Search MUTCD:  

• MUTCD Home
• Site Map

• Knowledge
• 
• Overview
• Evolution of the MUTCD
• Who Uses the MUTCD
• 2003 Edition with Rev.1 & 2
• Color Specifications
• Amendment Process
• Experimentations
• Standard Highway Signs (SHS)
• Pavement Markings
• Traffic Signs
• FAQs

• Technical Assistance
• 
• Peer-to-Peer Program
• Discussion Area
• MUTCD Team

• Resources
• 
• 23 CFR 655
• Official Rulings
• Interim Approvals
• Interpretations Issued by FHWA
• State MUTCD's & TCD Info
• FHWA Contacts
• Related Links
• Federal Register
• Policy Statements
• 2003 MUTCD, with Rev. 1 only, November 2004
• 2003 MUTCD, Original, 11/03/2003
• 2000 MUTCD, Rev. 1
• 1988 Edition, Rev. 3, 9/3/1993, Part VI

• Services
• 
• Publications
• Training
• Outreach
• Events

To Conduct an Experimentation

If you think you have an idea for a new traffic control device or a different application of an existing device that will improve driver safety, but the device is not included in or on compliance with the MUTCD, it is possible to experiment with the device or its use. This experimentation is conducted in a controlled setting.

All requests for experimentation should originate with the State/local highway agency or toll operator responsible for managing the roadway or controlled setting where experiment will take place. That organization forwards the request to the FHWA - with a courtesy copy to the FHWA Division Office. The FHWA must approve the experiment before it begins. Requests may also be forwarded directly to the FHWA Division Office, and the Division Office can submit the request to the FHWA Headquarters Office. All requests must include:

1. A statement of the nature of the problem, including data that justifies the need for a new device or application.
2. Describe the proposed change, how it was developed, how it deviates from the current MUTCD.
3. Any illustration(s) that enhance understanding of the device or its use.
4. Supporting data that explains how the experimental device was developed, if it has been tried, the adequacy of its performance, and the process by which the device was chosen or applied.
5. A legally binding statement certifying that the concept of the traffic control device is not protected by a patent or copyright (see MUTCD Section IA.10 for additional details.)
6. The proposed time period and location(s) of the experiment.
7. A detailed research or evaluation plan providing for close monitoring of the experimentation, especially in the early stages of field implementation. The evaluation plan should include before and after studies as well as quantitative date enabling a scientifically-sound evaluation of the performance of the device.
8. An agreement to restore the experimental site to a condition that complies with the provisions of the MUTCD within 3 months following completion of the experiment. The agreement must also provide that the sponsoring agency will terminate the experiment at any time if it determines that the experiment directly or indirectly causes significant safety hazards. If the experiment demonstrates an improvement, the device or application may remain in place as a request is made to update the MUTCD and an official rulemaking action occurs.
9. An agreement to provide semiannual progress reports for the duration of the experimentation and to provide a copy of the final results to the Office of Transportation Operations (HOTO) within three months of the conclusion of the experiment. HOTO may terminate approval of the experimentation if these reports are not provided on schedule.

Experimentation Process Flow Chart

• Flowchart of the Experimentation Process (PDF, 98KB)

How to Send the Requests to FHWA Headquarters

Requests for experimentation approval should be on agency letterhead and should be sent electronically as an attachment (PDF or Word Document) to an e-mail to: MUTCDofficialrequest@dot.gov. [Note: if e-mail is not possible, the letter may be sent via postal mail or delivery service to FHWA at 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E., HOTO-1, Washington, DC 20590.

A successful experiment is one where the research results show that the public understands the new device or application, the device or application generally performs as intended, and the device does not cause adverse conditions. The "experimenter" must evaluate conditions both before and after installation of the experimental device and describe the measurements of effectiveness (MOEs) of the safety benefits and traffic benefits (e.g., better visibility, reduced congestion).

You will need the Adobe Acrobat Reader to view the PDF on this page.