Template revised January 10, 2019.
COMMISSION
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Item No.
8c
ACTION ITEM
Date of Meeting
January 14, 2025
DATE: January 6, 2025
TO: Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director
FROM: Jeff Wolf, Director, Aviation Commercial Management
Eileen Francisco, Director, Aviation Project Management Group
SUBJECT: Rental Car Facility Quick Turn-Around Fire Suppression System Replacement
(C801412)
Amount of this request:
$ 6,825,000
Total requested project cost:
$7,000,000
ACTION REQUESTED
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to take all steps necessary to
complete the Rental Car Facility (RCF) Quick Turn-Around (QTA) Fire System Replacement project
at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (SEA). The total amount requested for authorization is
$6,825,000 for a total authorization amount of $7,000,000.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The RCF is the primary operating location for most rental car providers at SEA. This facility uses
an aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) to extinguish fuel-based fires that contains per- and poly-
fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The AFFF fire suppression system allows operation of the fueling
systems at all four QTAs at the RCF. In 2018, the state of Washington passed a bill which banned
the manufacture, sale, and distribution of AFFF containing PFAS starting in 2020. Due to this ban,
replacement AFFF is unavailable and in the event the current system runs out of foam due to
actual fires or false alarms, the foam-portion of the fire suppression system would become
inoperable. This project will replace the existing AFFF system with a dry-pipe water-based fire
sprinkler system ensuring the continued operation of the RCF.
JUSTIFICATION
This project supports the Century Agenda strategic goal and objective to advance this region as
a leading tourism destination and business gateway by meeting the region’s air transportation
needs at the Airport for the next 25 years. The RCF is a major facility and is the primary operating
location for most rental car providers at SEA. In 2023, approximately 4.6 million passengers
utilized the RCF and generated $46.5 million in concession/land rent revenues to the Port, and
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8c Page 2 of 5
Meeting Date: January 14, 2025
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
$41.6 million in customer facility charge (CFC) revenues. CFCs are fees paid by customers and
remitted to the Port as part of each rental car transaction to help fund repayment of the debt
used to construct the RCF as well as other operating expenses, such as the busing system to and
from the airport terminal. Costs associated with this project and this funding request will be paid
for by the CFC fund. Replacing the existing fire sprinkler system ensures the continued operation
of the RCF.
Diversity in Contracting
The design of this project will utilize an existing indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ)
contract that has an established women and minority business enterprise (WMBE) goal of 23%.
The project team will work with the Diversity in Contracting department to establish additional
WMBE goals within the construction phase of this effort.
DETAILS
The RCF has four QTAs, one located on each floor, that support the fueling, car washing, cleaning,
and limited light maintenance operations for the vehicles within the rental car fleets. The existing
fire suppression system in the QTAs is an AFFF system that contains PFAS. In 2018, the state of
Washington passed a bill which banned the manufacture, sale, and distribution of AFFF
containing PFAS, effective July 2020. The Port completed a fire risk assessment in March 2024
that recommended the replacement of the AFFF fire suppression system with a dry-pipe water-
based sprinkler system. While the system currently has enough material to maintain an
appropriate charge, there is not a sufficient supply to recharge the system should there be a
release. In that event, the system could be operated as a water-only system, however this is not
how the system was designed or intended and is not a long-term solution. The Port is required
to perform the work under the terms of the RCF Lease Agreements.
Scope of Work
The project will replace existing AFFF fire suppression system dry-pipe water-based sprinkler
system. The work will include the replacement of tanks, valves, pumps, sprinkler lines, sprinkler
heads and reserve tanks. The new sprinkler system work will tie into the existing Fire Alarm
System.
There have been prior releases of AFFF containing PFAS at the RCF that may have resulted in the
contamination of other facilities and infrastructure (e.g., concrete structure, sanitary sewer
system) however, remediation of these facilities and infrastructure is not included in the scope
of this project. Insufficient regulation and standards exist currently to determine if environmental
actions are necessary to address impacts from historical activations of the fire suppression
system. This work will be conducted, if required, by the Port at a future date once regulations
and standards are determined.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8c Page 3 of 5
Meeting Date: January 14, 2025
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
Schedule
Activity
Design start
Construction start
In-use date
Cost Breakdown
This Request
Total Project
Design
$ 777,000
$ 952,000
Construction
$ 6,048,000
$ 6,048,000
Total
$ 6,825,000
$ 7,000,000
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED
Alternative 1 – No action
Cost Implications: $0
Pros:
(1) No financial investment required by the Port.
Cons:
(1) Continued operation of the RCF is at risk since AFFF material cannot be purchased to
recharge the system.
(2) PFAS source is maintained allowing the potential for additional contamination.
(3) Regulatory agencies may require full replacement increasing future costs.
(4) Port would be in violation of the Lease Agreement with the Rental Car companies.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 2 – Partial replacement of AFFF fire suppression system (tanks, valves, sprinkler
heads) and flush fire sprinkler lines rather than replace the lines.
Cost Implications: $3.1 to $5.5 million.
Pros:
(1) Ensures continued operation of the RCF.
Cons:
(1) Requires financial investment by the Port.
(2) Does not fully remove PFAS source (i.e. - keeps current sprinkler lines) and potential for
future contamination.
(3) Regulatory agencies may require full replacement increasing future costs.
This is not the recommended alternative.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8c Page 4 of 5
Meeting Date: January 14, 2025
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
Alternative 3 – Full replacement of AFFF fire suppression system with dry-pipe water-based
sprinkler system in each QTA.
Cost Implications: $7.0 million.
Pros:
(1) Ensures the continued operation of the RCF.
(2) Removes PFAS source and potential for future contamination.
Cons:
(1) Greater financial investment required by the Port.
This is the recommended alternative.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary
Capital
Expense
Total
COST ESTIMATE
Original estimate
$7,600,000
$0
$7,600,000
Current change
($1,100,000)
$500,000
($600,000)
Revised estimate
$6,500,000
$500,000
$7,000,000
AUTHORIZATION
Previous authorizations
$175,000
$0
$175,000
Current request for authorization
$6,325,000
$500,000
$6,825,000
Total authorizations, including this request
$6,500,000
$500,000
$7,000,000
Remaining amount to be authorized
$0
$0
$0
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds
This project CIP #801412 was included in the 2024-2028 capital budget and plan of finance with
a budget of $7,600,000. A budget decrease of $600,000 was transferred to the Non-Aeronautical
Reserve (CIP #800754) resulting in a zero-net change to the Aviation capital budget. The funding
source for this project will be customer facility charge (CFC) revenues.
Financial Analysis and Summary
Project cost for analysis
$7,000,000
Business Unit (BU)
Rental Cars
Effect on business performance
(NOI after depreciation)
NOI after depreciation will decrease
IRR/NPV (if relevant)
N/A
CPE Impact
N/A
Future Revenues and Expenses (Total cost of ownership)
This project will not result in a change to annual operating and maintenance costs.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8c Page 5 of 5
Meeting Date: January 14, 2025
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND
At SEA, AFFF fire suppression systems containing PFAS are currently in use at the RCF, aviation
Fuel Terminal, and the PACCAR, Delta Airlines, and Alaska Airlines hangars. The Port has the
responsibility to replace the fire suppression system at the RCF. The airline consortium has the
responsibility to remedy the fuel suppression system for the aviation Fuel Terminal and this work
is anticipated in the next 5-6 years. The tenants (PACCAR, Delta Airlines, and Alaska Airlines)
have the responsibility to remedy the fuel suppression systems for their hangars. Delta Airlines
and PACCAR are currently working on design of their new systems, and the schedule for
replacement of the Alaska Airlines hangar system has not been shared. Early in 2024 the Port
transitioned the Fire Department Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) vehicle fleet to an FAA-
approved PFAS-free firefighting foam. The systems described here are the only systems at the
airport that contain firefighting foam with PFAS.
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST
(1) Presentation
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS
None.