Lebanon WWTP Site Selection — Public Record Archive | Return to main page
The following requests were filed with the City of Lebanon through the NextRequest public records portal pursuant to the Tennessee Public Records Act (T.C.A. § 10-7-503 et seq.). Each request targets information that has not been entered into the public record of the site selection proceedings and that materially affects how one or more candidate sites should be scored. The requests correspond directly to the formal requests for disclosure contained in Revision C of the Public Record Statement. A summary of all formal requests is available on the formal requests page.
Requests all inspection records, condition assessments, material and pressure specifications, asset management data, and internal communications addressing the proposed repurposing of the existing 30-inch effluent force mains (F1 and F2) from treated-effluent outfall service to raw-sewage conveyance. The force mains are currently permitted under NPDES Permit No. TN0028754 for treated effluent only; repurposing them to carry raw sewage upstream of the new plant is a regulatory reclassification that has not been initiated with TDEC on the public record.
Requests all hydrogeological studies, Phase 1 and Phase 2 environmental assessments, TDEC well location data, correspondence with the LaGuardo Utility District, and any GIS mapping of aquifer boundaries or well locations near candidate sites. The corridor sits on karst limestone with no natural soil filtration; 38 documented private wells lie within the 2-mile contamination radius, and the LaGuardo Utility District supplies approximately 12,000 residents from karst-fed groundwater. None of this has been entered into the public record.
Requests the design RFP, hauler permit records, operational configuration plans for septage receiving after the new plant comes online, regional service area projections, road sub-base assessments, road improvement cost estimates, and noise and air-quality analyses. Wilson County alone generates an estimated 5,000–6,500 septage truckloads per year; whether those trucks relocate to the new plant has not been disclosed. Field measurements document Mann Road at 17–18 ft of pavement — narrower than the engineer’s stated figure and insufficient for two-way commercial tanker traffic.
Requests the design RFP (biosolids sections), records addressing whether on-site digestion or gasification will be included at the new plant, documentation of the existing Hartmann Drive gasification system, disposal method and site records, projected outbound truck volumes, and related correspondence. The existing plant converts biosolids to electricity on-site; a greenfield facility will not inherit that infrastructure. Without digestion, a 20 MGD plant generates an estimated 45–80 tons of dewatered biosolids per day. The disposal method has not been disclosed or factored into any site’s scoring.
Requests the design RFP (technology sections), records documenting the basis for the 60-acre minimum acreage threshold, technology comparative analyses, TDEC correspondence on anticipated nutrient removal requirements for Old Hickory Reservoir discharge, and any evaluation of whether smaller sites are viable under compact-process design. The 60-acre threshold is mathematically consistent with conventional activated sludge at ultimate buildout capacity — the most land-intensive and potentially most expensive option once nutrient removal is required. The treatment technology has not been disclosed.
Requests all versions of the scoring matrix, written scoring rubrics and anchor definitions for each criterion, documentation of the basis for the importance factor weights, any sensitivity analyses, records identifying data gaps between sites, three-phase electrical cost estimates for sites lacking service, the list of deferred criteria, and the per-site data sheets used to prepare scoring presentations. The absence of written rubrics or a sensitivity analysis in response to this request would itself confirm the procedural gaps documented in Appendix G.
Requests the parcel-specific Columbia Gulf pipeline analysis used to deprioritize the Rockwood site at the March 19, 2026 working session, all records of that working session, records showing whether the same analysis was applied to Sites 1–7 in the same pipeline corridor, PHMSA and FERC pipeline routing and inspection data, and emergency response records. The same three high-pressure lines cited as limiting Rockwood’s usability cross the Mann Road, Berea Church Road, Maple Hill Road, and Coles Ferry Pike corridor. The asymmetry has not been addressed on the public record.