Template revised September 22, 2016.
COMMISSION
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Item No.
6c
ACTION ITEM
Date of Meeting
July 25, 2017
DATE: July 17, 2017
TO: Dave Soike, Interim Executive Director
FROM: Wayne Grotheer, Director, Aviation Project Management Group
Michael Ehl, Director, Aviation Operations
SUBJECT: Automated Screening Lanes at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (CIP#C800920)
Amount of this request:
$17,000,000
Total estimated project cost:
$30,000,000
ACTION REQUESTED
Request Commission authorization for the Executive Director to (1) proceed with design for
automated screening lanes at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, (2) execute a contract to
purchase the screening lane equipment, and (3) use Port crews. This authorization is for
$17,000,000 of a total estimated project cost of $30,000,000.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Passenger loads at Sea-Tac International Airport (SEA) continue to increase and longer security
lines at the security checkpoints are one result. This project will make modifications to the
passenger screening lanes at the airport’s security checkpoints to increase security
effectiveness and efficiency and improve the passenger experience. Automated Screening
Lanes (ASLs) automate bin conveyance and the screening process at the checkpoint allowing
items to move through screening without physical intervention. This past year the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has been testing ASLs at its national test facility.
As this equipment testing is completed, TSA has granted approval for field verification at
specific airports around the country. The results of field verification to date have demonstrated
that, when properly configured, ASLs have shown a 30 to 40 percent increase in passenger
throughput. Increases are achieved primarily through parallel divestment, alarm bag divert for
continuous flow and automated bin return. Additional gains can be achieved through
centralized/remote screening once approved by TSA in the future. Along with increasing
effectiveness and efficiency, security is further enhanced by added cameras and RFID bins
allowing the TSA to positively track the items in the screening process. These improvements will
benefit the passenger experience at the airport.
While this project was not included in the 2017 – 2021 capital budget and plan of finance, staff
recommends authorization at this time so that the initial installation can be completed by Q2
2018.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6c Page 2 of 5
July 25, 2017
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
JUSTIFICATION
SEA has seen unprecedented growth in passenger traffic along with unprecedented wait times
and space requirements in the Airport’s security queues. ASL’s have rapidly developed and
expanded at other US airports with 25 lanes deployed in 2016 and another 75 planned in 2017.
They are demonstrating a measurable increase in passenger throughput.
The TSA has now completed testing of two vendors’ systems. This is the appropriate time to
undertake procurement and installation of ASLs for this airport. With security checkpoint
queuing becoming one of the main choke points for passengers at SEA, an ASL conversion will
increase checkpoint efficiency, shorten queue lines and improve the overall customer
experience. TSA has been a partner in this project though no federal funds are available to pay
for it. Both Delta Air Lines and Alaska Airlines also support the installation of these lanes at the
airport’s security checkpoints.
DETAILS
This project will upgrade Passenger Security Checkpoints 2, 3 and 5 in a phased approach, one
checkpoint at a time, taking security lanes out of service in pairs to install the ASL equipment.
The new equipment will be integrated with the existing TSA X-Ray machines. The project will
install new electrical and data infrastructure and relocate existing equipment to make room for
the new lanes. ASLs are larger than the Airport’s existing security checkpoint lanes. Security
checkpoints will need to be reconfigured in order for the ASLs to fit. If necessary, new security
grills, walls, or doors to provide off-hours closure will be installed. This will be determined
during design after procurement of the lanes.
Scope of Work
Work will include making modifications to the screening lanes to increase security effectiveness
and efficiency and improve passenger experience. These components include, but are not
limited to, the following:
(1) Procure ASLs through a competitive best value procurement
(2) Install additional electrical power and data communications for the ASLs
(3) Relocate existing checkpoint X-Ray equipment into the ASLs
(4) Make revisions to the checkpoint security grills if needed
(5) Install new checkpoint enclosure walls if needed
Small Business
In an effort to maximize small business interest, Port staff will leverage the Port of Seattle’s
Small Business Generator program (PortGen) to outreach and to provide contracting training to
all small and diverse businesses interested in this project.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6c Page 3 of 5
July 25, 2017
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
Schedule
Activity
Design start
Commission construction authorization
Construction start
First In-use date
Last In-use date
Cost Breakdown
This Request
Total Project
Design
$3,800,000
$3,800,000
Procurement
$13,200,000
$13,200,000
Construction
$0
$13,000,000
Total
$17,000,000
$30,000,000
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED
Alternative 1 – Do not install Automated Screening Lanes.
Cost Implications: $0 capital.
Pros:
(1) No capital cost, freeing funds for other uses.
Cons:
(1) No additional efficiency or throughput at checkpoints
(2) Queue lines and congestion will stay similar or increase in size from the current
situation
(3) As queue lines increase in size, additional queue management may be required in the
future
(4) This would not achieve the airlines goals of providing a better customer experience
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 2 – Implement only a pilot/demonstration of ASL at one checkpoint
Cost Implications: $11,000,000
Pros:
(1) Allows us to better understand how the checkpoints may change operationally to
better understand the necessary modifications to the entire checkpoint
(2) Allows us to understand staffing levels for TSA and how that may affect overall
checkpoint staffing
Cons:
(1) Much slower implementation if you plan to do all lanes later
(2) Only provides minimal relief for congestion and queues
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6c Page 4 of 5
July 25, 2017
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
(3) Airlines will not get the added customer experience in the magnitude and timing they
are requesting
(4) Difficulty in securing the lanes during off hours due to size and length of new lanes
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 3 – Provide ASLs across all checkpoints (in a phased approach)
Cost Implications: $30,000,000
Pros:
(1) Provides a noticeable improvement in customer experience
(2) Faster throughput provides a greater potential to decrease queue lines and
congestion
(3) Provides Airlines with their requested level of innovation at the checkpoints with
increased customer experience
Cons:
(1) Due to size, new ASLs could create egress and circulation issues which has to be
accommodated in the project – space planning currently in progress
(2) Due to size, new ASLs may require new security walls to be put in place at most
checkpoints (similar to checkpoint 5)
(3) Highest cost alternative
This is the recommended alternative.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary
Capital
Expense
Total
COST ESTIMATE
Original estimate
$30,000,000
$0
$30,000,000
AUTHORIZATION
Previous authorizations
$100,000
0
$100,000
Current request for authorization
$17,000,000
0
$17,000,000
Total authorizations, including this request
$17,100,000
0
$17,100,000
Remaining amount to be authorized
$12,900,000
$0
$12,900,000
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds
The Automated Security Lane (CIP #C800920) was not included in the 2017-2021 capital budget
and plan of finance. The budget was transferred from the Aeronautical Allowance (CIP
#C800753), resulting in no net change to the capital budget. The funding source for this project
will be future revenue bonds. The airlines were briefed at the airport airline affairs committee
meeting on July 20, 2017, and a majority-in-interest (MII) vote ballot will be submitted
subsequently.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 6c Page 5 of 5
July 25, 2017
Template revised September 22, 2016; format updates October 19, 2016.
The ownership of the screening equipment will be transferred to the TSA. Accordingly, the cost
of the equipment will be accounted for as public expense. In the table above, all costs are
shown as capital. The assignment of costs to public expense will be refined and updated during
design.
Financial Analysis and Summary
Project cost for analysis
$30,000,000
Business Unit (BU)
Terminal Building
Effect on business performance
(NOI after depreciation)
NOI after depreciation will increase
IRR/NPV (if relevant)
N/A
CPE Impact
$.09 in 2019
Future Revenues and Expenses (Total cost of ownership)
There will be no revenue or anticipated expenses to the Port. The ownership of the ASL
equipment would be transferred to the TSA for consideration.
ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND
Checkpoint lines continue to get longer as passenger loads increase at airports nationwide. The
TSA and other agencies have been looking for solutions to keep up with the demand. An
innovation task force was established to foster innovation by integrating key stakeholders to
identify and demonstrate emerging solutions that increase security effectiveness and efficiency,
improve passenger experience and the flow of commerce, and deliver solutions that secure the
freedom of movement throughout the nation’s transportation system.
TSA has worked closely with airlines, airport authorities, and vendors to deploy 25 ASLs in 2016
across four large hub airports; Atlanta Hartsfield International Airport, Los Angeles International
Airport, Chicago O'Hare International Airport and Newark International Airport.
ATTACHMENTS TO THIS REQUEST
(1) Presentation slides
PREVIOUS COMMISSION ACTIONS OR BRIEFINGS
None