1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE. 

Washington, DC 20590

April 22, 2008 

In Reply Refer To: HSSD/B-170 

Mr. Don S. Turner 

Traffic Safety and Design Engineer 

South Carolina Department of Transportation 

P.O. Box 191 

Columbia, SC 29202-0191 

Dear Mr. Turner: 

This is in response to your letter of September 21, 2007, requesting the Federal Highway 

Administration’s (FHWA) acceptance of South Carolina DOT’s temporary concrete barrier wall 

anchorage. You requested that we find this design acceptable for use on the National Highway 

System (NHS) under the provisions of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program 

(NCHRP) Report 350 “Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of 

Highway Features.” Mr. Nicholas Artimovich of my office replied via e-mail on October 29, 

2007, agreeing that your proposal was acceptable. The purpose of this letter is to document our 

acceptance of your request for both 10 foot and 12 foot segments, and the subsequent 

correspondence and telephone conversations between Mr. Mark Bloschock of my office and 

Mr. Joe Sease on barrier designs and Mr. Barry Bowers on anchor specifications. 

Introduction 

The FHWA guidance on crash testing of roadside safety hardware is contained in a 

memorandum dated July 25, 1997, titled “INFORMATION: Identifying Acceptable Highway 

Safety Features.” 

Your request was for an anchorage system for ten- and twelve-foot long New Jersey profile 

barriers with triple loops and drop-in pin connections. This “North Carolina Design” for the 

temporary concrete barrier wall itself was found acceptable in the FHWA acceptance letter, 

B-98, dated May 10, 2002. To anchor this barrier you asked to use an anchorage system based 

on the FHWA acceptance letter, B-5 dated March 14, 1989, for anchorage of pre-cast concrete 

traffic barriers. 

The anchorage described in acceptance letter B-5 consisted of proprietary anchors and grout. 

Each anchor was a 15 1/2 inch long 1 inch diameter HS Hot Dipped Galvanized “Kelibond” 

Anchor. The number of anchors required for each section of barrier wall was noted as ten (10) 

for a 20-foot section and seven (7) for a 15-foot section. Each anchor passed through a slot 

fabricated into the barrier wall and inserted into an anchor hole drilled to allow an embedment 

depth of 6 1/2 inches and secured in the anchor hole with “Keligrout. These anchors were only 

installed on the traffic side of the barrier wall. 

Archived – 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only
2

The anchor system you requested is equivalent to the system in acceptance letter B-5, except that 

it will use generic and non-proprietary materials. The anchors will be 16 inch long 1 inch 

diameter A449 fully threaded galvanized rods. Each 10 foot section of barrier wall will be 

anchored on the traffic side with four (4) anchors. Each 12 foot section of barrier wall will be 

anchored on the traffic side with five (5) anchors. The anchor rods will pass through a slot 

fabricated into the barrier wall and inserted into a 1 1/8” diameter hole 6 1/2” deep into the 

concrete bridge deck. Each anchor will be secured in the anchor hole with a two-component 

epoxy-resin bonding agent. Drawings illustrating the temporary concrete barrier wall with the 

anchorage system are enclosed, as are the epoxy grouting specifications. 

Findings 

Therefore, the system described above is acceptable for use on the NHS under the range of 

conditions the original barriers were tested, when proposed by a State. 

Please note the following standard provisions that apply to FHWA letters of acceptance: 

• This acceptance is limited to the crashworthiness characteristics of the device(s). 

• Any changes in the barrier design or anchor specification that may adversely influence 

the crashworthiness of the device will require a new acceptance letter. 

• Should the FHWA discover that in-service performance reveals unacceptable safety 

problems, it reserves the right to modify or revoke its acceptance. 

• You will be expected to supply potential users with sufficient information on design and 

installation requirements to ensure proper performance. 

• Contractors should be expected to certify that the hardware furnished has essentially the 

same chemistry, mechanical properties, and geometry as that submitted for acceptance, 

and that they will meet the crashworthiness requirements of the FHWA and the NCHRP 

Report 350. 

• To prevent misunderstanding by others, this letter of acceptance, designated as number 

B-170 shall not be reproduced except in full. This letter, and the test documentation upon 

which this letter is based, is public information. All such letters and documentation may 

be reviewed at our office upon request. 

• This acceptance letter shall not be construed as authorization or consent by the FHWA to 

use, manufacture, or sell any patented device for which the applicant is not the patent 

holder. The acceptance letter is limited to the crashworthiness characteristics of the 

candidate device, and the FHWA is neither prepared nor required to become involved in 

issues concerning patent law. Patent issues, if any, are to be resolved by the applicant. 

Sincerely yours, 

David A. Nicol, P.E. 

Director, Office of Safety Design 

Office of Safety 

FHWA:HSSD:NArtimovich:tb:x61331:1/31/08 

REVISED 4/2/08 

File: s://directory folder/nartimovich/B170-SeaseSCFIN.doc 

cc: HSSD (Reader, HSA; Chron File, HSSD; N.Artimovich, HSSD; 

 MBloschock, HSSD; M.McDonough, HSSD) 

Archived – 

For 

Research 

and 

Historical 

Purposes 

Only