The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (usually referred to as the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, abbreviated MUTCD) is a document issued by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) of the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) to specify the standards by which , road surface markings, and traffic light are designed, installed, and used. Federal law requires compliance by all traffic control signs and surface markings on roads "open to public travel", including state, local, and privately owned roads (but not parking lots or gated communities). Frequently Asked Questions - General Questions on the MUTCD While some state agencies have developed their own sets of standards, including their own MUTCDs, these must substantially conform to the federal MUTCD.
The MUTCD defines the content and placement of traffic signs, while design specifications are detailed in a companion volume, Standard Highway Signs and Markings. This manual defines the specific dimensions, colors, and fonts of each sign and road marking. The National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) advises FHWA on additions, revisions, and changes to the MUTCD.
The United States is among the countries that have not ratified the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals. The first edition of the MUTCD was published in 1935, 33 years before the Vienna Convention was signed in 1968, and 4 years before World War II started in 1939. The MUTCD differs significantly from the European-influenced Vienna Convention, and an attempt to adopt several of the Vienna Convention's standards during the 1970s led to confusion among many US drivers.
History
Government action to begin resolving the wide variety of signage that had cropped up did not occur until the late 1910s and early 1920s when groups from Indiana, Minnesota, and Wisconsin began surveying existing road signs in order to develop road signage standards. They reported their findings to the Mississippi Valley Association of Highway Departments, which adopted their suggestions in 1922 for the shapes to be used for road signs. These suggestions included the familiar circular railroad crossing sign and octagonal stop sign.
In January 1925, Thomas Harris MacDonald, chief of the federal Bureau of Public Roads, published an article in which he argued that developing highway transportation in the United States to the "highest degree" would require five major innovations. Among them were "uniform markings and signs" and a "uniform color code". (At p. 7.) MacDonald argued that "drastic enforcement of uniform rules" as to "all those matters of law, regulation and safety devices which involve the human attributes in the operation of the vehicle" would improve safety on American highways, because in emergency situations, a driver and his vehicle must react as one on the basis of "reflex" and there is no time to think.
In January 1927, the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO) published the Manual and Specifications for the Manufacture, Display, and Erection of U.S. Standard Road Markers and Signs to set standards for traffic control devices used on rural roads. Despite the title, this manual did not have any guidance on pavement markings. In the archaic American English of the 1920s, the term "road marker" was sometimes used to describe traffic control devices which modern speakers would now call "signs." In 1930, the National Conference on Street and Highway Safety (NCSHS) published the Manual on Street Traffic Signs, Signals, and Markings, which set similar standards for urban settings, but also added specific guidance on traffic signals, pavement markings, and safety zones. Although the two manuals were quite similar, both organizations immediately recognized that the existence of two slightly different manuals was unnecessarily awkward, and in 1931 AASHO and NCSHS formed a Joint Committee to develop a uniform standard for both urban streets and rural roads. This standard was the MUTCD.
The original edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways was published in 1935. It was only 166 pages long and it was published as a Mimeograph document. In 1937, the manual was republished, this time as a typeset document.
Since that time, subsequent editions of the manual have been published with numerous minor updates occurring between, each taking into consideration changes in usage and size of the nation's system of roads as well as improvements in technology.
In 1942, the Joint Committee was expanded to include the Institute of Transportation Engineers, then known as the Institute of Traffic Engineers. During World War II, the second edition of the MUTCD was released as a War Emergency Edition. This included information on traffic control under blackout conditions and how to conserve materials needed for the war effort.
In 1948, three years after World War II ended, the third edition of the MUTCD was released. This edition had a different format and structure than the previous editions. Several road signs first assumed their current appearance in this edition.
The single most controversial and heavily debated issue during the early years of the MUTCD was the color of center lines on roads. The 1948 MUTCD settled the long-running debate in favor of white. However, the 1948 MUTCD also allowed for two major exceptions to white center lines: yellow was recommended but not mandatory for double center lines on multi-lane highways and for center lines in no-passing zones.
In 1949, the United Nations Conference on Road and Motor Transport launched a research project to develop a worldwide uniform scheme for highway signs. In 1951, the UN conducted experiments in the U.S. to compare the effectiveness of national traffic sign standards from around the world. Signs from six countries were placed along the road for test subjects to gauge their legibility at a distance. The test strips were located along Ohio State Route 104 near Columbus, U.S. Route 250 and Virginia State Route 53 near Charlottesville, Minnesota State Highway 101 near Minneapolis, and other roads in New York. France, Chile, Turkey, India, and Southern Rhodesia reciprocated by installing MUTCD signs on their roads. In the U.S., the experiments attracted unexpected controversy and curious onlookers who posed a hazard. By September 1951, the experts working on the project were in favor of the American proposals for stop signs (at the time, black "STOP" text on a yellow octagon), "cross road", "left or right curve", and "intersection", but were still struggling to reach consensus on symbols for "narrow road", "bumpy or uneven surface", and "steep hill".
In 1953, after cooperating with the UN conference's initial experiments, the United States declined to sign or ratify the UN's then-proposed protocol for a worldwide system of uniform road signs. There were two major reasons behind this decision. First, most U.S. roads and streets were (and still are) under state jurisdiction. Second, the United States was developing modern controlled-access highways at the time (culminating in the creation of the Interstate Highway System in 1956), and the novel problems presented by such new high-speed highways required rapid innovations in road signing and marking "that would definitely be impaired by adherence to any international code". Despite the Americans' withdrawal from the research project, the experiments eventually resulted in the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals of 1968.
The 1954 revision of the 1948 MUTCD changed the standard color of stop signs from yellow to red.
In 1960, the National Joint Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices was again reorganized to include representatives of the National Association of Counties and the National League of Cities, then known as the American Municipal Association. In 1961, the MUTCD was again revised to make yellow center lines mandatory for the two exceptions where they had previously been recommended. The 1961 edition was the first edition to provide for uniform signs and barricades to direct traffic around Roadworks and maintenance operations.
During the 1960s, one of the most energetic traffic safety advocates in the United States was Connecticut politician Abraham Ribicoff, who had previously served as governor of his state and then went on to represent his state in the United States Senate. In an essay published in the July 1965 edition of The Atlantic, Senator Ribicoff sarcastically mocked a variety of idiotic traffic rules, signs, and markings in order to persuade Americans why all these things must be made uniform across the land. For example, two of the worst deviations from the majority rule that no passing should be marked with a solid center line were Pennsylvania, which marked no-passing zones only with signs and not center lines, and Georgia, which marked them only with a yellow line on the shoulder. Like MacDonald several decades earlier, Ribicoff's point was that uniformity saves lives by leaving no ambiguity in traffic situations where drivers' split-second decisions often mean the difference between life or death.
In 1966, Congress passed the Highway Safety Act, , , which is now codified at et seq. It required all states to create a highway safety program by December 31, 1968, and to adhere to uniform standards promulgated by the U.S. Department of Transportation as a condition of receiving federal highway-aid funds. The penalty for non-compliance was a 10% reduction in funding. In turn, taking advantage of broad rulemaking powers granted in , the Department simply adopted the entire MUTCD by reference at . ((a)(1), also enacted in 1966, authorizes federal agencies to incorporate by reference technical standards published elsewhere, which means the agency may merely cite the standard and need not republish its entire text as part of the appropriate regulation.) Thus, what was formerly a quasi-official project became an official one. States are allowed to supplement the MUTCD but must remain in "substantial conformance" with the national MUTCD and adopt changes within two years after they are adopted by FHWA.
The 1971 edition of the MUTCD included several significant standards. The MUTCD imposed a consistent color code for road surface markings by requiring all center lines dividing opposing traffic on two-way roads to be always painted in yellow (instead of white, which was to always demarcate lanes moving in the same direction), and also required that all highway guide signs (not just those on Interstate Highways) contain white text on a green background. Orange was introduced as the standard color for traffic control in work zones.
Another major change, inspired by the Vienna Convention, was that the 1971 MUTCD expressed a preference for a transition to adoption of symbols on signs in lieu of words "as rapidly as public acceptance and other considerations permit." During what was then expected to be a transition period, the MUTCD allowed state highway departments to use optional explanatory word plaques with symbol signs and to continue using the previous standard word message signs in certain cases. Robert Conner, the chief of the traffic control systems division of the Federal Highway Administration during the 1970s, believed that symbol signs were "usually more effective than words in situations where reaction time and comprehension are important." Conner was active in the Joint Committee and also represented the United States at international meetings on road traffic safety. However, several American traffic safety experts were concerned that American drivers would not understand the Vienna Convention's unintuitive symbols, which is why the MUTCD allowed for explanatory word plaques. Most of the repainting to the 1971 standard was done between 1971 and 1974, with a deadline of 1978 for the changeover of both the markings and signage.
The U.S. adoption of several Vienna Convention-inspired symbol signs during the 1970s was a failure. For example, the lane drop symbol sign was criticized as baffling to U.S. drivers—who saw a "big milk bottle"—and therefore quite dangerous, since by definition it was supposed to be used in situations where drivers were about to run out of road and needed to merge into another lane immediately. American highway safety experts ridiculed it as the "Rain Ahead" sign. Many American motorists were bewildered by the Vienna Convention's symbol sign with two children on it, requiring it to be supplemented with a "School Xing" plaque. (The American "School Xing" symbol was later redesigned to depict an adult crossing together with a child.) However, several signs from the Vienna Convention were successfully adopted into the 1971 MUTCD, including the red "Yield" sign, which replaced the previous yellow version, and the "Do Not Enter" sign, which replaced a word-only version. Because the Vienna Convention version was circular, it was given a square backing to conform with the MUTCD shape for regulatory signs, and the words "DO NOT ENTER" were superimposed to ensure American driver comprehension.
The 1971 MUTCD's preference for a rapid transition to symbols over words quietly disappeared in the 1978 MUTCD.
The 2000 and 2003 MUTCDs each eliminated a symbol sign that had long been intended to replace a word message sign: "Pavement Ends" (in 2000) and "Narrow Bridge" (in 2003).
After 1971, FHWA formally assumed responsibility for publishing the MUTCD. The 1971 MUTCD was revised eight times. In 1978, the MUTCD physical format was changed to a ring binder whose revisions were published as replacement pages (i.e., an interfiled looseleaf service). The 1978 MUTCD was subject to four revisions, and the subsequent 1988 MUTCD was subject to seven revisions.
The 2000 MUTCD was the first to use headings, to be published on letter-size paper, to be available on the internet, and to use metric units. Due to a number of significant flaws, it was quickly superseded by the 2003 MUTCD.
The tenth edition of the MUTCD was published in 2009, with revisions in 2012. This was the first editing to feature numbering of individual paragraphs and to cover traffic control devices on private property.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) of 2021 required the USDOT to update the MUTCD quadrennially, and the eleventh edition was released in 2023. This edition allowed painted red bus lanes, rules allowing more crosswalks and traffic signals, new rules for determining speed limits, signage for shoulders that are used part-time as traffic lanes, and new signage for electric vehicle charging stations and autonomous vehicles. It also added painted green bike lanes, bike boxes, and bike-specific traffic lights. Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) were also added to the MUTCD; a pedestrian beacon for uncontrolled intersections consisting of two rectangular lights, side-by-side, which alternate flashing, under a yellow diamond with a walking person on it, above an arrow pointing out the crosswalk. RIN 2125-AF85 National Standards for Traffic Control Devices; the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways; Revision, III. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action in Question RRFBs were previously on interim approval by FHWA since March 20, 2018. Transportation safety advocates criticized the changes as not going far enough to deal with a substantial spike in pedestrian fatalities, especially guidance setting speed limits based on the 85th percentile of actual driving speeds. Press statement: Newly updated MUTCD doesn’t go far enough to protect pedestrians Feds, Advocates Talk About What’s In The New MUTCD (And What Isn’t)!
Development
The NCUTCD is supported by twenty-one sponsoring organizations, including transportation and engineering industry groups (such as AASHTO and ASCE), safety organizations (such as the National Safety Council and Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety), and the American Automobile Association. Each sponsoring organization promotes members to serve as voting delegates within the NCUTCD.
Adoption
]] Eighteen states have adopted the national MUTCD as is. Twenty-two states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the United States Department of Defense through the Military Surface Deployment and Distribution Command (SDDC) have all adopted supplements to the MUTCD. Ten states have adopted their own editions of the MUTCD "in substantial conformance to" an edition of the national MUTCD, annotated throughout with state-specific modifications and clarifications. The Guam Department of Public Works has also adopted the MUTCD in some form.
The following state-specific MUTCD editions are currently in effect:
- California Department of Transportation: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD)
- Delaware Department of Transportation: Delaware Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (DE MUTCD)
- Indiana Department of Transportation: Indiana Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (IMUTCD)
- Maryland State Highway Administration: Maryland Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MdMUTCD)
- Michigan Department of Transportation: Michigan Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD)
- Minnesota Department of Transportation: Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MN MUTCD)
- Missouri Department of Transportation: Engineering Policy Guide (EPG), section 900
- Ohio Department of Transportation: Ohio Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (OMUTCD)
- Texas Department of Transportation: Texas Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (TMUTCD)
- Utah Department of Transportation: Utah Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Utah MUTCD)
Enforcement
From 2014 to 2018, New York placed over 500 non-compliant "I Love New York" tourism destination signs along its highways and expressways to encourage tourists to visit nearby destinations, especially those in economically depressed Upstate New York. FHWA contended that the signs violated numerous MUTCD rules, along with the general principle of the MUTCD that signs should be simple so that they are "easy to identify, comprehend and understand in a matter of seconds as you are driving". After FHWA threatened to withhold $14 million in federal funding, New York removed the signs in November 2018.
Other jurisdictions
(alerting drivers of unexpected or hazardous conditions) tend to be more verbose than their Vienna Convention counterparts. On the other hand, MUTCD guide signs (directing or informing road users of their location or of destinations) tend to be less verbose, since they are optimized for reading at high speeds on freeways and expressways.
The MUTCD lacks a Mandatory sign like the Vienna Convention does, a separate category for those signs like "Right Turn Only" and "Keep Right" that tell traffic what it must do instead of what it must not do. Instead, the MUTCD primarily classifies them with the other that inform drivers of traffic regulations.
Canada
The Ministry of Transportation of Ontario (MTO) also has historically used its own MUTCD which bore many similarities to the TAC MUTCDC. However, as of approximately 2000, MTO has been developing the Ontario Traffic Manual (OTM), a series of smaller volumes each covering different aspects of traffic control (e.g., regulatory signs, warning signs, sign design principles, traffic signals, etc.).
Mexico
Mexico signed the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals on November 8, 1968, but has yet to fully ratify it.
Central America
Belize
South America and Caribbean
Argentina
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Ecuador
Ecuador signed the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals on November 8, 1968 but has yet to fully ratify it.
Guyana
Metric speed limit signs in km/h are found in Guyana, while the use of such signs with speed limits in km/h in the United States are extremely rare, usually seen near the borders with Canada and Mexico, both of which use the metric system.
Paraguay
Peru
Venezuela
Asia and Oceania
Australia
- Australian warning signs have a yellow diamond with a black legend, following America's practice. Australia remains the only country that still has the text-based version of the low-clearance signage. (Most other countries now use vertical arrows in between the clearance height.)
- Australian temporary warning signs are rectangular, following the United Kingdom practice, but they differ from the British temporary warning signs by having a yellow, or an orange background instead.
- Australian regulatory signs are similar to those used in America, except (at least since 1974) the speed limit signs which bear the red circle legend.
The typeface used for Australian road signs is the AS 1744 font which is based on Highway Gothic.
Thailand
Thailand is a signatory to the 1968 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals, but has yet to fully ratify the convention.
See also
- Comparison of MUTCD-influenced traffic signs
- Comparison of traffic signs in English-speaking territories
- Road signs in the United States
- Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, for the UK
External links
- National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) website
- MUTCD History by H. Gene Hawkins
|
|
