Appalachian Voices v. Tennessee Valley Authority

In motions in the district court and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to stay the district court’s order, TVA argued that it was likely to succeed on the merits in its appeal of the district court’s rulings that TVA failed to consider a reasonable range of alternatives; that TVA violated NEPA timing requirements by precommitting to its decision before commencing the NEPA process; and that vacatur was the appropriate remedy because the errors were “fundamental to the analysis.” TVA also argued that stopping work on the project would result in irreparable harm to TVA and public, including due to risk of disruption to the supply of electricity.

On August 31, 2026, the federal district court for the Eastern District of Tennessee issued a sealed memorandum and judgment order that vacated the Tennessee Valley Authority’s environmental impact statement (EIS) and record of decision for replacement of a coal-fired power plant with a natural gas-fired plant at the Kingston plant in eastern Tennessee.

The federal district court for the Eastern District of Tennessee denied Tennessee Valley Authority’s (TVA’s) request to stay environmental organizations’ lawsuit challenging TVA’s plan to build a new gas-fired power plant after retiring nine coal-fired units at the Kingston Fossil Plant. TVA requested the stay after the TVA board authorized a plant to continue operating the coal-fired units in conjunction with the gas plant and instructed staff to apply for permits to operate both plants alongside each other. The court found that the TVA board’s final decision on the coal-fired units would not affect “the question at the center of this litigation,” which was the TVA’s decision to build the gas plant. The court found no “pressing need” to delay the litigation until a final decision is made regarding the coal-fired units.

Three environmental organizations filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the Eastern District of Tennessee alleging that Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) failed to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act and NEPA when it decided to build a gas-fired power plant to replace a coal-fired plant in East Tennessee. The plaintiffs alleged that TVA failed to consider a reasonable range of alternatives that included alternatives containing a substantial renewable component. They also alleged that TVA failed to take a hard look at the proposed gas plant’s environmental impacts, including impacts on climate pollution. In addition, they claimed that TVA committed to the gas plant before issuing a record of decision and made an arbitrary finding that the gas plant was the “lowest system cost” alternative.