Committee Hears Bill to Legalize ‘Natural Organic Reduction’ After Years of Out‑of‑State Adoption

Representative Jessica LaMontagne introduced House Bill 1457 on behalf of sponsors seeking to authorize and regulate natural organic reduction (NOR), a process in which human remains are converted into soil in controlled, enclosed systems. "Natural organic reduction is the contained accelerated conversion of human remains to soil," LaMontagne told the House Executive Departments and Administration Committee, saying the bill defines NOR and sets licensing, building, location and custody rules modeled in part on existing cremation statutes.

Supporters, including mortuary professionals and a commercial operator, told lawmakers the bill is aimed at providing an additional disposition option for families and reducing environmental impacts associated with flame cremation and conventional burial. "If we don't have natural organic reduction as an option here, people who really want this will go to a facility out of state," LaMontagne said, noting Vermont and Maine have legalized the process and Massachusetts is considering it.

David Bryant, president of the New Hampshire Funeral Directors Association, said the draft borrows heavily from cremation law but leaves gaps for NOR's different scale and operational needs. "Cremated remains weigh less than 10 pounds typically. NOR remains are up measured in cubic yards," Bryant said, warning the bill does not clearly address storage and disposal of unclaimed or excess NOR remains and that language such as "alternative containers" may not translate to NOR practice.

Opponents urged caution on technical, environmental and ethical grounds. Bob Dunn, director of public policy for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Manchester, asked the committee to weigh whether this new technology is "commensurate with the fundamental principle of the inherent dignity of each human being," and recommended the committee consider ITL (inexpedient to legislate).

Representatives of OPLC and the Office of Professional Licensure and Certification told the committee a limited statutory amendment could clarify rulemaking authority for a new license type and pointed to RSA 325:9 as the board's existing rulemaking reference. OPLC offered to provide suggested statutory text and a list of technical conflicts and said it was not taking a policy position.

Industry speakers including an operator who said other states built NOR rules off cremation statutes urged the committee to proceed with careful statutory language, oversight and inspection requirements. Witnesses also discussed possible testing protocols (for arsenic, E. coli and similar contaminants) and options for where excess material would be used — for example land‑conservation projects — and emphasized that the resulting material would not be used for food production.

The committee took extensive testimony and questions on operational detail, definitions (for example, whether the bill's "casket" language conflicts with the cemetery chapter), and public‑health metrics. Lawmakers and witnesses agreed additional drafting and rulemaking language may be necessary to address storage, testing, disposal of unclaimed remains, and the board's specific rulemaking authority.

The committee did not vote on the bill during the hearing. Lawmakers asked the sponsor and stakeholders to provide model rules, technical clarifications and a comparison to statutes in other states so the committee can consider amendments ahead of executive session.