8j. Memo

Surface Area Management System Project at SEA

AGENDA MEMORANDUM                        Item No.          8j 
ACTION ITEM                            Date of Meeting      February 8, 2022 

DATE:     January 28, 2022 
TO:        Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director 
FROM:    Laurel Dunphy, Director Airport Operations 
Krista Sadler, Director ICT Technology Delivery 
SUBJECT:  Surface Area Management Project (CIP #C800650) 

Amount of this project request:                 $8,718,000 
Total estimated project cost:                   $13,500,000 
Total estimated 10-year Hosting Fee:           $2,200,000 
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to (1) construct the Surface Area 
Management System project at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport using Job Order Contracting 
alternative public works, (2) increase the project budget by $6,900,000 for a new total of
$13,500,000, and (3) execute contract amendments over $300,000 with SAAB Inc. to include
recurring system hosting fees over the next 10 years of $2,200,000. 
In June 2019, the commission approved the first phase of a project to provide the tools needed
to effectively predict, respond, and mitigate operational issues and to realize opportunities for
improvement such as increasing aircraft taxiing efficiencies and optimizing gate utilization. The
approval was for two deliverables: (1) acquire and deploy hardware, software, vendor services,
and maintenance and (2) deliver the design for the installation of sensors and cameras used by
the new system. This request is for authorization for the construction phase to install the sensors
and cameras based on the design. 
This project procured and implemented a surface area management (SAM) system to improve
airfield situational awareness and provide forensic and analytic information on airfield operations
at Sea-Tac airport. The system provides information to improve aircraft flow and gate docking
efficiencies, reduce aircraft holds, and support safety initiatives by providing more detailed
information on incident causes and contributing factors. Integrating with several Port and
external data feeds, the system provides a real-time, actionable picture of operations that is
invaluable to Airport Operations, emergency response, security, and our airline partners. 

Template revised January 10, 2019.

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8j                                   Page 2 of 6 
Meeting Date: February 8, 2022 
The system was implemented in multiple phases and is now used by Port staff, Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), and Airlines. The implementation started with an initial phase that
deployed the core system in December 2020. This was followed by phase 2 in May 2021 to deploy
ASSAIA Video Analytics. Phase 3, implemented in November 2021, deployed the video analyticsbased
vehicle and equipment tracking and the remaining integrations with other Port systems.
In parallel to these phases, the project team progressed the design work for phase 4, the
installation of sensors and cameras used by the new system. 
Since the deployment of phase 1 of the project, the Port and its partners have realized several
benefits from using the new system. 
Alaska Airlines leveraged information from the new system and implemented a change to
its operations that that resulted in reduction of wait time for gates upon arrival.
Ramp Tower and FAA coordination significantly improved coordination during impacts of
the 2021 Airport Improvement Project (AIP) work and International Arrivals Facility (IAF)
construction taxi lane closures 
Sixty-seven (67) gates are currently under turn monitoring surveillance providing time
stamps of up to 36 critical milestones throughout the progression of a turn which
establishes a record to gauge vendor performance and predict off-block times 
The original estimates for the design and construction for the installation of sensors and cameras 
that will improve operational efficiency and safety analytics, was $2,643,000. This was based on
realistic assumptions from the technical vendor prior to a final contract and design. During design
it was discovered that the planned wireless cameras would not meet performance specifications
and 50% of existing gate cameras couldn't support turn monitoring. The combined design and
construction body of work, that includes the connection and installation of additional cameras, 
is now estimated to be $9,543,000, which is an increase of $6,900,000. An increase to the vendor
contract for hosting fees, not part of the original contract, is estimated at $2,200,000 and will be
paid for out of annual operating expense funds. 
Over the last few years, the Port has invested in several key systems, practices, and services to
improve overall airfield efficiency. This includes Airport Surface Detection System (ASDE-X),
Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B), Flight Information System (FIMS), Visual
Docking Guidance Systems (Safedock), and Foreign Object Debris Detection System (FOD). 
Although, existing systems improve the airport's detection of activities within their respective
coverage areas, they do not provide a holistic view or understanding of underlying reasons or
root causes for delays, bottlenecks, or deficiencies. These systems detect and tell us what is
occurring, but we are unaware of why they are occurring, or where there may be opportunities
to improve. For example, existing systems can tell us how long an aircraft may hold for a gate, or
the taxiing time to reach the gate, but there is no way of knowing if the aircraft had to hold for
the gate due to a vehicle blocking its path, a lack of personnel to marshal or guide the aircraft
into the gate, or a delay in the departure of a preceding aircraft. Without knowing the cause for

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8j                                   Page 3 of 6 
Meeting Date: February 8, 2022 
these deficiencies, the airport has no way to effectively improve and correct underlying causes
for inefficiency. 
As a result, the Port continues to lack sufficient situational awareness of aircraft, vehicle, and
equipment movement on the airport ramp, gate, and aircraft parking areas, hindering the
Airport's ability to diagnose and mitigate capacity issues, anticipate threats, realize organizational
gaps and lapses, and optimize gate usage.
The implementation of a SAM system is the next step in the evolution of this effort and addresses 
the remaining gaps in sensor coverage as well as limitations in diagnostic and forensic tools. SAM
also integrates and leverages data from existing systems and sensors into a consolidated tool to
enhance situational awareness and business performance  while establishing a common
operating picture for the airport, airlines, and FAA to collaborate around and make better
decisions towards improved safety and efficiency. 
This project includes several important operational and safety benefits. 
(1) SAM improves efficiency by detecting taxi times and the underlying causes of delays and
airfield bottlenecks, synchronizing ground traffic flow with FAA's airspace procedures to
set taxi routes, and alerting staff of delays so we can more proactively mitigate issues. It
is estimated that, annually, a 40% reduction of taxi time delays will save airlines up to
$2,500,000 annual airline savings and reduce emissions by 3,700 metric tons. 
(2) SAM improves safety by providing data to determine incident root cause and develop
mitigation measures and intercepting potential hazards before they become an incident. 
(3) SAM improves legal defense by providing forensic data associated with incidents. This
may include video, vehicle speed, erratic driving patterns, and operating conditions. 
(4) SAM improves business performance by showing real-time gate usage to reduce conflicts,
track progress of deicing equipment and match schedule with aircraft readiness, and
more accurately record hardstand usage for billing purposes. 
Diversity in Contracting 
This project will utilize a Job Order Contract (JOC) to construct this project's scope of work. The
overall JOC contract has a 16% Women and Minority Business Enterprise (WMBE) commitment
goal. Each work order within the JOC strives to achieve this stated WMBE commitment. 
Scope of Work 
The Phase 4 project scope of work includes sensor and camera installation at various locations in
the airfield to improve identification of targets for situational awareness and provide gate turn
monitoring at all gates. The scope also includes the setup of the all the required Power and

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8j                                   Page 4 of 6 
Meeting Date: February 8, 2022 
Communication Infrastructure for the sensors and cameras. This request also includes budget to
complete the design remaining design work. 
Phase 4 Construction start                     2022 Quarter 3 
Phase 4 In-use date                            2023 Quarter 4 
Total Project Complete                        2024 Quarter 1 
Cost Breakdown                                     This Request           Total Project 
Hardware/Software/Vendor Services                                        $2,623,000 
Port Labor                                                  $80,000               $934,000 
Sensor/Camera Installation                             $8,638,000             $9,543,000 
Total Capital                                                $8,718,000            $13,100,000 
Training                                                                              $200,000 
Spare Parts                                                                        $200,000 
Total Expense                                                                   $400,000 
TOTAL PROJECT                                    $8,718,000          $13,500,000 
The original construction estimate was based on assumptions that sensors and cameras could
utilize wireless connectivity and existing cameras at gates would be sufficient for turn monitoring.
During design, it was found that cameras could not meet performance specifications when
connected wirelessly and an estimated 50% of the gates did not have cameras that are directed
in an optimal way. 
Alternative 1  Utilize wireless connectivity and eliminate cameras associated with sensors and
on remaining gates. 
Cost Implications: approximately $1,000,000 
(1)   This is the lower cost alternative. 
(1)   Efficiencies and associated cost savings and customer service improvements related to
gate turn monitoring will not be realized. 
(2)   Reduced improvements in safety monitoring of non-aircraft vehicles and equipment on
the airfield. 
This is not the recommended alternative. 

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8j                                   Page 5 of 6 
Meeting Date: February 8, 2022 

Alternative 2  Approve cost increase for wired cameras and additional gate cameras to monitor
gate turns. 
Cost Implications: $6,900,000 
(1)   Gate turn monitoring is essential to realizing efficiencies in the turn process that
generate significant savings to our airline partners and support process change that
improves the customer experience. 
(2)   Full camera capability supports real-time safety monitoring and safety management
analysis capabilities on non-aircraft vehicles and equipment on the airfield. 
(1)   This is the higher cost alternative. 
This is the recommended alternative. 
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary              Capital        Expense           Total 
Original estimate                                 $6,200,000        $400,000      $6,600,000 
Budget Increase                                $6,900,000              $0      $6,900,000 
Revised estimate                              $13,100,000       $400,000    $13,500,000 
Previous authorizations                          $4,382,000        $400,000      $4,782,000 
Current request for authorization                $8,718,000               $0      $8,718,000 
Total authorizations, including this request      $13,100,000        $400,000     $13,500,000 
Remaining amount to be authorized                    $0             $0             $0 
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds 
This project, C800650 was included in the 2022-2026 capital budget and plan of finance for
$6,200,000. The capital budget increase of $6,900,000 was transferred from the Aeronautical
Allowance C800753 resulting in no net change to the Aviation Division capital budget. The
funding source would be the Airport Development Fund and future bonds. This project had prior
airlines Majority in Interest (MII) approval of $5M. The budget increase would utilize the MII
Management Reserve which would not require additional MII approval. The expense budget for
2022 was included in the operating budget. 

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

COMMISSION AGENDA  Action Item No. 8j                                   Page 6 of 6 
Meeting Date: February 8, 2022 
Financial Analysis and Summary 
Project cost for analysis              $13,500,000 
Business Unit (BU)                  Airfield Movement Area 
Effect on business performance    NOI after depreciation will increase due to inclusion of
(NOI after depreciation)             capital (and operating) costs in airline rate base 
IRR/NPV (if relevant)                N/A 
CPE Impact                       $0.15 in 2022 
Future Revenues and Expenses (Total cost of ownership) 
Previously authorized annual recurring maintenance and license costs for this system, estimated
at $1,400,000 are budgeted in the Aviation Operations operating budget. A new annual recurring
cost for system hosting estimated at $220,000 per year will be budgeted in the Aviation
Maintenance operating budget for a total annual cost of $1,620,000. 
(1) Presentation 
June 11, 2019  Item 6e - Commission authorized proceeding with the project for $4,782,000 

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

Limitations of Translatable Documents

PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.