25A-185 (73) ` February 14, 2001 Page 3
Meeting No. 010
We are proceeding on information contained herein. Please advise the writer immediately of any
misunderstandings, omissions or clarifications.
Respectfully submitted,
PROCESS FACILITIES INC.
Kevin M. Chellman
Project Plumbing/Fire Protection Engineer
cc: Attendees
Jerry Goodsell, Minute Maid
Mike Hogan
Andrea Fisher
Peter Elliott
File
J116040\Minutes\16040 MM 0IO.doc
February 14, 2001 Page 2
Meeting No. 010
10.8 Mr. Patillo then asked if PFI was planing any further changes to the drawings. PFI stated
that at this time no changes were being considered, but that the Town would be notified
and sent any future changes.
10.9 Mr. Patillo then asked if PFI had performed any calculations for the hanger loads. PFI to
forward the calculations for the capacity of the joists.
10.10 Mr. Mazeski then asked Tim Elliott some questions on the routing and installation of the
supply feeds to the new boiler. All were satisfied that the drawings illustrated the
connection points.
10.11 Mr. Mazeski and Mr. Patillo expressed confusion over the disjointed submittal of the
drawings. PFI explained that due to the fast track nature of the project certain sections,
that could be done ahead of others, were broken out from the main contract to speed up
installation and final job completion.
10.12 Mr. Mazeski stated that several inspection had already been made and that the project
was exceeding the normal amount of inspections done for this kind of project. It was
agreed that the final permit cost would reflect the additional visits. (Mr. Mazeski stated
that a preliminary estimate would put the permit cost at about $400 dollars. If more visits
than were estimated (12) were required there would be a further charge for the permit. )
10.13 Mr. Mazeski then stated that he had not seen any permit applications for the backflow
devices or the high pressure gas permit. PFI explained that the job was still at the Bid
stage and that as soon as the job was awarded the plumbing contractor was aware that he
must file for the permits as soon as possible.
Post meeting note:
After the meeting with the town, Minute Maid informed PFI that the hose stations would be
removed from their contract. Minute Maid has engaged a plumbing contractor to install the hose
stations outside the new pouch area and felt it would be easier for coordination purposes to have
one contractor do all. Minute Maid has also requested the air compressor main loop piping
through the new work area be relocated under the new mezzanine. PFI has agreed to take care of
these items.
. a
THE MINUTE MAID COMPANY
POUCH LINE ADDITION
PFI PROJECT NO. 16040
MINUTES OF MEETING NO. 010
DATE: February 14, 2001
ATTENDEES: Town Inspectors PFI
Charles Mazeski Hemant Mehta
` Harry Geiselman
George'' ier Tim Elliott
Kevin Chellman
Vicki McCourt
GENERAL: Review Drawing, Code and Pipe Designation Issues
LOCATION: Building Inspector's Office, Northampton, MA
10.1 The meeting was held with the Town of Northampton Plumbing Inspector (Charles
Mazeski), Building Inspector (Antony Patillo) and Electrical Inspector (George
Fournier). Due to the amount of people present at this meeting, the location was moved
to the Town Council Board Room.
10.2 PFI apologized that due to the short notice of the meeting that the Electrical Engineer was
unable to attend, but could be reached by phone if necessary.
10.3 Mr. Mazeski then started the meeting with a background on the differences between
Process Water and Potable Water. All in attendance agreed with the definition.
10.4 The location of the larger back flow protectors (2 in the equipment area and one (1) in the
loading dock area) were discussed and agreed they were in proper locations.
10.5 Mr. Mazeski insisted that the piping from these devices be properly marked and the
equipment and piping should be visible from the back flow devices. It was agreed that
the drawings showed the devices to be in close proximity to the equipment connected to
and the piping was visible and adequate markings would be provided.
10.6 Mr. Mazeski then stated that all devices and equipment in the work area shall have a
backflow device. Even the equipment with built in air gaps and hose stations with
vacuum breakers shall have a Watts 9D backflow device on each supply connection to
the equipment.
10.7 It was then agreed that the letter content shall deal with the `Process Water' issue only.
PFI to write the letter, forward first draft copies to Minute Maid and Mr. Mazeski for
final approval of the wording prior to a final issuance of the letter.