1. TITLE Toxic Materials Handling Laboratory BASIS FOR REQUEST: To centralize and control hazardous procedures related to iodinization and carcinogen dilution. 2. FUNDING: HEW Grant (1 C06 CA 28136-01) Central Administration matching ftmds 3. SCOPE OF PROJECT: Construct and equip two small limitEd access laboratories and one technicians's office, complete with fume hoods and isolated air handling 4. COST ESTIMATE: Construction cost: $355,334 . Total Project Cost $465,920 Cost estimate based on grant not revised to date. 5. TIME SCHEDULE: , Complete working drawings . Advertise for bids Receive bids Award contracts Begin construction Complete construction 6. ARCHITECT: (if in-house: put Office of Physical Planning) Roger Johnson/James Forberg Associates 1409 Williow Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 (Dates) April 23, 1981 May 15, 1981 JtIDe 9, 1981 JtIDe 30, 1981 July 1, 1981 May 1, 1982 2/74 . data sheet form/Regents
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1.
TITLE Toxic Materials Handling Laboratory
BASIS FOR REQUEST: To centralize and control hazardous proceduresrelated to iodinization and carcinogen dilution.
2. FUNDING: HEW Grant (1 C06 CA 28136-01)Central Administration matching ftmds
3. SCOPE OF PROJECT: Construct and equip two small limitEd access laboratoriesand one technicians's office, complete with fume hoods and isolated airhandling
4. COST ESTIMATE:
Construction cost: $355,334 .Total Project Cost $465,920Cost estimate based on grant applicati~, not revised to date.
5. TIME SCHEDULE:
,
Complete working drawings.Advertise for bidsReceive bidsAward contractsBegin constructionComplete construction
6. ARCHITECT:
(if in-house: put Office of Physical Planning)
Roger Johnson/James Forberg Associates1409 Williow StreetMinneapolis, Minnesota 55403
IV. NON BUILDING COST . 110,586--A. Sitework... 700
1. Landscaping.
2. Utilities.
· ..•.••••• __N/_A_
700
B. Furnishings and Equipment. 18,200
53,300
· . . . ------Consultant1s Fees.C.
D. Miscellaneous .• 38,386
1. Contingencies 12,450
2. Co~struction Supervision. 7,107
3. Soil Bo~ings.....•• N/A
2,5004. Material and Performar:ce Testing.
5. Uni vers ity Eng -j neeri ng Servi ces. 3,550
6. Building Activation ...
7. Sewer Availability Charge.
8. Building Pennit ..••• . . . .
1,425
1,425------
711
. _----$465,920
8,507
7119. Incidental. &. H.S.P.O. . ••• _--:-------
10. Builders Risk Insurance ..
TOTAL PROJECT COST. . . • • . .(:,
v.11/78Ipl
\ . r
The items listed on the reverse side under IV, r~on-8uilding Cost, may typically bedefi'ned as fo 11 m'/s:
IV. A. 1.
C'IV. A. 2
IV. B.
IV. C.
IV.D. 1.
IV. D. 2.
Landscaping: All exterior development such as finish grading, sod,trees,sidewal~s, driveways, retaining walls, etc.
Utilities: W~ter, qas, steam (including tunnels), telephone, electricity, storm and sanitary sewers, etc.
Furnishings and Equipme~t: Furnishings~ sun control, graphics, custoial equipment, A-V and other technical equipment, etc.
Consultant's Fees: Fees for all consultants hired by the University,e.g., the architect, acoustical engineer, food service consultant,landscape architect, etc. as applicable.
Contingencies: Funds set aside to remedy unforeseen problems whichcrop up during construction.
Construction Suoervision: SJlary for the University's cor.structionsuperintendent and other costs related thereto.
IV. D. 3. Soil Borings: Cost of taking soil borings and filing report on same.
IV. D. 4.
IV. D. 5.
CIV. D. 6.
IV. D. 7.
IV. D. 8
Material and Performance testing: Cost to perform various standardtests on building components, e.g., concrete, \"e1ding, etc.
University Engineering Services: Personnel costs related to variousservices provided by the Engineering and Construction staff.
Building Acti~ation: Testing and balancing air handling system,connection to Delta 2000, fire extinguisher's, tOile1 cabinets, keyspreparation of 1/16" = 1 1 floor plans, moving.
Sewer Availability Charge: Essentially a tax on ne\'1 (additional)plumbing fixtures, paid to the r'tetro Haste Control Commission.
Building Permit: 0.2~ of building cost, levied by the University andpayable to the State of Minnesota.
IV. D. 9. Incidental: Printing, travel, telephone, etc.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFAREPUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH
BETHESDA. MARYLAND ~J-C i;.,C6'
March 13, 1979
Dr. Roger DeRoosWi36 Boyten Health servicesUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Dear Dr. DeRoos:
NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE
Enclosed is an application kit as requested 00 this date, relative toa construction grant. we believe the instructions are self-evident.Applications are reviewed by the National Cancer Advisory Pcard threetimes a year. The deadlines for receipt of applications are: June 1,1979 for January 1980 Board; October 1, 1979 for May 1980 Board andFebruary 1, 1980 for September 1980 Board.
Effective with the February 1, 1978 sul:::mission deadline, the fundingrequirements were revised. The new matchin:] fum requirement based onallowable costs is fifty per cent Federal funds and fifty per centGrantee non-Federal funds.
I wish to anphasize that construction funds are to be used for thedevelopnent of new space for cancer research. Therefore, justificationfor your request must be based 00 either an ongoing cancer researchprogram which needs additional space, or 00 a proposed new researchprogram which will require space to develop. In toth situations areview am eValuatioo will be made by a peer scientist review group.
It is stron:]ly urged, that \'tlether you are considering space to enlarge an ongoin:] program or spare to initiate a new program, youdiscuss your space needs with us before you file an application.Please do not hesitate to call (301) 496-7141 or write.
Since~ely yours,
~e~~·Donald G. Fox, Ph.D.ChiefResearch Facilities BranchDivisioo of Cancer Research Resources
and Centers
Enclosure
l51lA~-;L 1~~~~~~
u.'4~12p-,.
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA P(~~)(Rt(j)H(OO}t Physical Plant Operations ~lWlN CITIES Design Office
The preliminary cost estimate for subject project was directed this date toMr. Ralph Wollan. It was in the amount of $140,000.00 including $18,200.00for equipment to be purchased by the user department. This left $121,800.00for general, mechanical and electrical construction work which includednecessary architectural and engineering services required to complete theproject.
In order for our Engineering and Construction Division (Physical PlantOperations Department) to prepare the necessary architectural and engineering drawings and specifications required for bidding by private contractors, we must have a type 08 authorization to fund our engineeringeffort.
Inasmuch as this appears to be a very meticulous project, it is conceivablethat en~ineering costs could amount to ten or twelve percent of the cost ofthe proJect; in other words, ten thousand dollars or more.
If this project is to go ahead, I recommend that a type 08 authorizationin the amount of $5,000.00 be processed through this office at an earlydate to assure that it gains a favorable position in our production schedule.That authorization should include a statement that "additional funds will beprovided as required ll and should refer to the above project and cost estimatenumbers.
After the authorization has cleared the Business Office, we will assign ajob captain to the project along with a mechanical and electrical engineer.A pre-engineering meeting will be set up with our engineering team andrepresentatives from the using department which will get the project rolling.
Please contact me on 3-2048 if you need further clarification with respectto the above.
The distance betwecn successivc ionizations in thepath of a primary recoil electron produced by Co".oy-rays is of t.he order of 1000 A, ConscqtJ('ntly, arat.her sparsely ionized t.rack is ohtailJ('d. At, enchpoint. of ioni7.ation, secondary "lel'lrons promotefmt.her ionization of t,he water (readion 2) nnd form 1\
group of ion pairs. Thesc nrc represent.ed hy' A ,inFigure 1, Ilnd nre post.ulntcd to have all origillnl dinmeterof the order of 10 to 20 A. (11, 12). a-Pnrtirlcsform nn essentially continuous trnck of ionizaf.ion(B of Figure 1) resulting from overlapping spheres of
The energy loss cf(uat.ion for heavy particles, usuallyemployed at nonrelativistic energies in radiationchemistry studics, is:
where the definitions of symbol.s arc identical to thoseused for electrons nnd z = charge on the part.icle.Sincc the velocity of heavy particles for a given energyis much leRs than t.hat of elect.rons of this energy, theprincipal cITect of heavy iOllR is to increase the energyJoss pllmmcter. Numerical values of these parnmeterstaken from Lea (6) are given in Table 1 for electrons,protons, nnd a-particles.
586
I nrwd on work performed under the aU8plcee of the U. 8.Atomic Energy Commi88lon.
whereE - ener~y of the inddent particlo111 - rna"" of the electront - char~e on the electronr - velocity of the particlec - velocity of light/I - vicN - n'lmher of ntollUl/cc. of mntter irrndintedZ - n••"lenr chnq;~c
I - l\VCrnIl;C excitntion pot.cntil\l of the atom
For protonR, a-rays, and other heavy particles, thornte of energy loss is much greater than for electrons.
PRIMARY PROCESSES
R.\nUTION chemistry is It rapidly expnnding branchof chrmistry. This gnm·th is due in pnrt. to the postwnr lwnilnbility and development of powerful radintion"olll'crs nnd in pnrt to its mnny nppIicnt,ions to probICllls in chemistry, biolo~y, find pile technology. Theprr~ent, pnper (knls sprcificnlly with the chemicalchnnges induced in nf(ucous solutions under irradiationhy a-mys, {3-rays, X-rays, nnd y-rays. The mechanismof frre radical formntion, the principles of chemicaldosimct.ry, the dclerminat,ion of primary yields ofmoleclllnr products and free radicals, and t,he kineticsof sOllle chmnicnl reactions in nf(ueous solution:'! nrediscllsscd.
The hrond nspccts of the intemct.ion of ionizingmdintions with mntfer have been trented previously inTillS JOURNAL by Burton':'! /IAn Introduction to Hadiation Chemistry" (1). Early work using a-particlesnlHI c1ectrolls is covcred by Lind (2). Recent dctailed:rrdews on this suhject may also be found in Volumes1-7 of the II nn1lul Reviews of Physical Chemistry (3).He\;ew pnprrR by Lefort (4) on ,chemicnl effects inaqueous solutions, and by Miller (5) on dosimetry arenlso recommended for additional study.
The ionizntion llIHI diRsociation proceRRCS which occurwhcnl'ledromagnet.ic mdiation or charged partidesinlcrnrf, with watrr have been described by Len. (0),
.. Dainton (7), Allen (8), and Mngee nnd Burton (9).. \ _=_-====0=00""""""""""""""======-=-....._
X-rnys and y-rays lead to the ejection of photo- Iwd/orCompton recoil electrons capable of producing multipleionizat.ions of the water. The average energy lossper em. of track is given by Bethe and Ashkin (10)for electrons at relativistic velocities:
The radioiodine labeling laboratory is to be the facility where all radio
iodine labeling of chemicals and proteins is done on the Minneapolis campus of the
University of Minnesota. Iodine-125 is both a highly desirable label because of
its sensitivitYt versati1itYt easy preparation and ana1ysis t and a potentially
hazardous one because of its toxicity and volatility. This centrally located lab
oratory will allow radioiodine labeling to be conducted without jeopardizing the
health of technicians or the safety of the environment.
Description of the Facility
The 12' by 28' laboratory will be located in the Boynton Health Service
building and equipped so that two labeling procedures may be conducted simultane
ously. Two radioisotope fume hoods will be installed midway along the one wall of
the 1aboratoryt thus effectively separating the room into two work stations. A
work bench will extend the length of the opposite wall with common equipment t such
as a bench-top centrifuge and source ca1ibrator t stored midway along the counter t
accessible to both halves of the laboratory. Two sinks will also be installed in
the work bench.
The radioiodine hoods will conform to specifications for hoods for radioisotope
use t including an exhaust duct with a radioisotope filter enclosure for a charcoal
radioiodine filter and prefilter. The fume hoods will be positioned back to back
and will share a common exhaust duct. Instruments for monitoring the effluent
air concentrations of radioiodine will be installed in the duct. Personnel breath
ing zone air will also be monitored.
Locking storage cabinets and drawers will be provided for use by 15 - 20
individual researchers storing their labeling equipment and materials. An ade
quately shie1ded t large capacity laboratory refrigerator is to be installed along
the wall for storage of temperature sensitive substances. A cold room with a
work bench and vertical columns for fractionation procedures will also be provided.
- 2 -
The cold room air will be monitored and work surfaces routinely surveyed.
Construction will be such that the room can be decontaminated as needed.
Because the effectiveness of monitoring depends upon accurate, reliable
instrumentation, an instrument calibration radiation source will be stored in
a shielded cubicle, adjoining and accessible to the labeling laboratory. The
instruments used on the pr~ises will be calibrated regularly and individual
researchers will also be able to calibrate the instruments they use to monitor
leakage and contamination in their own laboratories.
Use of the Facility
The radioiodine labeling laboratory will allow all radioiodine labeling on
the Minneapolis campus of the University of Minnesota to be done with adequate
environmental controls under the supervision of the University Radiation Protection
Program staff.
A Radiation Protection Program technician will schedule and supervise all
labeling procedures. Researchers will come to the central labeling laboratory and
125receive the previously ordered I and other needed materials from the Radiation
Protection technician in attendance. The labeling will be carried out by the re-
searcher or his/her staff in the radioisotope fume hood, while the breathing zone
air and the effluent air is sampled and counted for contamination. Upon completion
of the labeling procedure, while still in the fume hood, radioiodine contaminated
materials will be packaged, sealed and removed for disposal. Fractionation of
the labeled material will also be conducted in the fume hood, or, if necessary,
in the specially designed cold room adjoining the labeling laboratory. The rela-
tively safe, non-volatile labeled fraction may then be carried back to the
researcher's laboratory with little exposure hazard.
The Radiation Protection Program will take responsibility for storage and
control of unused 1251 , 1311 and other stock materials. The laboratory is e-
quipped with sufficient cabinet and refrigerator storage space to make these
controls feasible.
- 3 -
~ Radiation Protection Advantages of the Facility
The central radioiodine labeling laboratory reduces the risk of employee
and public exposure to ionizing radiation in several importan't ways:
1. Charcoal filtration of laboratory effluent air will ensureprotection of the general public.
2. An adequately ventilated, spill-protective fume hood will be used forall labeling procedures. Frequent! testing to ensure adequateface velocity and filter integrity will be provided.
3. Breathing zone, fume hood effluent, and cold room air will beconsistently monitored and controlled to ensure radiationprotection.
4. The laboratory will be designed to be easily decontaminatedin case of a spill.
5. Investigators will always be monitored before leaving theradioiodine labeling laboratory to prevent radioactivecontaminants from being carried out of the laboratory intoareas where the general public or other personnel might beexposed.
6. Fractionation can be conducted in the controlled-accesscold room when temperature sensitive materials are used.This central cold room will eliminate the need to useradioiodine in other cold rooms throughout Health Sciences.
7. Radioactive waste will be packaged in the fume hood, storedunder the fume hood and disposed of under the supervision ofRadiation Protection Program personnel. This contains andcontrols another source of potential contamination.
8. Radiation monitoring instruments will be calibrated in thecentral laboratory using the calibration source. Contamination surveys in the individual laboratories, as well asmonitoring of the central facility, will thus be done withroutinely calibrated instruments available to individualusers.
9. Dose rates from the labeled proteins will be determined beforeleaVing the labeling laboratory, so that adequate shieldingand packaging may be pro~ided for all packages.
Administrative Advantages of the Facility
1. A radiation protection technician will be available to thecentral labeling laboratory to supervise and instruct as needed,
- 4 -
whenever radioiodine labeling is performed. He or she will alsocollected the required air samples.
2. Scheduling will be simplified. The need to coordinate schedulesof laboratory technicians with the Radiation Protection staffwill be minimal.
3. Locking storage space will be provided for approved radioisotopeusers who perform iodinization procedures. Transport ofinstruments or equipment will not be necessary, and previouslyordered radioiodine will be provided for each labeling procedure.
4. Storage of· unused 1251 and disposal of radioactive waste willno longer be the responsibility of individual researchers.
5. Capital expenditures for ventilation,fume hood and/or cold roommodifications will not be needed to control the hazards ofvolatile radioiodine in individual laboratories.
•
..•
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
September 7, 1979
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical Planning4103 Powell Hall. Box 75500 Essex Street S.E.Minneapolis. Minnesota 55455
(612) 373·8981
10:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
George MichealsonEnvironrrental Health and Safety
Paul J. MaUPina .. ()Health Science~gCoordinator
Grant Application for Proposed Radiation Protection Facility
Enclosed please find a "draft" of the grant application for the proposedradiation protection facility to house the Radioiodine Labeling andCarcinogen and Highly Toxic Chemical Laboratories.
We have prepared a draft letter to NCI, a research objective paper,the HE»J Form 537 completed with the estimated project costs,justification paper for the project, included a listing of theongoing research projects with support letters for the RadioiodineLab, a detailed floor plan of the project and a project description.This fulfills our obligation as per our original agreerrent withRoger DeRoos. Our design is based on the current state of the art.
It is vital to the grant that one of the leading researchers usingthe facility be identified as responsible for the activity. Thisperson ITBJSt be identified sorrewhere in the written composition ofthe grant. In addition, we have not received any listing of theresearch being done to support the Carcinogen Lab or any supportletters for that facility. Your department will also have toprovide the percentage of eligibility figures based upon your knowledge of the users of the facility.
We have been assured by NCI that the matching dollars for this grantpresents no problem.
Please review the enclosed information for any changes that you feelneed to be made. The final composition, editing and submission ofthe grant is the responsibility of Environrrental Health and Safety.The grant application is to be in Washington, D.C. no later thanOctober 1, 1979.
Dr. Roger DeRoosWi36 Boyten Health ServicesUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Dear Dr. DeRoos:
Enclosed is an application kit as requested on this date, relative toa construction grant. He believe the instructions are self-evident.Applications are reviewed by the National Cancer Advisory Board threetimes a year. The deadlines for receipt of applications are: June 1,19/9 for January 1980 Board; October 1, 1979 for May 1980 Board andFebruary 1, 1980 for September 1980 Board.
-
Effective with the February 1, 1978 submission deadline, the fundingrequirements were revised. The new matching fund requirement based onallowable costs is fifty per cent Federal funds and fifty per centGrantee non-Federal funds.
I wish to emphasize that construction funds are to be used for thedevelopment of new space for cancer research. Therefore, justificationfor your request must be based on either an ongoing cancer researchprogram which needs additional space, or on a proposed new researchprogram which will require space to develop. In roth situations areview and evaluation will be made by a peer scientist review group.
It is strongly urged, that v.hether you are considering space to enlarge an ongoing program or space to initiate a new program, youdiscuss your space needs with us before you file an application.Please do not hesitate to call (301) 496-7141 or write.
Singe.:t;'ely yours,
af)/r /J ~/.;'. ~ /.?// t_..sJ_"-,/ < ' v /0'
Donald G. Fox, Ph.D.ChiefResearch Facilities BranchDivision of Cancer Research Resources
and Centers
~:
r--'
Ik"
~~f~'" _"~-..~
Enclosure
c
...DRAFT
September 10, 1979
National Institutes of HealthBethesda, Maryland 20014
Re: NCI Protection Facility
Gentlenen:
Please find enclosed application for matching ftmds to be used to renovateexisting facilities to meet NIH guidelines for a NCI Protection Facility.
The area to be renovated is currently being used as a warehouse area. Thespace is ideal due to its central location and easy conversion to a fullyself-contained space for the radiation protection facility.
DocUIlE.ntationis enclosed which includes approval by the University ofMirmesota Division of EnvirOI1ID2ntal Health and Safety and guarnateed financialsupport from the University of Minnesota Central Administration.
This application includes a number of support letters by investigatorsstating their support and need for the facility.will be the coordinator of the program.
To my knowledge there is no existing protection facility either in theHealth Sciences at Hinnesota or on the Twin Cities campus. We have assuredCentral Administration at the University of Minnesota that the mit willbe made available to all the investigators at the University requiring useof the laboratories.
I believe the enclosed application meets the intent of the NIH, and we arepleased to submit the application for your consideration.
very truly yours,
~.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Ncr PRarECTrON FACll..r1Y (Radioiodine Labeling and Carcinogen and HighlyToxic Chemical Facility)
We are requesting matching fLmds for a National Cancer Institute Protection
Facility to be developed in the Boyton Health Services building as part
of the Radiation Protection Services at the University of Minnesota to
facilitate studies requiring Radioiodine Labeling and handling of Carcinogen
and other Highly toxic chemicals. This facility will be the first of its
kind at the University of Minnesota and will be available to all investigators
conducting studies requiring these procedures. In this application, we
describe the proposed renovations (remodeling) required to alter an existing
warehouse space into one that can be employed for a fully self-contained
Radioiodine Labeling Lab and Carcinogen and Highly Toxic Chemical Lab.
These procedures are currently being done in individual researchers I labs
often with inadequate filtration and ventilation. The vast majority of the
studies being done reflect an extension of ongoing fLmded research projects
at the University. This facility should provide an additional d.inension to
the continuing research programs of the investigators involved.
3. APPLICANT APl'l.lE..') FOR FEDERAl. FUND,') FOR CONSTIUJCTION UNDER 'IlIE FOLLOWING I'RCX;RAM(S):
DIIEW
OTHER (IDENTIFY)
$-----
$-----
$------
$------
I. I Other Nonprofit
LEAVE IILANK
STATE
tWC Public
$-----
$------
$ -llZ.959
$-------
[~I New facilityL 1 Expansion of existing facility
~ Remodeling
r= I Acquisition[J E(juipnlent onlyC] Orher (sp,'clty)
University of MinnesotaMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Congressional Dist. #5
(I) Type of Ownership
(E) Type of operational control in other than the owner
(C) Type of consrruction (Check al/ Ihal af>ply)
(B) C;!{ANT AMOUNT
University of MinnesotaDept. of Envirornnental Health &
Safety
(2) _
(1) _
(I) Radiation Protection Facility
(A) ;:ODE NO.
(A) Name and Type
NIC Protection Facility(Radioiodine Labeling & Carcinogen
and Highly Toxic Chemical Lc1.b)University of Minnesota
The following assurances are divided into twoparts. Part A assurances arc r"'Juired forallapplicants appl,.ing for construction program supportincluding the acquisition of facilities where applicable, from the Depa rtment of Health, Education,and Welfare. Part B assurances are ones which relate only to individual construction grant or loan programs. Signature by the appllcant's representativewill indicate that the institution agrees to all Part AaSSurances and to the Part B assurances requiredby the program Or programs to which it is applyingfor suppo d.
The appllcant gives assurance that:
Part A.1. It possesses legal authority to apply for and
receive the grant Or loan, and to finance andconstruct the proposed facilities; that a resolution, motion or similar action has been dulyadopted Or passed as an official act of theapplicant's governing board, authorizing thefiling of the application, including all understan(~ings and assurances contained therein,and directing and authorizing the perSonidentified as the official representative ofthe applicant to act in connection with theappllcation and to provide such additionalinformation as may be required,
2. It will comply with the provisions of theNational Environmental Policy Act,PL 91-190; Executive Order 11296, relatingto flood-plain elevation and necessary controls; and Executive Order 11288 relating tothe prevention, control, and abatement ofwater pollution.
3. Sufficient funds will be avail;,ble to meet thenon- Fede ral sh;, re of the cost of constructingthe facility, and that sufficient funds will beavailable when construction is completed toassure effective operation and maintenanceof the facility for the purposes for whichconstructed.
4. Approval by the HEW Secretary or hISdesignee':' of the final working drawings andspecifications will be obtained before theproject is advertised or placed 011 the ma rketfor bidding; that it will con5truct the project,or cause it to be constructed. to final completion in accordance with the applicationand approved drawings and specifications;that it will submit to the Secretar,. or hisdesignee for prior approval changes thatmaterially alter the scope or costs of theproject, use of space, or functional layout;that it will not enter into a constructioncontract(s) for the project or a part thereofuntil the conditions of the construction grantor loan programs h;'lve been met.
5. Except as otherwise provided by State/locallaw, all contr;,cting for construction (including the purchase :lnd install:ltion ofbuilt-in equipm"nt) shall "" on a lump SUmfixed-price ":Isis. :llH\ con!:"a :ts will beawarded on the h:lsis of competitive biddlllgwith awa rd of the contract to the lowest re-
·Thc term Secretary or his designee shJIlIl)('.111 COlllttlisstoncT ofEducation with respect to Office of J:ducatlon programs.
HEW-537
SrOnS1V(~ ;'Illc\ ,-t'spol1sibll' hidder. The provision for exceptions based on State :lnd local13,," will not be invoked to give local contractors or suppliers a percentage preferanceover non-Jocal contractors bidding for thesam" contract. Such practices are preCludedby this assul'ance.
6. Except as otherwise provided by law, alllaborers and mechanics employed by contractors and subcontractors on all construction and minor remodeling projects will bepaid wages at rates not less than those prev:liling as determined by the Secretary ofLabor in accordance with the Davis-BaconAct, as amended (40 U.S.C.276a-276a-5)and29 CFIZ Part I, and sh:lll receive overtimecompensation in accordance with and subjectto the provisions of the Contract Work HoursStandards Act (40 U.S.C. 327-332); that suchcontractors :lnd subcontractors shall complywith the provisions of 29 CFlZ Part 3; andthat all construction contracts and subcontrrtcts sh:lll incorporate the contract clausesrequired by 29 CFrz 5.5(a) and (c). Such contracts shall also incluck the applicable provisions of Executive Order 11246, as amended(:'-Jondiscrimination in Construction ContractEmploym('ntj, and the applicant shall otherwise comply with the requirements of section301 of said Executlv(' Order. The contractorshall furnish performance and paymentbonds, each in the amount of the full contractprice; and provide, during the life of th.,contract, for adequate fire, public liability,property damage, and workmen's Compensa-tion insu ranee.
7. It will provide and m"intain competentand l1df'qu<ltc architectural f'npinceringsupe rvision and inspection at the construction site to insure that the completed workconforms with the approved drawings andspecifications; that it will furnish progressreports and such other information as theSecretary or his designee may require.
R. An aSSUrance of complianc(' with Title VI ofthe Ci,"il Pights Act of 19h4 (Form HEW 441)applying to th" facility described in thisapplicatIOn was filed or is attached to thisapplication.
9, It will maintain gr:lnt or loan accountingrecords (identifiable by grant or loan number), including all r.:cords relating to ther('ceipt and expenditure of Federal grant orloan funds and to the expenditure of the nonFederal share of the cost of a project, forthree ,'ea rs aft" r the completion of theproject if:ln :lUlltt is conducted by or on b,,half of the Department within th:lt period, orin the caSe where no audit is performed, forfiv(~ Y(~dr.~;; ('XC('pt th.'lt ~ho\lldauditqu05tions
artS" with respect to the grant or loan, therecords will ".' maint:lined until :Ill suchquestions" re resolved. IZepresentatives ofthe Federal (;overnment shall have aCCeSs at<Ill reasona"le tin",s to the grantee's recordsand to \vork \Vh"IH~v('r it is in pr(~parati()n orprogress, "nd the contractor sh:lll provideproper facilities for such accesS and inspection.
10. The facility will \'" operated :lnd m:linL1inedin accordance with the requirements of
, . .! • • .II;
c. That the facility will furnish a communityservice and:
applicable Federal, Stat" and local a~"ncies
for the maintenance and operation of suchfacilities.
d. The facility will be used for the purposesfor whi'" it is constructed for not lessthan 20 years after the completion of theconstruction.
• r
I rI rI fr f(-I
r Ir Ir Ir I~ I~'I
~ I,
fI Ifll~ Iri~ I
<I
[ I, ,
rl
d.
H£\\'-537
d. 1'11" ;lpplic;111t'S ~cho()l [;Jcililif!s \""ill hr;lV;lil,lhl,' to till' childrf;l1 for \\'llns(~ (·dllc;),lio!l ('Ollt rib\ltiol1s .l rt' provid(Od with fundsundcr Public Law HI-815, as amend"d,Oll til''' Srlrn p tl'rn1S, in tlccofclancr withthe l:l\\'s of the SL1tc in which applic.lnt issitll;)ted, as the)' are available to otherchildren in applicant's school district.
c. The applicant has or will have title tothe site or the rip.ht to build the schoolf"cilities on the site and tomaintainthemon the site for at least twenty years.
a. It is :l local educational agency havingadministrative control and direction offree public elementary or secondaryeducation in the applicant school district,or a State agency which has the responsibility for providing school facilities.
e. The !l""lth or Allied Health ProfessionsTraining facility or Nurse Training facility will provide for increased enrollment as set forth in the program instructions anri in this application.
4. School Construction under P.L. 81-815:
b. It is a local educational agency createdand authorized to construct and maintainschool buildings under constitutional,statutory, or charter provisions; andthat it may accept and disburse Federalfunds to aid in financing the cost of constructing school buildings in accordancewith constitutional, statutory, or charterprovisions cited:
Citation:
Legal Clas sification:
such Llcillty is to be situClted, at leastthe e s sent ia 1 elements of comp rchenSIV" mental health services-i.e., inpatient services, outpatient services,pa rtial hospitalization services (includin~ at least day care serVices). emergency services provided 2'1 hours perda)', and consultation and education service s ava ila ble to community agenc ie sand professional personnel.
3. Health Professions and Allied Health Professions Teaching Facilities, Nurse Training Facilities, "led;cal Library Facilities,and Health Hesearch Facilities.
a. The facility will not be used for sectarianinstruction or as a place for religiousworship.
b. The Health Professions Teaching facilityis intended to be used for the purpose setforth in this application.
c. The Allied Health Professions Teachingf"cility or Health Hesearch facility willbe used for the purpose for which it isconstructed for not less than 10 yearsafter the compldion of construction.
The Nurse Training facility or MedicalLibrary faCIlity will be used for the purpose for which it is constructed for notless th"n 20 years after the completionof construction.
Community Mental HealthMental Fetardation Facilities.
(2) will 1\'0'1' furnish below cost or withoutcharge a reasnnable volume of services to persons un"ble to pay therefore, because of the justification whichis attached.
b. That all portions and services of theentire facility for the constructIOn ofwhich, or in connection with which, aidis sought, will be made available withoutdiscrin1ination on account ·of creed, andno professionally qualified person wll1 bechscriminated against on account of creedwith respect to the privilege of profes sional practice in the facility.
(I) will furnish below cost or withoutcharge a reasonable volume of services to persons unable to pay therefore; or
2. Community Mental Health Centers:
That the services to he provided by thef;ICilily, alone or in conj\lnctiol1 \vithother facilities owned or operated bythe applicant, will he made availClble fora program provirilng principally forpersons resirling In <1 particular community or communities in or near which
il. The applicant will requi re th" facility to bedesigned to comply with th" "AmericanStanda rd Spec ifications for Making Buildings and Faciliti"s Accessible to, and Usableby, the Physically Handicapped," NumberAI17.1-1961, as modified by other standardspresc ribed by the Sec reta ry of HEW or theAdministrator of General Services. Theapplicant will be responsible for conductinginspections to insure compliance with thesespecifications by the contractor.
a. That it will conform to all the applicablerequirements of the appropriate Stateplan and the regulations pertainingthereto.
13, Any Federal funds received pUI'suant to agran' or loan will be used soldy for defraying the development cost of the proposedproject.
12. The applicant will cause work on the projectto be commenced within a resona"le timeafter receipt of notification from the Secretary Or his desi~nee that funds have be'mawarded, and that the project will be prosecuted to completion with reasonable diligence.
Part B.1. Hill-Burton,
Centers, and
L
(.,I,
c. The <lppl;c~flt v.,ill C,ll!S(' dllP cOllsidpfCl_
tiarl ttl lle givl~n to ('xc(~ll('ncc of <trchi_tecture and desi[;n of project <Jnd to theinrlusion of wo rks of a rt the cost of whichdoes not exceed one pe ,'cent of the Federal share of the cost of the project.
5. Hi[;her Educ<Jtion Facilities under Titles I,II, III of the Higher Education Facilities Act.
a. No part of the eligible areas included inthe proposed p,'oject: (J) is intendedprimarily for events for which admissionis to be char[;ed to the general public;(2) is especially designed for athletic orrecreational activities other than for <In<Jcademic course in physical education;(3) will be used for sectarian instructionor as a place for religious worship orprim<Jrily in connection with any part ofthe program of a school or departmentof divinity (as defined in P.L. RR-204);or (4) wil1 be used hy a "school of medi_cine,11 "school of dentistry," "school ofosteopathy,rr "school of pharmacy,""school of optnn)(·try,11 "school ofporl.atry," or "school of public health" asthese terms a rc defined in section 724 ofthe Public Health Service Act, or by a"school of nUl'sing" as defined in thatActunder section R43.
b. The <lpplicant is fully cognizant of ther c qui rem r. n t s reg3.rding f'conomicalmdhods of purch<lse of movable t'quip_mp.nt in <1CCort![ll1CC with sound businesspr~ctice, ~s set forth in tl", applicableregulations, (-15 CFIl 170.-1), ~nd al1movable equipment, tht' cost of which isto be charged to the project, will beprocu red in accord.?lncc with such regulations. It is underslood and. ag reed hy
--------------(Legal Name of Applicant)
(Signatu re of Autho ri zed Office r)
(Typed Name and Title of AuthorizedOffice r)
HEW 537
tl", appliral1t th'lt the eligihle projt'ctdevelopment cost <Jnd the Federal grantor loan <Jmount may be reduced <Jt settlement by the Commissioner of Educationbased on the <Jmount of any costs cl<Jimedunder the project which are for elaborateor extravag<Jnt equipment items.
c. It is unde rstood and agreed hy the applicant that the Commissioner of Educationmay, from time to time, after executionof a gr'lnt or 10'ln rt[;reement for theproject, and prior to final settlement underthe grant or· loan a~rp.cmcnt, mClkeclownward amendmcnts in the grant or loanamount to adjust to a reduction in thecost of the facilities, the identification ofineligihle costs, or a reduction in thesi7.e of the project.
d. The applicant has reviewed the academicand financial requi rements for operationof the f<lcilities upon completion, andconsiders the plans for operation of thefacilities to be pr<lctical and within thefinanci;l1 capahilities of the institution.
e. The f~cilily will be used as an ac~demic
facility for not less th~n twenty (20)ye<l rS after completion of construction(unless otherwise approved by the U.S.Commissioner of Education), or for solong as the Government holds any of thehonds pursuant to a 10anfromtheGovern_ment. whichever is longer.
lO, CE[{T1F1CATION BY APPLICANT
The applicant hereby certifies that the foregoing information in this application (inc1udin[; allaSSurances <lnd <Ill attachments) are correct to thebest of its knowledge and belief.
--- _._-----------(Address if different than above)
(Date of Application)
DRAFT
JUSTIFICATION FOR NCI PRarECTION FACILITY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
The University of Minnesota is a mu1tidicip1inary campus with major programs
currently ongoing in a number of important areas in cancer research. It is
apparent that a number of these ongoing research studies being done are
proceeding with risk to the investigator and staff members as well as the
environment due to the inadequate facilities provided in each of the
researchers' own lab areas.
Within the proposed NCI Protection Facility, we intend to provide two
laboratories, Radioiodine Labeling Lab and Carcinogen & Highly Toxic
Chemical Lab, as well as shower and toilet faci1ites and reception
area, creating a fully self-contained unit. The Radioiodine Labeling lab
is to be the facility where all labeling of chemical and proteins is done on tht
Minneapolis Campus at the University of l1inesota. This centrally
located lab will allow Iodine Labeling to be done with the greatest degree
of protection to the technician as well as to the staff and environment.
Currently, researchers are conducint labeling within their own laboratory
areas. Due to the large number of 1251 users and the wide spread location on
campus, complete monitoring and coverage by the Radiation Protection Officer is
not possible. Use of the Carcinogen Lab will replace procedures now being
carried out in a number of locations on campus as well. Typical chemicals
which are presently being used are benz(a)pyrene, B-naphty1amine, aflatoxin and
diisopropylfluorophosphate. In the present laboratories, none of the
laboratory hoods are adequately filtered for volatile carcinogen use. In
both cases, it is apparent that the laboratory procedures are being conducted
under adverse conditions with some risk to the investigator as well as
the staff members and the environment.
c
If approved, this facility will be the first of its kind on campus and
will be available to all researchers using these procedures. Since
there is no other facility of this kind on campus, the insuring protection
for these types of procedures depends upon the approval and funding of
the grant.
RENOVATION OF EXISTING WAREHOUSE AREA FOR NCI PRCYTECTION FACILITY:
The University of Mirmesota Envir~ntalHealth and Safety Department
has inspected the warehouse area sub-basement level of the Boyton
Health Services building to determine its feasibility for renovation to
provide NCI Protection Facility. This feasibility survey deals with the
suitability and adaptability of the laboratory as related to the m3.jor laborat01
design requirerrents. Pending IDJdification of reconnendations, this facility wi!
fulfull the criteria for NIC Protection Facility. A complete floor plan
and description of the facility is enclosed. In addition ot the two
laboratory areas, the space will contain washroom facility including
toilet, shower and lockers which will be particularly useful for laboratory
personnel. The presence of this fully self-contained faciltiy will
further reduce frequency of IDJvement in and out of the facility thereby
reducing risk to the investigators, staff members and environment. The
facility will provide three holding tanks for storage of radioactive waste
m3.terial creating a centrally located area for radioactive waste removal.
We have asked the Health Sciences Planning Office at the University of
Minnesota to estim3.te the work and cost required to renovate this facility.
A complete description of the proposed renovation is attached as part of
this grant application.
In the following sections to the grant, we describe the specific
renovations requied of the existing warehouse area. We also briefly
list sorre of the current ongoing research studies that will require
use of the facility. We believe the use of the closely supervised, self
contained tmit along with adequate laboratory components will reduce sone of the
variables in the proceudres being conducted as well as enhance the
evaluation of the technics bieng used.
We have attached a listing of some of the research studies now being
conducted along with letters of support for the facility from proposed
users. All of these studies reflect extensions of ongoing f1.mded research
projects, and are therefore well within the expertise, training and
technical competence of the principal investigators involved.
c
DRAFT:
PROPOSED NCI RADIATION PRarEcrION FACILITY:
The radioiodine labeling laboratory is to be the facility Where all
radioiodine labeling of chemicals and proteins is accomplished on the
Minneapolis Campus of the University of Mirmesota. Iodine-125 is
a highly desireable label because of its sensitivity, versatility,
ease of preparation and analysis and is potentially hazardous because
of its toxicity and volatility. The centrally located facility
will allow radioiodine labeling to be conducted without j eoparadizing
the health of teclmicians or the environment.
DESCRIPTION OF FACILITIES:
Reception check in room 101 will be identified as the entry point to the
radioiodine/carcinogen laboratory facility, which each investigator shall
sign in and out thus giving the facilities technician a permanent record
of the days activity. This space shall also serve as the facility's
technician's office.
Upon signing into the facility, the investigator will enter the laboratory
area via corridor 102. Proceeding down corridor 102, the investigator
shall enter gown room 105, where he or she shall gown prior to entering the
radioiodine or carcinogen laboratories.
The radioiodine labeling laboratory 107 and 108 will be equipped so that two
labeling procedures may be conducted sinultaneously. 'IWo radioisotope fume
hoods will be installed back to back midway along the south wall of the
laboratory thus effectively separting the room into two work stations.
Metal laboratoy casework with stainless steel cOtmtertops will extend the
entire lenth of the north wall with tTDvable equipment, such as a bench~
top centri:fugl'!and source calibrator, stored midway along the COtmter.
Two stainless steel sinks will be provided in the casework components
located on the east and west walls. The drains of these particular
sinks will be piped directly to the holding tanks provided in room 111.
The radioiodine hoods will conform to specifications for hoods designated
for radioisotope research, including the sealed stainless steel exhaust
duct work which will be desigend to ftmction wiath a 1" fiber roughing filter
and 6" charcoal radioiodine filter. Each duct will be designed to provide
access points on each side of the filters whereby instrumentation can be
installed for monitoring the effluent air concentrations of radioiodine.
Each hood shall also be specified with a rnonitoring devise on the sash,
which will rronitor the personnel breathing zone.
Metal laboratory casework will provide locked individual storage for 15
to 20 investigators. An adequately shielded, large capacity laboratory
refrigerator will be provided for the storage of temperature sensitive
substances.
6' -1/2" x 6' - 1/2" cold room (#109) complete with metal laboratory casework
and vertical columns for fractionation procedures will be installed adjacent
to radioiodine labeling laboratory 108. The cold room exhaust will
also be rnonitored, and the work surfaces routinely surveyed.
Because of the effectiVBIless of rronitoring depends upon accurate
reliable instrumentation, an instrument calibration radiation source
will be installed in Room 110, which will be designed with radiation
shielding to a 7' -0" height on the west and south walls. The instruments
used on tile premises will be calibrated regularly by tile facilities technician.
The investigators will also be able to use this equipment to calibrate
tileir rronitoring instruments used back in their own laboratories.
The radioiodine labeling laboratories will allow radioiodine labeling on
tile Minneapolis Campus to be accomplished tmder tile state of the art
environmental controls.
Carcinogen Laboratory 106 will be designed to include on 6' -0" radioisotope
fi.m.1e hood, which will be provided with an identical exhaust system to tllat
provided in the radioiodine laboratory. The north wall will provide
rretal laboratory casework witil stainless steel cotmtertop and stainless
steel sink, again tile drain systems witil in tilis laboratory will be piped
directly to the holding tanks in room 111.
The use of the specialized laboratory for carcinogen and highly toxic
chemical handling room 106 will be limited to experiments or procedures
involving significant concentrations or pure materials. A typical procedure
would involve opening a vial of a pur:substance, weighing a quantity and
rmking up a dilution of the measured IlE.terial. Once these IlE.terials have
been diluted, it is usually safe to use them in a somewhat less controlled
laboratory setting, and therfore further procedures would be conducted back
in the investigators individual laboratory.
Laboratory procedures carried on in this facility will generally be relatively
simple. They IlE.y also be quite rapid, altilough certain dissolution techniques
could require several hours of heating and stirring.
Upon completing their activity in the radioiodine or carcinogen laboratory,
c
the investigator will return to gown room 105 where he or she will be
monitored by the facilities technician to insure that the investigator
has not inadvertantly contaminated him or herself. If this test proves
negative, the investiagor will be allowed to proceed to the reception
check-in room 101 where he or she will sign out in the log book prior to
leaving the facility.
BASIC FINISHES:
The entire facility shall receive the following finish ffi'3.terials, which will
provide the environmental control necessary in this facility.
Walls concrete block with surface filler and two coats of epoxy
paint.
Ceiling - plaster with two coats of epoxy paint
Flooring - seamless sheet vinyl with a coved base and therTIE.lly fuse
welded joints. ~'~ Holding tank room 111 shall receive a seam
less cornposiiton flooring with a coved base to 4'-0".
All exposed joints between finishes shall be sealed with a contineous
bead of silicone sealer. i.e. floor to metal casework, ceiling and
wall intersection, coved base to wall, etc.
(draft - leave in as is)
Radiation Protection Advantages of the Facility
The central radioiodine labeling laboratory reduces the risk of employee
and public exposure to ionizing radiation in several important ways:
1. Charcoal filtration of laboratory effluent air will ensureprotection of the general public.
2. An adequately ventilated, spill-Protective fume hood will be used forall labeling procedures. Frequent testing to ensure adequateface velocity and filter integrity will be provided.
3. Breathing zone, fume hood effluent, and cold room air will beconsistently monitored and controlled to ensure radiationprotection.
4. The laboratory will be designed to be easily decontaminatedin case of a spill.
5. Investigators will always be monitored before leaving theradioiodine labeling laboratory to prevent radioactivecontaminants from being carried out of the laboratory intoareas where the general public or other personnel might beexposed.
6. Fractionation can be conducted in the controlled-accesscold room when temperature sensitive materials are used.This central cold room will eliminate the need to useradioiodine in other cold rooms throughout Health Sciences.
7. Radioactive waste will be packaged in the fume hood, storedunder the fume hood and disposed of under the supervision ofRadiation Protection Program personnel. This contains andcontrols another source of potential contamination.
8. Radiation monitoring instruments will be calibrated in thecentral laboratory using the calibration source. Contamination surveys in the individual laboratories, as well asmonitoring of the central facility, will thus be done withroutinely calibrated instruments available to individualusers.
9. Dose rates from the labeled proteins will be determined beforeleaVing the labeling laboratory, so that adequate shieldingand packaging may be provided for all packages.
Administrative Advantages of the Facility
1. A radiation protection technician will be available to thecentral labeling laboratory to supervise and instruct as needed,
(draft - leave in as is)
whenever radioiodine labeling is performed. He or she will alsocollected the required air samples.
2. Scheduling will be simplified. The need to coordinate schedulesof laboratory technicians with the Radiation Protection staffwill be minimal.
3. Locking storage space will be provided for approved rBdioisotopeusers who perform iodinization procedures. Transport ofinstruments or equipment will not be necessary. and previouslyordered radioiodine will be provided for each labeling procedure.
4. Storage of unused 125 r and disposal of radioactive waste willno longer be the responsibility of individual researchers.
5. Capital expenditures for ventilation. fume hood and/or cold roomIIDdifications will not be needed to control the hazards ofvolatile radioiodine in individual laboratories.
The following cancer research projects involve radioiodine labeling procedures,and would be supported by the proposed central iodination facility:
Dr. Anthony J. Faras, Microbiology
Public Health Service - NIH NOl-CP-61055"Regulation of RL'1A Tumor Virus Gene Expression in Mannnalian Cells"The studies are intended to determine the level of control of the expression
of ~~A tumor virus genes in transformed (malignant) and retrovertant(nonmalignant) mammalian cells.
Public. Health Service - NCI CA-20011"NechClrdsm of Retrovirus Proviral DNA SyuthESi$l1The ~tudies address the involvement of the location of the primer RNA, RNase H
activity, and terminally repeated genomic nucleotide sequences in the syntheslsand circula:t'izat.ion of proviral DNA.
Public Health Service - NIH CA-18303"RNA-directed DNA Polymerase and 70S RNA of Oncornaviruses"By reannealing, hybridization and/or competition hybridization experiments,
information should be revealed regarding the nature and location of thesequences involved in the formation of the 70S RNA, transduction and geneticrecombination.
Leukemia Research Foundation, Inc."Molecular Mechanism of Avian Oncornavirus Induced Oncogenesis"Study concerns the underlying mechanism by which the growth mechanism of normal
cells is disturbed during the development of cancer.
The University of Minnesota Leukemia Task Force"Nature and Hechanism of Action Molecules Responsible for Cell Transformationand Tumorigenesis"Studies intended to determine the specific changes required to induce tumorigenicity
in a tumor virus-infected animal cell model system as well as the precisechanges in the molecular biology of human lymphocytes during leukemogenesis.
Public Health Service - NIH CA-25462"Human Papilloma Virus and Malignant Disease"
Public Health Service - NIH CA-6387''Revision of Rous-Sarcoma Virus-Transfonned Cells"
Dr. I~azami2ra Gaj 1-?ec3alska, Pa thology
National Institutes of Health - NCI CA-1703Lf-01f
"Immunology of Human Lymphoid Tumors"Iodine-125 is used for labeling human innnunoglobulins (IgG, IgH and IgA) used
in double antibody radioimmunoassay for evaluation of suppresor or enhancingactivity of lymphocytes from pati~nts with lymphoma and leukemia.
~ Dr. Nelson ColdbeEa, Pharmacology
American Cancer Society - B166"Cyclic CMP and Control of Cell Proliferation"Iodine-125 is used for radioamino assays for measurement of the cyclic G}W.
c
c
- 2 -
Dr. Jonathan Parsons, Anatomy
American Cancer Society, University of Minnesota InstitutionalResearch Grant - IN-13-R-2S"Determination of the Estrogen Binding Properties of Pituitary Tumors"The MtTw1s mammosomatotropic tumor used in these studies produces large
quantities of both growth hormone (GH) and prolactin (PRL). Correlation of tumor function with tumor estrogen receptor characteristicsinvolves, in part, the use of radioimmunoassays of both of thesehormones. Ongoing use of RIA for GH and PRL is, therefore, an essentialaspect of the work.
Dr. Charles Noldow, Medicine
National Cancer Institute CA-13722"Cell Surface Receptors for Oncogenic Viruses"The research addresses the binding of tumor receptors to cell lines.
Viral host range glycoproteins are purified, radioiodine labeled, andused in binding assays to identify cell surfac.e receptorsk
Dr. Andreas Rosenberg, Laboratory Medicine and Pathology
National Institute of Health BL16833-06"Hemoglobin and red cell system in hemoglobinopathies ll
National Science Foundation - PCM77-17689"Systems Approach to Protein Structure"
National Institutes of Health - (in review)"Effect of Surface Absorption on Multisubunit Proteins"
In the above research, iodination procedures are used for labeling labilemitogens, such as lectins and antigens. The labeled compounds are usedin study of interactions of these compounds with surfaces, both artificialand of cellular origin.
-' .. -
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
Department of Laboratory Medicine and PathologyMedical SchoolBox 198 Mayo Memorial Building420 Delaware Street S.E.Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8623"
July 19,1979
Ralph O. WollanRadiation Safety OfficerDepartment of Environmental
Health and SafetyBoynton Health Service410 Church Street, S.E.
, Minneapolis, MN 55455
Dear Mr. Wall an:
One aspect of an ongoing research project in our laboratory is thecharacterization of the binding reaction of Concanavalin A to avariety of surfaces. Artificial and biological surfaces are beingexamined in order to classify the type of Can A binding observed. Oneof the more critical comparisons will be to study the binding reactionof Can A to transformed and normal cells, and to examine, within thecontext of our model, any differential behavior in the binding reactionswhich appear. In order to do this we require that the Con A be hemogenousin its binding characteristics, and that the binding reaction be observableover a wide range of experimental conditions. The required sensitivitycan be obtained by using radioiodinated Can A. Also, the trace iodinationmethods currently available are very gentle, and labeled Con A is notmeasurably altered in its binding characteristics when compared with nativeCan A.
As mentioned above, we require pure Con A. ~25are developing a purification/iodination protocol which will produce pure I-Con A in essentially onestep, thereby increasing the efficiency of the production of our labeledreagent. The proposed facility would greatly simplify the12ggistics ofusing this new, more efficient protocol. In this regard, I-Con A is notcommercially available, and even if it were, its purity would be suspect,since commercially available preparations of Con A are not pure.
The use of 125I_Con A allows us enhanced sensitivity inour assays, andexperimental flexibility. Thus, we definitely will benefit by theestablishment of a central radioiodine labeling laboratory. We feel thatthe handling and disposal problems which now exist would be greatly reduced
HEALTH SCI[NCES
Ralph O. vlo11anPage 2
and that the risk of t~§idental exposure of fellow workers to the highlyradioactive label (Na 1) would be eliminated. The combination ofefficient handling of all aspects of the iodination procedure, fromreceiving the radioiodine, to the use of a specially designed cold roomfor chromatography, and the presence of trainT~5personnel will greatlyreduce the hazards involved in producing the I-Con A required in ourinvestigation of the binding behavior of Con A to transformed and normalce11 s.
SUM~1ARY
We utilize iodination procedures (1 125 ) for labelling of labile mitogenssuch as lectins and antigens (antigen E for example). The labelled compoundsare used in study of interactions of these compounds with surfaces, bothartificial and of cellular origin.
Thi s work is supported by the fa 11 owi ng grants:
NIH 2 POI BL16833-06in hemoglobinopathies.
1979-1984 Hemoglobin and red cell system120000 per year.
NSF PCM77-17689 Systems approach to protein structure 1979-198140 000 a year.
NIH Effect of Surface Adsorption on Multisubunit Proteins in Review.
Sincerely,
Andreas RosenqL-C'~/I a-L<-~Professor and DirectorResearch Programs
AR:pr
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
Department of SurgeryMedical Sc:hoolHealth Sciences Unit C516 Delaware Street SE.Minneapolis. Minnesota 55455
Au gus t 3, I979
Ralph O. WollanRadiation Protection OfficerDepartment of Environmental
Health and Safety
Dear Mr. Wollan,
1 1 m writing in support of your proposal to establ ish a central radioiodinelabel ing faci I ity. This is of particular significance to our laboratories sincewe have recently used radioiodine to label one of our agents in our own facil itywhich we found severely wanting in terms of employee radiation protection.That label ing procedure was done very inefficiently because we had first to borrowor obtain several items and had to tie up our own hood space during the procedure.A central facil ity would save us a great deal of time and inconvenience if suchwere avai lable.
The alternative to operating with these difficulties is of course to purchase commercially labeled material. This solution is most often not appropriatefor us because of its added cost and because the radioiodine-labeled agents wemight use are not routinely available. Furthermore, we may not need as much ofthe labeled material as the minimum avai lable as a commercial product. Therefore,it remains a requirement for us, in terms of both cost and availabi 1ity, to beable to label our own materia:s in our own faci I ity as needed.
Our source of funding for Cancer-related research is USPHS grant CA 11605,entitled I'lmmunologic Reactivity in Special Circumstances". The use of radioiodine in these and other studies conduced in our laboratory is not always predictable. Though we have no current need for radioiodine-labeled material, thepotential for its need is always with us as we identify agents which must betraced for their fate within a cell. Whi Ie we have no plans to be the centralfacilityls most active user, its presence is most significant to us. Withoutit we ~ight be tempted tc leave certain questions unresolved if an alternatemeans of label ing is not avai lable or appropriate.
CX[C,rctl}f,O' ..r, s'(l~;,~! \{ ,()J\"v---- '.-.~obert Nc ~on, Ph.D.for Rich<Jrd L. Simmons, M.D.Professor of Surgery
RN:kpa
HEALTH SCIENCES
. .
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
Box 609 Ma.yoUniversity Hospitals and Clinics420 Delaware Street S E
1
, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 376-1267
Ju1.y 20, 1979
c
MJr.. Ralph O. WoUa.nRa.cUati.oYt PMte.c;UO n a-6~eJtVe.paJt:bne.n:t 0 n Env-Uw nme.n.tai.. He.aLth a.n.d. Sa6e.:tyBoynton He.a.Uh Se/lv..i.e.e.410 ChuJr.ch S.t!Le.e.:t SfM..i.i1.Ytea.pow, MN 55·155
Vv..JL MIt. Woil.a..n :
Ra.dioiocUne. la.be.U.e.d .6ub~danc.e6 pJr..e6e.n:ti-y pMvJ..de. u.h will a IUghly.6 eMLti..ve. and anai.yUc.a1. :toal 6aJr.. e.o nduc.t:..i.ng auJr.. pM j e.c..:t6 ..i.n c.a.ne.eJt Jr..e..6e.oJr.c.h. The. pMp0.6 e.d e.e.rJ:Jtafhe.d la.beiling La.boJr..a.:toJr..y would Jr..e.pJr..e..6 e.n:t a.6..i.grt..i.bJ..c.a.nt te.c.hrt..i.c.a£ a.dva.n~e.n.t by plLov.-i.d..i.ng a. la.boM-toJr..y 06 mawnai.e.6 n;..c...i.e.ne.y ..i.rt all. ct6 pe.e.a a6 the. lab eev--ng pMe.e.dwte.. Suc.h a laboJr..a.:toJr..ywou1.d Wc.ouJr..a.ge. ..i.rtVe..6:t..i.gatoJr...6 :to Jta.d..i.o-i...ocUna.:te. the...i.Jr.. OWn JLe.a.ge.n;t¢, theJte.byobv..i.wng the. ne.e.d :to puJr..c.ha.6 e. e.xpe.n.6..i.ve. pJr..e.la.be.U.e.d Jr.e.a.g e.J'tU. A c.e.n;f:Jc.a1..tabe£Li..ng labaJUtto Jr..y wauhf. a.l.6a 9Jr.e.a.:te.y ..i.mpMve. on Jr.a.dia;tum pMte.c.tio nbe.c.a.uo e. 0 n the. pJr.opM e.d plLe..6 wc.e. 0-6 ma.:«.mai. .6 a.-6 e.g ua.Jr.d -6acJ.Ll..;t[e..6 and pMc.e.duJr..e..6 •
We. e.n:thu..6ict6;u.c.a.UIj .6Uppoltt the. c.on.6Vw.won On .6u.c.h a -6a.c...i.U:tIJ.
RADIOIODINE LABELING LABORATORYResearch Potentially Supported by the Facility
Cancer research which involves commercially prepared iodine-labeled compoundswould potentially be supported by the central radioiodine labeling laboratory,if the principle investigator elects to prepare his/her own radioiodine labelsrather than purchasing pre-labeled material. The following is a sample ofsuch research:
Dr. John Kersey, Laboratory Medicine and Pathology
National Cancer Institute (Contract)"Antigents of Human Lymphoid Organs:and Lymphomas"
CB-24261-31Immunodiagnosis of Leukemias
c
National Institutes of Health CA-25097-01"Differentiation of the Human Innnune System: Cell Surfac.e Antigens"
Both the above referenced grants involve the investigation of cell surfaceantigens present on human malignant and nonmalignant leukocytes. Iodinatedreagents are used to: a) quantitate immunoglobulin production viaradioimmunoassay, and b) detect monoclonal antibodies produced by hybridcells via a radiobinding assay.
"':J .'~ - .,
Dr. John Kersey, M.D.
In the construction grant proposal for a central radioiodine labelingfacility, we will list and describe the cancer research to be supported bythe facility (i.e., cancer research involving radioiodine labeled material).Please review the information below about your cancer research and correctany errors or missing information (note items with*), so that our proposalis complete, correct, and as persuasive as possible.
Return this sheet by July 20 to Radiation Protection Program, BoyntonHealth Service W-140. Thank you for your help on this project.
Source of Funding: National Institutes of HealthGrant Number: CA-25097-0lResearch Project Title: "Differentiation of the Human Immune System: Cell
Surface Antigens"* Statement describing the research and the role of 1-125/1-131:
*
Source of Fundjng: National Cancer InstituteGrant Number: (Contract) CB-2426l-31Research. Project Title: "Antigens of Human Lymphoid Organs: Immunodiagnosis
of Leukemias and Lymphomas"Statement describing the research and role of 1-125/1-131:
Both of the above referenced grants involve the investigation of cellsurface antigens present on human malignant and nonmalignant leukocytes.Iodinated reagents are used to: a) quantitate immunoglobulin productionvia radioimmunoassay, and, b) detect monoclonal antibodies produced byhybrid cells via a radiobinding assay. All work is done in vitro, withno work involving live animals.
Ti tle:
..-•
Dr. Jonathan Parsons, Ph.D.
In the construction grant proposal for a central radioiodine labelingfacility, we will list and describe the cancer research to be supported bythe facility (i.e., cancer research involving radioiodine labeled material).Please supply the information requested below. Even if you do not have agrant at this time, describe the role of radioiodine in any cancer researchin progress. We would like our proposal to be complete, correct, and aspersuasive as possible.
Return this sheet by July 20 to Radiation Protection Program, BoyntonHealth Service - W140. Thank you for your help on this project.
Source of Funding:Grant Number:Rese~rch Project Title:
Statement describing research and the role of 1-125/1--131:
Source: American Cancer Society, University of Minnesota InstitutionalResearch Grant.
Grant #: ACS Grant IN-13-R-25
Determination of the Estrogen Binding Properties of PituitaryTumors.
~ Statement:
lA. Project description
In recent years the analysis of steroid hormone receptor populationsin normal and neoplastic tissue has proven to be of considerable value.Knowledge of receptor levels in hormone responsive tumors has aided intheir diagnosis and treatment. Preliminary observations in this laboratoryindicate that an experimental rat pituitary tumor has measurable amountsof estrogen receptors. This project is designed to evaluate further thequantity, physiochemical characteristics, cellular distribution andlocalization of this receptor in tumors from several experimental treatment groups. The receptor characteristics can then be correlated withthe endocrine secretory activity of the tumor. Due to the limited numberof estrogen receptor studies performed on pituitary tumors and thepotential for this tumor system to serve as a model to study hormonally)'('sponsive endocrine secretory tisc-.ue, this porjocc should provide ne'tlinformation to the field of tumor cell biology.
• •
B. Role of 1-125/1-131
The MtTW mammosomatotropic tumor used in these studies produceslarge quantiti~s of both growth hormone (GH) and prolactin (PRL). Correlation of tumor function with tumor estrogen receptor characteristicsinvolves, in part, the use of radioimmunoassays of both of these hormones.Ongoing use of RIA for GH and PRL is, therefore, an essential aspect ofthe work.
2. Helpful aspects of central labeling laboratory
Current practices require the attendance of an RP representativeduring our radioiodination procedures performed within our laboratory.Scheduling has been a problem occasionally. The proposed facility shouldobviate these problems by providing a full-time RP representative whoshould be able to serve at the convenience of the various radioiodineusers.
3. Radiolabeled rat pituitary hormones are not gencr'ally availablethrough commercial sources. The expense incurred by having to use"cus tom labeling" services would likely prove to be prohibitive.
~especOl1fullYy urs,
,:l- ~(/. f)--~~
Jonathan A. Parsons, Ph.D.Associate ProfessorDepartment of Anatomy
JAP/bs
...
Faculty Support for theRadioiodine Labeling Laboratory
Dr. Kazamiera Gajl-Peczalska communicated her support for the facilityby telephone:
1. Radioiodine labeling is a major tool in the type of research Dr. Gajldoes. She would not be able to pursue her research without the radioiodine labels. Further, she would not be able to pursue the researchwithout the ability to do the labeling at the University because prelabeled compounds are not available commercially.
2. The central facility will be better for the safety of her laboratorystaff and more economical in that it will free up space now reservedalmost exclusively for iodination procedtlres~
..... .
..AUG 8 Rec'd
Dr. Ronald Soltis, M. D. UNIV. OF MINN.;EALTH SCIENCE
i ".ANNING OFFICE
In the construction grant proposal for a central radioiodine labelingfacility, we will list and describe the cancer research to be supported bythe facility (i.e., cancer research involving radioiodine labeled material).Please supply the information requested below. Even if you do not have agrant at this time, describe the role of radioiodine in any cancer researchin progress. We would like our proposal to be complete, correct and aspersuasive as possible.
Return this sheet by July 20 to Radiation Protection Program, BoyntonHealth Service W-140. Thank you for your help on this project.
Source of Funding: u& PH!y ",IJfJGX<lnt Number: J to} jlTfJ 26(j&v-o!Rese"rch Project Tin/nits Of U:J lliV ImrntJ).J7}ct6P1iZl1u fi6&£t-6f/I7f5JJStatement describing research and the role of r-125/1-131:
I kJ Pl5j1(JJJ1c TO 'iGlIR 5P;Glfll (VLfl6T7(J)./J ~
l') T1i E~( £'11J1)ItJ ()1tJUW N{JJ BE. PoJSIBl c. ()J rrrtOtJTj?-fri)IO J(1) IJ.t Lfr13tUI.:6. f, (t AJrRfttJ~UJ u:rB~()J()tRlJ#.ff COMtt ~UTl TO ~ CPffIItlTlj lJF7t115 cfrtJilf
(!) trrt tJifh}J lTV /fft1J11J&t IJ rttft(' fJ UNrR-/IL tft13WGlJ1b ftoPe FIJU~ 6ufif2/hVTlc f fJ1JI fl1707V P~1l:Q7tnJ ·
0 ' (\....JI r !«~.,a-( , • 17 {){) f / O..Q. "" / '" () /mn f:n1 /"1l {)( I~. ) rUill,t IiI'Ju.,.·...' I v.....·l"-j/01,, ..."~''"' ,-,v,,,, VV'WIJ-.j·
tvOrFfiJRtl/1fl;Ci •(ili17JT1) I-fr&t, I ill (jJ[)fJl1J ~t/lTlLf /,tlt(26f8C
olfP, fXfl;JJ~t5·
~ ~-~.~ UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA'-.. . ~ <.. TWIN CITIES
August 6, 1980
Health SCiences Planning OfficePhysical Planning4103 Powell Hall. Box 75500 Essex Street S.E.~Minneapolis. Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Clint Hewitt ().. JJPaul J. Maup~
Toxic Materials Handling Facility
We have reviewed the proposals submitted by the Architectsfor the Toxic Materials Handling Facility. Our recorrmmdationsare as follows:
1. Rodger Jolmson-James, Forberg Assoc. / Arch.
Impressive experience with University and laboratorydesign - partic~larly radio-isotope labs
2. Trossen/Wright Assoc. / Arch.
good experience in hospital and labs design
Tom Kyle of my staff will attend the August 18, 1980 selectionrreeting along with Dr. Vessley.
)
PJM:jm
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
August 7, 1980
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical Planning4103 Powell Hall. Box 75500 Essex Street S.E.Minneapolis. Minnesot~ 55455
(612) 373-8981
'ID:
FRCM:
SUBJECT:
Clint Hewitt Q ..~Paul J. Maupin1'U«/
Toxic Materials Handling System
Dr. Vessely has reviewed the proposals submitted by theArchitects and concurrs with our recormendations (seeour IIa1D to you dated August 6, 1980.)
Dr. Vessley will be unable to attend the selection meetingas he will be on vacation at that time. However, Mr. Kyleof my staff will represent the University and the departmentat this meeting.
PJM:jrn
" '.
Lrn UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
Office of the Assistant Vice President
t'hysical Planning340 Morrill Hall100 Church Street S.E.Minneapolis. Minnesota 55455
September 25, 1980
Roger Johnson/James Forberg Associates, Architects1409 Willow StreetMinneapolis, Minnesota 55403
Attn: Mr. Roger Johnson
Re: Toxic Material Handling Facility
Dear Sirs:
OCT 0 9 1980
Attached for your signature are four copies of a standard University ofMinnesota Owner/Architect Agreement with your firm regarding professionalarchitectural services to be performed for the Toxic Material HandlingFacility located on the Twin Cities Minneapolis Campus.
Please sign all copies of the agreement and return all copies to this officefor execution on behalf of the University of Minnesota. A fully executedcopy will be returned for your files.
If you have any concerns, questi ons Qt' comments regardi ng thi s agreement,please feel free to call either me or Mr. Gary Summerville at 373-2250.
( h
'nt'tHI N. He~ittAssistant Vice PresidentPhysical P~ning
CNH:GJS:jr
cc: Gary SummervillePaul Maupin
.'
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
Owner and Architect
Agreement
(:; THIS AGREEMENT, made this .:> ~. dayOf~ b,..vv' 1980, by and between
the REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as "University,1I
as party of the first part, and Roger Johnson/James Forberg Associates, Architects,
1409 Willow Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55403, hereinafter referred to as
"Architect," as party of the second part, WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the University intends to remodel spaces in a building, hereinafter
described in the Project Description and will require professional services.
NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto:
The Architect agrees to perform for the work set out in the Project Description
professional and other services as hereinafter set forth in Articles I and II.
The University agrees to compensate the Architect for such services as
hereinafter set forth in Articles III, IV, and V.
The parties further agree to the following conditions:
2
Project Description: The Project is located at the University of Minnesota
Twin Cities Minneapolis Campus and shall be known as the Toxic Material Handling
Facility. The Project consists of upgrading and modifying portions of the
Boynton Health Service to comply with modern environmental standards, program
requir'ements and applicable codes. The scope of the services to be provided shall
include:
1. General Building Work
2. Mechanical Work
3. Electrical Work
4. Development in cooperation with the University of a design concept
and construction sequence that will allow adjacent academic programs
and health center functions to maintain operations during the con
struction process, acknowledging reasonable allowances for
construction inconveniences.
5. Cost estimates and construction schedule requirements.
ARTICLE I - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
The Architect shall provide for the Project complete architectural and engin
eering services in accordance with the best professional standards. Where qualified
and competent structural, mechanical, electrical engineers, and cost consultants
are not employed within the Architect's organization, such engineers or consultants
shall be employed and paid for by the Architect and shall be approved by the
University. In the performance of all phases of the professional services listed
her'eunder, the Architect and such consultants shall employ energy saving measures
and techniq~es to the greatest extent possible. The professional services shall
be divided in the following phases and shall include the following:
3
PHASE I - SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE
a} Analysis of the University's IIProgram ll and consultation leading to the
adjustment of the University's IIProgram ll to conform with the stated project
construction cost.
b} Preparation of Schematic Design Studies which will define the proposed
general arrangement of rooms and spaces; general, mechanical, electrical, struc
tural and building materials systems; and preliminary cost estimates.
c} Presentations in appropriate written and graphic form, including all
building floor plans, sections, block elevations, perspective sketches or simple
block model, written statement of construction materials and fundamental engineer
ing systems, a written cost estimate, and a written report regarding energy con
servation measures and techniques which will be considered for the project.
PHASE II - DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE
a} Upon approval by the University of the Schematic Design Phase, further
detailed development of the Project to establish the final space arrangement;
building materials, structural, mechanical and electrical systems; site develop
ment; outline specifications; and cost estimates.
h} Presentation in appropriate written and graphic form, including floor
plans indicating Group I and Group II equipment layout; plans indicating the
essentials of the structural, mechanical and electrical systems; appropriate
building sections; basic building details; delineated perspective of the Project;
written outline specifications and written cost estimates of each item as noted
in the Project Description; and a written report regard.ing energy conservation
meaSUt'es and techniques employed. (This report shall also include a summary of
all other energy conservation measures and techniques that were considered and the
reasons that they were rejected.)
4
PHASE III - CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS PHASE
a) Upon approval by the University of the Design Development Phase,
preparation of complete documents, including all working and detail drawings,
specifications and proposal documents required to obtain bidder proposals for
the work and the preparation of a final cost estimate. Observe in the preparation
of all plans and specifications the instructions of the "Standard Requirements
for University of Minnesota Construction" and the latest addenda thereto, unless
permission to deviate therefrom is secured in writing.
b) Submission of all documents and the cost estimate, including deduct
alternates to provide a 10% bidding cushion, for review by the University.
c) Correction of the documents in accordance with the University's
instruction.
d) Submission of a final written report regarding energy conservation
measures and techniques employed, including the life cycle cost savings that can
be expected as a result of the incorporation of these measures and techniques
in the Project.
e) Upon approval by the University of working drawings and specifications
and when instructed to proceed, issuance of bidding documents and preparation
of addenda to plans and specifications.
f) After receipt of bids, assistance in the analysis of the bids received
and recommendations for award of contract for construction.
PHASE IV - CONSTRUCTION PHASE
a) Throughout the construction period, preparation of large-scale and
full-sized details, if required, checking and approval of shop drawings
(inciuding Group I Equipment) and samples, preparation of color schedules, approval
of materials and colors, and preparation of bulletins and change orders.
5
b} Throughout the construction period, observation of the construction
work by periodic visits to the site of such frequency and duration as are approxi
mately equivalent to one-man-day visit each week. The Architect will endeavor
to ensure that performance of the work of the contractors is in accord with the
contract documents for the work. The Architect's services shall not be construed
as the undertaking of supervisory control of construction, but he shall, upon the
request of the University, render opinions in the interpretation of, or adherence
to, the contract document. Observation shall include the Architect's attendance
at scheduled meetings of the contractors and the University. In conjunction
with the required observation, the Architect will make a written report to the
Assistant Vice President, Physical Planning, at least once each month during the
progress of the work and make a final inspection and report when the work is
completed. Where time exceeding the equivalent of one-man-day visit each week
is required and authorized, the Architect will be reimbursed in accordance with
the provisions of Article V. Resident detailed supervision by a Construction
Superintendent and such assistants as may be necessary shall be provided by and
paid by the University.
c} The Architect shall provide services to assist the University in the
selection of furniture and furnishings for the Project in the form of consultation
relating to general design objectives and critiques of the University's proposals
of layout and selection. In the event that the University desires the Architect
to provide full interior design services for the selection of interior furnishings
and special equipment, these services will be covered under a separate agreement.
d} Upon the completion of the construction period, furnish one set of
reproducible original tracings or mylar sepia suitable for reproduction, either
of which must be corrected to "as -built" conditions. The drawings shall be
6
construed to be of lias-built" condition, if they record all addendums, change
orders, field changes, or other significant modification from the original bidding
document, particularly that which'is concealed after completion and particularly
that which may affect future expansion or the construction of other facilities.
"As-built" drawings shall not be required to record in-detail changes such as
lighting switch locations, routing of detail piping, conduit, wiring and the like
which are incidental to normal construction.
DRAWINGS AND DOCUMENTS TO BE FURNISHED
The Architect shall, at his own expense, furnish the University up to six
sets of all drawings and documents required for Phase I; reproducible transparen
cies of drawings and up to six sets of drawings and other documents required for
Phase II; reproducible transparencies of drawings and up to thirty sets of working
drawings, specifications and addenda required for bidding purposes and one set
(; of "as -built" original tracings upon completion of construction. Additional
copies shall be paid for by the University at the actual cost to the Architect.
ARTICLE II - COST OF PRODUCT
The cost of the construction contracts for the Project shall not exceed Three£' lJutd- ·!d t~f (~(9cl(~, ,!r=-
Hundred Fifty-Five Thousand Dollars ($355,000). ~ Itt ,C?-30-B. .
The Architect, in the course of his performance of ~ofessional services,
will keep the University advised in writing as to the estimated value of changes
in construction costs occasioned either by revisions in requirements of the
University or by the general cost trends in the construction industry. Where
these estimates vary from the previous estimate to a degree which brings them out
of line with the above mentioned construction cost, revisions in the program
and/or budget mutually satisfactory to the University and the Architect shall be
7
made. Where bids exceed the final approved estimate, the Architect will make
recommendations to the University of changes in plans and specifications whereby
the construction cost will be reduced. Such recom~endations will include, if
necessary, revision of working drawings and specifications at no cost to the
University except where the bidding process has been materially delayed or
major unforeseeable economic changes have occurred in construction costs, in which
case the Architect shall be reimbursed for making such major revisions as provided
for in Article V.
ARTICLE III - COMPENSATION
The University agrees to compensate the Architect on account of services
rendered on the basis of a lump sum fee of Thirty-Three Thousand Seven Hundred
Twenty-Five Dollars ($33,725). if the Project-is completed. If the Project is
abandoned or suspended, the Architect shall be compensated for work completed in
accordance with this Article and Articles IV, V, and XII.
If the University requests the Architect to perform architectural services
for any part of the Project which is not built, the Architect shall be compensated
for this work up to the point of its suspension. Payment for such work shall be
on the same basis as other work in the contract in direct proportion to the amount
of work completed, based on the latest estimate agreed to by the University and
the Architect.
Payments to the Architect shall be made within approximately thirty days
following the Architect1s request for payment. Requests for payment may be made
monthly. Such requests shall be written, shall explain in reasonable detail the
basis for the amounts requested, shall include the University's purchase order
number, and shall be signed by a principal of the firm. At no stage of the work
shall the aggregate of such monthly requests exceed the following:
Completion of Phase I
Comp1eti on of Phase II
Completion of Phase III
Completion of Phase IV
ARTICLE IV - REIMBURSEMENTS
8
15% of the base fee
35% of the base fee
75% of the base fee
100% of the base fee
The University agrees to reimburse the Architect, in addition to the basic
fee as follows:
1) For the actual cost of transportation and living incurred by him and
his staff while traveling on trips authorized by the University. This shall not
include the cost of transportation between the Project site and the home office
of the Architect, nor living in the area of the Project site.
2) For costs of prints and documents in'excess of the number specified
in Article I, when authorized by the University.
4CJ 3) For consultants fees, when authorized by the University.
4) For the preparation of change orders for major revisions in drawings,
specifications or other documents when such revisions are inconsistent with
written approvals or instructions previously given by the University and are due
to causes beyond the control of the Architect.
Requests for reimbursements are to be accompanied by supporting vouchers.
ARTICLE V - EXTRA SERVICES AND SPECIAL CASES
In addition to the compensation to the Architect for basic fee and for reim
bursements as provided for in Article IV, the Architect shall be paid for extra
services necessitated by the following:
1) General revisions in design, layout and program requested by the
University after acceptance of the previous phase of professional services, pro
vided the Architect enters claim for extra compensation within 30 days after
9
receiving University instructions relative to said revisions. Minor changes
required by the University during the period of the preparation of the working
drawings shall not be construed by the Architect as valid claim for extra compen
sation.
2) Damage to Project caused by fire, windstorm or acts of God.
3) Observation of construction in excess of that described in Article I.
4) Services relating to the preparation of special brochures, special
drawings, models or special funding document data not customarily associated
with professional services, when authorized by the University.
5) Services beyond the scope of this agreement, as specifically described
and agreed to by the University and Architect prior to the performance of such
services.
Requests for pa)~lent on account of extra services shall be based on an
4tJ hourly charge for all man-hours worked by the Architect's personnel assigned to
providing such services. The charge for man-hours worked shall be billed at
2.75 times the regular hourly rate of the employee, plus the net cost of premium
pay for overtime. (This factor is intended to cover all fringe benefits, over
head and profit.) Hourly charges for principals shall not exceed $45.00 per hour
and associates shall not exceed $35.00 per hour. In the case of a salaried
employee, the equivalent hourly rate will be obtained by dividing his salary
by 2080.
In no case shall the Architect receive extra compensation by reason of any
subdivision of the work into separate contracts.
ARTiCLE VI - CREDITS
Not applicable.
· .
10
ARTICLE VII - UNIVERSITY CONSULTANTS
The Architect agrees to work with representatives of t,he University and
any consultant or consultants that the University may appoint relative to the
Project. The University shall pay the fees of such consultants.
ARTICLE VIII - DATA TO BE FURNISHED BY UNIVERSITY
The University shall, so far as the work under this agreement may require,
furnish the Architect with complete and accurate survey data on all floor
elevations, and full information as to sewer, water, gas and electrical services.
The University shall pay for borings or test pits and for chemical, mechani
calor other tests as requested by the Architect, but it is expressly understood
and agreed that in so agreeing to pay for such borings or tests, the University
is not responsible for their adequacy for the purposes used, nor for any con
clusion drawn therefrom.
4tJ ARTICLE IX - ORDER OF PROCEDURE
The execution 'of this agreement shall constitute approval to proceed with
Phase I - Schematic Design Phase. The Architect shall proceed beyond that
phase only as and to the extent ordered in writing by the University. Phase IV
Construction Phase shall commence upon awarding the construction contracts by
the University and shall not require further written approval from the University
for the Architect to proceed. The Assistant Vice President, Physical Planning,
is the designated representative of the University to issue such written approval
and to act on its behalf with respect to this Project.
ARTICLE X - SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNMENTS
The University and the Architect each binds himself, his partners, successors,
executors, administrators and assigns to the other party to this agreement, and
to the partners, successors, executors, administrators and assigns of each other
party in respect to all covenants of this agreement.
11
Except as above, neither the University nor the Architect shall assign,
sublet or transfer his interest in this agreement without the written consent
of the other.
ARTICLE XI - SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES
In case any dispute or controversy arises between the Architect and the
University out of any provisions herein contained, such dispute or controversy
shall be referred to any neutral individual or organization, designated by the
Vice President of Finance, such as the American Arbitration Association or the
State Board of Hearing Examiners, whose decision shall be final and binding
upon all parties. All costs of arbitration shall be borne by the party demand
ing arbitration, subject to any award of costs by the arbitration panel. No
action under this paragraph shall be maintained by the Architect unless commenced
within 90 days after said Architect has been furnished by the University with a
4tJ final payment under this contract Ot', at the election of the Architect, within
six months after the work provided for under this agreement is completed.
While the Architect shall be in general charge of the Project, and shall be
the chief advisor and consultant to the University on this Project, yet in all
cases in which consultants are separately employed by the University, the full
cooperation of the Architect shall be required and, in turn, such consultants
shall cooperate fully with the Architect. Any disagreement which may arise between
the Architect and such consultants shall be referred to the University whose
decision in the matter shall be final and binding on all parties.
ARTICLE XII - CANCELLATION, TERMINATION BY ABANDONMENT OR SUSPENSION,REDUCTION IN SCOPE
1) Cancellation. If, through any cause other than force majeure, strikes,
fire, or by de·lay authorized by the University,the Architect shall fail to submit
12
drawings and other documents as required herein and according to the project
schedule to be established by the University in consultation with the Architect,
or if the Architect shall violate any of the covenants, agreements or stip
ulations of this agreement or perform such services in an unsatisfactory manner,
the University shall have the right to cancel this agreement upon three days
written notice to the Architect. If, upon cancellation, the Univer'sity incurs
additional costs as a result of the Architect's failure to perform, the Architect
shall be liable for the purpose of set-off, until such time as the exact amount
of such additional cost is determined and the Architect has rendered payment
thereof. The Architect shall only be entitled to payment for services satis
factorily performed as of the date of notice of cancellation in accordance with
the schedule as established in Articles III, IV, and V of this agreement.
2) Termination by Abandonment or Suspension, Reduction in Scope. At any
time during the term of this agreement, the University may abandon the Project
entirely, suspend it for an indefinite time or reduce the scope or quality of the
Project upon seven days written notice to the Architect.
a) In the event that the University abandons the Project entirely or
suspends same for more than 90 calendar days, the Architect shall only be entitled
to compensation for services satisfactorily rendered as of the date of notice
of abandonment or suspension in accordance with the payment schedule set forth
in Articles III, IV and V of this agreement.
b) In the event that the University reduces the scope of the Pro
ject, the Architect's fee shall be computed on the basis of Article III of this
agreement. If said reduction in scope is undertaken in order to bring the
Project within the allocated construction cost, the Architect shall perform all
services occasioned by said reduction in scope pursuant to Article II of this
13
agreement. If the University reduces the scope of the Project for any other reason,
the Architect will be entitled to compensation for any additional work occasioned
thereby pursuant to Article V of this agreement.
ARTICLE XIII - NON-DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT
The Architect agrees not to discriminate against any employee or applicant
for employment to be employed by the Architect in the performance of this agree
ment with respect to hire, tenure, terms, conditions or privileges or employment
or any matter directly or indirectly related to employment because of sex, race,
color, religion, national origin or ancestry.
The Architect further agrees that every subcontract relating to professional
services entered into for the performance of this contract will contain a provision
requiring non-discrimination in employment, as herein specified, on the part
of each subcontractor. Breach of this provision may be regarded as a material
breach of this agreement.
ARTICLE XIV - OTHER CONDITIONS
1} At the time of signing this agreement, the Architect shall furnish to
the University a copy of a policy of Professional Liability Insurance in the
amount of ten percent (10%) of the allocated construction cost and, in no case,
shall the minimum coverage be less than $200,000 per project. The insurance
premium shall be paid by the Architect.
2} Ownership of Documents. Except for original tracings and copies of
ad.ditional material, all drawings, samples, surveys, maps, models, photographs,
reports, data studies specifications and all other finished or unfinished
documents prepared by the Architect under this agreement shall be deemed the
property of the University whether or not the project for which they are made
;s completed or this agreement is cancelled prior to termination.
14
The University and the Architect hereby agree to the full performance of
the covenants contained herein.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these presents to
NCI granted award on June 3, 1980 and by September 2, 1980the finn of Johnson-Forberg Associates had been selectedas consultants for the Iodinization Facility to be constructedin Boynton Hall. The terms of Award, Item 15, requires thatthe project be under contract by July 1, 1981.
The contract with the architects should stipulate thatcritical July date and if one backs up from there it isevident the project is seriously late in starting.
It is imperative that we begin i.nnediately with consultantson the phase one Schema.tics.
I am contacting the Architect now in an effort to get theball rolling. The department has prepared preliminaryprogram information which I will transmit to the consultants.We have lost four IIDnths or one third of the time allottedfor this unique and inovative project and at this pointit will require especially concentrated efforts of allinvolved to ID2et deadlines. I will appreciate your effortsto expedite the process.
Yours truly,
'"/1 (Y:Y/Tom KyleAsst. Health Sciences Plal1ning Coordinator
TK:rrka
cc: Dr. VesleyPaul Maupinfile v"
'..
BOGEB JOHNSON· JAMES POBBERG ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTSlUI WILLOW STREET I MINNEAPOLIS I MINNESOTA 55403 I '12-171-7741RO~ '1'. JOHNSON I JAMIl:~H. F'ORBERG I RICHARD H. SIIUTH
..
Mr. Clinton N. 'lfeW~tt)Page 2;":Octob$r 3, J 980 ,:~: .
..
... ,.;;.,
.'~>
SuRinervUJ e·',Maup.in ", ...
,.tyle
Ttle University "'-Vw,~t.;t9 corts.1der reta; nf ng Nonpan Steere and J;erhardKnutsQn as cqnsU'~·tcftlt$;fo,r .theirSe)(pe.rtise. Harvey Jaeger is familiar withthelr.;,credentialS .··"'r''\~· .
."}'
. . ..... '!:We w~l dapprecfate~\1thOrtlation.~:toorder the· as...bu11t -print' of.Boynton .'and theadjacentra~<'f!t-e\jator~~·,·~.tair tower Jcontains mechanical, shaft forbuilding) at anear11'.d4te so as to implement the start of won. .
RTJ~b{fenc.'
(,;UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
October 15, 1980
I Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical Planning4103 Powell Hall. Box 75500 Essex Street S.E.
! Minneapolis. Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
10:
FRCM:
SUBJECT:
Clint Hewitt r2. _I ~
Paul J. MaUP~
Toxic Materials Handling Facility
c
Tom Kyle has drafted a response to Jolmson/ForbergArchitects' letter of 10/3/80 giving specific answersto questions contained in the letter.
Attached please find our rough draft letter for yourapproval along with a copy of the letter of inquiry.
PJM:jrn
DRAFI' ONLY
October 15, 1980
Hr. Roger T. JolmsonRoger Joimson/James Forberg Associates/Architects1409 Willow StreetMinneapolis, Minnesota 55403~~to~ ·/b·3·fS'o
Re: ToX1c Material Haadling Facility
Dear Mr. Jolmson:
We appreciate your concern about the schedule of events for theToxic Materials Handling Facility and endorse all efforts to makeup for time lost. One of the "Tenns of Award" fran NCr requiresthat the project be under contract by July 1, 1981. That dateis first priority to all concerns and will be met to insurefunding.
The Health Sciences Planning Coordinator is Mr. Paul Maupin.He has assigned Mr. Tan Kyle as project manager and Tom isyour primary contact for the project. The Health SciencesPlanning Office is in charge of the project and all correspondence,pay requests and meeting requests should be addressed to thatoffice. r am aware that you have made contact with Mr. Kyle onOctober 10, 1980 for a preliminary exChange of information.Mr. Kyle will be responsible for providing you with updated andapproved program infonnation.
The Health Sciences Planning Office prepared the budget for NCrsubmittal and it is fixed per the Grant and Tenns of Award.
Other guide lines to adhere to are UBC, State and Local requirements,and University Standards. The project will be reviewed and approvedby the University Engineering Depart::rrent and University CodeOfficials.
The Environmental Health Department wishes to retain the testingcubicle mentioned in your letter and will discuss options withyou in your plarming meetings.
The consultants you mentioned will not be necessary as ourEnvironmental Health Depart:.m2nt persormel are considered wellversed in the field and set the standards. One of the consultantsis a fonner tnerber of their staff.
You should continue to work with the Health Sciences PlarmingOffice and order any documentation necessary fran EngineeringRecords.
Very truly yours,
Clinton N. RoottAsst. Vice-President
HOGER JOHNSON· ..lAr..1ES FOB.BERG ASSOCIATI!iS I AH.Cn:ITECTS1 4 0 f, WI l, I. 0 W S T It E E T I ~I INN E A POI. IS! ~! INN E SOT A 5;; ~ 0:; I 6 1 ~ . Po 7 I - 71 4 1
ROG!;n ". JOIINSON I JAMI';S H. !'onnlmG I R1CIlAitD 11. SMITH
October 3, 1980
Mr. Clinton N. HewittAssistant Vice PresidentPhysical Planning340 1'1orrill HallUniversity of r~innesota
,We appreciated being selected as the architects for this project and arcprepared to' proceed immediately with the design phase. We understandthat becduse of the federal funding, the time fraJlle for completing thedocuments is relatively short. Because of this and the building tradescontract expirations next spring, we believe it would be extremelyadvantageous to proceed at the earliest possible date.
The RFP from the Designer Selection Board indicated starting ConstructionDacl1:;~~nt:; on October 1. t'!e V/ou1 d 1ike to be ab 1e to rr.~~e up the t'::0 ~lCr.t~S
which has been lost to date and will do whatever possible in this regard.
The signed contracts are enclosed as is a copy of the Professional LiabilityPolicy coverage sheet.
Richard Smith and I will be working directly on the project. We a~e bothfamiliar with University procedures and are sornev/hat familiar vlith Boynton f1a1l.He have visited th~ construction area with Tom Kyle and Dr. 'Jessely.
l~ou1 d you pI ease adv'j se the name or names of the pet'sons \'/ho wi 11 be in~s~Q.Dsjble.-x.harge,...f9!'_.!hg.JJDj.vf;Ss..Hy ~._.JUso,_))J:i.Q t:.-t0._tb~ ..i.n terv iew,. ~ve.. \'..ere.....aQ:dsej.that tho. program had been revised. Have these changes been incorporated.irto.. _
The special nature of this pro-ject l11C1kes it difficult to estimate the cost ofconsl.l'uction until detailed cost data has been acculllulated. How \,J;'$ the$350,000 budget established? Is it fixed? Is the data available for ouruse which was needed in establishing the budget?
Phase I and Phase II of the contract requires perspective sketches anrl/ormodels which are probably not appropriate to this project. We will bal~n~e thisrf?quil'elllent \'/ith d highet' quality presentation technique in other asp8cts ofthe requirements.
The area of the work includes a prefabricated testing cubicle. Willthis be removed by the University or will the contractor be expectedto do this \'/ork.
,
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FORBF~RGASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTS1 40!l WI L I. (I W S T nEE T I ~I INN E A I' (I L I" I ~I I N /II 1: SOT A 5 r, 4 03 I I; 1 2 - R 7 1 - 7 7 4 1ROGER T, JOHNSON I JA~n:S II. FOJ:BI:nG I RICHARD H, SMITH
r1r. Cl i nton N. HewittPage 2October 3, 1980
1//Woul d you please advi se if there are any federal gu; de1i nos other than )~)l( 'safety' and wage rates will be applicable to this project. '
IIWe are concerned about the size of the fee (between 9-10%) for aproject of this complexity. However, if the work is expedited by all
~~:ti~S~_iJl~QQUJl~ee~th~_timetabl~and offset what might be a_lo\v fee.
~The Uni vers ity may want to cons i der t'etai ni ng Norman Steers and Gerhar~Knutson as consultants for thei r experti se. -- Harvey Jaeger is famil i ar \·,iththeir credentials. -- _. _.----- . ----We would appr€ciate authorization to order the as-built prints of Boyntonand the adj~cent ramp elevator - stair tower (contains mechanical shaft for thebuilding) at an early date so as to implement the start of \·!Ork.
Physlca: Planning340 Morrill Hall100 Church Street S.E.Minneapolis. Minnesota 55455
DC" - "'v
. 2 1 !980
rr'
October 20, 1980
Mr. Roger T. Johnson.Roger Johnson/James Forberg Associates/Architects1409 Willow StreetMinne2Dolis, Minnesota 55403
RE: Response to letter, October 3, 1980
Dear Mr. Johnson:
r am writing in response to your letter of October 3, 1980 concerningthe schedule of events for the Toxic ~r.aterials Handling Facility andendorse all efforts to make up for time lost. One of the "Terms ofAward" from Ncr requires that the project be under contract by July 1,1981. That date is first priority to all concerns and will be met toinsure funding.
The Health Sciences Planning Coordinator is Mr. Paul Maupin ~nd Mr.Tom Kyle has been assigned ~he project manager. Tom is ~our primarycontact for the project. The Health Sciences Planning Office is incharge of the project and correspondence regarding the project andmeeting requests should be addressed to that office. r am aware that
;you have made contact with Mr. Kyle on October 10, 1980 for a preliminary exchange of information. He will be responsible for providingyou with updated and approved program information.
The Health ?_~~_~r15:es ~_t~I1pj.I1g _Of:fj,cepr~pa.H~dt;:h.~.Qy.dg..~t._for Ncr sub-mittal and it is fixed per the Grant and Terms of Award. Other guidelines to adhere to are the Uniform Building Code, state and localrequirements, and University Standards. The project will be reviewedand approved by the Planning Office, University Engineering Departmentand University Code Officials.
The Environmental Health Department wishes to retain the testing cubiclementioned in your letter and will discuss options with you in yourplanning meetings.
The consultants you mentioned will not be necessary as our EnvironmentalHealth Department personnel are considered well versed in the field andset the standards. One of the consultants is a rormer member of theirstaff.
,
October 20, 1980Mr. Roger T. JohnsonPage Two
You should continue to work with the Health Sciences Planning Officeand order any documentation necessary from Engineering Records.
Since.re ly'I:.... )I I
'""-'C/V'" \I
Clinton N. ' ewitt'Assistant Vice PresidentPhysical ~ianning
I .,JC
cc: ~y Surrnnervillevf'aul Maupin
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FORBERG ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTS1 4 0 9 WI L LOW S T nEE T I 1Il INN E A P (J LIS I 111 INN E SOT A 5 5 4 0 3 I 6 1 2 _ 8 7 1 _ 7 7 4 1ROGER T. JOHNSON I JAMES H. FORBEUG I RICHARD H. SMITH
November 5, 1980 " ,
Mr. Tom KyleHealth Science Planning Office
~ 4103 Powell HallBox 75
,500 Essex Street S.E.Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
;, Re: Toxic Material Handling Laboratory
Dear Tom:
In response to your telephone call today, we would propose the followingas a schedule for our work on this project.
Schematic Design Phase - Four Weeks Nov 5, 1980/Dec 2, 1980il User Review - Two Weeks Dec 3, 1980/Dec 17, 1980
- Design Development Phase - Five Weeks Dec 18, 1980/Jan 23, 1981
(;, ¥- User Review - Two Weeks Jan 26, 1981/Feb 9, 1981
Construction Documents Phase - Ten Weeks Feb 10, 1981/Apr 23, 1981~ User Review - 3 weeks Apr 24, 1981/May 14,1981
Bidding Phase - 3 weeks May 15, 1981/June 9,1981Contract Aware (Mandatory)- 3 weeks June 30, 1981
Construction Phase - 6 months Ju1y_l, 1981/January 1, 1982 ,\\
Of this total time, seven weeks have been allowed for review by the Universityand the related federal agencies. If this time a110ttment is exceeded by anysubstantial period, the mandatory contract award deadline could be jeopardized.We are hopeful that we can reduce the time spent on our phases of the work andwill make every attempt to do so. However, it will be difficult to make up thetime projected in the RFP (2! months delay) unless every effort is madeby all concerned to condense the time needed for their efforts.
We anticipate that we will have a revised preliminary plan for your review, basedon the revised program by the beginning of next week. I will contact you shortlyin this regard.
(, RTJ:b
cc: Gausman and Moore
..
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
November 7, 1980
RE: 1 C06 CA 28136-01
Mr. William E. Cissel, Jr.NCI Project EngineerResearch Facilities BranchNational Cancer InstituteWestwood Building - Room 820Bethesda, Maryland 20205
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical Planning4103 Powell Hall. Box 75500 Essex Street SE.Minneapolis. Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
,
,
Dear Mr. Cissel:
I am sending you copies of three letters from Dr. Thorrpsonand Mr. Wollan explaining their position on 'Holding Tanksin the Toxic Materials Handling Laboratory' at the Universityof Mirmesota. Dr. Thorrpson and I discussed her conversationswith you and the arnission of tanks rreets with our approval.
I have also included a proposed schedule of events for yourinfonration. We will submit the appropriate docUIl'EIltsto you per this schedule during the review periods identified.
This infonration is being sent to you for informationpurposes only.
Sincerely,
- .'/t/ -~f"t,Tom KyleAssistant Health Sciences Plarming Coordinator
TK:rrka
GC: Paul Maupin/'Dr. VeselyVic ScottFile
\.
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical Planning4103 Powell Hall, Box 75500 Essex Street S.E.Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
November 10, 1980
'ID:
FRCM:
SUBJECT:
Dave KerkowPete MerzRuss SmithDon Herronl.es Szomer
Tan Kyle~
Toxic Material Handling Laboratory
Attached is a copy of the Schedule of Events for the design ofa new laboratory in the Health Services Building.
I am advising you so you may look forward to reviewing the variousdocuments. It is important that the reviews be completed withinthe allotted time as NCI has informed us that the project IIIlStbe tmder contract by July, 1981 or it will not be funded.
We lwve no float time as you can see by the schedule and yourassistance and efforts will be appreciated.
cc: Paul Maupin /
'lK:jrn
~'~f'
~"
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FORBERG ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTS1 4 0 9 WI L LOW S THE E TIM INN E A POL I S I MIN N E SOT A 5 5 4 0 3 I 6 1 2 _ 8 7 1 _ 7 7 4 1ROGER T. JOHNSON I JAMES H. FOHBEHG I RICHARD H. SMITH
November 5, 1980
Mr. Tom KyleHealth Science Planning Office4103 Powe 11 Ha 11Box 75500 Essex Street S.E.Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Re: Toxic Material Handling Laboratory
Dear Tom:
In response to your telephone call today, we would propose the followingas a schedule for our work on this project.
Design Development Phase - Five WeeksUser Review - Two Weeks
Schematic Design Phase - Four WeeksUser Review - Two Weeks
~Construction Documents Phase - Ten Weeks
,'Jtt- User Revi ew - 3 weeksBidding Phase - 3 weeksContract Aware (Mandatory)- 3 weeks
Construction Phase - 6 months
Nov 5, 1980/Dec 2, 1980Dec 3, 1980/Dec 17, 1980
Dec 18, 1980/Jan 23, 1981Jan 26, 1981/Feb 9, 1981
Feb 10, 1981/Apr 23, 1981Apr 24, 1981/May 14, 1981May 15, 1981/June 9, 1981June 30, 1981JulyJ, 1981/January 1, 1982 i
\\
.....
Of this total time, seven weeks have been allowed for review by the Universityand the related federal agencies. If this time a110ttment is exceeded by anysubstantial period, the mandatory contract award deadline could be jeopardized.We are hopeful that we can reduce the time spent on our phases of the work andwi 11 make every attempt to do so. However, it wi 11 be diffi cult to make up thetime projected in the RFP (2! months delay) unless every effort is madeby all concerned to condense the time needed for their efforts.
We anticipate that we will have a revised preliminary plan for your review, basedon the revised program by the beginning of next week. I will contact you shortlyin this regard .
RTJ:b
cc: Gausman and Moore
, "
·.-J I,. .......
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FORBERG ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTS1409 WILLOW STREET f MINNEAPOLIS f MINNESOTA 55403 612-871-7741ROGER T. JOHNSON f JAMES H. FORBERG f RICHARD H. SMITH
MEMORANDUM
Date:
Subject:
Present:
December 2, 1980
Toxic Materials Handling Laboratory
Hewitt, Maupin, Vesely, Kyle and Johnson
The above met in Hewitt's office to review the documents prepared for theRegents' review on the above project. Included are three 30 x 40 boards, apreliminary cost estimate and an outline specification. Two boards includearchitectural and engineering plans and elevations. The third board, preparedby the University, is a key to the project location. The architects were requestedto prepare a fourth board which would identify the project more specificallyin Boynton.
The complex nature of the work propos~d was outlined to Hewitt. The type ofequipment and mechanical-electrical systems were reviewed. The safety provision
. requirements were discussed. The cost of the work including alternates foremergency power and use of existing chiller were noted.
It was noted that the project required more complete investigations at thepreliminary stage than is customary. Hopefully this will be of advantage inaccelerating the project completion.
Access for the handicapped is required and has been accommodated. To augmentthis feature, it was agreed to omit the floor from the walk-in Cold Room andinsulate from below. It was also agreed to include a 7' deep vestibule at eachlaboratory to complete the isolation technique.
The location of the ductwork in the adjacent stack space was reviewed. It wasrequested that this ductwork have appropriate labeling in the completedinstallation. The architect pointed out that some existing exhaust ductworkand fans in this same area might require upgrading at some time.
cc: HewittKyl e (3)G-M
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical Planning4103 Powell Hall, Box 75500 Essex Street S,E.Minneapolis. Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
December 3, 1980
RE: 1 006 CA 28136-01
Mr. William E. Cisse1, Jr.NCI Project EneineerResearch Facilities BranchNational Cancer InstituteWestwood Building - Room 820Bethesda, Maryland 20205
Dear Mr. Cisse1 :
Enclosed is the Schematic Design for the Central Toxic M:lteria1Handling Facility in Boynton Health Services at the Universityof Minnesota. This design was a result of extensive conrnunicationwith occupants and the architects selected. The special natureof the project required practically completing Design Developmentbefore a Schematic could be clarified.
For this reason and the time constraints involved we would liketo refer to these documents as Schematic &Design Development andproceed with Contract Documents; incorporating review COIIIIaltsof course.
With a July 1, 1981 award date for construction we are necessarilycorrpressing as many phases as possible. We will look forwardto your COIIIIalts and approval of our assurrptions.
Please call me at 612-373-8590 if you need clarification or wishto discuss the project.
Yours truly,
~~Tom KyleAssistant Health Sciences Planning Coordinator
cc: Paul M:lupinDr. VeselyVic ScottFile
ENC
Revised December 8, 1980
roXIC MATERIALS HANDLING FACILI1Y
CONS1RUCITON COSTS:
roN-BUIIDING COSTS:
$355,334 (1)
Architects Base Fees @9%Reimbursables @ 1%
UtilitiesTesting & BalancingSAC ChargeConstruction SupervisionMiscellaneous ExpensesMiscellaneous Fng:ineeringBuilding ActivationBuilding Pennits @ .20%Planning Consultants feesContingency @4%Builders risk Ins at .20 per
$100.00 per year
Total non-building Costs
GROUP II EOUIPMENT
1DTAL ESTIMATES PRQJECT COST
1DTAL F1JNDS AVAIlABLE:
$'33,725 (2)3,553
7002,5001,4257,1071,4003,5501,425
7117,107
12,450
711--74,939
18,200
$448 ,473
PHS (Cancer)U/M Central Admin.
Balance of Funds Available
$221,530232,961 454,491
$ 6,018 (3)
Notes:1. The construction figure is the not to exceed
figure in the grant application as well as:in the Architects contract
2. A/E fees are based upon the signed Architect/Ownercontract with 1% added :in for reimbursables.
3. . Any excess funds estimated to date will be consideredcontingency funds until the final award of contractis made.
PREPARED BY: Health Sciences PlanningOffice
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FORBERG ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTS1 4 0 9 WI L LOW S T R E E T / MIN N E A POL I S / MIN N E SOT A 5 5 4 0 3 / 6 1 2 - 8 7 1 - 7 7 4 1ROGER T. JOHNSON / JAMES H. FORB ERG / RICHARD H. SMITH
Tom Kyle called to advise of the following:
MEMORANDUM
Date:
Subject:
December 29, 1980
Toxic Material Handling Laboratory
1. HEW requires a tabulation of total net area and net areas ona room by room basis. Need this information to complete theirreview.
2. HEW had no other comments at this time on plan or construction systems.
3. HEW will not agree to dropping Design Development submittal. Kyle willadvise in this regard.
4. University will not require Design Development submittal. Proceedinto contract documents.
Johnson requested that the inconsistency of a rated wall for the RadioiodineLab without shielded doors be reviewed. Either non rated walls or rated doors?
Another item requiring c1arificiationcorridors to provide the second exit.estimate already exceeds the budget.in the original grant.
cc: KyleG &M
is who is to pay for enclosing theIt should be remembered that the
The corridor extension was not included
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTABUILDING APPLICATION and PERMIT
This space reserved forPERMIT NUMBER
APPLICATIONThis Permit Application is to be filled out in five copies. (No carbon necessary when sufficient pressure is applied.)A numbered copy, signed by the BUilding Official, will be returned to be used as the construction permit. Please fillin all pertinent information.
Description of work-.New copstruct:!-..Q!Lj.n ],,400 SJI. ft. of ..e~s..ting ..spa~ _Location Health S • B ·ldin B Buildingor campus__.__~ryJ..~e.Q._..JJJ,_ ._.lg_-_ as..enJ:uL ._.. number
Estimated 355 000 00 Sourcevalue of work $ ~__......,. .. .... __ . .. _ .. ._ . of estimate.......NC...I .......G....r ...an.......t~ _
University of MinnesotaPlanning Office321 Morrill HallMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
WHITE copy becomes PERMIT when approvedand numbered.
No
Is use of space being changed?
Will explosives be use~r stored?
Will flammable dusts be generated?
Cill L.P. gas be used or stored?
Is supporting structure being altered?
Is loading being changed?
Yes No
X
X
-X-
---X
--X..
--X..
Yes
Are exit routes being affected by this work? LHave structural changes beenreviewed with architect/engineer? IC_Name ofarch itect/eng ineerJohnson...FomBt;'g.-Associates
Was the project reviewedwith the Planning Office?
If so, name 1. . .J~"';,of individualC 1..0torLl1l;w.....t....tl....- _
PERMITNOTICE: This Permit is not valid until numbered and signed by the University of Minnesota Building Official.
Reviewed by:
___ Engineering and Construction
___ Environmental Health and Safety
'_.. __ Physical Planning
___ Physical Plant
SA Form 364/Rev. Feb. 79IP· •• ,A)
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GIVEN TO PERFORM THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THE ABOVE APPLICATION.
Building Official _
Date _
..
't
1\
\
January 6, 198\.
EOS ConstructionP. O. Box 43570St. Paul. Mn 55164
Re: Toxic Materials Handling FacilityBoynton Hea1th Service
Gentlemen:
Enclosed are sepias of the laboratory furniture shop drawings includingfume hoods. We have not included a set of prints as we assume you willwant to have a number of prints run for your office, field office andsubcontractors. These drawings are stamped wApproved as Noted W withthe exception nf the electrical drawinqs which are stamped MM!keCorrections Noted". The electrical drawings sheets 2C, 20 and 2E werereceived on Oecerrber " 1981. They were forwarded to the electricalenQineer for checkina and then to the University of Minnesota electricalinspector for his review. These drawings were then rerouted throughthe same channels to this office. The balance of the drawings Wl!re,received on Deced>er 15. lasl and have been held in this office so acomplete submittal could be returned at one time.
On reviewing the submittals and the accomoanyinQ correspondence, we weredisturbed by the indications in the letter of November 19. 19a1 fromAmerican Hamilton that we were disrupting the Hamilton delivery schedule.As you are aware, this p~ject has suffered extensive delays due to thelack of performance by the laboratory furniture supplier.
Prior to bidding. Haldeman Holm1e and AMerican Hamilton were aware thata dual chamber auxiliary air hood was specified. They indicated thatthey would have no problem ~eting this specification.
Before making I shop drawing submittal. Hamilton requested a meeting withthe University. the Architect and the Contractor at which time they triedto qet approval of their standard, single chamber auxiliary air fume hood.This request was re~ect.d. The first shop drawinqs submittal was notreceived until 21 .onths after the contract Iwar4dand was incomplete•.This submittal was not Icceptable. The second submittal was received over a mnthlater and contained I n~r 01 drawinQ$ not included with the first submittal.The electrical drawings included with the second submittal were "not approved".
On October 23. 1981 • meetina was held which was Ittended by Universityrepresentatives, Darrel Turnnock froil Haldeman Honl1l!, Jack Frerichs of EOSand me. At that time a number of items related to the shop drawinQswhich were in the possession of Derrll Turnnock were reviewed. Included in
'"
EOS ConstructionPal'.Je 2January 6. 1932
these comments were the reduction in removable and panel sizes to avoidconflicts with filters. casework etc. A coPy of the memo was provided toHa 1deman Horrme.
The shop drawings which are beinq returned with this letter did not containthe corrections discussed in the meetinq of October 23. 19R1. Correctionsnoted on the shop drawinQs have often not been made until repeatedly noted.An exanple of this is the recessed drainboard which was clearly detailed onthe architectural drawinQS. After two submittals and a third separate submittalon counter tops alone. the detail has finally been provided on the currentsubmittal. The comments on the electrical drawings which Hamilton took exceptionto in their letter of November 19, 1981 have not been prooerly addressed as evidencedby the repeated comments on the current electrical submittals. Hamilton'sfailure to make noted corrections has resulted in our having to spendadditional time double checking items on subsequent submittals. It is interestingto note that although the fume hoods were of the initial concern. the majorityof the delays in shop drawing approval have been due to items unrelatedto the auxiliary air system and involves features which are reasonably standardin the industry. It should be realized by this time that deviations fromthe specified products will not be permitted.
I would like to point out that the Quality of the shop drawinqs submitted andthe number of resubm1ttals required has resulted in an excessive amount oftime by this office and our engineering consultants. The del~s in makingthe corrections, requiring additional submittals has delayed the comoletionof the pro.fect a minilYlJm .of 51 months 2ast~.t,bedulf.C1.s..omltUwl-~!.e.We are positive that this has resulted in considerable additional costs for youas well as your other subcontractors. I cannot recall another pro~ectwhere delays of this magnitude have resulted from the failure of onesubcontractor to perform. Submittals have been reviewed and returned bythis office and our consultants in the minimum time possible. This finalsubmittal has taken longet due to its receipt just before the HoliuQJ ~cason
,and the additional review by the University's electrical department.
Please advise your SUPPlier that a firm delivery date has been reque5~~d onrepeated occasions but has never been received. This information should beprovided in writing at the earliest possible date. We recommend "that youadvise your subcontractor and his supplier of the total dissatisfaction by.11 Dirties concerned in this project with their failure to meet reasonabletime and performance standards.
Sincerely,
Richard H. SmithRHS:b
cc: ~le, Baron. G &Mand H &H
,
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
January 13, 1981
Mr. William E. Cissel, Jr.Ncr Project EngineerResearch Facilities BranchNational Cancer InstituteHesThDod Building - Room 820Bethesda, Maryland 20205
Reference: 1 C06 008136-01
Dear Mr. Cissel:
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical Planning4103 Powell Hall. Box 75
I 500 Essex Street S,E,I Minneapolis. Minnesota 55455
. (612) 373-8981
c
Attached is a room by room net area tabulation and thetotal net area figure that you requested as part of theSchematic plans and review process."
We will transmit the Design Development plans to you onschedule for your review. He continue to appreciate yourexpeditious handling of reviews.
Very truly yours,
-t1itf/4t0Thomas W. KyleAssistant Health Sciences Planning Coordinator
cc : Paul MaupinDr. Ixmald VesleyVic Scott
'IWK:jl1M7
Mr. Tom Kyl eHealth Science Planning Office4103 Powell HallBox 75500 Essex Street S.E .
. ~.,. Mi nneapo'l is, . Mi nnesota 55455
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FORBERG ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTS1409 WILLOW STREET I MINNEAPOLIS I MINNESOTA 55403 I 612-871-7741ROGER T. JOHNSON I JAMES H. FORBERG I RICHARD H. SMITH
January 7, 1981'\{.
57 S.F.42 S.F.
354 S.F.15 S.F.35 S.F.36 S.F.59 S.F.
125 S.F.32 S.F.16 S.F.37 S.F.
266 S.F.160 S.F.
1,234 S. F.
Instrument CalibCold RoomRadioiodine LabSHR (Radioiodine)Anteroom (Radioiodine)Toil etStorage/PrepRecept/Check-inLockersShr. (Carcinogen)Ante Room (Carcinogen)Carcinogen Lab.New Mech RoomTotal Net Area
We have calculated the net areas of the individual rooms in the ToxicMaterial Handling Facility as follows:
Dear Tom:
The total net area of all rooms excluding the new mechanical room is 1074square feet. This is 19 square feet larger than the 1055 square foot net areashown on the preliminary drawing SK-3. This difference can be accounted forby minute dimensional variations which are cumulative when working withindividual rooms.
,..•. '~....,
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
February 25, 1981
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical Planning4103 Powell Hall, Box 75500 Essex Street S.E.Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
,
Richard H. SmithRodger Johnson - James Forberg/Associates1409 Willow StreetMinneapolis, Minnesota 55403
I discussed the location of :funE hood fans with fub Hudalla,Harold Tatge, and Paul Maupin and we all agree to endorse theplacerrent of the fans in weather-proof enclosures on the roofof the elevator Irechanical room at ramp B. When we tIEet withfub to discuss the auxiliary air hoods we should review thefan placetIEnt with him and EnvirormY2Iltal Health.
Harold IIaltioned that fans exposed to outside temperatures shouldhave additional belts - one nnre than called for in specs; 3belts if two are called for or 2 belts if one is' called for.Please consider this suggestion as he has many years of practicalexperience in maintenance of these systerIE.
Sincerely,
7i:!fbAsst. Health Sciences Planning Coordinator
cc: fub HudallaPaul MaupinFile ~
TK:nka
..
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FORBERG ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTS1 4 O. WI L LOW S T R E E TIM INN E A POL I S I II INN E SOT A 6 6 4 0 aROGER T. JOHNSON I JAMES H. FORBERG I
May 1, 1981
Mr. Tom KyleHealth Sciences Planning OfficeBox 726 MayoMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Re: Toxic Materials Handling FacilityUniversity of Minnesota
Dear Tom:
En~losed is a copy of our Preliminary Cost Estimate dated April 30, 1981.This estimate has been reviewed to reflect the omission of the emergencygenerator, additional cost for lighting fixtures due to more wallmounted fixtures and additional costs involved in the re1coation ofelectrical panels due to the work which will be required on the firstfloor. The cost involved with the electrical panels relocation isnecessitated by the requirement of the 1981 National Electrical Codewhich recently went into effect.
The total estimated construction cost including a 10% contingency is$347,440. It is our recommendation that the estimated constructioncost listed in the Advertisement for Bids be reduced from $350,000 to$335,000 or $340,000. Please advise.
RHS:b
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FORBERG ASSOCIATES!ARCHITEcrs1 4 0 9 WI L LOW S T R F. E T I ~J I :\ N J:: .A POI. I S I ., INN E SOT.A Ii Ii 4 0 3 I 6 1 2 • 8 7 J • ; 7 4 1ROGER T. JOHSSON JAMES H. Jo'ORBERG RICHARD H. SMITH
Apri 1 30, 1981
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
TOXIC MATERIAL HANDLING FACILITYBASEMENT - BOYNTON HEALTH SERVICEUNIVERSITY HOSPITALS - UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES CAMPUS - MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA
General Construction
c
-C.B. walls including solid block where required-Lath and Plaster Partitions and Ceilings-Flooring and Base-Painting-Doors, H. M. Frames and Hardware-Calking and Toilet Accessories-Casework and Cold Room-Subtotal-Job Mobilizationprofit and Overhead-Total
Mechanical Construction
-Plumbing and Special Piping-Liquid Heat Transfer-Ventilating and Air Tempering-Controls-Subtotal-Job Mobi1zation, Profit and Overhead-Total
Electrical Construction
-Fixtures-Fire alarm, clocks, intercom-Relocation of E1ec Cabinet-Wiring, Cabinets and Temp Servicp-Tota 1-MoGilization, Profit ~nd Ov~rhe~d
-Total
-Grand Total-Contingency - In
$ 5,3456,3253,1201,5005,3005,440
75,000101 ,73025,430
$ 127,160
$ 54,0008,000
38,0008,000
108,00027,000
135,000
14,0002.800
15,0009,500
. ---4"-;~~Ci(11:?,3QI)
. - '-53 ,69~J
$ 127,160
S 135,000
:.: 15 ,HSO~1 .59n
S 347 .44tY
nE.DIJCT:VL I\l HRNI\TrS
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
Jtme 5, 1981
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical PlanningHealth Sciences ComplexBox 726 Mayo Memorial BuildingMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 373·8981
ID:
FRCM:
SUBJECT:
Tan Kyle [1..0 I
Paul J. Maup:il(lMJJ
Toxic M:iterials Handling Lab
Bill Sissel of National Cancer Institute called Jtme 3, 1981regarding review CCXllIElts on the Toxic M:iterials Handling Lab.I talked to a Bill Kermy on a conference call. The maj orconcern was regarding their past experience with the HedcoValves which do not nmction as the designers intended themto. They are constantly htmting or m:xlulating everytimethere is a flucuation in tanperature. They feel that thereare other valves on the market that satisfy the design intentwithout all of the problems.
They also made a general remark that we seem to have gone alittle too far with autanatic controls which in their experiencewill create maintenance problems for us in the future. Theydid not like the hip-p and low switch on the fume hoods. Therewere some minor electrical ccmnents. They did, however, makea flat state:nent that the radio-isotope fume hoods nust be on anemergency electrical source. Bill will transmit these ccmnentsto you in writing.
Tan, talk over each item with the Architects and others. If itis in the best interest of the University, make the change.After receiving Bill, s letter, answer each item with action takenin writing.
If changes are made, you will probably have to do so bychange order at a later date.
PJM:jnw
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
Jtme 15, 1981
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical PlanningHealth Sciences ComplexBox 726 Mayo Memorial BuildingMinneapolis. Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
c
TO: Tony Aydinalp
FRlli: Paul J.Maup~SUBJECr: Toxic Materials Handling Facilities
As you may be aware, EDS Construction is low bidder on thesubject project. Past experience with this contractorindicates that we will need prudent construction supervisionthe the project.
Inasrruch as Gordon Dahlen has 'WOrked with the contractorpreviously, we request that he be assigned the project.
PJM:jmv
I5TI UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical PlanningHealth Sciences ComplexBox 726 Mayo Memorial BuildingMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
June 23, 1981
TO: Gary SUIIIlErville
:FRrn: Tom Kyle ·-r;tvl4-LSUBJECl': Toxic Materials Handling Facility
Attached is a copy of the bid tabulation on the above,indicating the low bidder for the construction of thisproject as EDS Construction. Their bid was $277,300 totalbase bid. I have also included our office's project budgetinformation for your consideration.
I spoke with Bill Cissel at NCI on Hmday and he gj1Ve verbalapproval to award to the low bidder. We reCOIIlIEl1d you awardas soon as possible as the grant requires this project beunder contract no later than July I, 1981.
You will notice that the construction cost is well below theconsultants esti.ma.tes -- approximately 65,000. We intendto include, by nodification, an €!lIergency generator, additionalfixed equipnElt, and plastering over concrete block walls.These additions were at the suggestion of Mr. Cissel and we aredeveloping the changes with his direction and advice. He isapproving the full grant anount until we have a new figure tosubmit. We will be attenpting to include all program itemsacceptable to NCI.
Let lIE know when you wish to get together to review budgeton this project.
cc: Paul MaupinJoycene MaroneyVic Scott
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FOBBERG ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTSJ • 0 9 WI L LOW S T n F: E T / MIS N E A POL I S I M J N 111 E SOT A 5 5 • 0 3 I 6 1 2 ' 8 ~ I . 7 7 C 1ROGER T. JOHNSON I JAMES ,D. "'ORBERG RICHARD H. SMITH
MEMORANDUM
Date: October 23. 1981
Re: Toxic Materials Handling FAcilityUniversity of Minnesota
By. Richard H. Smith
The following is a tabulation of pertinent dates regarding this projectas it relates to the delivery of laboratory furniture and fume hoods.
August 19, 1981-September '.1981September 29. 1981
October 6. 1981October 7, 1981
October 15. 1981
cc: EDSBaronKyle
Contract awarded to EDSPre-construction MeetingList of Subcontractors received by JFAlist of approval on subcontractors by JFAMeeting at HSPO - Tom Kyle. Richard Smith.Jack Frerichs. Don Burda. Darrel Turnock andRepresentatives from Hamilton.(Casework shop drawings reported to be in mailand would arrive week of August 10)
Hamilton Shop Drawings received by JFAHamilton Shop Drawings returned "Not Approved"Hamilton Shop Drawings received by JFA(Second submittal - included a number of drawings notincluded with first submittal)
Meeting with Darrel Turnock on casework shop drawings.Hamilton shop drawings returned (Second submittalexcept for electrical drawings) "Approved as Noted Submit Record copies".Returned electrical drawings on fume hoods "NotApproved - Resubmit".
l5il UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
September 2, 1981
Laird Miller, AdministratorHealth ServicesBoynton Health ServiceEast BBnk CaIrpus
Dear Mr. Miller:
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical PlanningHealth Sciences ComplexBox 726 Mayo Memorial BuildingMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 373·8981
Our office is mmaging the design and construction effortsinvolved with the iIIpleJIEI1tation of the Toxic MaterialsHandling Facility in the West Wing of the Health ServicesBuilding. We have discovered a water leak against the westwalL north of the elevator shafts for the parking ranp.\-ben it rains heavily, water penetrates the exteriorwall below grade and floods the office of Leo Anderson.From there the water runs down pipe chases into the futurelaboratories now under construetion in the baseJIEI1t.
It is inperative that this condition be corrected beforeour construction can continue. We have authorized thegeneral contractor for the construction to excavate atthe mrth west corner of the west wind addition to locatethe problem. We need to act :i.ImEdiately and thereforecarmot afford the time loss in turning this problem overto the University to correct; as they have a backlog ofsimilar projects to address.
lbpefully the leak is only minor and inexpensive to repair;we will uonitor progress to insure proper handling. Wewill eJq>ect your maintenance fund to reinhurse the projectfor the actual costs, as this item is outside the scope ofv.urk described by the Grant to N. C. I . I hope to have anestimate of the costs within a week and I will relate themto you, I asSUl'lE it will be m.JCh less than having theUniversity do the v.urk because the contractor is alreadyat the site and we can v.urk out details without a designstaff. Of course all v.urk will have University Engineerapproval.
If you wish to discuss this approach or offer suggestions
Tom KyleAssistant Health Sciences Planning Coordinator
TK:nka
cc: Paul J. Maupinfile~
:"" '. f·
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FORBERG ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTS1 4 0 9 WI L LOW S T R E E T I !II I r.; N E A POL I S I M I }Ii N E SOT A Ii 6 4 0 3 I 6 1 2 - 8 7 1 - 7 7 • IROGER T. JOHNSON I JAMES ~. }'ORIlERG I RICHARD H. SMITH
MEMORANDUM
Date:
Subject:
Present:
October 23, 1981
Toxic Materials Handling FacilityUniversity of Minnesota
Tony Baron, Tom Kyle, Fay Thompson and Ralph Wollan - U of M;Darrel Turnock, Haldeman and Homme; Jack Frerichs- EDS;and Richard Smith- Johnson Forberg Associates
The above met to review the status of casework and fume hood delivery on thisproject. The following items were reviewed.
-A memorandum dated October 23,1981, prepared by Smith was distributed.This memorandum includes dates of the contract, meetings and shop drawinqsubmitta1s.
-Kyle advised that Dr. Vesley is in charge of this project. The completiondate is not critical. The facility will be used when ready.
-Turnock advised that casework delivery is running a minimum of 120 days.A firm delivery date can not be determined until Hamilton receives approvedshop dr~wings. Shop drawings are now in the hands of Haldeman-Homme.It was not known if the electrical shop drawings on the hoods would affectthe scheduling.
·-Fume hoods will be pre-wired. Wiring diagrams will be submitted to WallyMellum for his review once they are approved.
-Turnock will advise the .architects of the tentative delivery date as soonas it is received from Hamilton. The architects will then distributea letter on anticipatea completion. The tentative completion date willbe based on 60 days after casework delivery. The letter will qo toKyle with copies to Geretz and A. W. Johnson.
-Construction is now at a virtual stop. The majority of plastering work can becompleted before casework is delivered. Some plaster patching isanticipated after casework installation. Mechanical and electrical workwill be required in conjunction with the casework installation which isanticipated to take three weeks. All painting must be done after thecasework installation. Installation of doors, hardware and sheet vinylflooring is required after painting.
-The environmental room will be installed as soon as it arrives.-Turnock assured those present that installerswou1d be available as soonas the casework arrives.
-Wollan requested that architects send him a copy of the MSA filter brochure.-Shop drawings on the fume hoods were reviewed by Wo11an and Thompson. Wo1lannoted that additional vacuum outlets would be required at monitoringlocations. A vacuum outlet should be added in the ceiling near the testports and at the right side of each hood. Details of the proposed locationswill be reviewed with Gausman and Moore and Wol1an contacted if additionalinformation is required. Wo11an expressed concern over a steady vacuunlpressure. Thompson commented that a critical orfice fitting should suffice.
r
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FORBERG ASSOCIATES I ARCHITECTS1 4 f) 9 WI L LOW 8 T R E E T ! M I :\ N E A POL I S I M J NNE 8 0 T A Ii C> 4 0 3 I 6 1 2 • 6 ~ I • 7 7 • 1ROGI.r. T. JOHNSON I JAMES~. }'ORBERG RICHARD H. 8MITH
MEMORANDUMPage 2Toxic Materials Handling Facility
-It was noted that the removable end panels on the side of the fume hoodswhere countertops have high backsplashes and/or filters would have tQbe reduced in size to permit removal for access to services.
- TI,""nock ad vi sed that the hoods woul~ not be tested in the factoryprior to shipping. Hamilton has advised him they are confident that
./ the hoods will operate as specified and factory testing will not be(Itt necessary.
iI~ :jb~BarOn requested that the architects have the mechanical engineer check~b ~~ existing vacuum Sy~tero in the building to insure that the capacity is
l~~/~ adequate to handle the new outlets being installed as well as the additionalJ.\ VfI tfjV outlets proposed. .
J)/JJ cc: Kyl e~ Baron
ThompsonWollanEOSG and MHand H
"
,"
l5i1 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTAlWlN CITIES
Decenber 1. 1981
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical PlanningHealth Sciences ComplexBox 726 Mayo Memorial BuildingMinneapolis. Minnesota 55455
(612) 373·8981
",-",! 1.--
I /r"/
10: Dr. Vesley
FRCM: Tom Kyle 1tJtWSUBJEcr: Toxic Materials Handling Facility
Attached is the mst current letter fran the architectwhich will define the schedule of events for the Toxic MaterialsLaboratory construction. A project coopletion date of May 14,1982 is reasonable and possible.
Relative to the talks we've had I assune ~tUs neets with yourapproval; let ne know if you have a problem with that date.
TK:nka.
cc: Paul MaupinTony BaronA. W. JohnsonRalph VbllanFaye Thorq>son
1.
1 2.-.
. 3.
, .
",.
. BOGEB JOHNSON· JAMES FOBBEBG ASSOCIATES I ABCWiliECTSlUI WILLOW ITaEET I KINNEAPOLIS I KINWE80TA 1'.01 I 111·1'1·".1aoGD T. lOHNSON I UMES H. FOUEaG I aJCJL\U B. 81UTJ1
November 17, 1981
Mr. Tom KyleHealth Science Planning Office726 MayoMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Re: Toxic Material Handling FacilityUniversity of Minnesota
Dear Tom:
This is to follow up on our meeting of October 23, 1981 regarding deliverydate for casework. and fume hoods and projected project completion date.
In a telephone conversation with Mr. Jack Frerichs of EDS Construction on thisdate I was advised of the following information received from Mr. Darrel Turnockof Haldeman and Homme:
Casework and fume hoods are scheduled to be shipped at the end ofFebruary 1982.Revised fume hood wiring diagrams are to be mailed from the factorytoday.Final revised casework and fume hood drawings are to be mailed from thefactory this week.
It is our opinion that the shipping date should be considered as tentative until.witten confirmation is received. In projecting a completion date, we areassuming G delivery date of approximately two weeks after the shipping dateor Monday, March 15, 1982. Allowing 60 days for completion of the projectafter casework delivery, we are projecting a completion date of May 14, 1982.This may be optimistic as Mr. Turnock advised in the October 23, 1981 meeting thatthe fume hoods would not be tested before shipment. This may result in a longerperiod for final testing and adjustment extending the two week installationperiod projected by Mr. Turnock.
We will be in contact with you and Mr. Baron as soon as the shop drawings arerecefved to advise you of the status of the work. As you are aware, therehas been no work on this project for approximately 3 weeks and only minimal work isanticipated for the next three months as most remaining work is scheduledaround the casework delivery.
RHS:b
cc: BaronA. W. Johnson (4)EOS Haldeman Honme P.. &M
": ..
BOGEB JOHNSON· JAMES FORBEBG ASSOCIATBSIARCHITECTS140' WILLOW STREET I HINNEAPOLIS I JlINNESOTA Iii,oa I 112·1'11·7.,.1ROGER T. JOHNSON I JAKES H. FORBEBG I B1CHABD H. SKlTH
April 5, 1982
Mr. Paul MaupinHealth Science Planning OfficeBox 726 MayoMinneapolis, Mn 55455
Dear Paul:
Some months back you indicated that Dow Chemical Company mighthave use for our services in designing laboratory facilities dealingwith toxic materials. If you could provide me with the name of theperson to contact or if you inquire on our behalf, it would be appreciated.
The progress on the Boynton facility is frustrating. Hamilton's repeatedfailure to produce on schedule has extended beyond any reasonable period.We are also concerned about their unwillingness to test check prior toshipment. Everyone's patience is wearing a little thin. It will be niceto be able to view the completed product.
As you may be aware, we are presently making studies for a Toxic labRemodeling for the Minneapolis Medical Research Foundation. We havedesigned about a dozen projects for them since 1969. .
Johnson
RTJ:b
"
l5i1 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
April 6, 1982
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical PlanningHealth Sciences ComplexBox 726 Mayo Memorial BuildingMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
fF
William E. Cissel, Jr.Project EngineerResearch Facilities BranchDivision of Resources, Centers,
and carmunity ActivitiesNational Cancer InstituteRoan 3A05, Blair Building8300 Colesville RoadSilver Spring, Maryland 20910
REF: 1 C06 CA28136-01
Dear Bill:
Progress to date on the construction phase of the 'IbxicMaterials Handling Facility at the University of Mirmesotahas been poor. 'Ihis is due solely to the delays relatedto casework and fln're hood shop drawing approvals. Allsu1:mittals from Hamilton Industries (supplier) have been rejectednore than twice for errors or omissions. We do nON have adelivery date of April 26, 1982. 'Ihis would indicate arevised project canpletion date of August 1, 1982.
We have been working on developing the fixed equiprent listper your telephone conversations with Ire during the awardperiod. The revised schedule indicates we should be requestingthe contractor order the group I equi~t by the end of April.
I am su1:mitting the itans for your approval, as listed belON:
Mr. William Cissel, Jr.REF: 1 006 CA28136-01April 6,1982Page 2
The cost estimates do not include the installation charges fromthe contractor and contractor mark-up. Installation will bea time and material basis on a change order.
As previously mentioned we would like to order this group Iequiprent by the end of April and look forward to your approval.Call me if you need further clarification. (612-376-5073).
Yours truly,
~14/vThanas W. KyleAsst. Health Sciences Planning Coordinator
'IWK:rnka
cc: Paul MaupinDr. VesleyRalph ~llan
Faye Thompson
I
l5i1 1
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
March 10, 1982
Dr. Donald VesleyBox 197 Mayo
Dear Don:
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical PlanningHealth Sciences ComplexBox 726 Mayo Memorial BuildingMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
PF
The attached modification details the work doneto correct leaking problems at the northwestcorner of Boynton Health Services at the Basementlevel and first floor.
It is my understanding, from Tom Kyle, that thedepartment agreed to reimburse the project forthis work which was done by the contractor.
Therefore, please transfer $1,804.00 ($1,686 plus$118 for AlE fees) to 9950-9571-02. Pleaseindicate on the transfer that this is for ModificationG-6 to the Toxic Materials Handling Lab. A copy ofthe document should be sent to Joycene Maroney-Walstromof my staff at Box 726 Mayo.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Very truly yours,
Paul J. Maupl.nHealth Sciences Planning Coordinator
PJM:jmw
cc: Laird Miller
Februa ry 3, 1982
Date
Date
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESeTAMOD. NO. _...:::G:....-6.:::.- _MOD. REJECTED _CHANGE ORDER NO. _CONTRACTS TO BE MODI r-t EDo General Constructiono Mechanical Worko Electrical Worko Vertical Transportationo Caseworko _o --------
R~:ommendeCJ,,;...~~~~J4~.LJL_~2j~~_ Arc:itect :::: -2-/-3..../-8-2---1--.....1.--=-.....--··----- C
MODIFICATION TO CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTSProject No. University: 070-80-0080
Federal: lC06 - CA28136-0lPROJECT Tox;c Materials Handl;ng Fac;lityCONTRACTOR EOS Canst fllCt; on
Wnen thIS MOd,f'c.tIOr'l II slgf'WtCI. 11 snaIl become an orderto p'OCHa In accordance w,n'\ th. reQulreme,,11 of th.Mod"'ta.,on and Ih. Cont,acl OOtum.nl ..
L1 Cost ch ange (Add) (()eduet) olL$__1w.6,-",8.w..6 .a..1.2....6i-.-.- _o 1<10 change in cost or time
•
Person Requesting Change' Tony Baron - University Field Inspector - Site Condition
Reason for Change' To correct leaking problem at northwest corner of Bo'{Oton
Health Service at Basement Leyel and First Floor.
Description of Change:
Investiqative excavation revealed that the siamese connection located aoproximately3 1 -0" above grade on the west wall appears to have been relocated from alocation approximately 10 1 -0" below qrade to permit additional fill requiredby later construction. Two 3" pipes extend down on the exterior of the buildingand are in a deteriorated condition. The sealinq at the oenetration throuqhthe wall are in poor condition permitting water to enter.
Remove pipes and cap siamese connection at lower level. Grout holes in walltiqht. Clean and damooroof entire wall in excavated area. Install newsiamese connection at qrade and tie into standpipe above the first floorceil inq.
DEPARTMENT OJ HEALTH & HUMAl\: SERVICES
April 16, 1982
Public Health Service
National Institutes of HealthBethesda, Maryland 20205
Reference No. 1 C06 CA28136-01
Thomas W. KyleAsst. Health Sciences Planning CoordinatorBox 726Mayo Memorial BuildingMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
Dear Mr. Kyle:
I have reviewed the fixed equipment list you sent me and the items listed
are approved.
Please advise me if you have other items of fixed equipment to purchase.
Si ncerely,
£2' £~'fI';"~ L.... .. - - ~' ,
w '.dft,ltA-<...- .- '- ~
William E. Cissel, Jr.Project EngineerResearch Facilities Branch
,
I rr\ I UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA\;III: TWIN CITIES
II
April 6, 1982
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical PlanningHealth Sciences ComplexBox 726 Mayo Memorial BUildingMinneapolis. Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
William E. Cissel, Jr.Project EngineerResearch Facilities BranchDivision of Resources, Centers,
and Ccmmmity ActivitiesNational Cancer InstituteFocrn 3ADS, Blair Building8300 Colesville RoadSilver Spring, Maryland 20910
REF: 1 C06 CA28136-01
Dear Bill:
Progress to date on the construction phase of the 'lbxicMaterials Handling Facility at the University of Minnesotahas been poor. This is due solely to the delays relatedto cas~rk and fume hood shop drawing approvals. Allsuh:nittals fram Hamilton Industries (supplier) have been rejectedrrore than twice for errors or emissions. we do ncM have adelivery date of April 26, 1982. 'lhis would indicate arevised project ccrnpletion date of August 1, 1982.
We have been working on developing the fixed equiprent listper your teleFhone conversations with m: during the awardperiod. The revised schedule indicates we should be requestingthe contractor order the group I equi~t by the end of April.
I am sul:rnitting the i terns for your approval, as listed below:
Mr. William Cissel, Jr.REF: 1 C06 CA28136-01April 6,1982Page 2
The cost estimates do not include the installation charges franthe contractor and contractor mark-up. Installation will bea time and material basis on a change order.
As previous1y rrentioned we would like to order this group Iequipnent by the end of April and look forward to your approval.Call me if you need further clarification. (612-376-5073).
Yours truly,
--Gv14b'Ihanas W. KyleAsst. Health Sciences Planning Coordinator
'IWK:rnka
cc: Paul MaupinDr. VesleyRalph ~llan
Faye Thc:mpson
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTATWIN CITIES
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical PlanningHealth Sciences ComplexBox 726 Mayo Memorial BuildingMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 373-8981
June 16, 1982
Mr. Richard H. SmithRoger Johnson-James Forberg Associates1409 Willow StreetMinneapolis, Minnesota 55403
RE: Toxic Materials Handling FacilityUniversity of MinnesotaLetter of June 11, 1982 - Johnson/Forberg
Dear Dick:
Regarding the Fixed Equipment to be ordered by E.D.S.Construction, we have the following comments:
1. The Gamma 5500 Systems should also include"isosets for 13lr and 125r, and one variableisoset".
2. The Calibrator should have additional shieldingso it becomes a Model 78-2M. Additional Cost $lPOO.OO
3. The entire Track System for the Calibrator is notneeded - as you can imagine, a 30'-0" track wouldnot fit in Lab. All that is required for thisinstallation is the mirror and telescope assemblyand the instrument plate with the grid on it.The user will put the plate on a rolling cart.
4. We assume the Contractor can handle the installationand should include that cost in their bid after theyreceive the rigging requirements from J.L. Shepherd.
Richard H. SmithToxic Materials HandlingJune 16, 1982Page 2
5. The University does not approve bids that do nothave a fixed installation fee. The contractorand supplier should compute the probable costs andinclude them in the modification cost. Of courseadjustments can be made if a problem arises. AJ.L. Shepherd Representative should give us ademonstration and set-up with charges included inbid.
6. The license from ARC is being amended.can receive order for equipment but mayuntil a copy of amendment is received.supply it as soon as approved.
J.L. Shepherdnot shipWe will
Lastly, Dick, please impress upon the contractor thatprompt ordering will benefit all parties.
~~Thomas KyleAsst. Health Sciences Planning Coordinator
TK:mka
cc: Jerry StaigerRalph WollanPaul MaupinFile""'"
June 11. 1982
Mr. Tom KyleHealth Science Planning Office726 MayoMinneapolis, Mn 55455
Re: Toxic Materials Handling Facility,University of Minnesota
Dear Tom:
Encl~ed are three copies of a letter from EDS Construction an~accompanying quotations from Beckmen Instruments and J. l. Shepherdand Associ ates for the GanJTIa Counter andCa1i brator • Due to the ,technical nature of this equipment, Mr. Frerichs has requested that thequotation be reviewed by Mr. Wollan and Mr. ,Staiger ,prior to hisplacing an order.
Please note that the Calibrator quotation includes ,an indefinite amountfor installation based on approximate air fare, an hourly rate and per diemexpenses. The User should advise if the instal1ation,bythe manufacturersis required or if they intend to perfonn the installation. The statusof the license with the Atomic Regulatory Commis.sion sholJldalso b~
verified.
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FOBBBBG AS8CXJJArnalAROBITBCTS1 U t WI L LOW S T R E E TIM INN E A POL IS I 111 N Nit' 0 TA 6 1401 I • 11 •• 71 • 'I 7 UBOGER T. JOHNSON I JAlIEB II. I'ORBEBG ' I - BICHAllD H. SMITH
{,;,
\
li,it('#
",~'
lt
,\,
Richard H. Smith
RHS:b
cc: EOS
lSHEPHERD anJdluoaiau.
740 Salem Street, Glendale, California 91203
RECEIVED
MAy 251982
213/245-0187
Irradiation & Calibration Equipment
May 20, 1982
E. D. S. Construction CompanyP. O. Box 43570Saint Paul, Minnesota 55164
Attention: Jack Frerichs
• Lead Shielding • .Nuclear ApplicatIOns
Reference: Letter of Transmittal, 5/14/82, R.equest for Quotation fromRoger Johnson' James Forberg Assocates/Archetects with specificationscovering equipment manufactured by J. L. Shepherd and Associates.
QUOTATIO~
Item 1. One each, Model 78-1M Calibrator with a 10 Curie Cs-137 sourceand a 1 Curie Cs-137 source: $9,095.00.Note: If additional shielding is required so that the calibrator willbe a Model 78-2M with th~ve--5.ources, please add an additional$1,000.00 for a toa $10, 095. OO~-~'
Item 2. Model 154 Attenuator System: $4,195.00.
~tem 3. Model 150~~,incl~k,~in~nt
~, mirror and telescope assembly=-$!, n" 00. -f /YI-:JrruJ4-1enf plare
Item 4. Shipping, via motor freight: $450.00
Item 5. Installation charges on a cost incurred basis:a. Air fare for installation engineer: approximately $600.00.b. Installation Engineers time (including air travel time): $40.00 per
hour.c. Per diem expenses, including rented automobile, hotel and food as
incurred.d. Rigging: as required to move unit into room and to mount onto the
base: cost incurred basis. We suggest that rigging arrangements
)~~
lJ ,~ .~,II J t,'" (, r I /nrp~ EN(;/NrrIlS
E. D. S. Construction CompanyJack FrerichsQuotationMay 20, 1982Page 2
d. continued. be made by your company as to reduce installation time.We will send rigging requirements in detail when required.
J. L. Shepherd
JLS/mfs
..BECKMAN
AODRESS All ORDERSAND CORRESPONDENCE
TO THIS ADDRESS ~
BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS, INCANAL YTICAL INSTRUMENTS SALES AND SERVICE DIVISION
7262 Washington Avenue SouthEden Prairie, Minnesota 55344Roger L. Eggen 612/944-1350
DATE April 19. 1982
TO: E.D.S. Construction CompanyP. O. Box 43570St. Paul, MN 55164
ATTENTION Mr. Jack FrerichsYOUR REFERENCE NO.: tet ter of 5-11-82
PAGE 1 OF 1
QUOTATION NO MINN-0734.1
PLEASE REFER TO THIS QUOTE NO.
IN FUTURE CORRESPONDEoNCE
ITEM
1.
aT'!'
1
PART NO
69530n Gamma 5500 System____._ of
Includes:
DESCRIPTION U"IIT PRICE NET PRICE
14,500.00
2. 1 584281
-- Integral printer, multi-user tray system fortubes to 16 x 87 rom
Health Sciences Planning OfficePhysical PlanningHealth Sciences ComplexBox 726 Mayo Memorial BuildingMinneapolis, Minnesota 55455
(612) 373·8981
June 24, 1982
TO:
FROM:
Clint Hewitt
Paul J. MauPin~SUBJECT: Toxic Materials Handling Facility
As you are aware, the subject project came inunder budget and we have had to add modificationsand group I equipment inorder to satisfy theNIC grant. We feel that it would be in the bestinterest of the project to increase the moveableequipment budget from $18,200 to $26,OOO±. Thiswill not affect the grant but will be funded fromthe Central Administration funds. If you haveany problem with this, please let us know beforethe requisitions are sent to purchasing next week.Thanks.
PJM:jmw
.1
ROGER 30HN80N . JAMES FORBERG .AJI~6iiblSJ • O. WI L LOW I T It E E T I~D T. JOHHlON /
July 9, 1982
Mr. Clinton N. Hewitt.Assistant Vice Presidentfor Physical Planning321 Morrill HallUniversity of MinnesotaMinneapolis, Mn 55455
Re: Toxic Materials HandlingFacfli~yUniversJty of Minnesota
Dear Mr. Hewitt:
I am writing to express my concerns regarding the cost overruns we areexperiencing on this project due to continuing delays in the construction.The delays have been primarily due to the failure of one subcontractor todeliver materials, a condition which is beyond our control. A briefchronology of the critical dates is as follows:
a. Bick; received on June 9, 1981 (The low bid was approximately 20% belowthe project budget).
b. Contracts were awarded June 25, 1981 with a substantial completiondate of January 1, 1982. .
c. Enclosed are copies of two Memoranda both dated October 23, 1981documenting delays 4~ the delivery of laboratory furniture andsubmittal of shop drawings from the time of contract award throughOctober 23, 1981.
d. Pertinent dates subsequent to the October 23, 1981 meeting are asfollows:
,
1. November 17, 1981
2. December 1, 1981
3. December 9, 1981
4. January 6, 1982
- Haldeman-Homme advised casework and fume hoodsscheduled for shipment the end of Februarv 1982.
- Revised electrical shop drawings for hJods beingmailed on November 17, 1981.
- final revised shop drawings submitted that week.- Electrical shop drawings for fume hoods received
and forwarded to electrical engineer. (This wasapproximately one month prior to the scheduledproject completion).
- Electrical shop drawings for fume hoods forwardedto U of M(Wally Mel1um) for his review.
- Shop drawings on fume hoods and casework returnedto contractor with letter documenting delays todate. (copy of letter enclosed).
• 1
I,
ROGER JOHNSON· JAMES FOBBERG ASSOCIATES I ABCBl'I'ECTS140. WILLOW .TltEJ:T I MINNEAPOLII I IIINNE80TA U4DI I .11.171.774180eu T.IOBNION I . IAIlJ:8.Jl. FOIlBUC I IUCURD B.•IIITH
,::~~~?.'''.;:~;, .
.;",
Mr. Clinton N.Hew1t,tPage 2 "July 9, 1982
. '.' ·~'5. ','January ;'2/::)'982
~'6. 'february ,9. ,1.982
7. March 9, 1982
"B. :.Apr-it 20,1982
9. May 4 t 1982 '~'
, ,
~,
-',,-: :
~;Hi'demanHomme advised scheduled delivery date forcasework is March 8, ]982Haldeman Homme advised casework delivery would notbe on March 8, 1982. No delivery date or reasonfor delay given.
- Project completion date of July', 1982 projectedbased on casework de1i very by Hay 1.Casework scheduled for shipment within week. Fumehoods scheduled for ~pr1] Z6. 1982.Casework delivered to Haldeman Homme warehouse. Fumehoods still scheduled to be shipped ~dl ZR. ]i8~.Hamilton representative attended progress meeting.Refu,sed to explain reasons for delays lias it wasnot in ~heir best interest."
- Fume ~oods shipped May 2, 1982 and delivered to sitethat week. -- .--
'At ,this.t1me, Stlbstanti'alcompletion 'is approximately one IOOnth away. Currentdelays are due to .ltems related to casewor1c and fume hood installation, a changein tne painting subcontractor due to the delays and other related items. The
. lengthy delays have resulted in a number of stoppages in the work and aresultant loss of·coordination.
There have been 17'prog~ss meetings to date. Ten of these occurred afterJanuary 1, 1982 when the project was scheduled for substantial completion.In addition to the progress meetings. there has been a considerable amountof time spent on job site meetings. correspondence and related matterswith the casework supplier and contractor. Additional time will be requiredfor progress meetings, final inspection and project closeout.
Thenumerous delays in construction documented above and by the enclosureshas resulted in a substantial cost overrun by our firm. An adjustmemtin our fee of $3200 would appear to be justified by the above. Thiswould constitute approximately ,a 10% increase in the total fee.
Your consideration and response tp this request will be appreciated.
RTJ:Benc.
. . \ ~
..'i.t'..
.-cc: Paul Maup;n~
-
Physical Planning340 Morrill Hall100 Church Street S.E.Minneapolis. Minnesota 5545
Mr. Roger T. JohnsonRoger Johnson, James Forberg Associates/Architects1409 Willow StreetMinneapolis, Minnesota 55403
Dear Mr. Johnson:
I'm writing to acknowledge receipt of your letter of July 9, 1982 regardingyour concerns about the cost overruns associated with continuing delays inthe construction of the Toxic Materials Handling Facility. The chronologyof the contractor's performance on this project is not expected nor acceptableto the University. I have asked the staff for a report on this project andwill schedule a meeting to review this matter. Regarding your request foradditional fees, as soon as I have completed my review of this matter, I willrespond to your request.
Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention.