6d Passenger Loading Bridge September Memo
A of Seattle' COMMISSION AGENDA MEMORANDUM Item No. 8b ACTION ITEM Date of Meeting September 10, 2019 DATE: September 3, 2019 TO: Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director FROM: Jeffrey Brown, Director Aviation Facilities and Capital Programs C_ Fe Jeberey Bri Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group Aud) SUBJECT: Passenger Loading Bridge Renewal & Replacement Phase 2 - Budget Increase Request (CIP #C800793) Amount of this request: $3,000,000 Total estimated project cost: $13,000,000 ACTION REQUESTED Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to (1) increase the project budget for the Passenger Loading Bridge (PLB) renewal & replacement project in the amount of $3,000,000; (2) use Port of Seattle crews, and small and major works on-call contracts to perform the construction work; and (3) advertise, bid, and execute a major works construction project. This request is $3,000,000 for a revised total estimated project cost of $13,000,000. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Critical structural failures, unforeseen site conditions, and addition of new systems since the project was scoped have increased the cost to replace the PLBs. This request will provide the necessary funding to complete the replacement of the nine PLBs and fixed walkways. Reliable, well-operating PLBs are critical to airline and airport operations. Port staff has created a prioritized list of PLBs, whose age and condition indicate a need for replacement. Three of the nine PLBs and associated fixed walkways (S6, S11, and C15) have already been replaced and the others (B10, C9, C11, C18, D4, and D11) are at the highest risk for failure. JUSTIFICATION The PLBs at Sea-Tac have high utilization compared to airports with comparable annual enplanements. In 2018, Sea-Tac processed approximately 312,000 passengers per bridge, well above the average of the top 20 airports of approximately 209,000 passengers. Any unplanned downtime due to PLB or fixed walkway failure impacts airlines and customer service. PLBs have a service life of approximately 25 years before replacement is required. Many of the parts for 25+ year old PLBs are no longer available; as a result, repair time is extended while parts are fabricated or re-manufactured or used parts are located from other PLB owners. Unplanned downtime caused by failure of obsolete parts can extend for several weeks, seriously disrupting COMMISSION AGENDA - Action Item No. _8b_ Page 2 of 7 Meeting Date: September 10, 2019 airline operations. This has occurred with Gate C15, December 2017, being inoperable for almost a month because of a failed, obsolete motor generator set. Another failure occurred at Gate S12, May 2019, after a quarterly inspection found the structure to be critical; which required the PLB shut down for a significant amount of time to make temporary repairs until the PLB can be replaced. Diversity in Contracting The major works contract has a five percent aspirational goal for women- and minority-owned business enterprise (WMBE). No specific diversity in contracting goals were originally set for this project, however, the SWMBE achievements to date are 23.8 percent. DETAILS Aviation Project Management has worked in conjunction with AV Operations, AV Planning, AV Facilities and Infrastructure, and AV Maintenance to create a prioritized list of PLBs whose age and condition are cause for replacement or refurbishment. The additional funds will be used to complete the replacement of nine bridges covered under CIP# C800793. Several factors, as detailed below, have driven the increased cost to replace the PLBs and fixed walkways: e Gate S6 failed before it was scheduled to be replaced. The expedited replacement incurred additional costs and impacted the other PLB schedules. Other structural modifications, seismic upgrade requirements, telecommunications upgrades, and 400 Hz aircraft power modifications resulted in design and construction changes. This PLB is complete. e Gate S11 had a severely damaged anchor bolt for one of the foundations requiring a new foundation. Other structural modifications, differing site conditions, utility conflicts, and seismic upgrade requirements resulted in design and construction changes. This PLB and fixed walkway are complete. e The foundation for Gate C15 needed to be redesigned and constructed differently with a deeper foundation. This resulted from unknown utilities and differing site conditions. This PLB is installed and in close-out. e The foundation for Gate C11 needs to be redesigned and constructed differently with a deeper foundation. This resulted from unknown utilities and differing site conditions. e Gate D4 has an issue with the Pre-Conditioned Air hydronic piping not having isolation valves that allow for the replacement of the PLB. The lack of isolation valves requires the system to be drained and valves installed prior to bridge replacement. COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. _8b_ Page 3 of 7 Meeting Date: September 10, 2019 Gate D11 has two fixed walkway foundations, and one rotunda foundation that will need to be upgraded to meet seismic code. There is limited area to expand the foundations due to interference from other buildings and utilities resulting in changes to design and construction. Gate B10 foundation is surrounded by industrial wastewater system lines that will need to be relocated prior to adding a new foundation that meets current seismic code. Three manholes (two 48 inch and one 60 inch) will be installed to meet drainage requirements. These modifications to design and construction were a result of differing site conditions. Additionally, an abandoned fuel line will need to be remediated and removed prior to any foundation work. Gate C9 currently has all the 400Hz aircraft power system routed along the fixed walk - way which will have to be re-routed prior to replacing the PLB. This bridge has three foundations that will need to be upgraded to meet the seismic requirements. Gate C18 has two fixed walkway sections with three individual foundations that will need to be modified to meet current seismic code. Differing site conditions, utility conflicts, and seismic upgrade requirements resulted in design and construction changes. Scope of Work (1) Design services for this scope of work will be provided under existing indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (ID!Q) design services contract. (2) Purchase and installation of new PLBs, associated fixed walkway, and related components at Gates B10, C9, C11, C18, D4, and D11 along with necessary architectural, electrical, data, and mechanical infrastructure upgrades to meet new PLB standards and current code requirements. Three of the nine PLB's have already been replaced - S6, S11, and C15. (3) Port Construction Services will perform work associated with preparing the foundations upgrade or replacement and provide construction management services for PLB installations at all gates. (4) The new bridges will be connected to the Port's Facility Monitoring System so any malfunction that shuts the bridge down will be promptly reported to Maintenance for faster response. Schedule Replacement Schedule: 1. 4Q 2019: D4 & B10 2 1Q 2020: D11 3. 4Q 2020: C11 & C18 4 1Q 2021: C9 COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. _8b_ Page 4 of 7 Meeting Date: September 10, 2019 *This schedule is tentative and can change due to changing conditions and priorities. Activity Commission design authorization 2018 Quarter 1 ~ Design start 2018 Quarter 2 Commission construction authorization 2018 Quarter 1 Construction start 2018 Quarter 4 In-use date 2021 Quarter 1 Cost Breakdown This Request Total Project Design $500,000 $2,100,000 Construction $2,500,000 $10,900,000 Total $3,000,000 $13,000,000 ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED Alternative 1 Complete only the bridges that the current funding allows (7 bridges of 9 planned) Cost Implications: $0, No additional funds would be required. Pros: (1) This alternative minimizes the capital input by only replacing 7 of the 9 planned bridges. Cons: (1) This alternative would significantly degrade the quality of passenger experience at Sea-Tac. (2) This alternative would potentially lead to airlines insisting on processing departing passengers in severely congested hold rooms on other concourses already being used for other flights. (3) This alternative does not provide reliable gate capacity for the increasing number of flights. (4) This alternative does not give airlines, tenants, and passengers a reliable gate system to provide customer service and process guest for arrivals and departures. (5) This alternative does not address the need to replace the aging bridges that could lead to a significant failure causing increased cost and downtime to replace. (6) This alternative does not address the need to update the bridge foundations to meet the current seismic regulations. This is not the recommended alternative. COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. _8b_ Page 5 of 7 Meeting Date: September 10, 2019 Alternative 2 Delay replacement of the two (2) planned bridges to a later project. Cost Implications: $3,000,000 plus escalation costs added to a future project to re-start the replacement effort. Replacement timeline would be pushed out approximately 1.5 years for a new project to be created and approved. Pros: (1) This alternative delays the capital requirement. Cons: (1) This alternative will delay the replacement of the walk ways and bridges that have been identified as critical. (2) This alternative does allow for efficient use of PCS construction crews during the dry season for foundation work. (3) This alternative carries a risk of a premature failure of a bridge leading to extended closure time and increased cost for expedited replacement. (4) This alternative does not provide reliable gate capacity for the increasing number of flights. (5) This alternative does not give airlines, tenants, and passengers a reliable gate system to provide customer service and process guest for arrivals and departures. (6) This alternative does not address the need to replace the aging bridges that could lead to a significant failure causing increased cost and downtime to replace. (7) This alternative will increase the cost of future replacement projects. This is not the recommended alternative. Alternative 3 Increase the funding to complete the scope of work for all nine bridges. Cost Implications: $3,000,000 Pros: (1) Complete the planned bridge replacements and upgrade the foundations to meet the seismic code. (2) Relocate added equipment from the bridge to a permanent location and off the bridge structure. (3) The replaced bridge will have a new service life. (4) This alternative will give the airlines, tenants, and passengers a reliable gate system to provide customer service and process guest for arrival and departures. (5) This alternative will keep the bridge replacement on the existing timeline. (6) This alternative allows for construction flexibility with the PCS crews to complete the more complicated foundation work. Cons: (1) None This is the recommended alternative. COMMISSION AGENDA - Action item No. _8b_ Page 6 of 7 Meeting Date: September 10, 2019 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The Passenger Loading Bridges Project CIP #C800793 is included in the 2019-2023 capital budget and plan of finance with a budget of $10,000,000. A budget increase of $3,000,000 was transferred from the Aeronautical Reserve CIP C800753 resulting in zero net change to the Aviation capital budget. The funding sources would be the Airport Development Fund and revenue bonds. This project was approved by the airlines through a Majority-in-interest (Mil) vote in 2017. Due to the cost increase, the project will require additional MI! approval. Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary Capital Expense Total COST ESTIMATE Original estimate $10,000,000 SO $10,000,000 Current change $3,000,000 SO $3,000,000 Revised estimate $13,000,000 SO $13,000,000 AUTHORIZATION Previous authorizations $10,000,000 SO $10,000,000 Current request for authorization $3,000,000 SO $3,000,000 Total authorizations, including this request $13,000,000 SO $13,000,000 Remaining amount to be authorized SO SO SO Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds Financial Analysis and Summary Project cost for analysis $13,000,000 Business Unit (BU) Passenger Loading Bridges Effect on business performance (NOI after NOI after depreciation will increase depreciation) IRR/NPV (if relevant) N/A CPE Impact $0.04 in 2022 Future Revenues and Expenses (Total cost of ownership) This is a renewal and replacement program that replaces existing equipment that is old and dated. Replacement of the equipment will require a similar level of maintenance and an anticipated reduced level of repairs and does not have a material impact on current Aviation Maintenance O&M costs. ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND PLBs were historically predominantly owned by airlines. Over the past fifteen years or so, the Port has increasingly taken over ownership of PLBs when they needed to be replaced to provide a consistent level of maintenance and level of service for all PLBs. Currently, Alaska is the only COMMISSION AGENDA - Action Item No. _8b_ Page 7 of 7 Meeting Date: September 10, 2019 airline owning PLBs at Sea-Tac. Upon the completion of this project and the North Satellite Expansion project, the Port will own and maintain all the PLBs at Sea-Tac. ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST (1) Presentation slides PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS February 27, 2018 The Commission approved $7,700,000 for the design, construction, and purchase of PLBS at gates C15, C9, D11, C11, C18, S6, D4, and the fixed walkways at C9, D11, C18, and D4. February 28, 2017 The Commission approved $2,300,000 for the design, construction, and purchase of PLBs at gates S11 and B10 and the fixed walkway at S11.
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.