The U.S. Army lacks performance criteria for specifying alternatives to conventional built-up roofs (BUR) that might be suitable for replacements, new construction, or both. These alternative roofs, which have had a great impact on military and civilian construction, are the result of two major events in the roofing industry over the past 10 years: (1) the performance of traditional BUR has declined and (2) a variety of new systems has been introduced into the marked. Performance criteria and assessment methods are investigated to identify those which might apply to military construction. It was found that very little research has addressed this field; almost no guidance is available to help specifiers decide which of the new products merit consideration. Most of the techniques used now look at a series of mechanical and physical properties, with very few adopting a systems approach. Only three criteria have been accepted for evaluating the roof as a whole: fire resistance, wind uplift resistance, and impact resistance. These findings prompted a shift in emphasis for this study--toward development of a working framework to study this area systematically. It is recommended that standards be developed to allow accurate prediction of both in-applications and in-service performance of single-ply roofs. Keywords: Performance(Engineering); Test methods: Military construction; Army facilities.