Protect NYC Neighborhoods Against BESS: Responsible Siting & True Community Input

To: NYC Council, Mayor’s Office, FDNY, NYC DOB, NYS PSC, NYSERDA, and Con Edison

Summary:

We support clean energy and a more reliable grid. But large lithium-ion Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) must never be placed next to homes, schools, small businesses, or places of worship without robust safety reviews, transparent risk communication, and genuine community-driven siting.

Why we’re concerned:

• Residential safety first. Lithium-ion battery thermal-runaway events are rare but high-consequence. In dense neighborhoods, even a single failure can mean toxic smoke, evacuations, and long-duration disruption.
• Transparency & trust. Too many communities learned late. Residents and CBOs deserve early, multilingual engagement, clear emergency plans, and independent safety briefings—not after sites are effectively chosen.
• Clear standards & buffers. NYC should formally adopt protective setbacks from homes/schools, require equipment with FDNY Certificates of Approval, and publish plain-language emergency response plans for every site.
• Fair risk allocation. If projects go forward near people’s homes, require full-scope insurance, financial assurance, and 24/7 monitoring—with automatic shut-down protocols and community notification systems. How do we address system defects when the very monitoring systems that are in place are subject to failure and can become non-functional. Clean Energy Associates (CEA) a leading provider of green energy solutions most recent report of May 2025 revealed a 24% increase in BESSs system level defects.
• Data we can see. Publish third-party risk assessments (including plume/toxicity modeling), facility-level incident logs, and real-time safety telemetry where feasible.
• Alternative siting. Prioritize industrial zones, brownfields, and existing energy corridors (e.g., substations with adequate buffers) over residential blocks. 

What we’re asking for:

• We want ConEd and Elected officials to immediately halt the plans for lithium-ion Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) facilities in residential areas such as the following: By NineDot Energy LLC at 179-21 Linden Blvd. NY 11434 and 181-07 Jamaica Avenue, NY 11423.

• Establish a siting hierarchy that favors non-residential locations and requires a written alternatives analysis when a residential block is proposed.

• Mandate early, structured engagement with community boards and CBOs before site selection—at least two public meetings and a 60-day comment period, with translated materials. 

• Site selection and permits requires community board approval
• Require independent, public safety studies (thermal-runaway scenarios, fire-water runoff, plume modeling) and publish them online 30+ days before any permit hearing.
• Guarantee financial protections: full-scope project insurance; a remediation bond; and a documented claims path for neighbors if there’s an incident.
• One-page fact sheets for each site—owner/operator, chemistries, safety certifications, emergency contacts, and how to receive real-time alerts.
• We ask that the community support the State Legislation introduced by Senator Addabbo S.7197 and Assemblymember Williams A.6955 which will require a public review process and a setback mandate of 1000 feet from residential homes.

We support the energy transition—done safely.

NYC can lead on clean energy and public safety by centering neighborhoods in decisions that affect their homes and health. Please sign to demand responsible siting, real oversight, and true community partnership.

We write to put you — elected officials, city agencies, and Con Edison executives — on notice:

• Your silence is not safety. By failing to require robust guardrails, setback standards, or rigorous community consultation, you are effectively deciding these sites will go into our backyards. That is governing by default, not by mandate.
• We will hold you politically accountable. In future election cycles, we will assess your votes, public statements, and oversight actions—or lack thereof—on BESS siting. Campaign contributions, endorsements, volunteer support, and grassroots mobilization will follow from your record on protecting safety and transparency.
• No more “consultation after the fact.” If you are unwilling to commit to early, binding community engagement and enforceable siting constraints, your standard excuse of “balancing grid needs and safety” rings hollow—and residents will remember in the ballot box.
  Con Edison, you are on the hook. If you push for siting choices without open stakeholder input and safety-first design, we will campaign against your permits, push for regulatory penalties, and bring media exposure to every deficient decision.
• You won’t be rewarded for damage. We will litigate, complain to the PSC, demand investigations, and oppose funding or bond approvals for agencies or operators complicit in dangerous siting. If you side with BESS over neighborhoods, don’t expect support from communities, local PACs, or engaged citizens.
• This is a litmus test for integrity. Do you stand with the utilities and developers or with the families, seniors, schools, and small businesses whose lives and livelihoods may be disrupted by catastrophic failure or degraded property value?
• You can’t wash your hands of consequences. If your inaction or policy missteps lead to damage, fire, evacuations, or property loss, the public will ask: Who approved that location? Who greenlit that design? Who failed to alert neighbors? And in the next election cycle, you will answer.