U.S. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Highway 

Administration 

June 9, 2020 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

In Reply Refer To: 

HSST-1/B-343 

Mr. Gary Lallo 

Hill & Smith, Inc. 

1000 Buckeye Park Road 

Columbus, OH 43207 

USA 

Dear Mr. Lallo: 

This letter is in response to your January 13, 2020 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 FHWA control number B-343 and is valid until a subsequent letter is issued by FHWA 

that expressly references this device. 

Decision 

The following device is eligible within the length-of-need, with details provided in the form 

which is attached as an integral part of this letter: 

• Zoneguard® Portable Barrier

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 FHWA, 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 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, FHWA agrees that the device described herein meets the crash test 

and evaluation criteria of the AASHTO’s 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: Zoneguard® Portable Barrier 

Type of system: Longitudinal Barrier 

Test Level: MASH Test Level 3 (TL3) 

Testing conducted by: Texas A&M Transportation Institute 

Date of request: January 13, 2020 

FHWA concurs with the recommendation of the accredited crash testing laboratory on 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. Any modifications to this device should be submitted to the user 

(i.e., state DOT) as per their requirements. 

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 FHWA 

control number B-343 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 selrany patented system for which the applicant is not the patent holder. 

• This FHWA eligibility letter is not an expression of any Agency view, position, or 

determination ofvalidity, scope, or ownership of any intellectual property rights to a 

specific device or design. Further, this letter does not impute any distribution or licensing 

rights to the requester. This FHWA eligibility letter determination is made based solely 

on the crash-testing information submitted by the requester. The FHWA reserves the 

right to review and revoke an earlier eligibility determination after receipt of subsequent 

information related to crash testing. 

Sincerely, 

Michael S. Griffith 

Director, Office of Safety Technologies 

Office of Safety 

Enclosures 
Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 1 of 5 

Request for Federal Aid Reimbursement Eligibility 

of Highway Safety Hardware 

Submitter 

Date of Request: January 13, 2020 New Resubmission 

Name: Gary Lallo 

Company: Hill &Smith, Inc. 

Address: 1000 Buckeye Park Road, Columbus, OH 43207 

Country: USA 

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 L 

System Type Submission Type Device Name / Variant Testing Criterion Test 

Level 

'B':Rigid/Semi-Rigid Barriers 

(Roadside, Median, Bridge 

Railings) 

PhysicalCrashTesting 

EngineeringAnalysis 

Zoneguard®Portable 

Barrier 

AASHTO MASH TL3 

! - ! - !

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I r. (' 

I 

I I I I 

r. 

(' 

~ 

~ 

~ 

~ 

evel ! - ! - ! 

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 asSubmitter 

Company Name: Hill &Smith, Inc. Same asSubmitter 

Address: 1000 Buckeye Park Road, Columbus, OH 43207 Same asSubmitter 

Country: USA Same asSubmitter 

Enter below all disclosures of financial interests as required by the FHWA `Federal-Aid Reimbursement 

Eligibility Process for Safety Hardware Devices' document. 

TexasA&MTransportation Institute (TTI)wascontracted byHill &Smith,Inc. to perform full-scalecrash testing of 

the Zoneguard®Portable Barrier. There are no shared financial interests in the Zoneguard®Portable Barrier by 

TTI,or between Hill &Smith,Inc.andTTI,other than costsinvolved in theactual crash testsand reportsfor this 

submission toFHWA. 
 

 

 

 

I 

r- (' 

l 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 2 of 5 

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION 

A brief description of each crash test and its result: 

Help 

New Hardware or Modification to 

Significant Modification Existing Hardware 

The tested device wasa proprietary temporary roadside safety barrier provided and manufactured by Hill & 

Smith,Inc. of Columbus,Ohio. The test installation consisted of five barrier units,each unit nominally50 ft in 

length, for a total length of approximately250 ft.Each50 ft long barrier unit wascomprised of threesections(a 

maleend section,acentral section,and a femaleend section).Each barriersection was16 ft-8 incheslong and 

311⁄2 inches tall (without rubber pads) with a 27-9/16-inch wide sloped base. Each section contained four 

anchor channel feet in the base located at 1 ft-7-11/16 inchesand 6 ft-11⁄4 inches from each end. Each foot 

contained two 11⁄2-inch wide × 5-inch long longitudinal slots for anchor pins, laterally spaced at 19-11/16 

inches.Each male and female end section was fitted with four proprietary upper interlocking U-shaped 

channelspeed joint connectors,with asliding lock on one end. 

The Zoneguard®barrier was installed on a 3-inch thick asphalt pad with the traffic side edge of the base 8 

inchesfrom,and parallel to, the edge of theexisting concreteapron. Thebarrier wassecured to the asphalt 

pad with 11⁄4-inch diameter × 20-inch long pins.Each barriersection had 8slotsfor the anchor pins,4 each on 

the traffic and field sides. These pin locations provided anchorage every 33 ft-4 inches on center, with 

exception at each end of the installation. Other than the pins, there were no additional bolts, clamps, or 

adhesivessecuring the barrier to the asphalt pad. Additional detailsand information can be found on the 

drawings. 

CRASH TESTING 

Bysignature below, theEngineeraffiliated with the testing laboratory,agreesin support of thissubmission 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 testsare necessary to determine the device meets 

theMASH criteria. 

Engineer Name: D. Lance Bullard, Jr. 

D.LanceBullard,Jr. Digitally signed by D. LanceBullard,Jr. EngineerSignature: Date: 2020.01.12 09:17:01 -06'00' 

Address: 3100 SH 47, Bldg 7091, Bryan, Texas 77807 Same asSubmitter 

Country: USA Same asSubmitter 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 3 of 5 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

3-10 (1100C) 

Test 3-10 involves an 1100C vehicle 

impacting the test articleat a target impact 

speed of 62 mi/h ±2.5 mi/h and a target 

impact angle of 25° ±1.5°. The target CIP 

was determined using the information 

provided in MASHSection 2.2.1,Section 

2.3.2, and Table 2-7 and was for the left 

corner of the front bumper was 3.6 ft 

upstream of the joint between segments 9 

and 10.Theresultsof the test conducted on 

January 24, 2018 are found in TTI Test 

Report number 690900-HSI7. The test 

vehicle wastraveling at an impact speed of 

61.3 mi/h as it made contact with the 

Zoneguard®Barrier 2.7 ft upstream of the 

joint between segments 9 and 10 at an 

impact angle of 25.2°. After loss of contact 

with the barrier, the vehicle came to rest 

146 ft downstream of the impact. Working 

width was 28.8 inchesat the toe (ground 

level). Maximum dynamic deflection during 

the test was 3.4 inchesat the toe, and 9.0 

inchesat the top of the barrier, which was 

1.7 inches inside of the original position of 

the field side toe. Maximum permanent 

deformation was 1.0 inch at the joint 

between segments 9 and 10. The front 

bumper, hood, left front fender, left front 

rim, left front door, left rear door, left rear 

rim,left rear quarter panel,and rear bumper 

were damaged. The windshield was 

cracked in the lower center. The frontal 

damage was due to asecondary impact 

with another barrier. Maximum exterior 

crush to the vehicle was 6.0 inches in the 

side planeat the left front corner just above 

bumper height. Maximum occupant 

compartment deformation was0.25inch in 

the left floor pan area. The occupant risk 

factors were within the MASH preferred 

limits.Thedevice performed acceptablyfor 

MASH test3-10. 

PASS 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 4 of 5 

Required Test 

Number 

Narrative 

Description 

Evaluation 

Results 

3-11 (2270P) 

Test 3-11 involves a 2270P vehicle 

impacting the test articleat a target impact 

speed of 62 mi/h ±2.5 mi/h and a target 

impact angle of 25° ±1.5°.The target impact 

point for the test, as provided by the 

sponsor, was the centerline of the vehicle 

aligned with a point 4.3 ft upstream of the 

critical point of the system, which was the 

midpoint between the traffic side anchors 

of barriersections6and 7.Theresultsof the 

test conducted on May9,2017arefound in 

TTI Test Report number 690900-HSI6. The 

test vehicle, traveling at an impact speed of 

64.0 mi/h,contacted theZoneguard®barrier 

where it correlated to the centerline of the 

vehicle aligned with a point 3.56 ft 

upstream of the midpoint between the 

trafficsideanchorsof barriersections6 and 

7 at an angle of 25.2°. After loss of contact 

with the barrier, the vehicle traveled 

downstream of the point of impact along 

the existing runway of the test site. The 

vehicle then exited the runwayandentered 

an existing ditch beyond the edge of the 

runway.Thisfinal resting location was280ft 

downstream of the point of impact and 30 ft 

toward the field side. 

Working width was 51.1 inches, and the 

vehicle wasin contact with the barrier 24 ft. 

Maximum dynamic deflection during the 

test was 25.1 inches beyond the toe, and 

maximum permanent deformation was9.0 

inches.Thefront bumper,grill, left front tire 

and rim,left front fender,left front and rear 

doors,left rearcabcorner,left rear exterior 

bed,left rear tireand rim,and rear bumper 

were damaged. Theleft upper and lower Aarms were deformed. Maximum exterior 

crush to the vehicle was 12.0 inches in the 

side planeat the left front cornerat bumper 

height. Maximum occupant compartment 

deformation was1.5 inchesin the left front 

firewallarea.The occupant risk factorswere 

within the MASH preferred limits. The 

device performed acceptably for MASHtest 

3-11. 

PASS 

3-20 (1100C) The product is not a transition system. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 

3-21 (2270P) The product is not a transition system. Non-Relevant Test, not conducted 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~ 

Version 10.0 (05/16) 

Page 5 of 5 

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 A&M Transportation Institute 

Laboratory Signature: Digitally signed by Darrell L. Kuhn 

'Date: 2020.01.13 15:48:47 -06'00 

Address: 3100 SH 47, Bldg 7091, Bryan, Texas 77807 

TTI, TAMU 3135, College Station, TX 77843-3135 Same asSubmitter 

Country: USA Same asSubmitter 

Accreditation Certificate 

Number and Dates of current 

Accreditation period : 

ISO 17025-2017 Laboratory 

A2LA Certificate Number: 2821.01 

Valid To: April 30, 2021 

Digitally signed by Gary Lallo 

SubmitterSignature*: Gary Lallo Date:2020.04.2813:55:35 

-04'00' 

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 

Number Date Key Words