New Construction / UK / 2018 /

06 Materials

Information correct as of 19thApril 2024. Please see kb.breeam.com for the latest compliance information.

Building LCA – BREEAM Assessor or AP as consultant - KBCN1234

It is possible for a competent BREEAM assessor or AP to carry out the building LCA options appraisals. This is provided that they have had no direct input into the design of the options, and a conflict of interest statement is produced for QA. As well as outlining how conflicts of interest are managed, this statement must also confirm that the data provided by the design team for the purpose of producing the LCA options has not been altered in any way.

Building LCA – Comparison with the BREEAM Benchmark – mixed-used buildings - KBCN1191

If the building's net internal area is ≥50% either office, retail or industrial (see Mat 01 specific note 'Mixed use buildings' in the technical manual) then that use type shall be selected in the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool. A building LCA tool may then be selected for comparison with the BREEAM benchmark. If the building's net internal area is <50% either office, retail or industrial then 'mixed-use' shall be selected as the building type in the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool. Then no building LCA tool can be selected for comparison with the BREEAM benchmark - only options appraisal can be done (with no penalty in the credits available).

Building LCA – Evidence requirements for two (or more) BREEAM assessments on different parts of the same new building design - KBCN1173

As the building LCA work must cover the whole new building design (see KBCN1172 ‘Scope of the building LCA when a BREEAM Assessment covers only part of the new building design’), it is equally applicable to all BREEAM assessments being carried out on the building. Therefore, the same building LCA evidence may be submitted for each BREEAM assessment.

Building LCA – Options appraisal including reuse/recycling of existing construction products on site - KBCN1174

In general, reuse and recycling of existing construction product on site is likely to mean lower environmental impacts compared with products from other sources. However, this may not always be the case. After the demolition, transport and processing of the waste into a recognised product is finished (impacts at the end of the previous life), there will often be subsequent ‘product stage’ processing impacts (impacts at the start of the next life e.g. crushing, cleaning, making good). In addition, there will typically be a need for ongoing maintenance and possible replacement during the life of the new building. Building LCA options appraisal will help to show if this amounts to a higher environmental impact than products from other sources. Even when it seems self-evident that reuse is optimal (e.g. in-situ products with minimal ongoing maintenance and a remaining service life sufficient for the building design life – such as reused in-situ concrete substructure), options appraisal will demonstrate to the design team the environmental benefit of reuse vs. newly installed products. This is of particular relevance where the reuse will impose design constraints (e.g. structural layout, aesthetic) that the design team have accepted in order to achieve lower environmental impacts. For these reasons, it is valid to carry out options appraisal that compares reuse or recycling of existing construction products on site with products from other sources. Please note: For Building LCA in BREEAM, reuse does not apply to existing construction products that have been installed in preparation for a planned new building (or planned extension to a building) – even if a significant amount of time has passed. For example, substructure/hard landscaping that has never been used to support/serve a building cannot be considered as reused. Nor can substructure/hard landscaping that has been used to support/serve an existing building but, in addition, was originally designed to support/serve a planned future extension. Where this situation applies to a project, the Assessor should send a technical query to BREEAM explaining the basis of this conclusion. BREEAM will clarify how to proceed with this credit. Please note: For Building LCA in BREEAM, there shall be no assumption of reuse of products on-site after the end of the building’s life. All impacts (A, B and C stages) must be included as per the product LCA data found in the recognised building LCA tool. Although projects that chose to remove and dispose of reusable or recyclable products will not be penalised by the resulting demolition, transport, processing and disposal (impacts which belong to the end-of-life of the previous building), reuse is still significantly incentivised by avoiding the A1 to A4 (all or in part) and stage C impacts that would result from using products from other sources. 
24/01/2019 - Re-worded for clarity and additional information added (last paragraph)
23/09/2019 - Re-worded for clarity

Building LCA – Projects that include no hard landscaping - KBCN1175

The scope of applicable hard landscaping is the following (based on NRM 1, 2nd Edition by RICS):- 8.2.1 Roads, paths and pavings: • Roads, paths and pavements (vehicular and pedestrian) • Car parks • Protection of grassed areas • Non-specialist surfacings and pavings used for sports and general amenities. 8.2.2 Special surfacings and pavings: • Surfacings and pavings specially and specifically for outdoor sporting activities and general amenities. Almost all projects will involve some design work to one or more of these classifications, which can be informed by building LCA. For example, even on a tight urban site some works will be required to the surrounding pavement areas, building entrances or provision for deliveries. If the BREEAM assessment covers only part of the building, such as an upper floor, but hard landscaping works are part of the wider building design then it is still applicable to the assessment, see KBCN1172. Where the hard landscaping design includes only reuse of existing construction products on site (e.g. re-installation or making-good) it is often still applicable to the assessment, see KBCN1174. If the extent of, or options for hard landscaping are relatively limited then it would be advantageous to maximise the number of substructure options and minimise the hard landscaping options appraised for this credit. If the above guidance is followed carefully, and the assessor determines there is no applicable hard landscaping, then the Assessor should send a technical query to BREEAM explaining the basis of this conclusion. BREEAM will clarify how to proceed with this credit.

Building LCA – Projects that include no substructure - KBCN1176

The scope of applicable substructure is as follows:- 1.1.1 Standard foundations • Standard foundations up to and including the damp-proof course. 1.1.2 Specialist foundations • Load bearing foundation piles and caissons. • Inserting additional foundation support under and around existing foundations. 1.1.3 Lowest floor construction: • The entire lowest floor assembly below the underside of screed or lowest floor finish. 1.1.4 Basement excavation • Bulk excavation required for construction of floors below ground level. 1.1.5 Basement retaining walls • External basement retaining walls in contact with earthwork up to and including the damp-proof course. • External basement retaining walls consisting of shoulder to shoulder piles or other vertical construction, which are subsequently partially excavated on one side to form retaining walls which obtain their stability from the embedded lower portion. Almost all projects will involve some design work to one or more of these classifications, which can be informed by building LCA. If the BREEAM assessment covers only part of the building, such as an upper floor, but substructure works are part of the wider building design then it is still applicable to the assessment, see KBCN1172. Where the substructure design includes only reuse of existing construction products on site it is often still applicable to the assessment, see KBCN1174. If the extent of, or options for substructure are relatively limited then it would be advantageous to maximise the number of hard landscaping options and minimise the substructure options appraised for this credit. If the above guidance is followed carefully, and the assessor determines there is no applicable substructure, then the assessor should send a technical query to BREEAM explaining the basis of this conclusion. BREEAM will clarify how to proceed with this credit.

Building LCA – Scope when a BREEAM Assessment covers only part of the new building design - KBCN1172

To give reliable results, building LCA must capture the interactions that occur across an entire design (the system). A design decision in one part of the design will, in many cases, cause knock-on effects to other parts of the design. If only part of a building being designed is included in the building LCA the designer may choose a design option that optimises environmental impacts for the limited part analysed, but will be unaware of potential detrimental effects to the overall environmental impact of the building. In addition, if a building LCA only includes the construction products that form the BREEAM assessment area, inconsistencies arise with regards to construction products that serve all areas of the building in common. For example, an assessment on a central floor that excludes the roof, compared with an assessment on the (otherwise identical) top floor that does include the roof. This approach would be unfair. Therefore, the building LCA scope should normally include the whole building design (as defined in Mat 01, ‘Scope of assessment’) even if the area covered by the BREEAM assessment scope is only part of the building. However, where in the opinion of the BREEAM Assessor this is not reasonable, it is acceptable for the building LCA scope to match the BREEAM assessment scope. Examples where this may be the case include newly-constructed, mixed-use buildings (where the different use zones are assessed under different schemes or some are not being assessed at all) and part new-build part refurbishment projects. Where this is the case:-

Within or forming the boundary of the BREEAM assessment scope. Predominantly the responsibility of the project team undertaking the building LCA work.

Note: Based on the above conditions, if no construction elements/components are included, or what is included is too limited to have significantly different options to appraise, then credits cannot be awarded.

Select ‘Other’ for the ‘BREEAM assessment building use type’ (note: ‘mixed-use’ should only be entered for mixed-use buildings where the whole building is included in the building LCA scope). For ‘Functional quantity…’, enter the value corresponding to the scope included in the building LCA. Include the following text in cell C10 of the ‘DifferencesID2,3,4’ sheet: “The scope of this building LCA work matches the BREEAM assessment scope, which covers only part of a building being newly constructed/refurbished. Of the areas being newly constructed/refurbished, the building use type(s) of the areas included in the building LCA scope are [insert use type(s)] and the building use type(s) of the areas excluded are [insert use type(s)]. The Functional quantity of the areas excluded are [insert value]”.

06-Mar-2024 - Scheme applicability updated to UK NC V6.
01-Dec-2020 - Clarification to previous update added.
27-Nov-2020 - Exceptions paragraph added.
06-Dec-2019 - Scope of KBCN clarified.

Building LCA – similar buildings approach - KBCN1459

If multiple buildings share an identical design, as per KBCN1226, the one set of LCA evidence can be submitted for (where pursued) the superstructure and core buildings services criteria for each identical building. Where buildings are similar, but not identical the following applies. Level of variation Tool submission Separate submissions are carried out in BREEAM Projects: Evidence submission Separate and specific building LCA evidence for each building must be submitted for (where pursued): For options appraisals, common evidence covering all similar buildings can be used. There is no requirement for different design options for each building, although this can still be done if this brings value to the project. 
04-Oct-2023 - Title and layout updated for clarity and consistency. Scheme applicability updated.
16-Nov-2021 - Revised and re-published.

Building LCA tools recognised by BREEAM - KBCN1118

The following document shows the building LCA tools that are recognised by BREEAM for each BREEAM scheme. Only submissions from the tools listed here will be accepted as part of a BREEAM assessment. These recognised tools may be either an IMPACT Compliant tool or another type of building LCA tool that has been evaluated by BREEAM and considered suitable for carrying out building LCA according to BREEAM’s scheme specific requirements. To apply for a new tool to be evaluated, please contact: [email protected] Where more than one version of the same tool is listed for a given scheme version, the most recent version of the tool (that is available at the point building LCA work commences on the project) should be used. It is acceptable to use subsequent, more recent releases/versions of a recognised tool (that have the same name as shown in the table). View Building LCA tools recognised by BREEAM.       
Table updated to new downloadable format, with new layout and new recognised LCA tools and corrections added 01/03/2024
Table updated to include new recognised LCA tools and corrections 10/11/2023
Table updated to include new recognised LCA tools and corrections 22/07/2022
Table updated to include new recognised LCA tools 12/03/2021
KBCN updated for clarity regarding subsequent tool versions on 10/03/2021

Building LCA – Alternative designs resulting in options for single or multiple group elements - KBCN1369

Alternative designs – single group elements When undertaking option appraisal, projects may choose to explore discrete alternative designs that significantly affect only a single group element (either superstructure, substructure, hard landscaping or core building services). For example, a change from external timber cladding to aluminium cladding is a discrete change to the superstructure if it has no significant effect on the substructure, hard landscaping or core building services. This is more likely where the design of other group elements is largely fixed, or where each group element is being designed in relative isolation (e.g. by different designers). This approach is acceptable but is less likely to result in a holistic analysis of the project and may be limited in improving environmental performance. For this approach, the alternative design forms the basis of an option for the relevant group element section in the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool only (note: more than one change can be included per option). Alternative designs – multiple group elements Alternative designs that affect more than one group element are acceptable and, being more holistic, are encouraged for options appraisal. They are more likely to result in differences to the overall building design, rather than a discrete aspect of it. As such, greater insight may be gained into the environmental performance of the overall building and how to reduce it – the purpose of building LCA. However, as more than one group element is affected, the scale of modelling and analysis work is likely to be greater. In addition, to be meaningful, alternative designs of this nature typically require building LCA to start earlier in the design process. Therefore, it is acceptable for the same alternative design to form the basis of options in more than one group element section of the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool – providing each option is significantly different from the other options in the same group element section (as per the requirements in the technical manual). This is illustrated below.
Alternative design explored Resulting in significant differences for the following group elements Significantly different change(s) listed in the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool (illustrative only: Not detailed, not exhaustive)
Removal of occupied basement. Addition of extra upper floor Superstructure Building 1 storey taller
Substructure Removal of retaining walls
Core building services Primary plant moved to roof from basement. Changes to distribution layouts
Structural grid changed from 7.5m to 9m Superstructure Relocation and resize of columns and beams
Substructure Relocation and resize of piles
Change from HVAC to natural ventilation Superstructure Floorplate depth reduced from 25m to 15m
Substructure Relocation and resize of piles
Hard landscaping Relocation of surrounding road and paths
Core building services Change from HVAC to natural ventilation
Change from a refrigerant distribution-based system to an air distribution-based system Superstructure Changes to cores and floor-to-floor dimension
Core building services Change from a refrigerant distribution-based system to an air distribution-based system
  For clarity, where an alternative design affects more than one group element (such as the above examples) and forms the basis of changes listed for different group element options, the link between them should be detailed in the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool. This is illustrated below. ‘Description of differences between superstructure options’ (sheet name) Example of an alternative design listed as the sole change (ID 2) Example of an alternative design change plus another subsequent change (ID 3). ‘Description of differences between substructure and hard landscaping options’ (sheet name) Example of an alternative design listed as the sole change (ID 7).

Building LCA – evidence requirements for multiple assessments with identical designs - KBCN1226

Superstructure + core building services Where an identical superstructure design and / or identical core building services design is used for multiple buildings, the same building LCA evidence may be submitted for all these assessments. The following shall be identical: Substructure and hard landscaping It is unlikely that the same substructure and hard landscaping design will apply to more than one building due to variations in ground conditions and site layout. Therefore, it is not acceptable for the same substructure / hard landscaping LCA evidence to be submitted for this criteria for more than one assessment. Similar buildings approach If the LCA(s) are part of a similar buildings assessment, please also see KBCN1459. 
04-Oct-2023 - Link to KBCN1459 added. Scheme applicability updated. KBCN layout adjusted for clarity.
 

Building LCA – ‘Baseline’ and ‘Integrated’ approaches - KBCN1370

Both ‘baseline’ and ‘integrated’ approaches are applicable to option appraisal. A description of each and how they work with the Mat 01/02 Results Submission tool is given below. Baseline A ‘baseline’ approach means building LCA starts after the project team have established an initial building design. Once an initial building design is available, building LCA is used to work out its environmental impact – the ‘baseline’ result. Then various alternative designs are explored to lower the impact compared with the ‘baseline’. This approach is common where the building LCA work is less integrated with the design process and done as a separate exercise (e.g. by an LCA specialist for example). The alternative designs can be used as the basis of options for options appraisal. Where this approach is followed for Mat 01, the ‘baseline’ option will typically be the worst performing option and it is logical for it to be included as the 1st option in the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool. The subsequent alternative designs explored form the 2nd, 3rd etc. options. Integrated An ‘integrated’ approach means building LCA is integrated into the design process before the design team have established an initial building design (there is no ‘baseline’). From this earlier stage, as alternative designs are explored, building LCA is used to inform the designers on environmental impact performance of each one. This approach requires the LCA work to be highly integrated within the design process, either by the designers themselves or by a specialist working in parallel. Earlier use and greater integration of building LCA should prove more effective at reducing impacts. For example, compared with the ‘baseline’ approach, there is no initial design that the project team have already spent time developing which may in some respects have become fixed. Where an ‘integrated’ approach is followed for Mat 01, the differences between options are still expressed as ‘changes’ relative to option 1 in the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool. However, this does not mean option 1 is necessarily worse. It is simply a convenient way of declaring the differences between the options – any of the options can be option 1. For both approaches Mat 01 options can be based on either: -

Credit Score Ready Reckoner - KBCN1120

The downloadable files below are both designed to allow users to identify how many credits are available for different combinations of factors applicable to Mat 01 (e.g. the stages done, the tool used, whether options appraisal is done or not). The 'BREEAM New Constrction 2018 Mat 01 Maximum Credit Score Ready Reckoner' file is a static table. The 'Mat01_InteractiveRR' file is an interactive tool (which also allows users to see how different numbers of options appraised afects the credit award). Both approaches achieve the same function but one may be preferable to the other depending on the circumstances, and user preferences. Although the same information can be found using the Mat01/02 Results Submission Tool (which takes precedence), these files may be useful as quick reference guidance. Instructions for 'BREEAM New Construction 2018 Mat 01 Maximum Credit Score Ready Reckoner' file:-
  1. Identify if the building use type is applicable to ‘Superstructure comparison with the BREEAM benchmark’ (blue section columns).
  2. If it is applicable, identify what stage(s) the ‘Superstructure comparison with the BREEAM benchmark’ will be done at, and use that column (b, c or d). Then decide which tool that will be used for ‘Superstructure comparison with the BREEAM benchmark’. If ‘Superstructure comparison with the BREEAM benchmark’ is not applicable use column a.
  3. Identify what stage(s) ‘Options appraisal’ will be done at (green section rows) and if substructure & hard landscaping and/or core building services will be included. Then identify the tool(s) that can be used for ‘Options Appraisal’ and chose one. Use the relevant row (1 to 13).
  4. Find the intersection of the column identified in step 2 and the row identified in step 3 to find the applicable credit score (this is the maximum depending on the number of options appraised and performance compared with the benchmark, if applicable).
  5. If the credit score identified in step 4 is not 'n/a', follow the same row across and check its intersection with columns e and f to see which additional exemplary credits are applicable.
(Alternatively, identify a target credit score first, and then work backwards to find the stages, tool(s) and scope that must be achieved.) Instructions for 'Mat01_InteractiveRR' file:-
  1. Starting at the topmost yellow box under 'Assessment details', complete all the yellow boxes according to the project's anticipated approach to the Mat 01 issue. The predicted credit score will be shown.
  2. Explore the effect on the predicted score when responses are changed (with due consideration of appropriateness to the project). Details on different recognised tools can be see in the 'ToolsRecognisedByBREEAM' sheet.
  3. Use this process to either confirm or modify the approach to take.
For both files, the score should be verified by entering the required inputs (determined from this table) into the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool. BREEAM New Construction 2018 MAT 01 Maximum Credit Score Ready Reckoner_v1 Mat01_InteractiveRR_V1.1 
02/03/2020 Mat 01 Interactive Ready Reckoner updated to V1.1

Definition of a ‘product’ - KBCN1142

For Mat 02, the definition of a product is the same as for Mat 03: ‘A manufacturer-specific product (i.e. with a manufacturer reference number) that is specified by the designer (e.g. architect, engineer, interior designer, quantity surveyor, landscape architect etc.) or selected by the constructor (principle or sub-contractor), and installed on the project’. It is acceptable for a product in Mat 02 to have variations in where it is manufactured, how it is manufactured and the source of its constituent products (as defined in Mat 03), providing these variations are not available for the specifier (or constructor) to choose between, but are instead determined by the manufacturer. If variations are available for the specifier to choose between then, for the purposes of Mat 02, each variation is effectively a different product. Examples of acceptable variations for a product:- Examples of unacceptable variations for a product:- The following exceptions are variations that the specifier can choose between, but shall still be considered a product for the purposes of Mat 02 (providing they are variations of a single product and not listed as separate products by the manufacturer). This is to recognise the practicalities of producing EPD for product ranges with varying combinations:-

Design stage requirements where specific product details are unknown - KBCN1483

The Mat 03 tool must be completed in accordance with the Methodology, providing all available details and submitted as evidence. Where products or materials are subject to a performance specification and a specific manufacturer and certificate reference cannot be provided, the missing details should be completed as 'tbc'. This ensures that a strategy for compliance can be demonstrated, even where some specific details are unavailable.

EPD for systems of products always installed together - KBCN1102

Where an EPD is for a system of products, from the same manufacturer, that are always installed together, this system of products shall be considered a single product for the purposes of assessment in BREEAM. Examples of this include:

EPDs’ validity - KBCN0798

EPDs which have expired or are pending verification at the time the relevant product was specified, cannot contribute to awarding credits. However, it is not necessary that they are valid at the time of the design or post-construction stage submissions. BREEAM is primarily trying to encourage designers to take EPDs into consideration when specifying products.   
04/11/2019 Confirmed applicability to UK NC2018
27/03/2020 Added applicability to Green Guide ratings and ISO 14001 certificates
27/05/2020 Reference to ISO 14001 removed - Whilst the same principle applies, the wording relating to product specification does not - See KBCN1401.
12/08/2021 Clarification regarding the validity of EPDs during QA submission and removal of reference to Green Guide ratings

Erratum – 2018 to V6 – scope – external doors - KBCN1651

The scope of this issue includes external doors. Currently, external doors are missing from the Mat 03 scope 'internal finishes'. This will be corrected in future versions.

Erratum – up to v1.0 – issue overview icons - KBCN1070

Some icons in the recently published UKNC2018 technical manual indicate incorrect numbers of credits available by assessment type. The table below summarises the error and correction needed. 
12-Oct-2022 - Title amended for clarity.
10-Aug-2018 - Technical manual updated. Only relevant to v1.0 of the manual.

Evidence requirements – responsible sourcing of materials at post-construction - KBCN1599

Whilst the UK BREEAM manuals are less prescriptive in the evidential requirements to allow flexibility, to ensure consistency across the schemes, it is expected that robust evidence should be provided to verify the source of any certified materials and how the assessor has confirmed the products and manufacturers used. Evidence supplied at post construction stage must reflect the completed building and confirm the responsibly sourced materials that have been procured and installed on the project. Supporting documentation is required to validate letters of confirmation or schedules of materials. Evidence provided could include proof of purchase, for example, invoices, delivery tickets, purchase orders or correspondence from suppliers. This may be an example for each material sourced, rather than every delivery ticket for instance.  Alternatively, evidence of the use of the responsibly sourced materials may include as-built drawings, O&M documentation or site photographs.

FSC and PEFC Mixed Sources certified timber - KBCN00091

Products labelled: Meet the BREEAM responsible sourcing requirements. This means any such products: Products carrying the FSC Mix label contain at least 70% FSC certified and recycled material. These products may contain a small proportion of FSC Controlled Wood (KBCN00054). However for BREEAM compliance, the FSC Mix label is sufficient to meet our requirements. 
14-Mar-2024 - Wording clarified and expanded. Relevant prerequisites and requirements clarified. Scheme applicability updated.

FSC Controlled Wood - KBCN00054

The FSC Controlled Wood label minimises the risk that wood comes from illegal or controversial sources, however it does not eliminate this risk. Therefore, products which are: Do not meet the BREEAM definition of responsibly sourced. Where FSC Mix labelled products contain FSC Controlled Wood, see KBCN00091. This means that any such products: 
14-Mar-2024 - Wording clarified and expanded. Relevant prerequisites and requirements clarified. Scheme applicability updated.

GN18 BREEAM Recognised Responsible Sourcing Certification Schemes and BREEAM Scheme Applicability - KBCN0723

Latest version: v3.7, May 2023 BREEAM awards credits for responsibly sourcing construction products (typically under the Mat 03 issue) to encourage responsible product specification and procurement in construction. To achieve these credits, applicable specified products (as listed in the relevant technical manual) must be covered by an Environmental Management System (EMS) or a responsible sourcing certification scheme (RSCS) recognised by BREEAM. Guidance Note 18 lists the responsible sourcing certifications schemes recognised by BREEAM along with the relevant summary scores to be used in BREEAM assessments. Download Guidance Note 18 Download Guidance Note 18 v2.0 (licensed assessors only - optional for projects registered prior to release of v3.0 in September 2016) View all Guidance Notes on BREEAM Projects (licensed assessors only)

GN24 Demonstrating compliance with Mat 03 in BREEAM - KBCN0721

Latest version: v1.1, May 2022 Guidance Note 24 provides additional guidance to assessors and specifiers on demonstrating compliance with the criteria set out in Mat 03. It should be read in conjunction with the Technical Manual for the relevant assessment scheme. It covers: Download Guidance Note 24 (licensed assessors only) View all Guidance Notes (licensed assessors only)

Hard landscaping – shared site - KBCN1458

Table 9.2 of Mat 01, NC 2018 states: Include hard landscaping that is installed as part of the project under assessment and: Hard landscaping with no such distinction shall be excluded. Where a site is shared between multiple assets, only assess the hard landscaping directly associated with the assessment. Exclude all shared elements.

LCA Concept Design stage submission before the assessment is registered - KBCN1437

In certain circumstances, it may be necessary for the design team to submit the Concept Design stage LCA before the BREEAM assessment has been registered. In such cases, please submit the LCA tool and associated files along with details of your situation as follows:

LCA submission stage – Applications for planning consent - KBCN1148

An application for planning consent can fix aspects of the design very significantly, depending on the information included. The opportunity for building LCA to guide the design towards lower environmental impacts reduces as a consequence. More credits are, therefore, available for a building LCA submission at ‘concept design’ stage (which must be made before an application for planning consent has been submitted that includes information on external products or materials). Concept Design Stage Mat 01 submissions Two factors determine whether a Mat 01 concept design submission is valid: - • The local authority planning and building control status • The stage of the project The table (link below) shows whether a Mat 01 concept design submission is valid according to the status of these two factors. If a Mat 01 concept design submission has already been made but is now out of date (e.g. due to a change to the client’s brief or planning being refused) it becomes invalid. To achieve the concept design credits, an up-to-date re-submission must be made. IMPORTANT: This KBCN shall be read in conjunction with KBCN1147 ‘LCA submission stage – ‘Concept design’ and ‘Technical design’’ NOTE: ‘Technical Design’ stage Mat 01 submissions are not affected by the planning status. NOTE: According to the RIBA Plan of Work, “Planning applications are typically made using the Stage 3 [Developed Design] output”. KBCN1148 Table
Exceptions (added 18.11.2020)
In circumstances where it is illogical to make the submission to BRE prior to planning consent, it may be appropriate for the assessor to take a view and/or seek guidance on the timing of the Mat 01 submission. This is envisaged in cases where buildings are ‘up-scheming’ (i.e. moving from UK NC 2014 to UK NC 2018, for example) or where a building was granted planning consent prior to the launch of UK NC 2018. In these circumstances, it must be demonstrated that there would be no value lost in an adjusted application of LCA or post-planning approval submission (one example would be if an independent review has supported the case, such as a technical design panel and/or other third party). A later submission would be accepted by the BRE where sites are located in a conservation area and/or have other designated status, such that the timing of a planning application would not significantly limit early design options; where aspects such as height, shape/massing, style, external materials are constrained. Assessors will need to quote this KBCN entry and submit evidence in support of their claim, including planning submission reference number(s) and the specific impacts on the building form of any constraints and designations. There may be other examples where the assessor believes this approach is appropriate. In such cases, the assessor should submit a technical query outlining why the project is unable to submit Mat 01 prior to planning AND how it is able to evidence that no LCA value would be lost in a later submission. Please ensure that the supporting information (evidence) accompanies the query to enable an expedient determination. 
18.11.2020 'Exceptions' paragraph added
05/10.03.2020 Updated for clarity and Table added
21.11.2019 Wording clarified

LCA submission stage – ‘Concept design’ and ‘Technical design’ - KBCN1147

As a building design passes through successive design stages, more and more aspects of the design become fixed.  The opportunity for building LCA to guide the design towards lower environmental impacts reduces as a consequence.  More credits are, therefore, available for a building LCA submission at ‘concept design’ stage, when there are more opportunities than at the later ‘technical design’ stage. Concept design Mat 01 submissions Two factors determine whether a Mat 01 concept design submission is valid: - The table in KBCN1148 shows whether a Mat 01 concept design submission is valid according to the status of these two factors. If a Mat 01 concept design submission has already been made but is now out of date (e.g. due to a change to the client’s brief or planning being refused) it becomes invalid. To achieve the concept design credits, an up-to-date resubmission must be made. Technical design Mat 01 submissions As stated in the manual, a technical design Mat 01 submission shall be submitted at the end of technical design. If a technical design submission has already been made but is now out of date (e.g. due to a change to the client’s brief) it becomes invalid. To achieve the technical design credits, an up-to-date re-submission must be made. Where parts of a project are at different design stages The whole project will often be at the same stage in the design process. However, it is possible for the three Mat 01 issue scope types ‘Superstructure’, ‘Substructure and hard landscaping’ and ‘Core Building Services’ to be at different stages. For each scope type, the most developed element comprising the scope type determines its stage. For example, if the roof element is at ‘concept design’ stage but the façade element is at ‘technical design’ stage, the ‘superstructure’ scope type is considered to be at the ‘technical design’ stage. In situations that are unclear, KBCN1156 should be used to confirm the design stage for the building and, if necessary, each scope type. Which scope types can be included in a Mat 01 concept design stage submission depends on the stage each scope type has reached. For example, if the ‘Superstructure’ and ‘Core building services’ are at concept design but ‘Substructure and hard landscaping’ has already progressed to a later stage, only ‘Superstructure’ and ‘Core building services’ can be submitted at concept design. If ‘Superstructure’ has progressed to a later stage than ‘concept design’, none of the Mat 01 scope types can be submitted at ‘concept design’.   IMPORTANT: This KBCN shall be read in conjunction with KBCN 1148 ‘LCA submission stage – Applications for planning consent’ 
05//03/2020 Updated for clarity
10/10/2019 Clarifications added to paragraphs 2 and 4

Learning Mat 01 - KBCN1343

To support learning of the UK New Construction 2018, Mat 01 issue, an online e-learning module is available on the BRE Academy website which pulls together much of the information and links contained in this KBCN. https://www.bre.ac/course/mat-01-explained The module is free to access, and requires signing up for a free account with BRE Academy. For additional detail on Mat 01, the below lists a recommended sequence (to optimise learning and understanding) of learning resources consisting of a variety of reading material and video tutorials.
  1. Why whole building life cycle assessment (LCA)? Explains why BREEAM has introduced building LCA.
  2. Getting results with building LCA Explores ways to reduce impacts using building LCA.
  3. The BREEAM UK New Construction manual Note that the mat 01 issue allows for flexibility:
    • In the tool used; results are accepted from several different 3rd party building LCA tools.
    • In the assessment approach:-
      • Comparison with the BREEAM benchmark - to see how the design compares with average buildings of the same type.
      • Option appraisal – to encourage designers to explore options to reduce impacts for their specific building (regardless of how it compares with the benchmark).
    • In the stages building LCA is done.
    • In how many design options are appraised.
    • In what parts of the building is included in the assessment scope (superstructure; substructure and hard landscaping; core building services).
    • and
    • Reward for integrating LCA options appraised with LCC options in Man 02 – to better inform the designers and client on overall sustainability.
    • Reward for having the building LCA work done by, or verified by, an independent 3rd
  4. Credit Score Ready Reckoner A tool to assist users early in the process to determine what they need to do to achieve different credit award levels. There is a PDF and interactive Excel version.
  5. The Results Submission Tool To submit results from the chosen building LCA tool and to work out the credit award. The following video tutorials provide detailed guidance
Further reading
  1. Building LCA benchmarks Explains how the benchmarks are developed and how they are used in BREEAM.
  2. The BREEAM Simplified Building LCA tool A free tool for users instead of the paid-for 3rd party full building LCA tools. The following video tutorial provides detailed guidance
  3. The knowledge base Guidance on how to comply if specific situations arise on a project.
Case study webinars
  1. Tips & Tricks to master Mat 01 for BREEAM 2018 from One Click LCA Demonstration on how to achieve LCA credits with One Click LCA (Life Cycle Assessment software) and Buro Happold.
  2. Life Cycle Design Modelling for BREEAM UK NC 2018 using eToolLCD Demonstration of the basics of completing life cycle design modelling in eToolLCD LCA software  from start to finish.
Note: More webinars and other related content may be added to the BRE Academy website from time to time.  

Legally harvested and traded/Legal and sustainable timber – Reclaimed/recycled timber - KBCN0654

Timber should, wherever possible, be sourced in accordance with the UK Government’s Timber Procurement Policy. However, if for reclaimed timber the original procurement details are unobtainable, robust evidence to demonstrate it has been reclaimed can be acceptable. The government UK Government Timber Procurement Policy Timber Procurement Advice Note (6th edition) states: As an alternative to demanding timber and wood-derived products from a Legal and Sustainable source, Contracting Authorities can demand ‘recycled timber’. Documentary evidence and independent verification will also apply to recycled timber and recycled wood-derived products but will focus on the use to which the timber was previously put rather than the forest source. And defines ‘recycled timber’ as: “…recovered wood that prior to being supplied to the Contracting Authority had an end use as a standalone object or as part of a structure and which has completed its lifecycle and would otherwise be disposed of as waste. The term ‘recycled’ is used to cover the following categories: pre-consumer recycled wood and wood fibre or industrial by products but excluding sawmill co-products (sawmill co-products are deemed to fall within the category of virgin timber), post-consumer recycled wood and wood fibre, and drift wood. It also covers reclaimed timber which was abandoned or confiscated at least ten years previously.” As per the above policy, BREEAM requires “Documentary evidence and independent verification” that all reclaimed/recycled timber products meet the definition of ‘recycled timber’ given above. 
01/06/2020: Amended to clarify and extended applicability to Mat 03

Mat 01 Tools tutorials - KBCN1119

1 Introduction to the File Set Up  (4.06) 2 Importing Results from Building LCA tools (6.42) 3 Introduction to the BREEAM Simplified Building LCA tool (16.24) 4 Completing the Mat 01 parts of the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool (39.04)  

Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool – brief guidance - KBCN1107

This is available on BREEAM Projects within the 'Tools and Calculators' folder of this scheme along with 'how-to' tutorials'. 
06/09/2018 Updated following publication of further guidance

Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool – concept and technical design submission - KBCN1209

As stated on the Mat 01/02 Results Submission tool, uploading the Mat 01/02 Results Submission Tool to BREEAM Projects is the required method for submitting the tool at Concept and Technical Design stages; it is not required to be submitted to BRE via email. The upload will be date-stamped for the purposes of QA checks.

On site fabrication - KBCN1292

Where concrete (or another construction product) is produced on site, there is no requirement to provide responsible sourcing certification for the end product. As in this case fabrication on site is effectively part of the onsite building process, the certification of the individual products (e.g. aggregates, cement), as delivered to site, shall be used in the assessment instead.

Product classification code for ‘Other’ materials/products - KBCN1229

In the ‘MAT02_EPDSchedule’ sheet of the Mat01/02 Results Submission Tool, the product classification ‘P8’ should be entered for products classified as ‘other’ (according to the mat 02 materials classification table in the technical manual).

Protecting vulnerable parts of the building from damage – underground car parks - KBCN1331

Exposed elements, such as columns in an underground car park, should have been designed against structural damage from minor vehicle collision and, therefore, do not require any additional protection to meet compliance for this BREEAM Issue. Assessors should, however, consider whether additional protection is required at the vehicular entrance to underground car parks. The requirements are intended to address the issue of damage to vulnerable parts of the facade, which would require repair/replacement in the event of minor vehicular collisions.

Responsible Sourcing – Scope when a BREEAM assessment covers only part of the new building - KBCN1217

To give reliable results, the assessment of responsible sourcing must capture the interactions that occur across an entire design (the system). A design decision in one part of the design will, in many cases, cause knock-on effects to other parts of the design. If only part of a building being designed is included in the assessment the designer may choose a design option that optimises responsible sourcing performance for the limited part analysed, but will be unaware of potential detrimental effects to the overall responsible sourcing performance of the building. In addition, if a responsible sourcing assessment only includes the construction products that form the BREEAM assessment area, inconsistencies arise with regards to construction products that serve all areas of the building in common. For example, an assessment on a central floor that excludes the roof, compared with an assessment on the (otherwise identical) top floor that does include the roof. This approach would be unfair. Therefore, notwithstanding the exception below for internal finishes, the responsible sourcing scope must include the whole building design (as defined in Mat 03, 'Scope of assessment') even if the area covered by BREEAM assessment is only part of the design. The exception to this is any construction products classified as '3. Internal finishes'. Internal finishes are specific to each part of the building with little or no functional relationship with other parts. Therefore, the scope of the assessment of internal finishes shall be limited to the assessed area only.

Responsible Sourcing – Evidence requirements for two (or more) BREEAM assessments on different parts of the same new building - KBCN1218

As the responsible sourcing assessment work must cover the whole new building design (see KBCN1217 'Measuring Responsible Sourcing - Scope when a BREEAM Assessment covers only part of the new building design'), it is equally applicable to all BREEAM assessments being carried out on the building, with the exception of internal finishes. If the assessment scope does not include any construction products classified as '3. Internal finishes', the same responsible sourcing assessment evidence may be submitted for each BREEAM assessment. If the assessment scope does include construction products classified as '3. Internal finishes', then the responsible sourcing assessment evidence submitted must be unique to each BREEAM assessment.

Responsibly sourced timber – government licence - KBCN1033

A government licence, e.g. a UK Forestry Commission felling licence certificate, can be used as evidence of legally sourced timber. It does not meet the definition of a third party timber certification scheme so cannot demonstrate compliance with the responsible sourcing requirements of this Issue.

RICS category for roof terraces - KBCN1344

Roof decks and terraces should be categorised under 2.3.2 ‘Roof coverings’

RSCS summary score level for BES 6001 products - KBCN0955

For products certified under BES 6001, the rating score (between 5 and 7) can be found in the Green Book Live. This is the rating that needs to be entered in the Mat 03 calculator. The RSCS score that is entered into the Mat 03 calculator comes from the relevant table in Guidance Note 18. However, for BES 6001, the score is per certificate because 6001 works at different levels of rigour.  Once you have found the product, by searching on the page below, click 'More..' on the right-hand side to reveal further details, including the BREEAM score level. GreenBookLive Responsible Sourcing

Scope of hard landscaping - KBCN1305

Roads, paths and paving-like elements that are within the footprint of the building or are internal to it are to be classified under substructure or superstructure (as appropriate). Those that are outside the building’s footprint or are external are external works. 
date amended: 26/03/2021 to align with RICS NRM

Setting of Responsible Sourcing Certification Scores (RSCS) - KBCN00017

Mat 03 credits require the majority of the materials used to be sourced with a high RSCS score. While maximum points (10) are available for reused materials the points available for RSCS's are typically less than 10. The available points are representative of the relative merits of each source while also providing some incentive for each scheme to improve and gain higher scores in the future. The latest points scores for each RSCS route are available in the latest version of GN18.  

Sustainable procurement plan – timing - KBCN1659

Where a sustainable procurement plan is not in place before Concept Design (as required in the criteria), the credit can still be achieved if:

Third party verification – BREEAM Assessor or AP - KBCN1235

A BREEAM assessor or AP who meets the definition may be considered as a 'suitably qualified third party' for this credit, provided that any conflicts of interest are managed and that the individual is not directly involved in the design of the LCA options. See also KBCN1234

Third-party verification – Timing - KBCN1603

The third-party LCA verification requirements for concept and technical design stages do not need to be completed at a specific project stage. It is, for example, acceptable for these to be verified as a single exercise, following technical design stage.

Uniclass codes - KBCN1363

The following lists the official UNICLASS 1.4 names from table P relevant to this issue: The complete tables for P and L can be searched here https://www.cpic.org.uk/uniclass1/
Information correct as of 19thApril 2024. Please see kb.breeam.com for the latest compliance information.