BILL ANALYSIS
AB 747
Date of Hearing: April 19, 1995
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Dan Hauser, Chair
AB 747 (V. Brown) - As Amended: April 17, 1995
SUMMARY
Reduces wood roof fire retardency standards from passing a 10-year
natural weathering test to passing a five-year natural weathering
test by January 1, 2001.
DIGEST
Existing law:
1) Requires a statewide minimum "Class C" fire resistance
standard for all in new roofs in state responsibility areas (SRA)
where the state has primary fire-fighting responsibility. (SRAs
cover approximately 30% of the state.)
2) Authorizes local jurisdictions to adopt more stringent fire
safety regulations due to local climatic, geological, or
topographical conditions. (Several hundred local
jurisdictions
have adopted local ordinances which require either Class A, B
or C
roofs.)
3) Effective July 1, 1995, requires minimum Class C fire roofing
standards in all areas of the state and requires Class B roofs in
"high" SRA fire hazard severity zones. (Roofs in "moderate" and
"low" SRA fire hazard severity zones must continue to meet the
existing law's Class C requirement.)
- continued
-
AB 747
Page 1
AB 747
4) Establishes a minimum Class B standards for roofs in locally
designated very high fire hazard severity zones.
Locally designated zones are in the process of being created
in the following manner: The Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection (DFFP) is required to develop maps designating
"very high fire hazard severity zones" which fall within local
fire responsibility areas. The maps are required to be
provided to jurisdictions in 15 specified counties on or
before January 1, 1995, and to the remaining jurisdictions on
or before January 1, 1996. Local jurisdictions have the
ability to add or subtract areas from the maps designating
very high hazard severity zones and existing law requires the
jurisdictions to adopt the final maps within 120 days after
receiving the maps from DFFP.
5) Requires the State Fire Marshal (SFM), by July 1, 1996, in
consultation with the DFFP director, to prepare and adopt a model
ordinance providing for comprehensive space and structure
defensibility, including very high hazard severity zones. Class
A roofs, however, will be required on new or repaired roofs in all
very high fire hazard severity zones by
January 1, 1997 if the local jurisdiction fails to adopt the
model ordinance adopted by the SFM, as specified.
6) Requires all wood roofing materials to have passed a 10-year
weather test and a rain test approved by a testing laboratory
recognized by the SFM as meeting the Class A, B, or C fire
retardency standards.
This bill:
Reduces wood roof fire retardency standards from passing a 10-year
natural weathering test to passing a five-year natural weathering
test by January 1, 2001.
FISCAL EFFECT
Unknown
- continued
-
AB 747
Page 2
AB 747
COMMENTS
1) The Author: According to the author, this bill is necessary
because current law has created an arbitrary standard, thus
leading to an unfair advantage for one company within the wood
roofing industry. Last year's AB 3819 (W. Brown), Chapter
843, Statutes of 1994, required all wood roof coverings to
pass a 10-year (natural) weathering test. Companies who were
either in the process of completing the 10-year test or had
not yet begun the test were systematically eliminated from
marketing their products in California without any
notification whatsoever.
2) How Wood Products Are Tested For Fire Retardency: The fire
retardency of wood shakes and shingles, as well as all other types
of roof coverings,
is measured through a uniform series of tests detailed in
Standard 15-2 of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). These tests are
performed by Underwriters Laboratories and other recognized
testing laboratories. As a result of these tests, roofing
products - including treated shakes and shingles - are given three
separate fire protection classifications:
a) Class A: Effective against severe fire exposure.
b) Class B: Effective against moderate fire exposure.
c) Class C: Effective against light fire exposure.
3) Manufacturers Have Been Able to Claim Fire Ratings Without
Passing All Three Tests: The UBC's 15-2 test for the fire
retardency of roofing products has three components: a burn test,
a rain test, and a 10-year weathering test. To comply with these
tests, each manufacturer of treated wood products delivers 33
testing decks of his/her product to a testing laboratory.
First, the testing lab takes several decks and performs
various burn tests to measure the combustibility of the
product. Second, other decks are subjected to a "rain test"
- continued
-
AB 747
Page 3
AB 747
which involves soaking the product with water to simulate the
effects of rain, then drying the wood and again measuring the
combustibility of the material through various burn tests.
Third, and concurrent with the first two tests, other decks of
the material are required to undergo the 10-year weather test.
In the 10-year weather test, the decks of shakes or shingles
are set outside to weather naturally and then "burn" tested at
1-, 2-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year intervals. If the product fails
during this weathering test, the testing lab pulls its label
from the product.
After a product passes the "burn" and "rain" tests (which
usually takes around four months) and the testing labs commonly
"lists" the product, the manufacturer can begin to sell the
product as meeting a certain fire retardency standard. For
instance, a product could be listed by Underwriters Laboratories
(UL) as a Class C wood shake even though the shake was still
undergoing the natural weathering test. Later, if the product
fails at one of the intervals of the 10-year natural weather test,
UL will remove its Class C listing from the product.
4) Lab Hopping: It is alleged that in the past some treated
shake producers and shingles have engaged in a practice called
"lab hopping" to keep their products on the market. In a typical
scenario, a manufacturer delivers product samples to a laboratory
for testing under the UBC's 15-2 standard. The product passes the
initial burn and rain tests, is listed, and allowed to be sold,
while the rest of the sample undergoes the 10-year natural
weathering test. Meanwhile, the manufacturer sets up a 10-year
weathering test at its own facility. Knowing that the laboratory
will be testing its product at 1-, 2-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year
intervals, the manufacturer performs the identical tests on its
products ahead of the laboratory's testing schedule. If the
manufacturer's product begins to fail at its own testing facility,
the manufacturer then pulls its product from the laboratory and
either changes its chemical treatment formulation or goes to
another lab and starts the process all over again. Therefore, a
firm can technically remain in business selling products passing
the initial burn and rain tests, but not the 10-year natural
- continued
-
AB 747
Page 4
AB 747
weathering test.
5) Only One Company's Products Have Currently Passed The 10-Year
Weather Test: According to the SFM, there is only one company
that is currently in business whose products have passed the UBC's
15-2 natural weathering test: Chemco.
6) ICBO Improved Test: The sponsor of this measure, the Clarke
Group, contends that recent improvements to the accelerated rain
test required by the International Conference of Building
Officials (ICBO) have increased the current rain-test requirement
from 12 wet/dry cycles to 250 wet/dry cycles, with an ultraviolet
light component to simulate the effects of sunlight. The sponsors
argue that this more severe test will eliminate many of the prior
"dip and ship" types of practices that have led to criticism the
wood roofing is currently facing. In addition, the sponsor
contends various data and experts have established that this
accelerated test is equivalent to various natural weathering
time periods. This test, however, is only necessary to obtain
an ICBO Evaluation Services number, which is a valuable tool
in convincing some local building officials (mostly in other
states) that the product meets ICBO standards.
7) Policy Issues:
a) Legislative Mandate: Inferior Products? On July 1, 1995,
two legislative mandates for wood roofing standards take
effect: Class C statewide, and Class B in "high" SRA fire
danger zones. The Class B requirement also begins to take
effect as local jurisdictions complete the mapping process for
local high fire hazard severity zones.
Should the Legislature mandate the people of the state to
use Class B or C roofs, while at the same time allowing the
sale and installation of certain wood roofing products that
have failed or have not completed the natural weathering
tests required under the UCB?
b) What About The Consumer? When a consumer purchases
- continued
-
AB 747
Page 5
AB 747
fire-treated wood roof products for his/her home, he/she does
so with the expectation that he/she is buying long-term - as
opposed to short-term - fire protection. How is consumer
expected to discern among the various wood roofing products
when a consumer has no way of knowing if a product has or has
not passed a 10-year weathering test?
8) Prior Roofing Bills: All of the various roofing bills and
fire protection bills passed by the Legislature over the last
several years have focused on one single point: reducing the
chances for a reoccurrence of recent firestorms such as those that
occurred in Oakland and Southern California. Although there is
some debate among fire-prevention experts over the effectiveness
of fire-rated roofs alone to prevent the kind of damage seen in
Oakland Hills, it makes sense that a treated wood roof that will
not readily burn is better than an untreated one that certainly
will.
The statewide Class C standard, which takes effect on July 1,
1995, was required AB 2131 (O'Connell), Chapter 553, Statutes
of 1992. During that same year, AB 337 (Bates), Chapter 1188,
Chapter of 1992, was a much more comprehensive fire protection
bill dealing with firebreaks and other preventative measures
and required that the Class B standard be imposed in
designated very high fire hazard severity zones. AB 3819
required Class B roofs in "high" SRA fire hazard areas.
Existing law requirements are, for the most part, prospective
and begin to take effect in on July 1, 1995. Today, a builder
must comply with whatever standards local jurisdictions
require, which can range from a complete ban of all wood
shakes and a Class A requirement for the City of Los Angeles
to unrated roofs in other jurisdictions. Any structure which
falls within an SRA must meet at least the Class C
requirement.
9) SFM Report: According to the SFM fire incident reporting
system, in 1988 there were:
- continued
-
AB 747
Page 6
AB 747
a) 31,615 residential building fires.
b) 1,511 fires in which the roofs were the areas of origin.
c) 1,040 fires in which the roofing material was wood.
d) 197 fires in which wood was first ignited by a flying
brand, ember, or spark.
10) Ten Years: Is It Too Much? According to SFM experts, there
is some data that shows that if a roofing product passes at least
five years of natural weathering it continues to perform for 10
years and more. Perhaps the 10-year test can be reduced to five
years if the testing method is subject to SFM approval.
11) Potential Compromise Amendments: Through conversations with
representatives of the Clarke Group, staff understands that the
Clarke Group has a Class C product that has passed eight years of
the 10-year natural weathering test. Their Class B shakes,
however, are just starting the 10-year weathering test. Should
the Committee require that at least Class C wood products pass at
least five years of the 10-year natural weathering test in order
to be sold in this state, and then focus on the Class B problem as
a separate issue?
SUPPORT
The Clarke Group (Sponsor)
OPPOSE
Chemco, Inc.
- continued
-
AB 747
Page 7