Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the End Of Life Options topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bills to legalize so‑called 'natural organic reduction' (human composting) as end‑of‑life option
Summary
Lawmakers heard testimony both for and against Senate Bill 53, which would authorize natural organic reduction (human composting). Supporters cited consumer choice and environmental benefits; funeral industry witnesses urged careful regulation and further study of health, environmental and disposal rules.
Sen. Dan Ennis introduced Senate Bill 53 to authorize natural organic reduction — a process sometimes described as “human composting” — as a lawful disposition option in New Hampshire. “Live free after you die,” Ennis said, framing the bill as an expansion of consumer choice.
Proponents, including representatives of Earth Funeral and several individuals, said the process is used elsewhere in the U.S., is strictly engineered, and can provide an environmentally preferable option that returns soil to families or to conservation projects. Mike Vlasic, testifying for Earth Funeral, said the company has served families in other states and described the process as “a safe, responsible, and dignified process of turning a body into a soil amendment.” Nora Shannon Plank, an industry supporter, said the process allows families to express values through disposition and praised neighboring states’ movement toward legalization.
Funeral industry witnesses and other skeptics urged caution. David Bryant, a licensed funeral director and embalmer, said demand in New Hampshire is uncertain and raised questions about the resulting material, regulatory oversight and potential contamination (including PFAS). The New Hampshire Funeral Directors Association asked that fee schedules and some operational details be placed in regulation rather than statute, and suggested additional study before implementation.
Several witnesses and the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification (OPLC) recommended technical amendments. Deanna Juris, OPLC executive director (pinch‑hitting for counsel), suggested aligning licensing terms, inspection schedules and fee authority with existing boards and statutes. Representatives of Earth Funeral said the bill is modeled after regulatory frameworks in other states and pledged to collaborate with local funeral directors and regulators.
Supporters emphasized safeguards in the bill, such as testing of the resulting soil, and said the process is not intended for food production. Opponents requested clearer rules on wastewater, pathogen control, bone handling and post‑process disposal. Several participants urged that alkaline hydrolysis (a different disposition process) not be folded into this bill.
The committee received written testimony and asked sponsors and regulatory staff to consider technical fixes and regulatory delegation for fees and inspections before advancing the bill.
