The tradesperson rule also applies to safety-critical defective lithium cells and batteries

Dear Lithium Battery Service Customers,

Today, it's all about the "Handwerker-Regelung" (craftsmen regulation) and a clarification regarding our statement in the last newsletter.

Jürgen Werny and I had misinterpreted Mr. Depre's statement from 2021, which we included in the last newsletter. Now, Mr. Depre has kindly explained via email why critically defective lithium cells and batteries are excluded from the craftsmen regulation in his view.

At ABS, we never intended to imply that a lithium cell or battery that, for example, already shows clear physical damage or is excessively hot, would simply be transported under the craftsmen regulation.

However, it seemed reasonable to us that common sense, such as that of the service technician, is required here, as they cannot make an assessment based on the safety criteria of the cell/battery or product manufacturer. Additionally, it is unrealistic to consult a technical expert in such cases.

What can reasonably be expected from a service technician, however, is an assessment of whether the apparent defect or damage to the lithium cell or battery during transportation could lead to rapid disassembly, dangerous reactions, flames, dangerous heat development, or the release of toxic, corrosive, or flammable gases or vapors, as described in ADR SV 376.

A non-diagnosable lithium cell or battery without obvious damage or defects is probably the most challenging case for the person applying the craftsmen regulation.

If the service technician encounters a critically defective lithium cell or battery, it is unlikely for practical reasons that P 911 or LP 906 would be applied. Instead, depending on the nature of the emergency, a case-by-case decision will be made on the best course of action for occupational and environmental safety reasons.
It also happens that some cell/battery manufacturers wish to examine a fully reacted cell/battery in their laboratory, and in such cases, P 911 or LP 906 may be applied. This is especially the case when trying to determine whether the reaction was an isolated incident or an issue in series production. In such instances, the topic of warranty comes into play.

Here is Mr. Depre's statement explaining why critically defective lithium cells and batteries are excluded from the craftsmen regulation:

Start of forwarded message:
From: "Depre, Christian (StMB)"
Subject: AW: Classification of vehicle bodies
Date: March 7, 2025, 2:59 PM CET
To: Eva Glimsche

Dear Ms. Glimsche,

Regarding point 2 (applicability of the craftsmen regulation to safety-critical defective lithium cells and batteries) in your newsletter below, I would like to point out that the conclusion is incorrect. In my statement from September 20, 2021, only defective lithium batteries were mentioned; critically defective batteries were not the subject of the discussion. The underlying inquiry from Mr. Werny dated September 18, 2021, was solely about the transport of defective lithium batteries by service technicians after replacing batteries at a customer's site.

While the exemption under subsection 1.1.3.1(c) of the ADR means that the other ADR provisions do not apply, the conditions of the exemption itself must still be met. One of these conditions is that the maximum quantities according to subsection 1.1.3.6 ADR must not be exceeded. To determine the maximum quantities for critically defective lithium batteries, chapter 3.3 special provision 677 ADR must be considered, as it is the only provision that specifies the applicable transport category 0. Consequently, the maximum allowable total quantity according to subsection 1.1.3.6 ADR is also 0, making the exemption under subsection 1.1.3.1(c) ADR inapplicable. However, for non-critical defective batteries, the exemption is generally applicable.

I believe that this result is immediately understandable because it concerns lithium batteries that, according to special provision 376, may undergo rapid disassembly, dangerous reactions, flame formation, dangerous heat generation, or the release of toxic, corrosive, or flammable gases or vapors under normal transportation conditions. No reasonable person would voluntarily place such a battery in their car. I consider that implausible.

Please share this information promptly through your newsletter.

Best regards,
Christian Depre