Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Port Shoreside Power topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port seeks $5.7 million for Pier 70 shoreside power to offset emissions from Pier 27 work
Summary
The Port of San Francisco asked the Budget & Finance Subcommittee to authorize a $5.7 million Pier 70 shoreside power project to offset emissions from decommissioning a Pier 27 facility; the SFPUC pledged $1.5 million and the port plans an equipment charge to help repay debt.
The Budget & Finance Subcommittee on Tuesday heard a presentation from the Port of San Francisco seeking authorization to install shoreside power at Dry Dock No. 2 at Pier 70, a project the port estimates will cost up to $5.7 million.
Brad Benson, special projects manager for the port, said the Pier 70 facility is intended to offset air emissions that will result from decommissioning a shoreside power installation at Pier 27 during construction of the cruise terminal. "The EIR requires the port ... to install this Pier 70 shoreside power project," Benson said, describing expected reductions in reactive organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, sulfur oxides and carbon dioxide.
Under the proposal, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission would contribute $1.5 million and the port would apply an equipment charge of $0.04 per kilowatt-hour to recover costs. Benson described a financing plan that would combine that charge with a certificates-of-participation issuance to fund the project and noted the port expects to recover roughly 75% of costs over a 10-year financing period through the PUC contribution and the equipment charge.
Hugh Vanderspeck, general manager of BAE Systems San Francisco Ship Repair, told the committee the project would also increase the shipyard's ability to host larger vessels and could mean additional jobs. "We're employing blue collar workers and paying them a living wage," Vanderspeck said, describing recent contract wins and projected increases in volume.
Supervisors pressed staff on contracting rules and local hire/LBE (local business enterprise) requirements after Benson said the port would ask the board to waive certain competitive-bidding provisions and rely on lease-amendment approaches with BAE. "We would be happy to go back and work with BAE and its contractor to see if there's an LBE potential for this project," Benson said, and he agreed to consult with the City Attorney on how local-hire rules will apply.
The budget analyst told the committee the port's capital outlay estimate is $6.36 million when debt-service reserve and issuance costs are included; the $5.7 million figure excludes financing costs. The port said the project cost includes $600,000 to remove PCB transformers. The committee voted to forward the ordinance to the full board with recommendation.
The next step is the full Board of Supervisors' consideration and a future port debt issuance; the port said it expects to return in late April seeking financing authority.
