Human remains disposal: alkaline hydrolysis: licensure and regulation.
Scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2020, AB 967 also delineates the requirements for hydrolysis facility operators, which include securing the necessary state and local permits, employing approved hydrolysis equipment, and submitting to regular inspections. Notably, this legislation expands the definition of crimes related to the mishandling of human remains, introducing new penalties for improper disposal. As a result, the bill not only enhances regulatory oversight but also places more significant accountability on those operating hydrolysis facilities. Additionally, local registrars will be tasked with issuing permits specifically for the disposal of hydrolyzed remains.
Assembly Bill 967 introduces significant changes to the regulation of human remains disposal in California, specifically concerning alkaline hydrolysis. This bill mandates the licensing and regulation of hydrolysis facilities under the oversight of the Cemetery and Funeral Bureau within the Department of Consumer Affairs. The bill aims to standardize the legal framework around hydrolysis to ensure safety and compliance. By doing so, it aims to align the licensure process for hydrolysis facilities with existing regulations for crematoria, thus modernizing the methods available for human remains disposal in the state.
The sentiment around this bill appears to be generally supportive, especially among advocates for environmental sustainability in funeral practices. Proponents argue that alkaline hydrolysis is a more eco-friendly alternative to traditional burial and cremation. They highlight its potential to reduce the environmental footprint of human remains disposal. However, there may be concerns regarding the costs associated with regulatory compliance and the potential for increased funeral service prices because of new requirements.
Debate around AB 967 may primarily center on the balance between modernization of funeral service practices and the costs imposed on operators. While the bill is seen as an improvement for ensuring standards in human remains disposal, some local entities and small providers could view the additional regulatory oversight and financial obligations as burdensome. Moreover, discussions could arise regarding the various ethical considerations tied to new disposal methods and the cultural preferences associated with different forms of human remains handling. Overall, the bill reflects a shift toward acknowledging and integrating new technologies in funeral practices.