Prohibits the siting and construction of battery energy storage systems and related facilities, systems, infrastructure, and substations of any scale and possessing any storage capacity on Staten Island.
This bill would amend the General Municipal Law to prohibit the future siting and construction of battery energy storage systems (BESS) and related facilities, systems, infrastructure, and substations on Staten Island. The prohibition is broad and applies to projects of any scale and storage capacity, including lithium-ion battery installations, with limited exceptions for facilities sited in industrial zones and small-scale residential applications. The bill also defines battery energy storage systems and distinguishes between tier one and tier two systems based on storage capacity and configuration.
The measure states that its purpose is to protect public health and safety from perceived risks associated with battery storage facilities, including air pollution, toxic fumes, and explosions, especially near homes, schools, churches, playgrounds, and small businesses. It would take effect immediately and apply to permit applications already pending on the effective date, which means it could affect projects already in the approval pipeline.
If enacted, the bill would create a Staten Island-specific prohibition within the General Municipal Law, limiting local and state permitting authority for battery energy storage projects in that borough. It would bar issuance of permits for new BESS-related construction and infrastructure on Staten Island, except for the narrow categories expressly exempted, and would affect utility, commercial, and other large-scale energy storage proposals. The bill would also reach pending applications, potentially disrupting projects already under review and altering the siting landscape for renewable-energy-supporting infrastructure in the borough.
The bill text reflects strongly negative sentiment toward battery energy storage facilities, framing them as a threat to public health, safety, and neighborhood quality of life. No committee transcript or vote data is available, so there is no recorded legislative debate or roll-call sentiment to assess beyond the sponsor’s stated concerns. Based on the bill language alone, the measure is clearly precautionary and restrictive rather than supportive of energy storage development.
The central point of contention is the balance between local safety concerns and the broader need for battery energy storage infrastructure to support grid reliability and clean-energy goals. Supporters of the bill would likely emphasize fire risk, explosion risk, and community impacts near residential and sensitive uses, while opponents would likely argue that an outright or near-outright ban could hinder energy transition projects, utility planning, and commercial development. The narrow exceptions for industrial zones and small-scale residential uses suggest the bill is aimed at limiting large installations, but that same breadth may be viewed as overinclusive by energy developers, utilities, and clean-energy advocates.