Which U.S. states have enacted packaging EPR laws?

Seven states have enacted packaging Extended Producer Responsibility laws as of 2026: Maine (LD 1423, 2021/2025), Oregon (HB 3626, 2021), Colorado (HB 22-1355, 2022), California (SB 54, 2022), Minnesota (HF 3911, 2024), Maryland (SB 901, 2025), and Washington (E2SSB 5284, 2025). Oregon and Colorado have active fees. California fees begin 2027.

What are the EPR packaging compliance deadlines for 2026?

Key 2026 deadlines: May 31 -- Annual Supply Reports were due in Oregon, Colorado, California, Minnesota, Maryland, and Washington (now past due -- contact CAA immediately if not filed). June 1 -- California producer registration deadline via PEPRS/CAA (now past due). July 1 -- Washington producers must be PRO members via CAA (direct producer obligation). Also July 1 -- CAA submits its producer/brand/material list to Maryland MDE (CAA obligation, not producer). All registration goes through the Circular Action Alliance (circularactionalliance.org).

How do I register with the Circular Action Alliance (CAA) for EPR compliance?

The Circular Action Alliance (CAA) is the only approved Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) in all 7 enacted U.S. EPR states. Register at circularactionalliance.org. You will sign a Participant Producer Agreement (PPA) and gain access to the harmonized reporting portal for all states. Registration covers Oregon, Colorado, California, Maine, Minnesota, Maryland, and Washington through a single enrollment.

What are the EPR packaging fee rates by material type?

Oregon published 2025-26 rates (indicative for all states): Aluminum ~$0.02/lb (lowest), Clear PET ~$0.04/lb, HDPE ~$0.05/lb, PP ~$0.08/lb, LDPE/mono-PE film ~$0.11/lb, multi-layer laminates $0.55-$0.90/lb, EPS (expanded polystyrene) $1.08-$1.30/lb (highest). Fees follow the formula: Annual Fee = Tonnage x Base Rate x Eco-Modulation Multiplier. Budget 15-40% uplift on current packaging spend.

What is eco-modulation and how can it reduce EPR fees?

Eco-modulation adjusts EPR fees up or down based on packaging design attributes. Credits (fee reductions) are awarded for: How2Recycle certification, post-consumer recycled (PCR) content, mono-material construction, elimination of carbon black pigments, and reusable packaging. Oregon allows up to 60% fee reduction; Colorado caps reduction at 10%. Switching from PET/PE laminates to mono-PE can reduce fees 40-55%. Reusable and refillable packaging that meets SB 54 reuse criteria is treated as exempt from California fees (confirm specifics with CalRecycle, as fees have not yet started).

What are the penalties for non-compliance with U.S. packaging EPR laws?

California: up to $50,000 per day per violation (highest in the U.S.). Oregon: up to $25,000 per day. Maryland: $5,000-$20,000 per violation. Oregon began issuing enforcement warning letters in March 2026. California fees become active in 2027. Non-compliance penalties stack per SKU and per reporting period -- a brand with 50 SKUs in California faces potential exposure in the tens of millions per quarter.

Which states are likely to pass packaging EPR laws next?

New York's PRRIA (S.1464-A / A.1749-A) failed to receive an Assembly floor vote before the June 2026 session ended -- the bill stalled for a second consecutive year despite Senate passage. Sponsors plan 2027 reintroduction. Massachusetts (SB 571) and New Jersey remain the next highest-priority pending states. Rhode Island and Hawaii have enacted needs-assessment legislation (full EPR expected 2028-2030). Illinois, Michigan, and Georgia have introduced bills with medium-term likelihood.

U.S. Packaging EPR Laws by State 2026 | Fees, Deadlines & Compliance

Period	Key Events	State Count
Now - May 2026	Oregon & Colorado fees active. OR/CO/CA/MN/MD/WA supply reports due May 31 (). CA producer registration due June 1 (). Washington PRO membership due July 1 (producer obligation). CAA submits Maryland producer list to MDE by July 1 (CAA obligation). NY PRRIA failed June 2026 -- 2027 reintroduction planned.	7 enacted
Late 2026	Maine startup fees begin. California final fee rates published (Oct). Oregon constitutional challenge trial (Jul 13). NY 2027 reintroduction likely.	7
2027–2028	California fees begin. Minnesota & Maryland fees start. NJ, MA, IL likely enactments. Rhode Island & Hawaii needs assessments complete → full EPR rulemaking.	9–12
2029–2030	Washington full fees. Michigan, Connecticut, Tennessee likely. Oregon/Colorado second-generation fee schedules. Federal harmonization pressure intensifies.	13–17
2032–2035	Possible federal EPR framework. 26+ states projected. Southeast states begin enacting (Tennessee as bridgehead).	26+

EPR creates a new, recurring cost line tied directly to packaging weight and material type - not a one-time fee. It grows as more states enact laws and fee schedules mature. Here's what finance needs to model, budget, and monitor.

📊 Financial Modeling Inputs

1Budget 15–40% uplift on packaging spend as your planning range. Heavy EPS/flexible film users sit at the high end; aluminum and clear PET portfolios at the low end.
2Fee formula: Tonnage × Rate × Eco-Mod Multiplier. Oregon average: ~$345–$457/metric ton across all materials in 2025–26.
3California is the largest exposure - projected $500M/year program. Your California liability will likely exceed all other states combined.
4Eco-modulation can cut fees 20–50%. Model the NPV of packaging redesign investments vs. multi-year fee savings - redesign often pays back in 2–4 years.
5First-year compliance cost: 80–320 internal hours depending on SKU count. EPR software reduces this 50–70%. Budget for this setup cost now.

⚠️ Penalty Exposure - The Hidden P&L Risk

State	Max Daily Penalty	90-Day Exposure
California	$50,000/day/violation	$4.5M+ per SKU
Oregon	$25,000/day	$2.25M
Maryland	$5,000–$20,000	$450K–$1.8M
Colorado	Civil + sales prohibition	Revenue at risk

⚠️

Penalties stack per SKU and per reporting period. A brand with 50 SKUs sold into California that is non-compliant faces potential exposure in the tens of millions per quarter.

📅 Fee Payment Calendar - When Does It Hit Your P&L?

State	First Fee Due	FY2026 Budget Impact	FY2027+	Scale
Oregon	July 2025 ACTIVE	Fees now owed	Annual cycle	Moderate
Colorado	Jan 2026 ACTIVE	Fees now owed	Annual cycle	Moderate
California	2027	Registration cost only	$500M/yr program - largest	Largest
Maine	Late 2026 (startup)	Minor startup fee	Full fees 2027–28	Small
Minnesota	2028–2029	None	Ramps to 90% cost coverage by 2031	Medium
Maryland	2028	None	50% Jul 2028 · 75% Jul 2029 · 90% Jul 2030	Medium
Washington	2029–2030	None	50% Feb 2030 · 75% Feb 2031 · 90% Feb 2032	Medium

💡 Actions to Reduce EPR Fees

Eco-modulation is the primary lever finance has to reduce EPR cost. These actions have calculable ROI and can be prioritized by fee exposure and payback period. Fee-reduction percentages reflect Oregon's published schedule and are indicative estimates for other states until their fee schedules are finalized.

Action	Sustainability Principle	Est. Fee Impact	Priority
Fund How2Recycle certification across branded packaging portfolio	Clear Recycling Instructions	−7% (OR confirmed; others est.)	High / Quick Win
Approve mono-material conversion for top-fee SKUs (e.g. laminates to mono-PE)	Design for Recyclability	Up to −40% per SKU	High / 12-24 mo.
Invest in PCR resin sourcing agreements targeting ≥30% post-consumer content	Increase Recycled Content	−5% to −10%	High / 12-18 mo.
Commission LCA studies for highest-fee Oregon SKUs (submit by Aug 15 annually)	Measure & Reduce Impacts	Up to $20K/SKU (OR)	High / Annual
Set lightweighting targets with fee-reduction KPIs tied to EPR cost savings	Optimize Material Use	Direct weight savings	Medium / Ongoing
Budget packaging BOM database for EPR reporting automation and audit readiness	All principles	50-70% admin cost reduction	Medium / 3-6 mo.

EPR is a structural shift in how consumer goods companies are taxed on packaging - one that rewards sustainable design and penalizes legacy formats. Here is the strategic picture for executive decision-making and board-level framing.

🌍 Strategic Landscape

17 states, ~20% of U.S. population (about 1 in 5 Americans). This is no longer a niche regulatory issue. Every CPG brand with national distribution is affected now.
2The EU is 3–5 years ahead. European brands have already restructured packaging for EPR. U.S. companies that waited are now scrambling.
3Eco-modulation = packaging cost advantage. Companies that redesign toward mono-material, recyclable formats gain a structural cost edge over competitors who don't.
4CAA is industry-governed. Producers who engage with CAA's governance have a voice in fee schedules and eco-modulation criteria as programs mature.
5Federal EPR unlikely before 2030–2035, but state-by-state proliferation will eventually create pressure for federal harmonization.

🏆 What Leading Brands Are Doing

✓Forming cross-functional EPR working groups (Finance, Legal, R&D, Procurement, Supply Chain, Marketing).
✓Building packaging BOM databases that feed EPR reporting, GHG Scope 3, and ESG disclosures simultaneously.
✓Adopting How2Recycle labeling across their portfolio - earns eco-modulation credits in CO and OR while improving consumer communication.
✓Switching away from EPS and multi-layer film toward mono-material formats and molded pulp alternatives.
✓Engaging trade associations (AMERIPEN, Consumer Brands Association) to shape eco-modulation criteria as state programs mature.

⚡ Stakeholder Framing by Function

Function	Core Concern	EPR Framing That Resonates
Finance / CFO	Cost, budget, P&L	EPR is a recurring cost line; eco-modulation has calculable ROI; non-compliance creates catastrophic penalty exposure.
Marketing	Brand equity, consumer perception	How2Recycle labeling improves trust; recyclable packaging is a brand asset with measurable consumer demand.
R&D / Packaging Eng.	Performance, shelf life, cost	Mono-material is becoming the industry standard; LCA-verified redesigns earn Oregon Bonus A credits (up to $20K per SKU, capped at 10% of that SKU's Oregon base fees).
Supply Chain / Procurement	Sourcing, vendor relationships	PCR content needs to be built into supplier contracts; packaging suppliers must provide certified material data.
Legal / Regulatory	Compliance risk, enforcement	$50K/day penalties in CA, $25K/day in OR are existential. Registration is non-negotiable.

💡 Actions to Reduce EPR Fees

EPR fee reduction is a strategic advantage, not just a compliance task. These actions require executive sponsorship and cross-functional coordination to deliver measurable results. Fee-reduction percentages reflect Oregon's published schedule and are indicative estimates for other states until their fee schedules are finalized.

Action	Sustainability Principle	Est. Fee Impact	Who Leads
Launch cross-functional EPR working group (Finance, R&D, Legal, Procurement, Supply Chain)	All principles	Enables all other reductions	CEO / COO
Mandate How2Recycle labeling across all branded packaging as a non-negotiable standard	Clear Recycling Instructions	−7% (OR confirmed; others est.)	CMO / VP R&D
Set portfolio-wide lightweighting targets and track EPR fee reduction as a KPI	Optimize Material Use	Direct weight savings	VP Supply Chain
Approve capital for packaging redesign toward mono-material and recyclable formats	Design for Recyclability	20-40% per redesigned SKU	CEO / CFO
Require PCR content minimums in packaging procurement strategy and supplier contracts	Increase Recycled Content	−5% to −10%	CPO
Engage CAA governance to shape eco-modulation criteria in maturing state programs	All principles	Shapes future fee structure	VP Regulatory

Regulatory and legal teams own producer registration, annual reporting, PPA review, enforcement monitoring, and tracking new state enactments. The stakes for missing deadlines are severe - here is your complete checklist and risk landscape.

✅ Master Compliance Checklist

1Determine obligated status for all 7 active states using the producer hierarchy: brand owner → licensee → importer → distributor.
2Verify de minimis status annually - thresholds are based on global company revenue, not state-specific revenue. Check each year.
3Review and sign the CAA PPA with legal counsel - includes fee obligations, audit rights, and data use terms that require careful review.
4File Annual Supply Reports by May 31 (OR, CO, CA, MN, MD, WA) via CAA's harmonized portal. California also requires a Source Reduction Supply Report due May 31. CA producer registration: June 1, 2026.
5Washington producers: join CAA as PRO member by July 1, 2026 - this deadline is active and approaching. Maryland producer deadline was May 31 (now past).
6Monitor Maine SO selection (late 2026) and register upon finalization.
7Track NY and NJ legislative sessions - both could enact in 2026–27, triggering rapid registration timelines.
8Retain all compliance data 5–7 years - state auditors may request full methodology documentation.

⚖️ Key Legal Risk Areas

⚠️

Oregon NAW Injunction (Feb 2026): Protects NAW member companies only. All other producers remain fully subject. Constitutional challenge trial: July 13, 2026.

📋

California SB 343 Labeling: Restricts "recyclable" claims to packaging in programs serving ≥60% of CA population. Violating this is a separate CA consumer protection law violation. Note: 21 organizations filed a constitutional challenge on March 17, 2026 (Case 3:26-cv-01675). PI hearing held June 3, 2026; written opinion pending. SB 343 enforcement deadline: October 4, 2026.

⚖️

California AB 2253 (Mass Balance Bill): Passed the Assembly 42-19 in late May 2026; now in the Senate. Would prohibit credit-based mass balance accounting for recycled content claims, requiring documentation of actual physical recycled content. If enacted, could constrain how chemically recycled PCR is counted toward SB 54 compliance and eco-modulation. Watch closely.

🏛️

Federal Bills - Three to Watch: (1) PACK Act (H.R. 6832): Proposed federal labeling standards; preemption could override CA SB 343. (2) CIRCLE Act (H.R. 4466, Jul 2025): Comprehensive federal recycling infrastructure bill - distinct approach from PACK Act. (3) RMAA (H.R. 7502, Feb 2026): Recycled Materials Attribution Act - would standardize mass balance crediting federally. None enacted as of May 2026.

📦

Packaging Scope Complexity: Primary packaging always in scope. Tertiary (B2B transport only) typically excluded from fees but may need reporting. Multi-material composite = highest-risk classification.

⚗️

Toxics in Packaging (CONEG Model Laws): Most active EPR states (OR, WA, CA, MN, CO, ME, and others) have separate Toxics in Packaging laws restricting lead, cadmium, mercury, and hexavalent chromium in packaging at a combined concentration limit of 100 ppm. This is independent of EPR - a packaging format can be EPR-registered and fee-compliant while simultaneously violating Toxics in Packaging. Heavy metal pigments (cadmium-based colorants, lead chromate) are the most common trigger. These same materials also attract eco-mod malus penalties under Oregon and Colorado fee schedules.

📆 Critical Deadlines

Deadline	Action Required	States	Status
May 31, 2026	Annual Supply Reports + CA Source Reduction Supply Report (2025 data)	OR, CO, CA, MN, MD, WA	Urgent
June 1, 2026	Producer registration / enrollment	California	Upcoming
July 1, 2026	PRO membership registration (CAA) Washington producers must be enrolled as PRO members with CAA by this date -- direct producer obligation. Separately, CAA must submit its producer/brand/material list to Maryland MDE by July 1 -- this is CAA's obligation; Maryland's producer deadline was May 31.	Washington (producers); Maryland (CAA)	Upcoming
Aug 1, 2026	Individual Source Reduction Plans due	California	Monitor
Aug 2026	CAA invoices early pre-program fees (one installment, CY2025 data)	California	Monitor
Late 2026	Maine SO registration + startup fee	Maine	Monitor
Oct 2026	CA final fee rates published	California	Monitor
2027	CA fee collection begins	California	Plan
Mar 1, 2027	First California Plastic Pollution Mitigation Fund payment due (~$500M/yr)	California	Plan
2028	MN & MD fees begin	MN, MD	Future

💡 Actions to Reduce EPR Fees

Regulatory teams control the eco-modulation filings that directly lower fee invoices. Accurate documentation and timely submissions are the difference between paying full rates and achieving maximum discounts. Fee-reduction percentages reflect Oregon's published schedule and are indicative estimates for other states until their fee schedules are finalized.

Action	Sustainability Principle	Est. Fee Impact	Deadline
File How2Recycle certifications with annual supply reports for all qualifying SKUs	Clear Recycling Instructions	−7% (OR confirmed; others est.)	May 31 annually
Submit LCA reports under Oregon Bonus A program for highest-fee SKUs	Measure & Reduce Impacts	Up to $20K/SKU (OR)	Aug 15 annually
Document PCR content percentage per packaging component; confirm post-consumer (not PIR) sourcing	Increase Recycled Content	−5% to −10%	Pre-reporting
Record mono-material and no-carbon-black certifications for qualifying SKUs on file for auditors	Design for Recyclability / Eliminate Problematic Materials	−5% to −12% per attribute	Annual audit prep
Document reusable packaging return systems with program records for qualifying SKUs	Optimize Material Use	−20% per qualifying SKU	Annual
Monitor CA, MN, MD, WA eco-mod rules as programs mature and apply new credits proactively	All principles	Future savings as rules expand	Ongoing

⚠️ California SB 343: The Recyclability Labeling Paradox

⚠️

Compliance conflict risk: A package can be EPR-compliant (registered with CAA, paying SB 54 fees) while simultaneously violating SB 343 if it carries a "recyclable" claim but the format does not meet California's separate 60% population coverage threshold.

What SB 343 Requires

A packaging format must be collected and processed in programs serving ≥60% of California's population to display any "recyclable" claim in CA. CalRecycle's CMC (Covered Materials Category) list defines which formats qualify.

The Practical Result

How2Recycle "Widely Recyclable" uses national U.S. household coverage data. CA's CMC list uses California-specific data. They diverge for some material categories. Verify each format independently against the CMC list - do not use H2R national ratings as proxy.

What to Check

Verify each packaging format against CalRecycle's CMC list before making any recyclability claim in California: calrecycle.ca.gov/packaging/sb54 ↗. Pay particular attention to formats rated "Check Locally" or "Store Drop-Off" by H2R.

⚖️

Litigation watch (as of June 2026): 21 organizations filed a constitutional challenge to SB 343 on March 17, 2026. PI hearing held June 3, 2026; written opinion pending. Do not assume enforcement is paused during litigation - plan for compliance (October 4, 2026 deadline) while monitoring. Also watch the PACK Act (H.R. 6832) - if enacted, federal labeling standards would preempt SB 343.

✅ May 31, 2026 CAA Portal Submission Checklist

Annual Supply Reports are due May 31 for OR, CO, CA, MN, MD, and WA via the CAA harmonized portal. California also requires a CY2023 Baseline Source Reduction Report on this date. This checklist covers everything due on or triggered by this deadline.

Material Inventory Data - All States

☐ Weight per packaging component (kg) by material type
☐ Resin identification codes (1-7 or fiber) per component
☐ Volume placed on market in each state (not manufactured)
☐ Multi-material composites flagged and documented
☐ PCR content % confirmed post-consumer (not post-industrial)

Eco-Modulation Documents - OR + CO

☐ How2Recycle certificates for all "Widely Recyclable" SKUs
☐ Mono-material certifications (if applicable)
☐ Carbon-black-free pigment records (if applicable)
☐ PCR content supplier certifications
☐ CO: full-body H2R label confirmed (partial label = no credit)

California-Specific (Due May 31)

☐ Annual Supply Report (CY2025) via CAA portal
☐ CY2023 Baseline Source Reduction Report (separate filing)
☐ Formats verified against CalRecycle CMC list for SB 343
☐ Note: Individual Source Reduction Plans due Aug 1 (separate)
☐ CA producer registration (PEPRS/CAA) due June 1, not May 31

Simplified Reporting States

☐ Minnesota: Simplified Supply Report via CAA portal
☐ Maryland: Supply report per CAA portal guidance
☐ Washington: Supply report per CAA portal guidance
☐ WA PRO membership due July 1 (producer obligation); MD July 1 is CAA's filing to MDE, not a producer step
☐ Active CAA PPA confirmed current for all obligated states

ℹ️

What is NOT due May 31: Oregon Bonus A LCA reports (Aug 15). CA Individual Source Reduction Plans (Aug 1). CA producer registration in PEPRS (June 1). CA early fee invoice from CAA (Aug 2026). WA PRO membership (July 1, producer); MD CAA-to-MDE list filing (July 1). Maine SO registration (late 2026). Minnesota first fee payments (Feb 1, 2029).

Packaging engineers and R&D teams have more direct influence over EPR fees than any other function. Every design decision you make - material choice, layer count, color, closure type - translates directly into a fee reduction or increase. Here is how to optimize.

🎯 Design Decisions That Reduce Fees

↓Evaluate mono-material construction as a redesign pathway. PET/PE laminate → mono-PE can yield 40–55% fee reduction per ton where manufacturing constraints allow. Not all formats will be feasible to convert - assess tooling, performance, and supply chain impact alongside EPR savings.
↓Evaluate eliminating carbon black pigments and heavy metal colorants. NIR sorting equipment at MRFs cannot detect carbon black - it receives the maximum malus in every state. Heavy metal-based pigments (cadmium yellows/reds, lead chromate) are "problematic additives" under Oregon and Colorado eco-mod rules and are also independently restricted under state Toxics in Packaging laws at a 100 ppm combined threshold.
↓Evaluate removing full-body PETG/PVC sleeves. These contaminate PET recyclate streams. Paper labels with APR-approved wash-off adhesives are a common alternative, subject to brand and performance requirements.
↓Evaluate lightweighting opportunities. EPR fees are weight-based - every gram removed reduces fee liability and material cost simultaneously. Assess structural integrity requirements and minimum viable weight for each format.
↓Evaluate adding Post-Consumer Recycled (PCR) content. Earns eco-modulation discounts and satisfies California's separate PCR mandates. Factor in PCR resin availability, cost premium, and performance validation. Document % per component once confirmed.
↓Evaluate How2Recycle ↗ certification for qualifying SKUs. Directly satisfies Colorado's on-package sorting bonus. Assess program costs vs. projected eco-mod fee savings for your portfolio before committing.

🔄 Material Fee Ranking - Best to Worst

Optimize your portfolio toward the top of this list.

💡 Oregon LCA Bonuses - A (disclose), B (improve), C (reuse)

Oregon's eco-modulation has three LCA-based credits, each requiring a third-party reviewed, ISO 14040/44-compliant LCA submitted to CAA. Bonus A (disclosure): conduct and submit an LCA, no improvement required. The credit is 10% of that SKU's Oregon base fees, capped at $20,000 per SKU; up to 10 SKUs gives a $200,000 per-producer ceiling (not a shared pool). The $20,000 is a ceiling, not a flat amount, so a SKU must generate $200,000+ in Oregon base fees to reach it and most small-to-mid volume SKUs earn well under $20,000. Bonus B (improvement): a comparative LCA showing a reduction in your packaging's environmental impact, tiered by how much you cut, capped at $50,000 per SKU; up to 10 SKUs gives a $500,000 per-producer ceiling. Bonus C (reuse shift): a comparative LCA showing a switch from single-use plastic to reusable or refillable formats, tiered, capped at $50,000 per SKU or batch per year; the reusable return-rate pathway runs up to three years (up to about $1.5M per producer over three years at the maximum). A given SKU can earn only one bonus type per year, so you cannot stack A with B or C on the same SKU, and there is a three-year wait before resubmitting that SKU. Bonus B and C credit against 2027 fees; confirm current submission windows with CAA. Weigh LCA study costs (typically $15,000–$40,000/study) against projected credits before committing.

🧭 7 Principles in Practice - R&D Action Checklist

Each principle maps directly to eco-modulation credits or base-rate reduction. Use this as your SKU redesign scorecard. Fee-reduction percentages reflect Oregon's published schedule and are indicative estimates for other states until their fee schedules are finalized.

Principle	R&D Action	EPR Benefit
Optimize Material Use	Lightweighting analysis on every SKU. Set per-unit gram targets. Eliminate redundant layers.	Weight-based savings
Measure & Reduce Impacts	Determine feasibility of 3rd-party verified LCAs for top Oregon SKUs by fee exposure. Weigh study costs vs. projected credits before committing. Due Aug 15.	Up to $20K/SKU (OR)
Design for Recyclability	Evaluate converting PET/PE laminates to mono-PE or mono-PET where feasible. Also evaluate total cost of molded pulp as an alternative to EPS, factoring EPR fees into the comparison. Review APR design guide for each format.	−12% mono-material
Recycled & Sustainable Fibers	Evaluate switching to FSC/SFI certified fiber for paper/board components. Confirm supplier certification availability and cost impact before specifying.	Low base rate
Eliminate Problematic Materials	Audit all SKUs for carbon black pigments, heavy metal colorants (cadmium, lead chromate), and PVC/PETG sleeves. All three categories trigger eco-mod maluses in OR and CO. Heavy metal pigments also violate state Toxics in Packaging laws (100 ppm combined Pb/Cd/Hg/hex-Cr limit) independently of EPR. Not all reformulations will be feasible - evaluate alternatives against functional requirements.	−5% per attribute
Increase Recycled Content	Evaluate piloting PCR resin on top-volume rigid formats. Assess resin availability, cost premium, and performance validation requirements. Document % per component; confirm post-consumer (not PIR) sourcing.	−5% to −10%
Clear Recycling Instructions	Evaluate enrolling portfolio in How2Recycle program (SPC). Assess program fees vs. projected eco-mod savings across your active state mix before enrolling. Provide certification docs to compliance team for eco-mod filings.	−7% (OR confirmed; others est.)

🏷️ How2Recycle vs. EPR Eco-Modulation: What Actually Maps

How2Recycle (H2R) is an SPC-managed labeling program. EPR eco-modulation is a PRO fee calculation system. They share vocabulary but are not the same thing. H2R certification supports eco-mod credit applications - it does not replace EPR reporting data or auto-reduce fees.

H2R Label Rating	What It Means for Recyclability	EPR Eco-Mod Fee Implication	Action Required
Widely Recyclable	Accepted in programs serving ≥60% of U.S. households (national standard)	Bonus eligible - OR and CO confirmed; MN/MD/WA expected	File H2R certificate with annual supply report for eco-mod credit
Widely Recyclable (CO)	CO specifically: H2R certification qualifies for on-package sorting bonus	CO sorting bonus confirmed (~7%)	Confirm SKU is on Colorado SOP list; use full-body label; include cert in CO filing
Check Locally	Recyclable in some but not majority of programs	No eco-mod bonus; likely neutral	Do not claim eco-mod credit; monitor recycling access expansion
Store Drop-Off	Recyclable only via specific drop-off infrastructure, not curbside	No curbside bonus; SB 343 exposure in CA	Flag for CA SB 343 review; do not file for curbside eco-mod bonus
Not Yet Recyclable	No broad recycling pathway currently exists	Malus likely in OR and CO; neutral elsewhere	Prioritize redesign; document elimination plans for audit readiness

⚠️

Critical distinction: H2R data sheets confirm labeling program membership - they do NOT satisfy EPR material inventory reporting. Supply reports require separate weight-per-component data, resin codes, and PCR percentages. Provide both to your compliance team independently.

⚠️ California SB 343: The Recyclability Labeling Paradox

⚠️

Design decision risk: A package optimized for recyclability (mono-material, H2R certified) can still violate SB 343 if the specific format has not achieved 60% California population coverage. EPR fee optimization and CA labeling compliance are separate tracks.

What SB 343 Requires

Any "recyclable" claim on packaging sold in California requires the format to be collected in programs serving ≥60% of California's population. CalRecycle's CMC list is the authoritative reference - it does not mirror H2R national ratings.

R&D Implication

When evaluating a package redesign, check both the H2R national rating AND the CalRecycle CMC list independently. A format that achieves "Widely Recyclable" nationally may still need CMC validation before any CA on-pack recyclability claim. Loop in regulatory on all CA-sold SKUs.

⚖️

Litigation watch (as of May 2026): 21 organizations filed a constitutional challenge to SB 343 on March 17, 2026. PI hearing held June 3, 2026; written opinion pending. Also watch the PACK Act (H.R. 6832) - if enacted, federal labeling standards would preempt SB 343. Design for compliance now; update if preemption occurs or PI is granted. CMC list: calrecycle.ca.gov/packaging/sb54 ↗

If you sell packaging materials or finished packaging to brands, EPR is reshaping your customers' buying decisions right now. Understanding EPR positions you as a strategic partner - not a commodity vendor - and opens doors to conversations your competitors aren't equipped to have.

📦 How EPR Is Reshaping Your Customers' Decisions

1Material type drives fee rates. Customers switching from EPS to molded pulp, or multi-layer film to mono-PE, are doing it to cut EPR fees - not just for sustainability optics.
2Your customers need your material data. EPR reporting requires exact material type, resin code, and weight per component. Certified data sheets are becoming table stakes.
3PCR content is a competitive differentiator. Customers earn eco-modulation discounts for documented PCR content - being able to supply and certify PCR materials is a premium offering.
4How2Recycle compatibility wins business. Customers are shifting to formats that earn "Widely Recyclable" status. Design and material choices that support this certification will win RFPs.
5If your brand appears on packaging you sell, check whether you meet the "producer" definition in each active state - you may be the obligated party, not just your CPG customer.

🚀 Positioning for the EPR Era

✓Lead with EPR fee impact data. When pitching alternative materials, quantify the fee savings your solution delivers vs. the incumbent. Put a dollar figure on it.
✓Get How2Recycle compatibility documentation for your packaging formats. It's a sales asset that your customers' R&D teams will ask for.
✓Offer PCR-content tiers. Brands want to hit PCR targets for eco-modulation. Being their PCR supply partner creates stickiness and pricing power.
✓Provide certified material data proactively. Make it easy for customers to get the weight and composition data they need - it's a service differentiator at zero marginal cost to you.
✓Track new state enactments. NY, NJ, and MA are close. New enactments accelerate redesign decisions at your customers - be ready with compliant alternatives before they ask.

What's New in U.S. Packaging EPR

Covers the last 30 days. Last checked: Monday, June 8, 2026

30-Day Monitor

Latest

Regulatory & Policy

Litigation CA Week of June 8, 2026

SB 343 Preliminary Injunction Hearing Held June 3 -- Written Opinion Pending

A federal court in the Southern District of California held a hearing June 3, 2026 on plaintiffs' preliminary injunction motion in California League of Food Producers v. Bonta (Case No. 3:26-cv-01675), a challenge to California's SB 343 "Truth in Recycling" law brought by 21 industry organizations. The court did not rule from the bench; a written opinion is expected soon. If a PI is granted, enforcement of SB 343's recyclability claim restrictions (compliance deadline: October 4, 2026) could be paused pending trial. Source: The Daily Intake (June 2026); Keller and Heckman (June 2026).

Update OR Week of June 8, 2026

Oregon DEQ Approves CAA Responsible End Markets Program Plan Amendment

Oregon DEQ approved CAA Oregon's program plan amendment on Responsible End Markets (REM) on May 18, 2026, establishing a verification framework for how recyclable materials collected in Oregon are confirmed as managed responsibly under the Recycling Modernization Act. The amendment leverages existing third-party certifications and sets implementation timelines for end-market audits. CAA is separately developing a national REM Certification Standard -- public comment open through July 7, 2026. Submit comments by July 7. Source: CAA press release (May 18, 2026).

Legislative NY Week of June 1, 2026

New York PRRIA Fails to Reach Assembly Floor -- Session Ends Without Vote

The New York Assembly adjourned its 2026 legislative session without holding a floor vote on PRRIA (A.1749-A / S.1464-A), despite the bill having cleared the Senate and receiving a 150-amendment overhaul in April 2026. Industry opposition from 80+ business associations stalled the effort for a second consecutive year. Sponsors Sen. Harckham and Assembly Member Glick have pledged to return in 2027. Brands with New York sales should monitor 2027 session activity. Source: Packaging Dive; Waste Dive; Plastics News (June 2026).

New Regulation MD Week of June 1, 2026

Maryland's First EPR Packaging Regulations Take Effect May 25

The Maryland Department of the Environment adopted its first implementing regulations for the packaging and paper products EPR program on May 5, 2026; they became effective May 25, 2026. The regulations cover producer registration requirements. The May 31 simplified supply report deadline to CAA has passed; the next key deadline is July 1, 2026, when CAA must submit its producer, brand, and covered material list to MDE. Source: Holland and Knight (May 2026); MDE.

Legislative CA Week of June 1, 2026

California AB 2253 (Mass Balance Ban) Passes Assembly 42-19, Moves to Senate

California AB 2253 (Boerner, D-Encinitas) passed the Assembly 42-19 and was ordered to the Senate as of late May 2026. The bill would prohibit mass balance accounting for recycled content claims on all products and packaging, requiring documentation of actual physical recycled content. This significantly constrains chemical recycling claims for PCR content compliance under SB 54. Source: Resource Recycling (May 29, 2026); Packaging Dive.

Update MN Week of June 1, 2026

Minnesota MPCA Issues Formal Notice of Intent to Develop EPR Rules

The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency issued a formal notice on May 15, 2026 of its intent to develop rules implementing the Packaging Waste and Cost Reduction Act (PWCRA). Rulemaking will be informed by the Preliminary Assessment completed in February 2026 and the Needs Assessment due December 31, 2026. CAA was approved as Minnesota's PRO in February 2025. Source: Fredrikson and Byron alert (May 2026); MPCA.

Delay ME Week of June 1, 2026

Maine SO RFP Still Unreleased -- Program Timeline Slipping Further

Maine DEP has still not released its Request for Proposals to select a Stewardship Organization as of late May 2026. Under the original schedule, producers were expected to be registering and reporting 2025 data in May 2026, with initial invoices in July 2026 -- both milestones now in doubt. DEP said the RFP would be released "soon." Maine, the first state to enact packaging EPR in 2021, continues to lag all other active-program states. Source: Packaging Dive; Waste Dive (May 2026).

New Regulation CA Week of May 25, 2026

California SB 54 Final Regulations in Effect -- Producer Registration Closed June 1

California's Office of Administrative Law approved permanent SB 54 regulations on May 1, 2026, effective immediately. The June 1, 2026 producer registration deadline has now passed. Producers who did not register via CAA, independently with CalRecycle, or via the Small Producer Exemption through PEPRS face enforcement under the permanent rules ($50,000/day). Source: Holland and Knight (May 2026); Ropes and Gray (May 2026).

Comment Period CAA Week of May 25, 2026

CAA Draft REM Certification Standard Open for Public Comment Through July 7

Circular Action Alliance opened a public comment period May 5 through July 7, 2026 on its draft Certification Standard for Responsible Markets for paper, packaging, and food serviceware. Developed with SCS Standards and Assurance Systems, the standard addresses material traceability, responsible management verification, and end-use confirmation across all U.S. EPR packaging programs. Submit comments by July 7 at circularactionalliance.org. Source: CAA; Recycling Today (May 2026).

Platform

Site Updates

Site Update Week of June 2, 2026

EPR Atlas June 2026 Release: Ask Atlas, Feedback Form, and Dynamic Deadline Tracking

This release adds three new features: (1) AI Assistant tab with full knowledge of all 7 active U.S. EPR programs, fee structures, deadlines, and pending legislation. (2) Feedback form for questions, corrections, and feature requests. (3) Dynamic deadline banners that automatically transition from countdown to PAST DUE and elevate the next urgent deadline. All changes effective June 2, 2026. Source: EPRAtlas.com.

ℹ️ About This Tab

This tab shows developments from the last 30 days across U.S. packaging EPR programs, organized into two sections. Regulatory & Policy covers new enactments, fee schedule changes, enforcement actions, legislative updates, comment periods, and implementation delays. Site Updates covers new hub features and data additions.

Source of Truth -Weekly Monitor Checks

Program Administrator

🔄 Circular Action Alliance - Fee schedules, portal reporting manuals, PRO guidance (CA, CO, OR, MN, MD, WA, ME) ↗

State Agencies

🌲 Maine DEP - LD 1541 / LD 1423 implementation, SO selection, registration ↗ 🌲 Oregon DEQ - Enforcement actions, fee schedule, HB 4030 status ↗ 🏔️ Colorado CDPHE - Eco-modulation rules, fee schedule, program plan updates ↗ ☀️ CalRecycle - SB 54 implementation, PEPRS portal, Covered Material Categories (CMC) lists ↗ 🌾 Minnesota MPCA - HF 3911 implementation, cost-share milestones, reporting requirements ↗ 🦀 Maryland MDE - SB 901 implementation, PRO registration, covered materials list ↗ 🌊 Washington Ecology - E2SSB 5284 implementation, PRO membership, enforcement timeline ↗

Ask Atlas

Send Feedback

Thanks for the feedback