PORT OF SEATTLE 
MEMORANDUM 
COMMISSION AGENDA             Item No.      6c 
ACTION ITEM             Date of Meeting    May 22, 2012 

DATE:    May 10, 2012 
TO:     Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
FROM:    David Soike, Director, Aviation Facilities and Capital Program 
Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group 
SUBJECT:  C60  C61 Baggage Handling System Modifications Project at Seattle-Tacoma
International Airport (CIP #C800168) 
Amount of This Request: $1,789,000      Source of Funds: Airport Development
Fund, TSA Grant, Future Revenue Bonds 
Est. State & Local Taxes: N/A           Est. Jobs Created: N/A 
Total Project Cost: $10,969,000 
ACTION REQUESTED: 
Request Commission authorization (1) to authorize the use of Port Construction Services (PCS)
crews in support of design development; and (2) for the Chief Executive Officer to authorize full
design for the C60 - C61 BHS Modifications project. The total amount of this request is
$1,789,000 and the total projected program cost is $10,969,000. 
SYNOPSIS: 
This project benefits airline passengers by increasing baggage handling capacity by renovating 
the Airport's oldest operating baggage systems that transport over 3 million bags per year and
approximately 35 percent of all bags at the southern portion of the Airport. C60  C61 was
being assembled as part of the Concourse A construction when the events of September 11,
2001, occurred. As a result, the bag screening capability of C60  C61 was dramatically and
rapidly increased; however, the project was not fully completed due to contractual issues and has
been operating successfully in an interim condition ever since.
Airport staff and TSA staff have been working cooperatively to refine the scope of this project
and have determined it wise to reduce an earlier larger scope to ensure that certain scope
elements will not have to be upgraded again in just a few years as the Airport and TSA consider
further planned improvements to increase security while reducing operational cost. The
reductions in scope lower the budget significantly and include waiting to consolidate Checked
Baggage Resolution Areas (CBRA) staffed by the TSA, and postponement of approximately
1,300 lineal feet of reinsertion and infeed conveyor systems. The remaining scope of work totals
$10,969,000. Airport staff have been working with the TSA headquarters staff and have a verbal

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 10, 2012 
Page 2 of 6 
understanding that existing remaining unutilized federal funds earlier granted to the Airport
baggage security systems will be eligible for use on this project. This understanding cannot be
finalized until design is far enough along to allow the TSA to verify its requirements are met.
When design is at 30-percent completion, the TSA would have sufficient information to consider
recommitting to the use of all or a portion of the remaining $7.8 million grant proceeds from
earlier security projects for the Airport.
The first element of this authorization provides necessary budget for PCS crews to be available
to assist the project team with a complete inventory of Port owned conveyor equipment. This
equipment was purchased as part of the original project but never installed due to the interim
conditions. PCS will complete an asbestos survey of the project site. 
The second element of this authorization allows for outside consultants and in-house staff to
collaborate to fully design the system in joint cooperation with the TSA in preparation for public
bidding by the Port.
BACKGROUND: 
The C60 and C61 BHSs were originally designed and installed as part of the South Terminal
Expansion Program (STEP). Prior to completion, the contractor relationship was terminated and
the two systems have been operating in an interim condition. The final completion of the project
was intended to install an additional baggage make-up device (called C60-MK1), combine the
C60 and C61 CBRAs into a common location, and place a third explosive detection system
(EDS) machine on the overhead steel mezzanine in line with two other existing machines on the
C61 system. C61 now operates with the third machine on the bagwell floor in the area
designated for the C60-MK1 device as part of the interim configuration. 
TSA has conducted a system analysis of the systems to determine how best to resolve many of
the baggage tracking issues and system malfunctions that have resulted from the interim
condition. 
After a meeting held with TSA Headquarters representatives on March 4, 2010, it was agreed
that several alternatives would be developed and reviewed with a goal of resolving the issues that
have been detrimental to the two systems. The team developed four alternatives and came to an
agreement with the TSA to build a new C61 CBRA at the south end of the bagwell, reroute the
feed conveyors, and add reintroduction conveyors to both CBRA areas. The Airport would 
replace both the C60 and C61 obsolete computer and programmable logic controller (PLC) 
equipment, combine their functionality in one new computer system, and make the TSA
recommended mechanical improvements to both systems. 
At this point in the project, the TSA has verbally agreed to reimburse the Port for security
improvements up to $7.8 million remaining in the TSA grant and to pay 90 percent of all eligible
costs. The final agreed upon number will not be determined until a 30-percent design is 
completed. 
Following more recent discussions with TSA, we were notified of TSA's interest in a national
recapitalization and optimization plan for all baggage screening operations. This plan will
deploy the newest technology for baggage screening but may require further modifications to

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 10, 2012 
Page 3 of 6 
existing baggage systems. This deployment and associated modifications will be included in
separate future Commission authorization requests. 
As a result, the Airport team came to the conclusion that the project should not complete the full 
scope of the project as previously defined with the TSA. Staff have removed elements of the
project that would not be prudent based on the TSA recapitalization plan but will address issues
TSA and the Airport deemed necessary in the near term. This ultimately decreased the scope
and budget to approximately $10.9 million. 
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION: 
The work planned under this project represents a critical component in providing improved
operational baggage in-line screening at the south end of the Airport.
Project Objectives: 
Provide more baggage make-up capacity for airlines. 
Improve baggage tracking capability to benefit security and customer service. 
Combine search rooms to optimize TSA staffing levels. 
Improve efficiency and through-put of the baggage system to benefit the Airport by being able to
efficiently serve a growing number of passengers.
PROJECT SCOPE OF WORK AND SCHEDULE: 
Scope of Work Reductions and/or Deferrals until future Projects: 
Delete C-61 CBRA. 
Delete 1,300 lineal feet of conveyor related to C-60 CBRA. 
Modifications to the feed belts to EDS machines. 
Scope of Work Remaining in the Project: 
Modify existing C61 CBRA room by expanding into existing C60 CBRA space and to comply
with TSA Planning Guidelines and Design Standards and tie into existing C61 system. 
Modify existing C60 CBRA room to accommodate new C61 CBRA layout. 
Install new re-insertion lines from C61 CBRA room. 
Install new C60 MK1 make-up unit at bagroom level. 
Install one new EDS machine on mezzanine and reroute associated conveyor. 
Replace one EDS machine on the mezzanine with the current floor machine. 
Fix tracking issues in various locations around the C60 and C61 systems. 
Replace the C60 and C61 computer and PLC systems with a new combined system in one
location. 
Modify steep conveyor inclines and declines. 
PCS complete asbestos survey and inventory equipment.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 10, 2012 
Page 4 of 6 
Schedule: 
Authorize Design                    May 2012 
Begin Design                       June 2012 
Complete Design                   March 2013 
Authorize Construction Contract           April 2013 
Advertise Construction                 April 2013 
Construction Start                      June 2013 
Project Completion                   April 2014 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: 
Budget/Authorization Summary:           Capital      Expense   Total Project 
Original Budget                        $10,799,000        $0    $10,799,000 
Revised Budget                        $10,969,000        $0   $10,969,000 
Previous Authorizations                   $ 0        $0    $ 0 
Current request for authorization              $ 1,789,000        $0    $ 1,789,000 
Total Authorizations, including this request       $ 1,789,000        $0    $ 1,789,000 
Remaining budget to be authorized            $ 9,180,000        $0    $ 9,180,000 
The budget has been reduced due to changes to scope and project refinements.
Project Cost Breakdown:               This Request   Total Project 
Construction Costs                        $ 0    $ 7,247,000
Port furnished equipment                   $ 0    $ 0 
Sales tax                                $ 0    $ 684,000
Outside professional services                  $1,304,000    $ 1,304,000 
Aviation PMG and other soft costs             $ 485,000    $ 1,734,000 
Total      $1,789,000    $10,969,000 
Budget Status and Source of Funds: 
This project was included in the 2012-2016 capital budget and plan of finance as a business plan
prospective project, CIP #C800168. The source of funds for this project will be the Airport
Development Fund, a TSA grant, and future revenue bonds. TSA funds may include $7.8
million of available unused grants for earlier security projects at the Airport.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 10, 2012 
Page 5 of 6 
Financial Analysis and Summary 
CIP Category 
Renewal/Enhancement 
Project Type                      Security 
Risk adjusted Discount rate            N/A 
Key risk factors                     N/A 
Project cost for analysis                $10,969,000 
Business Unit (BU)                  Terminal 
Effect on business performance          NOI after depreciation will increase 
IRR/NPV                   N/A 
CPE Impact                   CPE will increase by $.02 in 2015.
However, no change to business plan
forecast as this project was included.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES: 
This project promotes the Port's strategic goals to "Ensure Airport and Seaport Vitality" and "Be
a Catalyst for Regional Transportation Solutions." It contributes to accommodating the Port's
Century Agenda Goal to "Double the number of international flights and destinations." 
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY: 
This project demonstrates environmental sustainability by improving existing Port assets and
better utilizing existing resources. This project will facilitate greater utilization of the baggage
systems. This reduces the potential environmental impact of major new construction.
BUSINESS PLAN OBJECTIVES: 
The anticipated growth in domestic and international enplanements will require additional
capacity in baggage processing. This supports the Aviation Division's strategic goal of
"Anticipating and meeting the needs of our tenants, passengers, and the region's economy." 
TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE SUMMARY: 
This project will increase the long-term ability of the Airport to serve a growing number of both
passengers and airlines. This project will reduce future potential costs by eliminating the need to
provide new baggage systems by improving the efficient use of the existing systems. Long-term
vitality of the Airport benefits the regional economy, the local environment and nearby
communities. 
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS: 
Alternative 1  Do nothing. This would not address the TSA requirements and request for
improving baggage system performance and would not increase the capacity of baggage makeup
necessary for future growth and airline realignment. This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2  Proceed with the recent larger plan estimated at $26 million and address all the
TSA and Port concerns. This would potentially include expenditures that would be removed or
discarded within the next five years. This is not the recommended alternative.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer 
May 10, 2012 
Page 6 of 6 
Alternative 3  Perform the modifications indicated above, install the baggage make-up device
(MK1) as originally planned, and complete the programming necessary to improve tracking and
baggage system performance. This is the recommended alternative. 
OTHER DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS REQUEST: 
C60-C61 Baggage Handling PowerPoint presentation. 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS: 
None.