The California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery on Oct. 14 opened a 15-day written comment period on permanent regulations for the state’s EPR program. | Susanne Pommer/Shutterstock
Producers, recyclers and the public have another chance to comment on California’s SB 54 extended producer responsibility for packaging permanent regulations.
The California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery, or CalRecycle, opened a 15-day written comment period on SB 54’s permanent regulations, from Oct. 14 through Oct. 29.
Previously, CalRecycle held a 61-day public comment period in March and a public hearing in April after releasing the draft rules.
In the revised version, the department adjusted some definitions, including for component, food serviceware, producer, reuse and refill, item and curbside collection. CalRecycle also reorganized the section under which some definitions were housed, including definitions of trademark, compost, digestate from land application, discrete, food packaging, intermediate product and product.
Diving into reuse specifics
The expanded reuse and refill definition section specifies that to be considered reused or refilled by a producer, items must be recovered from users and returned into the supply chain, and be used or filled either four times or, for plastic items, the number times necessary “so that 75% less plastic waste is generated overall.”
And for items that are meant to be reused or refilled by someone other than the producer, the item’s “design and marketing must incorporate directions reasonably necessary for such person to understand how to perform such actions completely,” the rules note.
In addition, the items either have to be accepted back at the same location they were purchased from or within one mile of that location with the same hours of operation.
“If the item was delivered directly to a consumer, return of the item must be facilitated through the same means (such as the same website) that the consumer used to acquire it and must not require the consumer to travel to a location other than the delivery location,” the rules state.
Further, returning the item “must not impose limitations or requirements on consumers, such as the use of technologies, access restrictions, or contribution of materials other than the item.”
Other wording tweaks cover exemptions, markets, chemical recycling
CalRecycle also provided more detail on how to apply for exemptions, such as those for durable packaging; corrective action plans; hearing procedures; and the requirements, exemptions and extensions for local jurisdictions and recycling service providers.
Several formulas were added to the final rules, including for the evaluation of covered material recyclability rate and recycling rate, and the method of granting source reduction credits.
A section on additional producer responsibility organizations was struck from the rules, while a section on review of certain technologies was added. One such technology is chemical recycling, which the program will not consider “recycling” until “an independently peer-reviewed scientific study confirms that the technology does not generate a significant amount of hazardous waste.”
In the responsible end markets section, the final language changed from “the entity shall maximize benefits to the environment and minimize risks to public health and safety” to “the entity shall minimize the discharge of emissions, effluents and materials produced by the entity, including feedstocks and residuals.”
More detail was added about the conditional approval of a producer responsibility plan and to the end market viability section, which was also renamed to end market development. The audits and verifications sections were combined in the final rule, and annual budget reporting was folded into the larger annual plan submission.
A deadline for producers to register with the department of July 1, 2025, was inserted, and for the time frame to correct errors in submitted data was changed from 10 business days to 14 calendar days.
Finally, the final rules noted that a PRO may dismiss producers only for “good cause,” after exerting “good faith effort” to resolve the problem. Good cause is defined as substantial noncompliance with the act or requirements of the PRO plan.
Written comments can be submitted on CalRecycle’s website.
A version of this story appeared in Resource Recycling News on Oct. 15.