What basic standards exclude

Exclusion	Principle
Existing buildings	the scheme addresses new buildings
Single-family dwellings	separate regime
Very small buildings	below a threshold of storeys and area
Refurbishment	scope disputed across sources

Those exclusions are neither general nor final, and each calls for checking.

This is the widest exclusion, and it rests on reference dates. It concerns existing buildings.

The scheme does not apply to existing buildings, the notion of existing being defined by the date the building application was submitted, with distinct dates by building type. The date retained is checked on the original permit.

Those dates differ for high and medium buildings, for low buildings and for industrial buildings. They range from the mid-1990s to the late 2000s.

Two consequences.

Verification bears on the date of the application, not on that of construction. A building completed after a reference date may fall under the earlier regime if its application was older.

The reference date depends on the category of the building, which makes the classification covered in the article on low, medium and high buildings doubly important.

Two distinct exclusions, often confused.

Single-family dwellings fall under a separate regime, and an interpretative note from the administration has clarified that notion, testifying to difficulties of application.

Very small buildings are excluded on the basis of a threshold combining a number of storeys and an area. The threshold is cumulative: both conditions must be met, and a building meeting only one remains within scope.

Those exclusions do not mean an absence of requirements. Regional obligations exist, notably on detection, covered in the article on sector rules by region.

This is the point on which professional sources diverge, and knowing that is better than applying a categorical answer. The qualification of a major renovation is not uniform.

Some sources state that refurbishment left the scope following an amendment in the early 2000s.

Others present the scheme as also covering refurbishment and extension of existing buildings.

The divergence is real and it bears on a structural point. The prudent position is to check with the authority competent for the project concerned, and not to base a design decision on a general answer found online.

This question connects to the wider subject covered in the article on new, existing and refurbishment. The tipping thresholds are explained there.

The essential point of this article, and the one least retained. Exclusion from the basic standards does not mean absence of rules.

Four bodies of rules continue to apply to a building excluded from the basic standards. None of them depends on the basic standards to apply.

Regional sector rules, for premises open to the public, which are regional and independent of the federal scheme.

Welfare-at-work regulation, as soon as the building houses workers.

Requirements imposed by the permit, notably those arising from the fire service opinion, covered in the article on what the municipality adds.

The rules of good practice, which apply in any event and whose breach engages liability, as the article on good practice and liability explains.

In other words: outside the federal scope does not mean outside the law. An excluded building may face equally heavy requirements, from another source.

Four rules.

Check the date of the building application, not that of the works, to establish the applicable regime.

Do not infer an absence of requirements from an exclusion, but look for the other sources.

Treat the refurbishment question case by case, the general answer not being settled.

Check the cumulative nature of exclusion thresholds, one condition met not being enough.