PORT OF SEATTLE 
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA               Item No.      4g 
ACTION ITEM 
Date of Meeting    October 13, 2015 
DATE:    September 23, 2015 
TO:      Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
FROM:   Brick Spangler, Environmental Program Manager, Maritime Environmental and
Planning 
Kathy Bahnick, Manager, Maritime Environmental and Planning 
SUBJECT:  Upland and Sediment Environmental Site Management and Investigation Support
Services Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity Agreements 
Maximum Value of      $2,000,000 
Contracts: 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission Authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to execute up to two personal
services indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contracts for consultant support for
environmental services in support of potential future environmental investigations and remediation
activities totaling no more than $2,000,000 with a three-year contract ordering period. No funding is
associated with this request. 
SYNOPSIS 
Port Environmental Programs  provide and manage remediation liability and environmental
regulation support services for the Maritime, Economic Development, Aviation, and Capital
Development Divisions and the Northwest Seaport Alliance (Alliance). The service agreements
resulting from this request will allow the Port to respond to a range of environmental investigation,
characterization and remediation needs. 
Existing open-order environmental services agreements are due to expire in March 2016. In order for
Environmental Programs to continue to provide these services, new contracts with environmental
technical and consultant services providers are needed. The contracts will be managed by the
Maritime Environmental Program but will be available for use by other Port Divisions and the
Alliance. 
This request is only for contracting authority; funding will be authorized by the Commission under
the annual environmental remediation liabilities authorization process or through project-specific
authorizations. 
We are reviewing the contract scope of work with the Office of Social Responsibility (OSR) to
identify small business subcontracting availability for these contracts. Small business subcontracting
requirements will be established and stated in the solicitation.
Template revised May 30, 2013.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
September 23, 2015 
Page 2 of 4 

CONTRACT SCOPE OF WORK AND SCHEDULE 
Scope of Work 
The purpose of these proposed contracts is to provide timely, cost-effective consulting services
necessary to perform remediation-related assessments, investigations and other related activities to
understand potential liability associated with contamination present at a current or potential future
Port Facilities.  These remediation-related assessments and investigations  primarily address
contaminated sites regulated under the State's Model Toxics Control Act or Federal Superfund
program (CERCLA) requiring specialized services addressing the technical and regulatory needs of
these regulations.
IDIQ contracts provide the Port's Environmental Programs with flexibility to meet the regulatory
requirements and perform necessary assessments. Issuing individual service directives on an asneeded
basis, within a general pre-defined scope of work for a fixed period of time and a maximum
contract amount will enable the Port to accomplish these tasks. Competitively bid IDIQ contracts are
a widely used public sector contracting tool, consistent with the General Delegation of Authority and
governed by the CPO-1 policy. 
In addition to this proposed IDIQ, Port staff are proposing an Environmental Construction Support
Services IDIQ, under a separate commission authorization request (Item No. 4f) that is focused on
management of construction waste and other regulated materials generated by operating facilities.
Expertise is required in materials management under state and federal solid waste regulations.
Personnel required to meet these two IDIQ requirements are significantly different. Combining
these two procurements was considered in acquisition planning. A single procurement would result
in larger contract with multiple specialty subcontractors.  Two separate procurements was selected
in order increase ability to select, avoid prime contractor management fees and provided direct
access the specialized services required. 
Schedule 
Contracts should be executed by February 2016 in order to have a transition period between these
new contracts and the current ones. The new contracts will have a five-year ordering period. Each
service directive will specify the duration and schedule associated with the task or tasks involved. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
Charges to these contracts will be from projects separately authorized. There is no funding request
as part of this authorization since the budget for this requested action will be authorized in the annual
Environmental Remediation Liability (ERL) program authorization requests.  All costs will be
accounted for as environmental remediation liabilities and charged to expense in accordance with
Port Policy AC-9. The tax levy is the primary funding source. 
TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE 
State and federal laws require elimination of unacceptable levels of environmental risk caused by the
presence of contaminants in soil, groundwater, and sediment.  From the perspective of the
surrounding communities and the customers that we serve, the Port's participation in site
remediation is the hallmark of responsible environmental stewardship.  Cleanup also returns

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
September 23, 2015 
Page 3 of 4 
contaminated land to a more productive use. Regarding small business participation, the Office of
Social Responsibility (OSR) will provide analysis and recommend or require Small Contractors and
Suppliers (SCS) participation in accordance with the Port's small business policy (Resolution No.
3618). 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1)  Project work completed by adding Port staff 
Pros: 
Adding new Port staff to complete these potential projects would reduce the Port's reliance
on outside service contracts and increase the Port's technical capacity to respond to our
internal customers in the long term. 
Cons: 
The level of effort and expertise requirements for the potential project work to be
completed under this IDIQ is unknown at this time. Therefore, determining proper staff
needs to complete this work is not feasible. 
This alternative would add several months to each project schedule to hire or reallocate
current staff for each individual project and would impact the ability to meet project and
customer needs.
Potential project work under this IDIQ would most likely require specialized environmental
sampling equipment that the Port does have access to due to the associated capital and
maintenance cost.
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2)  Separate procurement for each project 
Pros: 
Separate contracts would allow consulting firms multiple opportunities to compete for each
individual project. 
Cons: 
This alternative would increase overhead and administrative costs to the Port, as we would
need to manage more procurement processes and contracts. 
This alternative may add several months 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 company may increase as they would be responding to multiple
procurements. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 3)  Prepare a single procurement for two IDIQ contracts 
Pros: 
Prepare a contract with up to two firms for identified needs as they arise. This alternative
would ensure the Port has the necessary professional and technical resources available to
assist in time-critical evaluations and delivery of future projects, and that small business
participation is part of the criteria. 
This alternative would minimize the number of procurement processes necessary for timely
completion of projects and reduce overhead and administrative costs to the Port.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
September 23, 2015 
Page 4 of 4 
Cons: 
This alternative would limit the number of opportunities available to firms to compete for
work. 
This is the recommended alternative. 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
None 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
None