US. Dcporlment 

of Trcnsportotion 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Federal Highway 

Administration Junel ,201 6 

In Reply Refer To: 

HSST-l /B-1 768 

Mr. Gary Lallo 

Hill and Smith Ltd 

987 Buckeye Road 

Columbus. OH 43207 

Dear Mr. Lallo: 

This leuer is in response to your March 17, 2016 request for the Federal Highway Administration 

(Fl IWA) to review a roadside safety device. hardware, or system for eligibility for 

reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program. This Fl [\VA letter of eligibility is 

assigned fl IWA control number B-1768 and is va lid until a subsequent Jetter is issued by 

Fl IWA that expressly references this device. 

Decision 

The following devices are eligible, with details provided in the form which is allached as an 

integral part of this letter: 

• Zoneguard. Asphalt 

Scope of this Letter 

To be found eligible for Federal-aid funding. new roadside safety devices should meet the crash 

tesl and evaluation criteria contained in the American Association of Stale Highway and 

Transportation Officials' Manual for Assessing Safety I lardware (MASH). However, the 

Fl IWA, the Department of Transportation. and the United States Government do not regulate the 

manufacture of roadside safety devices. Eligibility for reimbursement under the f-ederal-aid 

highway program does not establish approval, certification or endorsement of the device for any 

particular purpose or use. 

This letter is not a determination by the Fl l\VA. the Department ofTransportation. or the United 

States Government that a vehicle crash involving the device will result in any pa11icular 

outcome, nor is it a guarant ee of the in-service performance of this device. Proper 

manufacturing. installation, and maintenance arc required in order for this device to function as 

tested. 

This finding of eligibility is limited to the crashworthiness of the system and docs not cover other 

structural features, nor conformity with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 
2 

Eligibility for Reimbursement 

Based solely on a review of crash test results and certifications submitted by the manufacturer, 

and the crash test laboratory, FHW A agrees that the device described herein meets the crash test 

and evaluation criteria ofthe American Association of State Highway and Transportation 

Officials' Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). Therefore, the device is eligible for 

reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program if installed under the range oftested 

conditions. 

Name ofsystem: Zoneguard, Asphalt 


Type of system: Longitudinal Barrier 


Test Level: MASH Test Level 3 


Testing conducted by: Texas A&M Transportation Institute 


Date ofrequest: February 5, 2016 


Date of completed package: March 17, 2016 


Full Description of the Eligible Device 

The device and supporting documentation, including reports ofthe crash tests or other testing 

done, videos of any crash testing, and/or drawings ofthe device, arc described in the attached 

form. 

Notice 

If a manufacturer makes any modification to any of their roadside safety hardware that has an 

existing eligibility letter from FHWA, the manufacturer must notify FHWA ofsuch modification 

with a request for continued eligibility for reimbursement. The notice of all modifications to a 

device must be accompanied by: 

o 	 Significant modifications - For these modifications, crash test results must be 

submitted with accompanying documentation and videos. 

o 	 Non-signification modifications - For these modifications, a statement from the 

crash test laboratory on the potential effect ofthe modification on the ability of 

the device to meet the relevant crash test criteria. 

FHW A's detennination of continued eligibility for the modified hardware will be based on 

whether the modified hardware will continue to meet the relevant crash test criteria. 

You are expected to supply potential users with sufficient infonnation on design, installation and 

maintenance requirements to ensure proper performance. 

You are expected to certify to potential users that the hardware furnished has the same chemistry, 

mechanical properties, and geometry as that submitted for review, and that it will meet the test 

and evaluation criteria ofthe MASH. 
3 

Issuance of this letter docs not convey property rights of any sort or any exclusive privilege. This 

letter is based on the premise that information and reports submitted by you are accurate and 

correct. We reserve the right to modify or revoke this letter if: (1) there are any inaccuracies in 

the information submitted in support of your request for this letter. (2) the qualification testing 

wns flawed. (3) in-service pcrfonrnrnce or other information reveals safety problems, (4) the 

system is signi licantly different from the version that was crash tested, or (5) any other 

information indicates thnt the letter wns issued in error or otherwise docs not reflect full and 

complete information about the crashworthiness of the system. 

S tandard Provisions 

• 	 To prevent misunderstanding by others. this letter of eligibility designated as Fl I\VA 

control number B-1768 shall not be reproduced except in full. This letter and the test 

documentation upon which it is based arc public information. /\ II such letters and 

docu1ncntation may be reviewed upon request. 

• 	 This lcller shall not be construed as authorization or consent by the FH\VA to use. 

manufacture, or sell any patented system for which the applicant is not the patent holder. 

• 	 If the subj ect device is a patented product it may be considered to be proprietary. If 

proprietary systems are specified by a highway agency for use on Federal-aid projects: 

(a) they must be supplied through competitive bidding with egunll y suitable unpatented 

items; (b) the highway agency must certify that they arc essential for synchroni zation 

with the existing highway facilities or that no equally suitable alternative ex ists: or (c) 

they must be used for research or for a distincti ve type of construction on relatively short 

sections of road for experiment al purposes. Our regulations concerning proprietary 

products are contained in Title 23, Code or Federal Regulations. Section 635.4 11. 

Sincerely yours, 

Michael S. Griffith 

Director. Office of Safety Technologies 

Office of Safety 

Enclosures 
Version 10.0 (03/16) 

Page 3 of 4 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 


Description 


Evaluation 


Results 


3-10 (1100() 

Test ZG-USA-1 performed previously. For 

this barrier system, MASH Test 3-1 O (2425-lb 

small car) was not tested because the small 

car test is not the controlling test for the 

strength of the barrier system and vehicle 

stability. MASH Test 3-11 (SOOD-lb pickup 

truck) is the controlling test for strength of 

the barrier system for Test Level 3. Due to 

the heavier vehicle mass for the pickup, 

MASH Test 3-11 produced higher impact 

energy and resulted in a greater force 

applied to the barrier units and 

connections. The center of gravity (e.g.) of 

the pickup truck is higher than the center of 

gravity of the small car. As a result, vehicle 

stability is of greater concern for this barrier 

type for the pickup truck test. If vehicle 

stability and strength of the barrier system 

are acceptable for the pickup truck test, it is 

the assumption ofTII that these evaluation 

parameters will be acceptable for the small 

car test. The MASH small car presents a 

lower center of gravity and smaller 

impacting force on the barrier system. In 

addition, lateral deformations in the barrier 

system from the impacting vehicle and the 

forces in the anchoring hardware to the 

deck are expected to be greater for the 

pickup truck test. 

Non-Critical, not conducted 

3-11 (2270P) 

TII Test 690900-HSI l, performed 

2015-06-15, Test Report No. 690900-HSll: 

The Zoneguard" barrier pinned on both 

sides every 50-ft on 3-inch thick asphalt 

contained and redirected the 2270P vehicle. 

The vehicle did not penetrate, underride, or 

override the installation. Maximum dynamic 

deflection during the test was 38.9 

inches at the toe ofthe barrier. No detached 

elements, fragments, or other 3-11 (2270P) 

debris were present to penetrate or show 

potential for penetrating the occupant 

compartment, or to present hazard to 

others in the area. No occupant 

compartment deformation or intrusion 

occurred. The 2270P vehicle remained 

upright during and after the collision event. 

Maximum roll and pitch angles were 46 

degrees and 13 degrees, respectively. 

Occupant risk factors were within the 

preferred limits of MASH. 

PASS 

3-20 (llOOC) This system is not a transition system. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

3-21 (2270P) This system is not a transition system. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 
Version 10.0 (03/16) 

Page 1 of 4 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility 

ofHighway Safety Hardware 

Date of Request: March 17,2016 I (i' New r Resubmission 

Name: Gary Lallo 

~ 

Cll 

t:·e 

.a 

:J 

U) 

Company: Hill & Smith, Inc. 

Address: 987 Buckeye Road, Columbus, OH 43207

Country: United States 

To: Michael S. Griffith, Director 

FHWA, Office of Safety Technologies 

I request the following devices be considered eligible for reimbursement under the Federal-aid 

highway program. 

Devjce & Iegjng Crltecloa - Eater frnm eight to left sta[!ing with Iest Level Ii-1-q 

System Type Submission Type Device Name I Variant Testing Criterion Test 

Level 

'B': Rigid/Semi-Rigid Barriers 

(Roadside, Median, Bridge 

Railinas) 

(i' Physical Crash Testing 

r Engineering Analysis Zoneguard, Asphalt 

AASHTOMASH TL3 

By submitting this request for review and evaluation by the Federal Highway Administration, I certify 

that the product(s) was (were) tested in conformity with the AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety 

Hardware and that the evaluation results meet the appropriate evaluation criteria in the MASH. 

Individual or Organization responsible for the product: 

Contact Name: Gary Lallo Same as Submitter ~ 

Company Name: Hill & Smith, Inc. Same as Submitter ~ 

Address: 987 Buckeye Road, Columbus, OH 43207 Same as Submitter ~ 

Country: United States Same as Submitter ~ 

Enter below all disclosures of financial interests as required by the FHWA 'federal-Aid Reimbursement 

Eligibility Process for Safety Hardware Devices' document. 

TTI Proving Ground had/has no financial interests in the Hill & Smith Zoneguard barrier. Hill & Smith, Inc. 

contracted for the service of crash testing this barrier according to specifications for American Association of 

State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) Test 3-11, 

for which TTI Proving Ground was compensated for the cost to perform the test. 
Version 10.0 (03/16) 

Page 2 of 4 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

New Hardware or ('Modification to 

c; Significant Modincatlon Fxlstlng Hardware 

For Minimum Denecllon System (anchored at ends and Intermediate) 

Zoneguard was tested to NCH RP Report 350 TL-3, TL·4 and MASH TL·3 In 2007 and received eligibility letters 

B·176 and B·176A In 2008. At the time two different anchoring connguratlons were tested. This request 

pertains to the connguratlon which Is anchored at each end of the run and at intermediate locatlons along the 

length of the run and which we call "Minimum Denectlon Anchoring Connguratlon·. The original tests used to 

establish MASH eligibility were ZG·USA· l and ZG·USA·3. Data summary sheets for both are attached. In these 

original tests the surface was concrete and adhesive anchors were used. The recent testing performed and 

submitted herein was on an asphalt surface. The slgnlncant revisions made were the removal of the rubber 

pads on the 33•.4• centers on the original test. The attached document describes some minor modifications 

made to the bariler. With this request we seek approval of the modified system without the rubber pads using 

the anchor pins on an asphalt surfoce with both SO'·O" and 33•.4• anchor spacing. 

CRASH TESTING 

By signature below, the Engineer afflllated with the testing laboratory, agrees In support or this submission that 

all of the critical and relevant crash tests for this device listed above were conducted to meet the MASH test 

criteria. The Engineer has determined that no other crash tests arc necessary to determine the device meets 

the MASH crlerla. 

Engineer Name: D)tn: C. Alberson, P.E., Texas A&M Transportati on Institute 

Engineer Signature: I 

tl-(J () ') -- ~ 

Address: 3135 TAMu, College Station, TX 77843 Same as Submitter O 

Country: USA Same as Submitter 0 

A brief descrlptlon oT each crasli test and Its result: 
Submitter Signature·: 

Version 10.0 (03/16) 

Pc'lge 4 of 4 

Full Scale Crash Testing w as done in compliance with MASH by the fol lowing accredited crash test 

laboratory (cit e the laboratory' s accreditation status as noted in the crash test report s.): 

Laboratory Name: Texas Transportation lnsti!ute 

Laboratory Signature: .I J~~ ~,ijl ~ 

Address: - 3135 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843 Same as Submitter 0 

Country: United States Same as Submitter ig] 

Accreditation Certificate 

Number and Dates of current A2LA Mechanical Testing Certificate 2821.0 1: 2015-02-19 through 2017 04-30 

Accreditation period : 

/\.TT/\.CHMENTS 

Artach to this form: 


I) Additional disclosures of related fi nancial interest as indicated ahove. 


2) A copy of the full test report, v ideo, and a Test Da la Summary Sheet for each test conducted in 


support ofthis request. 

3) A d rawing or drawings of the device(s) that con form to the Task Force- 13 Drawing Specifications 

[]:!ard\\;1rc Guide £k;t'~ ing and:ir~I"1- for proprietary products. a single isometric line drawing is 

usually acceptable to illustrate the product, with detailed specifications, intended use, and contact 

infomrntion provided on the reverse. Additional drawings (not in TF-1 3 format) showing details that 

arc relevant to understanding the dimensions and performance ofthe device should also be s ubrniued 

to faci litate o ur review. 

FHWA Official Business Only: 

Eligibility Letter 

Number Date Key Words 
Aw Rem.... ECR Doto IO>ed< 

Drown By Dute t.tmoria! 

GL APA201S STEEL 

-., F<n"" 

NIS GALVANIZE 

Oescr'ptcn 

ZONEGUARD 

ASSEMBLY x 50'-0 

UNCONTROLLED 

WHEN PRINTED 

Hill & Smith -~~con ll!i 

Drawing No. 

7000 
0.000 s 0.200 s 0.400 s 0.700 s

EXISTING 10·-o WIDE ASPHALT PAD 

.. ... • 

' 

-l 

;;o 

z 

0 

C\ 

\0 

0 

\0 

0 

0 

I 

:r: 

en 

00 

General Information 
 lmp:ict Conditions Post-Impact Trajectory 

Test Agency ......................... Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TII) 
 Speed ..................................64.0 ml/h Slopping Distance ....................... 220 ft dwnslrm 

Test Standard Test No ........ MASH Test 3-11 
 Angle ................................... 25.5 degrees 15 fl twd traffic 

TII Test No ......................... 690900-HSl1 
 l ocation/Orientation ........... .43 inches upslrm Vehicle Stability 


Date ..................................... 2015-06-15 
 of joint 5-6 Maximum Yaw Angle ................... 263 degrees 


lmp:ict Severity ..................... 127 kip•ft (+10%) Maximum Pitch Angle .................. 13 degrees 


Test Article Exit Conditions Maximum Roll Angle .................... 46 degrees 


Type..................................... Portable Traflic Barrier Speed ................................. .47.6 ml/h 
 Vehicle Snagging ........................ No 


Name ................................... Zoneguard® Barrier without Pads Anglo ................................... Nol obtainable 
 Vehicle Pocketing ........................ No 


Installation Length ............... 250 It Occup:int Risk V:ilues 
 Test Article Deflections 

Material or Key Elements .... 50-fl galvanized steel barriers with drop-in Longitudinal OIV ................13.1 !tis 
 Dynamic (at the toe) .................... 38.9 inches 

pin anchors every 50 fl 
 Lateral OIV .......................... 14.1 lt/s 
 Permanent (at tho toe) ................ 22.0 inches 

Soil Type and Condition ....... 3-inch thick asphalt, dry 
 Longitudinal RDA. ................4.5 G 
 Working W1dlh (w/vehicle) ........... 74.4 inches 

Lateral RDA ......................... 5.6 G 


Test Vehicle 
 THIV ................................... 20.1 km/h 
 Vehicle Dam:igc 

Type/Designation ................. 2270P 
 PHD ..................................... 6.6 G 
 VDS ............................................. 11LF04 

Make and Model .................. 2009 Dodge Ram 1500 
 ASI ...................................... 0.88 
 coc............................................. 11FLEW4 

Curb ..................................... 4947 lb 
 Max. 0.050-s Average Max. Exterior Oelormalion ........... 16.0 inches 

Test Inertial. ......................... 5015 lb Longitudinal ...................... -5.3 G OCDl ............................................ LFOOOOOOO 

Dummy ................................ No dummy Lateral .............................. 6.2 G Max. Occupant Compartment 

Gross Static ......................... 5015 lb Vertical ............................ .4.0 G Deformation ........................... None 


N 

0 

V'i 

I 

0 

\0 

0 

I Figure 5.6. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-11 on Zoneguard® Barrier Pinned on Both Sides Every 50-ft On-Center N 

and Set on 3-inch Thick Asphalt. 
0.000 s 0.200 s 0.400 s 0.700 s 

EXISTING 10'-0 WIDE ASPfW.T PAO 

. .. .... 

~' 

-1

;;o 

z 

0 

0\ 

0 '° '°0 

0 

I 

::c 

{/) 

00 

General Information 
 Impact Conditions Post-Impact Trnjectory 

Test Agency ......................... Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) 
 Speed ................................. 64.0 mi/h Stopping Distance ....................... 220 ft dwnstrm 

Test Standard Test No ........ MASH Test 3-11 
 Angle .................................. 25.5 degrees 15 ft twd traffic 

TTI Test No ......................... 690900-HSl1 
 Location/Orientation ........... .43 inches upstrm Vehicle Stability 


Date ..................................... 2015-06-15 
 of joint 5-6 Maximum Yaw Angle ................... 263 degrees 


Impact Severity ..................... 127 kip'ft (+10%) Maximum Pitch Angle .................. 13 degrees 


Test Article Exit Conditions Maximum Roll Angle .................... 46 degrees 


Type .................................... Portable Traffic Barrier Speed ................................. .47.6 mi/h 
 Vehicle Snagging ........................ No 


Name .................................. Zoneguard® Barrier without Pads Angle ................................... Not obtainable 
 Vehicle Pocketing ........................ No 


Installation Length ............... 250 ft Occupant Risk Values 
 Test Article Deflections 

Material or Key Elements .... 50-ft galvanized steel barriers with drop-in Longitudinal OIV .................. 13.1 fVs 
 Dynamic (at the toe) .................... 38.9 inches 

pin anchors every 50 ft 
 Lateral OIV .......................... 14.1 fVs 
 Permanent (at the too) ................ 22.0 inches 

Soil Type and Condition ....... 3-inch thick asphalt. dry 
 Longitudinal RDA ................ .4.5 G 
 Working Width (w/vehicle) ........... 74.4 inches 

Lateral RDA ....................... 5.6 G 


Test Vehicle 
 THIV ................................... 20. 1 km/h 
 Vehicle Damage 

Type/Designation ................. 2270P 
 PHO .................................... 6.6 G 
 VDS ............................................. 11LFQ4 

Make and Model .................. 2009 Dodge Ram 1500 
 ASl .......................................0.88 
 CDC ............................................. 11FLEW4 

Curb ..................................... 4947 lb 
 Max. 0.050-s Average Max. Exterior Deformation ........... 16.0 inches 

Test Inertial. ............. ............ 5015 lb Longitudinal ...................... -5.3 G OCDI ............................................ LFOOOOOOO 

Dummy ................................ No dummy 
 Lateral .............................. 6.2 G Max. Occupant Compartment 

Gross Static ......................... 5015 lb 
 Vertical ............................ 4 oG Deformation ........................... None 


Iv 

0 

I 

Vl 

0 

'° 0 

I Figure 5.6. Summary of Results for MASH Test 3-1 I on Zoneguard® Barrier Pinned on Both Sides Every 50-ft On-Center Iv 

and Set on 3-inch Thick Asphalt. 
Tablt -U- Summary ofTtsf Rtsults and Co ndition~ 

ll .• I& 

·-- ··~ ........ ___ \~ 

--~~--- ...... ?:. ... 'f's ru .. ,.. 

··- r-.J . ..··-··-....··-... r.·~ -~- tv-J

­

..... 

"­

0

.., 

t..i 

°' ~tnl lnfo1'1D2non lmp:act Conditions Test Artidt Dtflt<bOn 

Test Agency ..........•......... Sowbn"tSt Re~ l.nsmurt SPffd (kmbr) .......... 103.4 Dymmic (•op ofrail) - .•....••.•• 0.20 m (8 m} 

Tes• Number ............. - •..• ZG-USA-1 

Tes1 Oat!!..•- ..................• 10/0112007 

Ani;le (ck~es) ..•••- .23.7 Dynamic (bue ofratl) ...•. - ... 0. 10 m (4 in) 

EDICondition\ Penmnent (•op ofml)........... 0.09 m(J.5 1n) 

Test Cmgory ··-··········---3-10 Updm 

Tut Anide 

Speed (kmbr) __84 (c.alculutd) Pmnsnenr (b~ of Wl)...-.0 m (0 m) 

Al2gle (~es) !:? \"Hiiclt Dsm2i;t 

T)-pe ---·-···· .-.....Lem~ Burier OcCllp llnJ Rill: \ ":alutPS E%mior 

l.asaJlniOD ·····---76.:? Ill (:?50 ft) lmjuct \"elooty (ms) CDC ·-··········--······-·-···--11 LFE\V9 

1'om. Banier He1:1ll .•-.••0.8:? m (2.69 ft) 

Type ofPrinury Banier .. Pom.ble Sitt! Barrier 

x-dlrKnon ........ .5.0 VDS ··-·····················-····-···-11-LFQ-3 

y-duection ......... -7.2 Intenor 

Soi.I NA - lnsttlled on Coocrtie 

Tut \"thid e Ridedomi Acc:elera.tious (!:'s) OCDI ···-···················-····-·····LFOOOOOOO

x-diJKtioll....-..3 3 :Mu.. Deform. (mm) .............. 0 

T)-pe ----············-···.Smsll Cllr y-dlJK0011 _ ...• _.12s 


l>Hi~o _•.. . ········-·-··I IOOC Post lmput \ "eicub.r Bilivior 


Model-·----·················· 2001 Kia Rio ~Wcimum Roll~ (de~ets) ----· ·--·· ·'.!0.4 r? 0.420 sec 


Mass (k~ -···--· ............... 1065 Ma..-mmun Puch ~(~~es) ........ - ...-9.9 1~ 724 sec. 


IDatil1 ~hu{k~ ·-····-··- 1065 Dummy !.ass (k~ ___73 


Gross Smit ~u.n Otv.....1138 


M&Xlllll.Ull Yaw~ (ckgets)----······ 123.6 :~ 2.767 SK. 

------

...... ..,,,.,.,.. 

....... ­ -­-- -------..

/ 

_ ....... ... .­ i=rrTable .u - Summary of Test Results :ind Conditions 

,... 

0 Gcusl Wonmrion lmp:act Conditions 
 Tut A.rticlt DdJection 

Tei Agmc}-··---__. ...5oall:twest P..-rch Inm1m2 Speed(Janbr) --101.5 
 Oymmic (1Dp ofburar) __0.41 m(l61n) 

Tei ?\umber --···-..ZG-US.A-3 (deptts).--25..: 
 Oymmic (base oflwraJ) _.•...0.13 m(Sm) 

TetDm--······-··· .... -lnll1i2007 Exit Corufitions Pmnmem (rop ofbmln) ..•.....0.08 m (3 in) 

Test C..tr.~ -················3·11 t.:pdatr. Speed (kmhr) ...•..._.71 (ulculned) PmmD!!ll (base ofbmler)....... 0 m (0 ill) 

TtltATtidt AaYe (degees)...•._.l2A \"ebide lhmar;e 

Typt. ·····-····-····--········-.Loopmdinltl B2Iritr Ocruput Risk \"ah1ts E.-mrior 

Inmllanon ~th ···-··· 76.2 m (150 ft) 

Kom. Bmier v~ ....•..0.81 m (2.69 ft) 

Impact Velocity (m's) 

x-dnKtion .•___..4.5 

CDC------·······--····-········· 111.FEWS 

\IDS ··--····--·-··-······-·········· 11-LFQ-3 

l)'Jlf oC Prima:)· Burier..Potttble Sreel Burier Y~-----·S 6 Iml!!lor 

Soil NA - Insttlled on Concrete 

Ttsl \"ehidt 

RidMom! Accelentions 's) 

x-di:rKtion _____.sJ 

OCDL_·········-········-····-········ LF(OX-1)(1) (-·..-aturs =up:msion ofOq H)(OXOXO) 

T}']lf ·····--············.......•'1-<nn crew ub p1clrop y-drrtc:tion ....___!4.1 M11X.. Defonn. (mm) 127 

0e5i:mtion····-···..-·-····2270P Post Impact \"ebiculu Bdlnior (nluts limittd to cbta <: 1.000 1Kond.s) 

Modtl------·-··...2002 ~!Um 1500 Qlud Cab Mrnm1m Roll~ (dtptti) ----·B.6 @ 0.539 sec. 

Mass (kV -------2108 

Illlml1 MuJ(kg>.._________nos 

Maximwn Pndl (dtPftS)---· 14.6 0.55-1 sec. Maximnm Ysw ~t(dtpMS)--49.5 1~ 1.000 sec. 

Dammy~ws (k~ •••••.•••.NA 


Grou Sutic Mm (ltg) ...•2208 


... 

'" 

'" ~ 

­ ­