Planning Commission asks fire chiefs and engineers to weigh in on battery storage safety, decommissioning and tiering

Chairman James Benn opened discussion on battery energy storage systems, outlining three outstanding issues the commission must resolve: whether fire risks should be handled by the county or the project applicant, how to regulate Tier 1 systems (600 kWh or less), and decommissioning requirements. By consensus the Planning Commission asked staff to gather additional technical and public-safety input before making regulatory recommendations.

The Commission unanimously directed staff to consult the seven county fire chiefs about fire-risk mitigation and to review siting agreements and permit conditions used by other localities to identify public-safety terms that could be adopted locally. Staff also was asked to invite the chiefs to a future meeting or seek their input through the chiefs’ association meeting, recognizing the association meets quarterly.

On decommissioning, commissioners expressed uncertainty about obtaining accurate cost estimates because there is limited local experience removing battery systems. Staff noted the county’s solar permitting review process includes an engineering consultant review of bond estimates. Commissioners asked staff to consult engineers experienced in energy infrastructure development and bonding to obtain more reliable estimates.

The commission discussed whether project landowners should be listed as co-obligees on decommissioning bonds. Staff reported County Attorney Russell Slayton previously advised that adding landowners as co-obligees likely provides little additional protection and that landowners should secure protections in lease agreements. Commissioner Andrew Carwile argued including landowners would cost little and could protect them if the county failed to decommission a project; the commission, by consensus, took no further action on adding co-obligees.

Commissioners debated tiering for battery systems. Staff reviewed local examples and the county’s three-tier approach used for solar; commissioners discussed residential battery sizes, permitting complexity for multiple systems at one residence, and concerns about placing larger systems in residential neighborhoods. By consensus, staff was asked to research options to split Tier 1 into two residential categories (small residential and large residential/commercial) and return with recommendations at the next meeting.

The Commission did not adopt new regulations at the meeting; instead it directed multiple follow-up tasks for staff: consult fire chiefs, review siting and permit language from other localities, obtain engineering input on decommissioning bonds, and prepare proposed tiering options for Tier 1 systems.