COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          6j 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting       June 11, 2019 
DATE:     June 4, 2019 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Jeffrey Brown, Director Aviation Facilities and Capital Programs 
Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group 
SUBJECT:  Passenger Loading Bridges Gate S12 (CIP #C801094) 
Amount of this request:               $1,750,000 
Total estimated project cost:           $1,750,000 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to (1) prepare design and
construction bid documents for the replacement of the passenger loading bridge (PLB) and
fixed walkway at Sea-Tac Airport Gate S12; (2) purchase one new PLB and fixed walkway; (3)
use Port crews and small works contracts. The amount of this request is $1,750,000 for a total
estimated project cost of $1,750,000. 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
Reliable, well-operating passenger loading bridges are critical to airline and airport operations.
Recently, during a quarterly preventative maintenance inspection, the structural integrity of the
Gate S12 PLB was identified as critical; it was taken out of service on May 22 to evaluate repair
and/or replacement options. This PLB, in service since 1982, services international flights and this
closure will add operational stress and congestion to an already busy terminal. Staff recommends
that this PLB be replaced as soon as possible. This funding request is being brought forward now
to expedite the replacement of this highly critical PLB. 
Funding for this project was not included in the 2019-2023 capital budget and plan of finance.
The capital budget will be transferred from the Aeronautical Allowance #C800753 resulting in
no net change to the Aviation Division capital budget. 
JUSTIFICATION 
The PLBs at Sea-Tac are  highly utilized  compared to airports with comparable annual
enplanements. In 2015, Sea-Tac processed approximately 217,000 passengers per gate, the
highest of all peer airports and well above the national average of approximately 153,000. Any
unplanned downtime due to PLB or fixed walkway issues impacts airlines and customer service.

Template revised January 10, 2019.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _6j__                                Page 2 of 5 
Meeting Date: June 11, 2019 
DETAILS 
The Gate S12  PLB was originally installed in 1982 and was refurbished in 2012; this
refurbishment did not include any structural repairs, enhancements, or modifications. 
Scope of Work 
(1)   Design services for this scope of work will be  provided under existing indefinite
delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) design services contract. 
(2)   Purchase  and  installation  of  new  PLB,  associated  fixed  walkway,  and  related
components at Gate S12 along with necessary architectural, structural, electrical, data, 
and mechanical infrastructure upgrades to meet new PLB standards and current code
requirements. 
(3)   Port Construction Services will perform work associated with preparing the foundation
upgrade or replacement and provide construction management services for PLB
installation. 
(4) The new bridge will be connected to the Port's facility monitoring system so any
malfunction that shuts the bridge down will be promptly reported to Maintenance for
faster response. 
WMBE 
Through Port Construction Services (PCS), small works contracts are utilized, providing several 
small business opportunities within the project scope of work.  Additionally, the IDIQ design
firm uses a WMBE firm for structural design which is a vital part of the design process. 

Schedule 
Activity 
Design start                                       2019 Quarter 2 
Commission construction authorization          2019 Quarter 2 
Construction start                                2019 Quarter 3 
In-use date                                       2019 Quarter 4 
Cost Breakdown                                      This Request           Total Project 
Design                                                    $300,000              $300,000 
Construction                                             $1,450,000             $1,450,000 
Total                                                          $1,750,000              $1,750,000 



Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _6j__                                Page 3 of 5 
Meeting Date: June 11, 2019 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1  Operate flights that would use Gate S12 at hardstand locations and add the S12
replacement to the next phase of bridge replacements. 
Cost Implications: $1,750,000 
Pros: 
(1)   Deferred capital expenditure. 
Cons: 
(1)   With Gate S12 being out of service AV Operations is using hardstand operations to
offset Gate S12 not being usable which has a trickledown effect that displaces several
smaller aircraft vying for the same hardstand locations. One wide-body aircraft takes
up the same amount of room as three narrow-bodies at Cargo 7. This displacement
will  impact  the  passenger  experience  with  longer  wait  times,  flight  delays,  and
potentially canceled flights. 
(2)   Stress airline operations with a gate closure. 
(3)   This alternative would potentially lead to airlines insisting on processing departing
passengers in severely congested hold rooms on other concourses already being used
for other flights. 
(4)   This alternative does not give airlines, tenants, and passengers a reliable gate system
to provide customer service and process guests for arrivals and departures. 
(5)   This alternative would significantly degrade the quality of passenger experience at
Sea-Tac. 
(6)   This alternative has the longest down time of the S12 gate. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2  Proceed with prioritizing the design, construction, and replacement as outlined
for Gate S12. 
Cost Implications: $1,750,000 
Pros: 
(1)   Replaces aged equipment giving it a new service life of 25+ years. 
(2)   Upgrade the PLB, fixed walkway, and associated gate equipment to the current codes
and standards (seismic, electrical, mechanical, Etc.). 
(3)   This has the shortest potential for turn around to get the gate operational. 
(4)   PCS  can  proactively  work  on  the  necessary  upgrades  while  the  bridge  is  being
manufactured. 
(5)   This  alternative  provides  the  Port  dependable  equipment  to  facilitate  airline
operations. 
Cons: 
(1)   This alternative could push out the replacement of a planned bridge due to resource
availability. 

Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _6j__                                Page 4 of 5 
Meeting Date: June 11, 2019 
This is the recommended alternative. 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary               Capital        Expense           Total 
COST ESTIMATE 
Original estimate                                 $1,750,000               $0      $1,750,000 
AUTHORIZATION 
Previous authorizations                                   $0               $0               $0 
Current request for authorization                $1,750,000               $0      $1,750,000 
Total authorizations, including this request       $1,750,000               $0      $1,750,000 
Remaining amount to be authorized                    $0             $0             $0 
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds 
The Passenger Loading Bridge Project CIP#C801094 was not included in the 2019-2023 capital
budget and plan of finance. The capital budget will be transferred from the Aeronautical
Allowance C800753 resulting in no net change to the Aviation Division capital budget. The
funding source will be from existing revenue bond. 
Financial Analysis and Summary 
Project cost for analysis              $1,750,000 
Business Unit (BU)                  Passenger Loading Bridge 
Effect on business performance     NOI after depreciation will increase 
(NOI after depreciation) 
IRR/NPV (if relevant)                N/A 
CPE Impact                        $.01 in 2020 
Future Revenues and Expenses (Total cost of ownership) 
This is a renewal and replacement program that replaces existing equipment that is old and
dated. Replacement of the equipment will require a similar level of maintenance and an
anticipated reduced level of repairs and does not have a material impact on current Aviation
Maintenance O&M costs. 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
(1)   None 


Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _6j__                                Page 5 of 5 
Meeting Date: June 11, 2019 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
None 

















Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.