All certifications

CMA Composter Approved

PACKAGING

Rigor
3/5
Independence
3/5
Enforcement
3/5
Weight in a score
1/10

CONFIDENCE MEDIUM · ANALYSIS ONLY, NOT AN AUDIT OR CERTIFICATION

Our read

CMA answers a question ASTM D6400 does not. A laboratory result establishes that an item can biodegrade at 58 degrees C under controlled conditions over six months. CMA puts the physical item into operating commercial facilities and measures whether it disintegrates inside that facility's real cycle time, then reports pass or fail separately for windrow, aerated static pile and covered in-vessel. Because modern facilities run shorter cycles than the ASTM protocol assumes, a product can hold a valid ASTM pass and still be screened out as contamination. CMA is the evidence that closes that gap. The frequent mistake is treating CMA and BPI as alternatives. They are not. CMA requires a passing ASTM or EN 13432 lab report and total fluorine below 100 ppm before it will field test at all, so it sits on top of the same evidence base BPI uses. Read the two together and the technology suffix matters more than the logo: CMA-W is a harder pass than CMA-I. The limits are scale and governance. CMA is a private LLC owned by the composters running the tests, with no accreditation body behind it, no published expiry, no published sanction process, and a network covering roughly 13 states.

What it covers

  • Field disintegration testing of the actual product in operating commercial compost facilities, not only in a laboratory
  • Separate marks for each of the three main industrial technologies: CMA-W windrow, CMA-A aerated static pile, CMA-I covered in-vessel; a product is listed only for the technologies it passed
  • Measured disintegration thresholds: greater than 80 percent for fibre-based products and multilayered coated paper, greater than 90 percent for biopolymers, non-paper multilayered coated substrates, and single uncoated substrates with additives above 1 percent
  • Field test run over the facility's real cycle time, cited as 49 to 60 days for in-vessel and 90 days for windrow, with the sample extracted after active composting and sifted
  • Total fluorine below 100 ppm by a closed-vessel preparation method from a CMA-approved laboratory, as a PFAS screen
  • A passing ASTM D6400, ASTM D6868 or EN 13432 laboratory result as a prerequisite, covering biodegradation, heavy metals, spectral analysis and phytotoxicity
  • CMA-S, a separate lower designation for items approved as composting substrate such as wood cutlery and uncoated paper, rather than certified compostable
  • Photographic before-and-after documentation of each sample, and a public accepted-products list carrying several hundred named SKUs
  • Per-SKU granularity: each shape and each colour counts separately, because pigments can affect disintegration
  • Contractual control of the mark through a separate licence agreement and fee for use of the CMA name or logo

What it leaves out

Not a criticism of the scheme. A standard is a scope, and this is where this one ends.

  • One attribute only: whether the item physically falls apart in a commercial process. Nothing about carbon, water, chemistry beyond fluorine, labour, or sourcing
  • No home or backyard compost claim of any kind; all three marks are industrial
  • Does not replace ASTM D6400 or BPI certification, and requires the same laboratory battery as a prerequisite; it adds field evidence, it does not substitute for lab evidence
  • No external accreditation; CMA writes its own protocol, and the field method is a work item before ASTM Committee D34, not a published ASTM standard
  • No published certificate validity period, expiry date, or retesting interval
  • No published fee schedule and no published sanction or delisting procedure
  • Facility network is limited: roughly 13 US states plus Puerto Rico and a single Canadian site, so a pass at CMA partner facilities is not evidence of performance at the reader's local facility
  • Says nothing about whether a consumer has access to any industrial composter, or whether that composter accepts the item
  • Does not address litter, marine degradation, or behaviour in landfill
  • CMA is owned by the compost manufacturers whose facilities run the tests, an industry-owned scheme with no independent accreditation layer

The scheme

Issued byCompost Manufacturing Alliance, LLC — a private for-profit LLC partnership owned and operated by commercial compost manufacturers including Cedar Grove, Denali Water Solutions, A1 Organics and St. Louis Composting. Not a nonprofit and not an accredited certification body
Where it appliesNorth America. Partner facility directory covers Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New York, Texas, Virginia and Washington, plus Puerto Rico and one facility in Thorold, Ontario
Audit and renewalNot published. CMA publishes no certificate validity term, expiry, or retesting interval; products remain on the acceptance lists until removed
CostNot published. Fees are charged per SKU, with each shape and colour counted separately, and a separate licence agreement and fee is required to use the CMA name or logo

What we read

CMA Certification and Acceptance Requirements page, CMA Field Testing page, CMA FAQ and CMA Partners page, all read 26 July 2026. CMA's field testing method is ASTM work item WK 85822 before Committee D34; it is not a published ASTM standard

What we could not establish

Geographic reach is derived from CMA's own facility-directory location taxonomy rather than a published facility count; CMA does not publish a total number of partner facilities, and only four partner companies are named publicly (Cedar Grove, Denali Water Solutions, A1 Organics, St. Louis Composting). Could not establish: certificate validity term, whether retesting is ever required, the fee schedule, whether any product has been delisted and on what basis, the names of CMA-approved laboratories, or the number of facilities a product must pass to earn a given technology mark. CMA's FAQ and requirements pages are silent on all of these. Enforcement is scored 3 on the basis that the acceptance lists are public and per-SKU, so removal is observable, and mark use is governed by a separate licence agreement — but no sanction procedure or delisting record is published. Independence is scored 3 rather than 4 because no accreditation body stands behind the scheme; the mitigating structural fact, which is unusual and worth weight, is that CMA is owned by the downstream composters who bear the cost of contamination, so the certifier's commercial interest runs against the applicant's rather than with it.

Who holds it

Scored companies carrying this mark, highest first. Holding it is not the same as scoring well — the mark is one input of six.

CompanyScope heldYKO score
Repurpose. Not stated 15.5

If you hold this certification, it is already on your record. What a buyer cannot see there yet is the evidence behind the parts this standard does not reach.

Have ours built — free See who holds what