On December 2, 2025, the California attorney general issued a formal enforcement advisory letter to producers of food-service ware made from expanded polystyrene foam (EPS). The letter reminds producers that under California Senate Bill 54 (SB 54), the sale, distribution, or import of foam service ware is prohibited. The prohibition covers single-use trays, plates, bowls, clamshells, cups, hinged, or lidded containers, utensils, stirrers, and straws. The advisory warns of steep consequences, with administrative penalties up to $50,000 per day per violation plus potential civil penalties of up to $2,500 per violation under California’s unfair competition law.
What Happened?
Under SB 54, enacted in 2022, EPS producers were required to demonstrate that at least 25% of EPS food-service ware was recycled beginning January 1, 2025. This threshold was not met, triggering the state’s automatic prohibition on the sale, distribution, or import of EPS service ware in California. CalRecycle issued follow-up notices on April 4 and August 6, 2025, reiterating that EPS containers remain barred from the California market. With the attorney general’s latest enforcement advisory, the state has now signaled a readiness to actively enforce the ban. CalRecycle has also created a publicly available EPS Food Service Ware Notification Form to enable Californians to report potential violations.
What This Means for Food Industry Stakeholders
SB 54 defines “producer” broadly to include manufacturers, brand owners, importers, and distributors or sellers who bring the EPS packaging into California. In short, those who touch the chain of commerce for EPS food ware destined for California may be subject to enforcement.
For food manufacturers, retailers, distributors, and other supply-chain participants, including white-label, private-label, or third-party distribution setups, the message is clear: continuing to sell or distribute EPS food-service ware in California is a serious liability to the tune of $50,000 per violation per day, plus possible civil action under the state’s consumer protection statute. It is not enough to simply stop ordering new EPS products; companies must confirm that their current inventory fully complies with SB 54’s requirements.
The advisory letter provides a good opportunity for producers and distributors of food packaging to (1) conduct a supply chain audit to identify EPS-containing food service products and ensure compliance with SB 54; (2) if necessary, pivot to compliant alternatives (e.g., compostable, reusable, or recyclable non-EPS alternatives) immediately; and (3) review relevant contractual arrangements, such as manufacturing, distribution, or white-label agreements to ensure that risk allocation and compliance warranties account for SB 54 obligations.
Looking Ahead
The attorney general’s advisory represents the latest and clearest enforcement-focused communication since SB 54’s enactment and establishes a clear expectation of near-term enforcement. Given the magnitude of potential penalties and the broad definition of “producer,” companies selling products into California should treat EPS compliance as a priority.