Template revised January 10, 2019.
COMMISSION
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
Item No.
10c
ACTION ITEM
Date of Meeting
June 27, 2023
DATE : June 20, 2023
TO: Stephen P. Metruck, Executive Director
FROM: Sarah Cox, Director, Aviation Environment and Sustainability
Steve Rybolt, Sr. Environmental Program Manager, Aviation Environment and
Sustainability
SUBJECT: Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Near-Term Projects Environmental Review
– Update and Budget Increase
Amount of this request:
$2,350,000
Total estimated project cost:
$8,750,000
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 $2,350,000 for a total contract amount of $8,750,000.
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 support delays due to COVID-19 and other factors and update
existing conditions and impact analyses to account for a change in the proposed opening of the
Sustainable Airport Mater Plan Near-Term Projects (SAMP NTP) from 2027 to 2032. This action
will continue to support enhanced stakeholder engagement and outreach.
JUSTIFICATION
The estimated cost of the SAMP NTP environmental review has exceeded the current budget and
expected level of effort. There are three primary reasons for increased cost of analysis,
documentation, and project management of the SAMP NTP environmental review: a delay due
to the COVID-19 pandemic; a shift in the anticipated opening year of the SAMP NTPs; and an
update of the existing conditions and impact analyses because of the change in opening year.
Additional information on each of these areas is noted below.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 2 of 7
Meeting Date: June 27, 2023
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
Staff anticipates the $2,350,000 in additional funds will be sufficient to complete the SAMP NTP
environmental review documentation due to the delay. This funding will validate or fully update
all analyses, continue extensive public engagement during the release of the draft documents,
and complete the NEPA and SEPA documentation. The environmental review will be done under
the existing contract, led by Landrum & Brown, a consultancy firm specializing in environmental
review.
• COVID-19 pandemic and associated delays. In late 2020, due to impacts from the COVID-
19 pandemic, the SAMP NTP environmental review slowed. This slowdown was the result
of unknown future aviation demand forecasts and the Port assessing the viability to
construct the NTPs based on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic to its current and
future capital program. While the environmental analyses continued, in late 2021 the FAA
requested a new aviation demand forecast be completed based on SEA’s passenger and
operations recovery as the global pandemic receded. A new aviation demand forecast for
SEA has been completed but resulted in a delay. The pandemic also impacted SEA’s
capital program, resulting in a new opening year of the SAMP NTPs occurring in 2032
versus 2027.
• Update of technical analysis. An update of the aviation demand forecasts, and a new
opening year of the SAMP NTPs has resulted in the need to update most, if not all,
environmental analyses. In many cases detailed technical analyses must be completely
restarted, including air quality, noise, and surface transportation. When possible, existing
analyses will be validated, such as wetland delineation and historic resources, etc. While
this is a large undertaking, this will ensure that once the draft environmental reviews are
released, they will have the most updated information for the public to review. These
efforts require additional time for analysis and documentation, specialized expertise, and
coordination with appropriate governmental agencies.
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 exceeds this requirement with an 11% 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.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 3 of 7
Meeting Date: June 27, 2023
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
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 ($2,350,000) 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.
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.
• 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:
Aug. 2024 Completion of draft affected environment and environmental consequences
Dec. 2024 NEPA EA draft document released for agency and public review
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 4 of 7
Meeting Date: June 27, 2023
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
Feb. 2025 NEPA EA agency and public review complete
Apr. 2025 NEPA EA final document and decision
Jun. 2025 SEPA EIS draft document released for agency and public review
Aug. 2025 SEPA EIS agency and public review complete
Sep. 2025 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 and would
be significant considering the delay to the entire SAMP NTP.
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 $2,350,000 savings.
Other cost increases cannot be reasonably quantified, due to probable delay in SAMP NTP, but
should be considered significant.
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
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 5 of 7
Meeting Date: June 27, 2023
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
Port lacks the staff resources to conduct the work – in particular, within the Aviation
Environment and Sustainability department.
This is not the recommended alternative.
Alternative 3 – Add the requested funds to the existing SAMP contract.
Cost Implications: $2,350,000
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) $2,350,000 cost
This is the recommended alternative.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Cost Estimate/Authorization Summary
Expense
Total
AUTHORIZATION
Previous authorization (11/10/2015)
$3,000,000
$3,000,000
Previous authorization (2/25/2021)
$3,400,000
$3,400,000
Current request for authorization
$2,350,000
$2,350,000
Total authorizations, including this request
$8,750,000
$8,750,000
Remaining amount to be authorized
$0
$0
Annual Budget Status and Source of Funds
Approximately $5,000,000 has been spent on the SAMP NTP environmental review to date and
the remaining funds within the current project budget of $1,230,000 are allocated to tasks in
progress, leaving $170,000 in unallocated funds. The 2023 operating budget includes $1,480,000
for SAMP NTP environmental review activities. 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.
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 6 of 7
Meeting Date: June 27, 2023
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
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
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
February 25, 2020 – Commission Action: “Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Near-Term
Projects (NTP) Environmental Review Briefing and Request for Additional Funds”
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"
COMMISSION AGENDA – Action Item No. 10c Page 7 of 7
Meeting Date: June 27, 2023
Template revised June 27, 2019 (Diversity in Contracting).
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”
