What Changed in 2026

Current as of August 19, 2026.

This page exists because a great deal of published California workers' compensation material — including material written by practitioners — currently describes rules that have been superseded. Every item below is dated and sourced.

January 2, 2026 — four treatment guidelines replaced

Corrected August 19, 2026. This section previously said two guidelines were replaced. Four were. Verified against the DWC's own MTUS listing and against the regulations: 8 CCR § 9792.23.2 and § 9792.23.4 each carry "Amendment filed 12-18-2025; operative 1-2-2026."

Replaced effective January 2, 2026 — each amendment filed December 18, 2025 (Register 2025, No. 51):

Note the section number on that last one. Traumatic brain injury sits under Special Topics at § 9792.24.5, not under Clinical Topics with the orthopedic guidelines. Anyone searching the 9792.23 series for it will not find it.

Why it matters: a utilization review denial resting on a superseded guideline is resting on something that no longer exists — and so is an appeal that cites it.

In the current shoulder guideline: MRI for rotator cuff tendinopathy is strongly recommended; steroid injection for adhesive capsulitis is strongly recommended; rotator cuff repair for chronic massive tears is not recommended; and platelet-rich plasma carries no recommendation, which produces an automatic denial.

The traumatic brain injury replacement matters more than its profile suggests. TBI is the injury most often missed at intake — nobody loses consciousness, nobody orders imaging, and the symptoms are attributed to stress. A replaced guideline changes what a reviewer will approve. How California rates a brain injury.

April 1, 2026 — the MTUS added mental health guidelines

Added August 19, 2026. This page had missed this entirely, and it is the most consequential MTUS change of the year for a large class of claims.

8 CCR § 9792.23.8, the Workplace Mental Health Guideline, was amended effective April 1, 2026 — filed April 3, 2026, Register 2026, No. 14 — and it now incorporates three ACOEM modules:

The PTSD and Acute Stress Disorder module is the addition. The other two were already there.

Why this matters more than the orthopedic updates. Psychiatric claims are the hardest category in California workers' compensation to get treatment authorized in. A guideline is what a utilization reviewer measures a request against — and where none existed, denials rested on general standards and were correspondingly hard to challenge.

This is directly relevant to: anyone claiming psychiatric injury under § 3208.3 · public safety members relying on the PTSD presumption · workers injured in an assault, where § 4660.1(c)(2)'s violent-act exception makes the psychiatric component ratable.

April 30, 2026 — the MTUS Drug List was updated

DWC adopted updates to the MTUS Drug List effective April 30, 2026.

Why it matters: whether a drug is exempt or non-exempt on that list decides whether your physician must obtain prior authorization — and for a non-exempt drug the utilization review decision is due in five business days with no extension available (8 CCR § 9792.9.8(b)(3)). A drug that moved between categories changes the process, not just the paperwork.

Utilization review and the formulary. · I can't afford my prescriptions.

June 1 and August 1, 2026 — four more guidelines

Effective June 1, 2026: Eye Disorders (8 CCR § 9792.23.9) and Initial Approaches to Treatment. Effective August 1, 2026: Ankle and Foot Disorders (§ 9792.23.7) and Hip and Groin (§ 9792.23.10).

The Initial Approaches to Treatment guideline is the one to watch — it governs the earliest phase of care, which is where the § 9792.9.7 thirty-day no-prior-authorization window also operates. Eye injuries and the 240-week rule.

January 22, 2026 — the Santa Barbara WCAB became the Goleta WCAB

120 Cremona Drive, Suite 270, Goleta, CA 93117 · (805) 770-6161.

Most directories and law firm pages still list the old Santa Barbara address. The Goleta office — including its walk-through schedule, which differs from every other office in the system.

April 1, 2026 — the utilization review regulations were restructured

The UR regulations were reorganized into §§ 9792.9.1 through 9792.9.8.

Why it matters: UR deadlines and procedural requirements are where defective decisions are found — and a procedurally defective UR decision goes to a workers' compensation judge rather than into IMR, which is a materially better forum. Citing the pre-April regulation numbers is citing regulations that no longer exist.

How to check a UR denial for defects. · If IMR upheld the denial.

July 13, 2026 — Labor Code § 5909's transmittal trigger was made permanent

This is the change most likely to be missed.

§ 5909 deems a petition for reconsideration denied unless the Appeals Board acts within 60 days. The trigger for that 60 days moved once, was scheduled to move back, and was then locked in place:

The operative text now reads: "A petition for reconsideration is deemed to have been denied by the appeals board unless it is acted upon within 60 days from the date a trial judge transmits a case to the appeals board." The trial judge must give notice of the transmittal to the parties and the Board, and service of the accompanying report under § 5900(b) counts as that notice.

Reed v. County of San Bernardino (WCAB significant panel decision, November 5, 2024), which held the clock began when the case appeared as "Sent to Recon" in EAMS, was construing the trigger that is still operative today.

We had this backwards until we re-read the chaptered bill, and we have logged that. A great deal of published material — ours included — announced a reversion to the filing trigger on July 1. The Legislature undid the sunset twelve days later, on July 13. Because SB 171 was chaptered after July 1, whether the filing trigger governed a petition acted on inside that twelve-day window is an open question, and one worth an attorney's attention on the specific dates in a file. Our correction.

The full procedural timeline. · Hearings and trial.

July 1, 2026 — medical mileage rose to 76¢

Up from 72.5¢, which itself took effect January 1, 2026. The rate applies to travel on or after the effective date regardless of date of injury. More.

July 2026 — SB 171 rewrote SIBTF

The Subsequent Injuries Benefits Trust Fund was rewritten, retroactively, with a June 1, 2026 grandfather snapshot.

Every SIBTF page in California written before that describes a system that no longer exists — including the market leader's.

SIBTF pays workers who had a pre-existing disability and then suffered an industrial injury that, combined, produces a substantially greater disability. It is paid by a state fund, not by the employer — genuinely additional money, and chronically under-claimed.

What changed and what it means. · If you had a claim before.

Still in effect from 2024–2025, and still widely missed

July 1, 2024 — Labor Code § 6401.9 (SB 553). Nearly every California employer — not just health care — must maintain a written Workplace Violence Prevention Plan and a Violent Incident Log, and make those records available to employees and their representatives. Ask for it by name. Where this matters most.

July 23, 2024 — 8 CCR § 3396, the indoor heat standard. Applies above 82°F, with additional requirements at 87°F. It reaches warehouses, commercial kitchens, laundries, foundries, food processing, manufacturing floors, and delivery vehicles — workplaces previously outside any heat regulation. Heat illness claims.

October 15, 2025 — AB 1336 was VETOED. It would have created a rebuttable presumption that heat illness in outdoor workers is industrial. There is no heat illness presumption in California. Several sources describe the bill as though it passed.

2025 — SB 230 and AB 1125 (Ch. 404 and Ch. 291, Stats. 2025) changed the public safety presumption landscape. Public safety presumptions.

October 1, 2025 — AB 394, public transit worker protections: extended to all transit employees and contractors including janitors and fare collectors; battery penalties to $10,000 and/or three years; workplace violence restraining orders available to transit agencies. Transit operators.

Decisions worth knowing from 2023–2026

Nunes v. State of California, DMV (WCAB en banc, June 22, 2023, aff'd Nunes II) — there is no such thing as "vocational apportionment." Only reporting physicians determine apportionment under § 4663. Apportionment.

Havanis, Fiore, and Cano (2024 WCAB panel decisions) — the four-step burden for rebutting a scheduled rating and proving permanent total disability, and why step 4 is where these cases die. Permanent total disability.

Zenith Insurance Co. v. WCAB (Hernandez) (2025) 110 Cal.App.5th 1164 — narrowed the special risk exception to the going-and-coming rule. Commute injuries.

Rader v. Ticketmaster (WCAB significant panel decision, January 8, 2026) — an attorney fee commuted from a lifetime award ends when the approved amount is satisfied, and payments must return to full with statutory interest on anything improperly withheld. Attorney fees.

Guzman v. ADCO Roofing & Waterproofing (WCAB panel, April 27, 2026) — a catastrophic-injury psychiatric case remanded on an undeveloped record. The lesson: these are lost on records, not on law. Catastrophic injury.

This page is maintained. If you are reading it long after the review date above, the items below the most recent entry may have moved.