The Massachusetts legislature is considering three proposed bills that would significantly obstruct development of new battery energy storage systems in the state.

The bills would impose a permit moratorium period and state-wide setbacks from populated and ecologically sensitive areas, and hand municipal governments veto power over construction of energy storage facilities.

A joint committee hearing was held on two of the bills (H.B. 4690 and H.B. 4685) on November 13, but no votes have been scheduled.

House Bill 4690: Temporary Moratorium on Lithium Battery Storage Facilities

H.B. 4690 would impose an 18-month moratorium on new permits for lithium-ion battery energy storage facilities. Facilities with final regulatory approval before enactment would remain unaffected and may proceed as planned.

During the moratorium, a commission of state officials, municipal representatives, environmental advocates and industry experts will review fire safety, environmental risks, emergency response and regulatory adequacy and report back to the legislature within 12 months after the bill is enacted.

This moratorium could immediately halt new lithium-ion battery storage project development for up to 18 months, potentially delaying Massachusetts' clean energy transition goals and grid modernization initiatives.

Project developers without final regulatory approval may face significant development delays, increased costs and financial uncertainty. The commission's findings and recommendations could substantially reshape the regulatory framework for battery energy storage systems throughout Massachusetts.

House Bill 4689: Buffer Zones for Battery Storage Facilities

H.B. 4689 would prohibit construction of battery storage facilities within 2,000 feet of “populated areas,” defined as any residentially zoned areas, schools, hospitals or other locations with high human occupancy.

Construction of battery projects within 3,000 feet of “ecologically protected areas” such as wetlands, wildlife reserves and conservation areas would also be prohibited.  The bill further requires battery storage projects to implement fire prevention and mitigation plans, submit emergency protocols to local fire authorities, install mandatory fire suppression systems, and do groundwater monitoring, soil contamination prevention and regular environmental assessments.  Non-compliance would lead to permit suspension or revocation.

Mandatory setbacks could significantly limit available sites, particularly in densely populated or environmentally protected areas, potentially increasing development costs, extending permitting timelines and affecting project economic feasibility.

House Bill 4685: Local Approval Requirement for Battery Storage Facilities

H.B. 4685 would require municipal approval before the state can grant permits for new battery storage facilities. Municipalities could establish additional siting criteria, safety standards and environmental requirements beyond state regulations. Municipal processes must include public hearings with comprehensive project presentations, including risk assessments and community benefit proposals. State agencies could not override municipal denials. Violations would carry penalties up to $100,000 and may require projects to stop operating.

This bill would shift primary regulatory authority from the state to the municipal level, giving local authorities broad discretionary powers and potentially creating inconsistent local frameworks. Projects may face extended permitting, increased complexity and uncertainty, as municipal opposition could prevent state-approved projects.

A similar bill, S.B. 3182, was introduced in the state Senate on September 11, 2025.