PLEASE NOTE: ESA is now part of the American Clean Power Association (ACP). This website material is not regularly updated and is for archival and reference purposes only. Please visit for more information.

ESA is actively working at the state regulatory and legislative level to drive deployment of energy storage. Our policy efforts fall into three policy categories: increase revenues, enhance competition, and ensure access. Below are examples of state policy actions.

Policies to increase revenues available to storage, such as by creating electricity markets and programs that reward flexibility and establishing deployment targets & incentive programs.

Energy Storage Targets

  • California passed the first-in-the-nation storage target legislation in 2010 and today has a 1,825 MW target by 2020 through the work of the legislature and commission.
  • New York’s governor, commission and legislature have worked collaboratively to develop a 1,500 MW by 2025 target and a 3,000 MW by 2030 target in 2018
  • Massachusetts’ legislature passed a 1,000 megawatt-hour storage target in 2018
  • New Jersey’s legislature passed a 600 MW by 2021 and 2,000 MW by 2030 target in 2018.
  • Nevada’s PUC issued an order stating storage targets are in the public interest in 2018 and a second phase has been kicked off to develop the target.

Incentive Programs

  • California’s SGIP program initially spurred the behind-the-meter storage market with $400M in investment and was extended by 5 years (with $166M/year) through SB 700.
  • New York has committed nearly $350M in incentives for both retail and bulk level storage.
  • Massachusetts launched the SMART program with a storage adder in 2018 and the state’s utilities include an innovative energy storage program in their energy efficiency plans.

Cost-benefit Studies

  • Massachusetts, New York, Nevada, and North Carolina have completed cost-benefit studies with robust modeling, while Virginia, New Jersey, and Colorado have ongoing cost-benefit studies. The studies that have been completed all demonstrate a net benefit to customers in various storage deployment scenarios.

Policies to enhance the competitiveness of storage, such as by including storage in state and regional planning processes and updating procurement evaluation methods.

Utility Planning Reform

  • Colorado passed legislation in 2018 calling for the state commission to review all utility planning rules to ensure consideration of energy storage procurement. The commission issued those rules in late 2018, incorporating storage into bulk system, transmission and distribution planning rules.
  • Michigan, Arizona, Washington and New Mexico have issued orders or policy statements calling on the utilities to consider energy storage in their integrated resource plans.
  • Arizona’s regulators placed a temporary moratorium on the construction of new natural gas plants over 150 MW until the state’s energy rules are reformed.

Policies to ensure grid & market access for storage, such as through improving grid interconnection processes, codes & standards, and multiple use functionality of storage.

Distribution Interconnection

  • Arizona, Nevada, California, New York, and Hawaii have all revised their distribution interconnection rules to better reflect the characteristics of energy storage systems. Michigan, Maryland, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Colorado have ongoing stakeholder working groups to review potential changes.

Multiple Use Application Frameworks

  • California and New York lead the way with ongoing stakeholder working groups to develop a set of policies and reforms to facilitate multiple services from the same energy storage asset.
  • Maryland’s legislature passed a storage pilot to test innovative regulatory approaches to facilitate multiple use and multiple ownership.

Become a Member

Join ESA - the National Network of Energy Storage Stakeholders

Learn More About Membership