Commissioners                                             Tay Yoshitani 
Chief Executive Officer 
Tom Albro 
Commission President 
Stephanie Bowman                   P.O. Box 1209 
Bill Bryant                           Seattle, Washington 98111 
John Creighton                      www.portseattle.org 
Courtney Gregoire                      206.787.3000 
APPROVED MINUTES 
COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JULY 9, 2013 
The Port of Seattle Commission met in a regular meeting Tuesday, July 9, 2013, at Port of Seattle
Headquarters, Commission Chambers, 2711 Alaskan Way, Seattle,Washington. Commissioners 
Albro, Bowman, Bryant, Creighton, and Gregoire  were present.  Commissioner Creighton
participated by telephone. 
1.   CALL TO ORDER 
The regular meeting was called to order at 12:02 p.m. by Tom Albro, Commission President. 
2.   EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to RCW 42.30.110 
The regular meeting was immediately recessed to an executive session estimated to last
approximately one hour to discuss matters relating to legal risk and potential litigation. 
At 1:05 p.m., the Commission Clerk announced on behalf of the Commission President that the
executive session would be extended until 1:15 p.m. to finish consideration of the matters
previously announced. 
Following the executive session, which lasted approximately 70 minutes, the regular meeting
reconvened in open public session at 1:23 p.m. 
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 
3.   APPROVAL OF MINUTES 
Minutes available for approval are included in the Unanimous Consent Calendar. 
4.   SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS 
None. 
5.   UNANIMOUS CONSENT CALENDAR 
[Clerk's Note: Items on the Unanimous Consent Calendar are considered routine and are not
individually discussed. Port Commissioners receive the request documents prior to the meeting
and may remove items from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion and vote in accordance
with Commission bylaws.] 

Digital recordings of the meeting proceedings and meeting materials are available online  www.portseattle.org.







PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                   Page 2 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
5a.  Approval of the minutes of the June 4, 2013, regular meeting. 
5b.  Approval of the claims and obligations of the period June 1, 2013, through June 30,
2013, including accounts payable checks nos. 813518 through 814501 in the amount of
$26,072,127.34 and payroll checks nos. P-174607 through P-174765 in the amount of
$7,853,872.06 for a fund total of $33,925,999.40.
5c.  Authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to complete design for the rehabilitation of
100 feet of the Shilshole Bay Marina Central Seawall for an amount not to exceed
$202,000. The total project cost is approximately $901,000. 
Request document(s) provided by Darlene Robertson, Director, Harbor Services, Real Estate
Division; Tracy McKendry, Senior Manager, Recreational Boating Facilities; and Mark Longridge,
Capital Project Manager, Capital Development Division:
Commission agenda memorandum dated July 1, 2013. 
Presentation slides. 
5d.  Authorization to (1) proceed with the Marine Energy Efficiency Project; (2) spend up to
$100,000 for an energy audit for the project; and (3) for the Chief Executive Officer to
advertise and execute an energy savings performance-based contract, as defined in
Chapter 39.35A RCW. 
Request document(s) provided by Joe McWilliams, Managing Director, Real Estate, and Paul
Meyer, Manager, Seaport Environmental: 
Commission agenda memorandum dated June 28, 2013. 
5e.  Authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to execute a contract to provide elevator
and escalator maintenance and repair services at the Seattle-Tacoma International
Airport for up to five years in an amount not to exceed $15,000,000. 
Request document(s) provided by John Christianson, General Manager Aviation Maintenance: 
Commission agenda memorandum dated June 28, 2013. 
5f.   Authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to authorize design of the Airport Fiber to
Backstands project and the purchase of supporting technology and equipment.  This
authorization is for $789,000 out of a total estimated project cost of $3,284,000. 
Request document(s) provided by Michael Ehl, Director, Airport Operations, and Wayne Grotheer,
Director, Aviation Project Management: 
Commission agenda memorandum dated June 28, 2013. 
5g.  Authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to proceed with design and preparation of
construction documents for the Fishermen's Terminal C-2Nordby Building HVAC and
Roof Replacement Project for an estimated cost of $223,000, bringing the current
authorization for this project to $298,000 for a total estimated project cost of
$2,001,000.





PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                   Page 3 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
Request document(s) provided by Rod Jackson, Capital Project Manager, Capital Development,
and Rebecca Schwan, Real Estate Manager, Portfolio and Asset Management:
Commission agenda memorandum dated July 1, 2013. 
5h.  Authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to execute an indefinite delivery, indefinite
quantity contract for survey and mapping services totaling $300,000 with a contract
ordering period of three years, in support of various programs at the Port of Seattle.
There is no budget request associated with this authorization. 
Request document(s) provided by Tina Soike, Director, Engineering Services, and Garry Ensley,
Manager, Survey and Mapping Services: 
Commission agenda memorandum dated June 26, 2013. 
Motion for approval of consent items 5a, 5b, 5c, 5d, 5e, 5f, 5g, and 5h  Bryant 
Second  Gregoire 
Motion carried by the following vote: 
In Favor: Albro, Bowman, Bryant, Creighton, Gregoire (5) 
PUBLIC TESTIMONY 
As noted on the agenda, public comment was received from the following individual(s): 
Brenda NNambi, Director, Office of Equal Opportunity for the Washington Department of
Transportation (WSDOT). Ms. NNambi commented on the importance and quality of the
disparity study conducted by BBC Research and Consulting for WSDOT. She described
the role of the disparity study in bolstering WSDOT's defense of its Disadvantaged
Business Enterprise program that required race- and gender-conscious programs. 
Without the disparity study, WSDOT would have had to implement a completely raceand
gender-neutral program. 
Leslie Jones, Director of Diversity Programs for Sound Transit. Ms. Jones commented
on Sound Transit's disparity study conducted by BBC Research and Consulting in
coordination with its study for WSDOT.
Darin Lang, President, ATZ Inc. Mr. Lang spoke in support of agenda items 6d and 6e,
relating to a lease and improvements at the Doug Fox Parking Lot with ATZ Inc. He
noted his intention to divest his interest in ShuttlePark2 and clarified that neither he nor
anyone related to him would have an interest in ShuttlePark2, which competes with the
Doug Fox Lot. He described the challenges facing competitiveness of the lot and
encouraged adoption of the lease and provision of infrastructure and signage
improvements at the site. Mr. Lang submitted letters from ATZ on this subject dated
May 28, 2013 and July 2, 2013. Copies of the letters are, by reference, made a part of
these minutes, are marked Exhibit A and Exhibit B, respectively, and are available for
inspection in Port offices.


PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                   Page 4 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
6.       DIVISION, CORPORATE, AND COMMISSION ACTION ITEMS 
6a.  Request the Commission to (1) enable sole-source selection of BBC Research and
Consulting to conduct a disparity study of Port contracting by exercising the
Commission's authority under RCW 53.19.020(5); and (2) authorize the Chief Executive
Officer to enter into a consulting contract with BBC to conduct the study for an amount
not to exceed $300,000. 
Request document(s) provided by Ralph Graves, Managing Director, Capital Development, and
Luis Navarro, Director, Office of Social Responsibility:
Commission agenda memorandum dated June 28, 2013. 
Presenter(s): Mr. Navarro and Mian Rice, Small Business Program Manager. 
The Commission received a presentation that included the following relevant information: 
The Office of Social Responsibility (OSR) is responsible for implementation and tracking
of the Port's small business programs. This includes work to achieve the Century
Agenda goal of 40 percent spending with qualified small business firms on Port-procured
construction services and goods and services.  OSR also implements the federal
Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program for the Port. The federal DBE
program is regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) and Port
participation is required for recipients of funding from the U.S. DOT. 
Title 49, Part 26, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) governs the DBE program and
requires the Port to ensure access to DBE firms and provide support to DBE and non-
DBE firms applying for Port contracts. Less than ten percent of projects at the Port are
federally assisted. 
In addition, OSR  manages the implementation and tracking of the Port's Small
Contractors and Suppliers program. OSR tracks participation in Port contracting and
procurement of all other small businesses that are within the U.S. Small Business
Administration's size standards. 
In 2012, 35 percent of Port spending on Port-procured construction services and goods
and services was with qualified small businesses. 
The Port does not have reliable data on which segments of the small business
community fail to benefit from Port contracts in proportion to their availability or benefit
disproportionately well from Port contracts relative to their availability. Participation by
women- and minority-owned businesses is of particular interest. A disparity study will
provide statistically sound data to provide this information. 
The main purpose for the Port to conduct a disparity study is to inform and modify if
necessary the Port's DBE program and the existing small business program outreach
effort relating to underutilized women- and minority-owned businesses. 
The use of race-conscious remedies for any disparity or discrimination that might be
revealed by a disparity study will be limited to federally funded contracts. All other locally
funded contracts and procurements are subject to the provisions of Initiative 200.
Passed in 1998, Initiative 200 prohibits government entities  in Washington  from
discriminating or granting preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or
national origin.


PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                   Page 5 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
The disparity study methodology was described.  It will focus on construction and
construction-related professional services.   Federally funded and locally funded
contracts will be reviewed. Results will inform implementation of appropriate measures
in the Port's DBE and small business programs. 
A disparity study typically costs about $500,000 to $1,000,000. Leveraging the data
already collected for WSDOT and Sound Transit by BBC Research and Consulting will
reduce the cost considerably. The study is expected to take ten months to complete
from the date of execution of a contract.
Staff is requesting $300,000 for the disparity study. Since the item was not included in
the 2013 budget, funds are requested for this use from contingency funding. Costs
incurred in 2014 will be budgeted in the Office of Social Responsibility. 
In response to Commissioner Albro, Mr. Navarro reported that ethnicity in contracting is not
currently tracked in the Port's small business program, although the ability to do so exists. He
noted that tracking relies on the information provided by consultants and prime contractors about
subcontractors. Commissioner Albro commented on the importance of collecting this information in
order to measure progress in encouraging suppliers of all types to participate in Port contracts. 
In response to Commissioner Albro, Mr. Navarro noted that the scope of a disparity study
conducted relative to CFR 49 Part 26, relating to construction-related contracts, does not include
the particular analysis required under CFR 49 Part 23, which covers Airport concessions. Mr. Rice
added that there would be a different methodology for analyzing Airport concessions.
Commissioner Albro requested information about expanding the disparity study scope to include
analysis of Airport concessions. Commissioner Gregoire noted the difference in scope, and asked
for additional information on what the scope would be for a disparity study that takes into
consideration Airport concessions. 
In response to Commissioner Creighton, Mr. Navarro confirmed that construction-related contracts
port-wide, including at the Airport and Seaport, would be included in the disparity study. 
Motion for approval of item 6a  Gregoire 
Second  Bowman 
Motion carried by the following vote: 
In Favor: Albro, Bowman, Bryant, Creighton, Gregoire (5) 
6b.  Authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to execute a contract with Northwest
Center, consistent with RCW 39.23, to provide janitorial services at Pier 69, for a total
amount of $1,017,125, for a five-year term. 
Request document(s) provided by Joe McWilliams, Managing Director, Real Estate Division, and
Ralph Graves, Managing Director, Capital Development Division: 
Commission agenda memorandum dated June 28, 2013. 
Presenter(s): Nick Milos, Manager, Corporate Facilities.




PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                   Page 6 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
The Commission received a presentation that included the following relevant information: 
RCW 39.23 encourages purchase by municipalities of services from sheltered
workshops, which serve handicapped and disadvantaged workers. 
Northwest Center is a sheltered workshop that has provided janitorial services at Pier 69
since 2008.
Competitively bidding the contract and using Port labor were also considered as
alternatives to contracting with the Northwest Center. Contracting with Northwest Center
was determined by staff as a means of providing cost-effective janitorial services while
also providing workforce development consistent with the mission of the Northwest
Center. 
Northwest Center was founded in 1965 and provides workforce opportunities for adults
with developmental disabilities. 
Services purchased with sheltered workshops by municipalities must be at fair market
price.  Northwest Center has disclosed its detailed pricing model in the process of
establishing fair market value.  This model includes prevailing wages, benefits, and
overhead expenses. 
Past janitorial services from the Northwest Center have been exceptional. 
Motion for approval of item 6b  Bryant 
Second  Gregoire 
Motion carried by the following vote: 
In Favor: Albro, Bowman, Bryant, Gregoire (4) 
Absent for the vote: Creighton 
6c.  Authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to prepare design and construction bid
documents for the replacement of approximately 70,100 square feet of roof systems
located on the Concourse D of the terminal building at Seattle-Tacoma International
Airport for an amount not to exceed $530,000 of a total estimated project cost of
$3,727,000. 
Request document(s) provided by Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group,
and David Soike, Director, Aviation Facilities and Capital Program: 
Commission agenda memorandum dated June 28, 2013. 
Passenger terminal diagram. 
Presentation slides. 
Presenter(s): Mr. Soike and Mr. Grotheer. 
The Commission received a presentation that included the following relevant information: 
There are multiple roofing systems on different parts of the Airport. 
Despite 10-to-15-year warranties, staff works to extend the life of roofing systems
through thorough routine inspection. The roofing systems to be replaced are currently
about 20-25 years old.




PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                   Page 7 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
The budget anticipated for the work a year ago will not cover the construction cost due to
assumptions in the prior bids on which cost forecasts were based. Instead of work over
large open areas of roof as in prior bids, the systems currently planned for replacement
have multiple obstructions including pre-conditioned air conduit, skylights, and other
obstructions common on the D Concourse. 
Another factor affecting increased cost is the need to install fixed safety ladders for
access on the roof at Concourse D. 
Work on roofs on Concourse C will encounter similar obstructions as on Concourse D.
The budget for this work, which will not be scheduled for a couple of years, will be
adjusted ahead of time to reflect the different conditions. 
Opportunities for energy efficiency arising during the design phase will be considered. 
Motion for approval of item 6c  Gregoire 
Second  Bowman 
Motion carried by the following vote: 
In Favor: Albro, Bowman, Bryant, Creighton, Gregoire (5) 
6d.  Authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to execute a lease substantially as drafted
in Exhibit 1 with ATZ Inc. for a term of five years, with two five-year extension options
upon mutual agreement, for operation of the parking facility commonly known as the
Doug Fox Parking Lot located north of South 170th Street and east of the Northern
Airport Expressway in the City of SeaTac. 
[Clerk's Note: This item was previously considered as agendaitem 6a on June 4, 2013, at which
time further consideration and final action were deferred.] 
Request document(s) provided by James R. Schone, Director, Aviation Business Development,
and Jeff Wolf, Manager, Aviation Business Development and Analysis: 
Commission agenda memorandum dated July 2, 2013. 
Draft lease and concession agreement. 
Presentation slides. 
Presenter(s): Mr. Schone and Mr. Wolf. 
The Commission received a presentation that included the following relevant information: 
Important components of the lease include a term of five years with two five-year options;
minimum annual guaranteed revenue to the Port beginning at $1.5 million and increasing
to $2.8 million in the second year; inclusion of a concession fee beginning at 55 percent
and increasing in the second year to 63 percent; assessment of a shuttle trip fee for
shuttles bringing passengers from the lot to the terminal that is bundled into the concession
fee and not separately assessed; and inclusion of a clause preventing the operator from
owning or operating a competing lot within three miles of the facility or the Airport. 
Anticipated revenue from the lease is dependent on approval of the improvements
described in agenda item 6e.

PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                   Page 8 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
Responses to questions asked during the presentation of June 4, 2013: 
The request for proposal was advertised broadly in June 2012 in prominent local
publications and industry-specific publications. 
Staff analysis indicated the best return to the Port if the facility was operated by a private
entity. 
Six firms responded with questions or attendance at the pre-proposal conference. Of
these six, only ATZ currently operates a competing facility with three miles of the Doug
Fox Lot. 
The three-mile radius was selected for the area in which the operator could not have a
competing financial interest based on the radius in which competing firms currently
operate parking and shuttle services to the Airport. The purpose of the non-competition
clause was intended to ensure that the operator would have the best interest of the Doug
Fox Lot and its concessions revenue to the Port as a priority. 
Two proposals were submitted in response to the request for proposal, and only one of
these met the minimum financial return to the Port identified in the request for proposal. 
During the past two years, occasionally similar requests for proposal have received only
two or three responders. 
The best near-term alternative uses for the Doug Fox Lot site are for a hotel or air-crew
lodging facility combined with office space and parking. 
As noted in public testimony, Darin Lang has agreed in writing to divest himself of
interest in ATZ competitor ShuttlePark2, in accordance with the non-competition clause
of the lease agreement. 
Commissioner Gregoire noted that it is not common for the Port to receive only one eligible bid
during a request-for-proposal process, as demonstrated by its occurrence only 14 times out of 162
contract solicitations in 2012. Commissioner Bowman noted her interest in providing opportunities
for multiple businesses to bid on Port contracts. 
Motion for approval of item 6d  Gregoire 
Second  Bowman 
Motion carried by the following vote: 
In Favor: Albro, Bowman, Bryant, Creighton, Gregoire (5) 
6e.  Authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to:  (1) advertise, award, and execute a
major public works contract for the construction of the Doug Fox Parking Lot Service
Upgrades Project in the amount of $3,322,000 for construction, construction
management, project management, and other soft costs; and (2) execute a Developer
Extension Agreement with the Valley View Sewer District to connect to a sewer pipeline
within the South 170th Street right-of-way.  This amount is in addition to $1,796,000
previously authorized for a total project cost of $5,118,000. 
[Clerk's Note: This item was previously considered as agenda item 6b on June 4, 2013, at which
time further consideration and final action were deferred.]





PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                   Page 9 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
Request document(s) provided by James R. Schone, Director, Aviation Business Development,
and George England, Program Leader, Aviation Project Management: 
Commission agenda memorandum dated July 1, 2013. 
Presentation slides. 
There was no presentation at this time. The Port Commissioners received a presentation on the
request during its consideration on June 4, 2013, and the request documents were distributed for
review prior to the meeting of July 9, 2013. 
Motion for approval of item 6e  Bowman 
Second  Gregoire 
Motion carried by the following vote: 
In Favor: Albro, Bowman, Bryant, Creighton, Gregoire (5) 
7.   STAFF BRIEFINGS 
7a.  Update on Planning for the Sea-Tac Airport International Arrivals Facility. 
Presentation  document(s)  provided by Elizabeth Leavitt, Director Aviation Planning and 
Environmental Programs, and Wayne Grotheer, Director Aviation Project Management:
Commission agenda memorandum dated June 28, 2013. 
Presentation slides. 
Presenter(s): Ms. Leavitt, Mr. Grotheer, and Borgan Anderson, Senior Manager, Aviation Finance
and Budget. 
The Commission received a presentation that included the following relevant information: 
Century Agenda objectives supported by a new International Arrivals facility were noted. 
International passengers at the Airport are expected to grow 3.5 percent annually, higher
than the expected growth in domestic passengers. There are currently 18 non-stop
intercontinental service locations served by flights from the Airport.  International
passengers have increased 54 percent since 2004, and growth of passengers during the
midday peak is 116 percent. 
The existing arrivals facility is outdated and remote, provides a poor customer
experience, and has reached its passenger capacity. Passengers have to be held on
board aircraft or in a secured corridor on an increasing basis due to capacity issues at
the current arrivals facility. 
Delays in processing international passengers affect domestic flights, since many
international passengers connect to domestic flights after their arrival at the Airport. 
Seattle-Tacoma International Airport lags  behind  West-Coast competitors, such as
Vancouver International Airport, Los Angeles International Airport, and San Francisco
International Airport, which have made or are preparing to make improvements to their
international arrivals facilities that threaten Seattle's market share. In particular,

PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                  Page 10 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
Vancouver, B.C., has a ten-year, $1.8 billion strategy to target U.S. passengers bound
for international destinations. 
Problems anticipated without construction of an improved arrivals facility include
additional passengers held on board aircraft, the need to bus passengers from remote
hardstands, backups at primary Customs checkpoints, lack of baggage claim capacity,
exceeding checkpoint queue space, exceeding satellite transit system capacity, missed
connections for international passengers to domestic flights, and increased aircraft
towing for aircraft that arrive and depart from different gates. 
There is a need for modest improvements to the existing facility during construction of a
new facility, together with design and planning of a new facility with the goal of
completion in 2018. Planning steps for a new facility were summarized. 
Short-term improvements for the existing arrivals facility were summarized, including
reconfiguring checkpoints, additional elevators, improved way-finding, and modifications
to the public address system. 
Staff is working closely with Delta Air Lines and the Airport/Airline Affairs Committee in
early planning for the new International Arrivals Facility. 
Options for configuration of a new International Arrivals Facility were presented.  All
options were contemplated to include gates for 17 wide-body aircraft and initial 
throughput of 1,800 passengers per hour growing to peak-hour throughput of 2,600
passengers per peak hour over a 20-year period. 
The options were narrowed from four to two possibilities in April 2013. Option 1 includes
arrivals of international flights on the South Satellite and Concourse A, connected by a
bridge or tunnel, and processing of international passengers in facilities on Concourse A.
Option 4 includes arrivals of international flights on the South Satellite and Concourse A,
connected by a bridge or tunnel, and dual processing of passengers in facilities on
Concourse A and at the South Satellite. 
Option 1 is estimated to cost between $250 million and $300 million. 
Option 4 is estimated to cost between $335 million and $405 million. 
Common to either option is a large new facility adjacent to Concourse A. Construction of
either option is a multi-year project requiring assembly of a major capital project team. 
Resources will be needed for program and project management, similar to the
NorthSTAR program. 
A variety of funding sources will be identified for the project, which will be a separate
cost center. 
The preliminary project schedule begins after July project authorization with project
planning and definition in 2013, additional authorization for building design in early 2014,
project design in 2014 and 2015, construction authorization in 2015, and construction
between 2015 and 2018. 
The July authorization request will cover initial project funding, alternative project
delivery, and procurement of program and project management support. 
Additional remaining steps include state approval of the alternative project delivery
method, recommendation of a preferred alternative, and environmental review. 
The costs for the new facility will be charged to the airlines that use it. Costs funded
through passenger facility charges or grants are not recovered from the airlines.




PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                  Page 11 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
Commissioner Bryant noted that adequate staffing by Customs and Border Protection also affects
the capacity of the International Arrivals Facility.  Commissioner Gregoire requested more
information on the Airport's ranking with Customs and Border Protection for receipt of additional
staffing or other resources that would affect international passenger throughput. 
Commissioner Creighton requested staff consider a panel on lessons learned by other airports
building new international arrivals facilities to inform the Port's project. 
Commissioner Albro noted the importance to business, universities, and tourism of the
International Arrivals Facility. He asked that design of the facility be driven by factors that improve
the Airport's competitiveness with other international airports. 
7b.  Briefing on Alternative Public Works Contracting. 
Presentation document(s) provided by Ralph Graves, Managing Director, Capital Development
Division:
Commission agenda memorandum dated June 27, 2013. 
Project delivery method charts. 
Presentation slides. 
Presenter(s): Mr. Graves. 
The Commission received a presentation that included the following relevant information: 
Design/Bid/Build 
The majority of Port construction projects are accomplished using a traditional and wellrecognized
design/bid/build methodology in which an owner contracts for design and
preparation of construction documents. Following design, general contractors bid to
build the project. Often, the lowest bidder is awarded the contract and builds the project
with assistance from subcontractors and suppliers. 
Advantages to the design/bid/build method include that it is common and well
understood and that it is often less expensive to prepare a lump-sum bid than a proposal
package common to other project delivery methods. Responsibility or responsiveness
criteria are used more to filter out contractors lacking qualifications to successfully
perform the work than to establish the bid with the best value. 
Multiple procurements and selection of a separate designer and contractor tend to
lengthen the schedule of work under design/bid/build methodology. The builder does not
participate in the project design, so the builder's expertise is lacking from the design
phase. Errors and omissions in design become the risk of the owner. 
Other project delivery methods are available under state law. 
General Contractor/Construction Manager 
In the general contractor/construction manager methodology, the owner contracts for
design and proceeds to obtain a general contractor at an earlier stage based primarily on
qualifications. The general contractor functions in this model as an additional consultant 
on design of the project. Near the end of design, the owner and general contractor

PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                  Page 12 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
negotiate to establish a maximum allowable construction cost. The risk for costs above
this threshold is assumed by the general contractor. Subcontracts are then competitively
bid.  Under this methodology, some construction activities may commence prior to
completion of design. 
The relationship of builder to designer is similar in general contractor/construction
manager methodology to design/bid/build methodology. Risks for errors and omissions
are borne by the owner. 
Lump-Sum Design/Build 
The lump-sum design/build methodology involves an owner beginning very preliminary
design, usually about 15 percent, and then issuing a request for proposal. A team of
designer and builder bid to complete design and construct the project for a lump sum.
Construction of some aspects of the project may commence prior to completion of
design.
Lump-sum design/build involves a single procurement and provides more opportunity to
expedite the project than general contractor/construction manager methodology. The
value of the lump-sum bid is usually dependent on the expectation of being able to work 
quickly to complete the project.
A risk to the owner in this method is that design changes will extend the performance
period of the contract and cost the owner significantly more than the lump sum that was
bid by the design/build team. 
Price-Factors Design/Build 
In 2013, the Washington Legislature renewed the authority to use alternative contracting
methods and introduced an alternative new to the state of Washington referred to here
as price-factors design/build. 
In the price-factors design/build methodology, the design/build team may be hired prior
to establishing the complete lump-sum cost of the project. The team is selected based
on qualifications, best value, and price factors such as profit/overhead rates and general
conditions work. In this methodology, a project can be expedited and be bid with even
less design than in the lump-sum design/build methodology. It can potentially reduce the
risk of bidding for a lump sum on a project with only 15-percent design completed. Of
the four methods, this one has the greatest potential to compress the design and
construction schedule for a project. 
Price-factors design/build involves negotiation focused on estimating costs, but provides
less price risk for the builder and more opportunity for the owner to guide design. 
Price-factors design/build methodology is new to Washington state, but has been
practiced elsewhere. 
General Information on Alternative Project Delivery 
The appropriateness of a particular project delivery method is dependent on differing
priorities and types of projects. 
Examples of design/build and general contractor/construction manager approaches to
Port projects over the years were provided for reference. 
Federal funding may attach conditions to an alternative project delivery method.

PORT COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES                  Page 13 of 13 
TUESDAY, JULY 9, 2013 
Use of alternative project delivery methods requires approval by a state project review
committee or certification to perform projects using alternative methods. 
Due to the importance of scheduling in the International Arrivals Facility project, staff
recommends using price-factors design/build methodology as a project delivery method.
Other factors considered were cost, quality and aesthetics, implementation risks, and
stakeholder involvement. 
Statistics on cost growth using the price-factors design/build methodology are ambiguous. 
There is a risk in not appropriately outlining the contract terms. Staff intends to use
consultants and leverage experience with the elevators/escalators project to mitigate this
risk. Another risk is in changes to design.
On July 23, 2013, staff plans to request authorization to use price-factors design/build
methodology to build the new International Arrivals Facility. 
Commissioner Albro emphasized the need to use the process that results in the most productive
facility, rather than focus strictly on schedule. 
8.   NEW BUSINESS 
None. 
9.   POLICY ROUNDTABLE 
None. 
10.  ADJOURNMENT 
There being no further business, the regular meeting was adjourned at 3:10 p.m. 

Bill Bryant 
Assistant Secretary 
Minutes approved: August 6, 2013.