PORT OF SEATTLE 
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA               Item No.       6f 
ACTION ITEM 
Date of Meeting     January 26, 2016 
DATE:    January 19, 2016 
TO:      Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
FROM:   Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group 
Michael Ehl, Director, Aviation Operations 
SUBJECT:  Gate D6 Modifications at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (CIP #C800771) 
Amount of This Request:     $1,713,000     Source of Funds:   Airport Development 
Fund 
Est. Total Project Cost:       $1,733,000 
Est. State and Local Taxes:      $116,000 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request a single Commission authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to (1) proceed with
design of a passenger ramp for Gate D6 at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Airport); (2)
execute a contract to purchase the inclined walkway, furniture, casework, and equipment
required; and (3) use Port Construction Services to install the inclined walkway and complete
related work. This single authorization is for $1,713,000 of a total estimated project cost of
$1,733,000. 
SYNOPSIS 
The Gate D6 Modifications project will reactivate the holdroom and portal at Gate D6 in order to
provide a waiting and processing area for passengers who will be transported via bus to board a
remotely parked aircraft. This request is to authorize the design and installation of an inclined
walkway or ramp at Gate D6, and to complete the installation of furniture and equipment for the
Gate D6 holdroom for passenger and airline use. The ramp will be compliant with the Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) for passenger access to/from Gate D6. A single authorization is
required in order to allow construction to be completed prior to the 2017 summer peak travel
season. 
BACKGROUND 
In 2014, Gate D6 was de-activated as part of Airline Realignment when American Airlines
moved to Concourse D. At that time, the passenger loading bridge was removed from the
building to accommodate American's larger aircraft on Concourse D. That condition has not
changed, and thus it is not possible to utilize the holdroom in a traditional manner, with
passengers boarding via loading bridge. Alternatively, adding an ADA-compliant walkway and

Template revised May 30, 2013.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
January 19, 2016 
Page 2 of 6 
installing furniture and common use equipment in the holdroom, will allow the Port to use Gate
D6 for remote hardstand busing of passengers. 
With the projected growth in enplanements and operations, and the upcoming construction
activities that will take existing gates out of service temporarily, the Airport will be experiencing 
a severe shortage of contact gates that provide passenger loading bridges to connect aircraft to
the terminal building.
As early as 2016, passengers on some flights may be enplaned or deplaned at a remote aircraft
parking position and bused to/from the terminal. Enplaning passengers will, in this scenario, be 
processed for departure and wait for a bus to transport them to their remotely parked aircraft. 
This project will be designed to provide additional holdroom space and passenger processing
capabilities at Gate D6 and to accommodate a remote hardstand operation from this location for
two flights with staggered departure times. 
This project is the second step in creating passenger holding and processing space for remote
hardstand operations at the Airport. The first step is to create a new holdroom on the ramp level
of Concourse B, for which Commission authorized design in October 2015. Port staff is also
considering other spaces and locations needed to provide adequate holdroom capacity for
additional remote hardstand operations in the future. 
In 2014, the Commission authorized a similar project to provide a ramp for Gate S1 at the South
Satellite. Under a single authorization, the Port designed, procured materials, and installed a
ramp very similar to what staff is proposing for Gate D6. That project was successfully
completed under a reduced schedule and budget, in time for the June 2015 summer season. Staff
plans to use that same method of project delivery with this project to ensure that the Gate D6
holdroom will be ready for the 2017 summer season. 
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION AND DETAILS 
To accommodate operations when sufficient gates are not available, the Airport will enable
remote hardstand arrivals and departures where passengers are bused between the terminal
building and remotely parked aircraft. Since the Gate D6 boarding area currently does not have a
passenger loading bridge attached, it is an ideal location to hold and process passengers
departing from remote hardstand positions. The investments needed for Gate D6 are
comparatively less than investments needed to create additional holdroom space in other areas of
the Airport. For instance, as described in the alternatives section below, there is no need to build
an additional building or remodel an existing space into a new holdroom with this project.
Additionally, re-activation of this gate for remote hardstand operations will allow us to process
several flights per day from a location that maintains a high level of customer service for
passengers.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
January 19, 2016 
Page 3 of 6 
Project Objectives 
Increase productivity of existing terminal facilities. 
Provide holdroom and customer service space in the main terminal to accommodate
passengers. 
Provide the ability to process two flights from more than one airline consecutively at
the same gate. 
Scope of Work 
This project proposes to reactivate gate D6 by making modifications to the holdroom and
building exterior to accommodate holding and processing passengers for busing to remote
hardstands by:
Building an ADA-accessible ramp walkway to a bus loading zone at ramp level 
Adding common use casework and equipment to the holdroom 
Installing access control to the door portal 
Installing an external camera to monitor the door 
Relocating an Electrical Ground Support Equipment (EGSE) Charging Station 
Schedule 
Begin Design                          1st Qtr 2016 
Begin Procurement                      3rd Qtr 2016 
Begin Construction                       3rd Qtr 2016 
Complete Project                        1st Qtr 2017 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
Budget/Authorization Summary              Capital     Expense   Total Project 
Original Budget                      $1,400,000          $0    $1,400,000 
Budget Addition                      $333,000         $0     $333,000 
Revised Budget                     $1,733,000         $0    $1,733,000 
Previous Authorizations                   $20,000          $0      $20,000 
Current request for authorization            $1,713,000          $0    $1,713,000 
Total Authorizations, including this request     $1,733,000          $0    $1,733,000 
Remaining budget to be authorized               $0          $0          $0 
Total Estimated Project Cost              $1,733,000          $0    $1,733,000 
Project Cost Breakdown                     This Request       Total Project 
Design Phase                              $219,000          $239,000 
Procurement                              $338,000          $338,000 
Construction Phase                          $1,040,000         $1,040,000 
Sales Tax                                  $116,000          $116,000 
Total                                      $1,713,000         $1,733,000

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
January 19, 2016 
Page 4 of 6 

Budget Status and Source of Funds 
The Gate D6 Modifications (CIP #C800771) was included in the 2016-2020 capital budget and
plan of finance with a budget of $1,400,000. A budget increase of $333,000 is due to scope
changes during the project definition phase to add a second common-use counter, an external
security camera, relocate an Electrical Ground Support Equipment charging station, and an
increased steel cost. The budget increase will be transferred from the Aeronautical Allowance
CIP #C800404 resulting in no net change to the Airport capital budget. The funding source for
this project is the Airport Development Fund. 
Financial Analysis and Summary 
CIP Category             Renewal/Enhancement 
Project Type              Renewal & Replacement 
Risk adjusted discount rate     N/A 
Key risk factors             N/A 
Project cost for analysis        $1,733,000 
Business Unit (BU)          Terminal 
Effect on business performance  NOI after depreciation will decrease 
IRR/NPV             N/A 
CPE Impact             $.01 in 2017 
Lifecycle Cost and Savings 
The life of the walkway asset is estimated to be 40 years. We do not anticipate significant
ongoing maintenance costs, other than occasional refurbishment of the floors every 3 to 5 years
depending on usage and weather at an estimated cost range between $5,000 and $7,000. The
maintenance costs of the other project elements including the access control and common use
equipment will not have a significant budgetary impact. 
STRATEGIES AND OBJECTIVES 
This project promotes the Port's Century Agenda objective of meeting the region's air
transportation needs at the Airport for the next 25 years by providing critically needed passenger
holdrooms with common use passenger processing equipment for remote hardstand/off-gate
aircraft operations. It will also Increase the proportion of funds spent by the Port with qualified
small business firms on construction, goods and services. Flexible gate operations will allow for
more efficient utilization of the airport's existing facilities. 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1  Maintain the status quo (not recommended). 
This option does not provide an additional holdroom in the terminal for facilitating remote
hardstand operations. During times of gate shortage, airlines would incur significant delays as
they wait for gates to become available where they can process and board passengers.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
January 19, 2016 
Page 5 of 6 

Capital Cost: $0 
Pros: 
This alternative does not require a capital investment. 
Cons: 
This alternative would potentially delay aircraft arrivals and departures. This would
significantly degrade the quality of passenger experience at Sea-Tac and increase costs of
airlines related to delays. 
This alternative could require aircraft to idle engines while waiting for a gate increasing
emissions into the air and negatively affecting the environment. 
This alternative would potentially lead to airlines having to process departing hardstand
passengers in severely congested holdrooms already being used for other flights.
This alternative does not give airlines a dedicated space to provide customer service and
process passengers for hardstand departures.
Alternative 2  Add additional terminal capacity by increasing the building footprint and
adding contact gates and holdroom space (not recommended). 
This alternative would construct a new building in order to provide the additional capacity
needed. 
Capital Cost: $20 million. (This rough order of magnitude estimate for this alternative is based
on the 60 percent design estimate for the expansion portion only of the North Satellite
Renovation and North Satellite Transit System Lobbies Project that is adding new terminal and
gate capacity.) 
Pros: 
This alternative would provide the best passenger experience. It would not require
accessing the building from the ramp level or busing. 
This alternative would allow the addition of circulation space, passenger amenities, and
concessions space in addition to holdroom space.
This alternative would create new terminal capacity to hold 200 people. 
This alternative would provide additional contact gates and the ability to connect to the
pre-conditioned air system and ground power significantly reducing aircraft emissions
and energy savings. 
Cons: 
There is no space to add concourse level terminal contact gates without impact to current
taxi lanes and taxiways making this option not viable. 
This alternative, if it were viable, is significantly more expensive than adding holdroom
and passenger processing space within the current building footprint.
This alternative could not be completed in time to meet demand.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Ted Fick, Chief Executive Officer 
January 19, 2016 
Page 6 of 6 
Alternative 3  Reactivate the holdroom at Gate D6 and provide an ADA compatible
walkway to the bus loading/unloading area (This is the recommended alternative). 
Capital Cost: $1,733,000 
Pros: 
This alternative provides approximately 2,000 square feet of dedicated common use
holdroom and passenger processing space for use during hardstand operations. 
This alternative provides access for all passengers through one entry and exit point for
flights assigned to this holdroom. 
This alternative provides additional capacity within the existing building footprint as
directed in the Airport's business plan strategic goal to increase productivity of existing
air terminal facilities. 
This alternative aligns with the Century Agenda goal to meet the region's air
transportation needs at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport for the next 25 years and
encourage the cost effective expansion of domestic and international passenger and
cargo service. 
Cons: 
Building the new ADA walkway could impact operations on the ramp during
construction and the footprint of the walkway will take up some space currently used to
park ground service equipment. 
This is the recommended alternative. 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
Computer slide presentation showing project location. 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
May 26, 2015  Aviation Division Business Plan Overview 
April 28, 2015  Commission Briefing: Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP)