.jpg)
Building owners and facility teams face a practical challenge: regulations increasingly require measurable monitoring and reporting of energy consumption, comfort, and indoor air quality. But these new requirements also present opportunities. By implementing effective monitoring, buildings can not only remain compliant but also improve operational efficiency, comfort, and investment planning. The question is: what is the minimum requirement, and where do you start to immediately create added value?
The performance of non-residential buildings is increasingly evaluated based on measurability, controllability, and demonstrable performance. Energy consumption, comfort, indoor air quality, and reporting are no longer separate issues. They are integrated into the way a building is technically monitored and managed.
That is precisely what the EPBD and BACS regulations address. For many buildings, simply having a building management system is no longer sufficient. The question is whether the building can effectively monitor energy consumption, detect anomalies, adjust systems, and make data usable for management, reporting, and certification.
This raises a practical question for owners, managers, and facility teams: What is needed today to ensure compliance, and which steps also add value in terms of comfort, operations, and investment planning?
The European EPBD lays the groundwork for a more efficient and smarter building stock. In Flanders, part of this has been translated into specific requirements regarding building automation and control systems for non-residential buildings, known as BACS for short.
As of December 31, 2025, non-residential buildings with a heating and/or air conditioning system with a rated capacity exceeding 290 kW must be equipped with a building automation and control system. By December 31, 2029, at the latest, this threshold will be lowered to 70 kW. As a result, the requirement will apply to many more buildings in the coming years.
The core principle of BACS is clear: a building must not only be equipped with systems, but also be able to monitor, analyze, and adjust those systems. This includes energy monitoring, communication between technical systems, consumption analysis, optimization of technical systems, integration of renewable energy, automated lighting, and indoor air quality monitoring.
This is a familiar scenario for many existing buildings. While a building management system (BMS) is often already in place, measurement data is scattered, alarms are of limited use, reporting requires manual effort, and the link between energy consumption, comfort complaints, and control settings is not always clear. This makes it difficult to make informed decisions.
BACS is sometimes viewed as a software issue. In practice, it is much broader in scope. It touches on HVAC, electrical systems, measurement infrastructure, IT, data, maintenance, and operations.
The key question is not which platform offers the most features, but what functions the building actually needs. An existing building does not always need to be completely renovated. Sometimes, a targeted expansion of measurement points, trend logging, alarm management, or control strategies is sufficient.
There are a few points to consider:
The current status is not always fully known. As-built information is missing or outdated. Monitoring points are in place, but they are not always reliable or usable. Some systems function properly on their own, but do not provide sufficient data for monitoring or reporting.
Nor is the priority always clear-cut. A shortcoming in the BACS system is not necessarily the first area that requires investment. Sometimes, a targeted intervention focused on the largest consumers yields better results than a broad system integration. Sometimes, a better metering structure is needed first before optimization makes sense.
That is why a phased approach is important. Rather than starting with a comprehensive platform, we should first determine what is legally required, what technical gaps exist, and where the greatest added value lies.
Ingenium uses the Smart Readiness Indicator SRI) as a structured framework. The SRI is based on the same European context as BACS and helps to objectively assess a building’s smart functionality. It is not an end in itself, but rather a framework for consistently evaluating technical systems, energy efficiency, and data usage.
The approach consists of three clear steps.
We begin with an as-built survey and a site visit. During this process, we assess which systems are in place, how they are currently controlled, which measurement points are available, and which data is actually usable.
The output is an initial BACS compliance status, supplemented with quick wins and a roadmap for improvement. This quickly clarifies where the building stands today and which areas require further attention.
We then assess the current situation against BACS regulations. We identify which functions are missing, where additional measurements are needed, and which improvements are relevant for energy efficiency, comfort, management, and reporting.
We work with the client to establish priorities. In doing so, we consider not only compliance but also feasibility, cost, timing, and impact. The result is a well-founded sequence of actions, complete with budgets and a realistic timeline.
A good study doesn’t end with a list of recommendations. The measures must also be made feasible.
That is why we translate the selected actions into a concrete action plan. This may include a measurement and control concept, functional specifications, a checklist, a measurement plan, integration principles, a testing and acceptance approach, and agreements regarding data and reporting.
This results in a set of documents that can be used for bidding, construction, and commissioning. Contractors and integrators know what is expected, and the owner gains greater control over the scope, performance, and handover.
A well-planned BACS process offers more than just legal compliance.
• Clarity regarding the building’s current BACS status
• Insight into missing features, data points, and data quality
• Priorities based on compliance, impact, and feasibility
• Reduced risk of unnecessary platform choices or fragmented interventions
• Improved monitoring of energy consumption, comfort, and indoor air quality
• A ready-to-implement plan covering tendering, execution, and commissioning
For owners and managers, the added value lies primarily in the combination of compliance and operational efficiency. By first accurately assessing the current situation, you can avoid unnecessary investments. By then setting targeted priorities, it becomes clear which measures will have the greatest impact. And by defining the chosen steps in precise technical terms, implementation becomes more manageable.
BACS is therefore not an administrative requirement that is added as an afterthought. It is a way to make buildings more measurable, controllable, and manageable. Those who approach this in a structured manner simultaneously build compliance, comfort, lower operating costs, and a stronger case for tenants, owners, investors, and certification.
Would you like to know what the EPBD and BACS actually mean for your building or property portfolio? A targeted assessment is often all it takes to get a clear picture of the current situation, the main gaps, and the appropriate next steps.
.png)
