A BILL FOR AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning agriculture and animals.
SB 135 authorizes alkaline hydrolysis as a lawful method for disposing of animal remains in Indiana. The bill defines alkaline hydrolysis and alkaline hydrolysis chambers, and adds the method to the list of approved disposal options for licensed disposal plants, alongside burial, incineration, rendering, composting, and other methods approved by the state veterinarian. It also clarifies that facilities using alkaline hydrolysis are not to be treated as incinerators, crematories, or medical waste processors for zoning and related regulatory purposes.
The bill directs the Indiana Department of Environmental Management to adopt wastewater, effluent, and discharge standards for alkaline hydrolysis chambers, including rules on neutralization, storage, land application, discharge, and when a federal NPDES permit is required. It also requires the State Board of Animal Health to adopt rules on construction, operation, biosecurity, equipment, operator training, emergency shutdown, containment, and handling of residual bone material. The bill further establishes recordkeeping and pathogen-control requirements for operators and sets an effective date of July 1, 2026.
SB 135 would amend multiple sections of Indiana law governing environmental management, animal health, and zoning. It excludes alkaline hydrolysis facilities from statutory definitions of incinerator and solid waste processing facility, creates new regulatory authority for IDEM and the State Board of Animal Health, and adds a new chapter framework for the disposal of animal remains by alkaline hydrolysis. Local governments would retain some zoning authority over these facilities, but they could not classify them as incinerators or crematories or impose more restrictive zoning than comparable veterinary or agricultural waste-handling facilities.
Based on the bill text, the measure appears generally supportive of expanding disposal options for animal remains while building in regulatory safeguards. The structure of the bill suggests an effort to normalize alkaline hydrolysis as a distinct, regulated practice rather than a combustion-based process. No committee transcript or vote data is available, so there is no recorded public debate or formal vote history to indicate broader legislative sentiment.
The main points of potential contention are regulatory classification and local zoning limits. The bill specifically prevents local units from treating alkaline hydrolysis facilities as incinerators or crematories, which may concern local governments or opponents who want broader land-use control. Environmental and public-health oversight is another likely issue, since the bill requires detailed discharge, effluent, biosecurity, and pathogen-control rules, and it creates a streamlined pathway for small veterinary or agricultural systems that may draw scrutiny from regulators or neighboring property owners. Supporters would likely emphasize animal-health benefits and regulatory clarity, while critics may focus on wastewater handling, facility siting, and the extent of local control.