Clean Energy Group Publishes Safety-Focused Model Regulation for Energy Storage Facilities

This sound is generated automatically. Let us know if you have feedback.

Brief description of the dive:

States and municipalities can use framework model regulation The American Clean Energy Association has published guidance on developing regulations for permitting, siting, safety, environmental compliance and retirement of energy storage systems, the ACP said Thursday.
This framework is based on guidelines from the National Energy Laboratories, applicable state and local regulations, and national fire safety standards such as: UL9540 AND NFPA 855 StandardACP said.
Frank Macchiarola, ACP’s director of policy, said in a statement that the framework “represents the broadest and most significant effort to date to promote the adoption of the latest national safety standards, as well as the development of rigorous and sound rules for the development and operation of battery energy storage resources.”

Diving Insight:

ACP has published a new model framework for regulation less than a week after explosive fire at the Aricell factory near Seoul, South Korea, killed 22 workers and reignited concerns about the safety of lithium-ion batteries.

Although defective cells and modules are responsible for some battery explosions and fires, joint study published earlier this year by TWAICE, the Electric Power Research Institute and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory found that most have other causes. These include installation problems made worse by incompatible wiring, HVAC systems and fire suppression, the report said.

A “diverse group of stakeholders” helped develop the model ordinance, said Noah Roberts, senior director of energy storage at ACP. These included fire safety experts, current and former firefighters, and developers, operators and manufacturers of energy storage systems.

ACP has provided guidance on siting and permitting to state and local governments in the past, but the model ordinance is a “first-of-its-kind policy” that “represents a major step because it incorporates the principles of NFPA 855 and other best practices and standards into the detailed guidance included in the model,” Roberts said.

NFPA 855, which Roberts called the “industry standard practice” for fire safety, imposes requirements for the “design, installation, start-up, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning” of energy storage facilities, including maximum energy and unit spacing, according to ACPIt also provides details on required regulatory documents such as threat mitigation analyses, emergency response plans and safety system specifications.

UL 9540 details specific safety standards for energy storage devices as defined by NFPA 855, while the related UL 9540A standard details fire safety testing requirements for energy storage systems, according to UL Solutionswhich oversees standards.

The ACP Model Ordinance applies to energy storage systems of 1 MW or greater and establishes an initial application review period of 30 days or less, after which municipalities must issue written consent or provide a deficiency notice.

This model allows for the siting of electricity storage facilities that meet the requirements of the regulation in all land-use zones, with permits being granted in agricultural, industrial and commercial areas and discretionary permits in residential, mixed-use and public/institutional areas.

By-right or ministerial approval occurs when the proposed land use complies with existing zoning and building regulations. Discretionary approval requires additional review by local permitting authorities, potentially adding time and cost to the pre-construction period.

The model also sets out requirements for decommissioning energy storage facilities, including a bond or other form of financial security from the applicant that is “not less than the estimated cost of decommissioning the energy facility, net of salvage or recycling value.”

The model ordinance framework can be adopted or incorporated into state and local laws, but “it may not be appropriate … to adopt it exactly as written” or to use it as legal advice, according to the model’s preamble. Local governments should seek legal advice and consider modifying the model ordinance language “to accommodate local conditions, comprehensive plans, existing land uses, and zoning regulations,” the model says.