Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

RSF Animal Facility Manu Sharma, PE Facilities Management.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "RSF Animal Facility Manu Sharma, PE Facilities Management."— Presentation transcript:

1 RSF Animal Facility Manu Sharma, PE Facilities Management

2 Research Support Facility (RSF) (AKA Building 30 or LAR) KUMC’s largest animal building. Original building with two floors built in 1987. Two other floors added in 2003. Both parts built with separate mechanical, electrical and plumbing (MEP) systems fed from the same sources. No interconnection between the two. Lower level MEP systems are nearly 25 years old and some are in need of replacement.

3 Understanding the HVAC for RSF HVAC- Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning AHU- Air Handling Unit

4 Understanding the HVAC for RSF Air Terminal- Controls the room temperature by adding heat, meters the air flow to help maintain room pressure

5 M E P System Study KUMC hired Engineering consultant Brack & Assoc. in October 2011 to – Review the condition of Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing (MEP) systems and assess their reliability – Recommend required replacements – Recommend upgrades to have redundancy of MEP systems, i.e. two separate water supply sources to the building.

6 Study Findings Lower Level MEP systems are nearing the end of life and need to be replaced, especially the air handling unit (AHU) serving the lower levels (AHU-1) Lower level air terminals need to be replaced with new digital controls for better performance and monitoring. Exhaust systems are not fully redundant. Lack of redundancy if steam or chilled water from power plant is lost. Heating water and domestic hot water systems on lower level need to be replaced and connected to upper level for redundancy

7 Study Findings (continued) Emergency power generators and electrical switchboards need replacement Lack of redundant transformer

8 Our Plan Based on the Study Recommendations Phased plan – funding limitations Only Phase 1 and 2 have firm funding commitments, with some of the funds for phase 2 coming from NIH grant (outcome not known) Phase 1 (Estimated Construction time Early June to December 2013) -Install ductwork and controls to interconnect AHU-1, AHU-2 and proposed AHU-3. Phase 2 (Estimated Construction time February 2014-November 2014) – Install AHU-3 – Replace AHU-1 – Replace Air Terminals on Ground and First Floor with new controls – Extend south stair to roof level – Install a new water line for RSF, providing a redundant source of water.

9 Our Plan Based on the Study Recommendations (continued) Phase 3 New Emergency Generator New electrical switchgears for normal and emergency power Phase 4 New Boiler and Chiller for redundancy New redundant heating system serving all parts of the bldg New redundant domestic hot water system serving all parts of the bldg New redundant exhaust fans for the whole bldg New redundant transformer New Edstrom system for Grd & first floors New Elevators Phase 5 Build out penthouse for storage space Build a barrier suite on second floor

10 AHU-1 Interior Pics

11 Time Line for Phase 1 Work Complete Design and Bid Documents for interconnecting ductwork – From Now - End of March 2013 Bid the project – Between April – End of May 2013 Construction – Between June – December 2013

12 Proposed Work on Ground Floor

13 Proposed Work on First Floor

14 Proposed Work on Roof

15 Impact of Construction in Phase 1 Several Air supply shut downs to make modifications to ductwork. Targeted to not last more than 4 hours at a time. All shut downs shall be scheduled with RSF management. Will create temporary work spaces with partitions on ground and first floor. Dust and construction traffic shall be controlled. Expect periodic noise and vibration in areas below, when ducts and pipes are cut or attached to structure

16 Areas That May Experience Construction Noise/Vibration- Ground Floor

17 Areas That May Experience Construction Noise/Vibration- First Floor

18 Areas That May Experience Construction Noise/Vibration- Second Floor

19 Areas That May Experience Construction Noise/Vibration- Third Floor

20 IACUC Chair/Regulatory Veterinarian Update Who am I and What can I provide to the Research Community? Nathan C Culley, DVM, DACLAM

21 Functions Provide assistance to the Office of Animal Welfare on IACUC policies/procedures and regulations. Chair the IACUC Pre-review protocols for submission to the IACUC. – Assist new investigators on the review process and protocol development. Communication/consultation with the IO on the Animal Care and Use Program – Program needs/improvements – Compliance issues Work together with The AV, Executive Director of the LAR, and the Research Community to assure a compliant Animal Care and Use Program at KUMC.

22 Upcoming Changes to the Program Occupational Health – Update categories for all animal users. In person annual screening vs. on-line questionnaire – Risk assessment to determine needs/services per protocol Protocol Review Process Changes – 3 tier review process-Pre-review, Vet review, IACUC review Goal is to have the protocol polished prior to IACUC review – Drop Vet Pain and Distress Consult form-Vet review will satisfy regulations and provide “consult” – Hard dead-lines New policies/procedures based on the New Guide and improvement in the Animal Care and Use Program.

23 Changes to the Animal Care and Use Program Scott Bury, Ph.D. Director, Office of Animal Welfare

24 Upcoming Changes to Program Up coming AAALAC inspection – June-July 2013 – Updated policies on OAW and LAR sites – Draft Policies for Review Triennial Training – Discontinued annual online refresher – Every 3 years, must attend LAR Animal User Training Session (status determined at time of de novo) New ACUP Forms – Drafts Posted on OAW website – March and April Training Sessions – April 1 st old forms will no longer be accepted (addendum and ACUP)

25 Upcoming Changes to Program LAR Advisory Committee – Dr. Warren Nothnick, Scientific Director of LAR – Reinstitute the LAR advisory committee – Communicating research communities concerns and insights with LAR, OAW, IACUC and Senior Administration Research Staff Training by PI – New requirement to document protocol specific training by lab – Records must be maintained by PI Call for topics for upcoming OAW seminars

26 Attending Veterinarian Services Doug Brandt, DVM Attending Veterinarian Laboratory Animal Resources

27 Veterinary Services Responsible for the overall health and welfare of all animals on KUMC campus Clinical and surgical care of animals Rodent Health monitoring Assist with Model Development – Surgical Assistance – Anesthetic Support – Biotechnical Services – Other veterinary procedures

28 Veterinary Services Animal procedure training Controlled Drug dispensing Pharmaceutical dispensing Protocol development Pain and Distress consultation

29 Pathogen Outbreak Management in Rodent Colonies Recommendations will be made by the Veterinary Staff to help contain the outbreak as well as eliminate the pathogen – Depopulation – Rederivation – Colony wide treatments – Extended quarantine without breeding – Others

30 Pathogen Outbreak Management in Rodent Colonies When an outbreak is confirmed the affected rooms will be placed on quarantine status until it is lifted by the Veterinary Staff – Enhanced PPE – Cage handling techniques – Quarantine Per Diem rates Veterinary Staff will have final authority on how the colony will be managed

31 Operational Updates Vilma Zolynas, DVM, MBA, MHRM Executive Director Laboratory Animal Resources

32 TOPICS 1. Critical Animal Life Safety 2. Housing of Animals Exposed to Chemical Hazards 3. Rat Space Provisions and Cage Change Frequency 4. LAR Financial Data 5. Study Budget Estimate

33 CRITICAL Animal Life Safety LAR Emergency Preparedness Plan If a disaster occurs within the animal facility, such as fire, excess heat, or chemical spill, and the animal facility becomes a harmful environment, then animals shall be moved to a safe location to the extent possible. Reasonable and valid attempts will be made to recover animals by the best means possible. If personnel have limited time to move or otherwise take care of animals, then the animals shall be helped in with the following priority: -Attempts will be made to save all the USDA regulated species -Critical/irreplaceable to the study animals participating in grant-funded research (bar code cage card marked with a red dot). PIs should mark only a few mice breeding pairs per line that cannot be replaced -Non-critical animals If animals cannot be successfully evacuated, they will be humanely euthanized. Mark cages with red dots by April 1 st.

34 Upcoming Changes ‘Chemical Hazards SOP’ Chemicals that are toxic, known or suspect carcinogens, reproductive hazards, teratogens, mutagens and antineoplastic agents may be used in animal protocols. All chemicals being used must be documented in an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee approved protocol. Two separate SOPs: PROG 28 is Biological Hazards and PROG 48 is Chemical Hazards Two procedure rooms will be equipped with Class II Type B hoods Training will be provided to researchers on as needed basis. LOCATIONS: RSF procedure room G033 (234 sq. ft.) with dedicated animal room G040 (111 sq. ft.) RSF procedure room 3011 (145 sq. ft.) with dedicated animal room 3016 (225 sq. ft.) No animal transfer charges

35 Species Dimensions of Enclosure Space requirement based on animal size Maximum Number Animals/Enclosure Guiding Document Enclosure Composition Minimum height 7 inches Rats 20 x 10.5 = 210 in 2 8 inch height BREEDING CAGE Weight, g <100 Up to 200 Up to 300 Up to 400 Up to 500 >500 Floor Area, in 2 17 23 29 40 60  70 3 or M + F + Litter The Guide, internal SOP Polysulfone, automatic watering, open top, cage 11.5 x 12 = 138 in 2 7 inch height GREEN LINE CAGE 1 if over 500 g 2 if 400 – 500 g 3 if less than 400 g or 1 F + Litter Green Tecniplast IVC Polysulfone 14.25 x 8.25 = 118 in 2 7.25 inch height BLUE LINE CAGE Minimum height 7 inches 2 if up to 400 g 1 if over 400 g Blue Tecniplast IVC Polysulfone 17 x 10 = 170 in 2 7 inch height METABOLIC CAGE 2 Stainless Steel, wirebottom suspended, open top RATS: Primary Enclosures and Space Provisions RAT HUSBANDRY SOP: All rat cages are being changed twice a week. If the cage is clean (singled housed, newly split animals and weaned litters), LAR technician will not change such cage to avoid unnecessary animal handling.

36 LAR Historical Financial Data FY2009-FYTD December 2012 Actual Projected RevenueFY2009FY2010FY2011FY2012 FYTD December31, 2012FY2013 Internal KUMC Department Generated - (Per Diems, Recharges, & Charges for Services)$1,326,397$1,397,221$1,608,302$1,732,838$826,753$1,576,753 External Customer Generated - (Per Diems, Recharges, & Charges for Services) 61,533 120,214 60,940 59,951 74,457 105,000 Total LAR Generated Funds$1,387,930$1,517,435$1,669,242$1,792,789$901,210$1,681,753 Research Overhead Fund - Institutional Departmental Indirect 853,056 966,432 1,047,752 1,182,092 473,908 947,473 State Appropriations 116,021 172,939 320,324 495,372 245,931 489,658 Grant-Shared Equipment 24,865 1,135 Total KU & State Funds$993,942$1,140,506$1,368,076$1,677,464$719,839$1,437,131 Total Revenue$2,381,872$2,657,941$3,037,318$3,470,253$1,621,049$3,118,884 Revenue represent cash flow from Per diems - collection from services runs on average 60 days from when service provided. LAR started FY2013 with 4 external customers. As of the end of December we are down to 3. Over the last year, LAR has self funded around 54% of operations and received no outside funding for capital equipment replacement. Major maintenance repairs are addressed by KUMC facilities, but LAR must fund any outside contractor or equipment purchases required. We continue to see a slow steady decrease in animal numbers.

37 LAR Historical Financial Data FY2009-FYTD December 2012 Percent Funds received from KU & State41.73%42.91%45.04%48.34%44.41%46.08% Percent of Total Expenditures Funded by KU & State (Including funded Deficit Funds)48.81%50.73% Actual Projected ExpenditureFY2009FY2010FY2011FY2012 FYTD December31, 2012FY2013 Payroll & OT$1,498,905$1,650,451$1,820,322$1,737,949$842,822$1,685,644 Benefits375,366509,724573,013 578,616 292,943 585,886 Contractual Services82,729147,773124,767 75,733 62,040 130,645 Maintenance137,376127,129129,252 151,853 137,153 174,000 Travel5,85223,30623,476 18,887 5,149 21,180 Telephone & Networking19,37915,34119,514 23,894 12,824 26,000 Supplies527,017542,219288,352 320,972 173,313 329,525 Capital Outlay64,44263,98231,308 427,699 183,749 313,749 Total Expenditures$2,711,066$3,079,925$3,010,003$3,335,603$1,709,993$3,266,629 Ending Available (Deficit Funds)($329,194.00)($421,984.00)$27,314.76$134,650.00($88,944.00)($147,745.00) Actual Projected FY2009FY2010FY2011FY2012 FYTD December31, 2012FY2013 Note: In FY2012-FY2013, LAR invested substantial funds in upgrading facilities and equipment.

38 Upgrading LAR Facilities and Equipment FY2012-FY2013 BuildingEquipment/SystemQuantityAmount RSFAnimal Transfer Stations*4$32,703.74 RSFRacks for Non-Human Primates5$46,125 RSFIndividually Ventilated Racks with Automated Watering*13$456,809 RSFAutomated Watering Cages for Rats360$20,120.40 RSFEdstrom Automated Watering System Replacement1$149,761.99 RSFWatering System Installation1$115,305.54 RSF-Smith EastStorage Racks for Cage Wash Area22$34, 500.50 RSFClass II Type B Biochemical Hoods2$22,500.00 RSFInstallation of Biochemical Hoods1$47,000.00 RSFSound Insulation Project (Large Animal Rooms, RSF 1st Floor)1~$50,000.00 Grand Total$ 974,586.60 * Two animal transfer stations and ten individually ventilated racks were purchased from non-LAR funds. Total: ~$368,000

39 Staff InformationFY2009FY2010FY2011FY2012Dec. 2013 Projected FY2013 Payroll FTE's-Budgeted50.5 48.544.542.5 Payroll FTE's-Actual45.547.542.539.538 Revenue - LAR Animal Animal Census$1,277,332$1,460,853$1,575,431$1,572,971$815,126$1,519,669 Service & Supplies*$110,598$56,582$93,811$219,818$86,084$162,084 Total$1,387,930$1,517,435$1,669,242$1,792,789$901,210$1,681,753 Animal Cages\Billing Unit Per Month Mice - Starting in FY2011 mice billed by cage 15,816** 15,819* 4,738 4,492 4,022 Rats 1,219 757 539 432 538 Non-Human Primates 103 62 53 45 40 Other 54 11 12 14 Total 5,342 4,983 4,614 - Animal Care Days Mice - Starting in FY2011 mice billed by cage 5,783,791 5,815,573 1,733,523 1,678,360 756,065 1,479,845 Rats 445,368 276,969 206,748 179,089 103,190 206,378 Non-Human Primates 37,702 23,907 19,388 16,495 7,456 14,296 Other 35,219 4,250 4,420 5,909 2,881 7,471 Total 6,302,080 6,120,699 1,964,079 1,879,853 869,592 1,707,990 LAR Historical Financial Data FY2009-FYTD December 2012 * Re-bill of drugs & supplies was 55% in FY 2012 and 60% as of FYTD December 2012. Veterinarians billed 3.6% of their time during FY2012 and 3.4% during FYTD December 2012. Technicians billed 14.7% of their time during 2012 and 6.2% during FYTD December 2012. Balance is from charges for specific service fees as outlined on LAR's rate schedule. ** Mice (not cages)

40 Cost & Rate Analysis for FY 2012: The calculated unit cost below is based on the 2000 edition of the Cost Analysis and Rate Setting for Animal Research Facilities produced by the Cost Manual Revision Committee under the auspices of the Comparative Medicine area of the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), a component of National Institutes of Health (NIH). Cost Center Total Accumulated Costs # of Units Calculated Unit Cost Actual RateVariance *External Rate Survey Technical Activities $ 272,742.72 $ 227,868.0 44,874.72 $ - Animal Husbandry $ - 1Lamprey Fish $ - - - 2Gerbil per diem $ 2,852.34 2,334 $ 1.2221 $ 0.6500 0.5721 $ - 3Goat per diem $ 16,156.26 848 $ 19.0522 $ 12.3900 6.6622 $ - 4Hamster per diem/Outside patron $ 650.87 357 $ 1.8232 $ 1.7400 0.0832 $ 1.950 5Mice Autoclaved Box per diem $ 789,155.09 593,815 $ 1.3290 $ 0.8190 0.5100 $ - 6Mice Bio-Containment Box per diem $ 39,056.26 23,401 $ 1.6690 $ 1.0300 0.6390 $ 1.150 7Mice Conventional Box per diem $ 1,023,820.15 851,540 $ 1.2023 $ 0.7100 0.4923 $ 0.930 8Mice Diabetic Box per diem $ 11,360.29 4,729 $ 2.4023 $ 1.3400 1.0623 $ - 9Mice Germfree Box $ 1,448.10 4,670 $ 0.3101 $ - 0.3101 $ - 10Mice Outside Patron Box per diem $ 5,717.14 1,890 $ 3.0249 $ 1.8200 1.2049 $ - 11Mice Sentinel & Training $ 7,405.05 35,664 $ 0.2076 $ - 0.2076 $ - 12Mice Sterile Box per diem $ 232,505.64 158,470 $ 1.4672 $ 0.9200 0.5472 $ 0.990 13Pigtail Monkey per diem $ 23,997.90 1,451 $ 16.5389 $ 11.0700 5.4689 $ 11.430 14Rhesus per diem $ 103,604.68 6,337 $ 16.3492 $ 11.0700 5.2792 $ 11.430 15Squirrel Monkey per diem $ 122,241.94 8,631 $ 14.1631 $ 9.6200 4.5431 $ 11.430 16Rabbit per diem $ 574.07 104 $ 5.5199 $ 3.0600 2.4599 $ 3.670 17Rabbit per diem/Outside patron $ 8,301.36 775 $ 10.7114 $ 7.3500 3.3614 $ - 18Rat Autoclave per diem $ 39,953.75 34,486 $ 1.1585 $ 0.6400 0.5185 $ - 19Rat Bio-containment per diem $ 8,372.30 6,445 $ 1.2990 $ 0.7500 0.5490 $ - 20Rat Conventional per diem $ 134,638.89 124,288 $ 1.0833 $ 0.5900 0.4933 $ 0.620 21Rat Diabetic per diem $ 1,126.35 605 $ 1.8617 $ 0.8000 1.0617 $ - 22Rat per diem/Outside patron $ 13,129.02 5,974 $ 2.1977 $ 1.3800 0.8177 $ - 23Rat Sentinel & Training $ 2,566.50 10,820 $ 0.2372 $ - 0.2372 $ - 24Pig per diem/Outside patron $ 1,041.04 21 $ 49.5732 $ 28.4000 21.1732 $ - 25 $ - - - 26 $ - - - Total $ 2,862,417.73 Note: Total accumulated costs exclude cost associated with regulatory compliance, purchase of fixed assets and unallowable costs per OMB Circular A-21. *Source: Per Diem Rate Survey included the following institutions: The Ohio State University, University of Colorado Health Science Center, University of Iowa, University of Illinois-Chicago University of Kansas Medical Center, University of Kentucky, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, University of Tennessee-Memphis University of Oklahoma Health Science Center, University of Nebraska Medical Center

41 Peer Group Per Diem Rate Survey FY 2013 SPECIES ► PigDogRabbitRatMouse/SterileMouse ABSL2Guinea PigNHPHamster PER DIEM TYPE ► (per animal) (per cage 2.66)(per cage 5) (per animal) (per cage 3.8) ColoradoIowaColoradoKentuckyTennessee Kentucky $33.10$20.91$5.18$2.79$1.31$1.57$2.36$18.10$3.76 IowaKansasKentucky*Ohio StateKentucky*Ohio State Minnesota*Ohio State $22.32$16.09$5.05$2.12$1.23$1.40$2.12$13.10$2.74 KentuckyColoradoOklahomaIowaMinnesota Tennessee*Ohio StateIowa $21.42$14.63$4.64$1.73$1.10$1.40$1.96$12.06$2.62 Illinois-ChiOklahoma*Ohio StateMinnesotaOklahoma Iowa $1.95 Mean $19.70$13.07$4.39$1.70$1.09$1.32$1.85$11.66Minnesota $16.96$12.61$3.67$1.68$0.99KentuckyKansas $1.70 Median KansasMinnesotaIowaKansas $1.23$1.82$11.63Illinois-Chi $14.91$12.38$3.55$1.64$0.97$1.15OklahomaIllinois-Chi$1.48 MinnesotaIllinois-ChiKansasColorado*Ohio StateKansas$1.81$11.55UNMC $14.00$11.13$3.21$1.60$0.95$1.08$1.80$11.43$1.46 Oklahoma*Ohio StateUNMC ColoradoIllinois-ChiColoradoUNMCTennessee KUMC $13.58$10.76$3.14$1.38$0.94$1.02$1.75$9.12$1.24 2013 Ranking *Ohio StateKentuckyMinnesotaOklahomaUNMC MinnesotaOklahoma $12.39$10.45$2.84$1.31$0.93$0.96$1.60$8.09$0.62 TennesseeUNMCIllinois-ChiTennesseeIllinois-ChiColoradoUNMCTennesseeColorado $9.70$9.12$2.77$1.30$0.80$0.94$1.41$7.59No Rate UNMCTennessee Illinois-ChiIowa Illinois-ChiColoradoKansas $9.22$7.67$1.97$1.25$0.59 $1.35No Rate The Ohio State University, University of Colorado Health Science Center, University of Iowa, University of Kansas Medical Center, University of Kentucky, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, University of Tennessee-Memphis, University of Illinois-Chicago, University of Oklahoma Health Science Center, University of Nebraska Medical Center Participants: *The Ohio State University will adjust rates in October, 2012

42 Information Needed For Study Budget Estimate LAR will not prepare a budget estimate if PI presents only study design described in the ACUP. PI should prepare detailed study flow chart/plan. Supplies Animals Labor Housing Equipment Price list of PPE, drugs, and expendables is posted on LAR website Note: For example, the budget estimate for study is about ~42,000. This is the best approximation of the costs involved for LAR to support the study. Studies usually do not go as planned and contingencies should be built into study budget. If investigator decides to change the original study design, the study budget estimate should not be relied upon when submitting to funding agency.

43 Example Of Study Budget Estimate

44 Example Of Study Budget Estimate (cont.)

45

46

47 LAR Budget Estimate Agreement for Biotechnical Services I __________________________________(PI name) have read the budget estimate provided by LAR for the animal study slated to begin approximately (date) __________________ and end approximately (date)________________under ACUP#_____________. I understand that this is the best approximation of the costs needed for LAR to support my study. While the fixed prices for labor (technical service rates) and supplies (supply price list) and animal housing (per diem rate) have been provided, I also understand that the costs may differ (actual cost may be higher or lower than initial estimate) based on and not limited to the actual time needed to complete various services provided by LAR and the actual number of supplies needed for the procedures. Additionally, if animals suffer post-operative complications, there will be additional costs associated with the labor and supplies needed to perform treatments and observation to address those complications. If on-going or intense technical support is needed, it may be more cost-effective to hire a dedicated technical support person for my laboratory. I have also discussed details related to animal caging needed for this study, and I am satisfied with the caging supplied by LAR for this particular study. Provisions of LAR Biotechnical Services: Biotechnical services are provided by LAR on an ‘as available’ basis without warranties of any kind, either expressed or implied (For example, if an LAR employee, who provides technical support for the study, gets sick or resigns, there may be resulting delays for the study. However, LAR and the lab may work together to procure replacements for such staffing positions). LAR will not issue credits for lab animals that are not suitable for study. LAR will make every effort to ensure animals are healthy prior to shipment into LAR facilities. Furthermore, if animals are deemed unhealthy or unsuitable upon arrival, with input from the lab, LAR may seek animal replacements from the animal vendor. However, no such replacements are guaranteed Also, LAR will not issue credits for services (i.e. per diem accrual) due to decisions made by the lab. (For example, if a lab chooses to delay procedure in order to work with a specific LAR staff member when an adequate alternative staff member is available, LAR will not be responsible for the additional per diems associated with the study delay). If the PI is dissatisfied with LAR technical service or any terms, guidelines, or practices, the sole and exclusive remedy is to discontinue using the services. If the investigator decides to change the original study design, this budget estimate is automatically invalid and should not be used for submission to funding agency. ___________________________________________________ Signature of PI/InvestigatorDate


Download ppt "RSF Animal Facility Manu Sharma, PE Facilities Management."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google