New NYS safety codes for battery facilities unveiled, but opposition remains on LI

As New York State and LIPA push ahead with plans for large battery-energy storage facilities, pockets of resistance continue to emerge on Long Island, even after the recent adoption of new fire safety codes for the projects.

Battery-storage developers have earmarked dozens of sites for lithium-ion battery storage plants across Long Island, including at least two under contract to the Long Island Power Authority in Hauppauge and Shoreham.

Last week, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, which administers green-energy programs, announced plans for 1,000 megawatts of new battery-energy storage across the state, part of Gov. Kathy Hochul’s plan for some 6,000 megawatts of batteries by 2030. The technology got a boost from the Trump administration and Congress with the passage of the "Big Beautiful Bill" that included a carve-out for federal subsidies for utility-scale battery facilities through 2033, before credits begin to sunset.

Also last week, the state Fire Prevention and Building Code Council approved new storage safety codes using input from a Hochul-convened interagency Fire Safety Working Group, designed to address concerns about fires at the facilities, including one at a 5-megawatt facility in East Hampton. Earlier this year, a fire engulfed one of the nation’s largest battery storage facilities, in Monterey, California, which burned for days and left toxins in the surrounding area.

On Long Island, civic groups and some residents who live around proposed battery-storage projects have expressed opposition to the facilities, citing the potential for lithium-ion fires. Developers say the facilities are safe, with systems and construction designed to limit or prevent fires. Nevertheless, most Long Island towns have moratoriums on the facilities to varying degrees, though Brookhaven and East Hampton are among those that don’t.

Louis Marcus, public information officer and longtime firefighter for the Hauppauge Fire District, which would include the LIPA-contracted facility, expressed concern about the location and frustration over a dearth of information about the plant.

Any potential fire at the proposed site in Hauppauge "has the potential to really get out of control," he said. "We just don't believe it belongs here."

On Thursday, the Hauppauge Fire District released a statement calling for Islip Town to extend its moratorium on new battery facilities, after expressing "serious safety concerns" about the proposed 79-megawatt facility by developer Key Capture Energy (KCE). The statement, by the district’s board of fire commissioners and chiefs of the Hauppauge Fire Department, asked for a one-year extension of Islip Town’s current battery-storage plant moratorium to allow the developer to address the district's concerns.

The fire officials said the main concern about the facility is its location, at 220 Rabro Dr. in Hauppauge, which they said is "not a suitable location," particularly because of the "history of lithium-ion battery fires at similar sites globally." They noted its proximity to a residential neighborhood, the Bretton Woods Elementary School and the St. Thomas More Church.

Those officials also cited safety issues for residents living nearby and first responders who would have to respond to any fires at the plant, and they called for "clear and comprehensive information regarding the safety measures (or lack thereof) for this facility."

KCE declined to address the fire district’s concerns but in a statement, Lucia Yu, manager of development for KCE and the lead developer for the project, said that with the new state codes, "Islip has all the information it needs to lift the moratorium and continue to process the project’s application ..."

Yu said KCE "looks forward to addressing any concerns and providing additional information during the permitting process."

Islip Town officials declined to comment. LIPA in a statement said it believes "these facilities can be built and operated safely."

Battery proponents have said the facilities have vastly improved safety records in recent years with fewer fires at the facilities, and emphasized that new safety codes, which take effect in January, will provide even further safeguards. The new code mandates an outside, independent review of each developers’ project plans.

NYSERDA, noting battery facilities have "evolved rapidly," said municipalities "have been asking for this updated [fire-safety] code, and New York has answered."

Local governments, the agency said, "now have the tools necessary to site, review and approve projects to ensure we have the most modern, affordable, safe and reliable energy system to power our communities and economic growth."

Newsday has reported that there are dozens of proposed battery storage plants that have requested interconnection to the grid from the New York Independent System Operator, which manages the state grid. KCE is among the biggest developers of proposed sites, but other developers listed include National Grid and the New York Power Authority, which is eyeing sites at its power plant properties in Brentwood and Holtsville.

Holtsville is also the site of a proposed 110-volt facility for which land clearing has already begun. There’s also a smaller facility in Patchogue for which most construction is complete. Caithness, the power plant developer, has proposed two batteries at its Yaphank facility and has said it would likely participate in any NYSERDA procurement.

NYSERDA has said its bulk-energy program will employ a new "market-based" subsidy called an Index Storage Credit for developers, which would give project owners "greater revenue certainty while incentivizing them to participate in wholesale energy and capacity markets."

"Safe and strategic deployment of energy storage will help drive economic development and reduce costs for New Yorkers," Hochul said in a statement.

By Mark Harrington

mark.harrington@newsday.comMHarringtonNews

Mark Harrington, a Newsday reporter since 1999, covers energy, wineries, Indian affairs and fisheries.