Putnam County Commission denies Novastis waste‑to‑fuel facility after public opposition and Jackson‑law review
Loading...
Summary
After a Jackson‑law hearing and extensive public testimony about odors, traffic and neighborhood impacts, the Putnam County Commission voted 19–2 to deny Novastis’s application to expand a waste‑to‑fuel processing facility near residential areas and Cane Creek Park.
Putnam County commissioners voted on Nov. 10 to deny Novastis’s application under Tennessee’s Jackson‑law review process after a hearing that drew dozens of citizens and detailed questions from commissioners.
At a public hearing, Novastis cofounder Kelly Wolbus described the company’s NovaDry process, calling it a non‑thermal system that dewaters and pulverizes municipal solid waste into a high‑BTU fuel, and said the firm would use negative‑air systems and detectors to control odors and remove contaminated loads. "We use a ton of air, so it's a negative airflow situation," Wolbus said, adding the company believes its product is "carbon‑negative" compared with landfill disposal.
Residents who live near the proposed facility told commissioners they were worried about air quality, garbage blowing from the site, truck traffic, stormwater runoff into nearby Cane Creek Park and property‑value declines. Dave Roland, who identified himself as a nearby business owner and Next Step for Life chairman, said apartments and childcare programs sit within a few dozen feet of the site and urged commissioners to apply the Jackson‑law criteria to protect neighborhood health and safety. "I'm here to speak against this for several reasons," Roland said, citing proximity to homes, parks and schools.
Commissioners used the Jackson law’s eight statutory criteria — including noise/odor impacts, effects on property values, traffic and infrastructure, and economic impact — as the legal framework for their decision, after County Attorney Jones summarized the statutory standard and reminded commissioners the applicant bears the burden of proof. Commissioners asked Novastis about current and projected throughput (the company said it now averages roughly 4–5 tons per day at its research site and sought permits to scale toward about 100 tons per day), where feedstock would originate, how inerts and recyclables would be handled, and what contamination detection would be used.
Concerned neighbors said the company’s descriptions did not remove their worries about increased truck traffic and neighborhood impacts if intake increased. Tyler Brown, who said he owns apartment units near the site, described tarped trash currently at the location and warned of runoff into protected wetlands that feed Cane Creek Park.
After extended public comment and commissioner questions, Commissioner Andrews moved to deny the application citing the Jackson‑law criteria for traffic/infrastructure and economic impact; the motion was seconded and the commission conducted a roll‑call handset vote. The clerk reported 19 voting yes to deny and 2 voting no; the chair declared the motion carried and the Novastis application denied.
The commission’s decision was narrowly procedural in language: the record documents that commissioners evaluated whether the applicant satisfied the Jackson‑law criteria rather than issuing a broader policy pronouncement on waste‑to‑fuel technologies. Novastis representatives said their fallback would be seeking to increase permitted tonnage at an existing, smaller permitted site if the application before the commission failed.
The denial resolves this application at the county level; any subsequent permitting steps that Novastis pursues (including state permitting or site relocation) were not decided at the meeting. The commission moved on to other agenda items after the roll‑call result was announced.
