1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Washington , D.C. 20590 

July 7, 2017 

In Reply Refer To: 

HSST-1/ B-280 

Mr. Adrian Bullock 

Highway Care Ltd. 

Callow Hill Business Park 

Led bury, Herefordshire 

HR8 2PZ 

Dear Mr. Bullock: 

This letter is in response to your March 10, 2017 request for the Federal Highway Administration 

(FHW A) to review a roadside safety device, hardware, or system for eligibility for 

reimbursement under the Federal-aid highway program. This FHW A letter of eligibility is 

assigned FHW A control number B-280 and is valid until a subsequent letter is issued by FHW A 

that expressly references this device. 

Decision 

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

integral part of this letter: 

• BarrierGuard 800 

Scope of this Letter 

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

test and evaluation criteria contained in the American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials' (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). 

However, the FHW A, the Department of Transportation, and the United States Government do 

not regulate the manufacture of roadside safety devices. Eligibility for reimbursement under the 

Federal-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 FHWA, the Department of Transportation, or the United 

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

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

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

tested. 

This finding of eligibility is limited to the crash worthiness of the system and does 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, FHWA agrees that the device described herein meets the crash test 

and evaluation criteria of the 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 of tested 

conditions. 

Name of system: BarrierGuard 800 

Type of system: Longitudinal Barrier 

Test Level: MASH Test Level 3 (TL3) 

Testing conducted by: Safe Technologies 

Date of request: March 10, 2017 

FHWA concurs with the recommendation of the accredited crash testing laboratory as stated 

within the attached form. 

Full Description of the Eligible Device 

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

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

form. 

Notice 

This eligibility letter is issued for the subject device as tested. Modifications made to the device 

are not covered by this letter and will need to be tested in accordance with all recommended tests 

in AASHTO's MASH as part of a new and separate submittal. 

You are expected to supply potential users with sufficient information 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 of AASHTO's MASH. 

Issuance of this letter does 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 

was flawed, (3) in-service performance or other information reveals safety problems, ( 4) the 

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

information indicates that the letter was issued in error or otherwise does not reflect full and 

complete information about the crashworthiness of the system. 
3 

Standard Provisions 

• To prevent misunderstanding by others, this letter of eligibility designated as FHW A 

control number B-280 shall not be reproduced except in full. This letter and the test 

documentation upon which it is based are public information. All such letters and 

documentation may be reviewed upon request. 

• This letter shall not be construed as authorization or consent by the FHW A to use, 

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

• If the subject 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 equally suitable unpatented 

items; (b) the highway agency must certify that they are essential for synchronization 

with the existing highway facilities or that no equally suitable alternative exists; or ( c) 

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

sections of road for experimental purposes. Our regulations concerning proprietary 

products are contained in Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 63 5 .411. 

Sincerely, 

Robert Ritter 

Acting Director, Office of Safety 

Technologies 

Office of Safety 

Enclosures 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 1 of 6 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility 

of Highway Safety Hardware 

... 

... 

-~ 

(II

E 

.0 

::::, 

V) 

Date of Request: March 10, 2017 r. New (' Resubmission I 

N.ame : Adrian Bullock 

Company: Highway Care Ltd 

Address: Callow Hill Business Park, Ledbury, Herefordshire. HR8 2PZ 

Country: UK 

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 . 

Device & Testing Criterion - Enter from right to left starting with Test Level Fl 

System Type Submission Type Device Name/ Variant Testing Criterion Test 

Level 

'B': Rigid/Semi-Rigid Barriers 

(Roadside, Median, Bridge 

Railinasl 

(e' Physical Crash Testing 

(' Engineering Analysis 

BarrierGuard 800 

AASHTO MASH 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: Adrian Bullock Same as Submitter 

Company Name: Highway Care Ltd Same as Submitter IZ! 

Address: Callow Hill Business Park, Led bury, Herefordshire. HR8 2PZ Same as Submitter IZ! 

Country: UK Same as Submitter IZ! 

Enter below all disclosures offinancial interests as required by the FHWA 'Federal-Aid Reimbursement 

Eligibility Process for Safety Hardware Devices' document. 

Safe Technologies Inc. (STI) was the test laboratory used for the physical crash testing of this product for this 

eligibility application. STI has no financial interests in BarrierGuard 800 and has no ownership of the product IP. 

IZ! 
Version 10.0 (05/16} 

Page 2 of 6 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

(e New Hardware or 

• Significant Modification 

(' Modification to 

Existing Hardware 

BarrierGuard 800 is a steel barrier formed from two step profile, thin gauge sheets of steel being welded 

together to form a long hollow section, the overall dimensions of the barrier section is 540mm wide at the 

base, 235mm wide at the top and 800mm high. Each longitudinal section can be joined together using a 

Quicklink hole and pin arrangement or a bolted joint arrangement. These barrier sections are joined together 

and laid out along the road surface to create a longitudinal barrier system (wall). 

CRASH TESTING 

By signature below, the Engineer affiliated with the testing laboratory, agrees in support of 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 are necessary to determine the device meets 

the MASH criteria. 

Engineer Name: Joseph Nagy 

Engineer Signature: Joseph Nagy Digitally signed by Joseph Nagy 

Date: 2017.03.10 16:13:38 -08'00' 

Address: 170 River Road, Rio Vista, CA 94571 Same as Submitter D 

Country: USA Same as Submitter D 

A brief description of each crash test and ,ts result: 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 3 of 6 

Required Test Narrative Evaluation 

Number Description Results 

This test was conducted by STI on June 24, 

2016 under STI Test number BG161 l. 

The BarrierGuard 800 satisfied the MASH 

structural adequacy criteria for its intended 

function as a longitudinal barrier. The test 

article redirected the 11 00C vehicle in a 

controlled manner. The vehicle did not 

penetrate, underride, or override the 

installation. The test article exhibited 

controlled permanent and dynamic 

deflection in the test. 

All of the occupant risk criteria were 

satisfied in testing the BarrierGuard 800. 

Theoretical occupant impact velocities in 

the longitudinal and lateral directions were 

well below the preferred limit of 30.0 ft/s 

3-10 (11 00C) (9.6 mi s). Ridedown accelerations in the PASS 

longitudinal and lateral directions were well 

below the preferred limit of 15.0 G. There 

was no test article debris detached during 

the test. 

There was no deformation to the occupant 

compartment of the 11 00C test vehicle. 

There were no intrusions into the occupant 

compartment. The test vehicle remained 

upright during and after the collision with 

minor roll, pitch and yaw. 

The BarrierGuard 800 was judged as 

satisfying the applicable MASH vehicle 

trajectory criteria. 

The barrier was judged to have successfully 

met all of the evaluation criteria for MASH 

Test 3-10. 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 4 of 6 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

3-11 (2270P) 

This test was conducted by STI on October 

14, 2013 under STI Test number BG 1302. 

The BarrierGuard 800 satisfied the MASH 

structural adequacy criteria for its intended 

function as a longitudinal barrier. The test 

article redirected the 2270P vehicle in a 

controlled manner. The vehicle did not 

penetrate, underride, or override the 

installation. The test article exhibited 

controlled permanent and dynamic 

deflection in the test. 

All of the occupant risk criteria were 

satisfied in testing the BarrierGuard 800. 

Theoretical occupant impact velocities in 

the longitudinal and lateral directions were 

well below the preferred limit of 30.0 ft/s 

(9.6 mi s) . Ridedown accelerations in the 

longitudinal and lateral directions were well 

below the preferred limit of 15.0 G. There 

was no test article debris detached during 

the test. 

There was no deformation to the occupant 

compartment of the 2270P test vehicle. 

There were no intrusions into the occupant 

compartment. The test vehicle remained 

upright during and after the collision with 

minor roll, pitch and yaw. 

The BarrierGuard 800 was judged as 

satisfying the applicable MASH vehicle 

trajectory criteria. 

The barrier was judged to have successfully 

met all of the evaluation criteria for MASH 

Test 3-11. 

PASS 

3-20 (11 OOC) Non-Relevant Test, not conducted Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 5 of 6 

3-21 (2270P) 

This test was conducted by STI on August 1, 

2016 under STI Test number BG1614. 

The BarrierGuard 800 satisfied the MASH 

structural adequacy criteria for its intended 

function as a longitudinal barrier. The test 

article redirected the 2270P vehicle in a 

controlled manner. The vehicle did not 

penetrate, underride, or override the 

installation. The test article exhibited 

controlled permanent and dynamic 

deflection in the test. 

All of the occupant risk criteria were 

satisfied in testing the BarrierGuard 800. 

Theoretical occupant impact velocities in 

the longitudinal and lateral directions were 

well below the preferred limit of 30.0 ft/s 

(9.6 mis). Ridedown accelerations in the 

longitudinal and lateral directions were well 

below the preferred limit of 15.0 G. There 

was no test article debris detached during 

the test. 

There was no deformation to the occupant 

compartment of the 2270P test vehicle. 

There were no intrusions into the occupant 

compartment. The test vehicle remained 

upright during and after the collision with 

minor roll, pitch and yaw. 

The Critical Impact Point for this test was 

chosen to verify the performance of the 

product at a point where it changes form 

being a flexible (deflecting) system to a rigid 

anchored system, this point was just 

upstream of the anchor point at the mid 

point of the last barrier section of the 

installed length. 

The BarrierGuard 800 was judged as 

satisfying the applicable MASH vehicle 

trajectory criteria. 

The barrier was judged to have successfully 

met all of the evaluation criteria for MASH 

Test 3-21. 

PASS 

Full Scale Crash Testing was done in compliance with MASH by the following accredited crash test 

laboratory (cite the laboratory's accreditation status as noted in the crash test reports .): 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 6 of 6 

Laboratory Name: Safe Technologies, Inc. 

Laboratory Signature: Joseph Nagy Digitally signed by Joseph Nagy 

Date: 2017.03.1016:17:15-08'00' 

Address: 170 River Road, Rio Vista, CA 94571 Same as Submitter D 

Country: USA Same as Submitter D 

Accreditation Certificate 

Number and Dates of current

Accreditation period : 

1851.01. Valid through March 31, 2017 

Submit Form 

ATTACHMENTS 

Attach to this form: 

1) Additional disclosures of related financial interest as indicated above. 

2) A copy of the full test report, video, and a Test Data Summary Sheet for each test conducted in 

support of this request. 

3) A drawing or drawings ofthe device(s) that conform to the Task Force-13 Drawing Specifications 

[Hardware Guide Drawing Standards]. For proprietary products, a single isometric line drawing is 

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

information provided on the reverse. Additional drawings (not in TF-13 format) showing details that 

are relevant to understanding the dimensions and performance of the device should also be submitted 

to facilitate our review. 

FHWA Official Business Only: 

Eligibility Letter 

Number Date Key Words