COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          6c 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting       April 24, 2018 
DATE:     April 6, 2018 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Jeffrey Brown, Director of Aviation Facilities and Capital Programs 
Mike Tasker, General Manager, Aviation Facilities and Infrastructure 
SUBJECT:  Airport Utilities Master Plan 
Amount of this request:                       $0 
Total estimated project cost:          $6,000,000 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to execute a 5-year contract  for
planning studies, measurements, modelling, analysis, and project development to complete
infrastructure master planning for Airport utility systems, for an amount  not to exceed
$6,000,000. 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
The Port of Seattle is responsible for maintaining utility infrastructure systems at the Seattle-
Tacoma International Airport and staff desires to complete utility master plans to address
existing and future infrastructure needs. The master plans will provide a road map to keep the
airport utility systems capable of providing reliable, efficient, and sustainable utility services.
The utility master plans will address current deficiencies, currently proposed capital
improvements of existing facilities,  and proposed future expansion plans to include the
Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP). Currently proposed capital improvements include but
are not limited to the South Satellite renovation, C1 Building, restroom upgrades, tenant
improvements, and consolidated deicing facilities. 
Each of the utility systems (listed in the scope on page 3) will have a stand-alone master plan.
The plans will be coordinated to ensure that all airport utility development is attained in the
most efficient manner possible.  The master plan effort will also address naming convention
and standards to address current technologies, sustainability goals, and to ensure consistency
between all current and future facilities where practical. 
JUSTIFICATION 
The Seattle-Tacoma International Airport needs to improve its utility infrastructure. The airport
has multiple utility "lines" (pipes, conductors, conduits) that were built in the 1960s and 1970s.

Template revised September 22, 2016.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _6c___                              Page 2 of 5 
Meeting Date: April 24, 2018 
Some of these "lines" are at capacity or are in poor condition. Although they are functioning
today, several utilities are or will soon be outdated and need replacement to avoid airport
operational delays, costly repairs, and short-term fixes. 
Infrastructure system planning was last accomplished in the 1999-2001 era. Those documents
supported the new A Concourse, Central Terminal Expansion, and the Delta Hangar but are now
beyond the intended planning horizon. This project is necessary to ensure that the Port's utility
infrastructure is in place to support the Airport's near and long-term capital development
program and to meet the new Century Agenda goals related to environment, sustainability, and
resource use. 
The airport also needs to improve its approach to accomplishing utility infrastructure projects.
As individual capital projects move forward, the airport conducts project-specific condition
assessments and addresses utility need  replacement of old lines or addition of new lines  
applicable only to that project.  With the region's unprecedented growth in aviation demand, 
the airport has multiple large-scale capital improvement projects scheduled to be constructed, 
and coordination to ensure efficient implementation warrants study. There are multiple large
capital projects planned or scheduled for construction over the next ten years. An abbreviated
list of those capital improvement projects includes: 
South Satellite Renovations 
C1 Building 
Restroom Upgrades 
Consolidated Deicing 
SAMP Near-Term Projects (2027) 
ADR Program 
Tenant improvement projects 
The Utility Master Plan will also conduct scenario planning to consider potential requirements
of projects included in the SAMP Long-Term Vision. 
The airport requires a forward-looking Utility Master Plan that considers campus-wide needs
over time.  This Utility Master Plan will better inform the Airport of all the necessary
infrastructure improvements and will aid the Airport in developing a prioritized and phased
program.  The program will recommend specific projects to replace aging infrastructure,
increase capacity, provide appropriate redundancies or backup systems to mitigate the risk of
utility outages or failures, and identify new technology and efficiency systems to manage
operational costs. 
DETAILS 
Pending Commission approval, the Utility Master Plan project will procure a planning and
engineering consultant team under a project-specific request for qualifications. 


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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _6c___                              Page 3 of 5 
Meeting Date: April 24, 2018 
Scope of Work 
A high-level scope of work for the Utility Master Plan includes the following tasks: 
1.  Project Management 
2.  Develop existing utility distribution plans and condition assessments 
3.  Develop utility system models and evaluate capacities 
4.  Review future utility needs and develop delivery alternatives 
5.  Develop future utility phasing plans 
6.  Prepare cost estimates 
7.  Prepare utility master plan document findings 
Inclusive of but not exclusive to the following systems: 
Mechanical Systems including Hot and Chilled Water, Steam and Condensate, and
Preconditioned Air 
Sanitary Sewer and biffy dump (aircraft lavatory waste) 
Surface Water Systems including Storm and Industrial Waste System (IWS) 
Domestic Water System 
Airfield Fuel System 
Electrical Power System  including energy supplies, backup/emergency generation,
electric vehicle (including electric ground support equipment) charging and 400 Hz
power 
Natural Gas System 
Solid Waste Management System 
Information and Communications Technology Systems 
Utility Metering and Data Acquisition System 
Small Business 
This contract will include a 15% Small Business requirement 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1  Advertise and execute multiple individual project specific contracts (one for
each specific Utility Master Plan; i.e., Mechanical, Storm Water, Power, etc.) 
This alternative would require that both Port staff and consultants participate in multiple
solicitation processes. The solicitation process is lengthy and costly. The consultant teams will
need to repeatedly evaluate their team's availability and capacity to conduct each individual 
Utility Master Plan element and the Port may see an overall reduction in response to the
procurement process. This is not a viable alternative if the Port is committed to best practices
for project delivery and meeting our business sponsor needs.  This is not the recommended
alternative. 
Cost Implications:
Procurement of additional staff costs and higher consultant management costs to provide
utility master plans. 

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _6c___                              Page 4 of 5 
Meeting Date: April 24, 2018 

Pros: 
(1) Separate contracts would allow consulting firms multiple opportunities to compete for
each individual utility master plan project. 
Cons: 
(1) This alternative is an inefficient use of Port resources and staff time and does not
leverage  the  Port's  contracting  methods.  It  would  increase  overhead  and
administrative costs to the Port, as we would need to manage more procurement
processes and contracts. 
(2) This alternative will add time to each project schedule to complete the procurement
process for each individual project and would impact the ability to meet project and
customer needs. 
(3) Costs to the consulting companies may increase as they would be responding to
multiple procurements. 
(4) Integration of the individual utility master planning efforts into a coordinated campus-
wide executive summary document would be more difficult to achieve. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2    Advertise and execute one project specific contract with an appropriate
qualified consulting firm to perform all Utility Master Planning for the following Airport utility
systems to include but not exclusive to: 
Mechanical Systems including Hot and Chilled Water, Steam and Condensate, and
Preconditioned Air 
Sanitary Sewer and biffy dump (aircraft lavatory waste) 
Surface Water Systems including Storm and Industrial Waste System (IWS) 
Domestic Water System 
Airfield Fuel System 
Electrical Power System  including energy supplies, backup/emergency generation,
electric vehicle (including electric ground support equipment) charging and 400 Hz
power 
Natural Gas System 
Solid Waste Management System 
Baggage and Vertical Conveyance System 
Information and Communications Technology System 
Utility Metering and Data Acquisition System 



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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. _6c___                              Page 5 of 5 
Meeting Date: April 24, 2018 
Cost Implications: 
The capital program includes substantial infrastructure implications as new facilities and capital
improvements are envisioned which will require utility support. This planning effort will apprise
the Port with appropriate forethought and intelligent design analysis to intelligently inform
program capital funding decisions. 
Pros: 
(1)   The Port will minimize duplications of effort and cost increases by conducting holistic
infrastructure systems planning and development.  This alternative reduces costs in
staff time and overhead for each utility involved - the solicitation, evaluation and
selection process for design services is completed upfront for multiple planning
efforts. 
(2)   This alternative reduces the schedule for each utility involved in that the solicitation,
evaluation and selection for design services has already been completed.  Typically,
this process consumes approximately 3 to 4 months. 
(3)   This alternative more effectively provides for the "consistency" of parallel utility
master planning efforts with sub consultants all being directed by a single prime
consultant. The end result will be a fully integrated all-utility location and construction
phasing plan. 
Cons: 
(1)   None 
This is the recommended alternative. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds 
$500,000 was included in the operating budget for 2018. The remainder of the funding will be
included in the operating budget of future years. 
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
(1)   Presentation slides 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
None 




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