U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000


Skip to content U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway AdministrationU.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration

Transportation Performance Management

 

State Highway Infrastructure Report - Tennessee

In the line graphs below, FHWA has shifted the "Year" label in the x-axis back by one year, from Data Reporting Year to Data Collection Year. More information

The information displayed is provided by the State Department of Transportation (DOT) in their 2018 Baseline Performance Report, 2019 Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) data submittal, and 2020 Mid Performance Period (MPP) Progress Report and has not been edited by FHWA. Any questions about individual State reports should be directed to the respective State DOT.

Please note: FHWA has posted data from State DOT reports to help bring context to their performance targets. This data may result in some discrepancies among published State DOT performance data due to data sources and reporting years used when establishing the performance targets.

Significant Progress Determination

Using data from the 2020 MPP Progress Report, FHWA has determined whether a State DOT has made significant progress toward achieving its individual targets for five National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) measures and one National Highway Freight Program (NHFP) measure, as described in 23 CFR 490.109.

Full Significant Progress Determination Table

  • Interstate Pavement in Good Condition

    • Trend through 2021

      Desired trend: ↑

      Tennessee % Interstate Lane Miles Good Condition


  • Interstate Pavement in Good Condition 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
    Condition/Performance -- 72.0 71.5 -- --
    Target -- -- -- -- 60.0

    Behind the data: For the first performance period only, baseline condition and 2-year targets are not required for the Pavements on the Interstate System measures.


  • Interstate Pavement in Good Condition

    The 4-year target selected considers four years’ worth of projected decline plus a percentage equivalent to the expected variability for the % cracking individual distress metric, which could affect interstate pavement condition ratings.

    Network analysis findings indicate funding required to affect good rating values is significant while funding required to maintain percent poor is minimal.

    Based on full distress measure, all three pavement distresses must be rated as good for an overall good rating; variability with percent cracking distress data has potential to impact good values significantly (as much as 8%).

    N/A
    N/A
    N/A
  • Data Sources:
    Tennessee 2018, 2020 Biennial Performance Report
    Tennessee 2019, 2020 HPMS Data Submittal

  • Interstate Pavement in Poor Condition

    • Trend through 2021

      Desired trend: ↓

      Tennessee % Interstate Lane Miles in Poor Condition


  • Interstate Pavement in Poor Condition 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
    Condition/Performance -- 0.3 0.3 -- --
    Target -- -- -- -- 1.0
  • Behind the data: For the first performance period only, baseline condition and 2-year targets are not required for the Pavements on the Interstate System measures.


  • Interstate Pavement in Poor Condition

    Based on network analysis of pavement management data, it is expected that values for % poor will stay within reasonable range of recent historical observations. Thus, targets were set within a similar range.

    Minimum pavement condition requirement for Interstates is no more than 5.0% in poor condition.

    N/A
    N/A
    N/A
  • Data Sources:
    Tennessee 2018, 2020 Biennial Performance Report
    Tennessee 2019, 2020 HPMS Data Submittal

  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Good Condition (Full-distress + IRI)

    • Trend through 2021

      Desired trend: ↑

      Tennessee % Non-Interstate NHS Lane Miles In Good Condition


  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Good Condition (Full-distress + IRI) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
    Condition/Performance -- -- 41.6 -- --
    Target -- -- 42.0 -- 40.0
  • Behind the data: Because Tennessee State DOT has established targets based on full-distress plus IRI data, FHWA has calculated the value for Actual using full-distress plus IRI data for assessing target achievement.


  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Good Condition (Full-distress + IRI)

    Non-interstate targets are based on the "full measure" as defined in 23 CFR 490.313(c), not IRI alone as defined in paragraph e of the same section. Targets were established per the full measure on time in accordance with the law as defined in 23 CFR 490.105(e). Using the “full measure”, TDOT estimated a baseline value of 44.8%. Performance projections of the full measure at current funding levels extended below what TDOT considers an acceptable state of good repair, so a minimum target was selected within range of TDOT’s historical state of good repair.

    Performance projections using IRI alone, in which projected decline is much less severe, indicate non-interstate NHS % Good will be 72.8% at the mid-performance period and 72.2% by the end of the performance period.

    The 2-year target of 41.6 was not met by a margin of 0.4%. The baseline value per the “full measure” was 44.8%, indicating a 2-year decline of 3.2%. Local state-of-good-repair metrics indicate a slow decline in the condition of the non-interstate NHS. It is expected that the end-of-cycle 4-year calculation will be very close to the 4-year target value.

    N/A
    In late 2020, funding for the state route resurfacing program was increased from $164-milion to $195-million. These added funds will affect the 2021 resurfacing year but are expected to not affect reported condition data until the 2022 data collection period. Thus, benefits from the increase may not be visible until the next performance cycle. Increased use of pavement management data in support of project selection is expected to improve efficiency in meeting targets, but as this program evolves we expect it will take a few more years before positive results are observed.

  • Data Sources:
    Tennessee 2018, 2020 Biennial Performance Report
    Tennessee 2020 HPMS Data Submittal

  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Good Condition (IRI Only)

    • Trend through 2021

      Desired trend: ↑

      Tennessee % Non-Interstate NHS Lane Miles In Good Condition


  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Good Condition (IRI Only) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
    Condition/Performance 72.7 69.7 70.6 -- --
  • Behind the data: For the first performance period, FHWA has calculated the values for Baseline and Actual using International Roughness Index (IRI) only (or Present Serviceability Rating (PSR) values for road sections where speed is less than 40 mph) for assessing condition change from the baseline.


  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Good Condition (IRI Only)

    See Full-distress + IRI above.
    See Full-distress + IRI above.
    See Full-distress + IRI above.
    See Full-distress + IRI above.
  • Data Sources:
    Tennessee 2018, 2020 Biennial Performance Report
    Tennessee 2018, 2019, 2020 HPMS Data Submittal

  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Poor Condition (Full-distress + IRI)

    • Trend through 2021

      Desired trend: ↓

      Tennessee % Non-Interstate NHS Lane Miles In Poor Condition


  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Poor Condition (Full-distress + IRI) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
    Condition/Performance -- -- 4.0 -- --
    Target -- -- 4.0 -- 5.0
  • Behind the data: Because Tennessee State DOT has established targets based on full-distress plus IRI data, FHWA has calculated the value for Actual using full-distress plus IRI data for assessing target achievement.


  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Poor Condition (Full-distress + IRI)

    Non-interstate targets are based on the "full measure" as defined in 23 CFR 490.313(c), not IRI alone as defined in paragraph e of the same section. Targets were established per the full measure on time in accordance with the law as defined in 23 CFR 490.105(e) and may be adjusted during the mid-performance period. Using the “full measure”, TDOT estimated a baseline value of 3.2%. Based on network analysis of the full measure using pavement management data, it is expected that values for % Poor will stay within reasonable range of recent historical observations. Thus, targets were set within a similar range.

    Historical calculations of using IRI alone indicate a gradual increase in %Poor. Projects for 2019 and 2021 % Poor using IRI alone are 7.0 and 7.3%, respectively.

    The 2017 baseline data calculated by TDOT for the "full measure" was 3.24%. TDOT estimates the percentage of Poor routes will continue to increase at a similar rate of 0.4% per year for the remainder of the performance cycle.

    TDOT is already at the target level for poor routes at the mid-point of the performance cycle. We are also observing an increase in poor routes and expect the percentage of Poor routes will continue to increase at a similar rate of 0.4% per year for the remainder of the performance cycle. Use of pavement management data in support of project selection is expected to improve efficiency in meeting targets, but as this program evolves we expect it will take a few more years before positive results are observed.

    In late 2020, funding for the state route resurfacing program was increased from $164-milion to $195-million. These added funds will affect the 2021 resurfacing year but are expected to not affect reported condition data until the 2022 data collection, 2023 reporting. Thus, benefits from the increase may not be visible until the next performance cycle. Additionally, use of pavement management data in support of project selection is expected to improve efficiency in meeting targets, but as this program evolves we expect it will take a few more years before positive results are observed.

  • Data Sources:
    Tennessee 2018, 2020 Biennial Performance Report
    Tennessee 2017, 2018, 2019 HPMS Data Submittal

  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Poor Condition (IRI Only)

    • Trend through 2021

      Desired trend: ↓

      Tennessee % Non-Interstate NHS Lane Miles In Poor Condition


  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Poor Condition (IRI Only) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
    Condition/Performance 6.7 7.6 7.6 -- --
  • Behind the data: For the first performance period, FHWA has calculated the values for Baseline and Actual using International Roughness Index (IRI) only (or Present Serviceability Rating (PSR) values for road sections where speed is less than 40 mph) for assessing condition change from the baseline.


  • Non-Interstate National Highway System (NHS) Pavement in Poor Condition (IRI Only)

    See Full-distress + IRI above.
    See Full-distress + IRI above.
    See Full-distress + IRI above.
    See Full-distress + IRI above.
  • Data Sources:
    Tennessee 2018, 2020 Biennial Performance Report
    Tennessee 2018, 2019, 2020 HPMS Data Submittal

  • National Highway System (NHS) Bridges in Good Condition

    • Trend through 2021

      Desired trend: ↑

      Tennessee % Deck Area in Good Condition on NHS Bridges


  • National Highway System (NHS) Bridges in Good Condition 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
    Condition/Performance 39.5 36.8 35.1 -- --
    Target -- -- 36.0 -- 36.0

  • National Highway System (NHS) Bridges in Good Condition

    TDOT utilized National Bridge Inventory (NBI) historic data to derive a percentage of bridge deck in Good Condition for the years 2011 – 2017. The analysis of the data revealed a linear trend that has remained fairly constant over this time period. TDOT’s bridge program funding has remained relatively stable with bridge program replacement and repair projects helping to maintain fairly consistent good condition levels slightly above 40%.

    Key influencing factors for target setting include age of infrastructure assets. The average age of Tennessee bridges is currently 42 years. As bridges continue to age, deterioration rate for bridge inventory increases. Growing truck traffic on the highway system is also likely to accelerate the overall deterioration of the bridge inventory

    TDOT has received additional state funding for bridge replacements and other transportation improvements due to the IMPROVE Act passage in 2017. Some of the funding can be used to address NHS bridge condition, however, the time required to develop and deliver these new projects will generally exceed the timeline (2018-2021) covered by the performance targets. With all of these factors, TDOT expects a gradual decline so that the good condition will remain at or above 36.0% through the first four year reporting period.

    TDOT missed the “good” mid-year target by 0.9% based on our initial goal. We understand the average age and number of bridges in our inventory will lead to a decline in the network overall condition. Our efforts to address this include the development of asset preservation projects designed to extend the current condition of various bridge elements. TDOT has instituted various deck preservation initiatives including epoxy deck seals, concrete overlays, and polymer concrete overlays to mitigate the damaging effects of chloride penetration into the bridge decks and beam ends. Results of these efforts should be reflected in the next reporting cycle as many of these bridges will have new inspection data uploaded.

    N/A
    TDOT has increased funding for preservation efforts. The impacts of this funding increase should be reflected in the next reporting cycle. as TDOT has instituted various deck preservation initiatives to mitigate the damaging effects of chloride penetration into the bridge decks and beam ends.

  • Data Sources:
    Tennessee 2018, 2020 Biennial Performance Report
    Tennessee 2018, 2019, 2020 NBI Data Submittal

  • National Highway System (NHS) Bridges in Poor Condition

    • Trend through 2021

      Desired trend: ↓

      Tennessee % Deck Area in Poor Condition on NHS Bridges


  • National Highway System (NHS) Bridges in Poor Condition 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
    Condition/Performance 3.5 3.8 4.1 -- --
    Target -- -- 6.0 -- 6.0

  • National Highway System (NHS) Bridges in Poor Condition

    TDOT utilized NBI historic data to derive a percentage of bridge deck in Poor Condition for the years 2011 – 2017. The analysis of the data revealed a linear trend that has remained relatively constant over this time period demonstrating a gradual increase in percent of bridges in poor condition. TDOT’s bridge program funding has remained relatively stable from 2011-2017.

    The average age of Tennessee’s bridge inventory is currently 42 years; as bridges continue to age, a gradual decline in condition is anticipated. Growing truck traffic on the highway system is also likely to accelerate the overall deterioration of the NHS bridge inventory.

    Other factors that were considered in the target setting process include the uncertainties in Federal funding which can impact certain aspects of TDOT’s bridge program. Additionally, potential changes in condition of large area bridges can have significant impact. For example, data from 2015-2017 showed where three large structures influenced percentage poor rating increase by 3% due to isolated issues needing repair.

    TDOT has received additional state funding for bridge replacements and other transportation improvements due to the IMPROVE Act passage in 2017. Some of the funding can be used for NHS bridge condition, however, the time required to develop and deliver these new projects will generally exceed the timeline (2018-2021) covered by the performance targets. TDOT expects the gradual decline in bridge condition to continue over the next four years. In consideration of trend data and influencing factors, it is anticipated that the Poor condition will remain at or below 6.0% through the first four year reporting period. Target evaluation will be conducted at the performance cycle mid-point.

    TDOT maintained better results than our submitted goal. With a target goal of 6% and an actual result of 4.1%, we understand that one or two large structures shifting into the poor category would be enough to shift the results above our target goal. We elect to hold this target until the next reporting cycle.

    N/A
    As previously mentioned, TDOT has funded a new preservation program to help address the good bridge inventory. Many of these projects are under development and will be delivered and reflected in the next reporting cycle.

    The Improve Act passed in 2017 is based on addressing poor rated bridges on and off the NHS system. As these projects come online, we will be able to assess the impact on our overall bridge inventory and reevaluate out bridge targets for the next cycle.

  • Data Sources:
    Tennessee 2018, 2020 Biennial Performance Report
    Tennessee 2018, 2019, 2020 NBI Data Submittal


Significant Progress Determination

PLEASE NOTE: Each State’s performance target assessment is based on its own State-specific target methodology and program philosophy. Therefore, conclusions should not be drawn based only on the information in the 2020 Mid Performance Period Significant Progress Determination Results table. For example, the State may have set aggressive targets, and not met those targets, while another State may have set more easily attainable targets, and met those targets. FHWA understands that each State’s program is unique and therefore does not prescribe a methodology for States to set targets. States have the flexibility to use the methodology they deem most appropriate when setting their performance targets.

A State has met or made significant progress toward target achievement if “actual” condition/performance is equal to or better than the established two-year target or “actual” condition/performance is better than baseline performance 23 CFR 490.109 (e).

Tennessee 2020 Mid Performance Period Significant Progress Determination Results
Measure Area Measures Baseline Target Actual Better than Baseline? Achieved Target? Made Significant Progress? Consequences [23 CFR 490.109(f)]
The condition of pavements on the National Highway System (NHS) (excluding the Interstate) Percentage of pavements of the non-Interstate NHS in Good condition Based only on IRI 72.7 --- 70.6 No --- No Additional reporting
Based on Full Distress + IRI --- 42.0 41.6 --- No
Percentage of pavements of the non-Interstate NHS in Poor condition Based only on IRI 6.7 --- 7.6 No --- Yes
Based on Full Distress + IRI --- 4.0 4.0 --- Yes
The condition of bridges on the National Highway System Percentage of NHS bridges classified as in Good condition 39.5 36.0 35.1 No No No Additional reporting
Percentage of NHS bridges classified as in Poor condition 3.5 6.0 4.1 No Yes Yes
Updated: 04/20/2021
Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000