WPCNR EAST ENDER. By John F. Bailey. October 3, 2004: The 18-months it has taken New York Presbyterian Hospital from the time the New York Department of Environmental Conservation finalized its regulations in March 2003, to prepare and finalize plans for storm water retention pools, landscaping and environmental treatments and landscaping of its accelerator site (demanded by the city and the DEC) may have cost the hospital the competitive edge in establishing a world-class proton therapy center in White Plains.
In the time it has taken the hospital to design storm water rentention pools and get the environmental treatment of its site right in the eyes of the city, the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, the number 1 cancer treatment center in the United States, ranked by U.S. News and World Report, has been building its own 85,000 square foot proton accelerator facility. The facility, being constructed by Hitachi America, Ltd, is expected to be completed in Spring, 2006, when it is expected to open.
Groundbreaking for the M.D. Anderson facility took place in May, 2003 in The University of Texas Research Park. An M.D. Anderson news release reports it will take 12 months to construct the proton-therapy only facility building to house the proton accelerator, and an additional two years to “install, commission, integrate, and test equipment and safety systems to ensure that clinical specifications are met.” The cost of the project has not been reported.
Selected Hitachi Over Optivus – Hitachi, G.E. Bring Jing to the Table.
Hitachi America was selected over Optivus, of Los Angeles, the candidate reported by the New York Presbyterian Hospital as the firm they will be using to build the NYPH proton accelerator. Optivus, in 2001, had reported it was one of two finalists for the prestigious M.D.Anderson proton accelerator project.
Hitachi appears to be a likely attractive candidate that NYPH might consider over Optivus as the proton accelerator moves forward because Hitachi is investing its own money in the M.D. Anderson facitlity. (NYPH has declined to mention how its facility will be financed.) Hitachi describes its proton accelerator mission as creating and managing profit-making centers.
Hitachi is listed as being a member of a “ private partnership” which includes Sanders Morris Harris, a Houston investment bank; The Styles Company, a holding company formed by the partners to manage construction of the center; Varian Medical Systems, world’s leading radiotherapy supplier, which will provide software and hardware; the Houston Firefighters Relief & Retirement Fund, investing capital; IMPAC Medical Systems, a world leading health management consulting firm; the Houston Police Officers’ Pension System, capital investment; and the General Electric Company.
General Electric is described as a “financial investor,” and Hitachi is described as providing “a state-of-the-art proton therapy treatment delivery system, debt financing, and equity investment in the Proton Therapy Center.”
Earlier this week, New York Presbyterian Hospital, through a spokesperson, declined to comment on financing sources for their accelerator. It is also not known whether Optivus has been contracted for any other proton accelerator projects or considered for them since 2001.
$160 Million is About Right.
In a previous article, WPCNR reported that Hans-Udo Klein, the Managing Director of ACCEL Instruments GmbH in Gladbach, Germany, had estimated the cost of creating a cyclotron-generated proton accelerator beam as 120 Million Eurodollars, or $160 Million U.S. Dollars.
This appears right on the money, because Hitachi is reported selected by the New South Wales government of Australia to develop the Aussies’ first proton therapy center at a projected cost of $160 Million.
The Hitachi project in Houston is a synchrotron-based proton accelerator, which they tout as state-of-the art. Thedifferent from the ACCEL system which is a cyclotron-based system scheduled to be installed at the Rinecker Proton Therapy Center in Munich, Germany. Mr. Klein and the developers of the cyclotron “compact proton accelerator” inform WPCNR that the cyclotron provides a direct beam, and is technically the state of the art. WPCNR continues the development of this on-going story.
NYPH Facility at Least 5 years away.
Considering the three year construction time frame for the Houston facility, it would appear the NYPH has put itself in a competitive hole with the M.D. Anderson facility, due to its lack of efficiency in getting designs for a couple of retention pools completed.
Should the Hospital break ground Tuesday, after its anticipated site plan renewal, it still has to construction the retention pools first. Then it will most likely take three years at the least, and most likely four years to construct the proton accelerator/biomedical lab research building of 384,000 square feet. This projects, using first grade math, a completion date of 2010, if the project gets going in the middle of 2005. Construction of retention pools and access road in 2005; building start in 2006, plus 4 years.
It would appear, based on the Houston proton accerlator process now in place, that New York Presbyterian Hospital is looking at that kind of time frame: 2010 before their proton accelerator starts picking off cancer tumours.
Construction Plans of Building to Come?
Susan Habel, Commissioner of Planning, told WPCNR that she did not think any preliminary construction plans of the actual building had been submitted to the Building Department yet.
Building Commissioner Mike Gismondi did not return WPCNR calls (made twice) to confirm whether or not the hospital had submitted preliminary interior design construction plans for the project.
Habel, in an interview with Paul Wood, Acting Executive Officer in on the call, said the Department of Environmental Conservation had finalized its storm water retention regulations in March 2003. She rejected the suggestion that the hospital had “dragged its feet,” since that time, saying they had been working very hard in design of the retention pools. Asked if she had seen construction plans she said she had not, and did not know if they had been filed with the Building Department.
WPCNR asked Ms. Habel if the grounds design had changed that significantly that the interior design of the building could not be started. Habel said the question was unintelligent, because if a building was designed with one land contour, and it was changed, the plans would have to change.
For more detail about the M.D. Anderson proton accelerator, WPCNR refers CNR newsbuffs to www.mdanderson.org/featured_sites/protontherapy/display.cfm/?id=397522327-9AEE-450 and Hitachi at http://www.hitachi.us/Apps/hitachicom/content.jsp?page=PressReleases/details/Hitachi%20to%20
Note: Paul Wood, Acting Executive Officer for Mayor Delfino, said Friday that the public would have an opportunity to speak out on the Renewal Issue when it comes up for discussion at the Monday evening Council Meeting. "Absolutely," Wood said.
