COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          6d 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting     February 13, 2018 
DATE:     February 2, 2018 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Michael Ehl, Director, Airport Operations 
Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group 
SUBJECT:  Professional Service Contracts for Airfield Technical Support Services, Indefinite
Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) 
Amount of this request:                       $0 
Maximum Contract Value:            $6,000,000 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to execute four professional
services indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts for airfield technical support
services, two in the amount of $2,500,000 per contract and two in the amount of $500,000 per
contract for a total of $6,000,000, with a contract ordering period of three years in support of
upcoming airfield capital improvement projects at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. No
funding request is associated with this authorization. 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
Over the next several  years, the Port of Seattle will embark on several large capital
development programs to fulfill business goals and Century Agenda objectives.  Procuring
airfield technical support services IDIQ contracts will allow the Port to meet the needs of the
planned projects in a timely manner. 
IDIQ contracts provide the Port with the flexibility to meet business requirements as they arise
by issuing individual service directives to accomplish tasks within a general, pre-defined scope
of work on an as-needed basis for a fixed period of time and a maximum contract amount. 
JUSTIFICATION and DETAILS 
Contracts for architectural and engineering services are addressed in Chapter 39.80 RCW, which 
requires selection be based on the most highly qualified firm at a price that is considered fair
and reasonable to the agency.
As part of the solicitation, the Port will advertise and select four firms in total. Two of the four
contracts will be set aside for small businesses, and small business participation percentages

Template revised September 22, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. __6d__                              Page 2 of 3 
Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 
will be applied to all four contracts in an effort to attract participation from small and womenowned
and minority-owned businesses. 
Each contract will have an ordering period (during which the design services may be separately
authorized) of three years. The actual contract period may extend beyond three years in order
to complete the work identified in particular service directive(s).  Service directives may be
issued only during the contract ordering period.  The Port will not issue service directives in
excess of the contract value. 
Representative projects could include, but are not limited to, airfield operational analysis,
general aviation planning, aircraft parking and gate layout planning, airfield electrical system
upgrades, wildlife data analysis, refueling and fuel management systems, storm water and
Industrial Waste Sewer system evaluation, Computer Aided Drafting support services and safety
risk assessments. It is anticipated that many of these projects and other non-identified projects
will move forward for approvals based on the improvements and their timing identified to
support the Sustainable Airport Master Plan.  Each service directive will include the project
specific scope, duration and schedule associated with the work. 
Schedule 

Execute Contracts                               2018 Quarter 3 

ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1  Separate procurement for each project 
Cost Implications: $0 
Pros: 
(1)   Separate contracts would allow consulting firms multiple opportunities to compete for
each individual project. 
Cons: 
1)  This alternative would increase overhead and administrative costs to the Port as we
would need to manage more procurement processes and contracts. 
2)  This alternative would add 4 to 6 months to each project schedule to complete the
procurement process for each individual project and would impact the ability to meet
project and customer needs. 
3)  Costs to the consulting community may increase as they are responding to multiple
procurements. 

This is not the recommended alternative. 

Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. __6d__                              Page 3 of 3 
Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 

Alternative 2  Single solicitation to procure four (4) design teams, two (2) of which are small
businesses 
Cost Implications: $0 
Pros: 
(1)   Prepare a single contract with four firms for identified design needs as they arise. This
alternative would insure the Port has the necessary professional and technical
resources available to assist in time-critical evaluations and delivery of future projects. 
(2)   Two small business firms will be selected in this procurement 
(3)   This alternative would minimize the number of procurement processes necessary for
timely completion of projects and reduce overhead and administrative costs to the
Port. 
Cons: 
(1)   This alternative would limit the number of opportunities available to firms to compete
for work during the contract ordering period. 
This is the recommended alternative. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
The total estimated cost for technical support services will not exceed $6,000,000.  Two 
contracts will have a not-to-exceed threshold of $2,500,000 and two small business contracts
will have a not-to-exceed threshold of $500,000. Work is not guaranteed to the consultants
and the Port is not obligated to pay the consultant until a service directive is executed.  After
receiving authorization for each specific project in accordance with the General Delegation of
Authority, the actual scope of work will be fully defined and the Port will issue individual
project-specific service directives.  The scope and cost of the various service directives will be
separately authorized either as part of capital project authorizations or, if expense work, as part
of the annual operating budget approval. 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
None 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
None 




Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.