Shiner Nails- code violation?

There are stipulations about what and how much needs to be retrofitted.

I. Roof to Wall Connections (Wind Bourne Debris Region only)
A. Trigger: When a roof on an existing site-built, single family residential structure within the wind
borne debris region and having an insured value or just valuation for purposes of ad valorem
taxation for the structure of $300,000.00 or more is replaced.

B. Requirements:

  1. Sufficient eave sheathing shall be removed to expose a minimum of 6 feet of framing
    members (Clarification: 6 feet from the corner on a horizontal plane along the edge of
    the roof to expose 3 roof trusses, rafters etc. The width from the edge or eve of the
    roof only has to be the minimum required to view the connectors which could be 12
    inches, 16 inches, 24 inches etc. depending on the width of the overhang.)
  2. Wherever a strap is missing or an existing strap has fewer than 4 fasteners on each end
    the intersection of roof framing with the wall below shall be strengthened by adding
    a. Metal connectors, clips, straps and fasteners such that the performance level
    equals or exceeds the uplift capacity as specified in Table 201.3.
    b. Approved strap ties or right angle gusset brackets with a minimum uplift
    capacity of 500 lbs shall be installed to the top plate or masonry wall below.
    c. Refer to sections 201.3.1 to 201.3.4 for prescriptive requirements.
    C. Guidelines:
  3. Can a Roofing Contractor pull the permit for the re-roofing and the roof wall retrofit?
  • Yes.
  1. What additional paperwork must be submitted by the Roofing Contractor prior to the
    issuance of a re-roof permit?
  • Proof of insured value or a copy of the ad-valorem tax value. A valid permit
    application for the re-roof, and the required mitigation retrofit work, the contract value
    of which equals or exceeds 15% of the cost of re-roofing and proof of the date the
    building was constructed.
  1. Does the 15% of the cost of the re-roof include the cost of the investigation, subsequent
    report and the proposed roof to wall connections?
  • Yes.
  1. Who can prepare a report to be submitted with the re-roof permit application addressing
    existing and proposed metal connectors, clips, straps, fasteners and additional structural
    elements when using the prescriptive methods specified in sections 201.3.1 to 201.3.4?
  • Florida Professional Engineer, Registered Architect, Licensed General Contractor,
    Building Contractor, Residential Contractor or a Licensed Roofing Contractor.
  1. Is a separate permit required to install metal connectors, clips, straps, fasteners and
    additional structural elements?
  • No, this work can be subcontracted to a Licensed General Contractor, Building
    Contractor or Residential Contractor.
  1. Is there a required inspection (or affidavit certification) for the installation of metal
    connectors, clips, straps, fasteners and additional structural elements?
  • Yes.
  1. Who can perform this inspection (or affidavit certification)?
  • Florida Professional Engineer, Registered Architect, Licensed General Contractor,
    Building Contractor, Residential Contractor or persons certified in the structural
    discipline under FS 468 such as a Roofing Contractor.
  1. Can a Roofing Contractor install metal connectors, clips, straps, fasteners and additional
    structural elements?
  • Yes.
  1. Which side of the wall can the retrofit connectors be installed on?
  • Either side, the manual states “Wherever access makes it possible (Without damage of
    the wall or soffit finishes)”.
  1. If there is an existing strap with less than 4 fasteners, can fasteners be added?
  • Yes, that opinion appears for hip roofs on wood frame or masonry construction and for
    gable roofs on wood frame and may be determined acceptable by the local governing
    authority under alternate materials and methods provisions of the Florida Building
  1. Does an existing 1/8” strap with 3 – 16d nails satisfy the 500 lb uplift requirement?
  • No, per the manual.

Thanks John.

I remember that now.

I was talking to our head structural inspector a few years back and he went over the items you just mentioned.

Pretty f-ucked up that all the big win mit guys agree to photograph something that should not exist HUH.

I have been saying it for years.

Just ust the mighty mt6 to measure down 2 inches then draw a lind=e and circle and witte bottom od 8D nail.

if it is good enough to measure every six inches then it is good enough to measure two in my opinion.

Let the a s s Kissers begin you negative comments :slight_smile: YOU ARE THE PROBLEM WITH INSURSNCE INSPECTIONS.

It is also dangerous as heck to crawl all over an attic looking for something that should not be there to prove a point.

Many otf the ones that such the insurance companies a s s e s will not agree but it works for my clients when shiners are NOT present.

The key to remember for this is - the structure must be valued at $300K or more for this to be required. And, this retrofit rule didn’t go into effect until Oct 2007, not at the issuance of the FBC.

It also does not ensure that ALL trusses are to be retrofitted, so it most likely won’t count for credit on the WM. I should add that hip jacks on the corners are usually not retrofitted, just the full trusses. And, I don’t believe that a roofer can do the installation unless they have changed that rule.

You would actually mark up uneven tar paper?
Why would it matter? its going to be riddled with holes after the shingles go on.
You should come spend a day with me. I wish I could be that picky.
Also why would you care about some debris in the attic, thats what happens when you re-roof.

Hmmm, thought that this was 2004. 2007 for SWR and re-nailing on all others<750K

Whoever said they could “measure” with an MT6 did not know what they were taking about. It is not accurate enough to measure the length of a nail. It does “beep” when slid across a truss for several feet(when it is not near other metal objects), if you mark the beeps it will give you an accurate “representation” of nail spacing. It will not tell you exactly where the nails are or their size.

Actually ignorance and assumptions are the biggest issue with MOST insurance inspections. The second is the unprofessional-ism of the inspectors who think they are smarter than all the engineers and all the others in the insurance industry.

BTW, if it is dangerous to crawl an attic you should not do it. Safety first. We have done more than 20k inspections and not much more than a splinter so far.

First off, the tar paper was cut, then spliced back together. Maybe that is an acceptable practice in some places…but not to me. Next, a peel and stick membrane went over this tar paper and then, a foam-down tile went over that. Needless to say, the appearance of the roof looked like crap. Every tile was out of alignment with every other tile.

The debris was excessive and maybe it is acceptable to some to leave half the old roof in the attic, but not to me.

The house above ended up in a a lawsuit, but, the client ended up getting all of his money back. Don’t know what he did with the roof.

Nope, the RTW retrofit came into play the same time as the roof deck renailing and the SWR along with gable bracing - Hurricane Mitigation Retrofit Manual.

I think the $750K trigger is for opening protection requirements if you spend more than $50K on a remodel.


Thanks for answering.
I didnt realize the roof was not shingles, but hey that all we got here. I am happy when there is tar paper.

I was watching a show and it was in Canada, where they were re-roofing a home. No tar paper, just shingles! If we ever tried that here, I wonder what would happen! :smiley:

Here, in Sofla, we are required to have two layers of underlayment. This guy didn’t get the swr (secondary water resistance) credit because the peel and stick wasn’t adhered to the deck…even though he had three layers of underlayment!

The difference for wind mits is “self-adhering”. Tar paper is not used as a water resistance in most cases, it is used to protect the shingles from the wood decking. The wood absorbs the oils and drys the materials out. If the shingles were in direct contact with the wood they would dry and and crack much sooner(ask any manufacture). This is why tar paper is removed in small pieces.

That makes sense now. The entire roof is dependant on the tar paper itself and how well its nailed on. Obviously the membrane has no attaching quality to the decking, and if the tiles are foamed down then the same as well. So cutting strips would be a bad idea.

Was the felt 30 or 42 pound ? I put a granulated torch down on part of my roof down there many years ago. IT was all dependant on how well the underlayment was put on and how well the edges were adheared to the drip edge. The cool thing about that stuff is if you ever get a damaged spot, you just fix it with a soldering torch. :smiley:

It is code compliant to have the layer of peel and stick over the felt, which was 30Lb. in this case. To get the wind mit credit, you have to cut the peel and stick into 4-inch strips and cover every joint, then take pictures of that while it is going on. I’ll be doing a “roof in progress” inspection next month, and will get pictures, of hopefully, a proper installation.

I don’t believe it is actually “in” the building code per se, but I can tell you first hand as a builder, and also having many re-roofs under my belt in Brevard County, that a thorough building inspector will bust you during a new construction inspection, and require that they be removed and the deck re-secured at those location(s).

Code or not, on new construction it is just good practice to do so, as the biggest concern is that if you missed the truss, the deck is not secured properly at that location, and there is also the possibility of them backing out over time and disturbing the shingles above. On a re-roof it would be damn near impossible to do so, and absurd impo since the deck was nailed off from the original construction anyhow, then re-nailed during a proper “professional” re-roof, and that access via the attic space is very limited. :wink:


A lot of AHJ’s in my area are starting to require self adhered membranes (if used) be installed over a mechanically fastened layer of underlayment (roofers agree). This mimics the HVHZ method of SWR. PnS directly on the sheathing is extremely hard to get off and makes repairs and future reroofs difficult. The 1802 has not caught on to this, but I would imagine that this question will be brought up in the next revision of the form. What they should do is eliminate the question altogether and include the discount for SWR on permitted reroofs after 10/01/2007 where the SWR is required, even if it is only single ply felt paper on 4/12 or greater slopes.


When they re-roof, those nails may or may not push up and cause a leak.

My biggest question, and one I have yet to find an answer for, is that when you re-nail a deck, the old nails are there, as a guide and if properly installed, which almost all were, how can you put nails in between the existing nails, and still miss the truss? :roll:

Good question, but you most likely will not be able to ask that question in English. The nail guy is all about speed, not quality. Most reroofs get done the same day (with tear off).

You already know the answer to that one Eric. :wink:
The same reason I find 3 nailed shingles here constantly.

30# in two layers is allowed in the building code, in many areas. While the SWR in the wind mit is Self adhering only.