COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          8a 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting     February 27, 2018 
DATE:     January 8, 2018 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Jeffrey Brown, Director of Aviation Facilities and Capital Programs 
Thomas Hooper, Manager Aviation Planning Program 
SUBJECT:  Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Request for Additional Funds 
Amount of this request:                 $800,000 
Total estimated project cost:         $10,450,000 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to execute an amendment to the
existing SAMP service agreement with Leigh Fisher for an increase of $800,000 for a new
contract amount of $10,450,000 to finalize planning documentation and provide planning
support to environmental review of the SAMP Near-term projects. 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
The Port initiated the Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) in 2013 and the planning work is
nearing completion.  Most recently, staff worked with stakeholders to identify and evaluate
major enabling and capacity projects required to satisfy near-term demand. Analysis of these
major projects (including 19 gates connected to a second terminal, north of the existing
terminal complex) and has concluded that they will deliver needed capacity through 2027. 
Commission received a SAMP planning status update on February 13, 2018. Staff is currently
working with the FAA, airlines, and internal stakeholders to finalize the package of near-term
projects to be proposed for environmental review and anticipates briefing Commission again in
April.
SAMP planning has taken considerably longer and has cost more than anticipated. There are
two primary factors which have contributed to schedule delay and the increased cost of
analysis, documentation, project management, and other soft costs of the SAMP. One factor is
extensive airside modeling and coordination with the FAA experts to test the ability of
development alternatives to meet near-term and long-term demand and to determine a twostep
approach to advance SAMP. The other primary factor is a dditional analysis and
documentation required due to the identification of alternatives involving one vs two terminals 
i.e.  accommodating  forecast  demand  within  the  existing  terminal  with  significant

Template revised September 22, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _8a___                              Page 2 of 8 
Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 
redevelopment/expansion versus accommodating future demand with a combination of a
second terminal and less expansion/modification of the existing terminal.
Staff anticipates  the $800,000 additional funds will be sufficient to complete the SAMP
documentation and provide planning support to environmental review of the SAMP Near-term
projects for the estimated duration of that process.  The environmental review will be done
under a separate but existing contract, led by Landrum & Brown, a consultancy firm specializing
in environmental review and currently under contract with the Port. 
In accordance with RCW 53.19.060, this memorandum constitutes notifying Commission the
amended amount ($10,450,000) to the service agreement with Leigh Fisher for SAMP exceeds
50 percent of the original contract value of $6,000,000. This am endment is made available for
public inspection. $2,096,142 of the total authorization was used to prepare programming and
planning analyses, peer review to support the development of the project definition document
for the IAF. 
JUSTIFICATION 
The estimated cost of SAMP planning has exceeded the amended level of effort and the
requested additional funds are needed for the following primary reasons: 
Increased cost of project management and contract administration due to the additional
time required to conduct specific analysis and documentation. 
o  SAMP  planning  has  taken  considerably  longer  than  anticipated  due  to
unforeseen challenges related primarily to airside modeling of development
alternatives; documentation and analysis related to terminal requirements and
alternatives; and implementation planning related to physical and financial
constraints. 
Extensive airside modeling required to assess development alternatives.
o  Following the initial round of modeling and documentation of results, the Port
worked with the FAA to evaluate the model's performance and subsequently 
determined that the way in which the airfield is operated has changed, airlines
have changed the way they schedule flights, and  the airfield/airspace is
constrained.  This required recalibration of the model, several more rounds of
modeling, and extensive coordination with FAA experts to test the ability of
development alternatives to meet near-term and long-term demand and to
determine a two-step approach to advance SAMP. 
Additional analysis and documentation required due to the identification of alternatives
involving one vs two terminals.
o  The  planning  process  led  to  the  identification  of  two  major  terminal
development options; one where future gates and airfield are served by
redevelopment and expansion of the existing terminal and supporting landside
system, and another where future gates and airfield are served by the existing

Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _8a___                              Page 3 of 8 
Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 
terminal and a second terminal and supporting roadways to the north.  These
two options have very different facility requirements,  which required a
significant amount of additional analysis and documentation. 
Stakeholder Coordination and Community Outreach 
o  Continue Community Open Houses 
o  Ongoing engagement with tenants, operators, FAA, & TSA 
o  Targeted engagement with external stakeholders 
Airport-area communities 
Social justice community leaders 
Airport-area business leaders 
Regional business and labor leaders 
Traveling public 
o  Coordinated outreach program between SAMP planning and environmental 
Planning Support during Environmental Review 

DETAILS 
Environmental review of the SAMP Near-term projects will be led by Landrum & Brown, a
consultancy firm specializing in environmental review and currently under contract with the
Port.   Continued planning support services are needed to finalize SAMP documentation,
conduct additional public outreach, transition the SAMP to environmental review and provide
planning support during environmental review. SAMP documentation is required to gain
concurrence from the FAA regarding the Near-term projects and approach to environmental
review, and to serve as the public facing document explaining the planning process and
findings.
Planning  analysis  and  supporting  documentation  required  to  transition  the  SAMP  to
environmental review includes: 1) an analysis of a "no-action alternative" which will be used to
compare the relative impacts of taking no action to the impacts of implementing the SAMP
Near-term projects and 2) the drafting of detailed project descriptions which will include
information regarding construction quantities and activities which are required to assess
construction impacts of Near-term project implementation. 
Scope of Work 
These additional funds would be used to complete work that falls within the scope of the
existing contract. 
The SAMP scope includes the following primary tasks: 
Strategic ObjectivesConfirm study goals and focus areas. 
Sustainability  Determine, understand, and fully integrate environmental, social, and
economic responsibilities. 

Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _8a___                              Page 4 of 8 
Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 
ForecastDetermine future activity levels for passengers, cargo, and flights. 
InventoryGathering and preparing background data and drawings for analyses. 
RequirementsDevelop basis for sizing facilities to provide adequate capacity to meet
future activity levels. 
AlternativesIdentify and evaluate alternative facility development plans to accommodate
forecast demand. 
FinancialAnalyze financial capacity to support decision-making for capital improvements. 
Implementation PlanPrepare a capital improvement program based on the SAMP Long-
term Vision. 
Airport Layout Plan (ALP)Update the current ALP for approval by the FAA. 
Public InvolvementCommunicate master plan progress and conclusions to the public and
other stakeholders. 
Also include in the based scope of work as authorized by the Commission on March 11, 2014 is 
IAF Project Definition Document (PDD) Support  - Programming and planning analyses,
peer review to support the development of the project definition document for the IAF 
Schedule 
Staff anticipates beginning the public scoping process for environmental review of the Nearterm
projects in Q2 or Q3 of 2018.  Staff anticipates the $800,000 additional funds will be
sufficient  to  complete  the  SAMP  documentation  and  provide  planning  support  to
environmental review of the Near-term projects for the duration of that process. 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1  Do not add funds to the SAMP planning contract, but instead, procure new
consultant services. The work described in this memo is required to advance the SAMP Nearterm
projects  into environmental review, but could be conducted  by  a consultancy firm
specializing in airport master planning and not currently under contract with the Port. 
Cost Implications: This alternative would likely cost more and take longer to complete, but the
potential increase in cost and schedule delays cannot be reasonably quantified. 
Pros: 
(1)   None 
Cons: 
(1)   Procuring  a  consultancy  firm  specializing  in  airport  master  planning  other  than
LeighFisher to conduct the work described in the details section of this memo would
likely cost more and take longer due to the lack of knowledge of the planning issues
and projects that has, by comparison, been gained by the SAMP planning consultant

Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _8a___                              Page 5 of 8 
Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 
team through their work on the SAMP to date. In addition, the procurement process
itself would take time to execute. 
(2)   Cost likely higher than the estimated $800,000 authorization request 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2  Do not add funds to the SAMP planning contract and use Port staff to complete
the work. 
Cost Implications: No additional funds added to the contract  potential $800,000 savings. 
Pros: 
(1)   Short term cost savings 
Cons: 
(1)   Using Port staff to conduct the work described in the details section of this memo
would likely take longer due to the lack of knowledge of the planning issues and
projects that has, by comparison, been gained by the SAMP consultant team through
their work on the SAMP to date.  In addition, the Port lacks the staff resources to
conduct the work  in particular, within the planning department which is currently
understaffed. 
(2)   Using Port staff to conduct the work would also likely result in an inferior product 
given their comparative lack of SAMP specific knowledge and staff time to apply to the
work effort. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 3  Add the requested funds to the existing SAMP contract. 
Cost Implications: $800,000 
Pros: 
(1) This is the most cost effective way to complete the work described in the details section
of this memo due to the knowledge of the planning issues and projects that has been
gained by the SAMP consultant team through their work on the SAMP to date and the
public relations resources in the SAMP consultant team. 
Cons: 
(1)   $800,000 cost 
This is the recommended alternative. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 



Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _8a___                              Page 6 of 8 
Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 
Authorization/Expenditure Summary          Authorization    Expenditure     Remaining
thru 12-31-17      Funds as of
12-31-17 
AUTHORIZATION 
Previous authorizations 
SAMP (09-05-12)                      6,000,000     $7,208,955 
IAF related planning (03-11-14)            3,650,000      $2,096,142 
Total      $9,650,000       $9,305097        $344,903 
Current request for authorization                  $800,000 
Total                                               $10,450,00       $9,305097 
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds 
The 2018 operating budget included $500,000 for additional SAMP planning work to transition
to environmental review. If all of the additional $800,000 is spent together with the remaining
authorization in 2018, the Aviation division would need to identify $644,903 in other savings to
keep within the 2018 budget.  As these are operating costs, the funding source will be the
Airport Development Fund.
Financial Analysis and Summary 
The costs associated with this contract are accounted for as operating costs and allocated
among airport cost centers.  There would be no impact on passenger airline cost per
enplanement (CPE) if spending stays within budgeted amounts. 
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND 
The Port initiated the Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) in 2013 and the planning work is
nearing completion, with public scoping for environmental review anticipated to begin in Q2 or
Q3 of 2018. 
The primary purpose of the SAMP is to identify facility improvements required to satisfy
demand over the 20-year planning horizon and to balance capacity in all key functional areas to
the fixed capacity of the airfield. To that end, the SAMP started with an unconstrained, 20-year
forecast of cargo and passenger activity which was used to determine peak hour facility
requirements based on demand derived from the movement of aircraft, passengers, bags,
vehicles and freight.  Alternatives for facilities development to satisfy demand were then
developed and assessed, resulting in a phased capital program to deliver needed capacity
through the 20-year planning horizon. 
For planning purposes, the SAMP assumes the airport's current three-runway system and closein
airspace configuration will remain in place. With the airport's small footprint and significant
physical constraints, redevelopment at Sea-Tac requires expensive relocation of existing
facilities and limited options for expansion. 

Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _8a___                              Page 7 of 8 
Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 

Work to evaluate alternatives for project phasing and to assess airside capacity has included
extensive airside modeling in consultation with FAA specialists and has determined that existing
constraints require a two-step approach to advance the SAMP.
The first step is to identify a package of Near-term projects to be assessed through 
environmental review.  Included in this briefing is an overview of the major improvements
anticipated to be included in the package of Near-term projects.
Staff has conducted airside modeling of these near-term projects (including 19 gates connected
to a second terminal, north of the existing terminal complex) and has concluded that they will
deliver needed capacity through 2027. Staff is currently working with the FAA, airlines, and
internal stakeholders to finalize the package of Near-term projects to be proposed for
environmental review and anticipates briefing Commission in April 2018.
The second step is to better understand the constraints for airside facilities, which includes
runway  and  taxiway  utilization,  airfield  configuration,  gate  availability,  and  airspace
management as conducted by FAA.  The Port will work with the FAA to conduct an
airfield/airspace study which will determine the long-term capacity of the airfield and inform or
reaffirm the SAMP Long-term vision.
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
(1)   Presentation slides 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
February 13, 2018 - Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP)
Planning Update" 
August 23, 2016 -  Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP)
Planning Update" 
July 12, 2016 - Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Planning
Update" 
April 12, 2016 - Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Planning
Update" 
January 26, 2016 -  Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP)
Planning Update" 
September 8, 2015 - Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP)
Planning Update" 
April 28, 2015 - Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Planning
Update" 
March 24, 2015 - Commission Briefing: "Briefing on Sea-Tac Cargo as part of the
Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP)" 

Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _8a___                              Page 8 of 8 
Meeting Date: February 13, 2018 
January 27, 2015 -  Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP)
Planning Update" 
October  7,  2014 -  Commission  Briefing:  "Sustainable  Airport  Master  Plan  (SAMP)
Forecast and Facilities Challenges" 
March 11, 2014 - Commission authorization to amend the existing Sustainable Airport
Master Plan (SAMP) service agreement with Leigh Fisher Associates for IAF-related
planning tasks for an increase of $3,650,000 and a new total contract amount of
$9,650,000 
September 5, 2012 - Commission authorization for SAMP development and to advertise
and execute a contract for consulting services for the SAMP, with a total estimated
value of $6 million 
August 14, 2012 - Commission deferred consideration of a request to approve funding
for the Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) 
June 27, 2012 - Commission Briefing: "Terminal Development Challenges" 













Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.