Is there a mechanism by which a MUTCD violation by a state or local government can be reported to FHWA for their action? And has anyone ever done so?
Check with whoever turned NYSDOT in for the I Love NY signs.
What about the City of xxx signs that have disappeared all over the place. Was that a violation? Just curious as I don't see much of those anymore.
1-800-HYPOCRI(TE).
Quote from: hbelkins on June 07, 2021, 04:29:55 PM
Is there a mechanism by which a MUTCD violation by a state or local government can be reported to FHWA for their action? And has anyone ever done so?
Most of the time, MUTCD violations are inadvertent errors caused by overlooking or misunderstanding a portion of the manual. Thus, every time I've heard of a roadgeek contacting the DOT to point out a MUTCD compliance issue, it was either acknowledged and corrected or the DOT stated their interpretation of the MUTCD that conflicted with the understanding of the roadgeek reporting it.
So before contacting FHWA, the first place to go would probably be to contact the management office for whichever region or district applies and try to work with them, then work your way up the state chain of command until you reach the head of the DOT or transportation secretary.
The only cases where FHWA might have a considerable interest in getting involved is if there's an intentional internal state DOT policy that materially conflicts with FHWA and NCUTCD's intent with the MUTCD (like the I Love NY signs, FL colored US shields, CA internal exit tabs, etc).
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on June 08, 2021, 03:48:25 PM
What about the City of xxx signs that have disappeared all over the place. Was that a violation? Just curious as I don't see much of those anymore.
What, like this?
(https://i.imgur.com/zLHXLjb.jpg)
As far as I know there's nothing prohibiting them. TDOT may simply be failing to replace them when they're damaged or stolen.
Quote from: hbelkins on June 07, 2021, 04:29:55 PM
Is there a mechanism by which a MUTCD violation by a state or local government can be reported to FHWA for their action? And has anyone ever done so?
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 08, 2021, 07:02:49 PM
Most of the time, MUTCD violations are inadvertent errors caused by overlooking or misunderstanding a portion of the manual. Thus, every time I've heard of a roadgeek contacting the DOT to point out a MUTCD compliance issue, it was either acknowledged and corrected or the DOT stated their interpretation of the MUTCD that conflicted with the understanding of the roadgeek reporting it.
So before contacting FHWA, the first place to go would probably be to contact the management office for whichever region or district applies and try to work with them, then work your way up the state chain of command until you reach the head of the DOT or transportation secretary.
The only cases where FHWA might have a considerable interest in getting involved is if there's an intentional internal state DOT policy that materially conflicts with FHWA and NCUTCD's intent with the MUTCD (like the I Love NY signs, FL colored US shields, CA internal exit tabs, etc).
FHWA is authorized as an administration of Federal funding, but not a regulatory agency. They only serve as jurisdiction in the case that Federal funds are being misused or misappropriated. There is certainly nothing wrong with "I Love NY" signs or Florida's colored U.S. Route shields, but the FHWA can't authorize the use of Federal funds for those types of things. But it also wouldn't surprise me that some of the oddball Appalachian Regional Corridor signage was purchased using Federal highway funds instead of ARC funds.
We probably went down the wrong path when discussing silly signs. True safety design violations would be under the purview of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), but they are probably going to stay clear of anything signed off by a licensed professional engineer. If there is something more sinister going on with respect to MUTCD violations, those things fall under FBI jurisdiction (or similar state authority).
Quote from: Dirt Roads on June 08, 2021, 07:29:33 PM
FHWA is authorized as an administration of Federal funding, but not a regulatory agency. They only serve as jurisdiction in the case that Federal funds are being misused or misappropriated. There is certainly nothing wrong with "I Love NY" signs or Florida's colored U.S. Route shields, but the FHWA can't authorize the use of Federal funds for those types of things. But it also wouldn't surprise me that some of the oddball Appalachian Regional Corridor signage was purchased using Federal highway funds instead of ARC funds.
I seem to recall FHWA threatening to withhold future federal funds for MUTCD violations in the past.
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 08, 2021, 07:02:49 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on June 07, 2021, 04:29:55 PM
Is there a mechanism by which a MUTCD violation by a state or local government can be reported to FHWA for their action? And has anyone ever done so?
Most of the time, MUTCD violations are inadvertent errors caused by overlooking or misunderstanding a portion of the manual. Thus, every time I've heard of a roadgeek contacting the DOT to point out a MUTCD compliance issue, it was either acknowledged and corrected or the DOT stated their interpretation of the MUTCD that conflicted with the understanding of the roadgeek reporting it.
So before contacting FHWA, the first place to go would probably be to contact the management office for whichever region or district applies and try to work with them, then work your way up the state chain of command until you reach the head of the DOT or transportation secretary.
The only cases where FHWA might have a considerable interest in getting involved is if there's an intentional internal state DOT policy that materially conflicts with FHWA and NCUTCD's intent with the MUTCD (like the I Love NY signs, FL colored US shields, CA internal exit tabs, etc).
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on June 08, 2021, 03:48:25 PM
What about the City of xxx signs that have disappeared all over the place. Was that a violation? Just curious as I don't see much of those anymore.
What, like this?
(https://i.imgur.com/zLHXLjb.jpg)
As far as I know there's nothing prohibiting them. TDOT may simply be failing to replace them when they're damaged or stolen.
It may be a TDOT policy or TN law but all of the City of xxx signs on all of the fully controlled access highways have been removed. They still exsist on the surface routes.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on June 08, 2021, 07:29:33 PM
FHWA is authorized as an administration of Federal funding, but not a regulatory agency. They only serve as jurisdiction in the case that Federal funds are being misused or misappropriated. There is certainly nothing wrong with "I Love NY" signs or Florida's colored U.S. Route shields, but the FHWA can't authorize the use of Federal funds for those types of things. But it also wouldn't surprise me that some of the oddball Appalachian Regional Corridor signage was purchased using Federal highway funds instead of ARC funds.
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 08, 2021, 10:13:13 PM
I seem to recall FHWA threatening to withhold future federal funds for MUTCD violations in the past.
Yes, and they can also demand repayment for misused/misappropriated funds (some MUTCD violations may not fall in those categories). When I worked as a consultant for the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), they also used an aggressive tool whereby serious issues were elevated by "Program Management Oversight" proceedings that could develop a "Congressional Report". The one that I was involved was quite serious. The issue got resolved quickly and never got submitted to Congress. This level of jurisdiction was handled at the regional level (in this case, FTA Region 3, which covers Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia). The FHWA doesn't have a comparable or similar structure.