California's SB 54 rules are in force, but CalRecycle's own data put every plastic packaging category far below the 65% recycling target

Where SB 54 stands on 31 October 2026

The regulations took a long road. In March 2025, with 2024 rules close to final, the Governor directed CalRecycle to restart the rulemaking over cost concerns; CalRecycle released new draft rules in May 2025 and withdrew them from the Office of Administrative Law on 9 January 2026 to revise the food and agricultural packaging provisions, with a further 15-day comment period planned (Packaging Dive, 12 January 2026). The Office of Administrative Law approved the revised text on 1 May 2026. CAA has said the restart cost 16 months (Waste Dive, 14 October 2026). The statutory dates did not move.

CalRecycle’s public notice of 12 May 2026 gives both the approval date and the effective date as 1 May 2026. Its SB 54 page says the regulations became effective upon filing with the Secretary of State. SPI confirmed that status on CalRecycle’s own pages on 31 October 2026, and found no notice of any stay or amendment.

Two dates in SPI’s tracker record have moved. PR-US-004 gives 16 October 2026 as the Advisory Board’s next meeting; CalRecycle’s SB 54 page now names 6 November 2026, while its Advisory Board page still lists 16 October as upcoming. SPI has not yet confirmed whether the 16 October meeting took place. The record also predates the 13 October submission, and is being updated.

CAA is the only PRO. CalRecycle’s page says CAA has been approved to serve as the first producer responsibility organisation under PRC 42061.5, and CAA’s plan states that more than 4,000 participant producers had registered with it by October 2026 (CAA plan, p. 3).

The target ladder, as the regulations now read it

The statute sets the targets, and CalRecycle’s guidance gives the dates in Exhibit 3. The reuse and refill column is the one most often left out of summaries, including SPI’s own earlier ladder in the US state piece.

Two features change how a business reads the ladder. The targets are collective: CalRecycle’s guidance says participating producers are in compliance when the plan’s combined reductions meet the targets, so an individual brand has no personal 25% line unless it complies as an independent producer. And independent producers carry the full weight: CalRecycle states that they must have a CalRecycle-approved plan under 14 CCR 18980.7 and show the recycling and source reduction outcomes that apply to their covered material (Producer Guidance).

How source reduction is counted

CalRecycle’s Source Reduction Reporting Guidance, updated on 4 August 2026 from a 17 July version, is the most practical document the regulations have produced. It sets out what producers report, from which year, and what counts.

The double count matters most for light, multi-part packs. In CalRecycle’s own examples, a corrugated box with air pillows carries 9 plastic components and 4.5 pounds of plastic per 1,000 units, while a deodorant container carries 6 components and 106 pounds. By SPI’s calculation, the box has 1.50 times the deodorant pack’s component count and 4.2% of its plastic weight. A pack redesign that removes air pillows moves the component metric far more than the weight metric; a lighter deodorant wall does the opposite.

The guidance also closes a door many brands had counted on. A move from virgin to recycled plastic, the main lever in most corporate packaging goals, does not reduce plastic for SB 54. Only the 8% recycled content allowance, if CalRecycle approves a formula, gives it any credit.

The recycling path: what 65% means against 2024 data

CalRecycle had to publish a recycling rate for every covered material category by 1 January 2026 (PRC 42061(b)(1)), and it did so on 31 December 2025. The rate is the material recycled divided by the material recycled plus the material disposed, with disposal covering landfill, transformation and engineered municipal solid waste conversion in California. The recycled figure does not yet test whether material reached a responsible end market, because those markets have not yet been identified (CMC list, January 2026 Update).

The method is coarse by design. CalRecycle estimated 2024 rates jointly for groups of categories, so each category in a group shares the rate, and several are given only as an upper bound.

The categories that already meet 65% are not plastic. Six glass categories are at 65%, two paper and fibre categories at 68%, four at 71% and one at 78% (CMC list). In plastic, the 11 recyclable categories are bottles, jugs and jars in PET, HDPE and PP, plus rigid PET, HDPE and PP containers and items. Their 2024 rates run from 0% for HDPE pails and buckets to 19% for HDPE bottles. Film, polystyrene and multi-material formats are both outside the recyclable list and at single-digit rates or below.

SB 54 uses 65% in more than one place, and the routes are easy to confuse. Exhibit 6 separates them.

The rate-based exclusion is the only one an individual producer can use directly. An item that is not collected through curbside programmes, is not mixed with unsorted curbside material, is recycled at responsible end markets and reaches 65% (70% from 2027) may, with CalRecycle approval, fall outside covered material altogether (Extensions, Exemptions, and Exclusions). For a dedicated take-back system, such as returnable transport packaging or a closed-loop B2B container, that is a real option; for consumer packaging sold through stores it rarely is.

A framework: four positions on the SB 54 map

SPI groups single-use packs into four positions using two tests from CalRecycle’s own list: is the category deemed recyclable, and is the pack mostly plastic by weight? Each position points to a different first move.

Scenarios: how far recycling has to move

Exhibit 8 shows how much the recycled tonnage of four plastic categories would need to grow, if each category’s 2024 rate is the starting point and the target is applied to it. The formula is simple: required recycled tonnes divided by today’s equals the target rate times (1 minus the cut in tonnes placed on the market), divided by the 2024 rate. Source reduction helps because it shrinks the base the rate is measured on.

Three readings follow. The 2028 step is the smallest: HDPE bottles would need 1.42 times their 2024 recycled tonnes, four years on from the data year. The 2032 step is far larger for every category: even with the full 25% cut, clear PET needs about three times its 2024 recycled tonnes. And for film and PP rigid packs the multiples run from 9.75 to 32.50, which no collection programme reaches by raising capture alone.

The PRO plan: what CAA has put to CalRecycle

CalRecycle’s SB 54 page says it received CAA’s producer responsibility plan on 13 October 2026, that it has 75 days to review it for compliance under 14 CCR 18980.6.1(b)(2), and that it takes public comments to 13 November 2026 by email to CalRecycle with the subject line PRO Plan Comments. CAA’s FAQ lists CalRecycle’s options as approval, disapproval, conditional approval, a request for more information or a timeline for a decision (CAA plan page). CalRecycle’s guidance gives the aim as approval by 1 January 2027.

The plan is 495 pages. Waste Dive reports that CAA cut its 2027 programme budget from up to USD 1.87 billion in the June draft to about USD 1.11 billion, and its five-year estimate from USD 9.35 billion to USD 17.2 billion down to USD 7.81 billion to USD 13.1 billion, citing lower reserves, collection and compost capital and operating costs, and reuse and refill costs (Waste Dive, 14 October 2026). SPI has not yet confirmed those budget figures against section 8.3 of the plan. The source reduction targets sit in section 6.2 and the fee timing in section 9.5; SPI has not yet confirmed their content.

By SPI’s calculation, CAA’s forecast puts 59 cents of each dollar into regulatory payments and 12 into administration, against 4 cents for the reuse and refill transitions that must deliver at least 2% of single-use plastic by 2027 and 10% by 2032. The mitigation fund is fixed in statute: USD 500 million a year for ten years from July 2027, 60% for environmental justice and public health impacts and 40% for environmental impacts, and it can be spent only after the Legislature appropriates it (CalEPA).

By SPI’s calculation, local jurisdictions and trade associations together wrote 1,305 comments, or 54.4% of the total, against 146 from producers, or 6.1%. That mix fits the plan’s design: local governments are the main recipients of reimbursement, and trade associations speak for producers as a group.

Three paths, and who is still in scope

The 1 May 2026 bulletin gave every producer the same three choices: register with CAA and submit supply data, register with CalRecycle and apply to be an independent producer, or register with CalRecycle and apply for the small producer exemption. Each path leaves a different set of duties in place, and none of them removes the 2032 design test entirely.

The small producer exemption under 14 CCR 18980.5.2 covers producers with gross annual sales under USD 1 million. CalRecycle says it may exempt them from most reporting and fee requirements, but that they must still ensure all their packaging is recyclable or compostable by 2032, and they must first register in PEPRS (Extensions, Exemptions, and Exclusions). The line is low: Oregon’s small producer test is USD 5 million of revenue (PR-US-004, citing Oregon DEQ).

Other exits are narrower. A person who produces, harvests and packages an agricultural commodity on the site where it was grown is outside the producer definition under PRC 42041(w)(4). Single-use packaging components that meet the de minimis criteria in 14 CCR 18980.2.2 are not covered material, but plastic food service ware can never be de minimis, and CalRecycle’s page gives no numeric weight threshold. Covered material facing unique compliance challenges or health and safety concerns may be exempted from the recyclability, compostability and recycling rate requirements under 14 CCR 18980.2.4, again only with CalRecycle approval.

Reporting runs through PEPRS either way. CAA handles registration, reporting and some exemption and exclusion submissions for producers in its plan; producers that choose to self-report, and every independent producer, file directly, with a WebPass account (Producer Guidance).

Reading the plan before 13 November: where to look

The plan is long, and most producers will read it only once. Exhibit 11 maps the sections that decide a producer’s cost and obligations to their page numbers in the 13 October 2026 version.

Two definitions in the early chapters already shape the bill. The plan treats covered costs as new and additional costs incurred after 1 January 2023, citing 14 CCR 18980.8(g) (p. 48), and says projects with costs incurred between 1 January 2023 and 31 December 2026 may be reimbursed through its funding pathways (p. 50). By SPI’s reading, that means part of the 2027 fee will pay for collection and processing investments local governments and recyclers have already made, which helps explain why reimbursement drew 614 comments, the most of any chapter.

The source reduction chapter drew 330 comments, led by the design of reuse and refill systems (Appendix C). Producers that want a say in how the 2% reuse and refill share is delivered in 2027 have until 13 November 2026 to write to CalRecycle; after the decision, the plan’s mechanisms bind every participant producer until the next plan.

The courts: two cases now aim at SB 54

The legal risk has shifted from labels to the whole programme. SB 343, California’s recyclability label law (PR-US-011), has been under a preliminary injunction since 14 July 2026, and SPI’s piece on US recycled content and label laws covers it. Two newer moves target SB 54 directly.

The amended SB 343 complaint, as Packaging Dive describes it, challenges the redefinition of recyclable, the packaging design requirements and the fee provisions, including a First Amendment claim over how fees may be shown on receipts or invoices. Packaging Dive gave a hearing date of 9 November 2026; the later Keller and Heckman report sets the plaintiffs’ reply for 9 November and the hearing for 16 November. Until a court rules, the regulations apply in full.

What the regulations do not yet settle

The plan’s content. Until CalRecycle decides, the source reduction mechanisms, fee methodology and eco-modulation in the plan are proposals. CAA’s 2027 schedule is preliminary on the same basis, as SPI’s US brand owners piece explains.

The category list. The next update is due by 1 January 2027 (CalRecycle SB 54 page), and compostable determinations for products with synthetic substances run to 30 June 2027. A category moving off the recyclable list changes a pack’s position in Exhibit 7 overnight.

Federal-conflict exclusions. Food and agricultural commodity packaging that conflicts with federal rules needs a complete exclusion notice under 14 CCR 18980.2(a)(2), with CalRecycle guidance dated 27 August 2026; the public database of approved exclusions is marked as coming soon (Extensions, Exemptions, and Exclusions).

Linked rules. EPS food service ware has been restricted for producers since 1 January 2025 (PR-US-005). CRV plastic beverage containers carry a 25% recycled content standard under AB 793 (PR-US-009), which rises to 50% in 2030, and SPI has not yet confirmed from CalRecycle’s pages how SB 54 treats CRV containers.

For fee rates per tonne in other markets, see SPI’s EPR fees per tonne and the Oregon and Colorado schedules line by line.