Committee backs amendment to expand Cochrane shoreside‑power contract at Pier 27; Port seeks $5.1 million

The Governmental Audit and Oversight Committee advanced an amendment to a prior ordinance that would expand a sole‑source contract with Cochrane Incorporated to install shoreside (shore-to-ship) power equipment at the Port of San Francisco’s Pier 27 and Pier 29. Vice Chair Eric Marr and Supervisor Sophie Maxwell supported forwarding the measure to the full Board as a committee report.

Port representatives said the project, first discussed with the public in 2003–05, moved from an initial Pier 35 plan to Pier 27 for engineering reasons and that the Board had previously authorized a sole‑source contract to Cochrane for design and installation. Jay Och, manager of environmental and regulatory affairs for the Port’s maritime division, told the committee the system will allow cruise ships to plug into city power and shut off onboard diesel generators. He cited per‑call emission estimates of roughly 140 pounds of diesel particulate matter, 1.3 tons of nitrogen oxides, nearly 1 ton of sulfur oxides and almost 20 tons of carbon dioxide for a 10‑hour call, and said the Port anticipates about 20 calls a year initially from the Princess fleet.

Ed Byrne, the Port’s chief harbor engineer, described system specifications and construction needs: an initial delivery capability of about 2.5 megawatts at either 6,600 or 11,000 volts per ship and a design that can be upgraded to 20 megawatts. Byrne explained the routing of conduits from the street through Pier Shed 29 into Pier 27, the need to weatherize equipment placed outdoors on a saltwater pier, and added labor, hazmat and structural allowances for timber pier repairs.

Those changes and the added second connection point increased the estimated project cost, the Port said. Byrne stated the contract estimate rose from about $2.2 million initially to roughly $4.4 million, and the Port requested authority for $5.1 million to cover a 10% contingency and three additional years of operations and maintenance support. The Port said it brought in independent estimator YEI Engineers to review the numbers and found them reasonable.

Funding presentations cited a committed Bay Area Air Quality Management District grant and SFPUC capital funds totaling about $3.4 million, two pending federal grant applications (the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and a U.S. Department of Energy transportation program) and, if federal grants do not materialize, roughly $1.5 million of Port capital contingency that the Port would use. The Port and SFPUC staff said PUC rate schedules are designed to recoup the PUC contribution but could not provide a precise payback period; Port staff agreed to follow up with a recoupment estimate under alternate funding scenarios.

Several members of the public spoke. Comments ranged from technical concerns about electrical vaults and transformer capacity to requests for continued outreach to stakeholders who participated in earlier deliberations; some speakers praised the project’s environmental benefits. After discussion, Supervisor Maxwell moved to advance the ordinance amendment with the committee’s recommendation; the two committee members present supported the recommendation and the item was sent to the full Board for consideration on June 16.

The committee record shows the Port will proceed with design and preparatory work pending grant outcomes; the measure forwarded from committee does not itself authorize final disbursements beyond the existing procurement and will require Board approval to finalize any contract amendment or funding transfer.