Template revised April 12, 2018.
COMMISSION
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Item No.
6e
ACTION ITEM
Date of Meeting
July 24, 2018
DATE: July 11, 2018
TO: Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director
FROM: Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group
SUBJECT: Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Service Agreement for Vertical
Conveyance Design Services
Amount of this request:
$0
Total estimated contract cost:
$5,000,000
ACTION REQUESTED
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to execute one professional
services indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity contract for vertical conveyance design services
for a total maximum value of $5,000,000 with a maximum contract ordering period of five
years. There is no funding request associated with this authorization; funding to utilize this
contract will come separately from individual project authorizations from the Aviation and
Maritime Divisions.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This procurement will serve as a pilot project for the “Diversity in Contracting” program and
have an MWBE aspirational goal.
The Aviation Project Management Group (AV/PMG) anticipates $2,000,000 to $3,000,000 in
vertical conveyance design service fees over the next few years. In addition, the Seaport Project
Management and Marine Maintenance have expressed an interest in utilizing this IDIQ contract
for various vertical conveyance projects to support Maritime and Economic Development
portfolios, including north harbor properties associated with the Northwest Seaport Alliance.
Evaluation of the options resulted in an IDIQ contract being selected by staff as the best
method to secure the required vertical conveyance design services.
The Port of Seattle (Port) utilizes IDIQ contracts to meet highly variable workload projections
for design services. Based on current workload projections, this contract will provide the
necessary vertical conveyance design services to meet Port project needs for the next three to
five years.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. __6e__ Page 2 of 4
Meeting Date: July 24, 2018
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
Competitively procured IDIQ contracts are widely used public-sector contracting tools,
consistent with the Port’s General Delegation of Authority, and governed by CPO-1 policy.
JUSTIFICATION
The workload demands for delivery of vertical conveyance projects at the Port are increasing.
To support the increasing and dynamic business requirements of Sea-Tac Airport, Maritime,
and Economic Development, staff requires flexibility. IDIQ contracts provide flexibility through
project specific service directives that allow engineering design services to be provided on an
as-needed basis for a fixed period and a maximum contract amount.
DETAILS
This request is to execute one contract for a value of $5 million. The contract will have a three-
year ordering period with two, one-year options for a total ordering period of up to five years.
Service directives may be issued at any time during the contract-ordering period. Ongoing work
may be performed to completion after expiration of the ordering period. The total value of all
service directives issued on a contract will not exceed the contract value.
Aviation Project Management has been partnering with the Port’s small business group to
ensure proper outreach via PortGen to small businesses and those owned by minorities and
women (MWBE firms).
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED
Alternative 1 – Procure separate design service agreements for each project.
Cost Implications: Each project would expend additional administrative costs to procure
individual vertical conveyance design services contracts.
Pros:
(1)
Separate contracts would allow consulting firms multiple opportunities to
compete for each individual project.
(2)
Defers the administrative cost of procurement to a later date when individual
projects each do their own procurement
Cons:
(1)
This alternative is an inefficient use of Port resources, staff time, and does not
leverage the Port's contracting methods.
(2)
This alternative will increase overhead and administrative costs to the Port, as we
would need to manage more procurement processes and contracts.
(3)
This alternative will 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.
(4)
Costs to the consulting companies may increase as they would be responding to
multiple procurements.
(5)
Integration among related projects would be more difficult to achieve.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. __6e__ Page 3 of 4
Meeting Date: July 24, 2018
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 2 – Hire two full-time engineers to meet project design workload forecasts.
Cost Implications: A potential savings of approximately $1 Million could be realized over a
three-year period, compared with hiring consultants.
Pros:
(1)
Lower hourly cost than the use of consultant engineers.
(2)
Institutional knowledge is built by Port Staff.
Cons:
(1)
Consultant engineers with specialized skills might still need to be hired when Port staff
skills do not meet the needs of a particular project.
(2)
Time to build up adequate staff with the necessary and specific skill sets would take
approximately 18 to 24 months. This would substantially delay our current backlog of
projects.
(3)
The type of work needed is highly specialized and is not guaranteed. Adding full time
in-house staff would create long term costs that could potentially be unnecessary
during times when that work is not needed.
(4)
The design of vertical conveyance systems is a highly specialized field and is currently
in high demand. Staff with these skills sets may be difficult to attract, hire and retain.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 3 – Procure one design services agreement (IDIQ).
Cost Implications: No capital costs will be incurred with this procurement. Funding to utilize
these contracts will be separately authorized by the individual projects
requiring vertical conveyance design services.
Pros:
(1)
This alternative reduces overhead costs for each project requiring vertical
conveyance design services; the solicitation, negotiations and contracting for
vertical conveyance design is completed onetime for all projects.
(2)
This alternative reduces the schedule for each project requiring these services
because the solicitation, evaluation and selection for design services has already
been completed. Typically, this process consumes approximately 3 to 4 months.
(3)
This alternative allows the Port to utilize the consultant at an earlier stage of
project development. Under a typical project specific solicitation, the consultant
cannot come on board until after the planning phase has been completed.
(4)
This alternative leverages the Port’s contracting methods.
(5)
This alternative more effectively provides for the “consistency” of parallel projects
that may utilize the same consultant.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. __6e__ Page 4 of 4
Meeting Date: July 24, 2018
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
Cons:
(1) This alternative would limit the number of opportunities available to firms to compete
for work.
This is the recommended alternative.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Charges to this contract will be from projects that will be authorized separately through
established procedures. Consequently, there is no funding request associated with this
authorization. The total cost for vertical conveyance design services under this contract will not
exceed $5,000,000. No work is guaranteed to the consultant and the Port is not obligated to
pay the consultant until a service directive is executed. After receiving authorization for each
project in accordance with the Master Delegation of Authority, the actual work will be defined
and the Port will issue individual project-specific service directives.
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST
None
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS
None
