PORT OF SEATTLE 
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA             Item No.      6a 
ACTION ITEM             Date of Meeting  September 25, 2012 

DATE:    September 18, 2012 
TO:      Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
FROM:    Mike Ehl, Director, Airport Operations 
Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group 
SUBJECT: Cargo 2-West Hardstand Expansion at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
(CIP #C800247) 
Amount of This Request:  $2,410,000   Source of Funds: Airport Development Fund (and
future revenue bonds) 
Est. State and Local Taxes: N/A       Est. Jobs Created: TBD 
Est. Total Project Cost:   $12,130,000 
ACTION REQUESTED: 
Request Commission authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to (1) design and prepare
construction documents for the demolition of a cargo building (Building 2) and for the 
enlargement of the hardstand in the Cargo 2-West area in the amount of $830,000; and (2)
terminate the lease, containing two cargo buildings in the Cargo 1 and Cargo 2 areas currently
owned by ProLogis (formerly AMB) at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, at a cost not to
exceed $1,580,000. 
SYNOPSIS: 
This project will promote air freight and regional economic vitality by allowing large freighter 
aircraft, such as the new 747-8F aircraft, to operate efficiently at the Cargo 2-West hardstand.
The project is consistent and necessary for the implementation of the Commission's Century
Agenda goals as they relate to tripling air cargo volume within 25 years. 
The cargo industry is gravitating towards the use of more and larger wide-body aircraft. This
trend is being reflected at the Airport. However, there are no hardstand positions at the Airport 
that can singularly accommodate the new Boeing 747-8 freighter (B747-8F). The project will
enlarge the western cargo hardstand in the Cargo 2 area toward the north, which will allow for
two simultaneous straight-in wide body freighter nose-load operations by aircraft like the B747-
400F and the B747-8F.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
September 18, 2012 
Page 2 of 7 

Users of the overall Cargo 2 area have increased their frequency of operation by more than 50%
in the last 5 years. The Airport saw a record number of B747F aircraft in July 2012 during the
summer cherry export season, with a total of 133 of this type of large aircraft. A lack of freighter
parking capacity led to operational disruption and displacement of customer aircraft to other
locations on one occasion and resulted in all positions being used simultaneously with no
capacity for additional operations on several other occasions during the summer. Similar
maximum capacity conditions are forecast for future winter holiday peak seasons.
Several current carriers have indicated potential interest in increasing frequency at Sea-Tac.
Other cargo carriers have expressed possible interest in starting service here. All of them,
however, are concerned about the ability and willingness of the Airport to ensure that there will
be sufficient capacity to meet their needs. Sea-Tac is unable today to ensure that it can meet the
simultaneous needs of scheduled cargo carriers, charter operators, seasonal expanded Fed-Ex
service, overnight or disabled aircraft parking needs, or diversion requests. In addition, as we
seek to attract new or expanded service, we cannot now demonstrate sufficient future capacity to
accommodate that potential demand. 
The terms of the lease with ProLogis for the two buildings in the Cargo 1 and Cargo 2 areas
require that the Port provide one year advance notice prior to termination.
The Cargo 2 project was objected to by the airlines in the Majority-in-Interest (MII) vote dated
February 24, 2012, triggering a 180-day waiting period that concluded on August 22, 2012.
Because staff believes that this project is necessary to meet the long-term goals of the Century
Agenda as well as the very near-term needs of existing tenants, we recommend that the Port
proceed with implementation. 
There are potential cost savings associated with two additional hardstand projects (the Cargo 5
Hardstand project, approved for design on March 27, 2012; and the Cargo 6 Enhancements
project, for which design authorization is currently being requested) that have the potential to be
combined with this project into a single bid to be completed in a single construction season
(2014). Staff has estimated potential savings of up to $10 million with a single, combined
contract as compared to the cost of using separate contracts for each project. This savings
represents 16% of the combined project costs, or 54% of the total costs of the Cargo 2 and Cargo
6 projects. 
There is a time sensitivity associated with the authorization of design for both the Cargo 2 West
Hardstand and Cargo 6 Enhancements in order to realize the estimated savings of up to $10
million. Authorization for these projects is needed now in order to combine Cargo 2, Cargo 5,
and Cargo 6 projects into a single contract to be constructed in 2014. The lease for Cargo 2
requires a one-year notice to the building tenants and sufficient time for their relocation. Cargo 2
also affects a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ASDE-X antenna. The FAA will need
adequate time to relocate their antenna in advance of the demolition of a building. The building
demolition is one of the first orders of work in the combined contract to be followed by work that

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
September 18, 2012 
Page 3 of 7 
is weather dependent and needs to fully utilize the normal construction season. Another
constraint is that Cargo 2 and Cargo 6 cannot both be out of service at the same time as it would
severely impact air cargo operations. It is envisioned that Cargo 2 will be completed first.
Authorization for both the design of Cargo 5 and Cargo 6 now will allow for the timely
relocation of a tenant and the FAA antenna, for the preparation of contract documents, and for 
Cargo 2, Cargo 5, and Cargo 6 to be constructed in one contract that is completed in a single
construction season. Should authorization for the design for Cargo 2 and Cargo 6 not occur now,
the opportunity to combine those projects with Cargo 5 into a single contract would be lost and
result in higher cost and operational impact. Alternatively, a deferral in the authorization for
Cargo 2 and Cargo 6 while combining the projects into a single contract would result in the
construction occuring over two construction seasons at a higher cost and environmental risk. . 
This project was included in the 2012-2016 capital budget and plan of finance as a business plan
prospective project. 
BACKGROUND: 
The industry forecasts overall cargo growth between 5% and 6.5% annually over the next 10 
years while international growth will be stronger, with growth of 6% to 7% in the Asia-Pacific
market. Air cargo represents approximately 30% of the value of goods exported from the United
States and is an essential part of regional economic vitality and the efforts to increase overall
exports. 
The existing Cargo 2 hardstand is too short to accommodate straight-in parking for certain types
of cargo loading operations. The current nose-load parking position line has to be angled, and
the 747-8F line must be configured east to west across two hardstands. This results in an
inefficient use of the ramp by taking up two parking positions for a single operation and reducing
overall capacity. 
All existing hardstands have limited space in front of parked aircraft to allow for cargo/ground
service equipment (GSE) staging. Consequently, cargo and GSE end up staged on either side of
the aircraft, impinging on adjacent hardstands. 
This project will provide additional concrete apron space to enlarge the western cargo hardstand
toward the north, which will provide enough room for two simultaneous straight-in wide body
freighter nose-load operations by aircraft including the 747-8F. The larger ramp area will allow
the taxilane to be moved to the north and provide better maneuverability and increased
operational room for users of both Cargo 2 and Cargo 3 ramps. Gate E-185 will be relocated so
that vehicular traffic is not directed towards the hardstand. 
Cargo 2 has no ground power connections, requiring the need for air carriers to run their
auxiliary power units (APUs) to power the aircraft while on the ground. This project installs inground
power, reducing the emission of greenhouse gasses and other pollutants by
approximately 325 tons annually and creating significant fuel savings for the airlines. With the

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
September 18, 2012 
Page 4 of 7 
addition of in-ground power, the Airport is providing modern "green" servicing options,
providing a financial benefit to the airlines and an environmental benefit to the Airport. 
ProLogis has a ground lease in the Cargo 2 area and owns two buildings there, one of which will
require demolition. The lease requires a one-year notice prior to termination and compensation
for the unamortized value of the buildings. The building that is to be demolished is occupied by
a tenant, Cargo Airport Services. The Port will coordinate with ProLogis and/or the tenant as
appropriate for the tenant's relocation prior to the start of construction. There is no Port cost
associated with the relocation. 
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: 
The existing Cargo 2-West hardstand is the only existing hardstand position at the Airport that
can efficiently and safely accommodate the cargo operation of the new 747-8F aircraft, and other
aircraft design group (ADG) VI very large freighter aircraft. Because Cargo 2 -West lacks
adequate depth, the current -8F nose-load parking position is required to be perpendicular to
existing parking lines, which results in the aircraft having to be positioned across a number of 
hardstand lines. This results in an inefficient use of the ramp by taking up two parking positions 
for a single operation. Effective alternatives do not exist. 
Project Objectives: 
Improve the Cargo 2-West hardstand in order to accommodate the increased size and
frequency of wide body cargo aircraft at the Airport 
Improve overall air cargo efficiency 
Support cargo volume growth 
PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK AND SCHEDULE: 
Scope of Work: 
Lease buyout from ProLogis 
Demolition of one cargo building currently owned by ProLogis 
Grade the building site and adjacent parking lot to the north 
Install concrete hardstand between Cargo 2 and Cargo 1 to the north 
Asphalt paving adjacent to concrete around hardstand area for cargo and GSE staging 
Relocate security gate E-185, related fencing and new guard shack 
Install in-ground 400 Hz power for the two wide body positions 
Replace affected or aged utilities 
Relocation of FAA radar antenna  EXPENSE ITEM 
Schedule: 
Commission Authorization to Terminate Lease and 100% Design     September   2012 
Lease Termination                                  September   2012 
Building Acquisition                                  September   2013 
Tenant Relocation                                   December    2013 
Commission Authorization to Advertise                     August     2013

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
September 18, 2012 
Page 5 of 7 
Advertise                                       September   2013 
Notice to Proceed                                    January     2014 
Construction Complete                              October    2014 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: 
Budget/Authorization Summary:             Capital      Expense   Total Project 
Original Budget                      $13,300,000      $300,000    $13,600,000 
Budget Decrease                     (1,470,000)               (1,470,000) 
Revised Budget                     $11,830,000      $300,000   $12,130,000 
Previous Authorizations                        $0          $0          $0 
Current request for authorization             $2,410,000           $0     $2,410,000 
Total Authorizations, including this request      $2,410,000           $0     $2,410,000 
Remaining budget to be authorized           $9,420,000      $300,000    $9,720,000 
Total Estimated Project Cost               $11,830,000      $300,000    $12,130,000 
Project Cost Breakdown:               This Request   Total Project 
Construction                               $0     $7,600,000 
Administrative Costs                     $830,000     $1,920,000 
Lease Buy-out                       $1,580,000     $1,580,000 
State & Local Taxes (estimated)                   $0      $730,000 
Total                                $2,410,000    $11,830,000 

Budget Status and Source of Funds: 
Cargo 2West Hardstand Expansion CIP #C800247 is included in the 2012-2016 capital budget
and plan of finance as a business plan prospective project with a budget of $13,300,000. The
budget reduction of $1,470,000 has been transferred to the Aeronautical New Projects CIP 
#C102165, a business plan prospective project, resulting in no net change to the Aviation capital
budget. Operating expense funds will not be utilized until 2013-2014. The source of funds for
this project will be the Airport Development Fund and future revenue bonds. Consistent with
the Port's plan of finance, the Airport has a number of projects that will require a revenue bond
issue in 2013. 
Financial Analysis and Summary: 
CIP Category                   Revenue/Capacity Growth 
Project Type                    Business Expansion 
Risk adjusted Discount rate           N/A 
Key risk factors                    N/A 
Project cost for analysis               $11,830,000

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
September 18, 2012 
Page 6 of 7 
Business Unit (BU)                 Airfield 
Effect on business performance         NOI after depreciation will increase since capital and
operating costs will be recovered through landing fees 
IRR/NPV                  N/A 
CPE Impact                  $0.06 in 2015; however, no change from business plan
forecast as this project was included. 
The revenues as well as the operating and capital costs associated with the cargo business unit
are included in the airfield cost center. The net impact of the cargo business unit, including this
investment, reduces the landing fee charged to all airlines. 
Lifecycle Cost and Savings: 
The estimated life expectancy for this project is 20 years for pavements, 15-20 years for the
security guard shack, 40 years for utilities, 20 years for 400 Hz power system and 30 years for
electrical panels and transformers. 
The estimated operating and maintenance cost is $28,000 for the first year, $20,500 per year
second year, with an increase of 3% per year thereafter. 
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES: 
This project is consistent and necessary for the implementation of the Commission's Century
Agenda goals that call for tripling air cargo volume over 25 years. 
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY: 
Energy conservation lighting may be used to reduce energy use and reduce off-airport
glare and light pollution. 
400Hz In-Ground Power: 
Utilizing 400 Hz power, versus auxiliary power units (APUs) or ground power units,
supports the Port's Century Agenda Goal to Reduce carbon emissions from all Port
operations by 50% from 2005 levels and reduce aircraft-related carbon emissions at Sea-
Tac by 25%. Using 400 Hz power at freighter parking and remain-over-night (RON) 
positions is consistent with previous decisions to reduce noise and emissions. 
The estimated annual emission savings of utilizing 400 Hz power versus APUs for a
cumulative 360 hours of 747 or MD11 freighter aircraft operations is: 
Hydrocarbon       0.1 tons/yr. 
Carbon Monoxide    2.0 tons/yr. 
Nitrous Oxides      0.5 tons/yr.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
September 18, 2012 
Page 7 of 7 
Carbon Dioxide     325 tons/yr. 
Alternative materials may be used in concrete, such as fly ash and slag. 
Portions of the existing building may be recycled. 
BUSINESS PLAN OBJECTIVES: 
This project is included in the 2012-2016 Aviation Business Plan to support the goal of operating
a world-class airport by anticipating and meeting the needs of our tenants, passengers, and the
region's economy by expanding and modernizing existing on-airport cargo facilities. 
TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE SUMMARY: 
This project will improve two hardstands in Cargo 2 area to accommodate the increased size and
frequency of wide-body cargo aircraft to increase the Airport's ability to retain and attract key
cargo customers, who want to operate the larger and more efficient newly available freighters.
The project will also reduce airfield carbon and other gas emissions by providing electrical
power as an alternative to fuel-powered generator operations. 
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS: 
Alternative 1 - Do Nothing: This alternative would perpetuate existing capacity
constraints and neglect customer requirements for the accommodation of increasingly
larger aircraft. Congested hardstand conditions would persist along with the inefficient
use of ramp space. This would not promote air cargo growth and the associated economic
development, and does not align with Commission Century Agenda goals. This
alternative is not recommended. 
Alternative 2 - Enlarge Cargo 2-West Hardstand: This alternative is consistent with the
goals of the Century Agenda for promoting growth in air cargo by alleviating capacity
constraints, and is consistent with the Airport's Comprehensive Development Plan
(CDP). This is the recommended alternative. 
OTHER DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS REQUEST: 
Attachment A  Overview of Cargo Planning 
Attachment B  Cargo 2 Hardstand Expansion 
Attachment C - Cargo 2 Buildings 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS: 
None.