PORT OF SEATTLE 
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA               Item No.      4d 
ACTION ITEM 
Date of Meeting      May 12, 2015 
DATE:    May 4, 2015 
TO:      Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
FROM:   Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group 
David Soike, Director, Aviation Facilities & Capital Programs 
SUBJECT:  Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Service Agreement for 3rd Party
Commissioning Agent 
Amount of This Request:             $0   Source of Funds:  Current and Future
Operating Budgets;
Maximum Value of          $4,000,000 
Future Individual
Contract:                                        Project
Authorizations 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to execute two IDIQ
contracts for a 3rd Party Commissioning Agent with a total maximum value of $4 million for the
Port of Seattle. 
SYNOPSIS 
Third Party Commissioning ensures that complex electrical and mechanical systems such as the
C4 UPS project, CTE HVAC project, Main Terminal Low Voltage project, Standby Power
project, and SCADA project are delivered with optimal operational effectiveness. This request
authorizes the CEO to execute contracts with two firms for 3rd Party Commissioning Agent
services. No funding is associated with this request.
The Aviation  Project Management  Group  has identified  nearly $90 million in capital
improvement projects that will require the use of a 3rd Party Commissioning Agent. Evaluation
of the options resulted in IDIQ contracts being selected as the best method to secure necessary
services. 
The contracts will be available to meet the needs of the Maritime, Economic Development, and
Aviation Divisions, as well as for Alliance properties. The proposed IDIQ contracts will allow 
the Port to  respond to future service needs efficiently and cost effectively. The project manager
will coordinate with the Office of Social  Responsibility to identify opportunities for small 
business participation prior to the public advertisement of the IDIQ. The International Arrivals
Facility and NorthSTAR projects will separately procure their own 3rd party Commissioning
Agent services contracts. This action does not impact the Sustainable Airport Master Plan
(SAMP). 

Template revised May 30, 2013.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
May 4, 2015 
Page 2 of 4 
PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK AND SCHEDULE 
Scope of Work 
The IDIQ contracts will be procured according to Port policies and procedures in accordance 
with Resolution No. 3605, as amended, and procurement policy CPO-1. The Port will advertise 
and issue a request for qualifications that will include a goal for small business  participation.
The contracts will be written with specific not-to-exceed amounts and identify the  services 
required. Each contract will have a contract-ordering period (during which the services  may be 
separately authorized) of three years.  The actual contract duration may extend beyond  three 
years in order to complete work identified in particular service directives.  Service  directives 
may be issued during the contract-ordering period and within the total original contract value. 
These IDIQ contracts will retain the services of two 3rd Party Commissioning Agent firms that
will develop commissioning plans, schedules and documentation and conduct field investigations
pertaining to the overall commissioning process for projects in the CIP, or any other projects that
interface with Port central mechanical and electrical systems. The International Energy Code 
and Washington State Energy Code require commissioning of certain energy using systems,
equipment and facilities. The 3rd Party Commissioning Agent will assist the Port in assuring that
the projects comply with the requirements of these codes. United States Green Building Council
requires commissioning of certain energy using systems, equipment and facilities for all projects
and facilities seeking Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) Certification, if
LEED certification is desired. 
Schedule 
It is estimated that the contracts will be executed by 3rd quarter of 2015, and have a three-year 
ordering period with a one year option. Each service directive will specify the duration and 
schedule associated with the task or tasks involved. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
No work is guaranteed to the consultant and the Port is not obligated to pay the consultant until a
service directive is executed. The budget for work performed under this contract will come from
individual authorizations for capital project work. Consequently, there is no funding request
associated with this authorization. 
BUDGET STATUS and SOURCE of FUNDS 
There is no funding request associated with this authorization. Individual service directives will
be executed to authorize the consultant to perform any specific work on the contract against
approved project authorizations and within the total contract amount.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
May 4, 2015 
Page 3 of 4 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1)  Separate Procurement for Each Project 
Pros: 
Separate contracts would allow consulting firms multiple opportunities to compete for
each individual project. 
Cons: 
This alternative is inefficient use of port resources and staff time and does not leverage
the Port's contracting methods. It would increase overhead and administrative costs to the
Port, as we would need to manage more procurement processes and contracts. 
This alternative may add time to each project schedule to complete the procurement
process for each individual project and would impact the ability to meet project and
customer needs. 
Costs to the consulting companies may increase as they would be responding to multiple
procurements. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2) Establish IDIQ contracts with two 3rd Party Commissioning Agent firms 
Pros: 
Selecting two firms allows for multiple CIP projects that have the need for a 3rd Party
Commissioning Agent to have the resources available and provides multiple firms the
opportunity to work for the Port of Seattle. 
This alternative reduces costs in staff time and overhead for each CIP in that the 
solicitation, negotiations and contracting for the 3rd Party Commissioning Agents services
has already been completed and each CIP project need only budget for  the
Commissioning Agents services. 
This alternative is the most efficient use of Port resources and staff time. 
This alternative leverages the Port's contracting methods. 
Port projects seeking a LEED certification will be able to use either of these two firms.
Cons: 
This alternative would limit the number of opportunities available to firms to compete for
work. 
This is the recommended alternative and provides the Port of Seattle with the most cost effective
method to ensure all CIP projects have 3rd Party Commissioning Agent support as required. 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
None

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
May 4, 2015 
Page 4 of 4 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
None