8b Sustainable Airport Master Plan Environmental Review budget increase Mem
COMMISSION AGENDA MEMORANDUM Item No. 8b ACTION ITEM Date of Meeting February 25, 2020 DATE: February 4, 2020 TO: Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director FROM: Arlyn Purcell, Director, Aviation Environment and Sustainability Steve Rybolt, Sr. Environmental Program Manager, Aviation Environment and Sustainability SUBJECT: Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Near-Term Projects (NTP) Environmental Review Briefing and Request for Additional Funds Amount of this request: $3,400,000 Total estimated project cost: $6,400,000 ACTION REQUESTED Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to execute an amendment to the existing Sustainable Airport Master Plan Environmental Review personal services agreement with Landrum and Brown for an increase of $3,400,000 for a new contract amount of $6,400,000. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This additional funding is being requested to complete environmental review documentation required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The additional funding will continue to support enhanced stakeholder engagement and outreach, the addition of several environmental categories requiring specialized analysis, preparation of separate NEPA and SEPA documents, and the additional time required to support these tasks. BACKGROUND Environmental review for the SAMP is a multi-year, multi-agency process that includes technical work and public engagement. The Port of Seattle (Port) is currently conducting an environmental review on a set of Near-Term Projects (NTP), which the SAMP planning team concluded in mid- 2018 were needed to meet current and expected near-term future demand, while staying within current airfield, airspace, and financial constraints. The Port completed environmental scoping, one of the first steps in a multi-step environmental review process, on September 28, 2018. Commission received a SAMP NTP environmental review update following agency and public scoping on February 26, 2019. Since the completion of Template revised January 10, 2019. COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. 8b Page 2 of 7 Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 scoping, the Port has updated the demand forecast and is now in the process of performing the environmental analysis. JUSTIFICATION The estimated cost of SAMP NTP environmental review has exceeded the initial budget and expected level of effort. There are four primary reasons for increased cost of analysis, documentation, and project management of the SAMP NTP environmental review: (1) the twoyear extension for completion of the SAMP planning process; (2) more extensive public engagement; (3) being responsive to agency and public comment from the scoping period, which requires additional analysis and associated documentation; and (4) the preparation of separate NEPA and SEPA documents. Additional information in each of these areas is noted below. Staff anticipates the $3,400,000 in additional funds will be sufficient to complete the SAMP NTP environmental review documentation. This funding will provide additional analysis, continued extensive public engagement during the release of the draft documents, and to complete the NEPA and SEPA work. The environmental review will be done under the existing contract, led by Landrum & Brown, a consultancy firm specializing in environmental review. Planning work extension and advanced planning coordination. The original SAMP Environmental Review personal service agreement was authorized by Commission on November 10, 2015 and a contract was awarded on April 27, 2016. Work began immediately as the schedule anticipated that SAMP planning would be completed by the end of 2016. The planning work extended until the middle of 2018 to complete additional airfield modeling and coordination with FAA. As a result, much of the environmental review work completed during this time had to be substantially updated when the NTP environmental review was initiated in 2018. Additionally, advanced planning has been conducted to further validate SAMP planning assumptions, requiring additional support of the Landrum & Brown team. Expanded scoping process and extensive stakeholder engagement and community outreach. Scoping for the NEPA Environmental Assessment (EA) and SEPA Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was expanded significantly to create greater opportunities for meaningful input. The expanded activities included a 30-day extension of the public comment period, four public open houses, an online open house, a robust outreach program to alert individuals of scoping and the comment period, providing documentation in five languages, reviewing several thousand comments, and producing a Scoping Report. The revised budget assumes continuation of this level of engagement and outreach. Additional technical analysis. Scoping identified additional areas of study to be analyzed and documented, including updating the demand forecast, and additional analysis within selected NEPA resource categories and elements of the environment within SEPA. The analyses include dispersion modeling for air quality, human health analysis, an Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting). COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. 8b Page 3 of 7 Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 environmental justice investigation, a review of current knowledge on aircraft noise exposure, an enhanced assessment of greenhouse gas emissions, a review of current knowledge on ultrafine particulate matter, and analysis of a larger transportation study area. These efforts require additional time for analysis and documentation, specialized expertise, and coordination with appropriate governmental agencies. Separation of NEPA and SEPA processes. The FAA and the Port have agreed that NEPA and SEPA would be best served by preparing two separate documents: a NEPA Environmental Assessment (EA) and a SEPA Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The documents will not be combined, as originally intended. The separation of the NEPA and SEPA reports allows the Port's SEPA analyses to be independent of and build upon, as warranted, analyses that are performed within the NEPA EA. However, this decision requires that the Port produce two separate robust documents, hold two separate public comment periods, and develop separate responses to comments and final documentation. Diversity in Contracting The SAMP Environmental Review personal services agreement has a Small Contractors and Suppliers (SCS) utilization requirement of seven percent. To date, the personal services agreement is exceeding it with a 12.5% SCS utilization rate. The seven percent SCS utilization requirement will continue through the duration of the service agreement. DETAILS This contract supports the Port's ongoing efforts to fulfill regulatory obligations (i.e. NEPA and SEPA) for decisions about airport growth and development. Consulting services made available through this contract allow the Port to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of future airport growth and development identified within the SAMP NTP and mitigate those impacts as appropriate. Upon completion of NEPA and SEPA, the Port may begin construction after Commission authorization. Environmental review of the SAMP NTP will continue to be led by Landrum & Brown, a consultancy firm specializing in aviation environmental reviews. Landrum & Brown will also continue to be supported by a variety of subconsultants, many of which are locally and/or nationally recognized experts within their respective disciplines. In accordance with RCW 53.19.060, this memorandum constitutes notification to Commission of the amended amount ($3,400,000) to the service agreement with Landrum & Brown for SAMP, as it exceeds 50 percent of the original contract value of $3,000,000. This amendment is made available for public inspection. Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting). COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. 8b Page 4 of 7 Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 Scope of Work These additional funds would be used to complete work that falls within the scope of the existing contract. The SAMP NTP Environmental Review scope includes the following primary tasks: Project Management Manage coordinated and effective relationships with the project team. SAMP Planning Review Confirm planning objectives/alternatives and identify information required for the environmental analysis. Scope of Work Development, Project Schedule, and Project Budget Prepare and document detailed scope of work, schedule, and project budget for NEPA and SEPA. Purpose and Need/Development of Alternatives Document purpose and need and identify and document alternatives to achieving that need. NEPA/SEPA Scoping Facilitate implementation and associated activities of scoping as required under NEPA and SEPA. Alternatives Evaluation Based on purpose and need, screen and evaluate Alternative(s), including a No Action Alternative. NEPA/SEPA Analysis Existing Conditions/Affected Environment Identify existing environmental conditions for all environmental categories required under NEPA and elements of the environment under SEPA. Future Environmental Consequences With and Without the Project Evaluate all environmental categories required under NEPA and elements of the environment under SEPA for future conditions associated with the Alternative(s) and No Action Alternative. Prepare Draft Environmental Documentation Prepare comprehensive interim documents that will be made available for agency and public comment. Public and Agency Coordination Conduct on-going coordination with appropriate stakeholders during the preparation of the draft and final environmental documents. This also includes public hearing(s) during the agency and public comment period. Prepare Final Environmental Documentation Review agency and public comments on the draft environmental document and revise the draft document to prepare the final environmental documents. Schedule Staff anticipates the following schedule: Jun. 2020 Completion of draft affected environment and environmental consequences Oct. 2020 NEPA EA draft document released for agency and public review Nov. 2020 NEPA EA agency and public review complete Apr. 2021 NEPA EA final document and decision May 2021 SEPA EIS draft document released for agency and public review Jul. 2021 SEPA EIS agency and public review complete Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting). COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. 8b Page 5 of 7 Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 Sep. 2021 SEPA EIS final document ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED Alternative 1 Do not add funds to the SAMP Environmental Review service agreement, but instead, procure new consultant services. The work described in this memo is required to advance the SAMP NTP environmental review but could be conducted by a consultancy firm(s) specializing in aviation environmental reviews and not currently under contract with the Port. Cost Implications: This alternative would likely cost more and take longer to complete; the potential increase in cost and delays to the schedule cannot be reasonably quantified. Pros: (1) Competition among qualified consultants for additional work. Cons: (1) Procuring a consultancy firm specializing in airport environmental reviews other than Landrum & Brown, to conduct the work described in the details section of this memo, would likely cost more and take longer due to the lack of knowledge of the environmental issues and projects that has, by comparison, been gained by the SAMP Environmental Review consultant team through their work on the SAMP NTP environmental review to date. In addition, the procurement process itself would take time to execute. This is not the recommended alternative. Alternative 2 Do not add funds to the SAMP Environmental Review service agreement and use Port staff to complete the work. Cost Implications: No additional funds added to the contract potential $3,400,000 savings. Pros: (1) Short term cost savings Cons: (1) Port staff lacks the breadth of specialized skills required within NEPA and SEPA. Using Port staff to conduct the work described in the details section of this memo would likely take longer due to the lack of knowledge of the environmental issues and projects that has, by comparison, been gained by the SAMP Environmental Review consultant team through their work on the SAMP NTP environmental review to date. In addition, the Port lacks the staff resources to conduct the work in particular, within the Aviation Environment and Sustainability department. This is not the recommended alternative. Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting). COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. 8b Page 6 of 7 Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 Alternative 3 Add the requested funds to the existing SAMP contract. Cost Implications: $3,400,000 Pros: (1) This is the most cost-effective way to complete the work described in the details section of this memo due to the knowledge of the environmental issues and projects that has been gained by the SAMP Environmental Review consultant team through their work on the SAMP NTP environmental review to date. Cons: (1) $3,400,000 cost This is the recommended alternative. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary Expense Total AUTHORIZATION Previous authorizations (11/10/2015) $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Current request for authorization $3,400,000 $3,400,000 Total authorizations, including this request $6,400,000 $6,400,000 Remaining amount to be authorized $0 $0 Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds Approximately $1,700,000 has been spent on the SAMP NTP environmental review to date and the remaining funds within the current project budget of $3,000,000 are allocated to tasks in progress. The 2020 operating budget includes $1,500,000 for SAMP NTP environmental review activities. This increased budget, if authorized, is not likely to cause us the exceed the 2020 operating budget. As these are operating costs, the funding source will be the Airport Development Fund. ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND The primary purpose of the SAMP is to identify facility improvements required to satisfy demand over the 20-year planning horizon and to balance capacity in all key functional areas to the fixed capacity of the airfield. To that end, the SAMP started with an unconstrained, 20-year forecast of cargo and passenger activity which was used to determine peak hour facility requirements based on demand derived from the movement of aircraft, passengers, bags, vehicles and freight. Alternatives for facilities development to satisfy demand were then developed and assessed, resulting in a phased capital program to deliver needed capacity through the 20-year planning horizon. For planning purposes, the SAMP assumes the airport's current three-runway system and close- in airspace configuration will remain in place. With the airport's small footprint and significant Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting). COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. 8b Page 7 of 7 Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 physical constraints, redevelopment at Sea-Tac requires expensive relocation of existing facilities and limited options for expansion. Work to evaluate alternatives for project phasing and to assess airside capacity has included extensive airside modeling in consultation with FAA specialists and has determined that existing constraints require a two-step approach to advance the SAMP. The first step in SAMP planning identified a suite of projects required to meet current and expected near-term future demand, known as the Near-Term Projects (NTP). The NTP consists of approximately 31 projects, including 19 gates connected to a second terminal, that are being evaluated within the SAMP NTP environmental review. Although the SAMP planning process identified projects beyond the NTP, known as the Long-Term Vision (LTV), these projects are not ripe for environmental review at this time, as they require further study and are not reasonably foreseeable. The second step in SAMP planning focused on understanding the constraints for airside facilities, which include runway and taxiway utilization, airfield configuration, gate availability, and airspace management as conducted by FAA. The Port will work with the FAA to conduct an airfield/airspace study which will determine the long-term capacity of the airfield and inform or reaffirm the SAMP LTV projects. Similar to the LTV, additional environmental review is required before any airfield/airspace projects could are implemented. ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST (1) Presentation slides PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS January 28, 2020 Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Near-Term Projects (NTP) Environmental Review Briefing Forecast and Schedule Update" February 26, 2019 Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Near- Term Projects (NTP) Environmental Review Briefing Scoping Report" May 8, 2018 Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Planning and Environmental Update" February 13, 2018 - Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Planning Update" November 10, 2015 Commission Action: "Environmental Review (National Environmental Policy Act and State Environmental Policy Act) Personal Services Agreement for the Sustainable Airport Master Plan" Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
Limitations of Translatable Documents
PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.