29234 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

23 CFR Part 655

[FHWA Docket No. 96–9]

RIN 2125–AD89

National Standards for Traffic Control

Devices; Revision of the Manual on

Uniform Traffic Control Devices;

Pedestrian, Bicycle, and School

Warning Signs

AGENCY: Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed amendment

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, and recognized as the national

standard for traffic control on all public

roads. After the current 1988 Edition of

the MUTCD was published, a decision

was made by the FHWA on January 6,

1988, at 53 FR 236, to postpone

rulemaking on all requests for revisions

to the MUTCD except those changes

which would significantly impact

safety. The FHWA announced its intent

to rewrite and reformat the MUTCD on

January 10, 1992, at 57 FR 1134. This

effort is still underway and as work

progresses, many changes and

modifications are being proposed. The

FHWA is inviting comments on a

proposed change to the MUTCD which

would assign the color fluorescent

yellow green as an optional color for

pedestrian, bicycle, and school warning

signs.

DATES: Submit comments on or before

October 7, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Submit written, signed

comments to FHWA Docket No. 96–9,

Federal Highway Administration, Room

4232, HCC–10, 400 Seventh Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20590. All comments

received will be available for

examination at the above address

between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., e.t.,

Monday through Friday except Federal

holidays. Those desiring notification of

receipt of comments must include a selfaddressed, stamped postcard.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

information regarding this notice of

proposed amendment contact Mr. Ernest

Huckaby, Office of Highway Safety,

Room 3416, (202) 366–9064, or Mr.

Raymond Cuprill, Office of Chief

Counsel, Room 4217, (202) 366–0834,

Department of Transportation, Federal

Highway Administration, 400 Seventh

Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.

Office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15

p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday

except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

MUTCD is available for inspection and

copying as prescribed in 49 CFR Part 7,

appendix D. It may be purchased for

$44.00 from the Superintendent of

Documents, U. S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, DC 20402, Stock

No. 050–001–00308–2.

The FHWA both receives and initiates

requests for amendments to the

MUTCD. Each request is assigned an

identification number which indicates,

by Roman numeral, the organizational

part of the MUTCD affected and, by

Arabic numeral, the order in which the

request was received.

This notice is being initiated by the

FHWA to provide an opportunity for

comment on the desirability of the

proposed amendment to the MUTCD.

Based on comments submitted in

response to this notice and upon its own

experience, the FHWA will issue a final

rule concerning this request.

Background

Request I–16(C)—Fluorescent Strong

Yellow Green Signs

The FHWA is exploring new

technology to improve transportation

safety and the effectiveness of traffic

control devices. The FHWA is working

to reduce the number of pedestrian and

bicycle accidents through the use of the

new color called fluorescent yellow

green, formerly called strong yellow

green in the MUTCD. The word

‘‘fluorescent’’ more accurately describes

the nature of the proposed color.

Fluorescent colors not only reflect light,

as do nonfluorescent colors, but they

also emit additional light. For this

reason, fluorescent colors appear

brighter than similar nonfluorescent

colors. A fluorescent yellow green sign

will stand out from its background,

commanding the attention of drivers

approaching school zones and

pedestrian and bicycle crossings. This

color is one of four unassigned colors

contained in the MUTCD for use on

highways.

Studies

The FHWA has initiated and

completed two studies with the use of

fluorescent yellow green signs—a pilot

sudy in conjunction with the National

Park Service and a nationwide study.

Copies of the final reports from the pilot

study and the 24 participants in the

nationwide study are available for

review in FHWA Docket No. 96–9 in the

FHWA Docket Room at the address

listed above. In early 1992, an FHWA

pilot study was completed by the

National Park Service which examined

the effects of fluorescent yellow green

crossing signs on motorist behavior at

five pedestrian and bicycle crossings in

the Washington, D.C. area. The scope of

this study included before and after

observations at five sites on the George

Washington and Rock Creek Parkways,

where the new crossing signs were

installed, and at one comparison site

where no changes were made. The pilot

study was limited in scope to

recreational crossings. While the results

were positive, further studies were

recommended to examine the

effectiveness of the sign in other States

and under other crossing conditions,

such as, nonrecreational use and school

crossings.

In early 1993, the FHWA conducted a

nationwide study to evaluate the

fluorescent yellow green on school, as

well as pedestrian and bicycle, crossing

signs. A total of 57 jurisdictions were

given permission to participate in the

study. Guidance was provided for

evaluation design and site selection

criteria. Field observations consisted of

behavioral data used to measure

motorist, pedestrian, and bicyclist

actions, and volume counts used to

provide a measure of exposure. In

addition to collecting behavior data and

volume counts, speed data was also

collected to determine if the new

crossing signs had an effect on the speed

profile. Public opinion surveys were

also distributed randomly to persons

who traveled through the study area and

to staff members and parents in schools

which were a part of the study.

Of the 57 original jurisdictions, 24 of

the participants responded with final

report recommendations. Two major

issues were mentioned concerning the

adoption of fluorescent yellow green.

The first issue involved the cost of the

fluorescent yellow green sheeting

material. This material costs more than

one and a half times as much as the

High Intensity sign material. A gradual

phase-in is recommended as part of

routine maintenance in view of the cost

and number of replacements necessary.

Another major issue is that the novelty

effect may wear off and over time the

fluorescent yellow green signs may be

regarded as the standard yellow signs

are now.

Overall evaluation results showed

that the fluorescent yellow green signs

had only marginal effects in improving

the behavior of motorists. At the few

sites where the number of motorists

slowing or stopping for pedestrians or

bicyclists did increase, the amount of

increase was not significant. The

fluorescent yellow green signs had little
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 111 / Friday, June 7, 1996 / Proposed Rules 29235

or no noticeable effect on the speed of

motor vehicles. The greatest impact

from the study was found in the public

opinion surveys. Survey comments

indicated a positive response to the new

signs. It was evident from the survey

results that the signs were very effective

in getting the attention of motorists.

Many people felt the fluorescent yellow

green signs would increase pedestrian

safety.

Proposed Change to MUTCD

Although the evaluation data showed

only marginal effects in improving the

behavior of motorists, the FHWA’s

review and examination of the studies

and public surveys described above

appear to indicate that this new color

warning sign would improve the

conspicuity of the sign message and is

very effective in getting the attention of

motorists during daylight conditions.

The FHWA proposes to adopt the

fluorescent yellow green as an optional

color for Pedestrian Crossing Sign

(W11–2), Bicycle Crossing Sign (W11–

1), School Advance Sign (S1–1), School

Crossing Sign (S2–1), and School Bus

Stop Ahead Sign (S3–1). If a State or

local highway agency elects to use the

fluorescent yellow green signs at these

specified locations, the FHWA

recommends that a systematic approach

be used to install these signs. For

example, if a specific school area is

identified as a candidate for fluorescent

yellow green, then all school signs

installed in that immediate area should

be fluorescent yellow green. The mixing

of standard yellow and fluorescent

yellow green within a selected site area

should be avoided.

The Commission Internationale de

l′Eclairage (CIE) (English: International

Commission on Illumination)

chromaticity coordinates (x,y), defining

the corners of the Fluorescent Yellow

Green daytime color region, are as

follows:

x y

0.387 0.610

0.460 0.540

0.421 0.486

0.368 0.539

These four pairs of chromaticity

coordinates determine the acceptable

color in terms of the CIE 1931 Standard

Colorimetric System (2 degree standard

observer) measured with CIE Standard

Illuminant D65 in accordance with

ASTM E991. In addition, the color shall

be fluorescent, as determined by ASTM

E1247.

The chromaticity limits given above

supersede the color Brilliant Yellow

Green, issued by the National Joint

Committee on Uniform Traffic Control

Devices in May 1969, which is no longer

applicable.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory

Planning and Review) and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

The FHWA has determined that this

action is not a significant regulatory

action within the meaning of Executive

Order 12866 or significant within the

meaning of Department of

Transportation regulatory policies and

procedures. It is anticipated that the

economic impact of this rulemaking

would be minimal. The change

proposed in this notice provides

additional guidance, clarification, and

optional applications for traffic control

devices. The FHWA expects that

application uniformity will improve 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 (Pub. L. 96–354, 5 U.S.C.

601–612), the FHWA has evaluated the

effects of this proposed action on small

entities, including small governments.

This notice of proposed rulemaking

adds some alternative traffic control

devices and only a very limited number

of new or changed requirements. Based

on this evaluation, the FHWA hereby

certifies that this action would not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

Executive Order 12612 (Federalism

Assessment)

This action has been analyzed in

accordance with the principles and

criteria contained in Executive Order

12612, and it has been determined that

this action would not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a federalism assessment.

The MUTCD is incorporated by

reference in 23 CFR part 655, subpart F,

which requires that changes to the

national standards issued by the FHWA

shall be adopted by the States or other

Federal agencies within two years of

issuance. The proposed amendment is

in keeping with the Secretary of

Transportation’s authority under 23

U.S.C. 109(d), 315, and 402(a) to

promulgate uniform guidelines to

promote the safe and efficient use of the

highway. To the extent that this

amendment would override any existing

State requirements regarding traffic

control devices, it does so in the

interests of national uniformity.

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

This action does not contain a

collection of information requirement

for purposes of the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501

et seq.

National Environmental Policy Act

The agency has analyzed this action

for the purpose of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42

U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has determined

that this action 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. 109(d), 114(a), 315, and 402(a); 23

CFR 1.32, 655.601, 655.602, and 655.603; 49

CFR 1.48)

Issued on: May 28, 1996.

Rodney E. Slater,

Federal Highway Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–14261 Filed 6–06–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–22–P