From 1 October 2026, New South Wales has a mandatory battery stewardship scheme — reported as Australia’s first. It covers the exact category of battery that has been keeping building managers awake: the ones inside e-bikes and e-scooters parked in basements, bike stores and hallways across the state.
If you manage a residential or mixed-use building in NSW, you will get questions about it. Here is the short version, followed by the detail that matters operationally.
Quick answer: From 1 October 2026, NSW’s Product Lifecycle Responsibility Regulation 2026 requires brand owners who supply regulated batteries — including e-bike and e-scooter batteries — to join an approved Product Stewardship Organisation and fund their collection and recycling. It does not place any legal obligation on owners corporations, building managers or residents, and it does not set rules for how e-mobility batteries are charged or stored inside a building. Your practical job is disposal pathways and resident communication, not compliance sign-off.
The instrument is the Product Lifecycle Responsibility Regulation 2026 (NSW), made under the Product Lifecycle Responsibility Act 2025 (NSW). It commences 1 October 2026 and has been described as Australia’s first mandatory battery stewardship scheme. (Hamilton Locke, February 2026)
The regulated categories are specific:
Where the battery in an e-micromobility device cannot practicably be removed, the whole device is treated as the regulated battery. (Enviliance ASIA, February 2026)
Lead-acid batteries, and the batteries inside mobile phones and laptops, are expressly excluded. (Hamilton Locke, February 2026)
This is the part worth being clear about with your committee, because it is easy to read “mandatory scheme” and assume the building has something to do.
The duty-holder is the brand owner — the business that supplies a regulated battery into NSW. Brand owners must join a designated Product Stewardship Organisation, notify before first supply, submit action plans to the EPA covering collection procedures and consumer education, keep records for at least six years, and report annually. (Hamilton Locke, February 2026; Enviliance ASIA, February 2026)
Penalties for failing to meet the scheme’s safety requirements run to $880,000 for corporations and $220,000 for individuals. (Hamilton Locke, February 2026)
Nothing in that list lands on an owners corporation, a strata committee, a building manager or a resident. What the scheme should produce, over time, is something building managers have been asking for: a funded, industry-backed collection network so that a dead e-bike battery has somewhere to go other than the general waste chute or a storage cage.
It is worth stating plainly, because the two topics get conflated constantly in strata forums and in vendor marketing.
This is a collection, recycling and producer-reporting scheme. It is not a fire safety rule.
It does not tell you where e-bikes may be charged. It does not set a standard for charging equipment. It does not require a bike store to be separately fire-rated, sprinklered or ventilated. It does not create a by-law. It does not change anything in the National Construction Code or in AS 1851 servicing routines.
If you present it to your committee as a fire-safety measure, you will create a false sense that a known risk has been regulated away. It has not.
The in-building safety question — charging infrastructure, storage location, by-laws governing where residents may keep and charge e-mobility devices — remains unaddressed by any Australian regulator we have been able to identify.
That leaves owners corporations to manage the risk through the instruments they already control:
None of that is new advice. What changes on 1 October is that you can finally close the loop on disposal, which removes one of the more common reasons a resident leaves a failing battery sitting in a cupboard.
A short, realistic list for a building manager in NSW:
The failure mode is not knowing the rules. It is that battery incidents, resident notices, by-law breaches, insurer questions and disposal arrangements each live in a different place — email, a notebook, the strata manager’s file, someone’s phone.
When an insurer or an investigator asks what the building knew and when, the answer has to be assembled from memory. That is the same problem building managers have with contractor inductions and defect histories, and it has the same fix: one record, attached to the building, that survives a change of manager.
In MYBOS that means resident communications sent and logged against the building, incidents raised as work orders with photos and timestamps, and shared infrastructure — the bike store, the charging points — tracked in the asset register alongside everything you are responsible for.
No. The obligations fall on brand owners supplying regulated batteries into NSW — registration with a Product Stewardship Organisation, notification, record-keeping and annual reporting. Owners corporations, building managers and residents have no compliance obligation under the regulation.
Take it to a collection point in the approved Product Stewardship Organisation’s network rather than placing it in general waste or recycling bins. Damaged, swollen or overheating batteries should be isolated, not charged, and handled as a fire risk.
No. The scheme governs collection and recycling only. No NSW regulator has set charging or storage standards for e-mobility devices inside buildings. That risk is still managed through by-laws, insurance conditions and physical controls.
Yes. Batteries powering e-micromobility devices are regulated, and where the battery cannot practicably be removed, the device itself is treated as the regulated battery.
Up to $880,000 for corporations and $220,000 for individuals for non-compliance with the scheme’s safety requirements — applying to brand owners, not to buildings or residents.
Not yet. This is a NSW regulation. It has been reported as Australia’s first mandatory battery stewardship scheme, which makes it the likely template if other states follow.
Every factual claim in this article is drawn from the sources below. Regulatory detail should be verified against the primary instrument before being relied upon for compliance decisions.
Last reviewed 22 September 2026.