Churchill County upholds Redwood Materials special-use permit for outdoor battery storage with added safety conditions

The Churchill County Board of Commissioners on an appeal hearing voted to uphold a Planning Commission approval allowing Redwood Materials to operate an outdoor lithium‑ion battery storage yard and a separate battery testing (R&D) area on property on Bangor Road, while adding conditions requiring a more detailed emergency response plan, baseline and annual soils and water testing, and additional agency inputs.

Randy Hines, Churchill County Public Works Planning and Building, described the project to the commission: “this is a special use permit for outside storage of lithium batteries.” Hines said the storage area in the application covers roughly 35 acres, using 900‑square‑foot grid stacks (about 30 by 30 feet) with a 10‑foot height limit; the county fire marshal required increasing spacing between stacks to 15 feet. The R&D/testing area was described as about 2.5 acres south of Bangor Road.

Why it matters: appellants and many members of the public said the combination of high temperatures, wind patterns, nearby water resources and volunteer emergency services raised unacceptable public‑safety and environmental risks if the project proceeds without stronger, enforceable safeguards. Supporters, including Redwood Materials representatives, argued the company already follows industry and regulatory practices and that the site will enable recycling of end‑of‑life batteries that would otherwise reach landfills.

The county decision and added conditions

After presentations, appellant testimony and public comment, the commission voted to uphold the Planning Commission’s approval and appended several additional conditions. The changes, read into the record by ADA Joe Sanford, require: an emergency management and response plan acceptable to the Churchill County Fire Marshal that complies with the proposed amendments to the 2024 International Fire Code; baseline and annual soils testing for lithium and other heavy metals prior to operations and annually thereafter; baseline water/well testing prior to operations and annual testing thereafter (the on‑site well did not yet exist); a requirement that the facility operate within federal, state or local standards for heavy metals and lithium in soil and water; an opportunity for the Truckee‑Carson Irrigation District/Board of Reclamation (TCID/BOR) to review and comment on final engineering and design plans; and notification and confirmation from the owner of an underground pipeline easement on the property that the pipeline owner has no objection or that no response after 60 days will be deemed waiver of objection.

What the proposal would do and how it would operate

Redwood Materials representatives said the company’s proposed outdoor storage would be arranged in a grid pattern, with security fencing, surveillance and fire mitigation measures. Don Tetreault, representing Redwood Materials, told the commission the company’s mission is to “keep those out of landfills” and to operate within a circular‑economy model. Company witnesses described thermal imaging (FLIR) monitoring, 24/7 site staffing, and on‑site emergency response vehicles and equipment including F‑500 foam to address thermal events. The company said it would not accept leaking batteries and would implement stormwater pollution prevention measures and a detention/retention pond to capture firefighting runoff for third‑party remediation and regulatory oversight.

Concerns raised at the hearing

Appellants Honey Gibbons, Carolyn Kendrick Hevern and Bernadette Franke, and several dozen public speakers, urged delay or denial. Appellant Carolyn Kendrick Hevern said, “Lithium batteries’ favorite thing is heat to make it combust and to make it explode, and they're going to be sitting out there in our hot summer sun.” Appellants and public commenters cited incidents at other battery facilities and transport fires, questioned whether local volunteer fire resources could be overburdened, and warned about possible contamination of the Truckee‑Carson irrigation system, Lake Lahontan and local wells. Tribal and farming representatives asked specifically about impacts to wetlands, crops and cultural resources downstream.

Commission discussion focused on two disputed findings in the county code: whether the project would overburden public services and infrastructure (particularly firefighters and water resources) and whether it would create adverse environmental impacts. Commissioners repeatedly referenced planning and engineering steps that would be required before operations: engineering drawings, stormwater and pollution prevention plans, and fire marshal review and sign‑off. Commissioner Matt Hyde (full role/title shown at first mention in the record) and others pressed the company and staff for specifics on ambient‑temperature monitoring, storage packing and whether the company would expand beyond the acreage currently proposed.

Public comment and evidence

More than two dozen members of the public spoke during the hearing. Speakers included local residents, farmers, tribal leaders and technical commenters who cited reported incidents at other sites, the potential for hydrofluoric acid and heavy‑metal emissions from lithium fires, and the difficulty of extinguishing such events. Several speakers asked for baseline environmental sampling and long‑term monitoring to be required in any approval.

Vote and next steps

Following the deliberations, a motion was made to uphold the Planning Commission’s approval with the amended conditions described above; the commission recorded the motion, a second, and multiple commissioners announced “Aye.” The chair declared the motion carried and the special‑use permit approval upheld subject to the added conditions. The decision and its conditions will be part of the appeal record and of the permit requirements to be met before operations begin. The county’s standard enforcement and remediation timelines apply if monitoring later shows contamination above applicable federal, state or local standards.

Context and background

The property involved is approximately 438.42 acres in an industrial zoning district along Bangor Road. County staff noted the Planning Commission originally recommended approval with conditions; the Board of Commissioners’ action affirmed that decision while adding further safeguards at the Board level. Multiple state and federal agencies were cited publicly as relevant to the project, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP), the federal Department of Transportation for packaging and transport rules, and local fire code enforcement (International Fire Code). Redwood Materials said it already operates a larger collection and recycling campus in the Tahoe‑Reno Industrial Complex and that the Bangor Road site would be used primarily for storage and limited R&D/testing.

Ending note

The Board's action allows the project to move forward under the Planning Commission approval but requires the additional items read into the record to the satisfaction of county staff and the fire marshal before battery storage or testing begins on the Bangor Road site. The county also recorded a schedule for baseline environmental sampling and annual monitoring; specific remediation triggers and enforcement actions are tied to existing county code and applicable federal or state thresholds.