Ground Snow Load by State
Whose document carries the number where you are, the 235 figures those documents print, what each one is keyed to, and the row every line was read from.
In thirty six states there is no state ground snow load
A ground snow load is the weight of snow a building code assumes will sit on the ground at a given place, in pounds per square foot. It is the starting figure a structural engineer works from, and the question people arrive with is almost always the same one: what is it here. The answer depends far less on how much snow falls than on which of three arrangements the state happens to use.
14 states publish something of their own that a reader can look a place up in: a map, a table, or a study the building code names. 17 adopt the national code and write no snow amendment, so the governing figure sits in a standard rather than on any state page. The remaining 19 set nothing at state level at all, and every figure in those states belongs to a county or a city building department.
That last group is why one state produces three different answers on three different websites, all of them correct for the place they were written for. The band below is the split, and the table under it names which states sit where.
| Where the figure comes from | States | Share | Which |
|---|---|---|---|
| Each building departmentEvery figure comes from a county or a city | 19 | 38% | Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming |
| The adopted codeNo state snow amendment, so the code governs | 17 | 34% | Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Nebraska, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas |
| The state publishes a tableA state table, usually county by county | 9 | 18% | Connecticut, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Utah |
| The state drew a mapA state map with towns or bands on it | 3 | 6% | North Carolina, Vermont, Wisconsin |
| A study the state adoptedA commissioned study the building code names | 2 | 4% | Montana, New Hampshire |

Where a reader can look it up in one step
Connecticut, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont and Wisconsin. They have less in common than the snowfall map would suggest. Some of the snowiest states in the country are not on this list, and some of the states on it publish a single figure that covers everywhere.
What these fourteen share is administrative rather than meteorological: at some point a code council decided that the national table was too coarse for the terrain it was being applied to, and commissioned or drew something keyed more finely. The document is linked on every one of those state pages, because the document is the thing worth having.
| State | Who publishes the figure | Keyed to | Figures read |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vermont | The state drew a map | By region or zone | 14 |
| North Carolina | The state drew a map | By elevation | 3 |
| Wisconsin | The state drew a map | By region or zone | |
| Connecticut | The state publishes a table | County by county | 12 |
| Massachusetts | The state publishes a table | County by county | 12 |
| Michigan | The state publishes a table | County by county | 12 |
| Rhode Island | The state publishes a table | County by county | 12 |
| Utah | The state publishes a table | By elevation | 12 |
| Maryland | The state publishes a table | County by county | 10 |
| Indiana | The state publishes a table | County by county | 9 |
| Minnesota | The state publishes a table | County by county | 8 |
| New Jersey | The state publishes a table | County by county | 6 |
| Montana | A study the state adopted | By elevation | 12 |
| New Hampshire | A study the state adopted | By elevation | 12 |
| Texas | The adopted code | By region or zone | 6 |
| Alaska | The adopted code | By region or zone | 4 |
| New York | The adopted code | By elevation | 4 |
| Maine | The adopted code | County by county | 3 |
| Ohio | The adopted code | County by county | 3 |
| Arkansas | The adopted code | By region or zone | 2 |
| Louisiana | The adopted code | County by county | 1 |
| Alabama | The adopted code | One figure statewide | |
| Florida | The adopted code | One figure statewide | |
| Georgia | The adopted code | County by county | |
| Iowa | The adopted code | Not stated | |
| Kentucky | The adopted code | One figure statewide | |
| Nebraska | The adopted code | Not stated | |
| North Dakota | The adopted code | Not stated | |
| Oregon | The adopted code | By elevation | |
| South Carolina | The adopted code | County by county | |
| Tennessee | The adopted code | County by county | |
| California | Each building department | By elevation | 12 |
| Washington | Each building department | By elevation | 12 |
| Arizona | Each building department | By elevation | 11 |
| Nevada | Each building department | By elevation | 9 |
| Delaware | Each building department | County by county | 7 |
| Idaho | Each building department | By elevation | 6 |
| Oklahoma | Each building department | By region or zone | 6 |
| Virginia | Each building department | County by county | 4 |
| Wyoming | Each building department | By region or zone | 4 |
| Pennsylvania | Each building department | County by county | 3 |
| Colorado | Each building department | By elevation | 2 |
| Kansas | Each building department | County by county | 1 |
| South Dakota | Each building department | County by county | 1 |
| Hawaii | Each building department | Not stated | |
| Illinois | Each building department | Not stated | |
| Mississippi | Each building department | County by county | |
| Missouri | Each building department | Not stated | |
| New Mexico | Each building department | By elevation | |
| West Virginia | Each building department | County by county |
The distance inside a single state
Nevada publishes figures from 20 psf at Churchill County to 600 at Lake Tahoe Basin, Risk Category II. Both are Nevada figures, both are current, and both were printed by the same body. The difference between them is elevation, which is what 13 states key their figures to. A county line, which is what 21 states key theirs to, moves the answer far less.
This is the single most misleading thing about the way the subject is usually written up. A page offering one number per state has taken one row out of a table with several dozen rows in it, and in a mountain state the row it took can be an order of magnitude away from the row that applies to the reader. Every figure below carries the place it belongs to and the band or county its own document keyed it to.

| State | Lowest printed | Highest printed | Distance between them |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nevada | 20 psfChurchill County | 600Lake Tahoe Basin, Risk Category II | 580 |
| Washington | 15 (Revised Ground Snow Load, psf)Bellingham | 588 (Revised Ground Snow Load, psf)Mt. Baker Ski Area | 573 |
| California | 29 psfNevada County | 542 psfNevada County | 513 |
| Montana | 19.2 psfDillon AP | 410.7 psfNorth Fork Jocko | 391.5 |
| Michigan | 20WAYNE | 100KEWEENAW: TOWNSHIP OF EAGLE HARBOR, TOWNSHIP OF GRANT, TOWNSHIP OF HOUGHTON | 80 |
| Arizona | 0City of Bullhead City | 75Coconino County | 75 |
| New Hampshire | 50 lb/ft2Portsmouth | 120 lb/ft2Beans Purchase | 70 |
| Idaho | 15 psfTwin Falls | 70 lbs per sq ftHayden, North of Miles Avenue | 55 |
| Utah | 21 lb/ft2St. George | 67 lb/ft2Monticello | 46 |
| Alaska | 60 pounds per square footCity of Fairbanks | 100 lbs. per square footCordova | 40 |
| Massachusetts | 25 psfProvincetown | 60 psfAdams | 35 |
| New York | 25 psfNew York City | 60, 64, 66 or 68Town Of Ephratah, Fulton County, New York | 35 |
| Vermont | 40 lbs.Williston | 70 lbs.Killington | 30 |
| Maryland | 20 pounds per square footWorcester County | 40 psfCarroll County | 20 |
The 235 published figures
Each of these was printed by a public body in a document linked beside it, and each appears here in the unit and the wording that document used. The spellings differ because the documents differ: psf, P.S.F., lbs, lbs per sq ft, and in a few county tables a bare number whose unit is given in a footnote. Normalising them would be tidier and would put a figure on the page that nobody published.
Each one governs the place its own document named and no further: a county figure covers that county, an elevation band holds inside that band, and a place its document passed over stands with none until the document is amended.

| Figure, as printed | Place | State | Keyed to | Document |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 600 | Lake Tahoe Basin, Risk Category II10000 | Nevada | Elevation band | Source |
| 588 (Revised Ground Snow Load, psf) | Mt. Baker Ski Area4200 (Approx. Average Elevation, feet) | Washington | Town or city | Source |
| 542 psf | Nevada County7501-8000 ft. | California | Elevation band | Source |
| 510 | Washoe County, west of US 395, Risk Category II10000 | Nevada | Elevation band | Source |
| 410.7 psf | North Fork Jocko6330 ft | Montana | Zone | Source |
| 400 | Town of Truckee7501-8000 | California | Elevation band | Source |
| 321.3 psf | Badger Pass6900 ft | Montana | Zone | Source |
| 315 | Lake Tahoe Basin, Risk Category II6000 | Nevada | Elevation band | Source |
| 300 pounds | Town of Mammoth Lakeselevations greater than 8,500 feet | California | Elevation band | Source |
| 285 psf | Virginia Lakes9,600 ft. | California | Zone | Source |
| 260 | Town of Truckee5500 | California | Elevation band | Source |
| 203 | Washoe County, east of US 395, Risk Category II10000 | Nevada | Elevation band | Source |
| 203 | Washoe County, west of US 395, Risk Category II6000 | Nevada | Elevation band | Source |
| 155 psf | June Lake7,600 ft. | California | Zone | Source |
| 140 lbs. | Modoc County | California | County | Source |
| 135.0 psf | West Yellowstone6659 ft | Montana | Town or city | Source |
| 129 (Revised Ground Snow Load, psf) | Newhalem510 (Approx. Average Elevation, feet) | Washington | Town or city | Source |
| 120 lb/ft2 | Beans Purchase2000 ft | New Hampshire | Town or city | Source |
| 115 lb/ft2 | Jackson1800 ft | New Hampshire | Town or city | Source |
| 105.2 psf | Red Lodge 2 N5500 ft | Montana | Town or city | Source |
| 100 lbs. per square foot | Cordova | Alaska | Town or city | Source |
| 100 pounds per square foot | Mammoth Yosemite Airport | California | Zone | Source |
| 100 | KEWEENAW: TOWNSHIP OF EAGLE HARBOR, TOWNSHIP OF GRANT, TOWNSHIP OF HOUGHTON | Michigan | Town or city | Source |
| 100 lb/ft2 | Berlin1600 ft | New Hampshire | Town or city | Source |
| 100 (Revised Ground Snow Load, psf) | Diablo910 (Approx. Average Elevation, feet) | Washington | Town or city | Source |
| 95.7 psf | Bozeman 12 NE5950 ft | Montana | Town or city | Source |
| 95 pounds per square foot | Petersburg | Alaska | Town or city | Source |
| 90 | KEWEENAW | Michigan | County | Source |
| 80 lb/sqft | Hermon | Maine | Town or city | Source |
| 80 | Lewiston | Maine | Town or city | Source |
| 80 | HOUGHTON | Michigan | County | Source |
| 80 lb/ft2 | Laconia900 ft | New Hampshire | Town or city | Source |
| 80 lb/ft2 | Lebanon1200 ft | New Hampshire | Town or city | Source |
| 77 (Revised Ground Snow Load, psf) | Maple Falls643 (Approx. Average Elevation, feet) | Washington | Town or city | Source |
| 75 | Coconino County7500 to 8000 | Arizona | Elevation band | Source |
| 75 | Jacob Lake7920 | Arizona | Zone | Source |
| 75 lb/ft2 | Hanover1300 ft | New Hampshire | Town or city | Source |
| 74 (Revised Ground Snow Load, psf) | Glacier900 (Approx. Average Elevation, feet) | Washington | Town or city | Source |
| 71 psf | Nevada County0-5000 ft. | California | Elevation band | Source |
| 70 PSF | Soldotna | Alaska | Town or city | Source |
Case study areas, in 16 states
In mountainous terrain the national mapping is too coarse to be keyed to a point, and the published documents say so themselves. Rather than print a figure they cannot stand behind, they mark the area as requiring a case study and send the designer to the local building department, which is the body with the authority to set one.
This is the commonest reason a reader searching for their own address finds nothing, and it is almost never explained at the point where the search fails. The rules are quoted below in the words the documents used.
Coconino County prints no figure above 8,000 feet and points to its own commissioned study for the rest, so a reader on the high ground has to go to the county building division rather than to a table.
Ground Snow Load – Coconino County Ground Snow Loads are established through a Case Study (CS) and references the "Ground Snow Load Case Study for Coconino County". ... Coconino County Above 8000 Design according to accepted engineering practice
Some California counties and cities print no number at all and send the reader to the building official, to a county map or to a national hazard tool for the value at a particular address.
The minimum ground snow load used to determine the design loads for buildings and other structures shall be specified by the El Dorado County Building Official. The Building Safety Division shall establish and enforce the snow load design criteria of El Dorado County.
Kootenai County prints its ground snow load as Varies and sends the reader to a 1986 University of Idaho publication and its map, so a site specific figure has to come from the building department.
1608.2: Ground Snow Loads. Delete entire section and replace with the following: The ground snow loads shall be determined using factors and methodology contained in the publication entitled Ground and Roof Snow Loads for Idaho and the accompanying map entitled Normalized Ground Snow Loads For Idaho by the University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, 1986.
Large parts of Maine come back from the national tool as a case study area, and the State Fire Marshal's guidance prints the exact procedure a designer follows when that happens.
If “Case Study Required” is displayed, click the return button in the upper right corner and follow the below instructions. 1) Select “ASCE/SEI 7-22” under Standard Version 2) Select the appropriate Risk Category 3) Check “Snow” for Load Type 4) Click “View Results” 5) The Snow Load given should be reduced by the following equation to bring it to ASCE/SEI 7-16 loads: SL22 * 0.70 = SL16 (Value not less than100 lb/ft2)
A site that is not near a listed station, or is at a different elevation from one, has no tabled value and the reader has to ask the State Building Codes Bureau or the local building official for it.
For areas not listed, not of the same elevation as listed, or locations having some other variable, ground snow loads should be determined by calling the State Building Codes Bureau at (406) 841-2056.
The table prints a value only every 500 feet of elevation and its own note leaves anything between two rows to the designer, so a site part way up has no row to read, and Douglas County publishes no figure of its own at all.
Intermediate values may be determined by interpolation
The study was written because the national map gives New Hampshire no usable statewide numbers, so a case study was run for every one of the 259 towns; above 2,500 feet the table stops and the document says a site specific case study is still required.
Do not use this information above 2500 ft: Conduct a site-specific snow load case study.
New Jersey's rule is written around the case study answer: where the national hazard website returns case study rather than a number, the state's own bulletin names six northern counties and gives each one a figure, and says every other county will return a number.
If the website returns with “case study (CS),” one may use withdrawn Bulletin 94-8 values for the following counties: Sussex, 50 psf; Warren, 35 psf; Hunterdon, 35psf; Passaic, 40 psf; Morris, 35 psf; Somerset, 30 psf. All other counties should generate a load number.
When the figure comes from a counter
In these states the building department with jurisdiction over the parcel holds the figure, and it holds it in whatever form suits it: a county code amendment, an elevation table on a handout, a line in an ordinance, or a value a plans examiner looks up against the address. The agency named beside each state below is the one that decides, and the rule linked beside it is what puts the decision there.
Several of these states carry more published figures than states with a statewide document do, because a county writing for its own terrain tends to key more finely than a state writing for everybody.
| State | Who sets the figure | Keyed to | Figures read |
|---|---|---|---|
| California | The city or county building department, with any change filed with the California Building Standards Commissioneach city and county sets its own figure by amending the state code on a local finding | By elevation | 12 |
| Washington | the county or city building department (for example Whatcom County Planning and Development Services, Chelan County Community Development, King County Department of Local Services)the county looks the value up against the parcel | By elevation | 12 |
| Arizona | The county board of supervisors for unincorporated land, and the city or town for land inside itArizona has no statewide building code for private construction, so each county and municipality adopts and fills in its own | By elevation | 11 |
| Nevada | the city or county building departmentNevada law leaves adoption to each city and county | By elevation | 9 |
| Delaware | the county or municipal building department where the work isDelaware has no statewide building code, so the county or the town writes the number into its own adopted code | County by county | 7 |
| Idaho | the city or county building departmenteach jurisdiction sets and publishes its own figure | By elevation | 6 |
| Oklahoma | the city or county building department, as the authority having jurisdiction under the Oklahoma Uniform Building Code Commission's rulesthe statewide rule leaves the snow cell empty and names the local jurisdiction as the one who fills it | By region or zone | 6 |
| Virginia | the building official of the county, city or town where the work isthe state code hands the climatic and geographic design criteria to the locality, and each building department publishes its own figure | County by county | 4 |
| Wyoming | the city or county building departmenteach jurisdiction adopts its own code and publishes its own figure | By region or zone | 4 |
| Pennsylvania | the building code official of the municipality where the work isthe number is written into the code's design criteria table locally, most often by municipal ordinance | County by county | 3 |
| Colorado | the city, county or regional building departmentColorado adopts no building code statewide, so each jurisdiction adopts its own and publishes its own figure | By elevation | 2 |
| Kansas | the county or the city, under its own home rule authoritya county's regulations reach only its unincorporated areas, and inside a city that city's own adopted code controls | County by county | 1 |
| South Dakota | the county or city building departmentthe code a South Dakota project is built to is the one that county or city adopted, and its own handbook is where the snow figure is printed | County by county | 1 |
| Hawaii | the county building department: the City and County of Honolulu, the County of Hawaii, the County of Maui and the County of Kauaithe one county code that could be read prints the heading and leaves the figure out | Not stated | |
| Illinois | your city, village, or county code officialthe state board that oversees construction codes publishes no snow load figures and says the code official where the work is has the answer | Not stated | |
| Mississippi | the county board of supervisors or the municipal governing authority, and the Mississippi Building Codes Council for the codes they may choose fromeach county and municipality picks its edition, and some opted out of having a code at all | County by county | |
| Missouri | the county commission, or the incorporated city, town or village, where the work isthe statute lets each community adopt a construction code by reference, and the state adopts none for site built houses | Not stated | |
| New Mexico | the city or county building departmentthe state amends neither code's snow provisions, so the figure comes from the local jurisdiction | By elevation | |
| West Virginia | the local jurisdiction that adopted the State Building Code, and the West Virginia State Fire Commission for the rule itselfthe county or city building department that adopted the code fills in the blanks the code leaves to the jurisdiction | County by county |
The codes behind the figures
Every figure on these pages sits inside an adopted building code, and 22 states amended the code they adopted rather than taking it as written. An amendment is where a state snow load table usually lives, so the amended column is a reasonable first place to look when a state appears to have no document of its own.
Editions matter here more than they look as though they should. Codes are adopted on a cycle of a few years, a county can amend one in between, and the national standard changed how it presents ground snow load between recent editions. The adopting rule linked beside each state is what governs on the day.
| State | Code adopted | Edition | Amended by the state | Adopting rule |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| North Carolina | North Carolina State Building Code: Building Code | 2018 | Yes | The rule |
| Minnesota | International Residential Code (IRC) | 2018 edition | Yes | The rule |
| Kansas | Johnson County Code of Regulations for Buildings and Construction, 2018 Edition | 2018 Edition, effective July 1, 2020 (2018 International Residential Code, 2018 International Building Code, 2018 International Fire Code, 2018 International Mechanical Code, 2018 International Plumbing Code) | Yes | The rule |
| Georgia | Georgia State Minimum Standard One and Two Family Dwelling Code (International Residential Code for One- and Two-Family Dwellings with Georgia State Amendments) | 2018 Edition, revised January 1, 2020 | Yes | The rule |
| Indiana | 2020 Indiana Residential Code, 675 IAC 14-4.4 | 2020 Indiana Residential Code, incorporating the 2018 International Residential Code for One and Two Family Dwellings | Yes | The rule |
| New York | 2020 Residential Code of New York State (2020 RCNYS), Part 1220 of Title 19 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York | 2020 RCNYS | Yes | The rule |
| Utah | International Residential Code | 2021 edition | Yes | The rule |
| Connecticut | 2022 Connecticut State Building Code | 2021 International Building Code and 2021 International Residential Code, as amended | Yes | The rule |
| Alabama | State Building Code (2021 International Building Code with exceptions) | 2021, adopted July 1, 2022, amended March 17, 2025 | Yes | The rule |
| South Carolina | 2021 South Carolina Building Code / 2021 South Carolina Residential Code | 2021, implementation date January 1, 2023 | Yes | The rule |
| New Hampshire | International Building Code | 2024 | Yes | The rule |
| Montana | International Residential Code | 2024 Edition | Yes | The rule |
| Oregon | Oregon Structural Specialty Code | 2025 | Yes | The rule |
| Florida | Florida Building Code | 8th Edition (2023) | Yes | The rule |
| Vermont | International Building Code, as amended by the 2025 Vermont Fire & Building Safety Code | IBC 2021 | Yes | The rule |
| Rhode Island | Rhode Island Building Code (RISBC-1), 510-RICR-00-00-1 | International Building Code (IBC), 2021 edition | Yes | The rule |
| Michigan | Michigan residential code for 1- and 2-family dwellings | international residential code, 2015 edition | Yes | The rule |
| New Jersey | One- and two-family dwelling subcode, N.J.A.C. 5:23-3.21, adopting the 2024 International Residential Code; building subcode, N.J.A.C. 5:23-3.14, adopting the 2024 International Building Code | IRC/2024 and IBC/2024 | Yes | The rule |
| Maine | Maine Uniform Building and Energy Code (MUBEC) | MUBEC, with ASCE 7-16 for snow loads | Yes | The rule |
| Wisconsin | Uniform Dwelling Code, Chs. SPS 320-325 (one- and 2-family dwellings); International Building Code 2021 for commercial work, Chs. SPS 361-366 | Register November 2024 No. 827 (ch. SPS 321); International Building Code - 2021 (ch. SPS 361) | Yes | The rule |
| Ohio | Residential Code of Ohio (one-, two- and three-family dwellings), Ohio Administrative Code Chapter 4101:8-3; Ohio Building Code, Ohio Administrative Code rule 4101:1-16-01, for all other buildings | Residential Code of Ohio effective July 1, 2019; Ohio Building Code structural rule effective March 1, 2024, adopting the International Building Code, 2021 edition | Yes | The rule |
| Massachusetts | Massachusetts State Building Code, 780 CMR (Tenth Edition), Massachusetts Amendments to the International Building Code 2021 | Tenth Edition | Yes | The rule |
Ground snow load questions
Ground snow load in every state
Fifty states read September 23, 2026: state code offices, building commissions, adopted standards and the county and city building departments that hold the figure where no state does. Every value, adopting rule and case study rule is linked to the document it was printed in. Codes are adopted on a cycle and a county can amend one in between, so the document linked beside a line is what governs on the day. A ground snow load is an input to a structural calculation about one building by somebody who has been to it.