TVA ST - Knoxville News Sentinel

1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR ROANE COUNTY, TENNESSEE
JOT RAYMOND AND BRENDA RAYMOND, and
LEA ANN RAYMOND and CHRIS RAYMOND,
Plaintiffs
versus
THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY [TVA],
a United States of America Government Entity, and
No._______________
12 Person Jury Demanded
Their Board of Directors and/or certain Executives, both individually and in their
official capacities, as follows:
Tom Kilgore, President and CEO, and
William R. McCollum, Jr., Chief Operating Officer, and
Peyton T. Harriston, Jr., Corporate Responsibility and Diversity, and
Anda A. Ray, Sr. Vice-president, Office of Environment and Research and
Environmental Executive, and
Emily J. Reynolds. Sr. Vice-president. Communications, Government and Valley
Relations and
Preston D. Swafford, Executive Vice-president, Fossil Power Group
COMPLAINT
Comes now your Plaintiffs, by and through their attorneys, Michael Ritter and
Stephen A. Irving, and sue the Defendants pursuant to the Federal Laws of 42 U.S.C.
1983, et. seq., as well as the statutory and common laws of the State of Tennessee,
and for their Causes of Action would show as follows:
Jurisdiction and Venue
Jurisdiction is invoked herein pursuant to both Federal and State law. Pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. section 1441[b] and related as well to pendant claims [see 28 U.S.C.

Sections 1343 and 1331], pendant state claims and concurrent jurisdiction are proper in
this state court. The wrongful acts or conduct complained of herein occurred in Roane
County, Tennessee.
Defendants are sued herein pursuant for damages under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and
under concurrent and pendant state claims.
Your Plaintiffs are citizens and residents of Roane County, Tennessee, owning
property therein, and have been damaged by the wrongful and negligent actions of the
Defendants. Plaintiffs own or have a property interest in various real property in Roane
County, Tennessee, contiguous to or in close proximity to the disaster herein
complained of, the value of which real property interests has been greatly diminished
because of the wrongful actions of the Defendants.
Additionally, Plaintiffs Jot Raymond and Brenda Raymond are owners and
developers of North Lake Estates, a subdivision in Roane County, Tennessee and have
been unable to show their properties to prospective purchasers and have experienced a
significant and immediate damage to the value of their venture. A creek running
through this development has been damaged and is backing up as a result of the spill.
Plaintiffs Chris Raymond and Lea Ann Raymond Habib own property in the
affected North Lakes Estates subdivision. The value of these properties has been
greatly diminished by the negligent actions and omissions of the Defendants. The
property of Chris Raymond was up for sale at the time of this disaster.
Jurisdiction and venue are properly before this Honorable Court.
Factual Background
The Tennessee Valley Authority [hereafter “TVA”] owns and operates an energygenerating
facility generally known as the Kingston Steam Plant, in Kingston,
Tennessee, in Roane County, Tennessee. The energy generated by the plant comes
from the burning of coal. The byproducts from the coal-burning process, which include
various contaminants and heavy metals, are deposited into a holding pond, a/k/a
“sludge pit.” To contain the byproducts, TVA constructs a berm around the holding
pond.
On or about December 22, 2008, the wall or berm containing the holding pond
failed, and as a result millions of cubic yards of coal-ash sludge poured across
hundreds of acres near the Kingston Fossil Plant, destroying homes and damaging
property and spoiling the scenic vistas of the area. Upon information and belief,
contaminants, including arsenic and heavy metals, were released into the adjacent
waterways and are leaching into the groundwater supply which serves the community.
Causes of Action
Federal
1. At all times relevant to this Complaint, the Defendants (their Superintendent,
supervisors, agents and others at TVA’s Kingston Steam Plant) were acting under the
direction, oversight, decision-making and control of the various Defendants. TVA
owned and operated the plants; the named Defendants, among others, (CEO and
Board and defendant TVA) made policy decisions with respect to its operation and
safety.

2. Acting under color of law and pursuant to official office policy or customs,
Defendants (as well as Superintendents, employees and agents at the TVA plant)
knowingly, recklessly and callously disregarded Plaintiffs’ rights, failed to instruct, failed
to monitor, failed to properly supervise or control on a continuing basis and unlawfully
failed to warn or protect Plaintiffs, regarding the inherent dangers of this situation,
thereby exhibiting an irrational governmental (or quasi-governmental) action or
governmental (or quasi-governmental) decision-making process and therefore violating
the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to Plaintiffs by the United States
Constitution and the laws of the state of Tennessee, and otherwise depriving Plaintiffs
of their constitutional and statutory rights, privileges and immunities.
3. Defendants (CEO, Board, Site Supervisors, sub Supervisors, etc.) had
knowledge, or, had they diligently exercised their duties to supervise, inspect, control on
a continuing basis, knew or should have had knowledge, that the wrongs which
occurred as heretofore alleged were reasonably likely to occur. That the Defendants
had power and ability to prevent the said wrongs, could have done so by reasonable
diligence, and knowingly, recklessly, and with callous disregard, conspired to not give
the Plaintiffs warning or notice of the possibility of the impending environmental disaster
or to take necessary actions to prevent the disaster.
4. Defendants TVA, et al, directly or indirectly, under color of law, supervised,
directed, approved or ratified the deliberate, reckless and wanton disregard of its
Directors, Board of directors, supervisors and agents as heretofore described.
5. TVA possessed or reasonably should have possessed knowledge and data
which indicated that the retention pond was subject to collapse or breach. TVA was
aware or reasonably should have been aware, of similar problems with other locations
similarly situated. TVA failed to take reasonable and proper corrective or preventative
measures to address the danger of this situation, particularly in light of their knowledge
of predecessor disasters.
6. As a direct and proximate cause of the acts of the Defendants as set forth in
this Complaint, Plaintiffs suffered loss of income, destruction of property or damage to
property value, potential future medical expenses, loss of future income, loss of
commercial access to their properties, severe mental anguish and a loss of the right to
enjoy life in connection with the deprivation of their constitutional and statutory rights
guaranteed rights by the fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution of the United
States and protected by 42 U.S.C 1983.
7. Further, in light of the egregious conduct by the Defendants, Plaintiffs request
that punitive sanctions be assessed to the Defendants, pursuant to statute.
Wherefore, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, Plaintiffs demand judgment against
Defendants, jointly and severally, individually and in their official capacities for
compensatory damages of $15,000,000.00 (Fifteen Million Dollars), and further
demands, against the Defendants, jointly and severally, individually and in their official
capacity, punitive damages in the amount of $150,000,000.000 (One Hundred and Fifty
Million Dollars) plus all costs of this action and such other and further relief as this Court

deems just and proper, as well as Attorneys fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988 (The Civil
Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act of 1976).
State Claims
PENDANT STATE CLAIMS
Plaintiffs re-allege paragraphs 1-7 of Count 1 “Federal Claims,” regarding
jurisdiction, venue and Defendants wrongful actions under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and hereby
incorporates them herein as fully as if copied verbatim.
A. That on or about December 22, 2008, in Roane County, Tennessee, a
retention pond, filled with ash, heavy metals, including but not limited to “a high level of
arsenic” surrounded by or retained by an earthen dyke, collapsed, and poured profusely
into the nearby residential community destroying thousands of acres. The retention
pond was owned, operated, and supervised by the Tennessee Valley Authority.
The full impact of the breach resulted in a spill of approximately 5.4 Millions
cubic yards of ash, heavy metals, contaminates, surged over the collapsed dam onto
adjacent properties. As a result of the breach, real property, possible health issues, as
exemplified by recent dead fish, exist.
As such, by and through Counsels, Plaintiffs file this Complaint and in support of
this Complaint would allege:
A1. That TVA, its directors, supervisors, agents and supporting staff owed a
duty to the citizens near or adjacent to the area to supervise, inspect, and control the
stability, safety and efficiency of the earthen dam containing millions of cubic yards of
coal-ash in a sludge.
A2. That agency officials, including but not limited to the Board of Directors for
TVA, the CEO of TVA, other officers and executives, on site supervisors and other
agents, failed to properly design, inspect, monitor and maintain the retention pond
dikes, their initial design and current stability and knew or should have known, of the
dangers of failure, breach or collapse of the structures. No preventative or remedial or
corrective measures were taken by Defendants, despite their knowledge of the risks
posed to health and public safety by the unsafe earth berm supportive structure.
A3. The Defendants were negligent in designing, constructing, maintaining and
inspecting the retention pond and its supporting structures.
A4. The Defendants were negligent in failing to warn surrounding residents and
property owners of the inherent dangers of the retention pond and its supporting
structures.
A5. The breach and failure of the dike [support structures in general]
surrounding the retention pond constitutes negligence per se. It should not have
happened. Climate conditions in the area were reasonably foreseeable and
predictable, and It was reasonably foreseeable to the Defendants that the structures
might and could collapse, causing major damage, and proper actions were not taken to

prevent this occurrence.
A6. Defendants, in the exercise of due diligence, knew or should have known of
the failure of similar structures at other venues and the consequences of a failure of the
structures supporting the retention pond. Other, safer retention measures were
commercially available to the Defendants, but they failed to implement and utilize such
alternative measures.
A7. As a result of the negligence of Defendants, your Plaintiffs suffered property
damage, diminution of property value, loss of ingress and egress to their properties for
commercial purposes, potential future health issues, pain and suffering, lost income,
the loss of the ability to enjoy life. All of these damages, among others, occurred as a
direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants.
A8. Plaintiff reserves the right to file other state claims and federal claims within
the limitations of actions for the state of Tennessee and the United States of America
PREMISES CONSIDERED, YOUR PLAINTIFFS PRAY:
1. That Process issue and be served on the Defendants, and each of them, and
that they be required to appear and answer or otherwise plead within the time and in
the manner prescribed by law, else judgment by default be taken against them.
2. For a trial by a jury of 12 persons.
3. That upon a hearing, the Plaintiffs be awarded the sum of $15,000,000.00 for
compensatory damages.
4. For punitive damages as allowed by law in the amount of One Hundred and
Fifty Million Dollars.
5. For such other further and general and beneficial relief that this Court deems
just and proper.
Respectfully submitted, this the ____ day of December, 2008.
____________________________
Michael Ritter, attorney at law
BPR #012229
1670 Oak Ridge Turnpike
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
[865] 482-7734
____________________________
Stephen A. Irving, attorney at law
BPR #5794

12204 Oakmont Circle
Knoxville, TN 37922
[865] 966-4904
Cost Bond
The undersigned, Jot Raymond, individually, as Principal and Michael
Ritter, attorney at law, as Surety, acknowledge ourselves responsible for costs in
this cause in accordance with TCA 12-20-104 et seq.
______________________________________________
Jot Raymond, individually, Plaintiff and Principal
134 Happy Hollow Road
Harriman, TN 37748.
[865] 882-6968
Surety:
____________________________
Michael Ritter, attorney at law
BPR #012229
1670 Oak Ridge Turnpike
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
[865] 482-7734