ASHRAE 90.1 Compliance Drawings: A Permit Guide

ASHRAE 90.1 compliance drawings should show how a commercial building design satisfies the energy code adopted for that project. They connect the code basis, compliance path, calculations, equipment schedules, control sequences, commissioning information, and permit details.

Direct answer. Start with the edition and amendments adopted by the project jurisdiction on the permit date. Define the work covered by that code. Select the permitted compliance path. Then place each result where a reviewer can verify it: calculations, plans, schedules, details, specifications, controls, or commissioning records. A COMcheck report can support this package, but it does not replace coordinated construction documents.

This guide is for US architects, MEP engineers, energy-code consultants, contractors, and BIM coordinators. Official sources were checked on September 26, 2026. Codes and local procedures can change. A qualified project professional and the authority having jurisdiction, or AHJ, should confirm the governing requirements.

What are ASHRAE 90.1 compliance drawings?

ASHRAE identifies ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 as the Energy Standard for Sites and Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings. The standard covers energy-efficient design requirements for most commercial sites and buildings. Its stated scope also includes new building portions and new systems or equipment in existing buildings.

Compliance drawings are the permit and construction documents that express those requirements for a specific project. They are not a separate drawing type issued by ASHRAE. A project may place the evidence across architectural, mechanical, plumbing, electrical, lighting, controls, and general sheets.

The package must answer five review questions:

Which code edition and amendments govern this permit?
Which project areas, systems, and alterations are within scope?
Which compliance path does the team use?
Where can the reviewer verify each required input and result?
How will construction changes, testing, and closeout preserve the approved design?

Treat the package as an evidence chain. A cover-sheet statement starts that chain. Calculations and models establish results. Drawings and schedules specify the work. Controls and commissioning records show how the installed systems should operate.

Which ASHRAE 90.1 edition applies to a project?

The adopted project edition controls, not the newest book on the ASHRAE website. Record the state, city or county, permit date, building-code adoption, local amendments, and any project-specific ruling before calculations begin.

Three dates are easy to confuse:

Fact	Verified status on September 26, 2026	What it means for a permit set
Latest ASHRAE publication	Standard 90.1-2025	It is the latest published edition, but it is not automatically the adopted code
Verified DOE determination	Standard 90.1-2022, published March 6, 2024	It triggers state review or update duties under federal law; it does not enact one local code nationwide
Project code	Edition and amendments adopted by the governing jurisdiction	This is the edition the design team must apply, subject to the AHJ record

The official ASHRAE Standard 90.1 page identifies 90.1-2025 as the latest published edition. It states that the edition incorporates 105 addenda. The page summarizes changes across enforcement, envelope, mechanical, power, lighting, renewable energy, credits, and performance methods.

The DOE determination published in the Federal Register addresses Standard 90.1-2022. It was published March 6, 2024. The notice gives March 6, 2026 as the state certification deadline. That deadline concerns state review and certification, not automatic adoption for every permit.

Neither fact proves local adoption. Verify the actual state statute, regulation, local ordinance, and AHJ guidance. Preserve the adoption record in the project file.

Create a code-basis record before drafting

A one-page code-basis record prevents edition drift. Include:

Project address and AHJ.
Permit type and anticipated filing date.
Adopted energy code and referenced Standard 90.1 edition.
State or local amendments.
Building use, project type, and areas in scope.
Climate zone source used by the adopted code.
Selected compliance path.
Responsible design and energy-code reviewers.
Date, source link, and copy of each adoption record.

Do not copy a code note from an earlier building. The same owner can have projects governed by different editions across jurisdictions or permit dates.

Is ASHRAE 90.1-2025 required now?

Not universally. It was the latest published edition on the research date, but adoption is a separate government action. A state can adopt another edition, amend it, use an IECC-based commercial code, or delegate decisions to local jurisdictions.

A client specification can also request a newer standard than the code minimum. A rating program, incentive, lease, or internal design standard may add another performance target. Keep these bases separate on the cover sheet:

Legally adopted energy code.
Referenced ASHRAE 90.1 edition.
Local amendments or approved interpretations.
Voluntary, contractual, or program requirements.

The separation matters during plan review. A voluntary target cannot silently replace a required code method. A newer specification also does not erase the locally adopted permit basis.

ASHRAE provides public read-only access to several editions through its read-only standards page. On the research date, that page listed 90.1-2025, 2022, 2019, and earlier editions. Use the licensed or public edition that matches the project basis. Never reconstruct a threshold from memory.

Which ASHRAE 90.1 compliance path should the team use?

Choose the path before developing the package because it controls the evidence required. The adopted edition and amendments determine the available options. Common routes include prescriptive compliance, the Energy Cost Budget method, and the Performance Rating Method in Normative Appendix G.

Compliance route	Main proof	Drawing implication	Coordination risk
Prescriptive	Component values, system limits, controls, and mandatory provisions	Plans and schedules must expose each input used in the check	A compliant report can conflict with later equipment or envelope changes
COMcheck-supported prescriptive path	Project data and reports from a supported code edition	Report values must match the permit sheets and specifications	Software availability does not prove the AHJ accepts that method
Energy Cost Budget	Proposed and budget building energy-cost comparison	Drawings must match the modeled envelope, systems, schedules, and controls	Model assumptions can become detached from issued design documents
Appendix G Performance Rating Method	Proposed and baseline building performance model	The package needs a traceable model narrative and consistent design data	Rating-program use can be confused with permit-code use

Mandatory provisions still require attention where the selected path calls for them. A performance result should not be treated as permission to omit documentation for required controls, commissioning, or other mandatory items.

The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory’s COMcheck-Web page identifies support for newer national and state energy codes, including Standard 90.1-2022. That does not establish which performance forms or software version the project authority accepts. Confirm the method and required records with the AHJ.

Before choosing a tool, ask the AHJ which method, report version, signatures, and supporting sheets it expects. Record that response. Tool support and permit acceptance are different questions.

What belongs on the general and code sheets?

The general or code sheet should establish the shared compliance basis. It should not become a dense copy of requirements that belong with the relevant discipline.

Include a concise project energy-code summary:

Governing energy code and Standard 90.1 edition.
Amendment source and effective date.
Project type, occupancy description, and work scope.
Climate zone and its source.
Compliance path and software version, when used.
Project areas included in the analysis.
Deferred or separate submittals affecting the energy record.
Sheet and report index for envelope, HVAC, service water heating, power, and lighting evidence.
Required design, owner, contractor, or commissioning responsibilities.
Revision rule for changes to modeled or reported values.

Add a short statement describing the review boundary. For example, a tenant-improvement set should identify whether the base-building envelope and central systems are existing, modified, or outside the submitted scope. The statement should match the actual alteration provisions in the adopted edition.

Use a compliance index rather than repeating every result. A reviewer should be able to move from the index to the calculation, then to the relevant plan, schedule, detail, or sequence.

What envelope information should the drawings show?

Envelope evidence begins with a boundary. Show the thermal envelope continuously on plans or sections. Label roof, wall, floor, slab-edge, below-grade, door, window, skylight, and air-barrier assemblies that affect compliance.

For each applicable assembly, coordinate:

Assembly identifier and location.
Framing or construction type.
Insulation type, location, and installed value.
Continuous-insulation condition and interruptions.
Fenestration and door performance used in calculations.
Vestibule, air-leakage, and air-barrier details when applicable.
Roof reflectance, emittance, or other properties used by the selected path.
Trade transitions at parapets, curbs, edges, penetrations, and openings.

The calculation should use the same assembly names as the drawings. If the energy report calls a wall W-3, the wall section and architectural schedule should use W-3. A reviewer should not need to guess whether two labels describe the same construction.

Avoid generic notes such as provide insulation per code. They do not state the designed assembly, placement, or continuity. They can also conflict with a calculation based on a specific construction.

Coordinate envelope values with the model

The model record should identify gross areas, fenestration areas, orientations, and assembly properties. Compare those inputs with the issued plans and elevations after every architectural revision.

Flag these high-risk changes:

Added glazing or skylights.
Changed glass type or frame.
Revised roof build-up.
Metal framing that changes assembly performance.
New loading doors or vestibule changes.
Expanded conditioned area.
Changed orientation or shading geometry.

Do not leave the energy model at schematic quantities while the permit set advances. The compliance result belongs to the submitted design, not to an earlier massing study.

What HVAC evidence belongs in the permit set?

Mechanical drawings should connect load conditions, equipment selections, distribution, ventilation, controls, and system operation. Exact requirements vary by edition, system, climate, and project scope.

Build the evidence around these records:

Mechanical system description and zoning basis.
Equipment schedule with model, capacity, efficiency, and rating conditions used for compliance.
Heating and cooling load calculation reference.
Fan, pump, and distribution-system data needed by the selected method.
Ventilation and exhaust basis.
Economizer, heat-recovery, or demand-control logic when applicable.
Setpoints, setbacks, optimum-start, and scheduling logic when applicable.
Simultaneous heating and cooling control.
Duct and piping insulation information.
Metering, monitoring, testing, and commissioning interfaces.

Use schedules to expose the compliance inputs. A schedule stating only tonnage and voltage may be inadequate. The reviewer needs to locate the metric and rated value used in the calculation. The submittal reviewer later needs the same information to compare the proposed equipment.

If a basis-of-design model changes, update all affected records. A heat-pump substitution can change efficiency data, power, controls, heat source, and model assumptions. A fan change can affect both mechanical and electrical sheets.

The MEP design services hub shows how Heaven Designs organizes multi-discipline drawing support. Project licensure, energy analysis, and design responsibility must be agreed for each engagement.

What service water heating information belongs in the package?

Service water heating can involve plumbing, mechanical, electrical, architectural, and control information. Assign one discipline to own the compliance record, then coordinate every connected sheet.

Show or reference:

Equipment type, fuel or energy source, capacity, and rated efficiency.
Storage volume and standby information used by the compliance check.
Distribution layout, pipe insulation, and circulation arrangement.
Temperature, scheduling, and circulation controls.
Heat traps or other required details when applicable.
Pool-heating or process interfaces when within scope.
Renewable or recovered-energy components used by the compliance path.

Keep domestic hot water separate from process hot water where the code treats their loads differently. Identify which loads were included in a performance model. A single water-heater symbol cannot communicate those assumptions.

What power and electrical information should be documented?

Electrical compliance information should explain how power is distributed, controlled, measured, and coordinated with energy-using systems. The applicable edition may address transformers, motors, voltage drop, receptacle controls, metering, monitoring, or other features.

The drawing package can include:

Service and distribution one-line diagrams.
Panel and equipment schedules tied to mechanical loads.
Transformer data used for compliance.
Motor and drive information.
Controlled receptacle locations and identification.
Automatic-control diagrams and schedules.
Energy-metering points, measured loads, data paths, and display locations.
Renewable-energy or storage interfaces used by the selected compliance path.
Commissioning and functional-testing references.

Do not invent a universal list. Verify the adopted edition and project triggers. The latest published 2025 edition includes revised power and energy-monitoring provisions, but that summary does not prove those provisions govern an earlier adopted project.

A disciplined drawing review resembles the equipment reconciliation used in a commercial electrical design checklist: ratings, connections, controls, schedules, and calculations should describe one installed system. The code basis differs, but the coordination principle remains useful.

What lighting and control evidence should the drawings contain?

Lighting compliance requires more than a fixture count. Coordinate lighting power, exempt or special-purpose loads, interior controls, exterior controls, daylight response, occupancy response, schedules, and functional testing.

Create a room-level lighting control schedule with these fields:

Field	Purpose
Space name and number	Ties the control record to plans and room data
Area and space type	Supports the chosen lighting allowance method
Connected lighting load	Reconciles fixtures, wattages, and controls
Control functions	Lists manual, occupancy, time, daylight, and other applicable actions
Controlled luminaires	Shows which fixture groups respond
Sensor or control location	Supports installation and inspection
Sequence	States the intended response, timing, and user interaction
Test reference	Connects the design to functional verification

Show daylight zones where the adopted requirements need them. Coordinate the zone geometry with glazing and interior partitions. If furniture plans or room boundaries change, review the sensors and controlled fixture groups again.

Exterior lighting needs its own basis. Record the selected zone, application areas, luminaires, connected loads, control schedule, and any claimed exception. Do not combine interior and exterior allowances in a way that hides the calculation.

How should controls and sequences be shown?

Controls are where a compliant equipment schedule can fail in operation. A permit set should state the intended sequence clearly enough for controls contractors, reviewers, and commissioning providers to test it.

Use a three-layer control record:

Plans show device locations, controlled zones, and connections.
Schedules list setpoints, operating modes, and applicable functions.
Sequences explain how the system responds under occupied, unoccupied, startup, setback, alarm, and failure conditions.

Name every sensor and controlled output consistently. Avoid as required by code as the only sequence. That phrase shifts design interpretation to the installer and provides no testable outcome.

For integrated systems, document dependencies. An air-handling sequence may rely on occupancy schedules, zone sensors, outdoor-air data, terminal controls, and building automation. The electrical and lighting set can use the same occupancy signal. Define the source, destination, and failure behavior.

The BIM services hub describes Heaven Designs support for coordinated models and clash review. Geometry coordination helps, but a clash-free model does not prove that a control sequence complies.

What is an ASHRAE 90.1 compliance evidence matrix?

An evidence matrix is a project index linking each compliance subject to its source, calculation, drawing location, specification, and verification record. It exposes missing handoffs before the permit set reaches the AHJ.

Use this structure as a starting point:

Discipline	Governing input	Calculation or model	Drawing or schedule location	Field or closeout evidence	Responsible reviewer
Code basis	Adoption and amendment record	Scope memo	General/code sheet	Approved permit record	Code lead
Envelope	Climate, assembly, and geometry data	Envelope check or energy model	Plans, elevations, wall sections, schedules	Product data and inspection record	Architect or envelope lead
HVAC	Loads, equipment, distribution, controls	Loads and compliance check or model	Mechanical plans, schedules, details, sequences	Submittals, startup, tests, commissioning	Mechanical lead
Service water heating	Demand, system, storage, controls	Prescriptive check or model input	Plumbing or mechanical plans and schedules	Product data and control test	Plumbing or mechanical lead
Power	Service, transformers, motors, controls, meters	Required calculations or model inputs	One-line, panels, schedules, control diagrams	Submittals and functional records	Electrical lead
Lighting	Areas, space types, fixtures, wattages, controls	Lighting power and control report	Lighting plans, fixture schedule, control schedule	Installed count and functional tests	Lighting or electrical lead
Performance model	Adopted method and design inputs	Proposed and comparison models	Model summary plus cross-sheet index	Final model and revision log	Energy modeler
Commissioning	Systems and required activities	Commissioning plan	General notes and discipline references	Issues log, tests, and final records	Commissioning authority or assigned lead

Add exact sheet numbers and report pages during design. Update the matrix at every issue. A blank cell is a coordination problem, not a formatting problem.

The matrix also helps the owner understand responsibility. It should identify who supplies an input, who verifies it, and who updates downstream records after a change.

What belongs in calculations instead of drawings?

Drawings should state the selected design. Calculations should demonstrate why that design satisfies the chosen method. A permit set should cross-reference both without pasting an entire model report onto plan sheets.

Keep detailed support in the calculation package:

Envelope area and assembly calculations.
Lighting power calculations and exemption support.
HVAC load reports and relevant system calculations.
Fan or pump calculations required by the adopted method.
COMcheck input and output reports.
Energy Cost Budget or Appendix G model files and reports.
Assumption log, schedules, utility-rate basis, and exceptional calculations.
Software name, version, weather file, and run date.
Model quality-control checks and unresolved items.

Place decisive outputs on the drawings or code summary. These can include assembly identifiers, equipment values, lighting totals, control functions, and the selected compliance result.

Do not hide a noncompliant drawing behind a compliant report. The report and plans are one submission record. If they disagree, a reviewer cannot know which design the team intends to build.

Is a COMcheck report enough for ASHRAE 90.1 compliance?

No. COMcheck can create compliance reports from project inputs, but the report is not automatically the complete permit package. It also does not prove that installed work matches those inputs.

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory states that COMcheck-Web supports commercial and high-rise residential energy-code compliance. Its public landing page identifies Standard 90.1-2022 among the newer supported codes. Check the live tool for the exact project edition and report options before relying on it.

A complete COMcheck workflow should include these controls:

Confirm that the software edition matches the adopted project edition.
Confirm that the AHJ accepts the report and selected method.
Enter project scope, geometry, assemblies, equipment, and lighting from controlled design records.
Reconcile every report input with plans and schedules.
Add mandatory provisions that the report does not fully express on drawings.
Preserve the software version, report date, and editable project file.
Rerun the report after relevant changes.
Confirm the installed product and control record during submittal and closeout.

COMcheck is strongest as a traceable calculation record. It becomes risky when treated as a detached certificate attached shortly before permit submission.

How should alterations and tenant improvements be handled?

An addition, alteration, tenant improvement, or equipment replacement needs a scope boundary before compliance can be evaluated. Do not assume that every provision applies to the whole existing building. Do not assume that existing work is exempt either.

Create an existing, demolished, relocated, and new matrix for each discipline. Show:

Existing envelope areas affected by the work.
New openings, roofs, walls, and conditioned spaces.
Existing systems retained and their relationship to new loads.
Replaced equipment and connected distribution.
New lighting and controls within the work area.
Base-building controls that serve the tenant space.
Metering, commissioning, and closeout boundaries.

Read the alteration provisions in the adopted edition and local amendments. State the resulting scope decision in the code summary. If the AHJ provides a written interpretation, preserve it with the calculations.

Existing conditions need field verification. Record equipment nameplates, control panels, as-built routing, envelope assemblies, and available base-building documents. Mark assumptions that still require verification. A hidden condition can change both the design and compliance path.

How should design changes be controlled?

Any change to a compliance input needs an impact review. The change can begin in architecture, procurement, value engineering, shop drawings, site work, or owner direction.

Use a change register with these fields:

Change identifier and date.
Initiator and reason.
Original and revised condition.
Affected compliance input.
Calculation or model impact.
Drawing, schedule, sequence, and specification impact.
Permit revision or AHJ coordination needed.
Reviewer and closure date.

Common triggers include glazing substitutions, insulation changes, equipment swaps, revised controls, lighting fixture changes, modified room layouts, and changed operating schedules. Modelers should not approve construction substitutions alone. The responsible design leads must verify constructability, code, controls, electrical, and commissioning effects.

Maintain one approved basis. A permit report, construction model, issued drawings, submittal log, and commissioning plan should not contain different equipment or control assumptions.

What are the most common compliance drawing defects?

Most defects are broken links in the evidence chain:

The cover sheet cites the newest edition instead of the adopted edition.
The report uses one climate zone while the plans state another.
Envelope labels do not match the calculation assemblies.
Equipment efficiency appears in a report but not in schedules.
Scheduled equipment differs from the modeled system.
Lighting wattages or room areas do not match the plans.
Control notes say per code without a testable sequence.
COMcheck is attached without reconciling plans and schedules.
Additions or tenant work lack a defined compliance boundary.
A voluntary rating method is presented as the permit method.
Commissioning responsibility is absent or assigned too late.
A field substitution changes the approved result without a rerun.

Run a cross-discipline audit before submission. Pick a sample envelope, HVAC, water-heating, power, and lighting input. Trace each from source through calculation, drawing, submittal, and test record. Any broken trace indicates a wider control problem.

How should commissioning appear in the drawings?

Commissioning requirements depend on the adopted edition, project scope, system type, and local rules. Identify the required activities early because they affect documents, controls, submittals, testing, and owner records.

The permit package should identify:

Systems and controls within the commissioning scope.
Responsible parties and independence requirements where applicable.
Required plans, reviews, checklists, and tests.
Sensor, setpoint, scheduling, and sequence verification.
Air and water balancing interfaces.
Deficiency tracking and correction.
Owner training and systems documentation.
Final report or closeout evidence.

Commissioning does not repair an undefined sequence. Functional tests require a written expected result. Add the test reference beside the corresponding schedule or sequence so the contractor can price and perform the work.

The design team should review commissioning findings for compliance impact. A failed daylight-control test or disabled economizer can undermine an input used by the approved package.

Are federal building requirements the same as local commercial codes?

No. Federal buildings can have separate statutory and regulatory requirements. Do not apply a federal rule to an ordinary private project merely because both records mention Standard 90.1.

For example, 10 CFR Part 433 contains energy-efficiency requirements for new federal commercial and multifamily high-rise residential buildings. It also contains provisions for covered federal renovations and fossil-fuel-generated energy consumption.

Use the federal record only after confirming the project falls within its definitions and dates. Federal agency criteria, project specifications, and other requirements can add further layers. Keep the federal basis in a separate section of the code matrix.

For nonfederal work, use the state and local adoption trail. The federal example demonstrates why project type and authority matter, not a nationwide permit rule.

What review workflow produces a coordinated package?

A reliable workflow uses controlled handoffs rather than a final compliance stamp.

The MEP design outsourcing guide helps teams assign production and review responsibilities. The BIM coordination workflow covers model interfaces that can change the documented system.

Stage 1: confirm the governing basis

Capture the adopted edition, amendments, permit date, AHJ, scope, and accepted compliance methods. Resolve uncertainty before modeling.

Stage 2: assign evidence owners

Assign one owner for the code basis and one for each discipline. Name the modeler, checker, drawing coordinator, and commissioning contact.

Stage 3: freeze initial inputs

Issue a controlled input set for envelope geometry, assemblies, loads, schedules, systems, equipment, lighting, and controls. Record assumptions and open items.

Stage 4: calculate and document together

Develop calculations, drawings, schedules, and sequences from the same inputs. Do not wait until the permit deadline to map the report back to plans.

Stage 5: perform a cross-sheet audit

Use the evidence matrix to trace every major input and result. Check names, values, units, edition references, sheet numbers, and revision dates.

Stage 6: review procurement changes

Compare proposed products with the approved basis. Route any energy-affecting difference through the change register before approval.

Stage 7: close the field record

Collect test reports, commissioning records, approved changes, and final calculations. Give the owner the controlled operating information.

The Our Services page outlines Heaven Designs drawing and engineering support across service lines. The design samples page can help a buyer assess drawing organization. Sample deliverables do not define a project-specific code scope.

How can Heaven Designs support an ASHRAE 90.1 drawing package?

Heaven Designs’ current service pages describe MEP drawing production, BIM modeling, CAD-to-BIM conversion, and multi-discipline coordination. A proposed engagement should start with the adopted code basis, design responsibility matrix, available calculations, modeling files, and expected drawings. Energy-code method selection and compliance certification are not established company services here.

Documented drawing and model support may include:

Preparing defined MEP drawing sheets and schedules from approved inputs.
Updating drawings from checked results provided by the responsible design team.
Coordinating Revit models and issued drawing sheets within an agreed scope.
Recording drawing revisions and coordination issues for the project team.

The project proposal should name the owners of method selection, energy modeling, and report-to-drawing checks. It should also assign licensed design, signatures, AHJ filing, and comment responses. Do not assume Heaven Designs holds those roles without confirmed capability and written project terms.

Review About Heaven Designs for company context. Use the contact page to share the location, permit target, adopted code, scope, and available model files. A qualified local professional should confirm jurisdiction-specific conclusions before filing.

Frequently asked questions

Do drawings need to cite ASHRAE 90.1?

The permit set should identify the governing energy code and referenced Standard 90.1 edition when that standard forms the compliance basis. It should also identify applicable amendments. The exact note location and format depend on the AHJ.

Can the latest ASHRAE 90.1 edition be used voluntarily?

It may be used as an added project target when contracts, programs, and the AHJ allow it. Keep the legally adopted basis separate. Confirm how conflicts and documentation will be handled before design begins.

Does DOE determine which edition every city enforces?

No. DOE issues national determinations that trigger state review or update obligations. States and local jurisdictions adopt and administer codes through their own legal processes.

Does a passing COMcheck report guarantee permit approval?

No. It shows a result from entered project data under the selected software option. The AHJ can review scope, inputs, mandatory provisions, drawings, signatures, amendments, and other permit requirements.

Should every compliance value appear on the plans?

No. Detailed calculations can remain in reports, but decisive design values and control requirements should be easy to locate. Use a sheet index and consistent identifiers to connect both records.

Who should review ASHRAE 90.1 compliance drawings?

Use qualified architects, MEP engineers, energy-code specialists, commissioning professionals, and local reviewers as the project requires. Professional licensure and signature duties depend on jurisdiction and scope.

How often should the compliance model be updated?

Update it whenever a design or field change alters an input or result. The change register should identify the trigger, affected documents, reviewer, and closure date.

Are BIM coordination and energy-code compliance the same task?

No. BIM can coordinate geometry, data, and drawing output. Compliance requires the correct adopted basis, method, calculations, controls, documentation, and qualified review. The two workflows should exchange controlled information.

Final review checklist

Before submission, confirm that:

The adopted edition and amendments are verified for the permit date.
The project scope and alteration boundary are explicit.
The selected compliance path is allowed and accepted.
Calculations use the current design geometry and system data.
Envelope identifiers match plans, sections, and reports.
Equipment schedules expose the values used for compliance.
Lighting fixtures, areas, wattages, and controls reconcile.
Control sequences are testable.
COMcheck or model outputs match the issued sheets.
Commissioning and functional-testing responsibilities are assigned.
Changes are logged and reviewed across disciplines.
Federal rules are applied only to covered federal work.
A qualified project professional has completed the final review.

This article reflects official sources available on September 26, 2026. It does not replace the adopted code, local amendments, AHJ instructions, licensed professional judgment, or project-specific energy analysis.