[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 96 (Thursday, May 17, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 27480-27482]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12426]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

23 CFR Part 655

[FHWA Docket No. FHWA-2001-8846]
RIN 2125-AE83


Revision of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices; 
General Provisions, Markings, and Signals

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed amendments to the Manual on Uniform Traffic 
Control Devices (MUTCD); request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The MUTCD is incorporated by reference in 23 CFR part 655, 
subpart F, approved by the Federal Highway Administration, and 
recognized as the national standard for traffic control devices on all 
public roads. The purpose of this notice is to propose revised wording 
on the design and installation of traffic control devices, specifically 
accessible pedestrian signals, in the MUTCD.
    This document proposes new text for the MUTCD in Part 1--General 
and Part 4--Signals. The proposed changes included herein are intended 
to revise supporting information and guidance relating to the 
decisionmaking process concerning accessible pedestrian signals.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 18, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Mail or hand deliver comments with the docket number that 
appears in the heading of this document to the U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Dockets Management Facility, Room PL-401, 400 Seventh 
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590 or submit electronically at http://dmes.dot.gov/submit. All comments should include the docket number that 
appears in the heading of this document. All comments received will be 
available for examination and copying at the above address between 9 
a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. 
Those desiring notification of receipt of comments must include a self-
addressed, stamped postcard or you may print the acknowledgment page 
that appears after submitting comments electronically.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding the notice 
of proposed amendments contact Mr. Ernest Huckaby, Office of 
Transportation Operations, Room 3408, (202) 366-9064, or Mr. Raymond 
Cuprill, Office of the Chief Counsel, Room 4230, (202) 366-0791, U.S. 
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 400 
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 Electronic Access

    Internet users may access all comments received by the U.S. DOT 
Dockets, Room PL 401, by using the universal resource locator (URL): 
http://dms.dot.gov. It is available 24 hours each day, 365 days each 
year. Please follow the instructions online for more information and 
help. An electronic copy of this notice of proposed amendment may be 
downloaded using a modem and suitable communications software from the 
Government Printing Office's Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202) 
512-1661. Internet users may reach the Office of the Federal Register's 
home page at: http://www.nara.gov/fedreg and the Government Printing 
Office's database at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.

Background

    The MUTCD is available for inspection and copying as prescribed in 
49 CFR part 7 on the FHWA's website at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov. This 
notice is being issued to provide an opportunity for public comment on 
the desirability of proposed amendments to Section 1A.11 and to Section 
4E.06 concerning accessible pedestrian signals. Based on the comments 
received and its own experience, the FHWA may issue a final rule 
concerning the proposed changes included in this notice.
    This notice of proposed amendment is being published in response to 
several letters received by the U.S. Department of Transportation 
objecting to language in the text of the MUTCD summarized in the final 
rule published at 65 FR 78923 on December 18, 2000. The letters 
received by the U.S. Department of Transportation were written by the 
American Council of the Blind, the Association for Education and 
Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired Division Nine--
Orientation and Mobility, the National Committee on Uniform Traffic 
Control Devices, and Accessible Design for the Blind.
    The letter from the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control 
Devices (NCUTCD) discusses a meeting it held in January 2001 with 
representatives of various organizations that represent individuals 
with visual disabilities. During the meeting the attendees drafted text 
they believe would be more acceptable to pedestrians with visual 
disabilities and the organizations that represent them. However, the 
NCUTCD recommended one sentence of the draft text be deleted because it 
believed it may encourage a ``do nothing'' response by a traffic agency 
as opposed to conducting an engineering study of the request to install 
a traffic control device at a location.
    The FHWA agrees with this position as Federal, State, and local 
agencies are required to comply with the Americans with Disabilities 
Act of 1990 (ADA) (42 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.). Title II of the ADA of 1990 
requires that public entites not discriminate against people with 
disabilities. Subject to the provisions of Title II, no qualified 
individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be 
excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the 
services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected 
to discrimination by any such entity. The FHWA believes that a traffic 
agency should review a request for pedestrian signals accessible to 
visually impaired persons in the same manner as it does all other 
requests to install a traffic control device. Also, the FHWA has the 
added requirement under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 701 
et seq.) and the ADA of 1990 of overseeing that recipients of Federal-
aid funding comply with the laws and do not discriminate against people 
with disabilities.
    The FHWA invites comments on the proposed new text for the last 
paragraph of the MUTCD Section 1A.11 and the first six paragraphs of 
the MUTCD Section 4E.06. The proposed changes are included in the 
following discussion:

[[Page 27481]]

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 1--General

    1. In Section 1A.11 Relation to Other Documents, the FHWA is 
proposing to add a new document in subparagraph U to paragraph 3 to 
read, `` `Accessible Pedestrian Signals,' A-37, U.S. Architectural and 
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (The U.S. Access Board).'' 
This new document would be a useful source of information for traffic 
engineers to use because it provides various techniques for making 
pedestrian signal information available to pedestrians with visual 
disabilities. The address for the U.S. Architectural and Transportation 
Barriers Compliance Board (The U.S. Access Board) would be added to 
page i of the MUTCD.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part 4--Signals

    1. In Section 4E.06, the FHWA proposes to revise paragraph 1 to 
read, ``The primary technique that pedestrians who have visual 
disabilities use to cross streets at signalized intersections is to 
initiate their crossing when they hear the traffic in front of them 
stop and the traffic alongside them begin to move, corresponding to the 
onset of the green interval. This technique is effective at many 
signalized intersections. The existing environment is often sufficient 
to provide the information that pedestrians who have visual 
disabilities need to operate safely at a signalized intersection. 
Therefore, many signalized intersections will not require any 
accessible pedestrian signals.'' The FHWA is proposing to replace the 
phrase ``the vast majority of'' with ``many'' because ``many signalized 
intersections'' better represents the degree of effectiveness of the 
technique used by pedestrians who have visual disabilities to cross the 
street.
    2. In Section 4E.06, the FHWA proposes to revise paragraph 2 to 
read, ``If a particular signalized intersection presents difficulties 
for pedestrians who have visual disabilities to cross safely and 
effectively, an engineering study should be conducted that considers 
the safety and effectiveness for pedestrians in general, as well as the 
information needs of pedestrians with visual disabilities.'' The FHWA 
is proposing to delete text from this paragraph that suggested safety 
and effectiveness concerns for all pedestrians be examined first before 
considering any access issues for pedestrians with visual disabilities. 
The FHWA is proposing to use the term ``engineering study'' rather than 
``examination'' or ``review'' to explain the general practice used for 
determining needed intersection improvements for road users, including 
all pedestrians. Engineering studies can examine numerous tools to 
assist pedestrians, including accessible pedestrian signals.
    3. In Section 4E.06, the FHWA proposes to revise paragraph 4 to 
read, ``Local organizations, providing support services to pedestrians 
who have visual and/or hearing disabilities, can often act as important 
advisors to the traffic engineer when consideration is being given to 
the installation of devices to assist such pedestrians. Additionally, 
orientation and mobility specialists or similar staff also might be 
able to provide a wide range of advice. The U.S. Access Board's 
Document A-37, `Accessible Pedestrian Signals,' \1\ provides various 
techniques for making pedestrian signal information available to 
persons with visual disabilities.'' The FHWA is proposing to replace 
``professionals'' with ``staff,'' because the term ``professionals'' 
could connote that a certification is necessary. The FHWA is proposing 
to add the sentence ``The U.S. Access Board's Document A-37, 
`Accessible Pedestrian Signals,' provides various techniques for making 
pedestrian signal information available to persons with visual 
disabilities' to the end of the paragraph. This reference was published 
in the NPA of December 30, 1999, at 64 FR 73612, 73670 under FHWA 
docket 99-6575, but inadvertently deleted from the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``Accessible Pedestrian Signals,'' U.S. Access Board, August 
1998, is available online at URL: http://www.access-board.gov. A 
single hardcopy may be obtained without charge by contacting the 
U.S. Access Board at (202) 272-5343 (voice) or (202) 272-5449 (TTY); 
or by writing to the Board at 1331 F Street, NW., Suite 1000, 
Washington, DC 20004-1111.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. In Section 4E.06, the FHWA proposes to delete existing 
paragraphs 5 and 6. The FHWA proposes to delete these paragraphs 
because paragraph 4 covers the consideration of advice from 
organizations that represent individuals with disabilities. In 
addition, an engineering study, mentioned in paragraph 2, covers 
consideration of cost.

Rulemaking Analysis and Notices

    The FHWA believes a 30-day comment period is sufficient for these 
proposed changes inasmuch as the issue has already been the subject of 
a notice-and-comment rulemaking (RIN 2125-AE71) and the proposed 
changes are in response to the aforementioned comments by the National 
Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, organizations providing 
support services to pedestrians with visual disabilities, and others. 
It appears that the concerns indicated by the different organizations 
have been addressed in these proposed changes. The notice of the FHWA's 
intent to add a section on accessible pedestrian signals in the MUTCD 
was first published in a notice of proposed amendment on December 30, 
1999 (RIN 2125-AE71). The FHWA provided an extensive opportunity for 
public comment and review by accepting comments on this issue for a 
period of 6 months until June 30, 2000. Because the public is very 
familiar with the issues, the FHWA believes a 30-day comment period 
would be sufficient. In addition, there are three national 
organizations, American Association of State Highway and Transportation 
Officials, Institute of Transportation Engineers and American Traffic 
Safety Services Association, that are in the process of printing the 
new MUTCD. Providing more than a 30-day comment period would be 
contrary to the public interest because it would also delay 
implementation of a massive publication effort and distribution of the 
MUTCD to traffic engineering practitioners. Since printing the MUTCD 
involves a large investment and they are aware of the possible changes 
to Section 4E.06, these national organizations would not like to print 
an MUTCD when such a significant change is pending. In addition, all of 
the concerned parties have expressed that they would be greatly 
concerned if the national organizations who plan to print the MUTCD do 
so with the current text of Section 4E.06. The FHWA believes that this 
is the most equitable and economic solution; and therefore, a comment 
period longer than 30-days would be contrary to public interest.
    All comments received before the close of business on the comment 
closing date indicated above will be considered and will be available 
for examination in the docket at the above address. Comments received 
after the comment closing date will be filed in the docket and will be 
considered to the extent practicable, but the FHWA may issue a final 
rule at any time after the close of the comment period. In addition to 
late comments, the FHWA will also continue to file in the docket 
relevant information that becomes available after the comment closing 
date, and interested persons should continue to examine the docket for 
new material.

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures

    The FHWA has determined preliminarily that this action will not be

[[Page 27482]]

a significant regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 
12866 or significant within the meaning of U.S. Department of 
Transportation regulatory policies and procedures. It is anticipated 
that the economic impact of this rulemaking would be minimal. The new 
standards and other changes proposed in this notice are intended to 
improve traffic operations and safety, and provide additional guidance, 
clarification, and optional applications for traffic control devices. 
The FHWA expects that these proposed changes will create uniformity and 
enhance safety and mobility at little additional expense to public 
agencies or the motoring public. Therefore, a full regulatory 
evaluation is not required.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-
612), the FHWA has evaluated the effects of this proposed action on 
small entities. This notice of proposed amendment proposes revised 
wording on the design and installation of traffic control devices, 
specifically accessible pedestrian signals, in the MUTCD. The proposed 
changes are intended to improve traffic operations and safety, expand 
guidance, and clarify application of traffic control devices as it 
relates to accessible pedestrian signals. The FHWA hereby certifies 
that these proposed revisions would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This proposed rule would not impose unfunded mandates as defined by 
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, March 22, 
1995, 109 Stat. 48). This proposed rule will not result in the 
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year (2 
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    The FHWA has analyzed this proposed action in accordance with the 
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132 dated August 
4, 1999. This proposal amends the existing regulation to revise wording 
on the design and installation of traffic control devices, specifically 
accessible pedestrian signals, in the MUTCD. The FHWA has consulted 
with States and local governments and believes that the proposed 
changes will not increase direct cost compliance costs of States and 
local governments.

Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

    The FHWA has analyzed this proposal under Executive Order 13175, 
dated November 6, 2000, and believes that the notice of proposed 
amendment would not have substantial direct effects on one or more 
Indian tribes; will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on 
Indian tribal governments; and will not preempt tribal law. The 
proposed changes in this notice of proposed amendment revise guidance 
and supporting information, not standards, related to the 
decisionmaking process concerning whether or not to install accessible 
pedestrian signals. Therefore, a tribal summary impact statement is not 
required.

Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review)

    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Number 20.205, 
Highway Planning and Construction. The regulations implementing 
Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on 
Federal programs and activities apply to this program.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501, et 
seq.), Federal agencies must obtain approval from the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they 
conduct, sponsor, or require through regulations. The FHWA has 
determined that this proposed action does not contain a collection of 
information requirement for purposes of the PRA.

Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    This proposed action meets applicable standards in Sections 3(a) 
and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize 
litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children)

    The FHWA has analyzed this proposed action under Executive Order 
13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and 
Safety Risks. This is not an economically significant action and does 
not concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may 
disproportionately affect children.

Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property)

    This proposed action would not effect a taking of private property 
or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, 
Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
Property Rights.

National Environmental Policy Act

    The agency has analyzed this proposed action for the purpose of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and 
has determined that it would not have any effect on the quality of the 
environment.

Regulation Identification Number

    A regulation identification number (RIN) is assigned to each 
regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. 
The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda 
in April and October of each year. The RIN contained in the heading of 
this document can be used to cross reference this action with the 
Unified Agenda.

List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 655

    Design standards, Grant programs--Transportation, Highways and 
roads, Incorporation by reference, Signs, Traffic regulations.

(23 U.S.C. 101(a), 104, 109(d), 114(a), 217, 315, and 402(a); 23 CFR 
1.32; and 49 CFR 1.48(b))

    Issued on: May 11, 2001.
Vincent F. Schimmoller,
Deputy Executive Director, Federal Highway Administration.
[FR Doc. 01-12426 Filed 5-16-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P