1200 New Jersey Ave ., SE

Washington, D.C. 20590 

In Reply Refer To: 

HSST-B-261 December 22, 2016 

Mr. John P. Donahue, PE 

Washington State Department of Transportation 

310 Maple Park A venue, SE 

Olympia, Washington 98504-7329 

Dear Mr. Donahue: 

This letter is in response to your April 5, 2016, request for the Federal Highway Administration 

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

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

assigned FHW A control number B-261 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: 

• WSDOT Guardrail On Slope (MGS with 8 in blockout, face of post 1 ft onto 1 V :2H slope) 

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' Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). However, the 

FHWA, the Department ofTransportation, 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 ofTransportation, 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 crashworthiness 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, FHW A 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: WSDOT Guardrail On Slope (MGS with 8" blockout) 

Type of system: W-beam guardrail with face of post at one foot onto 1 V :2H slope 

Test Level: MASH Test Level 3 (TL3) 

Testing conducted by: Texas A&M Transportation Institute 

FHW A 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 

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

existing eligibility letter from FHW A, the manufacturer must notify FHW A of such 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 of the modification on the ability of 

the device to meet the relevant crash test criteria. 

FHW A's determination 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 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 
3 

and evaluation criteria of the 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. 

Standard Provisions 

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

control number B-261 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 635.411. 

Sincerely yours, 

Michael S. Griffith 

Director, Office of Safety Technologies 

Office of Safety 

Enclosures 
Submitter

Date of Request: April 5, 2016 I (e New r Resubmission 

Name: 

Company: 

Address: 

Country: 

 To: 

John P Donahue, PE 

Washington State Department of Transportation 

310 Maple Park Avenue SE, WA 98504-7329 

United States

Michael S. Griffith, Director 

FHWA, Office of Safety Technologies 

I I 

System Type 

'B': Barriers (Roadside, 

Median, Bridge Railings) 

(e 

r 

Submission Type 

Physical Crash Testing 

Engineering Analysis 

Device Name / Variant 

Guardrail on Slope 

Testing Criterion 

AASHTO MASH 

Test 

Level 

TL3 

[8J 

[8J 

[8J 

[8J 

 Version 9.1 (11/15) 

Page 1 of 3 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility

of Highway Safety Hardware 

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

highway program. 

! - ! - ! 

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. 

Identification of the individual or organization responsible for the product: 

Contact Name: John P Donahue, PE Same as Submitter 

Company Name: Washington State Department of Transportation Same as Submitter 

Address: 310 Maple Park Avenue SE, WA 98504-7329 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 test lab has no financial interests in the tested barrier. The Roadside Safety Research 

Program Pooled Fund TPF-5(114) 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) Tests 3-10 and 3-11, for which TTI Proving Ground was compensated for the 

cost to perform the tests. No consulting relationships, research funding or other forms of research support, 

patents, copyrights, other intellectual property interests, licenses, contractual relationships, business ownership, 

or investment interests are retained for the TTI Proving Ground. 
I 

 Version 9.1 (11/15) 

Page 2 of 3 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

New Hardware or @ Significant Modification Modification to 

Existing Hardware 

The guardrail on slope system test installation had a total length of 181.25 ft. The system was comprised of a 

106.25 ft length of need section and a 37.5 ft long ET Plus terminal on each end. The 12-gauge W-beam was 

mounted on W6×8.5 steel posts. The guardrail height was 31 inches above the flat terrain. A 2H:1V sloped 

ditch was excavated behind the rail to represent the sloped terrain. The ditch was centered along the 

installation length and was 75 ft long and 12 ft wide. Six 6-ft long W6×8.5 posts were placed at 6 ft-3 inch 

spacing on the flat terrain portion of the test installation. These were posts 7-9 and 22-24. Along the sloped 

section, the 8-ft long posts were placed at 6 ft-3 inch spacing. These were post 10 through post 21. Standard 

size 8 inch × 6 inch × 14 inch wood blocks were used in the length of need section. The rail splices of the Wbeam rail sections in the length of need portion are located between posts. 

CRASH TESTING 

A brief description of each crash test and its result: 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description Evaluation Results 

3-10 (1100C) 

TEST 405160-2: The guardrail on slope contained and 

redirected the 1100C vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, 

underride, or override the installation. Maximum dynamic 

deflection during the test was 2.7 ft. The rail element 

separated from some of the posts. However, the rail element 

did not penetrate, nor show potential to penetrate the 

occupant compartment, nor to present undue hazard to 

others in the area. No occupant compartment deformation 

occurred. The 1100C vehicle remained upright during and 

after the collision event. Maximum roll and pitch angles were 

7 degrees and 5 degrees, respectively. Occupant risk factors 

were below the preferred limits specified in MASH. The 1100C 

vehicle crossed the exit box at the end of the guardrail. 

PASS 

3-11 (2270P) 

TEST 405160-1: The guardrail on slope contained and 

redirected the 2270P vehicle. The vehicle did not penetrate, 

underride, or override the installation. Maximum dynamic 

deflection during the test was 4.3 ft. The rail element 

separated from some of the posts and one blockout separated 

from a post. However, these elements did not penetrate, nor 

show potential to penetrate the occupant compartment, nor 

to present undue hazard to others in the area. No occupant 

compartment deformation occurred. The 2270P vehicle 

remained upright during and after the collision event. 

Maximum roll and pitch angles were 13 degrees and 3 

degrees, respectively. Occupant risk factors were below the 

preferred limits specified in MASH. The 2270P vehicle exited 

within the exit box. 

PASS 

3-20 (1100C) 

3-21 (2270P) 
 

[8l 

 Version 9.1 (11/15) 

Page 3 of 3 

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.): 

Laboratory Name: Texas Transportation Institute 

Laboratory Signature: Richard A. Zimmer Digitally signed by Richard A. Zimmer 

Date: 2016.01.08 14:51:17 -06'00' 

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

Country: United States Same as Submitter 

Accreditation Certificate 

Number and Dates of current 

Accreditation period : 

A2LA Mechanical Testing 2821.01: February 19, 2015 to April 30, 2017 

Digitally signed by John P. Donahue, P.E. John P. Donahue, DN: cn=John P. Donahue, P.E., o=Washington State 

Department of Transportation, ou=Development Submitter Signature*: Division, email=donahjo@wsdot.wa.gov, c=US P.E. Date: 2016.04.02 18:01:49 -07'00'

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 of the 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 AASHTO TF13 

Number Date Designator Key Words 

B-261 July 2016 Guardrail on Slope; MGS; Midwest Guardrail System; 

W-beam 
25.9° 

IMP.ACT PATH 

EXIT BOX 

0.000 s 0.078 s 0.234 s 

53 

General Information Test Agency ......................... 

Test Standard Test No. ....... TTI Test No. ........................

 Date ..................................... Test Article Type..................................... Name ................................... Installation Length ............... 

Material or Key Elements .... 

Soil Type and Condition....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. 

Make and Model ..................

 Curb..................................... Test Inertial.......................... Dummy ................................ Gross Static ......................... 

Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) MASH test 3-10 405160-20-2 April 20, 2012 Guardrail WSDOT Guardrail on Slope 181 ft 3 inches 12 gauge W-Beam Mounted on 8-ft long W6x8.5 Steel Posts on 2H:1V Slope Standard soil, dry 1100C 2006 Kia Rio 2457 lb 2429 lb 164 lb 2593 lb 

Impact Conditions Speed ................................60.3 mi/h  Angle .................................25.9 degrees  Location/Orientation .......... 3.0 ft upstrm post 15 Impact Severity ...................60.1 kip-ft, >7.9% Exit Conditions Speed ................................31.3 mi/h  Angle ................................. 32.3 degrees Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity  Longitudinal ....................17.4 ft/s  Lateral ............................16.1 ft/s  Ridedown Accelerations  Longitudinal ....................7.3 G  Lateral ............................6.8 G  THIV ..................................24.6 km/h  PHD ...................................9.3 G  ASI ..................................... 0.75 Max. 0.050-s Average  Longitudinal ....................-5.7 G  Lateral ............................ 5.5 G  Vertical ........................... -2.3 G 

Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance .......Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle ...

Maximum Pitch Angle ..Maximum Roll Angle ....

 Vehicle Snagging......... Vehicle Pocketing........Test Article Deflections Dynamic....................... Permanent ................... Working Width .............Vehicle Damage VDS ............................. CDC............................. Max. Exterior Deformat OCDI............................

Max. Occupant Compa

 Deformation...........

Figure 6.7. Summary of results for MASH test 3-10 on the guardrail on slope. 
- ----------- 164.0'-------------

41.4' - - - - 32.8' 

96" 

25.00 

--·~~· 

... 

16.6' 

t l t t 1 t I I t I -- --- 1 I , .. __ 

' L 

_____ _J ' J10.oo 

EXITPATI-1 

IMPACT PATI-1 96" 

0.000 s 0.156 s 0.390 s 

41 

General Information Test Agency ......................... 

Test Standard Test No. ....... TTI Test No. ........................

 Date ..................................... Test Article Type..................................... Name ................................... Installation Length ............... 

Material or Key Elements .... 

Soil Type and Condition....... Test Vehicle Type/Designation ................. 

Make and Model ..................

 Curb..................................... Test Inertial.......................... Dummy ................................ Gross Static ......................... 

Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) MASH test 3-11 405160-20-1 January 18, 2012 Guardrail WSDOT Guardrail on Slope 181 ft 3 inches 12 gauge W-Beam Mounted on 8-ft long W6x8.5 Steel Posts on 2H:1V Slope Standard soil, dry 2270P 2006 Dodge Ram 1500 4977 lb 5044 lb No dummy 5044 lb 

Impact Conditions Speed ................................63.9 mi/h  Angle .................................25.0 degrees  Location/Orientation .......... 0.9 ft upstream of 

post 14 

Impact Severity ...................123.0 kip-ft, >6.9% Exit Conditions Speed ................................Not obtainable  Angle ................................. ~10 degrees Occupant Risk Values Impact Velocity  Longitudinal ....................15.1 ft/s  Lateral ............................15.4 ft/s  Ridedown Accelerations  Longitudinal ....................9.0 G  Lateral ............................6.9 G  THIV ..................................22.3 km/h  PHD ...................................10.1 G  ASI ..................................... 0.61 Max. 0.050-s Average  Longitudinal ....................-4.5 G  Lateral ............................ 5.1 G  Vertical ........................... 1.8 G 

Post-Impact Trajectory Stopping Distance .........Vehicle Stability Maximum Yaw Angle .....

Maximum Pitch Angle ....Maximum Roll Angle ......

 Vehicle Snagging ........... Vehicle Pocketing..........Test Article Deflections Dynamic......................... Permanent ..................... Working Width ...............Vehicle Damage VDS ............................... CDC............................... Max. Exterior Deformatio OCDI..............................

Max. Occupant Compart

 Deformation.............

Figure 5.7. Summary of results for MASH test 3-11 on the guardrail on slope. 
[ [ ] 

r 

[ ] [ ] 

--

[ ] 

1;1 

II 

1'1 

1

1

1 

1'1 

1

1

1 

1'1 

1

1

1 

1

1

1 

1:1 

:1: 

1'1 

1

1

1 

1'1 

1

1

1 

1

1

1 

1'1 

1

1

1 

111 

:1: 

fl 

1

1

1 

1

1

1 

1'1 

1

1

1 

1

1

1 

1:1 

7" 178

2013

W6x9

[W150x113.5]

5-7/8" 150 2-1/16" 52

13/16" 21

TYP

96" 2438

FRONT SIDE

Wide-Flange Post for Guardrail on Slope

PWE10

SHEET NO. DATE

1 of 2 07/15/2013
 SPECIFICATIONS

See PWE01-04 for Specifications.

INTENDED USE

The PWE10 Post is used in the SXX00 Guardrail on Slope System.

2013

Wide-Flange Post for Guardrail on Slope

PWE10

SHEET NO. DATE

2 of 2 07/15/2013