 Welcome, everybody. It is Tuesday afternoon, the General Housing and Military Affairs, and we are picking up testimony on H244, which is an act relating to authorizing the natural organic reduction of humans remains. We have some time scheduled for this for the witnesses who were here last Wednesday at 3.30. We're gonna pick up on H477, which we talked about last week, which is about an act relating to leave for crime victims. And we have an amendment to consider for that bill to long-term from Damien and then, but we're gonna hear from witnesses. Ron, can you give us an idea, is Katie gonna be here later? Yes, sir, I've scheduled her for the end. She had a commitment overlapping. Okay, and I did not see an email from David Englander, but he is apparently not coming. Correct. What time was that, did he send that? Just a moment, I'll look it up. He messaged us at 11.43 in the morning. Okay. I don't see that, but I'll take your word for it. So we won't have the Department of Health today. We do, if we do continue on this bill, also the Office of Professional Regulation is asked to weigh in on it as well. So with that, Patrick, are you here? Yes, I am. All right, the microphone is yours. Actually, before we do that, if you've heard, we have more people in the room than we've had ever before or this year. So I'd like to just go around starting with the two representatives who are still on Zoom. And then we'll go around the room and introduce ourselves. The different configurations since the last time, well, not since last Wednesday, but since the last time we've talked in Trujillo-Syanian. So Mary? Hello, I am Mary Howard. I represent Rutland City District 5-3 in the Southwestern part. Thank you. Good afternoon, I'm Chip Troiano. I'm broadcasting from the flanks of Standard Mountain in the Northeast Kingdom, where I live. How you doing? Representative Navarro and Virgins, representing Northwest Addison County. I am Representative Lisa Hango, Franklin 5, which is Richford Berkshire, Franklin, and Highgate. Tiff Blomling, representing Burlington's South End. John Calacate from South Burlington. Joe Parsons, representing Towns of Newberry, Topson and Grotts. John Blasek representing Milton. Tommy Waltz from Berry City. Barbara Murphy, serving Fairfax, Franklin 2 District. And Tom Stevens from Waterbury, representing Waterbury, Bolton, Huntington, and Beale Score. So welcome all. And please share your thoughts on H-244. This committee has heard many different iterations of cemetery law over the last decade or so. And this is just the next one. Patrick, the microphone is yours. Welcome back. Thank you, Chair. I'm Patrick Healy from Greenmount Cemetery in Montpelier. I've been the director here for about 30 years. I'm also president of the Vermont Cemetery Association, which is for active cemeteries, unlike the Vermont Old Cemetery Association. And I just want to say we are in favor of this bill. Period. Okay. I'm going to test it on me. I can't, the brevity of that is stunning. So thank you. But I do have to ask, I do have to ask, but why? Why not? It's just another form of disposition of the body. And I think that many people are trying to figure out different ways. And this is not going to affect us one way or another. The real effect is it'll make us, our cemetery is a little more natural in different ways of bearing the remains of our loved ones. No, that's great. I won't push you. No, I appreciate your brevity. I just think it's, I know that you and I, through this committee, I've had this conversation. I've had a conversation about this position of remains for, I mean, I've been here for 14 years now. And so the idea of seeing the evolution to get to this point, it's really kind of neat to hear. So thank you. Okay, you're welcome. Okay. Caroline, I'm sorry, Chris Blair, would you have a bite? I have one question. Thank you again, Representative Byron. I had questions a little out of the box, but- A coffin. Yeah, a little out of the box. Boom, your joke. So anyway, my question is, I've had this concept popping around in my head for a couple of years. Have you and your colleagues or your association discussed open air cremation? Open air cremation? Yeah, like ceremonial funeral pyres, things like that. Colorado has it legal means looking at doing it. I just have always thought it was like an interesting concept with other funerary traditions of other cultures. So I was just curious if it was ever something you and your colleagues discussed? No, we haven't discussed that, but right now, everything's on the table. So people are coming up with some imaginative forms. Okay, thank you. All right, thank you, Patrick. Chris Palermo, welcome. Good to see you. Oh, wait a minute. Sorry, I'm not used to having so many people in the room. I'm looking for a little yellow hands on the Zoom. Representative Plasek. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm really not sure who to address this to. However, I have had a few constituents ask me to inquire. And their concern is, and this is a general cremation type question. Their concern is, when somebody is cremated, the smoke, something, whatever is given off from the body once it's during the cremation, where does it go? Is it hazarded? What has been possessed of other than their body? It is a hazard, it's only equal to out of three of those, I guess. So I would probably ask Chris Palermo as a former funeral director, perhaps to talk to that. Chris, you could choose to answer that if you'd like before we, before you testimony on 244 or? No, I'd be glad to speak to that. The crematories that are licensed to operate in the state of Vermont have to meet very specific EPA regulations. And most of those regulations are derived from the all, which is a manufacturer crematory retorts. And for them to operate and also discharge any smoke or matter from their stacks, there's a screening process, filtering process and very specific limits on what can be discharged through the stack. And they're tested on various increments to make sure that they continue to meet those EPA standards. But the particular matter that comes from those stacks is highly regulated and has very small impacts on the environment on purpose. So what? If I may. So sir, what you're saying is the defense, the federal government, their EPA or state EPA, somebody's EPA is determined that the smoke must be filtering requirements and in strict compliance with the EPA regulations. If it sounds like a stated person that I am because I need to get back to these people. Sure. So both, when they're inspected and when they first are in place and on an ongoing basis, they have to meet both federal and state air quality regulations. So yes, it's not an unregulated by any means process and they need to be very strict discharge permit levels. Thank you. Thank you sir. Sure. All right. Thank you. Thank you for that, Chris. Fox on page 244. Sure. So good afternoon, everybody. My name is Chris Palermo. I have been a funeral director for 42 years in the business zone in Wattagore. I retired back in late 2020 and I've served as president of the Vermont funeral director association. I currently act as their legislative liaison on different matters that come before your committees in the state house. There's a couple of discussion points. I just wanted to go over a reiteration of what we spoke about last week and some continued conversation. In my previous testimony last week, I spoke about whether the Vermont Veterans Memorial Cemetery has the ability to receive natural organic reduction remains based on their permitted types of disposition through Act 250. So they're currently eligible for earth barrel of cascaded bodies and burial vaults and cremated bodies buried in the earth, but not scattered. My question is, should the reference of natural organic reduction remains going to the veteran cemetery to be omitted for qualifying veterans until such time that the cemetery can make these provisions through the permitting process? So that's a question in terms of language that's currently in the bill. Next, I just wanna sort of fine tune some comments that I made last week and sort of expand on them a little bit. In reading the portion of the text that speaks to adding natural organic reduction, and I'm gonna refer to that as NOR to the required medical examiner permit for cremation, the bill indicates that the laws of the state of origin must be followed. In Vermont, before NOR cremation can take place a medical examiner permit for either is required. That much is really clear and I think is concise. And speaking with Dr. Elizabeth Bundock, the state chief medical examiner, we both came up with some similar questions and I'll share these with you. If the jurisdiction of origin does not specifically permit NOR, then can a Vermont facility perform NOR and remains originated from that jurisdiction regardless of whether cremation permitting process of the out of state jurisdiction? So for instance, if Maine or New Hampshire, if a facility came to fruition in Vermont and somebody from Maine or New Hampshire wanted to come to Vermont for natural organic reduction, if their state doesn't perceive that as a form of disposition, can Vermont receive that body if it's not recognized as a form of disposition? And I think that that's something that, whether it's a legislative process or a regular, through OPR to the regulatory process, I think it's something that needs to be ironed out just for Carolyn's sake who may wanna put a facility here but also for us practitioners that either wanna assist families in our state or out of state to come here for NOR. If the originating jurisdiction requires medical examiner permit for cremation and is silent on NOR, will a Vermont facility be able to perform NOR with the out of state ME cremation permit because Vermont considers cremation NOR to be equivalent? That sort of refers back to the text in the bill where it says that you must comply with the laws of the state in which the person died, including obtaining a copy of the medical examiner's permit if one is required. In Maine, if you're going to take someone who died there as a resident and was going to come to Vermont, you would need to get a medical examiner's permit. But if Maine doesn't recognize NOR as a form of disposition, how does that work? I guess, and finally, if the originating jurisdiction statutes specifically allow cremation without a medical examiner permit and are silent about NOR as a Vermont facility able to perform NOR. And this also applies to any practitioner who wants to assist a family in fulfilling that natural organic reduction disposition. Whether these questions are answered to the legislative or regulatory process, I think they need to be addressed. The answers are important for both the entity looking to place a facility in Vermont, possibly looking to serve multiple states and the licensed practitioners serving families looking for this type of disposition. Before I go any further, is there any questions or thoughts on anything that I spoke about? Yes, so Chris, just if you could explain again. So I'm going to do the typical legislative thing. So if someone in my family lived in Vermont, passed away on vacation in Maine. Does that mean that in the trends that they would not allow the transport back to Vermont if we were going to use natural organic or is that, how does that work back and forth as you're talking about what the state but the state they died in has for their rules. Right, so and that's the question that needs to be answered here because it's clear that if somebody died in Vermont that there's a process in which natural organic reduction can take place. But if somebody dies in a state that doesn't recognize natural organic reduction, funeral directors are required to follow the rules and regulations in which the person, the state in which the person passes away. So for an example, if I died at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in New Hampshire and desired to be cremated instead of waiting 24 hours as you would in Vermont before you can be cremated, I'd have to wait 48 hours. In New Hampshire, it's required that the medical examer actually view the body before the body can be transferred to the crematory. So you have to make provisions for the medical examer to view the body and for that individual, I could come back to Vermont for a cremation. So I think that moving forward, we just need to make sure that there's reciprocity within the states, both for Carolyn's sake as well as practitioners' sake that if we're gonna allow natural organic reduction in the state of Vermont, that there's some reciprocity in other states to be sure that that can happen. So that situation that you're speaking of doesn't add a wrinkle to all of this stuff. Representative Trinna. Right. So thank you, Chair Stevens. Who might have the answers to these questions, Chris? I think that either the Vermont Department of Health could reach out to the various states and ask them the question. Vermont's considering this as a form of disposition. How would you regulate this from your side of the ledger? Can somebody in Maine wanted to come to Vermont for this because it's allowed and there's a facility here through your transit process for bringing people from one location to another once you're deceased, would your state allow this? And I think that you would have the conversation throughout the New England states to see how their regulatory process would handle this and also talk with New York because New York borders us as well if somebody wanted to do that. So I think that there needs to be some legwork done. At least my suggestion would be that to make sure that as we walk down the path of this that not only monitors can be served from a facility if it comes to fruition here but also that there's a possibility that they can serve other practitioners and families in other states. So I think that either OPR or the health department somebody would want to make inquiries to make sure that that could happen. So if someone dies at Dartmouth-Hitchcock who lives in Vermont and dies in Dartmouth-Hitchcock would they need to announce to the medical examiner what the planned disposition of that remains would be? You would do that through the death certificate. So a medical examiner would issue if the person was gonna be cremated on the death certificate the disposition would be cremated and the medical examiner needs to go through their process. If a person is gonna come back to Vermont for N-O-R you still need to get a transit permit from that state. And the question I'm having is that on the transit permit it talks about donation to a medical school. It talks about cremation. It talks about burial in a cemetery and it talks about transfer to another state. And you can certainly fill that out but on that form that says transfer to another state it says where's that body going? To what cemetery or facility? And therein lies the rub in my estimation is that if you put down a natural organic reduction facility and it's not recognized as a form of disposition in New Hampshire, is that legal? I think that that's the question that needs to be asked so that moving forward. And I'm sure that it's different in other states I'm sure that where there's a facility in Washington state they may have made provisions for that and they may have reciprocity to other states but we're talking about Vermont and the associated states that may come here. We just wanna make sure that we don't arise in process or tease so that we can move forward with this legislation and it works. Thank you, Chris. And I apologize if I begin to talk and it becomes too long and sometimes I'm too lazy to stop so I just wanna make sure that I don't. And you're not a legislator? I know. Said more than a few years ago, I think Vermont approved the use of alcohol and hydrolysis which was another form of cremation, liquid cremation but it could also be compost it could, the remains could then be used or poured down the drain for that matter because they were gonna be clean. Has that happened in Vermont? No, no it hasn't. I think the closest facility right now is in New Hampshire but we do not have alcohol and hydrolysis facility in Vermont. And would that be the same kind of rules and regulations that would have been put into place to allow that to happen? Is that similar to what we're talking about here for NLR? I would imagine so because you would need to put down on the transit permit regardless where you were gonna go. Now it's a form of alkaline hydrolysis is a form of cremation but it's through a chemical liquid process versus heat. And to the best of my knowledge, most of the states in New England allow for alkaline hydrolysis so there's reciprocity no matter what. And I know that there's been a few families that have traveled with their funeral director to New Hampshire for that process to take place and just doesn't take place in Vermont. This NLR is a developing form of disposition and is legal now in three states. And I know that there's pending legislation, Carolyn, in other states as well. We just wanna make sure that we get this right and it's seamless. And Chris, is the testimony read? Is that what you provided for us last week? Is that what's on our, do we have that? I provided that today so that you have it in written form for today's agenda. That's great. Any further questions for Chris right now? No, thank you, Chris. That's very informative. And I almost apologize to my committee because this is our first funeral bill in a while in this committee. And some of these topics can be uncomfortable if we don't take into account that it really does happen. That happens. We need to function our way and spoke the bottom of it. Well, it's very comfortable for us as general practitioners to speak about this because this is what we do every day. And we wanna make sure that we can add a voice to answer questions and discuss this. I only have two other quick points. One is that we do concur with the language giving the office of professional regulation and authority to develop Vermont industry standards from which an NRR facility must operate as well as the authority to regulate the industry. I mean, it's the same for crematories, it's the same for funeral homes. And this would follow obviously into the purview of OPR to develop these industry standards. I know that these facilities, particularly Washington state has specific and I think Carolyn, excuse me, will speak to this. But we're glad to see that the office of professional regulation will be involved in that regulatory process. And I just wanna wrap up by saying that the BFDA very much supports NOR as another option in the final disposition for Vermonters. We look forward to partnering with stakeholders as this bill makes its way through the legislative process. Great, thank you Chris, I so appreciate it. Sure, and I'll stay on in case anybody has any further questions for me. Okay. Carolyn, I'm gonna butcher your last name. I think Carolyn Mises, is that it? That's perfect. Great, well, thank you for joining us. And welcome to the General Housing Military Affairs Committee. And as you may gather under the word general in our committee's name, we deal with quite a disparate group of topics and funerals and cemeteries are one of them. So welcome and please, microphone is yours. And if I could just share my screen, I will go ahead and present some slides. Ron, can you make Carolyn a co-host, please? Yes, I am. Sorry, I didn't hear you asking for me. I saw everyone staring at the camera and I wasn't quite sure. Could you enable screen sharing? No, I couldn't, what? Can you make Carolyn a co-host, please? Of course. Sorry, there you go. Great, thank you. Select these slides. Great, well, thank you so much for having me here today. I really appreciate the ability to speak about natural organic reduction. My name is Carolyn Mises and I am a co-founder and chief operating officer of a sustainable death care startup that is currently based in Washington called Earth Funeral Group. Also, I feel like I should note that I have strong ties to Vermont and New Hampshire, having gotten a couple of degrees at Dartmouth. I fell in love with the Upper Valley when I was 16 years old visiting and I cannot seem to stay away. So I had spent much of the past decade of my career in strategic healthcare operations, working with terminally ill people. And I was actually pursuing a PhD at Dartmouth when I came across natural organic reduction. It was through a group of end-of-life doulas. And I was just immediately captivated by the idea, largely because it's what I would want for myself. So environmentally, it helps regenerate damaged ecosystems and spiritually, at least for me, it would offer a sense of ecological connection and meaning. And so I'm very excited to be here to provide my perspective. And I hope that I can answer questions and be a resource as you're considering expanding access to natural organic reduction in Vermont. As we all know, there are really two prevalent methods of disposition today, cremation and burial. About 50% of Americans choose cremation and over 70% of Vermonters do. And a commonly cited reason for that is that it can be considered more environmentally friendly. And this was my previously preferred choice as well for that reason. Unfortunately though, cremation is a fossil fuel driven process. So although it is in fact regulated thoroughly by the EPA, it does emit a number of pollutants into the air, including over 500 pounds of CO2 per process. And that current CO2 that's emitted, it amounts to over 16,000 car trips across the length of Vermont every year for Vermont citizens who choose to be cremated when they die. Additionally, it emits things like carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, heavy metals and meat and mercury. As for traditional burial, we bury over 800,000 gallons of formaldehyde, which is a known carcinogen, over 100,000 tons of steel, over 1.6 million tons of reinforced concrete and over 30 million board feet of hardwood each in every year. For perspective, that amount of wood could build 4.5 million homes. And that is more steel than was required in the construction of the Golden Gate Bridge that we're putting underground every year in the United States. Cemetery's take up space, it can require fertilizers, pesticides, water and even mowing and perpetuity. And cremation and traditional burial will likely be the primary choice for many, if not most people, due to cultural, religious and other considerations. But the environmental impact has led many others to seek out alternative options. A 2019 survey by the National Funeral Directors Association found that more than 50% of Americans expressed interest in green burial options. And as a former resident of Vermont, I would bet that's a fair bit higher here. Natural organic reduction or soil transformation offers a natural environmentally friendly alternative. So instead of being cremated and turned into ash, we can be turned into nutrient rich soil over a 30 day process. It is a multi-step, but fairly simple process. First, the body is done, they cleansed and wrapped in a biodegradable shroud. It's placed in an individual vessel with other natural and organic materials. So this is things like mulch and wood chips and wildflowers. Then the naturally occurring microbes and bacteria that are already in our bodies go to work and they break down our body on a molecular level. The process reaches over 131 degrees Fahrenheit for 72 consecutive hours, which neutralizes pathogens. Inorganic materials are removed in an intermediary process before the compost goes through a final curing stage. The soil is tested for maturity, stability, and contaminants before being returned to families and or restoration projects. And each process produces about a cubic yard of compost. The underlying science here is composting. So we're balancing carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, optimizing the temperature and moisture levels, really creating the perfect conditions for those naturally occurring microbes and beneficial bacteria to break the body down on that molecular level. And the resultant soil is no longer human. It's indistinguishable from other types of compost. At Earth, we will do this in a state of the art facility using proprietary vessel technology that optimizes those conditions. And our process will use 100% renewable energy. From the get-go, NOR requires 90% less energy than cremation and it produces net zero CO2 emissions. So through the natural carbon cycle, the compost increases the ability of soils to sequester additional carbon. Studies have shown that a one-time application of compost can double forage production and soil sea sequestration over three years on both wet and dry grassland systems, which is pretty amazing. Simply put, compost increases photosynthesis and therefore the ability of plants to sequester carbon and build back soil structure. Healthy soil enables us to better filter water, provide more nutrients to plants and it can even reduce flooding and landslides. So at the end of the day, this makes natural organic reduction not only less pollutive, it makes it truly regenerative. And as was mentioned earlier, of course, Washington, Oregon and Colorado have already expanded consumer choice to include natural organic reduction and it's actively under consideration and of course here in Vermont, but also Massachusetts, Delaware, Illinois, New York and we anticipate again in California. And there are a handful of other states where it could fit under existing funeral law. We would be very open to alternatives and changes in the bills that would make implementation work best for the Office of Professional Regulation and the Medical Examiner and the Department of Health. And I would personally love to be a resource in any way that might be helpful to make recommendations based on other states' approaches. So for example, the environmental and professional license regulations that we've seen here in Washington, we've found them to be very thorough and very effective. And so in closing, well, I know I won't be for everyone. I do hope that for those with whom it resonates that they'll be able to make that choice. And I'm also happy to answer any other questions about the experience of the state of Washington regarding out-of-state transfers, a number of providers here are actively taking cases from all across the United States and then at least in the state of Washington, they are selecting a transit for the Burial Transit Permit in that line of method of disposition and it has been successful in doing that safely and in meeting regulations here in the state. I will stop my screen share. Representative Chino, is that your hand? Oh, no. You, you're on mute. What's a legacy hand? But I'm turning it into a current hand. So my question is, you said there's some process for 72 hours in which the body is heated. What source of fuel would provide that heat at this point? So the heat actually happens naturally within the composting process. The microbes and bacteria that are there actually really get going and they generate a lot of heat. I think some providers may have external sources of heat as well to supplement that, but the heat actually does occur naturally. All right. Yeah, I'm aware of that process. So it wouldn't, okay, that's great. Thank you. And we monitor, I'm not sure of every provider, but we have pretty sophisticated process control systems so that we can ensure that that threshold is being met. Representative Kulaki, then we'll ask Chris, how does this happen? Caroline, I'm interested in what Chris had shared about the state of origin. For the three states that have passed this, do you know how they've dealt with that issue? My knowledge so far, it hasn't been an issue. The states of origin have followed their normal process of transferring bodies out of state. And so in that burial transit line, they select that it's in transit for out-of-state transfer. And then they do put it in the place where it's being transferred to. But to my knowledge, the place it's being transferred to has, it hasn't mattered what type of disposition it ultimately is going to. All right, thank you. Chris Flaro. Thanks, Caroline. And hopefully that will stand true for New England states here as Vermont recognizes those. But I think it's important to ask the question to make sure that we do things appropriately and everybody's on the same page. So a couple of questions occur to me. To the natural organic reduction, my presumption is that the organic parts of a human body become part of the soil that it's mixed with. But you are left with recognizable skeletal remains and teeth and such. Is it my presumption correct that you would in turn need to remove anything that's identifiable, process it as a crematory might and then add back those ingredients to the soil so that it becomes sort of one package of compost, which would include skeletal remains that are no longer recognizable. Is that correct? It is exactly correct. So using the same processes as currently used for cremation and for alkaline hydrolysis. In the states that currently have this legislation in place and facilities, are there any provisions to say that this organic material can't be sold on the open market as sort of a commodity? And are there any restrictions in terms of utilizing it for growing food for human consumption? Yes, so the state of Colorado did include those two provisions so it cannot be sold for commercial purposes and that cannot be used for commercial food production. Okay, yeah. Which seems quite reasonable. Yeah, okay, thank you. So Carol, when you say that the family can take it, can take the remains or they could donate it to conservation efforts. What, who would that be going to? Yes, so the conservation efforts. It'll vary by provider and as with any other method of disposition, it would need to be disclosed to the families as a part of their contractual agreement. So for Earth, we have a piece of conservation land that is going to be protected in perpetuity and have a number of restoration projects for that conservation land. And so families can choose to donate to that specific conservation project. The other providers also have parcels of conservation land where they are also undergoing different restoration projects. Okay, and how long has it, who passed the law the longest ago? Washington. What year? In 2020. And the first facility that went live last year. Do I understand from Mr. Palermo's comments a couple of minutes ago that only Colorado out of those three states have a provision to not sell the compost on the open market? Colorado does. But the other two do not. Thank you. I don't see any of the providers doing so. But it's a safe provision to certainly include. Representative Brown. So if I couldn't put my remains out on the open market, I couldn't spread them on my far garden. Is that correct? Yes. Okay, thank you. That's where mine are going. So Carolyn, it's so new. One of the things is like this would allow this to happen. I think this legislation, this isn't, I mean, this is a concept. This is a form of disposition that doesn't, isn't allowed yet. This isn't, but anyone could come in and say, I'm going to develop, I'm going to have this kind of mausoleum or whatever the process is. Does that make sense to you? I mean, that's, I mean, where you're, this legislation is seeking to make this as an opportunity. It may never happen in Vermont based on business plans and demand and whatnot. Is that, is that what you ran across in other states so far? It's the question that when it's approved, sorry, I'm not quite sure what the question is. Could you rephrase that? Sure, there's a balance between saying, oh, look, here's a company that does this and they need us to change the law in order to come here and do it. That's, you know, especially in this particular trade, that happens, it happens all the time, but I mean, so from a purely theoretical basis, we're just looking to change the law to make, to allow someone to come in and do this. And I'm just curious, how is it taken, how many businesses, how is the, how is the business plans of individuals work in these other states yet? Is it something that is sustainable as a business model and you found enough interest to make it sustainable? Right, I think we're still really in the early stages, but the market receptivity is very strong. So of the providers in Washington, the first has had, has been over capacity since opening and they are opening additional, an additional facility next year. So I think that there certainly is consumer demand for it and it's a matter of finding the space and building the plans and raising the money, which takes time in order to then be able to offer it more widely. But of course the first step is authorizing it as a legal method of disposition so that, you know, business owners can actually start making those plans and start doing that research. Thank you, Representative Wals. Thank you, Chair. I'm a little bit confused on this whole business with the final disposition after the process. It sounds to me, what you're saying in Colorado is that the facility has control over the final disposition, I would think would be the family. I hope that's correct. The family is- And so in Colorado is saying the family cannot then sell you as fertilizer, which I find kind of bizarre, but okay. Right, the family nor the organization that has done the natural organic reduction process neither can because some families will elect to not receive the full amount of soil back because it is a very large quantity. And some people just do not have space for an entire cubic yard of soil. And so that is where we end up with a situation where a family might take a small sort of memorial piece of soil that they can then scatter in a garden or in some of their favorite places. And then the provider who did the natural organic reduction would have the remainder of that soil that they would then dispose of, typically in a conservation project. At least from the perspective of earth, we plan to use the remainder of the soil for restoration projects. Thank you. Representative Trinna. That's a legacy. Sorry. Chris Claremont. Thank you. I think that if a facility were to go into Vermont and Carolyn, you can maybe confirm or deny this, but it would seem to me that, based on the capital costs of putting in a facility, that it would become more of a regional facility where, and this sort of plays into what my testimony spoke about, was that it would serve a larger demographic than just Vermont, because I mean, there is a cost related to NOR, I think, Carolyn, from what I've read, the average cost is $5,500 to do a natural organic reduction per person. So that it doesn't make any sense for a facility like this to go into Vermont, if only two or three people in a year are gonna opt for that. But if there's people outside of Vermont that can come here, then you sort of open it up to a much broader demographic as they walk down the path. So I think that this is the first step in creating the ability to do it in Vermont. And then the next step is assuming that this gets approved in the industry standards are developed in regulation, then the rest of the hard work is really on whoever wants to put the facility in to figure out whether it's economically feasible or not. And that same thing happened with alkaline hydrolysis. We approve that legislatively, but the cost related into the band just didn't make it worth. Anybody's financial investment up to this point. Representative Hacke. Thank you. This question is for Carolyn. You have facilities in some of these other states, I assume, and how many since 2020, since this was legalized in the first date, how many remains have you processed? Do you know? All right, so we are launching in 2022. We have a beautiful facility that we are building out. And there are two other large scale providers in the state of Washington so far. Based on our state data, I would estimate that they have done about 150 or so processes in the past year. And it could be maybe 30% higher than that, but that would be my best guess. Thank you. Chris, can I ask you to do some remedial information for us about, when you talk about how regionalism might be, a regional facility might be the answer. Can you just give us the current update on the traditional disposition of bodies? How many crematories are in Vermont? How many folks still do traditional embankments within their own buildings or their facilities out there that take in from various areas? Can you just give us a quick rundown on what's out there right now? Sure. So in my early years as a funeral director, 40 some odd years ago, cremation was probably between 10 and 12% of the number of families that chose that form of disposition, traditional funerals, which we would equate to a casket, burial vault, church service, calling hours was more like 80 to 85%. Pre-COVID, the cremation rate in Vermont runs between 80 and 85%. I would say it was probably higher than that. Now with COVID and restrictions, previous restrictions on funeral services. So somewhere between 15%, maybe a little more than that, still opt for a traditional funeral and burial, but cremation by far in Vermont, this is a preferred method of disposition. And it's not based on cost necessarily, it's really more based on philosophy and the fact that families live in many different places in the country, in the world and getting back for funerals and such, it gives me families more options in terms of waiting for folks to be able to get back. So there's a lot of dynamics that go into this, not just about cost, but that's pretty much what the current statistics are now. Representative Plasic. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And just for comparison purposes real quick, two questions, what is the average weight of the remains for a normal cremation? Let's say a, I'll keep this simple for you, 200 pounds adult. What would be the average weight of the remaining cremation for that? And also, what would be in comparison to the cost of a usually, I shouldn't use word normal, unusual cremation versus your NLR? Well, I would be glad to sort of speak to the cremation piece. If you can envision a five pound bag of sugar that essentially is about the volume of human remains that come back from a cremated body. In average weight, you're probably talking somewhere between five and eight pounds of remains that are left following cremation. In terms of cost, I mean, it's really based on overhead expenses for whatever funeral home or facility that you're speaking of in Vermont cremation. I think the least expensive cremation costs that I've seen is around $13.95, and it kind of goes up depending on the facility and the desire for different services and those kinds of things. So that's the cremation side of weight, volume, and expense. On that cremation side, I think you said earlier, I believe you said about 55 something on the 5600, but he had arms, my correct answer might recall that. Do you think Caroline would like to speak to that? Sure. I'm sorry, I'm looking at her on the screen. No worries. So the current prices range anywhere from $5,000 to about $6,000 for natural organic reduction. And for the state of Vermont, I had actually just looked this up the other day, the average cost of a funeral is $8,900. For a traditional funeral? It was just for, it gave an overall number. So I think it's a blend. And that's a normal funeral. All right, yeah, I shouldn't use a normal, but a usual traditional dish with the gasket and the spring. Kill all the services, there are a lot in place. Blend of the total cost is how it's done. Press methods. I think Representative Plastic also wanted to know the weight of an N-O-R remains. So it's about a cubic yard, which I think ends up being close to a ton. Wow. Thank you. It's generally kind of a few wheel barrels full. It's probably half a ton. I'm sorry, it's less than a full ton. I think it might be closer to half a ton. Thank you. I'm new to this, so I don't understand how 200 person could be composted in this way and weight 500 pounds or 1,000 pounds. The ton is 2,000, right? Yeah, a ton is 2,000. So I think it's probably closer to a quarter to a half of a ton. It's essentially you add those, the amendments. So the natural materials, wood chips, alfalfa compost into the process. And that's, so it adds essentially double the weight at least of the person that you're, somewhere between one to two times of the weight of the body. Okay, thank you. A lot of material. Yes, the cubic yard is quite sufficient for a small garden. All right, any further questions for Carolyn or Chris or Patrick right now? I think, I mean, I think it's clear that we also need to hear. We all, we had scheduled representative for the Department of Health who could not come today. The representative from the Office of Professional Regulation certainly wanted to testify and could not make it today. It sounds like from what Chris, what you were saying is that we should be checking in with Bob Burke and with the Veterans Cemetery just to, just to see what they might need in terms of, in terms of any kind of legislation if these remains were gonna be used at the cemetery. So if I may, Tom, the, I talked to Bob Burke, I'm on the advisory board for the Veterans Cemetery and I knew that they operate, they're the only cemetery in the state to operates under an active 50 permit because they set on a aquifer. And so their active 50 permit currently allows for earth burial of cascader remains in a crypt or a vault and earth burial of cremated remains, no scattering. So there's no provision right now in their active 50 permit that allows them to scatter ashes or to receive natural organic reduction to be utilized in some fashion in their cemetery. So my only point in the legislation is, is that it refers to that for a qualified veteran who chooses natural organic reduction to be able to go to the Veterans Cemetery. And I'm not sure that that's an option because it doesn't adhere to their active 50 permit. And that was a conversation I had with Bob Burke and you can verify that with him if you'd like to, he's the director of the cemetery as well as Veterans Affairs. So I just wanted to point out that as the legislation moves forward that there's some considerations with the VVMC that you may want to take into account. No, that's fair, I mean, the last time I think we talked about this with the Veterans Cemetery it was about non-involved bodies and that they fit that it was allowed to go with their active 50, but this is completely different. Carol, before I let you go, actually, I just, and I see that our attorney is here to go through the last few pages of the bill of the walkthrough. But I noticed on the bottom of the handout that you shared with us that it says some cases are not eligible. Those with prion disease, my mycobacterium, TB, Ebola, a radioactive seed implant, nuclear pacemaker, et cetera. If I came to you and said, I want to be disposed of in this way, is this part of the back and forth with you to determine this? Yeah, it's part of the intake process. Yeah, because it's, I mean, I would want to know that, or I want my family to know that before they were saying I didn't qualify because I had a pacemaker or something, where was it, Peco? Does that also apply to cremation, those types of conditions or preclusions? Chris? Sure. So with cremation, if you have a pacemaker or a defibrillator, we're required to remove those prior to cremation because they have a radioactive battery and those are actually recycled through the crematories today. So they go back to the manufacturer. Any kind of orthopedic implant is removed. Those are also recycled. So anything that's artificial inside your body, except for stents, which are pretty much destroyed during the cremation process are removed and all you get back in terms of the cremated body is the body. With specific diseases, whether it's hepatitis, HIV, Ebola, it's a non-factor in terms of cremation. The prion-born diseases like Kuchfeldt-Jacob disease, a prion is a protein. You have to be careful in handling remains, particularly if they're autopsy for a transmission, but the prion is destroyed in the cremation process. As long as the crematory is fired at 1,800 degrees or higher, so that's a non-factor in terms of cremation. So there's no real exclusion through the cremation process for these various diseases. Thank you. So I guess, yes it does. And I think I missed that a very small part that Carolyn testified if those diseases are precluded from N-O-R process or would preclude someone from having the N-O-R process. Thank you. That's at the bottom of their hand now, yep. And that is based on the Washington state regulations, which our company would adhere to universally just because we think that they're good regulations to protect the health and safety of workers and then also the soil that's produced. Thank you.