[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 250 (Thursday, December 30, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 73606-73612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-33404]
[[Page 73605]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part II
Department of Transportation
_______________________________________________________________________
Federal Highway Administration
_______________________________________________________________________
23 CFR Parts 655 and 945
Revision of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices: Temporary
Traffic Control and General Provisions, Markings, and Signals; Proposed
Rules
Dedicated Short Range Communications in Intelligent Transportation
Systems (ITS) Commercial Vehicle Operations; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 250 / Thursday, December 30, 1999 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 73606]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Highway Administration
23 CFR Part 655
[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-99-6576]
RIN 2125-AE72
Revision of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices;
Temporary Traffic Control
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 Administrator, and
recognized as the national standard for traffic control on all public
roads. The FHWA announced its intent to rewrite and reformat the MUTCD
on January 10, 1992, at 57 FR 1134.
This document proposes new text for the MUTCD in Part 6--Temporary
Traffic Control. The purpose of this rewrite effort is to reformat the
text for clarity of intended meanings, to include metric dimensions and
values for the design and installation of traffic control devices, and
to improve the overall organization and discussion of the contents in
the MUTCD. The proposed changes included herein are intended to
expedite traffic, promote uniformity, improve safety, and incorporate
technology advances in traffic control device application.
DATES: Submit comments on or before June 30, 2000.
ADDRESSES: Signed, written comments should refer to the docket number
that appears at the top of this document and must be submitted to the
Docket Clerk, U.S. DOT Dockets, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. 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
notification of receipt of comments must include a self-addressed,
stamped postcard.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding the notice
of proposed amendments contact Mr. Charlie L. Sears, Office of
Transportation Operations, Room 3408, (202) 366-1555, or Mr. Raymond
Cuprill, Office of the Chief Counsel, Room 4217, (202) 366-0834,
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Access
Internet users may access all comments received by the U.S. DOT
Dockets, Room PL 401, by using the universal resource locator (URL):
http//dms.dot.gov. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each
year. Please follow the instructions online for more information and
help. An electronic copy of this notice of proposed amendment may be
downloaded using a modem and suitable communications software from the
Government Printing Office's Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202)
512-1661. Internet users may reach the Office of the Federal Register's
home page at: http://www.nara.gov/fedreg and the Government Printing
Office's database at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.
The text for the proposed sections of the MUTCD is available from
the FHWA Office of Transportation Operations (HOTO-1) or from the FHWA
Home Page at the URL: http://www.ohs.fhwa.dot.gov/operations/mutcd.
Please note that the proposed rewrite sections contained in this docket
for MUTCD Part 6 will take approximately 8 weeks from the date of
publication before they will be available at this web site.
Background
The 1988 MUTCD with its revisions is available for inspection and
copying as prescribed in 49 CFR part 7. It may be purchased for $57.00
(Domestic) or $71.25 (Foreign) from the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-
7954, Stock No. 650-001-00001-0. This notice is being issued to provide
an opportunity for public comment on the desirability of 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 National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD)
has taken the lead in this effort to rewrite and reformat the MUTCD.
The NCUTCD is a national organization of individuals from the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), the National Association
of County Engineers (NACE), the American Public Works Association
(APWA), and other organizations that have extensive experience in the
installation and maintenance of traffic control devices. The NCUTCD
voluntarily assumed the arduous task of rewriting and reformatting the
MUTCD. The NCUTCD proposal is available from the U.S. DOT Dockets (see
address above). Pursuant to 23 CFR part 655, the FHWA is responsible
for approval of changes to the MUTCD.
Although the MUTCD will be revised in its entirety, it is being
completed in phases due to the enormous volume of text. The FHWA
reviewed the NCUTCD's proposal for MUTCD Part 3--Markings, Part 4--
Signals, and Part 8--Traffic Control for Highway-Rail Intersections.
The summary of proposed changes for Parts 3, 4, and 8 was published as
Phase 1 of the MUTCD rewrite effort in a previous notice of proposed
amendment dated January 6, 1997, at 62 FR 691. The FHWA reviewed the
NCUTCD's proposal for Part 1--General Provisions and Part 7--Traffic
Control for School Areas. The summary of proposed changes for Parts 1
and 7 was published as phase 2 of the MUTCD rewrite effort in a
previous notice of proposed amendment dated December 5, 1997, at 62 FR
64324. The FHWA reviewed the NCUTCD's proposal for Chapter 2A-- General
Provisions and Standards for Signs, Chapter 2D--Guide Signs for
Conventional Roads, Chapter 2E--Guide Signs for Expressways and
Freeways, Chapter 2F--Specific Service Signs, and Chapter 2I--Signing
for Civil Defense. The summary of proposed changes for Chapters 2A, 2D,
2E, 2F, and 2I was published as Phase 3 of the MUTCD rewrite effort in
a previous notice of proposed amendment dated June 11, 1998, at 63 FR
31950. The summary of proposed changes for Chapters 2G--Tourist
Oriented Directional Signs, Chapter 2H--Recreational and Cultural
Interest Signs, and Part 9--Traffic Control for Bicycles was published
as Phase 4 of the MUTCD rewrite effort in a previous notice of proposed
amendment dated June 24, 1999, at 64 FR 33802. The summary of proposed
changes for Chapter 2C--Warning Signs and Part 10--Traffic Control for
Highway-Light Rail Transit Grade Crossings was published as Phase 5 of
the MUTCD rewrite effort in a previous notice of proposed amendment
dated June 24, 1999, at 64 FR 33806. The summary of proposed changes
for Chapter 2B--Regulatory Signs, Part 5--Traffic Control for Low-
Volume Rural roads, and update information for Part 8--Traffic Control
at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings was published as Phase 6 of the MUTCD
rewrite effort in a
[[Page 73607]]
previous notice of proposed amendment. The summary of proposed new
changes for Part 1--General Provisions, Part 3--Markings, and Part 4--
Signals was published as Phase 7 of the MUTCD rewrite effort in a
previous notice of proposed amendment. This notice of proposed
amendment is Phase 8 of the MUTCD rewrite effort and includes the
summary of proposed changes for MUTCD Part 6.
The proposed new style of the MUTCD would be a 3-ring binder with
8-1/2 x 11 inch pages. Each part of the MUTCD would be printed
separately in a bound format and then included in the 3-ring binder. If
someone needed to reference information on a specific part of the
MUTCD, it would be easy to remove that individual part from the binder.
The proposed new text would be in column format and contain four
categories as follows: (1) Standards--representing ``shall''
conditions; (2) Guidance--representing ``should'' conditions; (3)
Options--representing ``may'' conditions; and (4) Support--representing
descriptive and/or general information. This new format would make it
easier to distinguish standards, guidance, and optional conditions for
the design, placement, and application of traffic control devices. The
adopted final version of the new MUTCD will be in metric and english
units. Dual units will be shown in the MUTCD particularly for speed
limits, guide sign distances, and other measurements which the public
must read.
The FHWA invites comments on the proposed text for MUTCD Part 6. A
summary of the proposed significant changes contained in these sections
are included in the following discussion:
Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 6--Temporary Traffic
Control
The following items are the most significant proposed revisions to
Part 6:
1. The FHWA proposes to change the title of Part 6 from ``Standards
and Guides for Traffic Controls for Street and Highway Construction,
Maintenance, Utility, and Incident Management Operations'' to
``Temporary Traffic Control.'' This title better explains the contents
of this section.
2. In Section 6A, paragraph 4, the FHWA proposes to delete the word
``must'' from the second and third sentences. This deletion is proposed
because temporary traffic control does not guarantee the safety or
efficient completion of a work activity.
3. In Section 6A, in the second sentence of paragraph 5, the FHWA
proposes to revise the sentence to read ``A concurrent objective of the
traffic control is the efficient construction and maintenance of the
roadway.'' This change is proposed because it clarifies the objective
of proper traffic control.
4. In Section 6B.3c, the FHWA proposes to revise the first sentence
to read, ``Flagging procedures when used, should provide positive
guidance to drivers * * *.'' This change was suggested by the National
Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The FHWA agrees with this
suggestion because it will provide positive guidance to drivers to
safely travel through temporary traffic control area.
5. In Section 6B.4a, the FHWA proposes to revise the second
sentence to read, ``The most important duty of these individuals should
be to ensure that all traffic control elements of the project are
consistent with the traffic control plan * * *.'' This change will help
ensure that proper traffic control measures are being carried out.
6. In Section 6B, in the second paragraph of the STANDARD, the FHWA
proposes to change the following recommended condition to a STANDARD:
``All traffic control devices shall be removed when no longer needed.''
This change would ensure that all traffic control devices are removed
when no longer required.
7. In Section 6B.7, the FHWA proposes to revise the first sentence
to read, ``Good public relations should be maintained.'' This sentence
would be revised from a mandatory statement to GUIDANCE.
8. In Section 6C.1, the FHWA proposes to revise the third GUIDANCE
paragraph concerning traffic control plans for transit from mandatory
shall statements to recommended GUIDANCE.
9. In Section 6C.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new definition for a
Temporary Traffic Control Zone. A Temporary Traffic Control Zone is now
defined as including a Work Zone and/or an Incident Area. There
currently is no uniform definition of a work zone. As a result, work
zone crash data collection is not uniform.
10. In Section 6C.3, paragraph 3, the FHWA proposes to revise the
discussion on advance warning area from a mandatory condition to
GUIDANCE as follows:
``(A) On urban and rural two-lane roadways, effective placement of
warning signs should be as follows:
(1) Urban: Warning sign spacings in meters (feet) in advance of the
transition area normally should range from .75 (4) to 1.5 (8) times the
speed limit, in km/h, (mph) in meters (feet), with the high end of the
range being used when speeds are relatively high.
(2) Rural: Rural roadways are characterized by higher speeds. The
spacing, in meters (feet), for the placement of warning signs should be
substantially longer--from 1.5 (8) to 2.25 (12) times the speed limit,
in km/h, (mph).''
The above proposed changes will provide clearer guidance on warning
sign placement.
11. In Section 6C.3, paragraph 4, the FHWA proposes to revise the
following sentences from a permissive condition to GUIDANCE: ``Typical
distances for placement of advance warning signs on freeways and
expressways are longer because drivers are conditioned to uninterrupted
flow. Therefore, the advance warning signs should extend on these
facilities as far as 800m (one-half mile) or more.''
12. In Section 6C.5, paragraph 9, the FHWA proposes to change the
following discussion on an activity area from a recommended condition
to an Option: ``(a) Longitudinal Buffer Space: The Longitudinal buffer
space may also be used to separate opposing traffic flows that utilize
portions of the same traffic lane, as depicted in Figure 6-2.''
This change is proposed because buffer spaces are optional.
13. In Section 6C.7, paragraphs 6 and 7, the FHWA proposes to
clarify some of the discussion on tapers and make it GUIDANCE:
(A) ``Taper lengths shown in Table 6-2 should be the minimum
used.'' This change would require that tapers be calculated a certain
way unless proper justification is given.
(B) ``When using metric units, the maximum distance in meters
between devices in a taper should not exceed 1/5 times the speed limit
in kilometers per hour. When engineering judgment shows that there is a
special need for a speed reduction, the maximum distance in kilometers
between devices may be 1/10 of the speed limit in kilometers per hour.
When using English units, the maximum distance in feet between devices
in a taper should not exceed the speed limit in miles per hour. When
engineering judgment shows there is a special need for speed reduction,
the maximum distance in feet between devices may be one-half the speed
limit in mph.''
This proposed clarification requires a certain spacing between
channelizing devices unless proper justification is given. Also, the
option for the one-half spacing is in response to recommendations
contained in the
[[Page 73608]]
``Older Driver Highway Design Handbook''.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Older Driver Highway Design Handbook,'' Report No. FHWA-
RD-99-045, available from the FHWA Research and Technology report
Center, 9701 Philadelphia Court, Unit Q, Lanham, Maryland 20706.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. In Section 6C.7 , paragraph 12, the FHWA proposes to clarify
the discussion on shifting tapers and make it GUIDANCE: ``A shifting
taper should have a length of about one-half ``L.' '' This
clarification will require a certain length for shifting tapers unless
proper justification is given. This proposed change is in response to
recommendations contained in the ``Older Driver Highway Design
Handbook''.
15. In Section 6C.9 A, paragraph 2, the FHWA proposes to change the
discussion of the flagger method from an Option to GUIDANCE. ``When
good visibility and traffic control cannot be maintained by one flagger
station, traffic should be controlled by a flagger at each end of the
section.'' This proposed change recommends two flaggers in one-lane,
two-way traffic operation.
16. In Section 6D.1, paragraph 2, the FHWA proposes to add a new
GUIDANCE discussion on the staging of equipment and work vehicles,
barrier installation and regular inspections of work sites. These
additions will provide additional guidance for and increase safety of
pedestrians.
17. In Section 6D.1, paragraph 16, the FHWA proposes to clarify the
following sentence and make it GUIDANCE: ``At fixed work sites of
significant duration, especially in urban areas with high pedestrian
volumes, a canopied walkway may be used to protect pedestrians from
falling debris.'' In the existing MUTCD the intent of the sentence was
to provide safety to pedestrians by providing a canopied walkway. This
proposed change would provide an increased emphasis on pedestrian
safety.
18. In Section 6D.2, paragraph 3, the FHWA proposes to add the
following new Option: Shadow Vehicle--in the case of mobile and
constantly moving operations, such as pothole patching and striping
operations, a shadow vehicle, equipped with appropriate lights, warning
signs and/or a rear-mounted impact attenuator may be used to provide
additional safety for the workers from impacts by errant vehicles.
19. In Section 6E.2, paragraph 1, the FHWA proposes to revise the
fourth sentence to read, `` The retroreflective clothing shall be
designed to identify clearly the wearer as a person.'' This change is
proposed to delete the phase ``and be visible through the full range of
body motions `` because a flagger visibility is the most important
issue.
20. In Section 6E.4, paragraph 2, the FHWA proposes to revise the
sentence to read: ``When used at nighttime, flags shall be
retroreflectorized .'' Illuminating the flag would improve the
visibility of the flag for the warning of motorists.
21. In Section 6E.4, paragraph 2, the FHWA proposes to change the
following sentence from a recommended condition to a STANDARD: ``The
following methods of signaling with sign paddles shall be used.''
22. Throughout Section 6F, the FHWA proposes to add a description
of the following signs: STAY IN LANE, PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK, SIDEWALK
CLOSED (AHEAD) CROSS HERE, RIGHT TWO LANES CLOSED 0.8 KILOMETERS (\1/2\
MILE), CENTER LANE CLOSED AHEAD, THRU TRAFFIC MERGE RIGHT (LEFT), EXIT
OPEN, ON RAMP, RAMP NARROWS, SLOW TRAFFIC AHEAD, SHOULDER WORK, RIGHT
SHOULDER CLOSED, UTILITY WORK AHEAD, Lane Reduction Transition.
Several signs were in the Typical Application diagrams in the 1993
Edition of MUTCD, part 6 but there was no discussion as to their proper
use.
23. In Section 6F.2, in the third sentence of paragraph 2, the FHWA
proposes to add the following sentence as a STANDARD because mandatory
``shall'' is implied through the context of the sentence. ``Colors for
guide signs shall follow the standard in Chapter 2A, Table 2A.5, and
Chapter 2D, except for special information signs as noted below in
Section 6F.51.'' A second sentence is added to the sixth paragraph as a
STANDARD to clarify that ``red'' flags shall not be used on warning
signs.
24. In Section 6F.3, paragraphs 4, 6, 7 and 8 the FHWA proposes to
modify the mounting height discussion from recommended GUIDANCE to
mandatory STANDARD and added an Option condition to change the mounting
height requirement for signs in work zones.
There is an existing FHWA/NHTSA National Crash Analysis Study,
Contract DTFH61-97-X00015, on 1.5 m (5 ft) versus 2.1 m (7 ft) sign
mounting height. This study does not show a need to raise the sign
height to 2.1 m (7 ft). For all rural post-mounted signs, a 1.5 m (5
ft) minimum mounting height is appropriate for crashworthiness. If,
however, there is an operational need (visibility, etc.) to have a
higher mounting height, it may be used.
25. In Section 6F.3, paragraph 8, the FHWA proposes to change the
requirement for the amount of days that signs mounted on portable
supports may be used. The FHWA is also proposing to list the types of
signs to be used on portable supports for more than three days. Methods
of mounting signs other than on posts are illustrated in Figure 6-6.
Signs mounted on portable supports may be used for a duration of three
days or less (intermediate term stationary). The R11 series, W1-6
through W1-8, M4-10, E5-1 or similar type signs may be used on portable
supports for more than three days.
26. In section 6F.3, paragraph 10, the FHWA proposes to change the
following sentence from recommended condition to a STANDARD:
``Unshielded sign supports shall be designed to breakaway or yield on
impact to minimize hazards to motorists.'' The FHWA is proposing to
change this sentence to a STANDARD because devices, according to
National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 350, are required
to be crashworthy. The FHWA is proposing to add the word ``breakaway''
because it better explains what a sign does on impact. Also, the FHWA
is proposing to add the following sentence to explain the requirements
for signs mounted on multiple signs supports: ``Signs erected on
multiple breakaway posts shall be mounted a minimum of 2.1 m (7ft)
above the ground so as to permit an errant vehicle to pass under the
sign panel if all posts are not struck.''
27. In Section 6F.4, the FHWA proposes to change the text from a
recommended condition to a STANDARD. FHWA feels that this would
increase visibility and safety.
28. In Section 6F.8, paragraph 1, the FHWA proposes to change the
following sentence from a permissive condition to GUIDANCE: ``The ROAD
(STREET) CLOSED sign (R11-2) should be used where the roadway is closed
to all traffic except contractors' equipment or officially authorized
vehicles and should be accompanied by appropriate detour signing.''
Also, there is information on the use of these signs in both rural and
urban areas.
29. In Section 6F.9, paragraph 2, the FHWA proposes to add the
following new mandatory STANDARD sentence for rural areas: ``In rural
applications, the LOCAL TRAFFIC ONLY sign shall have the legend ROAD
CLOSED (XX) KILOMETERS (MILES) AHEAD-LOCAL TRAFFIC ONLY.''
30. In Section 6F.16, paragraphs 14, 15, and 16, the FHWA proposes
to add the following STANDARD and GUIDANCE regarding the proper use of
flexible signs: ``Flexible warning signs for nighttime use shall have a
black legend on a retroreflectorized orange or
[[Page 73609]]
retroreflectorized flourescent orange background. The mounting height
of flexible signs shall conform to the same requirements as rigid
signs. A 300 mm (1 foot) mounting height is allowable for flexible
signs, but they should normally be mounted higher in order to provide
improved visibility.''
The FHWA proposes to add the above sentences because of the
increased use of flexible signs in work zones.
31. In Section 6F.55C, paragraph 4, the FHWA proposes to add a
message format for Portable Changeable Message Signs. This format
indicates the following: line 1 should present the problem, line 2
should present the location or distance ahead, and line 3 should
present the recommended driver action. This addition is in response to
recommendations contained in the ``Older Driver Highway Design
Handbook'' which shows that motorists may benefit by having a message
in a logical sequence.
32. In Section 6F.56A, paragraphs 2 and 4, the FHWA proposes to add
SUPPORT and STANDARD conditions on TYPE D arrow panels to explain how
this type of arrow panel should be used.
33. In Section 6F.58E, the fourth sentence of paragraph 1, the FHWA
proposes to require the top stripe on all drums to be orange to allow
for better uniformity. The text will read as follows: ``Each drum shall
have a minimum of two orange and two white stripes with the top stripe
being orange.''
34. In Section 6F.58I, paragraph 4, the FHWA proposes to add under
GUIDANCE four paragraphs on two-way two-lane operations concerning
speed, traffic volumes, geometrics and intersections.
35. In Section 6F.59B, paragraph 1, the FHWA proposes to change the
minimum length of interim pavement marking from 1.2 m (4 ft) to 0.6 m
(2 ft). Texas Transportation Institute Research Record 1160, Field
Studies of Temporary Pavement Markings at Overlay Project work Zones on
Two-Lane, Two-Way Rural Highways, indicates that there is no
significant difference between the performance of the 1.2 m (4 ft)
broken line or the 0.6 m (2 ft) broken line.
36. In Section 6F.59C, paragraph 1, the FHWA proposes to add the
following new STANDARD wording: ``If raised pavement markers are used
to substitute for a broken line segment, at least two retroreflective
markers shall be placed, one at each end of a segment of 0.6 m (2 ft)
to 1.5 m (5 ft). For segments over 1.5 m (5 ft), a group of at least
three retroreflective markers shall be equally spaced at no greater
than N/8.'' This proposed change allows fewer raised pavement markings
for a broken line segment.
37. In Section 6F.60D(3), paragraph 2, the FHWA proposes to add the
new GUIDANCE discussion to ensure lights are put on the outside of the
curve to improve delineation of the curve.
38. In Section 6F.61, paragraph 3, the FHWA proposes to allow the
use of temporary traffic signals other than those controlled by hard
wire. This was included in the February 19, 1998, Final Rule.
39. In Section 6F.66, the FHWA proposes to add a new GUIDANCE that
the spacing of screens should not be more than 0.6 m (2 ft). This
addition is in response to recommendations contained in the ``Older
Driver Highway Design Handbook'' which shows that motorists may benefit
by having screens at this spacing.
40. The FHWA proposes to add a new Section 6F.68, FUTURE AND
EXPERIMENTAL DEVICES to Part 6. This section provides information on
the use of experimental products.
41. In Section 6G.2, the FHWA proposes to add the following words
to the second bullet of the second paragraph, ``or nighttime work
lasting more than one hour.'' The FHWA believes that the above
information is helpful to further explain intermediate-term stationary
work at night.
42. In Section 6G.2B, paragraph 2, the FHWA proposes to add the
following STANDARD statement: ``Since intermediate-term operations
extend into nighttime, retroreflective and/or illuminated devices shall
be used.'' This STANDARD is proposed because a good safety design
feature for any/all nighttime work is one that is properly delineated
with retroreflective signs and/or illuminated devices.
43. In Section 6G.10, the second sentence of paragraph 5, the FHWA
proposes to add a new STANDARD statement to read as follows: ``For lane
closures, the merging taper shall utilize channelizing devices and the
barrier shall be placed beyond the transition area.'' This proposed
change would provide proper delineation of a lane closure to the road
user. Also, this proposed change would delete the last sentence of the
second paragraph of Section 6G-7 of the Part VI of the 1993 Edition of
the MUTCD and Section 6G-7 would be transferred and renumbered as
Section 6G.10.
44. In Section 6G.10 B, paragraph 2, the FHWA proposes to change
the second sentence from a recommended condition to a STANDARD. This
proposed change would provide the road user with better delineation of
the left lane closure.
45. In Section 6G.10 D, the FHWA proposes to transfer to this
Section old Section 6G-7c of Part VI of 1993 Edition of the MUTCD. The
FHWA also proposes to change the sixth sentence of the existing Section
6G-7c from a recommended condition to a STANDARD. The proposed sentence
would read as follows: ``When a directional roadway is closed,
inapplicable WRONG WAY signs and markings, and other existing traffic
control devices at intersections within the temporary two-lane two-way
operations section, shall be covered, removed or obliterated.'' The
proposed sentence change would provide the road user with accurate
information on whether the road is open or closed.
46. In Section 6H.2, Notes for Figure TA-7, the FHWA proposes to
add the following sentence to note 1: ``Devices similar to those
depicted shall be placed for the opposite direction of travel.'' This
proposed change is very important to motorists traveling in the
opposite direction to inform them of the temporary traffic control
condition ahead.
47. In Section 6H.2, Notes for Figure TA-7 (Note 3) and Notes for
Figure TA-31 (Note 7), the FHWA proposes to change Note 3 for Figure
TA-7 and Note 7 for Figure TA-31 to read as follows: ``If the
tangential distance along the temporary diversion is less than 180 m
(600 feet), the winding road sign should be used at the location of the
first Reverse Curve sign. The second Reverse Curve sign should be
omitted.'' This proposed GUIDANCE statement would be in compliance with
Section 2C-8, Winding Road Sign, page 2C-4 of the 1988 Edition of the
MUTCD which describes the circumstances when the Winding Road sign
should be used.
48. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add new Notes 7 and 8 to
Figure TA-10 on the use of the BE PREPARED TO STOP sign.
49. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add new notes for Figure
TA-10 (Notes 9, 10, 11, and 12), a new note for Figure TA-30 (Note 4),
new notes for TA-32 (Notes 4, 5, and 6), new notes for TA-39 (Notes 11
and 12), and a new Figure TA-45 to provide additional information
concerning work zone treatments near highway-rail grade crossings.
On March 17, 1993, a tractor-semitrailer hauling gasoline was
struck by a National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) train
resulting in the truck driver and five occupants of three stopped
vehicles being killed. The truck driver was attempting to cross a
[[Page 73610]]
highway-rail grade crossing on Cypress Creek in Fort Lauderdale,
Florida and traffic in the area of the crossing was congested because
the left and center lanes were closed just beyond the crossing. As a
result of the investigation of the crash, the National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) recommended that the FHWA provide information on
channelization of traffic at work zones to minimize traffic congestion
over highway-rail grade crossings. The above mentioned notes and figure
are in compliance with the NTSB's recommendation. The above proposed
changes would be added to provide information for safe and efficient
operation of both highway and rail traffic at highway-rail grade
crossings within construction and maintenance work zone limits.
50. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to modify the first sentence
of Note 4 of Figure TA-12 to read as ``Stop lines shall be installed
with temporary traffic signals.'' The FHWA proposes to add the same
sentence to a new Note 9 for Figure TA-14. The proposed changes will be
in compliance with Part 4, Chapter 4D, of the Notice of Proposed
Amendments to the Manual on Traffic Control Devices dated January 7,
1997, which discuss the location of stop lines with respect to traffic
signals.
51. In Section 6H.2, for Figure TA-12, the FHWA proposes to move
Note 7 from a permissive condition to Note 11 as GUIDANCE. The FHWA
believes that changing the condition from a permissive condition to
GUIDANCE would provide the State and local agencies, and contractors
with additional guidance for making safe traffic operations' decisions.
52. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 8 for
Figure TA-14 which states ``Traffic control signal timing shall be
established by authorized personnel.'' This proposed change is in
compliance with Part 4, Chapter 4D, of the Notice of Proposed
Amendments to the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices dated
January 7, 1997, which states the responsibility for operation and
maintenance of traffic control signals and all of its appurtenances.
53. In Section 6H.2, Figure TA-14, under the signalized method, the
FHWA proposes to delete the requirement to remove any double yellow
pavement marking and add skip line pavement markings along the
northbound lanes because there is no reason to prohibit passing for
traffic leaving the intersection.
54. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to modify existing Note 4
for Figure TA-16 and to add a new Note 11 which would states, ``For a
survey along the edge of the road or along the shoulder, cones should
be placed along the edge line.'' The FHWA also proposes to add a new
Note 10 to read, ``If the work is along the shoulder, the flagger may
be omitted.''
55. In Section 6H.2, for Figure TA-17, the FHWA proposes to move
the second sentence of Note 5 from a recommended condition to Note 2 as
a STANDARD. It would read, ``Shadow and work vehicles shall display
flashing or rotating beacons visible in all directions.'' The FHWA
believes that flashing or rotating beacon visibility will help improve
the safety and visibility of the shadow and work vehicles resulting in
a reduction in work zone crashes. Also, the FHWA proposes to change the
wording ``protection vehicle'' to ``shadow vehicle'' to be in
compliance with the AASHTO Roadside Design Guide Book, Chapter 9.1.2.2,
Truck-Mounted Attenuators.
56. In Section 6H.2, Figure TA-17, the FHWA proposes to add a
CAUTION arrow board to be in compliance with Section 6F-55 B.
57. In Section 6H.2, Notes for Figure TA-17, the FHWA proposes to
delete the note on ``Optional Signs for Short Duration Operation''
because TA-17 is not for Short Duration work.
58. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to modify the first sentence
of Note 1 for Figure TA-18 to read as follows: ``The traffic control
procedures shall be used only for low-volume, low-speed facilities.''
This proposed change simplifies the STANDARD condition statement.
59. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 4 for
Figure TA-18 to read, ``Where traffic cannot effectively self-regulate,
one or two flaggers shall be used as illustrated in Figure TA-10.'' The
purpose is to improve the movement of traffic around the lane closure.
60. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to change Note 2 for Figure
TA-21 from a permissive condition to a STANDARD. This proposed change
is to provide for the direction of traffic around lane closures.
61. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 4
(GUIDANCE) and a new Note 5 (Option) to Figure TA-21 concerning
flashing or rotating lights on work vehicles. These proposed new notes
will assist in providing warning to road users and workers.
62. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 7 for
Figure TA-21 for the optional use of a truck-mounted attentuator on
shadow vehicles. This Option statement is proposed to provide safety to
road users and workers.
63. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 2
(GUIDANCE) for Figure TA-24 to provide for turn prohibition signs. This
GUIDANCE statement is being proposed to give road users addition
warning that turns are prohibited.
64. In Section 6H-2, the FHWA proposes to delete Note 2 (mandatory
condition) of Figure TA-26 concerning channelizing devices on tapers.
This proposal will make this in compliance with Section 6F.59,
CHANNELIZING DEVICES. That section recommends using a formula based on
speed, rather than a set number of channelizing devices.
65. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to change Note 2 for Figure
TA-27 on the use of uniformed law enforcement officers from a
permissive condition to GUIDANCE. The proposed GUIDANCE is to provide
for a person with recognized authority which should improve the safe
movement of traffic through the intersection.
66. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 6 for
Figure TA-27 which reduces the need for channelization for short-
duration work operations. We propose to add Note 6 to be in compliance
with Section 6G.2(1) which states that a reduction in the number of
devices may be offset by the use of other more dominant devices such as
flashing or rotating beacons on work vehicles.
67. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 1
(STANDARD) for Figure TA-28 to read as follows: ``Where sidewalks
exist, provisions shall be made for disabled pedestrians.'' The FHWA
also proposes to add this note as Note 1 (STANDARD) for Figure TA-29.
We propose to add this Note 1 to provide additional safety for disabled
pedestrians and to be in compliance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act Standards for Accessible Design.2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Americans with Disabilities Act Handbook, U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission and the U.S. Department of
Justice, EEOC-BK-19, Appendix B, ``ADA Accessibility Guidelines,''
December 1991.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
68. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 2
(STANDARD) for Figure TA-29 on curb parking restrictions in advance of
mid-block crosswalks to provide additional safety for pedestrians. The
proposed STANDARD statement provides additional safety for pedestrians.
69. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a second sentence to
Note 3 (GUIDANCE) for Figure TA-30 providing for additional signing for
[[Page 73611]]
higher speed and higher volume roads. The proposed GUIDANCE is added to
provide safety instruction for the road users traveling at higher
speeds.
70. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add new Notes 6, 7, 8, 9,
and 10 for Figure TA-34 concerning the use of traffic control devices
with movable barriers.
71. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 7 for
Figure TA-35 and a new Note 3 for Figure TA-37 to provide optional use
of truck-mounted attenuators on shadow vehicles. This is proposed
because truck-mounted attenuators attached to the rear of shadow
vehicles can reduce the severity of rear-end crashes.
72. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes a new Note 6 for Figure TA-
35 to allow optional use of a shadow vehicle. Existing Note 6 would be
renumbered as Note 8.
73. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes a new Note 5 for Figure TA-
35 to provide for the optional use of a shadow vehicle on the shoulder.
Note 5 will be renumbered as Note 9.
74. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 10 for
Figure TA-35 (GUIDANCE) on work vehicles and shadow vehicle locations.
This note is proposed to provide information and guidance to road users
of work ahead.
75. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 4 for
Figure TA-37 and a new Note 10 for Figure TA-38 to indicate where that
traffic may be redirected around the work area. These notes provide
additional information for the movement of traffic along the right
shoulder because the shoulder width is wide enough to safely
accommodate traffic.
76. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 6 for
Figure TA-39 which will address a problem of poor guidance for traffic
traveling through a two-lane, two-way operation at the end of the
construction zone. Consequently, truck drivers with driver eye heights
substantially above the road cannot see well enough through adverse
weather conditions (fog, heavy rain, snow squalls, etc.) to find
anything except the barrels leading back across the median. They too
often follow the backside of those barrels into the median, resulting
in crossover embankment collision, median side slope rollover, and
bridge rail impact. If we are going to use delineators to separate two-
lane, two-way traffic in construction zones, provisions should be made
to extend the line of delineation well beyond the end of two-lane, two-
way traffic in order to achieve ``continuity'' and to fulfill ``driver
expectancy'' under low visibility conditions.
77. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Note 7 for
Figure TA-39 concerning channelizing devices and signing for two-way
traffic. This new note is GUIDANCE to warn motorists that the roadway
is two-way traffic within a single lane, with flaggers.
78. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to change the third sentence
of Note 1 for Figure TA-40 from a permissive condition to GUIDANCE. ``A
temporary acceleration lane should be used to facilitate merging.'' The
proposed changed note will be renumbered Note 3 of the new Part VI.
79. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a STANDARD for Figure
TA-41 (Note 5) and for Figure TA-42 (Note 3) concerning the mounting
height for temporary EXIT signs in the temporary gore. The mounting
height noted in the above notes will be in compliance with Section 6F-
1, page 31, paragraph 6 of the Part 6 of 1993 Edition of MUTCD,
Revision 3.
80. In Section 6H.2, the FHWA proposes to add a new Figure TA-46,
Temporary Reversible Lane Using Moveable Barriers. Many jurisdictions
are using movable barriers. However, guidance for these devices is not
currently included in the MUTCD.
81. The FHWA proposes to add a new Figure TA-47, Variable Message
Sign Abbreviations. This proposed change is in response to
recommendations contained in the ``Older Driver Highway Design
Handbook'' as it will provide for uniformity in messages.
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 action 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 would be minimal. The new standards and other
changes proposed in this notice are intended to improve traffic
operations and safety, and provide additional guidance, clarification,
and optional applications for traffic control devices. The FHWA expects
that these proposed changes will create uniformity and enhance safety
and mobility 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 proposed action on
small entities. This notice of proposed rulemaking adds some new and
alternative traffic control devices and traffic control device
applications. The proposed new standards and other changes are intended
to improve traffic operations and safety, expand guidance, and clarify
application of traffic control devices. The FHWA hereby certifies that
these proposed revisions would not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule would not impose a Federal mandate resulting 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. 1532).
Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 dated August 4, 1999, and
it has been determined this action does not have a substantial direct
effect or sufficient federalism implications on States that would limit
the policymaking discretion of the States. Nothing in this document
directly preempts any State law or regulation.
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
[[Page 73612]]
Federal programs and activities apply to this program.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not contain a collection of information
requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
This action meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)
We have analyzed this action under Executive Order 13045,
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and does not
concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may
disproportionately affect children.
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)
This rule will 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.
National Environmental Policy Act
The agency has analyzed this action for the purpose of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has
determined that this action 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 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.
(23 U.S.C. 109(d), 114(a), 315, and 402(a); 23 CFR 1.32; 49 CFR
1.48)
Issued on: December 17, 1999.
Kenneth R. Wykle,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 99-33404 Filed 12-29-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
