Groups Sue TVA Over Clean Air Act Violations at Kingston Site

by | Sep 26, 2026 | Energy

Groups Sue TVA Over Clean Air Act Violations at Kingston Site

The Southern Environmental Law Center, representing Appalachian Voices and the Sierra Club, filed suit against the Tennessee Valley Authority in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee on Thursday, alleging Clean Air Act violations related to the Kingston site.

The lawsuit centers on TVA’s decision to construct a new natural gas plant while continuing to operate a 70-year-old coal plant at the same location. The environmental groups contend that operating both facilities simultaneously requires a “major” source permit under federal law, which TVA has not obtained before proceeding with construction. Additionally, the plaintiffs argue that TVA reversed an earlier commitment to close the Kingston coal plant, which experienced a significant coal ash spill in 2008.

According to the groups filing the suit, combining emissions from both plants would result in substantially increased air pollution linked to health concerns including asthma, respiratory diseases, and heart conditions. The combined facilities could also double greenhouse gas releases from the site. TVA’s own estimates, cited in the filing, indicate that earlier this year the utility decided to operate both the Kingston and Cumberland coal plants indefinitely.

The legal challenge follows action by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, which determined last month that TVA’s ongoing gas plant construction is unlawful. The environmental groups assert that state regulators did not adequately address the violations. The lawsuit also comes after a federal court previously ruled that TVA’s decision to build the gas plant violated law and contained “fundamental errors” in its environmental analysis.

TVA has estimated that maintaining the Kingston coal plant in operation will cost more than $636 million, expenses that the utility’s customers would bear through electricity rates. Environmental advocates contend that retiring the facility would be both more cost-effective and protective of public health compared to the utility’s current plans.

Article Attribution | Read More at Article Source

Article summary produced by Claude AI