Future System Performance

TASP Future System Performance Introduction Tennessee Aviation System Plan (TASP) Goals and Performance Measures (PMs) were first established in Chapter 1 – System Goals and Performance Measures, and existing system performance was then examined in Chapter 2 – Inventory and Existing System Performance. This chapter continues the analysis of Goals and PMs by exploring future performance targets through the development of a Future System Performance evaluation. The primary focus of this chapter is to introduce the desired f uture performance targets for the TASP PMs. Airports that do not meet desired future performance targets for TASP PMs are listed along with the necessary projects for those airports to meet future performance. It should be noted that System Indicators (SIs) are not evaluated for desired future performance, as they are intended to be for informational purposes only. Future System Performance The following sections are organized first by Goal and then by PM, including a brief explanation of the PM, then followed by the future performance targets set for the PM. Existing system performance was primarily based on information provided in the TASP Inventory Data Survey. Future performance targets were established by the TDOT Aeronautics Division after review of the current aviation system performance in Chapter 2 – Inventory and Existing System Performance. Future performance targets are defined as the total and percent of airports by classification that need to meet each PM in order to accomplish the overarching Goals of the TASP. Performance targets have been established for most PMs for most airport classifications, however, some performance targets are listed as “no target established.” It should be noted that not having an established target for specific airport classifications does not preclude an airport from seeking a project for their airport that relates to a given PM. Tables in the following sections are arranged by TASP role and only show airports that do not meet an associated PM. It should be noted that for certain PMs, Commercial Service airports are further distinguished as Primary commercial service or Nonprimary commercial service. Primary commercial service airports are those with more than 10,000 annual enplanements. Of Tennessee’s six commercial service airports, only McKellar-Sipes Regional Airport (MKL) is a Nonprimary commercial service airport.

Goal #1: Protect and preserve existing airport infrastructure by prioritizing airport system needs Goal #1 Performance Measures (PMs) focus on maintaining existing aviation infrastructure to meet the diverse needs of Tennessee’s aviation system. For the TASP, inf rastructure maintenance includes monitoring pavement to ensure pavement condition index (PCI) standards are met and maintaining other airport infrastructure within its useful life. Goal #1 includes two PMs, listed below:

 Percent of airports meeting the airport pavement management system (APMS) objective o Runways > 65 o Other pavement (taxiways/aprons) > 60  Percent of infrastructure within its useful life: o Pavement (new/reconstruction) – 20 years o Pavement rehabilitation – 10 years o Airfield lighting and signage – 10 years o NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment – 15 years o Buildings (terminal) – 40 years o Loading bridges – 20 years o Fencing – 20 years PERCENT OF AIRPORTS MEETING THE AIRPORT PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (APMS) OBJECTIVE Airfield pavement is some of the most important infrastructure at an airport. Maintenance of an airport’s pavement is critical for the safe movement of aircraft on runways and other paved areas, including taxiways and aprons. Pavement construction and rehabilitation is one of the most expensive projects an airport can undertake, highlighting the importance of continued maintenance to extend its useful life. The APMS monitors the health of all airport pavements in the system and assigns pavement segments a PCI number indicating the overall health of the pavement. The PCI is the industry standard used to represent the current state of an airport’s pavement based on a scale of 0 (unacceptable/failed) to 100 (new/perfect condition). Runways > 65 The APMS objective for primary runways is a PCI of 65 or greater. Table 1 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of airports needed to meet future performance targets for primary runways.

Table 1: Airports by Classification with Runway PCI of 65 or Greater – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Airports Needed to Airports Meeting Future Performance Airport Classification Meet Future System Objective Targets Performance Commercial Service 4 (67%) 6 (100%) 2 (33%) Regional Service 12 (71%) 17 (100%) 5 (29%) Community Business 12 (80%) 15 (100%) 3 (20%) Community Service 26 (66%) 38 (100%) 12 (34%) Turf N/A No Target Established N/A Statewide 54 (69%) 76 (97%)1 22 (28%) Source: TDOT APMS Study, 2019; individual commercial service airport PCI reports 1This percentage excludes Turf airports, which are not applicable to this analysis. Currently, 69 percent of airports statewide meet the objective. Future performance targets call for all runway PCIs to be 65 or greater, regardless of airport classification (excluding Turf airports). Twenty-eight percent of runway PCIs statewide are less than 65, as shown in Table 1. This includes 33 percent of Commercial Service, 29 percent of Regional Service, 20 percent of Community Business, and 34 percent of Community Service airports that do not meet the objective. Project recommendations for this PM are based on the TDOT Aeronautics Division APMS study. For commercial service airports, including Tri-Cities Airport (TRI), Lovell Field (CHA), Memphis International Airport (MEM), and Nashville International Airport (BNA), project recommendations were obtained through their individual pavement evaluation studies. McGhee Tyson Airport (TYS) did not provide cost estimates in their pavement evaluation study. Further, while McKellar-Sipes Regional Airport (MKL) is classified as Commercial Service in the TASP, it is included in the TDOT APMS study. Runway projects included in the 2019 APMS and commercial service pavement studies are also proposed to meet future performance goals for this PM, as shown in Table 2. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM. Table 2 does not include Johnson City Airport (0A4) or Dallas Bay Sky Park (1A0), privately-owned airports, which do not meet current performance targets but are not included in the APMS.

Table 2: Airports by Classification with APMS Recommended Runway Projects

Recommended Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Project Commercial Service McKellar-Sipes Regional APMS recommended Jackson MKL Airport project APMS recommended Knoxville McGhee Tyson Airport TYS project Regional Service APMS recommended Clarksville Outlaw Field CKV project

Recommended Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Project APMS recommended Columbia/Mount Pleasant Maury County Airport MRC project APMS recommended Millington Millington-Memphis Airport NQA project APMS recommended Smyrna Smyrna Airport MQY project Winchester Municipal APMS recommended Winchester BGF Airport project

Community Business Knoxville Downtown Island APMS recommended Knoxville DKX Airport project APMS recommended Oneida Scott Municipal Airport SCX project Everett-Stewart Regional APMS recommended Union City UCY Airport project

Community Service Centerville Municipal APMS recommended Centerville GHM Airport project APMS recommended Copperhill Martin Campbell Field 1A3 project APMS recommended Dayton Mark Anton Airport 2A0 project APMS recommended Halls Arnold Field M31 project APMS recommended Hohenwald John A. Baker Field 0M3 project Marion County - Brown APMS recommended Jasper APT Field project APMS recommended Lafayette Lafayette Municipal Airport 3M7 project APMS recommended Linden James Tucker Airport M15 project APMS recommended Millington Charles W. Baker Airport 2M8 project APMS recommended Portland Portland Municipal Airport 1M5 project APMS recommended Sewanee Franklin County Airport UOS project Source: TDOT APMS Study, 2019; individual commercial service airport PCI reports The TDOT Aeronautics Division currently monitors airport pavement surfaces f or runways, taxiways, and aprons for all Nonprimary publicly-owned system airports across the state. The TDOT Aeronautics Division should continue to monitor airfield pavement to determine which

airports’ needs are greatest in order to allocate appropriate funding resources towards pavement improvement projects. Other Pavement (Taxiways/Aprons) > 60 The APMS objective for other pavement (taxiways/aprons) is a PCI of 60 or greater. Table 3 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of airports needed to meet future performance targets for other pavement (taxiways/aprons).

Table 3: Airports by Classification with Other Pavement (Taxiways/Aprons) PCI of 60 or Greater – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Airports Needed to Airports Meeting Future Performance Airport Classification Meet Future System Objective Targets Performance Commercial Service 6 (100%) 6 (100%) 0 (0%) Regional Service 15 (88%) 17 (100%) 2 (12%) Community Business 13 (87%) 15 (100%) 2 (13%) Community Service 30 (79%) 38 (100%) 8 (21%) Turf N/A No Target Established N/A Statewide 64 (82%) 76 (97%)1 12 (15%) Source: TDOT APMS Study, 2019; individual commercial service airport PCI reports 1This percentage excludes Turf airports, which are not applicable to this analysis. Currently, 82 percent of airports statewide meet the objective. Future performance targets call for all other pavement (taxiways/aprons) PCIs to be 60 or greater, regardless of airport classification (excluding Turf airports). Fifteen percent of other pavement (taxiways/aprons) PCIs statewide are less than 60, as shown in Table 3. This includes 12 percent of Regional Service, 13 percent of Community Business, and 21 percent of Community Service airports that do not meet the objective. Project recommendations for this PM are based on the TDOT Aeronautics Division APMS study. For commercial service airports, including Tri-Cities Airport (TRI), Lovell Field (CHA), Memphis International Airport (MEM), and Nashville International Airport (BNA), project recommendations were obtained through the airports’ individual pavement evaluation studies. Other pavement (taxiways/aprons) projects included in the 2019 APMS and commercial service pavement studies are also proposed to meet future performance targets for this PM, as shown in Table 4. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM. Table 4 does not include Dallas Bay Sky Park (1A0) or Johnson City Airport (0A4), privately-owned airports, which do not meet current performance but are not included in the APMS.

Table 4: Airports by Classification with APMS Other Pavement (Taxiways/Aprons) Recommended Projects

Recommended Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Project Regional Service APMS recommended Smyrna Smyrna Airport MQY project APMS recommended Tullahoma Tullahoma Regional Airport THA project Community Business APMS recommended Lewisburg Ellington Airport LUG project APMS recommended Oneida Scott Municipal Airport SCX project Community Service APMS recommended Halls Arnold Field M31 project APMS recommended Humboldt Humboldt Municipal Airport M53 project APMS recommended Linden James Tucker Airport M15 project APMS recommended Madisonville Monroe County Airport MNV project Warren County Memorial APMS recommended McMinnville RNC Airport project APMS recommended Rogersville Hawkins County Airport RVN project Source: TDOT APMS Study, 2019; individual commercial service airport PCI reports The TDOT Aeronautics Division currently monitors airport pavement surfaces f or runways, taxiways, and aprons for all system airports across the state. The TDOT Aeronautics Division should continue to monitor airfield pavement to determine which airports’ needs are greatest in order to allocate appropriate funding resources towards pavement improvement projects. PERCENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN ITS USEFUL LIFE Infrastructure at an airport consists of its physical assets, including pavement, airfield lighting and signage, navigational aids (NAVAIDs) and weather reporting equipment, terminal buildings, loading bridges, and fencing. The most important indicator of an airport’s infrastructure quality is its age. Airports were asked to provide the percent of infrastructure that met the PM objective for pavement (new/reconstruction), pavement rehabilitation, airfield lighting and signage, and NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment. The results presented for this performance measure are presented as the average percent of the infrastructure that meets the objective; for instance, 47 percent of new and reconstructed pavement at Commercial Service airports is 20 years old or newer. Buildings (terminal), loading bridges, and fencing are presented as the

percent of airports that meet the objective; for instance, 76 percent of Regional Service airports have a terminal building that is 40 years old or newer. Pavement (New/Reconstruction) – 20 Years Specific project recommendations related to this PM are linked to projects in the APMS and were previously provided in Table 2 and Table 4. New pavement or pavement that has been totally reconstructed that is 20 years old or newer is within its useful life. Table 5 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of updated pavement (new/reconstruction) needed to meet future performance targets.

Table 5: Average Percent of Pavement (New/Reconstruction) That is 20 Years Old or Newer – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Percent Needed to Meet Average Existing Proposed Future Airport Classification Future System Performance Performance Performance Commercial Service 47% 100% 53% Regional Service 59% 100% 41% Community Business 62% 100% 38% Community Service 37% 100% 63% Turf N/A No Target Established N/A Statewide 46% 97%1 51% Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 1This percentage excludes Turf airports, which are not applicable to this analysis.

As Table 5 shows, a current average of 46 percent of pavement (new/reconstruction) statewide is less than 20 years old and meets the objective. Future performance targets call for all pavement (new/reconstruction) to be within its useful life (20 years), regardless of airport classification (excluding Turf airports). An average of 51 percent of pavement (new/reconstruction) statewide is older than 20 years old, as shown in Table 5. This includes an average of 53 percent of pavement (new/reconstruction) at Commercial Service, 41 percent at Regional Service, 38 percent at Community Business, and 63 percent at Community Service airports. Project recommendations for this PM are based on the TDOT Aeronautics Division APMS study. For commercial service airports, including Tri-Cities Airport (TRI), Lovell Field (CHA), Memphis International Airport (MEM), and Nashville International Airport (BNA), project recommendations were obtained through the airports’ individual pavement evaluation studies. Runway and other pavement projects included in the 2019 APMS and commercial service pavement studies are also proposed to meet future performance goals for this PM, as shown in Table 2 and Table 4. Therefore, specific project recommendations related to this PM are linked to projects in the APMS and were previously provided in Table 2 and Table 4. The TDOT Aeronautics Division currently monitors airport pavement surfaces f or runways, taxiways, and aprons for all system airports across the state. The TDOT Aeronautics Division should continue to monitor airfield pavement to determine which airports’ needs are greatest in order to allocate appropriate funding resources towards pavement improvement projects. Pavement Rehabilitation – 10 Years 7

Specific project recommendations related to this PM are linked to projects in the APMS and were previously provided in Table 2 and Table 4. Pavement that has been rehabilitated that is 10 years old or newer is considered within its useful life. This is a separate consideration from pavement that is new or reconstructed and that is 20 years old or newer; both types of pavement may be present at an airport. Table 6 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of updated rehabilitated pavement needed to meet future performance targets.

Table 6: Average Percent of Pavement Rehabilitation That is 10 Years Old or Newer – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Percent Needed to Meet Average Existing Proposed Future Airport Classification Future System Performance Performance Performance Commercial Service 26% 100% 74% Regional Service 51% 100% 49% Community Business 40% 100% 60% Community Service 44% 100% 56% Turf N/A No Target Established N/A Statewide 42% 97%1 55% Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 1This percentage excludes Turf airports, which are not applicable to this analysis.

As Table 6 shows, a current average of 42 percent of rehabilitated pavement statewide is less than 10 years old and meets the objective. Future performance targets call for all rehabilitated pavement to be within its useful life (10 years), regardless of airport classification (excluding Turf airports). An average of 55 percent of rehabilitated pavement statewide is over 10 years old, as shown in Table 6. This includes an average of 74 percent of rehabilitated pavement at Commercial Service, 49 percent at Regional Service, 60 percent at Community Business, and 56 percent at Community Service airports. Project recommendations for this PM are based on the TDOT Aeronautics Division APMS study. For commercial service airports, including Tri-Cities Airport (TRI), Lovell Field (CHA), Memphis International Airport (MEM), and Nashville International Airport (BNA), project recommendations were obtained through the airports’ individual pavement evaluation studies. Runway and other pavement projects included in the 2019 APMS and commercial service pavement studies are also proposed to meet future performance goals for this PM, as previously shown in Table 2 and Table 4. Therefore, specific project recommendations related to this PM are linked to projects in the APMS previously provided in Table 2 and Table 4. The TDOT Aeronautics Division currently monitors airport pavement surfaces f or runways, taxiways, and aprons for all system airports across the state. The TDOT Aeronautics Division should continue to monitor airfield pavement to determine which airports’ needs are greatest in order to allocate appropriate funding resources towards pavement improvement projects. Airfield Lighting and Signage – 10 years Airfield lighting and signage that is 10 years old or newer is considered within its useful life. Table 7 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of updated airfield lighting and signage needed to meet future performance targets. 8

Table 7: Average Percent of Airfield Lighting and Signage by Airport Classification That is 10 Years Old or Newer – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Percent Needed to Meet Average Existing Proposed Future Airport Classification Future System Performance Performance Performance Commercial Service 63% 100% 37% Regional Service 55% 100% 45% Community Business 45% 100% 55% Community Service 26% 100% 74% Turf 0% 100% 100% Statewide 38% 100% 62% Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019

As Table 7 shows, a current average of 38 percent of airfield lighting and signage statewide is less than 10 years old and meets the objective. Future performance targets call for all airfield lighting and signage to be within its useful life (10 years), regardless of airport classification. For airports currently without airfield lighting and signage, this will include the installation of new airfield lighting and signage. An average of 62 percent of airfield lighting and signage statewide is older than 10 years old, as shown in Table 7. This includes an average of 37 percent of airfield lighting and signage at Commercial Service, 45 percent at Regional Service, 55 percent at Community Business, 74 percent at Community Service, and 100 percent at Turf airports that do not currently meet the objective. Airports that need to update all or a portion of their airfield lighting and signage, or install new airfield lighting and signage, along with the percent of airfield lighting and signage needed to be updated or installed, are shown in Table 8. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM.

Table 8: Airports by Classification that Need to Update or Install Airfield Lighting and Signage

Percent of Airfield Associated Lighting and Signage Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project City Needed to Update or Install Commercial Service Bristol/Johnson/ Rehabilitate and/or replace Tri-Cities Airport TRI 55% Kingsport airfield lighting and signage McKellar-Sipes Rehabilitate and/or replace Jackson MKL 75% Regional Airport airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Knoxville McGhee Tyson Airport TYS 10% airfield lighting and signage Nashville International Rehabilitate and/or replace Nashville BNA 85% Airport airfield lighting and signage Regional Service Columbia/Mount Rehabilitate and/or replace Maury County Airport MRC 50% Pleasant airfield lighting and signage

Percent of Airfield Associated Lighting and Signage Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project City Needed to Update or Install Dyersburg Regional Rehabilitate and/or replace Dyersburg DYR 95% Airport airfield lighting and signage Elizabethton Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Elizabethton 0A9 100% Airport airfield lighting and signage Greeneville Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Greeneville GCY 5% Airport airfield lighting and signage Lebanon Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Lebanon M54 50% Airport airfield lighting and signage Millington-Memphis Rehabilitate and/or replace Millington NQA 100% Airport airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Morristown Moore-Murrell Airport MOR 95% airfield lighting and signage Gatlinburg-Pigeon Rehabilitate and/or replace Sevierville GKT 100% Forge Airport airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Smyrna Smyrna Airport MQY 80% airfield lighting and signage Upper Cumberland Rehabilitate and/or replace Sparta SRB 30% Regional Airport airfield lighting and signage Tullahoma Regional Rehabilitate and/or replace Tullahoma THA 50% Airport airfield lighting and signage Winchester Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Winchester BGF 10% Airport airfield lighting and signage Community Business Rehabilitate and/or replace Athens McMinn County Airport MMI 50% airfield lighting and signage Crossville Memorial - Rehabilitate and/or replace Crossville CSV 50% Whitson Field airfield lighting and signage Dickson Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Dickson M02 100% Airport airfield lighting and signage Knoxville Downtown Rehabilitate and/or replace Knoxville DKX 100% Island Airport airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Lewisburg Ellington Airport LUG 50% airfield lighting and signage Lexington- Beech River Regional Rehabilitate and/or replace PVE 100% Parsons Airport airfield lighting and signage General Dewitt Spain Rehabilitate and/or replace Memphis M01 90% Airport airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Oneida Scott Municipal Airport SCX 100% airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Paris Henry County Airport PHT 5% airfield lighting and signage

Percent of Airfield Associated Lighting and Signage Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project City Needed to Update or Install Savannah-Hardin Rehabilitate and/or replace Savannah SNH 75% County Airport airfield lighting and signage Springfield Robertson Rehabilitate and/or replace Springfield M91 25% County Airport airfield lighting and signage Everett-Stewart Rehabilitate and/or replace Union City UCY 85% Regional Airport airfield lighting and signage Community Service William L. Whitehurst Rehabilitate and/or replace Bolivar M08 100% Field airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Camden Benton County Airport 0M4 65% airfield lighting and signage Centerville Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Centerville GHM 100% Airport airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Chattanooga Dallas Bay Sky Park 1A0 100% airfield lighting and signage Install airfield lighting and Clifton Hassell Field M29 100% signage Collegedale Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Collegedale FGU 100% Airport airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Dayton Mark Anton Airport 2A0 70% airfield lighting and signage Fayetteville Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Fayetteville FYM 50% Airport airfield lighting and signage Jackson County Install airfield lighting and Gainesboro 1A7 100% Airport signage Install airfield lighting and Halls Arnold Field M31 100% signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Hohenwald John A Baker Field 0M3 100% airfield lighting and signage Jamestown Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Jamestown 2A1 75% Airport airfield lighting and signage Marion County - Brown Rehabilitate and/or replace Jasper APT 100% Field airfield lighting and signage Install airfield lighting and Johnson City Johnson City Airport 0A4 100% signage Lafayette Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Lafayette 3M7 70% Airport airfield lighting and signage Lawrenceburg- Rehabilitate and/or replace Lawrenceburg Lawrence County 2M2 100% airfield lighting and signage Airport Rehabilitate and/or replace Linden James Tucker Airport M15 100% airfield lighting and signage 11

Percent of Airfield Associated Lighting and Signage Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project City Needed to Update or Install Livingston Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Livingston 8A3 95% Airport airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Madisonville Monroe County Airport MNV 100% airfield lighting and signage Houston County Install airfield lighting and McKinnon M93 100% Airport signage Warren County Rehabilitate and/or replace McMinnville RNC 100% Memorial Airport airfield lighting and signage Johnson County Install airfield lighting and Mountain City 6A4 100% Airport signage Portland Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Portland 1M5 100% Airport airfield lighting and signage Rockwood Municipal Rehabilitate and/or replace Rockwood RKW 90% Airport airfield lighting and signage Hawkins County Rehabilitate and/or replace Rogersville RVN 100% Airport airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Sewanee Franklin County Airp ort UOS 100% airfield lighting and signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Somerville Fayette County Airport FYE 98% airfield lighting and signage Install airfield lighting and Tiptonville Reelfoot Lake Airpark 0M2 100% signage Rehabilitate and/or replace Trenton Gibson County Airport TGC 100% airfield lighting and signage Humphreys County Rehabilitate and/or replace Waverly 0M5 100% Airport airfield lighting and signage Turf Install airfield lighting and Benton Chilhowee Gliderport 92A 100% signage Install airfield lighting and Eagleville Puckett Field 50M 100% signage Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 The amount of airfield lighting and signage that needs to be updated ranges from five to 100 percent. Nine airports need to have airfield lighting and signage installed. Airfield lighting and signage projects will need to be implemented at the airports listed in Table 8 in order for all of these airports’ airfield lighting and signage to meet this objective. NAVAIDs and Weather Reporting Equipment – 15 years NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment that is 15 years old or newer is considered within its useful life. Table 9 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent

of updated NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment needed to meet future performance targets.

Table 9: Average Percent of NAVAIDs and Weather Reporting Equipment by Airport Classification That is 15 Years Old or Newer – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Percent Needed to Meet Average Existing Proposed Future Airport Classification Future System Performance Performance Performance Commercial Service 38% 100% 72% Regional Service 57% 100% 43% Community Business 67% 100% 33% Community Service 42% 100% 58% Turf 0% 100% 100% Statewide 48% 100% 52% Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019

As Table 9 shows, a current average of 48 percent of NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment statewide is less than 15 years old and meets the objective. Future performance targets call for all NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment to be within its useful life (15 years), regardless of airport classification. For airports currently without NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment, this will include the installation of new NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment. Future performance targets call for all existing NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment to be 15 years old or newer, regardless of airport classification. An average of 52 percent of NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment statewide is older than 15 years old, as shown in Table 9. This includes an average of 72 percent of NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment at Commercial Service, 43 percent at Regional Service, 33 percent at Community Business, 58 percent at Community Service, and 100 percent at Turf airports that do not meet the objective. Airports that need to update all or a portion of their NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment, or install new NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment, along with the percent needed to update or install, are shown in Table 10. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM.

Table 10: Airports by Classification That Need to Update or Install NAVAIDs and Weather Reporting Equipment

Percent of NAVAIDs and Weather Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Reporting Equipment Needed to Update or Install Commercial Service Rehabilitate and/or replace Bristol/Johnson/ Tri-Cities Airport TRI NAVAIDs and weather 85% Kingsport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Chattanooga Lovell Field CHA NAVAIDs and weather 80% reporting equipment 13

Percent of NAVAIDs and Weather Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Reporting Equipment Needed to Update or Install Rehabilitate and/or replace Knoxville McGhee Tyson Airport TYS NAVAIDs and weather 10% reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Memphis International Memphis MEM NAVAIDs and weather 100% Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Nashville International Nashville BNA NAVAIDs and weather 100% Airport reporting equipment Regional Service Rehabilitate and/or replace Clarksville Outlaw Field CKV NAVAIDs and weather 70% reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Columbia/Mount Maury County Airport MRC NAVAIDs and weather 50% Pleasant reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Dyersburg Regional Dyersburg DYR NAVAIDs and weather 100% Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Elizabethton Municipal Elizabethton 0A9 NAVAIDs and weather 100% Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Lebanon Municipal Lebanon M54 NAVAIDs and weather 50% Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Millington-Memphis Millington NQA NAVAIDs and weather 80% Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Morristown Moore-Murrell Airport MOR NAVAIDs and weather 65% reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Gatlinburg-Pigeon Sevierville GKT NAVAIDs and weather 40% Forge Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Smyrna Smyrna Airport MQY NAVAIDs and weather 85% reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Upper Cumberland Sparta SRB NAVAIDs and weather 90% Regional Airport reporting equipment

Community Business Rehabilitate and/or replace McMinn County Athens MMI NAVAIDs and weather 50% Airport reporting equipment 14

Percent of NAVAIDs and Weather Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Reporting Equipment Needed to Update or Install Rehabilitate and/or replace Crossville Memorial - Crossville CSV NAVAIDs and weather 90% Whitson Field reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Dickson Municipal Dickson M02 NAVAIDs and weather 50% Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Knoxville Downtown Knoxville DKX NAVAIDs and weather 100% Island Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace General Dewitt Spain Memphis M01 NAVAIDs and weather 25% Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Oneida Scott Municipal Airport SCX NAVAIDs and weather 50% reporting equipment Bomar Field- Rehabilitate and/or replace Shelbyville Shelbyville Municipal SYI NAVAIDs and weather 77% Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Springfield Robertson Springfield M91 NAVAIDs and weather 50% County Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Everett-Stewart Union City UCY NAVAIDs and weather 20% Regional Airport reporting equipment Community Service Rehabilitate and/or replace William L. Whitehurst Bolivar M08 NAVAIDs and weather 70% Field reporting equipment Centerville Municipal Install NAVAIDs and weather Centerville GHM 100% Airport reporting equipment Install NAVAIDs and weather Chattanooga Dallas Bay Sky Park 1A0 100% reporting equipment Install NAVAIDs and weather Clifton Hassell Field M29 100% reporting equipment Install NAVAIDs and weather Copperhill Martin Campbell Field 1A3 100% reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Fayetteville Municipal Fayetteville FYM NAVAIDs and weather 75% Airport reporting equipment Jackson County Install NAVAIDs and weather Gainesboro 1A7 100% Airport reporting equipment Install NAVAIDs and weather Halls Arnold Field M31 100% reporting equipment 15

Percent of NAVAIDs and Weather Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Reporting Equipment Needed to Update or Install Install NAVAIDs and weather Hohenwald John A Baker Field 0M3 100% reporting equipment Jamestown Municipal Install NAVAIDs and weather Jamestown 2A1 100% Airport reporting equipment Marion County - Install NAVAIDs and weather Jasper APT 100% Brown Field reporting equipment Install NAVAIDs and weather Johnson City Johnson City Airport 0A4 100% reporting equipment Lawrenceburg- Rehabilitate and/or replace Lawrenceburg Lawrence County 2M2 NAVAIDs and weather 20% Airport reporting equipment Install NAVAIDs and weather Linden James Tucker Airport M15 100% reporting equipment Houston County Install NAVAIDs and weather McKinnon M93 100% Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Charles W Baker Millington 2M8 NAVAIDs and weather 100% Airport reporting equipment Rehabilitate and/or replace Johnson County Mountain City 6A4 NAVAIDs and weather 50% Airport reporting equipment Hawkins County Install NAVAIDs and weather Rogersville RVN 100% Airport reporting equipment Franklin County Install NAVAIDs and weather Sewanee UOS 100% Airport reporting equipment Smithville Municipal Install NAVAIDs and weather Smithville 0A3 100% Airport reporting equipment New Tazewell Install NAVAIDs and weather Tazewell 3A2 100% Municipal Airport reporting equipment Install NAVAIDs and weather Tiptonville Reelfoot Lake Airpark 0M2 100% reporting equipment Install NAVAIDs and weather Trenton Gibson County Airport TGC 100% reporting equipment Humphreys County Install NAVAIDs and weather Waverly 0M5 100% Airport reporting equipment Turf Install NAVAIDs and weather Benton Chilhowee Gliderport 92A 100% reporting equipment Install NAVAIDs and weather Eagleville Puckett Field 50M 100% reporting equipment Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019

The number of NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment that needs to be updated ranges from ten to 100 percent. Twenty-one airports need to have NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment installed. NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment projects will need to be implemented at the airports listed in Table 10 in order for all of these airports’ NAVAIDs and weather reporting equipment to meet the objective. Buildings (Terminal) – 40 years Terminal buildings that are 40 years old or newer are considered within their useful life. Table 11 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of airports needed to meet future performance targets for terminal buildings.

Table 11: Airports by Classification with Terminal Buildings 40 Years Old or Newer – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Airports Needed to Airports Meeting Proposed Future Airport Classification Meet Future System Objective Performance Performance Commercial Service 2 (33%) 6 (100%) 4 (67%) Regional Service 13 (76%) 17 (100%) 4 (24%) Community Business 10 (67%) 15 (100%) 5 (33%) Community Service 17 (45%) 31 (82%)1 14 (37%) Turf 1 (50%) 1 (50%)1 0 (0%)

Statewide 43 (55%) 70 (90%)1 27 (35%) Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 1This percentage excludes airports that do not currently have terminal buildings.

As Table 11 shows, 55 percent of airports statewide have a terminal building that is 40 years old or newer and meet the objective. Future performance targets call for all airports to have a terminal building within its useful life (40 years), regardless of airport classification. It should be noted that if an airport does not currently have a terminal building, they are excluded from this analysis. Thirty-five percent of airports statewide have a terminal building over 40 years old, as shown in Table 11. This includes 67 percent of Commercial Service, 24 percent of Regional Service, 33 percent of Community Business, and 37 percent of Community Service airports that do not meet the objective. Airports that are recommended to update their terminal buildings are shown in Table 12. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM.

Table 12: Airports by Classification that Need to Update Terminal Buildings

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Commercial Service Bristol/Johnson/ Tri-Cities Airport TRI Update existing terminal building Kingsport McKellar-Sipes Regional Jackson MKL Update existing terminal building Airport Memphis International Memphis MEM Update existing terminal building Airport

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Regional Service Columbia/Mount Pleasant Maury County Airport MRC Update existing terminal building Dyersburg Regional Dyersburg DYR Update existing terminal building Airport Elizabethton Municipal Elizabethton 0A9 Update existing terminal building Airport Greenville Municipal Greeneville GCY Update existing terminal building Airport

Community Business Crossville Memorial Crossville CSV Update existing terminal building Airport - Whitson Field Knoxville Downtown Knoxville DKX Update existing terminal building Island Airport General Dewitt Spain Memphis M01 Update existing terminal building Airport Pulaski Abernathy Field GZS Update existing terminal building Bomar Field-Shelbyville Shelbyville SYI Update existing terminal building Municipal Airport Community Service Camden Benton County Airport 0M4 Update existing terminal building Chattanooga Dallas Bay Sky Park 1A0 Update existing terminal building Copperhill Martin Campbell Field 1A3 Update existing terminal building Fayetteville Municipal Fayetteville FYM Update existing terminal building Airport Halls Arnold Field M31 Update existing terminal building Humboldt Municipal Humboldt M53 Update existing terminal building Airport Colonel Tommy C. Stiner Jacksboro JAU Update existing terminal building Airfield Marion County - Brown Jasper APT Update existing terminal building Field Lafayette Municipal Lafayette 3M7 Update existing terminal building Airport Livingston Municipal Livingston 8A3 Update existing terminal building Airport Millington Charles W Baker Airport 2M8 Update existing terminal building Rockwood Municipal Rockwood RKW Update existing terminal building Airport Sewanee Franklin County Airport UOS Update existing terminal building Smithville Municipal Smithville 0A3 Update existing terminal building Airport Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 18

Updating a terminal building is one of the largest infrastructure projects an airport can undergo. However, projects will need to be implemented at the airports listed in Table 12 in order for all of these airports’ terminal buildings to meet the objective. Loading Bridges – 20 years Loading bridges that are 20 years old or newer are considered within their useful life. Loading bridges are only present at Tennessee’s Primary commercial service airports. As noted earlier, Primary commercial service airports are those with more than 10,000 annual enplanements. Of Tennessee’s six commercial service airports, only McKellar-Sipes Regional Airport (MKL) is a Nonprimary commercial service airport. Table 13 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of airports needed to meet future performance targets for loading bridges.

Table 13: Airports by Classification with Loading Bridges 20 Years Old or Newer – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Airports Needed to Airports Meeting Proposed Future Airport Classification Meet Future System Objective Performance Performance Commercial Service 4 (67%) 5 (83%)1 1 (17%) Regional Service N/A No Target Established N/A Community Business N/A No Target Established N/A Community Service N/A No Target Established N/A Turf N/A No Target Established N/A Statewide 4 (67%) 5 (83%)1 1 (17%) Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 1This percentage excludes Nonprimary commercial service airports

As Table 13 shows, 67 percent of Primary commercial service airports have loading bridges that are less than 20 years old and meet the objective. Future performance targets call for all Primary commercial service airports to have a loading bridge that is within its useful life (20 years). The only Primary commercial service airport that has loading bridges over 20 years old is Memphis International Airport (MEM). In order to meet future performance targets, Memphis International Airport (MEM) will need to undergo a project to replace their loading bridge(s). Fencing – 20 years Fencing that is 20 years old or newer is considered within its useful life. Table 14 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of airports needed to meet future performance targets for f encing.

Table 14: Airports by Classification with Fencing 20 Years Old or Newer – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Airports Needed to Airports Meeting Proposed Future Airport Classification Meet Future System Objective Performance Performance Community Business 9 (60%) 15 (100%) 6 (40%) Community Service 25 (66%) 38 (100%) 13 (34%) Turf 0 (0%) 2 (100%) 2 (100%) Statewide 53 (66%) 78 (100%) 25 (34%) Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019

As Table 14 shows, 66 percent of airports statewide have fencing that is less than 20 years old and meet the objective. Future performance targets call for all airports to have fencing within its useful life (20 years), regardless of airport classification. Note that if an airport does not currently have fencing, it is recommended that they build fencing. Thirty-four percent of airports statewide have fencing over 20 years old or do not have fencing, as shown in Table 14. This includes 33 percent of Commercial Service, 12 percent of Regional Service, 40 percent of Community Business, 34 percent of Community Service, and 100 percent of Turf airports that do not meet the objective. Airports that need to update their fencing, including airports that do not currently have fencing, are shown in Table 15. It is assumed that if an airport needs to update or construct fencing, it is for their full airport property perimeter. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM.

Table 15: Airports by Classification That Need to Update or Install Fencing

Total Airport Area Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project (Acres) Commercial Service Chattanooga Lovell Field CHA Install full perimeter fencing 950 Nashville International Nashville BNA Install full perimeter fencing 3,900 Airport Regional Service Columbia/Mount Install full perimeter fencing Maury County Airport MRC 188 Pleasant Upper Cumberland Install full perimeter fencing Sparta SRB 362 Regional Airport Community Business Athens McMinn County Airport MMI Install full perimeter fencing 210 Crossville Memorial Airport Install full perimeter fencing Crossville CSV 418 - Whitson Field Huntingdon Carroll County Airport HZD Install full perimeter fencing 196 Knoxville Downtown Island Install full perimeter fencing Knoxville DKX 200 Airport Oneida Scott Municipal Airport SCX Install full perimeter fencing 144

Total Airport Area Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project (Acres) Bomar Field-Shelbyville Shelbyville SYI Install full perimeter fencing 604 Municipal Airport

Community Service Fayetteville Municipal Install full perimeter fencing Fayetteville FYM 163 Airport Halls Arnold Field M31 Install full perimeter fencing 29 Hohenwald John A Baker Field 0M3 Install full perimeter fencing 180 Humboldt Humboldt Municipal Airp ort M53 Install full perimeter fencing 128 Colonel Tommy C. Stiner Install full perimeter fencing Jacksboro JAU 84 Airfield Johnson City Johnson City Airport 0A4 Install full perimeter fencing 45 Lafayette Lafayette Municipal Airport 3M7 Install full perimeter fencing 111 Madisonville Monroe County Airport MNV Install full perimeter fencing 112 Portland Portland Municipal Airport 1M5 Install full perimeter fencing 157 Selmer Robert Sibley Airport SZY Install full perimeter fencing 197 Sewanee Franklin County Airport UOS Install full perimeter fencing 70 Tiptonville Reelfoot Lake Airpark 0M2 Install full perimeter fencing 98 Waverly Humphreys County Airport 0M5 Install full perimeter fencing 160 Turf Benton Chilhowee Gliderport 92A Install full perimeter fencing Unknown Eagleville Puckett Field 50M Install full perimeter fencing 15 Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019

Projects will need to be implemented at the airports listed in Table 15 in order for all of those airports’ fencing to meet the objective. Due to the high costs associated with installing fencing around the full perimeter of an airport, airports should also coordinate with the FAA and TDOT Aeronautics Division in order to determine the feasibility of installing fencing at their airport and any other necessary studies or projects that would need to accompany a fencing project (i.e., a Wildlife Hazard Site Assessment). Airports included in this list that may have partial fencing should determine whether that fencing can be retained to contribute to the full perimeter fencing needed.

Goal #2: Provide an airport system with available and cost-efficient transportation options for moving people and freight Goal #2 PMs focus on adequate population and land coverage by Tennessee’s existing and proposed future commercial service and general aviation airports. The potential additional population and land area served within a reasonable drivetime is one of the primary considerations when determining the location of a new commercial service or general aviation facility. Goal #2 explores those factors through the two PMs listed below:

 Percent of area and population within a 45-minute drive to any Tennessee commercial service airport  Percent of area and population within a 30-minute drive to any Tennessee general aviation airport PERCENT OF AREA AND POPULATION WITHIN A 45-MINUTE DRIVE TO ANY TENNESSEE COMMERCIAL SERVICE AIRPORT For the average user, commercial service airports are the most familiar type of aviation facility. Tennessee has six airports that offer commercial service. Five are Primary commercial service airports, including Tri-Cities Airport (TRI), Lovell Field (CHA), McGhee Tyson Airport (TYS), Memphis International Airport (MEM), and Nashville International Airport (BNA), and one is a Nonprimary commercial service airport, McKellar-Sipes Regional Airport (MKL). Thanks to the geographic distribution of these airports, as well as the range of flights and services supported by them at a variety of price points, many of Tennessee’s residents have reasonable access to commercial aviation. To determine this access, the percent of land area and population within a 45-minute drive of the state’s six commercial service airports was calculated using geographic information system (GIS) and the U.S. Census. In instances when an airport’s drive time extended into a bordering state, only Tennessee’s population and land area was counted. Figure 1 shows the 45-minute drive time buffers surrounding each commercial service airport, as well as the population density by county. Currently, 65 percent of Tennessee’s population lives within a 45-minute drive time of a commercial service airport. This accounts for 22 percent of Tennessee’s total land area. To determine future system performance, it was first assumed that many of Tennessee’s residents would drive further than 45 minutes in order to reach certain commercial service airports. Memphis International Airport (MEM) and Nashville International Airport (BNA) are Tennessee’s largest commercial service airports in terms of total enplanements; therefore, it was determined that a 90-minute drive time was more appropriate for these airports. Further, Lovell Field (CHA) and McGhee Tyson Airport (TYS) are Tennessee’s next largest commercial service airports in terms of total enplanements. For these airports, it was assumed that a 60- minute drive time was more appropriate. Tri-Cities Airport (TRI) and McKellar-Sipes Regional Airport (MKL) are Tennessee’s smallest commercial service airports in terms of total enplanements and were kept as 45-minute drive times for the analysis. Figure 2 represents these updated drive time analyses. Based on these increased drive times, an additional 22 percent of Tennessee’s population and 30 percent of Tennessee’s total land area would be within driving distance to one of Tennessee’s commercial service airports.

Figure 1: Percent of Population and Area within a 45-minute Drive Time of a Commercial Service Airport

Source: ESRI Community Analyst, Community Profile, 2019; Kimley-Horn, 2020

Figure 2: Percent of Population and Area within a 45-, 60-, or 90-minute Drive Time of a Commercial Service Airport

Source: ESRI Community Analyst, Community Profile, 2019; Kimley-Horn, 2020

The purpose of this PM is to determine where an additional commercial service airport could be located in order to serve the greatest additional amount of Tennessee’s population and land area. To determine this, the TDOT Aeronautics Division selected eight current general aviation airports with the potential future ability to support commercial service. The eight airports chosen are distributed evenly throughout Tennessee and, most importantly, fill crucial gaps in Tennessee’s existing commercial service drive time areas. These eight additional airports are shown in Figure 3 along with the existing commercial service airports. Table 16 shows the additional population and land coverage that would be provided by each airport supporting commercial service.

Table 16. Additional Population and Land Coverage Provided by Eight Potential Commercial Service Airports

Land Land FAA Population Associated City Airport Name Population Coverage Coverage ID % (Sq. Mi) (%) Clarksville Outlaw Field CKV 10,466 0.2% 225 1% Crossville Memorial Crossville CSV 97,001 1.4% 1497 4% Airport/Whitson Field Paris Henry County Airport PHT 105,260 1.5% 1,686 4% Lexington- Beech River Regional PVE 52,433 0.8% 1,600 4% Parsons Airport Oneida Scott Municipal Airport SCX 38,651 0.6% 541 1% Savannah-Hardin County Savannah SNH 67,624 1% 1,715 4% Airport Upper Cumberland Sparta SRB 62,756 0.9% 964 2% Regional Airport Everett-Stewart Regional Union City UCY 107,523 1.6% 1,726 4% Airport Source: ESRI Community Analyist, Community Profile, 201

Figure 3: Additional Population and Land Coverage Provided by Eight Potential Commercial Service Airports

Source: ESRI Community Analyst, Community Profile, 2019; Kimley-Horn, 2020

This analysis focuses on the greatest additional amount of Tennessee’s population and land area that could be served by providing commercial service at one existing general aviation airport. Based on the information provided in Figure 3 and Table 16, Everett-Stewart Regional Airport (UCY) has the greatest potential to serve the most additional population should commercial service be offered at the airport. Providing commercial service at Everett-Stewart Regional Airport (UCY) would serve the greatest additional population at 107,523, or 1.6 percent of Tennessee’s population, and an additional 1,726 square miles, or four percent of Tennessee’s land area. PERCENT OF AREA AND POPULATION WITHIN A 30-MINUTE DRIVE TO ANY TENNESSEE GENERAL AVIATION AIRPORT General aviation airports serve an important role in Tennessee’s economy and the services they provide affect the lives of all Tennesseans. Tennessee has 72 general aviation airports, which range from Regional Service airports that serve national and international users to Turf airports that serve more local users. Tennessee’s general aviation airports support operations ranging from recreational, business, and agricultural to community functions such as law enforcement, firefighting, and air ambulance, as well as support new technology such as unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). Tennessee’s general aviation airports are also home to hundreds of on-airport business tenants and support community events such as fly-ins. Thanks to the geographic distribution of these airports, as well as the range of flights and services supported by them, many of Tennessee’s residents have access to general aviation and the services it supports. Figure 4 shows the 30- minute drive time buffers surrounding each general aviation airport, as well as the population density by county. Currently, 87 percent of Tennessee’s population lives within a 30-minute drive time of a general aviation airport. Seventy-one percent of Tennessee’s total land area is also covered.

Figure 4: Percent of Population and Area within a 30-minute Drive Time to any General Aviation Airport

Source: ESRI Community Analyst, Community Profile, 2019; Kimley-Horn, 2020

Figure 5: Additional Population and Land Coverage Provided by Two Potential General Aviation Airports

Source: ESRI Community Analyst, Community Profile, 2019; Kimley-Horn, 2020

The purpose of this PM is to determine where an additional general aviation airport could be located in order to serve the greatest additional amount of Tennessee’s population and land area. In order to determine this, the TDOT Aeronautics Division determined two potential new general aviation airport sites. In order to focus on the areas of highest need and demand, only two sites were selected for analysis. Based on existing gaps in the general aviation system, other sites were initially considered as well. However, they were not selected for analysis for the following reasons:

 Bledsoe, Grundy, Sequatchie, and Van Buren Counties: Large portions of land in these adjacent counties are currently controlled as state parks and natural areas. Bledsoe and Sequatchie Counties are located in the Blue Ridge Mountains, making it difficult to build an accessible airport. These counties are also some of the most sparsely populated in the state; out of 95 counties, ranked by population Bledsoe is 77th, Grundy is 82nd, Sequatchie is 78th, and Van Buren is 94th.  Blount County: This county is located in the Blue Ridge Mountains, making it difficult to build an accessible airport. While this county ranks 11th in terms of population in the state, it is currently largely served by some of Tennessee’s largest general aviation airports, including Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport (GKT), Monroe County Airport (MNV), and Knoxville Downtown Island Airport (DKX). The two selected sites are located in Williamson County and on the border of Anderson and Roane Counties, respectively, and fill crucial gaps in Tennessee’s existing general aviation drive time areas. These two additional airports are shown in Figure 5 along with the existing general aviation airports. Table 17 shows the additional population and land coverage that would be provided by each potential new airport supporting general aviation.

Table 17. Additional Population and Land Coverage Provided by Two Potential General Aviation Airports

Proposed Airport Population Land Coverage Land Coverage Population Location (%) (Sq. Mi) (%) Franklin- 125,670 1.8% 171 0.4% Williamson County Oak Ridge 97,105 1.4% 256 0.6%

Source: ESRI Community Analyst, Community Profile, 2019 This analysis focuses on the greatest additional amount of Tennessee’s population and land area that could be served by constructing an additional general aviation airport. Based on the information provided in Figure 5 and Table 17, the Franklin-Williamson County site has the greatest potential to serve the most additional population should it be constructed. Providing general aviation service at this location would serve the greatest additional population at 125,670, or 1.8 percent of Tennessee’s population, and an additional 171 square miles, or 0.4 percent of Tennessee’s land area.

Goal #3: Improve the safety and security of airport system users Goal #3 PMs focus on existing safety conditions at the state’s airports, including saf ety- and security-related plans, a saf e airfield, and approaches free of obstructions. Safety and security are the first and second priorities, respectively, that the TDOT Aeronautics Division has in place for determining which airport projects to fund. Goal #3 further explores these factors and the importance that the TDOT Aeronautics Division places on safety and security through the three PMs, listed below:

 Percent of airports that have adopted an emergency response and/or security plan  Percent of airports meeting federal design and safety criteria based on existing operations and current Airport Reference Code (ARC)  Percent of airports with approaches meeting state obstruction criteria PERCENT OF AIRPORTS THAT HAVE ADOPTED AN EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND/OR SECURITY PLAN Emergency response plans address emergencies that occur on or directly impact an airport or adjacent property that a) is within the authority and responsibility of the airport to respond; b) may present a threat to the airport because of the proximity of the emergency to the airport; or c) where the airport has responsibilities under local/regional emergency plans and by mutual aid agreements. Security plans for general aviation airports follow Transportation Security Administration (TSA) guidelines, while commercial service airports are required to follow onsite TSA guidance. The adoption of either an emergency response and/or security plan warrants that an airport has approved guidelines in place to address any onsite emergencies or security concerns. Table 18 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of airports needed to meet future performance targets for emergency response and/or security plans.

Table 18: Airports by Classification with an Emergency Response and/or Security Plan – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Airports Needed to Airports Meeting Proposed Future Airport Classification Meet Future System Objective Performance Performance Commercial Service 6 (100%) 6 (100%) 0 (0%) Regional Service 14 (82%) 17 (100%) 3 (18%) Community Business 10 (67%) 15 (100%) 5 (33%) Community Service 23 (61%) 38 (100%) 15 (39%) Turf N/A No Target Established N/A Statewide 53 (68%) 76 (97%)1 23 (29%) Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 1This percentage excludes Turf airports, which are not applicable to this analysis.

As Table 18 shows, currently 68 percent of airports have an emergency response and/or security plan and thus meet the objective. Future performance targets call for all airports to have an emergency response and/or security plan, regardless of airport classification (excluding Turf airports). Twenty-nine percent of airports statewide do not have an emergency response and/or 31

security plan, as shown in Table 17. This includes 18 percent of Regional Service, 33 percent of Community Business, and 39 percent of Community Service airports that do not meet the objective. Airports that need to develop and adopt an emergency response and/or security plan are shown in Table 19. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM.

Table 19: Airports by Classification That Need to Adopt an Emergency Response and/or Security Plan

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Regional Service Develop and adopt emergency Columbia/Mount Pleasant Maury County Airport MRC response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Gallatin Music City Executive Airport XNX response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Morristown Moore-Murrell Airport MOR response and/or security plan Community Business Develop and adopt emergency Athens McMinn County Airport MMI response and/or security plan Crossville Memorial/Whitson Develop and adopt emergency Crossville CSV Field response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Lewisburg Ellington Airport LUG response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Pulaski Abernathy Field GZS response and/or security plan Springfield Robertson County Develop and adopt emergency Springfield M91 Airport response and/or security plan Community Service Develop and adopt emergency Camden Benton County Airport 0M4 response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Centerville Centerville Municipal Airport GHM response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Chattanooga Dallas Bay Sky Park 1A0 response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Clifton Hassell Field M29 response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Halls Arnold Field M31 response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Jamestown Jamestown Municipal Airport 2A1 response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Jasper Marion County - Brown Field APT response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Johnson City Johnson City Airport 0A4 response and/or security plan 32

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Develop and adopt emergency Lafayette Lafayette Municipal Airport 3M7 response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Linden James Tucker Airport M15 response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Madisonville Monroe County Airport MNV response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Rogersville Hawkins County Airport RVN response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Smithville Smithville Municipal Airport 0A3 response and/or security plan New Tazewell Municipal Develop and adopt emergency Tazewell 3A2 Airport response and/or security plan Develop and adopt emergency Tiptonville Reelfoot Lake Airpark 0M2 response and/or security plan Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 Projects to develop and adopt either an emergency response and/or security plan will need to be implemented at the airports listed in Table 19. Airports should work with their local community as well as the TDOT Aeronautics Division and the FAA in order to adopt compliant plans that are specific to their airport and local community.

PERCENT OF AIRPORTS MEETING FEDERAL DESIGN AND SAFETY CRITERIA BASED ON EXISTING OPERATIONS AND CURRENT AIRPORT REFERENCE CODE (ARC) FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5300-13A, Airport Design, details the FAA’s standards and recommendations for airport design. FAA airport design standards increase safety, increase capacity to accommodate passengers and cargo and decrease delays, comply with federal environmental standards, and encourage innovative technologies that promote safety, capacity, and efficiency. FAA AC 150/5300-13A updated multiple FAA design methods from the previous AC. Three specific changes were analyzed as part of this PM, as detailed in the following pages. Wide Expanses of Pavement FAA guidance recommends avoiding wide expanses of pavement in the taxiway to runway interface. Wide expanses of pavement require placement of signs far from a pilot’s eye and reduce the visibility of other visual cues. This issue is particularly pronounced at runway entrance points. An example of a wide expanse of pavement is provided in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Wide Expanse of Pavement

Sources: Google Earth; Kimley-Horn, 2019

Three-Intersection Point Conflict Complex intersections increase the possibility of pilot error. FAA guidance recommends adherence to the three-node design principle. Adherence to this principle keeps taxiway intersections simple by reducing the number of taxiways intersecting at a single location and allows for proper placement of airfield markings, signage, and lighting. A three-intersection point conflict arises when a pilot has more than three directions available at any intersection on the airfield. An example of a three-intersection point conflict is provided in Figure 7. Figure 7: Three-Intersection Point Conflict

Sources: Google Earth; Kimley-Horn, 2019

Direct Access Conflict FAA guidance recommends not designing taxiways to lead directly from an apron to a runway without making a turn. Taxiways designed without direct access conflicts promote pilot situational awareness and lessen confusion when a pilot is expecting to encounter a taxiway but instead is led to a runway. An example of a direct access conflict is provided in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Direct Access Conflict

Sources: Google Earth; Kimley-Horn, 2019

Future System Performance for Federal Design and Safety Criteria Table 20 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of airports needed to meet future performance targets for federal design and safety criteria. An airport had to be free of wide expanses of pavement, three intersection point conflicts, and direct access conflicts in order to meet this objective.

Table 20: Airports by Classification Meeting Federal Design and Safety Criteria – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Airports Needed to Airports Meeting Proposed Future Airport Classification Meet Future System Objective Performance Performance Commercial Service 0 (0%) 6 (100%) 6 (100%) Regional Service 5 (29%) 17 (100%) 12 (71%) Community Business 2 (13%) 15 (100%) 13 (87%) Community Service 3 (8%) 38 (100%) 35 (92%) Turf N/A No Target Established N/A Statewide 10 (14%) 76 (97%)1 66 (83%) Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 1This percentage excludes Turf airports, which are not applicable to this analysis.

As Table 20 shows, currently 14 percent of airports statewide do not have wide expanses of pavement, three intersection point conflicts, or direct access conflicts and thus meet the objective. Future performance targets call for all airports to meet federal design and safety criteria, regardless of airport classification (excluding Turf airports). Eighty-three percent of airports statewide have wide expanses of pavement, three intersection point conflicts, and/or direct access conflicts, as shown in Table 20. This includes 100 percent of Commercial Service, 71 percent of Regional Service, 87 percent of Community Business, and 92 percent of Community Service airports that do not meet the objective. Airports that need airfield pavement projects in order to address wide expanses of pavement, three intersection point conflicts, and/or direct access conflicts are shown in Table 21. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM.

Table 21: Airports by Classification That Need a Project to Address Federal Design and Safety Flaws

FAA Associated City Airport Name Federal Design and Safety Flaw to Address ID Wide Three- Direct Expanse of Intersection Access Pavement Point Conflict Conflict Commercial Service Bristol/Johnson/Kingsport Tri-Cities Airport TRI √ √ √ Chattanooga Lovell Field CHA √ √ √ McKellar-Sipes Jackson MKL √ Regional Airport McGhee Tyson Knoxville TYS √ Airport Memphis Memphis MEM √ √ √ International Airport Nashville Nashville BNA √ √ √ International Airport 37

FAA Associated City Airport Name Federal Design and Safety Flaw to Address ID Wide Three- Direct Expanse of Intersection Access Pavement Point Conflict Conflict

Regional Service Clarksville Outlaw Field CKV √ Cleveland Regional Cleveland RZR √ Jetport Elizabethton Elizabethton 0A9 √ √ Municipal Airport Music City Executive Gallatin XNX √ Airport Lebanon Municipal Lebanon M54 √ Airport Millington-Memphis Millington NQA √ √ Airport Morristown Moore-Murrell Airport MOR √ Nashville John C Tune Airport JWN √ Gatlinburg-Pigeon Sevierville GKT √ √ √ Forge Airport Smyrna Smyrna Airport MQY √ Upper Cumberland Sparta SRB √ √ Regional Airport Tullahoma Regional Tullahoma Airport/William THA √ √ Northern Field Community Business McMinn County Athens MMI √ Airport Crossville Memorial - Crossville CSV √ Whitson Field Dickson Municipal Dickson M02 √ √ Airport Huntingdon Carroll County Airport HZD √ Knoxville Downtown Knoxville DKX √ √ Island Airport Lewisburg Ellington Airport LUG √ Beech River Lexington-Parsons PVE √ Regional Airport General Dewitt Spain Memphis M01 √ Airport

FAA Associated City Airport Name Federal Design and Safety Flaw to Address ID Wide Three- Direct Expanse of Intersection Access Pavement Point Conflict Conflict Scott Municipal Oneida SCX √ Airport

Pulaski Abernathy Field GZS √ Savannah-Hardin Savannah SNH √ County Airport Springfield Robertson Springfield M91 √ County Airport Everett-Stewart Union City UCY √ Regional Airport Community Service William L. Whitehurst Bolivar M08 √ Field Benton County Camden 0M4 √ Airport Centerville Municipal Centerville GHM √ Airport Chattanooga Dallas Bay Sky Park 1A0 √ Clifton Hassell Field M29 √ Collegedale Collegedale FGU √ Municipal Airport Martin Campbell Copperhill 1A3 √ Field Covington Municipal Covington M04 √ Airport Fayetteville Municipal Fayetteville FYM √ Airport Jackson County Gainesboro 1A7 √ Airport Halls Arnold Field M31 √ √ Hohenwald John A Baker Field 0M3 √ Humboldt Municipal Humboldt M53 √ Airport Colonel Tommy C. Jacksboro JAU √ Stiner Airfield Johnson City Johnson City Airport 0A4 √ √ Lafayette Municipal Lafayette 3M7 √ Airport

FAA Associated City Airport Name Federal Design and Safety Flaw to Address ID Wide Three- Direct Expanse of Intersection Access Pavement Point Conflict Conflict Lawrenceburg- Lawrenceburg Lawrence County 2M2 √ Airport Linden James Tucker Airport M15 √ Livingston Municipal Livingston 8A3 √ Airport Monroe County Madisonville MNV √ Airport Houston County McKinnon M93 √ Airport Warren County McMinnville RNC √ Memorial Airport Charles W Baker Millington 2M8 √ √ Airport Johnson County Mountain City 6A4 √ Airport Portland Municipal Portland 1M5 √ Airport Rockwood Municipal Rockwood RKW √ Airport Hawkins County Rogersville RVN √ Airport Selmer Robert Sibley Airport SZY √ Franklin County Sewanee UOS √ Airport Smithville Municipal Smithville 0A3 √ Airport Fayette County Somerville FYE √ √ Airport New Tazewell Tazewell 3A2 √ Municipal Airport Tiptonville Reelfoot Lake Airpark 0M2 √ Gibson County Trenton TGC √ Airport Humphreys County Waverly 0M5 √ Airport Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019

Design projects will need to be implemented at the airports listed in Table 21 to mitigate the identified design deficiencies as well as to meet the objective. Such projects have the potential

to be costly, so airports should work closely with the TDOT Aeronautics Division and the FAA to ensure projects are compliant with the latest guidance in the most cost-effective manner possible. PERCENT OF AIRPORTS WITH APPROACHES MEETING STATE OBSTRUCTION CRITERIA Maintaining an approach free of obstructions is important for maintaining safe airspace. Obstructions within the approach increase the risk of damage to property or the potential injury or death to people in the air or on the ground. An obstruction can be natural or manmade and is defined as an object tall enough to cause a hazard to air navigation. Airport approaches must be kept clear of obstructions per Part 77, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The TDOT Aeronautics Division enforces this federal regulation through a special State 20:1 approach surface that is evaluated to capture the most critical obstructions along the extended centerline of the runway. The 20:1 approach means that for every 20 feet off the end of the runway, the height allowed for an object on the ground is one foot. If an airport has an obstruction within this State approach surface, it is a Section I violation on the inspection report and results in a conditional license for the airport until the obstructions are removed. This PM is based on the State 20:1 approach surface and airports who were issued a conditional license based on obstructions in the State approach surface. Airports who were given conditional licenses were given them in 2019 due to obstructions in the State approach surface. The TDOT Aeronautics Division does not inspect commercial service or Part 139 Nonprimary airports; for these airports, it was assumed that they did not meet this objective. The likelihood of these airports having obstructions within their State approach surface is very high due to the fact they are generally in highly populated and urbanized areas. Table 22 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of airports needed to meet future performance targets for approaches meeting state obstruction criteria.

Table 22: Airports by Classification with Approaches Meeting State Obstruction Criteria– 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Airports Needed to Airports Meeting Proposed Future Airport Classification Meet Future System Objective Performance Performance Commercial Service 1 (17%) 6 (100%) 5 (83%) Regional Service 8 (47%) 17 (100%) 9 (53%) Community Business 10 (67%) 15 (100%) 5 (33%) Community Service 20 (53%) 38 (100%) 18 (47%) Turf 1 (50%) 2 (100%) 1 (50%) Statewide 40 (51%) 78 (100%) 38 (49%) Source: TDOT Aeronautics Division Inspection Reports, 2019

As Table 22 shows, currently 51 percent of airports statewide have approaches meeting State obstruction criteria and thus meet the objective. Future performance targets call for all airports to have approaches meeting State obstruction criteria. Forty-nine percent of airports statewide do not have approach surfaces meeting state obstruction criteria, as shown in Table 22. This includes 83 percent of Commercial Service, 53 percent of Regional Service, 33 percent of 41

Community Business, 47 percent of Community Service, and 50 percent of Turf airports that do not meet the objective. Airports that need projects to remove obstructions in the State approach surface are shown in Table 23. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM.

Table 23: Airports by Classification That Need Projects to Remove Obstructions in the State Approach Surface

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Obstruction Type Commercial Service Bristol/Johnson/ Tri-Cities Airport TRI Remove obstruction(s) Unknown Kingsport Chattanooga Lovell Field CHA Remove obstruction(s) Unknown McKellar-Sipes Regional Jackson MKL Remove obstruction(s) Unknown Airport Knoxville McGhee Tyson Airport TYS Remove obstruction(s) Unknown Memphis International Memphis MEM Remove obstruction(s) Unknown Airport Regional Service Clarksville Outlaw Field CKV Remove obstruction Tree Columbia/Mount Maury County Airport MRC Remove obstruction Tree Pleasant Elizabethton Municipal Elizabethton 0A9 Remove obstructions Trees Airport Greeneville Municipal Greeneville GCY Remove obstructions Trees Airport Millington-Memphis Millington NQA Remove obstruction(s) Unknown Airport Murfreesboro Municipal Murfreesboro MBT Remove obstructions Trees Airport Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Sevierville GKT Remove obstruction Tree Airport Smyrna Smyrna Airport MQY Remove obstruction(s) Trees Winchester Municipal Winchester BGF Remove obstructions Trees Airport

Community Business Athens McMinn County Airport MMI Remove obstructions Trees Dickson Dickson Municipal Airport M02 Remove obstructions Trees Lewisburg Ellington Airport LUG Remove obstructions Trees Pulaski Abernathy Field GZS Remove obstruction Tree Savannah-Hardin County Savannah SNH Remove obstructions Trees Airport

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Obstruction Type Community Service Camden Benton County Airport 0M4 Remove obstructions Trees Centerville Municipal Centerville GHM Remove obstructions Trees Airport Chattanooga Dallas Bay Sky Park 1A0 Remove obstructions Trees Clifton Hassell Field M29 Remove obstructions Trees Collegedale Municipal Collegedale FGU Remove obstructions Trees Airport Copperhill Martin Campbell Field 1A3 Remove obstruction Tree Gainesboro Jackson County Airport 1A7 Remove obstructions Trees Humboldt Municipal Humboldt M53 Remove obstructions Trees Airport Jamestown Municipal Jamestown 2A1 Remove obstruction Tree Airport Lawrenceburg-Lawrence Lawrenceburg 2M2 Remove obstructions Trees County Airport Linden James Tucker Airport M15 Remove obstructions Trees McKinnon Houston County Airport M93 Remove obstructions Trees Millington Charles W Baker Airport 2M8 Remove obstructions Tree, tower Sewanee Franklin County Airport UOS Remove obstruction Tree New Tazewell Municipal Tazewell 3A2 Remove obstructions Trees Airport Tiptonville Reelfoot Lake Airpark 0M2 Remove obstructions Trees, fence Trenton Gibson County Airport TGC Remove obstruction Tree Humphreys County Waverly 0M5 Remove obstructions Trees Airport Turf Eagleville Puckett Field 50M Remove obstructions Trees Source: TDOT Aeronautics Division Inspection Reports, 2019

Obstruction mitigation projects will need to be implemented at the airports listed in Table 23 in order for all of these airport approaches to meet State obstruction criteria. Such projects will need to start with a detailed obstruction analysis to determine the obstruction(s) in question. Airports should work closely with the TDOT Aeronautics Division in order to complete these projects to state standard.

Goal #4: Maximize federal, state and local resources to meet the airport system needs and minimize environmental impacts Goal #4 PMs focus on financial and environmental performance at system airports. As a state that participates in the FAA’s State Block Grant Program (SBGP), the TDOT Aeronautics Division promotes economically sustainable development at airports through its f inancial requirements, rules, and regulations that airports must adhere to. The TDOT Aeronautics Division also promotes environmentally sustainable development at airports through encouraging cooperation with local governments and adhering to environmental regulations. Goal #4 explores these factors through the f our PMs, listed below:

 Percent of airports with airport included in local comprehensive and/or land use plan  Execution of annual Airport Capital Improvement Plan (ACIP)  Percent of federal funds allocated through sub-awards  Percent of airports with a spill prevention control and countermeasure (SPCC) program PERCENT OF AIRPORTS WITH AIRPORT INCLUDED IN LOCAL COMPREHENSIVE AND/OR LAND USE PLAN Inclusion in the local comprehensive and/or land use plan ensures that an airport is considered and included when a community is planning for its future development. This is particularly important since an airport must adhere to unique land use and zoning requirements in order to maintain safe airport operations. Understanding how many airports are included in local planning efforts helps to determine the threat of incompatible land uses or where there are opportunities for airports to expand their operations due to surrounding compatible uses. Table 24 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of airports needed to meet future performance targets for inclusion in their local comprehensive and/or land use plan.

Table 24: Airports by Classification Included in Their Local Comprehensive and/or Land Use Plan – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Airports Needed to Airports Meeting Proposed Future Airport Classification Meet Future System Objective Performance Performance Commercial Service 4 (67%) 6 (100%) 2 (33%) Regional Service 8 (47%) 17 (100%) 9 (53%) Community Business 1 (7%) 15 (100%) 14 (93%) Community Service 7 (18%) 38 (100%) 31 (82%) Turf 0 (0%) 2 (100%) 2 (100%) Statewide 20 (26%) 78 (100%) 58 (74%) Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019

As Table 24 shows, currently 26 percent of airports statewide are included in their local comprehensive and/or land use plan and thus meet the objective. Future performance targets call for all airports to be included in their local comprehensive and/or land use plan. Seventy- four percent of airports statewide are not included in their local comprehensive and/or land use plan as shown in Table 24. This includes 33 percent of Commercial Service, 53 percent of 44

Regional Service, 93 percent of Community Business, 82 percent of Community Service, and 100 percent of Turf airports that do not meet the objective. Airports that need to be included in their local comprehensive and/or land use plan are shown in Table 25. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM.

Table 25: Airports by Classification That Need to be Included in Local Comprehensive and/or Land Use Plan

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Commercial Service Inclusion in local comprehensive Chattanooga Lovell Field CHA and/or land use plan McKellar-Sipes Regional Inclusion in local comprehensive Jackson MKL Airport and/or land use plan Regional Service Inclusion in local comprehensive Clarksville Outlaw Field CKV and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Columbia/Mount Pleasant Maury County Airport MRC and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Dyersburg Dyersburg Regional Airport DYR and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Gallatin Music City Executive Airport XNX and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Greeneville Greeneville Municipal Airport GCY and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Morristown Moore-Murrell Airport MOR and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Nashville John C Tune Airport JWN and/or land use plan Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Inclusion in local comprehensive Sevierville GKT Airport and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Winchester Winchester Municipal Airport BGF and/or land use plan Community Business Inclusion in local comprehensive Athens McMinn County Airport MMI and/or land use plan Crossville Memorial/Whitson Inclusion in local comprehensive Crossville CSV Field and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Dickson Dickson Municipal Airport M02 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Huntingdon Carroll County Airport HZD and/or land use plan Knoxville Downtown Island Inclusion in local comprehensive Knoxville DKX Airport and/or land use plan

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Inclusion in local comprehensive Lewisburg Ellington Airport LUG and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Lexington-Parsons Beech River Regional Airport PVE and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Memphis General Dewitt Spain Airport M01 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Oneida Scott Municipal Airport SCX and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Paris Henry County Airport PHT and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Pulaski Abernathy Field GZS and/or land use plan Savannah-Hardin County Inclusion in local comprehensive Savannah SNH Airport and/or land use plan Springfield Robertson County Inclusion in local comprehensive Springfield M91 Airport and/or land use plan Everett-Stewart Regional Inclusion in local comprehensive Union City UCY Airport and/or land use plan

Community Service Inclusion in local comprehensive Camden Benton County Airport 0M4 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Centerville Centerville Municipal Airport GHM and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Chattanooga Dallas Bay Sky Park 1A0 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Clifton Hassell Field M29 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Collegedale Collegedale Municipal Airport FGU and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Copperhill Martin Campbell Field 1A3 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Covington Covington Municipal Airport M04 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Dayton Mark Anton Airport 2A0 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Halls Arnold Field M31 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Hohenwald John A Baker Field 0M3 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Humboldt Humboldt Municipal Airport M53 and/or land use plan Colonel Tommy C. Stiner Inclusion in local comprehensive Jacksboro JAU Airfield and/or land use plan

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Inclusion in local comprehensive Jasper Marion County - Brown Field APT and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Johnson City Johnson City Airport 0A4 and/or land use plan Lawrenceburg-Lawrence Inclusion in local comprehensive Lawrenceburg 2M2 County Airport and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Linden James Tucker Airport M15 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Livingston Livingston Municipal Airport 8A3 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Madisonville Monroe County Airport MNV and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive McKinnon Houston County Airport M93 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Millington Charles W Baker Airport 2M8 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Mountain City Johnson County Airport 6A4 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Portland Portland Municipal Airport 1M5 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Rockwood Rockwood Municipal Airport RKW and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Rogersville Hawkins County Airport RVN and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Selmer Robert Sibley Airport SZY and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Smithville Smithville Municipal Airport 0A3 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Somerville Fayette County Airport FYE and/or land use plan New Tazewell Municipal Inclusion in local comprehensive Tazewell 3A2 Airport and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Tiptonville Reelfoot Lake Airpark 0M2 and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Trenton Gibson County Airport TGC and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Waverly Humphreys County Airport 0M5 and/or land use plan

Turf Inclusion in local comprehensive Benton Chilhowee Gliderport 92A and/or land use plan Inclusion in local comprehensive Eagleville Puckett Field 50M and/or land use plan Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 47

Airports listed in Table 25 will need to take an active role in coordinating with their local governments in order to be included in their local comprehensive and/or land use plan. Adoption of such a plan that includes the airport will require coordination with other local decision-makers, planning authorities, and other stakeholders that may be impacted by changes to the local comprehensive and/or land use plan. Airports and local governments in charge of the local comprehensive and/or land use plan can refer to ACRP Report 27: Enhancing Airport Land Use Compatibility and FAA AC 150/5020-1, Noise Control and Compatibility Planning for Airports f or assistance in developing and adopting such plans with airports included. EXECUTION OF ANNUAL AIRPORT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN (ACIP) The TDOT Aeronautics Division’s Airport Capital Improvement Plan (ACIP) is a mechanism used to identify capital project needs at an airport level on an annual basis. Airports annually submit their Capital Improvement Plans (CIPs) that contain the projects they want to request funding for over the next five fiscal years. The TDOT Aeronautics Division compiles all airports’ CIPs and programs projects only for the upcoming fiscal year based on the available funds and State project prioritization. However, every year projects that were not programmed in the TDOT Aeronautics Division’s ACIP are funded by the TDOT Aeronautics Division based on State priorities. The TDOT Aeronautics Division would like to decrease the number of unprogrammed projects receiving funding each year by working with the airports to submit CIPs that are reflective of both airport and State priorities. Table 26 presents current conditions on the amount of grant funding awarded to airports in State Fiscal Year (FY) 2020, as well as the dollar amount of programmed grants and unprogrammed grants. There is no future performance target associated with this PM, as it is a target established for the TDOT Aeronautics Division, not the airports.

Table 26: Amount of Programmed and Unprogrammed Projects Approved by TDOT Aeronautics Division by Airport Classification in State FY 2020

Percent of Total Percent of Total Projects Projects That Unprogrammed Projects That Airport Programmed and Were Projects Approved in Were Classification Approved in State FY Programmed State FY 2020 Unprogrammed 2020 and Approved and Approved Commercial $153,328 20% $616,321 80% Service1 Regional Service $3,685,708 57% $2,766,183 43% Community $11,163,729 88% $1,516,901 12% Business Community Service $12,880,022 82% $2,781,079 18% Turf $0 N/A $0 N/A Statewide $27,882,787 78% $7,680,484 22% Source: TDOT Aeronautics Division, 2020 1Projects included for Commercial Service airports are only for McKellar-Sipes Regional Airport (MKL), as TDOT Aeronautics Division does not program projects for the Primary Commercial Service airports.

PERCENT OF FEDERAL FUNDS ALLOCATED THROUGH SUB-AWARDS Tennessee is one of ten states that participates in the FAA’s SBGP. Participation in this program means that Tennessee is responsible for administering their FAA AIP funding to Nonprimary commercial service and general aviation airports. Funding is disbursed through several types of sub-awards. Sub-awards include non-primary entitlement (NPE), apportionment, Military Airport Program (MAP), discretionary, and supplemental. It is important to monitor the level of funding available through these different funding streams to ensure that the TDOT Aeronautics Division is properly managing the SBGP funds. Table 27 presents current conditions concerning the amount of funding allocated through FAA sub-awards over a five-year period. There is no future performance target associated with this PM, as it is a target established for the TDOT Aeronautics Division, not the airports.

Table 27: FAA Sub-Award Funding Allocated to Airports by FY

Percent of Federal Funds Allocated Through Sub- Fiscal Year Awards 2015 100% 2016 100% 2017 100% 2018 100% 2019 100% Source: TDOT Aeronautics Division, 2020

PERCENT OF AIRPORTS WITH A SPILL PREVENTION CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE (SPCC) PROGRAM The Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) program is a requirement by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to help prevent the discharge of oil into navigable bodies of water. Airports with fuel should have a SPCC program in place in order to be compliant with federal requirements and preserve a safe operating environment. This PM only includes airports with fuel, whether owned by the airport or a FBO. Table 28 presents current performance, future performance targets, and the percent of airports needed to meet future performance targets for adoption of an SPCC program.

Table 28: Airports by Classification with a SPCC Program – 2019 Performance/Future Performance Targets

Airports Needed to Airports Meeting Proposed Future Airport Classification Meet Future System Objective Performance Performance Commercial Service 6 (100%) 6 (100%) 0 (0%) Regional Service 16 (94%) 17 (100%) 1 (6%) Community Business 13 (86%) 14 (93%) 1 (14%) Community Service 27 (76%) 34 (89%)1 7 (13%) Turf N/A No Target Established N/A Statewide 62 (79%) 71 (91%)1 9 (12%) Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019 1Note: this percentage excludes airports without fuel, whether owned by the airport or FBO

As Table 28 shows, currently 82 percent of airports statewide with f uel have an SPCC program and thus meet the objective. Future performance targets call for all airports with fuel to have an SPCC program. Ten percent of airports statewide have fuel but do not have an SPCC program, as shown in Table 28. This includes six percent of Regional Service, 14 percent of Community Business, and 13 percent of Community Service airports that do not meet the objective. Airports that need to adopt a SPCC program are shown in Table 29. The airports listed in this table are only those that have projects recommended to meet future performance targets for this PM.

Table 29: Airports by Classification that Need to Adopt a SPCC Program

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Regional Service Music City Executive Adopt an airport appropriate SPCC Gallatin XNX Airport program Community Business Crossville Adopt an airport appropriate SPCC Crossville CSV Memorial/Whitson Field program Community Service Adopt an airport appropriate SPCC Chattanooga Dallas Bay Sky Park 1A0 program Adopt an airport appropriate SPCC Hohenwald John A Baker Field 0M3 program Jamestown Municipal Adopt an airport appropriate SPCC Jamestown 2A1 Airport program Marion County - Brown Adopt an airport appropriate SPCC Jasper APT Field program Lafayette Municipal Adopt an airport appropriate SPCC Lafayette 3M7 Airport program Adopt an airport appropriate SPCC Madisonville Monroe County Airport MNV program

Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Recommended Project Adopt an airport appropriate SPCC Mountain City Johnson County Airport 6A4 program Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019

Airports listed in Table 28 will need to adopt a SPCC program that is compliant with EPA requirements. Airports should work with their local government as well as airport users, including business tenants, pilots, and staff, to ensure compliance with the SPCC program.

Goal #5: Invest in the airport system and the aviation workforce to support economic growth and competitiveness The Goal #5 PM focuses on adequate population and land coverage by Tennessee’s existing and proposed general aviation airports that support business users. Airports support local economic growth and competitiveness in a variety of ways, including by supporting business aircraf t. Business aircraft require more substantial facilities than airports that solely accommodate recreational aircraft. When considering potential projects and investment, TDOT Aeronautics Division considers the ability of that airport to accommodate all aircraft, including business aircraft. The potential additional population and land area served within a reasonable drivetime is one of the primary considerations when determining potential investment in facilities and services f or a general aviation airport to be able to support business aircraft. Goal #5 explores those factors through its PM, listed below:

 Population and area within a 45-minute drive time of an airport meeting business aircraft needs. POPULATION AND AREA WITHIN A 45-MINUTE DRIVE TIME OF AN AIRPORT MEETING BUSINESS AIRCRAFT NEEDS Airports are important for supporting local business needs and fostering economic growth, particularly through their support of business aircraft. Business aircraft are most commonly jets that require substantial facilities that are not found at every airport. While needs may vary from business to business, the most critical needs that define a typical airport “business user” include the following:

 5,500-foot (or greater) runway  Jet-A fuel availability  Instrument approach  Ground transportation Tennessee has 27 airports that currently have all four of these facilities and are currently able to support business aircraf t needs. As shown in Figure 9, 91 percent of Tennessee’s population and 65 percent of Tennessee’s land mass is within a 45-minute drive time of one or more of these 27 airports. Thirty-four airports have all but one of these facilities/services. All 34 of these airports have Jet-A fuel availability, an instrument approach, and ground transportation; for all 34 airports, the only facility deficiency was a 5,500-foot (or greater) runway. Figure 10 and Table 30 provide the additional population and land coverage by airports needing one improvement to support business aircraft needs. Based on the information provided in Figure 10 and Table 30, Centerville Municipal Airport (GHM) has the greatest potential to serve the most additional population should the airport support business aircraft needs. Supporting business aircraft needs at Centerville Municipal Airport would serve the greatest additional population at 151,632, or 2.2 percent of Tennessee’s population, and 1,847 square miles, or 4.4 percent of Tennessee’s land mass.

Figure 9: Percent of Population and Land Area within a 45-minute Drive Time of Airports that Currently Support Business Aircraft Needs

Source: ESRI Community Analyst, Community Profile, 2019; Kimley-Horn, 2020

Figure 10: Additional Population and Land Area Coverage by Airports Needing One Improvement to Support Business Aircraft Needs

Source: ESRI Community Analyst, Community Profile, 2019; Kimley-Horn, 2020

Table 30: Additional Population and Land Area Coverage by Airports Needing One Improvement to Support Business Aircraft Needs

Runway Additional Population Land Coverage Land Coverage Facility Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Extension Population % (sq. mi.) (%) Missing Needed William L. Whitehurst 5,500-foot Bolivar M08 38,390 0.6% 961 2.3% 493 feet Field runway 5,500-foot Camden Benton County Airport 0M4 17,190 0.2% 465 1.1% 499 feet runway Centerville Municipal 5,500-foot Centerville GHM 151,632 2.2% 1,847 4.4% 1,498 feet Airport runway Covington Municipal 5,500-foot Covington M04 1,484 0.0% 108 0.3% 496 feet Airport runway Crossville Memorial - 5,500-foot Crossville CSV 80,922 1.2% 1,073 2.5% 82 feet Whitson Field runway 5,500-foot Dayton Mark Anton Airport 2A0 28,961 0.4% 534 1.3% 499 feet runway 5,500-foot Dickson Dickson Municipal Airport M02 55,557 0.8% 1,066 2.5% 499 feet runway Elizabethton Municipal 5,500-foot Elizabethton 0A9 13,807 0.2% 243 0.6% 499 feet Airport runway Humboldt Municipal 5,500-foot Humboldt M53 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1,497 feet Airport runway Colonel Tommy C. Stiner 5,500-foot Jacksboro JAU 47,321 0.7% 542 1.3% 1,500 feet Airfield runway Marion County - Brown 5,500-foot Jasper APT 37,881 0.6% 601 1.4% 2,002 feet Field runway Knoxville Downtown 5,500-foot Knoxville DKX 22,956 0.3% 147 0.3% 2,001 feet Island Airport runway Lafayette Municipal 5,500-foot Lafayette 3M7 12,329 0.2% 328 0.8% 300 feet Airport runway Lawrenceburg-Lawrence 5,500-foot Lawrenceburg 2M2 30,907 0.4% 824 2.0% 497 feet County Airport runway

Runway Additional Population Land Coverage Land Coverage Facility Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Extension Population % (sq. mi.) (%) Missing Needed Lebanon Municipal 5,500-foot Lebanon M54 5,643 0.1% 139 0.3% 500 feet Airport runway 5,500-foot Lewisburg Ellington Airport LUG 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 498 feet runway Livingston Municipal 5,500-foot Livingston 8A3 17,397 0.3% 504 1.2% 348 feet Airport runway 5,500-foot Madisonville Monroe County Airport MNV 2,873 0.0% 70 0.2% 1,857 feet runway Warren County Memorial 5,500-foot McMinnville RNC 28,627 0.4% 678 1.6% 500 feet Airport runway General Dewitt Spain 5,500-foot Memphis M01 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1,700 feet Airport runway 5,500-foot Millington Charles W Baker Airport 2M8 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2,001 feet runway 5,500-foot Mountain City Johnson County Airport 6A4 18,617 0.3% 280 0.7% 1,002 feet runway Murfreesboro Municipal 5,500-foot Murfreesboro MBT 16,582 0.2% 306 0.7% 747 feet Airport runway 5,500-foot Paris Henry County Airport PHT 3,652 0.1% 123 0.3% 499 feet runway Portland Municipal 5,500-foot Portland 1M5 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 500 feet Airport runway 5,500-foot Pulaski Abernathy Field GZS 19,776 0.3% 440 1.0% 190 feet runway Rockwood Municipal 5,500-foot Rockwood RKW 81,745 1.2% 1,019 2.4% 500 feet Airport runway Savannah-Hardin County 5,500-foot Savannah SNH 51,372 0.7% 1,188 2.8% 500 feet Airport runway

Runway Additional Population Land Coverage Land Coverage Facility Associated City Airport Name FAA ID Extension Population % (sq. mi.) (%) Missing Needed 5,500-foot Selmer Robert Sibley Airport SZY 48,620 0.7% 975 2.3% 497 feet runway Smithville Municipal 5,500-foot Smithville 0A3 25,510 0.4% 418 1.0% 1,243 feet Airport runway 5,500-foot Somerville Fayette County Airport FYE 21,853 0.3% 572 1.4% 500 feet runway 5,500-foot Trenton Gibson County Airport TGC 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 698 feet runway Humphreys County 5,500-foot Waverly 0M5 44,413 0.6% 1,058 2.5% 1,500 feet Airport runway Winchester Municipal 5,500-foot Winchester BGF 10,996 0.2% 320 0.8% 498 feet Airport runway Source: TASP Inventory Data Survey, 2019

Summary Meeting future system performance targets is important for ensuring that Tennessee continues to have a safe, secure, and efficient aviation system. The previous sections provided the results of the Future System Performance analysis, organized first by Goal and then by PM. Existing system performance was primarily based on information provided in the TASP Inventory Data Survey. Future performance targets were established by the TDOT Aeronautics Division after review of the current aviation system performance in Chapter 2 – Inventory and Existing System Performance. Future performance targets are defined as the total and percent of airports by classification that need to meet each PM in order to accomplish the overarching Goals of the TASP. For each performance measure, airports not meeting future performance targets were recommended a project to help these airports meet future performance targets. Recommendations ranged from smaller projects, such as the adoption of a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) program at nine airports to achieve future performance targets for the Goal #4 PM, “Has a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Program,” to larger infrastructure projects to achieve future performance targets for the Goal #1 PM, “Percent of infrastructure within its useful life.” Recommended projects will be used to develop cost estimates in a later Chapter. This Chapter will also explore the specifics of each project at each airport, including examining the feasibility of implementing these projects.