What’s in that shingle?

Revised asphalt shingle specification permits post-consumer content

If you order, distribute or install asphalt shingle roofing products, you should be aware of some recent changes to asphalt shingle standards.

In December 2025, ASTM International Committee D08 Roofing and Waterproofing approved revisions to ASTM D3462, “Standard Specification for Asphalt Shingles Made from Glass Felt and Surfaced with Mineral Granules,” that permits recycled and recovered pre-consumer and post-consumer materials in asphalt shingles. ASTM D3462 is referenced in the International Building Code® and International Residential Code® as a minimum code requirement for asphalt roofing shingle products. Asphalt shingles sold in the U.S. that comply with ASTM D3462 comply with building codes adopted by U.S. jurisdictions.

The same revisions were approved in August for ASTM D3018, “Standard Specification for Class A Asphalt Shingles Surfaced with Mineral Granules.” ASTM D3018 provides fewer requirements for compliant products than ASTM D3462 and is primarily concerned with asphalt shingles’ fire and wind-test performance. ASTM D3018 is not referenced in IBC or IRC. In short, all ASTM D3462-compliant products comply with ASTM D3018, but not all ASTM D3018-compliant products comply with ASTM D3462.

Revisions

The revised standards include the following new definitions:

  • Post-consumer material is a “roof cover material generated by the end users of products that has fulfilled its intended purpose or can no longer be used in its present state; this includes material returned from the distribution chain.”
  • Pre-consumer material is a “roof covering material that is rejected from the prime manufacturing process and which can be combined with virgin material for use in later production of roof membrane but only after significant reprocessing.”
  • Recovered material includes “materials and by-products that have been separated, diverted or removed from the solid waste stream.”
  • Recycling is the “processing of recovered material into secondary raw material or product, excluding energy recovery.”

The definitions originated in another ASTM International Committee D08 standard, ASTM D8013, “Guide for Establishing a Recycle Program for Roof Coverings, Roofing Membrane, and Shingle Materials,” though ASTM D3462 and ASTM D3018 did not adopt all of them in their entirety.

Also, the following new language permitting the use of nonvirgin materials was added to ASTM D3462 and ASTM D3018:

“The asphalt shingles covered by this specification are permitted to include pre-consumer, post-consumer, recovered and/or recycled materials. The resulting composite material construction shall meet or exceed all requirements of this specification.”

NRCA opposed including this language in ASTM D3462 and ASTM D3018 but agreed to withdraw its opposition based on a promise the proponent of the proposal would ballot a new product marking requirement that identifies post-consumer content on the asphalt shingle wrapper.

Concerns

NRCA primarily is concerned the language that was balloted and adopted introduces unacceptable raw material variability in asphalt shingle manufacturing. The new language allows unlimited use of recovered and recycled content from post-consumer and pre-consumer materials in all asphalt shingle product components—granules, parting agent, asphalt, asphalt filler, fiberglass mat reinforcement, sealant and laminating adhesive, and release film—without adding any new material testing or tracking requirements to verify recovered or recycled raw materials’ suitability for use or claimed post-consumer or pre-consumer origin.

Although asphalt shingle manufacturers generally have processes in place to establish material properties based on a chain of custody for pre-consumer recovered or recycled material, the same is not the case for post-consumer material.

The proponent did eventually ballot a proposal for ASTM D3018-compliant shingle packaging to indicate the “type(s) of recycled content the product contains,” but the wording was so milquetoast as to make it ineffective. The proposal drew several compelling negatives, including from NRCA. NRCA proposed alternative wording for another re-ballot. Asphalt shingle manufacturers voted against the new labeling requirement and effectively blocked it. The proposal was withdrawn in accordance with ASTM International’s ballot procedure.

More From This Issue

;