National Standards for Traffic Control Devices; Revision of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices; Markings, Signals, and Traffic Control Systems for Railroad-Highway Grade Crossings

tric dimensions and values for

the design and installation of traffic control devices and to improve

the organization and discussion of the contents of the MUTCD. The

proposed changes to the MUTCD are intended to expedite traffic, promote

uniformity, improve safety, and incorporate technology advances in

traffic control device application.

DATES: Submit comments on or before August 30, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Submit written, signed comments to FHWA Docket 96-47,

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 and 3:30 p.m., e.t.,

Monday through Friday except Federal holidays. Those desiring

notification of receipt of comments must include a self-addressed,

stamped postcard.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Program Office: Ms. Linda L. Brown,

HHS-10, (202) 366-2192. The proposed text for the parts of the MUTCD

discussed in this notice of proposed rulemaking is available in printed

copy or CD-ROM format. It is also available on the FHWA home page at

the following Internet address: HTTP://cti1.volpe.dot.gov/fhwa/. Office

of the Chief Counsel: Mr. Raymond Cuprill, HCC-20, (202) 366-0834,

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.

printed

copy or CD-ROM format. It is also available on the FHWA home page at

the following Internet address: HTTP://cti1.volpe.dot.gov/fhwa/. Office

of the Chief Counsel: Mr. Raymond Cuprill, HCC-20, (202) 366-0834,

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 1988 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, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954,

Stock No. 650-001-00001-0. This notice is being issued to provide an

opportunity for public comment on the desirability of proposed

amendments to the MUTCD. Based on the comments submitted and upon its

own experience, the FHWA will issue a final rule concerning the

proposed changes included in this notice.

The National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD)

has taken the lead in this effort to rewrite and reformat the MUTCD.

The NCUTCD is a national organization of individuals from the American

Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the

Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), the National Association

of County Engineers (NACE), the American Public Works Association

(APWA), and other organizations that have extensive experience in the

installation and maintenance of traffic control devices.

Although the MUTCD will be revised in its entirety, it will be done

in phases due to the enormous volume of text. The NCUTCD has submitted

to the FHWA for review and consideration the proposed text for the

following MUTCD Parts: MUTCD Parts III--Markings, Part IV--Signals, and

Part VIII--Traffic Control Systems for Railroad Highway Grade

Crossings

and maintenance of traffic control devices.

Although the MUTCD will be revised in its entirety, it will be done

in phases due to the enormous volume of text. The NCUTCD has submitted

to the FHWA for review and consideration the proposed text for the

following MUTCD Parts: MUTCD Parts III--Markings, Part IV--Signals, and

Part VIII--Traffic Control Systems for Railroad Highway Grade

Crossings. The FHWA has had an opportunity to review the NCUTCD's

recommendations and a majority of those recommendations are included in

this notice of proposed rulemaking as the first phase of the MUTCD

rewrite and reformat effort. In virtually all cases where the

recommendation from the NCUTCD for a text change or a change in the

``shall, should, or may'' condition was not accepted, the FHWA felt

there was insufficient justification presented for the change. In

reviewing the proposed text submitted by the NCUTCD, the FHWA prepared

a comparison table which shows the differences from the 1988 Edition of

the MUTCD and the FHWA's decisions on whether or not to accept the

changes. The comparison table is part of this docket and is available

for inspection.

MUTCD Parts I, VII and IX will be included in Phase 2 of the

rewrite effort and the remaining parts will be included in Phase 3. The

public will have an opportunity to review and comment on both of these

remaining phases of the MUTCD rewrite effort. The FHWA invites your

comments on the proposed text for Phase 1 which includes parts III, IV,

and VIII of the MUTCD. A summary of the significant changes contained

in these sections is discussed in this notice of proposed rulemaking.

The proposed new style of the MUTCD would be a 3-ring binder with

8\1/2\ inch pages. Each part of the MUTCD would be printed separately

in a bound format and then included in the 3-ring binder. If someone

needed to reference information on a specific part of the MUTCD, it

would be easy to remove that individual part from the binder

sections is discussed in this notice of proposed rulemaking.

The proposed new style of the MUTCD would be a 3-ring binder with

8\1/2\ inch pages. Each part of the MUTCD would be printed separately

in a bound format and then included in the 3-ring binder. If someone

needed to reference information on a specific part of the MUTCD, it

would be easy to remove that individual part from the binder. The

proposed new text would be in column format and contain four categories

as follows: (1) Standards--representing ``shall'' conditions, (2)

Guidance--representing ``should'' conditions, (3) Options--representing

``may'' conditions, and (4) Support--representing descriptive and/or

general information. This new format would make it easier to

distinguish standards, guidance and optional conditions for the design,

placement, and application of traffic control devices. For review

purposes during this rewrite effort, dimensions will be shown in both

metric and English. This will make it easier to compare text shown in

the 1988 Edition with the proposed new

edition. However, the adopted final version of the new MUTCD will be

solely in metric units.

This effort to rewrite and reformat the MUTCD will be an ongoing

activity over the next 2-3 years. Some of the other issues which will

be addressed in future notices of proposed rulemaking are: Standards

for the placement of pavement marking center lines and edge lines;

minumum retroreflectivity standards for signs and pavement markings;

signing for low-volume rural roads; traffic control for light-rail

grade crossings; and the addition of a new color ``Fluorescent Yellow

Green'' for use at pedestrian and bicycle locations. These proposed

changes to the MUTCD are intended to expedite traffic, promote

uniformity, improve safety, and incorporate technology advances in

traffic control device application.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part III--Markings

ds; traffic control for light-rail

grade crossings; and the addition of a new color ``Fluorescent Yellow

Green'' for use at pedestrian and bicycle locations. These proposed

changes to the MUTCD are intended to expedite traffic, promote

uniformity, improve safety, and incorporate technology advances in

traffic control device application.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part III--Markings

The following items are the most significant of the many revisions

to Part III of the 1988 MUTCD:

Characteristics of Islands as Traffic Control Devices

In the 1988 Edition of the MUTCD, ``Islands'' were covered in Part

V. It is proposed to relocate this topic to part III, Section 3G.

Pavement Marking Colors

In Section 3A.4 the color ``blue'' would be included as a new

standard pavement marking color for international symbol of access

parking.

General Principles for Longitudinal Pavement Markings

In Section 3A.5 a definition for ``Dotted Lines'' would be

included.

Widths and Patterns of Longitudinal Line Markings

The width and pattern for ``dotted lines'' would be added to

Section 3A.6.

Warrants for No Passing Zones at Curves

The warrants for no-passing zones at curves would be moved from

previous Section 3B-5 to Section 3B-1. These warrants for determining

minimum passing sight distances would be based on posted or statutory

speed limits as shown in Table III-1. Previously, the mimimum passing

sight distances were determined based on the greater of the off-peak

85th percentile speed or the posted speed limits. In addition, Table

III-1 includes incremental speed limits of five miles per hour

(kilometers per hour were rounded).

Center Line Markings

A new STANDARD would be added to Section 3B.1a that requires center

line markings to be placed on paved undivided streets and highways

including all rural and urban arterials and collectors with specified

widths and average daily travel (ADT), and including all two-way

streets and highways with three or more travel lanes.

es per hour

(kilometers per hour were rounded).

Center Line Markings

A new STANDARD would be added to Section 3B.1a that requires center

line markings to be placed on paved undivided streets and highways

including all rural and urban arterials and collectors with specified

widths and average daily travel (ADT), and including all two-way

streets and highways with three or more travel lanes.

Edge Line Markings

In Section 3B.3 edge line markings would be required on all

freeways and expressways and on all rural arterials with travel widths

of 6.1 m (20 ft.) or more. In addition, edge line markings are

recommended on rural collectors with travel widths of 6.1 m (20 ft.) or

more and at locations where the edge of the traveled way is not

otherwise delineated and where an engineering study indicates a need.

New Standard on Pavement Marking Extensions Through Intersections or

Interchanges

Section 3B.4 would provide that when markings are extended into or

continued through an intersection or interchange area, they shall be

the same color and at least the same width as the line(s) they extend.

This section also provides STANDARDS for dotted lines.

Raised Pavement Markers

New supporting information would be included in Section 3B.7. It

states that ``a raised pavement marker is a device with a height of at

least 10mm mounted on or in a road surface, and intended to be used as

positioning guides or to supplement or substitute for pavement

markings.''

The following new STANDARD would be included in Section 3B.7: The

color of raised pavement markers under both daylight and nighttime

conditions shall conform to the color of the marking for which they

serve as a positioning guide, or for which they supplement, or

substitute.

The following new GUIDANCE would be included in Section 3B.7:

Raised pavement markers should not be substituted for right edge lines.

Pavement Word and Symbol Markings

ction 3B.7: The

color of raised pavement markers under both daylight and nighttime

conditions shall conform to the color of the marking for which they

serve as a positioning guide, or for which they supplement, or

substitute.

The following new GUIDANCE would be included in Section 3B.7:

Raised pavement markers should not be substituted for right edge lines.

Pavement Word and Symbol Markings

In situations where through lanes become mandatory turn lanes,

Section 3B.12, under GUIDANCE, would be modified to allow signs or

markings to be repeated as necessary to prevent entrapment and to help

the road user select the appropriate lane before reaching the queue of

waiting vehicles.

A new STANDARD would also be added to this section. It states that

in situations where through lanes become mandatory turn lanes, lane-use

arrows shall be used and shall be accompanied by standard signs.

A pavement marking symbol for designated parking spaces for persons

with disabilities would be included as an OPTION in Section 3B.12.

A lane reduction pavement arrow would be included in Section 3B.12.

Channelizing Devices

A new STANDARD would be added to Section 3F.2 which states that the

color of cones and tube markers used outside construction and

maintenance areas shall be the same as the pavement marking for which

they supplement or substitute.

Approach End Treatment

A new STANDARD would be included in Section 3G.2 which states that

bars or buttons, when used in advance of islands having raised curbs,

shall not be placed in such a manner as to constitute an unexpected

hazard.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part IV--Signals

The following items are the most significant changes of the many

revisions to Part IV.

Definitions Relating to Highway Traffic Signals

Section 4A.2 would be significantly expanded from four definitions

to fifty-five definitions of technical terms that are being used

throughout Part IV.

Basis for Installing Highway Traffic Signals

ard.

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part IV--Signals

The following items are the most significant changes of the many

revisions to Part IV.

Definitions Relating to Highway Traffic Signals

Section 4A.2 would be significantly expanded from four definitions

to fifty-five definitions of technical terms that are being used

throughout Part IV.

Basis for Installing Highway Traffic Signals

Section 4B.2 would state that ``If changes in traffic patterns have

resulted in a situation where a highway traffic control signal is no

longer needed, consideration should be given to removing it and

replacing it with appropriate alternative traffic control devices.''

The FHWA has always acknowledged this but never stated it in the MUTCD.

Alternatives to Highway Traffic Control Signals

Since vehicle delay and accident frequency are sometimes greater

under traffic signal control than under STOP sign control,

consideration should be given to providing less restrictive

alternatives to traffic signals. Section 4B-4 would list eleven less

restrictive alternative measures that should be considered before a

highway traffic control signal is installed.

Studies and Factors for Justifying Highway Traffic Control Signal

Installation

Section 4C would list seven warrants for justifying a highway

traffic control signal installation. Warrants are a set of criteria

that can be used to define the relative need for, and appropriateness

of traffic control signals. The number of warrants would be reduced

from eleven warrants to seven warrants. The following is a brief

summary of how the warrants were reduced:

1. The interruption of continuous traffic warrant will be combined

with the new warrant number 1 entitled, ``Eight Hour Vehicle Volume

Warrant.''

2. The school crossing warrant will be placed in section 7D.4.

3. Warrant 8 will be incorporated into warrant 1.

4. The peak hour delay warrant will be included in Warrant 3

rants. The following is a brief

summary of how the warrants were reduced:

1. The interruption of continuous traffic warrant will be combined

with the new warrant number 1 entitled, ``Eight Hour Vehicle Volume

Warrant.''

2. The school crossing warrant will be placed in section 7D.4.

3. Warrant 8 will be incorporated into warrant 1.

4. The peak hour delay warrant will be included in Warrant 3.

The FHWA had been receiving a number of complaints concerning the

number and complexity of the signal warrants. This modification should

address these concerns.

Traffic Control Signal Features

In Section 4D.1, the following two cases where STOP signs are

allowed to be used with traffic control signals would be added: (1) If

the signal indication for an approach is a flashing red at all times;

and (2) If a minor roadway or driveway is located within or adjacent to

the controlled area, but does not require separate traffic signal

control because an extremely low potential for conflict exists.

Meaning of Vehicle Signal Indications

In Section 4C.4, the phrase ``Unless otherwise determined by law''

in the first paragraph under STANDARDS would be deleted. If this phrase

were left in the paragraph, States would have the right to assign

different meanings to signal indications than are allowed by the MUTCD.

Application of Steady Signal Indication

In Section 4D.5f(3) entitled ``A Steady GREEN ARROW Indication,'' a

GREEN ARROW would not be required on the stem of ``T'' intersections or

for turns from one-way roadways. In this same section under

``Options,'' the application of steady RED, YELLOW, and GREEN ARROWS is

discussed. In the 1988 MUTCD there was an item (e) that made it

optional to use a CIRCULAR GREEN indication for protected movements.

This proposal would eliminate item (e) so that the GREEN ARROW

indication would be mandatory for all protected left or right turn

movements.

Application of Steady Signal Indications for Left Turns

ns,'' the application of steady RED, YELLOW, and GREEN ARROWS is

discussed. In the 1988 MUTCD there was an item (e) that made it

optional to use a CIRCULAR GREEN indication for protected movements.

This proposal would eliminate item (e) so that the GREEN ARROW

indication would be mandatory for all protected left or right turn

movements.

Application of Steady Signal Indications for Left Turns

In Section 4D.6b(3), a new STANDARD would be added. It states that

``A four-section signal face (CIRCULAR RED, CIRCULAR YELLOW, CIRCULAR

GREEN, and left-turn GREEN ARROW) shall be used when the CIRCULAR GREEN

and left-turn GREEN ARROW indications begin and terminate together.''

This is known as ``split phasing'' and would be discussed for the first

time in the MUTCD.

Application of Steady Signal Indications for Right-Turns

Section 4D.7 would describe in more detail the various modes for

right-turn displays.

Traffic Control Signals for One-Lane, Two-Way Facilities

Section 4G would be greatly expanded to include the application,

design, and operation of traffic control signals used on one-lane, two-

way facilities.

Design of Freeway Entrance Ramp Control Signals

In Section 4H.2, the requirement for a signal face being mounted on

both the left and right side of a ramp that has two lanes would be

eliminated. In addition, the requirement for a signal face to have a

minimum nominal diameter of 8 inches has been eliminated. In this same

section, the recommended height of the signal face (between 4\1/2\ and

6 feet) has been changed from a GUIDANCE to an OPTION.

Design of Movable Bridge Signals and Gates

e being mounted on

both the left and right side of a ramp that has two lanes would be

eliminated. In addition, the requirement for a signal face to have a

minimum nominal diameter of 8 inches has been eliminated. In this same

section, the recommended height of the signal face (between 4\1/2\ and

6 feet) has been changed from a GUIDANCE to an OPTION.

Design of Movable Bridge Signals and Gates

In Section 4I.2, the following paragraph would be upgraded to a

STANDARD:

``Since movable bridge operations cover a variable range of time

periods between openings, the signals shall be of the following types.

The first type shall consist of the standard three color (red, yellow,

and green) traffic signal lenses, generally to be used if movable

bridge operation is quite frequent. The second type shall consist of

two red signal lenses in vertical array separated by a STOP HERE ON RED

sign. (See Section 2B.37)''

Meaning of Lane-Use Control Signal Indications

In Section 4J.2, under STANDARD, the flashing YELLOW X indication

would be replaced by two new lane-use control signal indications:

steady WHITE TWO-WAY LEFT-TURN ARROW and steady WHITE ONE-WAY LEFT-TURN

ARROW.

Warning Beacon

Section 4K.2 would replace the Hazard Identification Beacon section

that was in the 1988 MUTCD. Guidance for design and application of

warning beacons is described.

Speed Limit Sign Beacon

In Section 4K.3, all speed limit sign beacons would be required to

have a visible diameter of not less than 200 millimeters (8 inches).

Discussion of Proposed Amendments to Part VIII--Roadway-Rail

Intersections

The following are the most significant changes of the many

revisions to Part VIII:

Title of Part VIII

This section of the MUTCD would be retitled ``Traffic Control For

Roadway-Rail Intersections'' to more properly reflect the intent of

this part to deal with all instances where there is an intersection

between vehicles operating on fixed rail and vehicles operating on

roadways.

General

The following are the most significant changes of the many

revisions to Part VIII:

Title of Part VIII

This section of the MUTCD would be retitled ``Traffic Control For

Roadway-Rail Intersections'' to more properly reflect the intent of

this part to deal with all instances where there is an intersection

between vehicles operating on fixed rail and vehicles operating on

roadways.

General

The term ``roadway'' would be substituted for the terms ``highway''

and ``street.'' The term ``roadway'' connotes the terms ``highway'' or

``street'' unless specifically defined in a specific section. The term

``roadway-rail intersection'' would be substituted for the term

``grade-crossing.''

Roadway Rail Intersection Closures

Section 8A.4 would be expanded to discuss situations where the

railroad is closed and situations where the roadway is closed.

Traffic Controls During Construction and Maintenance

Section 8A.5 would be expanded to ensure that the standards

discussed in Part VI of the MUTCD are followed for construction and

maintenance operations at roadway-rail intersections. In addition, this

section would require the use of a law enforcement officer or flagger

at the intersection if the queuing of vehicles across the tracks cannot

be avoided during construction or maintenance activities. This

requirement would apply whether or not active traffic control devices

are in use at the roadway-rail intersection.

Roadway-Rail Crossing (Crossbuck) Sign

Section 8B-2 would be revised to include standards for the

installation of 2'' minimum retroreflective white material at all grade

crossings for placement on the back of each blade of the crossbuck sign

for the length of the

blade. At passive grade crossings, a strip of high grade

retroreflective white material would also be required on the full

length of the front and back of each ``Crossbuck'' (R15-1) or ``Number

of Track'' (R15-2) sign support. Figure 8-1 has been modified to

reflect this change.

terial at all grade

crossings for placement on the back of each blade of the crossbuck sign

for the length of the

blade. At passive grade crossings, a strip of high grade

retroreflective white material would also be required on the full

length of the front and back of each ``Crossbuck'' (R15-1) or ``Number

of Track'' (R15-2) sign support. Figure 8-1 has been modified to

reflect this change.

Roadway-Rail Intersection Signs and Markings

Some of the sections in 8B would be reordered to put all of the

discussions relating to signs together before pavement markings, etc. A

new Section 8B.10 ``Stop Lines'' would be added. This section discusses

the placement of stop lines. This information is presently contained as

a note on Figure 8-2. The current Section 8B.5 ``Illumination at Grade

Crossings'' would be moved to Section 8C.1.

Flashing-Light Signals and Gates

This Section 8C would be redesignated as 8D. Section 8D in the 1988

MUTCD entitled ``Systems and Devices'' would be removed and the

information in that section would be incorporated into revised sections

8A and 8D.

Train Detection Systems

In Section 8D-5, automatic flashing light signals would be required

to flash for at least 20 seconds before the arrival of any train

regardless of the train's speed. The current requirement applies to

trains that operate at speeds of 20 mph or greater.

Rulemaking Analyses and Notices

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

omments 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 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 new standards and other

changes proposed in this notice are intended to improve traffic

operations 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

ended to improve traffic

operations 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 (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 new and alternative traffic control

devices and traffic control device applications. The proposed new

standards and other changes are intended to improve traffic operations,

expand guidance and clarify application of traffic control devices. The

FHWA hereby certifies that these actions 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)

g 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 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: December 27, 1996.

Rodney E. Slater,

Federal Highway Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96-33405 Filed 12-31-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-22-P