A marked path, not a sign above a door.
IBC Section 1025 (and the parallel IFC 1025) requires means of egress in high-rise buildings to be marked with approved luminous or self-luminous material, or with signs, so that the path remains visible when normal lighting fails.
The practical consequence: a photoluminescent strip at floor level or on the handrail, continuous from the occupied space to the exit, plus a listed exit sign. A sign alone does not satisfy the clause in most adopted editions — the path has to be marked.
Local amendments are common — New York City Local Law 26 and 141, California's CHBC, and several state fire codes add requirements beyond the base text. Check the edition your authority having jurisdiction (AHJ) has adopted before specifying.
Section numbers shift between editions. Always cite the edition adopted by the project's AHJ.
Three numbers and a listing.
A plan reviewer looks for the charge condition, the 90-minute luminance and a UL file number. Everything else is supporting detail.
Duration beats peak
A material that peaks at 300 mcd/m² and falls to 4 by minute 90 fails. The code cares about the end of the window, not the start.
Listing, not just a test
UL 924 is a product listing, not a bench test. A test report alone will not satisfy a reviewer who asks for the listing file.
Continuous path
Marking has to be continuous from the occupied space to the exit. Gaps at door frames are the most common inspection failure.
| Requirement | Typical value | How it is proven | Our document |
|---|---|---|---|
| Charge | 15 min @ 25 lux | ASTM E2072 §6 | SGS report 2025-05 |
| Luminance, 10 min | ≥ 90 mcd/m² | ASTM E2073 | SGS report 2025-05 |
| Luminance, 90 min | ≥ 7 mcd/m² | ASTM E2073 | SGS report 2025-05 |
| Sign listing | UL 924 | UL listing file | UL file E-512xxx |
| Flame spread | Class A | ASTM E84 | Report 2024-12 |
Values are the minimums our product is tested to, not the code minimum in every jurisdiction. Where a local code sets a higher threshold, the higher one governs.
Four questions reviewers ask.
Answering these in the package usually avoids a resubmittal.
In most adopted editions, no. The clause requires the egress path to be marked, and a sign at the door does not mark the path. A few jurisdictions accept a sign-only approach in small buildings — confirm with the AHJ before designing to that assumption.
Only if the tape is rated for the substrate and the carpet is not the sole marking. Adhesion to loop pile is unreliable; most projects use a rigid carrier or a stair nosing insert instead. The code does not prohibit it, but the installation will fail before the inspection does.
25 lux for 15 minutes is the test condition. In practice a corridor on occupancy sensors may sit below that for hours, so the material never fully charges. Check the lighting schedule — this is the single most common design error we see.
No. UL 924 covers exit signs and emergency lighting; UL 1994 covers luminous egress path marking systems. A project may require both, and they are separate listings. We hold UL 924 for signs and test to ASTM E2072/E2073 for path marking.
Compliance pack for the AHJ
Everything a plan reviewer typically asks for, in one download.