COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM         Item No.                       8d 
ACTION ITEM                 Date of Meeting                  May 14, 2024 
DATE:    April 23, 2024 
TO:      Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:   Laurel Dunphy, Director Airport Operations 
SUBJECT: Seattle Ramp Tower Operations Services Contract
Amount of this request:                $16,000,000 
Total estimated contract cost:           $16,000,000 

ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to authorize contract execution for
the operation and management of the Seattle Ramp Tower (SRT) for an estimated cost of
$16,000,000 (total three-year term with three one-year options will commence approximately
January 1, 2025) ; and enter into agreements with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in
relation to managing and coordinating operations between the SRT and the FAA.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
The Seattle Ramp Tower (SRT) is currently operated by the Port of Seattle under contract with
Dynamic Science Inc. The current contract is set to expire on December 31, 2024.
The SRT generally manages operations in the taxilanes and gate areas. The FAA Control Tower
manages operations on the runways and taxiways.  Established agreements between the two
towers are necessary on how to transition aircraft and other operators between the two areas.
The close coordination is essential for both parties to efficiently operate the airport. 
Operating a Ramp Tower at SEA is crucial for safety, minimizes taxi times, saves fuel, reduces fuel
emissions, and saves costs for airlines. The ramp tower costs will not affect the landing fee rate,
as cost recovery will be achieved through an existing per-operations tariff. 
Also, noteworthy is the backdrop of expanding capital programs such as the C Concourse
Expansion (CCE) that increasingly impede the operational fluidity of our airport. Therefore,
securing a competent operator who can adapt to new technology becomes paramount to
navigating these challenges effectively. 

Template revised January 10, 2019.

             COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8d                                  Page 2  of 5
Meeting Date: May 14, 2024 

JUSTIFICATION 
SEA is one of the busiest airports in the United States, serving millions of passengers annually.
The intricate layout of taxilanes, aprons, and terminals often leads to congestion and
inefficiencies in aircraft movement on the ground. The SRT, also known as the ramp control tower
or ramp control for short, is an important asset that provides advisory instructions for aircraft
moving to and from these areas. It provides impartial sequencing of aircraft and avoids gridlock,
thus facilitating more effective traffic flows. Ramp control towers provide essential services in
daily operations at large airports, and with the implementation of ramp control towers, airlines
and airport operations have reported increased efficiency and reduced costs. Analysis of the SEA
SRT program showed a conservative cost savings to the airlines of approximately $1.8 million.
Increased operating costs since then would result in even greater savings. Costs associated with
this contract are fully recovered via a dedicated existing per-operation tariff and does not affect
landing fees. 
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), in its report on a 2001 runway incursion at SEA,
recommended that the Airport implement ramp control to reduce the potential for future runway
incursions. 
All of the SRT controllers are FAA-certified, to ensure the highest level of professionalism. 

DIVERSITY IN CONTRACTING 
We've spoken with the Diversity and Contracting department and because there are limited scope
elements and WMBE firms available in this industry, we will not be setting a WMBE aspirational
goal. However, there might be a few WMBE firms from out of state who could be interested, so
we'll reach out to them to encourage bidding. 

DETAILS 
The FAA provides positive control of aircraft activity on the runways and taxiways at SEA. This
positive control does not extend to the remaining paved areas for aircraft movement, known as
ramps and aprons. The responsibility for safe aircraft movements in these non-controlled areas
rests with aircraft pilots. Although the FAA Air Traffic Controllers can provide an advisory service
to aircraft moving on the ramp, this is not mandatory and is deemed optional. The NTSB, in its
report on a 2001 runway incursion incident at SEA, recommended that the Airport implement
ramp control as a means to reduce the potential for future runway incursions. The operation of
a ramp control facility is also fully supported by the air carriers that operate at SEA. 
Utilization of a ramp control facility provides coordinated advisory control of aircraft movements
to and from the airport runways and taxiways, provides impartial sequencing of aircraft, and
prevents gridlock. Ramp control facilities at large airports are essential to daily operations. The

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

             COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8d                                  Page 3  of 5
Meeting Date: May 14, 2024 
SRT also increases safety, minimizes taxi times, saves fuel, reduces emissions, and reduces airline
costs. 
Ongoing capital programs such as the Concourse C Expansion (CCE) contribute to the obstruction
of views from the current SRT. As new structures rise around the airport, the visibility for ramp
traffic  controllers  diminishes,  posing  safety  concerns  and  operational  challenges.  These
obstructions impede the ability of controllers to effectively monitor and manage ground
movements, potentially leading to delays and increased risks of accidents. 
The selected vendor will assist the Port in transitioning to a virtual ramp tower (VRT) system in
the next few years. The advanced camera systems and data analytic capabilities of a VRT provide
ramp traffic controllers with comprehensive situational awareness, even in areas with limited
visibility. This technology enables controllers to efficiently manage aircraft movements, mitigate
congestion, and reduce taxi times. Therefore, improving the overall flow of traffic within the nonmovement
area. Staff intend to transition to a VRT within the timeframe of this Commission
authorization. Costs associated with constructing the VRT will be brought before the Commission
as a separate action. 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1 – Initiate competitive procurement for staffing and operation of the Ramp Tower
Operations for a three-year term, to includes three (one-year) options. This alternative will
provide the personnel to staff and operate the Ramp Tower Facility, providing the coordinated
flow of aircraft to and from the runways, increasing the safety and efficiencies for the FAA, the
Airport, and the airlines. 
This is the recommended alternative. 
Cost Implications: $16,000,000 
Pros: 
• SRT controllers are FAA-certified. 
• Cost Control: Through competitive procurement, the airport can negotiate competitive
rates and terms, potentially reducing operational costs compared to in-house staffing. 
• Flexibility: Including options for contract renewal allows for flexibility in adjusting
staffing levels or transitioning to alternative solutions as needed. 
• Training – an experienced company has established training protocols, procedures,
materials, instructors, etc.
Cons: 
• Risk of Disputes: Contractual agreements with external providers may entail risks such as
disputes over performance, service quality, or contract terms, which could impact
operational continuity and stakeholder satisfaction. 
Alternative 2 – Hire SRT staff as Port of Seattle employees. 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

             COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8d                                  Page 4  of 5
Meeting Date: May 14, 2024 
Cost Implications: $20,286,000 
Pros: 
• Direct Control: Hiring controllers and a manager as Port of Seattle employees provides
direct oversight and control over staffing, training, and operational procedures, allowing
for greater customization and alignment with airport-specific needs and goals. 
• Stability and Continuity: Employing controllers and a manager as Port of Seattle staff
ensures stability and continuity in staffing, reducing turnover risks and maintaining
institutional knowledge and expertise over the long term. 
Cons: 
• Increased Administrative Burden: Assuming responsibility for hiring, training, and
managing SRT staff as Port of Seattle employees may impose additional administrative
burdens and resource demands. SEA does not currently have staff who have capacity to
conduct regular training of SRT employees. 
• Higher Cost: Directly employing SRT staff may result in higher operational costs for the
Port of Seattle. 
• Training: The Port does not have a training program for ramp controllers and the
supervisors. There is not enough time to develop one and get all staff trained prior to the
end of the existing contract. All the costs associated with training would feed into the
higher cost item above. 
Alternative 3 – Eliminate the SRT. 
Cost Implications: Initial savings but potentially increased indirect costs. 
Pros: 
• Cost savings. 
Cons: 
• Airport would become grid locked. 
• Higher greenhouse gas emissions caused by longer taxi times. 
• Reduced revenues as airlines would likely cancel flights due to the congested airfield. 
• Increased risk of aircraft accidents. 
• Increased risk of runway incursions. 
• Increased liability if there is an accident as we ignored the NTSB’s recommendation to
establish ramp control. 
• Increased airline costs due to increased taxi times, fuel burn, crew costs, maintenance
costs, etc. 


Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

             COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8d                                  Page 5  of 5
Meeting Date: May 14, 2024 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
The ramp tower annual expense is budgeted in the Airport Operation’s operating budget and
approved through the annual budget cycle. The expense is charged as an apron fee in the airlines
rates and charges. 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
(1) Presentation 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
1.  July 12, 2016:  Execute a contract for the operation and management of the Seattle Ramp
Tower for an estimated cost of $12,941,000 for up to 8 years (5- year initial with 3 1-year
options) 
2.  June 22, 2010: Execute a six-year contract for operations and management of the Seattle
Ramp Tower for an estimated cost of $4,700,000 for the first three years and options for an
additional three years for a total cost of $9,400,000. 
3.  September 22, 2009: Execute a one-year extension for continued operation of the Airport
Ramp Control Tower Facility for a total cost of $1,019,000. 
4.  On November 11, 2008, Commission authorized execution of the first one-year extension to
the PSA for the operation of the Airport Ramp Control Tower Facility, for an estimated cost
of $1,019,000. 
5.  On November 22, 2005, Commission authorized execution of a three-year PSA, for an
estimated cost of $3,675,000, with provisions for two one-year extensions, for the operation
of the Airport Ramp Control Tower Facility. 








Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).