Use boundary: This is an editorial framework for product-evidence pathways and project document control—not a certification register, technical-submittal approval, engineering design, permit decision, legal responsibility matrix or independent external review. No pergola product is represented as evaluated or certified by any scheme below.
6regional evidence pathways
10project-dossier stages
7controlled statuses
0products rated here
Product-evidence pathways in six regions
The same test report, certificate or mark can serve different functions across jurisdictions. This table explains how official frameworks use evidence; it does not establish that a product, report or project satisfies requirements.
| Region | Official framework and entry | Evidence can support | Still verify for the project |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | ICC-ES evaluation reports and the locally adopted building code. Official entry 1 · Official entry 2 | An evaluation report identifies the product, evaluated code or acceptance criteria, installation requirements and conditions of use. | The report is not a permit or universal approval. Confirm that the report is current, the exact product and configuration are covered, and the local code official accepts its use. |
| European Union / EEA | Construction Products Regulation, Declaration of Performance and CE marking where the product is covered by a harmonised standard or European Technical Assessment. Official entry 1 · Official entry 2 | The Declaration of Performance communicates declared product performance through the common CPR technical language. | CE marking is not a project design, local permit or statement that every declared characteristic satisfies the project's national requirements. Match the declared performance, intended use and national rules. |
| England | Building Regulations Approved Document 7: materials and workmanship, 2013 edition incorporating 2018 amendments. Official entry 1 | The guidance identifies routes for establishing the suitability of materials and adequacy of workmanship, including standards, certification, tests and management systems. | Approved Documents are guidance for England. Select the correct UK nation and verify the actual building-control, planning, product and workmanship requirements for the project. |
| Australia | NCC 2022 Part A5 documentation of design and construction, including evidence of suitability. Official entry 1 · Official entry 2 | Part A5 connects fit-for-purpose materials, products, forms of construction and designs to appropriate documentary evidence and appropriate installation. | Evidence can be rejected when it does not establish the relevant NCC requirement or is inappropriate for the use. State, territory, authority, certifier and contract requirements still apply. |
| Canada | National Research Council Canada — Canadian Construction Materials Centre product assessments. Official entry 1 · Official entry 2 | CCMC evaluation reports and listings provide product-specific technical opinions, evaluated uses and conditions tied to Canadian code requirements. | A CCMC assessment is not the authority's project approval. Verify the current registry entry, exact product identity, intended use, conditions and the provincial, territorial and municipal requirements. |
| New Zealand | MBIE CodeMark product certification and other evidence considered by the Building Consent Authority. Official entry 1 · Official entry 2 | A current CodeMark certificate must be accepted as Building Code evidence when the product or method is used within the certificate's details and limitations. | Check the current certificate register, limitations of use, installation instructions and maintenance requirements. CodeMark does not replace site design, consent conditions or other applicable law. |
Five joins that must all match
01
Document identity
Report number, issuer, status, edition and attachments are complete.
02
Product identity
Model, revision, materials, manufacturing location and field labels are traceable.
03
Configuration and boundary conditions
Span, size, roof state, connections, foundations and tested assembly match the project.
04
Site performance demand
Project wind, snow, rain, corrosion, fire and other actions do not exceed the evidence scope.
05
Responsible-party acceptance
The authority, designer, certifier or other accountable party records acceptance only within its scope.
Ten-stage project evidence dossier
The accountable category is a coordination prompt, not an allocation of legal duties in any jurisdiction. Confirm actual duties, qualifications, signatures and approval authority for the project and contract.
| Stage | Record to retain | Coordination category | Before release to the next stage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Project definition | Project address, owner brief, intended use, scope, drawing register and change authority. | Owner or client and lead designer | One controlled project identity and scope are agreed before technical evidence is assessed. |
| Classification and approvals | Actual construction classification, authority contacts, adopted rules, planning path, permit or exemption reasoning and conditions. | Authority, lead designer and owner | The approval path and unresolved authority questions are recorded; no national model-code page is treated as a local decision. |
| Site and design basis | Survey, boundaries, utilities, exposure, wind, snow, rain, seismic, soil, fire, flood and adjacent-building assumptions as applicable. | Lead designer and relevant qualified specialists | Every governing site action or hazard has a dated source, value, responsible interpreter and stated uncertainty. |
| Structural design | Load paths, member and connection calculations, foundations, anchors, supporting-building checks, design states and stated limitations. | Responsible structural designer | Calculations match the issued geometry, materials, site actions, operating states and connection details. |
| Product evidence | Exact model and revision, declared performance, report or certificate, test standard and edition, tested configuration, limitations, installation instructions and current status. | Manufacturer or supplier and responsible designer | The supplied product, evidence identity, project configuration and required performance are demonstrably the same or differences are resolved in writing. |
| Interfaces and services | Building attachment, weatherproofing, drainage, overflow, fire separation, accessibility, electrical, controls, heating, gas and plumbing coordination as applicable. | Lead designer, specialist designers, manufacturer and qualified trades | Every interface has one coordinated detail, performance owner, inspection point and accepted deviation path. |
| Technical review and approval | Submittal register, comments, requests for information, design changes, concessions, authority conditions and signed dispositions. | Responsible reviewers and approving parties | No rejected, superseded or unresolved critical item is used as construction information. |
| Fabrication and installation | Approved-for-construction documents, product identification, delivery checks, installer competence, hold points, concealed-work records, nonconformities and corrective actions. | Fabricator, installer and inspection party | Installed work is traceable to approved information and every nonconformity has an accepted disposition. |
| Inspection and commissioning | Structural observations, fastener or torque records where specified, drainage and overflow tests, controls, sensors, safety functions, electrical certificates and outstanding defects. | Inspector, commissioner and qualified trades | Acceptance criteria, test method, result, witness, date and unresolved defects are recorded before handover. |
| Handover, operation and change control | As-built information, certificates, warranties, operating limits, emergency states, maintenance plan, spare parts, training, inspection schedule and later alterations. | Owner, operator or facilities manager | The operating owner receives a complete, current dossier and reopens verification when use, enclosure, roof, loads, services or site conditions change. |
Document status needs more than “yes” or “no”
missing· Missing- Required evidence has not been received.
received_unverified· Received — unverified- A file exists, but identity, currency, scope or applicability has not been checked.
verified_scope_match· Verified scope match- The reviewer recorded how the document matches the product, configuration, edition and project question.
accepted_by_responsible_party· Accepted by responsible party- The accountable authority, designer, certifier or other responsible party recorded acceptance within its scope.
rejected· Rejected- The document is not accepted for the stated use; the reason and next action must be retained.
superseded· Superseded- A later controlled document replaces this record; it must not be used for construction or approval.
not_applicable_with_reason· Not applicable — reason recorded- The item is outside the project scope and the responsible reviewer recorded why.
Core control rule
Receiving a file is not verification; verification is not acceptance by the responsible party; acceptance does not make a document valid for every product, configuration, address or later alteration. Every status change should retain the date, reviewer, basis, decision and unresolved issue.
Project-use sequence
- Establish one project identity, scope, document numbering and revision rule.
- Confirm the authority, adopted rules, approval path and actual construction classification.
- Register documents against the ten stages and use only the seven controlled statuses.
- Check the five joins across document, product, configuration, site performance and responsible-party acceptance.
- Handover the current complete dossier and reopen verification when roof, enclosure, loads, services, use or site conditions change.
Download and verify
JSON retains the complete bilingual framework; the regional CSV supports comparison of official evidence pathways; the blank dossier CSV provides fields and ten stages without real project conclusions. No separate open-data licence is asserted for these files.
Confirm standards and adoption layers · Choose evidence by question · Check one product claim