on monday, september 30, 2019, the professional … · on monday, september 30, 2019, the...

On MONDA , SEPTEMBER 30, 2019, the PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMITTEE f the GreaterOrland Aviati n Auth rity met at the GOAA Annex Building, l*r Fl r C nference R ms(Ap ll /Gemini/Taurus), 5855 Carg R ad, Orland , FL 32827.the meeting t rder at 11:06 a.m. The meeting was p sted in acc rdance with Fl ridaStatutes and a qu rum was present.

Chair Th rnt n called

C mmittee Members present:Stanley J. Th rnt n, ChairDavin Ru h maki, Seni r Direct r f Planning, Engineering and C nstructi nGary Hunt, Direct r f MaintenancePam L'Heureux, Direct r f Finance

Als present:Kathleen Sharman, Chief Financial Officer (p rti n f the deliberati ns nly)R bert Alfert, Legal C unsel (Nels n Mullins Br ad & CasselMeredith Hamm ck, Legal C unsel (Marchena & Graham)T m Draper, Seni r Direct r f Airp rt Operati nsMark Birkebak, EngineeringDebbie, McKe wn, Pr ject C ntr lsSc tt G dwin, BHS/GSEDave Deans, BHS/GSEAbdu El-Bar udi, Airp rt Operati nsElizabeth Serran -Medina, Airp rt Operati nsOlimpia L nsdale, PurchasingJ hn Scala, GCIEmpe Mall ry, GCIJ anne Regid r, Rec rding Secretary

Others present:Armand Perez, CIMC Tianda N rth America JVAndy Lin, CIMC Tianda N rth America JVFrancis Chester, CIMC Tianda N rth America JVHerman Giac melli, CIMC Tianda N rth America JVPerry Jasin, CIMC Tianda N rth America JVPete Amad r, CIMC Tianda N rth America JVSc tt Bergeman, TentyS ft, Inc.Brian DeR che, J hn Bean Techn l gies C rp rati nDavid Burdakin, J hn Bean Techn l gies C rp rati nFrank M re, J hn Bean Techn l gies C rp rati nLee McDerm tt, J hn Bean Techn l gies C rp rati nSteve Tatt n, J hn Bean Techn l gies C rp rati nT ny T rres, J hn Bean Techn l gies C rp rati nJay Grantham, Aer Bridgew rks, Inc.Michael Madl ck, Aer Bridgew rks, Inc.Art Masri, Vanderlande IndustriesGamaciel Bernabe, Vanderlande IndustriesR bert C t , Vanderlande IndustriesAar n P tter, thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc.Carla R cha-McCage, thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc.Dana Gr ss, thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc.Enver Sarilar, thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc.Gary Eshenr der, thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc.Greg Engleby, thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc.Miguel Lasheras, thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc.R bert Garcia, thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc.Ulysse Wurtz, thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc.

-

of 15MINUTES OF THE SEPTERMBER 30, 2019, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING OF THEGREATER ORLANDO AVIATION AUTHORIT

LOBB IST DISCLOSUREF r individuals wh c nduct l bbying activities with Aviati n Auth rity empl yees r B ard members, registrati n with the Aviati n Auth rity is required pri r t January 1st f each year r pri r t c nducting any l bbying activities, whicheveris earlier. A statement f expenditures incurred in c nnecti n with th se l bbyinginstances sh uld als be filed pri r t April 1 f each year f r the preceding year.As a reminder, l bbying f Aviati n Auth rity Staff and B ard members, wh aremembers f any c mmittee resp nsible f r ranking bids r pr p sals and thereafterf rwarding th se rec mmendati ns t the B ard, is pr hibited between the time arequest f r pr p sals r bids is released until ranking and award ccurs,additi n, l bbying f any Aviati n Auth rity B ard member is pr hibited fr m thetime that the applicable c mmittee ranks the pr p sals r bids t the time that theAviati n Auth rity b ard makes the award. As ad pted by the B ard n September 19,2012, l bbyists are n w required t sign-in at the Aviati n Auth rity ffices pri rt any meetings with Staff r B ard members.Staff r a B ard member at a l cati n ther than the Aviati n Auth rity ffices, thel bbyist shall file a N tice f L bbying (F rm 4) detailing each instance f l bbyingt the Aviati n Auth rity within 7 calendar days f such l bbying,f rms, and instructi ns are available in the Aviati n Auth rity's ffices and theweb site. Please c ntact the Manager f B ard Services with questi ns at (407) 8252032 .

In

In the event a l bbyist meets with

The p licy,

ANNOUNCEMENTAny appeals f decisi ns made by the Pr fessi nal Services C mmittee (PSC) must befiled with the Chief Executive Officer within five business days (n later than 4:00p.m. n the fifth business day) f the rendering f that decisi n.

ANNOUNCEMENTPursuant t Fl rida Statute 286.0113 (2)(b)1, the p rti n f the PSC meeting, whenpresentati ns and interviews are being c nducted, will be exempt fr m public meetingrequirements and will be rec rded.

INTERVIEWS/RANKING OF SHORTLISTED FIRMS FOR WS136, PASSENGER BOARDING BRIDGES ANDAFFILIATED EQUIPMENT, AT ORLANDO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT.

Pursuant t the acti n f the PSC at its meeting n July 23, 2019, thesh rtlisted firms listed bel w (in alphabetical rder) were interviewed f r furtherc nsiderati n and rec mmendati n t the Aviati n Auth rity B ard f r the subjectservices:

1.

• CIMC Tianda N rth America JV• J hn Bean Techn l gies C rp rati n• thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc.

The PSC and staff had previ usly been furnished a c py f each Statement fQualificati n (SOQ) al ng with the Advertisement, the Submissi n Requirements, and ther supp rting d cumentati n.

It was the c nsensus f the PSC t utilize 1.5-h ur intr ducti ns/presentati ns/interviews f r the selecti n pr cess,intr ducti n/presentati n t the PSC,questi n and answer sessi n.

Each firm had up t 30 minutes t make anf ll wing which the PSC c nducted a 1-h ur

Interviews were c nducted fr m 11:06 a.m. t 3:56 p.m.intr ducti n/presentati n, which were then f ll wed by the interview, where questi ns

Each firm made its


were p sed by the PSC and staff. Questi ns were directed t each firm's pr p sedpr ject manager wh then resp nded r deferred t c lleagues.

Chair Th rnt n read the L bbyist Discl sure and n ted that any appeals f decisi nsmade by the PSC must be filed with the Chief Executive Officer within five businessdays (n later than 4:00 p.m. n the fifth business day f the rendering f thatdecisi n. Chair Th rnt n pr ceeded t read the f ll wing statement:in the procur m nt docum nts, the PSC will conduct privat qu stion and answ rs ssions with ach Propos r, as part of th ov rall c mpetitive pr curement proc ss.Th s s ssions ar clos d and x mpt pursuant to Florida Statut 286.0113 (2)(b)l.In accordanc with this Statut , the ntir clos d s ssion will b r cord d v rbatimby a r cording d vic .Wh n th clos d s ssion is compl t , an announc m nt will b mad and nd th r cording.tak plac b tw n th Propos r and th Aviation Authority r pr s ntativ s.

As s t forth

No portion of this m ting will b h ld off th r cord.

From that point forward, no discussion r garding th procur m nt may

Chair Th rnt n then asked CIMC Tianda N rth America JV t verify that all members fits team were present and that n ne, ther than its team members and Aviati nAuth rity staff, were present.sessi n f r CIMC Tianda N rth America JV was c nducted and rec rded.

Mr. Perry Jasin c nfirmed this; thus, the cl sed

CIMC Tianda North America JV (CTNA) : CTNA was represented by Mr. Perry Jasin,Direct r f Operati ns; Mr. Pete Amad r, Partner; Mr. Herman Giac melli, Member; Mr.Armand Perez, CEO - Tianda; Mr. Andy Lin, Deputy General Manager; Mr. FrancisChester, Business Devel pment Manager: and, Mr. Sc tt Bergeman with TentyS ft, Inc.CTNA displayed a P werP int presentati n; a c py f which is n file. During theinterview, CTNA intr duced its team members, presented their pr duct and plan, andaddressed PSC and staff questi ns.

Up n c nclusi n f the presentati n, Chair Th rnt n instructed the PSC and staff t p se questi ns based n CTNA's presentati n and submitted SOQ.were addressed.

Several questi ns

Chair Th rnt n thanked CTNA f r their time and eff rt and further stated that thecl sed sessi n f r CTNA is c mplete, and ann unced that fr m this p int f rward, n discussi n regarding the pr curement may take place between the Pr p ser and theAviati n Auth rity representatives. The rec rding was st pped.

[Th PSC r c ss d at 12:37 p.m., and r conv n d at 1:07 p.m.]

Chair Th rnt n read the L bbyist Discl sure and n ted that any appeals f decisi nsmade by the PSC must be filed with the Chief Executive Officer within five businessdays (n later than 4:00 p.m. n the fifth business day f the rendering f thatdecisi n. Chair Th rnt n pr ceeded t read the f ll wing statement:in th procur m nt docum nts, th PSC will conduct privat qu stion and answ rs ssions with ach Propos r, as part of th ov rall comp titiv procur m nt proc ss.Th s s ssions ar clos d and x mpt pursuant to Florida Statut 286.0113 (2) (b) 1.In accordanc with this Statut , th ntir clos d s ssion will b r cord d v rbatimby a r cording d vic .Wh n th clos d s ssion is compl t , an announc m nt will b mad and nd th r cording.tak plac b tw n th Propos r and th Aviation Authority r pr s ntativ s.

As s t forth



Chair Th rnt n then asked J hn Bean Techn l gies C rp rati n t verify that all members f its team were present and that n ne, ther than its team members and Aviati n


Auth rity staff, were present,sessi n f r J hn Bean Techn l gies C rp rati n was c nducted and rec rded.

Mr. Frank M re c nfirmed this; thus, the cl sed

John Bean Technologies Corporation (JBT):Gl bal Business Direct r; Mr. Brian DeR che, PresidentT rres, Sales Manager; Mr. Lee McDerm tt, Seni r Pricing Analyst; Mr. Steve Tatt n,Techn l gy and IT; Mr. Dave Burdakin, EVP & President JBT Aer Tech; Mr. Art Masri,Mr. R bert C t , and Mr. Gamaciel Bernabe with Vanderlande Industries; and, Mr. JayGrantham and Mr. Michael Madl ck with Aer Bridgew rks, Inc.P werP int presentati n; a c py f which is n file,intr duced its team members, presented their pr duct and plan, and addressed PSC andstaff questi ns.

JBT was represented by Mr. Frank M re,Jetway Systems; Mr. T ny

JBT displayed aDuring the interview, JBT

Up n c nclusi n f the presentati n, Chair Th rnt n instructed the PSC and staff t p se questi ns based n JBT's presentati n and submitted SOQ.were addressed.

Several questi ns

Chair Th rnt n thanked JBT f r their time and eff rt and further stated that thecl sed sessi n f r JBT is c mplete, and ann unced that fr m this p int f rward, n discussi n regarding the pr curement may take place between the Pr p ser and theAviati n Auth rity representatives. The rec rding was st pped.

[Th PSC r c ss d at 2:12 p.m., and r conv n d at 2:37 p.m.]

Chair Th rnt n read the L bbyist Discl sure and n ted that any appeals f decisi nsmade by the PSC must be filed with the Chief Executive Officer within five businessdays (n later than 4:00 p.m. n the fifth business day f the rendering f thatdecisi n.in th procur m nt docum nts, th PSC will conduct privat qu stion and answ rs ssions with ach Propos r, as part of th ov rall comp titiv procur m nt proc ss.Th s s ssions ar clos d and x mpt pursuant to Florida Statut 286.0113 (2) (b) 1.In accordanc with this Statut , th ntir clos d s ssion will b r cord d v rbatimby a r cording d vic .Wh n th clos d s ssion is compl t , an announc m nt will b mad and nd th r cording.tak plac b tw n th Propos r and th Aviation Authority r pr s ntativ s.

Chair Th rnt n pr ceeded t read the f ll wing statement: As s t forth



Chair Th rnt n then asked thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc. t verify that all members f its team were present and that n ne, ther than its team members and Aviati nAuth rity staff, were present.sessi n f r thyssenKrupp Airp rt Systems, Inc. was c nducted and rec rded.

Mr. Ulysse Wurtz c nfirmed this; thus, the cl sed

thyssenKrupp Airport Systems (TK): TK was represented by Mr. Ulysse Wurtz, Head fBusiness Devel pment; Mr. Enver Sarilar, Direct r f Sales; Mr. Greg Engleby, N rthAmerica Sales Manager; Mr. Miguel Lasheras, Seni r VP Integrati n S luti ns; Mr.R bert Garcia, Service ManagerSeni r Pr ject Manager; Mr. Dana Gr ss, Electrical Engineering Manager; Mr. Aar nP tter, Sales Estimat r; and, Mr. Gary Eshenr der, General Manager -displayed a P werP int presentati n; a c py f which is n file,interview, TK intr duced its team members, presented their pr duct and plan, andaddressed PSC and staff questi ns.

Dubai Airp rts Branch; Ms. Carla R cha-McCage,

Elevat r. TKDuring the

Up n c nclusi n f the presentati n, Chair Th rnt n instructed the PSC and staff t p se questi ns based n TK's presentati n and submitted SOQ. Several questi ns wereaddressed.


Chair Th rnt n thanked TK f r their time and eff rt and further stated that thecl sed sessi n f r TK is c mplete, and ann unced that fr m this p int f rward, n discussi n regarding the pr curement may take place between the Pr p ser and theAviati n Auth rity representatives. The rec rding was st pped.

[Th PSC r c ss d at 3:56 p.m., and start d d lib rations at 4:08 p.m.]

Chair Th rnt n read the L bbyist Discl sure and n ted that any appeals f decisi nsmade by the PSC must be filed with the Chief Executive Officer within five businessdays (n later than 4:00 p.m. n the fifth business day) f the rendering f thatdecisi n.

Chair Th rnt n then requested that Legal C unsel review the evaluati n pr cess.Legal C unsel elucidated that the RFP laid ut the exact evaluati n criteria f rqualificati ns, Pr duct and Schedule Pr p sal, and Price Pr p sal,the Aviati n Auth rity had d ne its vig r us due diligence f r this five-year pr gramand c ntract, in rder t select a reputable partner based n its c mmitment t theSmall Business Participati n G als, its financial stability, qualificati ns andc rp rate eth s, and the f ll wing evaluati n criteria:

He n ted that

(1) Qualificati ns: Pr ject Appr ach and Meth d l gyQualificati ns: Pr p sed Staffing PlanQualificati ns: Pr p ser's Past Perf rmance, Accident/Incident Hist ry,Claims, and References

(2)(3)

Pr duct/Schedule:Specificati nsPr duct/Schedule: Pr p sed Pr ducti n Schedule and Quality AssurancePr duct/Schedule: Pr p sed Maintenance Plan and Parts Replacement Schedule

(4) Technical Pr duct and C mpatibility with Design

(5)(6)

(7) Price: Lump-Sum C st f r the PBBs and Affiliated Equipment Needed f r S uthTerminal CPrice: Maintenance C stPrice: Maintenance C st

(8) StaffParts(9)

Legal C unsel ackn wledged that Mr. Dave Deans, Aviati n Auth rity Operati ns, hadth r ughly reviewed all f the Pr p sals, al ng with Mr. J hn Scala, Aviati nAuth rity c nsultant, and Mr. Sc tt G dwin, Aviati n Auth rity Operati ns. LegalC unsel stated that the Pr ject Team will pr vide their evaluati n and the PSC willrank each fact r and then pen the Price Pr p sals.

Chair Th rnt n asked if there were any questi ns r c mments. Ms. L'Heureux statedthat there was an update t the financial rep rts. Legal C unsel resp nded that thefinancial matter will be fair t br ach at the third categ ry f the Qualificati nscriteria, which is essentially a due diligence categ ry.

Chair Th rnt n pr ceeded t the staff evaluati n and requested that Mr. Scala presentthe findings. Mr. Scala thanked all f the Pr p sers f r resp nding t the RFP andstarted the review n qualificati ns.

F r the first fact r f qualificati ns, Pr ject Appr ach and Meth d l gy, the Pr jectTeam evaluated the Pr p sers appr ach t the Pr ject, including the firm'smeth d l gy f r pr viding a c mplete s luti n f r the PBBs, and ability t pr videthe required services.


Mr. Scala n ted that CTNA currently had n fact ry in perati n in the United Statesand n vend r identified f r PBB belt l ader r water cabinets. CTNA had n evidencepresented f bridge installs in the United States in the past 20+ years. CTNA iscurrently refurbishing an aircraft manufacturing plant in Dallas, TX t serve TiandaUSA PBB manufacturing facility,this Pr ject.

CTNA's j int venture was f rmed specifically f r

Mr. Scala further n ted that JBT's appr ach and meth d l gy is t manufactures andpr vide ancillary equipment (GPU, AHU, Water Cabinet) fr m a single manufacturingfacility, in additi n t PBBs.appr ximately 8,000 bridges w rldwide, with multiple installati ns in the UnitedStates including the Orland Internati nal Airp rt (MCO). Additi nally, JBT's partnerf r installati n, Aer Bridge, has pr vided airside c nstructi n services f r m rethan 14,000+ terminal gates at m re than 200 airp rts.

The plant is l cated in Ogden, Utah and pr duced

Mr. Scala n ted that TK, in its appr ach and meth d l gy, d es n t manufacturer all f its c mp nents at the same facility,equipment in MCO t pr vide the ancillary equipment. TK d es n t have a pr ducti nline c ntinuity.

TK selected partners wh have current

Chair Th rnt n requested Mr. Ru h maki t share his evaluati n. Mr. Ru h maki statedthat he agrees with staff's evaluati n. He ranked JBT, first; TK, sec nd; and CTNA,third, n this fact r. Mr. Ru h maki expanded that f r JBT's pr ject appr ach itmade sense that everything is manufactured in Utah, and it is a pr ven facility with30+ years in the same l cati n and a g d ISO verified pr cess,appr ach is n t as centralized, which was n t necessarily a bad thing; h wever, itcan be a discriminat r, as it c uld cause c nfusi n and delivery schedule impacts.He n ted his c ncern f CTNA f rming a new JV and the pe ple w rking c hesively. Mr.Ru h maki als n ted that CTNA d es n t have its plant up and running which,c nsidering CTNA's pr ject appr ach is t manufacture in that facility, c uld causedelivery and schedule impacts.

TK's pr ject

Chair Th rnt n asked if where the PBBs and equipment are manufactured is a fact r.Legal C unsel replied yes; h wever, it c uld als be c nsidered in fact r five.

Mr. Hunt c ncurred with Mr. Ru h maki. He then c mplimented the Pr p sers n d inga great j b n their presentati ns; h wever, he n ted his c ncern f TK n t pr viding

He stated that this is a l ng termHe n ted that JBT and TK did a

their pr duct fr m a centralized l cati n,pr ject and a f undati n and c ntinuity is needed,very g d j b with their meth d l gy and s luti ns, with JBT standing ut.JBT, first; TK, sec nd; and CTNA, third.

He ranked

Ms. L'Heureux c ncurred. She shared the same c ncern f CTNA's plant n t being upand running. As far as pr ject appr ach and meth d l gy, she was in agreement withMr. Ru h maki and Mr. Hunt.

Chair Th rnt n stated that regardless f where CTNA's plant will be l cated, theissue is that they currently d n t have a plant,and have been manufacturing PBBs f r quite s me time,glass PBBs manufactured at ne and steel PBBs at an ther,staff t clarify the l cati n f TK's facilities. Mr. Scala resp nded that the bestclarificati n that he can pr vide is what TK stated in their interview; that steelPPBs will be manufactured in Dallas, Texas, and glass PBBs in Eur pe.

JBT has a single-s urce plant,TK has a few plants, with

Chair Th rnt n asked


The PSC concurred on the following ranking for Qualifications: Project Approach andMethodology:

First: John Bean Technologies Corporation

Second: thyssenKrupp Airport Systems, Inc.

Third: CIMC Tianda North America JV

Mr. Scala pr ceeded t the sec nd qualificati ns fact r, Pr p sed Staffing Plan. Hen ted that CTNA met the desired schedule, but did n t pr vide pr p sed start datef r O&M and c ntract services and did n t appear t have a c hesive team withprevi us experience w rking t gether. JBT pr vided a g d O&M pr p sal, with eightt nine technicians and partnered with Vanderlande Industries (VI) t pr vide O&Mservices. TK met parameters and pr p sed a start date f O&M services f r July 1,2021 and w uld be perf rming the O&M services.

Chair Th rnt n asked if JBT has nineteen pe ple f r staff with ne, full-time staffpers n dedicated t Maxim . Mr. Deans c nfirmed yes.

Chair Th rnt n asked if TK's twenty-f ur pe ple w uld be new l cal hires,c nfirmed yes.

Mr. Deans

Chair Th rnt n stated that he was c ncerned with CTNA's pr p sed staffing plan beingadequate with ne supervis r and tw technicians per shift, f r six pe ple t tal.Mr. Deans replied that Aviati n Auth rity staff had the same c ncern with threetechnicians each, f r PBBs and AHUs.

Chair Th rnt n asked if the bridge erect r, Aer Bridge and JBT have w rked t gether.Mr. Deans c nfirmed yes.

Chair Th rnt n asked if JBT with VI w uld hire and train nsite staff,c nfirmed yes.

Mr. Deans

Mr. Ru h maki c mmented that f r strategic partnership, JBT had the right mix fstaff and have teamed with VI bef re, nati nwide. He appreciated that JBT fferedec n mies f scale, that when asked if VI incurred savings as a result f pr vidingO&M services f r b th the STC Baggage Handling System and STC PBBs w uld they passth se savings n t the Aviati n Auth rity, VI immediately said that they w uld.Mr. Ru h maki indicated that TK had a little bit m re staff but m re unkn wns, s they were just a little ff the mark. JBT was n the mark, and CTNA was ff themark.

Chair Th rnt n asked Mr. Hunt f r his th ughts. Mr. Hunt stated that he was impressedby TK's staffing numbers and their meth d l gy; JBT did a g d j b with an adequatestaffing plan, which t the p int Mr. Ru h maki made pri r, c uld ffer the Aviati nAuth rity a p int f savings. Mr. Hunt als n ted that, with nly six maintenancestaff ffered, CTNA's pr p sal was n t adequate in his pini n. Chair Th rnt nc mmented that TK stated that their representatives w uld stay at MCO f r a year.

Mr. Ru h maki c njectured that TK's c rp rate stability, with news that theirelevat r divisi n will be separated r s ld, that if there is a shift, it c uldimpact the Aviati n Auth rity n the staffing side.


Ms. L'Heureux stated that Mr. Ru h raaki made a g d p int. She appreciated that JBThad agreed t ffer ec n mies f scale if p ssible. She n ted that TK is well kn wnf r handing elevat r installati ns, and that CTNA's pr p sal f six pe ple f rmaintenance was lean.

Chair Th rnt n asked if there are parameters with h w many staff are pr p sed. LegalC unsel replied that whatever staffing plan a Pr p ser br ught f rth, they w uld berequired t pr vide the staffing pr p sed if awarded the c ntract,n ted that he was n t c ncerned with a "hide the ball and change the plan situati n."The am unt f staffing required will be l cked d wn by c ntract with the successfulpr p ser.

Legal C unsel

Chair Th rnt n verified that if a Pr p ser says it will pr vide twenty-f urmaintenance staff, then it is required t pr vide twenty-f ur maintenance staff,unless the Aviati n Auth rity neg tiates d wn r up. Legal C unsel c nfirmed yes.

Mr. Ru h maki n ted that JBT has a slight edge ver TK, in terms f perati nalreadiness, with having an experienced team. Mr. Hunt c ncurred.

Ms. L'Heureux asked, given that TK and JBT b th have strengths, if they c uld beranked first and CTNA third.given the same ranking if they are flatly identical in staffing qualificati ns.L'Heureux n ted, in her pini n, that JBT had a str nger team with Vi's perati nalreadiness liais n wh is already under c ntract.

Chair Th rnt n replied that TK and JBT c uld nly beMs.

Ms. L'Heureux added that TK d es have m re pe ple t handle a larger scale maintenancepr ject. Chair Th rnt n resp nded that either the Aviati n Auth rity can have twenty-f ur pe ple that are n t familiar with the Aviati n Auth rity r have nineteen pe plewith s me familiarity with the Aviati n Auth rity. Mr. G dwin added that equipmentfr m JBT is all in-h use, and f r TK, with three different pr duct lines, there c uldbe c ncern with deliveries and schedule c rdinati n.

Chair Th rnt n stated that pr p sed staffing is n t just a maintenance team, thereis pr ducti n, installati n, and c mmissi ning; JBT's team has w rked t getherbef re.

Ms. L'Heureux and Mr. Hunt c ncurred.

The PSC concurred on the following ranking for Qualifications: Proposed StaffingPlan:




Chair Th rnt n m ved nt the third fact r under Qualificati ns:Perf rmance, Accident/Incident Hist ry, Claims, and References.

Pr p ser's Past

Legal C unsel explained that during the Sh rtlisting phase, all f the Pr p serswere pre-qualified t m ve t the next stage,is c ntained in staff's evaluati n rep rts t help the PSC with making theirdeterminati n. Legal C unsel ffered t again summarize the claims and referenceinf rmati n that was presented t the PSC during the sh rtlisting phase, and ChairTh rnt n said yes.

He n ted that much f the inf rmati n


Legal C unsel indicated that CTNA's references came fr m utside f the United States;they were fr m C l mbia and Brazil, and there were n issues f c ncern. Overall,CTNA's references were clean.

Legal C unsel n ted that JBT had twenty-six references, ranging fr m g d t excellent. He n ted five references with issues: Walker Field, a pr ject value underSI Milli n, there was a pr blem with the d r sens r, and JBT quickly addressed theissue. S uthwest Airlines at Lambert-St. L uis Internati nal Airp rt and The d reFrancis Green Airp rt, with pr ject values under $2 Milli n, references stated, that,alth ugh sl w, JBT always takes care f their pr duct n matter what,was very c mplimentary, but the sl w service sh uld be flagged as a p tential issue.At Bradent n Internati nal Airp rt, a pr ject valuing $11 Milli n which t k placefr m 2017

The reference

2019 f r the replacement f thirteen l ading bridges, the referencestated the JBT was great n the financial side; h wever they did n t meet the smallbusiness requirement. Legal C unsel stated that verall the JBT references weregenerally clean.

Legal C unsel n ted that TK pr vided nineteen references, and five f which arequalified. He indicated that the reference f r N rthwest Fl rida Regi nal Airp rt,a pr ject f r the manufacture and installati n f tw PBBs, stated that the airp rtassessed Liquidated Damages (LDs) against TK t get the punch list d ne. At R an keRegi nal Airp rt, a pr ject f r the manufacture and installati n f five PBBs, thereference stated that, verall, TK did a great j b, but s metimes they are sl w t resp nd with service r pr duct failure. At Charl tte D uglas Internati nal Airp rt,an ng ing pr ject slated f r c mpleti n in 2021 and valued at $40 Milli n, thereference n ted that when the incident ccurred at Baltim re Washingt n Internati nalAirp rt (BWI), a supp rt bracket f r the fl r br ke during passenger perati nswhich resulted in an accident with injuries. At that time, Charl tte D uglas t ldTK that TK c uld n t deliver an ther bridge t Charl tte D uglas until they g t t the r t cause f the accident. The part f the PBB that failed and caused thec llapse was a cast metal bearing that was meant t be used in c mpressi n, n t meantt be pulled n. Additi nally, n the Charl tte D uglas pr ject, the reference n tedthat TK was having issues manufacturing the PBBs f r that pr ject t specificati ns.Furtherm re, at the time the reference was given, TK nly had thirteen bridgesinstalled when there was supp sed t be fifty-seven installed. The reference statedthat there are ng ing LDs ass ciated with nine f the PBBs, and in 4.5 years, thepr ject is n its f urth Pr ject Manager. Lastly, Legal C unsel n ted that TK'sreference at R nald Reagan Internati nal Airp rt, pr ject valued at $14.3 Milli nwith c mpleti n in 2021, stated that in the engineering phase, they f und TK t bevery c mpartmentalized and sil -ed. Legal C unsel n ted that s me f the inf rmati nin the reference checks regarding liquidated damages assessments appeared t c ntradict an answer t Mr. Ru h maki's questi n, where TK indicated that it hadnever been assessed LDs.

Legal C unsel m ved nt claims, and n ted that CTNA was clean; JBT had ne claim inDallas which is g ing t trial January 2020, f r an ng ing claim that is purp rtedlyc vered under JBT's insurance. JBT c nfirmed in the interview that this matter wasc vered by insurance. TK did n t discl se any litigati n at the SOQ phase. Theincident at BWI was discussed during TK's interview. There may be pers nal injurylitigati n t f ll w fr m the BWI incident; h wever, at the time there was n furtherinf rmati n.

Mr. Ru h maki asked if TK had LDs assessed against them acc rding t the referencesreceived. Legal C unsel replied that tw f TK's references indicated that LDs were


assessed r were being assessed n their respective pr jects,inf rmati n is kn wn at this time.

but n additi nal

Chair Th rnt n stated that when taking references int c nsiderati n, as well asdirect hist ry with TK teams at the Orland Internati nal Airp rt, with the TK PBBfailure issues and with assembly at vari us l cati ns, there was a str ng c ncernwith TK. The Aviati n Auth rity had rep rted the "p rch" failure issue t TK, thenMIA rep rted the same failure, and then BWI subsequently made nati nal news f r thesame failure. Mr. Th rnt n indicated that, in c mparis n, JBT presented str ngerperf rmance within the United States. The PSC c ncurred.

The PSC concurred on the following ranking for Qualifications:Performance, Accident/Incident History, Claims, and References:

Proposer's Past


Second: CIMC Tianda North America JV

Third: thyssenKrupp Airport Systems, Inc.

Chair Th rnt n pr ceeded t the f urth fact r, Pr duct/Schedule: Technical Pr ductand C mpatibility with Design Specificati ns, and requested staff t pr vide thereview. Mr. Scala stated that CTNA had s me assemblies c ming fr m Tianda plant inShenzhen, China.preference f bridges made in the United States. He n ted that there was carpet sh wnas fl ring instead f vinyl. F r affiliated equipment, CTNA pr p sed a Verde AHU,which appears is n t currently in pr ducti n. CTNA did n t identify a water cabinet r belt l ader manufacturer.

On specificati ns, Tianda "n ted" vs "c mply" in regard t

Mr. Scala stated that JBT's PBBs meet the Aviati n Auth rity's specificati ns, andwere currently in use at the Orland Internati nal Airp rt (MCO). Additi nally, JBTmanufactures the AHUs, GPUs, and water cabinets pr p sed and pr p sed KCI t manufacture the belt l ader. He n ted that TK PBBs meet the Aviati n Auth rity'sspecificati ns, and were currently in use at MCO.established manufacturers f AHUs, GPUs, and water cabinets kn wn and in use in MCOt day.

TK pr p sed partnering with

Chair Th rnt n stated that TK has a nice pr duct and s me techn l gical advances,which were still in delivery, but again, have three different s urces f r vari usparts, and yet JBT is single s urce f r m st f the ancillary equipment and the PBBs.Mr. Deans clarified that JBT d es everything with the excepti n f the belt l aders,which will be manufactured by KCI.

Chair Th rnt n indicated that the PSC needs t figure ut if the difference with TKand JBT are material,secti n, and the nly maj r differentiat r is in dealing with ne manufacturer versusmultiple .

Deans n ted that TK and JBT are satisfact ry f r thisMr.

Mr. Scala stated that ne pr duct line fr m ne l cati n is m re advantage us inmaintaining and c rdinating. Mr. Deans added that it is hard t "p int a finger"at an ther manufacturer if ancillary equipment fails when the pr vider is themanufacture, as in JBT's case.

Chair Th rnt n n ted that CTNA and TK have aut -d cking, but TK d es n t have theiraut -d cking n the market yet and CTNA did n t explain h w theirs w rked. Chair


Th rnt n asked t c nfirm that JBT did n t have aut -d cking,that JBT d es n t have aut -d cking.

Mr. G dwin resp nded

Mr. Ru h maki c mmented that fr m a risk perspective, it is less risky t g with ne manufacturer. Mr. Hunt agreed, and added that because f unpr ven techn l gy f the aut -d cking, there was still a level f c ncern, but d wn the r ad it canbe c nsidered as an pti n,appreciates TK's aut d cking techn l gy she d es n t wish t be the first t utilizeit.

Ms. L'Heureux c ncurred, n ting that while she

The PSC concurred on the following ranking for Product/Schedule: Technical Productand Compatibility with Design Specifications:




Mr. Scala m ved n t the fifth fact r, Pr duct/Schedule: Pr p sed Pr ducti nSchedule and Quality Assurance. He stated that all f the Pr p sers met the pr p sedschedule. He n ted that CTNA pr vided a high-level PBB manufacture, shipping andinstall timelines but did n t include a break ut f pr curement timelines f r AHU,GPU, p rtable water cabinets, baggage c nvey rs and additi nal access ries. CTNAstated they w uld c mply with the c ntract; referred t internal d cuments f r theirquality c ntr l pr gram, included inf rmati n n Quality inspecti n and c mmittedt a warranty peri d f tw years. He n ted, again, that CTNA has n plant in perati n in the United States.

Mr. Scala n ted that JBT pr vided an acceptable timeline f r pr ducti n andinstallati n schedules, as well as detailed pr curement timelines f r AHU, GPU,p rtable water cabinets, baggage c nvey rs and additi nal access ries. The pr p sedinstallati n schedule is als br ken d wn in detail by gate fr m delivery f equipmentthr ugh Cust mer Acceptance. JBT stated they w uld fully c mply with thespecificati n requirements and meet r exceed perf rmance requirements specified inthe c ntract. JBT is pr viding a tw -year warranty, in additi n t having everythingmanufactured at ne l cati n, with the excepti n f the belt l ader c ming fr mOreg n.

Mr. Scala n ted that TK met theextensive Quality C ntr l and Quality Assurance pr gram.TK stated they w uld c mply with the tw -year warranty.Dallas, TX; AHUs fr m Ohi ; GPUs fr m Fl rida; and belt l ader fr m Oreg n.

schedule and warranty requirements and pr vided anIn the c mpliance matrix,TK's PBBs w uld c me fr m

Chair Th rnt n indicated that there is a benefit t the Aviati n Auth rity t JBThaving everything, except the belt l ader, manufactured in ne facility and thatparts c ming fr m multiple l cati ns, such as TK is pr p sing, can be a disadvantage.Mr. Ru h maki resp nded affirmatively.

Mr. Scala stated that fr m c mp nents t ut-the-d r, JBT had a very detailedschedule, and that TK's schedule was als th r ugh but n t as detailed with respectt access ries and ancillary equipment.g d timelines, but JBT was better with c mp nents, and TK's QA/QC was better.Deans c mmented that JBT has an advantage with their assembly, as the ancillaryequipment c uld be fitted during the manufacturing pr cess.

Mr. G dwin n ted that TK and JBT b th hadMr.


Chair Th rnt n asked if TK was g ing t assemble nsite at MCO r at a plant.Deans replied TK stated that they w uld ship t MCO and install nsite.

Mr.

Legal C unsel asked if QA/QC carries f rward t nsite install. Mr. Deans repliedyes, but c rdinating shipping fr m multiple vend rs c uld be an issue.

Chair Th rnt n asked if JBT dry fits at the plant, perf rms test, then disassemblesand installs nsite. Mr. Scala replied yes; it was his understanding that JBT hasa l ck-d wn pr cess with assurance that c mp nents fit t gether pri r t deliveryat MCO. Chair Th rnt n highlighted the imp rtance with QA/QC, and fav red the dryfit in plant, where crews are present in the manufacturing plant with their t ls.

The PSC concurred on the following ranking for Product/Schedule: Proposed ProductionSchedule and Quality Assurance:




Mr. Scala pr ceeded t the sixth fact r, Pr duct/Schedule: Pr p sed Maintenance Planand Parts Replacement Schedule. He n ted that CTNA pr vided a limited maintenanceplan with quarterly checks. He indicated that JBT was m re th r ugh with identifyingpr cess f r amending checklists.

Mr. Hunt n ted that TK pr vided a g d plan that was detailed and pr active; likewise,JBT was als very g d,preventative maintenance.

Chair Th rnt n added that b th JBT and TK pr vided

Mr. Ru h maki n ted that there have been issues with b th TK and JBT in the fieldat MCO; h wever, JBT has been m re pr active,m re issues, as referenced at MCO, BWI and MIA.

In TK's case,Mr. Hunt c ncurred.

its hist ry reveals

Legal C unsel inf rmed the PSC that this fact r must be taken fr m scratch and n tt mix issues fr m fact r (3) Qualificati ns: Pr p ser's Past Perf rmance,Accident/Incident Hist ry, Claims, and References, but whether their plans have am re pr active appr ach. The questi n is if their plan is credible and if there areany discriminat rs.

Chair Th rnt n asked if this fact r is nly meant t take int c nsiderati n whatthe Pr p sers c mmitted t d ing g ing f rward, n t what they have d ne in the past.Legal C unsel replied yes, the PSC sh uld evaluate the pr p sals f r credibility t sh w activities that have been analyzed and the maintenance tasks are reas nable t ensure minimal d wntimes.

Chair Th rnt n asked if the Pr p sers pr vided a reas nable am unt f spare partsin Operati n's pini n. Mr. G dwin resp nded that TK has a m bile unit t maintainPBB usage, r ther equipment t keep perati ns g ing. Mr. Deans indicated thatin TK's pr p sal, they pr p sed inspecti ns every tw m nths, and JBT pr p sed everythree m nths, but JBT expressed during their presentati n that c uld be neg tiated.Legal C unsel stated t take what is written in the SOQs and Pr p sals w rd versp ken w rd in interviews n this p int.


Chair Th rnt n asked if the m bile unit was in TK's pr p sal,yes, the specificati ns address keeping the PBBs perati nal.

Mr. Deans replied

Chair Th rnt n stated that, in his pini n, TK pr p sed a better maintenance plan verall. Mr. Ru h maki and Mr. Hunt c ncurred.

The PSC concurred on the following ranking for Product/Schedule: Proposed MaintenancePlan and Parts Replacement Schedule:

First: thyssenKrupp Airport Systems, Inc. Corporation

Second: John Bean Technologies


Chair Th rnt n then requested that Ms. Meredith Hamm ck, utside Legal C unsel t the Aviati n Auth rity, and Ms. Debbie McKe wn, Manager f Pr ject C ntr ls, penthe Price Pr p sals in alphabetical rder. Ms. McKe wn pr vided the f ll wing:

• CTNA pr vided a flash drive with an electr nic c py, ackn wledged all addenda,and included Exhibits A and B. The f ll wing pricing was pr vided: Lump-SumC st f r the PBBs and Affiliated Equipment: $22,103,387.90; Maintenance C st

T talParts: $507,632.00;and Maintenance C stPr p sal Price: $45,154,169.00.

Staff: $22,543,149.10.

• JBT pr vided a flash drive with an electr nic c py, ackn wledged all addenda,and included Exhibits A and B. The f ll wing pricing was pr vided: Lump-SumC st f r the PBBs and Affiliated Equipment: $30,575,581.00; Maintenance C stParts: $1,166,939.00; and Maintenance C st

Pr p sal Price: $47,294,027.00.Staff: $15,551,507.00. T tal

• TK pr vided a flash drive with an electr nic c py, ackn wledged all addenda,and included Exhibits A and B. The f ll wing pricing was pr vided: Lump-SumC st f r the PBBs and Affiliated Equipment: $31,170,729.00; Maintenance C stParts: $3,723,556.47; and Maintenance C st

Pr p sal Price: $49,788,505.47.Staff: $14,894,220.00. T tal

Ms. McKe wn p pulated the Price Pr p sal Sheet and displayed the f ll wing:

[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]

-

-

-

of 15MINUTES OF THE SEPTERMBER 30, 2019, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING OF THEGREATER ORLANDO AVIATION AUTHORITY

John B anT chnologi sCorporation

CIMC TIANDA North Thyss nkrupp AirportSyst ms, Inc.

Combin d RankingAm rica JV

(: : C'-alincdiicr.s?rc eci Apprise.- *r.: Vet'.

CIMC TLANDA North3 2 22egy

America JV

John BeanTechnologiesCorporation

<2 ;:sPr p sed Staffing ?.3r.

3 2 13

<3; C 3Pr p ser'

Ac : dc r.z r.c: aeni Hist ry,He fe rcr.ces

Past Perf rmance Thyss nkrupp AirportSyst ms, Inc.

2 :• 19

; 4: Pr jct/Sens cle;Technical Pr ct er.aC xpatid:Iny w:rSpecif i can r.s

3 2Design

(S > ?r c _u*_/ Scheriu 1 eProposed Prodiclicn Scneio.e anaCos lily Assurance

3 2

Procuct Sched'j . ePropcsec Vamrenance Plan ar.cParts Peplacexer.t Schedule

3 2

Lump Sur Cosi fortne ?B3s and

At f 111 aiea Iq.premneeded for Scuih

(8) Price;Maintenar.ee C si

(9) Price:Ranking for p)Price Ranking for (8)

PriceRanking for (9)

PricePricing

Ma:ntenance C stStaff Parts

CIMC TXANDA North America JV 22 r 103,33".9CS 1 $ 22,543,149.ID 3 5 C , 632. 23 1

IJohn Bean Technologies Corporation % 33,5?5,531.C 2 $ 15,551,5C7.Cl 2 $ :,166,933.c: 2

Thyss nkrupp Airport Syst ms, Inc. S3i, pc, 29.:: 3 $ : 4 , $ 9 4,2 2 3 . Z 3 $ 3,7 2 3, 556.4

3

Legal C unsel, R bert Alfert, stated that, based n the nine ranking fact rs, JBThas the l west c mbined ranking with a sc re f 13, making JBT the first rankedpr p ser, then TK, with a sc re f 19, making TK the sec nd ranked pr p ser, andfinally, CTNA , with a sc re f 22, making CTNA the third ranked pr p ser. He n ted ne caveat, that the Price Pr p sal requires further review fr m Aviati n Auth rityStaff, Legal C unsel, and the Office f Small Business Devel pment, t make surethat all f the requirements have been met. As f t day, JBT is first ranked, TKis sec nd ranked, and CTNA is third ranked.

Upon motion of Mr. Ruohomaki, second by Ms. L'Heureux, vote carried to recommend tothe Aviation Authority Board (1) the ranking below; and, (2) the award of WS136,Passenger Boarding Bridges and Affiliated Equipment, at the Orlando InternationalAirport,$47,294,027.00, subject to review from Aviation Authority Staff, Legal Counsel, andthe Office of Small Business Development, as follows:

to the first-ranked firm for the total proposal price amount of




- -

: “

i

, '

:

- :

I

”

of 15MINUTES OF THE SEPTEFMBER 30, 2019, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING OF THEGREATER ORLANDO AVIATION AUTHORIT

ADJOURNMENT2 . There being n further business f r discussi n n this day, the meeting

[The PSC meeting rec rding terminated due t a technicaladj urned at 5:38 p.m.err r at 2:48 p.m. These meeting minutes have been prepared fr m Rec rding Secretaryn tati ns . ]

Stanley J. Th rnt n, ChairPr fessi nal Services C mmitteeChief Operating Officer

f 15MINUTES OF THE SEPTERMBER 30, 2019, PROFESSIONAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING OF THEGREATER ORLANDO AVIATION AUTHORITY

ADJOURNMENT2 . There being n further business f r discussi n n this day, the meeting

[The PSC meeting rec rding terminated due t a technicaladj urned at 5:38 p.m.err r at 2:48 p.m. These meeting minutes have been prepared fr m Rec rding Secretaryn tati ns.]

Stanley J. Tnd'rnt n, ChairPr fessi nal Services C mmitteeChief Operating Officer

on monday, september 30, 2019, the professional … · on monday, september 30, 2019, the...

Documents