Performance Solutions vs Deemed-to-Satisfy: Facade Compliance Pathways

Performance Solutions vs Deemed-to-Satisfy: Choosing the Right Facade Compliance Pathway

The NCC provides two routes to facade compliance: Deemed-to-Satisfy (DtS) provisions, which prescribe accepted materials and methods, and Performance Solutions, which use engineering analysis to demonstrate that a design meets the Code’s performance requirements. DtS is faster, cheaper, and lower risk when available. Performance Solutions exist for situations where DtS provisions cannot be met - typically projects with mixed-material facades, complex geometries, or non-standard construction.

Choosing the right pathway early in design is one of the most consequential decisions on a facade project. Get it wrong and you face delays, redesigns, and cost blowouts during certification. Get it right and compliance becomes a documentation exercise rather than an engineering one.

What is the Deemed-to-Satisfy pathway?

DtS provisions are the NCC’s pre-approved recipes. If your design uses the materials and methods prescribed in the Code, compliance is established without further analysis. For facades, the key DtS provision is C2D10, which sets out what qualifies as a non-combustible building element.

Under C2D10(5), aluminium and aluminium alloys are explicitly deemed non-combustible when the element is composed entirely of that material. Steel, copper, glass, and concrete are similarly listed. This means a facade built from solid aluminium panels or extruded aluminium rainscreen profiles satisfies the non-combustibility requirement by definition - no testing is strictly required by the Code, though independent testing provides additional assurance for certifiers and building owners.

The practical effect is significant. On a standard Class 2 apartment building (Type A construction, four or more storeys), specifying non-combustible aluminium cladding like interloQ or element13 with non-combustible sarking, steel battens, and non-combustible insulation gives you a straightforward DtS pathway. The compliance conversation becomes about documentation quality rather than engineering analysis.

DtS compliance typically requires:

• Material test certificates (AS1530.1 non-combustibility reports from a NATA-accredited laboratory)
• A facade system description showing all components are non-combustible
• Weather performance evidence (AS/NZS 4284 test reports)
• Installation details demonstrating compliance with the relevant construction type requirements

That is a documentation package, not an engineering engagement. The timeline is weeks, not months, and the cost is built into the supplier’s standard service.

What is a Performance Solution?

A Performance Solution is the alternative pathway under Clause A2.2 of the NCC. It demonstrates that a building design satisfies the Code’s Performance Requirements through one or more assessment methods - fire engineering analysis, full-scale testing, expert judgement, or a combination.

For facades, Performance Solutions are typically triggered when a project cannot satisfy C2D10 through DtS alone. The most common scenarios:

Mixed-material facades. When a design combines non-combustible and combustible materials - say, aluminium cladding on most elevations but timber soffits or a feature wall using a composite product - the combustible elements fall outside DtS and require a Performance Solution.

Complex geometries. Deep recesses, double-skin facades, or unconventional cavity configurations may create fire spread pathways not addressed by DtS provisions. A Performance Solution can demonstrate that the specific geometry is acceptable.

Alternative compliance evidence. Some products have system-level test data (AS 5113 reaction-to-fire classification or BS 8414 full-scale facade fire testing) that can support a Performance Solution even where the individual materials are combustible. This is the route most composite panel systems rely on.

Heritage or design constraints. Where the architect’s design intent requires materials that are inherently combustible, a Performance Solution is the only viable pathway.

What does a Performance Solution actually involve?

A Performance Solution for a facade is not a simple report. It is a structured engineering assessment prepared by a suitably qualified fire engineer, typically involving:

1. Identification of the relevant Performance Requirements. For facade fire safety, these include CP1 through CP9 - covering structural stability during fire, spread of fire both internally and between buildings, and safe evacuation. The fire engineer must demonstrate the facade design satisfies every applicable requirement.

2. Assessment methods. The NCC recognises four methods under A2.2: Verification Methods (prescribed calculation or test methods like C1V3, which references AS 5113), expert judgement, comparison with DtS provisions, or direct evidence from testing. Most facade Performance Solutions use a combination.

3. Fire engineering analysis. This may include computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modelling of fire spread across the facade, radiant heat analysis for boundary separation, and assessment of cavity fire dynamics. The scope depends on the materials and geometry involved.

4. Full-scale test evidence. For combustible or composite facade materials, AS 5113 or BS 8414 test data is often central to the Performance Solution. These are large-scale tests where a representative facade system is exposed to a controlled fire, and the fire spread, temperature rise, and mechanical performance are measured. A single test can cost $150,000 to $300,000 and the data belongs to the party that commissioned it.

5. Peer review and certification. Most jurisdictions require the Performance Solution to be reviewed by an independent fire engineer and accepted by the building certifier. This review process can add weeks to the programme.

What are the cost and time implications?

The difference between the two pathways is material.

A DtS compliance package for a fully non-combustible aluminium facade is typically included in the supplier’s standard documentation service. The timeline from specification to compliance sign-off is driven by the project’s documentation cycle, not by a separate engineering engagement.

A Performance Solution, by contrast, is a standalone professional service engagement. Fire engineering fees for a facade Performance Solution typically range from $30,000 to $80,000 depending on project complexity, with large or complex projects exceeding that. The timeline from engagement to accepted report is usually eight to sixteen weeks - and that assumes no redesigns are required based on the engineer’s findings.

Beyond the direct cost, a Performance Solution introduces programme risk. The fire engineer may identify issues that require design changes. The peer review process may raise questions that need resolution. The certifier may request additional information or analysis. Each of these is a potential delay to the facade procurement and construction programme.

None of this means Performance Solutions are bad. They exist for good reason and they enable designs that would otherwise be impossible. But they are an order of magnitude more involved than a DtS pathway, and that difference should be understood and planned for from the outset.

When does each pathway make sense?

DtS is the right choice when:

• The facade is entirely non-combustible materials (aluminium, steel, glass, concrete)
• The project is a straightforward Class 2-9 building where the construction type permits DtS compliance
• The design team wants to minimise compliance risk and programme uncertainty
• Budget for fire engineering is better allocated elsewhere on the project

A standard eight-storey residential building with interloQ rainscreen cladding on the primary elevations, element13 panels on feature areas, and a 165CW curtain wall system at the podium is a clean DtS project. Every material is non-combustible. Every component has NATA-accredited test evidence. The compliance pathway is documentation, not engineering.

A Performance Solution is necessary when:

• The facade includes combustible materials that cannot be avoided
• The design creates fire spread pathways not covered by DtS (e.g., a mixed-use podium with commercial glazing transitioning to timber-look cladding on upper residential levels)
• The project uses products relying on system-level test data rather than material-level non-combustibility
• State or territory amendments create specific requirements beyond the base NCC

A mixed-use project combining aluminium cladding with timber screening elements and a green wall system on one elevation is a textbook Performance Solution scenario. The aluminium elements satisfy DtS, but the timber and vegetation require fire engineering analysis to demonstrate acceptable performance.

How Valmond & Gibson supports either pathway

Valmond & Gibson supplies non-combustible aluminium facade systems - interloQ interlocking rainscreen, element13 solid aluminium panels, and 165CW unitised curtain wall. All are tested to AS1530.1 by CSIRO at their NATA-accredited laboratory.

Key test evidence we provide:

• interloQ: Non-combustible per AS1530.1 (CSIRO report FNC12595). Weather performance to AS/NZS 4284, pass at plus/minus 1500Pa serviceability limit state (Ian Bennie & Associates, report 2022-031-S1).
• element13: Non-combustible per AS1530.1 (CSIRO report FNC12545). AS1530.3 results: Ignitability 0, Heat 0, Flame 0, Smoke 1 (CSIRO report FNE12552). Weather performance to AS/NZS 4284 at plus/minus 1500Pa SLS.
• 165CW: Australian designed and extruded, 6060-T6 and 6005A-T6 alloys. Conforms to AS/NZS 1170.0, AS/NZS 1866, AS/NZS 4284.

All products carry a 20-year warranty and are 100% recyclable.

For DtS projects, we provide complete compliance packs - test certificates, technical manuals, and installation guidance - that give certifiers what they need to confirm compliance without further analysis.

For projects using a Performance Solution, our test data feeds into the fire engineer’s assessment. We work directly with the project’s fire engineer to provide material properties, test evidence, and system details as inputs to their analysis. We do not provide fire engineering services ourselves - that is the domain of qualified fire engineers with appropriate professional indemnity insurance.

The practical takeaway

If your facade can be non-combustible, the DtS pathway is almost always the better choice. It is faster, cheaper, carries less programme risk, and results in a simpler certification process. The threshold question is straightforward: can every component of the external wall system satisfy C2D10?

If the answer is yes, keep it simple. Specify non-combustible materials with robust test evidence. Build a clean compliance package. Move on.

If the answer is no - because the design demands it, not because of inertia or unfamiliarity with alternatives - then plan the Performance Solution properly. Engage the fire engineer early, budget appropriately, and allow programme time for the analysis and review process.

Either way, the compliance pathway should be a conscious design decision made at the start of the project, not a problem discovered during certification.

---

Need compliance documentation for your next facade project? Our team provides complete test evidence and technical data packages for either pathway. Get in touch.

---

Related Reading

• Evidence of Suitability Under NCC 2022: What Certifiers Actually Need
• AS 5113: Classification of External Walls Explained
• NCC Facade Requirements by Building Class
• The Real Cost of Specification Gaps

Last updated: 4 April 2026