Board reviews updated state guidance on battery energy storage; members voice safety concerns and desire for review or moratorium

Goshen Planning Board members reviewed updated New York State fire-code guidance for battery energy storage systems (BESS) and discussed a pending New Leaf application. Board members said the state guidance echoed many items the board and fire chiefs had already requested, but several members expressed continued concern about long-duration fires, airborne emissions, and emergency response capability.

What the board heard - Planning staff circulated updated New York State fire-code revisions specific to BESS. Staff said the new code addresses central station monitoring, emergency-response plans, site-specific fire-department training, signage, and response-time requirements; New Leaf has stated it will provide monitoring and training and an emergency plan. (4447.635, 4620.145) - Several board members and the transcript noted that best practices and industry experience are changing and that some jurisdictions have banned BESS entirely; Warwick and Montgomery were cited as examples of municipalities that faced strong opposition or imposed limits. (4569.325, 4583.88) - Board members raised the prospect that in a thermal runaway event a BESS fire could not be extinguished quickly, could burn for days or weeks, emit substantial smoke and toxic gases (hydrogen was mentioned among combustion byproducts), and require a strategy of containment rather than extinguishment. One member said: "They are going to let it burn." (4671.0103)

Options and concerns raised - Require detailed, written commitments from the applicant including: central monitoring, site-specific emergency-response plans, contractually guaranteed training for local fire departments, signage and access protocols, documented response times for the applicant or vendor, and demonstration of containment systems if claimed. (4620.145) - Consider a temporary moratorium on new BESS applications while the town completes its comprehensive plan and updates zoning and code provisions. The board noted a moratorium is legally permissible so long as the town is actively working toward a code update. (5176.16) - Seek stricter conditions or deny the project if the planning board or town board determines the risks outweigh benefits; board members pointed to Warwick as an example where permitting generated substantial community opposition and litigation risk. (5088.795)

What staff said - The state code revisions largely reflect items the board has already requested from New Leaf (monitoring, emergency plans, training). Staff also said New Leaf indicated they would not rely on water or foam to extinguish fires and had told the town they would "let it burn," which staff cautioned is an industry practice for certain BESS incidents. (4652.635, 4671.0103) - New Leaf reportedly planned to seek variances to proceed (the company needs road frontage variances among other items); staff noted that if the planning board is lead agency for SEQR review, the board would coordinate environmental review processes and related public hearings. (5250.125, 5190.115)

Bottom line: Board members said they remain concerned about catastrophic BESS incidents and want to ensure any application contains robust, enforceable commitments on monitoring, emergency response and training, and that the town has clarity about evacuation, air quality, and long-duration incidents. Some board members suggested the town board consider a moratorium while zoning and the comprehensive plan are updated.

Next steps: Staff will continue to track New York State code changes, require the applicant to provide written emergency-response and monitoring commitments, and flag the issue for the comprehensive-plan/zoning update process. The planning board may ask the town board to consider a moratorium or zoning changes if the committee decides broader code changes are required.