1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

 Washington, D.C. 20590

August 16, 2011

In Reply Refer To:

HSSD/CC-26J

Barry D. Stephens, P.E.

Sr. Vice President Engineering

Energy Absorption Systems, Inc.

3617 Cincinnati Avenue

Rocklin, CA 95678

Dear Mr. Stephens:

This letter is in response to your request for Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 

acceptance of a roadside safety device for use on the National Highway System (NHS).

Name of device/system: REACT 350® II

Type of device/system: Redirective non-gating impact attenuator

Test Level: NCHRP Report 350 Test Level 3 (TL-3)

Testing conducted by: E-TECH Testing Services

Date of request: December 10, 2010

Date initially acknowledged: December 22, 2010

Date final package received: July 22, 2011

Task Force 13 Designator: SCI 16c

You requested that we find this device acceptable for use on the NHS under the provisions of 

National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350 “Recommended 

Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features.”

Requirements

Roadside safety devices should meet the guidelines contained in the NCHRP Report 350, 

"Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features" or the 

AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware. FHWA Memorandum “ACTION: Identifying 

Acceptable Highway Safety Features” of July 25, 1997, provides further guidance on crash 

testing requirements of longitudinal barriers.

Decision

The following device was found acceptable, with details provided below:

• REACT 350® II Redirective Non-gating Impact Attenuator

FHWA: HSSI: WLongstreet: mb: x60087:8/5/11

File: h: //directory folder/HSST/ CC-26J_REACT 350 II.docx

cc: HSST Will Longstreet 
2

Description

The REACT 350® II Redirective Non-gating Impact Attenuator (REACT 350® II) uses an array 

of different energy absorbing cylinders with varying wall thicknesses to dissipate impact energy 

as per FHWA acceptance letters CC-26 (dated March 3, 1995) and CC-26I (dated April 18, 

2008). The current design presented in this submission requests FHWA review and acceptance 

of a shorter six cylinder system which is a self-restoring, redirective, non-gating crash cushion 

that can be used in temporary or permanent installations for both single-direction and bidirectional traffic applications when appropriately transitioned and anchored. The six-cylinder 

design includes slightly thicker cylinders in the front and additional internal energy absorbing 

segments in the first and last two cylinders creating a more robust design as per NCHRP 350 

compliance report prepared by E-TECH Testing Services, Inc. The crash test report describes 

the REACT 350® II as well as the two full-scale crash tests conducted on this new attenuator. 

Design details are provided as enclosure to this correspondence.

Crash Testing

To validate a shorter design, full-scale NCHRP 350 crash testing was conducted on the following 

two tests. The crash test summaries are enclosed for reference.

A. NCHRP 350 Test 3-30: This test utilizes a 820C vehicle (100KPH/0 deg/ w/4 offset). The 

purpose of this test was to evaluate occupant risk and vehicle trajectory criteria for a small 

820C passenger vehicle under a head-on centered, one quarter vehicle width offset, impact on

the test article. The curb mass of the vehicle was 827 kg, and the final test inertial mass was 

827 kg. The actual impact conditions were 97.7 km/h (60.7 mph) and 0 deg. the impact 

severity was 304.3 kJ which was within the NCHRP 350 recommended tolerance of 316.4 (-

24.8/ +25.8) kJ. The maximum dynamic deflection of the test article was 2.4 meters (7.9 feet) 

and the post-test deflection was 0.8-meter (2.6 feet).

B. NCHRP 350 Test 3-31: This test is a capacity test utilizing a 2000P vehicle (100KPH/0 deg). 

The purpose of this test was to evaluate the occupant risk and vehicle trajectory criteria for a 

large 2000P passenger vehicle under a head-on centered impact aligned with the nose of the 

system. The curb mass of the vehicle was 2063 kg (4548 lbs.) and the final test inertial mass 

was 2021 kg (4674 lbs.). The actual impact conditions were 97.0 km/h (60.7 mph) and 0 deg. 

the impact severity was 733.7 kJ which was within the NCHRP 350 recommended tolerance 

of 771.7 (-60.4 / +62.9) kJ. The maximum dynamic deflection of the test article was 4.0 

meters (13.1 feet) and the post-test deflection was 1.0-meter (3.3 feet) immediately after the 

test.

In addition, other required testing is hereby requested to be waived, as follows:

Test Number Test Level Requested Comparison

3-32 TL3 Not necessary since Test 3-30 considered worst case 

because in 3-32 car yaws quickly, resulting in lower 

ORV values

3-33 TL3 Not necessary since Test 3-31 considered worst case 

because in 3-33 pickup yaws quickly, resulting in lower 

ORV values

3-36 TL3 Not necessary since shorter configuration does not 
3

affect system performance. Vehicle sees same wire 

ropes and the cylinder wall thickness (stiffness) has 

increased, improving performance

3-37 TL3 Not necessary since shorter configuration does not 

affect system performance. Vehicle sees same wire 

ropes and the cylinder wall thickness (stiffness) has 

increased, improving performance (see reference test 

270687-VAN9)

3-38 TL3 Not necessary since shorter configuration does not 

affect system performance. Vehicle sees same wire 

ropes and the cylinder wall thickness (stiffness) has 

increased, improving redirective performance. (see 

reference test 472380-8)

3-39 TL3 Not necessary since shorter configuration does not 

affect system performance. Vehicle sees same wire 

ropes and the cylinder wall thickness (stiffness) has 

increased, improving redirective performance.

Findings

Based upon the successful completion of the provided NCHRP 350 tests and consideration of 

requested waiver of testing, we concur the six cylinder TL-3 REACT 350® II self restoring, 

redirective, non-gating crash cushion can be used in temporary or permanent installations for both 

unidirectional and bidirectional traffic applications when appropriately transitioned and anchored. 

Therefore, the system as described above may be used on the NHS when such use is acceptable to 

the contracting authority.

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

• This acceptance provides a AASHTO/ARTBA/AGC Task Force 13 designator that 

should be used for the purpose of the creation of a new and/or the update of existing Task 

Force 13 drawing for posting on the on-line ‘Guide to Standardized Highway Barrier 

Hardware’ currently referenced in AASHTO ‘Roadside Design Guide’.

• This acceptance is limited to the crashworthiness characteristics of the devices/systems 

and does not cover their structural features, nor conformity with the Manual on Uniform 

Traffic Control Devices.

• Any changes that may adversely influence the crashworthiness of the device/system will 

require a new acceptance letter.

• Should the FHWA discover that the qualification testing was flawed, that in-service 

performance reveals unacceptable safety problems, or that the device/system being 

marketed is significantly different from the version that was crash tested, we reserve the 

right to modify or revoke our acceptance.

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

installation requirements to ensure proper performance.

• You will be expected to certify to potential users that the hardware furnished has 

essentially the same chemistry, mechanical properties, and geometry as that submitted for 

acceptance, and that it will meet the crashworthiness requirements of the FHWA and the 

NCHRP Report 350.
4

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

CC-26J and 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 at our office upon request.

• The REACT 350® II is a patented product and considered proprietary. If proprietary 

devices/systems are specified by a highway agency for use on Federal-aid projects, 

except exempt, non-NHS projects, they: (a) 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.

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

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

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

the candidate device/system, 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,

Michael S. Griffith

Director, Office of Safety Design

Office of Safety

Enclosures
 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

 Washington, D.C. 20590

August 16, 2011

In Reply Refer To:

HSSD/CC-26J

Barry D. Stephens, P.E.

Sr. Vice President Engineering

Energy Absorption Systems, Inc.

3617 Cincinnati Avenue

Rocklin, CA 95678

Dear Mr. Stephens:

This letter is in response to your request for Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 

acceptance of a roadside safety device for use on the National Highway System (NHS).

Name of device/system: REACT 350® II

Type of device/system: Redirective non-gating impact attenuator

Test Level: NCHRP Report 350 Test Level 3 (TL-3)

Testing conducted by: E-TECH Testing Services

Date of request: December 10, 2010

Date initially acknowledged: December 22, 2010

Date final package received: July 22, 2011

Task Force 13 Designator: SCI 16c

You requested that we find this device acceptable for use on the NHS under the provisions of 

National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 350 “Recommended 

Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features.”

Requirements

Roadside safety devices should meet the guidelines contained in the NCHRP Report 350, 

"Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features" or the 

AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware. FHWA Memorandum “ACTION: Identifying 

Acceptable Highway Safety Features” of July 25, 1997, provides further guidance on crash 

testing requirements of longitudinal barriers.

Decision

The following device was found acceptable, with details provided below:

• REACT 350® II Redirective Non-gating Impact Attenuator
2

Description

The REACT 350® II Redirective Non-gating Impact Attenuator (REACT 350® II) uses an array 

of different energy absorbing cylinders with varying wall thicknesses to dissipate impact energy 

as per FHWA acceptance letters CC-26 (dated March 3, 1995) and CC-26I (dated April 18, 

2008). The current design presented in this submission requests FHWA review and acceptance 

of a shorter six cylinder system which is a self-restoring, redirective, non-gating crash cushion 

that can be used in temporary or permanent installations for both single-direction and bidirectional traffic applications when appropriately transitioned and anchored. The six-cylinder 

design includes slightly thicker cylinders in the front and additional internal energy absorbing 

segments in the first and last two cylinders creating a more robust design as per NCHRP 350 

compliance report prepared by E-TECH Testing Services, Inc. The crash test report describes 

the REACT 350® II as well as the two full-scale crash tests conducted on this new attenuator. 

Design details are provided as enclosure to this correspondence.

Crash Testing

To validate a shorter design, full-scale NCHRP 350 crash testing was conducted on the following 

two tests. The crash test summaries are enclosed for reference.

A. NCHRP 350 Test 3-30: This test utilizes a 820C vehicle (100KPH/0 deg/ w/4 offset). The 

purpose of this test was to evaluate occupant risk and vehicle trajectory criteria for a small 

820C passenger vehicle under a head-on centered, one quarter vehicle width offset, impact on

the test article. The curb mass of the vehicle was 827 kg, and the final test inertial mass was 

827 kg. The actual impact conditions were 97.7 km/h (60.7 mph) and 0 deg. the impact 

severity was 304.3 kJ which was within the NCHRP 350 recommended tolerance of 316.4 (-

24.8/ +25.8) kJ. The maximum dynamic deflection of the test article was 2.4 meters (7.9 feet) 

and the post-test deflection was 0.8-meter (2.6 feet).

B. NCHRP 350 Test 3-31: This test is a capacity test utilizing a 2000P vehicle (100KPH/0 deg). 

The purpose of this test was to evaluate the occupant risk and vehicle trajectory criteria for a 

large 2000P passenger vehicle under a head-on centered impact aligned with the nose of the 

system. The curb mass of the vehicle was 2063 kg (4548 lbs.) and the final test inertial mass 

was 2021 kg (4674 lbs.). The actual impact conditions were 97.0 km/h (60.7 mph) and 0 deg. 

the impact severity was 733.7 kJ which was within the NCHRP 350 recommended tolerance 

of 771.7 (-60.4 / +62.9) kJ. The maximum dynamic deflection of the test article was 4.0 

meters (13.1 feet) and the post-test deflection was 1.0-meter (3.3 feet) immediately after the 

test.

In addition, other required testing is hereby requested to be waived, as follows:

Test Number Test Level Requested Comparison

3-32 TL3 Not necessary since Test 3-30 considered worst case 

because in 3-32 car yaws quickly, resulting in lower 

ORV values

3-33 TL3 Not necessary since Test 3-31 considered worst case 

because in 3-33 pickup yaws quickly, resulting in lower 

ORV values

3-36 TL3 Not necessary since shorter configuration does not 
3

affect system performance. Vehicle sees same wire 

ropes and the cylinder wall thickness (stiffness) has 

increased, improving performance

3-37 TL3 Not necessary since shorter configuration does not 

affect system performance. Vehicle sees same wire 

ropes and the cylinder wall thickness (stiffness) has 

increased, improving performance (see reference test 

270687-VAN9)

3-38 TL3 Not necessary since shorter configuration does not 

affect system performance. Vehicle sees same wire 

ropes and the cylinder wall thickness (stiffness) has 

increased, improving redirective performance. (see 

reference test 472380-8)

3-39 TL3 Not necessary since shorter configuration does not 

affect system performance. Vehicle sees same wire 

ropes and the cylinder wall thickness (stiffness) has 

increased, improving redirective performance.

Findings

Based upon the successful completion of the provided NCHRP 350 tests and consideration of 

requested waiver of testing, we concur the six cylinder TL-3 REACT 350® II self restoring, 

redirective, non-gating crash cushion can be used in temporary or permanent installations for both 

unidirectional and bidirectional traffic applications when appropriately transitioned and anchored. 

Therefore, the system as described above may be used on the NHS when such use is acceptable to 

the contracting authority.

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

• This acceptance provides a AASHTO/ARTBA/AGC Task Force 13 designator that 

should be used for the purpose of the creation of a new and/or the update of existing Task 

Force 13 drawing for posting on the on-line ‘Guide to Standardized Highway Barrier 

Hardware’ currently referenced in AASHTO ‘Roadside Design Guide’.

• This acceptance is limited to the crashworthiness characteristics of the devices/systems 

and does not cover their structural features, nor conformity with the Manual on Uniform 

Traffic Control Devices.

• Any changes that may adversely influence the crashworthiness of the device/system will 

require a new acceptance letter.

• Should the FHWA discover that the qualification testing was flawed, that in-service 

performance reveals unacceptable safety problems, or that the device/system being 

marketed is significantly different from the version that was crash tested, we reserve the 

right to modify or revoke our acceptance.

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

installation requirements to ensure proper performance.

• You will be expected to certify to potential users that the hardware furnished has 

essentially the same chemistry, mechanical properties, and geometry as that submitted for 

acceptance, and that it will meet the crashworthiness requirements of the FHWA and the 

NCHRP Report 350.
4

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

CC-26J and 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 at our office upon request.

• The REACT 350® II is a patented product and considered proprietary. If proprietary 

devices/systems are specified by a highway agency for use on Federal-aid projects, 

except exempt, non-NHS projects, they: (a) 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.

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

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

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

the candidate device/system, 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,

Michael S. Griffith

Director, Office of Safety Design

Office of Safety

Enclosures