CalRecycle opens comment period on proposed SB 54 revisions

The Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) began a 15-day written comment period Jan. 29 for the proposed revisions to the S.B. 54 Plastic Pollution Prevention and Packaging Producer Responsibility Act permanent regulations. The public comment period ends Feb. 13.

The 15-day written comment period permits any interested person or their authorized representative to submit written comments to CalRecycle addressing the changes to the proposed regulations compared with the draft circulated with the 45-day comment period that ran from Aug. 22 to Oct. 7, 2025. Written comments, which offer a recommendation and/or objection or support the proposed change should reference a section of the proposed action to which the comment or comments are directed, and be limited to the noted changes.

RELATED: Building a bridge to circularity

CalRecycle will only consider written comments sent to CalRecycle and received during the 15-day written comment period. CalRecycle says it is only required to respond to comments that are related to the changes to the proposed regulations.

The release of the proposed regulation text has prompted initial comments from the National Stewardship Action Council (NSAC), which has been involved in S.B. 54 negotiations, rulemaking and implementation. The nonprofit’s national Packaging and EPR Implementation Working Group has been engaged in identifying real-world implementation considerations, particularly at the intersection of food safety, legal requirements and packaging design.

NSAC says, throughout the regulations process, it has been focus on identifying real-world implementation challenges and ensuring the law delivers on its intended public health, environmental, social and economic benefits. While it commends CalRecycle and the Office of Administrative Law for hearing the concerns the organization raised about the categorical exclusion language and how unfair it was to businesses and undermined the intent and integrity of the law, NSAC says it has concerns about revised text’s “compressed timelines, some ambiguous language, practical implementation issues and the large, possibly inequitable compliance burden on industry.”

Earlier in the process, NSAC raised concerns about ambiguity surrounding categorical exceptions for food and agricultural packaging, with members of its National Packaging and EPR Implementation Working Group being among those highlight the issue and raise it through individual comment letters and testimony.

NSAC says it will continue to convene its EPR Implementation Working Group to help everyone navigate the situation as the process intensifies, adding that comments made by individual group members are their own. The nonprofit says it plans to provide more focused comments after a more thoughtful review next week.