Sustainable Facility Design for Collaborative Research and Development

Transcription

1 Sustainable Facility Design for Collaborative Research and Development Dante Tedaldi, PhD, PE Directorate Head, Facilities Maintenance and Engineering SAIC-Frederick, Inc. May 09, 2013 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute Frederick National Laboratory is a federally funded research and development center operated by SAIC-Frederick, Inc., for the National Cancer Institute.

2 Disclaimer This project has been funded in whole or in part with federal funds from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, under Contract No. HHSN E. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of Health and Human Services, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES National Institutes of Health National Cancer Institute Frederick National Laboratory is a federally funded research and development center operated by SAIC-Frederick, Inc., for the National Cancer Institute.

3 Today s Focus Project Concept Construction Technique Project Cost Metrics Sustainability Features cgmp Considerations Partnering Approaches Key Takeaways

4 The Concept Maintain existing campus Consolidate technologies spread among 33 aged buildings Lease 330K sq ft on a 177 acre research campus Ability to expand to 800K sq ft w/ 40K sq ft in partner space Move 250 employees and add 200+ in 5 years

5 The Campus

6 Tilt-up Wall Construction Criticism: tilt-up is dull and not compatible with architecturally sophisticated designs Reinforced concrete walls and few joints between the relatively large pieces - good fire resistance and low maintenance. Operating efficiencies due to their thermal mass and low air infiltration rates

7 Sustainable Construction Department of Health and Human Services requires new construction or major renovation of HHS-owned buildings earn LEED or Green Globes certification. 3 Green Globes out of 4 95% of steel recycled 88% of construction waste re-used or recycled (1,050 t) 5,000 tons of excavated rock used on site ~4,000 tons of concrete from casting beds re-used 30% of materials regionally manufactured

8 Cost at Completion Architect/Engineer Design Labs & Green Globes $13,900,000 Data SAIC Center Staffing Program Management $1,000,000 Construction Project manager Lab Fit and Out ~8/9 FTE over 18 mo. of construction $121,400,000 Construction & Security Plan $9,700,000 Validation Consumed $8M of contigency, $2.4M remaining at completion. $3,700,000 SAIC-F FME PME $5,800,000 Design/Project Management $22,000,000 12% SAIC-F FME Shops $270,000 Data Construction/Validation Center Computer Equipment $154,000,000 $2,000,000 88% One Time Costs $2,100,000 Contingency $2,400,000 Tenant Improvement Costs $13,900,000 Total $176,000,000

9 Energy Conservation In-door chilled water cooling for data center racks Daylighting with dimming of electric fixtures Occupancy sensors Brazed plate heat exchanger for winter chilled water High performance envelope Low U value windows White reflective roof Energy sub-metering

10 Water Conservation Low flow, automatic fixtures Air handler condensate recovery used for cooling tower makeup water RO reject water recovery Computer controlled irrigation system with integrated weather station Recover 16,000 GPD

11 HVAC Design Innovative HVAC design reduces laboratory energy consumption 100 % Outside Air Chilled Beam Decoupled sensible heat from ventilation Desiccant dehumidification Allows 48 o Chilled Water Heat recovery Reduced size of air handlers & chillers Reduced energy consumption by 40%

12 ATRF Laboratories Flexible Utility Connections Electric power LAN for computer & phone Compressed air Vacuum Nitrogen CO2

13 ATRF Laboratories Laboratory Features Mobile Casework Standard lab module Detachable Utilities Daylighting Chilled beams

14 Data Center Rack Liquid Cooling The water-cooled Liebert system at the ATRF supports 20 kilowatts per rack. Passive cooling system eliminates the need for the usual raised floor found in many computing centers, lowers energy costs, and makes it possible for a 30 percent increase in power per rack. The water source is a 400-ton chiller and pumps located on the roof of the building.

15 Conference Center The 200-plus-seat auditorium is twice the size of the main campus auditorium. 3,000 sq.ft. of reconfigurable space.

16 BDP GMP Operations The BDP supports feasibility through development and Phase I/II cgmp manufacturing plus regulatory documentation Supports the development of monoclonal antibodies, recombinant proteins, therapeutic peptides and DNA vaccines, virus therapeutics and vaccines, gene therapy products, and other biological agents. More than 60 agents have gone into human clinical trials.

17 Biopharmaceutical Products Monoclonal Antibodies (35) Oncolytic Viruses (11) Cell & Virus Banks (10) Recombinant Protein (9) Oligonucleotides (3) Natural Products (2) Vaccines (38) Peptide (15) Viral (8) Recombinant Protein (5) Plasmid (4) Adsorbed (3) Cellular (3)

18 GMP Production BDP has three distinct GMP production trains: one cell culture with a maximum capacity of 1,000 liters, one bacterial with a maximum capacity of 500 liters, and one viral with a maximum capacity of approximately 20 liters.

19 Small Scale Production BDP also has three more production trains in the smaller-scale areas: one bacterial with a capacity of 100 liters, one cell culture with a capacity of 75 liters, and one viral with the capacity of about 5 liters. Materials manufactured in these areas are for nonclinical and potentially very early clinical use.

20 Flexible cgmp Manufacturing Utility Panels: Lab gases Plant steam USP steam Chilled water Cleaning solution Electrical Panel ISO 7 Clean Space

21 cgmp Manufacturing Maintenance Outside Clean Space Tech space - on left Walkable ceiling - above

22 Partnership Program New diagnostics and treatments for Cancer and AIDS Partnerships and collaborations with Government, Industry, and Academia Building capabilities and leveraging expertise Deploying unique infrastructure to meet mission-centric goals

23 Key Takeaways The design schedule was very aggressive. In addition, design review periods were only 2 weeks long covering over 2000 design documents.. In these short turnaround times, many comments were not adequately incorporated resulting in delays during construction. An overly aggressive construction schedule including the commissioning portion. A more adequate schedule could have allowed for better coordination between mechanical completion, commissioning and validation.

24 Key Takeaways Procuring major process equipment utilizing A/E services would have allowed sufficient time for fabrication, factory testing and delivery. Suppliers became less responsive and did not adhere to their original commitments when this responsibility was transferred to the GC near the end of design. The project team was remarkably small when compared to the standard at major design/builders and owners rep firms. This impacted the timely review/return of large quantity of documents including submittals and RFIs.

25