Thursday, October 1, 2026
The Sea Cliff Board of Trustees is drafting legislation regulating residential battery energy storage systems. There is one open application by a resident to install a unit, but the village code does not currently include regulations on battery storage.
Discussion at Monday’s public conference meeting about battery storage legislation centered around permits, capacity and location on a resident’s property. The board previously brought in Nassau County Assistant Chief Fire Marshal Andrew Schmitt and Brian O’Donnell, Sea Cliff’s first assistant fire chief, on Feb. 2 to discuss fire suppression systems and controlling a fire if a battery ignites.
Schmitt also suggested the board speak with other experts like electrical engineers. O’Donnell recommended that residents only be allowed to store batteries outdoors.
The law would make it legal for residents to install battery energy storage systems within certain parameters. Should a resident want to install a system outside those parameters, they will have to appear before the village’s planning board to make their case.
Storing energy generated by solar panels is one reason for keeping lithium batteries. Solar panels are not required for installing battery energy storage systems.
“I believe, with the way things are going, we’ll be seeing more and more and more of these applications,” Mayor Elena Villafane said. “So, I’d really like to wrestle this thing to the ground.”
The board dedicated most of its discussion to deliberating the maximum capacity in kilowatt hours that residents should be able to store. New York State’s code allows for a maximum of 80 kilowatt hours. Anything higher than that gets classified as commercial rather than residential.
Trustee James Versocki initially said he was comfortable allowing residents the full 80 kilowatt hours. Villafane and Village Administrator Bruce Kennedy made a case for a lower maximum capacity. Kennedy said his concern is how quickly a battery fire can spread, though a fire is unlikely.
"The more kilowatt hours you have, that’s the more batteries, the more outgassing, more chance of evacuation,” he said. “The more kilowatt hours there are, the further away (the Fire Department has) to work from the fire. So, it just becomes more dangerous the more you put in.”
Villafane echoed these concerns, emphasizing how close together some houses in Sea Cliff are to one another, making it more dangerous for neighbors in the unlikely event that a resident’s battery ignites.
Versocki later expressed uncertainty in choosing where the maximum capacity should be.
“As a non-professional, the state has given a code,” he said. “I’m fine with looking at something, but I’m not just going to pick a number because I think it’s a number.”
Kennedy and Trustee George Williams invoked Tesla’s Powerwall Three, which provides 13.5 kilowatt hours of usable energy. According to EnergySage, an online marketplace that helps homeowners compare quotes on solar panels and battery storage, Powerwall Three can potentially power a house for more than a day. The Powerwall stores solar energy for later use, such as in the event of a power outage.
The board used the idea that three Tesla Powerwalls can last a resident three days as a baseline when deciding on a maximum capacity to allow. Williams suggested a maximum of 41 kilowatt hours, multiplying 13.5 by three. The board agreed to 41 kilowatt hours for the proposed legislation. Residents who want a system accommodating more than that would have to go before the planning board for approval.
New York State has created a model law for municipalities to follow when drafting legislation for battery energy storage systems. In that model law, a building permit and electrical permit are required for installing a system. Sea Cliff’s law is expected to mirror these requirements.
Appropriate location for storage systems was also debated. The board discussed whether it should require storage systems to be kept outdoors only, or if some indoor installation may be acceptable. An instance of installation in a resident’s basement was noted, and Villafane expressed doubt that this was a good idea.
“That doesn’t really,” she said, “seem like something I would think is best practices.”
The board decided the proposed legislation should allow outdoor installation and systems to be kept indoors with enclosures designed to prevent fire from spreading and with proper ventilation. Much of the discussion around indoor installation pertained to garages rather than basements.
Another location factor that board discussed was how far systems should be placed from neighboring houses. Fire safety was the primary concern when deciding on a distance to include in the proposed legislation. While uncommon, battery fires can pose a threat to the owner’s house and neighboring houses. In this case, fire departments focus on controlling the fire’s spread.
“My thought process is, ‘What’s reasonable?’” Kennedy said. “Being what we know, what we don’t know, the fears of others, the potential for disaster, which exists, what’s reasonable?”
The board settled on including in the proposed legislation that storage systems must be placed a minimum of 30 feet from neighboring houses whether the system is indoors or outdoors. This would mean that if a resident installs a unit indoors, the structure where the unit is kept must be at least 30 feet from neighboring houses.
Once the legislation is drafted by the village attorney, the board will review it before scheduling a public hearing.
