Transportation compliance across the battery lifecycle: Key considerations

As high-voltage batteries move through increasingly complex lifecycle stages, including use, replacement, return, recall, and end-of-life management, determining whether and how batteries can be transported safely and lawfully becomes a central operational question.

Battery transportation imposes both regulatory obligations and practical constraints as companies seek to manage operational and environmental, health, and safety (EHS) risks. Whether a particular battery can move safely and lawfully, and under what conditions, may depend on decisions made long before shipment, including during the product design, testing, labeling, supplier documentation, return instructions, and service planning stages.

This alert summarizes key transportation compliance considerations for companies across the battery value chain and throughout the battery lifecycle. It builds on our previous alert on lithium batteries by examining how transportation requirements can shape product design, distribution, returns, recalls, recycling, and other lifecycle activities long before a shipment occurs.

Background: A layered transportation framework

The transportation of lithium cells and batteries to and from points within the United States is generally regulated under the US Department of Transportation (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)’s rules as Class 9 hazardous materials. Applicable regulatory requirements may be shipment-specific and turn on the battery's chemistry, size, configuration, condition, packaging, and transportation mode.

Cross-border or multimodal shipments may also implicate the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Technical Instructions, the International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code for vessel transport, and International Air Transport Association Dangerous Goods Regulations governing airlines and freight forwarders. The practical issue is not only determining which rules apply, but also ensuring that the company's packaging, documentation, labels, carrier instructions, return procedures, and other shipment parameters function across all relevant modes and jurisdictions.

For companies involved in the design, distribution, servicing, return, recycling, or end-of-life management of batteries and battery-powered products, assessment of transportation risks remains dynamic. A single battery may raise different transportation questions as it moves through its lifecycle, such as when it is shipped as a new component, incorporated into a product, used as a replacement part or prototype, returned by a customer, recalled, damaged in service, or managed as end-of-life material. Changes to the battery at each stage can affect packaging, documentation, routing, carrier acceptance, and whether the battery may move by air, vessel, rail, or highway.

The relevant regulatory framework is also changing. Recent PHMSA rulemakings (including HM-215Q, effective May 2024, and the February 2026 HM-265 proposal) have updated lithium battery requirements, and further rulemaking proposals would incorporate new regulatory classifications and shipping requirements for sodium-ion batteries and battery-powered vehicles.

As international dangerous goods standards continue to evolve, these rulemakings illustrate why battery transportation programs may require regular review and updating of labels, packaging inventories, shipping documents, carrier instructions, and customer-facing return procedures.

For companies that manufacture, assemble, or ship batteries, and for the carriers and logistics providers involved in their transportation, compliance is an ongoing focus that generally requires coordination across internal functions and external counterparties. The facts that determine how a battery must be classified, packaged, routed, and accepted often sit with different teams, suppliers, customers, and service providers.

Upstream product decisions shape downstream transport options

Transportation requirements often trace back to product parameters and choices made before a battery is first shipped. A battery's chemistry, energy rating, configuration, packaging, labeling, test history, and intended use can determine how it must be classified, what documentation must be made available, which modes of transportation may be used, and what carriers will accept.

At each stage of the battery’s lifecycle, those determinations may be informed by the following questions:

• Has the company confirmed classification, testing, packaging, and documentation before commercial shipment?
  
  
• Does the shipping approach match the battery's configuration, including whether it is transported as a cell, battery, module, or pack; packed with or contained in equipment; or installed in a vehicle? Is the approach appropriate for the quantity involved? If the design, suppliers, or chemistry change, does the company need to revisit prior testing or documentation?
  
  
• For returns, recalls, disposal, or end-of-life movement, does the battery’s current condition change the transportation pathway?
  
  
• Do downstream counterparties have the information needed to move the battery lawfully?

Upstream planning affects downstream execution. A battery program that treats transportation only as a shipment-by-shipment question may achieve compliant outbound distribution yet encounter transportation and compliance challenges when the same product returns from the field, moves across borders, or reaches end of life.

Classification records, test summaries, packaging specifications, labeling controls, return instructions, and contract terms developed at launch can preserve compliant transportation options later in the lifecycle.

Condition-based triage in reverse logistics

Planning is key in reverse logistics. A battery that was originally shipped as a new product may present a different transportation profile when it returns from the field, is recalled, or is evaluated for reuse, repurposing, recycling, or disposal.

At those later points in the product lifecycle, the question is not simply how the battery originally moved, but rather its current condition, configuration, location, and intended disposition – all of which may affect how and whether it can be transported.

Damaged, defective, or recalled batteries require particular attention. A battery that is swollen, leaking, corroded, overheating, physically damaged, or subject to recall may not be eligible for the same transportation pathway as an ordinary used battery. Under DOT rules, such batteries may be prohibited from air transport entirely. A company may also need to evaluate whether specialized packaging or a special permit is required and whether an available carrier will accept the shipment.

Companies are encouraged to conduct such assessments before a return, recall, repair, or recycling program is implemented at a scale that depends on routine battery transportation. Without appropriate intake, condition-assessment, packaging, and handling protocols, a program that appears workable on paper could encounter carrier refusals, shipment delays, or regulatory violations in practice.

Transportation challenges may also implicate broader EHS considerations. Battery failures or crashes during transport can result in fires, explosions, thermal runaway events, and releases of hazardous substances, creating potential workplace safety, environmental, and emergency response obligations. As a result, transportation planning often benefits from coordination among logistics, EHS, regulatory, and legal teams.

The issue is not limited to electric vehicle (EV) packs or large industrial batteries. Consumer products, micromobility devices, service parts, and other high-voltage battery-powered products can generate returns that require condition-based screening before shipment. Companies building warranty, service, or recycling programs are therefore encouraged to design reverse logistics around the condition of the battery at the time it moves – not solely around the product category or the original outbound shipment.

Transportation routing decisions may carry Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) arranger liability implications if a downstream facility fails. Companies also may need to navigate compliance obligations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act depending on the battery's condition and intended disposition.

State stewardship programs depend on transportation execution

State battery stewardship and extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs increasingly incorporate transportation requirements into collection and recycling obligations. EPR programs may assign responsibility for collecting, labeling, handling, recycling, or recovering value from end-of-life batteries, but those obligations depend on whether batteries can move lawfully from collection points to downstream destinations.

For example, Colorado’s Senate Bill 26-003, a first-in-the-nation EPR framework for EV batteries, implemented collection, labeling, and recovery obligations that depend on a working transportation pathway from dealers, dismantlers, facilities, and other handlers to appropriate downstream destinations. Other state programs may differ in producer definitions, covered products, deadlines, and other requirements. Companies across jurisdictions are encouraged to account for transportation execution in their EPR planning.

Looking ahead: Key questions for companies to consider

As battery products, return channels, and regulatory requirements evolve, companies are encouraged to assess whether their transportation compliance programs are keeping pace.

Key questions include the following:

• Once a battery leaves the company’s control, where might it need to move next, and under what conditions?
  
  
• Will the company’s current classification records and documentation support the movements that may be needed in the future?
  
  
• Can the company identify damaged, defective, or recalled batteries before they are offered for shipment?
  
  
• As PHMSA, ICAO, and state stewardship rules evolve, has the company translated the relevant changes into operational updates?
  
  
• Do the company’s contracts and counterparty relationships support the documentation, information flow, and risk allocation needed for compliant movement throughout the battery lifecycle?

For many companies, the answers to these questions will be specific to the product, supply chain, and lifecycle stage. Early and coordinated attention may help reduce compliance risk.

How DLA Piper can help

For stakeholders across the battery lifecycle, recent developments highlight the importance of proactive, documented transportation planning that spans regulatory compliance, contractual risk allocation, and operational governance.

DLA Piper's Transportation practice group and Battery Task Force help businesses anticipate, manage, and respond to transportation issues across the battery value chain and throughout the battery lifecycle. For more information, please contact the authors.