4d. Memorandum

Template revised September 22, 2016 COMMISSION AGENDA MEMORANDUM Item No. March 28, 2017 Amount of this request: 0,000 Total estimated project cost: ACTION REQUESTED EXECUTIVE SUMMARY JUSTIFICATION ��COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. Page of Template revised September 22, 2016 format updates October 19, 2016 DETAILS This action will enable the existing employee screening rooms to be completed with all of the needed safety and security features . The south room needs additional access control and data equipment modifications. The central room requires Port camera coverage along with data network connectivity once the airline has relinquished its use. A third screening room to the north will allow employees working in the north half of the irport to be screened at that location rather than walking south for screening and back to reach their jobs This project will also test equipment with new tec hnology for employee screening at the north employee screening room Should this test prove successful, additional equipment would be procured as part of a later phase Scope of Work This project will provide equipment and space for additional screening capability This phase will complete the build out of three employee screening rooms in the main terminal of the A irport (1) Install additional e lectrical ower, ata communications, access control improvements and cameras to two existing screening rooms (2) Install additional s afety mprovements for the secure side (i.e., bagwell side) of each of three screening room (3) Design and onstruct third s creening room to the north by remodeling an existing airline baggage service office. Relocate airline baggage service functions in order to prepare the space (4) Purchase creening quipment for the north screening room . As part of this purchase, test a new piece of security equipment. Schedule Activity ommission uthorization 2017 Quart er 1 Construction tart 2017 Quarter 2 se ate 2017 Quarter 3 Cost Breakdown Phase 1 This Request Total Phase 1 Design $143,000 $253,000 Procurement $207,000 $807,000 Construction 0,000 $790,000 Total 0,000 $1,850,000 ��COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. Page of Template revised September 22, 2016 format updates October 19, 2016 Cost Breakdown Phase 2 This Request Total Phase 1 Design $250,000 Procurement $400,000 Construction $1,000,000 Total $1,650,000 ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED Alternative 1 Do not complete phase 1 of the Employee Security Screening Cost Im plications: $150,000 return cost for equipment purchased earlier but now not used. Pros (1) No additional infrastructure required (2) No additional equipment procurement (3) No additional construction Cons (1) One airline would continue to screen its own employees (2) mployee the north end of the airport would travel south for screening (3) All airport employees except for one airline would be screened through one facility (4) Recommended safety improvements would need to be completed using other means. This is not the recommended alternative. Alternative 2 Complete improvements to the south and central screening rooms only Cost Implications: ,000 Pros (1) Provides uniform employee screening throughout the Airport (2) Provides additional recommended safety features on the secure side (3) Utilizes all equipment purchased as part of phase 1 Cons (1) Does not provide employee screening at the north end of the airport (2) Does not satisfy the Port s business plan to adjust security operations and invest in new facilities to meet the numbers of employees needing access to secure areas of the airport This is not the recommended alternative. Alternative 3 Complete phase 1 of the project Cost Implications 0,000 Pros (1) Provides improved employee screening with three locations at the south, central and north areas of the airport ��COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. Page of Template revised September 22, 2016 format updates October 19, 2016 (2) Provides uniform employee screening throughout the Airport (3) Provides additional recommended safety features on the secure side (4) Provides an opportu nity to test n ew security screening technology in preparation for future possible use Cons (1) Additional staff be required for the north screening room. (2) Costliest of the three alternatives This is the recommended alternative. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Cost Estimate /Authorization Summary Phase 1 Phase 2 Total COST ESTIMATE Original estimate $1,850,000 $1,650,000 $3,500,000 AUTHORIZATION Previous authorizations $550,000 $100,000 $650,000 Current request for authorization $850,000 $850,000 Total authorizations, including this request $1,400,000 $100,000 $1,500,000 Remaining amount to be authorized $450,000 $1,550,000 $2,000,000 Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds The employee security screening project (CIP #C800880) was included in the 2017 2021 capital budget and plan of finance with a budget of $3,500,000. The funding sources will include the Airport Development Fund and future revenue bonds , to be issued in 201 Financial Analysis and Summary Project cost for analysis $3,500,000 Business Unit (BU) Airfield Movement Area (security) Effect on business performance (NOI after depreciation NOI after depreciation will increase IRR/NPV (if relevant) CPE Impact .01 in 2018 Future Revenues and Expenses ( Total cost of ownership The estimated future maintenance costs for the security screening equipment for the three screening rooms are estimated at approximately $26,000 annually. ��COMMISSION AGENDA Action Item No. Page of Template revised September 22, 2016 format updates October 19, 2016 ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND A request for design authorization for phase 2 of the project is anticipated in Q2 2017 once project definition is complete ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST None PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS September , 2016 The Commission authorized the purchase of equipment and build out of space for future security needs at the irport

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.