The Grundy County Zoning Board of Appeals on Monday adopted a text amendment creating local rules for battery energy storage systems and set larger storage facilities as special uses subject to site-specific review.

The ordinance text amendment, presented by planning staff member Heidi, establishes two tiers of battery systems, safety and monitoring requirements, setback and screening rules, emergency-operation and training obligations for developers, and decommissioning and financial-assurance provisions. Board members voted in favor of moving the draft forward after public comment and discussion of safety and notification procedures.

The amendment defines tier 1 systems as those with capacity less than or equal to 600 kilowatt-hours and allows them as an administrative use across zoning districts; tier 2 systems—those with capacity greater than 600 kilowatt-hours—would be allowed only by special use in agricultural and industrial districts. "Tier 1 is less than or equal to 600, kilowatt hours of power," Heidi said while explaining the draft, and she added tier 1 permits would be processed administratively. The draft borrows elements from other county ordinances and lists nationally recognized testing laboratories and standards (UL, NEC) as part of required documentation.

The draft requires developers to provide a project summary with electrical diagrams and certification of standards compliance, a drain-tile or stormwater investigation where applicable, landscape buffering, site security fencing, site-specific emergency-operation plans and annual training for first responders paid for by the developer. It also includes setbacks and notification requirements: a 200-foot setback from parcel lines and public ways, and a 500-foot setback from nonparticipating residences for tier 2 proposals, and a 1,500-foot mailing notification radius plus on-site signage for community meetings and public hearings.

Heidi said the draft requires developers to supply water in an amount equal to 150% of the estimated capacity needed to control a facility fire; the fire department and health department would evaluate that. The ordinance also requires third-party monitoring and commissioning—Heidi said the county would not perform monitoring and that the county would require "third party" verification of system compliance. "No. We don't have that kind of expertise. So, if we're talking about monitoring, it could be, like a UL, or, you know, it has to be third party to the company itself," she said.

Public commenters raised concerns about firefighting approaches, toxic vapors from burning lithium-ion cells and the adequacy of water-based suppression. Thomas Bessweiser, who identified himself as a resident, questioned whether water storage is the correct suppression approach for lithium-ion systems and recommended other suppression technologies; "when you pour water on it, it just goes viral and...it makes actually more flames," he said. Larry Johnson urged requiring sectional disconnects so first responders can isolate parts of a facility "so they can at least try to isolate other systems."

Heidi responded that the emergency-operation plan and site-specific special-use review would allow the board and first responders to require safe shutdown, de-energizing and isolation procedures. She described the approach as "a team effort" between developers and first responders and said developers would be financially responsible for annual training and drills for jurisdictional responders.

Board members and staff also noted state-level action could change local authority. "We really didn't have a mechanism in place that denied battery storage," Heidi said. She added counties are adopting local standards to "get ahead" of pending state bills and provide a mechanism to regulate battery storage if state law changes.

The ZBA voted to adopt the text amendment as the county's template for regulating battery energy storage systems; the vote was taken by voice and no formal roll-call tally was recorded in the transcript. The board and staff said site-specific proposals for tier 2 systems would later appear before the ZBA as special-use petitions for individual review.

Members of the public and a Lightstar representative, Colin McAdam, were present; McAdam said he was available to answer community questions even though related site petitions had been tabled. Several site petitions tied to solar projects were continued for additional review by staff and stakeholders, the board said.

The ordinance draft lists standards, emergency planning and decommissioning requirements intended to protect public health, safety and the county's viewshed while allowing developers and first responders to work from an established regulatory framework. The county's planning staff said it sent the draft to first responders and department chiefs for input and will incorporate written comments into the implementation and special-use review process.

Future steps include application checklists, conceptual meetings between staff and developers, community meetings for residents within 1,500 feet of a proposed site and special-use hearings to add site-specific conditions on a case-by-case basis.