EBRA responds to the JRC proposals for amendments to the List of Wastes for batteries and battery waste (black mass)

EBRA supports the findings of the JRC study in support of the batteries regulatory framework but is concerned that not all aspects of the activities within the battery collection and treatment chain have been considered and firmly state that the impacts below must be taken into account prior to any amendments to the List of Wastes.

 PERMIT AND SHIPMENT ISSUES:

In particular, the impact on the logistics and collection of waste batteries from schools, retailers, other businesses, and battery collection points as there are additional transport document requirements, and in some cases, additional fees connected with the packaging and haulage of hazardous wastes.  

 Consideration must be given to how this may be managed to simplify the documentation process and administration burden and additional costs in each Member State - in a harmonious manner.  Of note, there is already high demand for ADR qualified drivers, and the additional changes may impact the availability of suitable and competent personnel with hazardous waste and ADR experience, again impacting transportation possibilities.

_____

Each battery recycling operator will hold a waste facility permit setting out the conditions by which they may operate to ensure that they meet the EU’s environmental and health and safety regulations to protect the environment and human health and social governance of the local community.   For many this will be including hazardous activities and permitted wastes already. 

A primary part of each of these permits is a list of the waste codes that the facility may accept, and often as well, waste codes for the outputs they will ship out of the facility that arise following the treatment operations. New codes for waste batteries and battery waste (e.g. to designate hazardous lithium batteries and black mass from lithium treatment) will of course not be present in the current permits, and therefore the operator will not be allowed to accept incoming batteries set out under the new codes.    Applying for the addition of new waste codes to a site that already accepts hazardous waste is often problematic, time consuming in terms of the documentation and notices required and can take a long-time to get approval from environmental and/or competent authorities.   EBRA is aware of applications for code changes taking between 8 and 18 months at sites within the European Union.  

Consideration must be given to how environmental and competent authorities in each Member State can (in a harmonious manner across the EU) issue wholesale approvals to battery recycling operators having an existing permit allowing hazardous automatically adding the new classification codes to the list of permitted waste codes included on their current waste facility permit.

_____

Given the low number of existing battery recycling facilities across the EU, and EBRA note, the fact that there is often only one facility or sometimes no facility in a country, the additional impact that has not been considered will be with the certain delays caused via the pre-informed consent (PICs) procedure.  

The large numbers of new PICs applications made when the logistics route is to a destination facility in another Member State is estimated by EBRA to be very high indeed.  Competent authorities are already often under-staffed or under-resourced, some only have one officer handling new applications.  

Often, the officer concerned has little or no knowledge of the handing and treatment of waste batteries adding to the likelihood of unrelated and time-consuming questions. Approvals may take between 8-12 weeks, but far more often the expected timeframe is much longer, with reports of some approvals taking over 12 months.

This situation will be further affected in 2024 due to the new PICs application rules that will be made for the export/shipment of e-waste and components from e-waste in 2025 under the changes to the Basel codes obligating every shipment to be pre-approved prior to the shipment commencing.  EBRA are aware that e-waste operators are already looking to submit a large number of new PICs applications for their waste as from June 2024 in order for those approvals to be in place and ready for the 1st January 2025 implementation date.

Consideration must be given to how competent authorities will be informed about the new / amended hazardous codes, and to ensure they establish a fast-track process to provide swift approval times, especially for those battery facilities holding pre-consent status - at least for the first twelve months of the implementation of the amendments to the LoW.

_____

Finally, and of great concern, is the impact on those interim collection and storage facilities, and on battery logistics and recycling operators that do not currently have a waste permit allowing them to receive and transport and treat hazardous waste.  Simply put, the implementation of new or amended codes denoting only hazardous designations will have an immediate effect on them being allowed to operate and it is highly likely to cause logistics and recycling facility issues (e.g. over full uncollected battery containers, limits reached on storage sites etc., having to turn away hazardous loads) which additionally, will lead to the higher potential for fires where such batteries include lithium types are stored for longer periods prior to sortation and treatment.

Given that there are a number of battery recycling operators in particular who will fall into this category, having waste permits for non-hazardous wastes only this is a cause for enormous concern.   EBRA knows that the usual time an amendment is considered and approved can be 12-18 months. 

Without a good management plan in each Member State before the new LoW codes are implemented, existing sites will have to close their gates to batteries re-classified under the new hazardous codes.   This will cause collection and storage issues under existing contracts as the periods of storage will need to be extended, or different routes found, if indeed available. 

If a temporary derogation (e.g. at least 18 months) is not envisaged and implemented allowing them to continue accepting the same battery types they have been doing safely  for some time already, then they will be forced to either temporarily close as they will not be allowed to accept hazardous waste, or worse, permanently close due to the lack of incoming business.   This is a very serious matter that will impact a number of Member States.

Consideration must be given to how Environmental and Competent Authorities in each Member State can speed up decisions on applications (in a harmonious manner) when considering and approving changes to be made to amend an existing waste permit to allow the transportation and/or reception and treatment of the newly classified hazardous batteries.  

BATTERY MANUFACTURING WASTE:

The JRC document has no mention of the proposals for codes to be used for battery manufacturing waste, being defined in Article 3 (51) of the Battery Regulation as “the materials or objects rejected during the battery manufacturing process, which cannot be re-used as an integral part in the same process and need to be recycled”.

As these materials are shipped from the manufacturing plant to a different location holding a relevant waste permit the holder of such waste should be directed towards appropriate LoW code.

EBRA advocates that battery manufacturing waste should be classified according to the type (chemistry) of battery being manufactured from which the waste arises. 

This may be defined in the LoW description - for example, at a site where there is a NiCd battery manufacturing process, the output material should be classified as: “16.06.02* Ni-Cd batteries and Ni-CD waste materials arising from the manufacturing process”. The inclusion of EBRA’s recommendation for the additional underlined text would clarify the appropriate LoW code to the necessary party dispatching the battery manufacturing waste material, and to the waste operator receiving it.

____

Specific responses to the JRC Report - https://tinyurl.com/6fffmrme

Row 111 EBRA agrees with and supports the clarification that batteries arising from the treatment of ELVs and WEEE should be classified under the battery codes in Chapter 16.06.  Clear guidance must be included in the amendment to the Waste Framework Directive, so this is understood and used by all parties to ensure a level playing field is available to all actors in the battery value chain.

Row 171 EBRA agrees with the JRC proposal to retain the hazardous classification of lead, NiCd and Mercury batteries.

Row 608 EBRA agrees with the JRC proposal to classify all lithium-ion waste batteries as absolute hazardous.

Row 653 EBRA agrees with the JRC proposal to classify all nickel-based waste batteries as absolute hazardous.

Row 696 In order to harmonise the classification across the EU, EBRA agrees with the JRC proposal to classify all alkaline batteries as absolute hazardous.

Row 742 Again, in order to harmonise the classification across the EU, EBRA agrees with the JRC proposal to classify all zinc-based waste batteries as absolute hazardous.

Row 806 EBRA advocates and supports the JRC conclusion that the black mass from lithium waste batteries has to be classified as hazardous due to the cathode material of lithium-ion batteries and the electrolytes.

Row 832 Whilst EBRA understands that the assessment of each black mass shipment should be made by each individual operator using the methods set out in the Waste Framework Directive using the H code classification process, in reality there are some poor actors in the industry who will take the shorter/cheaper route indicating their waste has no hazardous properties (making those intra-EU shipments cheaper and quicker) without having any actual verifiable evidence.  Thus EBRA advocates and supports the JRC conclusion that the black mass from alkaline waste batteries has to be classified as a hazardous in order to ensure a level playing field within the European Union.   However, EBRA advocates that individual and unique cases should be allowed where verifiable evidence is available to prove that a shipment has no hazardous properties, with the competent authorities of the point of origin and destination in agreement before a non-hazardous shipment is commenced.

Julie-Ann Adams

Secretary General (from 1st Jan 2024)

European Battery Recycling Association