PORT OF SEATTLE 
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA             Item No.      5c 
ACTION ITEM             Date of Meeting   October 23, 2012 

DATE:    October 11, 2012 
TO:     Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
FROM:    Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group 
Wendy Reiter, Director, Aviation Security and Emergency Preparedness 
SUBJECT:  Security Exit Lane Breach Control-Phase 1 (CIP #C800218) 
Amount of This Request:  $850,000 Source of Funds: Airport Development Fund 
Est. State and Local Taxes: $51,500  Est. Construction Jobs Created: 15 
Est. Total Project Cost:    $950,000 
ACTION REQUESTED: 
Request Commission authorization for the Chief Executive Officer to execute a contract for
equipment, to design building modifications to accommodate the equipment, and to use Port
crews for construction of the Security Exit Lane Breach Control project at Seattle-Tacoma
International Airport. This authorization is for $850,000 of a total estimated project cost of
$950,000. 
SYNOPSIS: 
Security breaches can occur at terminal exits when people enter a secured area through an exit
without passing through the security checkpoint. This request is for a pilot project that will
purchase and install automated security exit lane breach control technology devices at the
Concourse B security exit to mitigate the potential for a costly security breach. The security exits
are currently staffed with guards at a significant recurrent cost. The technology installed as part
of this project will reduce the security risk factor of guards that can become distracted and
inadvertently allow "unauthorized reverse flow." If the project is successful, the intention is to
seek Commission authorization for a Phase 2 project to provide exit lane breach control at four
additional security exits in the Airport terminal. This project was included in the 2012-2016
capital budget and plan of finance. 
BACKGROUND: 
Exit lane breach control technology is new to the Airport and to the United States. These systems
have been in use at European airports for many years and this summer the technology was
installed at McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas. The project will reduce the risk of a
security breach at the Airport. A security breach could require that all people inside the sterile
area be rescreened, which is very costly and disruptive to airline operations. The project will also
increase overall security and redeploy guard staff to reduce ongoing costs.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
October 11, 2012 
Page 2 of 4 
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: 
Currently, the five security exits at the Airport are staffed with guards who prevent anyone from
crossing these exits into the secure area without authorization. Three exits are staffed by the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and two are staffed by Port employees. Staffing
these lanes with guards is a significant recurrent cost. This Phase 1 project is a pilot project that
will purchase and install exit lane breach control equipment at only one of the five Airport
terminal exits, the Concourse B Security Exit currently staffed by TSA. Exit B was chosen as a
location since the existing hallway already provides much of the needed enclosure and because
the passenger flow is more evenly diffused throughout the day than the sporadic flows at Exit C. 
The Port, in partnership with local TSA, will test this new technology at the Concourse B
Security Exit for a period of up to six months. Upon completion of successful testing, the
intention is to seek Commission authorization to install the same technology at the other four
security exits at the Airport. 
The current staffing situation causes an increased security risk when exit lanes are busy and the
guard may be distracted. There have been incidents where "unauthorized reverse flow" has 
occurred causing a shutdown in access to sterile areas and delays for passengers. These delays
are costly for both the airlines and the passengers whose flights are delayed when there is a
security breach. The use of proven technology reduces the risk and also allows reduced costs in
the long term. 
As the aviation business climate increases the need for finding smarter and more economical
solutions, technology based security systems not only streamline processes, but significantly
reduce operating costs. By deploying equipment staff can be redeployed to tasks that require
human interaction. 
Technology that matches our needs has been successfully tested and deployed throughout
European airports as a means to control exit-to-sterile-area access points. 
PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK AND SCHEDULE: 
Scope of Work:
This project will purchase automated security exit lane breach control equipment, design the
emergency bypass lane and security camera system, and assemble the equipment and construct
the bypass lane. The equipment utilizes partitions, doors, sensors and alarms to automatically
detect and prevent the backflow of people and objects through the exit lane from the non-secure
to the secure side of the Airport terminal building. 
Since this technology is new to this country, good information on this type of equipment and its
cost is not readily available. Port staff took the unusual step to undertake procurement before the
project was approved in order to understand what was available and determine if the equipment
was cost-effective to meet the security needs of the Airport. We advertised a request for
information and request for proposals using preliminary planning funds. The Port is now
seeking Commission authorization to execute a contract to purchase the equipment, design an
emergency bypass lane next to the pre-fabricated exit lane equipment, and assemble/construct
the equipment and emergency bypass lane using Port crews.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
October 11, 2012 
Page 3 of 4 
Schedule: 
The project schedule is as follows: 
Commission Authorization for Contract Execution, Design, and Construction 
October 2012 
Design                           November 2012 
Purchase Equipment                      November 2012 
Construction by Port Crews                  March-May 2013 
Complete First 30 Days of Testing Installed Equipment       June 2013 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: 
Budget/Authorization Summary:           Capital      Expense    Total Project 
Original Budget                        $1,000,000          $0   $1,000,000 
Budget (Decrease)                      ($ 50,000)         $0   ($ 50,000) 
Revised Budget                       $ 950,000         $0    $ 950,000 
Previous Authorizations                   $ 100,000          $0   $ 100,000 
Current request for authorization              $ 850,000          $0   $ 850,000 
Total Authorizations, including this request       $ 950,000          $0   $ 950,000 
Remaining budget to be authorized            $ 0          $0   $ 0 
Project Cost Breakdown                This Request   Total Project 
Construction costs                      $ 354,200    $ 354,200 
Port Purchased Equipment                 $ 188,000   $ 188,000 
Sales tax                               $ 51,500    $ 51,500 
Design services                         $ 95,600    $ 145,600 
Aviation PMG and other soft costs            $ 160,700    $ 210,700 
Total                                  $ 850,000    $ 950,000 
Budget Status and Source of Funds 
This project (CIP #C800218) was included in the 2012-2016 capital budget and plan of finance 
as a business plan prospective project. The funding source will be the Airport Development
Fund. 
Financial Analysis and Summary 
CIP Category             Compliance 
Project Type              Health, Safety and Security 
Risk adjusted Discount rate     N/A 
Key risk factors             N/A 
Project cost for analysis        $950,000 
Business Unit (BU)          Airfield 
Effect on business performance  NOI after depreciation will increase.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
October 11, 2012 
Page 4 of 4 
IRR/NPV             N/A 
CPE Impact             CPE will increase by less than $.01 in 2014, but no
change to business plan forecast as this project was
included. 
Lifecycle Cost and Savings: 
There will be annual operating and maintenance cost increases to maintain the new system and a
reduction in the ongoing operating and maintenance costs for the existing portal backflow
detector that is near the end of its useful life and will be removed. 
The annual costs of staffing an exit are approximately half the cost of the capital costs,
suggesting a payback within a 2-3 year period. For this project, the savings would be realized by
TSA. 
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES: 
The project will support the strategic objective of the Airport being a leader in transportation
security by installing and testing a new security exit breach control system at the Airport. The
project ensures Airport vitality by providing enhanced security at security exit points, which
benefits our passengers and airline partners. 
BUSINESS PLAN OBJECTIVES: 
This project supports the Airport's strategic goal of operating a world-class international airport
by ensuring safe and secure operations through enhanced security.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS: 
Alternative 1: Procure security exit breach control for all five security exits for the Airport at
once. This would not allow for testing of the system prior to purchase and installation for the
remaining exits. This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2 (Do Nothing): This results in continued operation with the current annual staffing
costs and security risk factor. This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 3: Purchase automated security exit lane breach control equipment, design the
emergency bypass lane and security camera system and assemble the equipment and construct
the bypass lane at the Concourse B Security Exit as a pilot project. Once proven successful in the
field, seek authorization for a project for the remaining security exits. This is the recommended
alternative.
OTHER DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS REQUEST: 
Concourse B Security Exit Location Diagram 
Concourse B Security Exit Lane Diagram 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS: 
None.