Authored by: Rimkus Built Environment Solutions Marketing Team
Published July 28, 2026
A property manager overseeing assets in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Berkeley faces a different set of rules in each city. Those rules sit on top of a statewide framework that changed on January 1, 2026. Buildings that miss the June 1 benchmarking deadline under California’s Assembly Bill 802 (AB 802) may face civil penalties of up to $2,000 per category of missing data, per day.
California imposes two separate compliance tracks with different triggers. AB 802 and local benchmarking ordinances are ongoing annual reporting obligations for existing buildings, while Title 24, the state construction code, applies only when an owner or project team pulls a building permit for new construction or alterations.
Owners need separate tracking for state benchmarking, local benchmarking, audit cycles, and permit-triggered Title 24 obligations.
Key takeaways: Navigating California’s layered compliance requirements
California commercial property owners must track annual reporting duties, permit-triggered code requirements, and local thresholds that may differ by jurisdiction. Multi-city portfolios face different deadlines in each jurisdiction.
What the rules cover
- AB 802 requires annual benchmarking for commercial buildings over 50,000 square feet, due June 1.
- Title 24 Parts 6 and 11 apply at building permit for new construction, additions, and alterations.
- Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Berkeley each set benchmarking thresholds below the state level.
Compliance responsibilities
- Property owners are the legally responsible parties for AB 802 reporting.
- Buildings in approved local programs report locally rather than dual-reporting to the state.
- Penalties, audit cycles, and deadlines vary by jurisdiction and require separate tracking.
With 900+ experts on staff, Rimkus professionals support building condition and code compliance assessments across California portfolios. Contact Us.
California building performance standards combine reporting and code compliance
California’s building performance standards include annual energy reporting for existing buildings and construction-time efficiency and green building requirements. The annual track comes from AB 802. The construction track comes from Title 24, the state building code, which includes the California Energy Code (Part 6) and the green building standards code known as CALGreen (Part 11).
These programs answer different questions. Benchmarking measures how an existing building performs year over year, while Title 24 sets the efficiency floor for what gets built or renovated.
AB 802 and the state benchmarking program
AB 802 requires commercial building owners to report their building’s energy use to the state every year by June 1 for the prior calendar year. Mandatory reporting began June 1, 2018, for commercial buildings over 50,000 square feet of gross floor area with no residential utility accounts.
Owners complete the report using the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s free ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager tool, entering the property address, floor area, and 12 months of energy use data. The tool produces a 1 to 100 energy performance score, where 50 represents median performance and scores of 75 or higher may qualify for ENERGY STAR certification. The California Energy Commission posts submitted data publicly on its disclosure dashboard.
Title 24 and the 2025 Energy Code update
The 2025 California Energy Code (Title 24, Part 6) took effect January 1, 2026, and sets new efficiency requirements for commercial construction and renovation. The edition introduces a new heat pump baseline for certain commercial space-conditioning systems and stricter efficiency standards for new windows and glazing, with an exception for high-fire-hazard zones.
Which edition applies depends on the permit application date. Projects submitted on or after January 1, 2026, follow the 2025 edition. Projects submitted on or before December 31, 2025, follow the 2022 edition.
CALGreen and the green building standards code
Title 24, Part 11, known as CALGreen, sets green building requirements for new construction and major alterations, with the 2025 edition effective January 1, 2026. It addresses planning and design, water efficiency, material conservation, and environmental quality. For energy efficiency, CALGreen defers to Part 6, the California Energy Code.
CALGreen requires large nonresidential projects to address embodied carbon, the emissions tied to building materials, through building reuse, whole-building life-cycle assessment, or low-carbon material choices. These mandatory measures first took effect July 1, 2024, and continue under the 2025 edition. Some owners layer voluntary LEED certification on top of CALGreen compliance to pursue additional recognition. Building envelope requirements under CALGreen often overlap with Title 24 insulation and glazing mandates.
The emerging statewide building performance standards trajectory
Beyond AB 802 and Title 24, California is developing a broader statewide building performance standards framework that would apply performance targets to existing large buildings over time. The California Energy Commission is conducting a Building Energy Performance Strategy proceeding to inform that framework. Under Senate Bill 48 (2023), the CEC must submit that strategy to the Legislature by August 1, 2026.
In February 2026, USGBC California released model BPS policy guidance designed to help cities and counties adopt local performance standards with consistent interim targets and compliance pathways, signaling a trajectory from annual disclosure toward binding performance requirements with escalating targets.
Property owners tracking compliance obligations for the next five to ten years should monitor this proceeding, as adopted standards would add a third compliance track beyond existing reporting and permit-trigger obligations.
Compliance obligations depend on building status and permit activity
Compliance depends on whether a building is operating or undergoing construction. Existing buildings above size thresholds carry annual benchmarking obligations. New construction and alterations trigger Title 24 at the permit stage. A portfolio can include properties subject to each track simultaneously. A structured code compliance review can help owners track these annual and permit-triggered obligations side by side.
AB 802 coverage thresholds and the June 1 reporting deadline
AB 802 applies to commercial buildings over 50,000 square feet of gross floor area, with annual reports due every June 1. Buildings under that threshold, or with 16 or fewer residential utility accounts, are not required to report. Multifamily residential buildings face a two-part test: they must exceed 50,000 square feet and have 17 or more residential utility accounts of each energy type. Mandatory multifamily reporting began June 1, 2019.
Title 24 applicability: new construction, renovations, and permit triggers
Title 24 applies to newly constructed buildings, additions, and alterations to existing buildings at the point a building permit is filed. The permit application date controls; Title 24 is not triggered by sale, lease, or financing.
The scope of an alteration determines how much of the building must comply. The Energy Code treats a space first conditioned in an existing building as an addition, requiring all existing components to meet the Energy Code whether altered or not. For other alterations, the Energy Code applies only to the construction covered by the permit application. Local city or county building departments enforce these requirements as the Authorities Having Jurisdiction.
Exemptions and exceptions
AB 802 excludes several building types entirely, including buildings of 50,000 square feet or less, buildings with 1 to 16 active residential utility accounts per energy type, and buildings where more than 50% of floor area is used for manufacturing, industrial, or controlled-environment scientific purposes.
Otherwise-covered buildings may request formal exemptions for circumstances including lack of a certificate of occupancy for more than half the reporting year, pending demolition within one year, or enrollment in an approved local program.
Recent updates added exemptions for substantial destruction exceeding 50% of full cash value and for destruction from unforeseen events such as fires, flooding, or declared emergencies.
Local municipal ordinances can exceed the state baseline
Local ordinances in major California cities impose benchmarking and audit obligations that exceed the state baseline, often at lower size thresholds. State law sets the floor; cities can and do go further. A portfolio spread across Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Berkeley follows three distinct rule sets at once, where building condition assessments and energy code compliance can help clarify which obligations apply to each asset.
Los Angeles benchmarking and audit requirements
Los Angeles requires annual benchmarking and periodic energy audits and retro-commissioning for buildings over 20,000 square feet under its Existing Buildings Energy and Water Efficiency (EBEWE) program, administered by the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety. Buildings under 20,000 square feet are not subject to the ordinance.
The program operates in two phases. Phase I requires annual benchmarking through ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager by June 1 each year. Phase II requires an American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Level II energy and water audit plus retro-commissioning once every five years, staggered by the last digit of the building’s identification number. Buildings with a last digit of 0 or 1 face a December 1, 2026 due date. Buildings ending in 2 or 3 are due December 1, 2027.
San Francisco’s Existing Commercial Buildings ordinance
San Francisco requires non-residential buildings of 10,000 square feet or more to benchmark annually and report to the city by May 1 each year, a threshold well below the state’s 50,000-square-foot floor. San Francisco Environment Code, Chapter 20 codifies the program. The ordinance also requires periodic energy audits on a five-year cycle, with depth scaling to building size: an ASHRAE Level I audit for smaller buildings up to an ASHRAE Level II audit or strategic decarbonization assessment for buildings of 50,000 square feet and larger.
Other city-level programs and how they interact with state requirements
Berkeley’s Building Emissions Saving Ordinance (BESO) sets a benchmarking threshold of 15,000 square feet and is the only program among these three cities with a point-of-sale trigger. Buildings larger than 15,000 square feet submit annual benchmarking, while smaller buildings face an energy assessment at the time of listing for sale. The largest buildings, 25,000 square feet or more, complete a five-year cycle assessment in addition to annual benchmarking.
Buildings enrolled in a California Energy Commission-approved local program, including LA EBEWE, the San Francisco ordinance, or Berkeley BESO, satisfy the AB 802 state obligation through local reporting. The local program transmits data to the state; properties do not dual-report.
Non-compliance can affect penalties, permits, and occupancy
Non-compliance consequences differ sharply between the two tracks. Benchmarking failures may trigger daily civil penalties through administrative proceedings. Title 24 failures can stall permits and may hold up a certificate of occupancy. Each track carries its own enforcement mechanism and agency.
AB 802 penalties and enforcement
AB 802 penalties range from $500 to $2,000 per category of data not provided, per day, with multiple deficiencies each accruing independently. State regulations provide a 30-day cure period after notification before civil penalties attach; once that window closes without correction, the California Energy Commission initiates formal administrative proceedings.
Title 24 permit and inspection implications
Title 24 non-compliance stalls a project at plan check, inspection, or final occupancy rather than producing a daily fine. Local building departments conduct plan review, issue permits, perform field inspections, and control certificates of occupancy. Compliance documentation flows through a Certificate of Compliance at plan check, a Certificate of Installation during field inspections, and a Certificate of Acceptance before the certificate of occupancy is issued. Enforcement agencies may withhold the final certificate until required documentation is accepted. For lighting controls and mechanical systems, the Certificate of Acceptance must come from a technician certified by an approved provider. Building envelope defects can also affect Energy Code conformance at final inspection.
Disclosure obligations affecting property transactions and financing
California has no statewide requirement to disclose energy benchmarking data to a buyer, lessee, or lender at the point of a transaction. AB 802 replaced the transaction-triggered disclosure that existed under its predecessor, AB 1103, with the annual public benchmarking program. The public dashboard is searchable by any transacting party, but no affirmative disclosure to a counterparty is mandated at the state level. Among the cities examined, Berkeley BESO is the only ordinance with a transaction-triggered requirement.
Compliance planning requires separate jurisdiction tracking
Compliance planning for multi-jurisdiction portfolios requires separate tracking of thresholds, deadlines, penalties, audit cycles, local program identifiers, and permit-trigger dates. The emerging statewide BPS trajectory adds a longer-range planning dimension that property owners should monitor now.
For property owners and managers tracking obligations across jurisdictions, Rimkus BES provides building condition and code compliance consulting through its Built Environment Solutions practice. To discuss compliance assessment support for a commercial portfolio, contact us.
Frequently asked questions about California building performance standards
Who is required to report under California’s AB 802 benchmarking program?
Owners of commercial buildings over 50,000 square feet of gross floor area, and owners of multifamily residential buildings over 50,000 square feet with 17 or more residential utility accounts, must report energy use to the California Energy Commission by June 1 each year. Buildings at or below 50,000 square feet are not covered, and buildings where more than half the floor area is used for manufacturing, industrial, or controlled-environment scientific purposes are excluded. The property owner is the legally responsible party, though the reporting work is commonly delegated to property managers or consultants.
What happens if a building misses the June 1 AB 802 benchmarking deadline?
The California Energy Commission provides a 30-day period to correct the violation after notification before civil penalties attach. Once that window closes without correction, penalties range from $500 to $2,000 per category of missing data for each day the violation continues, and multiple missing categories accrue independently. Owners who miss the deadline can limit their exposure by reporting as soon as possible, since penalties are tied to how long the violation continues.
Do buildings in Los Angeles, San Francisco, or Berkeley report to both the city and the state?
No. Buildings enrolled in a California Energy Commission-approved local program, including LA EBEWE, San Francisco’s Existing Buildings Ordinance, and Berkeley BESO, satisfy the AB 802 state obligation through local reporting, and the local program transmits the data to the state. Owners still need to track each local program’s own deadlines and thresholds, which differ from the state’s: Los Angeles covers buildings over 20,000 square feet, San Francisco reaches down to 10,000 square feet, and Berkeley to 15,000 square feet.
This article is intended to provide general information and insights into prevailing industry practices. It is not intended to constitute, and should not be relied upon as, legal, technical, or professional advice. The content does not replace consultation with a qualified expert or professional regarding the specific facts and circumstances of any particular matter.