Council hearing spotlights safety review and community opposition to battery energy storage in residential areas

Chairperson Joanne Areola convened the Committee on Fire and Emergency Management for an oversight hearing on battery energy storage systems (BESS), where FDNY, the Mayor’s Office of Climate and Environmental Justice (MOCJ), the public advocate and dozens of industry representatives and residents testified on safety, permitting and siting.

The hearing focused on two competing priorities: the FDNY’s technical, engineering‑led approval process intended to reduce fire and HazMat risk; and community concerns about systems proposed adjacent to homes, schools and hospitals. FDNY officials described a layered review that begins with laboratory testing and a manufacturer’s certificate of approval, proceeds through plan acceptance for suppression and alarm systems, includes three on‑site inspections before an operating permit is issued, and is supplemented by HazMat familiarization drills and annual training.

Thomas Correo, chief of fire prevention for the New York City Fire Department, told the committee that FDNY “has exclusive authority and responsibility to grant certificates of approval for battery energy storage systems for use in New York City as required by New York City Fire Code 1112 and fire code 608.5.” Correo described checks including equipment certification, design and installation plans for fire suppression (per NFPA standards) and fire alarm systems, and required emergency management plans and central‑station monitoring.

Joseph Loftus, acting chief of HazMat Operations, said BESS differ from consumer devices such as ebikes because certified systems include battery management systems, remote monitoring and engineering safeguards. Loftus said those factors, together with FDNY preparedness, are why the department treats permitted, certified BESS differently from knock‑off consumer batteries.

FDNY provided operational numbers to the committee: 26 active BESS locations citywide, 17 sites the agency classifies as “large” (the department’s 250 kWh threshold was cited), 17 certificates of approval issued, and no reported BESS incidents at permitted sites in the five boroughs to date. FDNY also described response capacity: 14 specialized HazMat units and roughly 25 HazMat‑equipped trucks distributed across the city and yearly training requirements for personnel.

MOCJ witnesses, including Elijah Hutchinson, framed BESS as a distributed resilience tool that can reduce reliance on fossil‑fuel peaker plants, lower customer bills during peak demand and improve local air quality. Hutchinson said the administration’s “City of Yes” zoning approach created an as‑of‑right pathway for storage and that the office is compiling a single public resource listing the studies and standards that inform city and state requirements.

Industry and labor witnesses urged both faster deployment and stronger public‑sector coordination. Steven Levin of Solar 1 and Connor Scribe of Soltage said projects can take years to navigate FDNY and DOB approvals; Local 3 and joint industry board representatives described apprenticeship and microgrid training and called for projects that include prevailing‑wage jobs.

Public testimony, concentrated in Southeast Queens and St. Albans, pressed a different emphasis. Several residents and civic leaders said proposed BESS siting placed systems too close to homes and schools. Resident Yasmine Lawrence said, “This proposed battery farm would be 10 feet from our house,” and described litigation after a developer sought access across private property. Civic leaders called for setbacks (one testimony urged a 1,000‑foot minimum), more advance notice, and a public review process rather than purely agency permitting. Witnesses cited the East Hampton and Jefferson County incidents in New York State and the 2020 California storage‑plant fire as examples that elevated local concern about off‑site impacts and runoff.

Officials and witnesses also discussed tangible, near‑term follow‑ups: MOCJ said it will aggregate research and best‑practice guidance for community use; FDNY said it is hiring additional technical staff and highlighted the inspection units assigned to storage oversight; and the committee requested that agencies provide the body of literature and incident analyses that inform code requirements.

No formal vote or legislative action was taken during the hearing. Council members repeatedly pressed the administration for clearer, consolidated public information on health and environmental effects, finer details on timelines for approval, and whether siting could be limited to industrial areas or city‑owned land. FDNY reiterated that it reviews safety and issues equipment approvals and operating permits, while MOCJ and other agencies cited limits on the city’s control of privately developed grid infrastructure and emphasized trade‑offs between distributed siting and local resilience.

The hearing closed with the committee asking agencies to provide additional documents and data, and with community witnesses urging the council to pursue zoning or legislative steps to require larger setbacks, public notification and a formal review path for BESS proposed near homes, schools or hospitals.