The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is facing sharply divided feedback over a proposal that would remove certain pyrolysis technologies from a key air emissions rule, a decision that could have significant implications for the chemical recycling and tire pyrolysis industries.

The proposal would clarify that specific pyrolysis technologies used for chemical recycling are not considered forms of incineration under the Clean Air Act. As part of the change, the EPA would remove references to “pyrolysis/combustion units” from the definition of municipal waste combustion units under its Other Solid Waste Incinerators (OSWI) regulations.

The public comment period, which closed on May 4, attracted hundreds of responses from industry groups, recyclers, environmental organizations, local authorities, and manufacturers, reflecting ongoing debate around how pyrolysis technologies should be regulated in the United States.

Industry groups push for regulatory clarity

Supporters of the proposal argue that pyrolysis should be classified as a manufacturing process rather than incineration or waste management, saying current regulatory uncertainty is slowing investment and limiting expansion of chemical recycling infrastructure.

Industry stakeholders maintain that pyrolysis processes use heat in oxygen-limited environments to convert waste materials into reusable outputs rather than combusting them.

Companies involved in chemical recycling say clearer regulation could support investment in new facilities capable of processing difficult-to-recycle waste streams, including plastics and end-of-life tires.

In the tire sector, tire pyrolysis technologies are increasingly being developed to recover materials such as recovered carbon black (rCB), tire-derived oil, recovered steel, syngas, and pyrolysis char from end-of-life tires as part of broader tire recycling and circular economy initiatives.

Some industry participants also argue that regulatory changes could improve the competitiveness of domestic recycling and manufacturing industries by supporting investment in advanced recycling technologies.

Environmental groups raise concerns

Environmental organizations opposing the proposal argue that removing pyrolysis from the OSWI framework could reduce regulatory oversight and create gaps in emissions control requirements.

Critics of the proposal contend that pyrolysis systems still involve oxidation processes and should therefore remain regulated under existing combustion-related rules.

Several groups also expressed concern that the proposal was introduced within a broader regulatory package focused on air curtain incinerators and disaster debris management, arguing that the review period was too short for such a technically complex issue.

Some environmental groups said separate emissions standards should be established before pyrolysis facilities are removed from the municipal waste combustion category.

EPA and industry highlight economic opportunities

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has publicly supported regulatory changes intended to encourage growth in chemical recycling infrastructure, arguing that outdated classifications are limiting innovation and investment.

Supporters of the proposal point to international competition in advanced recycling technologies, particularly in Europe and Asia, where investment in chemical recycling capacity continues to expand.

In the United States, approximately 25 states currently classify certain chemical recycling operations as manufacturing rather than waste management, while other states continue regulating such operations under solid waste frameworks.

Federal legislation, including the proposed Recycling Technology Innovation Act, also seeks to formally classify chemical recycling as a manufacturing activity.

Implications for tire recycling and pyrolysis

The outcome of the EPA proposal could directly affect future development of pyrolysis facilities tied to both plastic and tire recycling markets.

Pyrolysis is increasingly viewed within the tire sector as a potential pathway for recovering valuable secondary raw materials, including recovered carbon black (rCB) and tire-derived oil, while reducing landfill disposal of end-of-life tires.

At the same time, the sector continues to face scrutiny over permitting, emissions management, scalability, and long-term environmental performance.

Some stakeholders argue that clearer permitting frameworks could accelerate investment in advanced recycling infrastructure, while others maintain that stricter oversight remains necessary to address environmental and public health concerns.

Regulatory decision still pending

The EPA has not yet announced next steps following the close of the public comment period.

According to the agency, the submitted comments will help inform future regulatory decisions related to chemical recycling and pyrolysis technologies.

The final outcome is expected to play an important role in shaping how advanced recycling, including tire pyrolysis, develops within the broader U.S. recycling and sustainability landscape.

To learn more about the matter, read the original article by Waste Dive.