Skip to main content
Battery SafetyRegulatory Loophole· Updated · 4 min read· in Home

Class L Label Confusion: Why Battery Storage Fire Rating Is Not a Standard

The new Class L fire classification for lithium-ion batteries defines how they burn, but lacks a mandatory testing standard. This loophole is allowing manufacturers to sell unverified storage cabinets and extinguishers, prompting regulator crackdowns.

By Adrien Caron

Share this story

Listen

Buying traditional fire safety equipment operates on a strict physical guarantee: a Class A or Class B label means the product has passed a legally mandated suppression test against burning wood or flammable liquids. The new Class L designation for lithium-ion battery fires appears identical on a product label, but it differs in one critical respect: it defines the behavior of the fire, but it does not legally require the product to pass a test against one.[1]

That distinction has created a regulatory blind spot just as lithium-ion battery use surges across residential and commercial properties. In 2026, the International Organization for Standardization published ISO 3941:2026, introducing Class L to categorize fires driven by the internal electrochemical reactions of lithium-ion cells. It marks the first new fire classification in 30 years, following the creation of Class F for cooking oils in 1996.

However, the classification arrived without a harmonized testing standard. Manufacturers of battery storage cabinets and fire extinguishers are increasingly applying "Class L" marketing labels to products that have only been tested against traditional Class A fires. This leaves facility managers and homeowners assuming they are protected against thermal runaway events when the equipment has never actually faced one.[1][2]

Regulators are now stepping in to police the resulting market confusion. On August 31, 2026, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) forced suppliers of lithium-ion fire extinguishers to amend their marketing claims. The watchdog found that companies were falsely implying compliance with Australian safety standards that do not currently exist for lithium-ion fires. The intervention follows a 600 percent increase in lithium-ion battery safety reports to the ACCC between 2020 and 2025.[2]

Regulators warn that consumer-grade fire extinguishers are largely ineffective against the internal chemical reactions of a failing lithium-ion cell.

"The ACCC's view is that lithium-ion battery fire extinguishers should not be marketed as being suitable for use by members of the general public," stated ACCC Deputy Chair Catriona Lowe. She noted that the devices require professional training and protective gear. "Lithium-ion battery fires can spread rapidly, produce toxic smoke and can be very difficult to extinguish," Lowe added, advising consumers to evacuate rather than attempt suppression.[2]

The labeling issue extends beyond extinguishers to the cabinets used to store power tools, e-bikes, and IT equipment on construction sites and in office buildings. Writing in Building Design on September 1, 2026, Matt Partridge, head of product development at Armorgard, warned that the "Class L approved" label on a storage cabinet tells a buyer almost nothing about its performance in a real emergency.[1]

A Class L fire behaves fundamentally differently from a traditional combustion event. During thermal runaway, a failing cell's temperature can exceed 400 degrees Celsius within seconds, releasing toxic gases like hydrogen fluoride before any flame is visible. Because the fire generates its own oxygen internally, traditional smothering techniques fail, and stranded electrical energy can cause re-ignition hours or even days later.

According to Partridge, the ISO standard describes Class L as "particularly useful in the context of [testing] equipment," which functions as a recommendation rather than a legal mandate. "Nothing compels manufacturers to test their equipment against a lithium-ion fire before bringing it to market," he noted. A cabinet could pass every existing fire test without ever facing the specific heat and pressure hazards of thermal runaway.[1]

The confusion over safety standards and fire behavior is also affecting grid-scale energy deployments. In California, which has expanded its Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) capacity from 4,000 megawatts in 2022 to 21,000 megawatts in 2026, public anxiety over battery fires remains a primary hurdle for new utility projects, despite the fact that grid-scale facilities use highly engineered cell-level cooling architectures.[3]

Despite public safety concerns, utility-scale battery storage has expanded rapidly, relying on highly engineered cell-level cooling rather than consumer-grade suppression.

"The biggest obstacle to energy storage by far in California at this point is local opposition and misunderstandings of the true safety implications of energy storage," said Scott Murtishaw, executive director of the California Energy Storage Alliance (CESA), on August 24, 2026. While the commercial industry has largely solved propagation control, the broader public confusion over battery fire safety continues to complicate local permitting.[3]

Until national testing standards are updated to mandate physical thermal runaway tests for Class L products, the burden of verification falls entirely on the buyer. Facility managers and homeowners purchasing storage for e-bikes or power tools must look past the marketing label and demand engineering data proving the enclosure can actually vent toxic gases and contain cell-to-cell propagation.[1][2]

Viewpoints in depth

Consumer Protection Regulators

Focuses on preventing false safety claims and keeping the general public away from toxic lithium-ion fires.

Regulatory bodies like the ACCC argue that the unique hazards of lithium-ion fires—specifically the rapid release of toxic smoke and the potential for explosive thermal runaway—make them entirely unsuitable for public intervention. Their primary concern is that marketing materials implying a product is 'Class L compliant' create a false sense of security. By forcing suppliers to amend their claims, regulators aim to ensure that consumers prioritize evacuation and professional emergency response over attempting to suppress a chemical fire themselves.

Fire Safety Engineers

Emphasizes the mechanical realities of thermal runaway and the need for rigorous physical testing.

For product developers and safety engineers, a classification label is meaningless without a corresponding physical test. They point out that traditional fire ratings were built on empirical evidence: a Class A extinguisher was proven to put out a wood fire. Because Class L currently lacks a harmonized testing mandate, engineers warn that the market is being flooded with storage cabinets and suppression tools that have never faced the extreme heat, pressure, and off-gassing of a failing lithium-ion cell. They advocate for mandatory testing that proves a product can actively manage cell-to-cell propagation and safely vent toxic gases.

Energy Storage Advocates

Focuses on overcoming safety misinformation to deploy necessary grid-scale battery infrastructure.

Industry groups representing utility-scale energy storage argue that public confusion over battery safety is actively hindering grid modernization. While consumer-grade e-bike batteries and unverified storage cabinets pose genuine risks, advocates stress that grid-scale Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) utilize highly engineered, cell-level cooling and gas mitigation architectures. They maintain that the regulatory and public conflation of these vastly different risk profiles leads to unwarranted local opposition, slowing the deployment of infrastructure required to stabilize renewable energy grids.

Key points

  1. The new Class L fire classification defines lithium-ion battery fires but does not mandate a physical testing standard for safety equipment.
  2. Manufacturers are applying 'Class L' labels to storage cabinets and extinguishers that have only been tested against traditional fires.
  3. The ACCC recently forced suppliers to amend marketing claims, warning that the public should not attempt to extinguish lithium-ion fires.
  4. A failing lithium-ion cell can exceed 400 degrees Celsius in seconds, requiring specialized propagation control rather than traditional smothering.

How we got here

  1. 1996

    Class F is introduced for cooking oils, marking the last major update to international fire classifications before lithium-ion technology.

  2. February 2026

    ISO 3941:2026 is published, officially introducing Class L to categorize the unique electrochemical behavior of lithium-ion battery fires.

  3. August 2026

    The ACCC cracks down on misleading lithium-ion fire extinguisher claims in Australia, forcing suppliers to amend their marketing.

Consumer Protection Regulators 35%Fire Safety Engineers 35%Energy Storage Advocates 30%
Consumer Protection Regulators
Focuses on preventing false safety claims and keeping the public away from toxic fires.
Fire Safety Engineers
Emphasizes the mechanical realities of thermal runaway and the need for rigorous physical testing.
Energy Storage Advocates
Focuses on overcoming safety misinformation to deploy necessary grid-scale battery infrastructure.

Perspectives this story doesn't cover

  • Insurance Underwriters
  • Lithium-Ion Battery Manufacturers

Sources

Source coverage

3 outlets

3 viewpoints surfaced

Consumer Protection Regulators 35%Fire Safety Engineers 35%Energy Storage Advocates 30%
  1. [1]Building DesignFire Safety Engineers

    Class L confusion – why a label isn't a standard when it comes to battery storage

    Read on Building Design →
  2. [2]ACCC Product SafetyConsumer Protection Regulators

    Fire extinguisher suppliers amend lithium-ion battery fire extinguisher claims

    Read on ACCC Product Safety →
  3. [3]Energy-Storage.NewsEnergy Storage Advocates

    CESA's Scott Murtishaw on safety, misinformation, and California's BESS milestones

    Read on Energy-Storage.News →
Listen

Comments

Stay informed

Every angle. Every day.

Get Home stories with full source coverage and perspective breakdowns, free every day.