PORT OF SEATTLE
MEMORANDUM 

COMMISSION AGENDA            Item No.         8a
Date of Meeting     January 13, 2009
DATE:   December 23, 2008
TO:     Tay Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
FROM:   Michael Ehl, Director, Airport Operations
Robert F. Riley, Director, Aviation Capital Improvement Program
Richard Ottele, General Manager, Aviation Facilities and Infrastructure
SUBJECT: Authorization to perform design totaling $3,770,000 for the Pre-Conditioned Air
Project at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.
ACTION REQUESTED: 
Request Port Commission authorization to procure and execute service agreements with
consultants to perform design; to prepare contract documents; and perform contract
administration for the Pre-Conditioned Air project at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport
(Airport) in the amount of $3,770,000. The ultimate project value is estimated to be
$33,360,000, of which $21.84 million will be reimbursed by a FAA grant. 
SYNOPSIS 
This memorandum requests authorization for design and associated Port staff costs for a new
Central Pre-Conditioned Air (PCA) project. The PCA project will allow flight crews to turn off
aircraft auxiliary engines and plug in to the Airport infrastructure to receive both heated and
cooled air. This will lower costs to the airlines while producing significant 'green' results by
reducing thousands of tons of carbon dioxide air pollution each year. This project is a cost
effective way to aid the airlines while improving the quality of the environment at the Airport
and the surrounding areas. The airlines have approved this project. The cost per enplanement is
anticipated to increase by $0.12; however, these costs will be more than offset by decreased
airline operating costs.
BACKGROUND 
While parked at a gate, an aircraft's heating and air conditioning is provided by either the
aircraft's on board Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) or a ground based supply system. Utilization of
the aircraft's APU is expensive (although less so during this current time of depressed fuel
prices). It also generates significant carbon dioxide (CO2) and other air emissions. Currently,
some gates at the Airport have a ground based (mobile cart) or Point of Use (POU) system
alternative to APU utilization.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
T. Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
December 23, 2008
Page 2 of 6

The dual goals of reducing environmental impacts and reducing airline operating costs have led
the staff to study the feasibility of installing an airport-wide PCA system. The study evaluated
APU operating costs against two ground based supply systems (Point of Use (POU)/mobile carts
and a centralized system). The centralized system produced the most cost effective and
environmentally sound results. Estimates for the reduction of CO2 and other emissions are
calculated to be in excess of 69,000 metric tons per year.
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) grant funding support for this project has been identified
through the Voluntary Airport Low Emissions (VALE) Grant Program. This program provides
funding for up to 80% of construction costs but excludes design and other soft costs. The project
will be accomplished in three phases in order to maximize the available VALE funds. Phase I
will be design only and will use all Port funds. Phase II will include construction of the Central
Plant, portions of the Chilled and Heated Water Distribution System, and installation of the gate
delivery equipment to selected gates. Phase III will complete construction of the Central Plant,
the remainder of the Chilled and Heated Water Distribution System and the remaining PC Air
gate equipment. Phase I will be completed in early 2010, Phase II will be completed in 2011,
and Phase III will be completed in 2012. The FAA has programmed $21.84 million in grant
funding for Phases II and III.
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTION 
None
PROJECT DESCRIPTION/SCOPE OF WORK 
Project Statement:
Design and construct a centralized pre-conditioned air system, with an associated central plant
including individual PC Air gate units at all passenger loading bridges.
Project Objectives:
Decrease the amount of energy used to heat and cool the aircraft. 
Significantly reduce the amount of CO2 and other air emissions produced. 
Provide aircraft with cabin heating and cooling while eliminating the need for using the
onboard APU which consumes jet fuel. 
Minimize life-cycle costs.
Minimize fuel consumption.
Minimize ramp noise.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
T. Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
December 23, 2008
Page 3 of 6
Scope of Work:
The PCA project will provide temperature-controlled outside air to all passenger loading bridges.
The system will include a central plant with chillers and central ice storage, a distribution piping
system, individual air handlers at each gate that connect to the aircraft, and direct digital controls.
The central plant will be connected to the Airport's existing cooling towers and direct digital
control system.
This requested action authorizes preliminary engineering, site investigation, final design,
commissioning and other costs related to the design of the central PCA project.
STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES 
The Central PCA Project supports the following Port strategies:
Ensure Airport Vitality
This project will provide a cost effective and efficient heating and cooling system for aircraft
parked at the gates. It will have a positive effect on the airline's operating costs by reducing fuel
consumption through reduced APU operation.
Exhibit Environmental Stewardship through Our Actions
This project significantly supports the Port's goal of becoming the cleanest, greenest and most
energy-efficient port in the United States, and will dramatically reduce CO2 emissions that are
generated by APUs. A centralized PCA system is the most cost effective and energy efficient
long term means of providing preconditioned air to gated aircraft.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED/RECOMMENDED ACTION 
Alternative 1  Airlines continue using onboard APUs to heat and cool aircraft parked at the
aircraft gates. This method generates CO2 emissions from APUs, and uses a significant amount
of costly aircraft fuel to operate. It is not cost effective for airlines, and negatively affects the
environment. This alternative is not recommended.
Alternative 2  Proceed with a POU preconditioned air system installed at each passenger
loading bridge, which would be individual electrical driven units at each gate. This alternative
reduces CO2 emissions. However, this alternative is not the most cost effective on a first cost or
life cycle cost basis and would consume almost all of the spare power capacity available from
several power centers in the Airport's existing electrical distribution system. This alternative is
not recommended.
Alternative 3 - Proceed with the Centralized Preconditioned Air project. The system features a
central plant that efficiently shares the load for all gates and distributes cooling or heating as

COMMISSION AGENDA 
T. Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
December 23, 2008
Page 4 of 6
needed. The system includes an ice storage system that allows the system to run at off peak
times increasing the energy efficiency. This is the recommended alternative.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
Budget/Authorization Summary 
Original Budget                      $31,087,000
Budget Increase                      $2,273,000
Revised Budget                     $33,360,000
Previous Authorizations                       $0
Current request for authorization             $3,770,000
Total Authorizations, including this request      $3,770,000
Remaining budget to be authorized          $29,590,000
Project Cost Breakdown             This Request     Total Project
Construction costs                            $0      $25,092,000
Sales tax                                    $0       $2,258,000
Outside professional services                $2,509,000       $2,509,000
Other                            $1,261,000      $3,501,000
Total                              $3,770,000      $33,360,000
The budget increase is due to the project phasing and producing 100% design documents that are
required to receive the VALE grant.
Source of Funds 
This project (CIP 800238) is included in the 2009-2013 capital budget and plan of finance. The
funding plan is predicated upon the Port receiving $21.84 million in VALE program grants, with
the remaining costs funded with revenue bonds to be issued in 2009 or 2010. If revenue bonds
prove not to be a prudent option, airport development funds will be used.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
T. Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
December 23, 2008
Page 5 of 6
Financial Analysis Summary 
CIP Category              New/Enhancement
Project Type                Infrastructure
Risk adjusted Discount rate       10.0%
Key risk factors               Realization of savings due to lower jet fuel usage.
Project cost for analysis          $11,520,000 (excludes VALE grant funded portion)
Business Unit (BU)            Terminal cost center
Effect on business performance     NOI after depreciation will decrease due to recognizing
depreciation on the full cost yet recovering capital costs
for the non VALE funded portion only.
IRR/NPV              NPV range of net savings to airlines: $6 million to $47
million 
CPE Impact              CPE will increase by $.12 in 2012; however, this cost
will be more than offset by decreased airline operating
costs.
ECONOMIC IMPACTS 
From a financial analysis perspective, the positive net present value for this project is based on
viewing the Airport and airlines together, as the Port will incur capital and operating costs, while
the airlines will realize the cost savings. The extent of the savings is dependent on: 1) the price
of jet fuel 2) the number of days per year the system is actually used, and 3) the number of
carriers that use the system rather than their own POU system. The Airport will incur increased
Operations and Maintenance (O&M) costs of about $800,000 per year. In addition, the Port will
incur annual debt service costs of about $1.2 million per year. The financial analysis assumes a
$2 for the price of jet fuel (recent prices have ranged from ~$1.50 to ~$3.50), use during summer
only (17 weeks) and it assumes Alaska Airlines and Southwest Airlines continue to use their
POU systems. These conservative assumptions generate a positive NPV of $6 million and
generate net savings to the airlines from the first year of operations. The savings increase each
year, making this a financially sound project
ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY/COMMUNITY BENEFITS 
There are significant air quality improvements achieved by installing a centralized preconditioned
air system. CO2 emissions and other emissions could be reduced by more than
69,000 metric tons per year which represents 2% of emissions from aircraft at the Airport. 
TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE SUMMARY 
This project is expected to help reduce the overall operating costs of the airlines while providing
an environmentally viable solution to maintaining comfortable aircraft cabin temperatures at the
gate. Decreased air emissions and decreased fuel consumption is consistent with the Port's
commitment to responsible environmental stewardship.

COMMISSION AGENDA 
T. Yoshitani, Chief Executive Officer
December 23, 2008
Page 6 of 6

PROJECT SCHEDULE 
Start Preliminary Design                                 Feb 2009
Complete Design                                 Jan 2010
Seek approval from Commission to advertise                     Feb 2010
Award Contract                                  Apr 2010
Anticipated Start Phased Construction                         July 2010
Anticipated Project Completion                            Dec 2012