1. MUTCD for Operations/ Maintenance Staff
Karen Stippich
ITS & Traffic Operations Engineer
FHWA –Indiana Division
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

2. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
What is the MUTCD ?
The National standard for Traffic Control Devices (TCD). The MUTCD outlines the design, application, and placement of TCDs through standards, guidance, options, and support provisions.
(23 USC 109(d) and 402(a)) and CFR 655 Subpart F
to obtain basic uniformity of traffic control
devices shall be as described in 23 CFR 655, Subpart F
Q: What is the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices?
A: The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) publishes the MUTCD, which contains all national design, application, and placement, standards, guidance, options, and support provisions for traffic control devices. The purpose of the MUTCD is to provide uniformity of these devices, which include signs, signals, and pavement markings, to promote highway safety and efficiency on the Nation's streets and highways.
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

3. FHWA publishes the MUTCD
The individual State and local highway agencies (not the FHWA) select, install, operate, and maintain all traffic control devices on all public roadways (including the Interstate and the U.S. numbered systems) nationwide.
to obtain basic uniformity of traffic control
devices shall be as described in 23 CFR 655, Subpart F
The FHWA publishes the MUTCD, but who decides which traffic control devices are selected and installed?
The individual State and local highway agencies (not the FHWA) select, install, operate, and maintain all traffic control devices on all public roadways (including the Interstate and the U.S. numbered systems) nationwide. On private roads open to public travel, the owner is responsible, although in some jurisdictions the State or local governments may exercise some approval requirements over private road traffic control devices, especially in the development approval process and in building and occupancy permits.
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

4. MUTCD Updates/History
New edition of the MUTCD approximately every 5 years Official version of the manual is now published by FHWA on the Internet only.
Roundabout
Lettering size change for the older driver
Research into symbol signs
Retroreflectivity requirements
Q: How often do MUTCD standards change, and how are the changes made?
A: The MUTCD is a dynamic document because standards change to address travel patterns and road conditions, and to incorporate technology and materials advancements. FHWA has stated its intention to issue a new edition of the MUTCD approximately every 5 years, and to keep revisions to an absolute minimum between new editions. The FHWA previously relied on periodic updates, usually every 2 to 3 years, to revise existing manuals. The 1988 edition was updated with many revised pages seven separate times over a period of 12 years, until a new edition was produced in The practice of keeping field personnel abreast of amendments to the MUTCD by mailing updates proved unsatisfactory because traffic planners and engineers had difficulty identifying whether or not they were applying the most recent "updated" version. This is one reason why the official version of the manual is now published by FHWA on the Internet only. All MUTCD revisions and new editions must be adopted via the Federal Register rulemaking process, which involves publishing a Notice of Proposed Amendments (NPA) soliciting comments, analyzing comments, and publishing a Final Rule.
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

5. Applies to all roads open to the Public
Privately owned
Publicly owned
Bike Paths
Clarification is added that, for the purpose of MUTCD applicability, the phrase “open to public travel” includes toll roads and roads within shopping centers, airports, sports arenas, and other similar business and recreation facilities that are privately owned but where the public is allowed to travel without access restrictions. This reflects the final rule in 2006 that modified the Code of Federal Regulations (23 CFR 655) to add this definition.
- The final rule language further clarifies that except for gated toll roads, private gated properties where public access is restricted at all times shall not be considered to be open to public travel.
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

6. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
Compliance Timelines
Have a program for the systematic upgrading of substandard traffic control devices (23 U.S.C. 402(a)) (23 CFR 655 F)
Either when the devices are no longer serviceable because they reach the end of their service life or otherwise need to be replaced, or when other events such as highway improvement or reconstruction projects occur
All new or reconstructed devices installed anytime after a new MUTCD is adopted must be in compliance with the new MUTCD provisions, regardless of whether or not there is a compliance date established for a given provision in the Manual
Each State is required by Title 23 of the U.S. Code and also by 23 CFR 655 to have a systematic program of upgrading substandard devices in the field to meet new MUTCD standards, and generally this is done by replacing noncompliant devices at the end of their service life or when they need to be replaced due to roadway reconstruction or other events.
For only 11 of the new Standards in the 2009 edition, FHWA has established specific compliance dates to retrofit or replace noncompliant devices that exist in the field. For these 11 new Standards, a specific date is needed because of critical safety considerations that would occur if only the “systematic upgrading” (end of service life) provisions were relied upon, or because the new Standard requires an action (such as a study or a retiming of signals) that is not directly related to service life of the device and FHWA has determined that it is critical for safety that the action be taken.
For these 11 new target compliance dates, specific dates (usually December 31 of a particular year) are set, rather than the previous practice of setting target compliance dates as a certain number of years from the effective date of the final rule.
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

7. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
Compliance dates
Federal Register dated December 16, 2009
In the 2009 MUTCD itself, in Table I-2 in the Introduction on pages I-4 to I-6.
Each State is required by Title 23 of the U.S. Code and also by 23 CFR 655 to have a systematic program of upgrading substandard devices in the field to meet new MUTCD standards, and generally this is done by replacing noncompliant devices at the end of their service life or when they need to be replaced due to roadway reconstruction or other events.
For only 11 of the new Standards in the 2009 edition, FHWA has established specific compliance dates to retrofit or replace noncompliant devices that exist in the field. For these 11 new Standards, a specific date is needed because of critical safety considerations that would occur if only the “systematic upgrading” (end of service life) provisions were relied upon, or because the new Standard requires an action (such as a study or a retiming of signals) that is not directly related to service life of the device and FHWA has determined that it is critical for safety that the action be taken.
For these 11 new target compliance dates, specific dates (usually December 31 of a particular year) are set, rather than the previous practice of setting target compliance dates as a certain number of years from the effective date of the final rule.
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

8. Interpretation Experimentation Interim Approval
Processes Section 1A.10 Design, application, and placement of traffic control devices other than those adopted in this Manual shall be prohibited unless the provisions of this Section are followed.
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

9. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
MUTCD Website
National MUTCD website
Standard Highway Signs book
Interim approvals
PowerPoint of Changes
show MUTCD page
Indiana MUTCD website
Substantial Conformance
Complete version
List of deviations
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

10. Interpretation Memo on a Standard
Issued October 1, 2010
Site-Specific Flexibility
not jurisdiction wide
Fully document engineering reasons for deviation
States may maintain 2003 wording on definition of a standard
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

11. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
News Headlines
Street Sign Overhaul To Cost Communities Thousands (WRTV – Indianapolis)
Government Orders Cities To Change Street Signs (KMBC)
Local Governments Told To Buy New Street Signs (ABC)
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

12. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
Do not need to replace ALL signs-
Just the ones that are under the minimums
The media should not be your source
LTAP
INDOT
FHWA
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

13. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
Street Name Signs
Lettering (Section 2D.43)
combination of lower-case letters with initial upper-case letters
Multi-lane 40 mph or less 6 inches 4.5 inches
Multi-lane More than 40 mph 8 inches 6 inches
Green with White letters
Blue with White letters
Brown with White letters
White with Black letters
January 2018 – Retroreflectivity
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

14. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
Evolution of the MUTCD
You need to keep up with the changes in the MUTCD!
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

15. Passive Rail Crossings
A YIELD sign shall be the default traffic control device for Crossbuck Assemblies
Unless an engineering study performed by the regulatory agency or highway authority having jurisdiction over the roadway approach determines that a STOP sign is appropriate
A new requirement is added that a YIELD or STOP sign shall be installed at all passive highway-rail grade crossings, except where road users are directed by an authorized person on the ground to not enter the crossing at all times that an approaching train is about to occupy the crossing. While the Crossbuck sign is in fact a regulatory sign that in most States requires vehicles to yield to trains and stop if necessary, recent research indicates insufficient road user understanding of and compliance with that regulatory requirement when only the Crossbuck sign is present at a passive grade crossing. The provisions are similar to those of a policy memo that was issued in 2006.
New figures are added and existing figures are revised to show typical Crossbuck Assemblies on the same support and on separate supports.
This new requirement also applies at passive highway-LRT grade crossings where a Crossbuck sign is used.
The FHWA establishes a target compliance date of December 31, 2019 (approximately 10 years from the effective date of this final rule) or when adjustments are made to the individual grade crossing and/or corridor, whichever occurs first, for implementing the new requirements for YIELD or STOP signs at existing passive crossings. Because the new requirements involve conducting engineering studies and installing signs that do not currently exist at existing grade crossings, the FHWA believes that relying on the systematic upgrading processes that highway agencies typically use to replace existing signs at the end of their service lives would result in an excessively long time period for installation of YIELD or STOP signs at existing passive grade crossings. The FHWA anticipates that installation of the required additional signs at existing locations will provide significant safety benefits to road users.
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

16. 2003 Manual regulatory signs are now replaced by warning signs
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

17. REDUCED SPEED LIMIT AHEAD
New guidance that a Reduced Speed Limit Ahead (W3-5) sign should be used to inform road users of a reduced speed zone where the speed limit is being reduced by more than 10 mph, or where engineering judgment indicates the need for advance notice to comply with the posted speed limit ahead.
New text recommends that a Reduced Speed Limit Ahead (W3-5) sign should be used to inform road users of a reduced speed zone where the speed limit is being reduced by more than 10 mph, or where engineering judgment indicates the need for advance notice to comply with the posted speed limit ahead.
. The FHWA adds a new section numbered and titled, “Section 2C.30 Speed Reduction Signs (W3-5, W3-5a).” (This Section was numbered Section 2C.51 in the NPA.) This new section includes a GUIDANCE statement, which recommends using the 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 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 received five comments from ATSSA, the City of Tucson, Arizona, and a private citizen in support of this change, and fourteen comments from several State and local DOTs opposed to the change. Those who opposed the change indicated that the existing signs are more recognized by drivers, and therefore have the desired effect of reducing speeds where needed. Although some of the opposing commenters, such as the NCUTCD and the Washington DOT, agreed that the sign should be classified as a warning rather than a regulatory sign, many still favored use of the existing signs for economic reasons or indicated disagreement with the design of the proposed signs.
The FHWA disagrees with the use of an advisory speed plaque with a word message “Reduced Speed Ahead” sign as was suggested by some commenters. This is an inappropriate use of an advisory speed plaque and would only serve to further confuse the motoring public about what the difference is between a (regulatory) speed limit and a (non-enforceable) advisory speed. The sign proposed in the NPA is the most logical and the one that best serves the public because it is consistent with other advance warning signs that warn of a specific regulation ahead, such as the symbolic Stop Ahead and Yield Ahead signs. The Canadian MUTCD[1] has incorporated a similar concept of speed reduction signs for several decades. The NCUTCD and the Missouri DOT felt that the proposed sign would be a maintenance burden on jurisdictions due to having to stock and carry on sign maintenance vehicles multiple versions of the Speed Reduction sign with different numerical speed values. In view of Canada’s long-standing use of this concept of speed reduction sign, the FHWA believes that this has not proven to be an unreasonable maintenance burden in Canada, nor has it been an unreasonable problem for jurisdictions in the U.S. with other standard signs in the MUTCD that provide for multiple speed values or distance values, such as the R2-1 Speed Limit sign, the W12-2 Low Clearance warning sign, the W13-1 Advisory Speed Plaque, or the W13-2 and W13-3 Exit and Ramp Speed advisory signs. Clear and unambiguous advance warning of a reduced regulatory speed limit ahead is an extremely important message that warrants the use of the sign as proposed in the NPA. The FWHA adopts the language for this section, as proposed in the NPA.
To respond to comments regarding the costs associated with this change, the FHWA revises the phase-in target compliance date to 15 years from the effective date of this final rule for existing R2-5 signs in good condition to be changed to W3-5 or W3-5a signs, to minimize any impact on State or local governments.
The FHWA received several comments from the Arizona DOT and private citizens suggesting revisions to the design of the W3-5 and W3-5a signs to make them more legible from longer distances. To address these comments, the FHWA makes minor refinements to the English unit version of the W3-5 symbol sign to make the numerals 9 inches high for the 36” x 36” sign and 12 inches high for the 48” x 48” sign, and adjusts the layout slightly. The FHWA also deletes the metric alternate of the W3-5 symbol sign because the numerals on it would be too small. The only allowable metric version of the Speed Reduction Warning sign is to be the metric word message W3-5a sign.
Additionally, the FHWA includes a STANDARD statement, which requires that a Speed Reduction Warning 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. The Minnesota DOT opposed this new paragraph, indicating that Section 2B.13 Speed Limit Sign (R2-1) already states that an R2-1 sign is required. The FHWA disagrees because Section 2B.13 does not require that statutory speed limits be posted, and this new paragraph is needed because it correctly limits the use of the Speed Reduction signs to only locations that are prior to “posted” speed limits. The FHWA adopts this paragraph in this final rule.
[1] “Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Canada”, 1998, and a December 2002 update, are available for purchase from the Transportation Association of Canada, at the following URL: and click on “Traffic Control”.
Section 2C.30 Speed Reduction Signs (W3-5, W3-5a)—removal of R2-5 Series Reduced Speed Ahead signs
and use of W3-5 or W3-5a warning signs instead—15 years from the effective date of the Final Rule
for the 2003 MUTCD.
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

18. Horizontal Curve Warning
The Turn (W1-1) sign or the Curve (W1-2) sign may be combined with the Cross Road (W2-1) sign or the Side Road (W2-2 or W2-3) sign to create a combination Horizontal Alignment/Intersection (W1-10) sign that depicts the condition where an intersection occurs within a turn or curve.
Several new designs of Combination Horizontal Alignment and Intersection signs are added to provide uniform designs for certain common situations.
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

19. Horizontal Alignment Signs
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

20. New table for spacing of Chevron signs
Chevron signs may be mounted at 4-foot height
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

21. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
Do Not Obscure Shape
Signs mounted back-to-back with STOP or YIELD signs should stay within the edges
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

22. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
MUTCD training by LTAP
Indiana LTAP MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES (MUTCD) WORKSHOP DATES and LOCATIONS
Fulfills the requirement for Indiana LTAP Road Scholar Core Course #8 MUTCD
 May 10, HUNTINGBURG Event/Community Center
 May 12, BROWNSTOWN Pewter Hall
 May 24, SELMA Ballroom at Cardinal Hills
 May 26, DANVILLE Hendricks County 4-H Fairgrounds
 June 7, FORT WAYNE Allen County Fairgrounds
 June 9, SOUTH BEND Century Center
Indiana LTAP website:
Road Scholar Core Course #5 Roadway Safety (3 hour Course)
June 1st 2011 in Indianapolis at (IACHES Conference)
Road Safety Workshop (6 hour Course)
July 28th 2011 in West Lafayette
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011

23. Purdue Road School March 8, 2011
Questions
Karen Stippich
Purdue Road School March 8, 2011