Options for Coordinating the Metric Conversion of Traffic Control Signs

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

[FHWA Docket No. 93-26]

Options for Coordinating the Metric Conversion of Traffic Control

Signs

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) DOT.

ACTION: Notice of agency decision.

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

SUMMARY: In this notice, the FHWA summarizes the responses to an FHWA

notice titled ``Options for Coordinating the Metric Conversion of

Traffic Control Signs,'' and announces the agency's decision to delay

implementation of any national metric sign conversion until after 1996,

or until further indication of the intention of Congress on this

subject is received.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Charles W. Craig, Office of

Highway Safety, (202) 366-2187, or Mr. Wilbert Baccus, Office of the

Chief Counsel, (202) 366-0780, Federal Highway Administration, 400

Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 31, 1993, the FHWA published a

notice in the Federal Register in which the agency requested comments

on the three options it is considering for coordinating an orderly

transition of distance, weight, and speed traffic control sign legends

from English to metric units consistent with the Federal Highway

Administration's five-year plan to convert its activities and business

operations to the metric system, as required under the Omnibus Trade

and Competitiveness Act of 1988. 58 FR 46036.

Option 1 involved making the conversion over an extended period of

time (a maximum of 4 to 7 years) through routine maintenance

replacement.

Option 2 recommended a quick conversion of all signs over a short

period (6 months to 1 year) through a concentrated effort.

Option 3 encouraged a two-phase conversion process using dual

posting of both metric and English messages for speed, weight, and

distance signs in the first phase (complete by September 30, 1996). The

second phase would involve the removal of all of the English units with

metric units remaining.

All comments were to be received by November 1, 1993. Comments

continue to be received sporadically. As of January 12, 1994, the FHWA

received 2,736 comments to this docket divided as follows:

Received from the general public............................... 2,592

Opposed...................................................... 2,228

In favor..................................................... 364

Option 1 (routine maintenance)............................. 23

Option 2 (quick change).................................... 224

Option 3 (dual units)...................................... 117

Received from various professional organizations............... 12

Opposed...................................................... 1

In favor (mostly Option 2)................................... 11

Received from Cities/Counties.................................. 82

Opposed...................................................... 51

In favor..................................................... 31

Option 1................................................... 3

Option 2................................................... 25

Option 3 & combination of options.......................... 3

Received from States (3 States sent 2 responses = 48 total).... 45

Opposed...................................................... 8

In favor in some form........................................ 37

Option 1................................................... 3

Option 2 (including various versions & combination of

options).................................................. 37

Option 3................................................... 1

Two Congressional responses were received with both opposing any

change.

Responses From the General Public

Eighty-six percent of the comments received opposed converting

English measurement signs to metric. A majority of the negative

responses stated the funds to convert the signs could be better used

for repair of roads and bridges or for charitable purposes. A number of

comments advised that the conversion to metric was unnecessary and

discussed personal objections.

The responses in favor of the metric change were split between

Options 2 and 3, with Option 2 receiving about twice the number of

favorable comments as Option 3. In general, those that strongly

supported converting to metric favored ``the quicker the better''

Option 2, and many commented that the United States was behind most of

the other nations in adopting the metric system.

Where nearly every negative response mentioned the cost involved

with converting and the need to do other things with that money, almost

none of the responses in favor of change mentioned costs. Also, quite a

few of the positive responses stated that a public education program

was needed before the change was made.

Responses From Organizations and Other Federal Agencies

These responses included the American Public Works Association, The

Department of Commerce, the Institute of Transportation Engineers, U.S.

Metric Association, and several others. There was one negative response

with the others mostly favoring Option 2 (quick change). The U.S.

Department of Commerce (the lead Federal agency in the change to

metric) recommended ``that metric conversion of highway signs be

delayed until after successful completion of FHWA's current conversion

plan.''

Responses From Cities/Counties

Nearly all responses, both positive and negative, identified the

need for special funding and a public education program if the decision

is made to change signs to metric units. Most of the negative responses

especially emphasized the cost of this proposal. Several commented that

this was another Federal mandate without thought of how it would be

locally financed. Most of the positive responses favored Option 2.

Responses From States

Forty-five States responded. Eight States expressed opposition to

the metrication of highway signs and all of the eight questioned the

need to make the change. A ninth State expressed opposition but stated

that if the sign legends must be converted to metric it would recommend

a modified Option 2. The remaining 36 States supported the switch to

metric. Most of these expressed support for Option 2 or some

combination of two or all three of the Options. One State recommended

implementation of the change using a method different from all of the

three Options. Most of the State responses, both positive and negative,

requested special funding and an education/public information program

before implementation. Several States included an estimate of the cost

to convert signs on the State highway systems and also estimated that

the conversion costs of the signs on the non-State highway system,

because of the much larger mileage, would cost a great deal more than

the State system conversion.

Agency Decision

Subsequent to the August 31, 1993, notice, Congress passed the

Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of

1994. Public Law 103-122, 107 Stat. 1198. Section 331 of this Act

prohibits the use of Department of Transportation Fiscal Year 1994

funds for implementing metric signing. Currently, there are several

proposed bills in both the Senate and House of Representatives placing

future restriction on the changing of highway signs from the English

system to the metric system.

In consideration of the docket responses, the current statutory

prohibition, and a possible future Congressional restriction on using

Federal funds for metric signs, the FHWA will not require the

implementation of metric sign legends until at least after 1996. Before

any nationally directed conversion to metric highway signs is

implemented, the agency will conduct a strong public education program

and will consider other appropriate measures to assure that such a

conversion would be as smooth as possible.

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315; 49 CFR 1.48.

Issued on: June 21, 1994.

Rodney E. Slater,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 94-15517 Filed 6-24-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-22-P