New battery waste codes: what will change for industrial sites and manufacturers?

Waste lithium-ion batteries will gain a specific hazardous waste code, while alkaline-based batteries will also receive an asterisk. These are changes in waste classification, not merely more precise descriptions. Sites using batteries need to review their waste streams and management arrangements. Manufacturers will also gain more detailed codes for production waste. The EU amendments have been adopted; the Polish regulation and its transitional provisions remain a draft.

Legal position and legislative progress verified: 10.09.2026. Editorial update: 11.09.2026 — expanded explanation of lithium-ion and alkaline-based batteries.

What has already been adopted, and what remains a proposal?

The changes originate in Commission Delegated Decision (EU) 2025/934, which updates the EU list of waste in relation to batteries. Its application date is 9 December 2026. The November date originally specified was changed by a corrigendum. This matters when consulting older commentaries or the original text of the Decision. EU Decision and its Annex, corrigendum to the application date.

In Poland, the Regulation of the Minister of Climate of 2 January 2020 remains in force. The new draft, listed as No 1288 in the Ministry's legislative work programme, is dated 3 September 2026 and was published on the Government Legislation Centre (RCL) website on 10 September 2026. It is undergoing public consultation. It proposes entry into force on 9 December but is not yet promulgated law. Current Polish list of waste, draft and RCL documentation, in Polish.

The adopted amendments to EU classification must therefore be distinguished from the proposed Polish arrangements for moving to the new codes. The latter may still change.

Lithium-ion batteries: from 16 06 05 to a hazardous waste code

The current Polish list has no separate entry for lithium-ion batteries in subchapter 16 06. For waste Li-ion batteries currently classified under the general code 16 06 05 “Other batteries and accumulators”, without an asterisk, the new classification provides 16 06 07* “waste lithium-based batteries”. This entry includes lithium-ion batteries, but is not limited to them. It is a change to hazardous waste classification, not merely a more precise name. Current Polish list of waste; Decision (EU) 2025/934, Annex.

An absence of an asterisk did not mean an absence of fire risk. Damage, short circuits or overheating of lithium-ion batteries can cause violent reactions, fire and the release of hazardous gases. The new classification does not create these hazards; it changes how the waste is identified in the list. Waste classification and the assessment of fire and transport risks must not be treated as interchangeable. State Fire Service information on Li-ion battery hazards, in Polish.

Alkaline-based batteries are another significant example: 16 06 04 → 16 06 04*. Waste covered by this entry will be classified as hazardous. Businesses should therefore examine not only the code in their records, but also storage arrangements, documentation and agreements with waste recipients, taking account of the applicable transition rules.

These examples concern separate waste battery streams in subchapter 16 06. They are not an instruction to reclassify every waste item containing a battery, nor all waste under 16 06 05, as 16 06 07*. Relevant municipal streams have separate entries in chapter 20. The source and nature of the particular waste remain decisive. The application dates and proposed Polish transitional provisions are explained below.

Why is this a substantial revision rather than a cosmetic update?

The new classification distinguishes battery chemistry and the stage at which waste arises more precisely: manufacturing, use and treatment. Subchapter 16 06 expands from six to 28 entries. It introduces separate codes for different battery chemistries, an extended set of manufacturing waste codes and a new subchapter, 19 14, for intermediate treatment fractions. Selected entries in chapters 09, 10, 19 and 20 also change. Annex 1 to the draft and explanatory memorandum, pp. 1–2, in Polish.

Selected examples illustrate the practical direction of the changes:

The table provides abbreviated descriptions, not full entry names or instructions for assigning codes. The waste battery examples refer to subchapter 16 06; separate entries in chapter 20 are provided for relevant municipal streams. Codes must be selected for the particular waste and its source. Draft, Annex 1, pp. 33–34 and 44–46, in Polish.

This is a major change for battery-related waste, not a comprehensive modernisation of the classification of all industrial waste.

Not just battery factories and recycling plants

The issue also concerns businesses that do not manufacture batteries but use them in equipment, tools, power supply systems or other site assets. The starting point should be to establish what waste actually arises at the site and who is responsible for it under the particular equipment servicing arrangements.

A site replacing batteries in its equipment needs a different preparation process from a cell manufacturer or a battery waste treatment installation. Not every business will face the same obligations.

The regulatory impact assessment (OSR) confirms this broad audience: it identifies waste producers, collectors, treatment operators, brokers and dealers. There is therefore no basis for addressing communications about the changes exclusively to battery manufacturers. OSR, section 4, in Polish.

A waste code is also a question of finding a recipient

Battery manufacturing waste is not necessarily a finished waste battery. It may arise when preparing electrode materials, cutting components or rejecting cells that fail quality requirements. The new manufacturing codes recognise this reality more explicitly.

The proposed correlation table illustrates this. New code 16 06 24* is linked, among other entries, to existing code 16 03 03*, while 16 06 25 is linked to existing code 16 03 04. This does not move all waste covered by those general entries into battery-specific codes. The nature of the particular waste determines the appropriate assignment. Draft, Annex 2, pp. 53–54, in Polish.

The practical problem does not end with finding a number in the list. The waste producer also needs a recipient whose authorisations and technological capabilities cover that waste. A broad category may make it harder to describe unambiguously which material is to be accepted and how it will be treated. The mere existence of a general code does not ensure that an appropriate recipient is available.

In our assessment, more detailed codes may facilitate communication between the waste producer, the recipient and the authority handling the application. This is a potential benefit of the amendment, not a guarantee of faster permitting or an immediate improvement in service availability.

It is not, however, a universal solution for manufacturing waste. In particular, the battery amendment does not automatically resolve the classification of all defective electronic components. A manufacturing reject should not be equated with a component removed from waste equipment solely because the two look similar.

Three dates that should not be confused

In the Polish draft, the date on which the new list enters into force is not the only date relevant to businesses:

Sources: corrigendum to the EU Decision, draft, §§ 5–6 and 9, and explanatory memorandum, p. 4, in Polish.

For example, a report for 2026 submitted in 2027 would still use the existing codes. The submission year should not be confused with the period covered by the report.

Particular care is needed with the 2030 date. The explanatory memorandum distinguishes classification of waste as hazardous from the later application of the specified management requirements. This must not be interpreted as permission to ignore hazards, existing permit conditions or all other obligations until 2030. The scope of this mechanism needs to be assessed for the particular situation and checked again once the legislation is promulgated.

Will permits or authorisations need to be amended?

It cannot currently be claimed that the change to the list alone will require every administrative decision to be amended. Proposed § 4 provides a continuity mechanism for final administrative decisions issued before the regulation enters into force, using the correlation table. It covers not only waste collection and treatment permits but also waste generation permits, integrated permits and other decisions referring to waste codes and types. The OSR explicitly states the intention to avoid a universal requirement to amend these decisions. Draft, § 4; explanatory memorandum, pp. 2–4; OSR, sections 6–7, in Polish.

This does not mean that the correlation table replaces a review of the entire decision. Waste descriptions, the scope of activities, technology, quantities and management conditions must be examined. A general old code should not be treated as automatic authorisation to accept any waste covered by the new entries.

For proceedings initiated but not concluded by a final administrative decision, proposed § 7 generally provides for the new list to apply. However, it contains exceptions for cases referred to in Article 193(1c) of Poland's Environmental Protection Law and Article 226a(1) of the Waste Act. A company holding a final decision and one awaiting a determination therefore require separate assessments.

What should an industrial site do now?

There is no need to wait for the final regulation before preparing the information required for an assessment. We recommend six steps:

1. Identify waste streams. Distinguish waste batteries, manufacturing waste and treatment waste. Establish their origin, composition and current classification.
2. Prepare a working code map. Compare existing entries with new ones, highlighting changes to hazardous status and cases requiring more information. Do not change current waste records before establishing the applicable legal basis and date.
3. Review decisions and pending proceedings. Separate final decisions from ongoing cases. Check the scope and conditions of decisions, not just their codes.
4. Speak to waste recipients. Establish which streams they will accept after the changes and on what basis. Assume neither automatic loss nor automatic expansion of their authorisations.
5. Review waste management arrangements. Assess segregation, storage, labelling, safety and preparation for transfer. Verify transport requirements separately: an asterisk next to a waste code is not a substitute for transport classification.
6. Plan the transition in records and reporting. Account for different reporting periods, staff instructions, and the final legislation and BDO communications.

This is a preparation plan, not a statement that every company must complete an identical set of formalities.

How can Ecothesis help?

Ecothesis supports businesses in assessing waste classification, reviewing administrative decisions and obligations, and preparing a practical adaptation plan. The starting point should be the site's actual waste and documentation, not simply a list of new codes.

Contact us for an assessment of how the changes affect your site: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., +48 530 778 650.

Sources

• Commission Delegated Decision (EU) 2025/934 of 5 March 2025 — adopted amendments to the EU list of waste.
• Corrigendum published on 19 August 2025 — application date: 9 December 2026.
• Regulation of the Polish Minister of Climate of 2 January 2020, in Polish — national list in force on the verification date.
• RCL: Ministry draft No 1288, in Polish — draft dated 3 September 2026, explanatory memorandum, OSR and annexes, published on 10 September 2026.

This article is for information only and does not replace an individual legal assessment or classification of a particular waste. The Polish section describes a draft regulation that may change. The legal position and legislative progress were verified on 10.09.2026.