By Benjamin Goss, MBA

The integrity and durability of a home’s roof are crucial to its overall health and stability. Among the various factors that contribute to this, the state of the shingles and their proper installation play a significant role. Despite this, many homeowners and professionals alike are unsure of how to assess the condition of shingles, particularly after a storm event. This is often because the protocols and procedures for such an evaluation, called a reparability test, have not been properly defined or standardized.

Understanding this challenge, we’ve meticulously developed a comprehensive 9-point reparability test protocol, considering the guidance provided by three major shingle manufacturers: GAF, CertainTeed, and Owens Corning. By incorporating their installation instructions and practical considerations concerning the loosening of the nail bond zone, this protocol provides an in-depth procedure to evaluate and possibly repair a damaged shingle.

This proposed protocol is designed to ensure consistency, repeatability, and effectiveness, thereby bringing more clarity to the reparability testing process. It promotes transparency and understanding, ensuring homeowners and insurance adjusters alike can make informed decisions about the condition of the roof and the need for repairs or replacement. Furthermore, it can assist in resolving disputes that often arise between homeowners and insurance companies following storm damage, fostering trust and fairness.

However, the success of any testing protocol depends largely on its careful and correct implementation. As such, each step of the protocol should be followed diligently and thoughtfully, with a full understanding of the underlying rationale. From the initial visual assessment to the final inspection and documentation, each stage has a specific purpose and contributes to the overall assessment of the shingle’s condition.

We invite you to review this 9-point reparability test protocol and consider how it might transform the way we approach roof repair evaluations. By acknowledging and incorporating the guidelines set forth by major shingle manufacturers, this protocol enables a nuanced, practical approach to roof shingle reparability. In the following sections, we will delve deeper into each step, clarifying its significance and providing a clear, step-by-step guide to effectively execute it.

1.   Visual Assessment:

Step 1 of our 9-point reparability test protocol entails conducting a visual inspection of the roof and the shingles. This fundamental starting point provides a general understanding of the roof’s current condition and reveals any visible signs of damage or aging. During this stage, the inspector should carefully survey the roof, noting any shingles that appear cracked, curled, blistered, or otherwise distressed. It’s also important to look for loose or missing granules, a key indicator of shingle wear and tear. Signs of damage on the roof deck, such as sagging or wet spots, should also be noted as they might indicate larger structural issues.

However, a visual inspection does not solely rely on identifying obvious physical defects. The inspector should also look for inconsistencies in shingle coloration, which could signal underlying damage. For instance, darker patches may indicate water retention, while lighter areas could point to granule loss. Other potential issues to look out for include rusting or damaged flashing, missing or exposed nails, and algae or moss growth. This comprehensive visual analysis gives the inspector a preliminary understanding of the roof’s condition, setting the stage for the more in-depth investigation to follow in the subsequent steps.

2.   Individual Shingle Inspection:

Step 2 in the reparability test protocol involves identifying the manufacturer of the shingles. This is a crucial step in determining how to proceed with potential repairs, as each shingle manufacturer provides specific instructions regarding the handling and installation of their products. By identifying the manufacturer, the tester can access the correct guidelines for inspecting, handling, and potentially repairing the shingles. Understanding the manufacturer’s specifications is crucial to preserve the integrity of the roof and maintain any existing warranties.

After determining the shingle manufacturer, it’s important to examine the specific type and style of shingle used on the roof. Different shingle types have varied features and installation requirements. For example, architectural shingles are thicker and more durable than traditional three-tab shingles, and they may require different handling methods during inspection and repair. Similarly, shingle styles like the GAF Timberline HDZ and Owens Corning Duration Shingles have unique features such as specific nail zones and adhesive strips that require careful handling. By identifying these features, the tester can ensure that all aspects of the shingles are considered during the inspection and any subsequent repair process.

3.   Loosening the Nail Bond Zone:

Step 3 focuses on the crucial aspect of reviewing the shingle manufacturer’s installation instructions. By examining these guidelines, the tester gains a detailed understanding of the correct techniques for handling, installing, and, if necessary, repairing the specific shingle type. As manufacturers develop these instructions based on extensive testing and research, adhering to them is crucial for ensuring the durability, functionality, and longevity of the roofing system.

The installation instructions provide information about several key areas, including nail placement, adhesive strip location, shingle alignment, and the degree to which a shingle can be lifted or bent without compromising its integrity. These details help the tester ascertain how much a shingle can be manipulated during the inspection and repair process without causing additional damage. Understanding these parameters can be especially critical when attempting to repair a shingle that’s been loosened or damaged by hail or wind, or when replacing a single damaged shingle in a field of otherwise intact shingles. By following the manufacturer’s instructions closely, the tester ensures that the roofing system maintains its optimal protective capabilities.

4.   Nail Examination:

In Step 4, the protocol focuses on identifying and marking the nail bond zone of the test shingle. The nail bond zone is the area where nails secure the shingle to the roof deck and where adhesive strips connect overlapping shingles. Accurately identifying this area is crucial because improper manipulation in this zone could potentially damage the shingle or affect its overall performance and longevity.

Marking this area helps the tester visualize the exact spot where the lifting will occur in subsequent steps and provides a guide for avoiding any possible harm to the shingle. It serves as a clear reminder to respect the shingle’s construction and the manufacturer’s design. It also helps in maintaining the integrity of the roofing system, ensuring that any repair work is aligned with the shingle’s designed function and installation instructions. This step is particularly important when dealing with complex roofing materials, such as architectural shingles with layered, laminated construction.

5.   Shingle Flexibility Test:

Step 5 requires lifting the test shingle to 90 degrees from its installed position. This angle may seem steep, but it’s necessary to allow for proper positioning and installation of a new nail. It ensures that there’s sufficient room for the movement of a hammer or nail gun, which are the standard tools used for roofing nail installation. This position also allows the tester to fully inspect the under-surface of the shingle for any hidden damages that may not be visible when the shingle lies flat.

While lifting the shingle, care must be taken not to force or apply undue pressure as it might lead to shingle breakage, especially if the shingle is brittle or aged. The 90 degrees lift should be achieved gradually and carefully. It’s important to note that the action is not about testing the strength of the shingle but creating enough room for effective nail installation as per manufacturers’ guidelines. This step respects the delicate balance between providing enough access for repair and avoiding unnecessary damage to the roofing system.

6.   Nail Removal and Replacement:

Step 6 focuses on applying hand pressure to the lifted edge of the shingle. Here, hand pressure is used as a method to check the flexibility of the shingle, which is particularly important when trying to determine its reparability. The force applied should be firm but controlled, aiming to mimic the pressure that would be applied during a repair process. At this point, the tester is essentially simulating a repair scenario and should be careful not to apply more force than what would typically be used.

The goal of this step is not to induce damage, but rather to assess the shingle’s tolerance to the typical manipulations it would undergo during a repair. By applying pressure, the tester can identify if the shingle can withstand being handled for repair, or if it’s too brittle and prone to crack or break. If the shingle withstands the pressure without cracking or other noticeable damage, it’s a strong indication that it’s capable of being repaired. Conversely, if the shingle cracks or shows signs of damage, it suggests that the shingle might not be repairable.

7.   Reinstallation of Shingle:

In Step 7, you’re to evaluate the shingle for signs of cracking or tearing. This is an integral step in the reparability test protocol, as it allows the tester to assess the extent of potential damage and the level of deterioration the shingle may have endured. This examination is crucial because it determines whether the shingle has held up to the force applied in the previous step, and if it maintains its integrity despite manipulation.

The inspection should be thorough, covering the entire area that was lifted and subjected to pressure in the previous steps. The tester should look for any cracks or tears that may have formed because of the stress applied. If there are visible signs of damage, it could suggest that the shingle is too brittle for repair. Conversely, if the shingle shows no signs of damage, it could indicate that the shingle has the flexibility and strength required for a repair. This step is crucial for the final evaluation, helping to determine whether a shingle is salvageable or whether a roof replacement might be necessary.

8.   Re-Assessment:

Step 8 calls for the tester to lower the loosened shingle back into its original position. This is the natural progression after the shingle has been examined and evaluated for damage. This step ensures that the shingle’s integrity is maintained and that it can return to its original position after being manipulated, which is a clear indication of its resilience and flexibility. The ability of the shingle to reassume its original position is a critical criterion in determining the reparability of a roof.

When returning the shingle to its original position, the tester should do so with care, avoiding any unnecessary stress that might induce additional damage. This process also allows the tester to assess the condition of the underlayment and deck. If the shingle does not lie flat and snug against the roof deck, this may indicate an issue with the underlayment or the deck itself, which could potentially exacerbate any existing damage or even create new problems. This careful examination provides valuable information about the overall health of the roof and aids in the final determination of the roof’s reparability.

9.   Documentation:

The final step, Step 9, calls for recording the findings of the test in a report. The tester is expected to detail their observations, including any visible damage, cracks or splits found in the shingle during the examination. Recording these findings provides a systematic and traceable record of the roof’s condition, ensuring all relevant information is accounted for when evaluating the overall reparability of the roof.

The process of reporting should be meticulous and thorough. The report should include photographs, if possible, and a comprehensive description of the state of the shingle, underlayment, and deck. Not only will this documentation be essential for potential future claims, but it also provides the necessary data for a comprehensive analysis of the roof’s condition. This in turn helps in making a well-informed decision regarding whether the roof can be repaired or if a full replacement is warranted. Such a report also enables a constructive dialogue between the homeowner, the insurance company, and any contractors involved, promoting transparency and clarity in what can be a complex process.

Protocol Overview

The proposed 9-step protocol for the reparability test is grounded in three critical attributes: randomness, representativeness, and repeatability. The random element ensures that the selected shingles are not biased towards any particular condition, area, or direction on the roof. This randomness provides an unbiased snapshot of the roof’s overall condition and avoids any skewness that might favor a repairable or unrepairable verdict.

Representativeness is the attribute that guarantees that the tested shingles accurately reflect the general condition of the entire roof. Testing a single, isolated shingle would not provide a reliable or indicative representation of the broader roof condition. Consequently, the tester must select shingles from different areas of the roof, ensuring a varied and representative sample. These selected shingles should mirror the various exposures and conditions present across the entire roof.

Repeatability, the final attribute, refers to the test’s ability to yield consistent results when performed multiple times under the same conditions. Consistency is crucial to ensure that the findings are reliable and not subject to situational variations or operator discrepancies. By following the prescribed protocol, different testers should be able to arrive at similar conclusions about the roof’s condition.

Lastly, throughout the entire testing process, it’s crucial to adhere to the manufacturer’s instructions. Any deviation may affect the shingle’s warranty and compromise its integrity, potentially leading to premature failure. If the damaged shingles fail this test, then a roof replacement might be necessary, underscoring the significance of this thorough and comprehensive testing protocol.

Conclusion

In concluding this in-depth exploration into roofing reparability, we find ourselves standing at the intersection of practicality, building code compliance, and adherence to manufacturer’s installation instructions. Our 9-step Reparability Protocol seeks to act as a guidepost at this crossroads, helping us determine whether a shingle can be repaired or if a roof should be replaced in its entirety.

The Building Code’s Sections R904.1, R904.2, and R904.3 establish foundational standards for roofing applications. They emphasize materials, application, and performance criteria in a manner that’s comprehensive and rigorous. A key concern highlighted in these sections is the need for roofs to exhibit a high degree of resistance to wind and hail. These natural elements are commonly recognized as significant sources of shingle damage, and the resistance against them becomes a deciding factor in the longevity and durability of a roof.

Moreover, the Building Code also places substantial emphasis on the compatibility of roofing materials. If damaged shingles are not compatible with the remaining, undamaged shingles on the roof, repair can become impractical. Not only does this impact the overall aesthetic appeal of the roof, but more importantly, it could affect the roof’s performance and protective capabilities.

Alongside compatibility, these sections also underscore the importance of fire resistance and other performance criteria, underlining their objective to protect both the structure of the building and its inhabitants. It’s through this detailed lens that we can further understand the intricate issues surrounding shingle reparability versus replacement.

Manufacturer’s instructions, such as those provided by GAF, Owens Corning, and CertainTeed, on the other hand, present a granular view of proper shingle installation and repair. They emphasize that the positioning of the nail and the degree of shingle lift are crucial to maintaining the shingle’s structural integrity and warranty. The 9-step reparability protocol we’ve proposed takes these factors into account, ensuring that the guidelines of both the Building Code and manufacturers are adhered to during the test.

As an example, GAF’s technical bulletin on shingle repairs following a storm offers guidance that aligns well with the approach our protocol takes. It recognizes the practical challenges of shingle repair and underscores the importance of following appropriate methods to maintain the integrity and warranty of the roof.

The legal ramifications of determining whether a shingle is reparable or if a roof needs replacement are far-reaching. Repairable damage may not warrant an insurance claim for a full roof replacement, while non-reparable damage may make such a claim necessary and justifiable. Here, the “brittleness” of a shingle is not the crux of the issue. Instead, it’s about whether the shingles can be practically repaired (or individually replaced) while upholding all the guidelines and standards.

In summary, the question of shingle reparability is multifaceted, blending practicality with building code compliance and adherence to manufacturer’s instructions. It’s crucial to implement a testing protocol that considers all these elements to make the most informed decision about roof repair or replacement. By doing so, we align with legal requirements, protect the homeowner’s investment, and ensure the longevity of our buildings. The proposed 9-step reparability protocol provides such a comprehensive approach, helping bring clarity to a complex issue in the roofing industry.

Some of the Resources used in the creation of this protocol include but are not limited to the following:

1. The International Residential Code (IRC) – specifically sections R904.1, R904.2, and R904.3. The IRC is a widely recognized and adopted set of building codes in the United States.
2. Manufacturer’s installation and repair guidelines from major roofing material manufacturers like GAF, Owens Corning, and CertainTeed. These can usually be found on the manufacturers’ official websites or requested directly from them.
3. Books and publications on the topic of roofing and building construction, such as:
   • “Manual of Low-Slope Roof Systems” by C.W. Griffin
   • “The Complete Guide to Home Roofing Installation and Maintenance: How to Do It Yourself and Avoid the 60 Ways Your Roofer Can Nail You” by John W. Chiles
4. Online resources from reputable roofing industry bodies or educational institutions. Some examples (as of my last training cut-off in September 2021) include:
   • The National Roofing Contractors Association (NRCA): www.nrca.net
   • Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association (ARMA): www.asphaltroofing.org
   • CertainTeed Shingle Applicator’s Manual: www.certainteed.com
   • GAF Technical Bulletin: Replacement of Storm Damaged Shingles