PORT OF SEATTLE 
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA                   Item No.         5i 
ACTION ITEM                   Date of Meeting   December 11, 2012 

DATE:     December 3, 2012 
TO:        Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
FROM:    Wendy Reiter, Director, Security 
Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group 
SUBJECT:  Known Crew Member Employee Bypass Project (CIP #C800576) 
Amount of This Request:   $630,000          Source of Funds: Airport Development Fund 
Est. State and Local Taxes: $ 31,000            Est. Jobs Created:     4 
Est. Total Project Cost:     $ 650,000 
ACTION REQUESTED: 
Request Port Commission authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to: (1) proceed with
design and construction; (2) use Port crews; and (3) competitively procure portals for the Known
Crew Member and Employee Bypass project at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport in the
amount of $630,000 for a combined project cost of $650,000. This request is time -sensitive and
seeks a single Commission authorization for design and construction in order to expedite project
completion in a timely manner. 
SYNOPSIS: 
This project will construct two new Known Crew Member (KCM) points of entry and employee
bypass (EMPL) portals at the Airport, in order to accommodate the expansion of the program by
the Transportation Security Administration (TSA). The KCM program allows properly screened
airline flight crews to bypass the Airport's security checkpoints. This program started with pilots
only but has now expanded to include flight attendants. Today they are located at two security
exits. These new portals would be equipped with appropriate security controls and be located at
each end of the main terminal. 
Staff requests a single authorization for design and construction for the following reason:
Because the KCM program has now been expanded to include more participants, they will queue
at the security exits while waiting to use the program. This will increase the risk to security due
to crowding at the security exits. The only alternative for the participants will be to use the
closest security checkpoint. With the pending realignment of the airlines in spring 2013 the
distribution of passengers to the south security checkpoint will grow. Adding flight crews to this
checkpoint will further slow it down. As the participant numbers swell and the summer traffic
peaks, this condition will grow worse and worse. Completing the KCM portals before summer is
the best way to minimize this situation and this risk.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
December 3, 2012 
Page 2 of 5 
Thus, proceeding with a single Commission authorization as stated in Resolution No. 3605, as
amended, section 4.2.3.1 for design, construction, and approval to advertise and award the
contract for the Known Crew Member Employee Bypass Project is necessary. 
This project was included in the 2013  2017 capital budget and plan of finance. 
BACKGROUND: 
Known Crew Member is a TSA program in use now that allows properly credentialed pilots to
bypass the security checkpoints at the Airport. TSA has adopted this program with the
cooperation of the airlines in order to reduce demand on the security checkpoints. While this
program originated as a means for pilots to bypass security, the TSA has now extended the
program to flight attendants and airlines have begun taking the steps necessary to add flight
attendants to the program. 
Today, the KCM bypass points of entry are located at the security exits of Concourses A and B
and adjacent to Security Checkpoint No. 5 at the north end of the main terminal. Once this
project is complete, new KCM bypass points of entry would be located at the south end and at
the north end of the main terminal. Because the KCM program is expanding soon, we intend to
complete the KCM bypass points of entry immediately. 
Once all eligible flight crew members participate in the KCM program, we anticipate crew traffic
at the existing locations to grow. This will introduce additional movement through and crowding
at the exits. This can compromise security of the exits. In addition, a future project to install
breach control at these exits will require this operation to move to new locations. Hence, the new
bypass points of entry will not be located at the existing exits. 
In addition, the impact to the security checkpoints from this increased demand can be further
mitigated by providing additional employee bypass portals. These portals would allow properly
badged Airport employees to bypass security. The portals will only allow one user to enter at a
time, and escorting of non-badged personnel will not be allowed. Because the selection process
for the portal equipment will take time, we intend to procure them separately while the KCM
points of entry are completed.
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: 
This project will improve the security of the Airport's security exits by moving demand for
security bypass to alternative locations in the main terminal. 
Project Objectives: 
Reduce security exit and checkpoint congestion. 
Control access and avoid inappropriate passage to others, also known as piggybacking. 
Relieve security risks. 
Reduce the visibility of the KCM points of entry from the traveling public.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
December 3, 2012 
Page 3 of 5 
PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK AND SCHEDULE: 
Scope of Work: 
Construct two KCM points of entry and employee bypass portals with Airport access control
equipment at each end of the main terminal. Each location will include a waiting area located
away from public view for users to congregate while they are processed through the points of
entry. The employee bypass portals will include automated entry doors to regulate their use. The
remote location will help secure the area from unauthorized people trying to use the bypass
portals and reduce concern from the public as to why some people are not being screened at the
checkpoints. 
Schedule: 
Known Crew Member 
Design               December    2012 
Construction          February      2013 
Complete            May         2013 
Employee Bypass 
Design               February      2013 
Procure Portals        April          2013 
Construction          September     2013 
Complete            December    2013 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: 
Budget/Authorization Summary:                      Capital     Expense     Total Project 
Original Budget                                      $800,000           $0        $800,000 
Budget reduction                                    -$150,000                    -$150,000 
Revised budget                                      $650,000                     $650,000 
Previous Authorizations                                $20,000           $0          $20,000 
Current request for authorization                        $630,000           $0         $630,000 
Total Authorizations, including this request             $650,000           $0         $650,000 
Remaining budget to be authorized                          $0          $0               $0 
Total Estimated Project Cost                          $650,000           $0         $650,000

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
December 3, 2012 
Page 4 of 5 
Upon completion of the project notebook, the budget was reduced from $800,000 to $650,000
due to refined cost estimates. 
Project Cost Breakdown:                            This Request          Total Project 
Construction                                              $400,000              $400,000 
Construction Management                               $76,000              $76,000 
Design                                                   $80,000               $80,000 
Project Management                                    $35,000              $55,000
Permitting                                                   $8,000                 $8,000 
State & Local Taxes (estimated)                            $31,000               $31,000 
Total                                                        $630,000               $650,000 
Budget Status and Source of Funds: 
This project, CIP #C800576, was included in the 2013-2017 Capital Budget and Plan of Finance 
as a business plan prospective project. The funding source 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           $650,000 
Business Unit (BU)               Terminal 
Effect on business performance   NOI after depreciation will increase 
IRR/NPV                   N/A 
CPE Impact                   CPE will increase less than $0.01 in 2014, but no
change to the business plan forecast as this project was
included.
Lifecycle Cost and Savings: 
The lifecycle cost and savings of this project will be determined as an element of design. 
Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs are estimated at $4,300 a year. 
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES: 
This project promotes the Port's strategic objective to 'Be a Leader in Transportation Security'
by providing a means for the expanded use of the TSA KCM program and minimizing impacts to
Airport security.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
December 3, 2012 
Page 5 of 5 
BUSINESS PLAN OBJECTIVES: 
This project supports the Aviation Division's strategic goal to operate a world-class international
Airport by ensuring safe and secure operations through minimizing impacts to airport security. 
TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE SUMMARY: 
This project will help the environment by considering energy reduction and sustainability as part
of design. It will help the Airport and the community by improving security and reducing
congestion at the security checkpoints and exits. 
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS: 
Alternative 1: Expand the existing security exits to accommodate the increased activity for
known crew members. This would require the acquisition of adjacent space such as concession
space for use as an expanded exit. This would not improve security and may impair security as
larger exits would become more difficult to manage. This alternative would also reduce income
to the Port and to affected concessions operators. This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2: Integrate known crew members into the existing security checkpoints. This could
increase congestion at the security checkpoints, which are already under strain from passenger
use. This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 3: Provide two new locations for known crew member and employee use. This will
provide locations away from vulnerable security exits and allow for the program to continue and
expand once the security exits become equipped with exit lane breach control. This is the
recommended alternative. 
OTHER DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS REQUEST: 
None. 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS: 
None.