Battery Directive

The first of the western European directives dealing with waste management was the "Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on Waste."[4] It didn't mention batteries or chemicals but specified the regulation of "particular categories of waste," which was later referenced to by both Battery Directives as a legislative or legal basis. The first version of the European Council Directive on Batteries and Accumulators 91/157/EEC was approved on 18 March 1991.[5] It covered many battery types, including industrial, automotive, dry-cell, lead-acid, alkaline, nickel-cadmium, nickel-metal-hydride, lithium, lithium-ion, mercury, etc. The first program in the directive was set for a six-year duration, starting in 1993.

The 1991 battery Directive's "Article 3; MI; Annex I" stated the prohibition (with exceptions) of marketing:

1. Batteries on the market after 18 September 1992 with:
   • 1.A. more than 25 mg of mercury per cell, except alkaline manganese batteries
   • 1.B. more than 0.025% cadmium by weight
   • 1.C. more than 0.4% lead by weight
2. Alkaline manganese batteries placed on the market after 18 September 1992 containing more than 0.025% of mercury by weight
3. Batteries on the market after 1 January 1999 with more than 0.0005% mercury by weight

Since battery recycling rates then were about 5% the directive sought to improve these rates. It set up recycling goals: separate collection and recycling, and provide recycling/collection information to the consumer. The responsibility for providing separated recycling collection was largely given to the manufacturers. Recycling requirements are found in Articles 4, 6, and 7.

There were marking provisions, including manufacturer responsibility for marking on the battery products themselves the contained substances and recycling information.

Regulation was met with heavy resistance. Disputed were deadlines, target recycling rates, implementation dates, weight percentage limits, applicable product groups, financial responsibility for public information campaigns and waste management (and its financial impact), exclusions of financial responsibility given to small producer businesses, and personnel safety from decreased reliability of "greener" batteries.

In a non-environmental battery marking question, automotive battery makers questioned markings on batteries relating to battery performance, arguing that the quantity of a car battery's electric current output to start a vehicle in extreme weather was a very good indicator of battery performance.

After poor implementation of the first Battery Directive, work began on a new directive that would more emphasise battery end-of-life waste management through mandated and better-structured collection and recycling programs. It was also acknowledged that more research on certain substance was needed before harsher, more complete, and, arguably, unrealistic, bans. Thus the onus was on everyone in the waste management chain, from producer to the consumer, rather than affecting product design with substance bans that manufacturers claimed are unreasonable.

Consultations to revisions of the first battery Directive started in 1997, giving all interested parties a voice in legislation and policy, especially in assessing the directive's economic, environmental, and social impact. In February 2003 an open stakeholders consultation process was started, which published its findings online, and culminated in a meeting in Brussels, in July 2003. The waters were tested by asking for Extended Impact Assessments for different scenarios of proposed ranges of regulation. For example, what would be the impact in establishing spent battery collection targets of from 30% to 80% or the impact of SEPARATE spent battery collection of from 70% to 100%? Entities were asked how these goals could be met and to propose collection responsibility models.

The "green" viewpoint (and perhaps that of the Conciliation Committee's)[6] was that the previous Directive had been limited in scope, while groups on the other side set forth reasons for less stringency. Those arguing for broadening the scope claimed that if batteries with certain metals were not banned carte blanche then the waste management effort would be hurt by confusion and perhaps inconvenience to the public.

There were at least six drafts the 2003 version, which was equivalent to a second battery directive. The 2003 revision, Council Directive 2003/0282/COD,[7] a July 2006 "conciliation agreement," was a compromise between the European Council and European Parliament, and came after three years of draft revisions. It was welcomed by entities like the European Portable Battery Association (EPBA), that favoured less stringency. As in other models of European compliance legislation, a corporation or organisations like the EPBA participates in working groups with members that include, among other players, legislators, large enterprises—in this case, battery-makers—trade associations, and non-governmental organisations. The Directive's overall stated objective was still to protect the public interest with a cleaner environment by minimising the negative impact on the environment of batteries, especially in their waste cycle. Depending on the viewpoint, it was also something of a compromise between 1. manufacturers and distributors, and 3. environmental proponents.

Disposal of automotive and industrial batteries by leaving in landfills or by incineration "should be prohibited". (Directive preamble point #8)

Article 7 requires Member States to maximise the "separation" of batteries from regular municipal waste and requires spent batteries to be collected separately. Recycling and collection targets are called for so that fewer batteries end up in landfills.

The collection program is found in Annex I. It is proposed that member states set their own country's standards using the Battery Directive as a guide for minimum levels. These levels are stated in terms of percents of prior annual sales. Article 3(17) states "'collection rate' means, for a given Member State in a given calendar year, the percentage obtained by dividing the weight of waste portable batteries and accumulators collected in accordance with Article 8(1) of this Directive or with Directive 2002/96/EC in that calendar year by the average weight of portable batteries and accumulators that producers either sell directly to end-users or deliver to third parties in order to sell them to end-users in that Member State during that calendar year and the preceding two calendar years."

Member States are required to provide collection sites that are accessible and free of charge to the public (Art. 8). Battery distributors may be required to provide this at Member States' discretion (Art. 8(2)(a)). Battery manufacturers may not refuse to take back waste batteries from end-consumers, irrespective of their chemical composition or origin (Art. 8(3)).

Waste battery collection rate targets are specified in Article 10. Minimum targets of 25% of battery sales and 45% of battery sales by 26 September 2012 and 2016 respectively(Art. 10(2)).

Collections rates are to be monitored annually as outlined in Annex I scheme, with yearly reporting to the Commission. There may be some leeway given in the form of "transitional agreements" if a nation has special circumstances. (Art. 10 (4))

There are many exclusions granted to manufacturers and certain product types. In some cases these are for batteries used in safety or other critical-use applications (e.g. miners' caps).

Exemptions for the following are still in place:

• Article 2 – Space, military, munitions, and "essential security" applications
• Article 4 – Mercury Ban: Button cells with 2% or less mercury content by weight
• Article 4 – Cadmium Ban: Emergency, emergency lighting, emergency doors, and alarm systems; medical equipment; cordless power tools[8]
• Article 14 – Incinerator and landfill disposal ban: Residues of batteries that have gone through appropriate treatment as per Art. 12(1) may be disposed of in landfills or by incineration.
• Article 18 – possibility to exclude small producers from the requirements of financing

Batteries imported from third countries under non-discriminatory conditions are included (Art. 19).

Member states may use instruments like differential tax rates to encourage less toxic batteries and recycling (Art. 9)

Member states are required to submit implementation reports to the commission every three years (Art. 22).

In Art. 21 marking must indicate separate collections or recycling and the heavy metal content. Labels should state collection information and chemical content of batteries. They should show a symbol of the "crossed-out" wheeled recycling bin (Annex II[9]) to indicate that the battery should not go in the bin. This symbol size is specified as a percent of battery area on its largest side (3%), except for cylindrical batteries, where the symbol should be 1.5% of total surface area.

Member states will set up measures for "effective, proportionate, and dissuasive" penalties for actions not comporting to the battery Directive and apprise the European Commission of these measures and any changes (Art. 25).

Annex I Battery Collection Targets mentioned in Art. 10 above:

• Year X is the year including the date mentioned in Article 26.

In practice, manufacturers of batteries need to make sure they have applied the legal framework to their company. This means they need to check who the producer under legal terms of the directive is and whether they have fulfilled the labelling obligation. In the next step manufacturers or distributors have to define their battery strategy and register with battery compliance schemes to control battery compliance and monitor recycling and recovery results.[10] While working within the framework of the battery directive manufacturers, producers and distributors also have to be aware of financial aspects and registration timelines to ensure compliance and reduce risks of their batteries. Most of the time they are supported with advice by suitable qualified persons.[11]