When did renailing the roof deck become a requirement? I did a WM on a 1979 house with a 2004 roof with no shiners, just staples showing. The more I looked, the more staples I saw but no shiners. Was it FBC 2007?
10-1-2007
That’s not a simple question, it really depends on region and the AHJ. The Florida Building Code has always required the roof deck, defined as part of the roof assembly, to be fastened in place in accordance with the current standard of building code. The Florida Building Code clarified this in the later versions as it was a grey area up to interpretation before that.
The HVHZ, which some counties adopted for roofing systems with the 2001 Florida Building Code (palm beach adopted the provisions of the hvhz in 2002), required fastening of the roof deck in accordance with the Florida Building Code in 2001:
2001 Florida Building code: 1521.5 A roofing system shall not be applied over an existing roof or over an existing roof deck where the roof sheathing has not been fastened in compliance with this code or where the roof sheathing will not permit effective fastening or where sheathing is water soaked or deteriorated so that effective attachment is not possible. All areas of deteriorated sheathing shall be removed and replaced. The building official shall not be required to inspect the re-nailing of the sheathing under this section.
But, re-nailing of the roof deck isn’t always required, there are qualifying attachments that do not require re-nailing during roofing system replacement. This is detailed in the Florida Building Code, Existing Building.
Attachment of the roof deck in accordance with the current code was pretty much required throughout the state in different counties at different times. Some waited until the Florida Building Code required it, 2001, and some decided to do it before it was required. The Florida Building Code always required it, they just clarified a grey area in 2004…and even more so in 2007…
As early as 1996…
The date you are looking for is what Greg posted, 10/01/2007 for your area. This was the implementation date of the Hurricane Retrofit Manual, which became part of the FBC 2004 and then written into the FBC 2007.
Straight to the point!
But how do you provide the picture required by the OIR?
I have been in a bunch where there were NO shiners. I could maybe see 8d nails in gaps and the mt6 may be going crazy but what to do if you cannot get that ever so important “useless” photograph of a nail next to a ruler?
Especially difficult if a real GOOD roofer did the job 
[quote=“Robert_R.Sheppard, post:3, topic:97130”]
2001 Florida Building code: 1521.5 A roofing system shall not be applied over an existing roof or over an existing roof deck where the roof sheathing has not been fastened in compliance with this code or where the roof sheathing will not permit effective fastening or where sheathing is water soaked or deteriorated so that effective attachment is not possible. All areas of deteriorated sheathing shall be removed and replaced. The building official shall not be required to inspect the re-nailing of the sheathing under this section.
But, re-nailing of the roof deck isn’t always required, there are qualifying attachments that do not require re-nailing during roofing system replacement. This is detailed in the Florida Building Code, Existing Building.
/QUOTE]
I have recently done two wind mitigation inspections that were roof over’s… The original roof deck was nailed with 6d nails, and does not qualify as FBC…I am curious, how can the Building Department allow this? How do they determine that the existing roof deck is FBC? —OR ---- Where in the Exisitng Building code is this exempted?
**606.3 Additional requirements for reroof permits. ** The requirements of this section shall apply to *alteration *work requiring reroof permits.
**606.3.2 Roof diaphragms resisting wind loads in high- wind regions.
**Where roofing materials are removed from more than 50 percent of the roof diaphragm of a building or section of a building located where the basic wind speed is greater than 115 mph or in a special wind region, as defined in Section 1609 of the Florida Building Code, Building, roof diaphragms and connections that are part of the main wind-force resisting system shall be evaluated for the wind loads specified in the Florida Building Code, Building, including wind uplift. If the diaphragms and connections in their current condition do not comply with those wind provisions, they shall be replaced or strengthened in accordance with the loads specified in the *Florida Building Code, Building. *
**611.7 **When a roof covering on an existing site-built single- family residential structure is removed and replaced, the following procedures shall be permitted to be performed by the roofing contractor: (a) Roof-decking attachment shall be as required by Section 611.7.1.
**611.7.1.2 **For roof decking consisting of wood structural panels, fasteners and spacing required in columns 3 and 4 of Table 611.7.1.2 are deemed to comply with the requirements of Section 606.3, *Florida Building Code, Existing Building *for the indicated design wind speed range. Wood structural panel connections retrofitted with a two part urethane based closed cell adhesive sprayed onto the joint between the sheathing and framing members are deemed to comply with the requirements of Section 606.3, *Florida Building Code, Existing Building, *provided testing using the manufacturer’s recommended application on panels connected with 6d smooth shank nails at no more than a 6-inch edge and 12-inch field spacing demonstrate an uplift resistance of a minimum of 200 psf.
**TABLE 611.7.1.2 SUPPLEMENT FASTENERS AT PANEL EDGES AND INTERMEDIATE FRAMING **
EXISTING FASTENERSEXISTING SPACINGVasd 110 MPH OR
LESS
SUPPLEMENTAL
FASTENER
SPACING SHALL
BE NO GREATER
THAN****Vasd **GREATER
THAN 110 MPH
SUPPLEMENTAL
FASTENER SPACING
SHALL BE NO
GREATER THAN **Staples or 6dAny6″o.c.b6″o.c.b8d clipped
head, round
head, smooth or
ring shank6″o.c. or
lessNone necessaryNone necessary8d clipped
head, round
head, smooth or
ring shankGreater
than
6″o.c.6″o.c.a6″o.c.a
It does appear that the FBC prevents roof overs without verifiying that the existing decking is nailed to FBC. BUT, I think the code was worded badly and only refers to roof replacements and not roof overs pre-2007 cycle. OR, local AHJ was not enforcing this for roof overs or even roof replacements before 10/01/2007. This is interesting.
Intent is clarified in the following versions of the building code…
Example: the NEC under UL 67 listed cabinets for use as a raceway is a perfect example of this. In the earlier versions of the NEC it was deemed as unacceptable to use the cabinet in this fashion, the code was clarified as conditional upon “space provided for”. When in reality the cabinets are UL 50 rated for use as junction boxes and/or raceways with their contents removed, so why couldn’t it used for a raceway if sufficient space was provided? Odd example, but you get the nuts and bones of it…
The FBC has always required attachment of the roof deck, defined as part of the “roof assembly” and “roofing covering system”, to be in compliance with the current code standard during replacement and/or recovering in reference to uplift…it was just about as clear as mud in the earlier versions. The requirement ended up being dependent upon the local authority and the knowledge of the building official.
Was it an accepted practice by building officials to not require it? You bet…so good luck with that argument.
It is slightly more complicated than what I have written…but it’s Sunday.
I’m bored so what the heck….
The attachment of the roof deck in an existing structure was required to be in compliance with chapter 15 of the 2001 Florida Building Code when the roof covering was replaced. Look at it like this, what good does it do to have a roof covering in compliance with current uplift standards if the roof deck comes off before it does?
**2001 Florida Building Code, Building: SECTION 1510 REROOFING **1510.1 General. Materials and methods of application used for recovering or replacing an existing roof covering shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 15. Roof repairs to existing roofs and roof coverings shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 34.
You see what they did there? IT says “shall* comply with the requirements of Chapter 15*”, ALL of Chapter 15! The devil is in the details as “shall” is defined as “required” in the building code. So what does Chapter 15 say?
**SECTION 1504 PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 1504.1 Wind resistance of roofs. **Roof decks and roof coverings shall be designed for wind loads in accordance with Chapter 16 and 1504.2, 1504.3, and 1504.4.
The FBC references roof deck and roof coverings in the same sentence because they are part of the roof covering system. See definition here:
ROOF COVERING SYSTEM. See “Roof Assembly.”
ROOF ASSEMBLY. A system designed to provide weather protection and resistance to design loads. The system consists of a roof covering and roof deck or a single component serving as both the roof covering and the roof deck. A roof assembly includes the roof deck, vapor retarder, substrate or thermal barrier, insulation and roof covering.
And there you go….clear as mud. Was it enforced? Probably not. Does that make it right? No.
