United States Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Considerations in 

Lowering Maintenance 

Standards of National 

Forest System Roads 

to Maintenance Level 2

National Technology & Development Program • Transportation Management • August 2013 • 1377 1803—SDTDC
Non-Discrimination Policy

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination against its customers, 

employees, and applicants for employment on the bases of race, color, national origin, 

age, disability, sex, gender identity, religion, reprisal, and where applicable, political beliefs, 

marital status, familial or parental status, sexual orientation, or all or part of an individual’s 

income is derived from any public assistance program, or protected genetic information in 

employment or in any program or activity conducted or funded by the Department. (Not all 

prohibited bases will apply to all programs and/or employment activities.)

To File and Employment Complaint

If you wish to file an employment complaint, you must contact your agency’s EEO 

Counselor (click the hyperlink for list of EEO Counselors) within 45 days of the date of the 

alleged discriminatory act, event, or in the case of a personnel action. Additional information 

can be found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_file.html.

To File a Program Complaint

If you wish to file a Civil Rights program complaint of discrimination, complete the USDA 

Program Discrimination form, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_

cust.html, or at any USDA office, or call (866) 632-9992 to request the form. You may also 

write a letter containing all of the information requested in the form. Send your completed 

complaint form or letter to us by mail at U.S. Department of Agriculture, Director, Office of 

Adjudication, 1400 Independence avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, by fax 

(202) 690-7442 or email at program.intake@usda.gov.

Persons with Disabilities

Individuals who are deaf, hard of hearing or have speech disabilities and you wish to file 

either an EEO or program complaint please contact USDA through the Federal Relay 

Service at (800) 877-8339 or (800) 845-6136 (in Spanish).

Persons with disabilities who wish to file a program complaint, please see information 

above on how to contact us by mail directly or by email. If you require alternative means 

of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) please 

contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

Forest Service Disclaimer

The Forest Service, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), has 

developed this information for the guidance of its employees, its contractors, and its 

cooperating Federal and State agencies. The Forest Service assumes no responsibility for 

the interpretation or use of this information by anyone except its own employees. The use 

of trade, firm, or corporation names is for the information and convenience of the reader. 

Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval of any product or service 

to the exclusion of others that may be suitable.
Considerations in Lowering 

Maintenance Standards of 

National Forest System Roads to 

Maintenance Level 2

By:

Mike Tippie, Regional Highway Engineer and Sign Coordinator, 

Pacific Northwest and Alaska Regions (R6/R10)

Vincent Barandino, Jr., Civil Engineer

San Dimas Technology and Development Center

San Dimas Technology & Development Center

i
ii
iii

Table of Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 1

2. BACKGROUND ................................................................................... 3

3. SIGNING STRATEGIES ...................................................................... 7

3.1. Sign Plan ..................................................................................... 7

3.2. Sign Removal and Replacement ................................................. 8

3.2.1. When should signs be removed? ........................................ 8

3.2.2. What signs should be replaced during 

 routine maintenance? .......................................................... 9

3.2.2.1. Route markers ............................................................. 9

3.2.2.2. Forest road destination signs .................................... 12

3.2.2.3. Regulatory signs ........................................................ 14

3.2.2.4. Warning signs, object markers and delineators......... 15

3.3. Addition of New Signs, Object Markers 

 and Delineators .......................................................................... 16

3.3.1. Regulatory signs ................................................................ 16

3.3.2. Warning signs, object markers and delineators ................. 16

3.3.2.1. NO TRAFFIC SIGNS (W18-1). .................................. 16

3.3.2.2. NO TURNAROUND AHEAD (FW14-1a). .................. 18

3.3.2.3. ROUGH NARROW ROAD (FW5-1b) 

 and ROUGH ROAD (W8-8). ...................................... 19

3.3.2.4. NOT SUITABLE FOR PASSENGER 

 CARS (FW5-1e) ........................................................ 21

3.3.2.5. Object markers .......................................................... 23

4. MAINTENANCE ................................................................................ 25

5. USER EXPECTATIONS ON ML2 ROADS ........................................ 31

5.1. Road Surface ............................................................................. 31

5.2. Speed ........................................................................................ 33

5.3. Type of User (Prudent Driver) .................................................... 34

5.4. Volume of Traffic ........................................................................ 35

5.5. Motorized Mixed Use ................................................................. 35

5.6. Highway Safety Program ........................................................... 35
iv

6. STRATEGIES TO SPEED UP THE TRANSITION ............................ 37

6.1. Berms and Road Template Reduction ....................................... 37

6.2. Roadside and Roadway Vegetation Treatment ......................... 40

6.3. Ditches and Drainage Treatment ............................................... 42

6.3.1. Ditches ............................................................................... 42

6.3.2. Waterbars and rolling dips ................................................. 44

6.3.3. Low-water crossing ............................................................ 46

6.4. Road Surface Treatment ............................................................ 47

6.4.1. Surface roughening ........................................................... 47

6.4.2. Asphalt surface (including chip seal) treatment ................. 48

7. MANAGING INTERMITTENT IMPROVEMENTS ............................. 51

8. DOCUMENTATION ........................................................................... 55

9. GLOSSARY ....................................................................................... 57

9.1. Definitions .................................................................................. 57

10. REFERENCE CITED....................................................................... 61
v

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this 

publication.

Steve Coupal, transportation operations and maintenance manager, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Region 

(retired)

John Booth, assistant director of engineering, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Region/Washington Office 

road development engineer

Tom Erkert, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway 

Administration, Western Federal Lands Highway Division, Asset 

Management, GIS, Forest Highways 

Dan Hager, national road system operations and maintenance engineer, 

national blasting program manager, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Washington Office

John Bell, national road system operations and maintenance engineer, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington Office 

(retired)

Sandra Wilson-Musser, geotechnical engineer, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region

Brenda Christensen, civil engineer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Northern Region

Justin Humble, P.E., transportation operations and maintenance 

engineer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain 

Region

Marge Hutchinson, south zone engineer, U.S. Department of 

Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Region, OkanoganWenatchee National Forest

Greg Napper, senior civil engineer, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, San Dimas Technology and Development Center (retired)

We also acknowledge Alan Yamada (retired) and Mike Montgomery for 

their guidance, and those individuals who provided photographs.
Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction 

Section 1—Introduction Section 1—Introduction Section 1—

Introduction Section 1Introduction Section 1Introduction 
Section 1—Introduction

1

The focus of this guide is on the safety aspects and considerations of 

lowering maintenance level (ML) 3, 4, or 5 National Forest System roads 

(NFS) to ML2.

The primary advantage of lowering the maintenance level of a road to 

ML2 is to reduce the cost of road maintenance. Several thousands of 

miles of ML3, 4, and 5 roads are being lowered to ML2 to meet this cost 

objective. Many of these ML2 roads will still exhibit the same physical 

characteristics of a higher maintenance level during the time it takes 

them to transition to ML2 characteristics. For example, many of these 

ML2 roads currently are passable by a standard passenger car, and have 

the signing and look-and-feel of a road being maintained at a higher 

level. During the transition, it is important to be aware of these physical 

characteristics and manage them accordingly. ML2 roads are neither 

intended nor maintained for standard passenger cars, but many of them 

are passable by standard passenger cars. User safety is a consideration 

on these roads as it is on all roads. 

There is some confusion on how to manage the roads during the 

period of time it takes to transition to the physical characteristics of a 

ML2 road and no longer be passable by prudent drivers in standard 

passenger cars. This guide addresses some aspects of lowering road 

maintenance levels to ML2 that should be considered by Forest Service 

road managers in order to successfully decrease road maintenance while 

emphasizing user safety.
Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 

2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 

2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 

2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 

2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 

2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—

Background Section 2—Background Section 2—Background 

Section 2—Background Section 2—Background Section 2—
Section 2—Background

3

The Forest Service, an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

is responsible for the management of over 373,000 miles of road

across the Nation. This vast road network was developed primarily after 

World War II to provide access to multiple-use resources. The National 

Forest Roads and Trails Act authorized use of timber receipts to fund 

construction of roads needed for timber removal. This authority was used 

to construct the majority of the post World War II road-system expansion. 

Policy implementing the act restricted design standards on timber roads 

to standards, which a so called “prudent driver” would use to construct a 

logging road on its own private land. At the time, logging roads on private 

land used wooden bridges, design lives of 20 to 50 years, and very little 

aggregate surfacing. Private-land roads typically received administrative 

and commercial use, and little recreation use. Reflecting this, “prudent 

driver” standards assumed maintenance for commercial-haul traffic 

would cover most maintenance needs. On the national forests, roads 

intended for multiple use including extensive recreation use, were often 

constructed to prudent-driver standards as timber sale receipts were the 

only available funding. 

In the latter part of the 20th century, the shortcomings of this type of 

system development became apparent. Environmental laws were 

passed, cumulative effects on watersheds were recognized, impairments 

to aquatic passage were recognized, recreation use increased 5-or-10 

fold, and an ever-widening gap in funding appeared between annual 

maintenance needs and available revenues. While the traffic-generated 

component of the annual maintenance need has declined with the 

declining commercial traffic; the nontraffic-generated components, such 

as ditch cleaning, culvert cleaning, brush removal, signing, and traffic 

control, did not. In fact, because of the age of the infrastructure, the 

nontraffic-generated component of maintenance needs, such as pipe 

replacement, actually increased. It costs on average four times more 

annually to maintain a ML3 road than it does to maintain a ML2 road. 

The maintenance costs for ML4 and 5 roads are even higher. This is 

one of the primary reasons that the Forest Service is now in a planning 

process to identify a sustainable road system (travel analysis) and why 

so many national forests are considering lowering the maintenance 

levels on many of their roads.

All National Forest System roads should be maintained at a level that 

minimizes damage to adjacent resources and perpetuates roads for 

future resource-management needs. This is the only maintenance 

required on a ML1 road.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Section 2—Background

4

In addition to preventing damage to adjacent resources, a ML2 road also 

is maintained for use by high-clearance traffic. 

In addition to preventing damage to adjacent resources, ML3, 4, and 5 

roads also are maintained for travel by a prudent driver in a standard 

passenger car. The primary difference in maintenance between ML3, 

4, and 5 roads is in user comfort and convenience. User comfort

and convenience are not considered priorities on ML3 roads. ML4

roads provide a moderate degree of user comfort and convenience at 

moderate speeds; ML5 roads provide a high degree of user comfort and 

convenience. Refer to the Forest Service Handbook (FSH) 7709.59, 

chapter 62.3 and “Guidelines For Road Maintenance Levels” (Apodaca, 

et al. 2011).

Some of the considerations this guide will address are:

• Strategies for signing.

• Minimum maintenance needs.

• User expectations on ML2 roads.

• Strategies to speed up the physical transition to a ML2 road.

• Management of intermittent improvements to a ML2 road.

Section 3

Signing Strategies Section 3Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 

Section 3—Signing Strategies Section 3—Signing Strategies 
Section 3—Signing Strategies

7

3.1. Sign Plan

A sign plan provides the framework for managing an effective and 

consistent sign program. It helps to identify what signs are needed so 

unnecessary signs are not installed and unnecessary signs installed 

prior to the plan can be removed. Also, it provides information for and 

commitment to a specific course of action. The initial sign plan may be 

developed from a map, but the final plan must be field verified.

When reducing a road to ML2, revisit the existing sign plan and revise 

it if necessary. This revision could be accomplished by developing a 

site-specific sign plan for individual or groups of roads. Consider the 

following: 

• Are existing signs still necessary?

• What new signs might be necessary?

• When should unnecessary signs be removed?

• Are the user’s expectations different now than they were before 

the maintenance level was lowered?

• What sign changes might be necessary initially?

• What sign changes might be necessary as the road physically 

deteriorates to a ML2 (high clearance) over time?

• Are guide signs still needed? If so, where should they be located 

to discourage passenger-car traffic or encourage high-clearance 

traffic?

• When to change route markers from horizontal to vertical? 

• What are the safety issues that could develop as the road 

deteriorates over time?

• Will regulatory signs, such as speed limit or stop signs, be 

needed and enforced?

• What are the budget constraints?

Update sign plans annually or as physical or administrative changes 

occur. A sign plan is very critical when implementing the sign and poster 

program. Guidance on signing is found in Engineering Manual (EM) 

7100-15, “Sign and Poster Guidelines for the Forest Service” and the 

“Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices” (MUTCD). Signs should 

complement and be consistent with the applicable motor vehicle use 

maps (FSM 7716.42). 

Refer to the EM7100-15, chapter 2, for more detailed information on sign 

plans and documentation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Section 3—Signing Strategies

8

3.2. Sign Removal and Replacement

3.2.1. When should signs be removed?

Remove signs that have been identified as no longer necessary as 

a result of lowering ML3, 4, or 5 roads to ML2. Existing signs may 

be left in place until the next road-maintenance cycle if they will not 

cause confusion to the road user, present a safety risk, or interfere with 

management objectives (figure 3-1). This will help preserve funding for 

higher-priority work. 

The following are examples of signs that may cause problems if left in 

place:

• A speed limit sign on a paved road when portions of the road 

have deteriorated and the recommended speed is less than the 

posted speed limit.

• A sign indicating a route to a destination when the road—or 

portions of the road—are no longer accessible by some vehicles,

such as recreational vehicles, vehicles with trailers, or some 

standard passenger cars.

• A horizontal route marker on a ML2 road. (When this marker is 

removed it should be replaced with a vertical route marker.)

• A destination sign when the management intent is to discourage 

traffic. 

Engineering judgment or an engineering study conducted by a qualified 

engineer is required before any traffic control devices are removed. See 

EM7100-15, chapter 3, for more detailed information on engineering 

judgment and engineering studies. 

Figure 3-1—Forest identification sign on an ML2 road that has deteriorated and 

has not been replaced.
Section 3—Signing Strategies

9

3.2.2. What signs should be replaced during routine 

maintenance?

3.2.2.1. Route markers

Route markers are the only signs required on a ML2 road. They are 

necessary for administrative purposes, and for the road user to identify 

a designated route shown on the motor vehicle use map. Replace 

horizontal route markers with vertical route markers after the decision 

has been made to lower a road to ML2 (figures 3-2 through 3-4).

Figure 3-2—Horizontal and vertical route markers.

Figure 3-3—Vertical route marker on a ML2 road.

R

(Optional)

E

B

L

H

C

B

A

D

C

B

D

L

H

A (Optional)

E

D

FM1-7v Examples

2

2

N

4

5

A

Y

3

S

0

4

1

2

4 2

2

N

4

5

A

Y

4

5

A

Y

22N

1 2 3

0000

000

05

10

05

B

5

Vertical route markers

33N34A

Horizontal route markers

Figure 3-3—Vertical route marker on a ML2 road.
Section 3—Signing Strategies

10

Figure 3-4— Installation guide for vertical route marker.

Figure 3-5— Horizontal route marker on a ML4 road.
Section 3—Signing Strategies

11

Provide information to the public when necessary to help them 

understand the significance between vertical route markers for ML2 

roads and horizontal markers for ML3, 4, or 5 roads. One way to provide 

this information is by showing the route-marker drawings in the forest 

visitor map and motor vehicle use map with a brief explanation of their 

significance (figure 3-6).

This is important because the motor vehicle use map does not 

distinguish between roads based on maintenance level. For example, a 

ML5 road may have the same designation on the motor vehicle use map 

as a ML2 road. 

Figure 3-6 — Example of route-marker information (Region 6 motor vehicle use map).

National Forest

distinctive

route marker

3134

National Forest

horizontal

route marker

2

3

2

3750

National Forest

vertical

route marker

Distinctive and Horizontal Route Markers

Distinctive route markers typically consist of two digits 

and they identify significant, highly traveled roads through 

the forest passable by passenger cars during the normal 

season of use.

Horizontal route markers typically consist of four digits 

with the first two digits identifying the distinctive route that

is branched off of. They identify all other forest roads 

passable by standard passenger cars during the normal 

season of use.

These are all considered higher level roads.

Vertical Route Markers

Vertical route markers identify roads that are not maintained for travel in standard passenger cars. These markers typically identify the higher level road they branch off 

of with the higher level road number displayed horizontally 

above the vertical number.

Explanation of road numbers as shown

On the ground or on the map

Higher level road number

Local road number
Section 3—Signing Strategies

12

3.2.2.2. Forest road destination signs

Use forest road destination signs to encourage traffic on National 

Forest System roads suitable for the type of traffic being encouraged. 

For example, forest road destination signs should not be placed at an 

intersection encouraging non-high-clearance traffic to turn onto a ML2 

road. Typically, forest road destination signs are not used on ML2 roads, 

where route markers and current maps provide sufficient guidance. 

Most forest road destination signs encouraging motor vehicle traffic 

should be removed after a road has been lowered to ML2 (figure 3-7). 

The intent is to not encourage traffic to travel to a destination where it 

cannot go. If forest road destination signs are necessary on a ML2 road 

for high-clearance traffic they should be placed up the road a sufficient 

distance from the intersection to not encourage standard passenger-car 

traffic to travel the road. An example of a forest road destination sign that 

might be necessary on a ML2 road is one that directs high-clearance 

traffic to an off-highway vehicle or high-clearance vehicle trailhead or 

campground (figure 3-8). The decision to install forest road destination 

signs should be based on an engineering-judgment recommendation.

Figure 3-7—Forest road destination signs for a ML2 road that have deteriorated 

and have not been removed. These signs should be removed to avoid confusion 

to the road user.
Section 3—Signing Strategies

13

Figure 3-8—Placement of forest road destination signs on a ML2 road. This 

example shows a combination strategy of encouraging high-clearance traffic 

by using guide signs with a specific message for high-clearance traffic and 

discouraging passenger-car traffic by using the vertical route marker and 

entrance treatment.

NFS road Maintenance Level 2

NFS road Maintenance Level 3, 4, or 5

Barrier to low-clearance

vehicles

or

FRD 

FRD

or 

RL-095 RL-150

Turnaround/parking

3

1

5

Tizer Basin 

OHV Route

Ti z e r B a s i n

Tizer Basin 

OHV Route

Ti z e r B a s i n
Section 3—Signing Strategies

14

3.2.2.3. Regulatory signs

Replace any regulatory signs that are still necessary after a road has 

been lowered to ML2. Pay particular attention to any existing speed limit 

signs and complete an engineering study to determine if these are still 

warranted. It is extremely rare to post a speed limit sign on a ML2 road.

It may be necessary to revisit any existing speed limit, STOP and/or 

YIELD signs before the scheduled routine maintenance period since 

they may not be necessary if the road has sufficiently deteriorated to 

effectively reduce the driving speed and traffic volume. Remove any 

regulatory signs that have been determined to be no longer necessary 

(figure 3-9). The decision to not replace a STOP, YIELD, or speed-limit 

sign should be based on engineering judgment or an engineering study 

performed by a qualified engineer. 

Figure 3-9—The STOP sign is no longer in place on this paved ML2 road and this 

stop ahead symbol warning sign should be removed on the next maintenance 

cycle if it has been determined that the STOP sign is no longer needed. If 

engineering judgment determines the STOP sign is needed it should be replaced.
Section 3—Signing Strategies

15

3.2.2.4. Warning signs, object markers, and delineators

Warning signs, object markers, and delineators call attention to 

unexpected conditions on or adjacent to a road and to situations 

that might not be readily apparent to road users. This is important to 

recognize in determining the need to replace these warning devices after 

a ML3, 4, or 5 road has been lowered to a ML2 road. 

The hazards that required these devices probably still exist if the 

characteristics of the road have not changed appreciably from what they 

were as a higher-level road. A qualified engineer needs to determine 

what conditions exist that might continue to require the need for replacing 

these warning devices and not rely simply on the maintenance level of 

the road to determine if they are needed. 

Warning signs, object markers, and delineators should be repaired, 

replaced, or left as is (if they are clean, legible, functional, and positioned 

properly to facilitate safe use) during routine maintenance cycles if the 

conditions that warranted them when the road was a ML3, 4, or 5 still 

exist. If the warranted conditions no longer exist then these warning 

devices do not need to be repaired or replaced and they should be 

removed. Engineering judgment or an engineering study conducted

by a qualified engineer is required before any warning devices are not 

repaired, replaced, or removed. 

The conditions that required warning signs, object markers, or 

delineators will probably diminish to the point where they are no longer 

necessary as the road is maintained continually for high-clearance traffic. 

This requires someone to assess the situation periodically and not rely 

solely on past judgments or reports. 

The physical characteristics and low-traffic volumes on ML2 roads 

preclude the need for many—if any—warning signs, object markers, 

or delineators. In addition, users of ML2 roads meeting these physical 

characteristics and low-traffic volume are expected to drive with an 

expectation there will be no warning of hazards on the road ahead. They 

must drive in a prudent manner reflecting that expectation. Continued 

use of existing warning devices should be kept to a minimum. 
Section 3—Signing Strategies

16

3.3. Addition of New Signs, Object Markers, and Delineators

New signs, object markers, and delineators may be necessary after a 

road has been lowered to ML2. Some factors to consider include user 

expectations, the road’s condition, entrance management treatments, 

and whether the road is still passable by a standard passenger car. 

Remove these new signs, object markers, and delineators when 

engineering judgment or an engineering study determines that the 

conditions that required them no longer exist. 

3.3.1. Regulatory signs

New safety-related regulatory signs, such as STOP, YIELD, and speed 

limit, are needed very rarely on a road that has been lowered to ML2. 

The need for new regulatory signs shall be based on engineering 

judgment or an engineering study. 

3.3.2. Warning signs, object markers, and delineators

The physical characteristics and low-traffic volumes on a road that has 

been lowered to ML2 preclude the need for many—if not all—warning 

signs, object markers, or delineators. Use of these warning devices 

should be kept to a minimum.

An expectation may have been established by the primary users at the 

higher-maintenance level, and some time may be needed for the users 

to gain an awareness of the changes. It might be necessary to warn of 

these changes with signs.

When maintenance is reduced to ML 2—and a road undergoes physical 

changes over time—these changes may not be consistent throughout the 

road. For example, the entrance and some portion of the road extending 

up some distance may be open and inviting to passenger-car traffic, 

but other sections may have begun to narrow and roughen up due to 

sloughs, slides, vegetation, and erosion. These conditions may require 

new signs, object markers, or delineators. This need shall be based on 

engineering judgment or an engineering study. 

3.3.2.1. NO TRAFFIC SIGNS (W18-1) 

This warning sign may be used only on unpaved, low-volume roads to 

advise users that no traffic signs are installed along the distance of the 

road (figure 3-10). If used, the sign may be installed at the point where 

the road user would enter the low-volume road or where the road user 

might need this information (MUTCD, 5C.12).
Section 3—Signing Strategies

17

Figure 3-10—W18-1.

A W7-3aP, W16-2P, or W16-9P supplemental plaque with the legend 

NEXT XX MILES, NEXT 500 FEET, or AHEAD may be installed below 

the W18-1 sign when appropriate (figure 3-11).

Figure 3-11—Supplemental plaque.

Situations where these signs may be used:

• When a road has been transitioned to a lower maintenance level 

and existing signs have been removed and advance warning 

of a change in traffic signs is necessary to warn users who 

historically have relied on these signs. When the change in 

signage is no longer considered to be new—or has been in place 

for a maximum of 12 months—the sign should be removed.

• When a signed road segment transitions to a nonsigned road 

segment.

Other than these situations, this sign should not be used where it has 

been determined that signs are not needed. Normally, this sign is not 

used on ML2 roads.

NO

TRAFFIC

SIGNS

 W7-3aP W16-2P W16-9P
Section 3—Signing Strategies

18

3.3.2.2. NO TURNAROUND AHEAD (FW14-1a)

Use this warning sign to warn road users at the last turnaround on a road 

without an outlet or that terminates in a dead end (figures 3-12 and 3-13). 

If there are no adequate turnarounds, the sign may be placed at the 

entrance to the road. 

Figure 3-12—FW14-1a.

If used, place this sign at a location that gives drivers of large commercial 

or recreational vehicles an opportunity to turn around.

Use this sign to discourage use by large commercial or recreational 

vehicles on a ML2 road with no entrance management and the road

appears accessible at the entry, but deteriorates the farther in you travel.

Figure 3-13—NO TURNAROUND AHEAD sign placed at a location that provides 

an adequate turn-around opportunity.

Figure 3-12—FW14-1a.

NO

TURNAROUND

AHEAD

Figure 3-13—NO TURNAROUND AHEAD sign placed at a location that provides 
Section 3—Signing Strategies

19

3.3.2.3. ROUGH NARROW ROAD (FW5-1b) and ROUGH ROAD (W8-8)

Use these warning signs when a road abruptly changes to these 

conditions. Generally, they are not intended to be used on a road that is 

maintained for high-clearance traffic, but if a paved or aggregate-surface 

road has been lowered to a ML2 and allowed to deteriorate naturally it 

may be necessary to warn the road user.

Use of supplemental plaques, such as XX MILES AHEAD, are 

recommended (when necessary) to avoid a situation where a vehicle 

cannot be turned around.

Use of a supplemental plaque, such as NEXT XX MILES, may be 

necessary to warn road users of the length of the condition so they can 

make an informed decision as to whether to continue on, especially if it is 

unreasonably long (figures 3-14 through 3-17).

Figure 3-14—FW5-1b and W8-8.

Figure 3-15—Old NARROW ROUGH ROAD sign on a paved ML2 road that

narrows and gets rougher a short distance ahead. The NARROW ROUGH 

ROAD sign has been replaced with the ROUGH NARROW ROAD sign in 

EM7100-15, 2012

ROUGH

NARROW

ROAD

ROUGH

ROAD
Section 3—Signing Strategies

20

Figure 3-16—Sometimes it may be necessary to install a sign on the left side of 

the road if ground conditions do not permit installation on the right side, such as 

the case with this ROUGH ROAD sign. Installing the sign at the beginning of the 

road provides the user an opportunity to turn around before starting up the rough 

road. Gates are required to have retroreflective alternating red and white tape, 

red and white striped barricade markers (FBM- R and L), or a Type 4 marker on 

the side or sides that will be facing oncoming traffic when the gate is closed.

Figure 3-17—Paved road reduced to ML2. Warning signs may be necessary as 

the pavement begins to deteriorate and break up.
Section 3—Signing Strategies

21

3.3.2.4. NOT SUITABLE FOR PASSENGER CARS (FW5-1e) 

Use this warning sign to warn road users when it is not apparent at the 

beginning of a ML2 road that it is not suitable for passenger-car traffic 

(figures 3-18 through 3-20). This will allow the road user to make an 

informed decision as to whether to continue or seek an alternate route. 

Display the distance ahead message in feet or miles.

Alternative vehicle types, such as trailers, vehicles with trailers, 

recreational vehicles, and so forth, can be substituted for ‘passenger 

cars.’

Figure 3-18—FW5-1e.

Figure 3-19—Install a NOT SUITABLE FOR PASSENGER CARS XX MILES 

AHEAD sign close to the beginning of the road and/or at the beginning of an 

adequate turn-around location as shown here.

NOT S U I TA B L E FO R

PAS S E N G E R CA R S

XX MILES AHEAD
Section 3—Signing Strategies

22

Figure 3-20—Install a NOT SUITABLE FOR PASSENGER CARS sign to 

discourage passenger-car traffic at the beginning of a ML2 road or just before an 

adequate turn-around location. 
Section 3—Signing Strategies

23

3.3.2.5. Object markers

The use of devices, such as object markers, to warn of encroachments 

into the roadway may be necessary on ML2 roads (figure 3-21). A 

common situation for their use is for fill failures that have encroached into 

the road, especially in areas of limited-sight distance (even at very-low 

speeds). 

Figure 3-21—Object markers; (a) OM2-2V; (b) Modified Type 2.

Delineators also may be needed as guidance devices in areas of abrupt 

road narrowing caused by failures that have reduced the width of the 

road (figure 3-22). Refer to EM7100-15, chapter 3D, for delineator 

positioning and spacing.

Figure 3-22—This section of road was narrowed by a large-flood event and 

delineators were installed to guide users through the section.

6 in

3 in

4 in

3 in

12 in

OM2-2V Modified Type 2 OM
Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 

4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—

Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance 

Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—Maintenance Section 4—
Section 4—Maintenance

25

The maintenance activities for a ML2 road are limited to those necessary 

for resource protection and to provide access for high-clearance traffic. 

An exception to this is when the economics of commercial haul may 

result in a higher level of maintenance, such as very smooth and dustfree road surfaces, and wider clearing limits (see section 7 for additional 

details).

Maintain ML2 roads to be open for use by high-clearance traffic.

Passenger-car traffic, user comfort, and user convenience are not 

considerations. Warning signs and traffic-control devices generally are 

not provided (see section 3 for details). If it is necessary to blade a ML2 

road to provide access for passenger-car traffic, such as to a trailhead, 

then the appropriate maintenance level would be ML3 or higher. 

Lowering operating speeds to meet the conditions is important on a ML2 

road. This can be accomplished by not overmaintaining or improving 

the road beyond its maintenance level. A road surface becomes less 

accessible for passenger-car traffic as the road deteriorates; potholes, 

ruts, or washboarding are created and fills settle. This is acceptable—

and should be encouraged—as long as management objectives 

for the road are being met, unacceptable environmental damage is 

prevented, and the road-drainage system and streams are hydrologically 

disconnected. Only use graders on a ML2 road if necessary to protect 

the resources and not to provide a smooth-driving surface. A dozer 

generally produces a more desirable outcome than a grader. All of these 

surface conditions help to lower operating speeds, which typically will 

reduce the probability and severity of a crash and bring operating speeds 

in alignment with actual conditions.

Clean and maintain culvert cross drains, drainage dips, and lead-off 

ditches on ML2 roads for resource needs but not to provide access, 

comfort, or convenience for passenger-car traffic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Section 4—Maintenance

26

Maintenance prescription guidelines for ML2 roads are as follows (figures 

4-1 through 4-5):

Traveled way. Log-out and brush only as necessary to provide 

passage for high-clearance traffic. Maintain road prism for 

drainage and to provide for passage of high-clearance traffic. 

Traveled way should not be bladed to provide a smooth-driving 

surface. Protrusions and rutting up to 6 inches may be present if 

not inhibiting desired drainage patterns. 

Shoulder. Shoulder is usually not defined and maintenance is not 

required unless necessary to maintain structural integrity of the 

roadway, drainage functionality, or access for high-clearance 

traffic.

Drainage. As necessary to keep drainage facilities functional, 

prevent unacceptable environmental damage, and provide 

passage for high-clearance traffic. Outslopes and dips, rather 

than ditches and cross-drain culverts, are the preferred roadway 

drainage treatment for ML2 roads.

Roadway. Manage vegetative cover as needed for planned traffic. 

Remove and/or repair slides and/or slumps as needed for access 

with high-clearance vehicles and to control resource damage. 

Ramping over slides or slumps is an acceptable alternative if 

erosion and risk of future failure of the road is not an issue.

Roadside. Generally no work is required. Refer to FSH 7709.59, 

chapter 40, for direction on danger trees located on roadsides.

Structure. Maintain all structures to provide for the passage of 

planned traffic.

Traffic service. Install and maintain route markers; warning, 

regulatory, and guide signs; and other traffic-control devices 

to provide for planned traffic and an appropriate trafficmanagement strategy.
Section 4—Maintenance

27

Figure 4-1—Potholes are developing on a ML2 road. This road condition helps 

discourage passenger-car traffic and is acceptable if the road and stream are 

hydrologically disconnected.

Figure 4-2—The surface on this ML2 road is more than adequate for highclearance traffic at low speed and there is no evidence of erosion. The vegetation 

on the shoulders is acceptable and does not encourage passenger-car traffic. If 

the vegetation begins to close off access to the road for high-clearance traffic or 

equipment needed to maintain the road some clearing may be necessary. The 

grass growing on the road surface is acceptable.
Section 4—Maintenance

28

Figure 4-3—The surface on this road is extremely rough, but it is still passable 

by high-clearance traffic at low speeds and discourages passenger-car traffic. No 

additional surface maintenance is required unless unacceptable environmental 

damage due to erosion or widening occurs.

Figure 4-4—Material from the cutbank on this ML2 road has settled into the 

roadway and has been ramped over. This is adequate for high-clearance traffic 

and discourages passenger-car traffic.
Section 4—Maintenance

29

Figure 4-5—Material from the cutbank on this ML2 road has settled into the 

roadway and left in place. The road template still allows passage by a highclearance vehicle and leaving this material helps discourage passenger-car 

traffic.

For additional information on all maintenance levels refer to “Guidelines 

for Road Maintenance Levels” (Apodaca et al. 2011).
Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 

on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads 

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User 

Expectations on ML2 Roads Section 5—User Expectations 
31

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads

When managing a road that has been lowered to ML2, consider 

user expectations. These expectations are guided by the physical 

characteristics of the road and not by the maintenance level. Many users 

do not have knowledge of what Forest Service maintenance levels are or 

what the maintenance level of a particular road is. It is important to know 

who the users are and how the lowering of a road to ML2 might affect 

their expectations.

5.1. Road Surface

Road surface smoothness is not a consideration on ML2 roads and—

over time—if the road is maintained to a ML2 standard the road surface 

smoothness will change. Until the surface condition changes to a rougher 

condition more suited to high-clearance traffic, the passenger-car driver 

may have a higher expectation when driving on the road (figures 5-1 and 

5-2). This results in a higher degree of reliance on traffic-control devices 

for conditions that warrant them. 

Figure 5-1—A ML2 road that still looks and drives like a much higher-level road. 

User expectations on this road would be fairly high even though it is a ML2. If a 

ML2 road, such as this one, continues to be bladed to provide a smooth riding 

surface and is not allowed to deteriorate, raise it to a higher maintenance level.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads

32

Figure 5-2—A ML2 road that is not passable by a standard passenger car. The 

user expectation on this road would be low because it is obvious that it is not 

passable by a standard passenger car. A vertical route marker would give further 

evidence of a lower-standard road. Ruts in the road are acceptable if they are 

hydrologically disconnected from the stream system.
33

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads

5.2. Speed

The conditions on a ML2 road are suitable for high-clearance traffic at 

prudent driving speeds that are typically less than 15 miles per hour 

(mph). A ML2 road that is passable by a standard passenger car and 

permits prudent driving speeds—much in excess of 20 mph—gives the 

road user the expectation of a higher-level road. This could result in 

a higher degree of reliance on traffic-control devices until the speeds 

are lowered due to a rougher road surface, increased vegetation 

encroaching on the traveled way, woody debris allowed to remain in 

the roadway, or other physical factors. A higher speed also results in an 

increased risk for vehicle damage or physical injury if an accident does 

occur (figures 5-3 and 5-4). 

Figure 5-3—A ML2 road with a prudent-driver speed of 50 mph due to the 

smooth road surface and wide traveled way. User expectations on this road 

would be high, and the risk and severity of an accident would be higher than on 

a ML2 road with prudent-driver speeds less than 15 mph. ML2 roads with these 

attributes would have a greater need for traffic-control devices.
Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads

34

Figure 5-4—A ML2 road with a prudent-driver speed less than 15 mph due to the 

rough road surface and encroaching brush. In this situation user expectations 

would be low and traffic-control devices would not typically be expected. At these 

speeds the risk and severity of an accident also would be low, which further 

decreases the need for traffic-control devices. If the vegetation begins to close off 

access to the road for high-clearance traffic or equipment needed to maintain the 

road some clearing may be necessary.

5.3. Type of User (Prudent Driver)

The typical user of a road that is not suitable for passenger-car traffic 

(ML2) usually has a lower expectation of relying on traffic-control devices 

because of the low speeds, rough road surface, limited sight distance, 

reduced-traffic volume, and other factors. If a ML2 road’s physical 

aspects allow or even encourage passenger-car traffic the type of 

user and his/her expectations generally change. The reliance on—and 

expectation of—traffic-control devices increases. The users of a ML2 

road that is not suitable for passenger-car traffic tend to be hunters, 

wood gatherers, 4-wheel drive enthusiasts, and generally more local 

travelers. When the ML2 road has the attributes of a passenger-car road, 

the potential for nonlocal users—with higher expectations—increases. 

These factors need to be considered when managing a road that has 

been lowered to ML2. 
35

Section 5—User Expectations on ML2 Roads

5.4. Volume of Traffic

Roads that are not suitable for passenger-car traffic (ML2) typically have 

low-traffic volumes. This is due to the types of vehicles that can traverse 

ML2 roads and because ML2 roads do not provide access to heavily 

used areas of the national forest. A road that is lowered to ML2, but is 

still suitable for passenger-car traffic and has a history of use that is more 

typical of a higher-level road, needs to be managed for that use. When 

the road deteriorates to the point where it is not suitable for passengercar traffic and/or the use patterns change, the traffic volume generally will 

decrease. This will help lower the expectation and need for traffic-control 

devices. 

5.5. Motorized Mixed Use

Typically, motorized mixed use is associated more with ML2 roads 

that are not suitable for passenger-car traffic rather than with higherlevel roads that are suitable for passenger-car traffic. Consequently, 

the expectations of the licensed driver on ML2 roads, which are not 

suitable for passenger-car traffic, are one of increased awareness to 

encountering unlicensed drivers. Roads that have been lowered to 

ML2, but are still suitable for passenger-car traffic, may run a higher risk 

of an accident if unlicensed drivers are allowed on the road too (i.e., 

designated for all motor vehicles on the motor vehicle use map). This 

might warrant the need for warning signs or an entrance treatment to 

discourage passenger-car traffic. 

5.6. Highway Safety Program 

Hazards on ML2 roads are not identified to the same degree as ML3, 4, 

or 5 roads by policy under FSH 7709.59, section 25, primarily because 

of low-operating speeds and reduced user expectations. However, road 

hazards and safety issues should still be considered, and traffic-control 

devices may be required. The need for warning and regulatory signs 

on a ML2 road should still be determined by engineering judgment or 

an engineering study, and any necessary traffic-control devices shall 

follow the requirements of the MUTCD and EM-7100-15. Generally, ML2 

roads require few if any traffic-control devices, but this is influenced by 

the physical attributes of the road and user expectations rather than the 

maintenance level or the fact that these roads may not be subject to all 

of the requirements of Forest Service guidance on highway safety (FSM 

7733; FSH 7709.59, chapter 40).

The typical road user rarely has any knowledge of the highway safety 

program, and not being subject to some of the requirements of the 

highway safety program does not lower the responsibility or liability to 

manage a ML2 road with respect to user safety. 
Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies 

to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up 

the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—

Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies 

to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up 

the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—

Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies 

to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up 

the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—

Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies 

to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up 

the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—

Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to 

Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the 

Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—

Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies 

to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up 

the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—

Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to 

Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the 

Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—

Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies 

to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up 

the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—

Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies 

to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up 

the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—

Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies 

to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up 

the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—

Strategies to Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to 

Speed Up the Transition Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the 

Transition Section 6Strategies to Speed Up the Transition 
37

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

Develope a transition plan before the management decision has been 

made to lower the maintenance level of a road from ML3, 4, or 5 to ML2. 

This will help ensure adequate consideration is given to user safety as 

the road physically transitions to a ML2, or to determine if steps are 

necessary to speed up this transition. Document the transition plan for 

a road in the comments section of the maintenance plan and the road 

management objectives.

ML3, 4, or 5 roads that have been lowered to ML2 will deteriorate over 

time by the elements or instabilities that occur as a result of external 

and internal factors, such as gravity, concentration of water, temperature 

variations, scour by wind and water, effects of traffic, the action of ice, 

erosion, change or loss of vegetation, and so forth. In some cases it 

may be desirable to speed up or supplement this natural deterioration, 

such as when the entrance to a ML2 road appears passable and even 

desirable to a passenger car, but conditions farther up the road present 

unacceptable risks. 

Several methods can be used to speed up or supplement natural 

deterioration, and/or assist with entrance management to discourage 

passenger-car traffic until natural deterioration takes hold. Some key 

methods to consider are:

• Berms and road-template reduction.

• Roadside and roadway-vegetation treatment.

• Ditches and drainage treatment.

• Road-surface treatment.

Berms and ditches can be used for delineation, access control, and 

attenuation devices, but it is important to design and construct them to 

meet the need without creating a hazard. 

6.1. Berms and Road Template Reduction

Berms can be used at the road entrance to discourage passenger-car 

traffic. The berms should be constructed to a height that will discourage 

access by a passenger car, but will allow passage by a high-clearance 

traffic without having it bottom out. The height depends on the width 

of the berm(s), but generally there is a height variation of less than 16 

inches. Single berms usually are constructed across the full width of the 

road entrance to avoid allowing access around it. Multiple and staggered 

berms containing rocks (figures 6-1 and 6-2) are more effective than 
Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

38

a single berm. These individually do not have to be constructed 

across the full width of the road if they are placed close enough to 

discourage passenger cars. Vegetation can be added to help discourage 

accessibility and even disguise the entrance of ML2 roads where even 

high-clearance traffic is not encouraged (figure 6-3). 

Figure 6-1—Multiple berms with rocks provide an effective entrance treatment.

Figure 6-2—A ML2 road with multiple small berms at the entrance and a ditch on 

the main road cuts across the entrance.
39

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

Figure 6-3—A berm with vegetation to help disguise the entrance.

Use berms to reduce the road template. They are most effective on 

extra-wide single-lane roads or roads that were constructed originally 

at 11⁄2-to-2 lane widths. Use berms on the downhill shoulder of the 

traveled way to make the road narrow to a single lane (figure 6-4) and 

direct surface flow away from erosive fillslopes or sensitive areas, 

and allow it to be dispersed into the surrounding area. This reduced 

road width is less attractive to the passenger-car driver and better fits 

the characteristics of a ML2 road. Generally, these berms should be 

restricted to areas of need, such as close to the road entrance, as they 

require increased road-corridor width and excavation quantities, while 

adding weight to fills, and concentrating the water somewhere else. 

Figure 6-4—Berm to reduce the road template and protect the fillslope. 
Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

40

6.2. Roadside and Roadway Vegetation Treatment 

Typically, vegetation is used for erosion control and soil stabilization, 

but it also can be used to narrow a road making it less attractive to a 

passenger-car driver. Allowing vegetation to encroach over time narrows 

the road and decreases the sight distance, which in turn reduces the 

vehicle speed. Vegetation allowed to grow in the roadway also helps to 

reduce vehicle speed (figures 6-5 through 6-8). This decrease in vehicle 

speed helps to decrease or eliminate the need for warning signs. 

Watering may be required for initial plant establishment, some fertilizer 

may be needed (though its use should be minimized), and some 

replanting or maintenance may be needed to enhance and speed up the 

treatment. 

Things to consider:

• Do not maintain or brush ML2 roads where the management 

strategy is for them to naturally close to ML1 over time.

• Plan minimal brushing into the maintenance work for those ML2 

roads that are really needed.

• Brush and tree encroachment leads to slower speeds and 

discourages passenger-car traffic.

• Site distance and speed desirable on a ML2 road.

Figure 6-5—The vegetation in the roadway on this ML2 road is acceptable since 

it allows for access for high-clearance traffic while discouraging passenger-car 

traffic. This is most effective in discouraging passenger-car traffic from starting up 

a road when it is apparent at the road entrance.
41

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

Figure 6-6—Allowing some vegetation to encroach into the traveled way is 

acceptable since it allows for access by high-clearance traffic while discouraging 

passenger-car traffic.

Figure 6-7—Allowing vegetation to continue growing in the middle of a ML2 road 

with a relatively smooth surface helps discourage travel by passenger-car traffic 

and helps to decrease vehicle speeds until the surface can deteriorate naturally.

Figure 6-6—Allowing some vegetation to encroach into the traveled way is 

Figure 6-7—Allowing vegetation to continue growing in the middle of a ML2 road 
Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

42

Figure 6-8—When vegetation is allowed to grow in naturally it helps disguise the 

road and make it less attractive to passenger-car traffic.

6.3. Ditches and Drainage Treatment 

6.3.1. Ditches

Ditches can be constructed at the entrance to ML2 roads to discourage 

passenger-car traffic and to narrow a road to a single lane (figures 

6-9 and 6-10). Ditches need periodic maintenance to be efficient

hydraulically, less of a risk for vehicles leaving the traveled way 

accidentally, and move water without erosion or damage to the adjacent 

land. 

Without proper maintenance, a well-designed ditch can deepen due to 

downcutting. This could pose a higher risk to vehicles that accidentally 

leave the road and might not allow access for high-clearance traffic. 

Consider maintenance methods in the design of ditches so that they will 

be suitable for the methods and equipment that will be used for their 

maintenance. On very flat grades, a ditch that is not maintained can fill 

with sediment and debris or pond water, which allows water to infiltrate, 

saturate, and damage the road subgrade and make the ditch ineffective.

Ditches along the road near natural drainages, such as streams, should 

be discharged onto the forest floor, vegetation or a stable area rather 

than directly discharging into the natural drainage.
43

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

Figure 6-9—The ditchline on the main road continuing through the intersection 

discourages passenger-car traffic on the ML2 road.

Figure 6-10—The ditchline on this ML3 road cuts through the intersection of a 

ML2 road discouraging passenger-car traffic.
Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

44

6.3.2. Waterbars and rolling dips

Waterbars and rolling dips are used to intersect and divert the surface 

water running down a road to prevent concentrated waterflow from

accelerating down a sloping road; to prevent excessive erosion until 

natural or planted revegetation can become established; and to divert 

water off a road. 

Waterbars and rolling dips commonly are used on ML2 roads (figures 

6-11 and 6-12). They both provide a low-cost method of drainage control 

where surface water running down the road may cause erosion, but 

waterbars are more effective at discouraging passenger-car traffic than 

rolling dips. Waterbars placed close to the beginning of a ML2 road are 

most effective at discouraging passenger-car traffic (figure 6-13).

Different design vehicles have different geometric requirements so that 

they can drive over a dip or waterbar without damaging the drainage 

structure or the vehicle. High-clearance vehicles can pass over drivable 

waterbars without causing damage. Low-clearance vehicles, such as 

passenger cars, require a longer, shallower rolling dip and a more gentle 

transition into and out of the dip. Generally, this type of structure should 

be avoided on a ML2 road to help discourage passenger-car traffic. 

During commercial use, such as an active log haul, waterbars may need 

to be graded or smoothed out to facilitate driving a log truck over them. 

These longer and shallower dips may not work as well for water diversion 

and do not discourage passenger-car traffic. Therefore, once the haul is 

completed, it is important to reconstruct the waterbars in the road.

The dimensions shown in figure 6-11 are average and should be 

adjusted to conditions for proper drainage and to ensure that the 

waterbar is passable by high-clearance traffic.
45

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

Figure 6-11—Drivable waterbar construction. Adapted from Wisconsin’s Forestry 

Best Management Practices for Water Quality (1995).

Figure 6-12—Rolling dips usually cost less, require less maintenance, and 

are less likely to plug and fail than culvert cross-drain pipes, but they are less 

effective at discouraging passenger-car traffic than a waterbar.
Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

46

Figure 6-13—ML2 road with multiple waterbars at the entrance to discourage 

passenger-car traffic.

6.3.3. Low-water crossing

Low-water crossings, or fords, are an alternative when removing culverts 

for stream crossings on ML2 roads where road use is low, when much 

upstream debris is present, and streamflow conditions are appropriate 

(figure 6-14). Low-water crossings allow access for high-clearance traffic 

while discouraging passenger-car traffic. Like other hydraulic structures 

for stream crossings, they require specific site considerations and 

specific hydrologic, hydraulic, and biotic analyses. 

Figure 6-14—Armored ford. This is on the high end of ford construction and 

generally exceeds the budgets and needs of most ML2 roads.

Figure 6-13—ML2 road with multiple waterbars at the entrance to discourage 
47

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

6.4. Road Surface Treatment

6.4.1. Surface roughening

Surface roughening or scarifying can be used to narrow the entrance of 

a ML2 road to a single lane by widening the shoulder at the intersection. 

This could help alert a driver of a road-condition change and help 

discourage passenger-car traffic. This technique also loosens the soil 

along the edge of the road for improved vegetation establishment, which 

over time also will serve to discourage access. 

Surface roughening or scarifying also can be done on the full width of 

the road to discourage passenger-car traffic (figure 6-15). This can be 

done at the beginning of the road and continue as far up the road as 

necessary to meet management objectives. 

Surface roughening and scarifying techniques can be applied to roads 

with an aggregate surface as well as a native surface (figure 6-16).

Limitations for surface roughening are: 

• May not be suitable for steep grades.

• May temporarily increase erosion prior to vegetation 

establishment. 

• Should be done across slope when needed to discourage rills.

Figure 6-15—Scarify the surface at the road entrance by using equipment.
Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

48

Figure 6-16—Aggregate-surfaced road with scarified entrance.

6.4.2. Asphalt surface (including chip seal) treatment

To the general public, an asphalt-surface road typically encourages 

passenger-car traffic. It is important to be consistent with road 

management objectives and maintenance criteria on asphalt-pavement 

roads that are being lowered to ML2. 

There are several methods to comply with the road management 

objectives and road maintenance criteria for an asphalt-surface road 

that is being lowered to ML2. One method is to allow the road surface to 

deteriorate naturally creating a rough, potholed surface, which may help 

discourage passenger-car traffic. While this surface is deteriorating, it 

may create risks to passenger-car traffic. It may be necessary to install 

warning signs or treat the entrance to discourage access by a standardpassenger car to reduce this risk until the deterioration is more consistent 

throughout the road (figure 6-17). It also is acceptable to use native 

materials to patch potholes minimally to lower risks for passenger-car 

traffic. 
49

Section 6—Strategies to Speed Up the Transition

Another treatment option is to rip up or remove the asphalt surface 

(figure 6-18). This can be done at the beginning of the road and continue 

as far up the road as is necessary to meet management objectives. 

Removal for at least the first 100 feet is recommended to be minimally 

effective.

The various treatments listed above have a range in application cost and 

effectiveness, so evaluating various alternatives should be considered as 

part of the decision process and weighed against available funding and 

management objectives.

Figure 6-17—ML2 road with deteriorating pavement. Warning signs may 

be necessary for sections such as this if the deterioration is not consistent 

throughout the road.

Figure 6-18—Rip or remove the asphalt surface at the entrance of a ML2 road.

Figure 6-17—ML2 road with deteriorating pavement. Warning signs may 
Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 

Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements 

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 

Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements 

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 

Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements 

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 

Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements 

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 

Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements 

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 

Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements 

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 

Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements 

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 

Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements 

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 

Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements 

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 

Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements 

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—

Managing Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing 

Intermittent Improvements Section 7—Managing Intermittent 
51

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements

When a ML2 road is improved to accommodate a temporary use, such 

as commercial use, give consideration to the effect this might have on 

user safety. Most ML2 roads experience only minor noncommercial traffic 

during those periods when they have been improved for commercial 

use and temporary traffic control signs may not be necessary. If 

noncommercial traffic is significant during periods of commercial use, 

it may need to be discouraged with temporary traffic-control devices, 

such as signs warning of timber harvest activities, or eliminated by an 

order (36 CFR 261), such as a closure to nonpermitted use and signed 

accordingly (figure 7-1). These measures may be necessary only during 

periods of increased noncommercial use, such as during hunting season, 

holidays, and weekends. They may be necessary during the entire period 

of commercial activity, if the road is improved to a level that encourages 

passenger-car traffic and noncommercial traffic increases significantly. 

New or additional regulatory and/or warning signs that were not needed 

before the ML2 road was improved may now be necessary. Some 

examples are:

• Curves that did not need warning signs before the improvement 

of the road because of the low speeds may now need signs due 

to increased speeds and encouraged passenger-car traffic. 

• Intersections may now need YIELD or STOP signs, such as 

where the improved ML2 road intersects with a higher-level road.

It is important to consider that an improved ML2 road should be

managed as if it was a higher-level road during the time its physical 

characteristics remain above ML2. A transition plan, which would include 

a site-specific sign plan should be developed before a ML2 road is 

improved, and implemented after the road has been improved and before 

commercial use has started. Another alternative would be to close the 

road to noncommercial use during the commercial-use period, and apply 

one of the strategies described in section 6 before the road is reopened. 

The decision to use a particular traffic-control device at a specific location 

should be made on the basis of an engineering study or the application 

of engineering judgment. 

Policy in the Forest Service Manual (FSM) 7732.2 requires commercial 

users to be responsible for their commensurate share of maintenance 

needs. Under this policy, when public recreation use is restricted or 

eliminated on a road, commercial users are responsible financially for 

all maintenance for traffic, including the needs for safety and signing 

discussed above. 
Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements

52

Figure 7-1—Variable Road Restrictions (FR5-11c) signs indicate specific times 

and/or days of use and modes of travel that are allowed or restricted. The 

information on these signs should be clear and concise to avoid confusion for 

the user. These signs should be designed on a case-by-case basis and shall be 

approved by the regional office.

Figure 7-2—Log haul on a road maintained temporarily at a higher-maintenance 

level.

LOGGING TRAFFIC ONLY

M O N 6 A M T H R U F R I 5 PM

SNOWMOBILES ONLY

FRI 5 PM THRU SUN 12 AM

LOGGING TRAFFIC ONLY

M O N 6 A M T H R U F R I 5 PM

O CT 31 – MAR 15
53

Section 7—Managing Intermittent Improvements

Figure 7-3—ML2 road maintained at a higher-maintenance level for a log haul.
Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 

Section 8—Documentation Section 8—Documentation 
Section 8—Documentation

55

The lowering of maintenance standards of National Forest System roads 

to ML2 should be documented through road management objectives 

(RMOs) approved by the line officer. Line-officer approval of RMOs 

certifies that management objectives are correctly documented rather 

than as a record of a new decision. Document RMOs as a permanent 

record that is readily available for use. Use the RMO Module of INFRA 

(the Forest Service infrastructure database) Travel Routes to record 

data. 

While the electronic record in INFRA is used for day-to-day road 

management, the completed RMOs must be printed and signed in ink 

by the certifying line officer. RMOs are a key part of the Government’s 

defense in the event of claims and litigation under the Federal Tort 

Claims Act. Courts generally do not accept electronic documentation as 

part of the defense. The written copy must be retained in the forest’s files 

for a minimum of 5 years past the date of any revision to the RMO. Refer 

to the Forest Service Handbook 7709.59, chapter 11.3.
Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 

9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary 

Section 9—Glossary Section 9—Glossary Section 9—

GS9GS9GS
Section 9—Glossary

57

9.1. Definitions

Engineering Judgment–An engineering judgment is the evaluation 

of available pertinent information, and the application of appropriate 

principles, standards, guidance, and practices as contained in the 

MUTCD, EM-7100-15, and other sources, for the purpose of deciding 

upon the applicability, design, operation, or installation of a traffic-control 

device. It is less technical than an engineering study. Engineering 

judgment shall be exercised by a qualified engineer, or by an individual 

working under the supervision of a qualified engineer, through the 

application of procedures and criteria established by the qualified 

engineer. Engineering judgment shall be documented (EM-7100-15).

At a minimum an engineering judgment should have:

• Name and signature of person making the judgment.

• Conclusions made.

• Location of and date the work was done.

Engineering Study–An engineering study is a formal, analytical, 

and comprehensive analysis and evaluation of available pertinent 

information, and the application of appropriate principles, standards, 

guidance, and practices as contained in the MUTCD, EM-7100-15, and 

other sources, for the purpose of deciding upon the applicability, design, 

operation, or installation of a traffic-control device. An engineering study 

shall be performed by a qualified engineer, or by an individual working 

under the supervision of a qualified engineer, through the application 

of procedures and criteria established by the qualified engineer. An 

engineering study shall be documented (EM-7100-15).

An engineering study may include: 

• Accident history and analysis. 

• Spot speed studies and curve speed studies. 

• Traffic counts and classification. 

• Existing and anticipated road conditions.

Maintenance Levels–Maintenance levels define the level of service 

provided by, and maintenance required for, a specific road. Maintenance 

levels must be consistent with road management objectives and 

maintenance criteria.
Section 9—Glossary

58

MUTCD–Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

Prudent Driver–A prudent driver is a person operating within their 

physical and mental limitations; with a properly equipped and maintained 

vehicle; and who always exercises due care for the road, traffic, lighting, 

and weather conditions (AASHTO’s “Guidelines for Geometric Design of 

Very Low-Volume Roads (ADT<400)”

Public Road (FSM 7705)–A public road is a road under the jurisdiction 

of and maintained by a public road authority and open to public travel (23 

U.S.C. 101(a)).

Public Road (FSM 7730.5)–A road that is:

• Available, except during scheduled periods, extreme weather, or 

emergency conditions. 

• Passable by four-wheel standard passenger cars. 

• Open to the general public for use without restrictive gates, 

prohibitive signs, or regulations other than restrictions based on 

size, weight, or class of registration (23 U.S.C. 101(a)(27); 23 

CFR 460.2(c) and 660.103).

Qualified Engineer–A qualified engineer is an engineer who by 

experience, certification, education, or license is technically trained and 

experienced in the proper application of principles, standards, guidance, 

and practices for traffic-control devices, such as forest, regional, and 

national sign coordinators (EM-7100-15).

Standard Passenger Car–All sedans, coupes, and station wagons 

manufactured primarily for the purpose of carrying passengers and 

including those passsenger cars pulling recreational or other light trailers.

Note: References made to standard passenger car use and passage

includes operation by a prudent driver.
Section 9—Glossary

59

Warrant–A warrant describes a threshold condition based upon 

average or normal conditions that, if found to be satisfied as part of 

an engineering study, shall result in analysis of other traffic conditions 

or factors to determine whether a traffic-control device or other 

improvement is justified. 

A warrant is a set of criteria, which can be used to define the relative 

need for, and appropriateness of, a particular traffic-control device.

Warrants are not a substitute for engineering judgment. The fact that 

a warrant for a particular traffic-control device is met is not conclusive 

justification for the installation of the device. 

Warrants should be viewed as guidelines, not as absolute values. 

Satisfaction of a warrant is not a guarantee that the device is needed. 

Conversely, the fact that a warrant is not fully satisfied does not 

constitute absolute assurance that the device could not serve a useful 

purpose. The application of warrants is effective only when combined 

with the knowledgeable engineering judgment considering all pertinent 

facts. 
Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 

Section 10—Reference Cited Section 10—Reference Cited 
61

Section 10—Reference Cited

Apodaca, M.; Tippie, M.; Verde, A.M.; Barandino, Jr. V. 2011. Guidelines 

for road maintenance levels, 1177 1811—SDTDC. San Dimas, 

CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, San Dimas 

Technology and Development Center. 50 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Forest Service 

Handbook. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, Washington Office. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2009. Forest Service 

Handbook 7709.59.60, Road Maintenance, [Effective date 

02/05/2009]. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Washington Office. 18 p

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service 2008. Forest Service 

Handbook 7730, Road Operation and Maintenance, [Effective date 

10/07/2008]. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Forest Service, Washington Office. 39p

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. 2012. Sign and poster 

guidelines for the Forest Service. EM-7100-15. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Washington Office, 

Engineering Staff.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1998. Waterbar 

placement and construction guide for Siuslaw forest roads. Updates 

Appendix F of 1995 Forest Road Obliteration and Upgrade Guide. 

Corvallis, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Siuslaw National Forest. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1995. Forest road 

obliteration and upgrade guide. [Unnumbered] Corvallis, OR: 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest 

Region, Siuslaw National Forest. 76 p.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 1983. Guide for traffic 

control devices on forest development roads. 8371 2603–MTDC. 

Missoula, MT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 

Missoula Technology and Development Center.
Section 10—Reference Cited

62

U.S. Department of Transportation. 2009. Manual on uniform traffic 

control devices, ISBN 978-1-56051-473-2. Washington, DC: U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. 

816 p.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1995. Wisconsin’s forestry 

best management practices for water quality-field manual for 

loggers, landowners and land managers. Publication No. FR093. 

Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 76p.

Web site

Highway Safety Act, Title 23 CFR <http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/nhtsa/

whatsup/tea21/GrantMan/HTML/07_Sect402Leg23USC_Chap4.html>.