August 2013 Meeting Minutes

Open­ing:

The Board Meet­ing of the Pana­ma City-Bay Coun­ty Air­port and Indus­tri­al Dis­trict was called to order at 9:00 a.m., August 28, 2013 in the Air­port Board Room by Chair­man Pilcher.

The Invo­ca­tion was giv­en by Ms. Pat­ty Mitchell.

The Pledge of Alle­giance was led by Chair­man Pilcher.

The Exec­u­tive Sec­re­tary called the roll and indi­cat­ed that all Board Mem­bers were present except Mr. Chris Forehand.

Pre­sen­ta­tion:

Mr. Mike Wells with Sun­shine Shut­tle addressed the Board and pro­vid­ed a pre­sen­ta­tion on the review of their first 90 days of oper­a­tion at the airport.

Approval of Minutes:

The July 24, 2013 Board Meet­ing Min­utes were approved as distributed.

Reports:

Mr. McClel­lan pre­sent­ed and reviewed the activ­i­ty report. Ms. Hen­der­son pre­sent­ed and reviewed the finan­cial report.

Con­sent Agenda:

a. Estab­lish a Spe­cial­ized Ser­vice Oper­a­tor Agree­ment with Jet South, LLC

This item pro­vides for Board approval of the estab­lish­ment of a Spe­cial­ized Ser­vice Oper­a­tor Agree­ment for air­craft and oth­er vehi­cle detail­ing with Jet South, LLC.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Mr. Bruett made a motion to approve the Spe­cial­ized Ser­vice Oper­a­tor Agree­ment with Jet South, LLC and autho­riza­tion for the Exec­u­tive Direc­tor to exe­cute any required doc­u­ments fol­low­ing sat­is­fac­to­ry legal review. Mr. Scott sec­ond­ed the motion. The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

b. Sub-Lease – Matt and Amy Mar­shall to Jet South, LLC

This item pro­vides for Board approval of a sub-lease between Matt and Amy Mar­shall to Jet South, LLC.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Mr. Scott made a motion to approve the sub-lease and autho­riza­tion for the Board Chair­man or his designee to exe­cute any required doc­u­ments. Ms. Moliter­no sec­ond­ed the motion. The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

c. Award Bid – Fire Alarm/​Sprinkler Sys­tem Inspec­tion and Service

This item pro­vides for Board award of a con­tract to Advanced Fire Pro­tec­tion Ser­vices, Inc. for the fire alarm and sprin­kler sys­tem inspec­tion and service.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Ms. Moliter­no made a motion to award the con­tract for fire alarm and sprin­kler sys­tem inspec­tion and ser­vice to Advanced Fire Pro­tec­tion Ser­vices, Inc., and autho­riza­tion for the Exec­u­tive Direc­tor to exe­cute any required doc­u­ments. Mr. Scott sec­ond­ed the motion. The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

d. Audit Engage­ment – Tip­ton, Mar­ler, Gar­ner & Chastain

This item pro­vides for Board approval of the fees with Tip­ton, Mar­ler, Gar­ner & Chas­tain for audit services.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Mr. Bruett made a motion to approve the Audit Engage­ment Let­ter with Tip­ton, Mar­ler, Gar­ner & Chas­tain for audit ser­vices and autho­riza­tion for the Exec­u­tive Direc­tor to exe­cute any required doc­u­ments. Mr. Math­is sec­ond­ed the motion.

The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

e. Retire­ment Plan Review of Invest­ment Options

This item pro­vides for Board approval for replace­ment of two under-per­form­ing funds in the District’s retire­ment plan.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Mr Scott made a motion to approve the replace­ment of the retire­ment funds and autho­riza­tion for the Direc­tor of Admin­is­tra­tion to exe­cute any required doc­u­ments. Mr. Bruett sec­ond­ed the motion. The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

f. Repub­lic Park­ing Annu­al Bonus

This item pro­vides for Board approval of an incen­tive bonus for Repub­lic Park­ing for the peri­od from June 2012 through May 2013, per the man­age­ment contract.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Ms. Moliter­no made a motion to approve the incen­tive bonus of $37,838.74 be paid to Repub­lic Park­ing per the man­age­ment con­tract. Mr. Math­is sec­ond­ed the motion. The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

g. Rat­i­fi­ca­tion of Pur­chase for Cov­ered Park­ing Project

This item pro­vides for Board rat­i­fi­ca­tion of the pur­chase of gates and tick­et dis­pensers for the cov­ered park­ing project.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Mr. Scott made a motion to approve the rat­i­fi­ca­tion of the pur­chase of gates and tick­et dis­pensers from Gor­rie-Regan for the cov­ered park­ing project. Ms. Moliter­no sec­ond­ed the motion. The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

Busi­ness Items:

a. ZHA Task Order – Cov­ered Park­ing Project Con­struc­tion Administration

This item pro­vides for Board approval of a task order with ZHA to per­form con­struc­tion admin­is­tra­tion ser­vices for the cov­ered park­ing project.

The Dis­trict has request­ed a task order from ZHA to pro­vide con­struc­tion admin­is­tra­tion ser­vices for the con­struc­tion of the new cov­ered park­ing struc­ture in the exist­ing short term and rental car sur­face park­ing lot. These ser­vices would include inspec­tion, mon­i­tor­ing of progress, inter­fac­ing with the design­ers, pro­cess­ing sub­mit­tals, change orders, ver­i­fi­ca­tion of quan­ti­ties, mon­i­tor­ing of qual­i­ty assur­ance test­ing, pro­cess­ing of month­ly pay appli­ca­tions and project closeout.

The total cost for this task order is $39,000. FDOT funds are antic­i­pat­ed to cov­er 50% of the cost. There are suf­fi­cient funds in the bud­get to cov­er this task order.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Mr. Math­is made a motion to approve the task order with ZHA and autho­riza­tion for the Exec­u­tive Direc­tor to exe­cute the nec­es­sary doc­u­ments. Ms. Moliter­no sec­ond­ed the motion. The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

b. ZHA Task Order – Qual­i­fied Mit­i­ga­tion Super­vi­sion and Mit­i­ga­tion Monitoring

This item pro­vides for Board approval of a task order with ZHA to per­form Qual­i­fied Mit­i­ga­tion Super­vi­sion (QMS) and Mit­i­ga­tion Mon­i­tor­ing for the annu­al peri­od Sep­tem­ber 2013 through August 2014.

In accor­dance with the Flori­da Depart­ment of Envi­ron­men­tal Pro­tec­tion WFP Per­mit #03- 0212186 – 004-DF, the air­port is required to pro­vide QMS to over­see all aspects of mit­i­ga­tion site imple­men­ta­tion, man­age­ment and cor­rec­tive actions and mit­i­ga­tion mon­i­tor­ing. The Per­mit requires con­tin­u­ous inspec­tion pres­ence on-site to mon­i­tor mit­i­ga­tion activities.

This task order for QMS includes the fol­low­ing services:

• QMS of all mit­i­ga­tion activ­i­ties on the mit­i­ga­tion site locat­ed south of CR 388 and the air­port for up to 100 days of on-site coor­di­na­tion and inspec­tion per annu­al period.
• Over­sight and admin­is­tra­tion of the con­struc­tion activ­i­ties and inter­face with the com­pa­ny per­form­ing the mit­i­ga­tion plan implementation.
• Annu­al mit­i­ga­tion mon­i­tor­ing in accor­dance with the Air­port Relo­ca­tion Mit­i­ga­tion Plan and mon­i­tor­ing the sta­tions and meth­ods estab­lished dur­ing the ini­tial base­line quan­ti­ta­tive mon­i­tor­ing con­duct­ed in Fall 2006.
• Pro­vide sta­tis­ti­cal analy­sis of the quan­ti­ta­tive mon­i­tor­ing data based pri­mar­i­ly on before and after com­par­i­son of over­all com­mu­ni­ty classification.
• Pre­pare the annu­al report and the mit­i­ga­tion report for the cur­rent period.

The cost for the task order is a lump sum of $372,000, which con­sists of $36,750 for QMS and Mit­i­ga­tion Mon­i­tor­ing and $335,250 for envi­ron­men­tal con­sult­ing ser­vices for the QMS and Mit­i­ga­tion Monitoring.

FAA and FDOT funds will be avail­able to pro­vide 95% fund­ing for this work, leav­ing $18,600 to be paid by the Dis­trict. There is suf­fi­cient fund­ing in the bud­get to cov­er this cost.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Ms. Moliter­no made a motion to approve the task order with ZHA and autho­riza­tion for the Exec­u­tive Direc­tor to exe­cute the nec­es­sary documents.

Mr. Bruett sec­ond­ed the motion. The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

c. Award Con­tract for Man­age­ment, Main­te­nance and Oper­a­tion of the Fuel Farm Facilities

This item pro­vides for Board award of a con­tract to pro­vide for the oper­a­tion of con­sol­i­dat­ed fuel farms at the airport.

A Request for Pro­pos­als for pro­vid­ing man­age­ment, main­te­nance and oper­a­tion of the fuel farm facil­i­ties was issued in July 2013. The avi­a­tion fuel farm con­sists of four 50,000 gal­lon Jet‑A tanks, four 15,000 avgas tanks, one 1,000 gal­lon diesel tank and one 1,000 gal­lon unlead­ed tank. The rental car facil­i­ty con­sists of one 15,000 gal­lon tank and one 5,000 gal­lon tank for unlead­ed gas.

The fuel farm oper­a­tor will be respon­si­ble for the oper­a­tion and main­te­nance of the fuel farm, man­ag­ing fuel inven­to­ries owned by the air­lines and FBOs, and own­ing and dis­pens­ing unlead­ed and diesel fuel for air­line ground ser­vice equip­ment and the rental car agen­cies. In addi­tion, the fuel farm oper­a­tor will pro­vide into-plane fuel­ing for the air­lines under sep­a­rate agree­ments direct­ly with the airlines.

The total main­te­nance and oper­a­tion costs include the cost of main­te­nance and oper­a­tion of the fuel farm and includ­ed charges to com­pen­sate the Dis­trict for the cap­i­tal cost of pro­vid­ing the fuel farm. In regard to the avi­a­tion fuel farm, these charges will be col­lect­ed by the fuel farm oper­a­tor from the users (air­lines and FBOs) based on a pro rata share of the gal­lons applic­a­ble to each oper­a­tor. The cost for the rental car facil­i­ty will be recov­ered by a mark-up of the fuel sold with the mark-up sub­ject to review and approval by the District.

There will be three agree­ments that per­tain to the fuel farm management:

Fuel Stor­age Con­tract – This agree­ment will be between the Dis­trict and those com­pa­nies that store fuel in the fuel farms.

• Fuel Sys­tem Access Agree­ment – This agree­ment defines the terms and con­di­tions that enti­tle com­pa­nies the right to with­draw fuel as autho­rized by the own­er of the avi­a­tion fuels.

• Main­te­nance, Oper­a­tion and Man­age­ment Ser­vices Agree­ment – This agree­ment pro­vides for the main­te­nance, oper­a­tion and man­age­ment of the fuel farms on behalf of the District.

In response to the RFP, only one pro­pos­al was sub­mit­ted to the Dis­trict. Sky­tank­ing USA, Inc., which is the cur­rent oper­a­tor of the fuel farm, sub­mit­ted a pro­pos­al that pro­vides for total main­te­nance and oper­a­tion costs in the amount of $443,180.

Sky­tank­ing has pro­vid­ed excel­lent ser­vice to the Dis­trict and its ten­ants for the past three years. If approved, this con­tract pro­vides for a five year term, renew­able at the dis­cre­tion of the District.

The award of this con­tract has no impact on the District’s bud­get, oth­er than to ensure that the Dis­trict will receive $140,000 in reim­burse­ment for the cap­i­tal cost of pro­vid­ing the fuel farm.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Ms. Moliter­no made a motion that the Board award the con­tract for the man­age­ment, main­te­nance and oper­a­tion of the fuel farm facil­i­ties to Sky­tank­ing USA, Inc., and autho­riza­tion for Board Chair­man or his designee to exe­cute any nec­es­sary doc­u­ments. Mr. Scott sec­ond­ed the motion. The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

d. Award Con­tract for Air­port Gate Ser­vices and Con­vey­or Sys­tem Oper­a­tion and Main­te­nance Program

This item pro­vides for Board award of a con­tract to pro­vide main­te­nance ser­vices for the pas­sen­ger load­ing bridges, pre­con­di­tioned air units, ground pow­er units and the inbound and out­bound bag­gage han­dling sys­tems at the airport.

A Request for Pro­pos­als for pro­vid­ing air­port gate ser­vices and con­vey­or sys­tem oper­a­tion and main­te­nance pro­gram was issued in July 2013. These ser­vices would include oper­a­tion and main­te­nance of the pas­sen­ger load­ing bridges, pre­con­di­tioned air units, 400Hz ground pow­er units and the inbound and out­bound bag­gage han­dling sys­tems. The out­bound bag­gage han­dling sys­tem sup­ports the TSA bag­gage screen­ing sys­tem for checked bags and includes the bag­gage make-up area. The inbound bag­gage han­dling sys­tem con­sists of the three bag­gage carousels locat­ed in the bag­gage claim area. These sys­tems are crit­i­cal for oper­a­tion of air­line pas­sen­ger ser­vices and must be func­tion­al to sup­port both inbound and out­bound air­line operations.

In response to the RFP, the fol­low­ing is a list of the com­pa­nies that sub­mit­ted bids and the respec­tive Year 1 bid amount:

Cofe­ly Ser­vices, Inc. Year 1 bid $373,740

Elite Line Ser­vices, LLC Year 1 bid (option 1) $363,073 (option 2) $324,273 ERMC IV, LP Year 1 bid $337,396.40

JBT AeroTech Air­port Ser­vices Year 1 bid $392,863 Van­Der­Lande Indus­tries Year 1 bid $547,744

Staff reviewed and eval­u­at­ed the bids, as well as the hours of oper­a­tion pro­posed by each com­pa­ny. Elite Line Ser­vices (ELS), which is the cur­rent provider of the con­vey­or sys­tem oper­a­tion and main­te­nance pro­gram sub­mit­ted a low bid under option 2 (alter­na­tive work sched­ule) of their pro­pos­al; how­ev­er, the work sched­ule pro­posed under that option reflect­ed a clos­ing time of 9:30 p.m., which was before the last sched­uled dai­ly flight arrived at approx­i­mate­ly 10:30 p.m.

If over­time became required for an ELS employ­ee to remain at the air­port for the last sched­uled flight, staff felt this option could poten­tial­ly be more expen­sive than the next low­est bid sub­mit­ted by ERMC IV, LP. Based on this poten­tial increase in cost, staff was pre­pared to rec­om­mend award of the con­tract to ERMC IV, LP.

It should be not­ed that dur­ing the review process, staff con­tact­ed ELS in order to clar­i­fy the sched­ule pro­posed under option 2. Staff received a let­ter from Mr. Mike Con­ner, Pres­i­dent of Elite Line Ser­vices, which stat­ed that the sched­ule pro­posed under option 2 was mere­ly a draft sched­ule and that ELS stood behind the low bid cost sub­mit­ted under option 2 which would apply for any sched­ule of oper­a­tion required to sup­port the air carrier’s flight schedule.

Attor­ney Franklin Har­ri­son addressed the Board Mem­bers and stat­ed that due to the fact that this was a review of pro­pos­als sub­mit­ted by com­pa­nies, staff was allowed to con­tact any com­pa­ny with regard to ques­tions con­cern­ing their respec­tive proposal.

Mr. Del Williams, Region­al Site Man­ag­er with Elite Line Ser­vices, was present at the Board Meet­ing and addressed the Board to reit­er­ate the intent of ELS to sup­port the low bid price sub­mit­ted work­ing any sched­ule nec­es­sary to sup­port the air carrier’s flight schedule.

In light of Staff’s clar­i­fi­ca­tion of the draft sched­ule pro­posed by ELS, Attor­ney Franklin Har­ri­son addressed Mr. McClel­lan and con­firmed that staff would be in favor of sup­port­ing the award of the con­tract to Elite Line Ser­vices. Mr. McClel­lan stat­ed that Staff would be in favor of con­tin­u­ing the con­tract and ser­vices pro­vid­ed by ELS.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Ms. Moliter­no made a motion to award the con­tract for air­port gate ser­vices and con­vey­or sys­tem oper­a­tion and main­te­nance to Elite Line Ser­vices under the option 2 bid price and with the under­stand­ing that ELS will work the required sched­ule to meet the air carrier’s flight sched­ule. Mr. Bruett sec­ond­ed the motion.

Before the vote was tak­en, Attor­ney Franklin Har­ri­son asked to address staff and con­firm whether or not ERMC had been con­tact­ed pri­or to the Board Meet­ing regard­ing staff’s ini­tial rec­om­men­da­tion to award the bid to that com­pa­ny. Mr. McClel­lan stat­ed that ERMC had been con­tact­ed regard­ing the award of the con­tract recommendation.

In light of this infor­ma­tion, Attor­ney Franklin Har­ri­son rec­om­mend­ed that pri­or to vot­ing on Ms. Moliterno’s motion regard­ing award of the con­tract, Mr. McClel­lan should review the infor­ma­tion and pro­vide a new staff rec­om­men­da­tion. The rec­om­men­da­tion will be pre­pared and pre­sent­ed to the Board for their con­sid­er­a­tion at the Sep­tem­ber 11, 2013 Spe­cial Meet­ing Board Workshop.

Mr. Pilch­er, Board Chair­man, direct­ed Mr. McClel­lan to con­tact ERMC and advise them of the amend­ed rec­om­men­da­tion regard­ing award of the contract.

The vote regard­ing this item was tabled until the Spe­cial Board Meet­ing sched­uled for Wednes­day, Sep­tem­ber 11, 2013.

e. Mod­i­fi­ca­tions to the Stormwa­ter Man­age­ment Sys­tem Aug­men­ta­tion Project

This item pro­vides for Board approval of mod­i­fi­ca­tions to the Stormwa­ter Man­age­ment Sys­tem Aug­men­ta­tion (SMSA) Project at the airport.

Recent­ly, there have been heavy rains expe­ri­enced at the air­port which have caused fail­ures to the exist­ing stormwa­ter sys­tem, and the SMSA project as a whole. The areas of con­cern that need to be addressed are the north­west cor­ner of the new wet pond, the north side of the new wet pond, the con­veyance ditch near the rental car facil­i­ty, out­falls from Pond C, and debris that is col­lect­ing in the over­flow structures.

In order to pre­vent any fur­ther dam­age or fail­ures with­in the stormwa­ter sys­tem, cor­rec­tive action needs to be tak­en at each of these sites. ZHA, the airport’s engi­neer­ing firm, has rec­om­mend­ed spe­cif­ic meth­ods to cor­rect the fail­ures at each of the sites, there­by pre­vent­ing any future areas of con­cern in the event of anoth­er episode of heavy rain. The fol­low­ing cor­rec­tive meth­ods have been rec­om­mend­ed by ZHA:

• North­west cor­ner of new wet pond: Rec­om­mend use of turf mats on the slopes and build­ing up the west­ern top of the bank area.

• North side of new wet pond: Rec­om­mend devel­op­ing a shal­low slope and chan­nel for water to enter the pond, includ­ing use of rip rap and oth­er improvements.

• Con­veyance ditch near rental car facil­i­ty: Rec­om­mend improv­ing the top of the berm and repair to ensure banks are returned to the orig­i­nal design.

• Out­falls from Pond C: Rec­om­mend cre­at­ing a large rip rap chan­nel to ensure the flow of water is minimized.

• Debris col­lect­ing in over­flow struc­tures: Rec­om­mend installing a chain link fence to fil­ter larg­er obstruc­tions from entering.

Imple­men­ta­tion of these rec­om­mend­ed solu­tions would require approval of a task order with ZHA for con­struc­tion admin­is­tra­tion and engi­neer­ing over­sight, as well as approval of a change order with Phoenix Con­struc­tion Ser­vices for the con­struc­tion of the new stormwa­ter sys­tem modifications.

Con­struc­tion admin­is­tra­tion and engi­neer­ing fees are esti­mat­ed to be approx­i­mate­ly $15,000 and con­struc­tion costs are esti­mat­ed to be $65,000, for a total not to exceed $80,000. Fund­ing is avail­able in the FY 2013 bud­get to cov­er the costs; how­ev­er, staff will attempt to have FDOT par­tic­i­pate in the fund­ing effort.

Fol­low­ing Board dis­cus­sion, Mr. Bruett made a motion to approve the task order with ZHA for the design and con­struc­tion over­sight of the stormwa­ter man­age­ment sys­tem mod­i­fi­ca­tions, and approval of a change order to Phoenix Con­struc­tion Ser­vices for the con­struc­tion of the stormwa­ter sys­tem mod­i­fi­ca­tions. Mr. Scott sec­ond­ed the motion. The vote was tak­en and the motion passed unanimously.

Exec­u­tive Direc­tor Reports:

Ground Trans­porta­tion Update: Mr. McClel­lan updat­ed the Board regard­ing the ground trans­porta­tion ser­vices with Sun­shine Shuttle.

Air Traf­fic Con­trol Tow­er Con­tract Pro­gram: Mr. McClel­lan updat­ed the Board regard­ing the sta­tus of the ATCT Con­tract Pro­gram and the airport’s efforts to con­tin­ue this program.

Stormwa­ter Man­age­ment Sys­tem Aug­men­ta­tion Project Update: Mr. McClel­lan updat­ed the Board regard­ing the sta­tus of this project.

Bay Air­craft Own­ers Hangar Door Update: Mr. McClel­lan updat­ed the Board regard­ing the sta­tus of repair to the hangar door.

Cov­ered Park­ing Project Update: Mr. McClel­lan updat­ed the Board regard­ing the sta­tus of con­struc­tion of the new cov­ered park­ing lot.

Pub­lic Comments:

There were no pub­lic comments.

Adjourn­ment:

The meet­ing was adjourned at approx­i­mate­ly 10:20 a.m.

Pat­ty Mitchell, Exec­u­tive Sec­re­tary John Pilch­er, Chairman