Template revised January 10, 2019.

COMMISSION

AGENDA MEMORANDUM

Item No.

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

COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b Page 2 of 7

Meeting Date: February 25, 2020

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

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 two-

year 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

COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b Page 3 of 7

Meeting Date: February 25, 2020

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

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.

COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b Page 4 of 7

Meeting Date: February 25, 2020

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

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

COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b Page 5 of 7

Meeting Date: February 25, 2020

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

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.

COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b Page 6 of 7

Meeting Date: February 25, 2020

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

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

Current request for authorization

$3,400,000

Total authorizations, including this request

$6,400,000

Remaining amount to be authorized

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

COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 8b Page 7 of 7

Meeting Date: February 25, 2020

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

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”