulation 
routes more than 100 mm (4 in) from the support between 675 mm (27 in) 
and 2000 mm (80 in) from the surface, as described in Section 4.4.1 of 
THE "AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES FOR 
BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES (ADAAG)", and supports shall not narrow 
the pedestrian facility to less than 1200 mm (48 in) in width, with a 
1500 x 1500 mm (60 x 60 in) passing space at least every 60 
m (200 ft), as described in Section 4.3.4 of ADAAG.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the third existing 
STANDARD statement that the ballast used with barricades shall not 
extend into the accessible passage width of 1500 mm (60 in).
    These proposed changes will provide for accessible pedestrian 
passes in temporary traffic control zones. The FHWA proposes a phase-in 
compliance period of 5 years for these changes in order to minimize any 
impact on State or local highway agencies.
    226. In Section 6F.62 Temporary Traffic Barriers as Channelizing 
Devices, the FHWA proposes adding SUPPORT and STANDARD statements 
related to the use of temporary traffic barriers as traffic control 
devices. These statements are being relocated from Section 6G.04, as 
they more properly belong in Section 6F.62.
    227. The FHWA proposes adding two new sections following Section 
6F.62 Temporary Traffic Barriers as Channelizing Devices. The remaining 
sections will be renumbered accordingly.
    Proposed Section 6F.63 Longitudinal Channelizing Barricades, 
consists of GUIDANCE, OPTION, and SUPPORT statements relating to the 
use of longitudinal channelizing barricades that are lightweight, 
deformable devices that can be used singly as Type I, II, or III 
barricades.
    Proposed Section 6F.64 Other Channelizing Devices, consists of an 
OPTION statement and a GUIDANCE statement that there may be 
channelizing devices other than those already described in Part 6 that 
may be used in special situations based on an engineering study. If 
used, these other channelizing devices should conform to the general 
size, color stripe pattern, retroreflectivity, and placement 
characteristics established for the devices described in Chapter 6F. 
This use of other channelizing devices was included in the 1988 MUTCD 
but was inadvertently omitted in the Millennium Edition of the MUTCD.
    228. In existing Section 6F.63 (new Section 6F.65) Temporary Raised 
Islands, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement following the 
GUIDANCE statement that at pedestrian crossing locations temporary 
raised islands shall be cut through or reduced in size to provide at 
least a 1500 mm (60 in) wide pathway for pedestrians, to meet the ADA 
requirements and to ensure that all pedestrians, including disabled 
pedestrians, have a clear and useable facility. The FHWA proposes a 
phase-in compliance period of 5 years for these changes in order to 
minimize any impact on State or local highway agencies.
    229. In existing Section 6F.64 (new Section 6F.66) Opposing Traffic 
Lane Divider, the FHWA proposes adding to the STANDARD statement that 
opposing traffic lane dividers shall not be placed across pedestrian 
crossings, to ensure that pedestrians have a clear and useable 
facility.
    230. In existing Section 6F.65 (new Section 6F.67) Pavement 
Markings, the FHWA proposes adding to the STANDARD statement that 
delineation and channelizing devices for use by pedestrians shall be 
accessible and detectable to pedestrians who have disabilities and 
shall be continuous throughout the temporary traffic control zone, to 
ensure that pedestrians have a useable facility.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement at the 
end of the section that pavement markings alone are generally not 
sufficient for use by pedestrians who have visual disabilities. Tactile 
warnings on the roadway surface or audible devices are usually more 
helpful to these pedestrians.
    231. In existing Section 6F.66 (new Section 6F.68) Temporary 
Pavement Markings, the FHWA proposes modifying the OPTION statement and 
the second GUIDANCE statement to indicate the acceptable use of DO NOT 
PASS and PASS WITH CARE signs instead of pavement markings for 
temporary situations, rather than the NO PASSING ZONE sign, because 
these signs provide a more effective regulatory message.
    232. In existing Section 6F.69 (new Section 6F.71) Lighting 
Devices, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement that the 
maximum spacing for warning lights should be identical to the 
channelizing device space requirements, for consistency.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the SUPPORT statement to 
an OPTION statement to more accurately reflect the uses of lighting 
devices.
    233. In existing Section 6F.70 (new Section 6F.72) Floodlights, the 
FHWA proposes adding a SUPPORT statement at the end of the section that 
research indicates that 50 lux (5 foot candles) is a desirable 
nighttime illumination level where workers are active.
    234. In existing Section 6F.72 (new Section 6F.74) Warning Lights, 
the FHWA proposes adding Type D 360-degree warning lights to the first 
and second STANDARD statements, the third OPTION statement, and the 
second GUIDANCE statement, to provide more flexibility in the use of 
lighting devices.
    235. In existing Section 6F.74 (new Section 6F.76) Temporary 
Traffic Control Signals, the FHWA proposes adding to the first GUIDANCE 
statement that, where pedestrian traffic is detoured to a temporary 
traffic control signal, engineering judgment should be used to 
determine if pedestrian signals or accessible pedestrian signals are 
needed, to enhance consideration of pedestrian needs in temporary 
traffic control zones.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new STANDARD statement 
that indicates that the supports for temporary traffic control signals 
shall not encroach into the minimum required pedestrian pathway width 
of 1500 mm (60 in), to meet the ADA requirements and assure a clear 
pathway for all pedestrians, including disabled pedestrians.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second SUPPORT 
statement a new item, "the nature of adjacent land uses" to 
the list of factors related to the design and application of temporary 
traffic control signals. The remaining items will be re-lettered.
    236. In existing Section 6F.75 (new Section 6F.77) Temporary 
Traffic Barriers, the FHWA proposes modifying the first SUPPORT 
statement by deleting the last two sentences related to the

[[Page 35877]]

functions of temporary traffic barriers and adding a portion of text 
from Section 6G.11, to more clearly describe the four primary functions 
of temporary traffic barriers.
    237. In existing Section 6F.76 (new Section 6F.78) Crash Cushions, 
the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement that damaged crash 
cushions shall be promptly repaired or replaced, to maintain their 
crashworthiness.
    238. In existing Section 6F.78 (new Section 6F.80) Rumble Strips, 
the FHWA proposes adding to the SUPPORT statement a definition for 
longitudinal rumble strips, and clarifying throughout the section which 
statements refer specifically to longitudinal rumble strips and which 
statements refer specifically to transverse rumble strips, to clarify 
which ones go on travel lanes and which ones go on the shoulder.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement 
following the SUPPORT statement that, if it is desirable to use a color 
other than the color of the pavement for a longitudinal rumble strip, 
the color of the rumble strip shall be the same as the longitudinal 
line the rumble strip supplements. If the color of a transverse rumble 
strip used within a travel lane is not the color of the pavement, the 
color of the rumble strip shall be white. These proposed changes are 
needed to conform to general principles for colors of pavement 
markings.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement 
that transverse rumble strips should not be placed on roadways used by 
bicyclists unless a minimum clear path of 1.2 m (4 ft) is provided at 
the edge or the roadway; that rumble strips should not be placed 
through pedestrian crossings or on bicycle routes; and that 
longitudinal rumble strips should not be placed on the shoulder of a 
roadway that is used by bicyclists unless a minimum clear path of 1.2 m 
(4 ft) is also provided at each edge of the roadway. These proposed 
changes will minimize interference caused by rumble strips to 
bicyclists using the roadway or shoulder.
    239. In Section 6G.01 Introduction, the FHWA proposes adding to the 
SUPPORT statement that temporary traffic control zones are subject to 
all accessibility requirements for use by all types of pedestrians. 
This is in accordance with the requirements of the Americans with 
Disability Act of 1990 (ADA).
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement 
following the second SUPPORT statement that bicyclists and pedestrians 
should not be exposed to unprotected excavations, open utility access, 
overhanging equipment, or other hazards.
    240. In Section 6G.04 Modifications to Fulfill Special Needs, the 
FHWA proposes adding throughout the GUIDANCE statement additional 
information related to the need to take into account pedestrian and 
bicycle usage.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving the SUPPORT and STANDARD 
statements at the end of the section to Section 6F.62, because this 
text regarding temporary traffic barriers is more appropriately located 
there.
    241. In Section 6G.05 Work Outside of Shoulder, the FHWA proposes 
adding to the first GUIDANCE statement that pedestrians should be 
separated from the worksite by appropriate barriers that maintain the 
accessibility and detectability for pedestrians with disabilities.
    242. In Section 6G.06 Work on the Shoulder with No Encroachment, 
the FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement that, where 
pedestrian routes are closed, alternate pedestrian routes shall be 
provided.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement 
that, where feasible, signs should be placed such that they do not 
narrow any existing pedestrian passage to less than 1500 mm (60 in).
    243. In Section 6G.07 Work on the Shoulder with Minor Encroachment, 
the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement that, where 
feasible, pedestrian routes should be protected or alternate accessible 
and detectable routes should be provided.
    244. In Section 6G.09 Work within the Traveled Way of Two-Lane 
Highways, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement that 
pedestrian detours should be avoided, since pedestrians rarely observe 
them and the cost of providing accessibility and detectability might 
outweigh the cost of maintaining a continuous route.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement 
that, whenever possible, work should be done in a manner that it does 
not create a need to detour pedestrians from existing routes or 
crossings.
    245. In Section 6G.10 Work Within the Traveled Way of Urban 
Streets, the FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement that, 
if the temporary traffic control zone affects an accessible and 
detectable pedestrian facility, the accessibility and detectability 
along the alternate pedestrian route shall be maintained.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement 
that work sites within the intersection should be protected against 
inadvertent pedestrian incursion by providing detectable barriers.
    246. In Section 6G.11 Work Within the Traveled Way of Multilane, 
Nonaccess Controlled Highways, the FHWA proposes adding to the first 
SUPPORT statement that Chapter 6D contains information regarding the 
steps to follow when pedestrian facilities are affected by the 
worksite.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving the information in the 
second SUPPORT statement related to the four primary functions of 
temporary traffic barriers to existing Section 6F.75 (new Section 
6F.77) as they more properly belong in that section.
    247. In Section 6G.12 Work Within the Traveled Way at an 
Intersection, the FHWA proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement 
and the second GUIDANCE statement regarding contact with the highway 
agency having jurisdiction at intersections where pedestrian visibility 
problems are anticipated, to reinforce proper contact procedures.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement after 
the second GUIDANCE statement that pedestrian crossings shall be 
protected with a pedestrian barrier detectable to pedestrians with 
visual disabilities.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying the third OPTION 
statement to indicate that flaggers or uniformed law enforcement 
officers can be used to direct road users when work is within an 
intersection.
    248. In Section 6G.19 Control of Traffic Through Incident Areas, 
the FHWA proposes moving all of the information in this section to a 
new chapter, numbered and titled "Chapter 6I Control of Traffic 
Through Traffic Incident Management Areas." In its place, the 
FHWA proposes a new Section 6G.19 titled "Temporary Traffic 
Control During Nighttime Hours." This proposed new section will 
contain SUPPORT and GUIDANCE statements regarding the temporary traffic 
control measures appropriate during nighttime hours.
    249. In Section 6H.01 Typical Applications, the FHWA proposes 
changing the Typical Applications to reflect the proposed changes to 
all parts of the MUTCD with particular reference to Part 6 changes.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the titles of Figure 
6H-11 from "Lane Closure on Low-Volume Two-Lane Road" 
to "Lane Closure on Two-Lane Road with Low Traffic 
Volumes,"

[[Page 35878]]

Figure 6H-15 from "Work in Center of Low-Volume Road" 
to "Work in Center of Road with Low Traffic Volumes," and 
Figure 6H-16 from "Surveying Along Centerline of Low-Volume 
Road" to "Surveying Along Centerline of Road with Low 
Traffic Volumes." These proposed changes will avoid confusion 
with material in Part 5 Traffic Control Devices for Low-Volume Roads. 
Low-volume roads as covered in Part 5 are specifically defined in 
Section 5A.01 as, among other criteria, being outside a built-up area 
and having a traffic volume of less than 400 AADT. The Typical 
Applications in Part 6 that refer to low volume roads are not intended 
to be limited only to roads meeting the limited definition of Part 5.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes the following changes to the notes 
to the figures of typical applications:
    a. Notes for Figure 6H-1: The FHWA proposes replacing 
existing item 5 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 5 in the 
OPTION statement, stating that vehicle hazard warning signals may be 
used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 6 
in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning 
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or 
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
    b. Notes for Figure 6H-3: The FHWA proposes replacing 
existing item 5 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 5 in the 
OPTION statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning signals may 
be used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 
6 in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning 
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or 
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity. Additionally, the 
FHWA proposes to add a new item 7 to the STANDARD statement at the end 
of the Notes that when paved shoulders having a width of 2.4 m (8 ft) 
or more are closed, at least one advance warning sign shall be used. In 
addition, channelizing devices shall be used to close the shoulder in 
advance to delineate the beginning of the work space and direct motor 
vehicle traffic to remain within the traveled way. This change is 
proposed to enhance safety for road users.
     c. Notes for Figure 6H-4: The FHWA proposes replacing 
existing item 5 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 5 in the 
OPTION statement, stating that vehicle hazard warning signals may be 
used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 6 
in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning 
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or 
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
    d. Notes for Figure 6H-6: The FHWA proposes replacing 
existing item 10 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 10 in the 
OPTION statement, stating that vehicle hazard warning signals may be 
used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 11 
in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning 
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or 
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
    e. Notes for Figure 6H-11: The FHWA proposes removing item 2 
of the STANDARD statement because this Typical Application specifically 
does not involve the use of flaggers. Typical Application 10 covers the 
temporary traffic control zone applicable to this STANDARD, using 
flaggers.
    f. Notes for Figure 6H-12: The FHWA proposes adding to item 2 
of the STANDARD statement that durations of red clearance intervals 
shall be adequate to clear the one-lane section of conflicting 
vehicles. Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new item 5 to the 
STANDARD statement that adequate means, such as interconnection, shall 
be provided to prevent conflicting signal indications at opposite ends 
of the lane closure. The remaining items would be renumbered. These 
changes are proposed for consistency with applicable requirements for 
temporary traffic control signals in Part 4.
    g. Notes for Figure 6H-13: The FHWA proposes modifying item 2 
of the STANDARD statement to indicate that a flagger or law enforcement 
officer shall be used during a temporary road closure. Additionally, 
the FHWA proposes removing item 3 of the OPTION statement, since it is 
not applicable. The FHWA also proposes adding a new item 3 as a 
GUIDANCE statement, which states that the law enforcement officer, if 
used for this application, should follow the procedures of Section 
6E.04 and 6E.05. This proposal is to encourage law enforcement officers 
to use proper flagging devices and procedures for a temporary road 
closure, if it is practical.
    h. Notes for Figure 6H-15: The FHWA proposes adding a new 
item 2 to the GUIDANCE statement that workers in the roadway should 
wear high-visibility clothing as described in Section 6D.02. 
Additionally, the FHWA proposes replacing existing item 6 in the 
STANDARD statement with a new item 7 in the OPTION statement, which 
states that vehicle hazard warning signals may be used to supplement 
rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 8 in the STANDARD 
statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning signals shall not 
be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or strobe lights. This 
change is proposed for clarity.
    i. Notes for Figure 6H-17: The FHWA proposes adding a new 
item 3 to the STANDARD statement that if an arrow panel is used, it 
shall be used in the caution mode. The remaining items would be 
renumbered. Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing existing item 5 of 
the GUIDANCE statement and moving it to the OPTION statement as part of 
existing item 9 that the use of a truck mounted attenuator is optional 
on either a shadow vehicle or a work vehicle. These changes are 
proposed for clarity.
    j. Notes for Figure 6H-21: The FHWA proposes replacing 
existing item 7 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 7 in the 
OPTION statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning signals may 
be used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 
8 in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning 
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or 
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
    k. Notes for Figure 6H-22: The FHWA proposes removing item 5, 
regarding a right-turn island using channelizing devices, from the 
OPTION statement, since it is inappropriate for the depicted 
application.
    l. Notes for Figure 6H-26: The FHWA proposes replacing 
existing item 7 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 7 in the 
OPTION statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning signals may 
be used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 
8 in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning 
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or 
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
    m. Notes for Figure 6H-27: The FHWA proposes replacing 
existing item 9 in the STANDARD statement with a new item 9 in the 
OPTION statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning signals may 
be used to supplement rotating lights or strobe lights, and a new item 
10 in the STANDARD statement, which states that vehicle hazard warning 
signals shall not be used instead of the vehicle's rotating lights or 
strobe lights. This change is proposed for clarity.
    n. Notes for Figure 6H-28: The FHWA proposes adding a new 
item 3 to the GUIDANCE statement that audible

[[Page 35879]]

warnings should be considered where midblock closings and changed 
crosswalk areas cause inadequate communication to be provided to 
pedestrians who have visual disabilities. The remaining items would be 
renumbered. Additionally, the FHWA proposes to add the use of Type D 
360-degree Steady-Burn warning lights to existing item 6 (new item 7) 
of the OPTION statement. These changes are proposed for consistency 
with other sections in Part 6.
    o. Notes for Figure 6H-29: The FHWA proposes to add a new 
item 3 to the GUIDANCE statement that audible warnings should be 
considered where midblock closings and changed crosswalk areas cause 
inadequate communication to be provided to pedestrians who have visual 
disabilities, for consistency. The remaining items would be renumbered.
    p. Notes for Figure 6H-32: The FHWA proposes adding a new 
item 2 to the STANDARD statement that when paved shoulders having a 
width of 2.4 m (8 ft) or more are closed, at least one advance warning 
sign shall be used. In addition, channelizing devices shall be used to 
close the shoulder in advance to delineate the beginning of the work 
space and direct motor vehicle traffic to remain within the traveled 
way. The remaining items would be renumbered. The FHWA also proposes 
removing the word "optional" from the shoulder taper 
illustrated on Figure 6H-32, to correspond to the proposed 
addition of new item 2 in the STANDARD statement. These changes are 
proposed to improve advance warning and channelization for road users 
approaching the half road closure on multilane high-speed highways.
    q. Notes for Figure 6H-33: The FHWA proposes to add a new 
item 3 to the STANDARD statement that when paved shoulders having a 
width of 2.4 m (8 ft) or more are closed, at least one advance warning 
sign shall be used. In addition, channelizing devices shall be used to 
close the shoulder in advance to delineate the beginning of the work 
space and direct motor vehicle traffic to remain within the traveled 
way. These changes are proposed to improve advance warning and 
channelization for road users approaching a lane closure on a divided 
highway. Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing existing item 3 of 
the GUIDANCE statement, since it is not applicable to the application 
depicted.
    r. Notes for Figure 6H-40: The FHWA proposes adding to item 3 
that YIELD or STOP lines should be installed, if needed, across the 
ramp to indicate the point at which road users should YIELD or STOP. 
Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a dimension of 7.5 m (25 ft) 
spacing between channelizing devices shown on Figure 6H-40. This 
additional guidance, beyond the general guidance in Section 6F.55 about 
channelizing device spacing, is proposed to help improve channelization 
specifically in the median crossover by providing a recommended device 
spacing to minimize the tendency of vehicles to drive between devices.
    s. Figure 6H-41: The FHWA proposes adding a dimension of 7.5 
m (25 ft) spacing between channelizing devices shown on Figure 
6H-41. This additional guidance, beyond the general guidance in 
Section 6F.55 about channelizing device spacing, is proposed to help 
improve channelization specifically in the median crossover by 
providing a recommended device spacing to minimize the tendency of 
vehicles to drive between devices.
    t. Notes for Figure 6H-42: The FHWA proposes removing items 6 
and 7 of the OPTION statement since they are not applicable to the 
specific application depicted on Figure 6H-42. The remaining item 
would be renumbered.
    u. Notes for Figure 6H-44: the FHWA proposes removing item 5 
in the GUIDANCE statement since it is too vague and there is no 
accepted practice to determine how traffic is stabilized. The remaining 
items would be renumbered.
    250. The FHWA proposes adding a new chapter, numbered and titled 
"Chapter 6I Control of Traffic Through Traffic Incident 
Management Areas." This proposed new chapter will contain 
existing Section 6G.19 Control of Traffic Through Incident Areas in its 
entirety with several modifications and additional information on the 
use of temporary traffic control devices for traffic incident 
management zones. The proposed new chapter will contain a general 
section as well as sections on major, intermediate, and minor traffic 
incidents, and on use of emergency-vehicle lighting (flashing or 
rotating beacons or strobes.) The FHWA proposes this new chapter in 
recognition of the importance of safely and efficiently controlling 
traffic through traffic incident management areas, and the unique 
characteristics of incidents and the traffic controls that should be 
utilized.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 7-Traffic Controls for 
School Areas

    251. In Section 7B.01 Size of School Signs, the FHWA proposes 
revising Table 7B-1 to increase the standard and special sizes of 
the End School Zone (S5-2) sign and the Speed Limit (School Use) 
(English) (R2-1) sign from 600 x 750 mm (24 x 30 in) 
and 900 x 1200 mm (36 x 48 in) respectively to 900 x 
1125 mm (36 x 45 in) and 1200 x 1500 mm (48 x 60 in) 
respectively. The FHWA also proposes revising Table 7B-1 to add 
the School Speed Limit Ahead (S4-5, S4-5a) and the School 
Speed Limit XX When Flashing (English and Metric) (S5-1) signs. 
The FHWA also proposes revising Table 7B-1 to revise the standard 
size of the When Children are Present (S4-2) plaque from 900 
x 500 mm (36 x 20 in) to 900 x 375 mm (36 x 15 
in), to revise the minimum, standard, and special sizes of the XXX FT 
(W16-2) plaque from 600 x 450 mm (24 x 18 in), 750 
x 600 mm (30 x 24 in), and 750 x 600 mm (30 x 
24 in) respectively to 600 x 300 mm (24 x 12 in), 750 
x 375 mm (30 x 15 in), and 900 x 450 mm (36 x 
18 in) respectively, to revise the minimum, standard, and special sizes 
of the XXX Feet (W16-2a) plaque from 600 x 300 mm (24 
x 12 in), 750 x 450 mm (30 x 18 in), and 750 x 
450 mm (30 x 18 in) respectively to 600 x 450 mm (24 
x 18 in), 750 x 525 mm (30 x 21 in), and 900 x 
600 mm (36 x 24 in) respectively. The FHWA also proposes to 
revise Table 7B-1 to revise the standard and special sizes of the 
Ahead (W16-9p) plaque from 900 x 500 mm (36 x 20 in) 
and 1200 x 750 mm (48 x 30 in) respectively to 900 x 
375 mm (36 x 15 in) and 1200 x 500 mm (48 x 20 in) 
respectively, and to revise the standard and special sizes of the 
Diagonal Arrow (W16-7) plaque from 750 x 450 mm (30 x 
18 in) and 750 x 450 mm (30 x 18 in) respectively to 900 
x 375 mm (36 x 15 in) and 1200 x 500 mm (48 x 
20 in) respectively. These proposed changes in the table are to reflect 
proposed changes throughout Part 7 and to make the sizes of 
supplemental plaques correspond more closely with the sizes of the 
signs they supplement.
    252. In Section 7B.07 Sign Color for School Warning Signs, the FHWA 
proposes changing item D in the OPTION statement to clarify that only 
the SCHOOL portion on the School Speed Limit (S5-1) sign may have 
a fluorescent yellow-green background. The SCHOOL portion of the sign 
is the warning message.
    253. In Section 7B.08 School Advance Warning Sign (S1-1), the 
FHWA proposes giving the page of sign images a number and title, 
"Figure 7B-1 School Area Signs" for easier reference.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new figure to be numbered 
and titled, "Figure 7B-2 Example of Signing for School 
Crosswalk Warning

[[Page 35880]]

Assembly" to illustrate the placement of these assemblies as 
described in Section 7B.09.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes renumbering and retitling Figure 
7B-1 to "Figure 7B-3 Example of Signing for School 
Area Traffic Control with School Speed Limits."
    254. In Section 7B.11 School Speed Limit Assembly (S4-1, 
S4-2, S4-3, S4-4, S5-1), the FHWA proposes 
adding to the OPTION statement that changeable message signs should 
subscribe to the principles established in Section 2A.07 and other 
sections of the MUTCD, for consistency with Section 6F.52. The FHWA 
also proposes adding at the end of the OPTION statement to provide 
information on the use of the FINES HIGHER (R2-6) sign to advise 
road users when increased fines are imposed for traffic violations in 
school zones. This sign can be used to enhance road user compliance 
with school speed limits.
    255. In Section 7C.03 Crosswalk Markings, the FHWA proposes adding 
a new SUPPORT statement at the beginning of the section to provide 
information on the use of crosswalk markings. While this SUPPORT 
statement is identical to that in Section 3B.17, the FHWA believes that 
it is important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding at the end of the first 
GUIDANCE statement additional guidance that crosswalks should not be 
used indiscriminately and that an engineering study should be performed 
before placing crosswalks at locations away from traffic control 
signals or STOP signs, for consistency with Section 3B.17.
    256. In Section 7C.04 the FHWA proposes revising the title from 
"Stop Line Markings" to "Stop and Yield Lines" 
because the FHWA proposes to include both stop and yield lines in this 
section. The FHWA also proposes revising the entire section to 
appropriately mirror the STANDARD, GUIDANCE, OPTION, and SUPPORT 
statements contained in Part 3. The FHWA believes that it is important 
to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD.
    257. In Section 7E.04 Uniform of Adult Guards and Student Patrols, 
the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement that adult guards shall 
wear high-visibility retroreflective clothing labeled as ANSI 
107-1999 standard performance for Class 2, and that student 
patrols shall wear high-visibility retroreflective material or clothing 
labeled as ANSI 107-1999 standard performance for Class 1. This 
clothing would make the guards and patrols (and the students they are 
managing) far more visible to approaching road users. The FHWA proposes 
a phase-in compliance period of 5 years for these changes in order to 
minimize any impact on State or local agencies.
    258. In Section 7E.05 Operating Procedures for Adult Guards, the 
FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement at the end of the section to 
allow the STOP paddle to be modified by adding white flashing lights, 
to enhance conspicuity of the paddle.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement 
following the new OPTION statement to define the acceptable flashing 
rate of the optional flashing lights on STOP paddles. This proposed 
change is consistent with the flashing rate in other parts of the 
MUTCD.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 8-Traffic Controls for 
Highway-Rail Grade Crossings

    259. In Section 8A.01 Introduction, in the STANDARD statement the 
FHWA proposes revising the definitions for "Advance Preemption 
and Advance Preemption Time" (change to "Advance 
Preemption" and "Advance Preemption Time"), 
"Clear Storage Distance," "Dynamic Envelope 
Delineation" (change to "Dynamic Envelope"), 
"Minimum Track Clearance Distance," and "Queue 
Clearance Time" to reflect accepted practice and terminologies. 
The FHWA also proposes adding definitions for the following, since they 
are referred to later in the MUTCD: "Dynamic Exit Lane Gate 
Operating Mode," "Exit Lane Gate Clearance Time," 
"Exit Lane Gate Operating Mode," "Flashing-Light 
Signals," "Timed Exit Gate Operating Mode," 
"Wayside Equipment," and "Vehicle Intrusion Detection 
Devices" to reflect accepted practice and terminologies.
    260. In Section 8A.02 Use of Standard Devices, Systems, and 
Practices, the FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement following the 
STANDARD statement. This proposed GUIDANCE statement will be identical 
to the second GUIDANCE statement in Section 10A.02 and reinforces that 
Part 1 principles of design, placement, operation, maintenance, and 
uniformity of traffic control devices should be considered for both 
highway-rail and highway-light rail transit grade crossings.
    261. In Section 8A.04 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Elimination, the 
FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement at the beginning of the 
section. This proposed GUIDANCE statement will be identical to the 
first GUIDANCE statement in Section 10A.04 and reinforces that both 
highway-rail and highway-light rail transit grade crossings are a 
potential source of congestion, and agencies should conduct engineering 
studies to determine the cost and benefits of eliminating such 
crossings.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding an OPTION statement at the 
end of the section. This proposed OPTION statement will be identical to 
the last OPTION statement in Section 10A.04 and reinforces that TRACKS 
OUT OF SERVICE (R8-9) signs may be temporarily installed at 
locations where both rail or light rail transit is eliminated at a 
highway-rail or highway-light rail transit grade crossing until the 
tracks are removed or paved over.
    262. In Section 8A.05 Temporary Traffic Control Zones, the FHWA 
proposes adding a SUPPORT statement at the beginning of the section. 
This proposed SUPPORT statement will be identical to the SUPPORT 
statement in Section 10A.05 and reinforces that temporary traffic 
control planning provides for continuity of operations when the normal 
function of a roadway at both a highway-rail and a highway-light rail 
transit grade crossing is suspended because of temporary traffic 
control operations.
    263. In Section 8B.02, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Highway-Rail Grade Crossing (Crossbuck) Signs (R15-1, 
R15-2)" to "Highway-Rail Grade Crossing (Crossbuck) 
Signs (R15-1, R15-2, R15-9)" to reflect the 
proposed addition to the OPTION statement for the optional use of a new 
sign, the Crossbuck Shield (R15-9) sign, that is a wing-shaped 
sign that may be mounted below the Crossbuck (R15-1) sign or 
Number of Tracks (R15-2) sign. Experimentation with Crossbuck 
Shield signs has shown benefits in calling attention to the presence of 
passive grade crossings, particularly at night. The FHWA is aware that 
in one of the evaluations of the Crossbuck Shield (R15-9) sign, 
words (or symbols) to indicate the State law about yielding or stopping 
at the grade crossing were included on the center panel of the shield. 
The FHWA is not including such words or symbols as an option as it 
believes that the Crossbuck Shield (R15-9) sign should be uniform 
in design and that, if a stop or yield is required either by State law 
or by regulation at any given crossing, the use of a standard YIELD or 
STOP sign is more appropriate and will be more universally recognized 
and complied with by road users than small lettering on the Crossbuck 
Shield would be. The FHWA proposes that this option

[[Page 35881]]

to use a Crossbuck Shield (R15-9) sign become effective 
immediately for new or replacement of damaged existing sign 
installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period of 10 
years for existing signs in good condition to minimize any impact on 
State or local highway agencies.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the second STANDARD 
statement to clarify the placement of retroreflective white material on 
the front and back of the supports for highway-rail grade crossing 
Crossbuck signs, to within 0.3 m (1 ft) of the ground level, except on 
the side of those supports where a Crossbuck Shield sign or flashing 
lights have been installed. This proposed change reflects a reasonable 
distance from the ground level and reflects that such strips are not 
needed to face approaching traffic when a Crossbuck Shield or flashing 
lights are on that side of the support.
    264. In Section 8B.03 Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Advance Warning 
Signs (W10 series), the FHWA proposes revising the first STANDARD 
statement, item A, to better define where Highway-Rail Grade Crossing 
Advance Warning (W10-1) signs are not required on an approach to 
a crossing from a T-intersection with a parallel highway.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the second STANDARD 
statement to clarify the proper use of the W10-2, W10-3, 
and W10-4 advance warning signs if the distance from the parallel 
highway to the railroad tracks is less than 30m (100 feet).
    265. The FHWA proposes adding two new sections following Section 
8B.08 TRACKS OUT OF SERVICE Sign (R8-9). The first proposed new 
section will be numbered and titled "Section 8B.09 STOP HERE WHEN 
FLASHING Sign (R8-10)" and will contain an OPTION statement 
describing the use of the STOP HERE WHEN FLASHING (R8-10) sign as 
it relates to highway-rail grade crossings.
    The second proposed new section will be numbered and titled 
"Section 8B.10 STOP HERE ON RED Sign  (R10-6)" 
and will contain SUPPORT, OPTION, and GUIDANCE statements describing 
the use of the STOP HERE ON RED (R10-6) sign at highway-rail 
grade crossings. The remaining sections would be renumbered 
accordingly.
    266. In existing Section 8B.12 NO SIGNAL Sign (W10-10), the 
FHWA proposes renumbering and retitling the section as "Section 
8B.14 NO SIGNAL Sign (W10-10) or NO GATES OR LIGHTS sign 
(W10-13)" and adding to the OPTION statement that the NO 
GATES OR LIGHTS (W10-13) sign may used as an alternate to the NO 
SIGNAL (W10-10) sign.
    267. In existing Section 8B.13 (new Section 8B.15) LOOK Sign 
(R15-8), the FHWA proposes modifying the OPTION statement by 
removing the phrase, "that do not have active warning 
devices" to clarify that the LOOK (R15-8) sign may be 
mounted at any highway-rail grade crossing.
    268. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following existing 
Section 8B.15 (new Section 8B.17) Storage Space Signs (W10-11, 
W10-11a, W10-11b). This proposed new section will be 
numbered and titled "Section 8B.18 Skewed Crossing Sign 
(W10-12)" and will describe the use of the Skewed Crossing 
(W10-12) sign at highway-rail grade crossings when railroad 
tracks are not perpendicular to the highway.
    269. In existing Section 8B.18 Dynamic Envelope Delineation, the 
FHWA proposes renumbering and retitling this section as "Section 
8B.21 Dynamic Envelope Markings" to clarify that the text refers 
to pavement markings.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a second paragraph to the 
OPTION statement to clarify that dynamic envelope markings may be 
installed at any highway-rail grade crossing unless a Four-Quadrant 
Gate system is used.
    270. In Section 8C.01 Illumination of Highway-Rail Grade Crossings, 
the FHWA proposes changing the OPTION statement to a GUIDANCE statement 
to indicate that illumination should be installed at and adjacent to a 
highway-rail grade crossing when an engineering study determines such 
illumination is needed to improve grade crossing safety.
    271. In Section 8D.01 Introduction, the FHWA proposes revising the 
first OPTION statement to clarify that flashing-light signals that are 
post-mounted or overhead-mounted may be used separately or in 
combination with each other and that flashing-light signals may be used 
without automatic gate assemblies as determined by an engineering 
study.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second OPTION 
statement information that In-Roadway Stop Line Lights and In-Roadway 
Warning Lights may be installed at highway-rail grade crossings that 
are controlled by active grade crossing warning systems, as discussed 
in Chapter 4L.
    272. In Section 8D.02 Flashing-Light Signals, Post-Mounted, the 
FHWA proposes modifying the GUIDANCE statement to clarify the sizes of 
lenses for use in highway-rail grade crossing flashing-light signals 
and to provide guidance for choosing the size of background behind the 
lenses.
    273. In Section 8D.05 Four-Quadrant Gate Systems, the FHWA proposes 
revising and adding to the GUIDANCE statement information to describe 
the various operating modes of exit lane gates and how they should be 
used.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the title of Figure 
8D-2 from "Typical Location Plan for Flashing-Light Signals 
and Four-Quadrant Gates" to "Example of Location Plan for 
Flashing-Light Signals and Four-Quadrant Gates."
    274. In Section 8D.07 Traffic Control Signals at or Near Highway-
Rail Grade Crossings, following the second paragraph of the second 
STANDARD statement, the FHWA proposes adding additional GUIDANCE, 
STANDARD, GUIDANCE, and OPTION statements to better describe the use of 
pre-signals to improve safety at highway-rail grade crossings at 
locations in proximity to intersections controlled by traffic control 
signals.
    Additionally, the FHWA is proposing adding to the last OPTION 
statement that at locations where a highway-rail grade crossing is 
located more than 15m (50 ft) (or more that 23 m (75 ft) for a highway 
regularly used by multi-unit vehicles) from an intersection controlled 
by a traffic control signal, a pre-signal may be used if an engineering 
study determines a need.
    The FHWA proposes that these changes become effective immediately 
for new installations. The FHWA proposes a phase-in compliance period 
of 10 years for existing installations in good condition to minimize 
any impact on State or local highway agencies.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 9-Traffic Controls for 
Bicycle Facilities

    275. In Section 9A.03 Definitions Relating to Bicycles, the FHWA 
proposes adding to the first STANDARD statement a definition for 
"Bicycle Facilities," since the term is frequently used in 
Part 9. The remaining items would be renumbered accordingly.
    276. In Section 9B.01 Application and Placement of Signs, the FHWA 
proposes removing the first SUPPORT statement as it only references 
Figure 9B-1. The FHWA proposes referencing Figure  9B-1 
in the first STANDARD statement, since the sign installation standards 
shown in Figure  9B-1 are discussed in this STANDARD.
    277. In Section 9B.02 Design of Bicycle Signs, the FHWA proposes 
replacing the term "shared-use path" with the term 
"bicycle facilities" in the first STANDARD statement and in 
the

[[Page 35882]]

first SUPPORT statement because the information in these statements 
relates only to bicycle facilities. Shared-use paths are for the use of 
pedestrians (with or without disabilities), skaters, joggers, and other 
non-motorized users in addition to bicyclists.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes changing the title of Table 
9B-1 from "Sign Sizes for Shared-Use Paths" to 
"Minimum Sign Sizes for Bicycle Facilities" and separating 
the column headed "Minimum Sign Size" into two sub columns 
headed "Path" and "Roadway," to better 
distinguish between the applications of signs on paths and roadways and 
to be consistent with sign sizes used on roadways as described in Part 
2. The FHWA also proposes revising Table 9B-1 by adding 
additional signs to reflect proposed changes elsewhere in Part 9.
    278. In Section 9B.03 STOP and YIELD Signs (R1-1, 
R1-2), the FHWA proposes modifying the first GUIDANCE statement 
so that it applies to the installation of both STOP and YIELD signs, 
and not exclusively to STOP signs. This change is proposed because 
YIELD signs as well as STOP signs may be appropriate for assignment of 
the right-of-way at a shared-use path/roadway intersection.
    279. In Section 9B.04, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Bicycle Lane Signs (R3-16, R3-17)" to 
"Bicycle Lane Signs (R3-17, R3-17a, 
R3-17b)."
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing existing text in this 
section in its entirety and replacing it with new text regarding the 
use of Bicycle Lane signs. This proposed modification will replace the 
existing Bicycle LANE AHEAD (R3-16), Bicycle LANE ENDS 
(R3-16a), and RIGHT LANE Bicycle ONLY (R3-17) signs with a 
redesigned BIKE LANE (R3-17) sign to be used in conjunction with 
new supplemental AHEAD (R3-17a) and ENDS (R3-17b) plaques. 
These proposed sign combinations will more clearly provide the 
information contained on the old R3-16, R3-16a, 
R3-17, and R3-17a signs, and will reduce road user 
confusion.
    280. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following Section 9B.05 
BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE YIELD TO BIKES Sign (R4-4). The proposed 
new section will be numbered and titled "Section 9B.06 Bicycle 
WRONG WAY and RIDE WITH TRAFFIC Signs (R5-1b, R9-3c)" 
and will standardize the design and placement of Bicycle WRONG WAY 
Signs. Wrong way travel by bicyclists is a major cause of conflicts and 
collisions, and should be discouraged at appropriate locations. The 
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
    281. In existing Section 9B.08 (new Section 9B.09), the FHWA 
proposes changing the title from "No Parking Bicycle Lane Signs 
(R7-9, R7-9a)" to "No Parking BIKE LANE Signs 
(R7-9, R7-9a)" and in the first STANDARD statement 
changing the name of the sign accordingly.
    282. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following existing 
Section 9B.10 (new Section 9B.11) Shared-Used Path Restriction Sign 
(R9-7). The proposed new section will be numbered and titled 
"Section 9B.12 Bicycle Signal Actuation Sign 
(R10-15)" and will provide a new sign giving information to 
bicyclists on how to best situate themselves within the proposed new 
Bicycle Detector pavement marking symbol so that they can actuate the 
traffic signal. The remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
    283. In existing Section 9B.14 (new Section 9B.16) Bicycle Surface 
Condition Warning Sign (W8-10), the FHWA proposes revising the 
first OPTION statement to clarify that BUMP, DIP, Pavement Ends, and 
any other word message signs are not supplemental plaques used with the 
W8-10 sign, but are instead standard signs to be used 
independently.
    284. In Section 9C.01 Functions of Markings, the FHWA proposes 
modifying the SUPPORT statement to remove the first sentence, since it 
only refers to roadways with a designated bicycle lane and is not broad 
enough to describe markings used for all types of bicycle facilities.
    285. In Section 9C.02 General Principles, the FHWA proposes to add 
a new STANDARD statement after the GUIDANCE statement. This proposed 
new STANDARD statement is being moved from Section 9C.03 to Section 
9C.02 because this text is applicable to all bicycle facilities, not 
just shared-use paths and is more appropriate in this section than 
Section 9C.03.
    286. In Section 9C.03 Marking Patterns and Colors on Shared-Use 
Paths, the FHWA proposes moving the STANDARD statement to Section 
9C.02, since this text is applicable to all bicycle facilities, not 
just shared-use paths and is more appropriate in this section than 
Section 9C.03.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes removing the first SUPPORT 
statement since it discourages the use of centerlines. Centerlines may 
be useful and valuable for user guidance in many applications, and, 
therefore, should not be discouraged.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement 
additional information on the marking of obstructions in a path.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving to the OPTION statement the 
second item of the OPTION statement currently in Section 9C.05, because 
letter, symbol, and arrow sizes to be used on shared-use paths 
represent markings rather than markers.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes moving the contents of existing 
Section 9C.06 in its entirety to Section 9C.03, because this 
information is more applicable in Section 9C.03 as it clarifies the 
design and placement of marking patterns and object markers on shared-
use paths.
    287. In Section 9C.04 Markings For Bicycle Lanes, the FHWA proposes 
revising the first sentence of the STANDARD statement to remove the 
specific distance of "not closer than 20 m (65 ft) from the 
crossroad" from the requirement for placing bicycle lane symbols, 
to provide jurisdictions with additional flexibility. The specific 
distance may not be feasible in urban locations, and is not necessary 
for marking durability.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new item to the STANDARD 
statement to prohibit the placement of bicycle lanes to the right of a 
right turn only lane. A bicyclist continuing straight through an 
intersection from the right of a right turn lane would be inconsistent 
with normal traffic behavior and would violate the expectation of 
right-turning drivers. The FHWA also proposes adding a new item to the 
STANDARD statement to prohibit the placement of bicycle lanes in the 
circular roadway of a roundabout, because such markings have been found 
to cause a false sense of security for bicyclists traveling through the 
roundabout with conflicting and turning traffic. This proposed change 
is consistent with state of the practice for roundabout design and is 
consistent with proposed changes to Section 3B.24.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a new paragraph to the 
SUPPORT statement describing that a bicyclist continuing straight 
through an intersection from the right of a right turn lane would be 
inconsistent with normal traffic behavior and would violate the 
expectation of right-turning drivers.
    Additionally, at the end of this section, the FHWA proposes adding 
a new GUIDANCE statement to establish guidance for bicycle lane 
markings at locations where a right through lane becomes an exclusive 
right turn lane, and at locations where there is a shared through and 
right turn lane next to a right turn only lane. This guidance is 
important to ensure that bicycle lanes

[[Page 35883]]

are not poorly designed at such intersections.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement and a 
SUPPORT statement to provide guidance on not using posts or raised 
pavement markers to separate bicycle lanes from adjacent travel lanes, 
since they can hinder maintenance of the bicycle lane and prevent 
proper vehicle merging.
    288. The FHWA proposes removing Section 9C.05 Word Messages and 
Symbols Applied to the Pavement, and Section 9C.06 Object Markers on 
Share-Used Paths, in their entirety. The FHWA proposes incorporating 
the information from these sections into Section 9C.03 Marking Patterns 
and Colors on Shared-Use Paths, as this more properly locates the 
information. The remainder of the sections would be renumbered 
accordingly.
    289. The FHWA proposes adding a new Section 9C.05 Bicycle Detector 
Symbol, containing an OPTION statement that defines a standard symbol 
for the marking of detector locations for traffic signals actuated by 
bicyclists. This symbol marking is shown in a proposed new figure 
numbered and titled "Figure 9C-7 Example of Bicycle 
Detector Pavement Marking." This symbol marking, along with the 
Bicycle Signal Actuation  (R10-15) sign, will assist 
bicyclists at signalized intersections by clearly showing the best 
location to achieve detection by loops or other vehicle detector 
equipment.
    290. In Section 9D.02 Signal Operations for Bicycles, the FHWA 
proposes revising the STANDARD statement to require that signal timing 
and actuation be reviewed and adjusted to consider the needs of 
bicyclists, instead of simply requiring the consideration of 
bicyclists' needs when timing signals. This greater emphasis is to 
ensure that the different operating characteristics of bicyclists are 
accounted for.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 10-Traffic Controls for 
Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossings

    291. In Section 10A.01 Introduction, the FHWA proposes adding a 
SUPPORT statement at the end of the section to reference Section 8A.01 
for the definitions applicable to Part 10.
    292. In Section 10A.03 Uniform Provisions, the FHWA proposes adding 
to the STANDARD statement that no sign or signal shall be located in 
the center of an undivided highway except in an island with non-
mountable curbs.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding a GUIDANCE statement at the 
end of the section to reinforce that where the distance between tracks 
exceeds 30 m (100 ft), additional signs or other appropriate traffic 
control devices should be used.
    293. In Section 10A.04 Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossing 
Elimination, the FHWA proposes removing from the second GUIDANCE 
statement and adding to the STANDARD statement that if the existing 
traffic control devices at a multiple-track highway-light rail transit 
grade crossing become improperly placed or inaccurate because of the 
removal of some of the tracks, the existing devices shall be relocated 
 and/or modified.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the second GUIDANCE 
statement that, when a roadway is removed from a highway-light rail 
transit grade crossing, appropriate signs should be placed at the end 
of roadway and other appropriate locations, to alert road users that 
the road no longer crosses the light rail transit tracks.
    294. In Section 10A.05 Temporary Traffic Control Zones, the FHWA 
proposes combining the two separate STANDARD statements into one 
STANDARD statement at the beginning of the section for clarity.
    295. In Section 10C.01, the FHWA proposes changing the title from 
"Introduction" to "Purpose" to more accurately 
reflect the contents of the section.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes correcting the text in the STANDARD 
statement to properly indicate that the design and location of signs 
shall conform to all of Part 2.
    296. The FHWA proposes adding a new section following Section 
10C.01 Introduction. The proposed new section will be numbered and 
titled "Section 10C.02 Highway-Light Rail Grade Crossing 
(Crossbuck) Signs (R15-1, R15-2, R15-9)" and 
will provide information regarding the use of Crossbuck signs at 
highway-light rail grade crossings. While this section would be 
identical to Section 8B.02 (as it is proposed to be revised as 
described above), the use of Crossbuck signs and the proposed optional 
Crossbuck Shield signs is applicable to both highway-light rail transit 
and highway-rail grade crossings, so the FHWA believes that it is 
important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The 
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
    297. In existing Section 10C.03 STOP or YIELD Signs (R1-1, 
R1-2, W3-1a, W3-2a), the FHWA proposes renumbering 
and retitling the section as "Section 10C.04 STOP (R1-1) or 
YIELD (R1-2) Signs at Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade 
Crossings" to clarify the content of the section.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the last sentence of the 
STANDARD statement to clarify that Stop Ahead (W3-1a) and Yield 
Ahead (W3-2a) Advance Warning signs shall also be installed if 
the criteria for their installation given in Section 2C.26 is met.
    Additionally, in the GUIDANCE statement the FHWA proposes adding to 
the list of characteristics to clarify when STOP or YIELD signs may be 
used the at highway-light rail transit grade crossings. The FHWA 
proposes adding the following characteristics to the list: that the 
determination of what constitutes low traffic volumes and low speed 
limits of crossing roadways should be made by local agencies, that 
light rail transit speeds do not exceed 40 km/h (25 mph), that the line 
of sight for an approaching light rail transit operator is adequate 
from a significant distance such that the operator can sound an audible 
signal and bring the vehicle to a stop before arriving at the crossing, 
and that the light rail transit tracks are located such that vehicles 
are not likely to stop on the tracks while waiting to enter a cross 
street or highway.
    298. In Section 10C.04 (new Section 10C.05) DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS 
Sign (R8-8), the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement to 
clarify that DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS (R8-8) signs may be placed on 
both sides of the track, to enhance visibility of the signs for road 
users.
    299. Following existing Section 10C.04 (new Section 10C.05) DO NOT 
STOP ON TRACKS Sign (R8-8), the FHWA proposes adding a new 
section. This proposed new section will be numbered and titled 
"Section 10C.06 TRACKS OUT OF SERVICE Sign (R8-9)" 
and will describe the use of the TRACKS OUT OF SERVICE (R8-9) 
sign at highway-light rail transit grade crossings. While this section 
would be identical to Section 8B.08, the use of the TRACKS OUT OF 
SERVICE (R8-9) sign is applicable to both highway-light rail 
transit and highway-rail grade crossings so the FHWA believes that it 
is important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The 
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
    300. Following existing Section 10C.05 (new Section 10C.07) STOP 
HERE ON RED Sign (R10-6), the FHWA proposes adding a new section. 
This proposed new section will be numbered and titled "Section 
10C.08 STOP HERE WHEN FLASHING Sign (R8-10)" and will 
describe the use of the STOP HERE WHEN FLASHING (R8-10) sign at

[[Page 35884]]

highway-light rail transit grade crossings. While this section would be 
identical to proposed new Section 8B.09, the use of the STOP HERE WHEN 
FLASHING (R8-10) sign is applicable to both highway-light rail 
transit and highway-rail grade crossings so the FHWA believes that it 
is important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The 
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
    301. In existing Section 10C.06 (new Section 10C.09) Light Rail 
Transit-Activated Blank-Out Turn Prohibition Signs (R3-1a, 
R3-2a), the FHWA proposes adding a STANDARD statement at the end 
of the section. This proposed STANDARD statement will be identical to 
STANDARD statement in Section 8B.05 and reinforces that at both 
highway-rail and highway-light rail transit grade crossings turn 
prohibition signs that are associated with preemption shall be visible 
only when the grade crossing restriction is in effect in order not to 
cause confusion to road users.
    302. Following existing Section 10C.06 (new Section 10C.09) Light 
Rail Transit-Actuated Blank-Out Turn Prohibition Signs (R3-1a, 
R3-2a), the FHWA proposes adding a new section. This proposed new 
section will be numbered and titled "Section 10C.10 EXEMPT 
Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossing Signs (R15-3, 
W10-1a)" and will describe the use of the supplemental 
EXEMPT Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossing (R15-3, 
W10-1a) signs at highway-light rail transit grade crossings. 
While this section would be identical to Section 8B.04, the use of 
these supplemental signs is applicable to both highway-light rail 
transit and highway-rail grade crossings, so the FHWA believes that it 
is important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The 
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
    303. In existing Section 10C.09 (new Section 10C.13) Light Rail 
Transit Only Lane Signs (R15-4 Series), the FHWA proposes titling 
the figure illustrating regulatory sign panels as "Figure 
10C-3 Regulatory Signs" and adding to and revising the 
signs illustrated in the figure, to be consistent with Section 2B.48 
Preferential Lane Signs, and to reflect changes elsewhere in Part 10.
    304. In existing Section 10C.11 (new Section 10C.15) Highway-Light 
Rail Advance Warning Signs (W10 Series), the FHWA proposes revising the 
entire section by replacing it with the STANDARD, OPTION, and GUIDANCE 
statements contained in Section 8B.03, including the proposed revisions 
as described above in Part 8. While these sections would be identical, 
the use of advance warning signs is applicable to both highway-light 
rail transit and highway-rail grade crossings, and the FHWA believes 
that it is important to have consistency in the use of these signs so 
this information is included in both parts of the MUTCD.
    The FHWA also proposes titling the figure illustrating 
predominantly warning sign panels as "Figure 10C-4 Warning 
Signs and Light Rail Station Sign" and adding to and revising the 
signs illustrated in the figure, to reflect changes elsewhere in Part 
10.
    305. Following existing Section 10C.11 (new Section 10C.15) 
Highway-Light Rail Advance Warning Signs (W10-Series), the FHWA 
proposes adding a new section. This proposed new section will be 
numbered and titled "Section 10C.16 Low Ground Clearance Highway-
Light Rail Transit Grade Crossing Sign (W10-5)" and will 
describe the use of the Low Ground Clearance (W10-5) sign at 
highway-light rail transit grade crossings. While this section would be 
identical to Section 8B.16, the use of Low Ground Clearance 
(W10-5) signs is applicable to both highway-light rail transit 
and highway-rail grade crossings so the FHWA believes that it is 
important to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The 
remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
    306. Following existing Section 10C.12 (new Section 10C.17) Light 
Rail Transit Approaching-Activated Blank-Out Warning Sign 
(W10-7), the FHWA proposes adding two new sections. The first 
proposed new section will be numbered and titled "Section 10C.18, 
Storage Space Signs (W10-11, W10-11a, W10-11b)" 
and will describe the use of Storage Space (W10-11) signs at 
highway-light rail transit grade crossings. The second proposed new 
section will be numbered and titled "Section 10C.19 Skewed 
Crossing Sign (W10-12)" and will describe the use of Skewed 
Crossing (W10-12) signs at highway-light rail transit grade 
crossings. While these sections would be identical to proposed Sections 
8B.17 and 8B.18, respectively, these signs are applicable to both 
highway-light rail transit and highway-rail grade crossings so the FHWA 
believes that it is important to have this information in both parts of 
the MUTCD. The remaining sections would be renumbered accordingly.
    307. Following existing Section 10C.13 (new Section 10C.20) Light 
Rail Station Sign (I-12), the FHWA proposes adding a new section. 
This proposed new section will be numbered and titled "Section 
10C.21 Emergency Notification Sign (I-13 or I-13a)" 
and will describe the use of Emergency Notification (I-13 or 
I-13a) signs at highway-light rail transit grade crossings. While 
this section would be identical to Section 8B.14, the use of these 
signs is applicable to both highway-light rail transit and highway-rail 
grade crossings so the FHWA believes that it is important to have this 
information in both parts of the MUTCD. The remaining sections would be 
renumbered accordingly.
    308. Following existing Section 10C.14 (new Section 10C.22) 
Illumination at Highway-Light Rail Transit Crossings, the FHWA proposes 
adding two new sections. The first proposed new section will be 
numbered and titled "Section 10C.23 Pavement Markings" and 
will describe the use of pavement markings at highway-light rail 
transit grade crossings. The second proposed new section will be 
numbered and titled "Section 10C.24 Stop Lines" and will 
describe the use of stop lines at highway-light rail transit grade 
crossings. While these sections would be identical to Sections 8B.19 
and 8B.20, respectively, it is important that the use of pavement 
markings and stop lines at highway-light rail transit and highway-rail 
grade crossings is consistent so the FHWA believes that it is important 
to have this information in both parts of the MUTCD. The remaining 
sections would be renumbered accordingly.
    309. In existing Section 10C.15, the FHWA proposes renumbering and 
retitling the section from "Dynamic Envelope Delineation 
Markings" to "Section 10C.25 Dynamic Envelope 
Markings" to clarify that the text refers to pavement markings.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes modifying the STANDARD statement to 
clarify that, if used, the pavement marking used to delineate the 
dynamic envelope shall be a normal solid white line, contrasting 
pavement color, and/or contrasting pavement texture. This STANDARD 
would be identical to that in Section 8B.21.
    310. At the end of Chapter 10C, the FHWA proposes adding two new 
figures. The first proposed new figure will be numbered and titled 
"Figure 10C-10 Example of Placement of Warning Signs and 
Pavement Markings at Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossings" 
and will illustrate the placement of warning signs and pavement 
markings at highway-light rail transit grade crossings. The second 
proposed new figure will be numbered and titled "Figure 
10C-11 Examples of Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossing 
Pavement Markings" and will

[[Page 35885]]

illustrate the use of R X R and associated pavement markings at 
highway-light rail transit grade crossings. While these figures would 
be identical to Figures 8B-7 and 8B-8, respectively, it is 
important that the warning signs and pavement markings at highway-light 
rail transit and highway-rail grade crossings is consistent so the FHWA 
believes that it is important to have this information in both parts of 
the MUTCD.
    311. In Section 10D.01 Introduction, the FHWA proposes removing the 
STANDARD statement since the information is already properly contained 
in Section 10A.01.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the OPTION statement that 
In-Roadway Stop Line Lights and In-Roadway Warning Lights may be 
installed at highway-light rail transit grade crossings that are 
controlled by active grade crossing warning systems, as discussed in 
Chapter 4L.
    312. In existing Section 10D.02 Four-Quadrant Gate Systems, the 
FHWA proposes moving this entire section to follow Section 10D.03 and 
renumbering it Section 10D.04. This reordering is proposed so that 
content contained in these sections would appear in the same order as 
it appears in Part 8.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes revising the STANDARD statement to 
clarify that the exit lane gate arms shall be designed to fail-safe in 
the up position except as noted in the OPTION statement, for 
consistency with Section 8D.05.
    Additionally, the FHWA proposes adding to the GUIDANCE statement to 
make it identical to the GUIDANCE statement in Section 8D.05, to 
provide information that describes the various operating modes of exit 
lane gates and how they should be used at both highway-rail and 
highway-light rail transit grade crossings.
    313. In Section 10D.03 Automatic Gates, the FHWA proposes changing 
the last SUPPORT statement to an OPTION statement to be consistent with 
the same language contained in Section 8D.04 on how the effectiveness 
of gates may be enhanced by the use of channelizing devices or raised 
median islands to discourage driving around lowered automatic gates.
    314. In existing Section 10D.04 Flashing Light Signals, the FHWA 
proposes moving this entire section to follow Section 10D.01 and 
renumbering it Section 10D.02. This reordering is proposed so that 
content contained in these sections would appear in the same order as 
it appears in Part 8.
    315. In Section 10D.08 Pedestrian and Bicycle Signals and 
Crossings, the FHWA proposes changing the first OPTION statement to a 
GUIDANCE statement to emphasize that if an engineering study shows that 
flashing-light signals alone would not provide sufficient notice of an 
approaching light rail transit vehicle, the LOOK (R15-8) sign 
and/or pedestrian gates should be considered.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Appendix A1-Congressional 
Legislation

    316. In Appendix A1 Congressional Legislation, the FHWA proposes to 
add to the listing of pertinent sections of Public Law 
104-59-Nov. 28, 1995 (National Highway System Designation 
Act of 1995) Section 306. Motorist Call Boxes. This section discusses 
the uses of motorist call boxes along the National Highway System.

Rulemaking Analysis and Notices

    All comments received before the close of business on the comment 
closing date indicated above will be considered and will be available 
for examination in the docket at the above address. Comments received 
after the comment closing date will be filed in the docket and will be 
considered to the extent practicable, but the FHWA may issue a final 
rule at any time after the close of the comment period. In addition to 
late comments, the FHWA will also continue to file in the docket 
relevant information that becomes available after the comment closing 
date, and interested persons should continue to examine the docket for 
new material.

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    The FHWA has determined preliminarily that this notice of proposed 
amendments will not be a significant regulatory action within the 
meaning of Executive Order 12866 or significant within the meaning of 
Department of Transportation regulatory policies and procedures. It is 
anticipated that the economic impact of this rulemaking will be 
minimal. The proposed standards and other changes in this notice are 
intended to improve traffic operations and safety, and to provide 
additional guidance, optional applications, and support clarification 
for traffic control devices. The FHWA expects that these proposed 
standards, guidance, optional applications, and support material will 
create roadway uniformity, and enhance the safety and mobility of the 
public at little additional expense to public agencies or the motoring 
public. Therefore, a full regulatory evaluation is not required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
601-612), the FHWA has evaluated the effects of this notice of 
proposed amendments on small entities. This notice of proposed 
amendments revising standards, guidance, optional applications, and 
support material wording will improve the design and installation of 
traffic control devices. The proposed changes are intended to improve 
traffic operations and safety, expand guidance, and clarify the 
application of traffic control devices. The FHWA hereby certifies that 
these revisions would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This notice of proposed amendments would not impose unfunded 
mandates as defined by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. 
L. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, March 22, 1995). This proposed action 
will not result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 
million or more in any one year (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This notice of proposed amendments has been analyzed in accordance 
with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 
dated August 4, 1999, and the FHWA has determined that this proposed 
action does not have a substantial direct effect or sufficient 
federalism implications on States and local governments that would 
limit the policymaking discretion of the States and local governments. 
Nothing in this document directly preempts any State law or regulation. 
The MUTCD is incorporated by reference in 23 CFR part 655, subpart F, 
which requires that changes to the national standards issued by the 
FHWA shall be adopted by the States or other Federal agencies within 
two years of issuance. The proposed amendment is in keeping with the 
Secretary of Transportation's authority under 23 U.S.C. 109(d), 315, 
and 402(a) to promulgate uniform guidelines to promote the safe and 
efficient use of highways.

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

    The FHWA has analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order 
13175, dated November 6, 2000, and believes that it would not have 
substantial direct effects on one or more

[[Page 35886]]

Indian tribes; will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on 
Indian tribal governments; and will not preempt tribal law. While the 
proposed changes in this notice of proposed amendments revise 
standards, guidance, optional applications, and support material, they 
will create roadway uniformity, and enhance the safety and mobility of 
the public at little additional expense to public agencies. Therefore, 
a tribal summary impact statement is not required.

Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205, 
Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing 
Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on 
Federal programs and activities apply to this program.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et 
seq.), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they 
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. The FHWA has 
determined that this proposed action does not contain a collection of 
information requirement for purposes of the PRA.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed action meets applicable standards in Sections 3(a) 
and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, to eliminate ambiguity, and to reduce burden.

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)

    The FHWA has analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order 
13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and 
Safety Risks. This is not an economically significant proposed action 
and does not concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    This proposed action would not effect a taking of private property 
or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights.

Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)

    The FHWA has analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order 
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use. It has been determined that it is not a 
significant energy action under that order because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and is not 
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy 
Effects under Executive Order 13211 is not required.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The agency has analyzed this proposed action for the purpose of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 
has determined that it would not have any effect on the quality of the 
environment.

Regulation Identification Number

    A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each 
regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. 
The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda 
in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of 
this document can be used to cross reference this proposed action with 
the Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 655

    Design standards, Grant programs-Transportation, Highways and 
roads, Incorporation by reference, Signs, Traffic regulations.

    Issued on: May 10, 2002.
Mary E. Peters,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
[FR Doc. 02-12269 Filed 5-20-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P