2.6 sustainability (1)

PG. 1 Page | 2.6-1
2.6 | Sustainability Design
Guidelines
2.6.1 | Introduction
The purpose of ‘Milestone 10 – Design
Guidelines’ is to provide overall guidance to
Globalfoundries when implementing
sustainability practices at various phases of
the project. This document has been
developed assessing Estidama requirements
with a brief initial analysis on various building
rating systems, as per GF’s advice on October
17th
2010. This report is intended to be a
‘Living’ document to ensure that any changes
with regards to project design development
are incorporated into the design, while input
from various project disciplines are being
considered through an integrated approach.
2.6.2 | Analysis on Building Rating
System: Estidama -- LEED
For Abu Dhabi project (AD01), three building
rating systems are potentially relevant:
Estidama Pearl Rating System developed by
Urban Planning Council (UPC), Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
Green Building rating system administered by
US Green Building Council and BREEAM Gulf
(BRE Environmental Assessment Method),
and a collaborative development by
organizations in Qatar, Abu Dhabi and Dubai.
LEED has greater international recognition
and is the only system currently at use in the
Semiconductor industry; however, LEED
credits do not fully factor the importance of
water in the region. BREEAM Gulf and
Estidama are currently less-known due to
being newer, but are weighted more
appropriately for Gulf region priorities.
Evaluation of the major criteria categories of
each of the three relevant rating systems
indicate that only BREEAM Gulf and Estidama
emphasize water sufficiently for UAE, where
water is scarce and therefore needs stronger
emphasis in selection of a sustainability rating
system when it comes to true performance.
LEED, on the other hand, emphasizes site-
related concerns more than water.

PG. 2 Page | 2.6-2
Figure 2.6-1: Comparison of Green Building Rating Systems – Categories Weighting

PG. 3 Page | 2.6-3
Table 2.6 -1 below compares the Green
Building Systems and their implementation
globally. This gives a good indication of
system applicability and recognition.
Table 2.6-1: Building Rating System Comparison
Both the BREEAM Gulf and Estidama
processes include 3 phases; design,
construction, and operations. A Pearls Design
Rating can be used to confirm that the
proposed project design is consistent with the
goals of Estidama. Once construction is
complete as designed, a Pearls Construction
Rating will be provided. The Pearls
Operational Rating is awarded after 2 years of
at least 80% occupancy.
BREEAM also has a certification system for a
design stage and a post-construction stage,
but unlike Estidama, BREEAM does not
require a post occupancy assessment except
for its highest rating (BREEAM Outstanding),
which has a mandatory requirement for a
‘BREEAM In Use’ certification within the first 3
years of operation.
LEED has an optional design submission at
which no certificates are issued, and has the
leanest post occupancy assessment of the
three systems. The new changes in LEED
2009 show a slow shift in the direction of post-
occupancy assessment with the new
requirement that the USGBC has access to
projects’ Whole-Building Energy and Water
Usage Data.

PG. 4 Page | 2.6-4
Figure 2.6 -2: Certification Process
As BREEAM Gulf and Estidama have not
been widely used in UAE, it remains to be
seen how the amount of paperwork and
engineering/modeling/administrative effort will
compare between the three systems.
Figure 2.6-3: Capital Investment per Rating System
We have been advised that LEED certification
is a GFGF corporate requirement and shall be
pursued. Estidama is now closely-tied to Abu
Dhabi regulations and as of 1st
September
2010, all new buildings must meet the
minimum requirements in order to receive
approval for construction to begin. The
Estidama Pearl Rating System, developed by

PG. 5 Page | 2.6-5
the Urban Planning Council (UPC) mandates
that all buildings achieve at least ONE pearl
rating. All government buildings or government
led investments will be required to meet the
requirements of TWO pearl rating.
Considering mandatory requirement from UPC
to pursue Estidama and GFGF corporate
mandate for LEED certification, GF is
considering pursuing both Estidama and LEED
certification for AD 01 project. This document
however, assesses only Estidama certification
requirements consistent with client’s request
on October 17th
2010.
2.6.3 | Project Boundary for
Certification
Project Boundary Definition
The building rating systems are generally not
geared towards industrial applications like
FAB. GF was clear in their direction in July 6,
2010 presentation that they would like to get
the entire Phase 1 development certified and
not just the office block.
GF shared their approach for project
certification boundary in the sustainability
review session in Malta on August 12, 2010. It
was informed that certification boundaries as
shown below were selected to facilitate the
energy modeling and baseline calculations.
GF mentioned that they had series of
discussions with GBCI to agree on the
certification boundaries as shown below.
Separate project boundaries were established
for the Administration and FAB Building, with
the utility systems (CUB building) included in
the energy model calculations for the FAB.
Figure 2.6-4: Project Definition – Malta FAB 8
Urban Planning Council called for a meeting to
discuss with their Estidama team regarding the
Pre-concept master plan submission. During
this meeting with UPC, project certification
boundary was discussed. Estidama team
supported the idea for separate certification for
Admin and Fab building considering their
function and use. In addition, it was agreed
that the CUB will be included in the
certification. Please find enclosed in
Appendix 2.7 I the UPC response.
Project Boundary Options and
Selected Approach
Further discussions were held in sustainability
review meeting on Sep 13, 2010 wherein
certification boundary options were discussed

PG. 6 Page | 2.6-6
in detail. GF team concurred that it will be
important to select consistent project
boundaries for LEED and Estidama. It was
agreed to proceed with Option 1 project
boundary for certification at this stage. The
FAB certification boundary will include the
CUB and GF team expressed confidence that
there will be no concerns with Green Building
Council (GBCI) to have slightly modified
boundary selection for Abu Dhabi AD01
project.
Option 1: Select Project Certification Boundaries Suggested by Estidama Team

PG. 7 Page | 2.6-7
Option 2: Select Project Certification Boundaries Accepted by GBCI on FAB 8, New York
Option 3: Separate Project Certification for Admin, FAB and CUB
2.6.4 | Sustainability Workshops
Coordination Meeting with UPC
An initial meeting was held on the 29th
of
August with representatives from Urban
Planning Council, GF and CH2M HILL. The
main purpose of the meeting was to discuss
the Pre-Concept Plan submission and the way
forward. UPC notes from the meeting can be
found in the Appendix 2.7-I.

PG. 8 Page | 2.6-8
The main outcome of the meeting can be
summarized as follows:
 Estidama 1 Pearl will be a
regulatory requirement for all
buildings in Abu Dhabi as of
September 2010
 For governmental funded projects 2
Pearl rating will apply as a minimum
requirement
 Estidama certification will require
GF to include the Central Utility
Building
Project Sustainability Charrettes
Sustainability Charrettes, one for each building
type, will be undertaken at the programming
stage to ensure that client values are
considered at an early stage of the design.
The main objective of these Charrettes is to
assess each building anticipated rating,
evaluate different design strategies, identify
challenges and opportunities, as well as credit
synergies and facilitate decision making
process. During the Charrettes the Preliminary
Estidama scorecards (please refer to
Appendix) will be used to guide the
brainstorming discussions.
Key Project Stakeholders that will be engaged
during the workshops are: GF Sustainability,
Design Technical Leads (Mechanical,
Electrical, Water Building Systems, Water
Processes Systems, Architect, Planning
Team, and Logistics).
The main output of the workshops will be a
revised set of the Preliminary Estidama
Scorecards incorporating the input from
various project stakeholders, while taking into
consideration various client decisions during
the evaluation process.
Coordination with GF
Weekly Sustainability meetings have been
scheduled with the client to discuss on key
issues, decisions need to be taken and
monitor progress.
2.6.5 | International Energy
Conservation Code Review
The International Energy Conservation Code
(IECC) is a building code created by the
International Code Council and is updated
every three years. It establishes minimum
standards for energy efficient buildings using
prescriptive and performance-based
provisions for residential and commercial
buildings. The code’s intent is to establish
criteria for energy conservation with provisions
that do not unnecessarily increase
construction costs.
It addresses the energy efficiency
requirements for the design, materials, and
equipment used for new buildings
construction, renovations, and construction
techniques. The Code applies to:
 Wall, floor, and ceiling
 Doors and windows
 Heating, ventilating, and cooling
systems and equipment
 Lighting systems and equipment
 Water-heating systems and
equipment.
 Materials
Table 2.6 -2 below includes a high level review
of the IECC for commercial buildings. At later
stages during the design the project team
should review criteria for each building type to
determine if provisions are achievable. The
industrial nature of the FAB and CUB buildings
and high-hazard provisions of the 2009
International Building Code (IBC) may warrant
review of applicability. IBC provisions (based
on life safety) shall supersede energy criteria.
The advantages to IECC compliance include
sustainable development, reduced
consumption, enhancing quality of living and
reducing energy costs. Other 2009 I-codes

PG. 9 Page | 2.6-9
may also contribute to sustainable
development as follows:
 International Plumbing Code (IPC):
water and energy conservation
 International Mechanical Code
(IMC): Carbon dioxide reduction,
improved indoor air quality,
reduction of ozone-depleting
refrigerants, energy conservation,
harvesting renewable resources
such as solar power, etc.
Table 2.6-2: IECC Review
No. IECC Reference Provision
IECC Chapters 1, 2 Administration and Definitions
1 101 Application and compliance
2 102 Alternate Materials-Method of Construction, Design or
Insulating Systems
IECC Chapter 3 Climate Zones and General Materials Requirements
3 Table 301.3(1)
Table 301.3(2)
Validate Abu Dhabi climate zone: 2A (warm-humid)
4 302.1 Interior design conditions:
22C maximum (heating)
24C minimum (cooling)
5 303.1 Materials, systems and equipment require labels for
identification of performance.
 Insulation wider than 305cm marked with R-value
 Window, doors and skylights marked with U-factor
IECC Chapter 4 Energy Efficiency for Residential Buildings (Not Applicable)
IECC Chapter 5 Energy Efficiency for Commercial Buildings
6 501.1 Determine project buildings to comply with Chapter 5
requirements or ASHRAE alternative below:
 IECC 502, Building envelope
 IECC 503, Building mechanical systems
 IECC 504, Service water heating
 IECC 505, Electrical power and lighting systems
Or comply with ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1, Energy
Standard for Buildings Except for Low-Rise Residential
Buildings in its entirety
7 Note: Below high level criteria is indicated if compliance
follows IECC rather than ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1.

PG. 10 Page | 2.6-10
8 502.1.1 Building thermal envelop shall meet requirements for Tables
502.2(1) and 502.3 based upon climate zone (use “all other”
column).
 Roof insulation: R-20
 Walls, mass: R5.7
 Walls, metal buildings: R-16
 Walls, metal framed: R-13
 Walls, below grade: Not required
 Floors, mass: R6.3
 Floors, joints/framing/steel: R-19
 Slab-on-grade: Not required
 Doors, opaque (<50% glass): U -
 Doors, swinging: U – 0.70
 Doors, roll-up or sliding: U – 1.45
9 502.3 Fenestration <40% above-grade wall
10 502.3 Metal framing with or without thermal break:
 Curtain wall/storefront: U- 0.70
 Entrance door: U - 1.10
 All other: 0.75
11 502.3 Use Table 502.3 for solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) for
glazing and skylights
12 502.4.8 Recessed lighting sealed to limit air leakage
13 503 Determine method of compliance for building mechanical
systems:
 Simple systems: Section 503.3
 Complex systems: Section 503.4
14 504.2 Performance of water-heating equipment
15 504.3 Temperature controls for water-heating equipment:
 32C setpoint
 43C outlet temperature of lavatories
16 Comply with requirements for:
 Heat traps
 Piping insulation
 Controls

PG. 11 Page | 2.6-11
17 505.2 Lighting shall comply with provisions for:
 Controls
 Light reduction controls
 Automatic lighting shutoff
18 505.3 Comply with tandem wiring fluorescent fixtures as prescribed
19 505.4 Internally illuminated exit signs: maximum 5 watts per side
20 505.5 Follow prescriptive interior lighting power requirements
21 Table 505.5.2 Interior lighting power allowances:
 Cafeteria: 1.4/0.0929m2
 Fitness: 1.0/0.0929m2
 Manufacturing: 1.3/0.0929m2
 Parking: 0.3/0.0929m2
 Warehouse: 1.0/0.0929m2
22 505.6 Comply with exterior lighting provisions
23 Table 505.6.2 Comply with lighting power densities for building exteriors
24 506 Comply with provisions for total building performance
including:
 Heating systems
 Cooling systems
 Service water heating
 Fan systems
 Lighting power
 Receptacle loads
 Process loads
Develop annual energy consumption including documentation
and compliance reports
IECC Chapter 6 Referenced Standards
2.6.6 | Integrated Sustainability
Decision Model and Cost Benefit
Analysis
The Infrastructure Sustainability Decision
Model (ISDM), developed by CH2M HILL,
takes a triple bottom line approach, along with
targeted Building certification requirements, to
guide design, construction, materials
management, and operational decisions. The
ISDM for GF will be arranged to assess
various scenarios for two building types of the
first development phase (AD-01) of the GF
FAB Park: Administration building and the
Industrial unit (FAB) including CUB.

PG. 12 Page | 2.6-12
Parameters To Be Considered
The Decision Model has the capability to
assess strategies on the following
infrastructure components:
 Potable Water
 Energy
 Solid Waste Management (For
office Building only)
 Embodied Carbon (Material
Selection for: Concrete, Rebar,
Structural Steel)
Scenarios To Be Developed
The model has the capability to assess up to 5
scenarios. The data will be arranged so as to
assess Business as Usual (BAU) case against
various conservation measures in line building
certification credit goals, which will be defined
as percent reduction of water, waste, energy
from BAU.
The different scenarios for both building types
shall consider the following:
 Administration Building
 BAU: will be established based on
previous experience in Abu Dhabi
 Water: scenarios will consider water
conservation fixtures
 Energy: scenarios will consider
measures such as Higher Thickness
of Roof Insulation, Triple Glazing
etc.
 Solid Waste Management scenarios
will include waste segregation and
reuse.
 Embodied Carbon: will provide
options to choose different materials
for Concrete, Rebar and Structural
Steel
 FAB Unit
 Baseline will be established based
on common practices or BAU
technologies while various
measures will be compared against
BAU by indicating the capital cost,
energy demand and O&M cost
variance.
 Water: scenarios will consider
Make-up Air Units (MAU)
condensate water reclamation, FAB
water reclamation etc.
 Energy: scenarios will consider
measures such as use of dual
temperature chilled water system,
MAU Variable Frequency Drives
(VFDs), Utilization of Fan Energy for
Reheat, Premium Efficiency Motors
etc.
 Embodied Carbon: will provide
options to choose different materials
for Concrete, Rebar and Structural
Steel
ISDM Output
The ISDM for GF will have the capability to run
various scenarios on water, energy, materials
and waste strategies to be considered with the
associated capital and operational costs as a
result of saving energy, water and using
sustainable materials.
The model capabilities are presented in the
Appendix with a dashboard arrangement
demonstrating high level calculations on
capital cost and additional cost & carbon
saving during operation per building type.
2.6.7 | Technical Design Guidelines
In order to achieve the required building
certification system, it is important to
incorporate relevant requirements into the
design guidelines and project specifications.
A set of preliminary guidelines has been
developed to ensure the implementation of the
required strategies with regards to
Construction Waste Management,
Construction Indoor Air Quality, Minimum

PG. 13 Page | 2.6-13
Energy Performance and Energy Reduction,
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Management Plan. A brief overview of each
Design Guideline is provided below; the actual
Guidelines can be found in the Appendix.
These guidelines have been developed in
accordance with the Estidama relevant credits
and they should be reviewed at the end of the
UPC Detailed Review to ensure that all
Estidama requirements are incorporated.
Table 2.6-3: Design Guidelines - Estidama Credits Achieved (Overview)
Guideline Estidama Credit
Construction and Demolition
Waste Management
 SM-R3: Basic Construction Waste
Management
 SM-13 Credit: Improved
Construction Waste Management
Construction Indoor Air Quality LBi-3: Construction Indoor Air Quality
Management
Minimum Energy Performance
and Energy Reduction
 RE-R1 Credit: Minimum Energy
Performance
 RE-1 Credit Improved Energy
Performance
Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Management Plan
Partial compliance with IDP-3 Credit:
Construction Environmental Management *
* Estidama requires a Construction Environmental Management Plan approved by EAD. As per EAD
Technical Guidelines the CEMP is required to address erosion and sedimentation impacts and
stipulate specific control measures. However, the scope of the CEMP covers other issues during
construction. It is understood that GF commissioned ERM to carry out the studies required (including
CEMP) to obtain the necessary environmental permits.
Construction and Demolition
Waste Management (CDWM)
Objectives
a. Demonstrate Compliance with local
regulation with respect to Construction
and Demolition Waste Management
b. As a minimum requirement a 70 %
(weight/volume) waste diversion rate
from landfill for construction and
demolition waste should be targeted to
achieve credits under Estidama. The
targeted credits to be obtained are
shown on the table below.

PG. 14 Page | 2.6-14
Table 2.6-4: CDWM and Estidama Credit Breakdown
Diversion Rate Estidama
30% (weight/volume) SM – R2: Basic Construction Waste
Management
50% (weight/volume) SM-13 Credit: Improved Construction Waste
Management (1 Additional Credits)
70% (weight/volume) SM-13 Credit: Improved Construction Waste
Management (2 Additional Credits)
Total: Mandatory + 2 Optional Credits
Design Requirements
a. Adopt design and procurement
methods to minimize use of materials
and waste arising as Best Practice.
b. Identify items to be recycled /
salvaged and develop a log indicating
activity/source of the generated for
each type of waste as well as
estimated volume. Consider materials
such as concrete, brick, metal, wood,
gypsum, plastic, cardboard etc.
c. Identify potential Waste Service
Providers to be appointed for each
type of waste and indicate location.
Waste Service Providers must be
licensed by the Abu Dhabi Waste
Management Center.
d. Establish targets for diversion from
landfill at a minimum rate of 70% of
total waste generated during
construction (weight/volume) or more
(to achieve additional points).
e. Develop a Construction and
Demolition Waste Management Plan
(CDWMP). The Plan shall include
targets estimated and shall
incorporate local regulatory
requirements and relevant approved
documentation by Regulatory
Authorities.
f. The CDWMP shall be included in the
Project Specifications for contractors
compliance
g. Prepare required documentation for
Credit review under Estidama rating
system
Construction Requirements
a. In accordance with the CDWMP
developed at the design stage and as
approved by Estidama, the General
contractor is required to develop a
CDWMP specific to their project
construction activities.
b. Compliance with the regulatory
requirements and Estidama targets
must be ensured through regular
coordination meetings (engaging the
Engineer/Client Representative as
well as Subcontractors), regular site
inspections and audits, as well as
comprehensive waste tracking and
reporting to fulfill Estidama required
documentation.
c. Key personnel, from the
well as the Contractor, must be
assigned with the responsibility of
supervising the implementation of
CDWMP.

PG. 15 Page | 2.6-15
d. Prepare required documentation for
system.
Construction Indoor Air Quality
Management
Objectives
a. Meet requirements to achieve
Estidama LBi-3: Construction Indoor
Air Quality Management; and.
b. Meet or exceed the recommended
Design Approaches of the Sheet Metal
and Air Conditioning Contractors
National Association (SMACNA) IAQ
Guidelines for Occupied Buildings
under Construction, 2007, 2nd Edition.
Design Requirements
a. Develop an Indoor Air Quality
Management (IAQ) Management Plan
to address at a minimum: Source
Control during construction, Building
Flush Out and Resuming Normal
Building Operation upon construction
completion as per Estidama
requirements.
b. Prepare IAQ Planning Checklists as
per SMACNA IAQ Guidelines -
Appendix C.
c. Identify and evaluate proposed
controls measures as per SMACNA
IAQ Guidelines - Appendix C.
d. Assess the duration of pre-occupancy
flush-out per Estidama requirements.
e. Prepare documentation for Credit
review under Estidama rating system.
a. In accordance with the Construction
IAQ Management Plan prepared at
the design phase, the General
Contractor is required to develop a
Construction IAQ Management Plan
specific to their project work.
b. Implement control measures identified
through the different phases of the
project,
c. Compliance with Estidama
requirements will be ensured through
regular coordination meetings
(engaging the Engineer/Client
Representative as well as
Subcontractors), regular site
inspections and audits, as well as
reporting to fulfill Estidama required
documentation.
d. Key personnel, from the
well as the Contractor, must be
assigned with the responsibility of
supervising the implementation of
Construction IAQ Management Plan.
e. Prepare required documentation for
system.
Minimum Energy Performance
and Energy Reduction
Objectives
a. To establish minimum level of energy
efficiency for the building and systems
and demonstrate a minimum of 12%
performance improvement compared
to baseline building performance to
comply with RE-R1 Credit: Minimum
Energy Performance (Estidama Rating
System).
b. Achieve additional reduction in the
building energy consumption during
operation to achieve RE-1 Credit
Improved Energy Performance
(Estidama Rating System).To obtain
additional credits under the Estidama

PG. 16 Page | 2.6-16
the following energy reduction must be
achieved:

Table 2.6-5: Minimum Energy Performance and
Reduction - Estidama Credit Breakdown
Design Requirements
a. Develop an Energy simulation model
to calculate building energy
consumption and identify the most
cost effective energy efficiency
measures. The model should comply
with ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard,
2007.
b. Ensure that the proposed design
(Building envelop and systems)
complies with baseline requirements
as per the specified sections
ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1 – 2007: Energy
Standard for Building except Low-Rise
Residential Buildings (Sections 5.4,
6.4, 7.4, 8.4, 9.4, 10.4)
c. Compare energy efficiency measures
and optimized performance against
baseline energy performance.
d. Develop and submit Energy Model
Template and calculations
summarizing the model results as per
Estidama Design and Construction
Submission requirements.
e. Prepare required documentation for
system.
a. Record any modifications to the
Energy Model. Ensure that any
changes in measures considered will
not affect credit intent.
b. Prepare required documentation for
system
Erosion and Sedimentation
Control (ESC) Management Plan
This section was initially prepared in line with
LEED credit rating requirements. Following
client’s direction on 17th
of October 2010 to
include only Estidama requirements in this
document, the Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Management section is not considered
relevant to the Estidama rating system.
Comparing to LEED, under Estidama rating
system, there is no individual credit on Erosion
Energy Reduction
%
Estidama Additional
Points
12% None (Required Credit)
14% 1
16% 2
18% 3
20% 4
22% - 22.5% 5 (22.5%)
24 – 25 % 6 (25%)
27.5 – 28 % 7 (27.5%)
30 % 8
32 – 32.5% 9 (32.5%)
34 - 35 % 10 (35%)
40 % 11
44 – 45% 12 (45%)
50% 13
55% 14
60% 15

PG. 17 Page | 2.6-17
and Sedimentation Control Management.
Relevant control measures fulfilling Estidama
requirements (Credit: IDP – 3) are expected to
be addressed under the Construction
Environmental Management Plan in line with
EAD ‘CEMP - Technical Guidelines Document’
(April 2010). It is understood that the GF
CEMP will be prepared by ERM.
Objectives
a. Prevent the loss of soil from the
construction site resulting from storm
water runoff, wind erosion, and
construction activities.
b. Prevent the sedimentation of storm
sewers and receiving waters.
c. Prevent air pollution caused by dust
and particulate matter.
d. Meet or exceed the requirements of
LEED-NC Version 3.0 Sustainable
Sites Prerequisite 1 “Erosion &
Sedimentation Control” which
specifies compliance with 2003, EPA
Construction General Permit
(Provisions for Phase I and Phase II of
the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System Programme), or
local erosion and sedimentation
control standards and codes,
whichever is more stringent.
Design Requirements
a. Identify Construction Activities with
potential soil erosion and
sedimentation impacts.
b. Carry out an analysis of site limitations
and constraints such as slope, surface
water streams, soil erodibility, etc.
c. Develop an Erosion and
Sedimentation Control (ESC)
Management Plan to prevent soil
erosion and stormwater runoff during
construction in compliance with LEED
and local regulatory requirements.
d. Prepare required documentation for
Credit review under Estidama/LEED
rating system
a. In accordance with the Erosion and
Sedimentation Control (ESC)
Management Plan prepared at the
design phase, the General Contractor
is required to develop a Plan specific
to their project work.
b. Develop a Drawing showing erosion
and sedimentation control measures
as described in this Section.
c. Installing erosion and sedimentation
control products.
d. Supervise on site erosion and
sedimentation control activities on a
daily basis and coordinating erosion
and sedimentation control tasks with
subcontractors to ensure timely and
orderly progress of the work.
e. Conduct erosion and sedimentation
control inspections and making
necessary repairs.
f. Prepare required documentation for
Credit review under LEED rating
system.
2.6.8 | Preliminary Scorecards
Preliminary Scorecards Purpose
Preliminary Scorecards have been prepared
for the Administration and FAB (including
CUB) buildings consistent to client decision
with regards to Project Boundary definition.
The purpose of preparing these preliminary
scorecards is to use them as guidance for the
Estidama Certification process.
At this initial stage of programming, the
scorecards can be viewed as valuable tools
that can be used to:

PG. 18 Page | 2.6-18
 Identify credits relevant to the
project scope, building use, overall
vision and GF corporate policies
 Identify Credits that can be easily
achieved with minimum effort and
least additional cost
 Identify potential opportunities that
can be refined via ROI analysis in
Design phase
 Identify Credits that require further
screening between the project
stakeholders through Sustainability
Charrettes at this initial stage
 Provide an initial evaluation of the
building’s expected rating while
identifying challenges and
opportunities
 Assist in decision making for GF
and Design Team to follow certain
design strategies
 Identify ‘follow up’ tasks in order to
facilitate credit intent
implementation
During later stages, during design, upon
design completion and as the project
progresses to the construction phase the team
can monitor actual performance for each
intended credit.
The preliminary scorecards, since are
developed at an early stage with limited
information available, followed a rather
conservative approach. Easy to achieve
credits, with minimum effort or additional cost,
were identified as intended (‘Yes’), while a
larger number of credits were indicated as
‘possible’ with the intention of generating
brainstorming discussions within the design
team (Sustainability Charrettes, Section 3) and
propose different options of design strategies
for GF to consider.
Preliminary Scorecards
Summary Overview
A summary overview of the scorecards per
category is provided below. The detailed
scorecards can be found in the Appendix.
Table 2.6 -6 below summarises credits
identified per category for both buildings.
Table 2.6-6: Pearl Credits Overview Per Category
Category Administration Building FAB Building
Yes Maybe No Yes Maybe No
Integrated Development Strategy 10 3 0 10 3 0
Natural Systems 2 0 10 2 0 10
Livable Buildings – Outdoor 5 5 3 5 5 3
Livable Buildings – Indoor 16 6 1 14 1 8
Precious Water 15 `9 9 19 10 14
Resourceful Energy 13 15 15 10 10 23
Stewarding Material 6 17 5 6 15 7
Innovating Practice 2 1 0 2 1 0
Total 69 66 43 68 45 65

PG. 19 Page | 2.6-19
Administration Building
The Preliminary Scorecard for the
Administration Building indicates that the
building can achieve a 2 Pearl rating, as
required by Estidama (government led
development (Required Credits + 60 points at
a minimum). The Figure below illustrates the
initial assessment of the Administration
building in relation to the Pearl Rating
Categories.
Figure 2.6-5: Administration Building - Initial Pearl Rating Assessment
Pearl 1
RE‐ 59
Pearl 2 Pearl 3 Pearl 4 Pearl 5
Required
Credits 60 ‐84 85‐114 115‐139 140 +


69 points         66 Points


FAB Unit
The Preliminary Scorecard for the
Administration Building indicates that the
building can achieve a 2 Pearl rating, as
required by Estidama (government led
development (Required Credits + 60 points at
a minimum). GF will need to agree with UPC
on the Baseline for energy and water
consumption of the FAB which will determine
the total number of credits achieved. The
Figure below illustrates the initial assessment
of the Administration building in relation to the
Pearl Rating Categories.
Figure 2.6-6: FAB Building - Initial Pearl Rating Assessment
Pearl 1
RE‐ 59
Pearl 2 Pearl 3 Pearl 4 Pearl 5
Required
Credits 60 ‐84 85‐114 115‐139 140 +


68 points         45 Points


2.6.9 | Estidama Registration
Upon completion of the planning review stage
with a planning permit obtained by UPC, GF
can proceed with the project registration for
Estidama Certification.
The Estidama application form, which is
included in the Appendix, must provide the
following information: Estidama rating
targeted, confirmation on project funding
(private or governmental) to establish the
minimum rating requirements, general project
information and details of the Project Qualified
Professional assigned for the project (including
documentation verifying that the PQP is an
Accredited Professional). No administrative
fees have been specified by UPC at the
moment.
2.6.10 | Supply Chain Strategy
Maintaining an effective management of
supply chain is important to sustainability

PG. 20 Page | 2.6-20
objective. The diagram below demonstrates
key parameters for effective supply chain
management from design to end of life
disposal.
Figure 2.6-7: Supply Chain –Key Parameters
For a typical building, 90% of carbon footprint
(embodied carbon) and around 80% of
building costs are attributed to just three
materials: Concrete, Steel and curtain walling
windows.
Figure 2.6-8: Carbon Contribution of Materials in Buildings
Insulation
1%
Wood
1%
Finishes
2%
Plaster
6%
Curtain
Walling
Windows
10%
Steel
21%
Concrete
59%

PG. 21 Page | 2.6-21
 For an effective strategy, we
decided to focus on concrete,
structural steel and rebar as they
are the major materials with
significant impact for AD01
development. A rough initial
estimate of materials for AD01 is
indicated below:
 Concrete: 120,000 cubic meters
 Steel: 14,000 metric tons
 Rebar: 5,000 metric tons
The suppliers listed below are based in the
UAE. This list is indicative and it requires
further investigation to identify additional local
suppliers and evaluate their building products
against Estidama requirements. It is
recommended therefore, that a
comprehensive pre-qualification process for
suppliers is established at the design stage of
the project to evaluate sustainability
performance of their products (together with
other criteria such as cost, availability, delivery
timeframe etc.) and identify potential strategic
partnerships.
Concrete
Cast in Place
The manufacturing of cement is one of the
most CO2 intensive processes on the planet. It
is estimated that 6% of the world’s carbon
production will come from the manufacturing of
cement. Cement is also one of the most widely
utilized building materials as it is a key
ingredient to the ready mix concrete
production and usage.
The concrete mixtures incorporating recycled-
content, Portland-cement-reducing admixtures
such as fly-ash are desirable in order to obtain
Material Selection related Credits under
Estidama building rating system.
Products listed below incorporate recycled
content or have desirable environmental
attributes:
AL FALAH READY MIX
AL FALAH READY MIX owns 36 production
plants strategically located over the UAE. They
have established around 20 Batch Plants in
the Emirate of Abu Dhabi, which operate
under an integrated Management System for
Quality, Environment, Occupational Health &
Safety, accredited and certified according to
ISO 9001:2000, ISO 14001:2004 and OHSAS
18001:2007.
Their “green” concrete uses re-cycled
materials and byproducts from other industrial
processes (such as GGBS and Pulverizes
Fuel Ash) in order to reduce Portland cement
and carbon impacts. Al Falah can provide an
on-site batching plant working as partner with
GF on the development of “green” concrete.
UNIBETON
Unibeton is present in the UAE for about 30
years with six production branches, with two to
three Batching Plants in operation for each
branch, within the Abu Dhabi emirate. They
are accredited to QHS&E (Quality ISO 9001,
Health & Safety OHSAS 18001, and
Environment ISO 14001) Management
System.
Unibeton, recently introduced a new
technology called ‘iCrete’ applied for the
production of optimized concrete and is closely
working with UPC regarding concrete mixtures
that would satisfy Estidama requirements.

PG. 22 Page | 2.6-22
Unibeton has exclusive rights to use ‘iCrete’
technology across UAE.
Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag
Cement production is energy-intensive and
polluting; concrete mixtures incorporating
recycled-content, performance-enhancing,
portland-cement-reducing admixtures such as
fly-ash are desirable. Recycled materials used
in place of mined stone aggregate - such as
slag, a byproduct of steel production – ease
landfill burdens and can improve the
concrete's strength-to-weight ratio and thermal
properties. Products listed here incorporate
recycled content or have other desirable
environmental qualities.
GULF CEMENT CO
Gulf Cement Company claims annual
production capacity of 2.5 million tons cement
and 1.3 million tons clinker. GCC has been
awarded with ISO 9002:1994, ISO 9001:2000,
ISO 14001:2002. GCC grinds and sells
pulverised slag as Ground Blast Furnace Slag
(GGBS) complying with BS 6699. Also, their
product carries the BSI KITEMARK.
SHARJAH CEMENT FACTORY
Sharjah Cement Factory produces Portland
Cement, Moderate Sulfate - Resisting Portland
Cement, Sulfate - Resisting Portland Cement,
Ground Granulated Blast furnace Slag.
GGBS produced is manufactured to comply
with the requirement of BS 6699 and exceeds
the minimum strength and fineness
requirement by a considerable margin. Their
product carries the BSI KITEMARK.
Precast Concrete Slabs
For the production of precast concrete,
concrete is cast in a reusable mould, cured in
a controlled environment, transported to the
construction site and lifted into place.
MAMMUT TECHNOCRETE
Mammut Technocrete (MTC) was formed in
2005 to manufacture pre-cast concrete
products for the contracting sector. Their
factory commenced supply to the UAE market
within the year of 2005 with the ability to
provide material with recycled concrete. Using
precast concrete has the following
advantages:
 100% Elimination of slab formwork
 50/75 % reduction of slab
reinforcement work
 15/50 % reduction of slab
concreting work
Reinforcing Steel (Rebar)
A rebar, or reinforcing bar, is a common steel
bar, and is commonly used in reinforced
concrete and reinforced masonry structures. It
is usually formed from carbon steel, and is
given ridges for better mechanical anchoring
into the concrete.

PG. 23 Page | 2.6-23
EMIRATES STEEL INDUSTRIES
Emirates Steel Industries is a wholly owned
government factory strategically located at the
recently developed Industrial City of Abu
Dhabi (ICAD). Their production asset has the
capacity of producing more than 720,000 tons
of rebar per annum (This figure applicable for
2007 capacity). Deformed Bar product
produced by Emirates Steel complies with
British Standard BS 4449/97 GR 460 B.
According to their statement, Emirates Steel is
applying a series of technologies to minimise
environmental impacts during the production
phase: minimization of CO2 emissions through
CO2 absorption system, process generated
waste supplies other types of industries (e.g.
Iron oxide fines used in cement industry).
Utilizes more than 50% post consumer
recycled content in production.
CICON
CICON Building Materials imports, stocks and
distributes building materials in the U.A.E.
CICON owns an operating plant with an
annual crude steel capacity of 1.200.000 MT.
According to their statement CICON is using
Best Available Techniques to minimize energy
consumption.
Structural Steel
The list of the suppliers below is indicative: the
recycled content of their products needs to be
clarified during the forthcoming design stages
through a comprehensive pre-qualification
process as mentioned earlier.
MAMMUT BUILDING SYSTEMS
Mammut Building Systems was established in
1997, in response to the increasing global
demand for Quality Pre Engineered and
Structural Steel Buildings. The total production
capacity of their units is at 6000 tons of steel
per month.
CLEVELAND BRIDGE & ENGINEERING
MIDDLE EAST
Cleveland Bridge & Engineering Middle East
(Pvt) Ltd., (CBEME), is a Dubai based
company specializing in the design,
manufacture and erection/installation of
structural steelwork and associated items.
Refer to the Appendix 2.7 I:
 UPC Response on GF Pre-concept
Review Submission
 ISDM Model output
 Sustainability Design Guidelines
o Construction and Demolition Waste
Management
o Construction Indoor Air Quality
Management
o Minimum Energy Performance
o Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Plan
 Preliminary Estidama Scorecards
(Follow up tasks identified)
 Estidama Registration Form
 Response to GF Comments on Draft
Report

2.6 sustainability (1)

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (15)

Similar to 2.6 sustainability (1)

Similar to 2.6 sustainability (1) (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

2.6 sustainability (1)