10c. Memo
SAMP Update and Budget Increase
COMMISSION AGENDA MEMORANDUM Item No. 10c ACTION ITEM Date of Meeting June 27, 2023 DATE : June 20, 2023 TO: Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director FROM: Sarah Cox, Director, Aviation Environment and Sustainability Steve Rybolt, Sr. Environmental Program Manager, Aviation Environment and Sustainability SUBJECT: Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Near-Term Projects Environmental Review – Update and Budget Increase Amount of this request: $2,350,000 Total estimated project cost: $8,750,000 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 $2,350,000 for a total contract amount of $8,750,000. 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 support delays due to COVID-19 and other factors and update existing conditions and impact analyses to account for a change in the proposed opening of the Sustainable Airport Mater Plan Near-Term Projects (SAMP NTP) from 2027 to 2032. This action will continue to support enhanced stakeholder engagement and outreach. JUSTIFICATION The estimated cost of the SAMP NTP environmental review has exceeded the current budget and expected level of effort. There are three primary reasons for increased cost of analysis, documentation, and project management of the SAMP NTP environmental review: a delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic; a shift in the anticipated opening year of the SAMP NTPs; and an update of the existing conditions and impact analyses because of the change in opening year. Additional information on each of these areas is noted below. Template revised January 10, 2019. COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 2 of 7 Meeting Date: June 27, 2023 Staff anticipates the $2,350,000 in additional funds will be sufficient to complete the SAMP NTP environmental review documentation due to the delay. This funding will validate or fully update all analyses, continue extensive public engagement during the release of the draft documents, and complete the NEPA and SEPA documentation. The environmental review will be done under the existing contract, led by Landrum & Brown, a consultancy firm specializing in environmental review. • COVID-19 pandemic and associated delays. In late 2020, due to impacts from the COVID- 19 pandemic, the SAMP NTP environmental review slowed. This slowdown was the result of unknown future aviation demand forecasts and the Port assessing the viability to construct the NTPs based on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic to its current and future capital program. While the environmental analyses continued, in late 2021 the FAA requested a new aviation demand forecast be completed based on SEA’s passenger and operations recovery as the global pandemic receded. A new aviation demand forecast for SEA has been completed but resulted in a delay. The pandemic also impacted SEA’s capital program, resulting in a new opening year of the SAMP NTPs occurring in 2032 versus 2027. • Update of technical analysis. An update of the aviation demand forecasts, and a new opening year of the SAMP NTPs has resulted in the need to update most, if not all, environmental analyses. In many cases detailed technical analyses must be completely restarted, including air quality, noise, and surface transportation. When possible, existing analyses will be validated, such as wetland delineation and historic resources, etc. While this is a large undertaking, this will ensure that once the draft environmental reviews are released, they will have the most updated information for the public to review. These efforts require additional time for analysis and documentation, specialized expertise, and coordination with appropriate governmental agencies. 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 exceeds this requirement with an 11% 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. Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting). COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 3 of 7 Meeting Date: June 27, 2023 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 ($2,350,000) 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. 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. • 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: Aug. 2024 Completion of draft affected environment and environmental consequences Dec. 2024 NEPA EA draft document released for agency and public review Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting). COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 4 of 7 Meeting Date: June 27, 2023 Feb. 2025 NEPA EA agency and public review complete Apr. 2025 NEPA EA final document and decision Jun. 2025 SEPA EIS draft document released for agency and public review Aug. 2025 SEPA EIS agency and public review complete Sep. 2025 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 and would be significant considering the delay to the entire SAMP NTP. 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 $2,350,000 savings. Other cost increases cannot be reasonably quantified, due to probable delay in SAMP NTP, but should be considered significant. 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 Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting). COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 5 of 7 Meeting Date: June 27, 2023 Port lacks the staff resources to conduct the work – in particular, within the Aviation Environment and Sustainability department. This is not the recommended alternative. Alternative 3 – Add the requested funds to the existing SAMP contract. Cost Implications: $2,350,000 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) $2,350,000 cost This is the recommended alternative. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary Expense Total AUTHORIZATION Previous authorization (11/10/2015) $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Previous authorization (2/25/2021) $3,400,000 $3,400,000 Current request for authorization $2,350,000 $2,350,000 Total authorizations, including this request $8,750,000 $8,750,000 Remaining amount to be authorized $0 $0 Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds Approximately $5,000,000 has been spent on the SAMP NTP environmental review to date and the remaining funds within the current project budget of $1,230,000 are allocated to tasks in progress, leaving $170,000 in unallocated funds. The 2023 operating budget includes $1,480,000 for SAMP NTP environmental review activities. 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. Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting). COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 6 of 7 Meeting Date: June 27, 2023 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 closein airspace configuration will remain in place. With the airport’s small footprint and significant 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 February 25, 2020 – Commission Action: “Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Near-Term Projects (NTP) Environmental Review Briefing and Request for Additional Funds” 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" Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting). COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 7 of 7 Meeting Date: June 27, 2023 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.