COMMISSION 
AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          8b 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting     February 25, 2020 
DATE:     February 4, 2020 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Arlyn Purcell, Director, Aviation Environment and Sustainability 
Steve Rybolt, Sr. Environmental Program Manager, Aviation Environment and
Sustainability 
SUBJECT:  Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Near-Term Projects (NTP) Environmental
Review Briefing and Request for Additional Funds 
Amount of this request:               $3,400,000 
Total estimated project cost:           $6,400,000 
ACTION REQUESTED 
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to execute an amendment to the
existing Sustainable Airport Master Plan Environmental Review personal services agreement with
Landrum and Brown for an increase of $3,400,000 for a new contract amount of $6,400,000.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
This additional funding is being requested to complete environmental review documentation
required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and State Environmental Policy Act
(SEPA). The additional funding will continue to support enhanced stakeholder engagement and
outreach, the addition of several environmental categories requiring specialized analysis,
preparation of separate NEPA and SEPA documents, and the additional time required to support
these tasks.
BACKGROUND 
Environmental review for the SAMP is a multi-year, multi-agency process that includes technical
work and public engagement. The Port of Seattle (Port) is currently conducting an environmental
review on a set of Near-Term Projects (NTP), which the SAMP planning team concluded in mid-
2018 were needed to meet current and expected near-term future demand, while staying within
current airfield, airspace, and financial constraints.
The Port completed environmental scoping, one of the first steps in a multi-step environmental
review process, on September 28, 2018. Commission received a SAMP NTP environmental review
update following agency and public scoping on February 26, 2019. Since the completion of

Template revised January 10, 2019.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8b                                  Page 2 of 7 
Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 
scoping, the Port has updated the demand forecast and is now in the process of performing the
environmental analysis.
JUSTIFICATION 
The estimated cost of SAMP NTP environmental review has exceeded the initial budget and
expected level of effort. There are four  primary  reasons for increased  cost  of analysis,
documentation, and project management of the SAMP NTP environmental review: (1) the twoyear
extension for completion of the SAMP planning process;  (2) more extensive public
engagement; (3) being responsive to agency and public comment from the scoping period, which
requires additional analysis and associated documentation; and (4) the preparation of separate
NEPA and SEPA documents. Additional information in each of these areas is noted below. 
Staff anticipates the $3,400,000 in additional funds will be sufficient to complete the SAMP NTP
environmental review documentation. This funding will provide additional analysis, continued
extensive public engagement during the release of the draft documents, and to complete the
NEPA and SEPA work. The environmental review will be done under the existing contract, led by
Landrum & Brown, a consultancy firm specializing in environmental review. 
Planning work extension and advanced planning coordination. The original SAMP
Environmental Review personal service agreement was authorized by Commission on
November 10, 2015 and a contract was awarded on April 27, 2016. Work began
immediately as the schedule anticipated that SAMP planning would be completed by the
end of 2016. The planning work extended until the middle of 2018 to complete additional
airfield modeling and coordination with FAA. As a result, much of the environmental
review work completed during this time had to be substantially updated when the NTP
environmental review was initiated in 2018. Additionally, advanced planning has been
conducted to further validate SAMP planning assumptions, requiring additional support
of the Landrum & Brown team. 
Expanded scoping process and extensive stakeholder engagement and community
outreach. Scoping for the NEPA Environmental Assessment (EA) and SEPA Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) was expanded significantly to create greater opportunities for
meaningful input. The expanded activities included a 30-day extension of the public
comment period, four public open houses, an online open house, a robust outreach
program  to  alert  individuals  of  scoping  and  the  comment  period,  providing 
documentation in five languages, reviewing several thousand comments, and producing 
a Scoping Report. The revised budget assumes continuation of this level of engagement
and outreach.
Additional technical analysis. Scoping identified additional areas of study to be analyzed
and documented, including updating the demand forecast, and additional analysis within
selected NEPA resource categories and elements of the environment within SEPA. The 
analyses include dispersion modeling for  air quality, human health analysis, an 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8b                                  Page 3 of 7 
Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 
environmental justice investigation, a review of current knowledge on aircraft noise 
exposure, an enhanced assessment of greenhouse gas emissions, a review of current
knowledge on ultrafine particulate matter, and analysis of a larger transportation study
area. These efforts require additional time for analysis and documentation, specialized
expertise, and coordination with appropriate governmental agencies. 
Separation of NEPA and SEPA processes. The FAA and the Port have agreed that NEPA
and SEPA would be best served by preparing two separate documents:  a NEPA
Environmental Assessment (EA) and a SEPA Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The
documents will not be combined, as originally intended. The separation of the NEPA and
SEPA reports allows the Port's SEPA analyses to be independent of and build upon, as
warranted, analyses that are performed within the NEPA EA. However, this decision
requires that the Port produce two separate robust documents, hold two separate public
comment  periods,  and  develop  separate  responses  to  comments  and  final
documentation.
Diversity in Contracting 
The SAMP Environmental Review personal services agreement has a Small Contractors and
Suppliers (SCS) utilization requirement of seven percent. To date, the  personal services 
agreement is exceeding it with a 12.5% SCS utilization rate. The seven percent SCS utilization
requirement will continue through the duration of the service agreement.
DETAILS 
This contract supports the Port's ongoing efforts to fulfill regulatory obligations (i.e. NEPA and
SEPA) for decisions about airport growth and development. Consulting services made available
through this contract allow the Port to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of future
airport growth and development identified within the SAMP NTP and mitigate those impacts as
appropriate. Upon completion of NEPA and SEPA, the Port may begin construction after 
Commission authorization.
Environmental review of the SAMP NTP will continue to be led by Landrum & Brown, a
consultancy firm specializing in aviation environmental reviews. Landrum & Brown will also
continue to be supported by a variety of subconsultants, many of which are locally and/or 
nationally recognized experts within their respective disciplines.
In accordance with RCW 53.19.060, this memorandum constitutes notification to Commission of
the amended amount ($3,400,000) to the service agreement with Landrum & Brown for SAMP,
as it exceeds 50 percent of the original contract value of $3,000,000. This amendment is made
available for public inspection.


Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8b                                  Page 4 of 7 
Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 
Scope of Work 
These additional funds would be used to complete work that falls within the scope of the existing
contract.
The SAMP NTP Environmental Review scope includes the following primary tasks: 
Project Management  Manage coordinated and effective relationships with the project
team. 
SAMP Planning Review   Confirm planning objectives/alternatives and identify
information required for the environmental analysis. 
Scope of Work Development, Project Schedule, and Project Budget  Prepare and
document detailed scope of work, schedule, and project budget for NEPA and SEPA. 
Purpose and Need/Development of Alternatives  Document purpose and need and
identify and document alternatives to achieving that need.
NEPA/SEPA Scoping  Facilitate implementation and associated activities of scoping as
required under NEPA and SEPA. 
Alternatives Evaluation  Based on purpose and need, screen and evaluate Alternative(s),
including a No Action Alternative. 
NEPA/SEPA Analysis  Existing Conditions/Affected Environment  Identify existing
environmental conditions for all environmental categories required under NEPA and
elements of the environment under SEPA.
Future Environmental Consequences With and Without the Project  Evaluate all
environmental categories required under NEPA and elements of the environment under
SEPA for future conditions associated with the Alternative(s) and No Action Alternative.
Prepare Draft Environmental Documentation   Prepare comprehensive interim
documents that will be made available for agency and public comment. 
Public and Agency Coordination  Conduct on-going coordination with appropriate
stakeholders during the preparation of the draft and final environmental documents. This
also includes public hearing(s) during the agency and public comment period.
Prepare Final Environmental Documentation  Review agency and public comments on
the draft environmental document and revise the draft document to prepare the final
environmental documents.
Schedule 
Staff anticipates the following schedule: 
Jun. 2020     Completion of draft affected environment and environmental consequences 
Oct. 2020     NEPA EA draft document released for agency and public review 
Nov. 2020     NEPA EA agency and public review complete 
Apr. 2021     NEPA EA final document and decision 
May 2021    SEPA EIS draft document released for agency and public review 
Jul. 2021       SEPA EIS agency and public review complete 

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8b                                  Page 5 of 7 
Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 
Sep. 2021     SEPA EIS final document 
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED 
Alternative 1  Do not add funds to the SAMP Environmental Review service agreement, but
instead, procure new consultant services. The work described in this memo is required to
advance the SAMP NTP environmental review but could be conducted by a consultancy firm(s)
specializing in aviation environmental reviews and not currently under contract with the Port. 
Cost Implications: This alternative would likely cost more and take longer to complete; the
potential increase in cost and delays to the schedule cannot be reasonably quantified. 
Pros: 
(1)   Competition among qualified consultants for additional work.
Cons: 
(1)   Procuring a consultancy firm specializing in airport environmental reviews other than
Landrum & Brown, 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
environmental issues and projects that has, by comparison, been gained by the SAMP
Environmental Review consultant team through their work on the SAMP NTP
environmental review to date. In addition, the procurement process itself would take
time to execute. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 
Alternative 2  Do not add funds to the SAMP Environmental Review service agreement and use
Port staff to complete the work. 
Cost Implications: No additional funds added to the contract  potential $3,400,000 savings. 
Pros: 
(1)   Short term cost savings 
Cons: 
(1)   Port staff lacks the breadth of specialized skills required within NEPA and SEPA. 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 environmental issues and projects that
has, by comparison, been gained by the SAMP Environmental Review consultant team
through their work on the SAMP NTP environmental review to date. In addition, the
Port lacks the staff resources to conduct the work  in particular, within the Aviation
Environment and Sustainability department. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 



Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8b                                  Page 6 of 7 
Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 
Alternative 3  Add the requested funds to the existing SAMP contract. 
Cost Implications: $3,400,000 
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 environmental issues and projects that has
been gained by the SAMP Environmental Review consultant team through their work on
the SAMP NTP environmental review to date. 
Cons: 
(1)   $3,400,000 cost 
This is the recommended alternative. 
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary                     Expense                   Total 
AUTHORIZATION 
Previous authorizations (11/10/2015)                     $3,000,000              $3,000,000 
Current request for authorization                         $3,400,000               $3,400,000 
Total authorizations, including this request                $6,400,000               $6,400,000 
Remaining amount to be authorized                            $0                     $0 
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds 
Approximately $1,700,000 has been spent on the SAMP NTP environmental review to date and
the remaining funds within the current project budget of $3,000,000 are allocated to tasks in
progress. The 2020 operating budget includes $1,500,000 for SAMP NTP environmental review
activities. This increased budget, if authorized, is not likely to cause us the exceed the 2020
operating budget. As these are operating costs, the funding source will be the Airport
Development Fund.
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND 
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 close-
in airspace configuration will remain in place. With the airport's small footprint and significant

Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8b                                  Page 7 of 7 
Meeting Date: February 25, 2020 
physical constraints, redevelopment at Sea-Tac requires expensive relocation of existing facilities
and limited options for expansion. 
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 in SAMP planning identified a suite of projects required to meet current and
expected near-term future demand, known as the Near-Term Projects (NTP). The NTP consists of
approximately 31 projects, including 19 gates connected to a second terminal, that are being
evaluated within the SAMP NTP environmental review. Although the SAMP planning process
identified projects beyond the NTP, known as the Long-Term Vision (LTV), these projects are not
ripe for environmental review at this time, as they require further study and are not reasonably
foreseeable. 
The second step in SAMP planning focused on understanding the constraints for airside facilities, 
which include 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 LTV projects. Similar to the LTV, additional environmental review is required
before any airfield/airspace projects could are implemented.
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST 
(1)   Presentation slides 
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS 
January 28, 2020  Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Near-Term
Projects (NTP) Environmental Review Briefing  Forecast and Schedule Update" 
February 26, 2019  Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Near-
Term Projects (NTP) Environmental Review Briefing  Scoping Report" 
May 8, 2018  Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Planning and
Environmental Update" 
February 13, 2018 - Commission Briefing: "Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Planning
Update" 
November 10, 2015  Commission Action: "Environmental Review (National Environmental
Policy Act and State Environmental Policy Act) Personal Services Agreement for the
Sustainable Airport Master Plan" 



Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).