Robert P. LaJeunesse - Comments

Document ID: FHWA-2009-0139-0006
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Federal Highway Administration
Received Date: May 10 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Date Posted: May 11 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: April 22 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: August 20 2010, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 80aea94c
View Document:

This is comment on Rule

National Standards for Traffic Control Devices: Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, etc.

View Comment

The docket states that when RRPM's supplement a longitudinal pavement marking, the minimum reflectivity levels are not applicable to that line as long as the RRPM's are maintained so that at least three are visible. Whether or not those RRPM's are maintained is very subjective. I would suggest that there be a minimum reflectivity level applied to the RRPM's to define their suitability in suplementing the longitudinal line. The same goes for the exemption of those roadways where continuous lighting is in place. How can it be determined if the continous lighting is sufficient?