What is DTS — and why would you use the DTS pathway over JV3?

Understanding the Basics: Section J Compliance under the NCC

Under the NCC (now on its 2022 edition for most jurisdictions), energy efficiency requirements for commercial and multi-unit buildings are set out in Section J (Part J2–J9 depending on building type).

To demonstrate compliance with Section J, project managers and builders have two main options:

1. Deemed-to-Satisfy(DTS) / Prescriptive Pathway - where each building element (e.g., insulation, glazing, sealing, lighting, HVAC) must meet specified prescriptive criteria set out in the code.
‍‍
2. Performance-based Pathway using JV3 Verification Method (JV3) - also called the “verification using reference building” method — where the proposed building’s energy performance is modelled and compared against a notional reference building built to the DTS standards. If the proposed design’s annual energy consumption or greenhouse gas emissions are equal to or better than the reference building, the design complies.

In other words: DTS is rules-based and element-by-element; JV3 is performance-based and holistic.

Key Differences: DTS vs JV3

Criteria	DTS / Prescriptive Pathway	JV3 / Performance Pathway
Flexibility / Design Freedom	Low — must meet fixed, prescriptive criteria for each building element.	High — allows trade-offs between building elements and services (e.g. better glazing + lighter insulation, or high-performance HVAC + modest façade), giving design flexibility.
Complexity / Effort	Simple to apply — checklists, prescriptive compliance.	Complex — requires whole-of-building energy modelling, comparison against reference building, sometimes several modelling runs.
Up-front Cost & Time	Lower — less technical work, faster compliance path.	Higher — modelling, consultant time, iterations; more time to deliver report.
Design Constraints	More rigid — may force over-specified or conservative elements to meet code (heavy insulation, limited glazing, standard HVAC).	More design freedom — especially beneficial for unique architectural forms, high façade glazing, mixed uses, or sustainability/efficiency-led design.
Energy Efficiency Outcome	Meets minimum code requirements (safe and compliant).	Potentially better — because holistic optimisation can lead to lower energy use, lower GHG emissions, and smarter integration of building fabric and services.
Best For	Straightforward, standard buildings or where simplicity and speed matter.	Complex, bespoke, high-performance, sustainability-focused buildings; those wanting flexibility or cost-effective optimisation.

When DTS Might Be the Right Choice

You might prefer DTS when:

The building design is simple and standard — typical floorplans, modest glazing, straightforward layout.
You want the quickest, lowest-cost compliance path.
You prefer certainty — knowing exactly what the code expects, without iterative modelling or performance uncertainty.
Project scope, budget or schedule cannot accommodate the extra time and cost of performance modelling.

Because DTS is prescriptive, it tends to suit conventional commercial or residential-class buildings where there’s no need (or appetite) for ambitious sustainability outcomes beyond the code minimum.

When JV3 Offers Real Value

The JV3 path often makes sense when:

The design is atypical or ambitious — e.g., heavy glazing or glazed façades, large open-plan spaces, mixed-use, industrial/warehouse, or complex HVAC/heating/ventilation needs.
You want greater energy efficiency, lower operational costs, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, or sustainability credentials beyond the code minimum.
You’re aiming for performance-based sustainability standards (e.g., energy optimisation, lower lifecycle costs, improved occupant comfort).
There’s flexibility in design, construction, materials, or services that don’t easily fit within prescriptive criteria.

For example: a JV3 energy-modelling exercise might allow you to reduce insulation thickness, or use lighter-weight construction, or trade off glazing performance via high-performance HVAC — while still complying. That flexibility can lead to cost savings, better design outcomes and more environmentally sensitive buildings.

Why a Client Might Choose DTS Over JV3 — Or Ask SUHO to Help Decide

When you request a Section J Report from SUHO, here’s why you might elect for DTS (or at least start there):

Cost-effectiveness and simplicity - DTS is quicker and less expensive, making it a practical first option when designs are conventional or margin is limited.
‍‍
Schedule certainty - fewer variables mean less time spent modelling, reviewing, or iterating — reducing risk of delays at DA or Building Permit stage.

Regulatory compliance without complexity - especially useful for projects where the goal is simply to satisfy NCC obligation for permit, not to optimise energy beyond that.
‍‍
Baseline check - even if you later go JV3, the DTS model provides a reference building baseline; having it prepared can support quicker decision-making (rather than starting modelling from scratch). Indeed, some advisors recommend preparing a DTS check first as a baseline.

On the other hand, you might choose (or be advised) to go JV3 because:

Your design doesn’t conform well to prescriptive rules - high glazing ratio, unusual geometry, sustainability-driven decisions or mixed-use functionality.
‍‍
You seek long-term operational efficiency and lower energy costs , not just compliance.

You want flexibility in specification - materials, glazing, services — to balance cost, energy performance and design vision.
‍‍
You desire documented, model-verified performance — useful for sustainability certification, investor value, marketing, long-term asset value.

With SUHO’s expertise in both pathways, we help clients decide the optimal pathway, prepare the required documentation (including thermal-bridging calculations, envelope performance, glazing analysis, HVAC/lighting/ventilation strategy), and deliver a robust Section J Report for compliance.

Conclusion: DTS vs JV3 — Not a Question of Right or Wrong, but What’s Right for Your Project

There is no one-size-fits-all answer to “should I use DTS or JV3?” — the correct path depends on your project’s design complexity, budget, energy performance goals, timeline, and the building’s long-term use.

For standard, conventional builds, DTS is often the most efficient, reliable and cost-effective route.
For complex, innovative or sustainability-driven buildings, JV3 offers flexibility, potential performance gains, and better alignment with long-term operational and environmental objectives.

At SUHO, we guide you objectively — reviewing your project’s specifics, modelling where necessary, comparing likely outcomes, and recommending the pathway that balances compliance, cost, design and performance.

Thinking about Section J for your next project? Let’s talk. We’ll help you choose wisely.

Get in Touch

Ensure your project is built on sustainable principles with SUHO’s ESD planning services. Contact us today to see how we can tailor our services to meet your project's needs.