Docstoc

Master_Plan_Final_vers_1.0

Document Sample
Master_Plan_Final_vers_1.0 Powered By Docstoc
					MASTER PLAN UPDATE
CHATTANOOGA METROPOLITAN AIRPORT
VOLUME 1 OF 2: Technical Report



Prepared For
CHATTANOOGA METROPOLITAN AIRPORT AUTHORITY
Chattanooga, Tennessee




July 2010
FINAL REPORT
                                                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                               Master Plan Update




                                                 TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                           (Volume 1 of 2)

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. i
CHAPTER 1 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM ...................................................................... 1-1 
  1.1  Introduction .......................................................................................................................1-1 
  1.2  Committees .......................................................................................................................1-1 
  1.3  Public Information Workshops ..........................................................................................1-1 
  1.4  Timing ...............................................................................................................................1-2 
  1.5  Issues................................................................................................................................1-2 
  1.6  Public Meetings of May 11, 2009 ......................................................................................1-3 
    1.6.1    User’s Group Comments on the Airport Development Concepts ..............................1-3 
    1.6.2    The Technical Advisory Group Comments on the Airport Development Concepts ...1-3 
    1.6.3    Public Information Workshop Number One ...............................................................1-4 
  1.7  Public Information Workshop of June 1, 2010 ..................................................................1-4 
CHAPTER 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS ......................................................................................... 2-1 
  2.1  Introduction .......................................................................................................................2-1 
  2.2  Background .......................................................................................................................2-1 
  2.3  Airfield/Airspace ................................................................................................................2-2 
    2.3.1    Runway 2-20..............................................................................................................2-2 
    2.3.2    Runway 15-33............................................................................................................2-2 
    2.3.3    Navigational Aids .......................................................................................................2-2 
    2.3.4    Taxiway System.........................................................................................................2-4 
    2.3.5    Apron Areas ...............................................................................................................2-4 
    2.3.6    Airspace Environment ................................................................................................2-5 
    2.3.7    Instrument Procedures ..............................................................................................2-5 
  2.4  Commercial Passenger Terminal Area .............................................................................2-8 
    2.4.1    Commercial Service Passenger Terminal .................................................................2-8 
    2.4.2    Access, Circulation, and Parking ...............................................................................2-9 
  2.5  General Aviation Facilities ..............................................................................................2-14 
    2.5.1    Fixed Base Operator................................................................................................2-14 
    2.5.2    Other General Aviation Facilities .............................................................................2-15 
  2.6  Cargo Facilities ...............................................................................................................2-15 
  2.7  Support Facilities ............................................................................................................2-15 
    2.7.1    Air Traffic Control Tower ..........................................................................................2-15 
    2.7.2    Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Facility ................................................................2-16 
    2.7.3    Airport Maintenance Facilities ..................................................................................2-17 
    2.7.4    Utilities .....................................................................................................................2-17 
  2.8  Regional Setting and Land Use ......................................................................................2-17 
    2.8.1    Airport Land Use ......................................................................................................2-17 
    2.8.2    Airport Height Zoning Restrictions ...........................................................................2-21 
  2.9  Environmental Overview .................................................................................................2-21 
    2.9.1    Floodplains ..............................................................................................................2-21 
    2.9.2    Wetlands ..................................................................................................................2-21 
CHAPTER 3 AVIATION FORECASTS .......................................................................................... 3-1 
  3.1  Introduction .......................................................................................................................3-1 
  3.2  Historical Activity Review ..................................................................................................3-1 
    3.2.1    Regional Commercial Service Airports ......................................................................3-2 
    3.2.2    Location and Other Characteristics of Regional Airports ...........................................3-3 
    3.2.3    Airlines Providing Service ..........................................................................................3-4 

Table of Contents                                                    TOC-i                                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                             Master Plan Update




   3.2.4   Domestic Airlines Serving Regional Airports .............................................................3-4 
   3.2.5   Markets Served..........................................................................................................3-5 
   3.2.6   Airport Efforts to Improve Air Service ........................................................................3-6 
   3.2.7   Market Share .............................................................................................................3-7 
   3.2.8   Annual Enplaned Passengers ...................................................................................3-7 
   3.2.9   Annual Aircraft Operations.........................................................................................3-9 
 3.3  Factors Affecting Future Aviation Demand .....................................................................3-11 
   3.3.1   Impact of September 11, 2001 ................................................................................3-11 
   3.3.2   National Economic Conditions .................................................................................3-12 
   3.3.3   Identification of the Air Service Area ........................................................................3-12 
   3.3.4   Local Socioeconomic Conditions .............................................................................3-13 
   3.3.5   Major Employers ......................................................................................................3-15 
   3.3.6   Airline Hubs in Atlanta and Nashville .......................................................................3-17 
   3.3.7   Airfares ....................................................................................................................3-17 
   3.3.8   Low Cost Airline Access to Atlanta ..........................................................................3-18 
   3.3.9   Airline Competition...................................................................................................3-18 
 3.4  Enplaned Passenger Forecast........................................................................................3-18 
   3.4.1   Market Share Analysis .............................................................................................3-18 
   3.4.2   Trend Analysis .........................................................................................................3-22 
   3.4.3   Regression Analysis ................................................................................................3-25 
   3.4.4   FAA Terminal Area Forecast ...................................................................................3-28 
   3.4.5   Indexed TAF ............................................................................................................3-30 
   3.4.6   Presentation of the Enplaned Passenger Forecast .................................................3-32 
   3.4.7   The Preferred Forecast............................................................................................3-34 
 3.5  Air Cargo .........................................................................................................................3-36 
   3.5.1   Industry Developments ............................................................................................3-36 
   3.5.2   Carrier Consolidations and Acquisitions ..................................................................3-37 
   3.5.3   Mail ..........................................................................................................................3-37 
   3.5.4   Global Trends ..........................................................................................................3-37 
   3.5.5   Cargo Operations at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport ..........................................3-38 
   3.5.6   Regional Air Cargo Operations ................................................................................3-41 
   3.5.7   Chattanooga Monthly Peaks ....................................................................................3-43 
   3.5.8   Cargo Forecasts for Chattanooga ...........................................................................3-44 
 3.6  Based Aircraft Forecast ..................................................................................................3-46 
 3.7  Aircraft Operations Forecast ...........................................................................................3-48 
   3.7.1   FAA TAF Operations Forecast ................................................................................3-48 
   3.7.2   Master Plan Forecast of Operations ........................................................................3-50 
   3.7.3   Commercial Service Operations Forecast ...............................................................3-51 
   3.7.4   Military and General Aviation Operations ................................................................3-53 
   3.7.5   Total Operations ......................................................................................................3-55 
   3.7.6   Instrument Operations .............................................................................................3-56 
 3.8  Design Day / Design Hour Activity Forecast ...................................................................3-59 
 3.9  Comparison With the FAA Terminal Area Forecast ........................................................3-63 
 3.10  Summary of Forecasts ....................................................................................................3-71 
CHAPTER 4 FACILITY REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................... 4-1 
 4.1  Introduction .......................................................................................................................4-1 
 4.2  Emerging Trends ..............................................................................................................4-1 
   4.2.1   Increased Low Cost Carrier Activity ...........................................................................4-1 
   4.2.2   Very Light Jets ...........................................................................................................4-2 
   4.2.3   Departure of the Tennessee Air National Guard .......................................................4-3 
   4.2.4   Potential Increase in Cargo Activity at Chattanooga .................................................4-3 

Table of Contents                                                   TOC-ii                                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                             Master Plan Update




 4.3  Airfield Requirements........................................................................................................4-4 
   4.3.1   Airfield Capacity Analysis ..........................................................................................4-4 
   4.3.2   Runway Requirements ..............................................................................................4-7 
   4.3.3   Taxiway Requirements ............................................................................................4-19 
   4.3.4   Electronic, Visual, and Satellite Aids to Navigation .................................................4-21 
 4.4  Commercial Service Passenger Terminal Complex .......................................................4-22 
   4.4.1    Gates .......................................................................................................................4-22 
   4.4.2    Commercial Service Passenger Terminal Building ..................................................4-27 
   4.4.3    Curbfronts ................................................................................................................4-35 
   4.4.4    Key Commercial Service Passenger Terminal Complex Trigger Points ..................4-36 
 4.5  General Aviation Requirements ......................................................................................4-37 
   4.5.1    Based Aircraft Storage Areas ..................................................................................4-37 
   4.5.2    Based Aircraft Tie-down Aprons ..............................................................................4-38 
   4.5.3    Itinerant Aircraft Parking Aprons ..............................................................................4-39 
   4.5.4    FBO Administration, Pilot Facilities and General Aviation Terminal ........................4-39 
   4.5.5    FBO Automobile Parking .........................................................................................4-40 
   4.5.6    Second FBO Facilities .............................................................................................4-40 
   4.5.7    Very Light Jet Facilities ............................................................................................4-45 
 4.6  Air Cargo Requirements .................................................................................................4-46 
   4.6.1    Existing Air Cargo Facilities .....................................................................................4-46 
   4.6.2    Cargo Terminal Planning Metrics ............................................................................4-46 
 4.7  Support Facilities ............................................................................................................4-48 
   4.7.1    Air Traffic Control Tower ..........................................................................................4-48 
   4.7.2    Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting ............................................................................4-48 
   4.7.3    Fuel Storage ............................................................................................................4-48 
   4.7.4    Airport Maintenance.................................................................................................4-53 
 4.8  Circulation and Parking Requirements ...........................................................................4-53 
   4.8.1    Terminal Area Circulation ........................................................................................4-53 
   4.8.2    Parking.....................................................................................................................4-56 
 4.9  Summary of Facility Requirements .................................................................................4-69 
CHAPTER 5 DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES .................................... 5-1 
 5.1  Introduction .......................................................................................................................5-1 
 5.2  Development and Evaluation of Alternatives Process ......................................................5-2 
 5.3  Identification of Airport Element Alternatives ....................................................................5-3 
   5.3.1    Airfield Improvements ................................................................................................5-3 
   5.3.2    Legend of Alternatives ...............................................................................................5-6 
   5.3.3    Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking Complex ..............................5-6 
   5.3.4    Second Fixed Base Operator ..................................................................................5-13 
   5.3.5    Conventional Hangars .............................................................................................5-17 
   5.3.6    T-Hangars ................................................................................................................5-23 
   5.3.7    Air Cargo..................................................................................................................5-28 
   5.3.8    Maintenance Center ................................................................................................5-31 
   5.3.9    Airport Business Park ..............................................................................................5-32 
   5.3.10  Greenways...............................................................................................................5-33 
   5.3.11  Enhanced Airport Entrances ....................................................................................5-35 
   5.3.12  First Evaluation of Alternatives ................................................................................5-39 
 5.4  Airport Development Concepts .......................................................................................5-43 
   5.4.1    Common Elements in the Airport Development Concepts ......................................5-43 
   5.4.2    Airport Development Concept One ..........................................................................5-44 
   5.4.3    Airport Development Concept Two ..........................................................................5-47 
   5.4.4    Airport Development Concept Three .......................................................................5-51 

Table of Contents                                                  TOC-iii                                                 FINAL REPORT
                                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                             Master Plan Update




 5.5  Evaluation of Alternatives ...............................................................................................5-55 
   5.5.1   Evaluation of Terminal/Parking Alternatives ............................................................5-55 
   5.5.2   Evaluation of Second FBO Alternatives ...................................................................5-56 
   5.5.3   Evaluation of Conventional Hangar Alternatives .....................................................5-57 
   5.5.4   Evaluation of T-Hangar Alternatives ........................................................................5-58 
   5.5.5   Evaluation of Air Cargo Alternatives ........................................................................5-59 
 5.6  Recommended Alternative..............................................................................................5-60 
CHAPTER 6 AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN ........................................................................................ 6-1 
 6.1  Introduction .......................................................................................................................6-1 
 6.2  Airport Layout Plan Set .....................................................................................................6-2 
   6.2.1   Cover Sheet ...............................................................................................................6-2 
   6.2.2   Airport Layout Plan ....................................................................................................6-2 
   6.2.3   Facilities Layout Plan .................................................................................................6-2 
   6.2.4   Terminal Area Plan ....................................................................................................6-2 
   6.2.5   Airport Airspace Drawing ...........................................................................................6-2 
   6.2.6   Inner Portion of the Approach Surface for Runway 02/20 .........................................6-3 
   6.2.7   Inner Portion of the Approach Surface for Runway 15/33 .........................................6-3 
   6.2.8   On-Airport Land-Use Plan .........................................................................................6-3 
   6.2.9   Airport Property Map ..................................................................................................6-3 
 6.3  Airport Compliance With FAA Design Standards ..............................................................6-3 
 6.4  Airport Layout Plan Highlights and Modifications ..............................................................6-4 
CHAPTER 7 FACILITIES IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ................................................................... 7-1 
 7.1  Introduction .......................................................................................................................7-1 
 7.2  Proposed Capital Improvement Program Projects ............................................................7-2 
   7.2.1   Short-Term Capital Improvement Program Projects ..................................................7-2 
   7.2.2   Short-Term Projects Summary ..................................................................................7-4 
   7.2.3   Medium-Term Capital Improvement Projects ............................................................7-7 
   7.2.4   Medium-Term Projects Summary ............................................................................7-10 
   7.2.5   Long-Term Capital Improvement Program Projects ................................................7-13 
   7.2.6   Long-Term Project Summary ...................................................................................7-15 
 7.3  Capital Improvement Program Costs ..............................................................................7-19 
 7.4  Environmental Considerations ........................................................................................7-22 
   7.4.1   Forms of Environmental Analysis ............................................................................7-22 
   7.4.2   Areas of Potential Environmental Impact.................................................................7-23 
   7.4.3   Agency Coordination and Permitting .......................................................................7-27 
   7.4.4   Environmental Summary .........................................................................................7-28 
CHAPTER 8 FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ......................................................................................... 8-1 
 8.1  Introduction .......................................................................................................................8-1 
 8.2  Enabling Legislation ..........................................................................................................8-1 
 8.3  Financial Framework.........................................................................................................8-2 
   8.3.1   Commercial Passenger Airlines .................................................................................8-2 
   8.3.2   Passenger Parking Facilities Management Agreement: Republic Parking Systems .8-3 
   8.3.3   Rental Car Agreement: Avis .....................................................................................8-3 
   8.3.4   Rental Car Agreement: Budget.................................................................................8-4 
   8.3.5   Rental Car Agreement: Enterprise............................................................................8-4 
   8.3.6   Rental Car Agreement: Hertz ...................................................................................8-4 
   8.3.7   Rental Car Agreement: National ...............................................................................8-5 
   8.3.8   Additional CMAA Leases ...........................................................................................8-5 
 8.4  Recommended Alternatives Projects Summary ...............................................................8-6 
 8.5  Additional Capital Improvements ......................................................................................8-8 
 8.6  Potential Funding Sources ................................................................................................8-9 

Table of Contents                                                  TOC-iv                                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                               Master Plan Update




     8.6.1    Federal Aviation Administration – Aviation Trust Fund ..............................................8-9 
     8.6.2    Overview and Status of the Airport Improvement Program .....................................8-12 
     8.6.3    Obligations and Assurances ....................................................................................8-14 
   8.7  Airport Improvement Program.........................................................................................8-14 
     8.7.1    Passenger Service Entitlement Grants ....................................................................8-14 
     8.7.2    Cargo Service Entitlement Grants ...........................................................................8-15 
     8.7.3    Discretionary Grants ................................................................................................8-15 
     8.7.4    Economic Stimulus ..................................................................................................8-19 
     8.7.5    Facilities and Equipment Program ...........................................................................8-19 
   8.8  Tennessee Department of Transportation ......................................................................8-19 
     8.8.1    Finance and Grant Management .............................................................................8-19 
   8.9  Third Party/Tenant Financing..........................................................................................8-20 
   8.10  Transportation Security Administration ...........................................................................8-21 
   8.11  Non-Traditional Funding Sources ...................................................................................8-21 
   8.12  Local Funding Requirement – Short-Term Capital Projects ...........................................8-27 
   8.13  FAA Approved Passenger Facility Charges ....................................................................8-27 
   8.14  Contract (Customer) Facility Charges .............................................................................8-28 
   8.15  CMAA’S Remaining Funding Requirement .....................................................................8-28 
     8.15.1  Airport Cash Flow and Reserves .............................................................................8-30 
   8.16  Local Funding Requirement: Medium-Term and Long-Term Capital Projects ................8-30 
   8.17  Issuance of Public (Municipal) Debt................................................................................8-33 
     8.17.1  General Obligation Bonds........................................................................................8-33 
     8.17.2  General Airport Revenue Bonds ..............................................................................8-33 
     8.17.3  Industrial Development Bonds/Economic Development Bonds and Special Facility
     Bonds .................................................................................................................................8-34 
     8.17.4  Short-Term Financing Instruments ..........................................................................8-34 
   8.18  Financing CMAA’s Remaining Local Requirement .........................................................8-35 
   8.19  Allocation of Average Annual Debt Service to Project Elements ....................................8-37 
   8.20  Historical Financial Information .......................................................................................8-38 
     8.20.1  Airport Revenues .....................................................................................................8-38 
     8.20.2  Airport Expenses .....................................................................................................8-41 
     8.20.3  Operating Surplus ....................................................................................................8-41 
     8.20.4  Non-Operating Revenues ........................................................................................8-41 
     8.20.5  Non-Operating Expenses ........................................................................................8-41 
   8.21  Pro Forma Cash Flow .....................................................................................................8-42 
     8.21.1  Airport Revenues .....................................................................................................8-42 
     8.21.2  Operating Expenses ................................................................................................8-46 
     8.21.3  Pro Forma Cash Flow Analysis Summary ...............................................................8-47 
   8.22  Summary.........................................................................................................................8-48 


                                                   TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1 Airport Layout.................................................................................................................2-3 
Figure 2-2 Chattanooga Regional Airspace ....................................................................................2-6 
Figure 2-3 Chattanooga Low-Altitude Enroute Chart ......................................................................2-7 
Figure 2-4 Commercial Passenger Terminal Facility ......................................................................2-8 
Figure 2-5 Regional Highway Network ..........................................................................................2-10 
Figure 2-6 Vicinity Map..................................................................................................................2-11 
Figure 2-7 On-Airport Parking .......................................................................................................2-13 
Figure 2-8 ARFF Facility ...............................................................................................................2-16 
Figure 2-9 Existing Land Use ........................................................................................................2-19 

Table of Contents                                                   TOC-v                                                     FINAL REPORT
                                                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                          Master Plan Update




Figure 2-10 Future Land-Use Changes.........................................................................................2-20 
Figure 2-11 Floodplain Map ..........................................................................................................2-22 
Figure 2-12 Wetlands Map ............................................................................................................2-23 
Figure 3-1 Geographic Region ........................................................................................................3-3 
Figure 3-2 Chattanooga Metropolitan Statistical Area...................................................................3-13 
Figure 3-3 Historical Market Share................................................................................................3-19 
Figure 3-4 Historical Annual Percentage Change in Enplanements .............................................3-22 
Figure 3-5 Chattanooga 2007 Monthly Freight (Pounds) ..............................................................3-43 
Figure 4-1 IFR and VFR Airfield Configurations ..............................................................................4-6 
Figure 4-2 Terminal Roadway System ..........................................................................................4-54 
Figure 5-1 Airfield Improvements ....................................................................................................5-4 
Figure 5-2 Location of Alternatives..................................................................................................5-6 
Figure 5-3 Terminal/Parking Alternative One ..................................................................................5-7 
Figure 5-4 Terminal/Parking Alternative Two ..................................................................................5-9 
Figure 5-5 Terminal/Parking Alternative Three .............................................................................5-10 
Figure 5-6 Terminal/Parking Alternative Three Ground Level .......................................................5-11 
Figure 5-7 FBO Alternative One ....................................................................................................5-13 
Figure 5-8 FBO Alternative Two ....................................................................................................5-14 
Figure 5-9 FBO Alternative Three .................................................................................................5-15 
Figure 5-10 FBO Alternative Four .................................................................................................5-16 
Figure 5-11 Conventional Hangars Alternative One ......................................................................5-17 
Figure 5-12 Conventional Hangars Alternative Two ......................................................................5-18 
Figure 5-13 Conventional Hangars Alternative Three ...................................................................5-19 
Figure 5-14 Conventional Hangars Alternative Four .....................................................................5-20 
Figure 5-15 Conventional Hangars Alternative Five ......................................................................5-21 
Figure 5-16 Conventional Hangars Alternative Six .......................................................................5-22 
Figure 5-17 T-Hangars Alternative One ........................................................................................5-23 
Figure 5-18 T-Hangars Alternative Two ........................................................................................5-24 
Figure 5-19 T-Hangars Alternative Three......................................................................................5-25 
Figure 5-20 T-Hangars Alternative Four........................................................................................5-26 
Figure 5-21 T-Hangars Alternative Five ........................................................................................5-27 
Figure 5-22 Air Cargo Alternative One ..........................................................................................5-28 
Figure 5-23 Air Cargo Alternative Two ..........................................................................................5-29 
Figure 5-24 Air Cargo Alternative Three .......................................................................................5-30 
Figure 5-25 Maintenance Center...................................................................................................5-31 
Figure 5-26 Airport Business Park ................................................................................................5-33 
Figure 5-27 Southern Greenway ...................................................................................................5-34 
Figure 5-28 Northern Greenway....................................................................................................5-35 
Figure 5-29 Shepherd Road ..........................................................................................................5-36 
Figure 5-30 Shepherd Road Airport Entrance ...............................................................................5-37 
Figure 5-31 Enhanced Shepherd Road Entrance .........................................................................5-38 
Figure 5-32 Enhanced Jubilee Drive Airport Entrance ..................................................................5-39 
Figure 5-33 Airport Elements Common to All Airport Development Concepts ..............................5-43 
Figure 5-34 Airport Development Concept One ............................................................................5-46 
Figure 5-35 Airport Development Concept Two ............................................................................5-50 
Figure 5-36 Airport Development Concept Three .........................................................................5-54 
Figure 5-37 Temporary Surface Parking Lot .................................................................................5-61 
Figure 5-38 Recommended Alternative.........................................................................................5-65 
Figure 6-1 ALP Drawing Set Cover Sheet.......................................................................................6-5 
Figure 6-2 Airport Layout Plan ........................................................................................................6-6 
Figure 6-3 Facilities Layout Plan .....................................................................................................6-7 

Table of Contents                                                TOC-vi                                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                           Master Plan Update




Figure 6-4 Terminal Area Plan ........................................................................................................6-8 
Figure 6-5 Airport Airspace Drawing ...............................................................................................6-9 
Figure 6-6 Inner Portion of the Approach Surface for Runway 02/20 ...........................................6-10 
Figure 6-7 Inner Portion of the Approach Surface for Runway 15/33 ...........................................6-11 
Figure 6-8 On-Airport Land-Use Plan............................................................................................6-12 
Figure 6-9 Airport Property Map ....................................................................................................6-13 
Figure 7-1 Short-Term CIP Projects ................................................................................................7-5 
Figure 7-2 Medium-Term CIP Projects ..........................................................................................7-11 
Figure 7-3 Long-Term CIP Projects ..............................................................................................7-17 
Figure 8-1 Aviation Trust Fund Funding Sources ..........................................................................8-11 
Figure 8-2 FAA Funding ................................................................................................................8-12 
Figure 8-3 Historical AIP Authorization and Appropriation 1982-2009 ..........................................8-13 


                                                   TABLE OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Taxiway Summary...........................................................................................................2-4 
Table 2-2 Public Parking Facilities ................................................................................................2-12 
Table 2-3 Airport-Owned ARFF and Emergency Response Equipment ......................................2-16 
Table 3-1 Tennessee and Georgia Commercial Airport Rankings ..................................................3-2 
Table 3-2 Distance to Regional Airports..........................................................................................3-4 
Table 3-3 History of Airlines Serving the Airport .............................................................................3-4 
Table 3-4 Airlines Serving Regional Airports ...................................................................................3-5 
Table 3-5 Primary Hub Airports .......................................................................................................3-6 
Table 3-6 Airline Market Share........................................................................................................3-7 
Table 3-7 Historical Enplanements .................................................................................................3-8 
Table 3-8 Historical Operations .....................................................................................................3-10 
Table 3-9 Historical and Demographic Information .......................................................................3-14 
Table 3-10 Share of Employment by Business Type ....................................................................3-15 
Table 3-11 Largest Manufacturing Employers in the MSA ............................................................3-16 
Table 3-12 Largest Non-Manufacturing Employers in the MSA ....................................................3-16 
Table 3-13 Market Share Analysis ................................................................................................3-21 
Table 3-14 Trend Analysis ............................................................................................................3-24 
Table 3-15 Regression Analysis....................................................................................................3-26 
Table 3-16 Summary Output of a Regression Analysis ................................................................3-27 
Table 3-17 FAA 2008 Terminal Area Forecast..............................................................................3-29 
Table 3-18 Indexed TAF................................................................................................................3-31 
Table 3-19 Summary of Enplaned Passenger Forecasts ..............................................................3-33 
Table 3-20 Preferred Enplanement Forecast ................................................................................3-35 
Table 3-21 Boeing Global Air Cargo Forecasts.............................................................................3-38 
Table 3-22 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport's Total Cargo (Short Tons) 1997-2006 ..................3-39 
Table 3-23 Total Cargo by Carrier (Pounds) July 2007 .................................................................3-39 
Table 3-24 Total Cargo Market Share by Carrier July 2007 ..........................................................3-39 
Table 3-25 Principal U.S. Domestic Fleets for Chattanooga Integrated Carriers ..........................3-40 
Table 3-26 Regional and Peer Group Airports Cargo Tonnage (Short Tons) 1997-2006 .............3-41 
Table 3-27 Monthly Freight Totals (Pounds) Transported by Freighters in 2007 ..........................3-44 
Table 3-28 2007 Monthly Freighter Landings ................................................................................3-44 
Table 3-29 Air Cargo Forecast (Short Tons) - "Base Case" 2007-2027........................................3-45 
Table 3-30 Cargo Tonnage (Short Tons) Forecast – “High Case” ................................................3-46 
Table 3-31 Based Aircraft Forecast...............................................................................................3-47 
Table 3-32 FAA TAF Operations Forecast ....................................................................................3-49 
Table 3-33 Historical Commercial Operations ...............................................................................3-51 

Table of Contents                                                 TOC-vii                                                 FINAL REPORT
                                                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                           Master Plan Update




Table 3-34 Commercial Operations Forecast ...............................................................................3-52 
Table 3-35 Forecast of General Aviation and Military Operations .................................................3-54 
Table 3-36 Total Operations Forecast...........................................................................................3-55 
Table 3-37 Primary Instrument Operations ...................................................................................3-57 
Table 3-38 Summary of Total Instrument Operations ...................................................................3-58 
Table 3-39 Monthly Distribution of Annual Enplanements ............................................................3-60 
Table 3-40 Monthly Distribution of Annual Total Operations .........................................................3-61 
Table 3-41 Design Day/Design Hour for the Selected Commercial Passenger Forecast .............3-62 
Table 3-42 Comparison of the FAA 2008 TAF and the Preferred Enplanement Forecast ...........3-64 
Table 3-43 Comparison of FAA 2008 TAF and the Preferred Total Operations Forecast ............3-65 
Table 3-44 Comparison of FAA 2007 TAF and the Preferred Based Aircraft Forecast ................3-66 
Table 3-45 Summary Comparison of the Preferred Forecast to FAA 2008 TAF ...........................3-68 
Table 3-46 Forecast Levels, Growth Rates, and Operational Factors ..........................................3-69 
Table 3-47 Summary of the Selected Forecast .............................................................................3-73 
Table 4-1 Aircraft Classifications .....................................................................................................4-4 
Table 4-2 Aircraft Operational Fleet ................................................................................................4-5 
Table 4-3 Peak Hour Airfield Capacity ............................................................................................4-7 
Table 4-4 Aircraft Approach Category and Airplane Design Group ................................................4-8 
Table 4-5 Airport Reference Code Groups of Aircraft .....................................................................4-9 
Table 4-6 Runway Dimensional Criteria ........................................................................................4-10 
Table 4-7 Runway Protection Zone Dimensions ...........................................................................4-11 
Table 4-8 Low Cost Carrier Hubs and Aircraft Fleet .....................................................................4-12 
Table 4-9 Distances Between Chattanooga and Selected Destinations .......................................4-13 
Table 4-10 Aircraft Runway Length Requirements .......................................................................4-14 
Table 4-11 Runway Declared Distances .......................................................................................4-16 
Table 4-12 Runway Pavement Design Strength ...........................................................................4-17 
Table 4-13 Aircraft Impacts on Runway Pavement .......................................................................4-17 
Table 4-14 Runway Designations .................................................................................................4-19 
Table 4-15 Taxiway Dimensional Criteria......................................................................................4-20 
Table 4-16 Electronic and Satellite Aids to Navigation..................................................................4-21 
Table 4-17 Visual Aids to Navigation ............................................................................................4-22 
Table 4-18 Existing Commercial Service Aircraft Parking Positions .............................................4-23 
Table 4-19 Enplanements per Gate Methodology.........................................................................4-23 
Table 4-20 Departures per Gate Methodology ..............................................................................4-23 
Table 4-21 Increase in Gates Based on Percent of Increase in Annual Operations .....................4-24 
Table 4-22 Gates Based on Projected Schedules ........................................................................4-24 
Table 4-23 Recommended Number of Gates ...............................................................................4-25 
Table 4-24 Aircraft Fleet Mix per Planning Period Based on Projected Schedules ......................4-25 
Table 4-25 Forecast of Required Gate by Aircraft Design Group .................................................4-26 
Table 4-26 Gate Apron Area and Terminal Frontage per Planning Period ...................................4-26 
Table 4-27 Summary of Existing and Forecast Commercial Service Terminal Areas ...................4-28 
Table 4-28 Existing Departure Lounge Capacity...........................................................................4-29 
Table 4-29 Forecast of Departure Lounges ..................................................................................4-30 
Table 4-30 Forecast of Check-In Positions ...................................................................................4-31 
Table 4-31 Forecast of Baggage Claim Facilities ..........................................................................4-32 
Table 4-32 Forecast of Passenger Screening Security Checkpoint Facilities ...............................4-33 
Table 4-33 200 Persons per Hour Federal Inspection Facilities ...................................................4-34 
Table 4-34 Existing Terminal Curbs ..............................................................................................4-35 
Table 4-35 Forecast of Terminal Curbs.........................................................................................4-35 
Table 4-36 Key Commercial Service Passenger Terminal Area Trigger Points ............................4-36 
Table 4-37 Forecast of Based Aircraft...........................................................................................4-37 

Table of Contents                                                TOC-viii                                                 FINAL REPORT
                                                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                             Master Plan Update




Table 4-38 Forecast of Conventional Hangar Space and Apron ...................................................4-38 
Table 4-39 Forecast of T-Hangar Space and Aprons ...................................................................4-38 
Table 4-40 Forecast of Based Aircraft Tie-Down Areas ................................................................4-39 
Table 4-41 Forecast of Itinerant Aircraft Parking Areas ................................................................4-39 
Table 4-42 Forecast of Second FBO Conventional Hangar Space and Apron .............................4-41 
Table 4-43 Forecast of Additional T-Hangars, Area, and Apron ...................................................4-41 
Table 4-44 Forecast of Second FBO Based Aircraft Tie-Down Areas ..........................................4-42 
Table 4-45 Forecast of Second FBO Itinerant Aircraft Parking Positions .....................................4-42 
Table 4-46 Potential FBO Administration, Pilot, and Passenger Facilities ....................................4-43 
Table 4-47 Second FBO Automobile Parking Spaces ..................................................................4-44 
Table 4-48 Summary of Facilities for a Second FBO ....................................................................4-44 
Table 4-49 Planning Guidelines for Air Cargo Terminals ..............................................................4-47 
Table 4-50 Planning Guidelines for Air Cargo Ramp ....................................................................4-47 
Table 4-51 Total Fuel Storage Facilities ........................................................................................4-50 
Table 4-52 Fuel Storage Capacity for a Second FBO ...................................................................4-52 
Table 4-53 Existing and Recommended Terminal Roadway Capacities ......................................4-55 
Table 4-54 Peak Hour Vehicles on Terminal Roadway System ....................................................4-55 
Table 4-55 Parking Supply ............................................................................................................4-56 
Table 4-56 Airline Market Share....................................................................................................4-57 
Table 4-57 Parking Occupancy - Public Lots ................................................................................4-59 
Table 4-58 Public Parking Demand Projections ............................................................................4-60 
Table 4-59 Parking Occupancy - Employee Lot ............................................................................4-62 
Table 4-60 Employee Parking Demand Projections ......................................................................4-63 
Table 4-61 Rental Car Spaces ......................................................................................................4-63 
Table 4-62 Rental Car Ready/Return Parking Demand Projections .............................................4-64 
Table 4-63 Daily Commercial Vehicle Trips ..................................................................................4-66 
Table 4-64 Parking Supply/Demand Summary .............................................................................4-67 
Table 4-65 Parking Requirements in Acres...................................................................................4-68 
Table 4-66 Summary of Facility Requirements .............................................................................4-69 
Table 5-1 Existing Runway Declared Distances .............................................................................5-4 
Table 5-2 Proposed Runway Declared Distances...........................................................................5-5 
Table 5-3 Airport Element Alternatives..........................................................................................5-41 
Table 5-4 Airport Development Concept One Airport Elements ....................................................5-45 
Table 5-5 Airport Development Concept Two Airport Elements ....................................................5-49 
Table 5-6 Airport Development Concept Three Airport Elements .................................................5-53 
Table 5-7 Evaluation of Terminal/Parking Alternatives .................................................................5-55 
Table 5-8 Evaluation of Second FBO Alternatives .......................................................................5-56 
Table 5-9 Evaluation of Conventional Hangar Alternatives ...........................................................5-57 
Table 5-10 Evaluation of T-Hangar Alternatives ...........................................................................5-58 
Table 5-11 Evaluation of Air Cargo Alternatives ...........................................................................5-59 
Table 5-12 Recommended Alternative Airport Elements ..............................................................5-63 
Table 7-1 Short-Term Capital Improvement Program Costs in 2009 Dollars ................................7-19 
Table 7-2 Medium-Term Capital Improvement Program Costs in 2009 Dollars ............................7-20 
Table 7-3 Long-Term Capital Improvement Program Costs in 2009 Dollars ................................7-21 
Table 7-4 Total Capital Improvement Program Costs in 2009 Dollars ..........................................7-21 
Table 8-1 FY 2010 Airline Rates and Charges................................................................................8-3 
Table 8-2 Avis Rentals ....................................................................................................................8-4 
Table 8-3 Budget Rentals................................................................................................................8-4 
Table 8-4 Enterprise Rentals...........................................................................................................8-4 
Table 8-5 Hertz Rentals ..................................................................................................................8-5 
Table 8-6 National Rentals ..............................................................................................................8-5 

Table of Contents                                                  TOC-ix                                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                              Master Plan Update




Table 8-7 Additional Agreements and Leases ................................................................................8-6 
Table 8-8 Short-Term Development Period ....................................................................................8-7 
Table 8-9 Medium-Term Development Period ................................................................................8-7 
Table 8-10 Long-Term Development Period ...................................................................................8-8 
Table 8-11 Additional Capital Improvements ..................................................................................8-8 
Table 8-12 Recommended Alternative and Costs.........................................................................8-17 
Table 8-13 Additional CIP Projects ...............................................................................................8-18 
Table 8-14 Short-Term Capital Projects Funding Plan ..................................................................8-23 
Table 8-15 Medium-Term Capital Projects Funding Plan .............................................................8-24 
Table 8-16 Long-Term Capital Projects Funding Plan ..................................................................8-25 
Table 8-17 Short-Term Capital Projects Local Funding Plan ........................................................8-29 
Table 8-18 Unrestricted Cash Reserves .......................................................................................8-30 
Table 8-19 Medium-Term Capital Projects Local Funding Plan ....................................................8-31 
Table 8-20 Long-Term Capital Projects Local Funding Plan.........................................................8-32 
Table 8-21 Medium and Long Term Capital Projects Bond Sizing................................................8-36 
Table 8-22 Medium and Long-Term Capital Projects Allocation of Debt Service .........................8-37 
Table 8-23 Medium and Long-Term Capital Projects Debt Service Funding Sources ..................8-38 
Table 8-24 Historical Revenues and Expenses ............................................................................8-39 
Table 8-25 Pro Forma Cash Flow .................................................................................................8-43 
Table 8-26 Projected Airline Cost per Enplaned Passenger .........................................................8-44 
Table 8-27 Debt Service - 2009 Bonds .........................................................................................8-47 


                                                 TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                           (Volume 2 of 2)

                                                         APPENDICES

A. Glossary of Terms, Acronyms and Abbreviations ..................................................................... A-1
B. Public Involvement Program...................................................................................................... B-1
  B.1 Technical Advisory Committee and User’s Group Members
  B.2 Technical Advisory Committee Presentations and Meeting Minutes
  B.3 Users Group Presentations and Meeting Minutes
  B.4 Public Information Workshop Boards, Public Comments, and Sign-In Sheets
  B.5 Public Information Workshop Boards, Public Comments, and Sign-In Sheets
C. Aviation Forecast Data .............................................................................................................. C-1
D. Aircraft Takeoff Weight Calculations ......................................................................................... D-1
E. Detailed passenger Terminal Area Requirements..................................................................... E-1
F. Projected Airline Schedules....................................................................................................... F-1
G. Cost Estimates ..........................................................................................................................G-1




Table of Contents                                                   TOC-x                                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




                                         INTRODUCTION
The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority (CMAA) owns, operates, and maintains the
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport (Airport), located in Chattanooga Tennessee. The Airport
provides commercial air transportation, General Aviation (GA), cargo, and other aviation related
services to southeast Tennessee and north Georgia.

In May of 2007, CMAA selected Reynolds, Smith and Hills, Inc, (RS&H) as the Prime Consultant to
prepare an update to the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport’s 2002 Airport Master Plan. CMAA
determined the update was necessary to direct future development at the Airport because of
increased passengers, landside parking constraints, cargo infrastructure, environmental issues,
and the need for considering long-term expansion alternatives of the Airport’s facilities and
infrastructure.

Presented in this airport master plan update are an evaluation of the Airport’s existing facilities and
an identification of actions recommended to meet the current and future air transportation needs of
the region. The overall update process involved individual study elements that provided detailed
examinations of the existing Airport infrastructure and operating methodologies.

The study format followed in this airport master plan update is consistent with the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) suggested format as described in Advisory Circular 150/5070-6B, Airport
Master Plans. This airport master plan update contains the following chapters:

    Public Involvement Program – Encourages information sharing and collaboration, and identify
     the key issues of various stakeholders.
    Existing Conditions – A gathering of pertinent data for use in subsequent plan elements.
    Aviation Forecasts – Forecasts of future levels of aviation activity are the basis for the
     determination of the need for new or expanded facilities.
    Facility Requirements – The determination of what, if any, additional facilities will be required to
     accommodate the forecast activity by assessing the ability of the existing facilities to meet
     current and future demand and, if they cannot, determine the additional facilities required.
    Development and Evaluation of Alternatives – Identification and evaluation of alternatives for
     meeting the needs of the airport users, as well as the strategic vision of the airport sponsor.
    Airport Layout Plan Set – The preparation of drawings that make up the Airport Layout Plan
     (ALP), which is a graphic representation of the current and future airport facilities as
     determined from the review of the aviation forecasts, facility requirements, and alternatives
     analysis.
    Facilities Implementation Plan – Provides guidance on how to implement the findings and
     recommendations of the planning effort typically including a schedule, a listing of key projects,
     project descriptions, timing of key activities, estimated development costs, interrelated projects,
     and special considerations..
    Financial Feasibility Analysis – Identifies potential funding sources and demonstrates the
     airport sponsors ability to fund the projects in the master plan with particular emphasis on the
     projects expected to be implemented in the near term.




Introduction                                         i                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                         Master Plan Update




In addition to the components noted above, various appendices are provided to supplement the
text as appropriate. The appendices include a glossary of terms used in the master plan update
and meeting minutes of the Public Involvement Program, as well as supplemental data.




Introduction                                   ii                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




                                     CHAPTER 1
                           PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM
1.1       INTRODUCTION

A public involvement program is an essential part of the Master Plan Update as it will encourage
information sharing and collaboration. Involved parties include:
 The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport
 The users
 Tenants
 Resource agencies
 Elected and appointed public officials
 Residents
 Travelers
 The public

Collectively, these various groups form the stakeholders who have an interest in the outcome of
the study. An effective public involvement program should provide these stakeholders with an
early opportunity to comment, before major decisions are made; provide adequate notice of
opportunities for their involvement; and should provide for regular forums throughout the study.

1.2       COMMITTEES

Two committees assisted the Airport and the Master Plan Team throughout the Master Plan
process:
    The Technical Advisory Committee
    The User’s Group

The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) was responsible for providing input and insight on
detailed operating and facilities issues as they pertained to the Airport and specific elements of the
Master Plan Update. They evaluated the Master Plan Update on its technical merits. This
committee was made up of local and regional planning organizations, the Tennessee Department
of Transportation (TNDOT), and the Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) personnel, among others.

The User’s Group was made up primarily of community leaders and served as a sounding board
and information exchange group for the stakeholders. This committee weighed recommendations
made in the Master Plan Update against community goals, values, and needs. Both committees
reviewed the planning team’s plans and proposals and interacted with the planning team members
during the review. The User’s Group also made consensus recommendations to the planning
team and gave its recommendation on the finished plan to the Airport. Both committees were
advisory and had no decision making power of their own. A complete list of the participants of
each committee can be found in Appendix B.

1.3       PUBLIC INFORMATION WORKSHOPS

Two Public Information Workshops were held during the course of the Master Plan Update. The
purpose of these meetings was to inform the public of the process and the progress made. Further
goals were to obtain public response and input and to coordinate planning objectives with the




      Public Involvement                       1-1                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update



needs and concerns of local community organizations and the public at large in a timely fashion, so
as to enhance public acceptance of the study’s findings and recommendations.

Each Public Information Workshop was held in an informal “open house” format with interactive
information stations staffed by knowledgeable Airport staff or members of the planning team. This
permitted the public and other stakeholders to visit the meeting site at their convenience and visit
with planners on a one-to-one basis. Information could be exchanged and the public was given the
opportunity to record their views, opinions and concerns either in writing or verbally.

1.4       TIMING

The first meeting with the Technical Advisory Committee was held shortly after the commencement
of the Master Plan Update on September 7, 2007. The first meeting of the User’s Group and the
second meeting of the TAC took place after data on the existing conditions at the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport had been collected and documented and the Aviation Forecasts had been
developed and submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for review and approval.
Each committee met separately, but on the same day, January 17, 2008.

The next meeting of both committees took place on the same day as the first Public Workshop,
May 11, 2009. These meetings occurred after the FAA approved the Aviation Forecasts, Facility
Requirements were developed, and Alternatives had been developed to address facility
deficiencies identified in the Facility Requirements. Both committees and the public were informed
of the progress made to that point and their opinions and ideas were sought and recorded. Only
after these opinions and ideas had been received, reviewed, and addressed were the Alternatives
evaluated and a recommended alternative selected.

The last meetings of the committees and the second Public Information Workshop will take place
after the recommended alternative has been selected, refined, and translated into specific Airport
Layout Plans. An Implementation Plan complete with scheduling, phasing, and preliminary costing
and funding will have been developed. Each of these will be reviewed with the committees and the
public and their views and concerns will be recorded and addressed prior to the completion of the
Master Plan Update.

Meeting minutes of the TAC and User’s Group as well as documentation of the Public Information
Workshops will be found in Appendix B, which will be updated as future meetings take place.

1.5       ISSUES

A preliminary list of key issues to be addressed in the Airport Master Plan Update was developed
by the Airport staff. These issues were reviewed with the Technical Advisory Committee in their
meeting of September 7, 2007 and additional issues were identified and consolidated with the
preliminary list. This resulted in the following issues to be addressed by the Master Plan Update:

   Provide realistic parking solutions to provide sufficient passenger vehicular parking.
   Develop a consolidated, efficient plan for general aviation activities that will allow them the
    maximum potential to grow, while not adversely affecting other Airport activities.
   Identify the issues causing flooding in certain areas of the Airport and develop plans to improve
    the drainage of these areas.




      Public Involvement                        1-2                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update



   Determine and evaluate the prospects for cargo expansion at the Airport and develop plans for
    the conditions and resources required to attract significant cargo operations.
   Create a plan for the Airport to remain an efficient user-friendly airport, while implementing
    capacity to meet aviation demands and the needs of the community to the year 2026.
   Create a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that identifies funded projects, unfunded projects,
    priorities, and potential sources of funds.
   Provide clear justification of CIP projects.
   Meet FAA design, safety, and security standards for the entire Airport.
This Master Plan Update will address these issues in detail, and discuss practical solutions that will
allow the Airport to sustain further growth during the planning period

Each of the Airport Development Concepts was presented to the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport
Authority, the Technical Advisory Committee, and the User’s Group and their comments were
solicited. The Airport Development Concepts were also presented to the public in the First Public
Information Workshop.

1.6       PUBLIC MEETINGS OF MAY 11, 2009

On May 11, 2009, three Public Involvement meetings were held with respect to the Chattanooga
Master Plan Update. The three meetings were with the Technical Advisory Committee, the User’s
Group, and the first public Information Workshop. At each meeting, the participants were updated
on the progress of the study and were shown alternatives for the long-term, 20-year development
of the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. Comments from the public and each of the committees
were solicited. Meeting minutes of the Technical Advisory Committee and the User’s Group can be
found in Appendix B. Written comments from the Public Information Workshop can also be found
in Appendix B.

1.6.1     User’s Group Comments on the Airport Development Concepts

Within the User’s Group, the comments and questions were more broad and general in nature.
However, in general the User’s Group was receptive to the idea of upgrading those areas of the
Airport that adjoin Brainerd Road/Lee Highway. Meeting minutes of the User’s Group Meeting can
be found in Appendix B.

It was stated that rather than a mounted Cessna jet at the Jubilee Drive entrance that something
coming from the Art in Public Places program would be preferred. The Airport staff indicated that it
was anticipated that the jet would be donated.

Suggestions were made to move the parking garage in Terminal Alternative 2 to the north to avoid
blocking the view of the terminal from Airport Road. It was also felt that the railroad line that runs
east of the Airport and in front of the Airport terminal should connect to downtown Chattanooga.

1.6.2     The Technical Advisory Group Comments on the Airport Development Concepts

The Technical Advisory Group (TAC) had some very specific comments and suggestions to make
concerning the various Airport Development Concepts and specific alternatives. Meeting minutes
for the Technical Advisory Committee can also be found in Appendix B.




      Public Involvement                           1-3                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




The air traffic controllers were concerned about the height of the maintenance center. It was
cautioned that when planning and designing the facility that line of sight issues with respect to the
runway ends, taxiways, and aprons should be studied very carefully.

Of the T-hangar alternatives, the TAC preferred T-hangar Alternative Two and T-hangar Alternative
Four. With these two alternatives, it was felt that the air traffic controllers would have better
visibility between the buildings than with T-hangar Alternative Five.

Of the air cargo alternatives, Air Cargo Alternative One and Air Cargo Alternative Three were
preferred. It was felt that Air Cargo Alternative Two would need a lot of work done to the apron
and that the apron would have to be made deeper to serve cargo adequately. Of Air Cargo
Alternatives One and Three, it was appreciated that the cargo trucks could travel down Jubilee
Drive to a stoplight at Brainerd Road, and could then travel directly to Interstate 75.

1.6.3     Public Information Workshop Number One

Comments were received in two ways from the Public Information Workshop: comment cards that
could be filled out at the meeting or mailed in later, and comments could and were e-mailed to the
planning team members. In general, the comments mainly concerned the interface of the Airport
and the surrounding neighborhoods. Some comments are summarized in this section. All
comments received in writing from the Public Information Workshop can be found in Appendix B.

Concern was expressed over the existing noise from C-130 military training flights. Another
concern was that an increase in the number of air cargo flights would generate more noise.

Positive comments were received with respect to the proposed greenways, especially the Southern
Greenway. It was felt that this change would markedly improve the appearance of the
neighborhood.

Concern was also expressed about the possibility of increased Airport related vehicular traffic on
Brainerd Road and Lee Highway. It was felt that there was already too much traffic on this road.

1.7       PUBLIC INFORMATION WORKSHOP OF JUNE 1, 2010

On June 1, 2010, a second Public Information Workshop was held at the Brainerd Crossings
community center to update the public on the progress of the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport
Master Plan Update and to solicit comments. As the public entered the room in which the meeting
was held, they were invited to view a short PowerPoint presentation that explained what a Master
Plan is, the Goals and Objectives of this Master Plan Update, and a short synopsis of the first
Public Information Workshop. After the PowerPoint, there were a number of boards set up on
easels illustrating the Recommended Alternative, breaking it into phases and individual projects,
and presenting cost estimates and probable funding sources for each of the individual projects.

The public was invited to give written comments in one of three ways. First, comment cards were
provided that could be submitted that evening. Second, the comment cards could be taken home
and mailed. Third, e-mails to the consultant could be sent within a period of about ten days.
Written comments from the Public Information Workshop, as well as copies of the PowerPoint
presentation and the Presentation Boards can be found in Appendix B.




      Public Involvement                       1-4                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




                                          CHAPTER 2
                                     EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1       INTRODUCTION

The Existing Conditions chapter documents the existing conditions of the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport and identifies the area it serves. The material in this chapter provides
essential background information for the Master Plan. The objective is to provide background
information for subsequent phases of the analysis. This information was obtained through on-site
investigations of the Airport, as well as interviews with Airport management, fixed base operators,
and tenants. Other sources are the collection and analyses of Airport data, previous reports, and
studies. The pertinent data presented here provides information associated with the following:

     Airport Background
     Airfield/Airspace
     Commercial Passenger Terminal Area
     General Aviation Facilities
     Cargo Facilities
     Support Facilities
     Regional Setting and Land-use
     Environmental Overview

2.2       BACKGROUND

The first scheduled air carrier operation in Tennessee took place in Chattanooga in 1928 at Marr
Field, located off the Amnicola Highway. Chattanooga was a stopover on the Contract Air Mail
route served by Interstate Airlines between Atlanta, Georgia and Chicago, Illinois. Soon, in 1930,
due to the interest and foresight of John Lovell, a new Chattanooga Airport was established with an
unpaved runway at its present location and was named Lovell Field in his honor. In 1936, the
landing area was expanded and runways paved as a part of the New Deal’s Works Progress
Administration (WPA). The original terminal building was also built at that time and expanded in
1950 and 1955 by the City of Chattanooga before being replaced by a new terminal building in
1964. That terminal was replaced approximately 30 years later by the current commercial
passenger terminal.

Lovell Field served as a military training facility throughout World War II. Post-war growth in
aviation in the 1950s led to a transfer of its operations to the City of Chattanooga and significant
airport expansion with construction of a new runway, which serves as the primary runway today.

The Airport ownership was transferred from the City of Chattanooga to the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport Authority (CMAA) in July of 1985. The Tennessee Metropolitan Airport
Authority Act1 provides that the CMAA’s basic operations be governed by the terms set forth in the
Metropolitan Airport Authority Act, as well as by the CMAA by-laws. As a separate legal entity, the
CMAA is authorized to adopt operating procedures, policies, and requirements separate from
those in use by the City of Chattanooga and to establish and charge fees, rentals, and other
charges. Federal airport grant assurances (49 U.S.C. 47107(a) (13)), require airports that accept
federal money to be as self-sustaining as possible. Because the CMAA does not receive local tax

1
    Metropolitan Airport Authority Act, Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 42-4-101, as amended

Existing Conditions                                  2-1                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




dollars, it must raise money through other means. This is done through contracts, licenses,
permits, and leases issued both for aeronautical and non-aeronautical airport purposes, and
through fees charged to offset the cost of regulation of certain activities.

The Board of the CMAA consists of nine commissioners. The City of Chattanooga appoints all
Airport Authority Board members. The day-to-day management of the Airport is carried out through
the President of the CMAA and a staff of aviation professionals.

2.3       AIRFIELD/AIRSPACE

The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport’s airfield facilities include the runways, taxiways, apron
areas, visual aids, and navigational aids. These airfield assets are operable within an aeronautical
environment associated with the local, regional, and national system of airports. The aeronautical
environment includes the surrounding airspace and the aeronautical activity that takes place within
the airspace, including arrival and departure procedures. The following sections provide a
description of the airfield and airspace associated with the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport.

2.3.1     Runway 2-20

The dimensions and characteristics of a runway are dependent on the aircraft that use the airport
and the design standards associated with those types of aircraft. The orientation of the runways
depends on the direction of the prevailing wind patterns, the size and shape of the area available
for development, and the land-use or airspace restrictions near the airport.

The primary runway at the Airport, based upon predominant runway use, is Runway 2-20, which
has a length of 7,400 feet and a width of 150 feet, as shown in Figure 2-1. The runway pavement is
grooved asphalt and is in good condition, based on the 2005 Pavement Study conducted by
Dynatest. The runway is equipped with centerline lights, as well as High Intensity Runway Lights
(HIRL) and has precision instrument markings on both ends.

The approach lighting consists of a Medium Intensity Approach Lighting System with Runway
Alignment Indicator Lights (MALSR) on the Runway 2 end. The Runway 20 end is equipped with a
High Intensity Approach Lighting System with Sequenced Flashing Lights. The Runway 2 end also
has a Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI) to assist landing aircraft.

2.3.2     Runway 15-33

The crosswind runway is Runway 15-33, which has a length of 5,575 feet and a width of 150 feet.
The pavement is in excellent condition as a runway rehabilitation and extension have recently been
completed. The runway is equipped with Medium Intensity Runway Lights (MIRL) and has non-
precision instrument markings on both ends. The Runway 15 end is equipped with a PAPI, while
the Runway 33 end is equipped with a PAPI to assist landing aircraft.

2.3.3     Navigational Aids

Navigational aids (NAVAIDs) assist the pilot with enroute navigation and approaches into and
departures out of airports. These aids consist of both ground–based electronic systems and a
space-based radio system.




Existing Conditions                              2-2                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                         Master Plan Update




    Source: G-Squared Mapping                                                                          N




                                                                                       Figure 2-1
                                                                                                     i
                                                                                AIRPORT LAYOUT
NAVAIDs in use at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport include two Instrument Landing Systems
(ILS), a Runway Visual Range (RVR) transmissometer, a segmented circle with a lighted wind


Existing Conditions                          2-3                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




cone, and the Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-8). A Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range
(VOR) facility is located approximately five miles southeast of the airfield and serves aircraft
utilizing the Airport.

2.3.4     Taxiway System

The primary function of a taxiway system is to provide access between runways and the apron
areas. Taxiway A serves as a parallel taxiway to Runway 2-20. The taxiway provides access from
the commercial passenger terminal area to both the Runway 2 end and the Runway 20 end and is
in good condition. Taxiway D serves as a full parallel taxiway to Runway 15-33 and is in good
condition.

There are several exit taxiways used to access both the commercial passenger terminal area as
well as provide access for the Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility. A description of
each taxiway is provided in Table 2-1.

                                              Table 2-1
                                         TAXIWAY SUMMARY
                                                                  Pavement
                            Taxiway            Width              Condition
                        Taxiway A                     60 ft.              Good
                        Taxiway B                     75 ft.              Good
                        Taxiway C                     60 ft.              Good
                        Taxiway D                     60 ft.           Excellent
                        Taxiway E                     60 ft.                Fair
                        Taxiway F             75 ft./ 60 ft.              Good
                        Taxiway G             75 ft./ 60 ft.              Good
                        Taxiway H                     75 ft.           Excellent
                        Taxiway J                     60 ft.           Excellent
                        Taxiway K                     60 ft.                Fair
                        Taxiway Z                     60 ft.           Excellent
                        Source: Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, 2007 and 2005
                        Pavement Study, Dynatest

2.3.5     Apron Areas

The air carrier apron serving the commercial passenger terminal concourse is constructed of
concrete and is in good condition. The apron area totals approximately 225,000 square yards.

The apron area just north of the air carrier apron is known as TAC Air North. TAC Air, a division of
Truman Arnold Companies, is the Fixed Base Operator (FBO) at the Airport. The TAC Air North
apron is of asphalt construction and is in fair condition. It is approximately 98,000 square yards in
size and primarily serves general aviation aircraft.

Directly south of the air carrier apron is the apron area known as TAC Air South. This apron is of
concrete construction and in good condition. It is approximately 62,000 square yards in size and
primarily serves general aviation aircraft.

Further to the south is located a combination cargo and general aviation apron that is of concrete
construction and in poor condition. The area of the apron used for cargo totals approximately
30,000 square yards, while the general aviation portion totals approximately 150,000 square yards.



Existing Conditions                                 2-4                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




There are several smaller apron areas on the west side of the airfield. These include the ARFF
apron that is approximately 34,000 square yards in size and is in excellent condition. There are
also two general aviation aprons that total approximately 45,000 square yards in size. Both aprons
are in excellent condition.

2.3.6     Airspace Environment

The national airspace system consists of various classifications of airspace that are regulated by
the FAA. Airspace classification is necessary to ensure the safety of all aircraft using the facilities.
The primary function of airspace classification is to separate air traffic. The airspace associated
with Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is depicted on the Atlanta Sectional Aeronautical Chart
shown in Figure 2-2.

The airspace surrounding the Airport is designated as Class C airspace during the period of 6:00
am to 11:50 pm eastern standard time (EST). At all other times the airspace is designated as Class
E airspace. The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Class C airspace consists of a five nautical mile
(NM) radius around the airfield that extends from the surface up to 4,000 feet above ground level
(AGL) and a 10 NM radius shelf area that extends from various altitudes (due to the surrounding
terrain) up to 4,000 feet AGL. There exists an “outer area”, not depicted in Figure 2-2, which is
associated with the Airport’s Class C airspace and extends out for a 20 NM radius around the
Airport.

The Airport has a Federal Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) that operates during the 6:00 am to
11:50 pm EST period. Aircraft operating under both Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight
Rules (IFR) must maintain contact with the ATCT when operating within the Airport’s Class C
airspace. During the hours that the ATCT is not in operation, IFR traffic must maintain contact with
Atlanta Center.

There are several Victor airways near the Airport. A Victor airway serves as a sort of “highway in
the sky” between NAVAIDs that aircraft frequently use to navigate while enroute. While these
airways provide enroute navigation, navigational procedures between the Airport and the airways
themselves is provided by published instrument approaches and departure procedures. Airways
and associated NAVAIDs near the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport are depicted in Figure 2-2 and
Figure 2-3.

Instrument approaches and departures at the Airport are controlled through Chattanooga Approach
and Departure Control as well as Atlanta Center. All aircraft into and out of the Airport may also
utilize the services provided by the Nashville Flight Service Station (FSS). In addition, aircraft
enroute to, or near the Airport may receive pertinent weather information from the Automated
Surface Observing System (ASOS) station located on the airfield.

Several areas of “special use” airspace located east of the Airport include Alert Area A-685 and the
Snowbird Military Operations area. Alert areas are those areas that may contain a high volume of
pilot training or an unusual type of aerial activity, while a Military Operations Area allows for
separation between military activities and IFR operations.

2.3.7     Instrument Procedures

Instrument procedures associated with an airport can include standard terminal arrivals (STAR),
departure procedures (DP), and published instrument approach procedures.



Existing Conditions                                2-5                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




    Source: National Aeronautical Charting Office, 2006




                                                                                      Figure 2-2
                                                                CHATTANOOGA REGIONAL AIRSPACE


Existing Conditions                                       2-6                                 FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




         Source: National Aeronautical Charting Office, 2007


                                                                                         Figure 2-3
                                                          CHATTANOOGA LOW-ALTITUDE ENROUTE CHART



Existing Conditions                                        2-7                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




The instrument approach procedures are further classified as non-precision and precision
approaches. Non-precision approaches differ from precision approaches in that they provide only
horizontal guidance information, while precision instrument approaches provide both horizontal and
vertical guidance information. With the addition of vertical guidance information, precision
approaches enable aircraft operations in lower visibility and cloud ceilings. The Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport has both non-precision and precision approaches.

2.4       COMMERCIAL PASSENGER TERMINAL AREA

The Chattanooga Metropolitan commercial passenger terminal was completed in the early 1990s
and offers a modern, well-appointed, and well-maintained facility. The ground level accommodates
the ticketing lobby with approximately 30 check-in counters; office and operational space for the
five airlines that currently serve the Airport; a baggage claim facility that has two flat-bed baggage
claim devices; offices and counters for five rental car companies; and restrooms and offices for
some of the commercial passenger terminal functions.

2.4.1     Commercial Service Passenger Terminal

The public reaches the second level of the terminal via stairs, elevators and escalators located in
the rotunda lobby. The second level accommodates the offices of the Airport administration, a
restaurant concession, a gift shop, and a passenger waiting area. All of these functions are
located on the non-secure side of the Airport. The Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA)
passenger security screening checkpoint, which has one security lane, is also located on the
second level. On the secure side of the passenger-screening checkpoint, there are five departure
lounge areas with associated gates. There is also a business center, restrooms, and a small
snack-bar/newsstand in the secure area.

                                        Figure 2-4
                         COMMERCIAL PASSENGER TERMINAL FACILITY




Existing Conditions                               2-8                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




2.4.2     Access, Circulation, and Parking

Convenient, simple, and efficient access to the commercial passenger terminal is an integral part
of an airport system. Airport access consists of connecting roadways that enable airport users to
enter and exit the airport, on-airport circulation, and parking facilities.

Off-Airport Access Roads

Ease of passenger access to an airport is an important factor for airport customer service.
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is located near both Interstates 24 and 75, on the east side of
downtown Chattanooga. Interstate 24 predominantly runs southeast from Nashville to
Chattanooga, and then merges into Interstate 75. Interstate 75 runs north and south from Michigan
to the west coast of Florida, and is the main Interstate from Chattanooga to Atlanta, Georgia. US
11/64 (Lee Highway) runs west from the Airport to the downtown Chattanooga area, while State
Route 153 is located east of the Airport and runs north to meet US 27, approximately 10 miles
north of downtown. Figure 2-5 shows the regional highway network for the Chattanooga area.

Passenger access to the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is gained from State Road 153 located
west of the Airport via the Shepherd Road/Airport Connector Road. The Airport can also be
accessed directly from Airport Road, which constitutes the eastern boundary of the commercial
passenger terminal area. Figure 2-6 shows ground access in the immediate area of the Airport.

On-Airport Circulation

On-airport circulation consists of both public access roads and non-public airport service roads.
Access to the commercial passenger terminal and associated parking lots is provided via a two-
lane “loop road” accessed from both the Airport Connector Road and Airport Road. The short- and
long-term parking lots can be accessed from the left lane of the loop road, while both lanes
continue around the parking areas and to the terminal curbfront. The interim parking lot can be
accessed from the right lane of the loop road just prior to the commercial passenger terminal. Once
in front of the terminal, the loop road becomes four lanes that split into two groups of two to allow
through traffic to flow more easily. Past the terminal curbfront, the loop road once again narrows to
two lanes and provides access to the rental car ready/return spaces, as well as access back to
Shepherd Road via the Airport Connector Road and Airport Road. The traffic exiting the short-,
interim- and long-term parking lots are routed back onto the loop road.

Access to the TAC Air North FBO facility is provided via Airport Road, while access to TAC Air
South is provided from an un-named Airport road that is accessed from Airport Road. Access to the
general aviation and cargo facilities on the south side of the Airport is provided via Pinehurst Road,
which is accessed from Airport Road. General aviation facilities on the northwest side of the airfield
are accessed by way of the Lovell Field Loop via Airport Road. The ARFF facilities on the west
side of the airfield are accessed via a perimeter roadway, which can be accessed from Brainerd
Road and sits atop the Brainerd Levee.




Existing Conditions                               2-9                                        FINAL REPORT
                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                         Master Plan Update




                                                Figure 2-5
                              REGIONAL HIGHWAY NETWORK


Existing Conditions   2-10                              FINAL REPORT
                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                         Master Plan Update




                                                         Figure 2-6
                                                     VICINITY MAP


Existing Conditions   2-11                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




Airport Parking

An airport typically provides short- and long-term public parking facilities to accommodate
passenger demand. The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport also has an interim-term public parking
lot. The on-airport surface parking lots are operated by Republic Parking Systems. They are
located directly south and east of the commercial passenger terminal as shown in Figure 2-7.
Table 2-2 shows the current number of spaces and rates for the on-airport passenger parking
facilities.
                                                Table 2-2
                                       PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES
          Facility      Spaces                             Fee Structure
        Short-term         173    15 Minutes Free, $1.00 Each Additional 30 Minutes, $12.00 Per Day
        Interim            220    15 Minutes Free, Each Additional 30 Minutes $.75, $7.00 Day
        Long-term          739    $1.00 Hour, $7.00 Day
       Source: Republic Parking Systems, 2007

The public parking supply has been strained in recent years due to the rapid growth and popularity
of travel from the Airport. The long-term parking spaces are often 100 percent utilized during the
middle of the week and travelers must use inconvenient off-airport parking areas.

Recently, the Airport constructed a temporary, gravel parking lot south of the terminal parking
facilities. This lot is served by a shuttle operated by the Airport and has an additional 150 spaces
to those listed above. Airport employees were using 80 to 85 public parking spaces in the terminal
parking area, but are now required to park near the maintenance facility and take the shuttle to the
terminal.

Rental Car Facilities

Five on-airport rental car agencies and one off-site agency serve the Airport. The following
sections provide a brief description of each of the on-airport agencies.

AVIS
The Avis Rent A Car System currently has 21 employees that work at both the commercial
passenger terminal counter and the Quick Turn Around (QTA) facility located east of the terminal
area. Directly south of the commercial passenger terminal, Avis uses 22 ready/return spaces. The
QTA is a wash, and re-fueling facility that has approximately 150 auto storage spaces, one
automated wash facility, and a 10,000 gallon unleaded fuel tank. Avis also performs light
maintenance at this facility.

BUDGET
The Avis/Budget Group also operates the Budget Rent A Car franchise. Both Budget and Avis
utilize the same 21 employees, but have separate facilities. Budget operates an off-site QTA facility
located on nearby Sheppard Road and uses 12 ready/return spaces south of the commercial
passenger terminal building. The QTA facility includes one automated wash facility, a 2,500 gallon
unleaded fuel tank, and a 2,500-gallon diesel fuel tank.




Existing Conditions                                  2-12                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                              Master Plan Update




               Source: G-Squared Mapping
                                                                                     N




                                                                          Figure 2-7
                                                                                          i
                                                               ON-AIRPORT PARKING




Existing Conditions                        2-13                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update



ENTERPRISE
The Enterprise Rent-A-Car has four full-time employees, three part-time employees, and one
manager to run its on-airport operations. Enterprise uses 13 ready/return spaces and does not
store any additional cars nearby, but uses cars from its other locations. Fueling, light maintenance,
and automobile cleaning are all done at local gas stations and wash facilities not associated with
Enterprise.

HERTZ
The Hertz Corporation has 35 employees to run its on-airport operations at both the commercial
passenger terminal counter and their QTA facility located south of the long-term parking lot. Hertz
uses 27 ready/return spaces in the lot southeast of the terminal, and stores a small number of
additional cars at its QTA facility. The QTA facility includes one automatic car wash and a 10,000
gallon unleaded fuel tank.

NATIONAL
National Car Rental occupies 23 ready/return spaces in the terminal lot and has capacity for 100
automobiles in storage at its QTA facility located east of the Airport. No light maintenance is
performed at the QTA facility, but it does include an area to hand wash the automobiles, as well as
a 12,000 gallon unleaded fuel tank.

2.5       GENERAL AVIATION FACILITIES

Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is a full service airport providing facilities for the general aviation
sector, as well as the commercial passenger sector. The general aviation facilities at the Airport
are primarily located in two areas and consist of a fixed base operator, various buildings, hangars,
and apron space. All general aviation facilities at the Airport are generally located east of Runway
2/20 and north of Runway 15/33. A discussion of services provided, is in the following sections.

2.5.1     Fixed Base Operator

A Fixed Base Operator (FBO) is an airport business that provides aircraft services to pilots.
Services include, but are not limited to, the sale of fuel and oil; aircraft sales, rental, maintenance,
and repair; parking and tie-down or storage of aircraft; flight training; air taxi/charter operations;
and specialty services, such as instrument and avionics maintenance, painting, overhaul, aerial
application, aerial photography, aerial hoists, or pipeline patrol. TAC Air, a division of Texas-based
Truman Arnold Companies (TAC), under contract to the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport
Authority, provides parking space for transient aircraft, aircraft storage and tiedowns, aircraft
fueling, aircraft rental, and minimal air cargo services. Currently, the FBO operates out of two
conventional hangars, located north and south of the commercial passenger terminal, referred to
as TAC Air North and TAC Air South, respectively. These hangars are used for offices, pilots
lounges, lobbies, conference rooms, and the storage of aircraft. TAC Air is the only FBO on the
airfield, and they operate 23 T-hangars, which they lease to aircraft owners. TAC Air leases
buildings, numbered 19 and 21, which are sub-leased to Star Avionics, and building number 10,
which is used for storage.

TAC Air operates the fuel farm and their airfield crew fuel most of the GA aircraft that use the
Airport. The fuel farm consists of two 15,000-gallon storage tanks and two 20,000-gallon storage
tanks, all of which store Jet A fuel and are above ground. There is one underground 15,000-gallon




Existing Conditions                               2-14                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update



storage tank, which is used for Avgas. Approximately 262,000 gallons of Jet A fuel are dispensed
each month and 12,000 gallons of Avgas are dispensed each month.

2.5.2     Other General Aviation Facilities

Additional general aviation facilities located at the Airport include maintenance facilities, forestry
service facilities, and corporate hangars. Star Avionics at the south end of the airfield performs
general aviation maintenance at the Airport. Star Avionics performs airframe and power plant
maintenance, as well as conducts avionics sales, installation, and repair.

Directly to the north of the Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facilities is located the fire
fighting wing of the United States Forestry Service. The facility includes administration buildings
and apron areas to serve fire-fighting aircraft.

Several corporate hangars are located around the airfield including those associated with TAC Air.
There is a privately owned hangar located at the extreme northwest corner of the airfield. East of
this hangar is a second, privately owned hangar with associated fuel tanks and apron areas.
Several private companies occupy this hangar.

2.6       CARGO FACILITIES

The cargo facilities at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport include those facilities dedicated to all-
cargo operators, belly cargo operators, and integrated carriers. All-cargo facilities typically include
an aircraft-parking apron dedicated to the loading and unloading of aircraft. Belly cargo represents
cargo transported on board air carrier passenger aircraft, while integrated carriers refer to
companies such as FedEx, UPS, and DHL that provide door–to-door freight transfer via ground
and air.

Currently, there are two facilities on the Airport just west of the Air traffic Control Tower (ATCT) that
cargo operators use as shown in Figure 2-1. The two buildings total 22,400 square feet and
provide the necessary facilities for Mountain Air Cargo (FedEx) and ABX Air.

2.7       SUPPORT FACILITIES

Support facilities at an airport exist to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the airport. At
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, this encompasses a broad set of facilities including:

         The ATCT
         The ARFF facility
         Airport maintenance facilities
         Utilities

2.7.1     Air Traffic Control Tower

The FAA’s ATCT is a 111-foot structure located east of the cargo area on the southeast portion of
the airfield. The ATCT, built in 1983, is in operation from 6:00 AM to 11:50 PM EST. The facility is
served by an Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR) and provides Air Traffic Control (ATC) services to
those aircraft approaching, departing, and traversing the Airport’s Class C airspace.




Existing Conditions                                2-15                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                      Master Plan Update



2.7.2     Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting Facility

Air carrier airports are required under 14 CFR Part 139 to provide aircraft rescue and firefighting
services. The Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility crew conducts firefighting
operations and fire prevention services. More specifically, the ARFF provides emergency
assistance; inspection of fuel farms, fuel trucks, and commercial sites; and guidance regarding
compliance of FAA standards on safety, equipment, and training.

The ARFF Station at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is located on the west side of the airfield off
Taxiway H. The building contains equipment bays, office space, a watch/alarm room, and
dormitory facilities.

The Airport employs nine full time fire fighters and one fire chief. Two to three of these personnel
are on duty at all times.

Based on the 14 CFR Part 139 Section 315 regulations, air carrier airports are assigned an index
group based on the length of the longest air carrier aircraft that uses the airport regularly. The
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport must maintain vehicles, chemicals, and response items in
accordance with Index B requirements. The vehicles currently in operation at the ARFF station are
listed in Table 2-3.

                                             Table 2-3
                      AIRPORT-OWNED ARFF AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE EQUIPMENT
                                                       Water             Foam         Dry Chemical
                   Vehicle Manufacturer              (Gallons)         (Gallons)           (lbs.)
             Oshkosh Striker                               1,500                205               500
             Titan                                         1,500                205               500
             Ford (Rapid Response Vehicle)         Numerous fire extinguishers and other equipment
           Source: Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, 2007

                                                    Figure 2-8
                                                  ARFF FACILITY




Existing Conditions                                         2-16                                     FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




2.7.3     Airport Maintenance Facilities

The Airport owns and operates a variety of maintenance equipment used for snow removal, ground
maintenance, pavement and facilities maintenance, and other activities. Maintenance vehicles and
equipment are generally housed in two buildings on the southeast portion of the airfield adjacent to
the cargo facilities. The larger of the two buildings measures approximately 9,700 square feet,
while the smaller facility has approximately 1,600 square feet.

2.7.4     Utilities

The availability of electric power, gas, water, and sewer lines to an airport must be considered in
evaluating the existing utility conditions. The public water distribution and sanitary sewage system
are significant governmental responsibilities and capital investments. Natural gas and electricity
are normally provided by the private sector in most areas, but can also be government
responsibilities.

Water and Sanitary Sewer

Tennessee American Water provides water and sewer service. Both systems are served by a 12-
inch steel main line.

Natural Gas

Natural gas is provided to the Airport by Chattanooga Gas via a four-inch line located on the west
side of the airfield and a 2½ - inch line located on the east side of the airfield. Natural gas is used
for heating facilities around the airfield.

Electricity

Electricity is provided by the Electric Power Board via a 2000 and 3000 AMP feed which break
down to 220V and 440V feeds. This electrical power source serves all of the Airport’s facilities
including airfield lighting and NAVAID equipment.

2.8       REGIONAL SETTING AND LAND USE

Airport environmental and land use inventory items are provided in this section. The two sections
discuss first, airport land use, and second, airport height zoning.

2.8.1     Airport Land Use

It is important to understand the land use patterns around the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport in
order to determine possible impacts to surrounding areas because of future airport development.
Both existing and future land uses as anticipated by the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Regional
Planning Agency (CHCRPA) are provided in this section.

The existing land use and zoning for the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is designated as
Transportation by the CHCRPA. This is shown in Figure 2-9. The existing land use surrounding
the Airport mostly encompasses recreational use to the west of the Airport. Commercial,
residential, industrial and vacant land uses make up the majority of the land to the east and south



Existing Conditions                               2-17                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update



of the Airport. Industrial land uses comprise most of the land to the north of the Airport. All of
these land uses are believed compatible with the Airport.

The proposed land-uses changes to area adjacent to the Airport are shown in Figure 2-10. Where
the areas in Figure 2-10 are white, it indicates that the land-use is not proposed to change from the
existing. The land use of areas to the north and east of the Airport are proposed to become future
industrial areas, while land use to the south and west of the Airport are not expected to change in
the future. Areas to the east of the Airport are proposed to become commercial. These future land
uses are compatible with Airport operations.




Existing Conditions                              2-18                                        FINAL REPORT
                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                         Master Plan Update




                                                       Figure 2-9
                                             EXISTING LAND USE




Existing Conditions   2-19                              FINAL REPORT
                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                         Master Plan Update




                                                 Figure 2-10
                                 FUTURE LAND-USE CHANGES




Existing Conditions   2-20                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update



2.8.2     Airport Height Zoning Restrictions

All airports have a three-dimensional system of imaginary surfaces that identifies each airport’s
navigable airspace requirements as dictated by Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77. FAR
Part 77 establishes standards for determining obstructions and publishes the design criteria for use
in constructing the imaginary surfaces profile for each specific airport. The surfaces represent an
imaginary “bowl” of airspace centered on the airport with long approach surfaces extending up and
outward from each runway end. These imaginary surfaces surrounding the airport are also used to
analyze all existing, future and proposed tall structure construction as to their potential for creating
a hazard for aircraft operating at the airport. If a natural object (i.e. a tree) penetrates into these
surfaces, then it is recommended to be removed or modified. If the structure or obstacle
penetrating the imaginary surfaces as defined by FAR Part 77 cannot be easily removed or
modified, the FAA may extend a waiver and the structure will need to be identified by either
painting, installing an obstruction light, or both. The airport’s visibility approach minimums may
also be impacted (i.e. increased) due to any penetrations to the FAR Part 77 surfaces.

The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport has the imaginary surfaces mandated by FAR Part 77.
These are codified in the Airport Zoning Ordinance of the City of Chattanooga, which defines the
imaginary surfaces, the procedures for removal or marking of objects that penetrate the surfaces,
and the penalties associated with the violation of the surfaces.

2.9       ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW

Future development plans at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport should take into consideration
those environmental issues that are known to exist near the Airport. Early identification of such
environmental factors will greatly influence the evaluation of proposed alternatives and will assist in
avoiding or reducing the impact to these areas while planning the future development.

2.9.1     Floodplains

Consideration should be given to the location of the floodplains near the Airport when planning
future development. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has mapped the
floodplains located on and around the Airport. The maps depict Special Flood Hazard Areas
inundated by a 100-year flood as well as other flood areas, as shown in Figure 2-11. A significant
amount of area in and around the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is located within the 100-year
floodplain.

2.9.2     Wetlands

Future alternatives should also consider the location of wetland areas. The National Wetlands
Inventory maintains a database of wetland areas at or near the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport.


Figure 2-12 depicts wetland areas on and surrounding the Airport. These wetland areas primarily
consist of those associated with the South Chickamauga Creek to the west of the Airport.




Existing Conditions                               2-21                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                       Master Plan Update




      Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2007
                                                                                    Figure 2-11
                                                                              FLOODPLAIN MAP




Existing Conditions                                 2-22                              FINAL REPORT
                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                         Master Plan Update




                                                      Figure 2-12
                                                  WETLANDS MAP




Existing Conditions   2-23                              FINAL REPORT
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                            Master Plan Update
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




                                         CHAPTER 3
                                    AVIATION FORECASTS
3.1      INTRODUCTION

Aviation forecasts for the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport are presented in this chapter for the 20-
year planning period (2007-2027). Forecasts of aviation demand provide a basis for determining
the type, size, and timing of aviation facility development. Consequently, the forecasts influence
virtually all phases of the planning process.

Forecasting future activity involves both analytical techniques and subjective considerations.
Regardless of the methodology used, assumptions must be made about how internal and external
forces might change in the future. Factors that can influence aviation activity levels include
regulatory policy on the local and national level, technological innovations, aviation industry trends,
and local fluctuations in population, employment, and per capita personal income. The objective of
forecasting is to develop a realistic measure of the potential for these changes so their effect can
be estimated in a rational manner and preparations can be made to smoothly and cost effectively
accommodate their impact on airport facilities. The development of aviation demand forecasts for
the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is presented in the following sections of this chapter:

     Historical Activity Review
     Factors Affecting Future Aviation Demand
     Enplaned Passenger Forecast
     Air Cargo
     Based Aircraft Forecast
     Aircraft Operations Forecast
     Design Day/Design Hour Activity Forecast
     Comparison with the FAA Terminal Area Forecasts
     Summary of Forecasts

The forecasts provide activity levels for five, 10, 15, and 20-year estimates of future aviation activity
at the Airport. The association of activity levels with specific periods is necessary in order to
develop a schedule of improvement needs and assess the ability of the Airport to finance the
recommended development plan. It is important however, to view the projections independent of
specific years, and use the projections to identify trigger points for future Airport facilities. If actual
growth occurs faster than anticipated, the implementation schedule should be reassessed and
accelerated as necessary. Similarly, slower than projected growth may warrant deferment of
planned improvements to a later date. Actual activity growth should be frequently compared to
projected growth so implementation schedule corrections can be identified and implemented.

3.2      HISTORICAL ACTIVITY REVIEW

This section presents a general overview of commercial service airports in the region followed by a
brief review of long-term historical trends in various elements of aviation activity at the
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. Elements reviewed included airlines serving the Airport, annual
enplaned passengers, and annual aircraft operations.




Aviation Forecasts                                  3-1                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                              Master Plan Update




   3.2.1    Regional Commercial Service Airports

   The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is classified as a non-hub, commercial service airport by the
   Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The FAA’s definition of a hub is not to be confused with the
   designation of a city/airport used by an airline where flights are concentrated in a hub-and-spoke
   operating concept. The FAA definitions are important because federal Airport Improvement
   Program (AIP) funding is dependent, in part, upon hub classification.

   The FAA hub classifications are based on the percentage of enplanements at an airport compared
   to the total number of enplanements in the United States. These percentages are as follows:

      Large Hub (L) – Enplanes more than 1.0 percent of the nation’s enplaned passengers
      Medium Hub (M) – Enplanes less than 1.0 percent but greater than 0.5 percent
      Small Hub (S) – Enplanes less than 0.5 percent but greater than 0.25 percent
      Non-Hub (N) – Enplanes less than 0.25 percent

   In 2007, the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport was ranked 150th busiest airport in the nation, up
   eight points from the CY 2006 ranking of 158. It is the 11th largest of the 240 non-hub airports,
   and it is the fourth busiest commercial service airport in Tennessee as shown in Table 3-1.


                                              Table 3-1
                         TENNESSEE AND GEORGIA COMMERCIAL AIRPORT RANKINGS
                                                                                                  CY 2007 ACAIS Data
Hub    National                                                                                      Annual         Percent
Size    Rank                    Airport Name                             City             State   Enplanements      of Total
 L         1       Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International   Atlanta                     GA         43,236,992        5.7%
 M        36       Memphis International                      Memphis                     TN          5,546,309       0.73%
 M        42       Nashville International                    Nashville                   TN          4,888,123       0.64%
 S        90       Savannah/Hilton Head International         Savannah                    GA            992,569       0.13%
 S        93       McGhee Tyson                               Knoxville                   TN            889,106       0.12%
 N       150       Lovell Field                               Chattanooga                 TN            301,830       0.04%
 N       172       Tri-Cities Regional TN/VA                  Bristol/Johnson/Kingsport   TN            212,845       0.03%
 N       195       Augusta Regional at Bush Field             Augusta                     GA            154,521       0.02%
 N       266       Columbus Metropolitan                      Columbus                    GA             46,982       0.01%
 N       291       Valdosta Regional                          Valdosta                    GA             35,093      <0.01%
 N       284       Southwest Georgia Regional                 Albany                      GA             38,759      <0.01%
 N       325       Brunswick Golden Isles                     Brunswick                   GA             24,147      <0.01%
 N       385       Middle Georgia Regional                    Macon                       GA             11,493      <0.01%
 N       440       Athens/Ben Epps                            Athens                      GA              6,370      <0.01%
 N       707       McKellar-Sipes                             Jackson                     TN                875      <0.01%
                   Total ALL US Airports CY 2007                                                    762,590,503        100%




   Aviation Forecasts                                          3-2                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




3.2.2    Location and Other Characteristics of Regional Airports

As can be seen from Table 3-1, there are a number of airports within Tennessee and Georgia that
are close enough to the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport to attract potential passengers from the
Chattanooga area. Within approximately 150 miles of Chattanooga are four major air carrier
airports: Nashville to the northwest, Knoxville to the northeast, Atlanta to the southeast, and
Birmingham to the southwest. A map of the airports surrounding Chattanooga is shown on Figure
3-1.

                                            Figure 3-1
                                        GEOGRAPHIC REGION




Source: ESRI Data & Maps, 2007

Each of these airports is within two and a half driving hours on a city-to-city basis. A fifth airport is
located in Huntsville, Alabama about three hours away by car. While likely not a major influence
on the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport market, information on the Huntsville International Airport
is also included. Key information on the five surrounding airports is provided in Table 3-2.




Aviation Forecasts                                 3-3                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                           Master Plan Update




                                                Table 3-2
                                     DISTANCE TO REGIONAL AIRPORTS
                                            Highway          Driving
                             City            Miles            Time           Route      Hub Size
                     Nashville                131             2:10            I-24      Medium
                     Knoxville                116             1:55            I-75       Small
                     Atlanta                  113             1:55            I-75       Large
                     Birmingham               149             2:20            I-59       Small
                     Huntsville               133             2:50           U.S. 72     Small
                     Source: MapQuest Road Atlas, 2007 edition;
                             FAA hub identification, 2007.

The first four of these cities are linked to Chattanooga by interstate highways that make driving
relatively easy. The city of Huntsville, Alabama is 133 highway miles away, but most of the route is
not on limited access highways.

3.2.3    Airlines Providing Service

Allegiant Air, American Eagle, Continental Express, Delta Connection, Northwest Airlink, and US
Airways Express are serving the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport in August of 2008, although
Continental Express has announced that they will pull their service from the Airport in the fall of
2008. Further, Skybus started service in April 2008. With the exception of Allegiant, all airline
services to the Airport are provided by one of the “legacy” airlines. These legacy carriers are the
traditional major airlines who serve most airports by means of subsidiary or affiliate carriers. The
legacy airlines at the Airport who serve it with subsidiary or affiliate carriers are American,
Continental, Delta, Northwest, and US Airways. The airline history of service to the Airport is
shown on Table 3-3.

                                               Table 3-3
                               HISTORY OF AIRLINES SERVING THE AIRPORT
          Airlines           ‘98     ‘99     ‘00     ‘01         ‘02   ‘03      ‘04     ‘05     ‘06     ‘07       ‘08
   Allegiant Air                                                                                 ●       ●         ●
   American Eagle                             ●       ●          ●     ●        ●        ●       ●       ●         ●
   Continental Express                                                                   ●       ●       ●         ●
   Delta Connection           ●       ●       ●       ●          ●     ●        ●        ●       ●       ●         ●
   Northwest Airlink          ●       ●       ●       ●          ●     ●        ●        ●       ●       ●         ●
   Skybus                                                                                                          ●
   United Express             ●       ●       ●
   US Airways                 ●       ●       ●       ●          ●
   US Airways Express                                 ●          ●     ●        ●        ●       ●       ●         ●
  Source: Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport records

3.2.4    Domestic Airlines Serving Regional Airports

This section identifies the domestic airlines serving Chattanooga versus the nearby airports at the
end of August 2008. The airlines identified in this analysis and shown in Table 3-4 include either a
“legacy” airline or its commuter affiliate associated by reservation system or other airline affiliations.
The actual airline affiliate operating the service to any one-city changes frequently and multiple
affiliates often serve the same airport without the passenger being able to tell one from another.



Aviation Forecasts                                         3-4                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




                                          Table 3-4
                            AIRLINES SERVING REGIONAL AIRPORTS
  Network Carrier Chattanooga      Nashville    Knoxville     Atlanta     Birmingham        Huntsville
  Legacy Airlines
      American        Yes             Yes          Yes          Yes            Yes              Yes
      Continental     Yes             Yes          Yes          Yes            Yes              Yes
      Delta           Yes             Yes          Yes          Yes            Yes              Yes
      Northwest       Yes             Yes          Yes          Yes            Yes              Yes
      United           No             Yes          Yes          Yes            Yes              Yes
      US Airways      Yes             Yes          Yes          Yes            Yes              Yes
  Low Cost Carriers
      Air Tran         No             No           No           Yes            No                No
      Allegiant       Yes             No           Yes          No             No                No
      ATA              No             No           No           No             No                No
      Frontier         No             Yes          No           Yes            No                No
      JetBlue          No             No           No           Yes            No                No
      Skybus           No             No           No           No             No                No
      Southwest        No             Yes          No           Yes            Yes               No
      Spirit           No             No           No           Yes            No                No
    Other Carriers
      Midwest          No             Yes              No       Yes             No               No
  Source: Each airport

The legacy network airlines are represented at each of the regional airports with the exception of
United that does not serve Chattanooga. Low cost carrier service is less well represented in the
region, but each of the regional airports has at least one low cost carrier. Chattanooga currently
has the low cost carrier Allegiant Air.

Both AirTran and Delta have major hubs in Atlanta. Southwest, which does not operate on a hub
and spoke system but rather a point-to-point system, has designated Nashville as a “focus city”,
which is loosely defined as an airport where more than 20 percent of Southwest’s traffic at that
airport consists of transfer passengers.

Table 3-4 indicates only the domestic service available at these airports. International service,
which makes up approximately five percent of United States total, is available at Atlanta. The only
other airport in the region with scheduled international service is Nashville that has flights to
Canada.

3.2.5    Markets Served

Since airline economic deregulation in 1978, most of the major airlines adopted a hub-and-spoke
operating concept. A hub is a collecting point for traffic where passengers arrive on flights from
multiple origination points, connect to other flights timed to provide multiple destination options,
and depart again to their final destination. The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport operates as a
spoke airport with mainline airlines and/or their commuter airlines feeding traffic to the airlines’
respective hub airports. The hub-and-spoke system is a means for a single flight from a spoke
airport to have multiple one-stop markets through the hub airport. Principal hub information for the
major airlines is shown in Table 3-5.




Aviation Forecasts                               3-5                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                         Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                     Master Plan Update




                                                 Table 3-5
                                           PRIMARY HUB AIRPORTS
        Airline                                                Hub City
     AirTran         Atlanta
     Alaska          Seattle, Anchorage
     Allegiant Air   Las Vegas
     American        Dallas-Ft. Worth, Chicago (O’Hare), St. Louis, Miami
     Continental     Houston, Newark, Cleveland
     Delta           Atlanta, Cincinnati, Salt Lake City, Orlando
     Frontier        Denver
     JetBlue         New York (JFK)
     Northwest       Detroit, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Memphis
     Southwest       Dallas (Love Field), Chicago (Midway), Las Vegas, Phoenix, Houston (Hobby), Baltimore
     US Airways      Philadelphia, Charlotte, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Washington DC (National)
     United          Chicago (O’Hare), Denver, San Francisco, Washington (Dulles)
    Source: Individual Airlines

As a spoke airport, the air service at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is focused on the hub
airports of the major and regional airlines. Most spoke airports typically have service limited to hub
airports, except for some key recreational or seasonal services to cities such as Las Vegas or
Orlando. The current direct markets served at the Airport fit this pattern of service:

      Allegiant Air serves Ft. Lauderdale, Orlando through Orlando Sanford International Airport, and
       Tampa through St. Petersburg.
      American Eagle serves Dallas-Ft. Worth and Chicago O’Hare.
      Continental Express serves Houston.
      Delta Connection serves Atlanta and Cincinnati.
      Northwest Airlink serves Memphis.
      US Airways Express serves Charlotte and Washington DC (National).

This pattern of service reflects the industry trends in hub and spoke services and offers insight into
potential future services. Specifically, airlines compete by offering hub services that are equal to or
greater than those of other airline hubs. The objective is to maximize the size of the hub by
serving as many spoke markets as feasible. This implies that hub airlines not currently serving the
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport are candidates for future services to assure the competitiveness
of their hub.

In addition, airlines currently serving the Airport have a reasonable expectation of providing service
to multiple hubs so long as they can be served with an aircraft that serves the market in terms of
size and range. This implies that the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is a potential candidate
particularly for non-stop service with regional jets.

The key positive aspect of the hub-and-spoke concept for airports such as the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport is numerous one-stop service destinations, available through the hub airports
that would not typically be available on a non-stop basis. The negative impact is that passengers
must make flight connections at the hub airport.

3.2.6      Airport Efforts to Improve Air Service

The Airport has been aggressive in efforts to increase and improve air service to the greater
Chattanooga region. The Airport is seeking change and is not satisfied with the current level of


Aviation Forecasts                                      3-6                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                               Master Plan Update




    airline service. These efforts have included applying for Small Community Air Service Development
    Program grants and attempting to reduce the cost of airline ground handling and flight service.

    The Airport recently began providing aircraft ground handling services in order to offer airlines a
    potentially lower cost and easier method of starting service. The Airport also now offers ticket
    counter personnel to provide a complete handling package, with the exception of fueling, for
    airlines with only a few flights a week or for those that want to outsource these services.

    3.2.7    Market Share

    The passenger market share for the airlines serving the Airport in calendar years (CY) 2005
    through 2007 is presented in Table 3-6. As shown, Delta Connection as represented by ASA
    carried the largest percentage of the enplanements in all three years. Together, the three Delta
    Connection airlines carried between 36.2 and 64.5 percent of the enplanements during the three
    years.

                                                      Table 3-6
                                               AIRLINE MARKET SHARE

                                     CY07           Percentage         CY06         Percentage         CY05            Percentage
     Airlines Market Share       Enplanements        of Total      Enplanements      of Total      Enplanements         of Total
Allegiant Air                           45,485           14.8%             5,474          2.1%                 0
American Eagle                          35,170           11.4%            32,465         12.7%            27,328              10.7%
Continental Express                     20,196            6.6%            17,196          6.7%             4,445               1.7%
Delta Connection (ACA)                                    0.0%                            0.0%                                 0.0%
Delta Connection (ASA)                   75,296          24.5%            76,575         30.0%              82,291            32.2%
Delta Connection (Chautauqua)            18,744           6.1%               270          0.1%              37,383            14.6%
Delta Connection (Comair)                17,328           5.6%            32,774         12.9%              45,368            17.7%
Northwest Airlink                        30,454           9.9%            28,949         11.4%              31,323            12.2%
Skybus                                    2,186           0.7%                            0.0%                                 0.0%
US Airways Express (Mesa)                                 0.0%                            0.0%                                 0.0%
US Airways Express (Piedmont)            28,892           9.4%            22,672          8.9%              17,437             6.8%
US Airways Express (PSA)                 32,844          10.7%            37,314         14.6%               8,838             3.5%
Charters                                    905          0.3%              1,270           0.5%             1,303              0.5%
Total                                   307,500        100.0%            248,164         100.0%           258,745            100.0%
Source : Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Records

    3.2.8    Annual Enplaned Passengers

    An extended history of passengers boarding commercial service aircraft, or enplanements, is
    presented in Table 3-7 where the blue bars represent periods of economic recession. Unless
    otherwise indicated in this document, all references to years are references to the Federal Fiscal
    Year (FY), which runs from October 1 through September 30. For example, FY 2006 would refer
    to the period from October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006.




    Aviation Forecasts                                       3-7                                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                           Master Plan Update




                                                          Table 3-7
                                                 HISTORICAL ENPLANEMENTS


                       350,000

                       300,000

                       250,000
        Enplanements




                       200,000
                                                                                               September
                       150,000                                                                 11, 2001
                                          1978 Airline                                         Attacks
                                          Economic                   Delta Airlines
                       100,000
                                          Deregulation              Mainline Leaves
                        50,000                                       Airport (1996)

                            0
                                 1976    1981        1986          1991       1996         2001          2006

                                                            Historical Enplanements

                                        Fiscal        Total              Annual
                                         Year     Enplanements     Increase/Decrease
                                         1976           256,320

                                        1981             227,759

                                        1986             272,468

                                        1991             274,480

                                        1995             280,063
                                        1996             239,318               -14.5%
                                        1997             271,335                13.4%
                                        1998             279,103                 2.9%
                                        1999             304,418                 9.1%
                                        2000             299,058                -1.8%
                                        2001             278,097                -7.0%
                                        2002             241,448               -13.2%
                                        2003             233,982                -3.1%
                                        2004             235,292                 0.6%
                                        2005             250,406                 6.4%
                                        2006             239,629                -4.3%
                                        2007             296,083                23.6%
Source: Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport
        FAA




Aviation Forecasts                                           3-8                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




Enplanements at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport have grown at an average annual rate of
0.5 percent over the last 31 years. This minimal growth has varied with several multi-year peak
and drop fluctuations in enplanements due to national and economic conditions. Between the
years of 1982 and 1999 however, in spite of a few economic drops, the average annual growth rate
for enplanements was 2.6 percent. In the year 2001, the Airport along with the rest of the aviation
industry was negatively impacted by the recession of that year and the September 11, 2001
attacks. Recovery at the Airport took a little longer than the industry average of two years, but in
the last four years the enplanements at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport have grown at an
average annual growth rate of about 6.1 percent.

Prior to the growth period between the years of 1982 and 1999, the Airport experienced a period of
relatively strong growth from 1976 through 1979. After approximately three years of decline (as
the United States airline industry adjusted fares and service in response to deregulation and the
national economic recession in the early 1980’s), enplanements at the Airport entered a second
period of growth. This period of growth consisted of an underlying cycle of small expansions and
contractions. Enplanement activity at the Airport has been expanding since 2003.

3.2.9    Annual Aircraft Operations

An aircraft operation is defined as either a takeoff or a landing. Table 3-8 presents a long-term
history of annual aircraft operations recorded at the Airport in four categories: air carrier,
commuter/air taxi (commuter), general aviation, and military. An air carrier operation represents
either a takeoff or a landing of a commercial aircraft with seating capacity of more than 60 seats.
Commuter operations represent scheduled commercial operations for aircraft with 60 or fewer
seats and include air taxi operations, which are nonscheduled flights or for-hire flights of aircraft
with 60 or fewer seats. General Aviation (GA) operations represent all civil aviation aircraft take-
offs and landings not classified as commercial (air carrier or commuter) or military. Military
operations are primarily those of aircraft of the United States military.

Air carrier operations were at their highest annual historical level at more than 19,500 operations in
1978. Air carrier operations declined each year through 1985, remained fairly steady through 1999
when there was a slight and brief expansion before settling down to new low levels. The air carrier
operations in 2007 totaled just over 3,600.

Commuter operations have grown considerably since 1983, increasing from approximately 8,400
to a peak of more than 23,300 operations in 2002. In the last four years, commuter operations
have remained relatively steady between 18,000 and 19,000 annual operations.

Until 1984, air carrier operations exceeded commuter operations. However, consistent with airline
industry trends throughout the United States, Chattanooga air service became much more reliant
on the commuter category aircraft as evidenced by the increase in the number of annual commuter
operations relative to air carrier operations. This trend has grown even more pronounced
throughout the United States in recent years. At the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, commuter
operations now outnumber air carrier operations by roughly a 5 to 1 margin.

The changes in air carrier versus commuter operations are not necessarily a negative factor in the
air service trend. Today, many commuter airlines operate regional jet aircraft that offer 50 seats or
more. The use of regional jet aircraft has allowed a much higher level of perceived quality of
service to many communities, as passenger preferences for jet aircraft relative to propeller has
been demonstrated. The changes made in fleet aircraft size have contributed to this transition as



Aviation Forecasts                                3-9                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




                                                           Table 3-8
                                                    HISTORICAL OPERATIONS


                       120,000


                       100,000


                        80,000
          Operations




                        60,000


                        40,000


                        20,000


                            0
                                 1976        1981       1986           1991        1996           2001         2006
                             Air Carrier             Commuter                 General Aviation                Military

                                         Commercial Service              General
                          Year     Air Carrier Commuter Total            Aviation       Military      Total
                          1976         19,233      2,267 21,500          104,048          2,214      127,762

                          1981          10,308         3,825   14,133         85,148       1,594     100,875

                          1986          10,388        12,264   22,652         91,854       4,179     118,685

                          1991             8,666      16,649   25,315         77,936       5,120     108,371

                          1996           7,616        13,986   21,602         61,489       5,476      88,567
                          1997           9,123        13,204   22,327         60,875       5,762      88,964
                          1998           9,959        12,831   22,790         63,352       7,321      93,463
                          1999           7,316        16,329   23,645         70,939      10,441     105,025
                          2000          11,260        11,963   23,223         72,793      11,902     107,918
                          2001          12,364        22,548   34,912         96,372      16,063     147,347
                          2002           7,210        23,157   30,367         80,657      18,564     129,588
                          2003           5,017        19,234   24,251         59,670      13,142      97,063
                          2004           5,225        18,129   23,354         57,441      14,619      95,414
                          2005           5,006        18,429   23,435         50,855      17,822      92,112
                          2006           4,081        18,286   22,367         46,442      12,762      81,571
                          2007           3,658        18,428   22,086         44,164      10,973      77,223
Source: Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport
        FAA




Aviation Forecasts                                              3-10                                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




airlines assign the most economical aircraft to the market. Since 1978, most of the major airlines
have accomplished this by transitioning the services to their affiliated code share partners that
operate smaller aircraft than those of the mainline carrier. Early on, these commuter aircraft were
19-seat propeller aircraft. These aircraft transitioned to 30-seat turboprop aircraft. The 30-seat
turboprop aircraft appear to be transitioning to the 50-seat and larger regional jet aircraft now
appearing frequently in the commuter fleet.

General aviation operations represent all civil aviation aircraft takeoffs and landings not classified
as commercial (air carrier or commuter) or military. As shown in Table 3-8, general aviation
operations were at their highest annual level at more than 104,000 operations throughout the late
1970’s. General aviation operations had a generally declining trend with the exception of a few
spikes through 1996. From 1997 through 2001, general aviation operations experienced a spike
where operations increased at an average annual growth rate of 12.2 percent to reach a high of
approximately 96,300 operations. From 2002 through 2006, all previous gains were lost with total
operations in 2007 of approximately 44,200.

Military aircraft operations have fluctuated within a range of approximately 1,600 to 7,300 annual
operations from 1976 through 1998. From 1999 through 2005, military operations increased with
peaks in 2002 and 2005 of approximately 18,600 and 17,800 operations, respectively. Military
operations in 2007 totaled approximately 11,000.

Total operations at the Airport have decreased at an average annual rate of approximately
negative 1.6 percent over the last 31 years. Most of the change is attributed to the decline in
general aviation activity.

3.3      FACTORS AFFECTING FUTURE AVIATION DEMAND

A number of factors have had a pronounced affect on the aviation activity at the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport. The terrorist acts of September 11, 2001, the national economy, local
socioeconomic factors, airfares, and airline competition are reviewed to determine what effect
these variables may have on the demand for future aviation activity at the Airport.

3.3.1     Impact of September 11, 2001

The events of September 11, 2001 had a profound impact on passenger interest in traveling in the
ensuing months. All U.S. airports were negatively affected, some more than others. The
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport and many other airports were impacted by the airline economic
troubles that followed September 11, 2001. Service cutbacks were widespread and many smaller
communities were deeply impacted.

The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport fared worse than the average of the United States as a
whole. While the United States domestic airline industry’s percentage of change in passenger
enplanements from the year 2000 to the year 2001 was a negative 6.1 percent, the enplanement
decline at Chattanooga was a negative 7.0 percent. Furthermore, it took Chattanooga longer to
recover. While the percentage change between 2001 and 2002 enplanements for the United
States domestic airline industry was a negative 1.7 percent, Chattanooga suffered a negative 13.2
percent change in total enplanements. On average, it took the United States domestic airline
industry approximately two years to reach the same enplanement levels it had reached in the year
2000; Chattanooga has yet to reach within a fiscal year the 299,058 enplanements it had in FY
2000. The FY 2007 enplanements approached that level at 296,083 enplanements. Calendar
Year (CY) 2007 enplanements exceeded 300,000 enplanements.


Aviation Forecasts                               3-11                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




3.3.2    National Economic Conditions

The national economy began slowing during the latter stages of 2000. Since the conclusion of the
Persian Gulf War in early 1992, the national economy was in an expansion mode for a record
number of quarters until 2000. On November 26, 2001, the National Bureau of Economic
Research announced that the United States economy had entered its 10th recession since the end
of World War II. However, the severity of the recession was not known until early 2002. Many
analysts predicted the recession would last for one quarter but the economy actually declined for
three consecutive quarters, starting with the first quarter of 2001. Not coincidentally, the downturn
in United States domestic passenger and cargo demand also began during this same quarter.

By the third quarter of 2001, the United States economy was in full recovery with quarter-to-quarter
growth in the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) surging to more than 7.0 percent by the third quarter
of 2003. Quarter to quarter GDP growth has remained solid for most periods varying around 3.5 to
4.0 percent.

According to revised calculations by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the United States GDP
grew at 3.9 percent annually in 2005, 3.4 percent in 2006, and 1.5 percent in 2007. The FAA and
other national forecasts anticipate GDP to level off in 2007 and 2008 to 2.1 percent. The long-term
forecast period anticipates a growth rate of 2.6 percent. These forecasts have been considered in
calculating future annual growth rates at the Airport. The timing, extent, and rate of annual growth
in the United States economy and future changes in real disposable income will affect the rate of
future airline traffic both nationally and at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport.

Passengers’ concerns for safety have largely diminished; however, the problematic economic
conditions within the airline industry persist. Most airlines struggled to remain solvent during the
economic downturn made worse by the events of September 11. Several airlines, particularly hard
hit by the economic slowdown, filed for bankruptcy protection (United Airlines in 2002, US Airways
in 2002, ATA Airlines in 2004, Delta Air Lines and Northwest in 2005). While conditions were
improving and most airlines have now come out of bankruptcy, past occurrences illustrate the
severity of the airline industry’s economic condition.

The very high cost of fuel continues to be a major economic concern for the airline industry. The
high cost of fuel has caused additional airlines to declare bankruptcy and to cease operations,
including Skybus, ATA, and Aloha. Every airline has cut service to some degree within the past
five months and some airports have seen reductions in service of as much as 30 percent.
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport lost one flight per day of Skybus in April, and Continental will
cease operating their two daily flights in the fall of 2008. This represents a reduction in seats of
10.4 percent from February 2008. However, American has announced that they will be adding an
additional flight to Dallas/Fort Worth in November of 2008. This will increase the number of seats
available and make the net loss in seats approximately 7.3 percent since February of 2008.

3.3.3    Identification of the Air Service Area

The prime geographic region served by an airport is referred to as an Air Service Area. The
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport serves the City of Chattanooga, Tennessee and a large area
surrounding the City. Chattanooga is the fourth largest city in Tennessee after Memphis,
Nashville, and Knoxville. For the purposes of this report, the Chattanooga Metropolitan Statistical
Area (MSA) will be defined as the Air Service Area because it represents the immediate
geographic area surrounding the Airport and is the source of the majority of the Airport’s existing


Aviation Forecasts                                3-12                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




passengers. With the introduction of the low cost carriers into the market, the Airport has been
drawing from an increasingly wider area.

3.3.4    Local Socioeconomic Conditions

Consideration of a community’s economic character is particularly important to the determination of
business travel, general aviation, and air cargo levels. Prior to developing the aviation demand
forecasts for the Airport, current and projected economic trends and population projections
associated with the Airport’s primary Air Service Area were examined. The Airport’s primary
service area is the Chattanooga MSA.

The Chattanooga MSA, as defined by the Office of Management and Budget, consists of three
counties in Tennessee (Hamilton, Marion, and Sequatchie) and three in Georgia (Catoosa, Dade,
and Walker) as shown in Figure 3-2. These six counties occupy 2,138 square miles (1,368,320
acres) in southeastern Tennessee and northwestern Georgia. The Census Bureau estimate of the
Chattanooga MSA’s population for 2007 is 500,273 people.

                                      Figure 3-2
                      CHATTANOOGA METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA




Source: ESRI

The “Greater Chattanooga Area” consists of 39 counties that surround the Airport in the states of
Tennessee, Georgia, North Carolina and Alabama. These counties are all within 100 miles of the
Airport and it could conceivably draw passengers from each of these counties. Table 3-9 shows
historical and projected information for the Chattanooga MSA, the Greater Chattanooga Area,
Tennessee, Georgia, and the United States.


Aviation Forecasts                              3-13                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                                 Table 3-9
                                 HISTORICAL AND DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION


                                          Population Growth Rates

                      0.0%            0.5%           1.0%               1.5%            2.0%             2.5%



             1969-2007




             2007-2027




                                                PCPI Growth Rates

                      0.0%         1.0%      2.0%        3.0%       4.0%         5.0%       6.0%        7.0%



              1969-2007




              2007-2027




                                          Employment Growth Rates

                          0.0%       0.5%         1.0%           1.5%          2.0%       2.5%          3.0%



               1969-2007




               2007-2027



                USA   Tennessee       Georgia    Greater Chattanooga Area         Chattanooga MSA

Source: Woods and Poole


Aviation Forecasts                                        3-14                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




The specific data used to generate Table 3-9 can be found in Appendix C of this report. The
demographic information depicted in Table 3-9 is summarized as follows:

   Population growth in the Chattanooga MSA was 0.8 percent annually in the period of 1969-
    2007. This rate was slower than the states of Tennessee and Georgia, as well as the United
    States in that period. For the next 20 years, the MSA population is expected to grow at an
    approximate 0.6 percent annual rate, which is behind the estimated 0.9 percent rate of growth
    for the United States. However, the Greater Chattanooga Area is expected to grow at a rate
    similar to national trends at slightly less than1.0 percent.
   Per Capita Personal Income (PCPI) growth in the MSA outpaced that of the United States and
    Georgia in the 1969 to 2007 period. The Chattanooga MSA is expected to exceed slightly all of
    the other locations in PCPI growth over the next 20 years. This will occur at a rate of slightly
    more than five percent per year.
   Employment growth rates in the MSA fell behind all of the comparative areas in the 1969 to
    2007 period principally with the State of Georgia. For the future, the MSA is expected to
    remain behind all of the comparative areas, with the exception of the Greater Chattanooga
    Area. Employment growth within the MSA is not expected to rise above 1.4 percent per
    annum.

This demographic information was developed prior to the announcement of the new Volkswagen
plant in Chattanooga, which will be discussed in the next section. This announcement is likely to
affect the demographic projections for the Chattanooga MSA in a positive manner.

3.3.5    Major Employers

As in most other regions, service employment dominates the employment statistics with 32.7
percent of the employment. However, the region has very diverse employment including a
manufacturing segment with approximately 15 percent of the employment as shown in Table 3-10.

                                         Table 3-10
                           SHARE OF EMPLOYMENT BY BUSINESS TYPE
                       Business Type                     Employment       Share
                       Services                               69,331      32.7%
                       Retail Trade                           37,932      17.9%
                       Manufacturing                          32,229      15.2%
                       Transportation                         20,414       9.6%
                       Public Administration                  15,226       7.2%
                       Finance/Insurance/Real Estate          13,270       6.2%
                       Construction                           11,680       5.5%
                       Wholesale Trade                        10,408       4.9%
                       Agriculture/Forestry/Fishing             1535       0.7%
                       Mining                                    170       0.1%
                       Non-classified                            129       0.1%
                       Total                                 212,324     100.0%
                       Source: Greater Chattanooga Area Chamber of Commerce, 2007

McKee Foods, a snack producer, leads the list of the eight largest manufacturing firms in the MSA.
Other large MSA manufacturing employment is in fiber production. The largest manufacturing
firms located in the MSA are presented in Table 3-11.



Aviation Forecasts                                3-15                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




                                       Table 3-11
                       LARGEST MANUFACTURING EMPLOYERS IN THE MSA
                        Rank              Firm                Main Product
                         1       McKee Foods             Snack Foods
                         2       Synthetic Industries    High Tech Fabrics
                         3       Roper Corporation       Home Appliances
                         4       Pilgrims Pride          Poultry Processing
                         5       Astec Industries        Heavy Equipment
                         6       Shaw Industries         Carpet and Fibers
                         7       Invista Incorporated    Carpet and Fibers
                         8       Olan Mills              Photography
                      Source: Chattanooga Area Chamber of Commerce, 2007

There are a number of high technology fiber and carpet firms in the MSA listing. This is because
the MSA is located adjacent to Dalton, Georgia, which is the carpet production capital of the United
States with over 150 carpet and floor covering plants. The stability of these manufacturing sectors
bodes well for the economic growth of the area.

As in any community, the major employers in the Air Service Area include a large number of
schools, hospitals, and retail establishments. Other major employers in the MSA include Covenant
Transportation (a trucking firm), the Tennessee Valley Authority (an electric power provider), and
UnumProvident Corporation (a large insurance firm). The largest non-manufacturer employers in
the MSA are listed in Table 3-12.

                                       Table 3-12
                     LARGEST NON-MANUFACTURING EMPLOYERS IN THE MSA
                          Rank        Business Name
                           1          Hamilton County Education
                           2          Covenant Transportation
                           3          Erlanger Medical Center
                           4          Blue Cross/Blue Shield
                           5          Memorial Hospital
                           6          Tennessee Valley Authority
                           7          UnumProvident Corporation
                           8          City of Chattanooga
                           9          CIGNA Healthcare
                           10         Bi-Lo Corporation
                       Source: Chattanooga Area Chamber of Commerce, 2007

On July 15, 2008, the Volkswagen Group of America announced that 20 years after closing the last
Volkswagen plant in the United States that it will build a U.S. automotive production facility in
Chattanooga and invest $1 billion in the economy. The plant will be built in the Enterprise South
Industrial Park located approximately three miles from the Airport. Enough land has been
earmarked for the facility that many of the supplier companies that an automotive plant requires will
also be able to locate adjacent to the plant. Production of a new Volkswagen sedan is expected to
begin in 2011 and will require 2,000 direct jobs. Estimates indicate that as many as 12,000
additional direct jobs will also come to Chattanooga because of the suppliers.




Aviation Forecasts                                3-16                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




3.3.6    Airline Hubs in Atlanta and Nashville

The disadvantage of air service from a spoke city is the necessity to make a connection. The
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is located within short driving distance of two hub airports:
Southwest’s “focus city” in Nashville, and the Delta and AirTran hubs in Atlanta. These facilities
have been identified as sources of passenger diversion for the Airport. Passenger preference for
non-stop service combined with perceived higher airfares to fly from Chattanooga influence many
passengers to drive to a hub airport, despite the added expense of higher automobile parking rates
associated with these facilities over the convenience of the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport.

Historically the Airport’s passenger studies indicate that at least half of the passengers in the
surrounding area drive to another airport. This loss of passengers is believed to be caused by:

   Good highways to nearby cities
   The perceived limited air service and “high” fares at the Airport
   The extensive non-stop service available at other airports – particularly the Delta and AirTran
    hubs at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta
   The low fare air service available at other airports – particularly the Southwest “focus city” at
    Nashville
   Historical ties to business, shopping, and related activities at the other regional cities that
    makes the drive less onerous

With the entrance of the low cost carriers into the Chattanooga market, lower airfares, and
increasing congestion in Atlanta, these trends have been reversing.

3.3.7    Airfares

Airfare levels have an important effect on the demand for airline service nationally and at the
Airport. Airfares are influenced by airline operating costs such as aircraft maintenance, industry
competition, and fuel. Overall, aviation fuel has dramatically increased in price since 1980. A
slight increase in fuel prices was recorded in the early 1990s because of the Persian Gulf War;
however, fuel prices have continued to rise sharply over the past three years, particularly in the last
five months. The FAA’s long-range fuel cost forecast acknowledges the short-range increases and
calls for a 7.6 percent annual average growth increase in jet fuel prices through 2010. Other costs
influencing airfares, such as labor costs, are forecast to increase nominally during the forecast
period. Significant competition from low-cost carriers will limit the industry’s ability to pass on
higher operating costs to passengers via higher airfares. Therefore, many airlines have resorted to
cutting service.

Southwest has long been known to hedge on their fuel costs with the results that the increases in
fuel prices have affected them little. Many of their fuel options have run out at this point and they
are being squeezed by the rising fuel cost but not yet to the same extent as some of the legacy
and start-up carriers. Southwest is also beginning to feel the effects of maturity in that their
employees have now been with the airline for long enough periods that they have accrued benefits
and wages approaching those of employees of the legacy carriers.

Low-cost, point-to-point airlines have survived with small passenger service growth since
September 11, 2001. These operators have increased enplanements by offering affordable direct
flights to vacation and resort locations from non-airline hub airports like the Chattanooga


Aviation Forecasts                                3-17                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




Metropolitan Airport. Allegiant Air currently offers this type of service at the Airport to three Florida
destinations.

3.3.8    Low Cost Airline Access to Atlanta

Allegiant Air chose to serve Chattanooga not because of the local market, but because of the
Atlanta market. They developed their business plan around the concept of serving a market not
from a large hub airport but from a smaller, less crowded, less expensive nearby airport.
Southwest successfully started this concept a few decades ago and Allegiant Air as well as others
are using similar strategies. They are relying on the idea that passengers seeking to travel to the
northern suburbs of Atlanta where a significant number of businesses have located will want to
travel through a lower cost, less congested airport to get to their destination. From Chattanooga,
they will enjoy a straight, relatively congestion free drive of an hour or less to these northern
Atlanta suburbs.

3.3.9    Airline Competition

Competitive factors have a significant influence on airfares. On routes that are more competitive or
in a city with a competitive environment such as one to two major air carriers and a low-cost
carrier, airfares are significantly lower. Changes in competitive forces such as airline bankruptcies,
mergers, and acquisitions would significantly influence, positively or negatively, airline traffic at the
Airport. The addition of low-cost carriers to Chattanooga could influence the reduction of airfares
of airlines already serving the Airport concerned over losing market share. This addition could also
influence other low-cost carriers to consider approaching the Atlanta market through Chattanooga.

3.4      ENPLANED PASSENGER FORECAST

The forecast of enplaned passengers is the foundation upon which other commercial service
activity forecasts are developed. The enplaned passenger forecasts are also the basis for
determination of the future facilities needed to accommodate projected passenger demands.
Forecasts or forecast methodologies employed in the preparation of passenger enplanement
projections for the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport include:

     Market share analyses, which compare the performance of the local market to the national
      market
     Trend analyses, specifically average annual growth based on specific periods of Chattanooga
      enplanement activity as well as the FAA National Growth trend
     Regression analyses, which examine various socioeconomic indicators to determine if strong
      relationships exist between the indicators and annual enplaned passengers
     The FAA’s December 2007 and 2008 Terminal Area Forecasts (TAF) for the Chattanooga
      Metropolitan Airport
     The Indexed TAF, which is a modification to the FAA 2008 TAF, recognizes the actual
      passenger enplanement increases of FY 2007.

3.4.1    Market Share Analysis

A typical method to forecast enplaned passengers at an airport is based upon that airport’s market
representing a share of the total United States enplanements. For example, if an airport
historically had one percent of the total United States enplanements, it is assumed for purposes of

Aviation Forecasts                                 3-18                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




the methodology that it will continue to have a similar share because factors that influence the
entire United States are expected to influence the airport similarly.

In 1976, the Airport’s market share of the United States passenger enplanements was 0.109
percent. This share decreased over the next 28 years to 0.034 percent in 2004. The market share
has increased since then to approximately 0.38 in FY 2007. This is shown in Figure 3-3.


                                                             Figure 3-3
                                                     HISTORICAL MARKET SHARE


                               0.12%


                               0.10%
          Share of US Market




                               0.08%


                               0.06%


                               0.04%


                               0.02%


                               0.00%
                                       1976   1981       1986      1991             1996         2001         2006
                                                                       Historical

Source: FAA

The FAA has forecast the total U.S. enplanements for the next 17 years. These are published in
the FAA Aerospace Forecasts FY 2005-2025, Table 5. A copy of Table 5 can be found in Appendix
C. The forecasts of U.S. enplanements were matched with the Airport market share during various
periods. For this forecast methodology, five scenarios were developed based on the Airport’s
historical market shares:

   The projection of the Airport’s returning to the lowest historical market share over the next
    twenty years would result in growth for the Airport as the U.S. enplanements are anticipated to
    increase to approximately 1,179,400,000 annual passengers in 2027. The FAA’s forecast only
    extends to 2025. For purposes of this report, it has been projected to 2027 at the same annual
    average growth rate. A 0.034 percent share of the U. S. enplanements would result in
    approximately 404,400 annual enplaned passengers at the Airport in 2027.
   If the Airport continued at the 0.039 percent market share, it held in 2007, the result would be
    an increase to approximately 457,900 annual enplaned passengers in 2027.
   By returning over the next 20 years to the 15-year average 0.043 percent of the market share
    that the Airport has held, approximately 509,300 annual enplanements could be realized by
    2027.



Aviation Forecasts                                              3-19                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                           Master Plan Update




o   By returning over the next 20 years to the 30-year average of 0.056 percent of the market
    share, the Airport would realize approximately 671,000 annual enplanements by the year 2027.

o   The maximum share that the Airport has achieved is 0.109 percent of market share. By
    returning to that level over the next 20 years, the Airport could realize approximately 1.28
    million annual enplaned passengers by the year 2027.

These five scenarios for market share projections are shown in Table 3-13. The Remain at the
Current Market Share was selected from this methodology to move forward for consideration. It
indicates modest growth, yet recognizes that the growth recently experienced by the Airport is
unlikely to continue unabated.




Aviation Forecasts                             3-20                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                                                 Table 3-13
                                                           MARKET SHARE ANALYSIS


                      700,000


                      600,000


                      500,000
       Enplanements




                      400,000


                      300,000


                      200,000


                      100,000


                           0
                                1976     1981       1986    1991     1996      2001    2006       2011      2016     2021        2026

                                       Historical                     Return to Min Share                Remain at Current Share
                                       Return to 15-year Average      Return to 30-year Average          Return to Maximum Share

                          Chattanooga                                            Market Share Scenarios
                                                                      Return      Remain at       Return to     Return to
                                                        U.S.            to         Current         15-Year       30-Year         Return to
                                         U.S.       Enplanements     Minimum       Market          Average       Average         Maximum
Year            Enplanements            Share          (000s)         Share         Share         1992-2007     1977-2007         Share
1976                  256,320          0.1083%        236,641,251

1981                      227,759      0.0780%         291,823,728

1986                      272,468      0.0632%         431,448,116

1991                      274,480      0.0561%         489,152,394

1996                      239,318      0.0390%         613,630,409

2001                      278,097      0.0401%         693,186,394

2007                      296,083      0.0388%         762,590,503

2012                                                                  297,500         306,500       315,100        342,100          444,300

2017                                                                  331,900         352,500       372,200        434,500          669,300

2022                                                                  366,600         401,800       435,700        542,100          943,800

2027                                                                  404,400         457,900       509,300        671,000       1,281,300

Average Annual Growth
2007-2012                                                               0.1%            0.7%             1.3%         2.9%              8.5%
2012-2017                                                               2.2%            2.8%             3.4%         4.9%              8.5%
2017-2022                                                               2.0%            2.7%             3.2%         4.5%              7.1%
2022-2027                                                               2.0%            2.6%             3.2%         4.4%              6.3%
 Source: FAA


Aviation Forecasts                                                      3-21                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                         Master Plan Update




3.4.2                                  Trend Analysis

Trend analysis relies on projecting historic trends into the future. Figure 3-4 shows the historical
percentage change in enplanements at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. These percentages can
be down a negative 14.5 percent one year and up 13.4 percent the next year as happened
between 1996 and 1997.

                                                                        Figure 3-4
                                                  HISTORICAL ANNUAL PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN ENPLANEMENTS


                                       25.0%
    Percentage Average Annual Growth




                                       20.0%
                                       15.0%

                                       10.0%

                                        5.0%
                                        0.0%
                                        -5.0%

                                       -10.0%
                                       -15.0%

                                       -20.0%
                                                1976     1981      1986           1991      1996           2001            2006

                                                                      Historical Average Annual Growth

Source: FAA


Average annual growth rates level these wide fluctuations within selected periods thereby
establishing a trend for that particular period. These average annual growth rates can be projected
into the future. With this methodology, different annual growth rates found in specific historical
periods of the Airport were projected forward based on those historical trends. Six scenarios were
developed:

     The growth rate for the period from 1976 through 2007, which defines all of the last 31 years, is
      a 0.5 percent average annual growth rate. This growth rate was projected into the future with
      the result that passenger enplanements would grow to 325,000 enplanements by the year
      2027.
     The lowest average annual growth rate analyzed was found between 1987 and 2007, a period
      of 20 years. The average annual growth rate during this period was negative 0.3 percent. This
      would result in 280,100 passenger enplanements in the year 2027.
     The 18-year average annual rate of growth for the years from 1982-2000 was 2.4 percent. This
      period was chosen, as it does not include the negative impacts of September 11, 2001.
      Projected forward this trend would result in 472,200 enplaned passengers in 2027.
     The 15-year period from 1992-2007 had an average annual growth rate of 0.02 percent.
      Projected forward this would result in 297,000 passenger enplanements in 2027.



Aviation Forecasts                                                         3-22                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




   The average annual growth rate of 0.9 percent for the last ten years or 1997 through 2007 was
    also projected. While three of the four previous scenarios within this methodology also
    contained the period of September 2001, the negative growth of the year 2001 to 2002 has
    more weight in this period as it represents a larger percentage of the total. Regardless, the
    average annual growth rate for this period was low, yet still positive with a 0.9 percent average
    annual growth rate resulting in an increase to approximately 352,600 passenger enplanements
    in 2027.
    The average annual growth rate for the last five years, 2002 to 2007, had the highest average
    annual growth rate of 4.2 percent. This five-year period does not have September 2001 within
    it. Projected forward, this average annual growth would result in 669,500 annual passenger
    enplanements in 2027.
Each year, the FAA updates their overall national forecast of aviation activity. In the FAA
Aerospace Forecasts FY 2005-2025, Table 5, the FAA indicated that the United States domestic
revenue passenger enplanements were expected to rise 2.7 percent annually in the 2007 to 2010
period, 2.8 percent from 2010 to 2020, and 2.7 percent annually from 2020 to 2025. When
translated to Chattanooga, the enplanements would increase annually at the national average
annual percentage rate. Passenger annual enplanements would grow to 509,400 by 2027 as
shown in Table 3-14. Again, the FAA forecasts end at 2025. The last two years were projected
using the 2.7 percent average annual growth rate.

The 18-year average annual growth rate scenario was selected to move forward for consideration
as it does not include September 11, 2001, is for a significant duration of time, and is within range
of the forecast derived from the FAA national growth rate. Moreover, with the entrance of the LCC
carriers into the market, the Airport is less likely to continue the low growth of the 10-, 15-, 20-, and
31-year trends.




Aviation Forecasts                                 3-23                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                        Master Plan Update




                                                                      Table 3-14
                                                                   TREND ANALYSIS

                  700,000

                  600,000

                  500,000
   Enplanements




                  400,000

                  300,000

                  200,000

                  100,000

                          0
                              1976    1981      1986        1991      1996          2001     2006        2011      2016          2021         2026

                  Historical                        31-Year AAG                     20-Year AAG                    18-Year AAG
                  15-Year AAG                       10-Year AAG                     5 Year AAG                     FAA National Growth Rate

                                                                     CHA Average Annual Growth Rates                               FAA 2008
                                                      31-Year      20-Year   18-Year 15-Year 10-Year                  5-year        National
                                                       (1976-       (1986-    (1982-   (1992-   (1997-                (2002-        Growth
                                     Percentage         2007)        2007)     2000)    2007)    2007)                 2007)          Rate
     Year                Enpl.        Change           (0.5%)      (-0.3%)    (2.4%)  (0.02%)   (0.9%)                (4.2%)         (2.8 %)
     1976               256,320

     1981               227,759          -11.1%

     1986               272,468          19.6%

     1991               274,480              0.7%

     1996               239,318          -12.8%

     2001               278,097          16.2%

     2007               296,083              1.0%

     2012                                             303,100       292,000    332,700      296,300      309,300     363,100              338,900

     2017                                             310,200       288,000    373,900      296,600      323,100     445,200              389,100

     2022                                             317,500       284,000    420,200      296,800      337,500     546,000              445,900

     2027                                             325,000       280,100    472,200      297,000      352,600     669,500              509,400

     Average Annual Growth Rate
     2007-2012                                           0.5%         -0.3%          2.4%        0.01%      0.9%          4.2%                2.7%
     2012-2017                                           0.5%         -0.3%          2.4%        0.02%      0.9%          4.2%                2.8%
     2017-2022                                           0.5%         -0.3%          2.4%        0.01%      0.9%          4.2%                2.8%
     2022-2027                                           0.5%         -0.3%          2.4%        0.01%      0.9%          4.2%                2.7%
Source: Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Records




Aviation Forecasts                                                           3-24                                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




3.4.3    Regression Analysis

Several local socioeconomic indicators were reviewed and analyzed to determine if statistically
significant relationships exist between historical enplanements at the Chattanooga Metropolitan
Airport and the selected indicators. The indicators reviewed in this analysis included: population,
employment, and per capita personal income (PCPI). These independent variables typically are
good predictors of enplanement levels (the dependent variable), absent air service constraints.
The actual data used for the analyses can be found in Appendix C.

The indicators and the enplanements were analyzed using a general statistical technique called
regression analysis. Regression analysis is a statistical forecasting model that is used to predict
and measure the relationships between a dependent variable, in this case enplanements, and one
or more independent variables, the socioeconomic indicators in this case. The benefit of using
regression analysis as a forecast methodology is that the tool interprets the significance of the
results.

One determination of the statistical significance of the projections produced by a regression
analysis is the coefficient of determination, or R2 value. The R2 value is the square of the
correlation coefficient and measures the contribution of the independent variables in the prediction
of the dependent variable. The R2 value will range between 0.00 and 1.00 with 1.00 indicating a
perfect correlation between the independent and dependent variables. R2 values of less than 0.70
generally indicate there is little correlation between the independent and dependent variables.
Where there is more than one independent variable in the analysis, the adjusted R2 value will be of
more significance. Each independent variable adds some variance to the dependent variable. The
adjusted R2 attempts to yield a truer R2. Again, values higher than 0.70 indicate a higher
correlation between the independent and dependent variables.

Multiple regression analyses were done using various combinations of the independent variables
of population, employment, and PCPI. “Dummy variables” were also used to offset effects in the
airline industry that may have abnormally affected enplanements. One dummy variable used was
one that proposed to offset the effects of September 11, 2001 to the airline industry. The second
dummy variable proposed to offset the effects of the recent downturn in the airline industry.
Neither of these dummy variables had a statistically significant affect on the dependent variable,
enplanements, in the analyses run.

Different periods were tested, ranging from three to 31 years. However, few analyses done for a
period exceeding approximately 13 years were found to be statistically significant. Three scenarios
were found to have some statistical significance. Each of the analyses paired the independent
variable employment to the dependent variable enplanements. As can be seen from Table 3-15,
as each of the scenarios has only one variable, the R2 factor is shown.




Aviation Forecasts                              3-25                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                                                 Table 3-15
                                                            REGRESSION ANALYSIS


                       500,000
                       450,000

                       400,000
                       350,000
        Enplanements




                       300,000
                       250,000
                       200,000

                       150,000
                       100,000
                           50,000
                               0
                                    1976   1981   1986      1991    1996         2001    2006     2011     2016     2021      2026

                                              Historical                                  Employment 1981-2000
                                              Employment 1982-2001                        Employment1982-2000
                                              Employment 1982-2000 with VW

                                                                                                                  Employment
                                        Historical         Employment       Employment          Employment         1982-2000
                           Year       Enplanements          1981-2000        1982-2001           1982-2000          with VW
                             1976           256,320
                             1981            227,759
                             1986            272,468
                             1991            274,480
                             1996            239,318
                             2001            278,097
                             2007            296,083
                             2012                             334,800              324,400           331,500           337,400
                             2017                             349,900              337,000           345,600           351,500
                             2022                             365,000              349,600           359,600           365,500
                             2027                             380,100              362,100           373,600           379,500
                       2
              R                             n/a                    0.36                 0.28              0.31              0.31
              Average Annual Growth
              2007-2012                                            2.5%                 1.8%             2.3%              2.6%
              2012-2017                                            0.9%                 0.8%             0.8%              0.8%
              2017-2022                                            0.8%                 0.7%             0.8%              0.8%
              2022-2027                                            0.8%                 0.7%             0.8%              0.8%



Aviation Forecasts                                                        3-26                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




 Each of the R2 values shown in Table 3-15 is significantly below 0.70. There are other indicators in
 the results of a regression analysis, which show that these scenarios may have statistical
 significance. Table 3-16 shows the summary output of the regression analysis done for the
 independent variable employment for the period of 1981 to 2000.

                                           Table 3-16
                            SUMMARY OUTPUT OF A REGRESSION ANALYSIS
SUMMARY OUTPUT
1982-2000
       Regression Statistics
Multiple R          0.556831233
R Square            0.310061022
Adjusted R Square 0.269476376
Standard Error      28696.25746
Observations                 19

ANOVA
                           df              SS             MS           F        Significance F
Regression                       1      6291235387     6.29E+09   7.63986025     0.013271662
Residual                        17      1.3999E+10     8.23E+08
Total                           18       2.029E+10

                       Coefficients   Standard Error     t Stat     P-value       Lower 95%         Upper 95%
Intercept             119364.6831        56570.3818    2.110021   0.04998011      11.61149598        238717.8
Employment            0.491799883        0.17792858     2.76403   0.01327166      0.116403396        0.867196

 While the R2 and adjusted R2 are important, they only indicate whether the dependent variable is
 predictable, not whether or not the analysis did a good job at predicting the dependent variable
 (enplanements) with that particular data. The “Significance F”, highlighted in yellow, gives that
 information and more. It tests the overall significance of the regression. It also tests whether or
 not the independent variable or group of independent variables can reliably predict the dependent
 variable. The level looked for is 0.05 or less. If the Significance F is greater than 0.05, it usually
 indicates that the independent variable or the group of independent variables is not worthwhile.

 The coefficients, highlighted in blue, indicate the value of each independent variable measured
 against the dependent variable. If the independent variable (employment) were increased by one
 unit, the dependent variable (enplanements) would be raised 0.492 units. If the independent
 variable (employment) were zero, the dependent variable (enplanements) would be would be equal
 to 119,365 enplanements.

 The “P-value”, highlighted in green, indicates whether the coefficient is significantly different from
 zero. Values below 0.05 are considered good. In the example above, the P-value is below 0.05.

 The two scenarios that have an R2 value of 0.31 are essentially the same scenario. The same
 independent variable of employment was used for the same period, 1982-2000. The difference
 between the two is that between the years of 2008 and 2011, 12,000 additional jobs were added to
 the equation to represent the 12,000 new, direct and indirect jobs that are anticipated to come to
 Chattanooga before 2011 when production begins in the new Volkswagen automotive plant. This



 Aviation Forecasts                                    3-27                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




scenario shows that approximately 5,900 enplanements per year could result due to these new
jobs alone.

The scenario for employment taken between the years 1982 and 2000 was selected to move
forward for consideration. While the scenario for employment using the 12,000 additional jobs
could also have been chosen, 10,000 of the 12,000 jobs are estimates of the number of supplier
jobs that could be added and the estimates for these have varied widely. Until information that is
more definitive is known, it would not be wise to use this scenario. This scenario does illustrate
that if 12,000 jobs are added to the Chattanooga CSA, that approximately 5,900 additional annual
enplanements can be expected. The summary output results for all of the scenarios shown in
Table 3-15 can be found in Appendix C.

3.4.4    FAA Terminal Area Forecast

The Federal Aviation Administration publishes each year the Terminal Area Forecast (TAF), the
official forecast of aviation activity at FAA facilities for:

   FAA towered airports
   Federal contracted tower airports
   Nonfederal towered airports
   Non towered airports

They also include projections for other active airports in the National Plan of Integrated Airport
Systems (NPIAS). These forecasts project the activities of air carriers, commuters, general
aviation, and the military as well as passenger enplanements and based aircraft. The FAA uses
the forecasts to determine their budget and planning needs.

The TAF, based upon the FAA’s mathematical models, generally does not specifically consider
local issues. The FAA Statistics and Forecast Branch (APO-110) generally relies on the FAA
regional offices to apprise them of significant issues.

The latest TAF for the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport released in March of 2008 uses FY2006
as the base year - when 239,629 enplaned passengers used the Airport. The average annual
growth rate used by the FAA in the 2007 TAF in the 2007 to 2025 forecast period is 1.5 percent. In
the preliminary 2008 TAF, the average annual growth rate has been reduced to 1.3 percent. The
FAA uses these very conservative rates of growth for many of the airports in the United States that
are of a similar size to the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. Table 3-17 shows the FAA 2008
TAF.

In the FAA 2008 TAF, 2007 is the initial year of the forecast and 289,158 passengers are projected
for Chattanooga. By 2025, the last year of the TAF projection, 363,061 passengers are estimated;
a growth of 73,903 enplaned passengers over 18 years, or over 4,000 enplanements per year. For
purposes of comparison to the cases that will follow in this report, the FAA 2008 TAF has been
projected by two years to the year 2027 using the same annual growth rate of 1.3 percent for a
total of 372,792 enplaned passengers. This methodology was advanced for further consideration.




Aviation Forecasts                              3-28                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                     Master Plan Update




                                                         Table 3-17
                                             FAA 2008 TERMINAL AREA FORECAST


                     500,000

                     450,000

                     400,000

                     350,000
      Enplanements




                     300,000

                     250,000

                     200,000

                     150,000

                     100,000

                      50,000

                          0
                               1976   1981   1986   1991   1996         2001     2006      2011     2016      2021      2026

                                                           Historical          FAA 2008 TAF

                                                                        FAA 2008 TAF
                                                      Historical        Enplanements
                                             Year   Enplanements          Forecast
                                             1976         256,320
                                             1981          227,759
                                             1986          272,468
                                             1991          274,480
                                             1996          239,318
                                             2001          278,097
                                             2005          250,406
                                             2007          296,083               289,158
                                             2012                                306,261
                                             2017                                326,817
                                             2022                                348,961
                                             2025                                363,061
                                             Average Annual Growth
                                             2007-2012                             1.2%
                                             2012-2017                             1.3%
                                             2017-2022                             1.3%
                                             2022-2025                             1.3%
Source: FAA


Aviation Forecasts                                             3-29                                                FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




3.4.5    Indexed TAF

The Indexed TAF is based on the FAA TAF but takes into consideration the passenger
enplanement growth that has already occurred at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. The FAA
2008 TAF uses the FY 2006 enplanements as the base. The actual passenger enplanements of
296,083 for FY 2007 indicate a higher volume of passengers used the Airport than the 248,741
enplanements the FAA is currently predicting.

In the Indexed TAF, the conservative 1.3 percent average annual rate of growth used by the FAA
in the 2008 TAF is used; however, the higher actual FY 2007 passenger level is used as the base.
The FY 2007 passenger level is obtained from Airport records, so the total should be very similar to
the results the FAA will obtain when they update the TAF. The FAA’s updated TAF is due in March
of 2009, and will be based on FY 2007 numbers.

With the Indexed TAF, the enplaned passengers would grow from the 296,083 enplaned
passengers the Airport experienced in FY 2007 to 384,400 in 2027 at the TAF average annual
growth rate of 1.3 percent. This would result in approximately 30 percent more passengers in
2027 than 2007 or approximately 88,300 more passengers as shown in Table 3-18.

Both the FAA 2008 TAF and the Indexed TAF would result in a “break-out” from the Airport’s
traditional ceiling of approximately 300,000 annual enplaned passengers. The key result of the
Indexed TAF is that the Airport would be preparing for close to 385,000 enplaned passengers by
the end of the 20-year period. This methodology was advanced for further consideration.




Aviation Forecasts                              3-30                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                        Master Plan Update




                                                                Table 3-18
                                                              INDEXED TAF


                         500,000

                         450,000

                         400,000
                         350,000
          Enplanements




                         300,000

                         250,000

                         200,000

                         150,000
                         100,000

                          50,000

                              0
                                   1976   1981     1986   1991    1996        2001   2006     2011     2016    2021     2026

                                                          Historical          FAA TAF        Indexed TAF

                                                            Historical           Indexed TAF
                                                 Year     Enplanements          Enplanements
                                                 1976           256,320
                                                 1981             227,759
                                                 1986             272,468
                                                 1991             274,480
                                                 1996             239,318
                                                 2001             278,097
                                                  2005            250,406
                                                  2006            239,629
                                                 2007 1           296,083

                                                 2012                                   315,800

                                                 2017                                   337,000

                                                 2022                                   359,800

                                                 2027                                   384,400

                                             Average Annual Growth
                                             2007-2012                                      1.6%
                                             2012-2017                                      1.3%
                                             2017-2022                                      1.3%
                                             2022-2027                                      1.3%
Source: FAA
        1
          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport records of actual annual passenger enplanements for FY2007


Aviation Forecasts                                                     3-31                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




3.4.6    Presentation of the Enplaned Passenger Forecast

The process of developing a preferred forecast is interpretative and is based on knowledge of
aviation trends and understanding of the factors that affect those trends. Therefore, the accuracy
of the forecasts depends greatly upon how well future trends are predicted. It also depends on
how these trends impact traffic at the Airport. This chapter presented five passenger forecast
methodologies. With several of the methodologies, two or more scenarios were also presented.
Together these provide a wide range of future activity for analytical purposes. Each of the
methodologies that had one or more scenarios have been further analyzed to reduce the number
of scenarios within each methodology to one. The results are as follows:

   Market Share Analysis – the Remain at the Current Market Share was selected as it represents
    modest growth while recognizing that the growth the Airport has achieved in the last several
    years is unlikely to continue at the same rate.
   Trend Analysis – the scenario selected is the 18-year Average Annual Growth scenario. It
    represents a high-case scenario representative of the growth the Airport has experienced in the
    last several years and is close to but below the FAA Aerospace Forecasts FY 2005-2025,
    national growth rate.
   Regression Analysis – the scenario Employment for the period 1982-2000 was selected, as it
    was the scenario with the strongest level of significance and therefore the most likely predictor
    of future enplanements of this group of enplanements.
The FAA 2008 TAF and the Indexed TAF were both brought forward for further consideration. The
forecasts brought forward are shown in Table 3-19.




Aviation Forecasts                               3-32                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                              Master Plan Update




                                                       Table 3-19
                                       SUMMARY OF ENPLANED PASSENGER FORECASTS

                    500,000
                    450,000
                    400,000
                    350,000
     Enplanements




                    300,000
                    250,000
                    200,000
                    150,000
                    100,000
                     50,000
                           0
                               1976   1981      1986   1991   1996      2001   2006   2011     2016       2021     2026
                               Historical                                      18-year AAG
                               Regression Employment                           FAA 2008 TAF
                               Indexed TAF                                     Remain at Current Market Share
                                                 Remain at    18-Year
                                                  Current      (1982-     Regression
                                 Historical       Market        2000)      Analysis        FAA 2008         Indexed
                    Year       Enplanements        Share       (2.4%)    (Employment)        TAF              TAF
                    1976             256,320
                    1981              227,759
                    1986              272,468
                    1991              274,480
                    1996              239,318
                    2001              278,097
                    2007              296,083                                                  289,158
                    2012                           306,500    332,700          334,813         306,261       315,800
                    2017                           352,500    373,900          349,899         326,817       337,000
                    2022                           401,800    420,200          364,985         348,961       359,800
                    2027                           457,900    472,200          380,069         363,061       384,400
      Average Annual Growth
      2007-2012                                        0.7%      2.4%             2.5%             0.7%          1.3%
      2012-2017                                        2.8%      2.4%             0.9%             1.3%          1.3%
      2017-2022                                        2.7%      2.4%             0.8%             1.3%          1.3%
      2022-2027                                        2.6%      2.4%             0.8%             0.8%          1.3%
    Source: FAA
            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport




Aviation Forecasts                                               3-33                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




3.4.7    The Preferred Forecast

As can be seen from Table 3-19, the forecasts brought forward tend to form two groups in the later
planning years. These are defined as follows:

   “Doldrums” – Where Airport enplanement levels follow long-term, low-growth trends with few
    changes in air service. Three of the forecasts fall within this scenario, with an increase to
    between approximately 363,061 and 384,400 annual passenger enplanements by the end of
    the planning period. These forecasts are the Regression Analysis Employment 1982-2000, the
    FAA 2008 TAF, and the Indexed TAF.            These three forecasts reflect the historical
    enplanements of the Airport and project them forward. Only the Indexed TAF recognizes the
    LCC influence; and the only LCC influence reflected in the Indexed TAF is that of the
    passenger enplanements of Allegiant through September of 2007.

   “Current Trends” – This group of forecasts reflects the modest continuation of the positive air
    service and passenger growth trends of the past five years. Two forecast methodologies
    support this scenario with increases to between approximately 457,900 and 472,200 annual
    passenger enplanements by the end of the planning period. These two forecasts include the
    Remain at Current Market Share and the Return to 18-year Average Annual Growth forecasts.
    Only the Remain at Current Market Share recognizes the passenger increases that have
    occurred in the two years since the FY 2006 data used for the FAA 2008 TAF. The 18-year
    Average Annual Growth reflects the growth the Airport was experiencing for an 18-year period
    prior to September 11, 2001.

Of the forecasts brought forward, the Remain at Current Market Share forecast was selected as
the Preferred Forecast. It is shown with the FAA 2008 TAF and the Indexed TAF in Table 3-20.




Aviation Forecasts                              3-34                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




                                                               Table 3-20
                                                   PREFERRED ENPLANEMENT FORECAST

                     500,000

                     450,000

                     400,000

                     350,000
      Enplanements




                     300,000

                     250,000

                     200,000

                     150,000

                     100,000

                      50,000

                          0
                               1976       1981     1986      1991     1996       2001      2007       2012     2017         2022

                                           Historical     FAA 2008 TAF        Indexed TAF          Remain at Current Market Share

                                                                                              Remain at          Percent
                                                                                               Current          Difference
                                                               FAA 2008          Indexed       Market           From FAA
                               Year        Enplanements          TAF               TAF          Share           2008 TAF
                               1976              256,320
                               1981                227,759
                               1986                272,468
                               1991                274,480
                               1996                239,318
                               2001                278,097
                               2007                296,083          289,158
                               2012                                 306,261      315,800            306,500            0.1%
                               2017                                 326,817      337,000            352,500            7.9%
                               2022                                 348,961      359,800            401,800           15.1%
                                      1
                           2027                                     372,792      384,400            457,900           22.8%
                          Average Annual Growth
                          2007-2012                                   0.7%          1.3%                0.7%          n/a
                          2012-2017                                   1.3%          1.3%                2.8%          n/a
                          2017-2022                                   1.3%          1.3%                2.7%          n/a
                          2022-2027                                   1.3%          1.3%                2.6%          n/a
  1
   The FAA TAF does not include the year 2027. Projections were made to the TAF at the same Annual Average
  Growth rate for purposes of comparison to the other forecasts.




Aviation Forecasts                                                        3-35                                                 FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




There were many reasons for the selection of the Remain at Current Market Share as the
Preferred Forecast. A few of these include:

     The FAA 2008 TAF was based on FY 2006 enplanement data.
     The Indexed TAF takes into consideration the enplanement data between the end of FY 2006
      and the end of FY 2007 on September 30, 2007.
     Since September of 2007, Allegiant Air added two flights per week to Ft. Lauderdale, FL and an
      additional flight to Orlando, FL using an MD-80 aircraft. Enjoying load factors between 96.7
      and 80.1 percent for an average load factor of 86.3 percent, this adds approximately 20,250
      annual enplanements.
     While Skybus has declared bankruptcy and left the Airport, their one flight per day was not
      counted into the FY 2007 annual enplanements as they only began service to the Airport in
      December of 2007.

     While Continental has announced that they will be leaving the Airport, American has agreed to
      add an additional flight per day to Dallas/Fort Worth, thereby reducing by more than half the
      impact of the Continental departure. The result is a loss of approximately 7,300 annual
      enplanements.
     In the last five years, Chattanooga has added seven new destinations to their schedule.
     The announcement of the building of a new Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga with an increase
      of up to 12,000 direct jobs could translate into as much as 5,900 annual enplanements.

3.5      AIR CARGO

The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport has long had air cargo service. In the last number of years,
the amount of cargo traveling into and out of the Airport has risen dramatically. This triggered the
Airport’s desire to investigate the viability of continuing the growth of air cargo at the Airport.
Further, if air cargo were determined to be viable, what facilities would be required? This section
explores the current state of the air cargo industry, Chattanooga’s current and possible future role,
and the facilities that would be required to fulfill that role.

3.5.1    Industry Developments

Throughout the 1990’s, growth enjoyed by many airports was directly attributable to integrated2
carriers, such as Airborne Express (ABX), DHL, FedEx and UPS. These carriers expanded
volumes by augmenting services and leveraging the dramatic growth of the U.S. economy over the
decade – but also by capturing market share formerly carried by passenger carriers in many
marginal markets. Passenger carriers unilaterally conceded much of this business by shedding
frequencies and destinations, as well as by operating regional jets and other cargo capacity-
strained aircraft on many routes.

Since 2000, many airports have experienced declining cargo volumes due to a variety of factors.
While 9/11 had an undeniable impact on cargo volumes, the general decline had begun at least a
year earlier sparked by a manufacturing slowdown starting in 2000.
2
  So-called because of the integration of proprietary services – specifically multi-modal transportation
including owned aircraft and trucking services, as well as freight forwarding and customs brokerage.



Aviation Forecasts                                3-36                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




As of July 2007, two integrated carriers – ABX Air Inc. flying on behalf of DHL and Mountain Air
Cargo flying on behalf of FedEx - accounted for more than 99 percent of all cargo processed at
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. Passenger carriers accounted for less than one percent.

3.5.2    Carrier Consolidations and Acquisitions

Since 2000, the number of integrated carriers shrank as UPS acquired Emery and DHL acquired
the former Airborne Express (now known as ABX Air, Inc.). Even as they grew through
acquisitions, the major integrators have been responsible for decreasing air cargo volumes at
airports. UPS ranks as the largest trucking company in North America, followed by FedEx, which
acquired three of the formerly top twenty over-the-road trucking companies in North America.
DHL’s interest in acquiring Airborne was largely driven by its interest in the former Airborne Ground
operation – giving DHL an instant trucking network in the world’s largest cargo market.

3.5.3    Mail

The previously referenced erosion of market share by passenger carriers has been exacerbated as
formerly lucrative US Postal Service contracts traditionally carried by passenger carriers have been
tendered to FedEx, supplemented by DHL. Consequently, airports experienced tremendous losses
in reported “mail”, although these “losses” are overstated because some of these volumes have
merely been redistributed to all-cargo airlines and no longer reported as mail. Growth rates for
reported mail volumes are likely to be suppressed due to continued pressure to divert low-yield
mail by truck and higher-yield priority mail to contract carriers such as FedEx. Indicative of the
trend, Southwest Airlines – formerly one of the USPS largest contractors – recently decided to
terminate its contract to carry mail, citing unacceptably low margins. Substitution of electronic
communications for traditional “letter” mail will undoubtedly continue, as well.

3.5.4    Global Trends

As detailed in Table 3-21, Boeing projects the Intra-North America market to grow at only 3.8
percent per annum through year 2025. Much of that growth will accrue to regional cargo hubs –
rather than spoke markets, as well as international routes linking North America to Asia, not likely
to benefit Chattanooga. Most North American markets will suffer as carriers like DHL, FedEx and
UPS allocate new freighters to fast-growing Intra-Asia and Domestic China where they are still
developing hub-and-spoke networks. Rather than adding freighter frequencies, these carriers are
likely to address slow-growth U.S. markets by extending the use of express trucking, as well as by
changes in aircraft gauge.




Aviation Forecasts                               3-37                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




                                         Table 3-21
                             BOEING GLOBAL AIR CARGO FORECASTS
                                                           Annual Average
                                                          Growth Rate 2005-
                             Region                             2025
                             Domestic China                           10.8%
                             Intra-Asia                                8.6%
                             Asia-North America                        7.1%
                             World                                     6.1%
                             Europe-North America                      5.4%
                             Intra-North America                       3.8%
                            Source: Boeing World Air Cargo Forecasts 2005/2006

Unfortunately, while Chattanooga may not have the opportunity to benefit from the stimulus of
trade with Asia, it is not likely to be left unaffected by that growth. Because of its proximity to
several large North American cargo hubs, Chattanooga can be served effectively for much of its
cargo needs by truck. Both UPS and FedEx have indicated early in 2008, that their larger North
American strategies to serve the domestic market are to maximize the use of trucks in the next few
years. Not only could the Airport be affected in terms of aircraft utilization but also unspecified
postponements are being introduced into corporate planning in terms of the need for new on-
airport cargo facilities at many airports.

Meanwhile, DHL, now owned by German Postal Company Deutsche Post, has actually faced large
institutional investors encouraging it to leave the U.S. market where it has experienced financial
losses since acquiring Airborne. Although the corporate directors of DHL have recently indicated
their willingness to persevere independently, it was also briefly rumored that DHL could sell its
domestic express operation to FedEx.

3.5.5    Cargo Operations at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport

While there has been a general erosion of cargo tonnage at many U.S. airports, losses have been
particularly severe at many “spoke” airports in cargo carriers’ hub systems. These airports have
been marginalized both by passenger carriers offering less belly space and by all-cargo carriers
maximizing their utilization of trucks on domestic segments in order to allocate freighters to high-
growth markets such as intra-Asia and trans-Pacific routes. The competitive economics of trucks
has been augmented by unprecedented fuel costs.

As depicted in Table 3-22, Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport had an extremely erratic ten-year
period between 1997 and 2006 but ultimately still managed to grow its total cargo volume by 75
percent over that span. Entirely due to the introduction of all-cargo flights in 2005, Chattanooga
experienced this dramatic growth in spite of having annual losses in more individual years than
gains during the period. As will be explored later, Chattanooga’s “relative prosperity” differs greatly
with the region’s dominant gateway, Atlanta, and Birmingham, which lost around 14 percent and
almost 30 percent respectively during the same period. For reasons already cited, Chattanooga’s
experience with diminishing increments of mail is typical of the vast majority of U.S. airports and
likely to continue. Because mail volumes are almost entirely a function of capacity offered by
passenger carriers and contracts with FedEx and others for premium products, there is little airport
operators can do but passively monitor this particular element of the cargo business.




Aviation Forecasts                                 3-38                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




                                         Table 3-22
            CHATTANOOGA METROPOLITAN AIRPORT'S TOTAL CARGO (SHORT TONS) 1997-2006
                                                                                                          Total
         Enplaned        Deplaned          Total         Annual            Enplaned     Deplaned        Freight &        Annual +/-
Year      Freight         Freight         Freight         +/- %              Mail         Mail            Mail              %
1997       2,271.7          2,007.3         4,279.0                              2.4         75.9           4,357.3
1998       2,428.1          1,922.7         4,350.8          1.7%                2.8         54.2           4,407.8              1.2%
1999       2,284.7          1,894.2         4,178.9         -4.0%                  -         25.3           4,204.2             -4.6%
2000       2,269.3          1,878.8         4,148.1         -0.7%                  -         48.4           4,196.5             -0.2%
2001       1,861.4          1,748.8         3,610.2        -13.0%                0.6         54.3           3,665.1            -12.7%
2002       1,815.7          1,661.8         3,477.4         -3.7%                2.2         19.0           3,498.7             -4.5%
2003       2,985.3          2,852.5         5,837.8         67.9%                5.1         36.4           5,879.3             68.0%
2004       1,524.7          1,410.1         2,934.8        -49.7%                  -         14.3           2,949.1            -49.8%
2005       2,174.7          2,368.3         4,543.0         54.8%                1.6          8.8           4,553.4             54.4%
2006       3,728.9          3,903.6         7,632.5         68.0%                1.7          5.6           7,639.7             67.8%
                                                                3
       Source: Airports Council International – North America

  Detailed in Table 3-23 and Table 3-24, as of July 2007, Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport’s two
  integrated carriers – DHL whose local flying and ground handling is performed by contract carrier
  ABX Air Inc. and FedEx whose local operations are flown by Mountain Air Cargo - accounted for
  more than 99 percent of all cargo processed at the Airport. Passenger carriers accounted for less
  than one percent.

                                                  Table 3-23
                                  TOTAL CARGO BY CARRIER (POUNDS) JULY 2007
                                                   Enplaned Deplaned                   Total
                                  FedEx              170,918  197,050                    367,968
                                  DHL/ABX            537,819  537,321                  1,075,140
                                  All Freighters     708,737  734,371                  1,443,108
                                  Total Cargo        710,745  740,073                  1,450,818
                                  Source: Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport


                                               Table 3-24
                              TOTAL CARGO MARKET SHARE BY CARRIER JULY 2007
                                                        Enplaned Deplaned Total
                                      FedEx                24.0%     26.6% 25.4%
                                      DHL/ABX              75.7%     72.6% 74.1%
                                      All Freighters       99.7%     99.2% 99.5%
                                      Source: Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport

  The DHL/ABX operation illustrates facets of Chattanooga’s current role and possible direction in
  the cargo industry. ABX operates a variety of DC-9 and (less often) DC-8 aircraft to DHL’s hub in
  Wilmington, OH – the furthest of the three integrators’ national hubs from Chattanooga. By itself,
  Chattanooga would not justify that size aircraft but DHL is able to gather the required loads by
  “triangulating” the service, flying from its Wilmington hub with a stop at Chattanooga before
  heading to Huntsville for the larger portion of the day. In the evening, the carrier stops again at
  Chattanooga en route from Huntsville to Wilmington. DHL staff estimated the aircraft ideally is only
  on the ramp at Chattanooga thirty minutes per stop. While it is undesirable for any carrier to
  operate more landings and departures than necessary from a fuel-utilization perspective,
  3
      Tonnage was originally reported in metric tons and therefore may differ slightly due to rounding.


  Aviation Forecasts                                                3-39                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




Chattanooga gets two daily landings for as long as the revenue contribution for those stops is
greater than the marginal cost for DHL.

By comparison, FedEx has contracted its local flying and ground handling to Mountain Air Cargo,
which typically operates a variety of ATR aircraft on the segment to FedEx hub Memphis. Given its
market share (about one-third that of DHL) in Chattanooga, one would typically surmise that FedEx
has properly “right-sized” its aircraft for the market. However, FedEx has considered upgrading
Chattanooga to a “jet city”, typically entailing initial B-727-200 service, aircraft that FedEx intends
to replace with B-757-200 aircraft between 2008 and 2016. Table 3-25 shows the principal U.S.
domestic fleets operated by the Chattanooga integrated carriers.

                                          Table 3-25
           PRINCIPAL U.S. DOMESTIC FLEETS FOR CHATTANOOGA INTEGRATED CARRIERS
                                                              Freighters
      Integrated Freight Carriers       Small                  Medium                      Large
     FEDEX                        B727-100, 200        A300-600, A310-200/320
     ABX Air (DHL contractor)     DC9-31,32,33,41      B767-200
     Astar (DHL contractor)       B727-200             A300B4-200, DC-8-73

Presently, UPS serves the Chattanooga market entirely by truck. Its overnight needs are met by
trucking shipments to UPS’ air operation in Knoxville, while deferred delivery (two to three day and
beyond) may be trucked either to the air hub in Louisville or be trucked completely to its
destination, depending on the schedule and distance. UPS registered its relative satisfaction with
this approach but included the caveat that over the longer-term planning horizon, a plane could be
justified if the carrier were to “bleed off” volumes presently fed through Atlanta.

All of these operations – DHL, FedEx and UPS – are demonstrative of the almost unique ability of
integrated carriers to exploit greater capacity by shifting demand through adjustments to service
areas. Unlike their more demand-driven counterparts in other sectors, integrated carriers have the
scale (in terms of sheer volume of shipments under their control) as well as resources (most
prominently trucks) to influence a market directly by adding capacity, then reworking its network to
support it. Once they introduce the capacity (“lift”) into a market, the integrators can simply change
their service parameters to ensure its operating effectiveness – perhaps by extending the service
area south toward Atlanta and/or north toward Knoxville. Because the Chattanooga Master Plan’s
aviation forecasts cover a longer planning range, the “high case” will account for this specific
possibility.

On the subject of trucking operations, it bears noting that although surface transportation is
essential to the air cargo industry and particularly to integrators, there is still substantial operating
autonomy between management of each mode. For example, on January 15, 2008, while FedEx
Freight announced their intention to nearly double their local presence on a tract of land near the
Airport. Quoted in the Chattanooga Times Free Press (“FedEx Freight Plans Shallowford Road
Facility”, 1/15/2008), Dennis Beal, FedEx Freight’s vice president of physical assets observed, “We
see the Chattanooga market as a vibrant market.” Proving as much, in the previous six months
FedEx Ground had begun construction of a $15 million facility off South Broad Street. All of this
investment is encouraging and provides Chattanooga with superior logistics offerings. However,
for the Airport, it is also likely emblematic of the near-term investment priorities of the integrators, in
general.




Aviation Forecasts                                  3-40                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                        Master Plan Update




Besides the on-airport presence of contract carriers for FedEx and DHL, Chattanooga is also home
to Chattanooga Air Freight, which provides consolidations and line-haul trucking services for local
freight forwarders – primarily to Atlanta. Previously, it also provided this service for FedEx, which
has since taken these operations internal.

The business model of freight forwarders, including former Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport
tenant Southern Air Freight, which has moved its operation off-airport is to offer communities such
as Chattanooga – which lack international airlift and wide-body capacity sufficient for containerized
freight – the ability to exploit the offerings of larger international gateways such as Atlanta.
Although they typically – other than the occasional chartered aircraft – do not bring in their own
scheduled air service, they have a critical role in the air transportation industry.

3.5.6    Regional Air Cargo Operations

Of the regional airports in Table 3-26, none grew by a greater percentage than Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport, which grew by about 75 percent between 1997 and 2006. The dominant
regional gateway, Atlanta, experienced a loss of almost 14 percent and Birmingham dropped
almost 30 percent. Both Nashville and Huntsville benefited from international volumes with the
former gaining a Dell Computer plant responsible for new freighter service to Asia, while the latter
has served as an alternative gateway for European freight forwarder Panalpina. Like many similar-
sized airports, Knoxville took several years to recover from the slowdown of 2001 but still managed
to register about a 20 percent increase for the period.

                                       Table 3-26
         REGIONAL AND PEER GROUP AIRPORTS CARGO TONNAGE (SHORT TONS) 1997-2006
        Year Chattanooga         Knoxville        Nashville         Huntsville     Atlanta    Birmingham
         1997       4,357            38,310           58,413             40,780       950,921       48,572
         1998       4,408            46,891           60,289             34,797       997,929       45,510
         1999       4,204            49,101           62,372             54,754       971,435       43,148
         2000       4,197            48,763           64,523             67,767       983,918       44,794
         2001       3,664            42,686           51,792             65,633       809,376       38,975
         2002       3,498            39,743           44,480             67,433       807,491       35,588
         2003       5,878            38,325           65,144             61,778       882,473       37,601
         2004       2,949            38,748           70,505             61,029       948,453       32,903
         2005       4,554            41,458           71,801             58,456       844,687       33,579
         2006       7,640            46,037           74,682             76,392       821,152       34,183
    Source: Airports Council International – North America

By annual volume, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport operates in an altogether
different sphere from any other airport in the region. By volume, Huntsville and Nashville are
roughly comparable to one another and still considerably larger than Knoxville and Birmingham. By
cargo volume, Chattanooga is considerably smaller than any other airport in the region and as has
been demonstrated repeatedly in recent years, one consequence of such a small volume base and
related dependence on so few carriers is that relatively minor changes in carrier operating patterns
tend to be magnified in Chattanooga’s annual cargo statistics.

Of the regional airports referenced, Atlanta, Nashville and Knoxville have the most direct
implications for Chattanooga. Therefore, these will be examined more closely. Atlanta and
Nashville have both been cited by regional transportation operators as specifically garnering
international and long-distance domestic shipments trucked from Chattanooga’s service area,


Aviation Forecasts                                           3-41                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




while Knoxville more closely overlaps in the service areas of integrated carriers. In fact, UPS
considers Chattanooga to be part of the larger Knoxville service area.

Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport

The starting point for Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport’s cargo performance is cargo
market leader (around 38 percent market share) Delta Airlines, which – although not operating
freighters – operates the largest wide-body fleet of any U.S. carrier. Moreover, Delta’s partnerships
with many other airlines and the opportunity for international carriers to interline cargo to access
Delta’s domestic route network provide powerful incentives for numerous other carriers to use
Atlanta as a cargo gateway.

The sheer volume of air cargo activity at Atlanta, the incomparable belly capacity and the
substantial local industrial demand sustain an enviable base of complementary service providers,
including more than 100 motor carriers serving the airfreight market (and more than 300 common
carriers operating in the metro), more than 100 licensed customs brokers and 200 domestic and
international freight forwarders. In terms of trucking common carriers, as well as other allied trade
and cargo services, Atlanta is likely superior to any Southeastern U.S. market other than Miami.

Nashville International Airport

The genesis of the Nashville Air Cargo Link – as Nashville’s air cargo complex is known – dates to
1999, when the Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority bought the original 30-year-old multi-tenant
cargo terminal comprising 89,638 square feet of warehouse and 435,600 square feet of ramp. In
August 2000, the Authority immediately commenced a $12 million enhancement/expansion project
on its new investment. The multi-phase cargo improvement program was initiated with $6.6 million
in rehabilitation and improvements to the existing cargo facility, cargo apron, taxiway, landside
truck terminal and parking lots.

In 2001, Nashville invested another $5.5 million ($4 million of which was federal funding) for a
cargo apron expansion to accommodate multiple wide-body freighters. In Phase II completed in
2003, Nashville added a new 24,000 square foot terminal with 762,300 square foot of ramp on the
airport’s west side built to accommodate China Airlines. In June 2006, third party developer
Aeroterm completed a dedicated facility for FedEx Express that relieves pressure on the Nashville
airport’s multi-tenant capacity. The FedEx facility comprises 71,500 square feet of warehouse and
sufficient apron for two to three wide-body aircraft. The facility presently operates as a 3,000
pieces per hour capacity facility but has capacity for 6,000 pieces per hour

In August 2001, China Airlines began service to Nashville from Taipei, Taiwan. The service was
initiated entirely to serve Dell Computers but area forwarders have supplemented Dell’s demand
with other regional consolidations. Dell’s initial primary logistics provider was Eagle Global
Logistics but more recently, it has been handled by UPS Global Logistics, which although this
division retained the China Airlines flight operations, UPS did not maintained its own domestic flight
operation - downgrading Nashville to a trucking-intensive service to the Louisville hub.

McGhee Tyson Airport

Unlike the international offerings at Atlanta and secondarily at Nashville, Knoxville’s McGhee
Tyson Airport has a more predatory relationship with the Chattanooga market in that unlike the
more unattainable international operations, domestic shipments are being trucked from
Chattanooga to Knoxville. The preceding is not an indictment against either Knoxville or carriers


Aviation Forecasts                                 3-42                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                Master Plan Update




such as UPS who do so, but rather merely symptomatic of the prevalent business model. As
detailed in Table 3-26, Knoxville processes about six times the annual volume of Chattanooga. To
the extent that far more of that origin and destination cargo is produced/consumed in the Knoxville
market, in some circumstances, it may be optimal for the carrier to use trucked freight from the
smaller market to effectively “top off” existing scheduled service at the larger market.

Apart from scale, Knoxville and Chattanooga bear some similarities. Both are essentially feeder
markets served by truck in order to consolidate air cargo at larger international gateways. Like
Chattanooga, Knoxville is dominated by integrated carriers with FedEx and UPS combining for
approximately 90 percent of the total cargo market share. Knoxville’s cargo complex dates to 1991
when the airport’s 21-acre cargo area was completed to provide Airborne Express, FedEx, and
UPS with dedicated cargo terminals, along with 430,000 square feet of aircraft parking apron and
more than 200,000 square feet of vehicular parking.

3.5.7    Chattanooga Monthly Peaks

Typically, one of the trickiest aspects of airport cargo planning is reconciling the need to
accommodate peak period requirements - for both cargo terminal and ramp demand – with the
desire to limit investments in facilities only used a portion of the year. However, as revealed in
Figure 3-5, Table 3-27, and Table 3-28. Chattanooga’s peaks have been relatively modest.

                                                            Figure 3-5
                                            CHATTANOOGA 2007 MONTHLY FREIGHT (POUNDS)

                              1,000,000
                               900,000
                               800,000
                               700,000
          Pounds of Freight




                               600,000
                               500,000
                               400,000
                               300,000
                               200,000
                               100,000
                                     0
                                          January   March      May           July    September November
                                                                          Month

                                                       Enplaned Freight       Deplaned Freight




Aviation Forecasts                                                3-43                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




                                        Table 3-27
            MONTHLY FREIGHT TOTALS (POUNDS) TRANSPORTED BY FREIGHTERS IN 2007

                                          Total      Total
                                        Enplaned   Deplaned
                               Month     Freight    Freight    Total Freight
                           January         668,193     726,998    1,395,191
                           February        643,468     696,598    1,340,066
                           March           775,423     794,643    1,570,066
                           April           623,682     672,843    1,296,525
                           May             720,561     789,877    1,510,438
                           June            747,158     780,903    1,528,061
                           July            708,737     734,371    1,443,108
                           August          810,775     881,068    1,691,843
                           September       727,446     740,944    1,468,390
                           October         781,403     764,476    1,545,879
                           November        766,223     750,880    1,517,103
                           December        683,133     718,063    1,401,196
                           2007 TOTAL    8,656,202   9,051,664 17,707,866


                                            Table 3-28
                                 2007 MONTHLY FREIGHTER LANDINGS
                                                                        % of
                                 Total     FedEx/Mountain              Annual
                       Month   Freighters        Air         ABX/DHL Freighters
                     January            63              21          42    8.30%
                     February           60              20          40    7.91%
                     March              69              23          46    8.30%
                     April              59              20          39    7.91%
                     May                66              22          44    8.30%
                     June               66              22          44    7.91%
                     July               60              20          40    8.30%
                     August             69              23          46    7.91%
                     September          60              20          40    8.30%
                     October            66              22          44    7.91%
                     November           63              21          42    8.30%
                     December           58              20          38    7.91%

3.5.8    Cargo Forecasts for Chattanooga

The slow cargo growth (3.8 percent) projected by Boeing for North American airports is likely to be
even more marginal for many non-hub airports, such as Chattanooga, which will not directly
participate in the growth in trans-Pacific cargo volumes likely to be trucked from gateways. In Table
3-29, growth rates for freight are held static at 3.8 percent, while the growth rate for mail has been
forecast to rise at a steady one percent per annum. However, this could easily run at a deficit.




Aviation Forecasts                               3-44                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                        Master Plan Update




                                           Table 3-29
                     AIR CARGO FORECAST (SHORT TONS) - "BASE CASE" 2007-2027
                                                                           Total
                               Enplaned    Deplaned            Total     Freight +    Annual
                        Year    Freight     Freight           Freight      Mail        +/- %
                        2007     4,328.1     4,525.8           8,853.9     8,861.3      18.1%
                        2008     4,492.6     4,697.8           9,190.3     9,198.0       3.8%
                        2009     4,663.3     4,876.3           9,539.6     9,547.6       3.8%
                        2010     4,840.5     5,061.6           9,902.1     9,910.4       3.8%
                        2011     5,024.4     5,253.9          10,278.4    10,287.0       3.8%
                        2012     5,215.4     5,453.6          10,668.9    10,677.9       3.8%
                        2013     5,413.5     5,660.8          11,074.4    11,083.6       3.8%
                        2014     5,619.3     5,875.9          11,495.2    11,504.8       3.8%
                        2015     5,832.8     6,099.2          11,932.0    11,942.0       3.8%
                        2016     6,054.4     6,331.0          12,385.4    12,395.8       3.8%
                        2017     6,284.5     6,571.6          12,856.1    12,866.8       3.8%
                        2018     6,523.3     6,821.3          13,344.6    13,355.8       3.8%
                        2019     6,771.2     7,080.5          13,851.7    13,863.3       3.8%
                        2020     7,028.5     7,349.6          14,378.1    14,390.1       3.8%
                        2021     7,295.6     7,628.8          14,924.4    14,936.9       3.8%
                        2022     7,572.8     7,918.7          15,491.6    15,504.5       3.8%
                        2023     7,860.6     8,219.6          16,080.2    16,093.7       3.8%
                        2024     8,159.3     8,532.0          16,691.3    16,705.2       3.8%
                        2025     8,469.3     8,856.2          17,325.5    17,340.0       3.8%
                        2026     8,791.2     9,192.7          17,983.9    17,998.9       3.8%
                        2027     9,125.2     9,542.1          18,667.3    18,682.9       3.8%

While this Base Case may seem conservative, (as has already been detailed) a trend analysis
simply based on the preceding ten years would be of dubious value given the highly erratic cargo
volumes experienced at the Airport during the period.

The High Case detailed in Table 3-30 introduces extraordinary developments in Years 2012 and
again in Year 2022. Specifically, in Year 2012, the forecast augments cargo volumes
commensurate with the possibility of FedEx upgrading its equipment from ATR to (initially) Boeing
727 freighter aircraft. In Year 2022, the forecast introduces another extraordinary event
concomitant either with the introduction of new service by UPS (suggested as a possibility as
Atlanta becomes more congested) or yet another upgrade by FedEx as B-727-200 aircraft is
replaced with the capacity of B-757 aircraft (again, as suggested by FedEx representatives).
However, pavement strength requirements of the interim B-727-200 aircraft require either
permission from the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority (pursuant to load bearing) or that
the carrier compromise payload maximization. Alternatively, FedEx has already begun the process
of replacing the aircraft with B-757-200 aircraft and might rotate this aircraft through Chattanooga
earlier or might delay the initiation of jet service into Chattanooga until later in the transition –
scheduled to be completed by 2016.




Aviation Forecasts                                     3-45                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




                                        Table 3-30
                     CARGO TONNAGE (SHORT TONS) FORECAST – “HIGH CASE”
                                                                      Total
                               Enplaned    Deplaned        Total     Freight    Annual
                       Year     Freight     Freight       Freight    + Mail      +/- %
                       2007      4,328.1     4,525.8       8,853.9    8,861.3     18.1%
                       2008      4,492.6     4,697.8       9,190.3    9,198.0      3.8%
                       2009      4,663.3     4,876.3       9,539.6    9,547.6      3.8%
                       2010      4,840.5     5,061.6       9,902.1    9,910.4      3.8%
                       2011      5,024.4     5,253.9      10,278.4   10,287.0      3.8%
                       2012      7,612.0     7,959.7      15,571.7   15,584.7     51.5%
                       2013      7,901.3     8,262.2      16,163.4   16,177.0      3.8%
                       2014      8,201.5     8,576.1      16,777.7   16,791.7      3.8%
                       2015      8,513.2     8,902.0      17,415.2   17,429.8      3.8%
                       2016      8,836.7     9,240.3      18,077.0   18,092.1      3.8%
                       2017      9,172.5     9,591.4      18,763.9   18,779.6      3.8%
                       2018      9,521.0     9,955.9      19,476.9   19,493.2      3.8%
                       2019      9,882.8    10,334.2      20,217.1   20,234.0      3.8%
                       2020     10,258.4    10,726.9      20,985.3   21,002.9      3.8%
                       2021     10,648.2    11,134.6      21,782.8   21,801.0      3.8%
                       2022     13,448.7    14,063.0      27,511.6   27,534.6     26.3%
                       2023     13,959.7    14,597.4      28,557.1   28,580.9      3.8%
                       2024     14,490.2    15,152.1      29,642.2   29,667.0      3.8%
                       2025     15,040.8    15,727.8      30,768.6   30,794.4      3.8%
                       2026     15,612.4    16,325.5      31,937.8   31,964.5      3.8%
                       2027     16,205.6    16,945.9      33,151.5   33,179.2      3.8%



3.6      BASED AIRCRAFT FORECAST

Based aircraft represent the total number of active civil aircraft permanently located at an airport
during a specific period. Based aircraft categories include single-engine, multi-engine, jet,
rotorcraft, and other/experimental. The national general aviation industry has experienced declines
in nearly all measures of activity since the early 1980s including new aircraft shipments, active
fixed base operators (FBOs), and hours flown. The number of aircraft based at individual airports
also dropped at many facilities, including the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport.

According to the Airport’s FAA 5010 form, there were 114-based aircraft at the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport in 2007. The Final Report, Tennessee Long-Range Transportation Plan,
Aviation System Plan, published in January of 2005 projects the based aircraft at Chattanooga to
grow to 181 based aircraft by the year 2030. The December 2006 FAA TAF forecast the based
aircraft to grow to 143 by 2025. The FAA FY 2007-2025 Summary TAF Report indicates an
approximate 0.87 percent average annual growth rate for based aircraft in the southern region of
the United States between 2007 and 2025. The FAA December 2007 TAF indicates 90-based
aircraft at the Airport. These 90-based aircraft are forecast to increase slowly to 108-based aircraft
by 2025, as shown in Table 3-31. If the 90-based aircraft in 2007 were corrected to 114-based
aircraft, and the same average annual growth rate was applied, it is likely that the Preferred Based
Aircraft forecast would be within one percent in the five-year forecast and two percent in the 10-
year forecast from the FAA TAF.




Aviation Forecasts                                 3-46                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                        Master Plan Update




                                                                  Table 3-31
                                                          BASED AIRCRAFT FORECAST

                      200

                      180

                      160

                      140
     Based Aircraft




                      120

                      100

                      80

                      60

                      40

                      20

                       0
                            1976    1981        1986       1991      1996        2001    2006       2011    2016       2021         2026

                                         Historical                                        FAA 2006 TAF
                                         FAA 2007 TAF                                      TN Aviation System Plan
                                         FY 2007-2025 Summary TAF Report                   FAA U.S. Growth by Aircraft Type
                                         FAA U.S. Growth by Total Aircraft
                                                                         Tennessee      2007-2025       FAA U.S.      FAA U.S.
                                            FAA             FAA           Aviation      Summary        Growth By     Growth By
                                          December        December        System           TAF           Aircraft       Total
   Year                     Historical    2006 TAF        2007 TAF          Plan         Report           Type         Aircraft
   1976                             0
   1981                            178
   1986                            161
   1991                            124
   1996                            114
   2001                            121
   2007                            114              115            90             119            114
   2012                                             123             95            132            119         133               122
   2017                                             132            101            147            124         152               131
   2022                                             140            106            160            129         172               140
   2027                                       n/a            n/a                  173      n/a               190               151
 Average Annual Growth
 2007-2012                                      1.4%           1.1%              2.2%        0.8%           3.1%            1.4%
 2012-2017                                      1.4%           1.2%              2.1%        0.8%           2.7%            1.4%
 2017-2022                                      1.2%           1.0%              1.7%        0.9%           2.5%            1.4%
 2022-2027                                    n/a            n/a                 1.6%      n/a              1.4%          n/a
Source: FAA
        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport



Aviation Forecasts                                                        3-47                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




The FAA Aerospace Forecasts 2008-2025, Table 27, found in Appendix C, projects the average
annual rate of growth for each type of civilian aircraft typically based at an airport. By projecting
the number of aircraft currently based at the Airport by type of aircraft using the FAA average
annual rate of growth and then adding these totals together, the FAA U.S. Growth by Aircraft Type
forecast results in a total of 190 aircraft based at the Airport in 2027. This is an increase of 76-
based aircraft over 20 years.

The FAA Aerospace Forecasts 2008-2025, Table 27, also projects the average annual rate of
growth for all general aviation aircraft as a group. The rate of approximately 1.4 percent per year
has been applied to the based aircraft at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport to achieve the FAA U.S.
Growth by Total Aircraft forecast resulting in 151-based aircraft at the Airport in 2027.

It can be seen from Table 3-31 that the FAA December 2006 TAF and the FAA U.S. Growth by
Aircraft Type both begin with between 114 and 115-based aircraft but by the year 2022 there is a
difference of 32 aircraft between the two. The FAA U.S. Growth by Total Aircraft is closely aligned
to the FAA December 2006 TAF. The Tennessee Aviation System Plan is located between the
FAA Growth by Aircraft Type and the FAA U.S. Growth by Total Aircraft, with a projected 173
based aircraft in 2027. Projections based on the FAA FY 2007-2025 Summary TAF Report fall
below the FAA December 2006 TAF. The FAA December 2007 TAF begins with 90 aircraft in
2007 and rises to 95 aircraft by 2012 and then slowly rises to 108 based aircraft by 2025. The FAA
U.S. Growth by Total was selected as the Preferred Forecast for based aircraft.

3.7      AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS FORECAST

The forecast of aircraft operations includes three categories: commercial service, general aviation,
and military. The commercial service category includes both air carrier and commuter operations
of both passenger and air cargo airlines. The military includes aircraft of the United States military,
while the general aviation category represents all civil aviation aircraft takeoffs and landings not
classified as commercial (air carrier or commuter) or military.

3.7.1    FAA TAF Operations Forecast

The FAA 2008 TAF contains the FAA’s record of historical aircraft operations by category, as well
as their projections. The FAA 2008 TAF indicates that the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport had a
peak number of annual operations of approximately 148,000 in 2001 and a low of approximately
88,000 annual operations over a 31-year period.

The FAA 2008 TAF Operations Forecast projects that total operations will increase to
approximately 94,800 annual operations in 2027. Within the categories of commercial service,
general aviation, and military, the FAA expects the largest growth to occur in general aviation,
while the commercial operations and military are predicted to remain stable or decline. The FAA
2008 TAF is shown in Table 3-32.




Aviation Forecasts                                3-48                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                               Master Plan Update




                                                          Table 3-32
                                                FAA TAF OPERATIONS FORECAST


                 120,000

                 100,000

                  80,000
    Operations




                  60,000

                  40,000

                  20,000

                      0
                           1976     1981       1986    1991      1996     2001   2006    2011       2016     2021

                                  Historical Commercial Ops                      Forecast Commercial Ops
                                  Historical GA & Military Ops                   Forecast GA & Military Ops

                               Historical FAA 2008 TAF Historical FAA 2008 TAF
                              Commercial Commercial Military & GA Military and GA
                    Year      Operations Operations    Operations   Operations    Total Operations
                    1976              21,500                        106,262                                127,762
                    1981              14,133                            86,742                             100,875
                    1986              22,652                            96,033                             118,685
                    1991              25,315                            83,056                             108,371
                    1996              21,602                            66,965                              88,567
                    2001              34,912                        112,435                                147,347
                    2005              23,435                            68,677                              92,112
                    2006              22,250                            59,417                              81,667
                    2007                              22,166                            56,485              78,651
                    2012                              23,047                            62,567              85,614
                    2017                              24,040                            67,427              91,467
                    2022                              25,082                            71,677              96,759
                    2025                              25,733                            74,406             100,139
                 Average Annual Growth
                 2007-2012                              0.8%                              2.1%                1.7%
                 2012-2017                              0.8%                              1.5%                1.3%
                 2017-2022                              0.9%                              1.2%                1.1%
                 2022-2025                              0.9%                              1.3%                1.2%
Source: FAA




Aviation Forecasts                                                3-49                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




3.7.2    Master Plan Forecast of Operations

In the last five years, the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport has recorded approximately 443,500
operations, or an average of approximately 88,700 annual operations. The total number of
operations per year has been declining. The forecast of total annual operations is a function of the
commercial, general aviation, and military operations. The commercial operations are dependent
upon the forecast of enplaned passengers selected. This will be covered in the next section of the
report.

A few considerations will apply regardless of the passenger enplanement forecast selected. They
are as follows:

   The size of the commuter passenger aircraft will continue to increase. Specifically the 19-, 34-,
    and 50-seat aircraft will become 50-, 75-, and 90-seat aircraft.
   A larger number of mainline passenger jet aircraft are expected in the 137 to 150--passenger
    seat range replacing some of the commuter aircraft and potentially greatly increasing
    passenger traffic without increasing the number of operations.
   General aviation traffic at the Airport is expected to see the disappearance of certain of the two
    and four piston-engined aircraft that will move to less-busy airports.
   The business aircraft market is expected to grow significantly, as corporate jets replace turbo-
    props and the new lower cost corporate jets multiply.
   The on-Airport military presence is expected to leave the Airport within the forecast period;
    however, as the on-Airport military unit is not an aviation unit, both the itinerant and local
    military operations are expected to continue, but decline somewhat with fewer and fewer
    operations each year.

The result is a relatively stable expectation of aircraft operations.




Aviation Forecasts                                 3-50                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                            Master Plan Update




3.7.3    Commercial Service Operations Forecast

The commercial service operations forecast is dependent on the number of passengers carried on
air carrier and commuter aircraft, or the air carrier / commuter “split”. Note that the FAA defines air
carrier and commuter operations based on the size of the aircraft (above and equal to 60 seats and
less than 60 seats and a similar weight-based measure for cargo aircraft).

The number of air carrier and commuter operations at the Airport “inverted” by 1984 when the
number of commuter operations exceeded the number of air carrier operations, as shown in Table
3-33. This was a common occurrence at many airports as the airlines shifted from air carrier
aircraft to increasing numbers of commuter aircraft. At first, this shift was to turbo-prop commuter
aircraft, a trend replaced by a shift to regional jets.

                                                               Table 3-33
                                                  HISTORICAL COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS

                                  25,000



                                  20,000



                                  15,000
                     Operations




                                  10,000



                                   5,000



                                      0
                                           1976      1981       1986           1991      1996        2001       2006

                                                       Historical Air Carrier Ops     Historical Commuter Ops

Source: FAA
        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport records

The trend toward more regional jets and fewer air carrier aircraft is likely to continue in the industry.
At the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, with the entrance of the LCC air service into the
Chattanooga market, larger aircraft are also entering the market, and the air carrier to commuter
split is changing. The FAA 2008 TAF forecast is based on an air carrier percentage of the
commercial operations beginning at 16.4 percent and reducing to 14 percent over the planning
period.

The FAA 2008 TAF forecasts the number of commercial operations to remain constant throughout
the planning period. The master plan forecast as shown in Table 3-34 predicts that the number of
passenger air carrier operations will decline somewhat over the planning period as aircraft become
larger. However, the cargo air carrier operations are expected to increase by approximately 3.8
percent per year. The commuter operations are expected to continue to raise over the planning
period for both passenger and cargo aircraft.



Aviation Forecasts                                                      3-51                                               FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




                                                                Table 3-34
                                                     COMMERCIAL OPERATIONS FORECAST

                           25,000



                           20,000



                           15,000
              Operations




                           10,000



                            5,000



                               0
                                    1976    1981     1986        1991      1996       2001    2006     2011      2016     2021     2026

                              Historical Air Carrier Ops                Forecast Air Carrier Ops                Historical Commuter Ops

                              Forecast Commuter Ops                     FAA TAF Air Carrier Ops                 FAA TAF Commuter Ops

                                Air Carrier                                              Commuter                                            Total FAA
                                              Air        FAA                                           Air        FAA        Total           2008 TAF
                            Passenger        Cargo       2008                         Passenger       Cargo       2008    Commercial        Commercial
Year   Historical            Forecast       Forecast     TAF            Historical     Forecast      Forecast     TAF       Service           Service
1976      19,233                                                            2,267                                              21,500            21,500

1981      10,308                                                            3,825                                                14,133                14,133

1986      10,388                                                           12,264                                                22,652                22,652

1991        8,666                                                          16,649                                                25,315                25,315

1996        7,616                                                          13,986                                                21,602                21,602

2001      12,364                                                           22,548                                                34,912                34,912

2007        3,658                                  789   4,066             18,428                       1518     18,479          24,394                22,545

2012                                2,430          950   3,675                           18,500          880     19,372          22,710                26,385

2017                                2,260      1,150     3,675                           19,300         1,060    20,365          23,780                27,455

2022                                2,150      1,380     3,675                           20,100         1,270    21,407          25,190                28,865

2027                                2,080      1,660     3,675                           21,100         1,540    22,413          26,340                30,015

Average Annual Growth
2007-2012                           -7.9%      3.8%          -                               0.1%     -10.3%      0.9%           -1.4%                  3.2%
2012-2017                           -1.4%      3.9%      0.0%                                0.9%       3.8%      1.0%            0.9%                  0.8%
2017-2022                           -1.0%      3.7%      0.0%                                0.8%       3.7%      1.0%            1.2%                  1.0%
2022-2027                           -0.7%      3.8%      0.0%                                1.0%       3.9%      0.9%            0.9%                  0.8%




       Aviation Forecasts                                                      3-52                                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                      Master Plan Update




3.7.4    Military and General Aviation Operations

Except for several years of growth in the early 1980s and again between 1997 and 2001, general
aviation operations at the Airport have generally declined since 1976. As shown in Table 3-35,
total Airport general aviation operations have decreased from 104,048 in 1976 to 44,164 in 2007,
similar to nationwide trends.

Future general aviation operations at the Airport are projected to slowly turn around and then begin
to grow at a moderate rate. Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport general aviation itinerant operations
are projected to grow by a 1.4 percent average annual growth rate from the 2007 level to
approximately 46,600 in 2027. The local operations are expected to grow at a slower rate to
approximately 10,300 operations by 2027. Local operations are those performed by aircraft which:

   Operate in the local traffic pattern or within sight of the airport
   Are known to be departing for, or arriving from, flight in local practice areas located within a 20-
    minute radius of the airport
   Execute simulated instrument approaches or low passes over the airport

Itinerant operations are all aircraft operations other than local operations.

Annual activity by military aircraft is a function of Department of Defense policy, military
appropriations, and the mission assigned to a particular flying unit. As such, projections of future
operations by military aircraft are not reliably predictable through use of socioeconomic indicators
or trend analyses.

Military activity at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport has historically ranged between
approximately 1,350 and 17,800 annual operations. The average number of operations over the
last 10 years has been above 12,600 annual operations. The military activity as projected by the
FAA 2008 TAF projects that the itinerant military operations will remain constant at 8,274 annual
operations after 2008 and that the local military operations will remain constant at 4,937 after 2008.
The on-Airport military presence is expected to leave the Airport within the short-term planning
period. The 241st Engineering Installation Squadron of the Tennessee National Guard is a non-
aviation wing, so the local military activity may decline over the period, but it will probably not
cease. The itinerant military presence is expected to continue with modest growth of itinerant
operations and a reduction in local operations as shown in Table 3-35.




Aviation Forecasts                                  3-53                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                                   Table 3-35
                              FORECAST OF GENERAL AVIATION AND MILITARY OPERATIONS

                 90,000

                 80,000

                 70,000

                 60,000
    Operations




                 50,000

                 40,000

                 30,000

                 20,000

                 10,000

                     0
                          1976     1981     1986        1991    1996      2001       2006     2011      2016     2021         2026

                  Forecast Itinerant GA                 FAA TAF Itinerant GA                Forecast Itinerant Military
                  FAA TAF Itinerant Military            Historical Itinerant GA             Historical Itinerant Military

                           Itinerant Operations                               Local Operations                                     FAA TAF
                                                                                                             Total GA &           Total GA &
 Year             General Aviation           Military            General Aviation            Military        Military Ops         Military Ops
 1976             64,277                  1,832                  39,771                     382                    106,262
  1981             61,179                 1,456                  23,969                     138                     86,742
  1986             63,307                 2,680                  28,547                  1,499                      96,033
  1991             53,654                 2,650                  24,282                  2,470                      83,056
  1996             45,296                 3,026                  16,193                  2,450                      66,965
  2001             67,567                 9,046                  28,805                  7,017                     112,435
  2007             35,317                 7,219                   8,847                  3,754                      55,137                56,485
  2012                           37,900            7,400                         9,100               3,200          57,600                62,567
  2017                           40,600            7,700                         9,500               2,600          60,400                67,427
  2022                           43,500            7,900                         9,900               2,100          63,400                71,677
  2027                           46,600            8,200                        10,300               1,500          66,600                76,290
 Average Annual Growth Rate
 2007-2012          1.4%                           0.5%                           0.6%               -3.1%            0.9%                  2.1%
 2012-2017          1.4%                           0.8%                           0.9%               -4.1%            1.0%                  1.5%
 2017-2022          1.4%                           0.5%                           0.8%               -4.2%            1.0%                  1.2%
 2022-2027          1.4%                           0.7%                           0.8%               -6.5%            1.0%                  1.3%




Aviation Forecasts                                                     3-54                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                           Master Plan Update




3.7.5    Total Operations

Table 3-36 presents the forecast of total operations at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport for the
combined elements of commercial service operations, general aviation operations, and military
operations.

                                                               Table 3-36
                                                      TOTAL OPERATIONS FORECAST


                             160,000

                             140,000

                             120,000
          Total Operations




                             100,000

                              80,000

                              60,000

                              40,000

                              20,000

                                  0
                                       1976   1981    1986      1991    1996        2001   2006     2011   2016    2021     2026

                                         Historical Total Ops      Selected Forecast Ops             FAA 2008 TAF Operations

                                                                                      Operations
                                                         Year          Historical      Forecast
                                                         1976            127,762
                                                         1981            100,875
                                                         1986            118,685
                                                         1991            108,371
                                                         1996             88,567
                                                         2001            147,347
                                                         2007             77,223
                                                         2012                              81,000
                                                         2017                              85,300
                                                         2022                              89,900
                                                         2027                              94,800
                                                      Average Annual Growth Rate
                                                      2007-2012                             1.0%
                                                      2012-2017                             1.0%
                                                      2017-2022                             1.1%
                                                      2022-2027                             1.1%




Aviation Forecasts                                                        3-55                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




3.7.6    Instrument Operations

An instrument operation, as defined by the FAA for towered airports, are arrivals or departures in
accordance with an Instrument Fight Rules (IFR) flight plan, special Visual Flight Rules (VFR)
procedures (Stage III/TCA Operations only), or an operation where IFR separation between aircraft
is provided by a terminal control facility. There are three kinds of instrument operations:

   Primary Instrument Operations are the departures or arrivals at the airport at which the
    approach control facility is located.

   Secondary Instrument Operations are the arrivals and departures at all the secondary airports
    combined.

   Overflight operations are those in which an aircraft transits the area without intent to land.

Historical primary instrument operations data for the Airport, as well as forecasts for primary
instrument operations by aircraft type are presented in Table 3-37. Annual primary instrument
operations have decreased from 81,114 in 1991 to 65,544 in 2007, representing an average
annual decrease of 1.3 percent during this period. Primary instrument operations are anticipated
to increase at the same pro-rata share that each component of total operations is anticipated to
increase over the planning period for a total of 77,700 primary instrument operations in 2027.

Table 3-38 shows the total historical and forecast instrument operations including not only the
primary instrument operations, but also the secondary and overflight instrument operations for the
planning period. The total instrument operations are anticipated to grow to 151,000 operations by
2027.




Aviation Forecasts                                3-56                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                          Master Plan Update




                                                 Table 3-37
                                      PRIMARY INSTRUMENT OPERATIONS
            Air Carrier               Commuter               General Aviation                  Military               Total
Year   Historical      Forecast   Historical   Forecast     Historical    Forecast      Historical    Forecast      Primary
1990     10,339                     16,414                       57,806                     2,873                    87,432
1991      7,944                     17,054                       53,271                     2,845                    81,114
1992      5,917                     13,222                       38,810                     2,640                    60,589
1993      2,551                      5,807                       17,418                       947                    26,723
1994      7,319                     17,983                       52,269                     3,333                    80,904
1995      7,409                     16,852                       48,074                     3,065                    75,400
1996      7,875                     13,462                       45,534                     3,219                    70,090
1997      9,450                     13,099                       45,612                     2,675                    70,836
1998     10,541                     12,829                       45,808                     3,202                    72,380
1999     12,608                     10,712                       48,869                     4,628                    76,817
2000     10,181                     12,842                       48,271                     5,751                    77,045
2001      7,473                     16,232                       46,125                     6,271                    76,101
2002      5,757                     18,374                       43,270                     7,720                    75,121
2003      4,845                     19,456                       41,378                     7,257                    72,936
2004      5,253                     17,847                       39,719                     8,064                    70,883
2005      4,736                     18,645                       37,687                     9,249                    70,317
2006      3,966                     18,238                       35,997                     7,047                    65,248
2007      3,450                     18,836                       35,498                     7,760                    65,544
2012                     2,300                  16,400                     41,600                         7,130       67,400
2017                     2,130                  17,100                     44,400                         6,910       70,500
2022                     2,030                  17,800                     47,400                         6,700       73,900
2027                     1,970                  18,700                     50,500                         6,490       77,700
Average Annual Growth Rate
2007-2012          -7.8%                         -2.7%                       3.2%                         -1.7%         0.6%
2012-2017          -1.5%                          0.8%                       1.3%                         -0.6%         0.9%
2017-2022          -1.0%                          0.8%                       1.3%                         -0.6%         0.9%
2022-2026          -0.6%                          1.0%                       1.3%                         -0.6%         1.0%




  Aviation Forecasts                                      3-57                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




                                               Table 3-38
                        SUMMARY OF TOTAL INSTRUMENT OPERATIONS
                                   Total       Total          Total           Total
                       Year                                                Instrument
                                 Primary     Secondary      Overflights        Ops
                       1990         87,432       5,881          28,825          122,138
                       1991         81,114       5,532          27,568          114,214
                       1992         60,589       4,533          21,293           86,415
                       1993         26,723       1,919          10,390           39,032
                       1994         80,904       6,163          30,151          117,218
                       1995         75,400       6,392          30,286          112,078
                       1996         70,090       5,811          28,859          104,760
                       1997         70,836       5,751          29,993          106,580
                       1998         72,380       6,368          33,400          112,148
                       1999         76,817       6,986          36,544          120,347
                       2000         77,045       6,131          26,573          109,749
                       2001         76,101       6,061          25,651          107,813
                       2002         75,121       6,160          28,694          109,975
                       2003         72,936       6,228          28,441          107,605
                       2004         70,883       8,552          28,725          108,160
                       2005         70,317      20,135          27,378          117,830
                       2006         65,248      19,873          25,853          110,974
                       2007         65,544      23,574          27,152          116,270
                       2012        67,400       25,800          29,500          122,700
                       2017        70,500       28,400          32,400          131,400
                       2022        73,900       31,200          35,600          140,700
                       2027        77,700       34,300          39,100          151,000
                     Average Annual Growth
                     2007-2012        0.6%        1.8%            1.7%             1.1%
                     2012-2017        0.9%        1.9%            1.9%             1.4%
                     2017-2022        0.9%        1.9%            1.9%             1.4%
                     2022-2027        1.0%        1.9%            1.9%             1.4%




Aviation Forecasts                                3-58                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




3.8      DESIGN DAY / DESIGN HOUR ACTIVITY FORECAST

Capacity analysis and determination of future facility requirements are often based on design day
or design hour activity levels. To avoid the construction and operational cost of acquiring capacity
that would be rarely used, design day and design hour activity levels should be representative of
busy periods, but not the absolute peak periods at the Airport. During unusually high activity
periods such as the Wednesday before and the Sunday after Thanksgiving Day, Airport facilities
can be expected to experience more crowded conditions and longer, but not unreasonable or
intolerable, processing times.

The design day level of activity is often calculated in airport planning using a peak month/average
day definition. Table 3-39 shows the high, low, and average monthly distributions of annual
enplanements. Table 3-40 shows the high, low, and average monthly distribution of annual total
operations. As is common when evaluating such data at various airports, the calendar month that
experienced the highest level of activity in a given year often varies. However, the annual activity
in the peak month expressed as a percentage of annual activity is usually constant from year to
year. If annual activity were equally distributed among all 12 months in a year, monthly activity
would be approximately 8.3 percent.

At the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, the peak month for passenger enplanements is typically
December with a maximum monthly activity of 9.8 percent of the annual enplanements. Interviews
with airline station managers indicate that the passenger traffic has typical airline passenger
activity such as busy Monday morning and Friday night traffic. In addition, all holidays see higher
traffic. The peak month for operations is usually October, with a maximum monthly activity of 10.1
percent of the annual operations.




Aviation Forecasts                              3-59                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                       Master Plan Update




                                                                                        Table 3-39
                                                                      MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF ANNUAL ENPLANEMENTS


                                                           12.0%
             Monthly Distribution of Annual Enplanements




                                                           10.0%



                                                           8.0%



                                                           6.0%



                                                           4.0%



                                                           2.0%



                                                           0.0%
                                                                    January   March          May             July          September     November

                                                                                       Average            Maximum          Minimum

                                                              Month              Average                    Maximum                      Minimum
                                                            January                 7.2%                        8.3%                         6.9%

                                                            February                  7.2%                          7.9%                      6.9%

                                                            March                     8.5%                          9.6%                      8.1%

                                                            April                     8.1%                          8.9%                      7.3%

                                                            May                       9.1%                          9.4%                      8.8%

                                                            June                      9.0%                          9.4%                      8.6%

                                                            July                      8.6%                          9.1%                      7.9%

                                                            August                    8.3%                          9.0%                      7.8%

                                                            September                 7.7%                          8.3%                      5.5%

                                                            October                   9.0%                          9.6%                      8.4%

                                                            November                  8.4%                          9.0%                      8.4%

                                                            December                  8.8%                          9.8%                      8.4%
Source:                                                           Chattanooga                  Metropolitan                         Airport                   records


Aviation Forecasts                                                                                 3-60                                               FINAL REPORT
                                                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                       Master Plan Update




                                                        Table 3-40
                                    MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF ANNUAL TOTAL OPERATIONS


                            12.0%



                            10.0%



                             8.0%
              Operations




                             6.0%



                             4.0%



                             2.0%



                             0.0%
                                    January   March          May             July      September        November

                                                       Average            Maximum           Minimum

                             Month              Average                     Maximum                      Minimum
                           January                 8.0%                         8.6%                         7.1%

                           February                   7.7%                          8.5%                       6.4%

                           March                      9.0%                          9.9%                       8.0%

                           April                      8.7%                          9.0%                       8.3%

                           May                        8.3%                          9.1%                       7.4%

                           June                       8.4%                          9.3%                       8.0%

                           July                       8.3%                          9.6%                       7.3%

                           August                     8.9%                          9.7%                       8.6%

                           September                  8.1%                          9.3%                       6.8%

                           October                    9.3%                      10.1%                          8.5%

                           November                   8.0%                          8.5%                       7.5%

                           December                   7.2%                          7.6%                       6.7%
Source: Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport records


Aviation Forecasts                                                 3-61                                               FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




Peak 20-minute enplanement and deplanement estimates are based on the flight schedule of the
Airport. Based on the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport’s schedule of September 2008, and
projections forward of the schedule based on knowledge of the aviation industry and the aircraft
that each airline is flying today, as well as the aircraft orders that each airline has placed,
schedules were developed for each planning year. These can be found in Appendix F. While not
predictions of actual flight schedules, the hypothetical schedules are examples of how airlines
might arrange their flights to maximize the passenger feed through their respective hubs and
protect their market from competing carriers.

Utilizing the annual enplaned passenger forecasts for the Preferred Enplanement forecast found in
Table 3-20, the Preferred Commercial Operations forecast found in Table 3-34 and the
percentages of daily passengers and commercial flights found in the projected schedules, design
day and design hour forecasts for the Preferred Enplanement forecast are shown in Table 3-41.

                                      Table 3-41
      DESIGN DAY/DESIGN HOUR FOR THE SELECTED COMMERCIAL PASSENGER FORECAST
                                                        2007       2012        2017        2022           2027

 Annual Enplaned Passengers              passengers   296,083     306,500     352,500    401,800        457,900
 Peak Month (9.8% of annual)             passengers    29,016      30,037      34,545     39,376         44,874
 Average Day (31 days)                   passengers       936         969       1,114      1,270          1,448

 Peak Hour Commercial Passengers
  Enplanements                           passengers       133         142         187        224            237
   Percentage Of Day                     percentage     14.2%       14.7%       16.8%      17.7%          16.4%
  Deplanements                           passengers       174         139         199        209            257
   Percentage of Day                     percentage     18.6%       14.3%       17.8%      16.5%          17.8%
  Total                                  passengers       147         264         425        421            426
   Percentage of Day                     percentage     15.7%       27.2%       38.2%      33.2%          29.4%

 Peak 20-minute Commercial Passengers
  Enplanements                           passengers       102         128         208        173            202
   Percentage of Day                     percentage     10.9%       13.2%       18.6%      13.6%          13.9%
  Deplanements                           passengers       144         104         142        140            173
   Percentage of Day                     percentage     15.4%       10.7%       12.7%      11.0%          12.0%

 Commercial Passenger Operations
  Annual                                 operations     20,270     20,900      21,600      22,300        24,700
  Average Day                            operations         64         66          68          70            78
  Peak Hour Total                        operations          8          8           8           9            10
   Percentage of Day                     operations     12.5%      11.7%       12.1%       12.6%         12.6%
  Departures                             operations          9          4           6           7             7
   Percentage of Day                     percentage     14.1%       6.3%        8.6%        9.5%          9.5%
  Arrivals                               operations          9          4           6           7             8
   Percentage of Day                     percentage     13.5%       5.7%        8.3%        9.8%          9.8%




Aviation Forecasts                             3-62                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




3.9       COMPARISON WITH THE FAA TERMINAL AREA FORECAST

The FAA reviews forecasts prepared in a master plan and compares them to the Terminal Area
Forecast (TAF) projections. The FAA Revision to Guidance on Review and Approval of Aviation
Forecasts memorandum of December 23, 2004 states that the FAA Office of Aviation Policy and
Plans will find a locally developed forecast for operations, based aircraft, and enplanements
consistent with the Terminal Area Forecast if it meets any of the following three conditions for a
non-hub, commercial service airport.

     The forecast differs less than 10 percent in the five-year forecast period and 15 percent in the
      10-year period, or
     Forecast activity levels do not affect the timing or scale of an airport project, or
 The forecast activity levels do not affect the role of the Airport as defined in FAA Order
  5090.3C, Field Formulation of the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems.

Actual enplanements at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport for 2007 were approximately 2.4
percent above the preliminary FAA 2008 TAF. This chapter presented five forecasts and
methodologies as follows:

     Market share analyses, which compare the performance of the local market to the national
      market
     Trend analyses, specifically average annual growth based on specific periods of Chattanooga
      Metropolitan Airport enplanement activity, as well as the FAA National Growth trend
     Regression analyses, which examine various socioeconomic indicators to determine if strong
      relationships exist between the indicators and annual enplaned passengers
     The FAA’s preliminary 2008 Terminal Area Forecasts for the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport
      based on FY 2006 activity
     The Indexed TAF, which is a modification to the FAA 2008 TAF that recognizes the actual
      passenger enplanement increases of FY 2007


Three of these also presented related scenarios for 16 passenger enplanement forecasts. All of
these forecasts were subsequently reduced to the Preferred Forecast, which is the Remain at
Current Market Share forecast.

Table 3-42 presents a comparison of the Preferred Enplanement forecast and the preliminary FAA
2008 TAF forecast. The Preferred Operations forecast is compared to the FAA 2008 TAF and is
presented in Table 3-43. The Preferred Based Aircraft forecast is compared to the December
2007 FAA TAF, as the preliminary FAA 2008 TAF does not include projections of based aircraft.
The comparison for based aircraft is presented in Table 3-44.




Aviation Forecasts                                    3-63                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                          Master Plan Update




                                            Table 3-42
            COMPARISON OF THE FAA 2008 TAF AND THE PREFERRED ENPLANEMENT FORECAST

                    500,000

                    450,000

                    400,000

                    350,000
     Enplanements




                    300,000

                    250,000

                    200,000

                    150,000

                    100,000

                     50,000

                           0
                               1976   1981     1986     1991    1996        2001      2007      2012      2017     2022

                                       Historical     FAA 2008 TAF       Indexed TAF         Remain at Current Market Share

                                                                                    Percent         Remain at        Percent
                                                                                   Difference        Current        Difference
                                                    FAA 2008    Indexed            From FAA          Market         From FAA
                    Year        Enplanements          TAF         TAF              2008 TAF           Share         2008 TAF
                    1976              256,320
                    1981              227,759
                    1986              272,468
                    1991              274,480
                    1996              239,318
                    2001              278,097
                    2007              296,083         289,158
                    2012                              306,261    315,800                 3.1%           306,500             0.1%
                    2017                              326,817    337,000                 3.1%           352,500             7.9%
                    2022                              348,961    359,800                 3.1%           401,800            15.1%
               2027 1                                 372,792    384,400                 3.1%           457,900            22.8%
       Average Annual Growth
       2007-2012                                        0.7%           1.3%           n/a                   0.7%          n/a
       2012-2017                                        1.3%           1.3%           n/a                   2.8%          n/a
       2017-2022                                        1.3%           1.3%           n/a                   2.7%          n/a
       2022-2027                                        1.3%           1.3%           n/a                   2.6%          n/a
1
 The FAA TAF does not include a forecast for the year 2027. The forecast shown for this year was projected for
comparison using the same Average Annual Growth rate.
Source: FAA
        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport




Aviation Forecasts                                                   3-64                                                 FINAL REPORT
                                                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                           Master Plan Update




                                       Table 3-43
       COMPARISON OF FAA 2008 TAF AND THE PREFERRED TOTAL OPERATIONS FORECAST


                             160,000

                             140,000

                             120,000
          Total Operations




                             100,000

                              80,000

                              60,000

                              40,000

                              20,000

                                  0
                                       1976    1981   1986      1991     1996      2001   2006     2011    2016    2021     2026

                                         Historical Total Ops         Preferred Forecast Ops        FAA 2008 TAF Operations

                                                                                                    Percent
                                                                         FAA         Preferred     Difference
                                                       Historical        2008       Operations     From FAA
                                              Year     Operations        TAF         Forecast      2008 TAF
                                              1976        127,762

                                              1981        100,875

                                              1986        118,685

                                              1991        108,371

                                              1996           88,567

                                              2001        147,347

                                              2007           76,925       78,651

                                              2012                        85,616          80,300          -6.2%

                                              2017                        91,467          84,200          -7.9%

                                              2022                        96,759          88,400          -8.6%

                                              2027                       102,451          93,000          -9.2%

                       Average Annual Growth
                       2007-2012                          1.7%            0.9%
                       2012-2017                          1.3%            1.0%
                       2017-2022                          1.1%            1.0%
                       2022-2027                          1.1%            1.0%
1
  The FAA TAF does not include a forecast for the year 2027. The forecast shown for this year was projected for
comparison using the same Average Annual Growth rate.
Source: FAA




Aviation Forecasts                                                         3-65                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




                                             Table 3-44
              COMPARISON OF FAA 2007 TAF AND THE PREFERRED BASED AIRCRAFT FORECAST

                        200
                        180
                        160
                        140
       Based Aircraft




                        120
                        100
                        80
                        60
                        40
                        20
                         0
                              1976   1981         1986      1991      1996       2001     2006         2011       2016     2021      2026

                                     Historical             Preferred Based Aircraft Forecast              FAA December 2007 TAF




                                                                                        Selected         Percent
                                                                        FAA              Based          Difference
                                                                      December          Aircraft        From FAA
                                           Year          Historical   2007 TAF          Forecast        2007 TAF
                                           1976                  0
                                           1981                178
                                           1986                161
                                           1991                124
                                           1996                114
                                           2001                121
                                           2007                114               90                           26.7%
                                           2012                                   95            122           28.6%
                                           2017                                  101            131           29.7%
                                           2022                                  106            140           32.5%
                                           2027                            n/a                  151         n/a
                                        Average Annual Growth
                                        2007-2012                           -3.6%          1.4%             n/a
                                        2012-2017                            1.2%          1.4%             n/a
                                        2017-2022                            1.0%          1.4%             n/a
                                        2022-2027                          n/a             1.4%             n/a
1
 The FAA TAF does not include a forecast for the year 2027. The forecast shown for this year was projected for
comparison using the same Average Annual Growth rate.
Source: FAA



Aviation Forecasts                                                           3-66                                                 FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




The Preferred Enplanement forecast is within 0.1 percent of the FAA 2008 TAF in the five-year
forecast and within 7.9 percent of the FAA 2008 TAF for the 10-year forecast. The Preferred
Operations forecast is within 6.2 percent of the FAA 2008 TAF for the five-year forecast and is
within 7.9 percent of the FAA 2008 TAF for the 10-year forecast.

The Preferred Based Aircraft forecast selected for the Master Plan Update is 28.6 percent higher
than the FAA December 2007 TAF for the five-year period and 29.7 percent higher in the 10-year
period. Therefore, the Preferred Based Aircraft forecast is not within the five- and 10-year
threshold limits of the FAA TAF.

The FAA Aerospace Forecasts FY 2008-2025 calls for general aviation aircraft to increase at a rate
of 1.4 percent annually for the planning period. The FAA FY 2007-2025 Summary TAF Report
projects the based aircraft in the southern region of the United States to rise by approximately 0.87
percent per year between 2007 and 2025. The FAA December 2006 TAF was remarkably similar
to the Preferred Based Aircraft forecast. The Tennessee Aviation System Plan’s 2005 forecast is
7.6 percent higher than the FAA December 2006 TAF in the five-year forecast and 11.5 percent
higher in the 10-year forecast.

According to the Airport’s FAA 5010 form, there were 114-based aircraft at the Airport in 2007.
The FAA December 2007 TAF indicates 90 based aircraft at the Airport. If the 90 were corrected
to 114-based aircraft, and the same average annual growth rate was applied, it is likely that the
Preferred Based Aircraft forecast would be within one percent in the five-year forecast and two
percent in the 10-year forecast.

FAA guidance on the review and approval of locally produced aviation forecasts is that the forecast
must meet one or more of the conditions stated above to be consistent with the TAF. This Master
Plan Update’s Preferred Enplanement and Preferred Operations forecasts meet the conditions of
the FAA guidance requirements. The Preferred Based Aircraft forecast does not.

Table 4-45 is a summary comparison of the Preferred Forecasts to the FAA 2008 TAF in the format
suggested by Appendix C of the FAA document Forecasting Aviation Activity by Airport.




Aviation Forecasts                               3-67                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




                                        Table 3-45
               SUMMARY COMPARISON OF THE PREFERRED FORECAST TO FAA 2008 TAF
                                                                                Percent
                                                                               Difference
                                                FAA 2008         Preferred     From FAA
                                         Year     TAF            Forecast      2008 TAF
                Passenger Enplanements
                Base Year                 FY           289,158     296,083             2.4%
                Base yr. + 5 yrs         2012          306,261     306,500             0.1%
                Base yr. + 10 yrs        2017          326,817     352,500             7.9%
                Base yr. + 15 yrs        2022          348,961     401,800            15.1%
                Commercial Operations
                Base Year                 FY            22,166      21,788             -1.7%
                Base yr. + 5 yrs         2012           23,047      22,700             -1.5%
                Base yr. + 10 yrs        2017           24,040      23,800             -1.0%
                Base yr. + 15 yrs        2022           25,082      24,900             -0.7%
                Total Operations
                Base Year                 FY            78,651      76,900             -2.2%
                Base yr. + 5 yrs         2012           85,616      80,300             -6.2%
                Base yr. + 10 yrs        2017           91,467      84,200             -7.9%
                Base yr. + 15 yrs        2022           96,759      88,400             -8.6%

Table 4-46 shows the forecast levels, average annual growth rates, and operational factors in a
format indicated in Appendix B of the FAA document Forecasting Aviation Activity by Airport.




Aviation Forecasts                              3-68                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                             Master Plan Update



                                                           Table 3-46
                                    FORECAST LEVELS, GROWTH RATES, AND OPERATIONAL FACTORS
                                                         A. Forecast Levels and Growth Rates
                                                                 Base Year: FY 2007
                                                                                                            Average Annual Compound Growth Rate
                                              Base Yr.     Base        Base         Base         Base      Base Yr. Base Yr.  Base Yr.  Base Yr.
                                               Level      Yr.+1yr.   Yr.+5yrs.   Yr.+10yrs.   Yr.+15yrs.    to +1    to +5     to +10    to +15
 Passenger Enplanements 1
  Air Carrier                                   94,776     86,523      98,111      112,835      128,616      -8.7%       0.7%         1.8%            2.1%
  Commuter                                     201,307    183,777     208,389      239,665      273,184      -8.7%       0.7%         1.8%            2.1%
    TOTAL                                      296,083    270,300     306,500      352,500      401,800      -8.7%       0.7%         1.8%            2.1%
 Operations
  Itinerant
    Passenger air carrier                        2,869      2,622       2,431        2,260        2,147      -8.6%      -3.3%        -2.4%           -1.9%
    Passenger commuter/air taxi                 17,402     17,604      18,453       19,318       20,137       1.2%       1.2%         1.1%            1.0%
      Total Commercial Passenger Operations     20,270     20,226      20,884       21,578       22,283      -0.2%       0.6%         0.6%            0.6%
   Air Cargo                                     1,518      1,576       1,829        2,204        2,656       3.8%       3.8%         3.8%            3.8%
    General Aviation                            35,317     35,811      37,859       40,585       43,506       1.4%       1.4%         1.4%            1.4%
    Military                                     7,219      7,264       7,448        7,684        7,927       0.6%       0.6%         0.6%            0.6%
   Local
    General aviation                             8,847      8,897       9,097        9,512        9,927       0.6%       0.6%         0.7%            0.8%
   Military                                      3,754      3,642       3,194        2,634        2,074      -3.0%      -3.2%        -3.5%           -3.9%
    TOTAL OPERATIONS                            76,925     77,416      80,312       84,197       88,374       0.6%       0.9%         0.9%            0.9%
 Primary Instrument Operations                  65,544     65,015      67,403       70,575       73,938      -0.8%       0.6%         0.7%            0.8%
 Total Instrument Operations                   116,270    116,300     122,700      131,400      140,700       0.0%       1.1%         1.2%            1.3%
 Peak Hour Commercial Operations                     9          9          10           10           10      -0.2%       0.6%         0.6%            0.6%
 Peak Hour Operations                               35         36          37           39           41       0.6%       0.9%         0.9%            0.9%
 Cargo/mail (enplaned + deplaned tons) CY        8,854      9,198      10,678       12,867       15,504       3.9%       3.8%         3.8%            3.8%
 Based Aircraft
  Single Engine (Non-jet)                           36         37          39           41           44       1.4%      1.4%          1.4%          1.4%
  Multi Engine (Non-jet)                            16         16          17           18           20       1.4%      1.4%          1.4%          1.4%
  Jet Engine                                        61         62          65           70           75       1.4%      1.4%          1.4%          1.4%
  Helicopter                                         1          1           1            1            1       1.4%      1.4%          1.4%          1.4%
  Other                                              0          0           0            0            0       1.8%   -100.0%       -100.0%       -100.0%
   TOTAL                                           114        116         122          131          140       1.4%      1.4%          1.4%          1.4%
                                                                                                                     Table 3-43 continued on next page



Aviation Forecasts                                                        3-69                                                               FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                 Master Plan Update



                                                                           Table 3-43 continued
                                                                          B. Operational Factors
                                                      Base Yr.       Base        Base      Base Yr.         Base
                                                       Level        Yr.+1yr.   Yr.+5yrs.   +10yrs.       Yr.+15yrs.
    Average aircraft size (seats)
     Air carrier                                               83        83          99            119         140
     Commuter                                                  18        36          38             40          42
    Average enplaned load factor
     Air carrier                                          80.0%      80.0%        81.7%       83.8%          85.9%
     Commuter                                             58.0%      58.0%        60.0%       62.5%          65.0%
    GA operations per based aircraft                        387        387          384         382            380
1
    Enplanements before 2008 included non-revenue passengers




Aviation Forecasts                                                                  3-70                                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




3.10     SUMMARY OF FORECASTS

This section provides a summary of the Master Plan Update forecasts. Information from this
chapter will be used in the remainder of the Master Plan Update to assess the capacity of the
existing Airport facilities and provide planning guidance for any needed facility expansion.

The Air Service Area for the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport or approximately the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) has experienced steady if modest population, economic, and
employment growth from 1969 to the present. While the population of the Chattanooga MSA is
expected to grow at a slower rate than the states of Tennessee and Georgia, and the United
States, the growth in PCPI is expected to outpace slightly all of the comparables including the
State of Georgia within the forecast period. Employment is also expected to keep pace with or
exceed the other comparable areas throughout the forecast period.

These demographic projections were made prior to the July 15, 2008 announcement by the
Volkswagen Group of America that it will build an automotive production facility in Chattanooga
and invest $1 billion in the economy. Production of a new Volkswagen sedan is expected to begin
in 2011 and will result in 2,000 direct jobs. Approximately 12,000 additional jobs are anticipated to
be added to the Chattanooga Metropolitan Statistical Area by the automotive parts suppliers.

The Airport was severely impacted by the attacks of September 11, 2001. Only now is it returning
to the year 2000 annual passenger enplanement levels. A low cost carrier, Allegiant Air, began
service to the Airport in October of 2006 and added additional service and an additional destination
in December of 2007. By June of 2008, Allegiant is operating ten weekly flights to three
destinations using 150-seat MD-80 aircraft.

Skybus, another low cost carrier, announced daily service to Columbus, Ohio. These flights began
in December of 2007. However, in April of 2008, due to high fuel costs, Skybus was forced to
declare bankruptcy and cease operations.

The interest shown by low cost carrier entrants to the Chattanooga market could positively
influence passenger enplanements to the market, particularly as both airlines planned to tap new
markets for Chattanooga. Allegiant caters primarily to the leisure market and both Skybus and
Allegiant deliberately targeted the Atlanta market with service through Chattanooga.

Utilizing different methodologies, 18 forecasts are presented in this chapter. Of these forecasts,
the forecast developed by comparing Chattanooga’s share of the total U.S. enplanement market
for a Remain at Current Market Share forecast was selected as the Preferred Enplanement
forecast for the following reasons:

   The FAA 2008 TAF was based on FY 2006 enplanement data.
   The Indexed TAF takes into consideration the enplanement data between the end of FY 2006
    and the end of FY 2007 on September 30, 2007.
   Since September of 2007, Allegiant Air added two flights per week to Ft. Lauderdale, FL and an
    additional flight to Orlando, FL using an MD-80 aircraft. Enjoying load factors between 96.7
    and 80.1 percent for an average load factor of 86.3 percent, this adds approximately 20,250
    annual enplanements.




Aviation Forecasts                              3-71                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




   While Skybus has declared bankruptcy and left the Airport, their one flight per day was not
    counted into the FY 2007 annual enplanements as they only began service to the Airport in
    December of 2007.
   While Continental has announced that they will be leaving the Airport, American has agreed to
    add an additional flight per day to Dallas/Fort Worth, thereby reducing by more than half the
    impact of the Continental departure. The result is a loss of approximately 7,300 annual
    enplanements.
   In the last five years, Chattanooga has added seven new destinations to their schedule.
   The announcement of the building of a new Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga with an increase
    of up to 12,000 jobs could translate into as much as 5,900 annual enplanements.

Commercial aircraft operations at the Airport are expected to increase at a slower rate than the
enplanements over the next 20 years. This is because the commercial passenger aircraft are
predicted to become larger rather than more numerous. The Preferred Operations forecast,
indicates that the commercial passenger operations would reach approximately 24,700 operations
per year in 2027. The general aviation operations are also expected to increase with moderate
growth reaching approximately 57,000 operations by 2027. The military operations are expected
to decrease over the planning period to approximately 9,700 operations in 2027. The based
aircraft are expected to increase at a steady but conservative rate reaching 151-based aircraft in
2027, up from the 114-based aircraft in 2007.

A summary of the Preferred Forecast is found in Table 3-47.




Aviation Forecasts                             3-72                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update



                                           Table 3-47
                               SUMMARY OF THE SELECTED FORECAST
       Description                               2007         2012       2017        2022         2027
       Annual Enplanements                      296,083      306,500    352,500     401,800     457,900

       Commercial Passenger Annual Operations    20,270       20,900      21,600      22,300      24,700

       Based Aircraft                                  114      122          131         140         151

       Total General Aviation Operations         44,164       47,000     50,100      53,400      57,000
       Total Military Operations                 10,973       10,640     10,320      10,000       9,700
       Total Air Cargo Operations                 1,520        1,830      2,200       2,660       3,200
       Total Operations                          78,651       80,300     84,200      88,400      93,000
       Instrument Operations                    116,270      122,700    131,400     140,700     151,000

       Total Short Tons of Air Cargo              8,861       10,678      12,867      15,504      18,683




Aviation Forecasts                              3-73                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




                                   CHAPTER 4
                                FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
4.1      INTRODUCTION

The facility requirements chapter analyzes the ability of the current facilities at the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport to accommodate existing and forecast aviation activity. As illustrated in the
previous chapter, the Airport has experienced significant growth in passengers and commercial
service operations. Future facility requirements described in this chapter are based on the ability
of the existing airport configuration to accommodate the forecast aviation activity. Specific facility
expansion and airport development alternatives to meet the future facility needs are addressed in
Chapter 5, Alternatives Development and Evaluation. The development of facility requirements for
the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is presented in the following sections of this chapter:

     Emerging Trends
     Airfield Requirements
     Commercial Service Passenger Terminal Building
     General Aviation Requirements
     Air Cargo Requirements
     Support Facilities
     Circulation and Parking Requirements
     Summary of Facility Requirements

4.2      EMERGING TRENDS

The aviation industry is an ever-changing arena where evolving technologies, new security
procedures and logistics, and airline mergers can greatly influence the size, type, configuration,
and longevity of an airport’s facilities. The changes often happen quickly, yet these industry trends
must be taken into consideration when developing facility requirements to insure that not only the
traditional influences are considered, but the emerging trends as well. This section addresses a
few emerging trends that will likely have influence on the facility requirements of Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport in the future.

4.2.1    Increased Low Cost Carrier Activity

In October of 2006, Allegiant Airlines, a Low Cost Carrier (LCC), began service to the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport. One of Allegiant’s operating strategies is to enter a market not from the
primary airport of that market but from a smaller, less utilized airport adjacent to the market.
Therefore, when Allegiant entered the Chattanooga market, they were not only targeting
Chattanooga, but Atlanta as well. Atlanta is known to be running out of capacity, and the
competition at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport is strong. The FAA told Atlanta in
May 2006 that they need to start looking for a second airport. Chattanooga has made it clear that
they would like to be the second Atlanta airport.

Skybus Airlines, another LCC, also saw the potential for Chattanooga to serve Atlanta and in
December 2007 began service to Chattanooga. Skybus chose not to advertise to the Chattanooga
market, but to the Atlanta market. While Skybus has since declared bankruptcy due in large part to
increasing fuel prices, it does not lessen the fact that Chattanooga has increasingly seen more
LCC operations. Allegiant has increased their flights and is considering adding new flights.


Aviation Forecasts                               4-1                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




Increased Peak Hour Demand on the Commercial Passenger Terminal

The increase in LCC activity has come with larger aircraft. Where the majority of the aircraft
serving the Airport prior to the entrance of Allegiant have been 50-seat aircraft or smaller, Allegiant
operates only MD-80 aircraft. The MD-80 has 150-seats and Allegiant has been experiencing high
load factors. Skybus was operating A319 aircraft with 124 seats.

Because of the increased size of the LCC aircraft, the result has been that both the enplaning peak
hour and the deplaning peak hour have been significantly higher than previously experienced at
the Airport. More passengers are trying to check-in at the same time and more passengers are
trying to pass through security at the same time. Additional passengers are also deplaning the
incoming aircraft and trying to get their baggage from baggage claim. The same numbers of
passengers spread out between three 50-seat aircraft do not have the same impact on the facilities
as one 150-seat aircraft. If a 150-seat aircraft is departing within the same hour as two 50-seat
aircraft, the impact is heightened. If two or more 150-seat aircraft are taking off even in adjacent
hours, the increased simultaneous demand on all of the Airport’s facilities can cause the facilities to
stress, if they are not properly sized.

Increased Passenger Parking Demand

The LCC’s affect the parking facilities through not only the increased peak hour demands, but
LCC’s also tend to cater to the vacation market. Their low fares are coupled with longer stays of
typically a week or more. This presents at least two issues for airport parking. First, the LCC
passenger typically does not want to pay more for their parking than they did for their airfare. With
longer stays in the parking facilities, the overall price of parking increases. For this reason, airports
that have experienced increased LCC activity have found that the LCC passenger is looking for
cheap parking and does not mind parking some distance away to pay less when they return.

Secondly, because of the longer stays, the parking space itself does not turn over as often. This
means that more parking spaces need to be provided to accommodate the same number of
passengers that may have stayed a shorter period, such as the business traveler who typically is
gone only two to three days.

4.2.2    Very Light Jets

Very Light Jets (VLJ), which have also been called Personal Jets, Microjets, and Personal Light
Jets (PLJ), are defined by the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) in their publication
Training Guidelines for Single Pilot Operations of Very Light Jets and Technically Advanced
Aircraft as “Jet aircraft weighing 10,000 pounds or less maximum certificated takeoff weight and
certificated for single pilot operations. These aircraft will possess at least some of the following
features: (1) advanced cockpit animation, such as moving map GPS and multi-function displays;
(2) automated engine and systems management; and (3) integrated autoflight, autopilot and flight
guidance systems.”

There are over a dozen manufacturers of the VLJ, but only two of these, Cessna and Eclipse, have
achieved certification for their aircraft, and many are expected to drop out before their respective
aircraft achieve certification. While over 3,000 of these aircraft have reportedly been ordered, only
about 250 have been delivered. The reason for their popularity is that they can fly at higher
speeds at altitudes ranging from 18,000 feet to 41,000 feet thus climbing over weather, can land on



Aviation Forecasts                                 4-2                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




runways approximately 3,000 feet in length, have short- to mid-ranges of about 300 to 600 nautical
miles and are priced at between $1.5 and $4 million.

While the air taxi services and the air charter services using these aircraft have received a lot of
press, it was initially conceived as a business jet that would allow access to airports with shorter
runways and less congestion. Increasingly, smaller corporations are ordering the aircraft to allow
them to access more markets more quickly. The VLJ has the potential to reinvigorate the general
aviation industry as these affordable, fast aircraft are predicted to become very popular corporate
fleet aircraft, as well as air taxi and air charter aircraft.

4.2.3    Departure of the Tennessee Air National Guard

The 241st Electronic Installation Squadron (EIS) of the Tennessee Air National Guard is a non-
flying, electronic and installation unit, which occupies approximately 11 acres at the southeast
corner of the intersection of Runways 02-20 and 15-33. The Guard has announced their intention
of vacating the Airport within the next five years. There are currently four buildings on the site, but
the value of the property is in its central location on the east side of the airfield. Having this
property available will create a number of opportunities to relocate other Airport facilities.

4.2.4    Potential Increase in Cargo Activity at Chattanooga

While there has been a general erosion of cargo tonnage at many U.S. airports, losses have been
particularly severe at many “spoke” airports in cargo carriers’ hub systems. These airports have
been marginalized both by passenger carriers offering less belly space and by all-cargo carriers
maximizing their utilization of trucks on domestic segments in order to allocate freighters to high-
growth markets such as intra-Asia and trans-Pacific routes. The competitive economics of trucks
has been augmented by unprecedented fuel costs, which further drives cargo from aircraft to
trucks.

Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport had an extremely erratic ten-year period between 1997 and 2006
but ultimately still managed to grow its total cargo volume by 75 percent over that span. Entirely
due to the introduction of all-cargo flights in 2005, Chattanooga experienced this dramatic growth
in spite of having annual losses in more individual years than gains during the period.
Chattanooga’s “relative prosperity” differs greatly with the region’s dominant gateway, Atlanta, and
Birmingham, which lost approximately 14 percent and almost 30 percent, respectively, during the
same period. However, as is typical of the vast majority of U.S. airports, Chattanooga experienced
diminishing increments of mail throughout the period.




Aviation Forecasts                                4-3                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                       Master Plan Update




4.3      AIRFIELD REQUIREMENTS

The airfield is the system of components upon which aircraft operate. Airfield requirements are
affected by demand; capacity; aircraft mix; runway, taxiway, and gate design standards; airspace;
and navigational and visual aids. This section looks at the following areas of the airfield at the
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport:

     Airfield capacity analysis
     Runway requirements
     Taxiway requirements
     Electronic, visual, and satellite aids to navigation

4.3.1    Airfield Capacity Analysis

Airfield capacity is an estimate of the number of aircraft that can be processed through the airfield
system during a specific period with acceptable levels of delay. The airfield capacity analysis
identifies the annual capacity of the airfield, referred to as the annual service volume, and the
hourly capacity based on the current operational characteristics.

Major factors that affect airfield capacity include the runway configuration, air traffic control
operating procedures, weather conditions, and aircraft fleet mix. For instance, required separation
distances between aircraft are greatly increased during inclement weather. As a result, the
number of aircraft that can operate at an airport under instrument meteorological conditions will be
much less than during visual meteorological conditions.

The goal of the analysis is to determine the airfield capacity and the sufficiency of the runways to
handle the peak hour and annual demand. This was done using the FAA Advisory Circular
150/5060-5 Airport Capacity and Delay, which uses the factors of aircraft mix index, the runway
use configuration, the Airport meteorology, and the percentage of touch-and go operations to
determine these values. The values developed were compared to the long-range forecasts for the
Airport to determine whether any shortfalls exist or will develop.

The aircraft mix index is a factor in the hourly capacity for an airfield. It is the relative percentage of
operations conducted by each of the four classes of aircraft shown in Table 4-1.

                                               Table 4-1
                                       AIRCRAFT CLASSIFICATIONS
                                  Maximum Certified                              Wake
                       Aircraft     Takeoff Weight          Number of         Turbulence
                        Class          (pounds)              Engines         Classification
                       A          12,500 or less            Single          Small (S)
                       B          12,500 or less            Multi           Small (S)
                       C          12,500 – 300,000          Multi           Large (L)
                       D          Over 300,000              Multi           Heavy (H)
                     Source: FAA AC 150/5060-5 Airport Capacity and Delay

The mix index is a mathematical calculation of the percent of Class C aircraft plus three times the
percent of Class D aircraft. The mix index can range between zero and 180. Smaller indexes
reflect predominately-small aircraft in the operational fleet mix and higher indexes represent a



Aviation Forecasts                                    4-4                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




larger aircraft fleet mix. The mix index for Chattanooga for each of the planning years, based on
the number of operations projected to occur by aircraft type is shown in Table 4-2.

                                              Table 4-2
                                    AIRCRAFT OPERATIONAL FLEET

 Aircraft            2007              2012                 2017                2022                   2027
 Class        Ops.          %   Ops.          %      Ops.          %     Ops.          %        Ops.          %
 A           17,412     22.6%   18,413    22.9%     18,904     22.6%    19,926     22.6%       21,171      22.4%
 B           29,866     38.8%   31,043    38.6%     32,505     38.8%    34,530     39.1%       36,057      38.2%
 C           29,649     38.5%   30,874    38.4%     32,330     38.6%    33,904     38.4%       37,273      39.4%
 D                0      0.0%        0     0.0%          0      0.0%         0      0.0%            0       0.0%
             76,927    100.0%   80,330   100.0%     83,739    100.0%    88,360    100.0%       94,500     100.0%
 Mix
 Index    29,649    38.5%       30,874     38.4%     32,330    38.6%    33,904     38.4%       37,273      39.4%
Source: FAA AC 150/5060-5 Airport Capacity and Delay

The runway use configuration is the number, relative location, and orientation or direction of the
runways. It also includes the direction of the operations under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and
Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations in effect and the relative percentage of time that each of
these are used. The airfield layout for Chattanooga is shown in Figure 4-1.




Aviation Forecasts                                   4-5                                         FINAL REPORT
                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                             Master Plan Update




                                                       Figure 4-1
                           IFR AND VFR AIRFIELD CONFIGURATIONS



Aviation Forecasts   4-6                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




The IFR and VFR operations are influenced by weather conditions at the Airport. The operations
reflect changes in visibility as well as wind direction and velocity. Meteorological records indicate
that the Airport experiences weather below the operational minimums only one percent of the time.

Touch-and-go operations are those where the pilot lands and departs from a runway without
exiting the runway. These are most commonly performed as training exercises. They affect the
capacity of an airport in that when they make up a large percentage of the operations, they
increase the capacity because aircraft in this type of pattern are nearly always available for
approaches. Nevertheless, they can also reduce the capacity of an airport if they keep other
aircraft from being able to use the airfield. Chattanooga’s touch-and-go traffic is less than ten
percent of the total aircraft activity and so is not considered to affect negatively the Airport’s
capacity.

Peak Hour Airfield Capacity

By utilizing the factors of aircraft mix index, the airfield layout, the airport meteorology, and touch-
and go operations, the peak-hour airfield capacity is calculated for VFR and IFR operations and the
results are shown in Table 4-3. The Peak Month Average Day Peak Hour (PMADPH) demand of
the airfield is also calculated.

It is generally accepted that it is cost effective to increase the capacity of a runway when demand
or PMADPHD reaches 90 percent of the hourly capacity of the runway. This means that 10
percent of the time, the runway system is failing and 90 percent of the time, it is functioning
properly.

The PMADPH for Chattanooga throughout the planning period ranges from 53.3 percent to 66.0
percent of the IFR capacity, indicating that there is no need to increase airfield capacity.

                                             Table 4-3
                                    PEAK HOUR AIRFIELD CAPACITY
                                                        2007      2012       2017         2022          2027
  Mix Index                                                  39        38         39           38            39
  Hourly Capacity VFR                                        77        77         77           77            77
  Hourly Capacity IFR                                        57        57         57           57            57
  Peak Month Average Day Peak Hour Demand                    30        30         32           35            38
  PMADPHD as a percentage of IFR                         53.3%     52.1%      56.5%        61.8%         66.0%
 Source: FAA AC 150/5060-5 Airport Capacity and Delay

4.3.2    Runway Requirements

The runways at an airport are an important component of the airfield system upon which aircraft
operate. Runways must be configured to allow aircraft to land and take off in the safest and most
efficient manner possible. FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13 Airport Design provides detailed
information on the requirements that have been set to allow this to occur in a uniform manner.
This section explores these requirements.

Dimensional Criteria

The FAA developed a coding system, the Airport Reference Code (ARC), to relate airport design
criteria to the physical and operational characteristics of the aircraft intended to operate at an

Aviation Forecasts                                      4-7                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                         Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




airport. The ARC is made up of two components. The first component, a letter, designates the
aircraft approach category based on the approach speed of an aircraft. The second component, a
Roman numeral, designates the design group, which is based on the wingspan. The FAA’s aircraft
approach categories and airplane design groups are listed in Table 4-4.

                                           Table 4-4
                     AIRCRAFT APPROACH CATEGORY AND AIRPLANE DESIGN GROUP
                           Approach
                           Category                 Approach Speed
                          Category A    Speed less than 91 knots
                          Category B    Speed 91 knots to less than 121 knots
                          Category C    Speed 121 knots to less than 141 knots
                          Category D    Speed 141 knots to less than 166 knots
                          Category E    Speed 166 knots or more
                            Design
                            Group                         Wing Span
                          Group I       Less than 49 feet
                          Group II      49 feet to less than 79 feet
                          Group III     79 feet to less than 118 feet
                          Group IV      118 feet to less than 171 feet
                          Group V       171 feet to less than 214 feet
                          Group VI      214 feet to less than 262 feet
                         Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13 Airport Design

The primary runway at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, Runway 02-20, is designated as a D-IV
runway, which indicates that it is designed for such aircraft as the DC-10-30. The crosswind
runway at the Airport, Runway 15-33, is designated as a B-II runway. Runway 15-33 is designed
to accommodate such aircraft as the Saab 340, the Embraer 120, and the Citations II, III, IV and V.
Based on the largest aircraft anticipated to operate at the Airport in the ultimate planning horizon
and the longest distances the aircraft may travel, it is recommended that the primary runway,
Runway 02-20 continue to be designed to accommodate ARC D-IV aircraft. Aircraft in this
category include the DC-10 and DC-8, and the MD-11. For the crosswind runway, Runway 15-33,
it is recommended that it continue to accommodate ARC B-II aircraft and other small general
aviation aircraft throughout the entire planning horizon. Representative aircraft in each ARC group
are shown in Table 4-5.




Aviation Forecasts                                    4-8                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




                                           Table 4-5
                          AIRPORT REFERENCE CODE GROUPS OF AIRCRAFT
   ARC
  Group                                     Representative Aircraft
  A-I        Beech Baron B55/E55, Beech Bonanza, Cessna 150, Embraer 820, Learfan 2100
  B-I        Beech Baron 58/58P/58TC, Beech King B100/F90, Cessna Citation I, Cessna 402/404/414/421,
             Embraer 121/326,Searingen Merlin 3B, Swearingen Metro
  C-I        Gates Learjet 24/25/54-55-56, Rockwell Sabre 75A
  D-I        Gates Learjet 35A/36A
  E-I        Lockheed SR-71
  A-II       Beech E18S, DHC-6-300 Twin Otter, Dornier DO 28D-2
  B-II       Beech King Air C90-1, Beech Super King Air B200, Cessna 441, Rockwell 840, Cessna Citation
             II/III, Embraer 110
  C-II       Canadair CRJ-200, Canadair CRJ-700, Grumman Gulfstream III, Embraer ERJ-145,Rockwell
             Sabre 80
  D-II       Grumman Gulfstream II/II-TT/IV
  A-III      DHC-4 Caribou, DHC-7 Dash 7-100, DHC-8 Dash 8-300
  B-III      BAe 146 100/200, Fokker F-27-500/6000
  C-III      Airbus A320-100, Boeing 727-100/200, Boeing 737-100/200/300/400/500, Lockheed L-1011,
             MDC DC-9-10/15/20/30/40/50/80/82
  D-III      BAC III-500, BAC/Aerospatiale Concord, Tupolev TU-134
  E-III      Tupolev TU 144
  A-IV       Boeing YC-14, Lockheed 1649
  B-IV       Boeing C97, Lockheed 1049/749, Vickers Vanguard 950
  C-IV       Airbus A-300-600/B4, Airbus A-310-300, Boeing 757, Boeing 767-200/300, Lockheed L-1011-
             100, MDC DC-10-10, MCD DC-8-10/20/30/40/50/62
  D-IV       Lockheed L-1011-250/500//500 ex. wing, MDC DC-10-30, MDC DC-8-61/63, Tupolev TU-154
  C-V        Boeing 747-SP
  D-V        Boeing 747-100/200/300SR/400, Boeing 777-200/300
Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13 Airport Design

Airport runway design is based on the ARC and the lowest designated or planned approach
visibility minimums for each runway. Visibility minimums refer to the minimum visibility specified for
an approach landing or take-off, expressed in statute miles, or feet where Runway Visual Range
(RVR) is reported. The FAA has established design criteria based on these factors. Table 4-6
shows the current dimensions for runway width, setbacks, Runway Safety Areas (RSA), Obstacle
Free Zones (OFZ), and Object Free Areas (OFA) for the two runways at Chattanooga, as well as
the required dimensions based on the ARC for each runway.




Aviation Forecasts                                   4-9                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




                                              Table 4-6
                                    RUNWAY DIMENSIONAL CRITERIA
                                                   Runway 2/20                  Runway 15-33
                                                          ARC D-IV                     ARC B-II
                    Dimension                   Existing  Required           Existing  Required
        Runway width                                  150      150                 150        75
        Runway centerline to:
         Taxiway centerline                          350      400                  353            240
         Taxilane centerline                         745      400                  353            240
         Aircraft parking area                       550      500                  275            250
        Runway Safety Area (RSA)
         Width                                        500      500                  150           150
         Length beyond runway end                   1,000    1,000                  300           300
        Runway Obstacle Free Zone
         Width                                       400      400                  400            400
         Length beyond runway end                    200      200                  200            200
        Runway Object Free Area (OFA)
         Width                                        800      800                  500           500
         Length beyond runway end                   1,000    1,000                  300           300
        Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13 Airport Design

With the exception of the distance between the centerline of Runway 02-20 and the centerline of
Taxiway A, which will be discussed in the section on taxiways, Runway 02-20 and 15-33 meet or
exceed the design requirements for their respective ARCs in all respects.

The Object Free Area (OFA) of a runway is centered over a runway along its centerline. It is wider
and longer than the runway - the specific dimensions being determined by the runway ARC. The
OFA must be kept clear of all above ground objects protruding above the runway safety edge
elevation, except, in most cases, objects that are required for air navigation, aircraft ground
maneuvering purposes, and to taxi and hold aircraft within the OFA. It is encouraged but not
required that the OFA be extended beyond the standard length to as long as feasible.

The Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) is a trapezoid-shaped area on the ground at each end of and
on the centerline to each runway. Its purpose is to enhance the protection of people and property
on the ground. This is achieved through the Airport’s control over the RPZ and through the
Airport’s clearing and maintaining the clearance of all incompatible objects and activities within the
area. The FAA encourages, but does not require, the Airport to own the property that contains the
RPZ. The RPZ begins 200 feet beyond the area of the runway that is useable for takeoff or
landing, unless special applications for declared distances are in place. The exact dimensions of
each RPZ are determined based on the function of the ARC designation and the approach visibility
minimum associated with that runway end.

There are two components to the RPZ, the Central Portion of the RPZ and the Controlled Activity
Area. The Central Portion is a rectangular area centered on the runway centerline and the width is
the same as the Object Free Area (OFA) of the runway. The Central Portion of the RPZ runs the
entire length of the RPZ from one end to the other. The clearance requirements for the Central
Portion of the RPZ are not as strict as the OFA, but it is generally recommended to keep all objects
from the RPZ, especially the Central Portion. In particular, automobile parking facilities, while
discouraged in the RPZ, may be permitted as long as they are not in the Central Portion.



Aviation Forecasts                                  4-10                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                         Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




The Controlled Activity Area of the RPZ is located outside of the Central Portion but within the
RPZ. Essentially, it is all areas of the RPZ not in the Central Portion. While it does not have the
strict clearance requirements of the Central Portion, it is still desirable that all objects be cleared
from the Controlled Activity Area. However, activities and land uses permitted in the area must not
create glare or smoke, attract wildlife, promote the gathering of people, interfere with the NAVAIDs,
and must be located below the approach surface. Land uses not permitted in an RPZ include but
are not limited to residences, places of public assembly (churches, schools, hospitals, office
buildings, and shopping centers), and fuel storage facilities.

The FAA acknowledges that it is not always practical for an airport owner to acquire and control the
land uses within an entire RPZ. In these cases, the land use standards are considered
recommendations for the portion of the RPZ that is not controlled by the airport owner. However, it
is the policy of the FAA to protect the public interest in the national airport system. To implement
that policy, the FAA retains the right to study objects and activities to determine their effect on the
safe and efficient use of the airport and the safety of people and property on the ground. If the
FAA determines that the object or activity conflicts with an airport planning or design standard or
recommendation, the FAA may issue an advisory recommendation in opposition to the presence of
that object or activity near the public use airport. Table 4-7 shows the dimensions for the RPZ at
each runway end at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport.

                                            Table 4-7
                                RUNWAY PROTECTION ZONE DIMENSIONS
                                                                    Runway
                             Dimension                 02        20      15            33
                     Length                            2,500     2,500   1,000         1,000
                     Inner width                       1,000     1,000     500           500
                     Outer width                       1,750     1,750     700           700
                     Central Portion
                      Width                              800       800      800          800
                      Length beyond runway end         2,700     2,700    1,200        1,200
                     Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13 Airport Design

The Controlled Activity Areas to Runways 15 and 20 are clear of all unapproved objects. Eighteen
buildings are either entirely or partially within the RPZ of Runway 02. The RPZ of the completed
extension to Runway 33 contains 13 buildings either partially or wholly within the RPZ as well as a
portion of a mobile home park, specifically 55 mobile home units. The land upon which the
buildings and mobile home units are located does not belong to nor is it under the control of the
Airport. It is recommended that the Airport acquire this property and remove the buildings and
mobile homes when the land becomes available. It is not considered necessary at this time to
acquire the land through eminent domain proceedings.

Length

The primary runway, Runway 02-20 is 7,401 feet in length. Runway 15-33 is 5,575 feet in length
following the 575-foot extension to Runway 33 completed and operational in June of 2008. A
number of factors determine the necessary length required of a runway. The height above sea
level of the airport, the aircraft that are being used by the respective air carriers, and the range or
distance between the runway and the destination runway are but a few of the factors that
determine the required runway length.




Aviation Forecasts                                    4-11                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




The air carriers that service the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport are unlikely to change either the
aircraft they use or the destinations they serve from Chattanooga unless an outside influence
forces them to make these changes. The new factor at Chattanooga is the presence of the Low
Cost Carriers (LCC). Not only are they bringing in equipment that was not previously used at the
Airport, but also they are flying to destinations that are new for Chattanooga. The increased
presence of LCCs at Chattanooga may create additional runway length requirements, based on
the new equipment, the new destinations, or a combination of both. Table 4-8 lists a number of
LCCs that are in operation today, their respective hubs (or in the case of Southwest Airlines “focus
cities”) and the typical equipment that each carrier uses.

                                            Table 4-8
                            LOW COST CARRIER HUBS AND AIRCRAFT FLEET
    Air Carrier                          Hubs or Focus Cities                     Typical Equipment
    Air Tran           Fort Lauderdale, Fort Meyers, Orlando, Atlanta, Tampa,
                       Chicago, Midway, Indianapolis, Baltimore, Las Vegas,
                       Akron/Canton, Milwaukee                                    717-200, 737-700
    Allegiant          Las Vegas, Orlando/Sanford, Tampa/St Petersburg, Fort
                       Lauderdale, Phoenix/Mesa, Bellingham                       MD-83, MD-87
    Frontier           Denver                                                     A318, A319, A320
    Jet Blue           New York JFK, Boston Logan, Fort Lauderdale                A320, ERJ-190
    Primaris           Las Vegas, New York JFK, Los Angeles, San Francisco,
                       Chicago O'Hare, Atlanta                                    B 767, B787, B757-200
    Southwest          Houston Hobby, Las Vegas, Baltimore, Chicago               B 737-300, B737-500,
                       Midway, Los Angeles, Oakland, Orlando, Phoenix             B737-700
    Spirit             Fort Lauderdale, Detroit, Atlantic City                    A319-100, A321-200
    Sun Country        Minneapolis, Dallas-Fort Worth,                            737-800
    USA 3000           Ft. Meyers, Detroit, St. Petersburg, Chicago O'Hare        A320-200
    Virgin America     San Francisco, San Diego, Las Vegas, New York JFK,
                       Washington DCA, Seattle                                    A319, A320
   Source: Respective Airline Websites

Table 4-9 shows the distance in nautical miles (nmi) between Chattanooga and the hub or focus
cities of several of the LCCs listed in Table 4-8.




Aviation Forecasts                                     4-12                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




                                             Table 4-9
                     DISTANCES BETWEEN CHATTANOOGA AND SELECTED DESTINATIONS
                                 Distance From
                                Chattanooga (nmi)      Destination
                                        88             Atlanta GA
                                       191             Louisville KY
                                       218             Charlotte NC
                                       234             Memphis TN
                                       247             Cincinnati OH
                                       273             Greensboro NC
                                       314             Columbus OH
                                       422             Chicago IL
                                       427             Sanford/Orlando FL
                                       458             St. Petersburg FL
                                       458             Washington D.C.
                                       566             Philadelphia PA
                                       596             Ft. Lauderdale FL
                                       604             Houston TX
                                       614             Miami FL
                                       698             Minneapolis MN
                                       797             Boston MA
                                      1,332            Phoenix AZ
                                      1,461            Las Vegas NV
                                      1,636            Los Angeles CA
                                      1,815            Seattle WA
                                      1,834            Bellingham WA
                                Source: www.worldatlas.com

In June 2008, Allegiant Air operated three weekly flights to Tampa/St. Petersburg FL, five weekly
flights to Orlando/Sanford FL, and two weekly flights to Fort Lauderdale FL. In September 2008,
they operated two weekly flights to Tampa/St. Petersburg FL, and three weekly flights to
Orlando/Sanford FL. Part of the decrease in service is due to the seasonal demand for travel to
largely leisure destinations, but a portion is also due to the extremely high cost of fuel. Allegiant
has been enjoying load factors between 85 and 95 percent since they began service to the Airport.

Allegiant services all of their flights with MD-80 aircraft. With five flights per week, this constitutes
over 520 MD-80 annual operations. The FAA requires that an aircraft use the airport an average of
at least 500 annual operations before the requirements of the specific aircraft can be considered in
runway length considerations.

Allegiant has expressed interest in servicing its hub in Las Vegas, NV from Chattanooga. Las
Vegas is approximately 1,500 nmi from Chattanooga. With the length of Runway 02-20 at 7,401
feet, an MD-83 aircraft - the predominant equipment in the Allegiant fleet would not be able to
reach Las Vegas from Chattanooga with a full payload. The airline would have to reduce
passengers and or baggage in order to reach this destination. Reducing the payload of a flight
does not make good business sense for Allegiant or any other airline.

Table 4-10 shows the runway lengths required for a selection of aircraft for varying stage lengths.
Aircraft take-off weight calculations done in preparation for the runway length calculations can be
found in Appendix D. The aircraft were chosen, as they are representative of aircraft either that
are used by airlines servicing Chattanooga today or that could reasonably be expected to within
the planning period.

Aviation Forecasts                                  4-13                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                       Master Plan Update



                                                                       Table 4-10
                                                         AIRCRAFT RUNWAY LENGTH REQUIREMENTS

                                500 nmi                               1000 nmi                               1500 nmi                              2000 nmi
                     Takeoff   Standard       Hot          Takeoff    Standard        Hot         Takeoff     Standard       Hot        Takeoff     Standard          Hot
                     Weight      Day          Day          Weight       Day           Day         Weight        Day          Day        Weight        Day             Day
A319 1               136,700      5,460       5,960        144,000       6,460        6,860       154,322        7,360      9,160       154,322        7,360         9,160
B737-800             151,000      5,960       6,260        157,000       6,360        6,760       164,000        7,360      7,660       171,000        8,560         9,060
B757-200             184,000      4,260       4,360        213,000       5,660        5,960       223,000        6,360       6,660      230,000        6,860          7,160
B 757-200PF 2        220,000      5,960       6,260        228,000       6,460        6,960       237,000        7,660       7,860      245,000        8,160          8,400
DC -9-32 3           102,000      6,660       7,060        108,000       9,060        9,460       108,000        9,060       9,460      108,000        9,060          9,460
MD-80-81 4           136,000      7,100       7,300        140,000       7,700        8,200       140,000        7,700       8,200      140,000        7,700          8,200
MD-80-82/88 5        139,000      6,300       6,900        149,500       7,800        8,500       149,500        7,800       8,500      149,500        7,800          8,500
MD-80-83 6           140,000      6,060       6,460        146,000       6,360        7,160       155,000        7,960       8,360      160,000        8,560          9,160
MD-80-87 7           127,000      5,160       5,260        134,000       5,960        6,260       140,000        6,560       6,860      140,000        6,560          6,860
MD-80-87 8           125,000      4,960       5,160        132,000       5,660        5,860       139,000        6,360       6,660      143,500        7,260          7,660
Source: Respective Aircraft Manufacturer’s Airport Planning Manuals
    1
      A319 aircraft cannot operate more than 1,500 nmi without taking payload penalties.
    2
      B757-500PF aircraft cannot operate more than 1,300 nmi off a 7,400 ft long runway without taking a payload penalty.
    3
      DC-9-32 aircraft cannot operate more than 980 nmi off a runway of any length without taking a payload penalty.
    4
      MD-80-81 aircraft cannot operate more than 800 nmi off a runway of any length without taking a payload penalty.
    5
      MD-80-82/88 aircraft cannot operate more than 1,200 nmi without taking a payload penalty
    6
      MD-83 aircraft cannot operate more than 1,800 nmi without taking a payload penalty.
    7
      MD-87 aircraft cannot operate more than 1,400 nmi off a runway of any length without taking a payload penalty.
    8
      With 1,130-gallon fuselage auxiliary fuel tanks.

                   Stage lengths exceed maximum payloads of the aircraft; payload penalties must be taken
                   Runway length required is longer than the 9,000 ft long runway recommended in the 2000 Master Plan
                   Stage length not possible at existing runway length of 7,401 ft., but possible if runway were 8,600 ft in length




    Facility Requirements                                                         4-14                                                                FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




Runway lengths highlighted in pink are for those stage lengths for which the aircraft would have to
take a payload penalty regardless of runway length due to the maximum payload-range for that
aircraft. These aircraft are not designed to take their respective maximum payloads these
distances. They include the A319 at distances greater than 1,500 nmi, the DC-9-32 at distances
greater than 980 nmi, the MD-80-81 aircraft at distances greater than 800 nmi, the MD-80-83
aircraft at distances greater than 1,800 nmi, and the MD-80-87 at distances greater than 1,400
nmi. Of the aircraft listed, the only aircraft that can travel 1,500 nmi without penalty are the A319,
the B757-200, the B757-200PF, and the MD-80-83. Allegiant Airlines operates exclusively MD-80
aircraft. Of these, the MD-80-83 aircraft currently makes up over 47 percent of its fleet.

Required runway lengths highlighted in yellow are stage lengths that are not currently possible
from the existing 7,401-foot long primary runway at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. However, if
Runway 02-20 were extended to 8,600 feet in length, the MD-80-83 aircraft could make the Las
Vegas stage length at maximum payload. Required runway lengths highlighted in orange are
longer than the 9,000-foot runway recommended in the 2000 Master Plan.

It is recommended that Runway 02-20 be lengthened to at least 8,600 feet in length. This would
allow the MD-80-83 aircraft to reach Las Vegas on even a hot day without a load penalty. None of
Allegiant’s current aircraft would be able to reach the Allegiant hub at Bellingham, WA with the
possible exception of the MD-80-87 aircraft with the fuselage auxiliary fuel tanks, but it is unlikely
that Allegiant would want to travel to Bellingham, WA within the planning period without first
stopping at Las Vegas.

An airline might desire to fly directly to the west coast to either the San Francisco or Los Angeles
markets within the planning period. Either of these cities could be reached from Chattanooga on
an 8,600-foot long runway and using the appropriate aircraft, such as a B757-200 or B767-200.

The 2000 Master Plan recommended that Runway 02-20 be extended to 9,000 feet. This distance
was based on the more demanding characteristics of a Boeing 727-200 aircraft. It was proposed
as a freight aircraft. In order to operate 500 nmi out of Chattanooga, the payload would have to be
reduced to 28,000 pounds from a maximum of 43,300 pounds, a reduction of the payload of 35
percent. In order to operate 1,000 nmi, the payload would have to be reduced to 20,000 pounds, a
reduction of 54 percent from maximum.

Use of the B727-200 is being phased out. Production ceased in 1984, but the cost of operating the
aircraft, as well as the necessity to have the aircraft modified with hush kits in order to comply with
Stage Three Noise Reduction mandates, have caused most if not all domestic passenger airlines
to phase them out of their respective fleets. In February of 2008, FedEx had the largest fleet of
domestic B727-200 aircraft at 91. They are currently replacing these aircraft with second-hand
retrofitted B757-200. These replacements are expected to be complete by 2016.

Declared Distances

In instances where an airport is operating under constrained conditions and it is impractical to
provide runway safety areas, runway object free zones or runway protection zones in full
compliance with the usual design standards, the FAA allows the use of an alternative airport
design methodology called declared distances on runways. Declared distances are the distances
that an airport declares available for the airplane’s takeoff run, takeoff distance, accelerate-stop
distance, and landing distance requirements. They treat an airplane’s runway performance
distances independently. The declared distances are:



Facility Requirements                            4-15                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




   Take Off Run Available (TORA): the length of runway declared available and suitable to
    accelerate satisfactorily from brake release to lift-off, plus safety factors.
   Take Off Distance Available (TODA): the TORA plus the length of any remaining runway or
    clearway beyond the far end of the TORA available to accelerate satisfactorily from brake
    release past lift-off to start take-off climb, plus safety factors.
   Accelerate Stop Distance Available (ASDA): the length of runway plus stopway declared
    available and suitable to satisfactorily accelerate from brake release to the critical engine-
    failure speed (V1) and then decelerate to a stop, plus safety factors. The V1 is selected for
    each aircraft by the aircraft manufacturer and is the speed at which the engine failure is
    assumed to occur.
   Landing Distance Available (LDA): the length of runway declared available and suitable to
    satisfactorily complete the approach, touchdown, and decelerate to a stop from the threshold,
    plus safety factors.

The application of each instance of a declared distance requires prior FAA approval. Approval is
reflected on the FAA-approved Airport Layout Plan (ALP) for an Airport. Both Runway 02-20 and
Runway 15-33 at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport have declared distances, and these have been
reflected on the Airport’s approved ALP. The existing declared distances are indicated in Table
4-11.

                                           Table 4-11
                                   RUNWAY DECLARED DISTANCES
                                                                     Runway
                         Declared Distances               02      20       15            33
            Takeoff Run Available (TORA)                  7,400   7,400   5,575          5,470
            Takeoff Distance Available (TODA)             7,400   7,400   5,575          5,470
            Accelerate-Stop Distance Available (ASDA)     7,201   7,400   5,575          5,470
            Landing Distance Available (LDA)              7,201   7,400   5,470          5,000

Declared distances are typically not allowed by the FAA except in the cases of existing constrained
airports where it is impracticable to provide Runway Safety Areas, Runway Protection Zones, or
Runway Object Free Areas in accordance with FAA design standards. Because of the limited land
area of the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, and the desire to lengthen the primary runway, it is
unlikely that the declared distances will be eliminated

Width

Currently, both Runway 02-20 and Runway 15-33 are 150 feet wide. The required width of an
ARC D-IV runway is 150 feet. The required width of an ARC B-II runway is 75 feet. Runway 02-20
meets the width requirements of an ARC D-IV runway and Runway 15-33 exceeds the width
requirements of an ARC B-II runway. No change in the runway widths is required or
recommended.

Pavement Design Strength

Runway pavement strength is as much a design determinant of which aircraft can use a runway as
length. The aircraft’s gear type and configuration determine how the weight of the aircraft is
distributed to the pavement and how the pavement will respond. The runways at Chattanooga


Facility Requirements                              4-16                                     FINAL REPORT
                                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                       Master Plan Update




Metropolitan Airport are rated in a manner similar to other air carrier airports in that they have a
listed capacity for single-wheel, dual-wheel, and dual tandem-wheel pavement ratings as shown in
Table 4-12.

                                             Table 4-12
                                  RUNWAY PAVEMENT DESIGN STRENGTH
                                                                                  Dual
                                                       Single-      Dual-         Tandem-
                           Runway         Units        Wheel        Wheel         Wheel
                        Runway 02-20      pounds       120,000      160,000       265,000
                        Runway 15-33      pounds       120,000      160,000       265,000

The aircraft that were previously considered as possible entrants into the Chattanooga market in
the discussions of runway length have also been examined with respect to pavement strength. In
addition, the B727-200 has been added. It was identified in the 2000 Master Plan as a potential air
cargo aircraft at the Airport. However, the maximum loads of the B727-200 aircraft cannot be
sustained by the existing runway pavements. Table 4-13 shows the maximum demands that these
aircraft would make on runway pavement according to the respective aircraft manufacturer’s
Airport Planning Manuals. It can be seen that the B727-200 and the B737-800 are capable of
making demands on the runway pavement at Chattanooga in excess of the pavement’s designed
capabilities.

                                              Table 4-13
                                AIRCRAFT IMPACTS ON RUNWAY PAVEMENT
                                                    Maximum         Maximum
                                   Maximum         Percentage       Weight of
                                    Design         Weight on       Main Gear on
                  Aircraft          Weight         Main Gear        Pavement         Type of Gear
                A 319                 155,204             92%           142,800      Dual
                B 727-200             210,000             93%           195,200      Dual
                B 737-800             173,000             95%           164,200      Dual
                B 757-200             251,000             92%           231,600      Dual Tandem
                B757-200PF            256,000             91%           233,400      Dual Tandem
                DC-9-32               109,000             92%           100,700      Dual
                MD-80-83              161,000             95%           152,600      Dual
                MD-80-87              141,000             95%           133,600      Dual
                MD-80-87              150,500             95%           142,600      Dual
                 Source: Respective Aircraft Manufacturer’s Airport Planning Manuals
                              Weight exceeds the design weight of the runway pavement

This does not mean that neither of these aircraft can operate at the Airport. The B737-800 aircraft
will likely operate as a passenger aircraft, if it is used at Chattanooga. This aircraft has a maximum
range of approximately 4,000 nmi, but it is unlikely that it will operate to distances of more than
2,000 nmi from the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, as Seattle, Washington, one of the most
distant domestic airports from Chattanooga is 1,834 nmi from Chattanooga. Thus, it can still
operate out of Chattanooga at full payload but with less than the maximum fuel capacity. This will
decrease the maximum weight of the aircraft without affecting the payload and thereby decrease
the resultant impact on the runway pavement.




Facility Requirements                                   4-17                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




The B727-200 was identified as a potential cargo aircraft in the 2000 Master Plan. This aircraft
does not currently operate from Chattanooga. It is being phased out of use by most airlines.
FedEx currently has the largest fleet of B727-200 aircraft and they have committed to replacing
them with B757-200 aircraft prior to 2016.

The pavement strength of both runways does not need to be altered. The maximum design
weights of the aircraft currently using the Airport are well within the pavement design strengths. Of
the aircraft that could potentially use the Airport that are not now doing so, only two have maximum
design weights that exceed that of the pavement strength. The B727-200 is unlikely to be
introduced to the Airport as it is being phased out of service. If the B737-800 comes to the Airport,
it will likely be as a passenger aircraft. It is unlikely that it will operate to distances of more than
2,000 nmi from the Chattanooga. As the aircraft has a maximum range of 4,000 nmi, it can easily
reduce the amount of fuel onboard thereby reducing its maximum weight without reducing the
payload.

Designation

Runway designation markings are provided on each end of a runway and are used by pilots to
identify landing facilities. A runway designation identifies a runway according to compass bearing
and consists of a number and, on parallel runways, is supplemented with a letter. The designation
number represents the whole number nearest the compass bearing when viewed from the
direction of approach. For example, where the compass bearing is 183-degrees, the runway
designation would be 18, and for a compass bearing of 87 degrees, the runway designation would
be 9. Compass bearings are affected by the magnetic field of the earth and by magnetic objects in
the vicinity. The effect of magnetic objects in the vicinity is called “deviation”. The effect of the
earth's magnetic field is called “variation”. Compass bearings corrected for nearby objects
(deviation) are “magnetic” directions. Correcting for the Earth's magnetic field (variation) gives us
“true” direction. When on land, “variation” is referred to as “magnetic declination” or sometimes
“deviation.”

The compass bearing is determined by correcting the runway’s true bearing for magnetic
declination. To accomplish this modification, westerly magnetic declination values are added to a
runway’s true bearing, while easterly magnetic declination values are subtracted. The magnetic
declination for the Airport is 3º 54’ west. Since the magnetic declination is westerly, the compass
bearings associated with the runways at the Airport are determined by adding the declination value
to the true bearing values. The true bearing of Runway 02-20 is 16º 42’ 11”. Therefore, the
compass bearing of Runway 02-20 is 20º 36’ 11” and the designation of the Runway is correct.
The variation or magnetic declination changes gradually over time. It is anticipated, based on the
historic rate of change of the magnetic declination, that Runway 02-20 should be changed to
Runway 3-21 around the year 2061.

The true bearing of Runway 15-33 is 145º 28’ 25” and the magnetic declination of the Airport is 3º
54’ 00” west. Therefore, the compass bearing of Runway 15-33 is 145º 22’ 25” and the heading of
the runway is correct. Based on the historic rate of change of the magnetic declination, Runway
15-33 should be changed to Runway 16-34 around the year 2075 as shown in Table 4-14.




Facility Requirements                             4-18                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




                                                   Table 4-14
                                              RUNWAY DESIGNATIONS
                                                                   Data
                        Airport declination                        3º 54’ 00” W
                        Rate of declination change per year        0º 5’ 00” W

                        Runway 02-20
                        True bearing                               16º 42’ 11.1937”
                        Compass bearing                            20º 36’ 11.1937”
                        Approximate years to designation change    53

                        Runway 15-33
                        True bearing                               145º 28’ 25.2729”
                        Compass bearing                            149º 22’ 25.2729”
                        Approximate years to designation change    67
                        Source: National Geodetic Survey
                                National Geophysical Data Center

4.3.3    Taxiway Requirements

The taxiways at an airport are another important component of the airfield system upon which
aircraft operate. Taxiways are the means by which aircraft travel to and from the runways to the
aprons. They must be configured to allow aircraft to maneuver in the safest and most efficient
manner possible. The requirements for taxiways have been determined in much the same way
that runways have in that they are grouped by the type of aircraft that use them. FAA Advisory
Circular 150/5300-13 Airport Design provides detailed information on taxiways. This section
explores these requirements.

Dimensional Criteria

Runway 02-20, an ARC D-IV runway has three partial parallel taxiways associated with it, Taxiway
A, Taxiway B and Taxiway H. Runway 15-33, an ARC B-II runway has a full parallel taxiway
associated with it, Taxiway D. Taxiways that service particular runways are sized for same ARC
group of aircraft as the associated runway. Table 4-15 shows the dimensional criteria required for
Taxiways A, B, H and D based on their respective ARC groupings and the actual dimensions of
each taxiway.




Facility Requirements                                     4-19                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                        Master Plan Update




                                             Table 4-15
                                   TAXIWAY DIMENSIONAL CRITERIA
                                                               Taxiway                                     Taxiway
                                     ARC D-IV                                              ARC B-II
           Dimension                 Required       A            B             H           Required             D
 Taxiway width                              75            60         75            75            35                 60
 Taxiway centerline to:
  Runway centerline                          400      350         745            400             240              350
  Taxiway centerline                         267      395         350            N/A             105              N/A
  Fixed or moveable object                   160      175         160            160             65.5             112
 Taxiway Object Free Area width              259      259         259            259             131              131
 Taxiway Safety Area width                   171      125         171            171              79               79
 Source: FAA AC 150/5300-13 Airport Design

With the exception of Taxiway A, each of the taxiways shown in Table 4-15 meet the dimensional
requirements. Taxiway A runs parallel to and east of Runway 02 and is neither wide enough nor
far enough removed from the centerline of Runway 02 to meet the requirements of a taxiway
parallel to an ARC D-IV runway. Neither is its Safety Area wide enough. These deficiencies must
be corrected in order to bring the taxiway and Runway 02-20 into compliance with FAA standards.
The deficiencies were reported in the 2000 Master Plan and the Airport included the required
modifications to Taxiway A into their Capital Improvement Plan. The relocation and widening of
Taxiway A is currently under construction. It will be widened to 75 feet, relocated 50 feet to the
east, and the Safety Area will be widened when complete. Even with the realignment of Taxiway
A, Taxiway B will still be of sufficient distance from Taxiway A to meet the requirements of an ARC
D-IV taxiway.

Taxiway B runs parallel to and east of Runway 02-20 and Taxiway A. It is 75 feet wide and its
centerline is 395 feet from the centerline of Taxiway A. Taxiway B meets the requirements of an
ARC D-IV taxiway.

Taxiway H runs parallel to and west of Runway 02. It is 75 feet wide and its centerline is 400 feet
from the centerline of Runway 02. Taxiway H also meets the requirements of an ARC D-IV
taxiway.

Taxiway D is a full-length parallel taxiway to Runway 15-33. It is 60 feet wide and its centerline is
350 feet from the centerline of Runway 15-33. It exceeds the requirements of an ARC B-II taxiway.

Exits

Exit taxiways permit aircraft to exit and often enter the runway from the parallel or connecting
taxiways. The exit taxiways need to be placed to allow aircraft to clear a runway as quickly and
efficiently as possible. The type of exit, the separation distances between the exit taxiways, the
configuration of the taxiways, as well as the efficiency of the taxiways all contribute to the ability of
aircraft to clear the runway. The exit taxiways at Chattanooga are sufficient to meet the criteria
placed upon them.




Facility Requirements                              4-20                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




4.3.4    Electronic, Visual, and Satellite Aids to Navigation

Navigational Aids (NAVAIDs) consist of equipment that help pilots locate and land at an airport and
provide horizontal or a combination of horizontal and vertical guidance information. The equipment
can be electronic as in the case of Instrument Landing Systems (ILS), visual as with runway lights,
or satellite-based as with the Global Positioning System (GPS) technology.

Both runways at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport have appropriate navigational aids that are
properly sited and in working condition. Both ends of Runway 02-20 have ILS systems that use
glide slope, approach lighting systems, and localizers. Runway 20 handles the majority of all
arrivals at approximately 60 percent. It has both a Category I and a Category II precision
instrument approach. Runway 02 has one Category I precision instrument approach. These three
approaches have more than 99 percent reliability.

Additional instrument approaches include GPS approaches on Runway 20, Runway 15, and
Runway 33. In addition, Runway 33 has a Very-high Frequency Omni-directional Range (VOR)
non-precision approach. The Airport is also equipped with an Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-8)
as shown in Table 4-16.

                                          Table 4-16
                         ELECTRONIC AND SATELLITE AIDS TO NAVIGATION
                                                            Runway
                                     02              20              15                33
              Approach         Precision       Precision       Non-precision     Non-precision
              Type             ILS CAT I       ILS CAT I       RNAV (GPS)        RNAV (GPS)
              Slope            3.00º           3.00º           3.06º             3.05º

              Approach         Non-precision   Precision                         Non-precision
              Type             RNAV (GPS)      ILS CAT II                        VOR
              Slope            3.00º           3.00º                             3.43º

              Approach                         Non-precision
              Type                             RNAV (GPS)
              Slope                            3.00º

                               Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-8)

Visual aids enhance the pilot’s visual information when visibility is poor and at night. It is essential
to provide visual aids that will be as meaningful to a pilot as possible. These aids can provide
pilots information based on their horizontal and vertical position by providing data regarding the
aircraft’s alignment, height, distance, rotation, and information concerning the rate of descent and
the rate of closure with the desired path. The visual aids at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport
include runway lighting, rotating beacon, threshold lights, Visual Approach Slope Indicator (VASI),
and Precision Approach Path and Indicator lights (PAPI). All of the existing visual aids are in
serviceable condition and need only routine maintenance. The visual aids are shown in Table
4-17.




Facility Requirements                             4-21                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                         Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                     Master Plan Update




                                             Table 4-17
                                    VISUAL AIDS TO NAVIGATION
                                                                Runway
            Airport                   02                   20             15                33
            Rotating Beacon     HIRL       HIRL                    MIRL           MIRL
            Lighted Wind Cone   MALSR-CTAF ALSF2                   4-light   PAPI 4-light   PAPI
                                                                   (3.00º GP)     (3.00º GP)
            Segment Circle      Centerline        Centerline
                                Lights            Lights
                                4-box      VASI   Touchdown
                                (3.00º GP)        Zone Lights
                                RVR               RVR
                                Equipment         Equipment

It is recommended that the VASI on Runway 02 be replaced with a 4-light PAPI. Runway 20
should be equipped with a 4-light PAPI as well. PAPIs are similar to VASIs but they guide pilots
with a narrower beam of light. Combined with lights extra to the VASI, the PAPI warns the pilots
earlier when they begin to drift from the desired glide slope, thus offering a more precise landing.

4.4      COMMERCIAL SERVICE PASSENGER TERMINAL COMPLEX

The commercial-service passenger terminal complex consists of the terminal, and associated
apron and curbfronts. The requirements for these facilities are based on the annual, daily, and
peak period enplanements and operations. The following principal areas are presented in this
section and the details of these can be found in Appendix E:

     Gates or aircraft parking positions
     Commercial service passenger terminal building
     Curbfronts
     Key commercial service passenger terminal area trigger points

4.4.1    Gates

Gates or aircraft parking positions located on the apron surrounding the commercial passenger
terminal concourse are currently accessed either by passengers with the use of a passenger
boarding bridge or by using stairs to access the apron. The six gates at Chattanooga Metropolitan
Airport are currently shared. Specifically, in some cases two airlines will share a single gate by
arrangement of the Airport rather than either airline having exclusive use of the gate. The Airport
instituted the arrangement when there were not enough gates to serve each airline exclusively.
The numbers of gates as well as Remain Overnight (RON) positions are shown in Table 4-18.




Facility Requirements                               4-22                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                          Master Plan Update




                                               Table 4-18
                        EXISTING COMMERCIAL SERVICE AIRCRAFT PARKING POSITIONS
                                                                                             Existing
                Gates with bridges                                                                  3
                Gates without bridges                                                               3
                Square feet of commercial service aircraft parking                            34,415
                Lineal feet of terminal frontage (50 feet from face of terminal)                  770
                RON aircraft parking positions                                                       3

Several methodologies can be used to determine the number of gates needed in the future. Each
of the following paragraphs briefly explains a methodology, some of the basic assumptions of the
methodology, and the outcome that particular methodology might yield for the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport.

The enplanements per gate methodology shown in Table 4-19 divides the annual enplaned
passengers for 2007 by the total number of gates available in that year for the number of enplaned
passengers per gate. The projected number of annual enplaned passengers is then divided by the
2007 enplaned passengers per gate to arrive at the number of required gates per planning year.
This method assumes that the usage and utilization of the gates in 2007 was acceptable and will
remain constant throughout the planning period. This method would result in nine gates in the year
2027.

                                             Table 4-19
                                ENPLANEMENTS PER GATE METHODOLOGY
                                              2007          2012          2017          2022              2027
      Annual Enplaned Passengers              296,083       306,500       352,500       401,800          457,900
      Enplaned passengers per gate             49,347        49,347        49,347        49,347            9,347
      Gates                                         6             6             7             8                9

The number of departures per gate methodology divides the annual commercial passenger
operations for 2007 by two to determine the number of departures. The result is divided by the six
gates available in 2007. The projected number of annual commercial passenger operations for
each year is then divided by two and then by the number of departures per gate for 2007 to
determine the number of required gates for each of the planning years. This approach assumes
that the 2007 usage and utilization of the gates will remain constant over the planning period. This
method as shown in Table 4-20 would result in seven gates in 2027.

                                              Table 4-20
                                  DEPARTURES PER GATE METHODOLOGY
                                                           2007        2012         2017       2022            2027
 Annual commercial passenger aircraft departures           10,135      10,450       10,800     11,150          12,350
 Annual departures per gate                                 1,689       1,689        1,689      1,689           1,689
 Gates                                                          6           6            6          7               7




Facility Requirements                                   4-23                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                          Master Plan Update




The percent increase in annual operations method assumes that the number of gates required will
increase at the same rate as annual commercial passenger operations through the year 2027.
This method takes the percentage increase in annual commercial operations between each set of
planning years and assumes that the number of gates will increase at the same percentage. This
method does not take into account changes in the fleet mix over the planning period. This method
would result in seven gates in the year 2027 as shown in Table 4-21.

                                        Table 4-21
          INCREASE IN GATES BASED ON PERCENT OF INCREASE IN ANNUAL OPERATIONS
                                                       2007          2012         2017          2022         2027
   Annual commercial passenger operations              20,270        20,900       21,600        22,300       24,700
   Percentage increase in operations                    -3.7%          3.1%         3.3%          3.2%        10.8%
   Gates                                                    6             6            6             6            7


The gates based on projected schedules takes the airline schedule of September 2008 and
projects forward the airline schedule based on knowledge of the aviation industry and the aircraft
that each airline is flying today, as well as the aircraft orders that each airline has placed. With this
knowledge, schedules were developed for each planning year. These can be found in Appendix F.
While not predictions of actual flight schedules, the hypothetical schedules are examples of how
airlines might arrange their flights to maximize the passenger feed through their respective hubs
and protect their market from competing carriers. Based on these schedules, the number of gates
required would be as shown in Table 4-22.

                                            Table 4-22
                               GATES BASED ON PROJECTED SCHEDULES
                                                              2007   2012      2017    2022     2027
                   Gates based on projected schedule             6      7         7       8        8

As projected, the schedules also show that regardless of whether or not the gates are operated as
common-use or exclusive use, the same number of gates will be needed in each of the planning
years. Exclusive-use refers to operations where each gate is used exclusively by one airline. This
usually results in the gate not being used as often as it could be throughout the day, which could
result in more gates than necessary being built. Common-use refers to operations where any
airline could use any open gate at any time. This could result in all gates being fully occupied
several times throughout each day. While this is good gate utilization, it does not allow for weather
delays and other non-scheduled events, which could strand one or more aircraft at the gates. If
the gates were to become truly common-use, theoretically, the number of gates required
throughout the planning period could be reduced, but weather delays and other unscheduled
delays as well as sudden or rapid growth at the Airport might not be easily accommodated. Ideally,
it is recommended that one additional gate position above the peak hour demand be provided to
allow a small amount of flexibility in scheduling as well as provide for weather delays and for a
small amount of unexpected growth. The resulting and recommended number of gates for each
planning period is shown in Table 4-23.




Facility Requirements                                  4-24                                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




                                          Table 4-23
                                 RECOMMENDED NUMBER OF GATES
                                                       2007        2012       2017       2022          2027
    Number of gate positions                                  6           8          8          9             9

The projected airline schedules are also useful in determining the projected aircraft fleet mix for
each planning period. Each of the aircraft within the fleet mix belongs to a design group developed
by the FAA that is based on the wingspan of each aircraft. The fleet mix and the respective aircraft
planning groups for each planning period are shown in Table 4-24.

                                        Table 4-24
         AIRCRAFT FLEET MIX PER PLANNING PERIOD BASED ON PROJECTED SCHEDULES
         Aircraft Design Group     2007         2012              2017        2022           2027
         Group I                      0.0%         0.0%             0.0%        0.0%           0.0%
         Group II
          AT7                         2.9%         3.9%             3.6%         0.0%            0.0%
          CRJ                        44.1%        56.2%            63.3%        56.3%           52.6%
          CR7                         0.0%         8.5%             7.7%        10.5%           14.2%
          ERD                         4.1%         9.2%             8.3%         7.4%            7.4%
          ER3                        14.1%         0.0%             0.0%         0.0%            0.0%
          ER4                        15.3%        13.1%            11.8%        20.0%           20.0%
          SF3                         8.2%         0.0%             0.0%         0.0%            0.0%
                                     88.8%        90.8%            94.7%        94.2%           94.2%
         Group III
          DH8                         7.1%         4.6%             0.0%         0.0%               0.0%
          MD-80                       4.1%         4.6%             5.3%         5.8%               5.8%
                                     11.2%         9.2%             5.3%         5.8%               5.8%

         Group IV                     0.0%         0.0%             0.0%         0.0%               0.0%
         Group V                      0.0%         0.0%             0.0%         0.0%               0.0%
         Group VI                     0.0%         0.0%             0.0%         0.0%               0.0%

These percentages together with the number of recommended gates determines the number of
gates required for each design group as well as the area required to accommodate these aircraft
parking positions or gates, assuming that the gates are operated as common-use gates. If the
gates were operated as exclusive-use gates, each airline using Group III aircraft equipment would
have to have a gate that could accommodate a Group III aircraft. If the gates are common-use and
the schedules permit, only one Group III aircraft gate is projected to be required. These are shown
in Table 4-25.




Facility Requirements                           4-25                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




                                             Table 4-25
                        FORECAST OF REQUIRED GATE BY AIRCRAFT DESIGN GROUP
                                               2007          2012          2017         2022         2027
                    Group I gates                     0             0             0            0            0
                    Group II gates                    5             7             7            8            8
                    Group III gates                   1             1             1            1            1
                    Group IV gates                    0             0             0            0            0
                    Group V gates                     0             0             0            0            0
                    Group VI gates                    0             0             0            0            0
                    Total number of gates             6             8             8            9            9

For planning purposes, the width of a Group II gate would be the largest wingspan allowed within
the group, 78.9 feet, plus a wingspan clearance of approximately 7.5 feet on each side. The
longest aircraft within Aircraft Design Group II that is likely to use the Airport is the Embraer 145 at
98 feet in length. Typically, for a Group II aircraft, at least 30 feet would be allowed between the
nose of the aircraft and the terminal and approximately 10 feet would be allowed behind the
aircraft. This would equate to an area of approximately 93.9 feet wide by 138 feet long or
approximately 12,960 square feet or 1,440 square yards per Group II gate.

Group III gates would be based on an aircraft wingspan up to but not including 118 feet. The wing
clearance on each side would be approximately 7.5 feet. The longest aircraft in Group III likely to
use the Airport would be an Airbus A320 at 123.3 feet in length. With a 30-foot clearance between
the nose of the aircraft and a 10-foot clearance behind the aircraft, the dimensions of the area
occupied by the aircraft would equal approximately 163.3 feet long by 132.9 feet wide or
approximately 21,700 square feet or 2,410 square yards. Taken together, the apron area for gates
required per planning period would be as shown in Table 4-26.

                                         Table 4-26
                 GATE APRON AREA AND TERMINAL FRONTAGE PER PLANNING PERIOD
             GATE POSITIONS                               2007          2012          2017         2022     2027
             Number of gates                                  6             8             8            9        9
             Group II gates                                   5             7             7            8        8
             Group III gates                                  1             1             1            1        1

             Area per Group II gate (square yards)         1,440         1,440     1,440        1,440        1,440
             Area per Group III gate (square yards         2,410         2,410     2,410        2,410        2,410
             Total gate area (square yards)                9,290        11,250    12,430       13,460       13,460

             Terminal frontage (lineal feet)                 590          790          790          870         870

The terminal frontage as shown in Table 4-26 is the distance required by the aircraft around the
terminal building approximately 50 feet out from the terminal. This is the approximate distance of
the wingspans and the wingtip clearances.

In addition to the gates that are use during the day, quite often, airlines schedule aircraft to remain
overnight at the Airport in excess of the number of gates that the airline uses during the day. This
is done in order to have the aircraft staged to depart with the first bank of departing flights in the
morning. The airlines would prefer to have these RON aircraft remain at the gate from which they
will depart in the morning. However, if they have more aircraft remaining overnight the ground than


Facility Requirements                                     4-26                                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




there are gates at the terminal, the aircraft are parked elsewhere overnight, usually on the apron,
and towed to the gate once the aircraft parked at the gate overnight has departed. The projected
schedules do not show that any additional RON gates in addition to the three existing will be
required during the planning period.

4.4.2    Commercial Service Passenger Terminal Building

The existing commercial service passenger terminal was completed in 1992. The allocation of
spaces within the terminal has been determined based on floor plans of the facility. The existing
terminal spaces have been compared to the areas that have been forecast to be required based on
the forecast of annual enplanements and the peak period forecasts. This section looks specifically
at the following areas, which are covered in more detail in Appendix E:

   Total square foot area
   Departure lounges
   Passenger check-in facilities
   Baggage claim
   Passenger security screening checkpoint
   Federal Inspection Services facilities

Total Square Foot Area

The total square foot area that will be required to accommodate the forecast number of passengers
has been calculated for each of the planning periods using industry standards and recognized
principles. A summary of the calculations is shown in Table 4-27. The numbers shown in the
column labeled “Existing” indicate the area of the particular function in the existing terminal. The
corresponding number under each of the planning years is the calculated area that would be
required based on the number of passengers anticipated to be processed in that year based on the
approved Aviation Forecasts.




Facility Requirements                           4-27                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                              Master Plan Update




                                                         Table 4-27
    SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND FORECAST COMMERCIAL SERVICE TERMINAL AREAS
                                                                                                Projected
 Functional Areas in Square Feet                                 Existing     2007     2012       2017       2022          2027
 Airline
 Total area of check-in counters and kiosks-exclusive use             2,490    1,600    2,000      2,900      2,600        2,800
 Area of check-in queue - exclusive use                               3,000    1,310    1,800      2,700      2,500        2,700
 Airline office area                                                  3,260    1,100    1,200      1,600      1,900        2,000
 Airline operational areas                                            2,600    2,700    2,800      3,700      4,500        4,700
 Baggage make-up                                                      8,370    2,700    2,800      3,700      4,500        4,700
 Total area of departure lounges or holdrooms                        10,860    9,850   13,020     13,020     15,320       15,320
 Inbound baggage input area                                           5,170    2,600    2,800      3,600      4,400        4,600
 Total area of baggage claim devices                                  1,110      880      940      1,240      1,480        1,560
 Baggage claim retrieval area                                         3,960    1,120    1,200      1,570      1,890        1,990
 Baggage service offices                                                  0      470      370        540        560          690
                            Subtotal Airline Functional Areas        40,820   24,330   28,930     34,570     39,650       41,060
 Passenger Security Screening
   Total area of security screening check point station(s)              670    1,100    1,100      1,600      1,600         1,600
   Area of security screening check point queue                         390    1,200    1,200      1,800      1,800         1,800
   Total area of deplaneing corridor                                    370      300      300        300        300           300
   Total area of post security screening check point                    200      400      400        600        600           600
                  Subtotal Passenger Screening Checkpoint             1,630    3,000    3,000      4,300      4,300         4,300
 Baggage Security Screening
   Area of checked baggage ETD screening                                630        0        0          0          0             0
   Area of manual EDS checked baggage screening                           0      840    1,320      1,680          0             0
   Area of in-line EDS checked baggage screening                          0        0        0          0      7,100         8,070
   TSA offices and support space                                        500    1,000    1,000      1,500      1,500         1,500
                                             Subtotal Security        1,130    1,840    2,320      3,180     12,900         9,570
 Terminal Amenity Areas
   Restaurant                                                         2,140    4,700    4,800      5,600      6,400        7,200
   Bar                                                                  670    1,410    1,440      1,680      1,920        2,160
   Restaurant and bar support areas                                   3,600    1,530    1,560      1,820      2,080        2,340
   News gifts and sundries                                              550      890      920      1,060      1,210        1,370
   Rental car counters and offices                                    1,960    1,250    1,250      1,250      1,250        1,250
   Rental car queue                                                     460      200      200        200        200          200
   Other terminal amenities                                           1,670    2,070    2,150      2,470      2,810        3,210
                                 Subtotal Terminal Amenities         11,320   12,050   12,320     14,080     15,870       17,730
 Public Areas
   Non-secure public restrooms                                        1,800    1,300    1,100      1,700      1,700        2,100
   Secure public restrooms                                            1,220      800      800      1,000      1,000        1,000
   Administrative offices and conference rooms                        6,240    6,400    6,600      7,800      9,000       10,200
   Waiting and seating                                                1,460    2,200    2,300      3,000      3,600        3,800
   Public circulation including lobby and entrance                   33,460   18,200   20,100     24,400     30,800       31,400
                                       Subtotal Public Areas         44,180   28,900   30,900     37,900     46,100       48,500
 Non-Public Areas
   Unassigned or unknown spaces                                      12,760    1,300    1,500      1,800      2,300        2,300
   Maintenance, storage and janitorial                                7,470    1,330    1,380      1,590      1,810        2,060
   Circulation                                                          240      870      950      1,120      1,360        1,440
   Mechanical                                                         4,460   10,600   11,700     14,100     18,000       18,400
   Building structure                                                 6,050    4,100    4,500      5,400      6,900        7,100
                                   Subtotal Non-Public Areas         30,980   18,200   20,030     24,010     30,370       31,300
 Total Building Area                                                130,060   88,320   97,500    118,040    149,190      152,460




Facility Requirements                                        4-28                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




It can be seen that the total square foot area of the terminal as a whole is more than sufficient to
accommodate the projected passenger traffic through the year 2017. By the time the traffic
projected to occur in 2022 occurs, an additional 19,130 square feet are projected to be required.
By the time that the traffic projected to occur in 2027 happens, an additional 22,400 square feet
above that available today is projected to be required. The space currently available however may
not be located where it is needed. The security facilities are currently undersized and additional
departure lounges may be required before 2012. Much of the additional area is found in some of
the generous circulation spaces and the first floor of the concourse. Therefore, while there
appears to be additional space, some of this area may not be readily available to increase the
sizes of those facilities that are reaching their capacity.

Departure Lounges

There are currently six departure lounges at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. These are
shared in the same manner as the aircraft gates so that some of the airlines are currently sharing
gates and departure lounges. The capacity of each of the existing individual departure lounges is
shown in Table 4-28.

                                              Table 4-28
                            EXISTING DEPARTURE LOUNGE CAPACITY
                                             Airline
                                            Counter
                                  Total       and       Seating
                    Departure    Square      Aisle       Area     Peak Hour       Aircraft
                     Lounge     Feet (SF)     (SF)       (SF)     Passengers       Seats
                  Gate 1            1,950         470     1,480          102          127
                  Gate 2            1,950         470     1,480          102          127
                  Gate 3            1,740         470       640           44           55
                  Gate 4            1,740         470     1,270           87          109
                  Gate 5            1,740         346       700           48           60
                  Gate 6            1,740         540     1,200           83          103
                  Total area       10,860      2,765      6,770          466          582

In September of 2008, there were four flights during the peak hour. 50-seat aircraft served all
these flights. While there are currently individual gates that can accommodate aircraft with
capacity up to 127 seats, there is no one individual departure lounge that can accommodate the
150-seat aircraft operated by Allegiant. This aircraft is accommodated because most of the
departure lounges are relatively open and passengers spill over into adjacent departure lounges.
Currently Allegiant operates during periods of the day when only one or two other smaller aircraft
are also enplaning or deplaning. This may not always be so. It is possible in the future, especially
when there are as many as seven or more aircraft at the gates simultaneously when the MD-80
aircraft passengers combined with those of the smaller aircraft will overwhelmed the area available
in the combined departure lounge area.

A comparison of Table 4-28 and Table 4-29 shows that the total area of existing departure lounges
is 10,860 square feet and that in 2012 through 2027, 4,460 additional square feet will be required.
Table 4-29 shows the number of departures lounges recommended for each of the planning years,
their respective seating area sizes, and the total area of all of the departure lounges. There will be
a requirement for three additional departure lounges by 2022.



Facility Requirements                            4-29                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




                                           Table 4-29
                                FORECAST OF DEPARTURE LOUNGES
  DEPARTURE LOUNGES                                        2007       2012       2017       2022        2027
  Number of departures lounges required                           6          8          8       9           9
  Number of departure lounges required per aircraft size
    50 seat aircraft                                              5          6          6         6            6
    80 seat aircraft                                              0          1          1         1            1
    110 seat aircraft                                             0          0          0         1            1
    160 seat aircraft                                             1          1          1         1            1
  Departure lounge area in square feet
    50-seat aircraft                                       4,000       4,800      4,800      4,800      4,800
    80-seat aircraft                                           0       1,270      1,270      1,270      1,270
    110 seat aircraft                                          0           0          0      1,750      1,750
    160-seat aircraft                                      2,550       2,550      2,550      2,550      2,550
  Deplaning corridors                                      1,800       2,400      2,400      2,700      2,700
  Airline operational area at departure lounges            1,500       2,000      2,000      2,250      2,250
  Total area of departure lounges                          9,850      13,020     13,020     15,320     15,320

Passenger Check-In Facilities

There are currently 25 conventional check-in counters and six kiosks in use at the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport distributed between the five airlines. Currently, each of these airlines operates
from their own exclusive check-in facilities with their individual branding on the counters, kiosks
and the walls behind the check-in area. Increasingly, technology will be assisting the check-in
process in such areas as printing the boarding pass at home and the increased use of check-in
kiosks, which decrease the time passengers spend checking-in. It is predicted that the
requirements for check-in facilities will decrease over the planning period as fewer passengers use
the Airport facilities and those that do will spend less time in the process. However, there will
continue to be a need for the checking of baggage. Nevertheless, even that could be decreased
with the printing of the baggage label at home and the possibility of remote checking of bags.

The forecast of check-in facilities shown in Table 4-30 does not account for significant technologies
in the baggage handling process, but it does account for increased use of the check-in
technologies over the planning period. The forecast also shows two methodologies for the
distribution of airlines across the check-in facilities. The first would be to use Common-Use
Terminal Equipment (CUTE) which would allow any airline to use any check-in desk for the
checking in of a flight. Along with CUTE, there is also Common-Use Self Service (CUSS)
equipment, which allows the passenger to use any kiosk to check-in, not just those that belong to
the airline they are using that day. These technologies exist and are operational today. Ultimately,
it allows all of the check-in facilities to be in use during the peak periods, significantly reducing the
overall space requirements for check-in facilities.

The second methodology is that which is used at most U.S. airports today, where each airline has
their own specific check-in facilities, which are used exclusively by them. This is called exclusive-
use. The airlines in general prefer these types of facilities as they provide more opportunity for
them to show their brand on the counters, kiosks and back wall. They also feel that it prevents
competitors from gaining access to their computer systems, although firewalls have been
successfully built-into the CUTE and CUSS for quite a while now. The space requirements for both
methodologies are shown in Table 4-30.



Facility Requirements                               4-30                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                     Master Plan Update




                                            Table 4-30
                                  FORECAST OF CHECK-IN POSITIONS
                                                                2007      2012     2017     2022       2027
     Common-use check-in facilities
     Number of conventional counters                               6          6         8        5           5
     Number of kiosks                                              4          6         9        7           9
     Total number of positions                                    10         12        17       12          14

     Square foot area of common-use positions                     780       960    1,330    1,020      1,110
     Square foot area of queue                                    670       870    1,240      980      1,100
     Total square foot area of common-use check-in facilities   1,450     1,830    2,570    2,000      2,210

     Exclusive-use check-in facilities
     Number of conventional counters                              15         16       19        13          12
     Number of kiosks                                              5         10       17        18          22
     Total number of positions                                    20         26       36        31          34

     Square foot area of exclusive-use positions                1,620     2,040    2,930    2,560      2,780
     Square foot area of queue                                  1,310     1,770    2,660    2,460      2,750
     Total square foot area of exclusive-use check-in           2,930     3,810    5,590    5,020      5,530

While common-use facilities would be more space efficient, the cost of the CUTE and CUSS
equipment must also be considered and these systems are most efficient when used throughout
the terminal such as in the departure lounges and baggage make-up areas. For these reasons
and because of the general resistance of the airlines to common-use facilities, the exclusive-use
facilities have been brought forward into the total terminal summary. The exclusive-use check-in
facilities are forecast to require 12 conventional check-in counters by the year 2027, down from the
existing 25. The number of kiosks is expected to increase from the six of today to approximately
22. The area that is currently used for check-in today measures approximately 2,490 square feet.
This includes the check-in desks, the kiosks, area behind the desks, the take-away belt, and
approximately five feet in front of the check-in counter. It does not include the passenger queuing
area in front of the check-in counters. It is calculated that approximately 1,620 square feet of
exclusive-use facilities are needed in 2007. This is approximately 870 square feet less than is
used today. There is additional area in the check-in hall that is not used today, including the area
that is currently being used for checked baggage security screening. It is expected that with the
exclusive-use facilities, the required check-in area would need to be expanded to approximately
2,780 square feet by 2027.

The existing passenger check-in queuing area for all airlines measures approximately 3,000
square feet. It is expected that with the exclusive use check-in facilities, the queue area will need
to be approximately 1,770 square feet in 2012 and 2,750 square feet in 2027. The 3,000 square
feet should be able to accommodate the check-in queue through the planning period.

Together with the check-in facilities, the existing 5,490 square feet used for check-in today will
need to be expanded by approximately the year 2017, if exclusive-use facilities are used. By 2027,
a total of 5,530 square feet is anticipated to be needed. If before 2017, common-use terminal
equipment were introduced to the terminal, only a total of approximately 2,210 square feet are
forecast to be required in 2027.



Facility Requirements                               4-31                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




Baggage Claim

The existing baggage claim area has two flatbed baggage-claim devices, each measuring
approximately 100 feet in presentation length. This is the length that is visible to the passenger
and from which they can retrieve their baggage. The total existing baggage claim area measures a
little over 5,000 square feet. Table 4-31 shows the forecast of baggage claim facilities through the
planning period.

                                           Table 4-31
                              FORECAST OF BAGGAGE CLAIM FACILITIES
                                                            2007    2012     2017       2022       2027
     Number of baggage claim devices required                   2       2        2          3          3
     Total baggage claim frontage required (lineal feet)      160     170      220        270        280
     Total baggage claim area (square feet)                 2,000   2,140    2,810      3,370      3,550

In 2012, approximately 170 lineal feet of presentation is calculated to be required. With the
existing length of 200 lineal feet, it is determined that this will be sufficient. However, by 2017, a
third baggage claim device may be required and it will definitely be needed by 2022 based on the
approved Aviation Forecasts. It is recommended that a baggage claim device of approximately
100 lineal feet in presentation length be added. The combined presentation length of 300 lineal
feet should be able to accommodate the expected traffic through the remainder of the planning
years.

While the existing baggage claim area technically has enough area to house another baggage
claim device, the area is not sufficiently long enough in the direction in which the next logical
placement of another device would be located. Depending on the configuration of the next device,
approximately an additional 75 lineal feet of building or three structural bays would need to be
added to accommodate the third claim device.

Passenger Security Screening Checkpoint

There is currently one passenger security screening checkpoint at Chattanooga Metropolitan
Airport with one security position. The entire security-screening checkpoint including the queue,
the deplaning corridor and the area after the checkpoint where passengers reassemble their
clothes and possessions occupies approximately 1,630 square feet. However, the queue spills
over for periods during extraordinary peak periods such as Easter, Thanksgiving, and special
events.

Based on the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) goal of an average processing rate of
one passenger every 18 seconds, the Airport needs two security positions today. Based on the
TSA’s Security Checkpoint Layout Design/Reconfiguration Guide, the typical passenger security-
screening checkpoint for each of the planning periods would occupy the area shown in Table 4-32.




Facility Requirements                                4-32                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




                                        Table 4-32
              FORECAST OF PASSENGER SCREENING SECURITY CHECKPOINT FACILITIES
                                                                       2007    2012     2017     2022       2027
Number of security positions required                                      2       2        3        3          3
Total area of passenger security screening check point (square feet)   1,060   1,060    1,590    1,590      1,590
Total area security queuing (square feet)                              1,200   1,200    1,800    1,800      1,800
Area post security (square feet)                                         400     400      600      600        600
Minimum area deplaneing corridor (square feet)                           290     290      290      290        290
Total passenger security screening check point area (square feet)      2,950   2,950    4,280    4,280      4,280

Two positions would require 2,950 square feet and three positions would require a minimum of
4,280 square feet, if TSA standards were used. The three security lanes should accommodate the
expected peak 20-minute passengers through 2027.

Federal Inspection Services Facilities

An airline has approached the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport with the desire to initiate
international flights that would require limited Federal Inspection Services (FIS) for inbound flights.
FIS agencies, including the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), the United States
Customs Service (USCS), the Public Health Services (PHS), Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service (APHIS) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) are responsible for
ensuring that no illegal person, substance, disease, infection, plant or animal are introduced into
the United States. All international passengers, crewmembers, baggage, and cargo are subject to
inspections by the FIS agencies.

The FIS facilities at an airport are subject to approval by the FIS agencies and all facilities,
counters, conveyors, and necessary equipment must be provided without cost to the FIS agencies.
These facilities must be separated physically and visually from the domestic operations of the
airport in order to establish a sterile environment. This ensures that no inbound person can bypass
inspection or interact with the public prior to inspection.

The FIS agencies have established various requirements for their facilities. These are typically
based on the peak number of persons that would be processed through the facility within one hour.
It is anticipated that at least initially, the facility would not process more than a maximum of 200
persons per hour. Table 4-33 indicates the area that would be required for FIS facilities processing
200 persons per hour according to guidelines outlined in INS Ports of Entry Technical
Requirements.




Facility Requirements                               4-33                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                     Master Plan Update




                                            Table 4-33
                        200 PERSONS PER HOUR FEDERAL INSPECTION FACILITIES
                                                                                  Square Foot
                                                                         Units       Area
                  Immigration and Naturalization Services (INS)
                  Number of positions                                        4
                  Primary inspection                                                       3,460
                  Soft secondary inspection                                                  760
                  Hard secondary inspection                                                2,910
                  INS administration                                                       3,860
                  In-transit lounge                                                          350
                                                         Subtotal INS                     11,340

                  FIS baggage claim                                                         5,130

                  Customs and Agriculture Inspection (USCS)
                  Primary inspection                                                          360
                  Green corridor                                                              600
                  Number of secondary inspection counters                    1
                  Secondary inspection area                                                   530
                  Agricultural inspection area                                                 20
                  Buffers between areas                                                       320
                  Customs and agricultural offices                                          1,680
                                                        Subtotal USCS                       3,510
                  U.S. Public Health Services (PHS)
                  Offices                                                                     750
                  Isolation area                                                              160
                                                         Subtotal PHS                         910
                  Animal and Plant Health Inspection Offices (APHIS)
                  Offices                                                                   1,870
                  Laboratories, counters and x-rays                                            60
                  Detector dog area                                                           300
                  Cargo office                                                                300
                                                       Subtotal APHIS                       2,530
                  U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS)
                  Offices                                                                     640
                  Examination room                                                            120
                  Secure storage (sf)                                                         100
                                                     Subtotal (USFWS)                         860
                  Passenger Services
                  Meeter/greeter restrooms                                                   200
                  Meeter/greeter lobby                                                     5,420
                  Waiting and seating                                                      1,410
                                           Subtotal passenger services                     7,030
                  Total FIS Facilities                                                    31,310

The area requirements for each of the agencies and the specific requirements within each area
may be modified or eliminated during the early planning phases. Early coordination with the local
and regional officials of each agency will determine the exact requirements for an FIS facility at


Facility Requirements                                 4-34                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




Chattanooga. This early coordination might also result in the determination that one or more of the
agencies might not require facilities at the Airport.

4.4.3    Curbfronts

The increased security procedures that came into effect after the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001, actually helped to increase the capacity at most airport terminal curbs in the U.S., as the
public is no longer allowed to park the car and leave it at the terminal curb. Passengers and
drivers are now to be actively in the process of loading or unloading the vehicle. In no case is one
allowed to leave an unattended vehicle at the curb. This is also true at the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport where the existing terminal curbs lengths are as shown in Table 4-34.

                                                    Table 4-34
                                            EXISTING TERMINAL CURBS
                            Existing Curbs in    Curb    Crosswalk    Effective Curb
                                Lineal Feet     Length    Widths          Length
                            Departure curb         290           30              260
                            Arrival curb           220           20              200
                            Commercial curbs       290           40              250
                            Total curb length      800           90              710

The number of lineal feet needed per planning period to accommodate the private vehicles, taxis,
rental cars, and courtesy and shuttle vans has been calculated as shown in Table 4-35. These are
calculated based on the split of the traffic between these various modes of transportation, as it
exists today.

                                                 Table 4-35
                                        FORECAST OF TERMINAL CURBS
                        Required Curbs
                         in Lineal Feet      2007    2012    2017      2022        2027
                        Departure curb         130     220     320       280         300
                        Arrival curb           120      90     120       120         170
                        Commercial curb        220     260     320       330         330
                        Total curb length      470     570     760       730         800

The overall effective curb length appears to be adequate through about year 2015. With the level
of enplanements expected in 2017, it is expected that an additional 50 lineal feet of curb will be
required and an additional 40 lineal feet of total terminal curb will be required with the level of
enplanements expected in the year 2027 for a total curb length of 800 lineal feet.

The departure curb with its existing 260 lineal feet should be adequate for the next seven years or
through 2015. An additional 60 feet will be needed in 2017, and a total of 300 lineal feet will be
required to accommodate the number of enplaning passengers expected in 2027.

The arrival curb currently has an effective length of 200 lineal feet. This should be adequate
throughout the planning period.

The commercial curbs have a total of 250 lineal feet, while 220 lineal feet are required today. By
the year 2012, 260 lineal feet will be required, and by the year 2027, a total of 330 lineal feet of
commercial curb are predicted to be required.


Facility Requirements                                 4-35                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                      Master Plan Update




4.4.4    Key Commercial Service Passenger Terminal Complex Trigger Points

Specific areas of the commercial-service passenger terminal complex have been discussed in this
section, and recommendations have been made for each. The determination of when to
implement the improvements should be initiated by demand rather than a specific year. Table 4-36
identifies the demand levels that should “trigger” the need to implement the associated
improvement. By monitoring the demand levels or “triggers,” the Airport can monitor the growth
trends and expand as the demand warrants.

                                        Table 4-36
              KEY COMMERCIAL SERVICE PASSENGER TERMINAL AREA TRIGGER POINTS
       Functional Area                       Trigger                            Trigger Point
  Gates                            Peak      hour departing   When peak hour flights exceed five, additional
                                   flights                    gates should be added to equal the peak hour
                                                              departing flights plus one gate.

  Total Terminal Building Area     Annual Enplanements        The current total building square foot area
                                                              should be able to accommodate comfortably
                                                              up   to   approximately    362,000   annual
                                                              enplanements.

  Departure      Lounges   Total   Total   Peak       Hour    The existing total area of departure lounges
  Area                             Passengers                 will hold 466 Total Peak Hour Passengers.

  Check-in Area                    Peak Hour      Enplaning   Adequate check-in area exists today to serve
                                   Passengers,                through the planning period.

  Baggage Claim                    Peak Hour      Deplaning   A third baggage claim device will be needed
                                   Passengers                 when Peak Hour Deplaning Passengers reach
                                                              about 143 passengers.

  Passenger         Security       Peak         20-minute     Two passenger security screening checkpoint
  Screening Checkpoint             Enplaning Passengers       lanes are required today. Three passenger
                                                              security screening checkpoint lanes will be
                                                              required when Peak 20-minute Enplaning
                                                              Passengers reaches 200 passengers.

  Federal Inspection Facilities    Peak Hour International    FIS facilities are sized by Peak Hour
  (FIS)                            Deplaning Passengers       International Deplaning Passengers, usually in
                                                              units of 100. It is anticipated that if a facility is
                                                              required that it should be sized for Peak Hour
                                                              International Deplaning Passengers of 200.

  Curbfronts                       Peak         20-minute     The departure curb will need another 60 feet of
                                   Enplaning Passengers       length when the Peak 20-minute Enplaning
                                   and Peak 20-minute         Passengers reaches 200. The arrival curb has
                                   Deplaning Passengers       sufficient capacity for the entire planning
                                                              period.    The commercial curbs will need
                                                              another 70 feet when the Peak 20-minute
                                                              Deplaning Passengers reaches 140.




Facility Requirements                                 4-36                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




4.5      GENERAL AVIATION REQUIREMENTS

General aviation encompasses all aviation activity other than commercial service and military
activity. General aviation is typically divided into two groups: those that are based at the Airport
and those that are transient. The facility requirements analyses the ability of the current general
aviation facilities to accommodate the existing and future demand based on the general aviation
activity forecasts. This section analyzes the following general aviation facility requirements:

     Based aircraft storage areas
     Based aircraft tie-down aprons
     Itinerant aircraft parking apron
     FBO administration, pilot lounge, and general aviation terminal
     FBO automobile parking
     Second FBO facilities
     Very Light Jet facilities

4.5.1    Based Aircraft Storage Areas

The based aircraft are typically housed in conventional hangars, T-hangars, or are tied down on a
specific area of the apron. The number of aircraft forecast to be based at the Airport throughout
the planning period is shown in Table 4-37.

                                              Table 4-37
                                     FORECAST OF BASED AIRCRAFT
                                                       Fixed-                    Total
                               Single     Multi-       Wing                     Based
                        Year   Engine    Engine       Turbine     Rotorcraft    Aircraft
                        2007        36          16           61           1          114
                        2012        39          17           65           1          122
                        2017        41          18           70           1          130
                        2022        44          20           75           1          140
                        2027        48          21           81           1          151

Conventional Hangars

Conventional hangars are capable of housing more than one aircraft. At Chattanooga, these are
either controlled by individual corporate tenants or operated by the Fixed Base Operator (FBO),
TAC Air. A Fixed Base Operator (FBO) is a business that provides aircraft services to pilots,
including sale of fuel and oil; aircraft sales, rental, maintenance, and repair; parking and tie-down
or storage of aircraft; flight training; air taxi/charter operations; and specialty services, such as
instrument and avionics maintenance, painting, overhaul, aerial application, aerial photography,
aerial hoists, or pipeline patrol.

In 2006, approximately 72 of the based aircraft at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport were housed in
conventional hangars. Based on existing corporate hangar storage patterns, 100 percent of the
fixed-wing turbine and rotorcraft aircraft, 50 percent of the multi-engine aircraft, and five percent of
the single-engine aircraft were assumed to be housed in conventional hangars. Typical space
allotments for each aircraft type were use to determine the gross conventional hangar
requirements for each of the planning years. These are shown in Table 4-38.



Facility Requirements                                4-37                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                             Table 4-38
                         FORECAST OF CONVENTIONAL HANGAR SPACE AND APRON
                                                               2007       2012        2017       2022        2027
       Number of aircraft in conventional hangars                  72         76          82         88          95
       Required square foot area in conventional hangars      164,000    174,700     187,800    201,600     217,300
       Required square yards of apron area                     18,200     19,400      20,900     22,400      24,100
       Land in acres area of conventional hangars                  7.5        8.0         8.6        9.3       10.0

 Together, the hangar space that TAC Air leases and the nine additional conventional hangars,
 account for approximately 175,000 square feet of conventional hangar space, exclusive of offices
 and maintenance spaces. The conventional hangar storage is reaching capacity at this time. This
 is evidenced by those approaching the Airport requesting to build additional conventional hangars.
 It is forecast that approximately 12,800 additional square feet of conventional hangar space will be
 required by 2017. By 2027, a total of approximately 217,300 square feet of conventional hangar
 space will be needed. The apron and circulation areas of the aprons adjacent to the conventional
 and T-hangars are typically of a size similar to the hangars themselves.

 T-Hangars

 T-hangars are hangars that are shaped like a “T”, are designed to house only a single aircraft, and
 usually are grouped in lines of four or more. There are currently 23 T-hangars on the Airport with a
 total area of 24,200 square feet. Historical T-hangar storage patterns indicate that 27 percent of
 the multi-engine aircraft and 53 percent of the single-engine aircraft are housed in T-hangars.
 Typical space allotments for each aircraft type were used to determine the gross T-hangar
 requirements for each of the planning years. These are shown in Table 4-39.

                                              Table 4-39
                               FORECAST OF T-HANGAR SPACE AND APRONS
                                                           2007          2012         2017          2022            2027
Number of aircraft in T-hangars                                23            25           27            29                31
Required total area of T-hangars in square feet            28,100        30,300       31,900        34,500            37,300
Required apron area in square yards                         3,100         3,400        3,500         3,800             4,100
Land area of T-hangars and aprons in acres                    1.3           1.4          1.5           1.6               1.7

 In 2007, 23 T-hangars were required and 31 are forecast to be required in 2027 with an associated
 square foot area of an additional 9,200 square feet for a total of 37,300 square feet of T-hangar
 space. The apron and circulation areas of the aprons adjacent to the conventional and T-hangars
 are typically of a size similar to the hangars themselves.

 4.5.2    Based Aircraft Tie-down Aprons

 For those owners of based aircraft that do not house their aircraft in the conventional hangars or
 the T-hangars, the remaining option is to tie the aircraft down on a specifically designated apron.
 In 2007, 19 aircraft were tied-down. Based on current aircraft storage practices, 42 percent of the
 single-engine aircraft and 23 percent of the multi-engine aircraft were determined to be in need of
 locations on the tie-down apron. Typical space allotments were used to determine amount of area
 needed for the tie-down apron as shown in Table 4-40.




 Facility Requirements                                     4-38                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                     Master Plan Update




                                          Table 4-40
                          FORECAST OF BASED AIRCRAFT TIE-DOWN AREAS
                                                              2007     2012      2017      2022       2027
        Number of tie down positions                             19       20        22        23         25
        Required area of tie-down areas in square yards      17,900   19,300    21,200    21,900     23,700
        Land area of apron in acres                             3.7      4.0       4.4       4.5        4.9

By the year 2027, the demand for based aircraft tie-down area is anticipated to increase by six
additional positions. The associated apron area would be increased approximately 5,800 square
yards for a total of 23,700 square yards of based aircraft tie-down apron.

4.5.3    Itinerant Aircraft Parking Aprons

Transient or itinerant aircraft are typically assigned a separate area of apron. The itinerant aircraft
ramp is used for parking aircraft that have come to the area for business or pleasure, for the
unloading or loading of passengers, and for the short-term parking of those using the FBO
facilities.

The number of itinerant aircraft parking spaces required has been calculated using the
methodology contained in Appendix 5 of the FAA Advisory Circular150/5300-13 Airport Design.
The busy month for operations at the Airport is typically October, which accounts for an average of
9.8 percent of the annual operations. The number of itinerant aircraft parking spaces on the apron
has been calculated for the busy day, which is assumed to be 10 percent more than the average
daily operations for the peak month. Itinerant apron parking positions were calculated for 50
percent of the itinerant aircraft expected to be on the apron on the busy day. The results are
shown in Table 4-41.

                                           Table 4-41
                         FORECAST OF ITINERANT AIRCRAFT PARKING AREAS
                                                                  2007     2012      2017       2022      2027
  Annual itinerant operations                                    42,536   45,300    48,300     51,400    54,800
  Peak month operations (9.8% of annual)                          4,169    4,439     4,733      5,037     5,370
  Average day operations (31 days)                                  134      143       153        162       173
  Busy day operations                                               148      158       168        179       191
  Itinerant aircraft parking positions                               37        39        42        45        48
  Area of Itinerant aircraft parking positions in square yards   35,100   37,400    39,900     42,500    45,300
  Land area of itinerant aircraft parking in acres                  7.3       7.7       8.2        8.8       9.4

The results indicate that 37 itinerant aircraft parking positions were required in 2007 and 39 will be
needed in 2012. By the planning year 2027, nine additional itinerant tie-down areas will be needed
for 48 itinerant aircraft tie-down positions.

4.5.4    FBO Administration, Pilot Facilities and General Aviation Terminal

Two separate FBO administration/terminal facilities currently exist on the Airport: one in the
southern General Aviation (GA) area and one in the northern GA area. TAC Air runs both. Current
FBO facilities consist of a total of six offices, two terminal lobby areas, two conference rooms, and
one pilots’ lounge. Together, there is approximately 18,500 square feet of area. The lease on


Facility Requirements                                 4-39                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




these areas does not expire until well after the end of the planning period of this report in 2031 and
it is not expected that additional area will be added to these facilities before that time.

4.5.5    FBO Automobile Parking

In 2005, the Airport contractually agreed to provide to TAC Air, the FBO, free parking for TAC Air’s
tenant customers as large as provided on the date of the lease at a location reasonably convenient
to the premises. Today, there are approximately 40 spaces at TAC Air North, 66 spaces at TAC
Air South, and approximately 100 at TAC Air Maintenance for a total of 206 parking spaces. The
lease with TAC Air is not set to expire until several years after the end of the twenty-year planning
period of this Master Plan. Should TAC Air lease additional facilities, the number of parking
spaces should increase proportionately.

4.5.6    Second FBO Facilities

There is currently one FBO operating at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport: Truman Arnold
Companies (TAC) doing business as TAC Air. They provide all fueling services both to the air
carrier aircraft and to general aviation and military aircraft. They lease the conventional terminal
just north of the commercial passenger terminal, the fuel farm, two conventional hangars just south
of the commercial passenger terminal, 23 T-hangars, and the TAC Air Maintenance Center, which
is comprised of three conventional hangars located adjacent to Taxiway A on the south of the
Airport.

Individuals and corporations proposing to operate a second FBO facility at the Airport approach the
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport from time to time. The idea of a second FBO on the Airport is an
interesting one to the Airport for a number of reasons. These include increased competition on the
airport for FBO services, security issues associated with air cargo, as well as the current split of GA
operations on either side of the Commercial Passenger Terminal Apron and the restricted amount
of land from which the Airport operates.

This section addresses the facility requirements of a potential second FBO entering the market. If
a second FBO were to begin operations at Chattanooga, additional facilities would have to be built,
as the TAC Air lease is not set to expire before 2031. It is not anticipated that all of the additional
facilities projected to be required by general aviation would initially be built for a second FBO.
However, sufficient facilities should be available to accommodate at a minimum the additional
required facilities for at least five years after the second FBO begins operation. If all of the facilities
could be designed, bid, and constructed within two years, the facility requirements should be sized
at a minimum for the facilities that are anticipated to be required through the year 2015. As the
approved aviation activity forecasts were presented in increments of five years beginning in 2007,
the planning year 2017 will be used as a base for the number and size of facilities that would be
needed to meet the Airport’s general aviation facility requirements, less the facilities currently
occupied by TAC Air. The remaining years of the Master Plan will also be included, as they will be
needed to determine the long-term size of the facilities.

Second FBO Conventional Hangars

The conventional hangar storage is approaching capacity at this time. The number of potential
firms requesting to build additional conventional hangars evidence this. As shown in Table 4-42, it
is forecast that a minimum of 12,800 additional square feet of conventional hangar space will be
required by 2017. By 2027, a total of approximately 217,300 square feet of conventional hangar
space will be needed. The apron and circulation areas of the aprons adjacent to conventional and


Facility Requirements                              4-40                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




T-hangars are typically of a size similar to the hangars themselves and this is reflected in both
Table 4-42 and Table 4-43. For purposes of this section, it is assumed that all conventional hangar
area and the associated aprons above those in existence in the year 2007 will be operated by the
second FBO.

                                        Table 4-42
               FORECAST OF SECOND FBO CONVENTIONAL HANGAR SPACE AND APRON
                                                                              2017       2022        2027
   Existing square feet of conventional hangars                             175,000    175,000     175,000
   Required square feet of conventional hangars                             187,800    201,600     217,300
   Surplus / (deficit) square feet of conventional hangars                  (12,800)   (26,600)    (42,300)
   Required additional square yards of apron for conventional hangars          1,400      3,000       4,700
   Land area of additional conventional hangar space and apron in acres         0.59       1.22        1.94

Second FBO T-Hangars

Table 4-43 indicates the number of additional T-hangars that are forecast to be required in each of
the planning years, as well as the area of the additional T-hangars, the associated apron, and the
number of acres of land required. In 2017, a minimum of four T-hangars in addition to the existing
ones will be required. By 2027, an additional eight T-hangars above those of 2007 will be needed.
For the purposes of this section, it is assumed that the second FBO would operate any additional
T-hangars over those in existence in the year 2007.

                                            Table 4-43
                        FORECAST OF ADDITIONAL T-HANGARS, AREA, AND APRON

                                                                     2017         2022            2027
      Existing T-hangars                                                 23           23               23
      Number of T-hangars required                                       27           29               31
      Surplus / (deficit) T-hangars                                      (4)          (6)              (8)
      Square feet of additional T-hangar area                         4,300        6,900            9,700
      Required additional square yards of apron area for T-
      hangars                                                              480          770         1,080
      Land area in acres of additional T-hangars and aprons               0.20         0.32          0.45

Second FBO Based Aircraft Tie-down Aprons

For those owners of based aircraft that do not house their aircraft in hangars, the remaining option
is to tie the aircraft down on a specifically designated apron. In 2007, 19 based aircraft were tied-
down. Based on past parking of based aircraft 42 percent of the single-engine aircraft and 23
percent of the multi-engine aircraft were determined to be in need of locations on the tie-down
apron. Typical space allotments were used to determine the amount of area needed for the tie-
down apron as shown in Table 4-44.




Facility Requirements                              4-41                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                         Master Plan Update




                                              Table 4-44
                        FORECAST OF SECOND FBO BASED AIRCRAFT TIE-DOWN AREAS
                                                                          2017          2022          2027
           Number of existing based aircraft tie-down positions               19            19            19
           Number of tie down positions required                              22            23            25
           Surplus / (deficit) tie down positions                             (3)           (4)           (6)
           Additional square yards of apron required                       3,190         3,880         5,690
           Additional acres of land for tie down positions                  0.25          0.30          0.45

If no additional incentives are present, the demand for based aircraft tie down areas is not
anticipated to increase substantially throughout the planning period with the result that in 2027, it is
anticipated that there could be a need for six additional based aircraft tie-down positions. For
purposes of determining the requirements of a second FBO, these six based aircraft tie-down
positions were assigned to the second FBO.

Second FBO Itinerant Aircraft Parking Aprons

The itinerant aircraft ramp is used for parking aircraft that have come to the area for business or
pleasure, for the unloading or loading of passengers, and for the short-term parking of those using
the FBO facilities. There are currently 32 tie-down spaces. Of these, 19 are currently used by
based aircraft, leaving 13 available for itinerant aircraft. For purposes of this section, it is assumed
that all additional itinerant aircraft parking positions above those available in 2007 would be
operated by the second FBO. Table 4-45 shows the number of itinerant parking positions that
could potentially be operated by the second FBO.

                                           Table 4-45
                 FORECAST OF SECOND FBO ITINERANT AIRCRAFT PARKING POSITIONS
                                                                              2017          2022         2027
     Annual itinerant operations                                              48,300        51,400        54,800
     Peak month operations (9.8% of annual)                                    4,733         5,037         5,370
     Average day operations (31 days)                                            153           162           173
     Busy day operations                                                         168           179           191
     Itinerant aircraft parking positions                                          42            45            48
     Number of existing itinerant aircraft parking positions                       13            13            13
     Surplus / (deficit) number of itinerant aircraft parking positions          (29)          (32)          (35)
     Square yards of additional itinerant aircraft parking positions          27,500        30,100        32,900
     Land area in acres of additional itinerant aircraft parking                  5.7           6.2           6.8

The results indicate that 42 itinerant aircraft parking positions will be needed in 2017. Of the 32
existing tie-down areas, 19 are currently committed to aircraft based at the Airport leaving 13 tie-
down spaces for itinerant aircraft. Therefore, as shown in Table 4-45, an additional 29 itinerant
aircraft parking positions are needed by 2017 with a total of 27,500 square yards of additional
apron covering approximately 5.7 acres.

Second FBO Administration, Pilot Facilities and General Aviation Terminal

If a second FBO operator were to enter the market, additional FBO administration, pilot facilities
and perhaps a general aviation terminal would probably be built. If it can be assumed that the


Facility Requirements                                   4-42                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




second FBO were to acquire approximately half of the itinerant aircraft business, and all of the
additional based aircraft positions, the building facility requirements for the FBO administration,
pilot facilities and general aviation terminal could be projected similar to what is shown in Table
4-46.

                                          Table 4-46
                 POTENTIAL FBO ADMINISTRATION, PILOT, AND PASSENGER FACILITIES
                           Functional Areas in Square
                                       Feet                 2017     2022        2027
                        Projected peak hour passengers          22       32          35
                        Passenger lounge                       420      610         660
                        Pilot lounge                            60       80          90
                        Flight planning                         40       60          70
                        Concessions/vending                    130      190         210
                        First conference room                  110      150         160
                        Second conference room                  50       80          80
                        Restrooms                               70      100         100
                        FBO administration                      80       80          80
                        FBO operations                         180      270         290
                        Storage and maintenance                 60       80          90
                        Circulation                            180      260         270
                        Mechanical                             170      240         250
                        Building structure                      60       90          90
                        Total building area                  1,610    2,290       2,440

It is important to work with the FBO in determining the final areas required based on the projected
number of passengers and based aircraft that particular FBO operator anticipates will utilize the
second FBO facility.

Second FBO Automobile Parking

If a second FBO enters the market, the number of automobile parking positions required to service
that facility would be approximately as shown in Table 4-47. This number of spaces is based on
one-half of the itinerant general aviation and military aircraft operations in a given year, half of the
local military operations and any local based aircraft operations above those of the year 2007.




Facility Requirements                                4-43                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                     Master Plan Update




                                                     Table 4-47
                            SECOND FBO AUTOMOBILE PARKING SPACES
                                                                         2017          2022         2027
       Conventional hangar parking spaces                                        7         12           17
       T-hangar parking spaces                                                   5          8           11
       Based aircraft tie-down parking spaces                                    2          5            6
       FBO employee parking spaces                                               8         11           12
       Parking spaces for itinerant aircraft - rental cars, taxis, etc           7         11           12
       Total number of parking spaces at the FBO                                29         47           57

Second FBO Summary

This section addressed the number and type of facilities that a second Fixed Base Operator (FBO)
at the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport would potentially need in order to operate. These facilities
are based on the assumption that the second FBO would be able to accommodate half of the
itinerant general aviation and military operations, and any based aircraft over and above those
based at the Airport in 2007.

It is assumed that it will take at least two years to design, permit and build a second FBO facility at
the Airport. If planned correctly, the facility should be able to operate for at least five years after
opening before any additional facilities need to be constructed. This means the facility should be
sized to accommodate the traffic anticipated in the year 2015. As the Aviation Forecasts were
presented in five-year increments beginning with the year 2007, the opening day plus five-year
facilities are pushed forward to the year 2017.

Table 4-48 is a summary table of the various facilities that might be needed to accommodate a
second FBO, with the exception of the fueling facilities, which are discussed in Section 4.7.3 of this
report. These facilities are based on the assumption that the second FBO would accommodate
half of the itinerant general aviation and military aircraft, and all of the based aircraft housed in
conventional and T-hangars and the tie-down areas greater than those accommodated in the year
2007.

                                             Table 4-48
                               SUMMARY OF FACILITIES FOR A SECOND FBO
                                                                                     2017        2022             2027
 Additional conventional hangar positions                                                10            16             23
 Additional square feet of conventional hangar area                                  12,800        26,600         42,300
 Additional square yards of conventional hangar apron area                            1,400         3,000          4,700
 Additional number of T-hangars                                                           4             6              8
 Additional square feet of T-hangar area                                              4,300         6,900          9,700
 Additional square yards of T-hangar apron                                              480           770          1,080
 Additional number of based aircraft tie-down positions                                   3             4              6
 Additional square yards of based aircraft tie-down area and circulation              3,190         3,880          5,690
 Additional itinerant aircraft tie down positions                                        29            32             35
 Additional square yards of itinerant aircraft tie down area and circulation         27,500        30,100         32,900
 FBO administration, pilot's lounge, GA terminal in square feet                       1,600         2,300          2,400
 Second FBO associated automobile parking spaces                                         29            47             57
 Fuel farm in square feet                                                             3,840         3,840          3,840




Facility Requirements                                    4-44                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




4.5.7    Very Light Jet Facilities

The emergence of the Very Light Jets into the market has the potential to influence Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport greatly in the coming years. This new generation of aircraft has been
designed to be flown with only one pilot. It has advanced automation controls in the cockpit that are
easily comprehensible and can fly at higher speeds and at elevations from 18,000 to 41,000 feet.
This allows it to climb above most weather. It has a short to medium range of from 300 to 600 nmi,
can take off from runways of about 3,000 feet in length. It is anticipated to cost between $1.5 and
$4 million. Each aircraft can accommodate from three to five passengers and one or two pilots. All
of these features make it extremely attractive to aviation enthusiasts, businesspersons, and small
corporations.

Of a little over a dozen companies currently designing VLJ aircraft, only two have aircraft that have
been certified: Cessna and Eclipse. The Eclipse 500 is a six-seat VLJ. At this time, only about
250 Eclipse aircraft have been delivered. Of those delivered, the largest number by far has been
delivered to DayJet, a commercial airline which began operations in the summer of 2007 using
exclusively Eclipse 500 aircraft and which “parked” its entire fleet on September 18, 2008 due to
“economic reasons.”

DayJet did not offer scheduled service. Travel was booked on-line, the passenger directed where,
and when they wanted to travel. The price was based on the amount of flexibility in the itinerary
and reportedly was comparable to that of a scheduled commercial airline.

DayJet, who wanted to expand to the Airport once their initial operations in Florida, Georgia,
Alabama, Mississippi, and North Carolina stabilized, approached Chattanooga Metropolitan
Airport. If such a facility, whether operated by DayJet or another operator, were to locate at
Chattanooga, the size of the facility would be dependent upon the number of passengers that the
operator expected to attract. Facilities at the Lakeland Lindner Airport in Lakeland, Florida, where
DayJet operated consisted of a total of 326 square feet of dedicated facilities. It is likely, at least in
the beginning, that if such an operation were to come to Chattanooga that they would only require
approximately this amount of dedicated space.

Facilities at the Gainesville Regional Airport where DayJet operated a “DayBase” included a
61,000 square foot building and associated ramp. The building contains both hangar space where
heavy maintenance of the aircraft was done and offices. Other “DayBases” were projected to
require 5,000 to 15,000 square feet of leased hangar space.

While it is too soon to tell how the cessation of DayJet’s operations will affect the use of VLJs for
air taxi services, the VLJ will also be used as a corporate aircraft. It is anticipated that between
800 and 1,400 VLJ will be manufactured annually between 2007 and 2010. After that,
manufacturing is expected to steady at between 1,200 and 1,400 aircraft per year. As these
aircraft enter the market, the number of general aviation operations is expected to increase.
Chattanooga could well see as many as 100 operations per year of these aircraft by private or
corporate users alone by the year 2017 and over 200 operations per year by 2027.

If VLJ owners were to base their aircraft at the Airport, it could well trigger an increased demand,
not only for conventional hangars, but for T-hangars as well. While most owners able to purchase
such an aircraft will probably desire to house the aircraft in a conventional hangar, the size of the
aircraft does not require it. The average size of the VLJ’s will allow them to be easily housed in a
standard T-hangar, if so desired.



Facility Requirements                              4-45                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




4.6      AIR CARGO REQUIREMENTS

The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport has long had air cargo service. In the last number of years,
the amount of cargo traveling into and out of the Airport has risen dramatically. This triggered the
Airport’s desire to investigate the viability of continuing the growth of air cargo at the Airport. If
viable, what facilities would be required? This section explores the facilities that would be required
to fulfill Chattanooga’s air cargo role.

4.6.1    Existing Air Cargo Facilities

Currently, the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport’s cargo facilities are comprised of two multi-tenant
terminals with a total of 22,400 square feet. Of total cargo terminal capacity, freight tenants occupy
only about 7,500 square feet of space. Non-cargo tenants occupy some, while other space is
currently unsuitable for occupancy. While there appears to be little urgency for near-term
augmentation of dedicated air cargo facilities, the Airport’s plan to renovate existing dilapidated
cargo space is warranted.

Due to the diminishing domestic market cargo volumes of recent years and a prognosis for future
slow-growth, many airports are unlikely to face critical cargo-related capital investment decisions
for several years. In fact, industry consolidation (acquisitions) left tremendous redundancy as DHL
and UPS have sought to rationalize their occupancy of former Airborne and Emery (respectively)
facilities. In some sense, this trend continues the already lower occupancy effect resulting from
passenger carriers increasingly outsourcing their ground (ramp) operations to third-party ground-
handlers. Because these handlers often serve a variety of carriers, they achieve a more efficient
use of terminal space and therefore often require far less space to serve a variety of carriers than
those carriers individually require.

What makes the preceding relevant for Chattanooga – including references to non-tenant UPS – is
that the excess supply of cargo facilities at small and medium-sized airports has left carriers less
inclined to support construction of speculative new multi-tenant facilities. Moreover, recent
indications from all three major integrated carriers have been that expectations for the near to mid-
term are relatively conservative for new on-airport facilities development in North America.

4.6.2    Cargo Terminal Planning Metrics

A number of complicating factors discourage the evolution of a single metric for right-sizing airport
cargo warehouses – especially those with multiple (often-dissimilar) tenants. While facilities
planners base many computations on anticipated throughput (tonnage), the variable of dwell-time
is too often inadequately considered. It is not enough to know how much but also how quickly
cargo moves through a facility because spatial consumption also depends upon how long cargo
remains on-site.

Owing to different velocities of transfer, area required inbound and outbound may differ even when
bi-directional cargo happens to be roughly equivalent4 as it is at Chattanooga. The build-up of
containers may occur on or off-airport. FedEx tends to perform more of its sort operations on-
airport, while UPS typically uses airport terminals as throughput stations while emphasizing off-
airport sites for most operations. Express carriers typically aim for high-throughput operations
largely focusing on envelopes and small packages with high degrees of automation. The
equipment utilized can require either more or less space depending upon the scale of throughput.
4
  At Chattanooga, enplaned cargo accounts for 49 percent, while deplaned cargo accounts for 51 percent of
the total.

Facility Requirements                             4-46                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                          Master Plan Update




It would also depend on whether the on-airport site is the principal terminal or merely a conduit for
a more intensive off-airport distribution center.

The International Air Transport Association’s (IATA) Airport Development Reference Manual,
Edition 9 offers the guidelines shown in Table 4-49 for planning of cargo terminal buildings.

                                             Table 4-49
                           PLANNING GUIDELINES FOR AIR CARGO TERMINALS

                              Amount of Automation                Tons per Square Foot
                          Low automation (mostly manual)          0.5 tons per 1.0 square ft.
                          Automated (average)                     1.0 tons per 1.0 square ft.
                          Highly automated                        1.8 tons per 1.0 square ft.
                         Source: IATA Airport Development Reference Manual, 9th Edition

Typically, integrated carriers are highly automated but even at the less productive “average”
automation, according to IATA’s planning guidelines, Chattanooga’s cargo terminal capacity of
22,400 square feet should suffice to accommodate 22,400 short tons of cargo – a volume
Chattanooga is not forecast to reach in the “base case” of the planning horizon.

Pursuant to ramp needs, the Air Transport Association’s (ATA) Facility Planning Guidelines for Air
Cargo Facilities (2001) suggests that for every square foot of facility warehouse space, the ramp
space (exclusive of taxiways) should be constructed as shown in Table 4-50.

                                              Table 4-50
                               PLANNING GUIDELINES FOR AIR CARGO RAMP
                                                                      Square Feet
                                                                     of Ramp Area
                                                                     Required Per
                                                                      Square Foot
                                     Cargo Warehouse Type            of Warehouse
                                   Passenger cargo                       1.25 - 1.50
                                   Freighter                             1.50 - 1.75
                                   Express spoke                         1.75 - 2.50
                                   Express hub                               2.50 +
                        Source: ATA Facility Planning Guidelines for Air Cargo Facilities (2001)

The larger of Chattanooga’s two cargo buildings is served by a non-contiguous 25,000 square foot
ramp adequate for two narrow-body aircraft. With the Chattanooga operation’s primary function as
a spoke market for DHL and FedEx, the applicable designation is the “Express Spoke”. With
current cargo warehouse space at 22,400 square feet and the “Express Spoke” designation, the
projected ramp need would be between 39,200 and 56,000 square feet.

Pursuant to the facility requirements presented above, FedEx provided a floor plan for a
prospective 31,400 square foot cargo terminal with a total site requirement of 120,000 square feet.
Rather than potentially build unnecessary space “on speculation”, the Airport should remain in
consistent contact with FedEx to monitor its interest in potential expansion at the Airport.




Facility Requirements                                     4-47                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




4.7      SUPPORT FACILITIES

The support facilities at an airport provide a broad but essential set of functions that ensure the
safe and efficient operation of the airport. The facility requirements for each of the applicable
support facilities for the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport are discussed in this section.

4.7.1    Air Traffic Control Tower

The Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) is a 111-foot high structure built in 1983. It is currently open
from 6:00 a.m. to 11:50 p.m. local time. The ATCT is considered sufficient to meet the
requirements placed on it throughout the planning period.

4.7.2    Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting

The Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility was completed in 2005 and designed to meet
Index B requirements. The longest aircraft currently serving the Airport is an MD-83 with a length
of 147’-10”. This aircraft qualifies as an Index C aircraft, but does not depart the Airport an
average of five or more times per day. Part 139 Section 315 allows the Airport to operate the next
lower index if the longest aircraft does not fly with the prescribed frequency. The next lower index
in this case is the Index B. It is not envisioned that this aircraft or any other within the Index C
lengths will depart the Airport an average of five or more times per day within the planning period.

The minimum requirements for an Index B ARFF are that it be able to house the following:

     One vehicle carrying at least 500 pounds of sodium-based dry chemical, halon 1211, or clean
      agent and 1,500 gallons of water and the commensurate quantity of Aqueous Film Forming
      Foams (AFFF) for foam production.

Or

     A second vehicle carrying either:
      o 500 pounds of sodium-based dry chemical, halon1211, or clean agent, or
      o 450 pounds of potassium-based dry chemical and water with a commensurate quantity of
         AFFF to total 100 gallons for simultaneous dry chemical and AFFF application, and
     A third vehicle carrying an amount of water and the commensurate quantity of AFFF so that the
      total quantity of water for foam production carried by this vehicle and the second vehicle is at
      least 1,500 gallons

The existing ARFF meets the second criteria.

4.7.3    Fuel Storage

Commercially available fuel is currently stored in two locations at the Airport. The primary fuel farm
is located between two hangars on the North Apron. This facility has two 20,000 gallon Jet A fuel
tanks, one 15,000 Avgas fuel tank, one 10,000 gallon unleaded motor gasoline (Mogas) tank, and
a fuel truck holding area. All of the tanks at this location are underground storage tanks (UST). A
secondary tank area is located next to the South Apron. This facility has two 15,000 gallon above
ground storage tanks (AST) for Jet A fuel, a 1,000 gallon AST for diesel fuel, and a fuel truck
holding area. Both of these facilities are owned and operated by TAC Air, the Fixed Base Operator
(FBO).



Facility Requirements                             4-48                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




Table 4-51 indicates the current capacity of the existing facilities for each type of fuel and the
number of days that quantity of fuel is likely to last given the operations projected to occur. A five-
day fuel reserve is recommended for Jet A fuel. The current facilities are projected to be able to
accommodate this recommendation through the year 2017, after which time, additional capacity
will be required to maintain the five-day fuel reserve.




Facility Requirements                            4-49                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                       Master Plan Update




                                                    Table 4-51
                                          TOTAL FUEL STORAGE FACILITIES
                                                            2007        2012         2017          2022           2027
Annual operations                            operations      78,651      80,300       84,200        88,400         93,000
Jet A
Annual fuel sales                            gallons      3,150,000   3,650,500   4,063,400     4,690,300      5,186,000
Peak month fuel sales per operation          gallons             40          43          46            50             53
Peak month fuel sales                        gallons        308,700     339,500     377,900       436,200        482,300
Average day peak month fuel sales            gallons          9,958      11,000      12,200        14,100         15,600
Five day fuel reserve                        gallons         49,790      55,000      61,000        70,500         78,000
Settlement (11% of total storage)            gallons          6,154       6,800       7,540         8,710          9,640
Total fuel storage required                  gallons         55,944      61,800      68,500        79,200         87,600
Current fuel capacity                        gallons         70,000      70,000      70,000        70,000         70,000
Days of supply at current fuel capacity      gallons              6           6           5             4              4
Avgas (100LL) or Avgas Equivalent
Annual fuel sales                            gallons       145,000     169,900      187,100       186,000        195,700
Peak month fuel sales per operation          gallons             2           2            2             2              2
Peak month fuel sales                        gallons        14,210      15,800       17,400        17,300         18,200
Average day peak month fuel sales            gallons           458         510          560           560            590
Five day fuel reserve                        gallons         2,292       2,550        2,800         2,800          2,950
Settlement (11% of total storage)            gallons           283         320          340           340            360
Total fuel storage required                  gallons         2,575       2,900        3,100         3,100          3,300
Current fuel capacity                        gallons        15,000      15,000       15,000        15,000         15,000
Days of supply at current fuel capacity      gallons            29          26           24            24             23
Mogas
Annual fuel sales                           gallons          14,850     17,000       18,700        20,600          22,800
Peak month fuel sales per operation         gallons             0.2        0.2          0.2           0.2              0.2
Peak month fuel sales                       gallons           1,455      1,580        1,740         1,920           2,120
Average day peak month fuel sales           gallons              47         51           56            62               68
Five day fuel reserve                       gallons             235        250          280           310             340
Settlement (11% of total storage)           gallons              29         30           30            40               40
Total fuel storage required                 gallons             264        280          310           350             380
Current fuel capacity                       gallons          10,000     10,000       10,000        10,000          10,000
Days of supply at current fuel capacity     gallons             212        170          160           140             130
Diesel
Annual fuel sales                           gallons          12,960     14,840       16,340        17,960          19,890
Peak month fuel sales per operation         gallons             0.2        0.2          0.2           0.2             0.2
Peak month fuel sales                       gallons           1,270      1,380        1,520         1,670           1,850
Average day peak month fuel sales           gallons              41         40           50            50              60
Five day fuel reserve                       gallons             205        200          250           250             300
Settlement (11% of total storage)           gallons              25         20           30            30              40
Total fuel storage required                 gallons             230        220          280           280             340
Current fuel capacity                       gallons           1,000      1,000        1,000         1,000           1,000
Days of supply at current fuel capacity     gallons              22         22           18            18              15

   By 2027, it is predicted that Avgas will no longer be available for sale. It could happen well before
   that. The future of Avgas or 100-low-level, or 100-LL as it is also commonly called, is being
   debated in the aviation industry. The question at present is not so much if it will survive, but for
   how long. Avgas contains Tetra-ethyl Lead (TEL), which is a highly toxic substance banned by the


   Facility Requirements                                  4-50                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




U.S. Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) in the 1980s from all gasoline. Even though
Avgas contains over four times as much lead as the highest-octane fuels produced for autos,
leaded aviation fuels were granted a special case reprieve as long as there was progress toward a
suitable alternative. However, any alternative must be less toxic than TEL. To date, no suitable
replacement has been found. Other factors that will influence the disappearance of 100-LL
include:

   Only a small number of refineries produce 100-LL.
   Only one factory in England produces TEL.
   Because 100-LL contains TEL, it must be refined, stored and transported in separate facilities
    from all other fuels. If these facilities are used for other types of fuels, they must be shut down
    and completely cleaned first.
   The current production of 100-LL in the world is less than one percent of all gasoline produced.
   All of these factors cause the price of 100-LL to increase, which reduces the demand, which
    increases the cost.

The GA piston engines that were certified for the higher-octane leaded fuels will have to be de-
rated from their current power levels, which will result in power level drops so severe that the
corresponding decreases in payload will make many of the aircraft unusable. Several engine
manufacturers are researching and developing alternative engines such as jet-fueled retrofit
engines. However, speculation in the industry is that many of the retrofits will cost more than the
cost of the aircraft and that high octane Mogas might be a more viable alternative. For these
reasons, in this report 100-LL is labeled Avgas or Avgas Equivalent.

If a second FBO should enter the market, it is anticipated that a second fueling facility would be
located in the area of the second FBO. In determining the size of the second fuel farm, it was
determined that the facility should be sized for at least five years after it is opened. Assuming that
it would take two years to design and construct, the facility could be open as early as 2010. Five
years after that would be 2015. The next forecast year in this analysis after that is 2017. Thus, the
facilities were sized for the purposes of this report for the year 2017. By 2017, it is assumed that
half of the commercial operations would be fueled from the second FBO in addition to half of the
itinerant general aviation operations, half of the military operations, and any additional local general
aviation above the local operations of the year 2007. The resulting required fuel storage capacity
for the second FBO based on the above assumptions is shown in Table 4-52.




Facility Requirements                             4-51                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




                                         Table 4-52
                          FUEL STORAGE CAPACITY FOR A SECOND FBO
                                                    Units         2017           2022          2027
 One half of commercial operations                operations        11,900       12,480        13,950
 One half itinerant GA and military operations    operations        24,150        25,700        27,400
 Based aircraft operations above 2007 numbers     operations           650           800           800
 One half local military operations               operations         1,300         1,050           750
 Total annual operations for second FBO           operations        38,003        40,030        42,900
 Jet A
 Annual fuel sales                                gallons        1,740,500    1,926,900     2,170,400
 Peak month fuel sales per operation              gallons               46           48            51
 Peak month fuel sales                            gallons          170,600      188,800       212,700
 Average day peak month fuel sales                gallons            5,500        6,100         6,900
 Five day fuel reserve                            gallons           27,500       30,500        34,500
 Settlement (11% of total storage)                gallons            3,400        3,800         4,300
 Total fuel storage required                      gallons           30,900       34,300        38,800
 Percentage of total airport Jet A fuel           percent           45.1%        45.3%         46.4%
 Avgas (100LL) or equivalent substitute
 Annual fuel sales                                gallons           80,120        88,698        99,906
 Peak month fuel sales per operation              gallons                2             2             2
 Peak month fuel sales                            gallons            7,900         8,700         9,800
 Average day peak month fuel sales                gallons              250           280           320
 Five day fuel reserve                            gallons            1,250         1,400         1,600
 Settlement (11% of total storage)                gallons              150           180           200
 Total fuel storage required                      gallons            1,400         1,600         1,800
 Percentage of total airport Avgas fuel           percent           45.2%         51.6%         54.5%
 Mogas
 Annual fuel sales                                gallons             8,000        8,900        10,000
 Peak month fuel sales per operation              gallons               0.2          0.2           0.2
 Peak month fuel sales                            gallons               800          900         1,000
 Average day peak month fuel sales                gallons                30           30            30
 Five day fuel reserve                            gallons               150          150           150
 Settlement (11% of total storage)                gallons                20           20            20
 Total fuel storage required                      gallons               170          170           170
 Percentage of total airport Mogas fuel           percent            54.8%        48.6%         44.7%
 Diesel
 Annual fuel sales                                gallons             7,000        7,700         8,700
 Peak month fuel sales per operation              gallons               0.2          0.2           0.2
 Peak month fuel sales                            gallons               700          800           900
 Average day peak month fuel sales                gallons                20           30            30
 Five day fuel reserve                            gallons               100          150           150
 Settlement (11% of total storage)                gallons                10           20            20
 Total fuel storage required                      gallons               110          170           170
 Percentage of total airport diesel fuel          percent            39.3%        60.7%         50.0%

Should a second FBO desire to sell all of the various types of fuel that are listed above, it is likely
the Jet A fuel would be accommodated with two tanks of 15,000 gallons apiece, and a third tank of
10,000 gallons. The Avgas or Avgas substitute (100-LL) would be accommodated with one 2,000-


Facility Requirements                            4-52                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




gallon tank and the Mogas and diesel fuels would be accommodated with a 200-gallon tank each.
These would be contained within a structure approximately 80 feet long by 48 feet wide with a four-
foot surrounding wall that would be able to contain at least 1.25 times the volume of all of the
tanks.

4.7.4    Airport Maintenance

The Airport maintenance facilities are currently housed in two buildings that together have
approximately 11,300 square feet. These facilities appear to be the right size for the current airport
maintenance operations. If additional pavement were added to the Airport, such as with the
extension of a runway, this could trigger the need for additional equipment needed to maintain the
additional pavement. This could in turn trigger the need for additional airport maintenance
facilities.

4.8      CIRCULATION AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS

The increases in enplaned passenger traffic also indicate a consistent increase in passenger-
vehicle traffic volumes. The increased service by the Low Cost Carriers in particular is anticipated
to trigger additional traffic coming from a greater distance to reach the Airport. This section
analyzes the impacts the increased number of vehicles will have on the terminal area circulation,
as well as public, employee, and rental car parking.

4.8.1    Terminal Area Circulation

The existing terminal area Loop Road is currently accessed off either the Airport Connector Road
Bridge or Airport Road. It circulates between the short- and long-term parking lots and Airport
Road, past the entrance to the intermediate-term parking lot, in front of the commercial service
passenger terminal, past the entrance and exits to the rental car ready/return lot, the exit from the
public parking lot back to the recirculation road or the Airport Connector Road Bridge. This
circulation pattern is shown in Figure 4-2.




Facility Requirements                            4-53                                       FINAL REPORT
                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                         Master Plan Update




                                Figure 4-2
                        TERMINAL ROADWAY SYSTEM




Facility Requirements             4-54                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




General guidelines for terminal roadway systems for airports of a similar size and operation to the
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport recommend that the terminal loop road have a minimum of two
12-foot wide lanes with a capacity of 600 vehicles per hour each, a recirculation road of two 12-foot
wide lanes with a capacity of 600 vehicles per hour and a terminal roadway with four lanes. The
lane closest to the terminal should be at least eight feet wide and would have no practical capacity.
The remaining three lanes should be at least 12-feet wide. The lane nearest the curb lane would
have a practical capacity of 300 vehicles per hour as it is used to maneuver between the curb lane
and the through lanes. The two remaining lanes are considered through lanes and should have a
capacity each of 600 vehicles per hour. A comparison of the existing elements of the existing Loop
Road and the recommended minimums can be found in Table 4-53.

                                              Table 4-53
                        EXISTING AND RECOMMENDED TERMINAL ROADWAY CAPACITIES
                                                        Number of Lanes         Capacity (vehicles per hour)
                                                             Recommended        Calculated   Recommended
 Loop Road Element                                  Existing    Minimum          Existing        Minimum
 Between Airport Road and long-term parking                2            2             1,200             1,200
 Between short- and intermediate-term parking              1            2               450             1,200
 In front of terminal check-in and baggage claim           3            4               900             1,500
 In front of terminal entrance                             3            4               900             1,500
 Between long-term parking and rental car parking          2            2             1,200             1,200
 Recirculation road                                        1            2               600               600
 Entrance/exit bridge                                      4            4             2,800             2,800

As can be seen from Table 4-53, there is more than one area of the roadway that does not meet
generally accepted minimums. It also shows that the point of most concern is the one lane area
just prior to the terminal that is located between the short-term parking lot and the intermediate
parking lot. The existing capacity of this area has been calculated as 450 vehicles per hour. Not
only does it have only one lane, but it also has both the entrance and exit from the intermediate –
term lot in this section of the roadway as well.

The number of peak hour vehicles projected to be on the roadway system during the various peak
hours over the planning period have also been calculated as shown in Table 4-54. While there are
occasional periods today when the traffic is backed up during peak hours, this usually occurs when
double parking is occurring at the terminal curb. This further reduces the low capacity of the
roadway system in front of the terminal. The traffic backs up into the one lane portion of the
roadway. This is normally relieved with good policing of the curb. However, the situation even with
exemplary policing will begin to breakdown with increasing regularity as the combined peak hour
numbers of 2022 are reached and the peak-vehicle numbers increase to approximately 460
vehicles per hour during this combined peak. This is more than the 450 vehicles per hour capacity
of the one lane portion of the roadway system that travels past the intermediate-term parking lot.
This portion of the roadway in particular will not be able to meet the demand. Even with excellent
curb policing, the roadway system will not be able to accommodate adequately the peak hour
number of vehicles and capacity will need to be added.

                                              Table 4-54
                           PEAK HOUR VEHICLES ON TERMINAL ROADWAY SYSTEM
                                                    2007      2012    2017         2022        2027
          Enplaning passenger vehicles                 120      140     180          220         240
          Deplaning passenger vehicles                 200      180     250          270         340
          Total peak hour passenger vehicles           150      290     440          460         480


Facility Requirements                                  4-55                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




 4.8.2    Parking

 The parking at the Airport has been divided into three principle user groups: the commercial
 passenger, the Airport employee, and the commercial passengers renting vehicles at the Airport.
 This section analyzes the parking requirements of each of these groups.

 PARKING SUPPLY

 There are currently 1,132 spaces available for public parking in the Short Term Lot (173 spaces),
 the Intermediate Term Lot (220 spaces) and the Long Term Lot (739 spaces). Some employees
 are permitted to park in the public facilities, and according to Airport staff, approximately 25
 employees routinely park in the three lots. These spaces and the rates charged for each are shown
 in Table 4-55.

                                             Table 4-55
                                          PARKING SUPPLY
             Parking Lot              Spaces                                  Fee
Public parking lots
 Short-term                              173   15 minutes free; then $1 per 30 minutes; max. $12 per day
 Intermediate-term                       220   15 minutes free; then $0.75 per 30 minutes; max. $7 per day
 Long-term                               739   $1 per hour; max $7 per day
Subtotal public parking lots           1,132
Employee lot                              94   $20 per month; $10 per month TSA
Subtotal public and employee           1,226
Temporary gravel lot                     150   No charge, currently
Rental car ready/return lot               97
Total on-Airport parking               1,473
Parking spaces available at Thrifty
Airport parking (off-Airport)          25-50   $4.99 per day plus tax

 Employee parking is currently provided in the employee lot north of the Intermediate Lot, and in a
 temporary gravel lot south of the terminal. With the recent increase in enplanements, public
 parking demand has grown to the point that on some days, the employee lot is needed for public
 parking. On those days, employees are asked to park in the gravel lot. They ride a shuttle bus to
 the terminal. The card access gate normally used by employees is closed, and an internal gate
 linking the employee lot to the Intermediate Lot is opened.

 Rental car ready/return spaces are provided in a separate lot immediately south of the terminal.
 Ninety-seven spaces are provided for the five rental car agencies operating on the Airport.

 There is only one provider of off-airport public parking, that being Thrifty Airport Parking. Thrifty
 offers an estimated 25 – 50 spaces and charges $4.99 per day plus tax.

 Enplanements

 Parking demand at an airport is directly related to originating enplanements, so it is important to
 understand enplanement history and forecasts. This information is contained in Chapter 3, Aviation
 Forecasts. For purposes of this analysis, it is assumed that all enplanements at Chattanooga
 Metropolitan Airport are originating enplanements, with no connections.




 Facility Requirements                            4-56                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




From 1995 through 2007, there have been double digit increases in annual enplanements by as
much as 18.8 percent and double digit decreases by as much as 13.2 percent. The forecast for the
immediate future reflects the expected impact of low cost carriers entering the market and
increasing flights and available seats. From 2007 to 2012, the average annual increase in
enplanements is forecast to be 0.6 percent per year. After that, the forecast annual average
increase is forecast to be 2.8 percent through 2017, and 2.7 percent through 2017.

In the last four years, May has been the peak month of enplanements, except for 2006 when it was
the second highest month. It is interesting to note that at no time in the last six years has the peak
month of enplanements been a traditional holiday month of November or December. In 2007, May
was the peak month of enplanements and October was a close second.

Airline market share is depicted in Table 4-56. It is important to note that the market share of low
cost carriers (LCCs) has increased from 2.1 percent in 2006 to 9.9 percent in 2008. Allegiant Air
began operations at Chattanooga in October 2006 and Skybus began operations in December
2007. The small increase in forecast enplanements between 2007 and 2012 is due to expected
decreases in service to Chattanooga due to the continuing fuel price crisis.

                                             Table 4-56
                                      AIRLINE MARKET SHARE
                                                                September
                           Airline                  CY 2006       2008
                           Allegiant Air                2.1%         9.9%
                           American Eagle              12.7%        12.4%
                           Continental Express          6.7%         0.0%
                           Delta Connection            43.0%        41.9%
                           Northwest Airlink           11.4%        13.3%
                           US Airways Express          23.5%        22.5%
                           Charter                      0.5%         0.0%
                                                      100.0%       100.0%

However, the influence of Allegiant Air, an LCC, in the market is expected to offset the fuel issue
somewhat. The introduction of an LCC into a market, or the expansion of LCC operations, can
have an impact on public parking demand well beyond the simple increase in enplanements due to
the increased service. First, the average trip on a LCC tends to be longer in duration, as the LCCs
attract more leisure travelers, and leisure trips tend to be longer than business trips. Thus, a single
trip can result in a car in the parking lot for more days, increasing overall parking demand. Second,
LCCs draw customers from a broader geographic area, where alternate ground transportation is
not available or not cost competitive with driving and parking at the Airport. Finally, the LCCs may
foster competition in airfares among the legacy carriers serving the Airport, thus increasing overall
enplanements. While the parking operator, Republic Parking Systems, reports that the parking
pattern at Chattanooga reflected a classic “business airport” in the past, with the busiest parking
days Tuesday through Thursday, this pattern is probably changing due to the introduction of LCCs.

Public Parking Demand

Parking demand at an airport is normally expressed as a ratio of spaces required per 1,000 annual
originating enplanements. Before determining this ratio, a critical question to answer is “What level
of activity should the design accommodate?” The recommended approach is to choose a design
day that represents a high level of activity, and a day on which operations should run smoothly and
routinely, but not the absolute peak day.


Facility Requirements                            4-57                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




Like most systems, a parking system runs most efficiently when it is at 85 percent to 95 percent of
capacity. The “cushion” of 5 percent to 15 percent of the spaces allows for the dynamics of cars
moving into and out of spaces, reduces search time for a space, and allows for temporary loss of
spaces due to minor construction, snow cover, or unforeseen circumstances. Ideally, this cushion
can also accommodate parkers on days, which are busier than the design day. On those extremely
busy days, there should still be a space for everyone, but the cushion will be very small and search
times will be high. (This circumstance is in keeping with customer expectations: if one goes to the
mall on the Saturday before Christmas, one expects it to be crowded. Likewise, if one goes to the
airport on the Wednesday before Thanksgiving, one expects the parking system to be quite full.)

Table 4-57 contains parking occupancy counts for May, October, and December of 2007, as well
as January 2008. Because of the availability of data and the way it was presented, the May and
October counts show the actual peak in each of the three lots for that day, the sum of which
probably overstates slightly the true total peak parking demand for that day. The December and
January data represents the peak count for the system as a whole that day; the individual lots may
have peaked at different times of day.

Despite these small discrepancies in how the data is presented, it is clear that the parking system
was overtaxed in 2007 and for at least the first month of 2008. Each cell in the table shaded
orange represents a day when an individual lot (Short, Intermediate or Long Term) experienced an
occupancy equal to or greater than its stated capacity. Each cell in the table shaded yellow
represents a day on which the entire system was more than 90 percent occupied. At this level of
usage, it is easy to predict that the Chattanooga customer experienced the following frustrations:

•   The desired lot might have been full, requiring re-direction to an alternate lot.
•   The entire system appeared to be full to the user.
•   Search times for a space were high.
•   When a space was finally found, it was a long way from the terminal.
•   The patron was getting nervous about making his flight or meeting his party.




Facility Requirements                             4-58                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                                         Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                                       Master Plan Update


                                                                                  Table 4-57
                                                                       PARKING OCCUPANCY - PUBLIC LOTS
                       May 2007                                        October 2007                                December 2007                                  January 2007
      Short-   Long-    Inter   Total       Percent   Short-   Long-      Inter    Total   Percent   Short-   Long-    Inter   Total   Percent   Short-   Long-      Inter    Total     Percent
       term    term    mediate                 of      term    term     mediate               of      term    term   mediate              of      term    term      mediate                of
        173     739      220    1,132        1,132      173     739        220     1,132    1,132      173     739      220    1,132    1,132      173     739        220     1,132      1,132
Day
 1       172     426          174     772    68.2%       76     454          115     645    57.0%       86      442       74     602    53.2%       79     473           99     651         57.5%
 2       177     519          190     886    78.3%      105     518          140     763    67.4%       96      454       85     635    56.1%      116     445          112     673         59.5%
 3       174     510          143     827    73.1%      117     588          162     867    76.6%       80      553      136     769    67.9%      144     441          118     703         62.1%
 4       119     431          107     657    58.0%      106     572          147     825    72.9%      101      626      138     865    76.4%      106     389          119     614         54.2%
 5       114     370           76     560    49.5%       65     545          109     719    63.5%      130      635      172     937    82.8%       71      64           86     221         19.5%
 6       174     328           77     579    51.1%       18     564           79     661    58.4%      108      636      152     896    79.2%       97      55           82     234         20.7%
 7       155     362          122     639    56.4%       48     560           82     690    61.0%       80      578      106     764    67.5%       82     404          158     644         56.9%
 8       174     537          159     870    76.9%       83     596          121     800    70.7%       30      494       53     577    51.0%       89     456          182     727         64.2%
 9       174     509          180     863    76.2%      135     639          200     974    86.0%       33      449       66     548    48.4%      125     506          209     840         74.2%
10       174     583          168     925    81.7%      155     679          212   1,046    92.4%       80      608      148     836    73.9%      124     533          174     831         73.4%
11       104     525          116     745    65.8%      125     663          195     983    86.8%      103      665      185     953    84.2%       93     487          114     694         61.3%
12        67     403           62     532    47.0%       72     623          160     855    75.5%      173      673      226   1,072    94.7%       40     351           77     468         41.3%
13       109     347           63     519    45.8%       48     577          108     733    64.8%      169      650      196   1,015    89.7%       46     295           91     432         38.2%
14       149     437          124     710    62.7%       66     555          108     729    64.4%      107      616      139     862    76.1%       94     296          173     563         49.7%
15       174     493          168     835    73.8%       89     608          180     877    77.5%       95      511       93     699    61.7%      171     691          186   1,048         92.6%
16       175     744          220   1,139   100.6%      109     663          202     974    86.0%       81      462       78     621    54.9%      178     694          211   1,083         95.7%
17       176     730          216   1,122    99.1%      158     664          219   1,041    92.0%       94      495      102     691    61.0%      174     727          192   1,093         96.6%
18       167     687          141     995    87.9%      172     620          120     912    80.6%      130      535      114     779    68.8%      140     645          142     927         81.9%
19       162     563          100     825    72.9%      147     615           64     826    73.0%      148      539      125     812    71.7%       49     571           82     702         62.0%
20       174     543          102     819    72.3%       46     563                          0.0%      105      532      108     745    65.8%       68     572           87     727         64.2%
21       173     555          143     871    76.9%       56     554                          0.0%       89      554       72     715    63.2%       87     601          132     820         72.4%
22       175     535          146     856    75.6%       80     625                          0.0%       52      652       50     754    66.6%      125     645          205     975         86.1%
23       175     744          159   1,078    95.2%      175     749          108   1,032    91.2%      100      734       69     903    79.8%      174     717          225   1,116         98.6%
24       136     604          127     867    76.6%      174     742          180   1,096    96.8%       37      713       78     828    73.1%      173     741          213   1,127         99.6%
25        98     514           87     699    61.7%      173     717          155   1,045    92.3%       41      753       88     882    77.9%      133     678          151     962         85.0%
26        64     283           63     410    36.2%      143     681           74     898    79.3%       78      740       86     904    79.9%       48     553          109     710         62.7%
27       103     272           60     435    38.4%       92     540                          0.0%       93      701       82     876    77.4%       50     532          116     698         61.7%
28        93     167           62     322    28.4%      113     513                          0.0%       66      652       90     808    71.4%       89     552          179     820         72.4%
29       158     334           99     591    52.2%       87     576          107    770     68.0%       63      671       79     813    71.8%      112     645          211     968         85.5%
30       174     361          118     653    57.7%       92     581          100    773     68.3%       88      660       76     824    72.8%      173     704          209   1,086         95.9%
31       173     395          117     685    60.5%       91     560          123    774     68.4%                                                  175     716          209   1,100         97.2%
      1 – Where no count is shown, count system was not operating.
      2 – The May and October data show the peak hour in each lot, and the sum is probably greater than the actual parking occupancy in the peak hour of that day.
      3 – The December and January data show the peak parking occupancy during that day. One or more of the lots may have peaked at a different hour of the day.
      4 – Yellow cells denote when the parking occupancy exceeded 90 percent of the capacity of the system.
      5 – Orange cells denote days when parking occupancy equaled or exceeded the capacity of the individual lot.




      Facility Requirements                                                                  4-59                                                                     FINAL REPORT
                                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                              Master Plan Update




It is recommended that a conservative approach be used in determining the design day for parking
at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, and thus the parking demand ratio. While many airport
facilities are designed for the average day of the peak month (ADPM), we recommend that the
parking system be designed for the peak day of the peak month (PDPM). The reasons for this
recommendation are as follow:

•   First, the peak day of the peak month of enplanements does not represent the peak day of the
    year. For example, the parking demand on a holiday weekend may be higher than the busiest
    day in May.
•   Second, there is only one small off-airport parking provider, with no more expected, to act as a
    “shock absorber” when the Airport’s parking system becomes overloaded. In other words, if a
    patron drives to the Airport, his car must be accommodated.
•   Third, the history of enplanements at Chattanooga has proven to be volatile over the years, so
    it behooves the Airport to remain nimble in order to accommodate sometimes-sudden
    increases in enplanements.
•   Finally, if enplanements on LCCs comprise a large portion of increased enplanements over the
    next few years, the parking demand at Chattanooga may grow more quickly than
    enplanements.

The PDPM parking demand at Chattanooga is estimated to be 1,130 spaces. However, Airport
personnel report that authorized employees routinely use about 25 spaces in the public lots, so the
public parking demand is 1,130 – 25 = 1,105. A cushion of 10 percent is added to this demand so
that the system operates efficiently on the design day. On days that are busier than the design day,
the cushion becomes smaller and parking is tighter. The parking demand including a 10 percent
cushion is therefore calculated as 1,105/0.90 = 1,228. When compared to Calendar Year (CY)
2007 annual enplanements, the public parking demand ratio is 1,228/301.718 = 4.07 spaces per
1,000 annual originating enplanements.

This ratio is applied to the forecast enplanements throughout the planning period as shown in
Table 4-58. This calculation results in a 2007 deficit of 121 public parking spaces, growing to a
deficit of 140 spaces in 2012 and 757 spaces in 2027.

                                                   Table 4-58
                                      PUBLIC PARKING DEMAND PROJECTIONS

                                          Parking
                                          Demand          Projected         Existing         Surplus/
                          Year             Ratio 1        Demand            Supply 2         (Deficit)
                       CY 2007                  4.07           1,228             1,107            (121)
                       FY 2012                  4.07           1,247             1,107            (140)
                       FY 2017                  4.07           1,435             1,107            (328)
                       FY 2022                  4.07           1,635             1,107            (528)
                       FY 2027                  4.07           1,864             1,107            (757)
                   1
                       Parking demand ratio includes 10 percent cushion
                   2
                       Parking supply = 1,132 spaces in public lots less 25 spaces in those lots that are regularly occupied
                       by employees.

It should be noted that the parking demand ratio could be measured with some precision for any
particular year, so long as the proper data is collected. However, it is not a static number, although


Facility Requirements                                          4-60                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




it has been treated it as such in the projections, because the nature of the airline passenger
changes over time is due to a number of factors. For example, if enplanements on LCCs comprise
a large portion of the increased enplanements over the next few years, the parking demand at the
Airport may increase more quickly than enplanements, for reasons stated previously. Therefore, it
is good practice to check this calculation each year to track trends and act more quickly when
patterns are changing.

Employee Parking Demand

Employees parking at the Airport include Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority employees,
TSA employees, board members, car rental company employees, airline employees (both based
and non-based), and so on. Some of these employees, about 25 on a typical day, are authorized to
park in the public lots. The remainders are issued a proximity card allowing them access to the
employee lot north of the terminal.

A gravel overflow lot was opened in mid-October 2007 south of the terminal. When public parking
demand is expected to exceed the capacity of the public lots, based on flight booking information
from the airlines, employees are notified in advance and are asked to park in the gravel lot. They
ride a shuttle bus to the terminal. Access to the Employee Lot is denied on those days, and an
internal connection between the Intermediate Lot and the Employee Lot is opened so that public
parking can overflow into the Employee Lot.

Occupancy counts in the Employee Lot in May and October 2007 are shown in Table 4-59. In each
month, the lot peaked at 100 percent occupancy on one day, and the lot was more than 95 percent
full on several days in May. Because employees are familiar with the system and generally create
only low turnover in the lot, the cushion afforded employee facilities is usually five percent rather
than the 10 percent common for public facilities.




Facility Requirements                             4-61                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                         Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




                                          Table 4-59
                              PARKING OCCUPANCY - EMPLOYEE LOT
                                   May 2007                     October 2007
                                Peak      Percent              Peak      Percent
                        Day   Occupancy    of 94             Occupancy    of 94
                         1           83     88.3%                   84     89.4%
                         2           84     89.4%                   50     53.2%
                         3           90     95.7%                   59     62.8%
                         4           91     96.8%                   76     80.9%
                         5           65     69.1%                   81     86.2%
                         6           81     86.2%                   67     71.3%
                         7           89     94.7%                   78     83.0%
                         8           86     91.5%                   88     93.6%
                         9           94 100.0%                      81     86.2%
                        10           93     98.9%                   94    100.0%
                        11           86     91.5%                   87     92.6%
                        12           64     68.1%                   78     83.0%
                        13           73     77.7%                   63     67.0%
                        14           87     92.6%                   69     73.4%
                        15           81     86.2%                   73     77.7%
                        16           91     96.8%                   50     53.2%
                        17           87     92.6%                   15     16.0%
                        18           90     95.7%                   13     13.8%
                        19           69     73.4%                    0      0.0%
                        20           73     77.7%                    0      0.0%
                        21           87     92.6%                    0      0.0%
                        22           83     88.3%                   24     25.5%
                        23           81     86.2%                    0      0.0%
                        24           80     85.1%                    0      0.0%
                        25           79     84.0%                    0      0.0%
                        26           59     62.8%                   46     48.9%
                        27           69     73.4%                    0      0.0%
                        28           70     75.5%                    0      0.0%
                        29           76     80.9%                   26     27.7%
                        30           71     75.5%                   29     30.9%
                        31           83     88.3%                   55     58.5%
                        Yellow cells denote parking occupancy greater than 95 percent.
                        A zero indicates the count system was not working on that day

Employee parking demand is estimated at 94 in the Employee Lot plus 25 using public lots for a
total of 119. Adding a five percent cushion would result in a demand of 125 employee parking
spaces. Relating this demand to 2007 enplanements yields a demand ratio of 0.41 spaces per
1,000 annual originating enplanements.

Table 4-60 contains the projections of employee parking demand through the planning period. The
2007 demand was approximately equal to supply, but there is a deficit of 26 spaces predicted for
2017, growing to a deficit of 69 spaces in 2027.




Facility Requirements                                 4-62                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                       Master Plan Update




                                                Table 4-60
                                  EMPLOYEE PARKING DEMAND PROJECTIONS

                                    Parking
                                    Demand         Projected          Existing       Surplus/
                           Year      Ratio 1       Demand            Supply 2, 3     (Deficit)
                        CY 2007          0.41             124                119              (5)
                        FY 2012          0.41             126                119              (7)
                        FY 2017          0.41             145                119            (26)
                        FY 2022          0.41             165                119            (46)
                        FY 2027          0.41             188                119            (69)
                   1
                     Parking demand ration includes five percent cushion
                   2
                     Parking supply includes 94 spaces in employee lot plus 25 spaces regularly used by employees in
                     the public parking lots.
                   3
                     Parking supply does not include the 150-space gravel lot.

Rental Car Ready/Return Spaces

In 2007, the rental car ready/return lot directly south of the terminal contained 97 spaces allocated
as shown in Table 4-61.

                                                 Table 4-61
                                             RENTAL CAR SPACES
                                               Rental Car        Spaces
                                                Agency
                                               Avis                  22
                                               Budget                12
                                               Enterprise            13
                                               Hertz                 27
                                               National              23
                                               Total                 97

The 97-space rental car facility is about two-thirds of what the rental car managers see as ideal for
the current operation, based on interviews with each agency. Each manager was asked to
estimate the number of spaces needed for optimum conditions under today’s circumstances. The
total came to 140 ready/return spaces. Each company’s desired number corresponded closely with
the current allocation proportions.

According to the estimates provided by the managers, average monthly rental transactions range
from 600 to 1,500, totaling approximately 5,000 altogether. Peak days experience about 250
returns and/or rentals. The total fleet inventory ranges from 900 to 1,300 depending on the season.
All managers expressed a need for more spaces. The next most common concern about the
existing facility was the awkward layout. It was characterized as inefficient, confusing, and
occasionally somewhat dangerous for customers. Maneuvering space is limited and the one-way
traffic flow confuses patrons. Vehicular access to spaces is difficult, especially for customers
returning cars. Congestion at peaks, especially during pre-flight return periods, can quickly gridlock
the lot.

Better security and improved graphics directing customers, once in the car, were mentioned by
more than one manager. The majority would like covered parking within close walking distance
from the terminal. It was also noted that space to provide customer service in the lot itself would be
desirable. None of the companies expressed concern with operating their Quick-Turn-Around

Facility Requirements                                     4-63                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                          Master Plan Update




(QTA) facilities remotely as they do now. There was no major opposition to the idea of a possible
consolidated fueling and wash facility unless it was remote which was interpreted as a possible
interference with effective customer service. None of the managers mentioned the cost of
operating as an important criterion to be considered for any future development.

Although they are able to operate under the current conditions, all the rental car managers
expressed the need for more space. All rental car parking lots include both ready and return
spaces, but in the future, they may need to be separated, when the operation gets too large to
handle both transactions in the same spaces. Although the managers expressed a desire for 140
spaces compared to the existing 97, our experience is that the balance between operating
expenses, particularly the labor to shuttle cars back and forth, and the cost of leasing the
ready/return spaces, usually results in fewer spaces being leased. Therefore, we estimate the
2007 need for ready/return spaces at 120. This is about 11 percent of the average fleet size
(1,100).

Projections of the need for rental car ready/return spaces are shown in Table 4-62. As passenger
traffic increases, it is projected that rental car transactions will increase at the same rate. Fleet
sizes will grow and more spaces will be needed to accommodate the operation.

                                             Table 4-62
                        RENTAL CAR READY/RETURN PARKING DEMAND PROJECTIONS

                                                      Existing
                            Parking      Ready/        Ready                      Approx.        Approx.
                            Demand       Return        Return      Surplus/       Monthly         Fleet
                  Year       Ratio 1     Demand       Supply        Deficit      Contracts        Size
                CY 2007          0.40        121            97          (24)          5,000         1,100
                FY 2012          0.40        123            97          (26)          5,100         1,100
                FY 2017          0.40        141            97          (44)          5,900         1,300
                FY 2022          0.40        161            97          (64)          6,700         1,500
                FY 2027          0.40        183            97          (86)          7,600         1,700
            1
                It is assumed that annual enplanements are approximately equal to deplanements

While there are certain economies in a small operation to utilize the same spaces for ready cars
and returns, there is a point when congestion and operational difficulties necessitate separating the
two functions. There is no predetermined point for this to occur, but it should become obvious
when it is approached.

The rental car operation is already in need of expansion. By 2012, approximately 123 spaces will
be needed to provide customers with an acceptable rental car service. This only addresses actual
space needs for the vehicles. Office space, counter space, cleaning and fueling (QTA), and fleet
storage space must also increase to accommodate the needs of a growing rental car operation. It
is usually a delicate balance between the amount of space available, the amount of space
companies want, and the amount of space they are willing to pay for that determines what the
optimum space really turns out to be. Such a development will undoubtedly progress in phases in
conjunction with other landside improvements.

The actual growth rate of rental car business compared to the passenger growth rate is contingent
on the traffic mix (business vs. pleasure travel) and the actual expansion of the Chattanooga
service area. For example, a large increase in business travel destined for the Atlanta area would
probably grow rental car operations at a higher rate. High leisure travel would mean longer-term


Facility Requirements                                       4-64                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                           Master Plan Update




rentals, which also affects the number of spaces needed. Such phenomena could require
expansion on a different schedule than originally planned. Other factors, currently unknown, can
greatly influence the accuracy of any projections made now. Rental-car company mergers,
technological, or marketing innovations could remake the entire system. In any case, it is factual
that expansion is needed now and that passenger-traffic growth projections indicate that further
expansion will be necessary in the near future.

Ground Transportation

The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority has a detailed set of Commercial Ground
Transportation Rules and Regulations under which all providers of such services must operate.
These rules apply to all services from baggage delivery to courtesy vehicles, shared vans,
limousines, taxicabs, and charter buses. All operators must possess a valid permit to pick up
passengers at the Airport, which includes a quarterly fee (annual for buses). One-time operations
by non-permitted companies are allowed for a fee as well. Specific operating areas are assigned
for each type of service. Vehicle condition minimums and driver conduct requirements are listed in
detail. The entire ground transportation network appears to be strongly controlled.

All ground transportation services operate on the terminal curbside drive in specifically assigned
spaces. There are three loading spaces on the baggage claim curb and four staging spaces on the
off-curb for taxicabs. Limousine/sedan services are assigned two spaces on the off-curb to stage
and load. Shared vans and/or buses utilize two spaces on the off-curb closer to the ticketing wing
of the terminal. Courtesy vehicles operate at the main terminal curb by the center entrance to the
terminal building. Baggage delivery vehicles use a space across from the airline ticket counters.
There is no remote staging area at this time.

Currently there are four cab companies with 17 vehicles permitted to operate at the Airport.
Taxicabs average about fifty outbound trips a day. Four shared ride van companies with 20
permitted vehicles average forty trips a day. Four limousine/sedan operators have 15 permitted
vehicles and average two trips a day per company. The six courtesy vehicles make about four trips
each, about 24 a day.

Ground transportation is available to multiple points in the service area, encompassing portions of
four states in addition to the immediate Chattanooga metropolitan area. Locations outside the
immediate area are usually served on a charter or pre-reserved basis only.

Assuming ground transportation usage will grow at the same rate as enplanements, daily
commercial vehicle trips should reach the levels shown in Table 4-63. By 2027, traffic generated by
the three most frequently used ground transportation operations will be in the neighborhood of 170
trips per day. These figures are based on the current estimates of daily trips with passengers from
the Airport. An almost equal number of trips inbound to the Airport with passengers should also be
expected. Luxury transportation will also add a few more trips each day.




Facility Requirements                            4-65                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




                                         Table 4-63
                               DAILY COMMERCIAL VEHICLE TRIPS

                                               Shared    Courtesy
                           Year      Taxicab    Van        Van         Total
                        CY 2007           50        40         24         114
                        FY 2012           50        40         24         114
                        FY 2017           57        46         28         131
                        FY 2022           65        52         31         149
                        FY 2027           74        59         36         170

Due to the nature of airline traffic, inbound trips do not necessarily correlate with a contiguous
outbound trip with arriving passengers. There will be several “deadhead” trips when an empty
vehicle leaves the Airport to provide services elsewhere or to pick up more Airport bound
passengers. Late in the day, there will also be empty inbound trips as vehicles come in to serve
arriving flights without bringing in departing passengers. All these trips add to traffic and possible
congestion.

By taking the existing number of spaces on the curbside assigned to various ground transportation
users and extrapolating future space needs based on the rate of growth shown above, it appears
that the existing curbside soon will not be able to handle peak periods. By 2027, at least four
additional spaces will be needed to accommodate commercial transportation adequately. For
passenger convenience, these spaces should be in the baggage claim area. It is reported that this
area of the curb is already too congested during peak flight arrivals. With the projected growth, this
space will be even more in demand. Local residents in their private vehicles, also in increasing
numbers, will be vying for the same space. It is difficult for Airport management to limit use of this
space by “taxpayers” and turn it over to taxis and vans. The space needs will escalate annually
with the increase in passengers, worsening the congestion problem.

By 2027, a remote staging area should be established for commercial ground transportation
vehicles. No staging with the exception of one or two cabs would be accommodated on the curb.
By turning the existing spaces at curbside currently used for staging into loading spaces, ground
transportation operations can continue on the curb initially. Gaining access to the curb during high
traffic periods then becomes the problem. When a cab cannot get through the traffic jam to get to
the customer, the service is not adequate. The next logical step would be to separate the
commercial ground transportation traffic from the public by establishing a commercial
transportation only operating area.

Terminal curbs are defined by the length of the terminal and width of how many lanes are provided.
Extending the curb past the terminal boundaries would make more curb space, but at decreasing
convenience, hence value, as the distance from the terminal doorways increases. Likewise,
widening the roadway by adding more lanes introduces another set of inconveniences as lane
upon lane fill with waiting vehicles. Passengers have difficulty finding their ride and risk injury
threading through several lanes of cars. Extending the curb by creating a separate curbside for
ground transportation, at the end of the building for example, not only eases traffic, it increases
efficiency and customer convenience. A ground transportation service center with a free flowing
traffic pattern and 20 to 25 loading spaces would serve the expected volume of passengers in
future years quite efficiently.




Facility Requirements                             4-66                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                             Master Plan Update




          Two factors of the expected growth, larger aircraft and the “regional service” affect of low cost
          carriers, will influence the ground transportation operation. Larger aircraft will increase curbside
          congestion as more vehicles, both commercial and private, arrive to transport the larger number of
          passengers present during the peak period. More vehicles will be competing for the same space at
          the same time. A wider region of service will attract additional transportation services to these
          areas, especially if a viable market develops. Such additional service may even be a new type of
          service, like a scheduled bus, which would add another variable into the ground transportation mix.
          Increased demand for ground transportation services like shared vans will encourage more
          competitors to enter the market and existing operators to increase their fleets or perhaps operate
          larger vehicles. Conversely, with more concentrated passenger arrivals, load factors on existing
          shared vans will increase allowing more passengers to be served with little or no initial increase in
          vehicular traffic.

          Parking Supply/Demand Summary

          Given the foregoing information, logic and assumptions, Table 4-64 presents a summary of the
          parking supply and demand analysis for 2007 and for the target years throughout the planning
          horizon.

                                                             Table 4-64
                                                  PARKING SUPPLY/DEMAND SUMMARY
                    Public Parking                     Employee Parking                  Rental Ready/Return                        Total
            Projected   Existing     Supply/     Projected   Existing   Supply/     Projected   Existing   Supply/     Projected   Existing       Supply/
  Year      Demand      Supply       (Deficit)   Demand      Supply     (Deficit)   Demand      Supply     (Deficit)   Demand      Supply         (Deficit)
CY 2007         1,228      1,107        (121)         124        119          (5)        121         97        (24)        1,473       1,323         (150)
FY 2012         1,247      1,107        (140)         126        119          (7)        123         97        (26)        1,496       1,323         (173)
FY 2017         1,435      1,107        (328)         145        119        (26)         141         97        (44)        1,720       1,323         (397)
FY 2022         1,635      1,107        (528)         165        119        (46)         161         97        (64)        1,961       1,323         (638)
FY 2027         1,864      1,107        (757)         188        119        (69)         183         97        (86)        2,235       1,323         (912)


          Review of Table 4-64 confirms that the parking situation at Chattanooga in 2007 was in a deficit
          situation by approximately 150 spaces. Each category of parking – public, employee, and rental
          car – had a shortage of spaces needed to operate in an efficient manner. The deficit of parking will
          grow throughout the planning period in correlation to the projected growth in enplanements. Note
          that public parking may grow at an accelerated rate due to the growth in low cost carrier
          operations.

          A plan should be developed to produce at least 200 net new spaces by 2012, 400 net new spaces
          by 2017, and 920 net new spaces by 2027. Likewise, there will be a growing need for curbfront
          space, a ground transportation staging area, and/or a separate ground transportation center.

          The parking requirements for each of the user groups listed above can be translated into the
          number of acres that will be required for each type of parking as shown in Table 4-65.




          Facility Requirements                                              4-67                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                           Table 4-65
                                 PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN ACRES
                                   Units     2007       2012     2017         2022        2027
         Public Parking Demand
          Demand                 spaces       1,205     1,247      1,435       1,635       1,864
          Demand                 acres           9.7     10.0       11.5        13.1        15.0
          Existing               acres           8.9       8.9        8.9         8.9         8.9
          Surplus/(Deficit)      acres         (0.8)     (1.1)      (2.6)       (4.2)       (6.1)
         Rental Car
          Demand                 spaces         118       123        141         161         183
          Demand                 acres           1.0       1.0        1.1         1.3         1.5
          Existing               acres           0.8       0.8        0.8         0.8         0.8
          Surplus/(Deficit)      acres         (0.2)     (0.2)      (0.4)       (0.5)       (0.7)
         Employee Parking
          Demand                 spaces         121       126        145         165         188
          Demand                 acres           1.0       1.0        1.2         1.3         1.5
          Existing               acres           0.8       0.8        0.8         0.8         0.8
          Surplus/(Deficit)      acres         (0.2)     (0.2)      (0.4)       (0.5)       (0.7)
         Total Parking
          Demand                 spaces       1,445     1,496      1,720       1,961       2,235
          Demand                 acres         11.6      12.0       13.8        15.8        18.0
          Existing               acres         10.5      10.5       10.5        10.5        10.5
         Surplus/(Deficit)       acres         (1.2)     (1.6)      (3.4)       (5.3)       (7.5)

Currently the Airport has approximately 10.5 acres of land devoted to parking, excluding the gravel
150-space parking lot. It is calculated that approximately 1.2 additional acres of parking are
needed today. By the year 2027, it is anticipated that approximately 18 acres of parking will be
required or 7.5 more acres than currently exists today. This would be an increase of approximately
70 percent over the existing.




Facility Requirements                            4-68                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                      Master Plan Update




4.9      SUMMARY OF FACILITY REQUIREMENTS

This section provides a tabular summary of the facility requirements for the Airport facilities
covered in this chapter. This summary is Table 4-66.

                                           Table 4-66
                               SUMMARY OF FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
              Facility                    Existing Capacity                           Recommendation

Runway Length                    Runway 02-20 is currently 7,401             Runway 02-20 should be extended
                                 feet in length. Runway 15-33 is             to at least 8,600 feet. Runway 15-
                                 currently 5,575 feet in length              33 has recently been extended.
                                                                             No       further    extension   is
                                                                             recommended for Runway 15-33
                                                                             within the planning period.

Gates                            The commercial service passenger            When peak hour flights exceed
                                 terminal has six gates.                     five, additional gates should be
                                                                             added to equal the peak hour
                                                                             flights plus one gate.

Total Terminal Building Area     Existing terminal building has              The total building square foot area
                                 approximately 130,060 square feet.          should be able to accommodate
                                                                             comfortably up to approximately
                                                                             362,000 annual enplanements.

Number of Departure Lounges      Existing terminal currently has six         The existing total area of departure
                                 departure lounges with a total of           lounges will hold approximately
                                 10,860 square feet.                         466 Total Peak Hour Passengers.

Check-in Facilities              Existing check-in facilities consist of     The total area of check-in facilities
                                 approximately 2,485 ft2.          The       and queue is adequate to
                                 passenger queuing area occupies             accommodate        the    expected
                                 approximately 3,005 ft2 for a total of      number of passengers throughout
                                 5,490 ft2.                                  the planning period.

Baggage Claim                    The existing baggage claim has two          Before 143 Peak Hour Deplaning
                                 baggage claim devices with a total          Passengers is achieved, an
                                 presentation length of 200 lineal           additional 100-foot long baggage
                                 feet.                                       claim device will be required.

Passenger Security Screening     The existing passenger security-            Two passenger security screening
Checkpoint                       screening checkpoint has one                checkpoint lanes are required
                                 screening position.                         today. Three passenger security
                                                                             screening checkpoint lanes will be
                                                                             required when Peak 20-minute
                                                                             Enplaning Passengers reaches
                                                                             200 passengers.




                                                                             Table 4-66 continued on next page



Facility Requirements                                4-69                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                       Master Plan Update




                                              Table 4-66 (continued)
                                SUMMARY OF FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
              Facility                        Existing Capacity                         Recommendation

Federal     Inspection   Facilities   None                                     FIS facilities are sized by Peak Hour
(FIS)                                                                          International Deplaning Passengers,
                                                                               usually in units of 100.          It is
                                                                               anticipated that if a facility were
                                                                               required that it would be sized for
                                                                               200     Peak      Hour    International
                                                                               Deplaning Passengers.

Terminal Curbs                        The existing terminal departure          The departure curb will need another
                                      curb, arrival curb and commercial        60 feet of length when the Peak 20-
                                      curb have effective lengths of 260,      minute      Enplaning    Passengers
                                      200     and    250     lineal  feet      reaches 200. The arrival curb has
                                      respectively.                            sufficient capacity for the entire
                                                                               planning period. The commercial
                                                                               curbs will need another 90 feet when
                                                                               the Peak 20-minute Deplaning
                                                                               Passengers reaches 140.

Conventional        Hangars   and     Currently, there are 175,000 ft2 of      When the total number of based
Aprons                                conventional hangar space.               aircraft reaches 131, it is expected
                                                                               that there will be a need for 187,800
                                                                               ft2 of hangars and 20,900 square
                                                                               yards (yd2) of adjacent apron.

T-Hangars and Aprons                  Currently, there are 23 T-hangars        When the number of total based
                                      with 24,200 ft2 of area and 2,690        aircraft reaches 122, there will be a
                                      yd2 of adjacent apron area.              need for 25 T-hangars.

Itinerant Aircraft Parking            There are 13 tie-down spaces for          There is currently a need for 37
                                      itinerant aircraft. These occupy          itinerant aircraft tie-down spaces.
                                      approximately 12,350 yd2 of apron.        When the total number of itinerant
                                                                                general      aviation     operations
                                                                                reaches 45,300, 39 itinerant tie-
                                                                                down areas will be required.

FBO Facilities                        The     FBO       currently  occupies     The area currently occupied is
                                      approximately 18,500 ft2 of offices,      considered sufficient to meet the
                                      pilot facilities, and general aviation    needs of the current FBO
                                      terminal.                                 throughout the planning period.

Air Cargo                             The existing air cargo buildings          The 22,400 ft2 is sufficient to meet
                                      have approximately 22,400 ft2 of          the projected air cargo demand,
                                      which 7,500 ft2 are currently used        but the condition of the space will
                                      for air cargo related activities.         require rehabilitation.



                                                                                 Table 4-66 continued on next page




Facility Requirements                                    4-70                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                     Table 4-66 (continued)
                           SUMMARY OF FACILITY REQUIREMENTS
                Facility               Existing Capacity                      Recommendation

Fuel Storage                   Commercially available fuel is         Current Jet A fuel capacity should
                               currently stored in:                   be sufficient through 84,200 total
                                Two 20,000 gal. Jet A fuel tanks     annual operations. One additional
                                Two 15.000 gal. Jet A fuel tanks     20,000-gallon fuel tank for Jet A
                                One 15,000 gal. Avgas fuel tank      fuel should provide capacity
                                One 1,000 gal. diesel fuel tank      through the planning period.
                                One 10,000 gal. Mogas fuel tank

Terminal Roadways              The portion of the Terminal Loop       An additional lane should be
                               Road with the lowest capacity is the   added to the Terminal Loop Road
                               single     lane     between      the   prior to the total peak hour
                               intermediate-term and short-term       passengers      reaching    345
                               parking lots with an hourly capacity   passengers.
                               of approximately 450 vehicles per
                               hour.

Public Parking                 There are currently 1,228 spaces in An additional 200 public parking
                               the public parking lots including the spaces should be added before
                               new gravel lot.                       the Annual Enplaned Passengers
                                                                     reaches 306,500. With the
                                                                     352,500      Annual      Enplaned
                                                                     Passengers, 1,435 public parking
                                                                     spaces will be needed. With
                                                                     457,900      Annual      Enplaned
                                                                     Passengers, 1,864 public parking
                                                                     spaces will be required.

Rental Car Parking             There are currently 97 spaces in the There is a current need for 121
                               rental car ready/return lot          rental car ready/return spaces.
                                                                    With 306,500 Annual Enplaned
                                                                    Passengers, this demand will
                                                                    grow to 123 spaces.        With
                                                                    457,900      Annual    Enplaned
                                                                    Passengers, 183 ready/return
                                                                    spaces will be needed.

Employee Car Parking           There are currently 119 employee There is a current need for an
                               parking spaces                   additional 24 employee parking
                                                                spaces.    With 306,500 Annual
                                                                Enplaned     Passengers,       126
                                                                employee parking spaces will be
                                                                required and with 457,900 Annual
                                                                Enplanements, 188 employee
                                                                parking spaces will be required.




Facility Requirements                           4-71                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




                               CHAPTER 5
               DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES
5.1      INTRODUCTION

This chapter identifies and evaluates development alternatives for the Chattanooga Metropolitan
Airport that will satisfy the facility requirements outlined in the previous chapter, satisfy the strategic
objectives and goals of the Airport Authority, and adhere to safe operational standards set by the
FAA and the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority. The resulting Airport Development Plan
combines all recommended improvements with the existing facilities into a cohesive plan. This
plan will enable the Airport Authority to move forward in a thoughtful, efficient manner that will
ensure the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport remains a leading transportation venue in the region
for the next twenty years. The development and evaluation of alternatives for the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport is presented in the following sections of this chapter:

     Development and Evaluation of Alternatives Process
     Identification of Airport Element Alternatives
     Airport Development Concepts
     Evaluation of Alternatives
     Recommended Alternative

One of the critical determinations in the development of alternatives is that of the acceptable
boundaries for development. Is it acceptable to plan outside of the current boundaries of the
Airport, as it exists today? Is it acceptable to plan outside of current leases within the Airport
boundaries? The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority has determined that it is acceptable
to indicate expansion outside of the current Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport boundaries as long
as it is done with the expectation that the Airport intends to expand through opportunity, when and
if properties become available. On Airport property, the Authority determined that long-term
leases, especially those of the current Fixed Base Operator, TAC Air, would be honored to prevent
adversely affecting the FBO or its tenants. As the leases with TAC Air are not scheduled to expire
until after the twenty years of this Master Plan Update, this means that these parcels of land will
not be encroached upon for purposes of Airport development within this Master Plan Update.
Adoption of these determinations has an important impact on the potential alternatives for the
development of the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, particularly the passenger terminal area.

The development of alternatives also takes into consideration the issues identified in Chapter One,
Public Involvement, as well as the comments and considerations brought forward during meetings
with the User’s Group, the Technical Advisory Committee, and the Public Information Workshop.
The Airport staff identified the following areas of focus prior to the commencement of the Master
Plan Update:

     Air Cargo
     General Aviation Development
     Airport Parking

These issues were reviewed with the Technical Advisory Committee in September of 2007 and
additional issues were identified and consolidated with the preliminary list. This resulted in the
following list of issues, which were later re-stated as measurable criteria:



Development and Evaluation of Alternatives           5-1                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




   Provide realistic parking solutions to provide sufficient passenger vehicular parking.
   Develop a consolidated efficient plan for general aviation activities that will allow the maximum
    potential for growth, while not adversely affecting other Airport activities.
   Determine and evaluate the prospects for cargo expansion at the Airport and develop plans for
    the conditions and resources required to attract significant cargo operations.
   Create a plan for the Airport to remain an efficient user-friendly airport, while implementing
    capacity to meet aviation demands and the needs of the community to the year 2026.
   Provide clear justification of Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects.
   Create a CIP that identifies funded projects, unfunded projects, priorities, and potential sources
    of funds.
   Meet FAA design, safety, and security standards for the entire Airport.
   Provide enhanced aesthetics at the entrances to the Airport.
   Provide aesthetic buffers between the Airport and the Brainerd Community.
   Provide an observation area where the public can watch the air traffic.

5.2      DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES PROCESS

There are a number of elements to an Airport, which include the runways, terminals, general
aviation facilities, and other areas. The elements that have been studied as part of the Master
Plan Update process include the following:

     Airfield Improvements
     Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking Complex
     Second Fixed Base Operator (FBO)
     Conventional Hangars
     T-Hangars
     Air Cargo
     Maintenance Center
     Airport Business Park
     Greenways
     Enhanced Airport Entrances

Alternatives were developed for the majority of the elements. After development, the alternatives
were evaluated in a largely subjective manner to eliminate those that did not meet the facility
requirements, did not allow efficient operations, or were not suitably situated on the Airport. The
results are a smaller number of alternatives for each element that best address the issues of that
element.

The remaining elements were then combined into three Airport Development Concepts. On May
11, 2009, the Airport Development Concepts were presented to the Technical Advisory Committee
(TAC) and the Users Group for input and comments. The three Airport Development Concepts
were also presented to the public in the First Public Information Workshop. At each meeting, the
participants were updated on the progress of the study and were shown the Airport Development
Alternatives for the long-term, 20-year development of the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport.
Comments from the public and each of the committees were solicited. Meeting minutes of the


Development and Evaluation of Alternatives         5-2                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




Technical Advisory Committee and the User’s Group can be found in Appendix B. Written
comments from the Public Information Workshop can also be found in Appendix B. After reviewing
the comments received from the TAC, the User’s Group, and the public, as well as evaluating the
alternatives, a Recommended Alternative was selected.

5.3      IDENTIFICATION OF AIRPORT ELEMENT ALTERNATIVES

This section looks at the alternatives that were developed for the various elements of the
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. Each of the alternatives was then subjectively evaluated and a
few of the alternatives were eliminated. The remaining alternatives were advanced for further
consideration and evaluation.

5.3.1    Airfield Improvements

The airfield consists of those elements such as taxiways and runways that allow aircraft to move
around the Airport. Improvements to the airfield make the operations of the aircraft and the Airport
safer and more efficient.

Extension of Runway 02 and Taxiway A

The 2001 Master Plan Update studied the extension of Runway 02/20 in detail. It concluded that
the extension of the runway from its current 7,401 feet to 9,000 feet could be accomplished by
adding 800 feet to the northern or 20 end of the runway. An additional 800 feet on the southern or
02 end of the runway was labeled “potential future extension.”

The northern extension was shown with a displaced threshold of 800 feet that would have allowed
the additional 800 feet on the northern end to be used for departures, but arriving aircraft would
use the existing touchdown point. In addition, declared distances were proposed that would make
the northern 800-foot extension unavailable for Runway 02 (northbound) arrivals and departures.
The combination of the displaced threshold and the declared distances would not require the
relocation of either Airport Road or the CSX rail line to the north of the Airport.

The runway length of 9,000 feet of the 2001 Master Plan Update was predicated on the use of the
Boeing 727-200 aircraft as the critical aircraft at the Airport. Today, that aircraft is rarely if ever
used at the Airport as discussed in the Facility Requirements chapter and the MD-80 aircraft was
determined to be the critical aircraft. Analysis discussed in the Facility Requirements chapter
indicated that Runway 02/20 should be extended to at least 8,600 feet to accommodate the MD-80
aircraft; an extension of 1,199 feet from the current runway length of 7,401 feet.

The 2001 Master Plan Update determined that the preferred extension alternative would have
been to extend both the northern and southern ends of Runway 02 by 800 feet. While the runway
extensions on each end could have been located on Airport land, the Runway Safety Area (RSA)
and the Object Free Area (OFA) would have required the relocation of the railroad line and Airport
Road on the northern end and the relocation of five businesses on the southern end to avoid the
extended OFA and RSAs.

However, with the reduction of the Runway 02/20 extension from 1,600 feet to 1,200 feet; the
runway, Taxiway A, and the runway’s RSA’s and both the runway and taxiway’s OFA’s can all be
accommodated to the south on current Airport property with the exception of five commercial
properties located on the north side of Lee Highway/Brainerd Road. These properties would have



Development and Evaluation of Alternatives         5-3                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




to be purchased and the buildings demolished. This is shown in Figure 5-1. Runway 02/20
currently has declared distances as shown in Table 5-1.

                                                    Figure 5-1
                                             AIRFIELD IMPROVEMENTS




                                                  Table 5-1
                                    EXISTING RUNWAY DECLARED DISTANCES

                                                                           Runway
                Existing Declared Distances                    02      20        15              33
       Takeoff Run Available (TORA)                          7,400   7,400     5,575           5,470
       Takeoff Distance Available (TODA)                     7,400   7,400     5,575           5,470
       Accelerate-Stop Distance Available (ASDA)             7,200   7,400     5,575           5,470
       Landing Distance Available (LDA)                      7,200   7,400     5,470           5,000

With the proposed extension, the declared distances would remain with the results shown in Table
5-2.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives             5-4                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                                Table 5-2
                             PROPOSED RUNWAY DECLARED DISTANCES
                                                                      Runway
               Proposed Declared Distances              02    20        15               33
       Takeoff Run Available (TORA)                     8,600   8,600      5,575          5,470
       Takeoff Distance Available (TODA)                8,600   8,600      5,575          5,470
       Accelerate-Stop Distance Available (ASDA)        8,600   8,600      5,575          5,470
       Landing Distance Available (LDA)                 8,400   7,201      5,470          5,000

Extension of Taxiway H

The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport currently has one full-length parallel taxiway to the primary
runway, Runway 02/20. Taxiway A is located on the eastern side of the runway. Taxiway H also
runs parallel to Runway 02/20, but on the western side of the runway. It does not yet run the full
length of the runway. An extension of approximately 500 feet to the north would provide access
from the western development area to the Runway 20 end as shown in Figure 5-1.

Widening of Taxiway K and the North GA Apron

Additional airfield improvements include the widening of Taxiway K, which accesses Runway 02/20
from the northern FBO apron. Taxiway K is only 50 feet wide. Taxiways associated with ARC D IV
runways such as Runway 02/20 require taxiways of at least 75 feet in width.

By expanding the northern FBO apron, as shown in Figure 5-1, apron edge Taxiway B can be
extended to meet Taxiway K. This will result in more operational flexibility with respect to Runway
02/20.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives        5-5                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




5.3.2    Legend of Alternatives

For convenience in locating the remaining alternatives on the Airport, a graphic presentation of the
potential development sites was developed that shows where each of the following alternatives is
located.

                                                     Figure 5-2
                                             LOCATION OF ALTERNATIVES




5.3.3    Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking Complex

The commercial service passenger terminal for the most part has adequate capacity to meet the
requirements of the next twenty years, with the following exceptions:

   A second lane for the security-screening checkpoint is needed today and a third one will be
    needed when peak 20-minute enplaning passengers reaches 200 passengers.
   When peak hour flights exceed five flights, additional gates will be required equal to the peak
    hour departing flights plus one gate. It is anticipated that this will result in the need for an
    additional three gates within the next twenty years
   The existing departure lounges will hold approximately 465 total peak hour passengers. When
    this number is approached, additional lounge area should be added.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives               5-6                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




   A third baggage claim device will be needed when peak hour deplaning passengers reach
    about 145 passengers. The additional baggage claim device will probably require an addition
    to the baggage claim wing of the terminal.
   The departure curb will need another 60 lineal feet of length when the peak 20-minute
    enplaning passengers reach 200.
   The commercial curbs will need another 70 lineal feet of length when the peak 20-minute
    deplaning passengers reach 140 passengers.

Because of the close proximity of the commercial service passenger terminal to the public, rental
car, and employee parking, and because of the limited areas available to expand, the parking
element and the terminal roads element have been combined with the terminal element when
considering alternatives. The requirements for the roadway and parking elements are as follows:
   An additional lane of terminal roadway needs to be added to that section which is currently only
    one lane wide before the number of peak-hour passengers reach 345.
   By the end of the twenty-year planning period an additional 1,864 public parking spaces will be
    needed.
   An additional 86 rental car ready/return parking spaces will be required within twenty-years
   An additional 69 employee parking spaces will be required within twenty years.
The first terminal/parking element developed, Terminal/Parking Alternative One, is presented in
Figure 5-3.


                                                  Figure 5-3
                                      TERMINAL/PARKING ALTERNATIVE ONE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives           5-7                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




Terminal/Parking Alternative One shows an extension of the existing aircraft gate concourse to
accommodate at least four additional gates. The baggage claim wing of the terminal has been
extended to accommodate the additional baggage claim unit. An extra lane has been added to the
roadway system where currently there is only one lane.

The parking garage is anticipated to accommodate all of the ready and return spaces for the rental
cars and approximately 1,240 public parking spaces. These would be accommodated on three
levels including the ground level. Adjacent to the parking garage would be placed a Quick-Turn-
Around (QTA) facility in order that the rental cars companies can quickly wash, vacuum, and fuel
their returning vehicles.

Terminal/Parking Alternative Two shows a reconfiguration of the terminal where the current check-
in wing of the terminal is relocated to run parallel with the baggage claim wing on the northern side
of the existing terminal rotunda. By relocating the check-in wing in this way, the terminal roadway
loop can also be realigned so that more parking surface is included within the loop and, more
importantly, that the roadway itself can be lengthened to allow more distance between decision
points and lengthen the terminal curb. The re-aligned roadway allows for future expansion of the
entire terminal and terminal area to the north beyond the planning period of this Master Plan
should that be desired.

However, the re-alignment of the check-in wing would also necessitate the re-alignment of the
passenger concourse as shown in Figure 5-4, as the distance between the re-aligned check-in
wing and the existing passenger concourse would not have enough room to allow the requisite
number and size of aircraft to park and maneuver between the two. The realignment of the
passenger concourse would; however, allow approximately six gates to be added to the existing
six gates, two more than Terminal/Parking Alternative One.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives        5-8                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




                                                  Figure 5-4
                                      TERMINAL/PARKING ALTERNATIVE TWO




After attending the User’s Group, TAC meetings, and the Public Information Workshop, as well as
reviewing the written comments received, it was determined that a third Terminal/Parking
Alternative should be developed. It is similar to Terminal/Parking Alternative One in that the
passenger concourse would be extended to accommodate four additional gates, the baggage
claim wing would be expanded to accommodate an additional baggage claim device, and the
terminal roadway loop has been widened in strategic areas to relieve some of the current
bottlenecks, as shown in Figure 5-5. Terminal/Parking Alternative Three also extends the terminal
loop roadway in a manner similar to Terminal/Parking Alternative Two, but does not realign either
the concourse or the check-in wing. Rather, the check-in wing is shortened somewhat in
recognition of the reduced role that the check-in hall is expected to have in the future. The
elongated roadway circles back beneath the new parking garage to rejoin the existing terminal loop
road providing additional curb length within the garage.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives           5-9                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                                 Figure 5-5
                                    TERMINAL/PARKING ALTERNATIVE THREE




The parking garage would be relocated in Terminal/Parking Alternative Three to the current
location of the Interim and employee parking lots. This location was determined based on the
desire to avoid blocking the view of the terminal.

The ground level of the parking garage would contain ready and return parking for the rental car
companies. The baggage make-up and baggage security screening, as well as a reduced check-
in area would also be placed on the ground level as shown in Figure 5-6. The parking garage
would require three levels of parking including the ground floor and roof top parking. In addition,
the remaining area of the current rental car ready and return parking lot would be utilized for
employee parking. The QTA’s of the on-Airport rental car companies would be consolidated and
located south of the Shepherd Road Airport Entrance ramps.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives          5-10                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




                                             Figure 5-6
                         TERMINAL/PARKING ALTERNATIVE THREE GROUND LEVEL




An essential part of this alternative would be to design the façade of the parking garage to reflect in
every detail the façade of the existing terminal. The parking garage must look as if it is and was
always intended to be a part of the existing terminal.

This terminal/parking alternative will solve a majority if not all of the Airport’s terminal and parking
issues:

   The concourse could be extended for at least four additional gates
   The baggage claim area could be expanded to allow the addition of another baggage claim
    device
   There would be enough capacity in the existing check-in wing that shortening it would not
    adversely affect operations.
   This alternative would lengthen the terminal curb with a departure curb in the parking garage.
   The garage and extended curb length could also allow the early adoption of new technologies
    that would decrease the processing time and thus the space required for passenger and
    baggage check-in. These emerging technologies and practices could include self-service,
    remote baggage check-in within the garage.
   Enough capacity could be built into the parking garage to accommodate the forecast for the
    next twenty years of public and rental car ready and return parking requirements.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives         5-11                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




There are also some drawbacks to Terminal/Planning Alternative Three:

   The location of the parking garage would not allow equal service to the arriving and departing
    passengers; arriving passengers would have to travel a greater distance from the baggage
    claim to the parking garage.
   It is expected that the rental car companies would be asked to participate in the building of the
    new parking garage and that their ready/return cars would be parked on the ground level of the
    parking garage. The rental-car companies typically want their customers to walk no more than
    300 feet from the exit of the rental-car counter area to the furthest parking space. This issue
    could be resolved by placing the rental car counters in the garage as well
   This alternative would not measurably take away from the number of vehicles passing in front
    of the terminal. Except for those vehicles parking in the existing long- and short-term surface
    lots, all vehicles entering the terminal area would at some point have to pass in front of the
    terminal.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives        5-12                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




5.3.4    Second Fixed Base Operator

Currently, there is only one Fixed Base Operator (FBO) at Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, TAC
Air. TAC Air has been at the Airport for many years and has a long-term lease with the Airport.
Increasingly, the Airport is being asked to provide competition in many areas of its operation,
including the services provided by an FBO. As a result, alternatives were developed to provide an
area for a second FBO operation at the Airport.

FBO Alternative One would be located on the western side of the Airport just south of the Aircraft
Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) facility, as shown in Figure 5-7. This alternative would have the
FBO accessed from Jubilee Drive and would have a combination of T-hangars, conventional
hangars and apron space suitable for itinerant and based aircraft tie-down areas in addition to a
fuel farm. This alternative would provide two conventional hangars with a total of approximately
24,000 square feet of area, 16 T-hangars, and about 18,300 square yards of apron of which at
least 7,700 square yards are aircraft tie-down areas. Approximately a third of the apron area
required has already been built by the Airport and is accessible to Runway 02/20 and Runway
15/33 via Taxiway H.

                                                   Figure 5-7
                                             FBO ALTERNATIVE ONE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives            5-13                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




FBO Alternative Two would also be located west of Runway 02/20, but it would be located
immediately north of the U.S. Forestry Service Area, which is located immediately north of the
ARFF facility. This alternative would also have the second FBO area accessed from Jubilee Drive.
It would have exclusively conventional hangars, as well as a fuel farm as shown in Figure 5-8.
There would be three conventional hangars with approximately 50,400 square feet of area and
approximately 4,400 square feet of office area. The apron tie-down area of approximately 5,700
square yards would be limited, but this area would also be accessible to both runways from
Taxiway H.

                                                   Figure 5-8
                                             FBO ALTERNATIVE TWO




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives            5-14                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




FBO Alternative Three would be located on the east side of Runway 02/20 as shown in Figure 5-9
in the area currently occupied by the Tennessee Air National Guard (TANG), who has indicated
that they will be leaving the Airport within the next five years or so. This alternative also would
have a combination of approximately 42,000 square feet of conventional hangars, 21 T-hangars,
approximately 27,000 square yards of apron space for aircraft tie-down areas, and a fuel farm.
Either Runway 02/20 or Runway 15/33 would be accessed via Taxiways A, B, and C. The FBO
would be reached from Airport Road via Rosedale Drive and Pinehurst Avenue.

                                                    Figure 5-9
                                             FBO ALTERNATIVE THREE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives             5-15                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




FBO Alternative Four would be located in the same area of the Airport as FBO Alternative One, on
the west side of Runway 02/20, south of the ARFF facility. But, this alternative would have a
different configuration and mix of facilities. It would still have a fuel farm and on-site parking, but
unlike FBO Alternative One, it would have no T-hangars and only 8,700 square yards of aircraft tie-
down area. It would have eight conventional hangars with a total of 97,800 square feet of area and
approximately 8,000 square feet of office area as shown in Figure 5-10.

                                                   Figure 5-10
                                             FBO ALTERNATIVE FOUR




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives            5-16                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




5.3.5    Conventional Hangars

At Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, it has been identified that approximately 53,300 square feet
of additional conventional hangar space and approximately 5,900 square yards of associated
apron will be needed within the next twenty years. This section addresses the alternatives that
would potentially fill that need.

Conventional Hangar Alternative One would be located on the site of the existing air cargo area;
east of Runway 02/20 and just west of the FAA air traffic control tower. It would have two
conventional hangars of approximately 22,500 square feet each and a third hangar of
approximately 33,000 square feet. The existing air cargo apron consists of approximately 28,000
square yards of pavement that is in poor condition. This alternative would require a rehabilitation
of the existing apron as shown in Figure 5-11. There is also a drainage issue in this area of the
Airport and drainage remediation would have to be considered into the cost of this alternative.
There is currently sufficient access to the site from Pinehurst Avenue as well as vehicular parking.
The vehicular parking will probably need to be rehabilitated when the conventional hangars are
constructed however.

                                                Figure 5-11
                                  CONVENTIONAL HANGARS ALTERNATIVE ONE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives         5-17                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                          Master Plan Update




Conventional Hangar Alternative Two would also be located on the east side of Runway 02/20
near the current 02 Runway end. This alternative would have two conventional hangars of
approximately 22,500 square feet each and a third hangar of approximately 15,000 square feet.
The existing aircraft apron of approximately 9,000 square yards is in good condition and would
serve the two 22,500 square foot hangars. Additional aircraft apron of approximately 3,750 square
yards would need to be built to serve the third hangar as shown in Figure 5-12. Vehicular parking
and some access road would also need to be constructed as part of this alternative.


                                               Figure 5-12
                                 CONVENTIONAL HANGARS ALTERNATIVE TWO




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives        5-18                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




Conventional Hangars Alternative Three would be located on the east side of Runway 02/20 and
further south than Conventional Hangars Alternative Two. It would be located on the site of the
former Target store. This site is strategically located near the intersection of Brainerd Road and
Jubilee Drive.

This alternative would have two conventional hangars of approximately 22,500 square feet each as
shown in Figure 5-13. There is currently no aircraft apron in this location and approximately
11,100 square yards of apron would have to be constructed. Taxiway A would have to be
extended south to meet the new apron for it to have access to the airfield. It is expected that when
Runway 02/20 is extended that Taxiway A would also be extended. In that event, only a short
taxiway stub would be required to reach Taxiway A.

Portions of the former Target store parking lot would serve as vehicular parking for these hangars,
but the pavement might need some rehabilitation. Access is proposed to be from Jubilee Drive.

                                               Figure 5-13
                                CONVENTIONAL HANGARS ALTERNATIVE THREE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives        5-19                                     FINAL REPORT
                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                          Master Plan Update




Conventional Hangars Alternative Four would be located west of Runway 02/20 and north of the
U.S. Forestry Service complex. It would provide approximately 50,400 square feet of hangar
space between three hangars and approximately 10,800 square yards of apron. There would also
be approximately 4,500 square feet of attached office space. A taxilane of approximately 500
lineal feet would lead to Taxiway H. New vehicular parking would be provided and access would
occur off Jubilee Drive as shown in Figure 5-14.

                                               Figure 5-14
                                 CONVENTIONAL HANGARS ALTERNATIVE FOUR




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives         5-20                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                           Master Plan Update




Conventional Hangars Alternative Five would be located in approximately the same location as
Conventional Hangar Alternative Two, on the east side of Runway 02/20, near the current Runway
02 end. This alternative would concentrate additional conventional hangars into the vicinity.
However, with a total of approximately 142,000 square feet of conventional hangar space, and
approximately 270,000 square yards of new apron. A new taxiway of approximately 800 lineal feet
would lead from Taxiway A to three hangars located behind the row of hangars that would run
parallel to Runway 02/20 as shown in Figure 5-15. New vehicular parking would be constructed
with this alternative along with some access roads. Two of the hangars along with much of the
associated apron, vehicular parking, and access road are shown located on land that is not
currently owned by the Airport. The cost to purchase this land would have to be considered into
the cost of this alternative.

                                                Figure 5-15
                                  CONVENTIONAL HANGARS ALTERNATIVE FIVE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives          5-21                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                           Master Plan Update




Conventional Hangars Alternative Six would be located in the northwest corner of the Airport at the
intersection of Runways 02/20 and 15/33 as shown in Figure 5-16. This alternative would provide
two conventional hangars of approximately 22,500 square feet each and associated aircraft apron
of approximately 17,500 square yards. An approximately 600-foot long taxiway would lead to
Taxiway D and another approximately 400 foot long taxiway would lead to Runway 02/20.
Vehicular parking would be provided, as well as an access road to Lovell Field Loop Road.

                                                Figure 5-16
                                  CONVENTIONAL HANGARS ALTERNATIVE SIX




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives         5-22                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




5.3.6    T-Hangars

Eight T-hangars and approximately 1,000 square yards of additional apron will be required within
the twenty-year planning period. Alternatives developed to address this need are presented in this
section.

T-Hangars Alternative One would be located in the same area as Conventional Hangars
Alternative Six; the northeast corner of the intersection of Runways 15/33 and 02/20. As shown
Figure 5-17, this alternative would provide approximately 40 T-hangar units within five buildings.
An approximately 750-foot long taxiway from the T-hangar area would provide access to Taxiway
D. Vehicular access to the site would be provided off Lovell Field Loop Road and parking would be
provided adjacent to the aircraft apron.

                                                     Figure 5-17
                                             T-HANGARS ALTERNATIVE ONE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives               5-23                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




T-Hangars Alternative Two would be located on the west side of Runway 02/20 north of the U.S.
Forestry Service location. As shown in Figure 5-18, this alternative would provide approximately
23 T-hangar units within three buildings. The T-hangars would be accessed from Taxiway H via a
taxiway of approximately 300 feet in length. Vehicular parking would be provided adjacent to the
associated aircraft apron and would be accessed via Jubilee Drive.

                                                     Figure 5-18
                                             T-HANGARS ALTERNATIVE TWO




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives               5-24                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




T-Hangars Alternative Three would be located on the east side of Runway 02/20 at the current
Runway 02 end. As shown in Figure 5-19, approximately 40 T-hangars would ultimately be
provided in five buildings. Access to Taxiway A would be provided via a new taxiway of
approximately 600 feet in length. Vehicular parking is not addressed in this alternative but could be
added on adjacent property depending on other development planned for the area.

                                                      Figure 5-19
                                             T-HANGARS ALTERNATIVE THREE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                5-25                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




T-Hangars Alternative Four would be located east of Runway 02/20 and east of the current air
cargo area adjacent to and south of the FAA air traffic control tower. As shown in Figure 5-20,
ultimately approximately 40 T-hangars housed in five buildings would be provided. Access to the
aircraft apron and then to Taxiway A would be provided via a new taxiway of approximately 100
feet in length. Vehicular parking would not be provided in this alternative as shown, but could be
added on adjacent parcels of land depending on other development in the area. Vehicular access
to the area would be made from Pinehurst Avenue. As shown, this alternative would also require
the acquisition of additional land to the south. If necessary, each of the T-hangar buildings could
be reduced in length to contain only 6 units apiece for 30 T-hangars, which would fulfill the facility
requirements for additional T-hangars for the next twenty years

                                                     Figure 5-20
                                             T-HANGARS ALTERNATIVE FOUR




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives               5-26                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




T-Hangars Alternative Five would be located on the same parcel of land as T-Hangars Alternative
Four. However, the buildings would be rotated 90 degrees to better fit onto the property that
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport currently owns. As shown in Figure 5-21, approximately 26 T-
hangar units would be built in two buildings although ultimately as many as 39 T-hangars could
possibly be built with the addition of a third 13-unit building. Access to Taxiway A would be made
with the addition of a new taxiway of approximately 250 lineal feet to the current air cargo aircraft
apron and then on to Taxiway A. Vehicular access would be from Pinehurst Avenue. While no
vehicular parking is shown on this alternative, vehicular parking currently exists in this area and
additional parking could be provided on this parcel with the shifting of the T-hangars to the south.
Vehicular parking could also be added to adjacent parcels depending on other development in the
area.

                                                     Figure 5-21
                                             T-HANGARS ALTERNATIVE FIVE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives               5-27                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




5.3.7    Air Cargo

Air Cargo Alternative One would be located to the east of the Runway 02/20 near the intersection
of Brainerd Road and Jubilee Drive at the site of the former Target store. As shown in Figure 5-22,
the facility would consist of two hangars of approximately 22,500 square feet each. Vehicular
access would be provided off Jubilee Drive and passenger vehicular parking would be provided to
either side of the hangars. Truck docking access and turn-around area would be provided to the
east of the hangars. An aircraft apron would have to be built. As shown, the air cargo ramp would
consist of approximately 11,100 square yards. Both larger and smaller hangars and aprons could
be built on the site. If this facility is built prior to the extension of the runway, an extension to
Taxiway A would have to be built to access Runway 02. If it is built after the extension to Runway
02/20 and Taxiway A, only a short taxiway stub would be required.

                                                     Figure 5-22
                                             AIR CARGO ALTERNATIVE ONE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives               5-28                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




Air Cargo Alternative Two would be located at the existing air cargo area, which is east of Runway
02/20 and adjacent to and southwest and west of the FAA air traffic control tower. As shown in
Figure 5-23, this alternative would have two hangars of approximately 15,000 square feet each and
a third hangar of approximately 20,400 square feet. The existing air cargo apron of approximately
28,000 square yards would need to be rehabilitated, as would the existing passenger vehicular
parking area, truck dock parking and turn around space. Access would continue to occur via
Pinehurst Avenue.

                                                     Figure 5-23
                                             AIR CARGO ALTERNATIVE TWO




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives               5-29                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




Air Cargo Alternative Three would be located on the west side of Runway 02/20 and north of the
U.S. Forestry Service complex. As shown in Figure 5-24, there would be as many as three
hangars, each of approximately 24,000 square feet. There would be an aircraft apron of
approximately 14,000 square yards and a new taxiway connecting to Taxiway H of approximately
350 lineal feet. The truck dock parking and turnaround would be to the southwest of the hangars
and would be accessed from Jubilee Drive.

                                                      Figure 5-24
                                             AIR CARGO ALTERNATIVE THREE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                5-30                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




5.3.8    Maintenance Center

The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport does not currently have a significant aircraft maintenance
facility, but from time to time, the Airport has been approached by different businesses interested in
bringing such a facility to the Airport. These approaches have not resulted in the business coming
to the Airport because either there were no existing facilities or an uncommitted area identified on
the Airport that would be able to accommodate such a facility. The Airport desires to have a
location identified within this Master Plan for such a facility. With the TANG leaving the Airport, the
land that they currently occupy would become available for other uses. One alternative would be
to identify the current TANG area of the Airport as a future Airline/Aircraft Maintenance Center or
airline completion center as shown in Figure 5-25.

This area was considered ideal for the purpose as it has a relatively large area of contiguous land
available. However, it is yet unknown exactly when this parcel will become available as the TANG
must build new facilities in their new location. While the time to design and construct the new
facilities can be estimated with some accuracy, the TANG is expecting to leave their current site on
the Airport in its current condition. They have indicated that they do not intend to participate in the
demolition of the facilities they will be abandoning. Considering the age of the facilities, it is
possible that asbestos will be found in the buildings, which will add considerably to the demolition
costs. While the Airport is petitioning various government officials to either compel the TANG to
participate in the demolition or grant the Airport the money to do the demolition themselves, the
time it will take to raise the funds and actually demolish the existing facilities remains unknown.


                                                  Figure 5-25
                                             MAINTENANCE CENTER




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives           5-31                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




5.3.9    Airport Business Park

For many years, airport operators across the United States relied upon the airlines to provide the
majority of the airport’s revenue in the form of landing fees and terminal rents. Many aircraft had
agreements with the airlines that annual shortfalls in the airport’s budget would be made up by the
airlines. Today, while airports still receive landing fees and terminal rent, the revenue derived from
airlines is much less certain as some airlines face bankruptcy and all are faced with major fuel
costs. Airport operators such as the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority, which are owned
by municipalities, are increasingly required to be self-sufficient. The FAA is encouraging airports
across the country to try to develop alternative sources of revenue in order to offset the decline in
airline revenues. Those airports with abundant undeveloped land have been developing those
parcels identified as not being required for future aviation related facilities into aviation compatible
land uses that will bring revenues to the airport offsetting the declining revenue from the airlines.
By doing this, the airports are able to keep the costs to the airlines relatively low, encouraging the
airlines to enter and remain in the market.

The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport does not have very much land that is not already developed
or set aside for future aviation uses. It is also landlocked to a certain extent as it is bordered by the
South Chickamauga Creek on the west, a quarry on the north and a heavily used freight rail line on
the east. South of the Airport is Brainerd Road/Lee Highway, part of the federal highway system.
However, there is some land between the Airport and Brainerd Road/Lee Highway. The land is
currently used for commercial purposes and some residential. Over the years, as land has
become available for sale at a reasonable price, the Airport has purchased some parcels in this
area.

Some of the commercial properties in this area are currently depressed. The local community is
concerned with the appearance that some of these properties present and would like to find a
solution to upgrade the area. The Airport Board also recognizes the need within Hamilton County
for a developable parcel of land of at least 50 acres that could be developed into a high-end, hotel,
restaurant, and office-building complex

The Airport has determined that a long-term alternative to all of these concerns would be for the
Airport to purchase land in this area as it becomes available with the goal of acquiring a contiguous
parcel of land that could be developed into a high-end business park with hotels, restaurants, and
two and three-story office buildings. All of these types of businesses would be compatible with the
Airport and would bring an alternative source of revenue to the Airport. The Airport has also
committed to the local community that as each individual piece of property is purchased, the
buildings will be taken down and the property cleaned as soon as legally possible.

Most developers do not find it cost effective to develop non-contiguous parcels or parcels of land
that are under approximately 50 acres. An area of approximately 50 acres located between the
Airport and Brainerd Road/Lee Highway has been identified as a potential area to acquire the
additional land as shown in Figure 5-26. Individual parcels identified for purchase may vary with
time. This will depend on when the parcels become available. It will also depend on their
respective prices.


The Airport is not considering taking these parcels by eminent domain. All purchases of property
are intended to be on a voluntary basis on the part of the current owners over a long period. The
dashed white line shows the boundary of the Airport, but there are also individual parcels of land



Development and Evaluation of Alternatives          5-32                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




currently owned by the Airport within the area bounded by the Airport, Jubilee Drive, Pinehurst
Avenue, Airport Road and Lee Highway. These parcels are not shown in Figure 5-26.


                                                   Figure 5-26
                                             AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK




5.3.10 Greenways

In response to the Brainerd community located adjacent to the Airport and others, the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport Authority requested that the Master Plan consider specific areas of the Airport
that could be aesthetically enhanced. Two greenways were identified that would act as a buffer
between the Airport and the community.

Southern Greenway

The Runway Protection Zone for Runway 02/20 extends beyond the property line of the Airport
over Brainerd Road as shown by the yellow line in Figure 5-27. The FAA recommends that
airports have control over the land located within RPZs, but recognizes that ownership of the land
is not always possible. Control over the land includes clearing the RPZ areas of incompatible
objects and activities. FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13 Airport Design identifies incompatible
activities to be places of public assembly such as churches, schools, hospitals, office buildings,
shopping centers, and other uses that would attract concentrations of people. Other non-
compatible uses would be those areas that would attract wildlife, most parking facilities, and fuel
storage facilities.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives             5-33                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




The Airport will endeavor to purchase those parcels of land on the north side of Brainerd Road that
are contained within the RPZ. The Airport does not intend to condemn the land and will only
purchase the land when it becomes available for purchase at a fair market price. As parcels are
purchased, it is the Airport’s intention to convert the land into a well-maintained green space with
grass and low plantings. It is not intended that this area would become a public park, as that might
at some point encourage an assembly of people. However, this greenway would provide an
aesthetically appealing view from Brainerd Road.


                                                  Figure 5-27
                                             SOUTHERN GREENWAY




Northern Greenway

The community has also requested a green area where they can picnic and perhaps view aircraft
taking off and landing. A parcel of land has been identified on the north side of the airfield that
would serve such a purpose. The area northwest of the intersection of Runways 02/20 and 15/33 is
very rocky and it would be extremely expensive to level this area sufficiently to provide aircraft
access. However, it would be possible to build an area for a picnic pavilion, picnic tables, a
parking area overlooking the airfield, and a fenced play area for children. This area would be
accessed via Lovell Field Loop Road, which can be accessed from Airport Road.

The northern greenway would have to remain outside of the Building Restriction Line, the green
line shown on Figure 5-28. There would need to be security fencing between the greenway and
the airfield.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives           5-34                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                                  Figure 5-28
                                             NORTHERN GREENWAY




5.3.11 Enhanced Airport Entrances

There are essentially three public entrances to the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. The primary
entrance accesses the Airport from Shepherd Road. Another entrance accesses the Airport from
Airport Road. Both of these enter the Airport at or near the commercial service passenger
terminal. The third entrance accesses the Airport at the intersection of Jubilee Drive and Brainerd
Road. The third entrance gives access to the part of the Airport that is located on the western side
of the primary runway, Runway 02/20. Both the Shepherd Road and Jubilee Road entrances are
in need of enhancement.

Enhanced Shepherd Road Airport Entrance

The primary entrance to the Airport is via Shepherd Road, which connects the Airport to
Tennessee State Road 153. Shepherd Road, also known as Airport Connector, is a four-lane road
with a center left-hand turning lane. As shown in Figure 5-29, the neighborhood through which it
travels is mixed use commercial and residential. While the commercial properties are set back
somewhat from the road, some residences back almost directly onto the road. There is very little
landscaping.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives           5-35                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




                                                Figure 5-29
                                             SHEPHERD ROAD




The Airport Authority Board is concerned that the aesthetics of Shepherd Road as it travels
between Tennessee State Road 153 and the Airport are unappealing. The Board would like to see
this road with a dividing median that has grass and landscaping. Additional landscaping on either
side of the road as well as additional landscaping at key intersections would also be welcome.
Some screening between the houses and the road would probably be welcome to the
homeowners. This section of Shepherd Road does not belong to the Airport. Any enhancements
to it would have to be done in conjunction with the City of Chattanooga, Hamilton County, and the
Tennessee Department of Transportation.

Just before Shepherd Road enters Airport property, it bridges over a rail line and Airport Road as
shown in Figure 5-30. All traffic entering Airport property, circles around to the north. Those
traveling to the Airport slant off further to the north and then travel around the surface parking area.
The remaining drivers continue to the stop sign at Airport Road and then travel either north or
south on Airport Road.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives         5-36                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                               Figure 5-30
                                    SHEPHERD ROAD AIRPORT ENTRANCE




The configuration as well as the aesthetics of Shepherd Road as it enters the Airport property is of
concern to the Airport Authority Board. Engineering students from the University of Tennessee at
Chattanooga studied the bridge and the traffic associated with it and discovered that 70 percent of
the traffic coming over the bridge to the Airport was not going to the Airport. Approximately 70
percent of the traffic would circle north and then east to the stop sign at Airport Road and take a
left hand turn to travel south in the direction of Lee Highway. Only 30 percent of the traffic was
accessing the Airport.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives          5-37                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                           Master Plan Update




The Airport will require more surface parking before they can build a parking garage, as the spaces
in the Intermediate and Employee Lots will have to be relocated before construction on the parking
garage can begin. With that in mind, a re-working of Shepherd Road was proposed as shown in
Figure 5-31. The re-design of the Shepherd Road Bridge would loop the traffic south away from
the terminal area, but would allow the Airport travelers to have an uninterrupted flow from the
Shepherd Road Bridge to the terminal area. By looping Shepherd Road to the south after it
crosses Airport Road, the area where the Hertz rental car Quick-Turn-Around (QTA) area is
currently located could be incorporated into the terminal surface parking.

                                                 Figure 5-31
                                     ENHANCED SHEPHERD ROAD ENTRANCE




Enhanced Jubilee Drive Airport Entrance

The Airport would also like to enhance the Jubilee Drive entrance to the Airport as Jubilee Drive
meets Lee Highway/Brainerd/Road. It is proposed that the northeast corner of the intersection of
Lee Highway and Jubilee Drive be upgraded to include a display area with a mounted aircraft.
Included in this setting would be a low sign indicating that this is an entrance to the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport as shown in Figure 5-32. There would be a curb cut to allow buses to pull out
of traffic to pickup and drop off passengers, as well as a bus shelter and a sidewalk. The entire
corner would be landscaped appropriately.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives          5-38                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




                                               Figure 5-32
                                ENHANCED JUBILEE DRIVE AIRPORT ENTRANCE




5.3.12 First Evaluation of Alternatives

Each of the alternatives was evaluated on subjective criteria. Some of the elements had only one
alternative. These include:

   Airfield Improvements
   Maintenance Center
   Airport Business Park

The elements for which there are more than one alternative are:

   Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking
   Second FBO
   Conventional Hangars
   T-Hangars
   Air Cargo
   Greenways
   Enhanced Airport Entrances

All of the Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking alternatives were advanced for
further consideration. Of the four FBO alternatives, it was considered that FBO Alternative Two did
not provide enough adjacent land area to allow expansion. FBO Alternative Three is located on
the current TANG site. As the timing of the availability of the TANG site is currently unknown and
is likely to take five years or more and the Airport desires to implement the second FBO within the


Development and Evaluation of Alternatives         5-39                                     FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




next five years, FBO Alternative Three was eliminated from further consideration.                      FBO
Alternatives One and Four were both advanced of further consideration.

Of the conventional hangar alternatives, only Conventional Hangar Development Six was
eliminated from consideration. This alternative would have been developed on the area northwest
of the intersection of Runway 02/20 and Runway 15/33. The terrain in this area rises from both
runways and there is a large amount of rock at and below the surface. The cost to level this area
sufficiently for hangars to be built and for aircraft to be able to traverse would be prohibitively
expensive for such a development.

Conventional Hangar Alternative Five was modified to include only the four western most
conventional hangars. The land upon which the two eastern most hangars would be built would be
better used for other purposes, if sufficient conventional hangars could be built in other areas.

Of the T-hangar alternatives, T-Hangars Alternative One was eliminated as it also would be located
on the rocky land in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Runway 02/20 and 15/33. T-
Hangars Alternative Three was eliminated as it would have been developed on land for which it
was determined that a better use could be made provided that sufficient T-hangars could be
provided on other parcels of land.

All of the Air Cargo Alternatives were advanced for further consideration.

The remaining Airport element alternatives are presented in Table 5-3. The squares made up of
dotted lines indicate Airport element alternatives that have been eliminated.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives        5-40                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                             Master Plan Update



                                                                                    Table 5-3
                                                                         AIRPORT ELEMENT ALTERNATIVES




                                                                                                                              Business Park
     Improvements




                                                          Conventional
                                             Second FBO




                                                                                                                Maintenance




                                                                                                                                                 Greenways
                                                                                 T-Hangars




                                                                                                                                                                Entrances
                                                                                                                                                                Enhanced
                       Terminal /




                                                                                                    Air Cargo
                                                          Hangars
                       Parking
     Airfield




                                                                                                                              Airport




                                                                                                                                                                Airport
                                                                                                                Center




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                                                   5-41                                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                             Master Plan Update



                                             This page left blank intentionally




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                 5-42                                              FINAL REPORT
                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                         Master Plan Update




5.4      AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS

Airport Development Concepts are made up of combinations of each of the Airport element
alternatives. Those Airport elements with only one alternative appear in all of the Airport
Development Concepts. The difference between the concepts lies in the Airport elements that
have more than one alternative and how they are combined.

5.4.1    Common Elements in the Airport Development Concepts

Each of the Airport Development Concepts was developed using the following elements that
remain the same for all of the Airport Development Concepts. These elements were combined and
are shown in Figure 5-33.

     Airfield Improvements
     Maintenance Center
     Airport Business Park
     Greenways
     Enhanced Airport Entrances

                                       Figure 5-33
              AIRPORT ELEMENTS COMMON TO ALL AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPTS




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives    5-43                                     FINAL REPORT
                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                        Master Plan Update




The difference between the Airport Development Concepts is the combination of the following
Airport elements:

   Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking
   Second Fixed Base Operator
   Conventional Hangars
   T-Hangars
   Air Cargo

5.4.2    Airport Development Concept One

As shown in Table 5-4 and Figure 5-34, Alternative Development Concept One was developed
using the following Airport element alternatives:

   Airfield Improvements
   Commercial Service Passenger Terminal Alternative One
   Second FBO Alternative One
   Conventional Hangar Alternative Three
   Conventional Hangar Alternative Five Modified
   T-Hangar Alternative Two
   Air Cargo Alternative Two
   Maintenance Center
   Business Park
   Greenways
   Enhanced Airport Entrances




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives    5-44                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                            Master Plan Update



                                                                               Table 5-4
                                                          AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT ONE AIRPORT ELEMENTS




                                                                                                                             Business Park
     Improvements




                                                                 Conventional
                                             Second FBO




                                                                                                               Maintenance




                                                                                                                                                Greenways
                                                                                T-Hangars




                                                                                                                                                               Entrances
                                                                                                                                                               Enhanced
                       Terminal /




                                                                                                   Air Cargo
                                                                 Hangars
                       Parking
     Airfield




                                                                                                                             Airport




                                                                                                                                                               Airport
                                                                                                               Center




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                                                  5-45                                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                         Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                    Master Plan Update




                                                                           Figure 5-34
                                                    AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT ONE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives   5-46                                   FINAL REPORT
                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                        Master Plan Update




5.4.3    Airport Development Concept Two

Alternative Development Concept Two, as shown in Table 5-5 and Figure 5-35 was developed
using the following Airport element alternatives:

   Airfield Improvements
   Commercial Service Passenger Terminal Alternative Two
   Second FBO Alternative Four
   Conventional Hangar Alternative One
   Conventional Hangar Alternative Four
   Conventional Hangar Alternative Five Modified
   T-Hangars Alternative Four Modified
   Air Cargo One
   Maintenance Center
   Business Park
   Greenways
   Enhanced Airport Entrances




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives    5-47                                     FINAL REPORT
                                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                         Master Plan Update




                                             This Page Left Blank Intentionally




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                    5-48                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                            Master Plan Update



                                                                               Table 5-5
                                                          AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT TWO AIRPORT ELEMENTS




                                                                                                                             Business Park
     Improvements




                                                                 Conventional
                                             Second FBO




                                                                                                               Maintenance




                                                                                                                                                Greenways
                                                                                T-Hangars




                                                                                                                                                               Entrances
                                                                                                                                                               Enhanced
                       Terminal /




                                                                                                   Air Cargo
                                                                 Hangars
                       Parking
     Airfield




                                                                                                                             Airport




                                                                                                                                                               Airport
                                                                                                               Center




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                                                  5-49                                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                     Master Plan Update




                                                                           Figure 5-35
                                                    AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT TWO




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives   5-50                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                          Master Plan Update




5.4.4    Airport Development Concept Three

Alternative Development Concept Three, as shown in Table 5-6 and Figure 5-36 was developed
using the following Airport element alternatives:

   Airfield Improvements
   Commercial Service Passenger Terminal Alternative Three
   Second FBO Alternative Four
   Conventional Hangar Alternative One
   Conventional Hangar Alternative Two
   Conventional Hangar Alternative Three
   T-Hangars Alternative Five
   Air Cargo Three
   Maintenance Center
   Airport Business Park
   Greenways
   Enhanced Airport Entrances




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives    5-51                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                         Master Plan Update




                                             This Page Left Blank Intentionally




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                   5-52                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                             Master Plan Update



                                                                               Table 5-6
                                                          AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT THREE AIRPORT ELEMENTS




                                                                                                                             Business Park
     Improvements




                                                                 Conventional




                                                                                                               Maintenance
                                             Second FBO




                                                                                                                                                Greenways
                                                                                T-Hangars




                                                                                                                                                                Entrances
                                                                                                                                                                Enhanced
                       Terminal /




                                                                                                   Air Cargo
                                                                 Hangars
                       Parking
     Airfield




                                                                                                                             Airport




                                                                                                                                                                Airport
                                                                                                               Center




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                                                  5-53                                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                      Master Plan Update




                                                                             Figure 5-36
                                                    AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT THREE




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives   5-54                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                       Master Plan Update




5.5      EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES

The evaluation of alternatives should be based upon the issues identified at the beginning of the
Master Plan process, as well the requirements of each element as detailed in the Facility
Requirements. Wherever possible the issues have been re-stated to provide measurable criteria.

5.5.1    Evaluation of Terminal/Parking Alternatives

Three Terminal/Parking alternatives remain under consideration. Each of these alternatives
provides realistic terminal/parking solutions in varying degrees. As shown in Table 5-7, each
meets the 20-year capacity requirements identified for the terminal and parking elements, which
included the following:

     In addition to the existing six gates, an additional three gates minimum
     A total of 15,320 square feet of departure lounge area
     One additional baggage claim device
     Two additional passenger screening checkpoint lanes
     800 feet of effective curb length
     A total of 2,235 public, employee ,and rental car ready and return parking spaces

                                               Table 5-7
                             EVALUATION OF TERMINAL/PARKING ALTERNATIVES
                                                                             Alternative
              Terminal Parking Alternatives                  One                Two                Three

    Number of Additional Gates                                         4                    6                    4

    Area of Additional Gates                                   17,500                27,500               17,500

    Total Terminal Curb Length in Feet                              900                1,400               1,600
    Shortest Distance in Feet on Roadway Between
    Decision Points                                                  20                 450                   350

    Approximate Number of Surface Parking Spaces                    810                1,210                  970
    Approximate Number of Structured Parking
    Spaces                                                         1,470               1,100               1,370

    Total Number of Parking Spaces                                 2,280               2,310               2,340

    Number of Floors to Parking Garage                                 4                    3                    3

    Parking Garage Blocks the View of the Terminal?          Yes                 Yes                 No

    Relative Cost                                      $75.9 million       $106.4 million       $90.1 million
    Potential Expansion Beyond Plan Without           5.5 Acres to the 1.4 Acres to the Less Than One
    Affecting Current FBO Areas                            North            North            Acre
                                                      Within 500-year Within 500-year Within 500-year
    Environmental Considerations                        Flood Area      Flood Area     Flood Area

While Terminal/Parking Alternative Two would provide more gates, there would be less than two
acres of additional land immediately adjacent to the terminal for potential expansion beyond the

Development and Evaluation of Alternatives            5-55                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                      Master Plan Update




plan without infringing upon the leased FBO areas to the north and the south. In addition, the
relative cost of Terminal/Parking Alternative Two would be considerably higher than either
Alternatives One or Three. While the lengthening of the roadway loop was desired, and it was
understood that the realignment of the concourse would ultimately allow more or larger gates to be
constructed, it was considered that the realignment of the concourse and check-in wing would be
more expensive than the Airport could afford within the next twenty years.

Between Terminal/Parking Alternatives One and Three, while Alternative Three costs
approximately $14.2 million dollars more, it has more than 1.7 times as much curb length, provides
longer distances between decision points on the roadway system making it easier to navigate, and
the parking garage does not impede the view of the terminal. In fact, the garage is proposed to be
designed to match the architecture of the terminal and the unified façade would present a cohesive
architectural element. Terminal/Parking Alternative Three was selected as the recommended
alternative.

5.5.2    Evaluation of Second FBO Alternatives

The two remaining Second FBO Alternatives would be located on the same site and would take up
approximately the same amount of area. The major difference between the two alternatives would
be the concentration of conventional hangars in Alternative Four versus the mix of conventional
hangars, T-hangars, and tie-down areas of Alternative One. As shown in Table 5-8, this also
results in a difference between the amounts of apron area available versus the amount of hangar
space available.
                                                 Table 5-8
                                  EVALUATION OF SECOND FBO ALTERNATIVES

                                                                             Alternative
                                             Criteria                     One            Four

                Square Feet of Conventional Hangar Space                   24,000          97,800

                Square Yards of New Apron                                    2,030          1,480

                Number of T-Hangars                                             16               0

                Distance from the Intersection of the Runways (feet)         1,950          1,950

                Travel Distance to a Principal Highway (feet)                7,500          7,500
                                                                       Less Than      Less Than
                Expansion Potential Beyond Plan                        One Acre       One Acre

                                                                                      Outside
                                                                       Outside        500-year
                                                                       500-year       Flood
                Environmental Considerations                           Flood Area     Area

While Alternative One would have more apron space available, Alternative Four would have far
more hangar space available. With all other criteria being relatively equal, Second FBO Alternative
Four was selected as the recommended alternative.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives              5-56                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                             Master Plan Update




 5.5.3    Evaluation of Conventional Hangar Alternatives

 There are five remaining conventional hangar alternatives, as shown in Table 5-9. While 42,300
 square feet of additional conventional hangar space and approximately 4,700 square yards of
 associated aircraft apron are anticipated to be required within the next 20-year period, it is
 anticipated that more than one of the conventional hangar alternatives may actually be constructed
 within the period. Therefore, more than one of the Conventional Hangar Alternatives will be used
 in the recommended Airport Development alternative. For that reason, rather than selecting one
 Conventional Hangar Alternative, these alternatives were ranked.

                                              Table 5-9
                          EVALUATION OF CONVENTIONAL HANGAR ALTERNATIVES

                                                                            Alternative
                                                                                                                 Five
              Criteria                           One            Two            Three            Four           (Modified)

Square Feet of Conventional
Hangars                                         55,500         60,000         45,000           50,400           103,750

Square Yards of New Apron                       14,400          3,750         18,300            9,000            13,700

Shortest Distance to a Runway
in Feet                                           600            600           1,400             750                600

Additional Acres of Land
Required to be Purchased                         None            1.0           None             None                3.4

Relative Site Development Costs               $5.2 million   $3.9 million   $20.7 million    $3.9 million     $9.2 million

                                                             Within 100-    Within 500-      Within 100-      Within 100-
                                               Seasonal      year Flood     year Flood       year Flood       year Flood
Environmental Considerations                   Flooding         Area           Area             Area             Area

                                 Rank             4              1               5                 3                  2

 Alternative Two is ranked number one. It would require the purchase of a small parcel of land of
 approximately an acre. The cost of the land has been factored into the cost of the alternative.
 However, because the alternative would be using existing apron, the overall cost of the site
 development of the alternative would be relatively low.

 Alternative Five (modified), which has been ranked second, would feature four conventional
 hangars on approximately the same site as Alternative Two, resulting in approximately 75 percent
 more conventional hangar area. Its implementation would require the purchase of a little over
 three acres of land. The cost of the land has been factored into the cost of the alternative. As in
 Alternative Two, Alternative Five would also be using existing apron, but would require more new
 apron to be built as well.

 Alternative Four has been ranked third. It would have less conventional hangar area than
 Alternative Two, but it would also require that less additional apron area be built than for
 Alternative Five (modified). However, there is no existing apron in this area to augment the new
 apron. The apron would be small in comparison to the other alternatives. The cost of this


 Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                     5-57                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                      Master Plan Update




  alternative would be influenced by the necessity to build a taxiway of approximately 500 lineal feet
  to reach Taxiway H.

  The fourth ranked Alternative Four would be well located in a central location on the primary
  runway. However, he existing apron would have to be entirely reconstructed as the existing apron
  in this area is in poor condition. In addition, considerable drainage improvements would have to be
  added to this site in order to mitigate the flooding that currently occurs in the area.

  Alternative Three would have the smallest amount of conventional hangar area, but would have the
  second largest apron area. In addition, this alternative would require that an extension to Taxiway
  A be built if the extensions to Runway 02/20 and Taxiway A have not been built prior to the
  construction of Conventional Hangar Alternative Three. Portions of the existing pavement of the
  former Target parking lot would have to be demolished and the former Target building would have
  to be razed prior to construction of this alternative. Each of these factors added considerably to
  the cost of this alternative and factored into its being ranked fifth.

  5.5.4    Evaluation of T-Hangar Alternatives

  There are three remaining T-hangar alternatives, Alternatives Two, Five and a modified Four.
  Alternative Four has been modified to have two buildings of eight T-hangars each. These
  alternatives and the criteria against which they have been evaluated are shown in Table 5-10


                                                   Table 5-10
                                     EVALUATION OF T-HANGAR ALTERNATIVES

                                                                            Alternative

                      Criteria                          Two                Four (Modified)              Five

Number of T-Hangars                                                  21                      16                     26

Square Yards of New Apron                                      12,680                   9,700                 11,000

Length in Feet of Additional Required Taxiway                       200                     100                    300
                                                 Clear View at 1,200      Clear View at 100       Obstructed View at
View Between Buildings From Tower                       Yards                   Yards                100 Yards
                                                                                                   Available on
Available Vehicle Parking                         64 Spaces on Site       90 Spaces on Site        Adjacent Site

Additional Land Purchase Required                       None                  0.7 Acres                 None

Relative Site Development Costs                      $3.6 million            $3.5 million           $3.1 million
                                                   Less Than One           3.0 Acres to the       1.6 Acres to the
Expansion Potential Beyond Plan                         Acre                    East                   South
                                                   Within 100-year                                   Seasonal
Environmental Considerations                         Flood Area           Seasonal Flooding          Flooding

  Each of the Alternatives would provide more than the eight additional T-hangars and the 9,200
  square yards of additional associated apron that are anticipated to be required within the next 20-
  year period. The respective additional taxiway lengths would also be relatively equal. More than
  enough vehicle parking spaces would be provided in Alternatives Two and Four. While vehicle

  Development and Evaluation of Alternatives          5-58                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




parking would not be provided in Alternative Five, as sufficient parking can be found in the vicinity,
it could also easily be added to this alternative. The principal difference in the site development
costs is the lack of on-site parking in Alternative Five. If parking were added to this alternative, the
alternative would have a cost more closely aligned with those of Alternatives Two and Four.

While Alternative Four would require the purchase of land, it is also has an unobstructed line of
sight and is closest to the Air Traffic Control Tower. In addition, Alternative Four would have
approximately three acres currently within the Airport boundaries that would be available for
expansion. T-Hangars Alternative Four (modified) was selected as the recommended alternative.

5.5.5    Evaluation of Air Cargo Alternatives

The Facility Requirements recommended a broad range of square foot air-cargo terminal areas
and square yards of associated aircraft apron. For the “Base” case, this ranged from 18,700
square feet to 33,600 square feet of terminal area and from 3,600 to 9,300 square yards of apron.
The “High” case recommended from 33,200 to 59,700 square feet of air-cargo terminal area and
from 9,200 to 16,600 square yards of apron. FedEx, when recently looking at Chattanooga,
recommended an air cargo terminal of approximately 31,400 square feet and an associated aircraft
apron of approximately 7,400 square yards.

Each of the Air Cargo Alternatives shown in Table 5-11 would exceed the “Base” case
requirements and those previously proposed by FedEx. None as shown would meet the highest
requirements of the “High” case.

                                                 Table 5-11
                                   EVALUATION OF AIR CARGO ALTERNATIVES

                                                                        Alternative
                      Criteria                         One                    Two                    Three

Square Feet of Hangar Space                                  45,000               52,400                   71,250

Square Yards of New Apron                                    18,300               14,400                   12,500

Travel Distance to a Principal Highway (feet)                     200               4,300                    9,150

Relative Site Development Costs                        $21.4 million         $5.3 million            $3.8 million

                                                2.2 Acres South &        3.4 Acres            Less Than One
Expansion Potential Beyond Plan                 2.2 Acres North          South                Acre

                                                Within 500-year          Seasonal             Within 100-year
Environmental Considerations                    Flood Area               Flooding             Flood Area

While the site development costs for Alternative Three would likely be the least expensive of the
three, it also completely builds out the site. There would be no room for potential expansion.

The cost to develop the site for Alternative One assumes that the extensions to Runway 02/20 and
Taxiway A have not yet been built. Therefore, the costs for extending Taxiway A to the site, which
is close to the intersection of Lee Highway and Jubilee Drive is included in the site development
costs of Alternative One. The cost of demolishing the former Target building and some of the
associated parking lot is included in the cost. However, Alternative One has the most adjacent
land area available for expansion.

Development and Evaluation of Alternatives            5-59                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




As the future expansion of the cargo industry is uncertain across the United States as well as at
the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport, Alternative Two was selected as the recommended
alternative. This is the site of the current air cargo facilities. By selecting this alternative, should air
cargo remain in a depressed state, the Airport would not have to build additional air cargo facilities
immediately. If the air cargo industry in Chattanooga should increase, the air cargo facilities can
be augmented on an incremental, as needed basis, as the demand builds.

5.6      RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE

The Airport staff, the Board of the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority, and the consultant
reviewed the comments of the User’s Group, the Technical Advisory Committee, and those
submitted at or after the Public Information Workshop. The positive and negative aspects of each
of the alternatives were also taken into consideration. From this input, it was decided to follow
primarily Airport Development Concept One, with the following exceptions:

     Terminal/Parking Alternative Three would be used instead of Terminal/Planning Alternative
      One.
     Instead of FBO Alternative One, FBO Alternative Four would be used which has eight
      conventional hangars with a total of 97,800 square feet.
     The residential parcels formerly identified as being within the Airport Business Park have been
      taken out; only commercial businesses would now be identified for acquisition and inclusion
      within the Airport Business Park.
     Instead of the modified Conventional Hangar Alternative Five, Conventional Hangar Alternative
      Two would be used, which has three conventional hangars with a total of 60,000 square feet.
Those elements from Airport Development Concept One that remain as part of the Recommended
Alternative are the following:

     Airfield Improvements
     Maintenance Center
     Business Park
     Greenways
     Enhanced Airport Entrances
     Conventional Hangar Alternative Three with two conventional hangars located near the
      intersection of Jubilee Drive and Brainerd Road with a total of 45,000 square feet
     Conventional Hangar Alternative Four with three hangars located just north of the U.S. Forestry
      Service with a total of 50,400 square feet
     The western most two buildings of T-Hangars Alternative Four with a total of 16 T-hangars in
      this planning period and ultimately 40 T-hangars
     Air Cargo Alternative Two with three hangars located at the existing air cargo apron




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives           5-60                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




Additionally, as it was determined that the parking garage would most likely not be built for several
years, but that additional parking would most likely be required before a parking garage could be
built. It was determined that the existing gravel parking lot should be expanded, paved, fenced, lit,
and revenue control equipment should be installed as shown in Figure 5-37. The additional
parking would also be needed during the construction of the garage to accommodate those cars
that are currently parking in the intermediate and employee parking lots.


                                                  Figure 5-37
                                        TEMPORARY SURFACE PARKING LOT




The Recommended Alternative as shown in Table 5-12 and Figure 5-38 will be brought forward
into the next chapter; Airport Layout Plans, where the Recommended Alternative will be graphically
depicted in a manner prescribed by the FAA to depict the current and future facilities of the
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport. The Recommended Alternative will also be brought forward into
the Facilities Implementation Plan, which will break it apart into individual projects. Each project
will be placed into an implementation schedule, a short, defining narrative will be written for each
project, and a gross order of magnitude cost estimate will be developed for each project.




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives            5-61                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                          Master Plan Update




                                             This page left blank intentionally




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                   5-62                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                         Master Plan Update



                                                                         Table 5-12
                                                          RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE AIRPORT ELEMENTS




                                                                                                                         Business Park
     Improvements




                                                             Conventional
                                             Second FBO




                                                                                                           Maintenance




                                                                                                                                            Greenways
                                                                            T-Hangars




                                                                                                                                                            Entrances
                                                                                                                                                            Enhanced
                       Terminal /




                                                                                               Air Cargo
                                                             Hangars
                       Parking
     Airfield




                                                                                                                         Airport




                                                                                                                                                            Airport
                                                                                                           Center




Development and Evaluation of Alternatives                                              5-63                                                            FINAL REPORT
This Page Left Blank Intentionally
                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                        Master Plan Update




                                               Figure 5-38
                                RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE




Airport Layout Plan   5-65                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




                                       CHAPTER 6
                                  AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN
6.1       INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) set for the development of the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport from 2009 to 2027, presents the Airport’s compliance with FAA design
standards, lists revisions to the ALP, and presents a reduced size ALP set. The ALP graphically
illustrates the existing facilities of the Airport, as well as the proposed development based on the
aviation forecasts, facility requirements, and the alternatives analysis. An ALP set is made up of
the ALP drawing, as well as other supporting drawings that are considered to be appended to the
ALP drawing. As presented in the FAA Advisory Circular 150/5070-6B, Airport Master Plans, five
primary functions of the ALP define its purpose:

     The approved plans are necessary in order to receive financial assistance under the terms of
      the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 (AIP), as amended, and specific passenger
      facility charge actions. The maintenance of a current plan and conformity to the plan are grant
      assurance requirements at an airport on which Federal funds have been expended under the
      AIP and the previous airport development programs, including the 1970 Airport Development
      Aid Program (ADAP) and Federal Aid Airports Program (FAAP) of 1946, as amended. While
      ALPs are not required for airports other than those developed with assistance under the
      aforementioned Federal programs, this guidance can be applied to all airports.
     The plans create a blueprint for airport development by depicting proposed facility
      improvements consistent with the strategic vision of the airport sponsor. The plans provide a
      guideline by which the airport sponsor can assure that development maintains airport design
      standards and safety requirements, and is consistent with airport and community land use
      plans.
     The ALP serves as a public document that is a record of aeronautical requirements, both
      present and future, and as a reference for community deliberations on land use proposals and
      budget resource planning.
     The approved ALP provides the FAA with a plan for airport development. This will allow
      compatible planning for FAA owned facility improvements at the airport. It also allows the FAA
      to anticipate needs for budgetary and procedural needs. The approved ALP will also allow the
      FAA to protect necessary airspace for planned facility or approach procedure improvements.
     The plans can be a working tool for use by the airport sponsor, including development and
      maintenance staff.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Tennessee Department of Transportation
(TNDOT) require a complete ALP set for consideration of future funding. Programming of FAA and
TNDOT funds are based on development projects depicted on the ALP sheet. The plans have
been developed in accordance with the following:

      FAA Advisory Circular 150/5070-6B, Airport Master Plans
      FAA Advisory Circular 150/5070-6B, Appendix F, Airport Layout Plan Drawing Set
      FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13, Airport Design
      Airport Layout Plan Checklist – Memphis Airport Districts Office (revised 9/95)



Airport Layout Plan                                 6-1                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




6.2       AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN SET

The complete Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport ALP set consists of nine drawings. The purpose
of each drawing is described in this section. The ALP drawings are produced on 24-inch by 36-
inch sheets and submitted by the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority to TNDOT and FAA
for review and approval. Reduced, reproductions of the draft ALP are included at the back of this
chapter for illustration purposes. All of the ALP set drawings were created using AutoCAD version
2008.

6.2.1     Cover Sheet

The cover sheet of the ALP set provides basic Airport data that is not found elsewhere on the ALP.
The cover sheet includes the project name, FAA, and TNDOT grant numbers and the name of the
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority as the Airport Sponsor. The cover sheet also displays
a location map, which indicates the Airport, major cities in Tennessee and Georgia, major roads
and other features near the Airport.


6.2.2     Airport Layout Plan

The ALP is the graphic representation of existing and ultimate Airport facilities. The ALP is the key
document, which reflects changes in physical features on and near the Airport, which may affect
navigable airspace or the ability of the Airport to operate. The ALP includes dimensional
information in order for recommended development to be in accordance with FAA planning and
design recommendations outlined in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13 Airport Design and
150/5070-6B Airport Master Plans. Development shown on the ALP corresponds to the Airport’s
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the 20-year period, with emphasis on the first five-year
period.

6.2.3     Facilities Layout Plan

This drawing presents the existing and future Airport facilities, and only critical, non-overlapping
clearance criteria, with minimal text. This drawing is essentially a simplified ALP and is intended to
be an easy to use graphic for Airport staff.

6.2.4     Terminal Area Plan

This plan sheet shows the development of the commercial-service passenger terminal area and
other facilities near the terminal. Major projects anticipated in the terminal area include loop road
improvements, a baggage claim building expansion, concourse expansion, and the new public
parking structure connected to the ticketing wing of the terminal.

6.2.5     Airport Airspace Drawing

The Airport Airspace Plan depicts “imaginary surfaces” that surround the Airport as defined in
Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 77. They consist of the following surfaces:

     Primary Surface
     Approach Surface
     Transitional Surface


Airport Layout Plan                                 6-2                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




     Horizontal Surface
     Conical Surface

The drawing is based on the ultimate runway configuration for both runways as planned to occur
within the twenty-year planning period. Known obstructions have been identified.

6.2.6     Inner Portion of the Approach Surface for Runway 02/20

This drawing shows plan and profile views of the inner portions of the approach surfaces to the
runway ends of Runway 02/20 at the Chattanooga Metropolitan. In addition to the approach
surfaces contained in 14 CFR Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace, the drawing also
depicts other approach surfaces including the threshold-siting surface and those surfaces
associated with United States Standards for Instrument Procedures (TERPS).

6.2.7     Inner Portion of the Approach Surface for Runway 15/33

This drawing will present the same information as the preceding drawing, but it will present it for
Runway 15/33.

6.2.8     On-Airport Land-Use Plan

On Airport, property areas to be reserved for basic Airport functions will be delineated on this
drawing. Such functions include the airfield, terminal area facilities including parking, air cargo,
general aviation, primary FBO areas, alternative FBO areas, ARFF, Airport maintenance, and non-
aviation commercial/industrial revenue production areas. These land uses are consistent with the
Airport’s requirements for aircraft operations and safety. Off-Airport property required for
acquisition to permit future Airport development has also been depicted.

6.2.9     Airport Property Map

The Airport Property Map depicts the Airport boundary, the various tracts of land that were
acquired to develop the Airport, and the method of acquisition. This plan must be updated when
the airport changes any property boundary, acquires new property, or acquires new easements.

6.3       AIRPORT COMPLIANCE WITH FAA DESIGN STANDARDS

The FAA provides airport design standards to ensure safe and efficient airport operations. The
primary guidance is contained in FAA Advisory Circular 150/5070-6B Airport Master Plans. The
production of an ALP set also relies on numerous other FAA and Federal Agency documents,
including, but not limited to the following:

     Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77, Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace
     FAA Order 8260.3B United States Standards for Terminal Instrument Procedures
     FAA Order 5200.8, Runway Safety Area Program

The ALP Drawing Set developed as a part of this master update complies with each of these
documents.




Airport Layout Plan                                6-3                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




6.4       AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN HIGHLIGHTS AND MODIFICATIONS

This section highlights significant elements of the proposed ALP and notes significant changes
from the previous ALP (2000) prepared for the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport.

     The recently completed 500-foot extension to Runway 33 has been shown.
     The recently completed 575-foot extension to Taxiway D has been shown.
     Taxiway A has been modified to reflect recent construction, which brings the taxiway up to FAA
      standards. The Taxiway is now 75 feet wide and the centerline is now 400 feet from the
      centerline of Runway 02/20.
     The configuration of Taxiway’s B and C has been modified to reflect recent construction.
     Future Runway 02 extension has been modified from 1,600 feet in length to 1,199 feet.
     Future Runway 20 extension of 800 feet has been eliminated.
     Future Taxiway A extensions have been modified from 1,600 feet in length to the south and
      3,000 feet in length in the north, to only 1,199 feet in the south.
     The future widening of Taxiway K has been shown.
     The future expansion of the North GA apron has been shown.
     The future expansion of the South airfield apron has been shown.
     The future extension to Taxiway H between Runway 15/33 and the Runway 20 end has been
      shown.
     The modifications to the western side of Runway 02/20 have been shown including the
      construction of Jubilee Drive, the ARFF facility, the U.S. Department of Interior facility, Taxiway
      H, and the apron adjacent to Taxiway H.
     An additional existing conventional hangar located in the northwest quadrant of the airfield has
      been shown.
     Future apron and conventional hangars have been shown on the east side of the extended
      Runway 02 in the location of the former Target building.
     Long-term development strategies have been developed for the commercial service terminal
      area, general aviation, air cargo, an Airport business park, an Airport Maintenance Center, and
      greenways. These are illustrated in the Facilities Layout Plan, the Terminal Area Plan and the
      On-Airport Land Use Plan.
     A new Facilities Layout Plan has been added to the set.
     A new On-Airport Land-use Plan has been added to the set.




Airport Layout Plan                                   6-4                                       FINAL REPORT
                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                       Master Plan Update




                                                Figure 6-1
                            ALP DRAWING SET COVER SHEET




Airport Layout Plan   6-5                              FINAL REPORT
                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                       Master Plan Update




                                                   Figure 6-2
                                       AIRPORT LAYOUT PLAN




Airport Layout Plan   6-6                              FINAL REPORT
                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                       Master Plan Update




                                                    Figure 6-3
                                     FACILITIES LAYOUT PLAN



Airport Layout Plan   6-7                              FINAL REPORT
                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                       Master Plan Update




                                                    Figure 6-4
                                         TERMINAL AREA PLAN




Airport Layout Plan   6-8                              FINAL REPORT
                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                       Master Plan Update




                                                Figure 6-5
                               AIRPORT AIRSPACE DRAWING




Airport Layout Plan   6-9                              FINAL REPORT
                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                   Master Plan Update




                                                                           Figure 6-6
                             INNER PORTION OF THE APPROACH SURFACE FOR RUNWAY 02/20




Airport Layout Plan   6-10                                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                   Master Plan Update




                                                                           Figure 6-7
                             INNER PORTION OF THE APPROACH SURFACE FOR RUNWAY 15/33




Airport Layout Plan   6-11                                                         FINAL REPORT
                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                        Master Plan Update




                                                  Figure 6-8
                                 ON-AIRPORT LAND-USE PLAN


Airport Layout Plan   6-12                              FINAL REPORT
                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                        Master Plan Update




                                                   Figure 6-9
                                      AIRPORT PROPERTY MAP




Airport Layout Plan   6-13                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




                                             CHAPTER 7
                                 FACILITIES IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
7.1       INTRODUCTION

The Facilities Implementation Plan presents the projects necessary to implement the
Recommended Alternative. These projects, which make up the Capital Improvement Program
(CIP), are arranged by the short-, medium- and long-term phase in which they are likely to be
required. The phase in which a project is placed is determined largely by the demand triggers
presented in Table 4-69 of the Facility Requirements chapter.

While projects have been assigned to specific planning phases, airport projects will be undertaken
only when demand warrants, rather than in accordance with a predefined schedule. By assigning
projects to a specific planning phase, the Airport is able to reserve or purchase land, obtain
environmental approvals, arrange funding, and a multitude of other steps in advance of actual
development. Therefore, the CIP schedule should be adjusted periodically in accordance with
actual conditions.

The CIP has a number of projects that would require some form of National Environmental
Protection Act (NEPA) documentation. Rather than have individual NEPA documentation for each
of the projects, several projects have been bundled together where feasible. Criteria used to
determine which projects should be bundled together included understanding projects linkages
such as:

     The implementation of one project would be dependent on the implementation of another
      project
     The projects are in geographic proximity to one another
     The projects have similar timeframes

The similar timeframes criterion had the least influence because the issue of segmentation was
considered to override the timeframe issue. Segmentation occurs when one or more projects is
broken into separate pieces and the environmental analysis only discusses the needs issues and
impacts within the boundaries whether physical or time of each piece rather than of the entire
project or projects. Independent utility was the key determinant in identifying the type of
documentation that should be prepared. It also determined which projects should be included in
each specific NEPA document. To have independent utility, a project must be useable and a
reasonable expenditure even if no other projects are implemented. With these considerations in
mind, the various NEPA documentation projects were bundled as shown in the list of projects.

This chapter also provides planning-level cost estimates for each project. The cost estimates are in
2009 dollars. Planning-level cost estimates are order of magnitude estimates that consider gross
areas multiplied by unit cost factors. Factors have also been included for each project that take into
consideration contractor overhead and design costs, as well as construction administration and
resident inspection costs for those projects where this is appropriate. In addition, a contingency
factor is applied, usually as high as 20 percent. This contingency factor is applied to account for
variables in the design and construction of facilities. The intent is to make sure enough funding is
set aside for each CIP project.



Facilities Implementation Plan                      7-1                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




Each project that receives federal funding must go through an environmental analysis. The type of
environmental analyses that are applicable to airport improvement projects, the areas of potential
environmental impact that might be encountered with the CIP projects, and an overview of the
agency coordination and permitting that could be necessary are also discussed in this chapter.

7.2       PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS

This section presents the three phases of the Master Plan Update Capital Improvement Program.
The phases are represented by the short-, medium-, and long-term. The short-term plan is
presented in more detail as the probability is higher that the projects identified in this phase will be
realized. The medium- and long-term phases are presented with less detail as their scope and
need are more likely to change before they are realized.

7.2.1     Short-Term Capital Improvement Program Projects

This section briefly describes the CIP projects that are planned to be implemented in the short-term
phase, between the years of 2009 and 2012. The majority of these short-term projects are
enabling projects that pave the way for other projects that are planned to be implemented within
the medium-term phase of the Capital Improvement Program.

Environmental

I-1: Air Cargo/Airport Business Park/Hangar Development/ Southern Development
Environmental Assessment
This project is one that analyzes projects that are likely to require an Environmental Assessment
(EA) and that are located on the eastern and southern areas of the Airport. These projects could
include:
 The demolition of the Target building and TANG facilities
 Land acquisition and demolition of existing structures for Phases 1, 2, and 3 of the Airport
    Business Park
 Runway 02 Runway Protection Zone
 T-hangars
 The construction and operation of T-hangars
 The Jubilee Drive Entrance Improvements
 The Southern Greenway
 The Maintenance Center
 Three conventional hangars
 The replacement of the existing Air Cargo facilities with new facilities

I-2: West Side Development Environmental Assessment
This EA would assess the potential impact of the construction and operation of the West
Development projects on the environment. The remaining projects requiring NEPA evaluation
would include the fuel farm and Phases 2 and 3 of the West Terminal Development Area.

Airfield Projects

I-3: Taxiway H Extension Design and Construction
The design and construction of the extension of Taxiway H would be 75 feet in width and would run
parallel to and west of Runway 02/20. The project would include the intersection of Taxiway H and
Runway 15/33 and would extend approximately 600 feet from Runway 15/33 to a point parallel to



Facilities Implementation Plan                       7-2                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




the end of Runway 20 and then turn to the east to meet the Runway 20 end for a total length of
approximately 1,100 feet.

I-4: Runway Protection Zone – Property Acquisition
This project would acquire approximately 14 acres of land located either wholly or in part within the
current Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) of Runway 02. Approximately 12 commercial properties
are currently situated on this land. The property lies between the current Airport property line and
Brainerd Road.

Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking

I-5: Temporary Surface Parking Area Design and Construction
A temporary surface parking area of approximately 81,250 square feet would be designed and
constructed in the area of the current gravel parking lot. This project would include the current
gravel parking lot. It would be designed to accommodate approximately 250 vehicles. Rosedale
Drive would also be relocated so that it does not bisect the parking area, but continues to link
Airport Road and Pinehurst Avenue. The relocated Rosedale Drive would be approximately 650
feet in length. Both the parking lot and associated road would be designed in asphalt.

I-6: Passenger Security Screening Checkpoint Expansion – Phase 1
The passenger security-screening checkpoint would be expanded by one additional screening lane
for two screening positions. This would necessitate the demolition of some interior non-structural
walls, as well as the building of new interior walls and the associated wall finishes and carpeting of
the area. It is assumed that the equipment and furnishings necessary for the additional passenger-
screening checkpoint would be provided by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Transportation Security Administration (TSA).

West Development Area

I-7: West Development Area Site Improvements Design and Construction – Phase 1
The design and conf site improvements for the entire West Development Area, which consists of
approximately 20 acres, would be accomplished in this project.

I-8: West Development Area - Phase 1 Structures Design and Construction
Phase 1 of the second FBO facility would consist of a fuel farm, two hangars with a combined total
of about 22,000 square feet, and approximately 30 vehicle parking spaces.

Enhanced Airport Entrances

I-9: Jubilee Drive Entrance Improvements Design and Construction
This project would design and construct the demolition of existing pavement on the site and
construct the planned improvements to produce a park-like entrance to the Airport via Jubilee Drive
in accordance with the parameters of the EA. This project would include signage, a bus shelter,
curb cut for city buses, and a mounted, donated, decommissioned aircraft.

Miscellaneous

I-10: Target Building Demolition
This project would demolish the former Target building and the debris would be removed from the
site. The building pad and parking pavement would remain.



Facilities Implementation Plan                      7-3                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                         Master Plan Update




7.2.2     Short-Term Projects Summary

Most of the projects to be accomplished within the short-term of the Master Plan or from 2009
through 2012 are enabling or preparatory projects that would be completed in the medium-term or
the years from 2013 to 2017. Figure 7-1 graphically indicates the short-term projects.




Facilities Implementation Plan                  7-4                                      FINAL REPORT
                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                  Master Plan Update




                                                            Figure 7-1
                                            SHORT-TERM CIP PROJECTS




Facilities Implementation Plan   7-5                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update


                                 This page left blank intentionally




Facilities Implementation Plan               7-6                                                FINAL REPORT
                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                           Master Plan Update




7.2.3     Medium-Term Capital Improvement Projects

This section describes the medium-term projects that are planned to be implemented in the five-
year period of 2013 to 2017. These medium-term projects complete development projects that
were begun in the short-term phase, as well as implement enabling projects that pave the way for
projects to be implemented within the long-term phase of the Capital Improvement Program.

Environmental

II-1: North GA Apron and Taxiway K Expansion CATEX
A CATEX environmental study would be performed to determine if the construction and operation
of an expansion of approximately 7,250 square yards to the North General Aviation (GA) Apron
would be detrimental to the environment. The report would also analyze the potential impacts of
widening Taxiway K from 50 feet wide to 75 feet wide.

II-2: Runway Extension Environmental Assessment
This EA would analyze the extension of Runway 02 and Taxiway A. It would analyze the potential
impact of the construction and operation of these airfield facilities on the environment.

II-3: Terminal Area Development Environmental Assessment
The Terminal Concourse Expansion, the Terminal Loop Road Widening, the Consolidated Rental
Car Quick-Turn-Around facility, the Parking Garage/Baggage Make-up, and the Baggage Claim
Expansion project would likely be included in this EA. The EA would analyze the potential
environmental impacts that the implementation and operation of these terminal area projects might
have on the environment.

II-4: Shepherd Road Enhancement and Bridge Reconfiguration Environmental Assessment
This EA, to be performed in cooperation with the Tennessee Department of Transportation,
Hamilton County, and the City of Chattanooga, would analyze the potential environmental impacts
of two proposed projects. The Shepherd Road Enhancement project and the Reconfiguration of
the Road and Bridge between Shepherd Road and the Airport would be studied to determine if
theses aesthetic and functional enhancements would adversely impact the environment.

Airfield Projects

II-5: Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Design and Construction
Once a FONSI has been signed for the EA, this project would complete the design and
construction of the 1,199-foot extension to Runway 02/20 and the associated extension of parallel
Taxiway A in accordance with the parameters of the EA.

II-6: North GA Apron Expansion Design and Construction
This project would design and construct the approximately 7,250 square yard expansion to the
North GA Apron.

Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking

II-7: Terminal Concourse Expansion Design and Construction
After the EA is concluded, this project would design and construct a two-story extension of the
terminal concourse. This project would include the addition of three passenger-boarding bridges.




Facilities Implementation Plan                   7-7                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




II-8: Terminal Loop Road Widening Design and Construction
After the EA is concluded, this project would design and construct the widening of the terminal loop
road in accordance with the parameters of the EA.

II-9: Consolidated Rental Car QTA Design and Construction
After the EA is concluded, this project would design the consolidated rental car Quick-Turn–Around
(QTA) facility for the rental car companies within the parameters of the EA.

II-10: Passenger Security Screening Checkpoint Expansion – Phase 2
The passenger security-screening checkpoint would be expanded by one additional screening lane
for three screening positions. It is assumed that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) would provide the equipment and furnishings
necessary for the additional passenger-screening checkpoint.

West Development Area

II-11: West Development Area – Phase 2 Design and Construction
Phase 2 of the second FBO facility would be designed and constructed with an additional two
hangars with a combined total of about 22,000 square feet and approximately 18 additional vehicle
parking spaces.

Conventional Hangars

II-12: Conventional Hangar 1 – Site Development Design and Construction
After the EA is concluded, this project would design and construct in accordance with the
parameters of the EA the approximately 12,000 square foot hangar, approximately 18 vehicle
parking spaces, and an access road of approximately 450 feet in length.

T-Hangars

II-13: Land Acquisition – T-Hangars
This project would purchase approximately two and a half acres of land for building two phases of
T-hangars with 16 additional units.

II-14: T-Hangars – Phase 1 – Site Improvements Design and Construction
At the conclusion of the CATEX, this project would demolish the existing properties on the
property, grub, grade the land, design, and construct approximately 120 square yards of
associated apron and taxilanes and a taxiway stub of approximately 175 feet in length.

II-15: T-Hangars – Phase 1 – Structures Design and Construction
This project would design and construct the eight-unit T-hangar structure.

Air Cargo

II-16: Air Cargo Site Improvements Design and Construction
The design and construction of the site improvements for new air cargo facilities and necessary
site drainage would be the focus of this project, which would include the reconstruction of
approximately 18,500 square yards of apron and approximately 10,000 square yards of vehicular
parking and truck maneuvering area.



Facilities Implementation Plan                     7-8                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




Maintenance Center

II-17: Demolition of Existing TANG Facilities and Site Grading
After the EA is concluded, this project would demolish the existing TANG facilities, the debris would
be removed from the site, and the site would be graded within the parameters of the EA.

II-18: Maintenance Center Site Development Design
After the EA is concluded, this project would begin the design of a maintenance center site-
development package in preparation for construction.

Airport Business Park

I-19: Airport Business Park Land Acquisition – Phase 1
This project would purchase land as it becomes available for sale by the current owners. The
purpose of the land acquisition would be for a future Airport Business Park. It is estimated that
approximately six acres would be purchased in Phase 1.

I-20: Airport Business Park Existing Structures Demolition – Phase 1
After the EA is concluded, this project would demolish existing structures on the property that the
Airport has purchased for the purposes of developing an Airport Business Park, the debris would
be removed from the site, and the site would be graded within the parameters of the EA FONSI.

II-21: Airport Business Park Land Acquisition – Phase 2
This project would purchase land as it becomes available for sale by the current owners. The
purpose of the land acquisition would be for a future Airport Business Park. It is estimated that
approximately seven acres would be purchased in Phase 2.

II-22: Airport Business Park Existing Structures Demolition – Phase 2
After the EA for this project is concluded, this project would demolish existing structures on the
property that the Airport has purchased for the purposes of developing an Airport Business Park,
the debris would be removed from the site, and the site would be graded within the parameters of
the EA.

Greenways

II-23: Demolition of the Commercial Properties within the RPZ
After the EA is concluded for the demolition of the commercial properties currently located within
the RPZ of Runway 02 end, this project would demolish the existing structures on the property, the
debris would be removed from the site and the site would be graded within the parameters of the
EA.

II-24 Southern Greenway Design and Construction
This project would design and construct a low-maintenance, aesthetically pleasing greenway with
plantings that would remain short naturally and would not be attractive to wildlife.

Enhanced Airport Entrances

II-25: Shepherd Road Enhancements Design and Construction
At the conclusion of the EA for the project, the design and construction of an aesthetical
enhancement with landscaping, signage, and enhanced lighting of the length of Shepherd Road
would begin in partnership with the City of Chattanooga, Hamilton County, and the State of

Facilities Implementation Plan                     7-9                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                         Master Plan Update




Tennessee and in compliance with the parameters of the EA. The project would include the
section of Shepherd Road between the State of Tennessee State Road 153 and the Airport.

7.2.4     Medium-Term Projects Summary

Upon completion of the medium-term Capital Improvement Program projects, a substantial portion
of the Recommended Alternative would have been realized. Figure 7-2 graphically indicates the
medium-term CIP projects.




Facilities Implementation Plan                 7-10                                     FINAL REPORT
                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                   Master Plan Update




                                                             Figure 7-2
                                            MEDIUM-TERM CIP PROJECTS




Facilities Implementation Plan   7-11                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update



                                 This page left blank intentionally




Facilities Implementation Plan                 7-12                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




7.2.5     Long-Term Capital Improvement Program Projects

This section briefly describes the long-term projects that are planned to be implemented in the ten
years between the years of 2018 and 2027. These long-term projects complete development
projects that were begun in the short- and medium-term phases. The projects within this phase
would complete the implementation of the Capital Improvement Program of the Recommended
Alternative.

Environmental

III-1: Northern Greenway Environmental Assessment
An EA would be performed to determine the potential environmental impacts of constructing and
operating a greenway in the northwest quadrant of the Airport. The greenway would include an
area where the public could observe the airfield and where compatible recreational activities would
be allowed.

Airfield Projects

III-2: Taxiway K Widening Design and Construction
At the conclusion of the CATEX performed in Phase 2, the design and construction of the widening
of Taxiway K from its current width of 50 feet to a width of 75 feet would be implemented.

Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking

III-3: Parking Garage/Baggage Make-Up Design and Construction
The design and construction of the parking garage/baggage make-up facility would commence
upon the conclusion of the EA. The project would include four checked baggage screening
devices and sufficient conveyors to allow baggage to be checked in within the parking garage. The
project would be accomplished in accordance with the EA.

III-4: Baggage Claim Expansion Design and Construction
Upon the conclusion of the EA for the project that would expand the baggage claim wing of the
terminal to add a third baggage-claim device project, the design and construction would begin in
compliance with the parameters of the EA.

West Development Area

III-5: West Development Area - Phase 3 - Design and Construction
Phase 3 of the second FBO facility would be designed consisting of an additional four conventional
hangars with a combined total of about 54,000 square feet and approximately 45 additional vehicle
parking spaces.

Conventional Hangars

III-6: Conventional Hangar 2 Site Development Design and Construction
Upon the conclusion of the EA for the conventional hangar, design and construction of the hangar
would be accomplished within the findings of the EA.

III-7: Conventional Hangar 3 Site Development Design and Construction
As a result of the findings of the EA for the conventional hangar, design and construction of the
hangar would be completed.


Facilities Implementation Plan                    7-13                                     FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




T-Hangars

III-8: T-Hangars - Phase 2 Design and Construction
This project would design and construct the second eight-unit T-hangar structure and associated
apron and taxilanes.

Air Cargo

III-9: Air Cargo Facility Design and Construction
An air cargo facility would be designed and constructed containing approximately 50,400 square
feet of hangar space, reconstructing the existing 28,000 square yard air cargo apron, as well as
vehicular parking and truck parking and turn around areas. This project would also include site
drainage features necessary to keep the area from flooding.

Maintenance Center

III-10: Maintenance Center Design and Construction
Upon the completion of demolition of the existing structures associated with the Tennessee Air
National Guard (TANG), and the determination of a suitable operator, a Maintenance Center would
be designed and constructed.

Airport Business Park

III-11: Airport Business Park Land Acquisition – Phase 3
This project would purchase land as it becomes available for sale by the current owners. The
purpose of the land acquisition would be for a future Airport Business Park. It is estimated that at
least four acres and possibly as much as 16 acres would be purchased in Phase 3.

III-12: Airport Business Park Existing Structures Demolition – Phase 3
Upon the conclusion of the EA, the existing structures on purchased land would be demolished,
the debris removed from the site, and the land would be graded in preparation for the Airport
Business Park.

III-13: Airport Business Park Site Development Design and Construction
The Airport Business Park site development would be designed and constructed upon the
conclusion of the EA.

Greenways

III-14: Northern Greenway Design and Construction
Upon the conclusion of the EA, the northern greenway would be designed and constructed. The
project is anticipated to include an Airport observation area, picnic areas, and childrens’ play area

Enhanced Airport Entrances

III-15: Shepherd Road Bridge Reconfiguration Design and Construction
With the conclusion of the EA, the Airport, the city of Chattanooga, Hamilton County, and the
Tennessee Department of Transportation would collectively determine the design and construction
of a new, re-configured bridge entering the Airport while providing easier access to those travelers
not wishing to enter the Airport.




Facilities Implementation Plan                     7-14                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                            Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                        Master Plan Update




7.2.6     Long-Term Project Summary

Upon completion of the long-term Capital Improvement Program projects, the entire
Recommended Alternative would have been realized. Figure 7-3 graphically indicates the long-
term CIP projects.




Facilities Implementation Plan                7-15                                     FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




                                 This page left blank intentionally




Facilities Implementation Plan                    7-16                                       FINAL REPORT
                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                   Master Plan Update




                                                              Figure 7-3
                                               LONG-TERM CIP PROJECTS



Facilities Implementation Plan   7-17                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update



                                 This page left blank intentionally




Facilities Implementation Plan                 7-18                                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                     Master Plan Update




7.3         CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COSTS

The Capital Improvement Program costs have also been divided into the three phases of the
Master Plan, the short-, medium, and long-term. More detail of each cost estimate can be found in
Appendix G. The short-term, medium-term and long-term projects are shown in Table 7-1, Table
7-2 and Table 7-3 respectively.

                                         Table 7-1
               SHORT-TERM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COSTS IN 2009 DOLLARS

 Project
 Number                            Short-Term Projects (2009-2012)                              Project Cost
               Environmental Projects
      I-1         Air Cargo/Airport Bus. Park/ Hangar Dev./Southern Dev. EA                      $           250,000
      I-2         West Side Development Environmental Assessment                                              75,000
               Airfield Projects
      I-3         Taxiway H Design and Construction                                                       4,281,000
      I-4         Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) Land Acquisition and Building Demolition                   1,565,000
               Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking
      I-5           Temporary Surface Parking Area Design and Construction                                2,686,000
      I-6         Passenger Security Screening Checkpoint Expansion Phase 1                                 700,000
               West Development Area
      I-7         West Development Area Site Improvements Design and Construction                           280,700
      I-8         West Development Area - Phase 1 Structures Design and Construction                      5,665,600
               Enhanced Airport Entrances
      I-9         Jubilee Drive Entrance Improvements Design and Construction                                329,000
               Miscellaneous
    I-10          Target Building Demolition                                                               325,000
                                                                                                 $      16,157,300




Facilities Implementation Plan                         7-19                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




                                         Table 7-2
              MEDIUM-TERM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COSTS IN 2009 DOLLARS

   Project
   Number                           Medium-Term Projects (2013-2017)                         Project Cost
                 Environmental
   II-1             North GA Apron Expansion and Taxiway K Widening CATEX                      $       5,000
   II-2             Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Environmental Assessment                       750,000
   II-3             Terminal Area Development Projects Environmental Assessment                      125,000
   II-4             Shepherd Road Enhancements and Bridge Reconstruction EA                          500,000
                 Airfield Projects
   II-5             Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Design and Construction                   23,861,000
   II-6             North GA Apron Expansion Design and Construction                             1,697,000
   II-7             Purchase and Demolition of Remaining Properties Within the RPZ                 757,000
                 Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking
   II-8             Terminal Concourse Expansion Design and Construction                        22,675,000
   II-9             Terminal Loop Road Widening Design and Construction                             77,000
   II-10            Consolidated Rental Car QTA Design and Construction                          3,308,000
   II-11            Passenger Security Screening Checkpoint Expansion - Phase 2                    100,000
                 West Development Area
   II-12            West Development Area – Phase 2 Design and Construction                        4,299,000
                 Conventional Hangars
   II-13            Conventional Hangar 1 - Site Development Design and Construction               1,107,000
                 T-Hangars
   II-14            Land Acquisition - T-Hangars-Phase 1                                           1,176,000
   II-15            T-Hangars - Phase 1 - Site Improvements Design and Construction                2,809,000
   II-16            T-Hangars – Phase 1 – Structures Design and Construction                         569,000
                 Air Cargo
   II-17            Air Cargo Site Improvements Design and Construction                            5,698,000
                 Maintenance Center
   II-18            Demolition of Existing TANG Facilities and Site Grading                          543,000
   II-19            Maintenance Center Site Development Design and Construction                    4,228,000
                 Airport Business Park
   II-20            Airport Business Park Land Acquisition – Phase 1                               1,243,000
   II-21            Airport Business Park Existing Structures Demolition – Phase 1                    70,000
   II-22            Airport Business Park Land Acquisition – Phase 2                               1,617,000
   II-23            Airport Business Park Existing Structures Demolition – Phase 2                   180,000
                 Greenways
   II-24            Southern Greenway Design and Construction                                        247,000
                 Enhanced Airport Entrances
   II-25            Shepherd Road Enhancements Design and Construction                             342,000
                                                                                              $ 77,983,000




Facilities Implementation Plan                         7-20                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




                                          Table 7-3
                LONG-TERM CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COSTS IN 2009 DOLLARS

   Project
   Number                              Long-Term Projects (2018-2027)                         Project Cost
                Environmental
      III-1           Northern Greenway Environmental Assessment                               $         75,000
                Airfield Projects
      III-2           Taxiway K Widening Design and Construction                                       420,000
                Commercial Service Passenger Terminal and Parking
      III-3           Parking Garage/Baggage Make-Up Design and Construction                       51,955,000
      III-4           Baggage Claim Expansion Design and Construction                              10,696,000
                West Development Area
      III-5           West Development Area - Phase 3 - Design and Construction                      7,545,000
                Conventional Hangars
      III-6           Conventional Hangar 2 Site Development Design and Construction                 1,120,000
      III-7           Conventional Hangar 3 Site Development Design and Construction                 1,120,000
                T-Hangars
      III-8           T-Hangars - Phase 2 Design and Construction                                    3,378,000
                Air Cargo
      III-9           Air Cargo Facility Design and Construction                                     3,206,000
                Maintenance Center
     III-10           Maintenance Center Design and Construction                                   24,313,000
                Airport Business Park
     III-11           Airport Business Park Land Acquisition – Phase 3                                 864,000
     III-12           Airport Business Park Existing Structures Demolition – Phase 3                   214,000
     III-13           Airport Business Park Site Development Design and Construction                 9,416,000
                Greenways
     III-14           Northern Greenway Design and Construction                                        457,000
                Enhanced Airport Entrances
     III-15           Shepherd Road Bridge Reconfiguration Design and Construction                8,413,000
                                                                                              $ 123,192,000

Over the course of the twenty-year Capital Improvement Program, the projects would continue to
evolve. The projects proposed for the medium- and long-term would probably change as events
and time change the requirements of and for the projects individually and collectively. The project
costs as currently envisioned for the entire Capital Improvement Program are shown in Table 7-4.

                                            Table 7-4
                    TOTAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COSTS IN 2009 DOLLARS
                                            Phase                   Cost
                                 Short-term                     $  16,157,300
                                 Medium-term                       77,983,000
                                 Long-term                        123,192,000
                                 Total CIP Costs                $ 217,332,300




Facilities Implementation Plan                         7-21                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




7.4       ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), signed into law on January 1, 1970, established
the national environmental policy for the United States. It requires that each Federal agency must
assess the environmental impact of each of their actions prior to making a decision. Section 302 of
FAA Order 5100.38C, Airport Improvement Program Handbook, states that all projects, in order to
be eligible for AIP funding, must undergo environmental processing prior to FAA approval. This
section broadly describes:

     Forms of Environmental Analysis
     Areas of Potential Environmental Impact
     Agency Coordination and Permitting

7.4.1     Forms of Environmental Analysis

There are three types of environmental processing used for Airport Improvement Program projects.
They are the Categorical Exclusion (CATEX), the Environmental Assessment (EA) and the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). While the airport sponsor or a consultant typically does the
documentation for each of these environmental processes, the Federal agency that is authorizing
the Federal action, in the case of airports typically the FAA, must approve or disapprove the
Federal action based on the findings of the environmental process. Therefore, the FAA has a large
stake in not only the veracity of an environmental document, but the process in which it was
developed.

Categorical Exclusion

Categorical exclusions (CATEX) are exemptions for certain categories of Federal actions that meet
the criteria contained in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1508.4, Categorical Exclusion.
These actions do not normally have adverse effects on the human environment. In reviewing the
list of normally categorically excluded actions, in order to determine if a particular project might be
eligible for this process, the FAA must also determine if there are extraordinary circumstances
associated with the individual project that may have a significant environmental effect. If a project
is not eligible for a CATEX, or the FAA official determines that there are extraordinary
circumstances involved with an individual project, that official may decide that an environmental
assessment should be prepared.

Environmental Assessment

An Environmental Assessment (EA) is supposed to be a concise document that takes a “hard look”
at the environmental effects of a proposed action. The preparation of an EA must be performed
following a prescribed process. The EA document is not the decision. It is the documentation of
the environmental resources in the area of the proposed Federal action or project and an analysis
of how the proposed action would affect the environmental resources. The authorizing FAA official
must make the determining decision based on the EA documentation. At a minimum, an EA must
be prepared when the proposed action is:

     Not categorically excluded
     Normally categorically excluded but involves at least one extraordinary circumstance
     Not known to require an environmental impact statement but is not categorically excluded




Facilities Implementation Plan                      7-22                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




The EA documentation can be either a short-form or a full report. The EA must develop a
statement of the purpose of the proposed project, as well as the need for the proposed project.
The EA is obligated to look at not only the alternative proposed by the airport sponsor, but also a
no-action alternative and reasonable alternatives including those outside the purview of the airport
sponsor. The EA will look at the impact of the proposed alternatives, including the no-action
alternative, on a range of environmental resources. Following the submission of the EA to the
FAA, the FAA reviews it and, if they can approve the Federal action based on the environmental
process and documentation, the FAA would issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). If
the FAA cannot approve the project based on the EA, they can request correction of deficiencies,
and/or attempt to resolve any outstanding issues. If these measures fail, are inadequate or do not
resolve the concerns, the FAA would require additional study through an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS).

Upon completion and the issuance of a FONSI, an EA is considered a Federal document. The
FAA considers an EA valid for a period of three years beginning when the responsible FAA official
accepts the final EA as a Federal document. If major steps towards the implementation of all
project phases have not commenced within three years, a written reevaluation from the
responsible FAA official would be required.

Environmental Impact Statement

An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required when the proposed action, including
mitigation, would continue to have a significant impact on the environment. The stated primary
purpose of an EIS is “to be an “action-forcing tool” to ensure Federal government programs and
actions meet NEPA’s goals and policies.” The EIS looks at specific environmental resources that
would be impacted.

An EIS can also be done without a preceding EA, particularly where the FAA official is aware that
there is a great potential for a significant environmental impact with a particular project or the
preferred alternative of a project. Projects that normally would go directly to an EIS include a new
airport or a new runway within a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA).

As with an EA, the EIS is obligated to look at not only the alternative proposed by the airport
sponsor, but also a no-action alternative and reasonable alternatives including those outside the
purview of the airport sponsor. The EIS will look at the impact of the proposed alternatives
including the no-action alternative. It will have a statement of the purpose and need for the project.
The FAA official reviewing the EIS must weigh the purpose and need for the project and the most
reasonable alternative for the implementation of the project with the impact the project will have on
the environmental resource or resources.

Following the publication of the accepted EIS in the Federal Register, the FAA may issue a Record
of Decision (ROD). The final decision on an EIS is considered valid for a period of three years
beginning from the date of the “Notice of Availability.” If major steps toward the implementation of
all project phases have not commenced within three years, a written reevaluation from the
responsible FAA official would be required at each major approval phase.

7.4.2     Areas of Potential Environmental Impact

This section looks at many of the environmental resources that FAA actions often affect. It also
looks at those projects within the CIP that might have environmental consequences on these
environmental resources. This is not a closed list. The Airport, the FAA, or the public might


Facilities Implementation Plan                     7-23                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




identify additional environmental resources as individual projects enter the environmental process.
There may also be CIP projects that may not be identified within this section as potentially affecting
an environmental resource due to the very limited scoping that the majority of these projects have
received at this point.

Air Quality

Development projects that exceed one or more of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
the six criteria pollutants require air quality analysis if they are proposed to occur in areas listed by
the EPA as non-attainment areas. The City of Chattanooga and the Chattanooga Metropolitan
Airport are located in a non-attainment area for the criterion PM2.5. PM 2.5 is a measure of particles
in the atmosphere with a diameter of less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers.

Biotic Resources

Various endangered and threatened biotic resources have been identified in Hamilton County,
Tennessee: Of these biotic resources, only the Snail Darter, Percina tanasi, is considered to be in
the actual environs of the Airport. Reportedly, the Snail Darter can be found within that portion of
the South Chickamauga Creek that borders the Airport to the west. None of the projects within the
CIP is anticipated to affect the South Chickamauga Creek or the Snail Darter.

Coastal Resources

The Airport is not located within and does not affect a coastal zone. Therefore, the procedures of
16 USC Chapter 33 Coastal Zone Management do not apply.

Compatible Land Use:

Determination of compatible land use near the Airport will be required based on the identified traffic
patterns and noise analysis completed as part of formal environmental analyses done for the
various CIP projects.

Construction Impacts

During construction, there is the potential for increased air quality, water quality and noise impacts
in addition to those normally associated with Airport operations. All construction related to future
Airport development projects should be designed and specifications written to comply with
guidelines set forth in FAA AC 150/5370-10A, Standards for Specifying the Construction of
Airports.

40 CFR Part 122 addresses construction disturbances of one acre or more. It would require a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for the specific site. Part
122.26(a)(1)(ii) requires a NDPES permit for storm water discharges due to construction activities
disturbing at least five acres of land.

The Tennessee Codes Annotated (TCA) §69-3-108, Tennessee Water Quality Control Act of 1977
requires a Water Pollution Control (WPC) Construction Stormwater General Permit be obtained if
an area of one or more acres is cleared, graded, or excavated or if the project disturbs less than
one acre of land and the project is part of a larger common plan of development or sale.
Application for a permit is begun with the submittal of a Stormwater Construction Notice of Intent
form along with a current site specific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).


Facilities Implementation Plan                       7-24                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




Section 4(f) Land

None of the projects within the proposed CIP requires the use of any publicly owned park,
recreation area, wildlife, or waterfowl refuge, or historic site lands of national, state, or local
significance. Therefore, the provisions of the Department of Transportation Act for the protection
of 4(f) lands do not apply.

Farmland

While there are soil types located within the vicinity of the Airport that are designated as prime
farmland; land having the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing
food, feed, fiber, forage, oilseed, and other agricultural crops with minimal use of fuel, fertilizer,
pesticides, or products; none of this land is currently in agricultural use. There are no farmlands
classified as unique, land used for producing high-value food and fiber crops, within Hamilton
County. The area surrounding the Airport, with the exception of adjacent to the South Chicamauga
Creek, is mostly urbanized with urban support services.

Floodplains

In compliance with Executive Order 11988, Floodplains, and the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT) Order 5650.2, Floodplain Management and Protection, all airport
development projects must avoid floodplains, if a practicable alternative exists. As illustrated in
Figure 2-11, the majority of the Airport is located in a 100-year flood plain as defined by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Therefore, for the majority of the CIP projects,
no practicable alternative exists. Therefore, the projects must be designed to minimize adverse
impact to the floodplain’s “natural and beneficial values” as well as minimize the potential risks for
flood-related property loss and impacts on human safety, health, and welfare.

Hazardous Materials

Hazardous wastes are defined as solid wastes that are “ignitable, corrosive, reactive, or toxic” in
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) at 40 CFR Part 261. According to 49 CFR
Part 172, Table 172.101, hazardous substances are defined as “hazardous waste, hazardous air
pollutants, hazardous substances designated as such pursuant to the Clean Water Act and the
Toxic Substances Control Act and elements, compounds, mixtures, solutions, or substances listed
in 40 CFR Part 302 that pose substantial harm to human health or environmental resources”.
However, it is determined that petroleum or natural gas substances and materials are not included.

The issue of hazardous materials most often comes into play for an airport when they are
purchasing land. To help protect airports from the costs or the liability associated with hazardous
materials or contamination, the FAA requires that an airport sponsor hire a competent specialist to
complete an Environmental Due Diligence Audit (EDDA) before acquiring any land for airport
purposes. This is of particular importance where there is known previous activity on the site that
may include the handling and/or distribution of chemical or petroleum products.

Historical, Architectural, Archaeological and Cultural Resources

Review of the Tennessee Historical Commission on-line database did not reveal a record of
properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places within the confines of the Airport or any
of the projects currently proposed in the CIP. It is advised however, that the State Historical
Preservation Officer be further contacted as a part of any further environmental analyses in
conjunction with these projects.

Facilities Implementation Plan                      7-25                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




Light Emissions and Visual Effects

Additional runway and taxiway lighting will be installed within the Airport property as part of the
extension of Runway 02 and Taxiway A. These lights are proposed to be at or near surface level.
The light emissions from the additional lights would be confined to Airport property, and would be
shielded as much as possible from residences.

Visual effects deal broadly with the extent to which Airport development contrasts with the existing
environment, architecture, historic or cultural setting, or land use planning. Many of the proposed
CIP projects were developed in response to the community’s desire to improve the aesthetic
appeal of the community along Lee Highway/Brainerd Road. The establishment of the Southern
Greenway, the Jubilee Entrance and the Airport Business Park are direct results of the Airport and
the community working together to enhance their neighborhood.

Natural Resources and Energy Supply

A project is considered to have a significant impact when its construction, operation, or
maintenance would cause demands that would exceed available or future natural resources or
energy supplies. None of the proposed CIP projects is anticipated to consume more energy or
natural resources than are currently available.

Noise

A significant noise impact would occur if noise sensitive areas were to experience an increase in
the day/night noise level (DNL) of 1.5 decibels or more at or above a DNL of 65 decibels when
compared to the no action alternative for the same timeframe. The Chattanooga Metropolitan
Airport has not had noise contours run since 1997. It is likely that the noise contour footprints
would be smaller than modeled previously, as aircraft that operate to and from the Airport today
are quieter than those previously modeled are. The proposed displaced thresholds on the Runway
will prevent aircraft from flying any lower or closer to the community than they do today. The
environmental analysis for the extension of Runway 02/20 and Taxiway A will most probably be an
environmental assessment that will necessitate the running of the FAA’s Integrated Noise Model
(INM), which will produce the new noise contours.

Socioeconomic Environmental Justice, and Children’s Health and Safety Risks

It is not anticipated that any of the CIP projects would unfairly and disproportionately affect low-
income or minority populations in a unique way. However, as the environmental analysis for the
projects is conducted, it is important that local human resource agencies be contacted to determine
if the community adjacent to the Airport meets the criteria of DOT Order 5610.2, Environmental
Justice in Minority and Low-Income Population.

The Airport does not intend to purchase land through eminent domain. Rather, they intend to
purchase property as it becomes available to the market. No residences have been identified for
purchase for either the Airport Business Park or the Southern Greenway.

Solid Waste

Several CIP projects include the demolition of existing facilities. Each of the projects will produce
an initial increase in solid waste from construction activities, but solid waste generation from typical
daily operations is not expected to occur. It is recommended that the City of Chattanooga’s Public

Facilities Implementation Plan                      7-26                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




Works Department be contacted as a part of the environmental analyses to determine the
anticipated future capacity of existing landfills.

Water Quality

The FAA must evaluate project-related discharges, especially those having the potential to affect
navigable waterways, municipal drinking water supplies, important sole-source aquifers, or
protected groundwater supplies. In particular, construction activities or seasonal airport anti-
icing/deicing activities are major concerns.

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 122 addresses construction disturbances of one acre or
more. Part 122.26(a)(1)(ii) requires a NDPES permit for storm water discharges due to
construction activities disturbing at least five acres of land. The Tennessee Codes Annotated
(TCA) §69-3-108, Tennessee Water Quality Control Act of 1977 requires a Water Pollution Control
(WPC) Construction Stormwater General Permit be obtained if an area of one or more acres is
cleared, graded, or excavated or if the project disturbs less than one acre of land and the project is
part of a larger common plan of development or sale. Application for a permit is begun with the
submittal of a Stormwater Construction Notice of Intent form along with a current; site specific
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).

Wetlands, Jurisdictional or Non-Jurisdictional

Navigable waters of the U.S. are those waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide
and/or are used, have been used in the past, or may be susceptible to use to transport interstate or
foreign commerce (33 CFR Section 329.4). The term, “navigable waters of the U.S.” includes
wetlands connected or adjacent to navigable waters of the U.S. Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (CWA) governs the dredging and filling of navigable waters of the U.S.        These navigable
waters come under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) who use 33 CFR
Parts 320 through 330 to define the wetlands. To conduct dredge or fill activities in these
wetlands, the Corps must issue a permit authorizing those activities. Non-jurisdictional wetlands
do not involve navigable waters because they are not connected to or adjacent to navigable waters
of the United States. Dredge and fill activities in these wetlands do not require Corps approvals,
but these wetlands are natural resources FAA must assess under NEPA.

Two actions that might affect wetlands are those that require disturbing the water table of an area
in which a wetland is located or indirectly affecting a wetland because it impacts areas upstream or
downstream of the wetland or it introduces secondary development that would affect a wetland.
Figure 2-12 shows the wetland areas in or near the Airport. None of these wetlands would be
directly impacted by any of the proposed CIP projects.

Wild and Scenic Rivers

The Airport’s property is immediately adjacent to the east side of the South Chickamauga Creek at
approximately 10 river miles upstream from the Creek’s confluence with the Tennessee River.
Neither the Tennessee River, nor the Creek, are in either the Wild and Scenic Rivers System or the
National Rivers Inventory, and therefore the provisions outlined in Public Law 90-542, The Wild
and Scenic Rivers Act, do not apply to the Airport’s CIP projects.

7.4.3     Agency Coordination and Permitting

Acceptance of Federal grant funding requires compliance with the requirements set forth in the
Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing the provisions of the National

Facilities Implementation Plan                     7-27                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 1500 through 1508,
Department of Transportation Order DOT 5610.1C, and other related statutes and directives. The
likely environmental processing identified in this chapter does not eliminate the possibility of
additional or more detailed environmental processing. Careful coordination with the responsible
FAA official should be conducted for every project utilizing Federal funds. In addition, it is
recommended that coordination with the following agencies also be conducted as part of
development actions utilizing federal funding or requiring environmental processing:

    United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service and the Tennessee Wildlife
     Resources Agency concerning impacts to flora or fauna and biotic communities associated with
     proposed development
    Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) for information on using TVA shoreline property or public
     land
    Tennessee State Planning Office serves as the Tennessee State Clearinghouse for Federal
     activities
    Tennessee Department of Environmental Conservation (TDEC) Division of Air Pollution Control
     (APC) for issues dealing with asbestos removal or gasoline dispensing facilities permits, as well
     as air quality
    TDEC Tennessee Historical Commission in accordance with Section 106 of the National
     Historic Preservation Act
    TDEC Water Pollution Control (WPC) Construction Stormwater General Permit and National
     Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Construction Permit for
     construction projects that disturb land through clearing, grubbing or excavation more than one
     acre of land.
    Hamilton County Soil Conservation District if land currently used for agricultural purposes is
     impacted
    City of Chattanooga Parks and Recreation Department and Hamilton County Department of
     Parks and Recreation concerning planned public parks and recreational areas
7.4.4     Environmental Summary

While the guidelines identified in this chapter comply with the National Environmental Protection
Act requirements, additional coordination and environmental processing may be necessary with
state and/or local agencies to comply with their rules and regulations.

The next chapter, Financial Feasibility Analysis, will provide potential funding sources for each of
the CIP projects. It will also provide details on the operating structure of the Airport and the
expectations for funding these and other capital projects.




Facilities Implementation Plan                      7-28                                      FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




                                       CHAPTER 8
                                  FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY

8.1       INTRODUCTION

The objective of this chapter is to identify a strategic financial plan (referred to herein as the
Financial Plan). This chapter will evaluate the Recommended Alternatives from the Capital
Improvement Program described in Chapter 7 of the Master Plan Update.

The Financial Plan includes an overview of the capital improvements recommended for the Airport
over a 19-year planning period, with emphasis on the four-year, short-term development period.
This analysis will assess the financial implications of Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
undertaking the proposed projects. Further, the Airport’s ability to generate future revenues
sufficient to exceed projected Airport operating and capital expenses will be examined. The
following summarizes the components of the Financial Plan:

     Eligibility for funding by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Tennessee Department of
      Transportation (TNDOT), and local sources
     A review of existing tenant leases, agreements and contracts
     A compilation and review of the Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority’s historical
      revenues and expenses
     An order of magnitude estimate of Airport revenues and expenses and a pro forma cash flow
      analysis to estimate future revenues and expenses

8.2       ENABLING LEGISLATION

The Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority (CMAA) was created in July 1985 under the
authority of the Tennessee General Assembly in accordance the provisions of the Metropolitan
Airport Authority Act (the Act), Tennessee Code, Annotated, Section 42-4-101 et seq., as
amended. The CMAA is an instrumentality and political subdivision of the State of Tennessee and
a public corporation.

The purpose of the CMAA is to:

     Establish, maintain, and operate a unified and coordinated Airport system
     Ensure the orderly and proper use and growth of the Airport
     Ensure that the maximum public benefit is obtained from the Airport

Further, it is the responsibility of the CMAA to:

     Ensure proper planning and establish Airport needs in the future
     Enhance business, industry, and trade
     Promote public transportation and commerce
     Provide an economical use of a public airport for the welfare, safety, and convenience of the
      public




Financial Feasibility                               8-1                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




The CMAA is composed of seven members, all of whom are appointed by the Mayor and Council
of the City of Chattanooga. At least five members must be residents of the City of Chattanooga.

8.3       FINANCIAL FRAMEWORK

The CMAA’s financial operations are accounted for on a fiscal year (FY) basis, ending June 30. As
the owner and operator of the Airport, the CMAA has the right to enter into agreements, leases and
contracts with tenants and to grant rights, privileges, and services related to the use of the Airport.
In exchange, tenants compensate the CMAA for occupancy of Airport facilities and utilization of
services.

The majority of Airport revenues are generated by three types of tenants: the commercial
passenger airlines, public automobile parking, and rental car companies. Other tenants and
services also contribute revenue to the CMAA, although to a lesser degree. The following provides
a brief summary of key provisions from certain agreements, contracts or leases with these tenants.

8.3.1     Commercial Passenger Airlines

The Airport is currently served by six regional airlines providing scheduled commercial air service
on five airline brands. Atlantic Southeast Airlines (ASA) doing business as (d/b/a) the Delta
Connection provides 10 daily departures to Delta Air Lines hub in Atlanta, GA. Piedmont Airlines
and PSA Airlines each d/b/a US Airways Express provide seven daily non-stop departures to US
Airways hub in Charlotte, NC and one daily departure to the Ronald Regan National Airport in
Washington, DC. American Eagle provides two daily departures to American Airlines hubs in
Chicago, IL and one daily departure to its hub in Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX. Mesaba Airlines and
Pinnacle Airlines, each d/b/a The Delta Connection, collectively provide three daily departures to
the Delta Air Lines hub in Memphis, TN. Allegiant Airlines provides seven weekly departures to the
Orlando-Sanford Airport in Orlando, FL and four weekly departures to St. Petersburg, FL.

The airlines operating at the Airport do not currently operate under a contractual agreement or
terminal lease with the CMAA. Airline rates and charges were calculated pursuant to a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in 1989, which was entered into between the CMAA and
certain airlines then operating at the Airport, in connection with the issuance of the CMAA’s 1990
Airport Revenue Bonds. These bonds were issued to fund the 1990 terminal development and
expansion project. Airport rates and charges are currently adjusted annually at the discretion of
the CMAA.

Table 8-1 presents a summary of the current airline rates and charges charged by the CMAA to the
commercial airlines operating at the Airport for the CMAA’s fiscal year ending June 30, 2010.




Financial Feasibility                             8-2                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




                                                   Table 8-1
                                     FY 2010 AIRLINE RATES AND CHARGES
                                                                              Monthly           Annual
       Airline Terminal Rentals           Area in Square Feet     Rate        Rental            Rental
    Airline Exclusive/Preferential                      13,697     $28.76      $32,827           $393,991
    Airline Baggage Claim                               12,756     $28.76      $30,572           $366,863
    Total Airline Terminal                                                     $63,404           $760,845

              Other Airline                                      Average     Monthly              Annual
            Rates & Charges                    Quantity           Rate      Fees/Rents        Fees/Rents
    Airline Landing Fees                320,904 units               $1.90      $50,810          $609,717
    Airline Security Fees               312,497 enplanements        $0.94      $24,387          $292,648
    Airline Loading Bridge              4 bridges                  $1,704       $6,816            $81,795
    Ground Handling                     364 Turns                    $360      $10,308          $123,698
    Total Other Airline Fees                                                   $92,322         $1,107,858
    Total Airline Areas                                                       $155,726         $1,686,712
    Source CMAA FY 2010 Budget.

8.3.2     Passenger Parking Facilities Management Agreement: Republic Parking Systems

The Airport provides short-, intermediate- and long-term parking facilities. There are 173 short-
term spaces at a customer cost of $0.75 per 20-minute segment to a maximum of $13.00 per day.
There are 220 intermediate spaces at a customer cost of $8.00 per day and there are 739 long-
term parking spaces at a customer cost of $8.00 per day. The parking operation at the Airport is
managed by Republic Parking Systems (Republic) under a management agreement which expired
December 31, 2009, but allows for a one-year renewal. Under the agreement, CMAA pays
Republic a management fee of $31,000 per year plus it’s covered operating expenses. At the
discretion of the CMAA, it may also pay Republic an annual incentive fee equal to 10 percent of the
management fee or $3,100. The CMAA retains all revenues in excess of the management fee and
covered expenses.

8.3.3     Rental Car Agreement: Avis

The CMAA entered into an agreement with Avis Rent A Car System (Avis) for a Service Facility on
February 2, 2009 for a nine-year term with one additional 10-year renewal option at the discretion
of the CMAA. Under a separate month to month agreement, Avis leases counter space in the
terminal building, 22 ready/return spaces located directly south of the terminal building, and a quick
turn around (QTA) facility located east of the terminal area. The QTA is a wash and re-fueling
facility with approximately 150 automobile parking spaces, one automated wash facility, and a
10,000 gallon unleaded fuel tank. Light automobile maintenance is also performed at the QTA.
The rental rates increase annually based upon the Consumer Price Index (CPI). In addition to the
rental rates set forth below, Avis pays the CMAA a concession privilege fee of 10 percent of its
gross receipts. Table 8-2 summarizes the rentals paid by Avis.




Financial Feasibility                                 8-3                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                         Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                     Master Plan Update




                                                 Table 8-2
                                              AVIS RENTALS
                              Space                         Monthly   Annually
                              Ground Rent                   $1,304    $15,644
                              Service Facility              $3,600    $43,200
                              Concession Fee (MAG)          $21,439   $257,264
                              Source : CMAA FY 2010 Budget.

8.3.4     Rental Car Agreement: Budget

Budget Rent-a-Car (Budget) operates at the Airport on a month-to-month basis under the same
terms of a 1998 agreement which expired on December 31, 2002. The leased premises include
counter space in the terminal building, an off-Airport QTA located on nearby Sheppard Road, and
12 ready/return parking spaces south of the commercial passenger terminal building. The QTA
includes one automated wash facility, a 2,500 gallon unleaded fuel tank, and a 2,500 diesel fuel
tank. The rental rates increase annually based upon the CPI. In addition to the rental rates set
forth below, Budget pays the CMAA a 10 percent concession fee based on its gross receipts.
Table 8-3 summarizes the other rentals paid by Budget.

                                               Table 8-3
                                            BUDGET RENTALS
                                      Space             Monthly        Annually
                             Ground Rent                 $1,120          $13,444
                             Service Facility               N/A              N/A
                             Concession Fee (MAG)       $11,317         $135,800
                             Source CMAA FY 2010 Budget.

8.3.5     Rental Car Agreement: Enterprise

Enterprise Rent-a-Car (Enterprise) operates at the Airport on a month-to-month basis under the
same terms of a 1998 agreement which expired on December 31, 2002. The leased premises
include counter space in the terminal building and 13 ready/return parking spaces. The rental
rates increase annually based upon the CPI. In addition to the rental rates set forth below,
Enterprise pays the CMAA a 10 percent concession fee based on its gross receipts. Table 8-4
summarizes the other rentals paid by Enterprise.

                                               Table 8-4
                                          ENTERPRISE RENTALS
                                      Space                   Monthly      Annually
                        Ticket Counter & Ready/Return           $1,104        $13,244
                        Service Facility                           N/A            N/A
                        Concession Fee (MAG)                   $11,993       $143,915
                        Source CMAA FY 2010 Budget.


8.3.6     Rental Car Agreement: Hertz

The CMAA entered into an agreement with Hertz Corporation (Hertz) effective April 1, 2008 for a
period of two years with one three-year renewal option for its Service Facility. Under a separate,
month-to-month agreement, Hertz leases counter space in the terminal building and 27


Financial Feasibility                                 8-4                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                      Master Plan Update




ready/return parking spaces located southeast of the terminal building. The rental rates increase
annually based upon the CPI. In addition to the rental rates set forth below, Hertz pays the CMAA
a 10 percent concession fee based on its gross receipts. Table 8-5 summarizes the other rentals
paid by Hertz.

                                                Table 8-5
                                             HERTZ RENTALS
                                    Space                    Monthly       Annually
                        Ticket Counter & Ground Rent         $1,387        $16,644
                        Service Facility                     $1,240        $14,875
                        Concession Fee (MAG)                 $26,857       $322,283
                        Source: CMAA FY 2010 Budget.

8.3.7     Rental Car Agreement: National

The agreement with National Rent A Car (National) expired December 31, 2002. Since that time,
National has operated at the Airport on a month-to-month basis. The leased premises include
counter space in the terminal building, a QTA facility located east of the Airport, and 27
ready/return parking spaces. The QTA facility has an area for cleaning vehicles, space to store up
to 100 automobiles, and a 12,000 gallon unleaded fuel tank. The rental rates increase annually
based upon the CPI. In addition to the rental rates set forth below, National pays the CMAA a 10
percent concession fee based on its gross receipts. Table 8-6 summarizes the other rentals paid
by National.

                                                Table 8-6
                                           NATIONAL RENTALS
                                      Space                    Monthly       Annually
                        Ticket Counter and Ground Rent           $1,254         $15,044
                        Service Facility                           $253          $3,036
                        Concession Fee (MAG)                    $18,376        $220,508
                        Source CMAA FY 2010 Budget.

8.3.8     Additional CMAA Leases

CMAA also has agreements and/or leases with the numerous other tenants at the Airport, as
shown in Table 8-7.




Financial Feasibility                                  8-5                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                                 Table 8-7
                                    ADDITIONAL AGREEMENTS AND LEASES
                                                                    Annual                                 Renewal
                Tenant                        Type                  Rentals          Termination           Options
    Air Host                         Retail/Food & Beverage           $65,000     Month to Month          Hold Over
    Chattanooga Aero                 Hangar/Services                  $28,903     June 30, 2010           No
    Choo-Choo Aero                   Hangar/Services                  $32,739     Mar. 31, 2020           No
    TAC Air                          Hangar/Services                 $592,962     Sept. 30, 2001          Yes1
    Executive Jet                    Hangar/Services                  $24,363
    US Forest Service                Hangar/Services                 $121,968     April 14, 2022          No
    RBG LLC                          Hangar/Services                  $65,483     Dec. 18, 2009           Yes2
    Mountain Air Cargo               Landing Fees                     $24,424     Month to Month          Hold Over
    TSA                              Space Rental                     $83,550     Aug. 3, 2012            No
    FAA Weather Observation          Space Rental                      $9,526     Sept. 30, 2010          No
    1st TN Bank                      ATM                               $1,800     July 31, 2010           No
    ABG Caulking                     Space Rental                     $12,319     June 30, 2010           No
    Other Misc.                      Misc/Property                   $118,038     Varies                  Varies
    Source CMAA FY 2010 Budget.
    1
      Lease provides for six, five-year renewal periods, to approximately September 20, 2031.
    2
      Two, five-year renewal periods.

8.4       RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVES PROJECTS SUMMARY

Based on the projected facility requirements identified in Chapter 4 and the evaluation of
alternatives in Chapter 5, Chapter 7 identified a list of recommended projects and associated cost
estimates. These projects will be discussed in this section.

These cost estimates are on an order of magnitude basis and are presented in 2009 dollars. As
stated in Appendix G to this Master Plan Update, planning level cost estimates consider gross
areas multiplied by unit cost factors. The planning level costs are estimates and are not meant to
represent final bids or negotiated prices. Actual costs will vary (perhaps substantially) from the
amounts shown due to inflation, shortages of materials, limited number of bids, or other factors.
Allowances have been included for each project that take into consideration contractor overhead
and design costs, as well as construction administration and resident inspection costs as
necessary. In addition, a contingency factor is applied, which may be as high as 20 percent (20%).
This contingency factor is applied to account for variables in the scope, final design, and bids for
construction.

In order to provide realistic assumptions regarding the availability of funding for the projects
recommended in the Recommended Alternatives, it is necessary to estimate the phasing
requirements of each project based on the need for enhanced safety, security, and/or demand for
the facilities during the 19-year planning period. For the purpose of this Financial Plan, Airport
improvements discussed in Chapter 7 are included in one of three general project phasing periods
based on an estimate of each project’s estimated implementation need. Following are the project
phasing periods used for this purpose:

     Short-Term Development Period – Projects anticipated to be implemented from 2009 through
      2012. The Financial Plan will focus on the projects occurring in this period.
     Medium-Term Development Period – Projects anticipated to be implemented from 2013
      through 2017.


Financial Feasibility                                       8-6                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




    Long-Term Development Period – Projects anticipated to be implemented from 2018 through
     2027.
The projects associated with the Recommended Alternatives are summarized on Table 8-8, Table
8-9, and Table 8-10 by their phasing period.


                                              Table 8-8
                                   SHORT-TERM DEVELOPMENT PERIOD
              Project No.                              Project Description
                  I-1        Air Cargo, Airport Business Park, Hangar Development and Southern
                             Development Environmental Assessments
                    I-2      West Side Development Environmental Assessment
                    I-3      Taxiway “H” Design and Construction
                    I-4      Runway Protection Zone Land Acquisition and Building Demolition
                    I-5      Temporary Surface Parking Area Design and Construction
                    I-6      Passenger Security Screening Checkpoint Expansion Phase I
                    I-7      West Development Area Site Improvements Design and Construction
                    I-8      West Development Area – Phase I Structures Design and Construction
                    I-9      Jubilee Drive Entrance Improvements Design and Construction
                   I-10      Target Building Demolition



                                               Table 8-9
                                   MEDIUM-TERM DEVELOPMENT PERIOD
               Project No.                             Project Description
                   II-1       North GA Apron Expansion & Taxiway “K” Widening CATEX
                   II-2       Runway 02 and Taxiway “A” Extension Environmental Assessment
                   II-3       Terminal Area Development Projects Environmental Assessment
                   II-4       Shepherd Road Enhancements and Bridge Reconstruction EA
                   II-5       Runway 02 & Taxiway “A” Extension Design and Construction
                   II-6       North GA Apron Expansion Design and Construction
                   II-7       Purchase & Demolition of Remaining Properties Within the RPZ
                   II-8       Terminal Concourse Expansion Design and Construction
                   II-9       Terminal Loop Road Widening Design and Construction
                  II-10       Consolidated Rental Car QTA Design and Construction
                  II-11       Passenger Security Screening Checkpoint Expansion, Phase 2
                  II-12       West Development Area, Phase 2 Design and Construction
                  II-13       Conventional Hangar 1, Site Development and Construction
                  II-14       Land Acquisition, T-Hangars, Phase 1
                  II-15       T-Hangars, Phase 1, Site Improvements Design and Construction
                  II-16       T-Hangars, Phase 1, Structures Design and Construction
                  II-17       Air Cargo Site Improvements Design and Construction
                  II-18       Demolition of Existing TANG Facilities and Site Grading
                  II-19       Maintenance Center Site Development Design and Construction
                  II-20       Airport Business Park Land Acquisition, Phase I
                  II-21       Airport Business Park Existing Structures Demolition, Phase I
                  II-22       Airport Business Park Land Acquisition, Phase 2
                  II-23       Airport Business Park Existing Structures Demolition, Phase 2
                  II-24       Southern Greenway Design and Construction
                  II-25       Shepherd Road Enhancements Design and Construction




Financial Feasibility                                 8-7                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




                                              Table 8-10
                                    LONG-TERM DEVELOPMENT PERIOD
              Project No.                              Project Description
                  III-1     Northern Greenway Environmental Assessment
                  III-2     Taxiway “K” Widening Design and Construction
                  III-3     Parking Garage, Baggage Make-up Design and Construction
                  III-4     Baggage Claim Expansion Design and Construction
                  III-5     West Development Area, Phase 3, Design and Construction
                  III-6     Conventional Hangar 2 Site Development Design and Construction
                  III-7     Conventional Hangar 3 Site Development Design and Construction
                  III-8     T-Hangars, Phase 2 Design and Construction
                  III-9     Air Cargo Facility Design and Construction
                 III-10     Maintenance Center Design and Construction
                 III-11     Airport Business Park Land Acquisition, Phase 3
                 III-12     Airport Business Park Existing Structures Demolition, Phase 3
                 III-13     Airport Business Park Site Development Design and Construction
                 III-14     Northern Greenway Design and Construction
                 III-15     Shepherd Road Bridge Reconfiguration Design and Construction

8.5       ADDITIONAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS

In addition to the projects included in the Facilities Implementation Plan, the CMAA has additional
capital projects included in its current five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Together, the
Recommended Alternative projects and the CMAA’s current CIP Projects are referred to as the
“Capital Projects.” Table 8-11 presents the Capital Projects included in the CMAA’s current CIP,
but not included in the Recommended Alternatives.

                                                Table 8-11
                                    ADDITIONAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
        Project No.                                    Project Description
                        Short-term CIP Projects (2009-2012)
      CIP-1             Taxiways A, B, and C Relocation and Reconstruction
      CIP-2             Security Enhancements
      CIP-3             West Apron Construction
      CIP-4             Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion and Gift Shop/Restaurant Relocation
      CIP-5             CT-80 Facility Modification Phase 2
      CIP-6             Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp – Design and Construction
      CIP-7             Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) – Additional Land Acquisition
      CIP-8             Runway 2 Extension Design

                        Medium-term CIP Projects (2013-2017)
      CIP-6             Terminal Ramp Rehabilitation/North Ramp – Design and Construction
      Source: CIP Projects - CMAA




Financial Feasibility                                8-8                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                          Master Plan Update




8.6       POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES

An airport does not typically satisfy its capital development funding needs with internal funding
sources alone. Federal, state and private funding, together with airport funds and bond proceeds
(supported by airport revenues and/or municipal support), are usually combined to produce the
total funds required to undertake a capital project. These sources of funding include: FAA, state,
private funds (tenant or third party provided), airport funds, Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs),
and loans or bond proceeds. Federal sources, including Airport Improvement Program (AIP)
funds, are subject to modification by Congress (the authorizing entity) or other entities having
jurisdiction over a particular funding source.

The specific project eligibility criteria vary depending upon the funding source. In identifying
potential sources of funds, it is necessary to examine each project element to determine its
eligibility for each program or funding source. It is also important to consider the availability of
funds for each funding source. The following paragraphs briefly describe the primary external
funding sources which may be available to provide funding for the Recommended Alternatives.

8.6.1     Federal Aviation Administration – Aviation Trust Fund

Congress began appropriating money for airport development in 1946 through the enactment of
the Federal Airport Act. Since that time, Congress has passed multiple legislative measures
intended to develop the national air transportation system in the United States. Congress enacted
the Airport and Airway Revenue Act of 1970, which established the Airport and Airways Trust
Fund. The Trust Fund is intended to provide the primary source of funding for FAA operations,
facilities, and equipment, as well as funding for the development of certain public use airports. The
Trust Fund is supported by a series of aviation-related excise taxes through charges on passenger
tickets, cargo waybills, and aviation gasoline and jet fuel.

The majority of the Trust Fund is supported by passenger ticket taxes paid by users of the
commercial airline industry. As a result, the amount of aviation taxes generated in a given year to
support the Trust Fund is dependent on the national level of commercial aviation activity and total
revenues generated from these activities. The revenues supporting the Trust Fund come from a
variety of aviation user fees and fuel taxes. These tax revenues were authorized until September
30, 2007, by the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-34). The authority for these taxes has been
extended through March 31, 2010. Revenue sources include:

(i)       7.5 percent ticket tax
(ii)      $3.60 flight segment tax5
(iii)     6.25 percent tax on cargo waybills
(iv)      4.3 cents per gallon on commercial aviation fuel
(v)       19.3 cents per gallon on general aviation gasoline
(vi)      21.8 cents per gallon on general aviation jet fuel
(vii)     $16.10 international arrival tax6
(viii)    $16.10 international departure tax
(ix)      7.5 percent “frequent flyer” award tax7
(x)       7.5 percent ticket tax at rural airports8

5
   A flight segment is defined as “a single take-off and a single landing.” The flight segment fee has been inflation
adjusted (rounded off to the nearest dime) on an annual basis since January 1, 2004.
6
  Both the international arrival and departure taxes have been adjusted (rounded off to the nearest dime) for inflation
since January 1, 1999. The rate for US flights to and from Alaska or Hawaii is $8.00.
7
  This tax is not limited to frequent flyers but includes all second party purchases of airline miles.


Financial Feasibility                                     8-9                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                            Master Plan Update




Since the creation of the Trust Fund in 1970, aviation excise taxes have exceeded spending
commitments from the FAA’s appropriations resulting in an aggregate surplus. However, since
2001, the Trust Fund’s uncommitted balance has declined as Trust Fund revenues have been
lower than projected. This trend has been exaggerated as the US economy entered an economic
recession beginning in December 2007. The economic slowdown, combined with a 60 percent
increase in the cost of aviation jet fuel in 2008, contributed to a net airline industry loss of $9.5
billion according the Air Transport Association. The airline industry has responded to the national
and global economic slowdown, as well as volatile changes in oil prices, by attempting to enhance
yields by implementing a series of capacity cuts, by reductions in aircraft and employees, and by
other measures. The resulting declines in passenger traffic, aircraft operations, and fuel
consumption have caused revenues generated to support the Trust Fund to be approximately 4
percent less than estimated by the FAA in Federal Fiscal Year 2009.

In Federal Fiscal Year 2009, these taxes produced approximately $10.9 billion, which is $1.3 billion
less than estimated and contributed to a reduction in the balance of the Trust Fund from $10.1
billion to $9.7 billion. The lower tax collection caused a reduction in the uncommitted balance from
$928 million in 2009 to $334 million in 2010. The FAA’s budget for 2010 estimates that total
aviation excise taxes will increase to $11.7 billion.

As shown in Figure 8-1, the total aviation excise taxes paid to the Trust Fund increased from $10.8
billion in Federal Fiscal Year 2005 to a high of $12.4 billion in Federal Fiscal Year 2008. Total
aviation excise taxes decreased by $1.6 billion from Federal Fiscal Year 2008 to Federal Fiscal
Year 2009.




8
  Rural airport passengers pay only the rural airport ticket tax. They do not pay the segment tax on the flight to or from
the rural airport, and do not pay the general ticket tax in addition to the rural airport ticket tax.



Financial Feasibility                                      8-10                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                         Master Plan Update




                                              Figure 8-1
                                AVIATION TRUST FUND FUNDING SOURCES




According to a report to Congress from the US Government Accountability Office, further declines
in the Trust Fund’s uncommitted balance could pose future budgetary challenges for the FAA.
Furthermore, if the Trust Fund revenues continue to fall below projected levels, the FAA’s ability to
cover existing and future funding obligations could be jeopardized.9

The funding of the FAA (including FAA operations, facilities / equipment, and the Airport
Improvement Program, among other things) is provided from a combination of the Trust Fund and
a transfer of funds from the General Fund, as appropriated by the US Congress. However,
according to the FAA, funding appropriated from the General Fund is limited to FAA operations.
As shown in Figure 8-2, the amount of funding required from the General Fund for FAA operations
has ranged from approximately 16 percent of the FAA’s total budget in Federal Fiscal Year 2008 to
25 percent in Federal Fiscal Year 2009. Figure 8-2 presents this historical relationship from
Federal Fiscal Year 2005 through 2009.




9
 US Government Accountability Office, Commercial Aviation Airline Industry Contraction Due to Volatile Fuel Prices and
Falling Demand Affects Airports, Passengers and Federal Government Revenues. April 2009.


Financial Feasibility                                    8-11                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                   Master Plan Update




                                              Figure 8-2
                                            FAA FUNDING


                  100%

                   90%

                   80%

                   70%

                             80%                                                         75%
                   60%                82%               81%             84%
                   50%

                   40%

                   30%

                   20%
                                                                                         25%
                   10%       20%      18%               19%             16%
                        0%
                             2005     2006              2007            2008             2009

                                             General Fund      Trust Fund



In his FY 2008 Budget, President George W. Bush called for a change in the funding structure for
the Trust Fund, from an excise tax-based system into a cost-based user system for commercial air
carriers and general aviation. Congress may address the Trust Fund issue with the authorization
of a new or revised aviation excise tax or user fee structure to support the Trust Fund. At the time
of this Master Plan Update’s printing, this mechanism of funding the Trust Fund is currently in
review for reauthorization by Congress.

8.6.2     Overview and Status of the Airport Improvement Program

The Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 authorized the capital grant-in-aid program
known as the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). The AIP is funded by the Trust Fund.
Congress authorizes and appropriates funds used for eligible airport improvements which are
administered by the FAA. AIP eligible projects include airport planning, airport development; noise
compatibility programs (80 percent at large- and medium-hub airports); and terminal development
at all but large-hub airports. An airport must be included in the National Plan of Integrated Airport
Systems (NPIAS) to be eligible to receive a grant from the AIP. Congress amends the Airport and
Airway Improvement Act from time to time, as required, to authorize funding levels on an annual or
multi-year basis. However, as depicted on Figure 8-3, Congress typically appropriates less AIP
funding than the authorization allows. Since its inception in 1982, the total amount of the AIP
appropriated by Congress is approximately $8.6 billion less than its authorization authority.




Financial Feasibility                            8-12                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                  Master Plan Update




                                                Figure 8-3
                        HISTORICAL AIP AUTHORIZATION AND APPROPRIATION 1982-2009



                $4.5

                $4.0

                $3.5

                $3.0
  $ Billions
                $2.5

                $2.0

                $1.5

                $1.0

                $0.5

                $0.0
                  1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008

                                                Federal Fiscal Year

                                           Authorization      Appropriation



In combination with an allocation from the General Fund (approximately 25 percent in 2009), the
Trust Fund provides for the funding of the FAA, including the AIP. In Federal Fiscal Year 2010, the
Aviation Trust Fund is estimated to provide approximately 75 percent or $12.9 billion of the FAA’s
budget ($17 billion). The FAA’s budget authority included approximately $3.5 billion in funding for
the AIP program.

On December 13, 2003, President Bush signed into law the Vision 100-Century of Aviation
Reauthorization Act (Vision 100). Also known as the FAA Reauthorization Bill, Congress
authorized the AIP for $14 billion over a period of four years, from 2004 through 2007. Vision 100
provides that certain projects are eligible for AIP funding at the 95 percent level at all commercial
service airports classified by the FAA as “small-hub” or smaller. Large- and medium-hub airports
are eligible for funding at the 75 percent level. As defined by the FAA, the Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport is a “non-hub” airport and therefore is currently eligible for FAA funding at 95
percent for AIP eligible projects. It should be noted there is a distinction between the eligibility and
justification of a project to be funded by the AIP.

Under multiple authorization extension acts, Congress authorized the AIP at $3.675 billion for 2008
and $3.9 billion for 2009. The Appropriations Committees of the US House of Representatives and
US Senate ultimately appropriated the AIP at $3.5 billion for both 2008 and 2009.

The President’s 2010 budget also includes proposed AIP appropriations of $3.5 billion, or
effectively the same level as 2009. However, in September 2009, the House and Senate passed a
bill extending FAA programs and aviation excise taxes through December 31, 2009. This
extension has been further continued to March 31, 2010. Congress has been working on a multi-

Financial Feasibility                                8-13                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                   Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




year FAA reauthorization bill since the expiration of Vision 100. The current House reauthorization
bill would authorize the AIP for approximately $15 billion from 2010 through 2013. The current
Senate reauthorization bill authorizes the AIP for a total of $8.1 billion for 2010 and 2011.

Although the future of the AIP is not guaranteed, Federal funding for public use airports has been
provided since 1946. Therefore, for the purpose of this Master Plan Update, it is assumed that the
AIP, or some form of it, will continue to be available and a viable capital funding option available to
the CMAA during the 19-year planning period.

8.6.3     Obligations and Assurances

The Airway and Improvements Act requires the CMAA to provide certain assurances that it will
comply with Federal law and regulation in using FAA AIP grant funds and in operating the Airport.
The CMAA must comply with the sponsor assurances in the performance of grant agreements for
Airport development, planning, and noise compatibility. The sponsor assurances are required to
be submitted as part of the project application by the CMAA for requesting funds under the
provisions of Title 49, USC, subtitle VII, as amended.

There are 39 sponsor’s assurances with which the CMAA must comply as a condition to accepting
AIP grants from the FAA. Among these requirements is the assurance that the CMAA will make
the Airport available as a public use airport on fair and reasonable terms without unjust
discrimination (Assurance 22); permit no exclusive aeronautical rights for use of the Airport
(Assurance 23); and maintain a fee and rental structure, consistent with Assurances 22 and 23, for
facilities and services being provided that will make the Airport as financially self-sustaining as
possible under the circumstances existing at the Airport (Assurance 24).

8.7       AIRPORT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

Grants administered by the FAA through the Airport improvement program (AIP) represent a critical
capital funding source for the CMAA to implement the projects recommended in this Master Plan
Update. Although the future status of the AIP is currently uncertain, for the purpose of this Master
Plan Update, it is assumed that the AIP will continue to be authorized and appropriated at levels
consistent with the FY 2010 AIP appropriation. Within the existing AIP authorization, there are two
major sub-categories which are generally used for improvement programs: entitlement grant and
discretionary grant programs. These sub-categories are discussed below.

8.7.1     Passenger Service Entitlement Grants

One of the most common types of Federal funding available for commercial service airports in the
US is passenger entitlement grants funded through the AIP and administered by the FAA.
Entitlement grants are essentially an allocation of certain AIP funds based upon an airport’s total
number of enplaned passengers in a given year. Only airports defined by the FAA as “Primary
Airports” (those having 10,000 or more enplanements) are eligible to receive AIP Entitlement
Grants. Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is classified by the FAA as a Primary Airport. Pursuant
to Vision 100, in any Federal fiscal year in which Congress appropriates funding for the AIP
program at the $3.2 billion level or more, Primary Airports receive apportionments based on the
following number of enplaned passengers:

     $15.60 for each of the first 50,000 enplanements
     $10.40 for each of the next 50,000 enplanements
     $5.20 for each of the next 400,000 enplanements


Financial Feasibility                             8-14                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                Master Plan Update




    $1.30 for each of the next 500,000 enplanements
    $1.00 for each enplanement in excess of 1 million passengers

For the purpose of determining passenger entitlements grants apportioned in 2010, the FAA uses
the number of passengers enplaned at each airport in calendar year 2008. Chattanooga
Metropolitan Airport enplaned 300,796 passengers in calendar year 2008, which includes airline
enplanements, as well as air taxi, charter, and other unscheduled enplanement activity. Based on
300,796 enplaned passengers in calendar year 2008, the AIP passenger entitlement grant
apportionment formula yields $2,344,139 for Federal Fiscal Year 2010. Total AIP passenger
entitlements are projected to be $9,503,483 during the short-term development period (2009–
2012) based upon the passenger forecast in this report.

Actual final amounts of AIP passenger entitlement grants may be affected by the total amounts
periodically authorized and appropriated by Congress for this program. Entitlement grants may be
carried over from one year to the next, used to pay the principal component of the eligible debt
service on bonds issued to finance eligible projects, and, among other provisions, future allocations
may be earmarked for repayment of current expenditures, if the FAA concurs and issues a Letter
of Intent (LOI).

8.7.2     Cargo Service Entitlement Grants

While originally designed to provide a source of reliable funding for commercial service airports that
provide passenger service, changes to the AIP have also resulted in entitlement set asides for
cargo service airports. Certain airports are designated by the FAA as cargo service airports.
According to FAA Order 5100.38C, Airport Improvement Program Handbook, a cargo service
airport is any airport that, in addition to any other air transportation services that may be available,
are served by aircraft providing air transportation of only cargo with a total annual landed weight of
more than 100 million pounds. Landed weight includes the weight of aircraft transporting only
cargo intrastate, interstate, and in foreign air transportation. An airport may be both a commercial
passenger service and cargo service airport.

Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport is not currently designated as a cargo service airport and
therefore does not currently receive cargo service entitlement grants. It is assumed that the Airport
will not receive cargo service entitlements during the 19-year planning period.

8.7.3     Discretionary Grants

Discretionary grants are based upon commitments to certain eligible development projects at the
option of the FAA. Discretionary grants are available for use by most types of public use airports.
Discretionary grant funding comprises two types of funds: set-aside funds and remaining funds.
The set-aside funds are allocated for noise compatibility and military airport programs. The
remaining discretionary grant funds are distributed to airports based on a priority system for
projects that enhance safety, improve security, meet standards, and add capacity, in that order.
The FAA has established the National Priority System (NPS) to assist in deciding how to allocate
AIP discretionary grants according to these priorities.

In the past, the CMAA has been successful in competing for AIP discretionary grants, receiving
approximately $20.7 million in such grants from 2005 through 2009. AIP discretionary grants will
continue to be an important source of project funding for the recommended projects. However, as
with AIP entitlement grants, AIP discretionary grants may be affected by the future reauthorization
of the AIP. In such event that discretionary grants are not available for funding the Capital


Financial Feasibility                             8-15                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




Projects, such projects will be postponed until such time that discretionary grants or other available
funding becomes available. Assumptions regarding the use of AIP entitlement and discretionary
grants are described below.

AIP Eligibility

All AIP grants are subject to approval by the Secretary of Transportation and periodic appropriation
by Congress. As a non-hub airport, certain project work elements may be eligible for AIP funding
at the 95 percent level. The Airport Improvement Program Handbook sets forth project eligibility
guidelines for AIP funding. Tables 8-12 and 8-13 present the anticipated AIP eligibility of each of
the proposed Capital Projects. As depicted on Table 8-13, the total AIP eligibility of the
recommended projects in the short-term planning period is estimated to be approximately $28.8
million, or 70.8 percent of the period’s total cost.

Due to the demand for AIP grant funds and the uncertainty regarding the future of the AIP, the
Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport may not be able to secure AIP funding at the maximum level for
each recommended project. It may be reasonable to expect that the Airport will continue to receive
approximately $2.3 million in annual entitlements through the short-term development period.

Table 8-13 presents the estimated AIP eligibility for the CMAA’s Capital Improvement Program
(CIP) not included in the Recommended Alternatives. As depicted on Table 8-14, it is estimated
that approximately $9.5 million in AIP entitlements and $15.9 million in AIP discretionary grant
funding will be used to fund the Capital Projects during the short-term development period. This
funding level will provide approximately 63 percent of the funding for the Capital Projects included
in the short-term development period. As previously discussed, in the event that discretionary
grants are not available for funding the Capital Projects, such projects will be postponed until such
time that discretionary grants or other available funding becomes available.

Funding Assumptions

The estimated funding plan for the Capital Projects included in the medium-term and long-term
development period are set forth on Table 8-15 and Table 8-16. Based on the availability of AIP
funds at that time and under the assumption that AIP funding will be applied at the 95 percent level
for eligible projects, the medium- and long-term Capital Projects are estimated to be funded with
approximately $30.7 million in AIP entitlements and $11.3 million in AIP discretionary funds. This
represents approximately 21 percent of the total project cost ($203.3 million) of the Capital Projects
proposed during these periods.




Financial Feasibility                            8-16                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                             Master Plan Update




                                                Table 8-12
                                    RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE AND COSTS
Project                                                                                               % AIP          Total AIP
Number                                Project Description                           Project Cost     Eligible        Eligibility
            Short-Term Projects (2009 - 2012)
  I-1         Air Cargo/Airport Bus Park/Hangar Dev/Southern Dev EA                 $      250,000        0%         $            -
  I-2         West Side Development Environmental Assessment                                75,000        0%                      -
  I-3         Taxiway H Design and Construction                                          4,280,657       95%              4,066,624
  I-4         Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) - Land Acquisition & Building Demo            1,565,000       95%              1,486,750
  I-5         Temporary Surface Parking Area Design and Construction                     2,686,000        0%                      -
  I-6         Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Phase 1                              700,000       95%                665,000
  I-7         West Development Area Site Improvements Design & Const                       280,657        0%                      -
  I-8         West Development Area - Phase 1 Structures Design & Const                  5,665,588        0%                      -
  I-9         Jubilee Drive Entrance Improvements Design and Construction                  329,000        0%                      -
 I-10         Target Building Demolition                                                 325,000          0%                   -
            Subtotal Short-Term Projects                                            $ 16,156,902                     $ 6,218,374
            Medium-Term Projects (2013 - 2017)
  II-1        North GA Apron Expansion-CATEX                                        $        5,000       95%         $        4,750
  II-2        Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Environmental Assessment                   750,000       95%                712,500
  II-3        Terminal Area Development Projects Environmental Assessment                  125,000        0%                      -
  II-4        Shepherd Road Enhancements and Bridge Reconstruction EA                      500,000       95%                475,000
  II-5        Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Design and Construction                 23,861,000       95%             22,667,950
  II-6        North GA Apron Expansion Design and Construction                           1,697,000       95%              1,612,150
  II-7        Purchase and Demolition of Remaining Properties within RPZ                   757,000       95%                719,150
  II-8        Terminal Concourse Expansion Design and Construction                      22,675,000       95%             21,541,250
  II-9        Terminal Loop Road Widening Design and Construction                           77,000       95%                 73,150
 II-10        Consolidated Rental Car QTA Design and Construction                        3,308,000        0%                      -
 II-11        Passenger Security Screening Checkpoint Expansion - Phase 2                  100,000       95%                 95,000
 II-12        West Development Area-Phase 2 Design and Construction                      4,299,000        0%                      -
 II-13        Conventional Hangars 1- Site Development Design and Construction           1,107,000        0%                      -
 II-14        Land Acquisition-T-Hangars-Phase 1                                         1,176,000        0%                      -
 II-15        T-Hangars-Phase 1- Site Improvements Design and Construction               2,809,000        0%                      -
 II-16        T-Hangars-Phase 1- Structures Design and Construction                        569,000        0%                      -
 II-17        Air Cargo Site Improvements Design and Construction                        5,698,000        0%                      -
 II-18        Demolition of Existing TANG Facilities and Site Grading                      543,000        0%                      -
 II-19        Maintenance Center Site Development Design and Construction                4,228,000        0%                      -
 II-20        Airport Business Park Land Acquisition - Phase 1                           1,243,000        0%                      -
 II-21        Airport Business Parking Existing Structures Demo - Phase 1                   70,000        0%                      -
 II-22        Airport Business Park Land Acquisition - Phase 2                           1,617,000        0%                      -
 II-23        Airport Business Parking Existing Structures Demo - Phase 2                  180,000        0%                      -
 II-24        Southern Greenway Design and Construction                                    247,000        0%                      -
 II-25        Shepherd Road Enhancements Design and Construction                         342,000         95%             324,900
            Subtotal Medium-Term Projects                                           $ 77,983,000                    $ 48,225,800

                                                                                   Table 8-12 continued on next page




    Financial Feasibility                                  8-17                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                    Master Plan Update




                                             Table 8-12 continued from previous page
  Project                                                                                                   % AIP              Total AIP
  Number                                 Project Description                             Project Cost      Eligible            Eligibility
               Long-Term Projects (2018 - 2027)
     III-1        Northern Greenway Environmental Assessment                            $       75,000         0%                      -
     III-2        Taxiway K Widening CATEX                                                     420,000        95%         $      399,000
     III-3        Parking Garage/Baggage Make-Up Design and Construction                    51,955,000         0%                      -
     III-4        Baggage Claim Expansion Design and Construction                           10,696,000        95%             10,161,200
     III-5        West Development Area-Phase 3 Design and Construction                      7,545,000         0%                      -
     III-6        Conventional Hangars 2- Site Development Design and Construction           1,120,000         0%                      -
     III-7        Conventional Hangars 3- Site Development Design and Construction           1,120,000         0%                      -
     III-8        T-Hangars-Phase 2 Design and Construction                                  3,378,000         0%                      -
     III-9        Air Cargo Facility Design and Construction                                 3,206,000         0%                      -
    III-10        Maintenance Center Structure Design and Construction                      24,313,000         0%                      -
    III-11        Airport Business Park Land Acquisition - Phase 3                             864,000         0%                      -
    III-12        Airport Business Parking Existing Structures Demo - Phase 3                  214,000         0%                      -
    III-13        Airport Business Park Site Development Design and Construction             9,416,000         0%                      -
    III-14        Northern Greenway Design and Construction                                    457,000         0%                      -
    III-15   Shepherd Road Bridge Reconfiguration Design and Construction                   8,413,000         95%           7,992,350
           Subtotal Long-Term Projects                                                  $ 123,192,000                    $ 18,552,550
  TOTAL AIRPORT MASTER PLAN CAPITAL PROJECTS                                            $ 217,331,902                    $ 72,996,724


                                                          Table 8-13
                                                  ADDITIONAL CIP PROJECTS

Project                                                                                                   % AIP              Total AIP
Number                             Project Description                             Short-Term            Eligible            Eligibility
                Short Term CIP Projects (2009 - 2012)
 CIP-1       T/Ws A, B, & C Relocation and Reconstruction                      $        2,878,647            95%        $       2,734,715
 CIP-2       Security Enhancements                                                      1,934,484            95%                1,837,760
 CIP-3       West Apron Construction                                                    3,000,000            95%                2,850,000
 CIP-4       Passenger Security Expansion - Gift Shop/Rest Relocation                     500,000            95%                  475,000
 CIP-5       CT-80 Facility Modification Phase 2                                          730,775             0%                        -
 CIP-6       Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp - Design & Const                               6,412,500            95%                6,091,875
 CIP-7       Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) - Additional Land Acquisition                 8,435,000            95%                8,013,250
 CIP-8       Runway 2 Extension Design                                                    600,000            95%                  570,000
                Subtotal Short-Term CIP Projects                               $       24,491,406                       $      22,572,600

                Short-Term Master Plan Projects                                $       16,156,902                       $       6,218,374

                Total Short-Term Capital Projects                              $       40,648,308                       $      28,790,974

                Medium-Term Projects (2013 - 2017)
 CIP-6       Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp - Design & Const                      $        2,137,500            95%        $       2,030,625
                Subtotal Medium-Term CIP Projects                              $        2,137,500                       $       2,030,625

                Medium-Term Master Plan Projects                               $       77,983,000                       $      48,225,800

                Total Medium-Term Capital Projects                              $     80,120,500                        $      50,256,425

                Total Long-Term Capital Projects                               $ 123,192,000                             $      8,552,550

                Total Capital Projects                                         $ 243,960,808                            $      97,599,949
Source: CIP Projects - CMAA


       Financial Feasibility                                   8-18                                              FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                              Master Plan Update




8.7.4     Economic Stimulus

On February 17, 2009 President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
(“ARRA”) into law. The best estimate of the overall direct cost of the stimulus package is $789
billion. The Department of Transportation was provided $48.1 billion, of which approximately $1.1
billion was allocated to the AIP for “ready to go” airport projects. While the funding from the AIP is
not subject to normal AIP authorization, the funding is to be administered under the requirements
of AIP Discretionary funding. CMAA received a $3.0 million grant under this program during FY
2009 to construct the West Apron project at the Airport.

8.7.5     Facilities and Equipment Program

The FAA is funded by four primary appropriation accounts: AIP; Facilities and Equipment (F&E);
Operations and Research; and Engineering and Development. The F&E Program is the principal
means for modernizing and improving the air traffic control and airway facilities. Certain projects
may be eligible for funding under the F&E Program or the Air Traffic Organization Account (ATO).
However, for the purpose of this Financial Plan, it is assumed that funding under the F&E will be
unavailable for the Capital Projects.

8.8       TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

8.8.1     Finance and Grant Management

The State of Tennessee has been providing financial aid to its airports since 1930. In 1986, the
Tennessee General Assembly adopted legislation that created the State Transportation Equity
Fund. This fund allocates receipts from taxes collected from transportation fuels for distribution to
airports, rail, and waterways based upon their contribution to the fund. For aviation, these monies
are administered by the Tennessee Department of Transportation (TNDOT), with the advice and
assistance of the Tennessee Aeronautics Commission. These funds are used for statewide grants
to air carrier and general aviation airports in Tennessee and can cover up to 90 percent of the total
costs of airport projects depending on the type of project.

The CMAA has been awarded $4.3 million grants from TNDOT to fund certain Capital Projects
included in the short-term development period. These grants include $3.4 million for the design
and construction of the West Development Area (PWEs I-7 and I-8), $270,000 for the demolition of
the Target property (PWE I-10), and $658,000 for the CT-80 Facility Modification Project (CIP-5).

As depicted on Table 8-14, approximately $5.5 million in additional state grant funding will be
needed to fund the recommended Capital Projects during the short-term development period.
State grants in-hand together with anticipated state grants will provide approximately 24 percent of
the funding for the projects included in the short-term development period.

Although the CMAA has been successful in its efforts to secure significant amounts of state grants,
the TNDOT has not committed to provide the additional state grant funding included in the Funding
Plan. According to the TNDOT Finance Division, aviation fuel tax collections used to support the
Tennessee Equity Fund have decreased by approximately two-thirds in the first quarter of FY 2010
compared to the same quarter in FY 2009. These declines are likely the result of the slowing of
the economies of the state and the United States. As a result of the lower aviation fuel tax
collections, TNDOT will defer all airport project applications received after November 12, 2009.
This deferral does not affect the 2.5 percent “local” match of projects funded by the AIP. If TNDOT



Financial Feasibility                            8-19                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




funding is not restored to historical levels, the CMAA may be required to postpone certain Capital
Projects until such time that funding becomes available.

The estimated Financial Plan for the projects included in the medium-term and long-term
development period are set forth on Table 8-15 and Table 8-16, respectively. Based on the
uncertainty of these funds during the medium- and long-term development periods, it is assumed
that the CMAA would receive an average of $1.2 million per year, compared to recent grant awards
of over $2.0 million per year. Given the availability of state funds during the medium- and long-
term and under the assumption that state funding will be applied at the 90 percent level for eligible
projects and 2.5 percent for all AIP funded projects, the medium- and long-term projects are
estimated to be funded with approximately $18 million in state funds, which represents 8.9 percent
of the total project cost of the Capital Projects proposed during these periods.

8.9       THIRD PARTY/TENANT FINANCING

Funding by third parties or tenants is a viable source for certain of the proposed projects. This
source of funding is facility related and directly reduces the amount that must be funded by the
CMAA. Third party/tenant funding is a particularly important arrangement to pay the cost of
proprietary facilities that may be ineligible for FAA participation such as hangars, air cargo facilities,
and non-aeronautical development ( such as the Airport Business Park).

Third party/tenant funding may take many forms depending upon the particular facility to be
constructed. The third party or tenant may either pay for facilities directly or pledge to pay debt
service on municipal or special facility bonds issued by the sponsor to construct the proposed
facilities. One option in this regard would be to request proposals for development of the West
Development Area, hangar facilities, Airport Business Park, public parking garage, air cargo
development, and/or the aircraft maintenance center which are recommended in the medium-term
and long-term of this Master Plan Update to be constructed when justified by demand. A proposal
could be structured to allow non-tenant investors the opportunity to build and lease facilities which
would otherwise be funded by the tenant or the owner. This would require a minimal initial capital
investment from the CMAA and other local sources and, if properly arranged, could result in the
development of a first class facility.

It should be noted that third party or tenant facilities would likely be financed by the users.
Alternatively, financing would be through the use of industrial development bonds or special facility
bonds (subsequently described in a later section of this chapter). Such types of financing would
likely require a long-term lease (up to 30 years) to ensure the third party or tenant’s recovery of its
investment in the facility. The CMAA would collect land rental payments and benefit from the
residual value of the facility reverting to the CMAA upon expiration of the lease.

The funding plan assumes that no third party/tenant funding will be required for the Capital Projects
recommended in the short-term planning period. However, the CMAA may consider inviting third
party/tenant participation to fund the West Development Area (PWE I-8) in exchange for a long-
term facility lease or management contract. The CMAA may also consider requesting proposals
from its food/beverage and gift shop concessionaires regarding capital investment needed to
relocate the gift shop and develop a new food and beverage location beyond the security
checkpoint (CIP-4).

The CMAA may manage the quality and services provided in improvements funded by third
party/tenants through the Minimum Standards, which establish the minimum facility and service
requirements for private businesses wishing to provide commercial aeronautical services at the


Financial Feasibility                              8-20                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                 Master Plan Update




Airport, as well as to insure that those who provide commodities and services are not exposed to
unfair or irresponsible competition.

The Financial Plan assumes that third party/tenant financing will be used to fund certain hangar
development in the medium-term and design and construction of an air cargo facility, Airport
Business Park and an aircraft maintenance center in the long-term development period. As
depicted on Table 8-15 and Table 8-16, these improvements will collectively require an estimated
investment of approximately $44.3 million.

8.10      TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) was created as part of the Aviation and
Transportation Security Act passed by the US Congress and signed into law by President George
W. Bush on November 19, 2001. The TSA is responsible for security in all modes of transportation
in the United States. The TSA provides for the security screening of passengers and baggage at
the Airport.

The TSA collects certain security fees to pay for the cost of providing for the capital, operating, and
maintenance expenses associated with providing aviation security for the national aviation
transportation system. These fees include the September 11 Security Fee and the Aviation
Security Infrastructure Fee.

The Capital Projects recommended in the long-term development period include design and
construction of the Parking Garage / Baggage Make-up project (III-3). As depicted on Table 8-16,
the total cost of this project is estimated to be $52.0 million. This project includes the installation of
four in-line explosive detection systems (EDS) in connection with the proposed baggage make-up
structure. The cost of the four EDS machines is estimated to be approximately $4.0 million. As
presented on Table 8-16, this amount is assumed to be funded by the TSA.

8.11      NON-TRADITIONAL FUNDING SOURCES

Other potential non-traditional Federal, state and regional funding sources the CMAA might
consider include agencies dealing with surface transportation, soil conservation, forestry, multi-
modal economic development, or waste management. Because of the uncertain nature of these
sources of funding, the Funding Plan assumes that the CMAA will not receive any such funds,
although the CMAA could thoroughly examine these potential sources to fund the recommended
projects should the opportunity arise.

Table 8-14 presents the local funding plan for the short-term development period projects. As
depicted, the CMAA’s local funding requirement for the short-term development period is estimated
to be $2.4 million.

A summary of the Funding Plan for the proposed projects recommended in the medium-term is
provided on Table 8-15 and the long-term projects funding plan is provided on Table 8-16. The
CMAA’s local funding requirement for these projects is estimated to be $92.7 million.




Financial Feasibility                              8-21                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                        Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                    Master Plan Update




                        This Page Left Blank Intentionally




Financial Feasibility                  8-22                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                                                                                                      Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Master Plan Update


                                                                                                          Table 8-14
                                                                                          SHORT-TERM CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDING PLAN
                                                                                                                      AIP                                                       State
 Project                                                                                                                            Total       Stimulus/                                                   Third Party/
 Number                                                                         Project Cost    Entitlement    Discretionary         AIP       Other Grants           In-Hand        Anticipated              Tenant                   Local
 2009 Projects:
    I-2    West Side Development Environmental Assessment                       $    75,000     $          -   $          -     $         -     $           -     $           -         $    67,500          $           -         $      7,500
    I-3    Taxiway H Design (2009 - 35%)                                             98,230          93,318               -          93,318                 -                 -               2,456                      -                2,456
    I-5    Temporary Surface Parking Area Design (Phase 1)                           32,500                -              -               -                 -                 -              29,250                      -                3,250
    I-7    West Development Area Site Improvements Design & Const                   280,657                -              -               -                 -           252,591                   -                      -               28,066
  CIP-1    T/Ws A, B, & C Relocation and Reconstruction                           2,878,647         763,000       1,971,715       2,734,715                 -                 -              71,966                      -               71,966
  CIP-2a Security Enhancements (2009)                                             1,408,168       1,337,760               -       1,337,760                 -                 -              35,204                      -               35,204
  CIP-3    West Apron Construction                                                3,000,000                -              -               -         3,000,000                 -                   -                      -                    -
                                                          Total 2009 Projects   $ 7,773,202     $ 2,194,078     $ 1,971,715     $ 4,165,793    $    3,000,000     $     252,591         $   206,376          $           -        $     148,442
 2010 Projects:
    I-3    Taxiway H Design (2010 - 65%) & Construction                         $ 4,182,427     $         -     $ 3,973,306     $ 3,973,306    $              -   $            -        $   104,561          $           -        $     104,561
    I-5    Temporary Surface Parking Area Design (Phase 2)                          194,500               -               -               -                   -                -                  -                      -              194,500
    I-6    Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Phase 1                          700,000         665,000               -         665,000                   -                -             17,500                      -               17,500
    I-8    West Development Area - Phase 1 Structures Design & Const              3,107,000               -               -               -                   -        2,796,300                  -                      -              310,700
   I-10    Target Building Demolition                                               325,000               -               -               -                   -          270,000                  -                      -               55,000
  CIP-2b Security Enhancements (2010)                                               526,316               -         500,000         500,000                   -                -             13,158                      -               13,158
  CIP-4    Passenger Security Checkpoint Exp. - Gift Shop Relo/Restaurant           500,000         475,000               -         475,000                   -                -             12,500                      -               12,500
  CIP-5    CT-80 Facility Modification Phase 2                                      730,775               -               -               -                   -          657,698                  -                      -               73,078

  CIP-6a   Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp - Design & Const                            2,137,500      2,030,625               -       2,030,625                   -                -             53,438                      -               53,438
                                                         Total 2010 Projects    $ 12,403,518    $ 3,170,625     $ 4,473,306     $ 7,643,931     $             -   $    3,723,998        $   201,156          $           -        $     834,434
 2011 Projects:
    I-4    Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) - Land Acq. & Building Demo             $ 1,565,000     $         -     $ 1,486,750     $ 1,486,750     $             -   $           -         $    39,125          $           -        $      39,125
    I-8    West Development Area - Phase 1 Structures Design & Const               2,558,588              -               -                -                  -         351,109           1,951,621                      -              255,859
    I-9    Jubilee Drive Entrance Improvements Design and Const                      329,000              -               -                -                  -               -             296,100                      -               32,900
  CIP-6b Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp - Design & Const                              2,137,500      2,030,625               -        2,030,625                  -               -              53,438                      -               53,438
  CIP-7    Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) - Additional Land Acquisition              8,435,000              -       8,013,250        8,013,250                  -               -             210,875                      -              210,875
                                                         Total 2011 Projects    $ 15,025,088    $ 2,030,625     $ 9,500,000     $ 11,530,625    $             -   $     351,109         $ 2,551,158          $           -        $     592,196
 2012 Projects:
    I-1    Air Cargo/Airport Bus Park/Hangar Dev/Southern Dev EA                $     250,000   $         -    $            -   $         -     $             -   $              -      $   225,000          $           -        $      25,000
    I-5    Temporary Surface Parking Area Construction                              2,459,000             -                 -             -                   -                  -        2,213,100                      -              245,900
  CIP-6c Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp - Design & Const                               2,137,500     2,030,625                 -     2,030,625                   -                  -           53,438                      -               53,438
  CIP-8    Runway 2 Extension Design                                                  600,000        77,530                 -        77,530                   -                  -           15,000                      -              507,470
                                                         Total 2012 Projects    $   5,446,500   $ 2,108,155    $            -   $ 2,108,155     $             -   $              -      $ 2,506,538          $           -        $     831,808

 Total Short-Term Projects                                                      $ 40,648,308    $ 9,503,483    $ 15,945,020     $ 25,448,504    $   3,000,000     $    4,327,698        $ 5,465,228          $           -        $ 2,406,879




Financial Feasibility                                                                                          8-23                                                                                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                                                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Master Plan Update


                                                                                                           Table 8-15
                                                                                          MEDIUM-TERM CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDING PLAN


               Project                                                                                         AIP Eligibility                         AIP                                        Third Party/
               Number      Project Description                                                Project Cost    %      Amount         Entitlements   Discretionary      Total AIP       State         Tenant              Local
                         Medium-Term Projects (2013 - 2017)
                  II-1     North GA Apron Expansion-CATEX                                      $     5,000   95%      $    4,750    $     4,750     $            -    $    4,750     $     125      $       -       $       125
                  II-2     Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Environmental Assessment              750,000   95%         712,500              -                  -             -       675,000              -            75,000
                  II-3     Terminal Area Development Projects Environmental Assessment             125,000     0%              -              -                  -             -             -              -           125,000
                  II-4     Shepherd Road Enhancements and Bridge Reconstruction EA                 500,000   95%         475,000        475,000                  -       475,000        12,500              -            12,500
                  II-5     Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Design and Construction            23,861,000   95%       2,667,950              -         11,333,975    11,333,975     1,000,000              -        11,527,025
                  II-6     North GA Apron Expansion Design and Construction                      1,697,000   95%       1,612,150      1,612,150                  -     1,612,150        42,425              -            42,425
                  II-7     Purchase and Demolition of Remaining Properties within RPZ              757,000   95%         719,150        719,150                  -       719,150        18,925              -            18,925
                  II-8     Terminal Concourse Expansion Design and Construction                 22,675,000   95%      21,541,250      6,826,245                  -     6,826,245     1,000,000              -        14,848,755
                  II-9     Terminal Loop Road Widening Design and Construction                      77,000   95%          73,150         73,150                  -        73,150         1,925              -             1,925
                 II-10     Consolidated Rental Car QTA Design and Construction                   3,308,000    0%               -              -                  -             -             -              -         3,308,000
                 II-11     Passenger Security Screening Checkpoint Expansion - Phase 2             100,000   95%          95,000         95,000                  -        95,000         2,500              -             2,500
                 II-12     West Development Area-Phase 2 Design and Construction                 4,299,000   0%                -              -                  -             -     2,005,584              -         2,293,416
                 II-13     Conventional Hangars 1- Site Development Design and Construction      1,107,000   0%                -              -                  -             -             -      1,107,000                 -
                 II-14     Land Acquisition-T-Hangars-Phase 1                                    1,176,000     0%              -              -                  -             -             -              -         1,176,000
                 II-15     T-Hangars-Phase 1- Site Improvements Design and Construction          2,809,000    0%               -              -                  -             -             -              -         2,809,000
                 II-16     T-Hangars-Phase 1- Structures Design and Construction                   569,000   0%                -              -                  -             -             -        569,000                 -
                 II-17     Air Cargo Site Improvements Design and Construction                   5,698,000   0%                -              -                  -             -             -      5,698,000                 -
                 II-18     Demolition of Existing TANG Facilities and Site Grading                 543,000    0%               -              -                  -             -             -              -           543,000
                 II-19     Maintenance Center Site Development Design and Construction           4,228,000    0%               -              -                  -             -             -              -         4,228,000
                 II-20     Airport Business Park Land Acquisition - Phase 1                      1,243,000    0%               -              -                  -             -     1,118,700              -           124,300
                 II-21     Airport Business Parking Existing Structures Demo - Phase 1              70,000    0%               -              -                  -             -        63,000              -             7,000
                 II-22     Airport Business Park Land Acquisition - Phase 2                      1,617,000    0%               -              -                  -             -             -              -         1,617,000
                 II-23     Airport Business Parking Existing Structures Demo - Phase 2             180,000    0%               -              -                  -             -             -              -           180,000
                 II-24     Southern Greenway Design and Construction                               247,000    0%               -              -                  -             -             -              -           247,000
                 II-25     Shepherd Road Enhancements Design and Construction                      342,000   95%         324,900        324,900                  -       324,900         8,550              -             8,550
                           Total Medium Term Projects                                           77,983,000            48,225,800     10,130,345         11,333,975    21,464,320     5,949,234      7,374,000        43,195,446

                         Additional Medium-Term CIP Project(s)
                CIP-6c     Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp - Design & Const                        $ 2,137,500   95%      $ 2,030,625    $ 2,030,625    $            -    $ 2,030,625    $   50,766     $          -    $     56,109

                                                       Total Medium-Term Capital Projects     $ 80,120,500          $ 50,256,425    $ 12,160,970    $ 11,333,975     $ 23,494,945   $ 6,000,000    $ 7,374,000     $ 43,251,555




Financial Feasibility                                                                                               8-24                                                                                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                                                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Master Plan Update


                                                                                                             Table 8-16
                                                                                              LONG-TERM CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDING PLAN
                                                                                                                                            AIP
              Project                                                                                                                                       Total                  Third Party/
              Number       Project Description                                                   Project Cost       Entitlements       Discretionary         AIP          State      Tenant            TSA              Local
                         Long-Term Projects (2018 - 2027)
                 III-1     Northern Greenway Environmental Assessment                             $       75,000     $             -    $          -    $        -    $   67,500    $        -     $           -    $     7,500
                 III-2     Taxiway K Widening CATEX                                                      420,000             399,000               -       399,000        10,500             -                 -         10,500
                 III-3     Parking Garage/Baggage Make-Up Design and Construction                     51,955,000                   -               -             -             -             -         6,255,974     45,699,026
                 III-4     Baggage Claim Expansion Design and Construction                            10,696,000          10,161,200               -    10,161,200       267,400             -                 -        267,400
                 III-5     West Development Area-Phase 3 Design and Construction                       7,545,000                   -               -             -     6,790,500             -                 -        754,500
                 III-6     Conventional Hangars 2- Site Development Design and Construction            1,120,000                   -               -             -     1,008,000             -                 -        112,000
                 III-7     Conventional Hangars 3- Site Development Design and Construction            1,120,000                   -               -             -     1,008,000             -                 -        112,000
                 III-8     T-Hangars-Phase 2 Design and Construction                                   3,378,000                   -               -             -     1,667,575             -                 -      1,710,425
                 III-9     Air Cargo Facility Design and Construction                                  3,206,000                   -               -             -             -     3,206,000                 -              -
                III-10     Maintenance Center Structure Design and Construction                       24,313,000                   -               -             -             -    24,313,000                 -              -
                III-11     Airport Business Park Land Acquisition - Phase 3                              864,000                   -               -             -       777,600             -                 -         86,400
                III-12     Airport Business Parking Existing Structures Demo - Phase 3                   214,000                   -               -             -       192,600             -                 -         21,400
                III-13     Airport Business Park Site Development Design and Construction              9,416,000                   -               -             -             -     9,416,000                 -              -
                III-14     Northern Greenway Design and Construction                                     457,000                   -               -             -             -             -                 -        457,000
                III-15     Shepherd Road Bridge Reconfiguration Design and Construction                8,413,000           7,992,350               -     7,992,350       210,325             -                 -        210,325
                                                                                                                                                                               $
                         Total Long-Term Projects                                                $ 123,192,000       $ 18,552,550       $          -   $ 18,552,550   12,000,000   $ 36,935,000    $ 6,255,974     $ 49,448,476

                                                                                                                                                                               $
              Total Medium and Long-Term Capital Projects                                        $ 203,312,500       $ 30,713,520       $ 11,333,975   $ 42,047,495   18,000,000   $ 44,309,000   $ 49,507,529     $ 92,700,031




Financial Feasibility                                                                                              8-25                                                                                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                         Master Plan Update

                        This Page Left Blank Intentionally




Financial Feasibility                 8-26                                             FINAL REPORT
                                                                             Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                        Master Plan Update




8.12      LOCAL FUNDING REQUIREMENT – SHORT-TERM CAPITAL                                         PROJECTS

CMAA will be required to provide for the remaining funding requirement after the application of all
AIP grants, state grants, and tenant/third party financing (if any) to complete the proposed
improvements. Several local funding sources have been identified and are hereinafter described in
the short-term local funding plan. In the case of financially self-sufficient airports with positive cash
flows and accumulated cash reserves, a portion of the local share may be funded by such cash
flows and reserves.

The short-term local funding plan includes two primary mechanisms the CMAA may utilize to
provide for the local share required to complete the Capital Projects in the short-term planning
period: Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) and Airport cash. In addition to these funding sources,
descriptions of other alternative funding sources including Contract Facility Charges (CFCs) and
the issuance of municipal bonds (or other types of borrowing) are provided for projects included for
the medium-term and long-term planning periods.

8.13      FAA APPROVED PASSENGER FACILITY CHARGES

Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) are available to fund certain qualified capital development
projects at commercial passenger service airports. The Aviation Safety and Capacity Expansion
Act of 1990 (ASECEA) authorized the Secretary of the Department of Transportation to grant
public agencies that control commercial service airports enplaning more than 2,500 annual
passengers the authority to impose a PFC for each passenger boarding an aircraft (enplanement)
at a given airport. The purpose of the PFC program is to preserve or enhance safety, security,
capacity, competition, and mitigate the impact of aircraft noise. The ASECEA provides that PFC
revenues may only be used for projects approved by the FAA including: payment of all or part of
allowable project costs; for an airport’s AIP matching funds; to augment AIP funded projects; and
for payment of debt service or financing costs associated with eligible airport development bonds.

Under existing authorization by Congress, airport sponsors may impose a PFC at a level of up to
$4.50 per enplaned passenger. These charges are collected by the air carriers when tickets are
sold and are later remitted to the airport, less a handling fee of $0.11 per PFC collected. In FY
2009, the CMAA collected approximately $1.3 million in PFCs, based on 292,086 revenue
passenger enplanements10 and a PFC level of $4.50.

CMAA has previously received approval on four PFC applications to impose and use a PFC at the
Airport. Following is a summary of the CMAA’s existing PFC collection and use authority.

               PFC Application Number            Approved for Collection             Approved for Use
              PFC Application No. 1                             $ 9,235,431               $ 9,235,431
              PFC Application No. 2                             $ 150,000                 $ 150,000
              PFC Application No. 3                             $ 5,752,115               $ 5,752,115
              PFC Application No. 4                             $ 2,413,001               $ 2,413,001
              Total PFC Authority                               $17,550,547               $17,550,547

The CMAA is authorized to collect a PFC through November 1, 2012 based upon passenger
enplanement, PFC collection levels and PFC-eligible project costs. However, given the current

10
    Revenue passenger enplanements are those enplanements that pay for their tickets and exclude passengers using
“zero fare” tickets including employee travel and frequent flyer tickets. Revenue passenger enplanements are estimated
to be approximately 93 percent of total passenger enplanements.


Financial Feasibility                                    8-27                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




level of enplaned passengers and PFC collections, the CMAA will likely satisfy its collection
authority in advance of the November 1, 2012 charge expiration date. As depicted on Table 8-17,
the Financial Plan assumes that the Airport will apply for and receive approval to use nearly $1.4
million in PFC revenues to provide funding for eligible Capital Projects included in the short-term
development period.

As previously discussed, Congress has been working on a multi-year FAA reauthorization bill since
the expiration of Vision 100. In addition to the reauthorization of the AIP, the current House of
Representatives reauthorization bill would increase the maximum PFC level from $4.50 to $7.00
per revenue passenger enplanement. The current Senate reauthorization bill proposes no change
to the $4.50 level. For the purpose of this Master Plan Update, it is assumed that the PFC will
continue to be available at the $4.50 level and any increase in the level would provide the CMAA
with an additional source of AIP/PFC eligible Capital Project funding during the 19-year planning
period.

8.14      CONTRACT (CUSTOMER) FACILITY CHARGES

Rental car Contract Facility Charges (CFCs) are another type of restricted airport revenue similar
to the PFC. The primary distinction between a CFC and a PFC is that a PFC must be approved by
the FAA. A CFC is a charge paid by rental car customers per the number of contract days that a
vehicle has been rented. The CFC can be negotiated and implemented contractually between the
airport and the rental car companies. Generally, CFC revenue is limited to funding rental car
facilities at the airport; rental car related capital expense (debt service); and rental car related
operating and maintenance expenses.

Given that the rental car specific improvements recommended in the Master Plan Update are not
projected until the medium- and long-term development period, CFCs are not included in the short-
term local funding plan. However, the CMAA should consider implementing a CFC during the
short-term planning period if it believes that rental car related capital development would occur
within the next five years. As will be discussed in the Local Funding Requirement – Medium-Term
and Long-Term Capital Projects section, CFCs are projected to be needed as a funding source for
rental car facility development projected to begin in the medium-term development period.

Based on a current estimate of 150,000 contract days and a $3.50 CFC level, the CMAA would
generate approximately $525,000 in CFC revenues each year. If additional funds are needed,
higher fee levels could be used.

8.15      CMAA’S REMAINING FUNDING REQUIREMENT

As depicted on Table 8-17, the CMAA will be required to provide approximately $1.0 million in
Airport cash to complete the funding for the short-term Capital Projects. This will be accomplished
through a combination of Airport cash flows and unrestricted cash reserves.




Financial Feasibility                           8-28                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                               Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                          Master Plan Update




                                               Table 8-17
                            SHORT-TERM CAPITAL PROJECTS LOCAL FUNDING PLAN
                                                                                                    Local Funding
Project                                                                   Local Funding                        Airport
Number                                                                     Requirement            PFC           Cash
2009 Projects:
   I-2    West Side Development Environmental Assessment                   $       7,500      $          -     $        7,500
   I-3    Taxiway H Design (2009 - 35%)                                            2,456             2,456                  -
   I-5    Temporary Surface Parking Area Design (Phase 1)                          3,250                 -              3,250
   I-7    West Development Area Site Improvements Design & Const                  28,066                 -             28,066
 CIP-1    T/Ws A, B, & C Relocation and Reconstruction                            71,966            71,966                  -
 CIP-2a   Security Enhancements (2009)                                            35,204            35,204                  -
 CIP-3      West Apron Construction                                                    -                 -                  -
                                                    Total 2009 Projects   $      148,442     $     109,626     $       38,816
2010 Projects:
   I-3    Taxiway H Design (2010 - 65%) & Construction                    $      104,561     $     104,561    $             -
   I-5    Temporary Surface Parking Area Design (Phase 2)                        194,500                 -            194,500
   I-6    Passenger Security Checkpoint Expansion Phase 1                         17,500            17,500                  -
   I-8    West Development Area - Phase 1 Structures Design & Const              310,700                 -            310,700
  I-10    Target Building Demolition                                              55,000                 -             55,000
 CIP-2b   Security Enhancements (2010)                                            13,158            13,158                  -
 CIP-4    Passenger Security Exp - Gift Shop Relo/Restaurant                      12,500            12,500                  -
 CIP-5      CT-80 Facility Modification Phase 2                                   73,078                  -            73,078
CIP-6a    Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp - Design & Const                            53,438            53,438                  -
                                                   Total 2010 Projects    $      834,434     $     201,156     $      633,278
2011 Projects:
   I-4    Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) - Land Acq & Building Demo                 39,125     $           -     $       39,125
   I-8    West Development Area - Phase 1 Structures Design & Const              255,859           255,859                  -
   I-9    Jubilee Drive Entrance Improvements Design and Const                    32,900                 -             32,900
 CIP-6b   Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp - Design & Const                            53,438            53,438                  -
 CIP-7    Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) - Additional Land Acquisition             210,875           210,875                  -
                                                    Total 2011 Projects   $      592,196     $     520,171     $       72,025
2012 Projects:
   I-1    Air Cargo/Airport Bus Park/Hangar Dev/Southern Dev EA                   25,000     $           -     $       25,000
   I-5    Temporary Surface Parking Area Construction                            245,900                 -            245,900
 CIP-6c   Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp - Design & Const                            53,438            53,438                  -
 CIP-8      Runway 2 Extension Design                                            507,470           507,470                  -
                                                    Total 2012 Projects   $      831,808     $     560,908     $      270,900

Total Short-Term Projects                                                 $    2,406,879     $ 1,391,861       $ 1,015,018




   Financial Feasibility                                   8-29                                           FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




8.15.1 Airport Cash Flow and Reserves

Airport cash flow refers to the collection of revenues earned or received, and payment of expenses
incurred during a fiscal year. The ability of the Airport to use positive cash flows and unrestricted
reserves as a source of funding depends on its ability to generate Airport revenues in excess of the
cost of operating, maintaining and improving the Airport.

Surplus annual cash flows are deposited by the CMAA into one of several unrestricted reserve
accounts. The CMAA can accumulate any such annual surpluses and any investment interest in
the reserve accounts and use a portion of the available balances to pay a part of the development
costs for the Capital Projects.

As of the end of FY 2009, the CMAA had approximately $5.05 as of December 31, 2009. A
summary of CMAA’s unrestricted cash is presented on Table 8-18.

                                            Table 8-18
                                   UNRESTRICTED CASH RESERVES

                        Account
                        Numbers    Account Name                       12/31/2009
                           New     Service Agreement Fund             $ 2,000000
                         101020    Operating & Maintenance Reserve       2,218,375
                         101021    Renewal & Replacement                   770,824
                          Totals                                       $ 4,989,199


Because not all of the available reserves can be used for Capital Projects, the ability of the CMAA
to use cash flows and reserves will be described in more detail in the Historical Financial
Information and Pro Forma Cash Flow sections.

8.16      LOCAL FUNDING REQUIREMENT: MEDIUM-TERM AND LONG-TERM CAPITAL
          PROJECTS

As with the local funding of the Capital Projects in the short-term, the CMAA will need to provide
funding for any portion of a project that is not paid with the application of federal grants, state
grants and tenant/third party financing to complete the proposed Capital Projects in the medium-
term and long-term. The local funding plan for the medium-term and long-term Capital Projects is
presented on Table 8-19 and Table 8-20.




Financial Feasibility                            8-30                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                                     Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                                          Master Plan Update


                                                                                Table 8-19
                                                            MEDIUM-TERM CAPITAL PROJECTS LOCAL FUNDING PLAN
                                                                                                                                          Local Funding
                                                                                                                                                           Bond Funding
                                                                                         Local                                                                       Non
Project                                                                                 Funding           PFC        Airport             PFC              CFC      PFC/CFC                 Total
Number           Project Description                                                Requirement       PAYGO              Cash            Bonds        Bonds           Bonds                Bonds
             Medium-Term Projects (2013 - 2017)
  II-1           North GA Apron Expansion-CATEX                                     $         125     $     125      $          -    $           -    $          -        $       -    $           -
  II-2           Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Environmental Assessment                 75,000        75,000                -                -               -                -                -
  II-3           Terminal Area Development Projects Environmental Assessment               125,000     125,000                  -                -               -                -                -
  II-4           Shepherd Road Enhancements and Bridge Reconstruction EA                    12,500        12,500                -                -               -                -                -
  II-5           Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Design and Construction              11,527,025              -               -    11,527,025                  -                -     11,527,025
  II-6           North GA Apron Expansion Design and Construction                           42,425        42,425                -                -               -                -                -
  II-7           Purchase and Demolition of Remaining Properties within RPZ                 18,925        18,925                -                -               -                -                -
  II-8           Terminal Concourse Expansion Design and Construction                   14,848,755              -               -    14,848,755                  -                -     14,848,755
  II-9           Terminal Loop Road Widening Design and Construction                         1,925         1,925                -                -               -                -                -
 II-10           Consolidated Rental Car QTA Design and Construction                     3,308,000              -               -                -   3,308,000                    -        3,308,000
 II-11           Passenger Security Screening Checkpoint Expansion - Phase 2                 2,500         2,500                -                -               -                -                -
 II-12           West Development Area-Phase 2 Design and Construction                   2,293,416              -    2,293,416                   -               -                -                -
 II-13           Conventional Hangars 1- Site Development Design and Construction                 -             -               -                -               -                -                -
 II-14           Land Acquisition-T-Hangars-Phase 1                                      1,176,000              -    1,176,000                   -               -                -                -
 II-15           T-Hangars-Phase 1- Site Improvements Design and Construction            2,809,000              -    2,809,000                   -               -                -                -
 II-16           T-Hangars-Phase 1- Structures Design and Construction                            -             -               -                -               -                -                -
 II-17           Air Cargo Site Improvements Design and Construction                              -             -               -                -               -                -                -
 II-18           Demolition of Existing TANG Facilities and Site Grading                   543,000              -        543,000                 -               -                -                -
 II-19           Maintenance Center Site Development Design and Construction             4,228,000              -               -                -               -    4,228,000            4,228,000
 II-20           Airport Business Park Land Acquisition - Phase 1                          124,300              -        124,300                 -               -                -                -
 II-21           Airport Business Parking Existing Structures Demo - Phase 1                 7,000              -          7,000                 -               -                -                -
 II-20           Airport Business Park Land Acquisition - Phase 2                        1,617,000              -    1,617,000                   -               -                -                -
 II-21           Airport Business Parking Existing Structures Demo - Phase 2               180,000              -        180,000                 -               -                -                -
 II-22           Southern Greenway Design and Construction                                 247,000              -        247,000                 -               -                -                -
 II-23           Shepherd Road Enhancements Design and Construction                          8,550         8,550                -                -               -                -                -
                 Total Medium-Term Projects                                         $ 43,195,446      $286,950      $8,996,716      $26,375,780      $3,308,000      $4,228,000       $33,911,780
             Additional Medium-Term CIP Project(s)
CIP-6c           Terminal Ramp Rehab/N. Ramp - Design & Const                       $       56,109    $ 56,109       $          -    $           -    $          -    $           -    $           -


                 Total Medium-Term Projects                                         $ 43,251,555      $343,059      $8,996,716      $26,375,780      $3,308,000      $4,228,000       $33,911,780




          Financial Feasibility                                                     8-31                                                                                  FINAL REPORT
                                                                                                                                       Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                                                                                    Master Plan Update

                                                                             Table 8-20
                                                          LONG-TERM CAPITAL PROJECTS LOCAL FUNDING PLAN
                                                                                                        Local Funding
                                                                                                                                                       Bond Funding
                                                                                  Local                                                                           Non
Project                                                                          Funding            PFC           Airport            PFC              CFC       PFC/CFC               Total
Number        Project Description                                              Requirement         PAYGO           Cash             Bonds            Bonds       Bonds                Bonds
           Long-Term Projects (2018 - 2027)
  III-1       Northern Greenway Environmental Assessment                       $        7,500       $   7,500     $          -     $         -   $         -    $         -       $            -
  III-2       Taxiway K Widening CATEX                                                 10,500          10,500                -               -             -              -                    -
  III-3       Parking Garage/Baggage Make-Up Design and Construction               45,699,026       6,357,633                -               -    19,603,445     19,737,948       39,341,393
  III-4       Baggage Claim Expansion Design and Construction                         267,400         267,400                -               -             -              -                    -
  III-5       West Development Area-Phase 3 Design and Construction                   754,500               -          754,500               -             -              -                    -
              Conventional Hangars 2- Site Development Design and
  III-6       Construction                                                           112,000                 -         112,000               -             -                 -                 -
              Conventional Hangars 3- Site Development Design and
  III-7       Construction                                                            112,000                -          112,000              -             -                 -                 -
  III-8       T-Hangars-Phase 2 Design and Construction                             1,710,425                -        1,710,425              -             -                 -                 -
  III-9       Air Cargo Facility Design and Construction                                    -                -                -              -             -                 -                 -
 III-10       Maintenance Center Structure Design and Construction                          -                -                -              -             -                 -                 -
 III-11       Airport Business Park Land Acquisition - Phase 3                         86,400                -           86,400              -             -                 -                 -
 III-12       Airport Business Parking Existing Structures Demo - Phase 3              21,400                -           21,400              -             -                 -                 -
 III-13       Airport Business Park Site Development Design and Construction                -                -                -              -             -                 -                 -
 III-14       Northern Greenway Design and Construction                               457,000                -          457,000              -             -                 -                 -
 III-15       Shepherd Road Bridge Reconfiguration Design and Construction          210,325            210,325              -                -             -              -                 -
           Total Long-Term Projects                                            $ 49,448,476        $ 6,853,358    $ 3,253,725      $         -   $19,603,445    $19,737,948       $39,341,393

Total Medium and Long-Term Capital Projects                                    $ 92,700,031        $ 7,196,417   $ 12,250,441     $ 26,375,780   $ 2,911,445    $23,965,948      $73,253,173




          Financial Feasibility                                                             8-32                                                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                           Master Plan Update




The medium-term and long-term Capital Projects funding plan assumes the use of PFCs, CFCs,
funds from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and Airport bonds to provide funding
for the local requirement. As depicted on Table 8-19, the estimated local funding requirement for
the medium-term Capital Projects is $43.3 million, of which $343,000 will be funded with PFCs on a
“pay-as-you-go” basis, $9.0 million in Airport cash and $33.9 million to be funded from proceeds of
general obligation bonds, Airport revenue bonds, or other type of public debt.

As shown on Table 8-20, the estimated local funding requirement for the long-term Capital Projects
is $55.7 million, of which $6.9 million will be funded with PFCs on a “pay-as-you-go” basis, $6.3
million will be funded by the TSA, $3.2 million in Airport cash and $39.3 million to be funded from
proceeds of general obligation bonds, Airport revenue bonds, or other type of public debt as
hereinafter described.

8.17      ISSUANCE OF PUBLIC (MUNICIPAL) DEBT

Proceeds from the issuance of municipal bonds are a common source of funding for airport
sponsors in the United States. To obtain these funds, airports seek access to the capital markets
on reasonable terms for short-, intermediate- and long-term financing needs. The most commonly
used financing instruments to fund major airport capital development programs are tax-exempt or
tax-advantaged municipal debt, including General Obligation Bonds, General Airport Revenue
Bonds, Industrial Development Bonds, and Special Facility Bonds. The following is a brief
summary of these primary types of municipal funding instruments. Please note that not all of these
types of instruments may be suitable given CMAA’s existing financial position, but may be viable
funding alternatives in the future.

8.17.1 General Obligation Bonds

General Obligation Bonds (GO Bonds) are among the first municipal financing instruments used for
airport development. GO Bonds are a debt of the issuing agency and are supported by its taxing
power. Since these bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the issuing agency, they often
require voter approval. As a rule, GO Bonds generally have the lowest interest rates when
compared with other municipal financing instruments and typically do not require the establishment
of backup reserve funds or coverage to enhance their creditworthiness. GO Bonds used for airport
financing increases the issuing agency’s outstanding debt, and thus reduces the amount of credit
available to finance other community needs.

8.17.2 General Airport Revenue Bonds

The first General Airport Revenue Bonds (GARBs) used to support airport development were
issued in the late 1950’s. These bonds were supported by revenues from the commercial airlines
operating at an airport that entered into long-term agreements in which they agreed to pay fees
and charges necessary to pay debt service and the operating and maintenance (O&M) expenses
remaining after deducting revenue from non-airline sources. These agreements also restricted the
airport sponsor’s ability to undertake capital developments without airline approval and thus,
except in unusual circumstances, long-term, residual agreements with the commercial airlines that
guarantee a specific level of fees and charges are no longer required to support GARBs. The use
of GARBs for airport development purposes has created a market demand for tax-favored
investments, and today GARBs are the primary instrument used to finance airport development.
Unlike GO Bonds, GARBs have no tax support, but are secured by a pledge of either all revenues
of the airport (gross revenue pledge) or, more commonly, net airport revenues remaining after the



Financial Feasibility                           8-33                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




payment of O&M expenses (net pledge). The creditworthiness of the bond issuer will determine the
interest rate and the credit enhancements required to sell the GARBs.

8.17.3 Industrial Development Bonds/Economic Development Bonds and Special Facility
       Bonds

Industrial Development Bonds/Economic Development Bonds (IDBs) are used by governmental
entities for projects eligible under the Internal Revenue Code in conjunction with other incentives
such as local and state tax abatement and/or tax credits to create a package that will attract
businesses to these zones and provide employment opportunities for its residents. IDBs are
issued by a governmental entity which then loans the proceeds to a private company to provide
financing methods for economic development projects. The IDBs are secured by the payment on a
promissory note by the private company. As the issuer, the governmental entity acts as a conduit
for the private company and has no liability.

Special Facility Bonds (SFBs) are issued by airport sponsors to encourage specific developments.
Their use originated in the 1960's as a means to finance needed facilities for airlines upon
reasonable terms and conditions. The facilities constructed with the proceeds are leased by the
issuer to the airline for a period that coincides with the term of the SFBs. The SFBs are not a debt
of the issuer, but are supported solely by the revenues from the project they were issued to
construct, and the sole responsibility of the issuer is to use its best efforts to generate rental
revenue from the project.

8.17.4 Short-Term Financing Instruments

In certain instances, the issuance of municipal bonds is not the most cost-effective way to provide
for the local funding requirement at an airport. There are several different short-term financing
instruments available to an airport sponsor to provide short-term capital project funding. Airport
sponsors use short-term financing instruments to bridge the gap between when expenses occur
and when revenues are available. Short-term instruments often have maturities of less than one
year.

The most commonly used short-term financing instruments used to provide bridge funding include
Revenue Anticipation Notes, Bond Anticipation Notes, General Obligation Notes, and Commercial
Paper. Following is a brief summary of the types of short-term municipal funding instruments.

Revenue Anticipation Notes (RANs)

RANs are issued by an airport sponsor or municipality in anticipation of future revenues generated
by the improvement being financed. RANs may be used to provide short-term funding for projects
that are entirely self-sufficient, the revenues of which would reimburse the airport sponsor for
providing the capital needed to fund the improvement.

Bond Anticipation Notes (BANs)

BANs are issued by airport sponsors to provide for bridge or interim financing in anticipation of a
future long-term bond issuance. Therefore, BANs are secured by a municipality or airport
sponsor’s ability to issue long-term municipal bonds.




Financial Feasibility                           8-34                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




General Obligation Notes

Similar to GO Bonds, General Obligation Notes are issued with the full backing of the issuing
municipality. General Obligation Notes are used for the same purposes as RANs and BANs.

Commercial Paper and Letter of Credit

Perhaps the most popular instrument available to an airport to provide for short-term financing is
the use of commercial paper backed by a Letter of Credit (LOC). This instrument involves the sale
of commercial paper in the competitive financial markets by a commercial paper dealer in the name
of the airport sponsor or municipality. The commercial paper is sold under the guarantee of a bank
LOC. Commercial paper is typically issued in $100,000 increments to fund needed airport
improvements. The bank LOC is not expected to ever actually be drawn upon.

8.18      FINANCING CMAA’S REMAINING LOCAL REQUIREMENT

Although the use of municipal debt may represent a viable funding option for CMAA in the future,
the Financial Plan does not assume the use of municipal debt to fund the local requirement for the
short-term Capital Projects.

The Financial Plan assumes that the CMAA will issue bonds to finance certain of the medium-term
Capital Projects including: (i) a portion of the design and construction of Runway 02 and Taxiway A
Extension design and construction (II-5); (ii) design and construction of the Terminal Concourse
Expansion Design (II-8); (iii) Consolidated Rental Car Quick Turn Around (II-10); and (iv) design
and construction of a site for the proposed maintenance center (II-19). These Capital Projects
would collectively require approximately $33.9 million in bond proceeds, as depicted on Table 8-
20.

As depicted on Table 8-20, the issuance of municipal debt is an option to the CMAA to provide
local funds to complete certain long-term Capital Projects, including a portion of the proposed
public parking garage (III-3). Based on current estimated project costs, total bond funds of $39.3
million would be required to complete these projects. The CMAA may also consider the issuance
of municipal debt to fund facilities in lieu of third party/tenant funding. Examples of these projects
include certain hangar, air cargo site, and aircraft maintenance center development projects. This
funding option would provide the CMAA with greater control over the development of the proposed
facilities and the opportunity to maximize the potential revenues generated from these facilities.

Given the magnitude of the proposed Capital Projects to be financed in the medium-term and long-
term development periods, it is assumed that the debt instrument used would be a standard
General Airport Revenue Bond transaction based on similar terms and conditions as other airport
debt financings in the United States.

An order of magnitude bond sizing is provided on Table 8-21 to present an estimate of average
annual debt service based on needed funding for certain Capital Projects that may be financed
with municipal debt during the medium-term and long-term development periods. The demand for
these Capital Projects will determine the phasing of each project element as well as the needed
project funding. In reality, multiple financings would be necessary to accomplish the local funding
of the medium-term and long-term Capital Projects described above. However, for the purpose of
this Financial Plan, one bond sizing was prepared for all medium-term and long-term Capital
Projects to be financed to provide an order of magnitude estimate of the average annual debt
service the CMAA may expect to provide financing for each project element.


Financial Feasibility                            8-35                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                               Master Plan Update




In addition to the construction cost of the proposed projects, certain other costs will likely be
incurred in connection with an airport debt financing. These other costs may include the cost of a
debt service reserve account, the cost of capitalizing interest during the period of construction of
the proposed projects, the costs of obtaining various credit enhancements such as bond insurance,
and other miscellaneous costs of issuance. For financial planning purposes, total additional
financial costs used for this purpose include a debt service reserve and financing contingency of 10
percent and a 2 percent cost of issuance.

                                            Table 8-21
                        MEDIUM AND LONG TERM CAPITAL PROJECTS BOND SIZING
                                                                                            Bond
                                                                                         Requirement
    Project Fund Deposit
             Medium-Term Projects (2013 - 2017)
    II-5       Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Design and Construction                   $ 11,527,025
    II-8       Terminal Concourse Expansion Design and Construction                          14,848,755
    II-10      Consolidated Rental Car QTA Design and Construction                            3,308,000
    II-19      Maintenance Center Site Development Design and Construction                    4,228,000
               Total Medium Term Projects                                                  $ 33,911,780

                 Long Term Projects (2018 - 2027)
    III-3          Parking Garage/Baggage Make-Up Design and Construction                  $ 39,341,393
                 Total Long-Term Projects                                                  $ 39,341,393

                 Total Medium and Long-Term Projects                                       $ 73,253,173

    Debt Service Reserve and Financing Contingency                               10%       $ 8,324,224
    Cost of Issuance                                                              2%       $ 1,664,845

    Total Estimated Bond Size                                                              $ 83,242,242

    Average Annual Debt Service1                                                           $ 6,047,458

    1
     Assumptions:
    Term =    30 years
    Rate =    6%

Based on these assumptions, it is estimated that the $73.3 million in medium- and long-term
Capital Project cost to be funded with municipal debt would require a financing of approximately
$83.2 million, as depicted on Table 8-21.

To calculate the annual debt service (principal and interest) requirement based on a $83.2 million
financing, an assumed interest rate of 6.0 percent and a financing term of 30 years were used.
These assumptions have been adopted to provide a reasonable framework with which to estimate
the financing costs to be incurred if the CMAA proceeds with the development of the Capital
Projects. It is important to recognize, however, that due to the inherent fluctuations of the bond
investment market and of factors related to identifying probable construction costs, it is inevitable
that some or all of the financing assumptions will vary to some degree from those actually



Financial Feasibility                                  8-36                                    FINAL REPORT
                                                                           Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                      Master Plan Update




   employed and such variances may be significant and adverse to the estimates contained in this
   Master Plan Update.

   Based on these financing assumptions, the total average annual debt service (principal and
   interest) on the debt issued to fund the medium- and long-term Capital Projects would be
   approximately $6.0 million per year.

   8.19      ALLOCATION OF AVERAGE ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE TO PROJECT
             ELEMENTS

   As previously described, CMAA will construct each of the projects funded with municipal debt when
   justified by sufficient demand. Therefore, an allocation of average annual debt service among the
   projects being financed is necessary for the purpose of identifying the annual cost of undertaking
   each project element. Table 8-22 presents an allocation of average annual debt service among
   the medium- and long-term Capital Projects to be financed. The average annual debt service for
   each project element is useful in estimating the revenue levels needed to support the facilities
   being financed.

                                            Table 8-22
                MEDIUM AND LONG-TERM CAPITAL PROJECTS ALLOCATION OF DEBT SERVICE
                                                                                                        Allocation of
                                                                          Construction     Pro Rata     Avg. Annual
                                                                          Fund Deposit      Share       Debt Service
         Medium-Term Projects (2013 - 2017)
II-5       Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Design and Construction       $ 11,527,025       15.7%       $     951,620
II-8         Terminal Concourse Expansion Design and Construction            14,848,755       20.3%           1,225,848
II-10        Consolidated Rental Car QTA Design and Construction              3,308,000        4.5%             273,094
II-19       Maintenance Center Site Development Design and Construction       4,228,000        5.8%             349,045
            Total Medium-Term Projects                                     $ 33,911,780       46.3%      $    2,799,607
         Long-Term Projects (2018 - 2027)
III-3        Parking Garage/Baggage Make-Up Design and Construction        $ 39,341,393       53.7%      $    3,247,852
             Total Long-Term Projects                                      $ 39,341,393       53.7%           3,247,852

         Total Medium and Long-Term Projects                               $ 73,253,173      100.0%      $    6,047,458

   The annual debt service associated with this financing would be payable with a combination of
   PFCs, CFCs, and Airport revenues, as presented on Table 8-23.




   Financial Feasibility                                  8-37                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                          Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                         Master Plan Update




                                         Table 8-23
            MEDIUM AND LONG-TERM CAPITAL PROJECTS DEBT SERVICE FUNDING SOURCES
                                                                                                              Airport
                                                                            PFC             CFC              Revenues
         Medium-Term Projects (2013 - 2017)
II-5       Runway 02 and Taxiway A Extension Design and Construction      $ 951,620        $         -         $       -
II-8       Terminal Concourse Expansion Design and Construction                   -                  -         1,225,848
II-10      Consolidated Rental Car QTA Design and Construction                    -            273,094                 -
II-19       Maintenance Center Site Development Design and Construction           -               -             349,045
            Total Medium-Term Projects                                    $ 951,620       $ 273,094          $1,574,893
         Long-Term Projects (2018 - 2027)
III-3        Parking Garage/Baggage Make-Up Design and Construction        $       -      $1,618,374         $1,629,478
             Total Long-Term Projects                                      $       -      $1,618,374          1,629,478

         Total Medium and Long Term Projects                              $ 951,620       $1,891,468         $3,204,370



 8.20      HISTORICAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION

 A review of the historical revenues and expenses is helpful in determining the financial self-
 sufficiency of the Airport and to help determine the CMAA’s future ability to generate revenues
 needed to operate and maintain the Airport and to provide funding for the Capital Projects. The
 CMAA’s revenues and expenses from FY 2005 through FY 2009 are summarized on Table 8-24.

 8.20.1 Airport Revenues

 The operating revenues are classified by operating line items and have not been classified into any
 of the Airport’s cost centers. The following provides a summary of each of the primary types of
 Airport operating revenues.

 Airline revenues include landing fees, terminal rentals, baggage fees, loading bridge charges,
 security and janitorial reimbursements and ground handling fees. Airline revenues represented the
 second largest source of operating revenues at the Airport, representing 30.4 percent of revenues
 in FY 2009. As shown on Table 8-24, total airline revenues grew at an average annual rate of 2.6
 percent per year, from $2,010,516 in FY 2005 to $2,224,541 in FY 2009. Following is a summary
 of each type of airline revenue.

 Airline Landing Fees

 Airline landing fee revenues are generated by a per landing charge paid by the airlines for each
 1,000 pound units of maximum aircraft gross landed weight at the Airport in a given year. Landing
 fee revenues have grown at an average annual growth rate of 0.6 percent from FY 2005
 ($817,112) to FY 2009 ($836,455), but were down by 8.3 percent from FY 2008.

 Airline Terminal Rentals

 Airline terminal rents and baggage fees are those revenues generated for the airlines’ use of airline
 areas in the passenger terminal building. Airline terminal rentals include exclusive space (ticket
 counters and offices), preferential space (gate and passenger holdroom areas) and common use



 Financial Feasibility                                  8-38                                         FINAL REPORT
                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                           Master Plan Update




    space (baggage claim areas). Total terminal rental and baggage claim revenues remained static
    from $820,785 in FY 2005 to $829,824 in FY 2009.

    Airline Loading Bridge Rentals

    Airline loading bridge rentals are paid by the airlines for use of the passenger loading bridges at
    the Airport. Loading bridge rentals remained relatively static from FY 2005 to FY 2009, increasing
    slightly from $94,620 to $95,231 during that period.

                                                   Table 8-24
                                      HISTORICAL REVENUES AND EXPENSES
                                                                                                                      Avg.
                                                                                                                     Annual
                                                                                                                     Growth
                                              2005           2006        2007           2008           2009           Rate
AIRLINE REVENUES
   Landing Fees                            $ 817,112      $ 777,367     $ 813,525     $ 912,486     $ 836,455             0.6%
   Terminal rental fees                       457,491       457,491       446,115        498,597       462,961            0.3%
   Baggage fees                               363,294       363,294       400,062        377,796       366,863            0.2%
   Loading bridge fees                         94,620        94,620        94,952         90,639        95,231            0.2%
   Security and janitorial                    277,999       277,999       305,678        287,014       292,648            1.3%
   Ground handling fees                             -             -        84,411        247,468       170,383             N/A
                 Total Airline Revenues   $ 2,010,516    $1,970,771    $2,144,743     $2,414,000    $2,224,541            2.6%
NON-AIRLINE REVENUES
   Hangar rental                          $   356,882    $ 394,462     $ 414,059      $ 434,402     $ 464,894             6.8%
   Fuel sales                                 217,036       269,179       350,399        412,148       367,664           14.1%
   Parking                                  1,702,540     1,653,148     2,059,056      2,373,460     2,236,243            7.1%
   Rental car                                 711,123       733,688       896,489      1,112,892     1,245,847           15.0%
   Other                                      881,843       758,497       757,222        813,513       780,373           -3.0%
            Total Non-Airline Revenues    $ 3,869,424    $3,808,974    $4,477,225     $5,146,415    $5,095,021            7.1%

              Total Operating Revenues    $ 5,879,940    $5,779,745    $6,621,968     $7,560,415    $7,319,562            5.6%
OPERATING EXPENSES
  Personnel services                      $ 2,818,073    $2,728,006    $2,760,151     $3,125,659    $3,118,412            2.6%
  Contractual services                        148,796       214,191       237,179        487,740       174,941            4.1%
  Utilities and telephone                     474,539       493,684       514,146        500,418       532,131            2.9%
  Insurance                                   359,075       337,844       336,542        399,824       408,383            3.3%
  Repairs and maintenance                     154,496       151,412       155,910        269,761       168,547            2.2%
  Promotion                                   321,200       280,973       281,996        232,290       188,041          -12.5%
  Parking management and expenses             256,846       206,631       230,239        267,035       233,453           -2.4%
  Other Operating Expenses                    617,547     1,318,688       616,446        434,387       465,118           -6.8%
              Total Operating Expenses    $ 5,150,572    $5,731,429    $5,132,609     $5,717,114    $5,289,026            0.7%

OPERATING SURPLUS (DEFICIT)               $   729,368    $    48,316   $1,489,359     $1,843,301    $2,030,536           29.2%
NON-OPERATING REVENUES
  Interest income                         $    83,989    $ 142,059     $ 253,451      $ 312,533     $ 228,137            28.4%
NON-OPERATING EXPENSES
  2002 Bonds Debt Service                 $  906,420     $1,117,443    $1,223,889     $1,151,282    $ 783,798             -3.6%
  Less: PFCs to pay Debt Service           (303,651)      (374,343)     (410,003)      (385,679)     (262,572)
  Loss of sale of assets                       2,034              -         2,097              -             -              N/A
        Total Non-Operating Expenses      $ 604,803      $ 743,100     $ 815,983      $ 765,603     $ 521,226             -3.6%

 INCOME / (LOSS)                          $ 208,554     $(552,725)      $ 926,827     $1,390,231    $1,737,447           69.9%
Source: Historical revenues and expenses CMAA annual audited financial statements.




    Financial Feasibility                                    8-39                                          FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                           Master Plan Update




Security Reimbursements

The airlines are billed for the net cost of providing security at the Airport as required by 49 CFR
Part 1542, exclusive of amounts received by a TSA Law Enforcement Officer Reimbursement
Agreement. Security reimbursements are a direct bill based on each airline’s pro rata share of
enplanements in a given fiscal year. Security reimbursements have increased from $277,999 in
FY 2005 to $292,648 in FY 2009, representing an average annual rate of 1.3 percent.

Airline Ground Handling Fees

The CMAA began to provide below the wing ground handling services to certain airlines in FY
2007 and generated $84,411 in revenues in that year. Ground handling fees increased to
$247,468 in FY 2008 and decreased to $170,383 in FY 2009. Currently, the CMAA’s Ground
Handling Department provides ground handling services to Allegiant Air.

Airport Parking

The largest source of operating revenue in FY 2009 was derived from public parking revenues,
representing 30.6 percent of total operating revenues. Such revenues are generated by originating
passengers parking vehicles at the Airport. Parking revenues increased from $1,702,540 in FY
2005 to $2,236,243 in FY 2009, representing an average annual growth rate of 7.1 percent. This
growth is the result of growth in passenger activity at the Airport and an increase in the public
parking rates during the historical review period.

Rental Car Concession Revenues

Rental car revenues are derived from the rental car companies operating at the Airport. The rental
car companies pay the CMAA 10 percent of their gross receipts for this privilege. The rental car
companies also pay counter rentals, amounts for ready/return parking spaces, and QTA ground
rentals. Rental car revenues experienced significant growth since FY 2005, increasing from
$711,123 to $1,245,847 in FY 2009, an average annual growth rate of 15.0 percent. These
changes are attributable to increases in passenger activity at the Airport and annually higher
minimum annual guarantees.

Hangar Rentals

The CMAA receives hangar rental revenues for the space leased to hangar tenants. These
revenues are based on the lease terms as previously summarized in the Financial Framework
section. Hangar rental revenues have increased by 6.8 percent from FY 2005 ($356,882) to FY
2009 ($464,894).

Fuel Flowage Fees

The CMAA receives a fuel flowage fee of $0.13 per gallon for each gallon of aircraft fuel sold to
general aviation tenants at the Airport. Fuel flowage fee revenues have increased from $217,036
in FY 2005 to $367,664 in FY 2009, representing an average annual growth rate of 14.1 percent.

Other Operating Revenues

Other operating revenues include monies received from the Airport’s Fixed Base Operator (FBO),
TAC-Air; non-airline/non-rental car terminal rents including the TSA and other tenants; food,
beverage and retail concession revenues; rental property revenues; and advertising among other

Financial Feasibility                           8-40                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                           Master Plan Update




miscellaneous revenues. These revenues have decreased by an average of 3.0 percent per year
from $881,843 in FY 2005 to $780,373 in FY 2009.

Total Operating Revenues

Total operating revenues increased from $5,879,940 in FY 2005 to $7,319,562 in FY 2009. This
represented an average annual growth rate of 5.6 percent.

8.20.2 Airport Expenses

Historical expenses are also depicted on Table 8-24. As shown, the CMAA summarizes the
expense detail from its general ledger into 15 expense categories. The largest category of Airport
expenses is personnel services, which are the expenses to retain qualified personnel to operate
the Airport. Personnel services expenses were $3,118,412 in FY 2009, accounting for 59.0
percent of total operating expenses.

Utilities and telephone expense category was the next largest component, representing 10.1
percent of total operating expenses at the Airport in FY 2009. Contractual services expenses
experienced the highest levels of growth rates throughout the examined period, growing at an
average annual rate of 4.1 percent. The remaining expense line items are general operating
categories required to operate the Airport.

Total operating expenses have increased by an average annual growth rate of 0.7 percent from FY
2005 through FY 2009, but declined by 7.5 percent from FY 2008 to FY 2009.

8.20.3 Operating Surplus

As shown on Table 8-24 the CMAA has generated an operating surplus each year of the analysis
period. This surplus increased from $729,368 in FY 2005 to $2,030,536 in FY 2009.

8.20.4 Non-Operating Revenues

Non-operating revenues include PFCs and interest income. As previously discussed, PFCs are
restricted revenues used to pay for certain capital improvements and debt service approved by the
FAA. Therefore, only PFCs used to pay debt service are depicted on Table 8-24 as an ‘offset’ to
debt service from FY 2005 to FY 2009, as will be hereinafter described.

Interest income represents the earnings on the CMAA’s unrestricted investments. Interest income
increased from $83,989 in FY 2005 to $228,137 in FY 2009.

8.20.5 Non-Operating Expenses

2002 Bonds Debt Service

In 1990, the CMAA issued its Airport Revenue Bonds, Series 1990, for $13,980,000 to provide a
portion of the permanent financing of a major terminal redevelopment and expansion project. The
1990 Bonds were subsequently refinanced by the CMAA in 2002 with the issuance of its Variable
Rate Demand Revenue and Refunding Bonds, Series 2002A, in the amount of $12,625,000 and its
Taxable Variable Rate Demand Revenue Bonds, Series 2002B, in the amount of $4,125,000. The
debt service on the 2002A Bonds was approximately 28.8 percent PFC-eligible and the debt
service on the 2002B Bonds was 100 percent PFC-eligible. The 2002B Bonds were retired in May
2008. Table 8-24 presents the combined debt service on the 2002A Bonds and the 2002B Bonds.

Financial Feasibility                          8-41                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                 Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                            Master Plan Update




In addition to debt service, the CMAA recognized a loss of approximately $4,000 from the sale of
assets during the historical review period which were not fully depreciated.

As will be described in the Pro Forma Cash Flow section, the 2002A Bonds were refunded in May
2009.

8.21      PRO FORMA CASH FLOW

Projected operating revenues for the short-term development period are presented on Table 8-25.
These figures were projected based on historical trends and existing lease agreements, as well as
anticipated growth in passenger enplanements and general aviation operations. The following
summarizes the projection of operating revenue presented in Table 8-25.

8.21.1 Airport Revenues

Airline Revenues

As previously described, airline rates and charges are adopted annually by the CMAA. Although
the CMAA may ultimately implement a cost recovery methodology to calculate airline rates and
charges in the future, the pro forma cash flow assumes that the CMAA will increase such charges
by the projected growth rate in the CPI as projected by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), or
1.2 percent per annum from FY 2010 to FY 2014.

Airline landing fee revenues are budgeted to decrease from $836,455 in FY 2009 to $609,717 in
FY 2010 as a result of potential flight reductions. Airline landing fee revenues are projected to
increase thereafter based on a combination of the level of anticipated airline activity and annual
increases in the landing fee rate tied to the CPI. Because of the projected increases in commercial
airline activity and increases in the CPI, airline landing fee revenue is projected to increase from
$609,717 in Budget FY 2010 to $664,320 in FY 2014, an average annual increase of 2.2 percent
per year.

Airline terminal rentals are also budgeted to decrease significantly in FY 2010, declining from
$462,961 in FY 2009 to $393,991. This reduction is the result of loss of a consolidation of terminal
rental space by Delta and Northwest stemming from a merger of those airlines on October 28,
2008. Airline terminal rental and baggage fees, loading bridge fees, security reimbursements, and
ground handling fees are projected to grow at CPI rate from FY 2010 through FY 2014.

Total airline revenues are projected to increase from $1,868,712 in FY 2010 to $1,987,452 in FY
2014.




Financial Feasibility                           8-42                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                            Master Plan Update




                                                   Table 8-25
                                             PRO FORMA CASH FLOW

                                                                                                                       Avg.
                                                                                                                      Annual
                                        Budget                                                                        Growth
                                         2010           2011            2012            2013            2014           Rate
Airline Revenues
   Landing Fees                     $    609,717    $    610,574    $    612,596    $    637,934    $    664,320           2.2%
   Terminal rental fees                  393,991         398,325         403,504         408,749         414,063           1.2%
   Baggage fees                          366,863         370,898         375,720         380,604         385,552           1.2%
   Loading bridge fees                    81,795          82,695          83,770          84,859          85,962           1.2%
   Security Reimbursements               292,648         295,867         299,713         303,609         307,556           1.2%
   Ground handling fees                 123,698         125,059         126,685         128,331         130,000            1.2%
      Total Airline Revenues        $ 1,868,712     $ 1,883,418     $ 1,901,987     $ 1,944,086     $ 1,987,452            1.6%

Non-Airline Revenues
  Hangar rental                     $     462,719   $     467,809   $     473,891   $     480,051   $     486,292          1.2%
  Fuel sales                              372,344         376,948         381,553         386,586         391,620          1.3%
  Parking                               2,085,076       2,065,069       2,045,062       2,103,063       2,162,709          0.9%
  Additional Parking Revenues                   -               -               -          97,567          97,567          0.0%
  Rental car                            1,214,901       1,206,027       1,197,442       1,229,277       1,261,988          1.0%
  West Development Area                         -               -         259,043         262,411         265,822          1.3%
   Other                                776,546         785,088         795,294         805,633         816,106            1.2%
      Total Non-Airline Revenues    $ 4,911,586     $ 4,900,941     $ 5,152,285     $ 5,364,589     $ 5,482,103            2.8%

      Total operating revenues      $ 6,780,298     $ 6,784,359     $ 7,054,272     $ 7,308,675     $ 7,469,556            2.4%

Operating Expenses
  Personnel services                $ 3,062,987     $ 3,141,525     $ 3,222,076     $ 3,304,693     $ 3,389,428            2.6%
      OPEB Liability Funding            351,098         360,100         369,334         378,804         388,517            2.6%
  Contractual services                  175,520         182,769         190,317         198,177         206,361            4.1%
  Utilities and telephone               504,072         518,716         533,784         549,291         565,248            2.9%
  Insurance                             439,372         453,735         468,569         483,887         499,706            3.3%
  Repairs and maintenance               247,224         252,663         258,222         263,903         269,709            2.2%
  Promotion & Air Service Dev           315,165         318,632         322,774         326,970         331,221            1.2%
  Parking-management fees               247,295         250,015         253,265         256,558         259,893            1.2%
   Other Operating Expenses             378,075         382,234         387,203         392,236         397,335            1.2%
      Total Operating Expenses      $ 5,720,808     $ 5,860,389     $ 6,005,544     $ 6,154,518     $ 6,307,418            2.5%

Operating Surplus (Deficit)         $ 1,059,490     $    923,970    $ 1,048,728     $ 1,154,157     $ 1,162,138            2.3%

Nom-Operating Revenues
  Interest income                   $    138,915    $    138,915    $    138,915    $    138,915    $    138,915           0.0%

Non-Operating Expenses
  2009 Bonds Debt Service           $    644,889    $    644,889    $    644,889    $    644,889    $    644,889           0.0%
   Less: PFCs to pay Debt Service   $ (185,921)     $ (185,921)     $ (185,921)     $ (185,921)     $ (185,921)            0.0%
      Total        Non-Operating
      Expenses                      $    458,968    $    458,968    $    458,968    $    458,968    $    458,968           0.0%
Income /(Loss)                      $ 739,437    $ 603,918          $    728,676    $    834,104    $    842,085           3.3%
   Source: Budget FY 2010 revenues and expenses CMAA.




  Financial Feasibility                                     8-43                                            FINAL REPORT
                                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                             Master Plan Update




AIRLINE COST PER ENPLANED PASSENGER
Airline cost per enplaned passenger is a ratio that measures the cost to an airline or group of
airlines serving an airport. The airline cost per enplaned passenger is calculated by dividing the
total revenues an airport receives from its passenger airlines in a year by the total number of
enplaned passengers in the same year. This ratio is useful to both airports and airlines in
evaluating an airport’s cost relative to the cost of operating at another airport. For the purpose of
calculating the airline cost per enplaned passenger for the Airport, ground handling fees were
removed from total airline revenues, as these fees are only collected from airlines who engage the
CMAA’s ground handling service in lieu of providing those services with airline employees and
equipment. As depicted on Table 8-26, the airline cost per enplaned passenger is estimated to
increase from $5.58 in FY 2010 to $5.73 in FY 2014, an estimated average annual rate of 0.6
percent per year, which is less than the projected growth in CPI during that time.

                                             Table 8-26
                          PROJECTED AIRLINE COST PER ENPLANED PASSENGER
                                                                                                                     Avg.
                                                                                                                     Ann
                                    Budget                                                                          Growth
Cost Per Enplaned Passenger          2010           2011               2012            2013           2014           Rate
Airline Costs
   Airline Revenues                $ 1,868,712    $ 1,883,418     $ 1,901,987     $1,944,086     $1,987,452           1.55%
   Less: Ground Handling Fees       (123,698)      (125,059)       (126,685)       (128,331)       (130,000)          1.25%
   Net Airline Revenues            $1,745,014     $1,758,359      $1,775,302      $1,815,755     $ 1,857,452          1.57%

Enplanements                            312,497        309,498         306,500         315,193        324,132         0.92%

Airline Cost        per Enplaned
Passenger                           $      5.58    $       5.68    $      5.79     $      5.76    $      5.73         0.65%



Airport Parking

Airport parking revenues are affected by the parking rates charged by the CMAA, the Airport’s
passenger profile (business or leisure), and the availability of parking spaces, among other factors.
However, the most important factor in airport parking revenues is directly related to the level of
originating passenger enplanement activity at an airport. Therefore, Airport parking revenues have
been projected at the FAA Approved Enplanement Forecast, as described in Chapter 3 of the
Master Plan Update.

Airport parking revenues are budgeted to decrease from $2,236,243 in FY 2009 to $2,085,076 in
FY 2010, based on an assumed 10 percent reduction in enplaned passengers in FY 2010.
However, based on four months year-to-date enplanement activity, FY 2010 enplanements are 7.2
percent over the same period in FY 2009. Airport parking revenues are projected to grow at an
average annual rate of 0.9 percent to $2,162,709 in FY 2014.

ADDITIONAL PARKING REVENUES
The short-term Capital Projects include the design and construction of a surface parking area (I-5)
in 2012, which is estimated to cost $2,686,000. It is assumed that the CMAA will increase certain
parking rates at the Airport, which together with the demand induced by passengers using this
remote lot would result in an amount necessary to recover approximately one half or 50 percent of


Financial Feasibility                                   8-44                                                 FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




the amortization of the total cost of the proposed surface parking lot. Therefore, additional parking
revenues are estimated based on the recovery of approximately 50 percent of the amortization of
the gross cost associated with the proposed surface parking lot ($2,686,000). Based on a 30-year
useful life and a 6.0 percent imputed interest rate, the annual amortization of this improvement is
estimated to be $195,135 per year.

Rental Car Companies

As previously discussed, five rental car companies operate on the Airport. The agreements
covering terminal counter space and ready/return parking spaces expired on December 31, 2002
and the rental car companies have continued to operate these spaces on a month-to-month basis.
Of the five rental car companies operating on the Airport, three are operating rental car QTA
facilities under current operating agreements. These agreements originated on April 1, 2008 and
expire on March 31, 2010. These three service facility agreements further provide for one
additional three-year term, extending the agreement to March 31, 2013. It is assumed that the
rental car agreements will be extended or renegotiated upon similar terms as the existing rental car
agreements during the pro forma cash flow period (FY 2010 – FY 2014).

Based on an analysis of the CMAA’s budget for FY 2010, approximately 89 percent of the
operating revenue generated by the rental cars at the Airport is a result of the 10 percent
concession fee on the rental car companies at the Airport. The remaining 11 percent is generated
from terminal rentals, service facility rentals and ready/return space fees. The portion of rental car
revenues related to the concession fees are projected to increase by the growth of enplanements.
The FAA approved enplanement forecast presented in Chapter 3, adjusted for estimated actual
2009 enplanements was used for this purpose. Based on this adjusted forecast, the total
enplanements are projected to grow by an average annual rate of 0.9 percent from FY 2010 to FY
2014. The portion of rental car revenues related to terminal space and service facility rentals is
projected to increase by the CPI index each year (4.0 percent) through FY 2014.

Based on these assumptions, rental car revenue is anticipated to increase from $1,214,901 in
budget FY 2010 to $1,261,988 in FY 2014, representing an average annual growth rate of 1.0
percent over this period.

Hangar Rentals

Historically, the operating revenues associated with hangar rentals increased at an average annual
growth rate of 6.8 percent from FY 2005 to FY 2009. For the purposes of this Financial Plan, it
was assumed that the operating revenues from this source would increase by a 1.2 percent
increase in the CPI. Total hangar rentals are projected to increase from $462,719 in FY 2010 to
$486,292 in FY 2014.

WEST DEVELOPMENT AREA HANGAR RENTALS
As described in Chapter 7 of the Master Plan Update, Phase 1 of the West Development Area
project in the short-term development period includes the design and construction of a 20-acre site
(I-7), fuel farm, two hangars with a total space of 22,000 square feet and approximately 30 vehicle
parking spaces (I-8). As depicted on Table 8-14, these improvements are projected to be
constructed in 2010 and 2011, and assumed to be available for lease in 2012 at a total estimated
construction cost of $5.9 million, of which approximately $3.2 million is related to hangar
development. Total hangar rental revenues are estimated based on an 8 percent of fair market
value methodology, although 10 percent could be used. Assuming the CMAA is successful in
leasing these facilities at fair market value, total West Development Area hangar rental revenues


Financial Feasibility                            8-45                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                           Master Plan Update




are estimated to be $259,043 beginning in FY 2012. These revenues are projected to increase
annually by the projected CPI rate, to $265,822 in FY 2014.

Fuel Flowage Fees

From FY 2005 through budget FY 2009, the Airport realized an average annual growth rate of 14.1
percent in fuel flowage fees at the Airport. It was assumed that these operating revenues would
increase by the growth of general aviation operations at the Airport each year thereafter. As
shown in Table 8-25, this results in the fuel flowage fee increasing from approximately $372,344 in
FY 2010 to $391,620 in FY 2014, representing an average annual growth rate of 1.3 percent over
this period.

Total Operating Revenue

As shown on Table 8-25, total operating revenue is projected to increase from $6,780,298 in FY
2010 to $7,469,556 in FY 2014, representing an average annual growth rate of 2.4 percent over
this period.

8.21.2 Operating Expenses

Projected operating expenses for the financial forecast period are also presented in Table 8-25.
Based on an analysis of historical growth trends, certain categories including personnel services,
contractual services, insurance, and repairs and maintenance were anticipated to increase at each
respective category’s historical growth rate for each year over the financial forecast period.
Utilities, promotion and parking management fees and expenses are projected to grow at projected
rate of growth in the CPI as projected by the CBO.

Collectively, operating expenses are projected to increase from $5,720,808 in budget FY 2010 to
$6,307,418 in FY 2014. This represents an average annual growth rate of 2.5 percent.

Non-Operating Expenses

2009 BONDS DEBT SERVICE
In May 2009, the CMAA decided to refund $12,625,000 of outstanding 2002A Bonds to reduce its
annual debt service obligations resulting in enhanced cash flows. The CMAA issued the 2009
Series Revenue Refunding Bonds in the par amount of $6,600,000 to be used in combination with
$6,025,000 in restricted reserve funds and PFCs to refund the 2002A Bonds and to pay for certain
costs of issuance. The 2009 Bonds have a fixed interest rate of 5.41 percent with a 15-year
amortization and a 10-year maturity. A schedule of 2009 Bonds debt service is provided on Table
8-27.




Financial Feasibility                           8-46                                       FINAL REPORT
                                                                              Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                                         Master Plan Update




                                                      Table 8-27
                                              DEBT SERVICE - 2009 BONDS

                                                          5.41%           Debt       Outstanding
                        Fiscal Year      Principle       Interest        Service       Balance
                                                                                      $ 6,557,1691
                              2010          292,268         352,620        644,888       6,600,000
                              2011          308,912         335,977        644,889       6,600,000
                              2012          326,289         318,600        644,889       6,600,000
                              2013          344,643         300,246        644,889       6,600,000
                              2014          364,030         280,859        644,889       6,600,000
                            2015-2019     4,921,027       1,047,160      5,968,187       6,600,000
                              Total     $ 6,557,169     $ 2,635,462    $ 9,192,631   $ 39,600,000
                        1
                         Net of $ 42,831 principle payment made in FY 2009
                        Source: CMAA FY 2009 Audited Financial Statements.

The 2009 Bonds are collateralized by the Net Revenues and all other property in which security
interests or liens are granted as specified in the Loan and Purchase Agreement, the Pledge
Agreement, and the Assignment between the CMAA and First Tennessee Bank. The 2009 Bonds
are also backed by an Airport Operation Service Contract with the City of Chattanooga. Under the
Service Contract, the City is obligated to make debt service payments to the bank in the event of
default by the CMAA.

The debt service on the 2009 Bonds is approximately 28.8 percent PFC-eligible based on an
analysis of the CMAA’s PFC Program. As depicted on Table 8-25, PFCs are used to reduce the
2009 Bonds debt service to be paid with Airport revenues.

CAPITAL PROJECTS
As previously discussed, the local funding for all the short-term period development is anticipated
to be paid from a combination of AIP and State grants, PFCs, and Airport cash. Given the CMAA’s
existing reserves of $5.0 million as of the end of December 2009 and $2.1 million in positive cash
flow through 2012, the CMAA is projected to be able to provide for the local funding requirement of
the short-term Capital Projects.

Two of the short-term Capital Projects are self-liquidating projects. These projects include a
portion of the West Airfield Development and the Surface Parking Lot project. These projects are
anticipated to generate additional revenues to the CMAA to be used to offset the cost of funding
these improvements. For the purposes of this Master Plan Update, it was assumed that CMAA
would be able to recover at least a portion of the additional amortization expenses associated with
these two projects. The additional operating revenues resulting from increased parking revenues
and the new hangar leases are included in the pro forma cash flow.

8.21.3 Pro Forma Cash Flow Analysis Summary

Table 8-25 presents the Airport’s estimated operating income for the period of FY 2010 through
2014 based on the projection of operating revenues and operating expenses discussed above. As
a result of the analysis discussed herein, operating surplus is anticipated to increase by 2.3
percent from $1,059,490 in FY 2010 to $1,162,138 in FY 2014.




Financial Feasibility                                        8-47                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                  Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport Authority
                                                                                             Master Plan Update




Total Airport income after payment of debt service on the 2009 Bonds is the amount that may be
used to pay the local, non-PFC share of the Capital Projects or that may be deposited in the
CMAA’s unrestricted reserve account. Total Airport income is projected to increase from $739,437
in FY 2010 to $842,085 in FY 2014.

8.22      SUMMARY

Following is a summary of the Financial Plan including the assumptions used to fund the Capital
Projects recommended in the short-term development period and pro forma cash flows:

    CMAA’s financial structure, current leases with major tenants, and historical revenues and
     expenses were examined to project future operating revenues and operating expenses.
    The total estimated cost of the short-term Capital Projects is $40.6 million, as presented in
     Table 8-14.
    The funding for the proposed Capital Projects during the short-term development period is as
     follows:
     o    FAA AIP                     $25.4 million
     o    Economic Stimulus             3.0 million
     o    State                         9.8 million
     o    PFC                           1.4 million
     o    CMAA                          1.0 million
    The total estimated cost of the medium- and long-term Capital Projects is $203.3 million, as
     presented in Table 8-16.
    The funding for the proposed Capital Projects during the medium- and long-term development
     period is as follows:
     o    FAA AIP                     $42.0 million
     o    State                        18.0 million
     o    Third Party/Tenant           44.3 million
     o    PFC paygo                     7.2 million
     o    TSA                           6.3 million
     o    CMAA Cash                    12.3 million
     o    Airport Bonds                73.3 million
    It is recommended that CMAA closely monitor the Federal AIP and the TNDOT funding
     program for any changes that may enhance or adversely affect the assumed future funding of
     the recommended projects.
    Total Airport operating revenues are projected to increase from $6.8 million in FY 2010 to
     approximately $7.5 million in FY 2014, representing an average annual growth rate of 2.4
     percent.
    Operating expenses are projected to increase from $5.7 million in FY 2010 to $6.3 million in FY
     2014, representing an average annual growth rate of 2.5 percent.
    Operating surplus is projected to increase from $1.1 million in FY 2010 to $1.2 million in FY
     2014 based on the assumptions contained in this chapter.
    The staging of the recommended projects is flexible. CMAA should proactively monitor/revise
     these projects on an annual basis to ensure projects are not implemented before the
     appropriate demand levels.


Financial Feasibility                            8-48                                        FINAL REPORT
                                                                    Chattanooga Metropolitan Airport