# Presentation: 445854

## Chapter 2B: Regulatory Signs

**Millennium Edition**Summary of Changes

**Notes:**
Explanation:  This presentation covers the significant changes to Chapter 2B “Regulatory Signs.”

These proposed changes were published in the Federal Register, dated December 21, 1999.

Comments are welcome and must be received by June 30, 2000.

## Retroreflection & Illumination

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Text indicating that all regulatory signs shall be retroreflective or illuminated is in Sections 2A-8 and  2B-1.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Discussion on sign retrorefleclivity & illumination remains in Section 2B.01

**Notes:**
Explanation:	In Section 2B.1, the FHWA Proposes to delete the sentence in  	the 1988 MUTCD which stated that all regulatory signs shall be       retroreflective or illuminated since this information is covered in Section 2A.8 	which provides general requirements for all signs, including 	regulatory signs.

## Sign Sizes

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Explanation of when various sign sizes should be used based on roadway classification.

- Section 2B.03

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Explanation:	In Section 2B.3, the FHWA proposes to include an explanation 	of when various sign sizes should be used based on the roadway 	classification.  This information is currently shown in the 		“Standard Highway Signs” book.  However, we believe it is 	worth mentioning in the MUTCD text as well.



Standard Highway Signs, FHWA, 1979 (Metric) is included by reference in the 1988 MUTCD.  It is available for inspection and copying at the FHWA Washington Headquarters and all FHWA Division Offices as prescribed at 49 CFR part 7.

## Regulatory Sign Sizes Table 2B-1

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD **_
- Table 2B.1 added which shows sign codes, road classification, and applicable MUTCD sections.
-      Section 2B.03

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Explanation:	In Section 2B.3, the FHWA proposes to add Table 2B.1 which 	shows the sign codes, the standard sign sizes, and applicable 	MUTCD sections for more detailed information.  The believes 	that having this information in a table format will provide an 	easy and quick reference for the readers.

## 4-WAY Supplemental Plaque

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- The 4-WAY supplemental plaque is recommended at intersections controlled by a STOP sign.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Requires the use of the 4-WAY supplemental plaque (R1-3) at intersections controlled by STOP signs.
-      Section 2B.04

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	The 4-WAY supplement plaque is recommended at intersection 	controlled by a STOP signs.

Proposed:	 “ STANDARD: At intersections where all approaches are 		controlled by STOP sign(s) (Section 2B.5) a supplementary 	plaque (R1-3 or R1-4) shall by mounted just below each STOP 	sign.

Explanation:	In Section 2B.4, paragraph 2, the FHWA proposes to require 	the use of the 4-WAY supplemental plaque (R1-3) at 		intersections where all approaches are controlled by STOP 		signs.  In the 1988 MUTCD this was a recommended practice.  	However, the FHWA believes that due to the increased 		aggressive driving behavior, disregard of STOP signs, and the 	hazardous nature of these type intersections, the required use of 	the 4-WAY supplemental plaque will provide additional 		emphasis and motorist information at these locations.

## Stop Sign Application

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Title is “Warrants for Stop Signs.”
- Section 2B-5

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Title changed to “Stop Sign Applications”
- Section 2B-05

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Explanation:	In Section 2B.5, the FHWA proposes to change the title from 	“Warrants for Stop Signs” to “Stop Sign Application.”  This 	proposed change attempts to eliminate the misunderstanding 	created by the term “warrants” which has a “legal sanctions” 	connotation.  

	The GUIDANCE provided in Section 2B.5 for installing STOP 	signs is not intended to be a legal sanction or authorization, but 	instead is intended to list possible situations where these signs 	could be appropriate based on an engineering study.

## TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- 	Not in MUTCD

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Add **GUIDANCE** to describe the appropriate street to stop traffic in a 2-way STOP situation and to recommend the use of engineering 		judgement.
- 	Section 2B.05

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	Not in the 1988 Edition of the MUTCD.

Proposed:	 “ GUIDANCE: The decision on the appropriate street to stop, 	once the decision has been made to install two-way control, 	should be based on engineering judgement.  In most cases, the 	street carrying the lowest amount of traffic should be stopped.”

Explanation:  The FHWA proposes to add guidance in Section 2B.5, 		paragraph 6 which describes the appropriate street to stop 		traffic in a 2-way STOP control situation. In most cases, the 	street carrying the lowest amount of traffic should be stopped.

## TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL

_**1988 MUTCD**_
-  Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD **_
- Considerations when deciding which street to install STOP signs where 2 streets have equal volumes.
- 	Section 2B.05

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:		Not in 1988 Edition of the MUTCD.

Proposed:		“Option:
				1.	Stopping the direction that conflicts the most with 								established pedestrian crossing activity or school walking 						routes;
				2.	Stopping the direction that has obscured vision, dips, or 						bumps that already require motorist to use lower operating 					speeds; and
				3.	Stopping the direction that has the longest distance of 							uninterrupted flow approaching the intersection.”

Explanation:  In section 2B.5, paragraph 7 FHWA proposes to include options for consideration  when deciding on which street to install a STOP sign in situations where 2 streets have relatively equal volumes and/or characteristics.

## STOP SIGN APPLICATIONS

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Restrictions for the use of STOP signs also applies to Multi-way Stop Signs.
- 	Section 2B.05

_**1988 MUTCD**_
-  Not in MUTCD.

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	Not in 1988 Edition of the MUTCD.

Proposed:	“STANDARD: Stop signs shall not be installed at intersection 	where traffic control signals are installed and operating because 	the potential for conflicting commands could create motorist 	confusion.
	Portable or part-time STOP signs shall not be used except for 	emergency and temporary work zone traffic control purposes.”

Explanation:  Restrictions discussed in Section 2B.5 for the use of STOP 		signs also applies to multiway stop signs discussed in Section 	2B.7.  Examples: Stop signs shall not be installed at 		intersections where traffic control signals are installed (Section 	2B.5, para. 2); Portable or part-time Stop signs shall not be used 	except for emergency and temporary work zone traffic control 	(Section 2B.5, para. 3); and Stop signs should not be used for 	speed control (Section 2B.5, para. 4).  Each of these restrictions 	also applies to multiway stop signs. 

## STOP SIGN PLACEMENT

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- A Stop sign _may_ be supplemented with a Stop line.
- Section 2B-9

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Stop lines _should_ be located at the point where the road user should stop.
- 	Section 2B.06

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	A Stop sign may be supplemented with a Stop line.

Proposed:	In Section 2B.6, paragraph 4, the FHWA recommends:
	“GUIDANCE: Stop lines, when used to supplement a STOP 	sign, should be located at the point where the road user should 	stop (see Proposed Section 3B.9).”

Explanation:  The use of pavement markings helps to reinforce sign and other 	traffic control device messages.  We believe that recommending 	the use of the STOP line provides the road user with additional 	information on which to make safe traffic operation decisions.

## STOP SIGN PLACEMENT

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- 1988 MUTCD shows the STOP sign placement in the typical drawings.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Add text that if only one STOP sign is installed, it  should not be placed on the far-side of the intersection.
- 	Section 2B.06

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	The 1988 MUTCD shows the STOP sign placement in the 		typical drawings.

Proposed:	“GUIDANCE: STOP signs should not be placed on the far side 	of the intersection.” 

Explanation:  In Section 2B.6, paragraph 5 the FHWA proposes to add a 		sentence which states that STOP signs should not be placed on 	the far-side of the intersection.  Although this is not new 		guidance and is shown in many of the typical figures in the 		1988 MUTCD, we believe that it is appropriate to include this 	statement in the text to eliminate any ambiguity.

## MULTI-WAY STOPS

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD **_
- Guidance added to recommend an engineering study to determine when to install multi-way stop signs.
- 	Section 2B.07

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	Not in the 1988 Edition of the MUTCD.

Proposed:	To add guidance to recommend an engineering study to 		determine when to install multiway stop signs.

Explanation:	In Section 2B.7, paragraph 2 the FHWA proposes to add 		guidance to recommend that the decision to install Multiway 	Stop signs should be based on an engineering study.

## Engineering Study Criteria for Multi-Way Stops

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Uses term “warrants”
- Optional condition
- Section 2B-6

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Use “engineering study”
- The criteria _should_ be considered for multi-way stop sign installation.
- Section 2B.07

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:		Use of the term “warrants.”  Optional (or may) condition.

Proposed:		“GUIDANCE: The decision to install multiway stop control should 					 based on an engineering study.  The following criteria should be 						considered in the engineering study for a multiway STOP sign 						installation:

				1.	Where traffic signals are justified, the multiway stop is an 	interim 					measure that can be installed quickly to control traffic while 							arrangements are being made for the signals installation.
				2.	A crash problem, as indicated by five or more reported crashes in 						a 12-month period that are susceptible to correction by a multiway 					stop installation.  Such crashes include right- and left-turn 								collisions as well as right-angle 	collisions.”	

Explanation:  In Section 2B.7, paragraph 3, the FHWA proposes to eliminate the 					misunderstood term "warrants" and use "engineering study" instead.  					The FHWA also proposes to change the criteria for installing  							multiway stop signs from an optional (or may) condition to a 							recommended (or should) condition.  

## Minimum Vehicle Volume Criteria

_**1988 MUTCD **_
- Total vehicle volume entering the intersection from the major street approach averages at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 hours of an average day.
- 	Section 2B.07

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Total vehicle volume from the major street approach (total of both approaches)  averages at least 300 vehicles per hour....
- 	Section 2B.07

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	Total vehicle volume entering the intersection from the major 	street approach average at least 500 vehicles per hour for any 8 	hours of an average day.

Proposed:	“GUIDANCE: Minimum volumes:  (a) The total vehicular 	volume entering the intersection from the major street 		approaches averages at least 300 vehicles per hour for any 8 	hours of an average day, . . .”

Explanation:  In Section 2B.7, paragraph 3, item 3a, the FHWA proposes to 	change the minimum vehicle volume criteria from 500 vehicles 	per hour for any 8 hours of an average day to 300 vehicles.  	This proposed change allows more consideration, flexibility, 	and allows more intersections to qualify for multiway stop sign 	installations.

## Combined Volume Criteria 

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Combination volume studies only include vehicles and pedestrians.
- 	Section2B-6

_**2000 MUTCD **_
- Add bicycle volumes to  combination volume studies of vehicles and pedestrians from the minor approach (total of both approaches)..
- Section 2B.07

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	Combination volume studies only include vehicles and 		pedestrians.

Proposed:	GUIDANCE: Minimum Volumes -- “(b)The combined 		vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle volume entering the 		intersection from the minor street averages at least 200 units per 	hour for the same 8 hours, with an average delay to minor street 	vehicular traffic of at least 30 seconds per vehicle during the 	highest hour . . .”

Explanation:	In section 2B.7, paragraph 3, item 3b, the FHWA proposes to 	add bicycle volumes to the combination volume studies of 		vehicles and pedestrians entering the intersection from the 		minor street.

## Multi-Way Stop Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Provide means to combine criteria for accident experience and volume counts. (80% of min. values)
- 	Section 2B.07

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	Not in the 1988 Edition of the MUTCD.

Proposed:	“GUIDANCE:  4. Where no single criterion is satisfied, but 	where criteria 2, 3(a), and 3(b) are all satisfied to 80% of the 	minimum values.  Item 3(c) is excluded from this condition.”

Explanation:  In Section 2B.7, the FHWA proposes to provide a means for 	combining the data on the accident experience and volume 		counts when considering the installation of multiway stop signs.

## Yield Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Discussion on design application, and placement was not separated in the 1988 edition.
- 	Section 2B-7

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Separate the discussion on design, application, and placement of Yield Signs
- 	Yield Sign (2B.08)
- 	Yield Sign Applications (2B.09)
- 	Yield Sign Placement (2B.10)

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	Section 2B.8 -- YIELD sign should not be used on the through 	roadway of expressways.

Proposed:	“STANDARD: The YIELD sign shall be a downward pointing,	equilateral triangle with a red border and the legend YIELD in 	red on a white background.
	The YIELD sign assigns right-of-way to traffic on certain 		approaches to an intersection.  Vehicles controlled by a YIELD 	sign need to slow down or stop when necessary to avoid 		interference with conflicting traffic.”

Explanation:	The FHWA proposes to separate the discussion on design, application, and placement of Yield Signs into separate sections 2B.8, 2B.9, and 2B.10 respectively.

## Yield Sign Applications

_**1988 MUTCD **_
- Section 2B.8 uses the term “Yield Sign Warrants.”
- 	Section 2B-8

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Revise this misunderstood term to “Yield Sign Applications” and listing the criteria to consider for installation.
- 	Section 2B.09

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:		Section 2B.8 of the 1988 MUTCD uses the term “Yield Sign 					Warrants.”

Proposed:		“Option: YIELD signs may be installed:
				1.	When the ability to see all potentially conflicting traffic is . . .
				2.	When controlling a merge-type movement on the entering 						roadway . . .
				3.	At the second cross-roadway of a divided highway, where the 					median width is 9 m (30 ft) or greater . . .
				4.	At an intersection where a special problem exists . . .
				5.	To control a major traffic movement through an intersection . 					. . (see Figure 2-3 of the proposed text).”

Explanation:	The term “warrants” is often misunderstood as a requirement for 				installation of certain traffic control devices.  To avoid this 					misunderstanding, the FHWA proposes to revise the language so 				that it is clear that State and local highway agencies have the 					option to install Yield signs when the situations listed exist.

## Yield Sign Placement

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Yield signs _should_ be located as close as practical to the intersection it regulates.
- 	Section 2B-9

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Yield signs _shall_ be located as close as practical to the intersection it regulates.
**	**
- 	Section 2B.10*** ***

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	YIELD signs should be located as close as practical to the 		intersection it regulates.

Proposed:	Section 2B.10 -- STANDARD: The YIELD sign shall be 		located as close as practical to the intersection it regulates, 		while optimizing its visibility to the road user it is intended.

Explanation:	The FHWA proposes to require that Yield signs be located as 	close as practical to the intersection it regulates because it will 	enhance the sign’s visibility and will help improve intersection 	safety.  This same change is proposed for STOP signs in 		Section 2B.6, paragraph 2.

## Yield Sign Placement

***         ***_**1988 MUTCD**_
-  Yield signs should not be used on the through roadway of expressways.
- Section 2B-8

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Delete this sentence.

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	Yield signs should not be used on the through roadway of 		expressways.

Proposed:	This sentence is deleted.

Explanation:	The FHWA proposes not to include this sentence in the new 	MUTCD in order to avoid potential conflict with Yield signs 	installed at signalized intersections on expressways for the 		purpose of controlling right-turn movements.

## Speed Limit Sign

_**1988 MUTCD**_
-  Not in MUTCD

**	**_**2000 MUTCD**_
-  Support statement added to clarify metric supplemental plaque is yellow background with black legend.
- 	Section 2B.11

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

## Truck Speed Limit Sign

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Truck Speed Limit text found in 2B-10 Speed Limit Sign.
- The “Trucks 40” legend appears to be appropriate for use as a “stand alone” independent sign.
- 	Section 2B-10

_**2000 MUTCD **_
- Added as separate section Clarify this sign is a supplemental plaque required for use below Speed Limit sign or included within R2-1 sign.
- 	Section 2B.12

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	In the 1988 Edition, the  “Trucks 40” legend appears to be appropriate for use as a “stand alone” independent sign.

Proposed:	“STANDARD: Where a special speed limit applies to trucks or 	other vehicles, the legend TRUCKS XX or such similar legend 	shall be shown on the same panel as the Speed Limit sign or on 	a separate plaque (R2-2P) below the standard legend.  When 	used independently below the standard legend, the Truck Speed 	Limit sign (R2-2) shall carry a reference to SPEED or KM/H 	(MPH).”

Explanation:	The FHWA proposes to clarify the language in the 1988 edition 	so that it is understood that the “Trucks 40” sign is a 		supplemental plaque (R2-2P) and that it shall be used below the 	Speed Limit (R2-1) sign or included within the R2-1 sign.

## Speed Limit Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- “Changeable message sign that changes for traffic and ambient conditions may be installed...”
- 	Section 2B.11

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	Statement under GUIDANCE.

Proposed:	“STANDARD: No more than three speed limits shall be 		displayed on any one speed limit sign or assembly.”

Explanation:  To reduce the potential for motorist information overload, the FHWA proposes to require that three be the maximum number of speed limits displayed on any one speed limit sign or assembly.  

## Reduced Speed Ahead Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Found in 2B-14
- Not in MUTCD.
- Not in MUTCD.
- Section 2B-14

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Added separate section.
-  Optional methods for advising road users of speed limit change ahead.
- Supplemental plaques should have white background w/ black legend and border.
- Section 2B.16

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:		Not in the 1988 Edition of the MUTCD.

Proposed:		“Option:  The following methods may be used to inform road 				users of speeds limit changes:
				1.	Any of the R2-5 series of signs may be displayed.
				2.	An assembly consisting of the Speed Limit sign (R2-1) with 					the supplemental legend plaque “BEGIN” mounted above 						the R2-1 sign and the supplemental distance plaque (1/6 km 					(1/4 mi), etc.) mounted below the R2-1 sign.
				3.	In school areas, the END SCHOOL ZONE (S5-2) sign may 					be used as an alternate to the R2-1 sign assembly.  (See 						Section 7B.10)

Explanation:	The FHWA proposes to include the following optional method 				for advising road users of the speed limit change ahead:  An 					assembly consisting of the Speed Limit (R2-1) sign with the 					supplemental plaque “BEGIN” mounted above the R2-1 sign 					and the supplemental distance plaque (1/4 mile, etc.) mounted 				below the R2-1 sign.  This idea was submitted by the Minnesota 				Department of Transportation.

## Turn Prohibition Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Turn Prohibition and U-Turn Prohibition Signs were 2 separate sections.
- 	Sections 2B-15 & 2B-16

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Combine these 2 sections.
- 	Section 2B.17

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:	Turn Prohibition & U-Turn Prohibition signs were 2 separate 	sections.

Proposed:	2B.15 Turn Prohibition (R3-1 to 4)

Explanation:	The FHWA proposes to combine the discussion for the Turn 	Prohibition and U-Turn Prohibition signs into one section since 	they are both related.

## Turn Prohibition Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Turn Prohibition signs _should_ be used to indicate intersection turns that are prohibited or restricted.
- 	Section 2B.15

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Except as noted in Option
- Where turns are prohibited, Turn Prohibition signs _shall_ be installed.
- 	Section 2B.17

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Turn Prohibition signs should be used to indicate intersection turns that are prohibited or restricted.

Proposed:  Where turns are prohibited, Turn Prohibition signs shall be installed.

Explanation:  The FHWA proposes to reword this sentence re: turn prohibitions to clarify that when turns are prohibited, the standard Turn Prohibition sign  shall be installed.

## Turn Prohibition Signs

**   **_**1988 MUTCD**_
-  Not in MUTCD.

- 	_**2000 MUTCD **_
-  Optional text added “Where ONE WAY signs are used, Turn Prohibition signs may be omitted.”
- 	Section 2B.17

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

## Turn Prohibition Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Installing Turn Prohibition signs adjacent to a signal face is an OPTION.
- 	Section 2B15

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Installing Turn Prohibition sign adjacent to a signal face remains an option.
- 	Section 2B.17

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  If signals are present, the sign may be installed adjacent to a signal face...

Proposed:  If signals are present, Turn Prohibition signs should be installed adjacent to a signal face...

Explanation:  The FHWA proposes to recommend that the turn prohibition signs R3-1 to R3-4 should be installed adjacent to a signal face instead of allowing this as an option.  The FHWA proposes to change this to a GUIDANCE condition because it enhances the sign’s visibility and improves the road user’s ability to see the sign placed in this overhead position.

## Turn Prohibition Sign

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- In addition to mounting the Turn Prohibition signs adjacent to overhead signals, this sign may be post-mounted.
- 	Section 2B.17

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 edition.

Proposed:  If signals are present, an additional Turn Prohibition sign may be post mounted to supplement the sign mounted overhead.

Explanation:  In addition to recommending the installation of an overhead turn prohibition sign at signalized intersections, the FHWA proposes to include an OPTION to install a post mount turn prohibition sign as a supplement to the overhead sign.

## Mandatory Movement Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- New sign (R3-5a) is used to notify  road user to stay in the same lane to proceed straight through the intersection.
- 	Sections 2B-19* *

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 Edition.

Proposed:   The Intersection Lane Control sign (R3-5a) may be used to require a road user to stay in the same lane and proceed straight through an intersection.

Explanation:  The FHWA proposes to add a new Intersection Lane Control sign  which may be installed to notify road users to stay in the same lane to proceed straight through an intersection.

## Mandatory Movement Lane Control Signs 

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Text added  that when Mandatory Movement Lane Control signs are installed, appropriate pavement markings may also be installed.
- 	Section 2B.19

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 Edition

Proposed:  When installed, these Intersection Lane Control signs shall be used in additional to Lane Control pavement markings (see proposed Section 3B.12)

Explanation:  In the 1988 MUTCD the use of pavement markings was only recommended for mandatory movement situations. This proposed change to require lane use pavement markings and signs in both mandatory and optional traffic movement situations will benefit  the road user by providing additional information to assist them in the decisionmaking tasks involved with perceiving and executing safe and appropriate traffic maneuvers.  Requiring pavement markings with lane use control signs is a practice that is successfully used in Europe and it is called “horizontal signing.”  European traffic engineers have found that the redundancy provided by horizontal signing is a very important element of attaining and improving both traffic efficiency and safety.  The FHWA proposes a 10 year compliance period based on the effective date of the MUTCD 2000 MUTCD.  This would allow States time to implement this proposed change.

## Intersection Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Where the number of  through lanes is 2 or less, the R3-5, R3-6, or R3-8 signs may be either overhead or ground mounted.
- 	Section 2B.18

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:   Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:   When the number of through lanes for an approach is two or less, the intersection lane-use control signs (R3-5, R3-6, or R3-8) may be either overhead or ground mounted.  

Explanation:   The FHWA proposes to add this proposed language to distinguish between when overhead and ground mounted intersection lane-use control signs are used.

## Intersection Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- When used Intersection Lane Control signs should be mounted overhead.
- 	Section* *2B.18

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  Where there are three or more approach lanes, Intersection Lane Control signs (R3-5, R3-6, or R3-8) should be mounted overhead when used.

Explanation:   This proposed change considers sign placement based on the visibility needs of the road user and the number of lanes at the intersection approach, particularly in situations where the road user’s view may be obstructed by other vehicles in the adjacent lanes.

## Mandatory Movement Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not discussed as a separate section
- 	Section 2B-17*** ***

_**2000 MUTCD**_
-  New section that specifically addresses application and placement for mandatory movement lane control signs (R3-5, R3-5a and R3-7)
- 	Section* *2B.19

**Notes:**
CURRENT:  Mandatory Movement Signs are not discussed in a separate section.  They are included in the text for all intersection lane-use control signs.

PROPOSED:  Add a new section that specifically addresses Mandatory Movement Signs (R3-5, 53-5a, and R3-7).

## Mandatory Movement Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Placement location is not clearly stated.
- 	Section 2B19

_**2000 MUTCD**_
-  Clarifies that word message “LEFT LANE MUST TURN LEFT” (R3-7) shall be ground- mounted only.
- 	Section* *2B.19

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:   “The mandatory turn sign (R3-7) designed for post mounting shall carry the message Right (or Left) Lane Must Turn Right (or left).” 

Proposed:   Clarify the last sentence of proposed Section 2B.17, paragraph 1 to indicate that the R3-7  “LEFT LANE MUST TURN LEFT”  word message sign shall be ground mounted only.

Explanation:   In the 1988 MUTCD, the placement location is not clearly stated.  The words “designed for post-mounting” does not specify whether post mounting the sign is mandatory or guidance.   FHWA proposes to classify this as a mandatory placement position for the R3-7 sign.

## Mandatory Movement Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- New design standard for the “LEFT OR RIGHT TURN ONLY” (R3-5) symbol sign.
- 	Section 2B.18 & 2B.19

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:   Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  When the “”LEFT OR RIGHT TURN ONLY” (R3-5) symbol sign is ground-mounted, a supplemental plaque (R3-5b, R3-5c, R3-5d) indicating the lane with the appropriate movement shall be added below.  (Example:  HOV 2+, TAXI LANE, LEFT LANE, CENTER LANE, RIGHT LANE, LEFT 2 LANES, etc.)

Explanation:  Adding the supplemental plaque with the lane designation (example LEFT LANE, TAXI LANE, or HOV 2+ lane) will help the road user determine which lane applies to the R3-5 “TURN LANE ONLY” symbol sign.
You will also notice that the FHWA has added the reference to HOV 2+ lanes.  The FHWA proposes to add new sections 2B.48 and 2B.49 that will prescribe provisions for the design, placement, and operation of high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes.  This will be discussed in more detail in the last few slides of this presentation.  However, with the significant deployment of HOV lanes on roadways throughout the U.S., we believe it is appropriate to include a reference to these signs in the discussion on types of designated lane-use signs.

## Optional Movement Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- The R3-6 sign is discussed in the same section with the mandatory movement signs.
- 	Section 2B-17

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Separate section to discuss “Optional Movement” R3-6 symbol sign.
- 	Section 2B.20

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current: The optional movement (R3-6) sign is discussed in the same section as the mandatory movement signs.

Proposed:  The optional movement (R3-6) sign is discussed in a separate section from the mandatory movement signs.

Explanation:   Separating the discussion of the optional movement (R3-6) sign helps improve the organization of the information in the MUTCD.

## Optional Movement Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- The specific location of the Optional Movement (R3-6) sign is not stated.
- 	Section 2B-17

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- If used, the Optional Movement (R3-6) sign shall be installed at the intersection location.
- 	Section* *2B.20

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  The specific location of the optional movement sign is not stated.

Proposed:  The Optional Movement Lane Control (R3-6) sign shall be located at the intersection.

Explanation:  The purpose of the MUTCD is to provide specific placement criteria for traffic control devices and this proposed change is in keeping with this purpose.

## Optional Movement Sign

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- The Optional Movement Lane Control (R3-6) sign shall indicate all permissible movements from specific lanes.
- 	Section 2B.20

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
CURRENT:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  The Optional Movement Lane Control (R3-6) sign shall indicate all permissible movements from  specific lanes.

Explanation:  This proposed change will give the road user more information on which to base their perception and decisionmaking task.

## Advance Intersection Lane-Use Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- The “Double Turn Lane-Use Control” (R3-8) Sign is not specified for use in advance of intersections.
- 	Section 2B-17

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- The “Double Turn Lane-Use Control” (R3-8) Sign is classified as an advance intersection sign.
- 	Section 2B.21

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  The “Double Turn Lane-Use Control” (R3-8 series) signs are not specified for placement in advance of the intersection.

Proposed:  The “Double Turn lane-Use Control (R3-8 series) signs are specified for placement in advance of the intersection.

Explanation:   The FHWA proposes to provide placement guidance that indicates the R3-8 sign would be installed in advance of the tapers or at the beginning of the turn lane so that road users can determine in advance their appropriate vehicle placement for lane changes.

In situations where HOV lanes exist, the “HOV 2+” (R3-5c) supplemental word message plaque may be installed at the top outside border of the R3-8 sign  and over the applicable lane.  The diamond symbol may be used in lieu of the word message “HOV”.  A more detailed discussion on HOV lane design and application is at the end of this presentation. 

## Reversible Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Added new section on “Reversible Lane Control Signs.”
- 	Section* *2B.21

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  Add a new section on “Reversible lane Control Signs.”

Explanation:  The use of reversible lane traffic control is a practice which is commonly used throughout the United States and it is appropriate for the MUTCD to provide design, application, and placement information for these.

## New Reversible Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD **_
- Not  in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- New reversible lane control signs (R3-9c to R3-9i) have been added.
- 	Section 2B.23

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  FHWA proposes to add 7 new reversible lane control signs (R3-9c to R3-9i) in Section 2B.21.

Explanation:  The new reversible lane control signs may be used for through traffic (with left turns either permitted or prohibited) in alternating directions during different periods and the lane may be used for exclusive left turns in one or both directions during other periods.  These signs may be either ground or overhead mounted.

## Reversible Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Does not indicate that reversible lane control signs may be designed as changeable messages.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Reversible Lane Control signs may be either static or changeable message type.
- 	Section* *2B.23

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
 Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  Reversible lane control signs (R3-9c to R3-9i) may be either static type or changeable message type.

Explanation:  The FHWA supports the use of changeable message signs especially in situations where real time motorist information is needed for changing traffic conditions.

## Reversible Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- When ground-mounted Reversible Lane Control signs are used, they shall be used as a supplement to overhead signs or signals.
- 	Section* *2B.23

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  When ground mounted reversible lane control signs are used, they shall be used as a supplement to overhead signs or signals.

Explanation:   The ground mounted sign is intended to provide the road user with more information in addition to the overhead signs or signals. The ground mounted sign is intended to provide an added opportunity for the road user to view the sign or signal message and react accordingly.

## Reversible Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- If a traffic engineering study determines that lane use control signals or barriers are not needed, overhead lane use control signs shall be used.
- 	Section 2B.23 & Figure 2B-1

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  Where it is determined by a traffic engineering study that lane use control signals or barriers are not necessary, the reversible lane shall be operated by overhead reversible lane control signs.  (NOTE TO SELF:  Check pavement markings section to see how reversible lane control is handled.)

Explanation:  The FHWA believes that if a traffic engineering study determines that traffic signals or barriers are not needed, then at the minimum, overhead reversible lane control signs shall be required.  These reversible lanes can be confusing and the road users needs to have some type of positive guidance.

## Reversible Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in  MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- 3 conditions to meet for reversing traffic flow using pavement markings and signs.
- 	Section 2B.23

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD

Proposed:  Reversing traffic flow may be accomplished with pavement markings and reversible lane control signs (without the use of lane control signals), when all of the following conditions are met:

1.  Only one lane is being reversed.
2.  A traffic engineering study indicates that sign operation alone would result in a level of safety and efficiency that is acceptable.
3.  There are no unusual or complex operations in the reversible lane pattern.

Explanation:  There are times when jurisdictions responsible for traffic control may want to exercise the option of installing only pavement markings and reversible lane control signs rather than using lane control signals.  The FHWA proposes to allow the option of installing only pavement markings and reversible lane control signs when the following 3 conditions are met:  (SEE LIST ABOVE).

## Reversible Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Table 2B-2 states to the meaning of symbols and legends on Reversible Lane Control Signs.
- 	Section* *2B. 23

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  Where symbols and legends are used, their meanings shall be as shown in Table 2B.2.

Explanation:  Since the FHWA is proposing new reversible lane control signs, this table will help engineers to select the appropriate sign for the traffic situation.

## Reversible Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- New R3-9g and 9h advance signs inform road users of  reversible lane boundaries; R3-9i is for use at the end of reversible lane.
- 	Section 2B.23

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  The new R3-9g and 9h signs shall be used in advance of the reversible lanes to notify drivers of the reversible lane boundaries.  The R3-9i sign  shall be used at the end  of the reversible lanes.

Explanation:  Transition at the entry to and exit from the section of roadway with reversible lanes must be carefully reviewed and planned.  It is important for the road user to know where the reversible lane begins and ends.

## Reversible Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Turn Prohibition signs shall be mounted overhead and separate from  Reversible Lane Control signs.
- 	Section 2B.23

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  When used in conjunction with Reversible Lane Control signs, the Turn Prohibition signs (R3-1 to R3-4) shall be mounted overhead and separate from the Reversible Lane Control signs. 

Explanation:  To reduce the potential for confusion and misunderstanding, the Turn Prohibition signs and the Reversible Lane Control signs shall be mounted in the overhead position but separated from one another.

## Turn Prohibition Signs

_**1988 MUTCD **_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- For added emphasis, a message stating the distance of the Turn Prohibition (ex, NEXT 1 MILE) should be included.
- 	Section* *2B.23

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current: not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  For additional emphasis, an auxiliary plate stating the distance of the prohibition (example: NEXT 1 MILE) should be added to the Turn Prohibition signs that are used in conjunction with Reversible Lane Control signs.

Explanation:  This proposed change provides added useful information.

## Reversible Lane Control Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Where left turning vehicles may impact reversible lanes, left and U-turns should be prohibited for a specified time.
- 	Section* *2B.23

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  not in the 1988 MUTCD

Proposed:  If an exclusive left turn lane or two-way left turn lane cannot be incorporated into the lane use pattern for a particular peak or off peak period, consideration should be given to prohibiting left turns and U-turns during that time period.

Explanation:  Left turning vehicles have a significant impact on the safety and operational efficiency of a reversible lane situation.  This proposed change attempts to mitigate potential problems that may occur.

## Slow Moving Traffic Lanes

_**1988 MUTCD **_
- “Signs for Uphill Traffic Lanes.”

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Title is changed to “Slow Moving Traffic Lane Signs.”
- 	Section 2B.27

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  The title of  section 2B.24 in the 1988 MUTCD is “Signs for Uphill Traffic Lanes.”

Proposed:  The new title is “Slow Moving Traffic Lane Signs.”

Explanation:  Since slow moving traffic is not only attributed to uphill roadway conditions, the FHWA proposes to delete the reference to uphill traffic and use the term “slow moving traffic” instead.

## Truck Lane Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- The use of the R4-3, and R4-5 sign was optional.
- 	Sections 2B-23 & 2B-24

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Where an extra lane is provided for slow moving traffic, the R4-3 or R4-5 signs should be installed at the beginning of the lane.
- 	Section 2B.27

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current: In the 1988 MUTCD, the use of the Slower Traffic Keep Right (R4-3) and the Trucks Use Right Lane (R4-5) sign was optional.

Proposed:  Where an extra lane has been provided for slow moving traffic, a Slower Traffic Keep Right (R4-3) sign and Trucks use Right Lane (R4-5) sign or other appropriate sigh should be installed at the beginning of the lane.

## Truck Lane Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- In advance of the climbing lane, a TRUCK LANE (XX) FEET sign (R4-6) may be erected.
- 	Section* *2B-24

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- A TRUCK LANE (XX) FEET sign    (R4-6)  should be installed in advance of the lane.
- 	Section* *2B.27

***or***

**Notes:**
Current: In advance of the climbing lane, a TRUCK LANE (XX) FEET sign (R4-6) may be erected.

Proposed:  A TRUCK LANE (XX) FEET sign (R4-6)  should be installed in advance of the R4-5 sign.

Explanation:  The FHWA believes that changing this to a recommended condition will provide the road user with important advanced information that will aid in the driver’s decisionmaking task.

## Slower Traffic Keep Right

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- The Slower Traffic Keep Right or Trucks Use Right Lane may be used.
- 	Section 2B-24

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- The Slower Traffic Keep Right sign may be used as a supplement or alternate to the Trucks Use Right Lane sign.
- 	Section* *2B.27

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:   In the 1988 MUTCD, the text reads, “Slower Traffic Keep Right” sign (R4-3) or more specific messages such as “Trucks Use Right Lane” (R4-5) may  be used where an extra lane has been provided on an upgrade for slow moving traffic.

Proposed:  The “Slower Traffic Keep Right” sign (R4-3) may be used as a supplement or an alternate to the TRUCKS USE RIGHT LANE (R4-5) sign.

Explanation:  This proposed change clarifies the intent of the 1988 MUTCD to indicate that in situations where the slower traffic may not be just “truck” traffic, the “Slower Traffic Keep Right” sign is appropriate for use.

## Wrong Way Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Figure 2B-2 shows typical wrong way signing for divided highways.

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  The figure currently shown in the 1988 MUTCD shows two diagrams:  one for divided highways with medians less than 9 m (30 ft.) and one for divided highways with medians 9 m (30 ft.) or wider.   The diagram for divided highways with medians 9 m (30 ft.) or wider does not show stop lines, wrong way pavement markings and vehicle turning paths. 

Proposed:  The proposed new figure for divided highways with medians 9 m (30 ft) or wider is expanded to show stop lines, wrong-way pavement markings, and pavement markings which show the vehicle turning path.  This was one of the recommendations included in the “Older Driver Highway Design Handbook,” Report No. FHWA-RD-99-045.

Explanation:  It intended to reduce the potential for wrong-way movements for drivers turning left from the minor roadway.  This proposed figure is shown in the proposed text for Chapter 2B for docket comment purposes.  If adopted, it will replace the figure currently shown in Chapter 2A.

## Wrong Way Signs

**Figure 2B-2**

**Notes:**
Current:  The figure currently shown in the 1988 MUTCD shows two diagrams:  one for divided highways with medians less than 9 m (30 ft.) and one for divided highways with medians 9 m (30 ft.) or wider.   The diagram for divided highways with medians 9 m (30 ft.) or wider does not show stop lines, wrong way pavement markings and vehicle turning paths. 

Proposed:  The proposed new figure for divided highways with medians 9 m (30 ft) or wider is expanded to show stop lines, wrong-way pavement markings, and pavement markings which show the vehicle turning path.  This was one of the recommendations included in the “Older Driver Highway Design Handbook,” Report No. FHWA-RD-99-045.

Explanation:  It intended to reduce the potential for wrong-way movements for drivers turning left from the minor roadway.  This proposed figure is shown in the proposed text for Chapter 2B for docket comment purposes.  If adopted, it will replace the figure currently shown in Chapter 2A.

## Pedestrian Prohibited Sign

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- The sign should be erected wherever it can be most effective.
- 	Section 2B-28

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- The R5-10c or R9-3a sign should be installed to be clearly visible to pedestrians at a location where an alternate route is available.
- 		Section 2B.31* *

**Notes:**
Current:  The PEDESTRIAN PROHIBITED sign should be erected wherever it can be most effective.

Proposed:  The PEDESTRIAN PROHIBITED sign should be installed so as to be clearly visible to pedestrians at a location where an alternate route is available.

Explanation:  The FHWA proposes this text clarification because we believe that it will help reduce the potential for pedestrians to walk in unsafe areas.

## One Way Sign

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- This sign should be placed parallel to the one way street directly opposite the exits from alleys and other public ways.
- 	Section* *2B-29

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- This sign shall be placed parallel to the one-way street at all alleys and roadways that intersect one-way roadways.
- 	Section 2B.32

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current: The ONE WAY signs (R6-1 and R6-2) should be placed parallel to the one way street directly opposite the exits from alleys and other public ways.

Proposed:  The ONE WAY signs (R6-1 and R6-2) shall be placed parallel to the one-way street at all alleys and roadways that intersect one-way streets.

Explanation:  The FHWA believes that requiring the placement of the ONE WAY signs parallel to the one-way street at all alleys or roadway intersections to one-way streets will:  (1) give motorists clearer directions, and (2) make traffic operations safer by reducing the chance of road users inadvertently making wrong-way movements.

##  Divided Highway Crossing Sign

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- This sign may be mounted beneath a STOP or YIELD sign or on a separate support.
- 	Section* *2B.33* *

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current: Not in the 1988 MUTCD

Proposed:  This sign may be located on the near right-hand corner of the intersection and may be mounted beneath a STOP or YIELD sign or on a separate support.

## Parking, Standing, Stopping Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- The text distinguishes between urban and rural.
- 	Sections* *2B-31,32,33

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Eliminate the distinction between urban and rural parking, standing, and stopping signs.
- 	Sections 2B.34,35,36

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  The 1988 MUTCD distinguishes between urban and rural parking, standing, and stopping signs.

Proposed:  In section 2B.33, FHWA proposes to eliminate the distinction between urban and rural parking, standing, and stopping signs.

Explanation:  The FHWA believes that the design and placement principles for both urban and rural conditions are substantially the same.

## Parking, Stopping, Standing Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Spacing of parking signs should be based on legibility and sign orientation.
- 	Section 2B.36* *

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  Section 2B.35 states “Spacing of parking signs should be based on legibility and sign orientation.”

Explanation:  The FHWA believes this is helpful guidance to follow when making sure that the parking signs are visible, particularly with regards to the surrounding traffic setting.  This guidance would include such considerations as the roadway geometry and surrounding conditions--such as curves or shrubbery that may hinder sign visibility.

## Emergency Restriction Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- “Emergency Parking Signs.”
- 	Section 2B-34

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Title changed to “Emergency Restriction Signs.”
- 	Section 2B. 37

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  In the 1988 MUTCD, this section title was “Emergency Parking Signs.”

Proposed:  The section title of 2B.36 is changed to “Emergency Restriction Signs.”

Explanation:  this proposed change will allow the section to cover not just the EMERGENCY PARKING ONLY (R8-4) sign but other emergency restriction signs such as the EMERGENCY STOPPING (R8-7) and DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS (R8-8) signs.

## Emergency Restriction Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- These signs shall have a black legend on a white background.
- 	Section 2B-34

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Emergency Restriction signs shall be rectangular and shall have a red or black legend & border on white background.
- 	Section 2B.37.

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  These signs are designed as horizontal rectangles and shall have a black legend on a white background.

Proposed:  Change Section 2B.36, paragraph 3 to read:  “These signs shall be horizontal rectangles and shall have a red or black legend and border on a white background.”

Explanation:  The FHWA believes that either red (the color for restrictions) or black (the color for regulatory signs) is appropriate.

## Retroreflective or Illuminated

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Did not require all signs to be retroreflective or illuminated.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Signs in Section 2B.35 and  2B.38 through 2B.40 are now required to be retroreflective or illuminated. (See 2B.01)
- 	Sections* *2B.35* *and 2B.38-2B.40

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  The following signs were not required to be retroreflective or illuminated:  Section 2B.34, “Parking, Stopping, and Standing Signs” , Section  2B.37, WALK ON LEFT (R9-1) and NO HITCHHIKING (R9-4) signs, Section 2B.38, “Pedestrian Crossing Signs,” and Section 2B.39, “Traffic Signal Signs, Auxiliary.”

Proposed:  The following signs are required to be retroreflective or illuminated:  Section 2B.34, “Parking, Stopping, and Standing Signs” , Section  2B.37, WALK ON LEFT (R9-1) and NO HITCHHIKING (R9-4) signs, Section 2B.38, “Pedestrian Crossing Signs,” and Section 2B.39, “Traffic Signal Signs, Auxiliary.”

Explanation:  This proposed change is consistent with Section 2A.8 which discusses the general provisions and standards for all signs.  FHWA proposes to require ALL signs to be either retroreflective or illuminated to increase their visibility to road users.

## Traffic Signal Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Add optional use of  2 new symbols signs for NO RIGHT (LEFT) TURN ON RED (R10-11c and R10-11d)
- 	Section* *2B*.*40

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  In Section 2B.39, FHWA proposes to add 2 new symbol signs:  one for NO RIGHT TURN ON RED (R10-11c) and one for NO LEFT TURN ON RED (R10-11d).  These new signs combine the standard NO RIGHT (AND NO LEFT) TURN symbols (R3-1 and R3-2) with the legend “ON RED”.

Explanation:  This change was proposed as an alternate to the NO TURN ON RED word message sign and the proposed sign provides the opportunity to, when necessary, describe which specific turn movement is prohibited.

## Emergency Signal Sign

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- A new “Emergency Signal” sign (R10-13) shall be used in conjunction with emergency-vehicle traffic control signals.
- 	Sections 2B*. *40 & 4F.02

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  In Section 2B. 39, paragraph 12, the FHWA proposes to add 2 new signs for use with emergency beacon installations.  These 2 proposed word message signs are:  EMERGENCY SIGNAL (R10-13) and EMERGENCY SIGNA/STOP WHEN FLASHING RED (R10-14).

Explanation: To provide additional information to the road user.

## High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- New section that includes provisions for the design and operation of HOV lanes.
- 	Section* *2B.49

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD

Proposed:  Add a new section 2B.48 that will include provisions for the design and operation of high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes.

Explanation:  Significant deployment has occurred with HOV lanes used on roadway facilities throughout the United States and the FHWA believes it is appropriate to address design, application, and placement of signs and pavement markings for  these special facilities.  The language proposed for section 2B.48 would provide agencies that own and operate HOV lanes with an overall discussion on HOV signing principles.  In addition to this proposed new section, the FHWA proposes the MUTCD changes shown in the next few slides related to HOV lanes.

## High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- HOV lane signs are not specifically addressed.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- Revise the R3-10 through R3-17 Preferential Lane signs to specifically address HOV lanes.
- 	Section* *2B.48

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  HOV lane signs are not speifically addressed in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  The FHWA proposes to revise the R3-10 through the R3-15 Preferential Lane signs to specifically address HOV lanes (see Section 2B.22) for text and example of signs.

Explanation:  These signs would specifically designate high occupancy vehicle lanes which by definition include carpools, vanpools, and buses (and low emissions vehicles?) carrying at least two or more persons.   They would contain messages describing the type of high occupancy vehicle lane restriction which applies.  (example: HOV lane, bus lane, or taxi lane).

When the preferential lane is designated for high occupancy vehicles, the word message “HOV” would be required along with the minimum allowable vehicle occupancy level (example:  HOV 2+).  The minimum allowable vehicle occupancy level would vary based on the level established for a particular facility by the State or local highway agency.  The diamond symbol may be used in lieu of the word message “HOV”.

## High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Diamond symbol was not exclusively for HOV lanes.  (Also used for bicycle lanes.)

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- The diamond symbol is for exclusive HOV lane use.
- 	Section* *2B.48

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  The diamond symbol was not exclusively for HOV lanes.  Example, it could be used for bicycle lanes.

Proposed:  The use of the diamond symbol for bicycles is proposed for deletion in the Notice of Proposed Amendment for Part 9 which was published June 24, 1999.  The proposed change to Section 2B.22 shown above would designate the diamond symbol for  HOV lane use only.  In situations where a preferential lane is not an HOV lane but is reserved for bus and/or taxi use the the word message “BUS” (or TAXI) would replace message on the R3-10 through R3-15 signs.  The word message “BIKE LANE” or bicycle symbol would be used if the preferential lane is designated for bicycles.

Explanation:

## High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- A supplemental plaque  shall be used with the ground mounted R3-5 sign on a multi-lane approach....
- 	Section 2B.19** **

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  Revise Section 2B.17, paragraph 3 so that when a mandatory movement lane control sign (R3-5) is ground-mounted a supplemental plaque with the message HOV 2+ shall be used.

Explanation:  This supplemental plaque would be used with the mandatory turn sign to indicate that the turn only lane is an HOV facility.

## High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes

_**1988 MUTCD**_
- Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- HOV related definitions are included in Part 1
- 	Section* *1A.13

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

**Notes:**
Current:  Not in the 1988 MUTCD.

Proposed:  The FHWA proposes to include HOV related definitions in Part 1A.14

## High Occupancy Vehicle Signs

_**1988 MUTCD**_
-   Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- New section that discusses HOV sign applications & placement.
- 	Section 2B.50

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard

## HOV SIGNS

_**1988 MUTCD**_
-  Not in MUTCD.

_**2000 MUTCD**_
- The R3-18 & R3-19 HOV signs have been    deleted.
**  ****	**Sections 2B.48 &2B.50

- Yellow Text Denotes a Standard