Issue #001

Lebanon wastewater capacity and the proposed treatment plant

Researching Supported

Researching: We are still reviewing records.
Supported: The records support the general concern, but important questions are still unanswered.

Last updated June 24, 2026 · Evidence access: Very difficult

The question

Does Lebanon need a new wastewater treatment plant? How much more capacity is needed? Where could a new plant go, and who would pay for it?

Plain-English answer

Lebanon has two related wastewater problems. Some problems happen at the treatment plant. Others happen in the network of sewer pipes, manholes, and pump stations that carry sewage to the plant.

The clearest records show that rainwater and groundwater are getting into the sewer system, sewage has overflowed at several locations, some required reports contained errors, and one manhole known as MH5898 overflowed several times.

In March 2026, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, or TDEC, called MH5898 a chronic overflow point. That means it had enough overflow events to trigger special permit rules. TDEC told Lebanon to consider a limited pause on adding more sewer flow upstream of that location.

TDEC later said two overflow events might be removed from the count because they happened during declared emergencies. That could remove the chronic label and the related pause on new flow. We have not found TDEC's final written decision.

Lebanon has also started building a new equalization basin. This is a large storage basin that temporarily holds extra wastewater during storms until the treatment plant can handle it. The newest approved design holds 8 million gallons. The project is expected to be mostly finished by November 18, 2027.

The records support the need for major wastewater work. They do not yet prove that the current projects will fully solve the problem or show how much safe, reliable capacity is still available for new development.

Helpful terms

Why this matters

What is confirmed

What remains unclear

Document review and differences

Did MH5898 remain a chronic overflow point?

The March 2026 notice called MH5898 a chronic overflow point. That triggered a requirement for Lebanon to consider a limited pause on new sewer flow upstream of the manhole.

A May 11 letter said TDEC was considering removing two emergency-related events from the count. TDEC said this would lower the count to three and remove the chronic label and related pause.

Assessment: UNCLEAR. The May letter described a possible decision. We have not found the final decision.

Why did the proposed basin change from 10 million gallons to 8 million gallons?

Earlier records described a 10-million-gallon new basin. TDEC's June 4 approval describes a revised 8-million-gallon basin and says the size was reduced to lower project costs.

This new basin is separate from the plant's existing storage basin and separate from the plant's 10-million-gallon-per-day treatment rating.

Assessment: CONFIRMED CHANGE. The newest approved design is 8 million gallons. The engineering reason for why 8 million gallons is enough has not yet been found.

Has sewer repair work reduced extra stormwater flow?

Lebanon said it inspected about 82,300 feet of sewer pipe. The city also said one repaired area had about 59 million gallons less flow during the first 145 days of 2026 than during the same period in 2025. The city described this as a 38 percent drop.

Assessment: SUPPORTED. These numbers appear in the city's report. We have not found a separate review that confirms them.

Does a 10-million-gallon-per-day permit mean that much capacity is still available?

No. The permit says what the plant was designed to treat. It does not tell us how much unused capacity is available today.

To answer that question, the city would need to account for current use, heavy-rain flows, system limits, and sewer capacity already promised to approved development.

Assessment: UNCLEAR. The permit number alone does not show how many new connections the system can safely accept.

Recent regulatory timeline

What to watch as decisions are made

These are questions for public review. They are not accusations of wrongdoing.

Questions citizens can ask

How hard was the evidence to find?

Very difficult. A resident must search city agendas, TDEC databases, permit numbers, engineering approvals, meeting videos, and separate public-record systems. A record can be public and still be very hard to find or understand.

Sources reviewed so far

Most TDEC records do not have simple, permanent web pages. Open the official viewer below, search permit TN0028754, and match the document title and date listed here.

Open TDEC's official data viewers · Read TDEC's guide to public wastewater records

Records still needed for a final conclusion

What would change the conclusion?

Our conclusion could change if newer engineering records show that the current system has enough reliable capacity, if repairs and the new basin greatly reduce overflow risk, if a less expensive solution meets the same needs, or if new TDEC records change the status of MH5898 or other system limits.

← Back to all issues