Comité Regulated Industries and Utilities del Senado, 29 de enero de 2026

Transcripción

335 turnos. Seleccione un tiempo para reproducir ese momento del video.

1. 0:19:50

   Things on the agenda today. Um, the first, my dear friend Representative Stevens, Chairman Stevens, you have a bill that we passed last year, uh, that deals with essentially mental health and substance abuse by nurses. I wanna invite you to present it again. I think most folks on the committee will remember it. We do have a couple of new members here that might need a little education. It's fairly simple, uh, and I want you just to ... It should be easy since we passed it out last year, but I'd like for you to go first.

2. 0:20:22

   It is easier for us if you use the podium. You- you, but if you're more comfortable in the chair, you can do that. You just, you get a little more TV time up there at the podium. This is in our folders, uh, folks. If you'll look, it should be on the very top, House Bill 219.

3. 0:20:40

   Go ahead.

4. 0:20:41

   Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you again for allowing me to come back on this bill one more time. Um, to give you a little overview, what this is, is a- an alternative to discipline, essentially for our nurses. Um, we have already have this particular program for pharmacists, dentists, and, uh, physicians. And from time to time, a, a, um, a nurse will get into trouble. Uh, they may, uh, have a substance abuse, it may be a mental health issue, could even be a physical issue. Um, but there's no real mechanism for these nurses to voluntarily come forward and say, "Look, I need some help, um, and can I get into a program?

5. 0:21:20

   And I wanna make sure that I'm not, uh, that I can get back in, uh, to work as soon as possible." The program, of course, will do that. This particular bill, for those of you that- that heard it before, will do exactly that. It gets them in the program, mirrors the other programs that are in the state today, uh, so that we can keep these health professionals, uh, working, um, in areas of course, that we have a, a huge, um, lack of these health professionals. Um, this particular one, if- if you'll notice on the bill, the person that's asking for help pays for the program.

6. 0:21:54

   Um, the, the expense comes on that person that's, that of course is going through the program. They're followed, um, tested if there's a substance abuse, and gets them back into being a productive citizen. And that's probably the, the highlight of the, of the bill, and I'll answer any questions if there are any.

7. 0:22:13

   All right. So this type of program is already, uh, in effect for physicians, and dentists, and pharmacists?

8. 0:22:19

   Yes, sir.

9. 0:22:19

   So this just gives an equal opportunity for nurses to deal with things in this manner, rather than going through a disciplinary process.

10. 0:22:27

    And potentially going through the judicial system, and they come forward voluntarily. It's, it's the proper way to do it.

11. 0:22:34

    So you're addressing the underlying problems before they really become a problem.

12. 0:22:38

    Yes, sir.

13. 0:22:38

    Okay. All right, any questions from committee members? Sen- uh, Chairman Albers, you are recognized.

14. 0:22:44

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, uh, Chairman Stevens, always great to work with you and, and hear from you. And, uh, I believe we worked together on the physician one. And, uh, isn't it true, we have heard, both you and I and others, uh, some real important, uh, feedback from those folks that have made the difference of them not just getting the help, but staying and, and really being a healer moving forward.

15. 0:23:02

    Yes, sir. You nailed it. Thank you.

16. 0:23:04

    Thank you for doing this. This is a great bill.

17. 0:23:06

    Thank you, sir.

18. 0:23:07

    Am I right that most, almost every other state has a similar program or the vast majority of them?

19. 0:23:13

    Yes, sir.

20. 0:23:13

    Okay. Senator Rhett, what you got to say about this? You're listed as the Senate sponsor. Know what we're talking about yet?

21. 0:23:21

    I think it's a great bill.

22. 0:23:22

    So there we go. All right. You got any questions? If you do, you better get with the chairman there before you present this on the floor. I don't see any other questions, and nobody has signed up to speak for your bill. I think we passed it out here twice. I know-

23. 0:23:36

    We have.

24. 0:23:36

    Okay. So I, I, I don't believe it had any problems. We just didn't get it reached on, on the floor, um, on sine die. So I, I wanted to go ahead and get your bill out of this committee early, since it was all loaded and set to go last time, instead of waiting till after crossover day, so.

25. 0:23:55

    Deeply appreciate it, committee.

26. 0:23:56

    All right. Uh, I'll receive any motion.

27. 0:23:58

    Move to pass.

28. 0:23:59

    Uh, I'm, I'm sorry, I gotta recognize Senator Dolezal first.

29. 0:24:02

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for, uh, just a question for the good chairman. I'm just curious, have you got any good Senate bills sitting over there in your committee?

30. 0:24:07

    Uh, we just met, met on several of them in, uh, in finance, matter of fact. Yes, sir.

31. 0:24:11

    I'll move to pass, Mr. Chairman.

32. 0:24:14

    I'll accept, uh, my secretary Senator Williams as a second there-

33. 0:24:17

    Yes, sir

34. 0:24:17

    ... since you wanted to make the motion. Is there any discussion or any proposed amendments? All right. Uh, then there is a motion do pass LC57-0201. All in favor, raise your hand. And any opposed? All right, that passes unanimously.

35. 0:24:34

    Thank you, Chairman and committee.

36. 0:24:35

    Thank you for being here, and I do understand Senator Rhett's gonna carry this for you on the floor. All right, we'll leave him as the sponsor. Thank you. All right, second thing on our agenda. I'm gonna skip ahead quickly, 'cause I know we're ... It just feels like a Friday afternoon, 'cause everybody's trying to get out of town since we're out, uh, tomorrow. I have two people signed up, uh, to speak on this, uh, Senate Resolution 482, and I had two signed up on, um, House Bill 232, the massage therapist bill.

37. 0:25:06

    During the, the last 48 hours, I have had, uh, a number of people that had interest in that bill explain that some of the interested parties are, uh, negotiating changes due to some changes in circumstances over the last year. But I've got a couple people I think, you know, maybe came here from far away that I'm gonna allow to speak on the bill. But the sponsor has asked that we not take action on it today, Representative Silcox. So if any of you are here for that bill, uh, feel free to leave if you want to.

38. 0:25:40

    We are not gonna take a vote on it, but I will hear testimony from the people that signed up if they'd like to be heard, since you've made the effort to be here and we have a, a quorum here to hear you, maybe to expedite things for later on. But I just, I see a pretty full room, and, uh- These, these did not seem to be particularly controversial bills. So if anybody was sitting here waiting on action on the massage bill, you may sit and enjoy the, uh, the show, or you can feel free to excuse yourself if you'd like to.

39. 0:26:10

    So having said that, let's go ahead and we'll follow our agenda. Uh, Senator Bearden, you are up. Uh, Senate Resolution 482. You patiently waited last year. I think this got filed relatively late is the w- the reason it didn't get on a-

40. 0:26:27

    It did

41. 0:26:27

    ... a committee calendar. And, 'cause I would certainly have expedited you if I could have. It is a little unique hearing a, um, a resolution for the creation of a study committee after, you know, the first year. Usually, that's in the interim between the first and second. But I know this is a, a issue of, of, uh, a passion of yours, and, and I wanna give you a chance to be heard. And, and I have seen it done, where there were study committees after the, the second session of a biennium. So if, if you wanna move forward, we will.

42. 0:26:59

    I listed it as a hearing only-

43. 0:27:01

    Yeah

44. 0:27:01

    ... because of those concerns, but the floor is yours.

45. 0:27:03

    Yep.

46. 0:27:03

    Please explain to us. And you do have people that have signed up that wanna be heard.

47. 0:27:07

    Okay. Well, I appreciate it, Mr. Chairman, and the committee members. Um, yeah, Senate Bill 42 was introduced kind of late. If you look at the, uh, resolution, it mainly talks a lot about advanced nuclear reactors, uh, also known as small modular reactors. And the reason why it was late, because, uh, the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, kind of beat us to the punch. Uh, he's really working hard with Texas A&M to try to be the state to build these small modular reactors, and I was trying to keep up pace, hopefully that Georgia could be, uh, one of those for the construction of these as they move forward.

48. 0:27:39

    But as I said, this got in a little bit late, but I'm gonna blame Governor Abbott in Texas for that one. But, um, as we're talking about a- advanced nuclear reactors, and I will also go into some comments I've had with, um, Chair Michel with PSC, this is really the future for generation of power that we got coming up. Um, these small nuclear reactors, they can... or small modular reactors, footprints on about 30 acres of land. Um, safer, cheaper, and the power that they can produce will be great for anything from manufacturing, as we've seen a large surge of data centers in the state of Georgia that small modular reactors could be used for.

49. 0:28:22

    In southeast Georgia, we got a little thing called the Atlantic Ocean that the small modulars could be used for desalination and help bring water into southeast Georgia. Excuse me. I'm sorry. I just had a late lunch too. So, uh, so that's what the bill was about. We want to get a head start, because these are coming. And, uh, just give you a heads-up on it, uh, Nuscale Power has w- and with the Tennessee Valley Authority, I think they're putting six small modular reactors in. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has gave Nuscale the ability to go up to 77 megawatts, so they're gonna try to get up to around, I think, six gigawatts of power going at the TVA.

50. 0:29:02

    So again, these are the future. I think we need to be ahead of the game as they're coming in onto play. Probably commercial production probably will not be until 2040, which may sounds like a long way a- away, but it will be here before we know it. Hopefully, I'm still not here at that time, but, uh, hopefully, that can be dealt with at that point. So, you know, if there's any questions about this, be more happy to answer 'em, answer those questions from the committee. So that is...

51. 0:29:30

    I recognize Senator Ginn, uh, for a question.

52. 0:29:34

    Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The, uh, uh, Senator, uh, I look at this, and I, I love urging the PSC to do something, but y- you know, I came out of the electric utility business. I'm the product of two Georgia Power employees a long time ago. The, uh, uh, what would you think about, uh, the, uh, us doing a Senate study committee on these, these, uh, power sources?

53. 0:29:57

    You know, uh-

54. 0:29:58

    The fine print of your bill-

55. 0:29:59

    Yeah

56. 0:29:59

    ... does ask the PSC to create a study committee rather than the-

57. 0:30:02

    Hey, I like to throw a curveball occasionally.

58. 0:30:03

    Yeah. That was it.

59. 0:30:03

    That way everyone's awake. But, uh-

60. 0:30:05

    You get our attention

61. 0:30:05

    ... but no, it's one of those where talking to Chairman Shaw, if we move forward for the vote, I would like to see it change a little bit, 'cause, um, we would like to add, I don't even like to use the term regular nuclear, but what we're doing, using the nuclear now instead of the advanced models and the small modulars, but that still be part of it. And also think our energy companies, the EMC, Georgia Power, Oglethorpe, um, those individuals should be part of this as well. But yeah, I was 100% with you.

62. 0:30:34

    I, I, uh, having, having been a, a engineer with Jackson EMC and Georgia Power, I, I got a little bit of insight. I, I'd love to be helping you on that.

63. 0:30:43

    Love to have all the help I can get.

64. 0:30:46

    Well, other questions? I, you, you caught my attention with it, because I had read... I mean, how does an ex-policeman learn about, uh, small nuclear reactors? What in the world got your attention to this futuristic, uh, solution to power needs?

65. 0:31:00

    Well, the answer is pretty simple: data centers.

66. 0:31:03

    Okay.

67. 0:31:03

    They're coming to my area, and I knew I had to do a deep dive to learn about data centers and what they're doing and what's the progression of those. And that's a unique, uh, technology too. That is changing on a daily basis. When you look at data centers, we have what is the learning modules, which is mainly NVIDIA. It trains the models. Now we are going into a, uh, world of what is considered inference. So when you go to Grok or ChatGPT, you ask a question, it gives you an answer. That's inference. That's gonna be the piece that's gonna be driving the data centers. And the interesting thing about that is those companies that are involved in the inference piece of data center stacks, they are using about 60%, at least 60% to 80% less electricity, and they use no water.

68. 0:31:46

    So when you look at something about, say, national security issue, like the data centers that's been brought up by this administration, um, seeing things and the technology change at that speed to address some of the issues on the energy side- And the water side being a finite, finite resource, uh, we need to make sure we're doing everything we can to get that knowledge and make sure we represent our folks properly.

69. 0:32:08

    How big are these little small nuclear reactors? I mean, that, we all think of the gigantic water, you know, cooling towers, you know, at Plant Vogel and that kind of thing.

70. 0:32:19

    Yeah.

71. 0:32:19

    Are these compact enough to fit inside a warehouse or on the property or...?

72. 0:32:23

    Uh, yeah, 'cause they can, uh, be put on, like, a 30 acre footprint, so much smaller. Um, as the, the technology that's changing so quickly with these, uh, even using different type of cooling substances from everything from sodium to, um, uh, there was one other one that was pre- hydrogen type stuff that was being used for cooling.

73. 0:32:42

    Yeah.

74. 0:32:42

    So it's, um, that's a... Between the SMRs, the data centers, which I think are both driving each other, and I think the data centers really drove the SMR production. Um, but with that technology, we're seeing things that we never thought we'd see before, especially in this, uh, arena.

75. 0:33:01

    Are they dangerous? I mean, for, as far as radiation or leaks, et cetera?

76. 0:33:06

    Uh, from everything that we have studied on those and looked at, they're safer than what we currently have. Um, plus we've have, uh, nul- nuclear reactors on some of our ships right there-

77. 0:33:16

    Mm-hmm

78. 0:33:16

    ... already in the, uh, in the seas sailing right now. That can go 20 years, so.

79. 0:33:21

    Do you know whether we have any statutory limitations on the use of these currently? I mean, or if, if one of these new data centers wants to pop one in there, could they? Or do we have to approve that or PSC?

80. 0:33:34

    I think at w- at some point you'll probably see where they can purchase, but it's gonna have to stay under the regulation of the PSC power companies and the safety a- and everything involved on those guardrails to make sure that it's being done properly. So I don't-

81. 0:33:50

    Yeah

82. 0:33:50

    ... ever see it just being bought and ran by an en- an entity, an entity. Uh, very few entities probably could afford it, so you're probably talking about your Googles and your Amazons that might be able to pull that off. But, uh, yeah, I could see them, uh, sitting really close to data centers or areas of large manufacturing.

83. 0:34:08

    Okay. Um, just a couple other questions and then I'm gonna let a couple other people speak. Um, this is an urging res- resolution for the PSC to, to study these type of small nuclear reactors for the purpose of making recommendations to the State Senate, um, later about using these for, you know, economic development or data centers or whatever. Would you want the EMCs involved as well?

84. 0:34:39

    Yeah, that's one of the things we liked to do is bring the power companies in, including our EMCs, to the, uh, to the resolution. I said if y'all decide that that's something we would like to move forward on, I would work with the legislative council to get a substitute draft to this, uh, resolution, or if we want to amend it here-

85. 0:34:53

    Yeah

86. 0:34:53

    ... or however we're going to do it.

87. 0:34:55

    Yeah. Let's, let's consider doing that because of the vast areas of the state that they provide power for, and the fact that it seems to me like a lot of the data centers are now gravitating towards rural areas, um-

88. 0:35:10

    Yeah

89. 0:35:10

    ... and that are most often served by EMCs. Consider doing that. And, uh, um, I'm very interested in, in this. I think it- it's gonna, there's gonna be a lot of solutions for power for these-

90. 0:35:23

    Yeah

91. 0:35:23

    ... data centers, and this is certainly one that other places are considering. Um, w- I got a question from Senator Albers. Uh, Senator, you're recognized.

92. 0:35:32

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, thank you, Chairman Bearden. I... This is excellent. I love what you're doing here. It's something we need to focus on, and, and I'd love to see, um, us, uh, go past Texas. If you're gonna make some changes, it might behoove us to add two things to that, which is as they're continuing to, uh, hone in on the use of fusion power, uh, that is gonna change the power game quite a bit as well. And the timing could be, um, coming together similarly, and we wanna make sure our investments are there. As well as, uh, radioactive decay batteries, which is something that's really been evolving in the last year or so, which is, uh, these are huge, um, batteries that can power everything from businesses to houses to cars, and have a half-life of 10 or 20 years that never need to be charged.

93. 0:36:16

    Uh, and as they figure that technology out and make it safe enough, I think that's another major, uh, shift. So just something. If they're, they're gonna get this great elite group together, I see those as the three large potential power solutions in the future, if you would consider that.

94. 0:36:30

    Okay. Sounds good.

95. 0:36:32

    Thank you.

96. 0:36:33

    And I- I'm gonna chime in, too, and if anybody else has suggestions, get with, with, uh, Chairman Bearden and let him know. Um, I think it might be interesting to have a Senate member and a House member on this, uh, study group, whatever you're calling it, you know, to, to let- lets us-

97. 0:36:50

    Could be you

98. 0:36:50

    ... be involved in the initial, you know, considerations of this, because I think there are probably a whole bunch of, uh, regulatory issues that we need to look at.

99. 0:37:02

    Okay.

100. 0:37:02

     All right. Uh, thank you, and I would now call Mr. Mark Woodall from the Sierra Club to give us his views.

101. 0:37:17

     Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. Uh, my name is Mark Woodall. I'm still the legislative chair of Sierra Club, nation's oldest and largest environmental group, representing our three million members, uh, and supporters across the country. Uh, appreciate your time. Uh, uh, we oppose this resolution for... I'll just give you the top four or five reasons to move along. Uh, as you've observed, uh, nobody... I've been asking around. Nobody can ever remember urging the PSC to do something. So I believe if, uh, Chairman Cowsert or Chairman Don Parsons call over to Chairman Shaw, since y'all control their budget, I believe y'all can get this done.

102. 0:37:56

     So we, we don't really understand this exercise. Second, I believe our, uh, theme this year at the legislature is affordability and consumer protection. And, uh, nuclear is not the way to go. As you may recall, uh, Vogel three and four was supposed to cost $14 million. Wound up costing over $35 billion. And it fell heaviest to start with on the residentials. Uh, some of you were here in 2009 when, uh, Senate Bill 31 passed, nuclear construction work in progress. And, uh, the way that got passed was we thought everybody in the building was opposing what Georgia Power wanted to do 'cause it would hurt their bills.

103. 0:38:32

     Uh, but the industrials led by, uh, Roy Bowen agreed to, uh, drop their opposition if they got mostly exempted from the, uh, the tariff, the construction work in progress tariff. So the final total for the tariff was the residentials, over $2 billion, 48% of the tariff. The commercial was 1.6 billion, 39%, and the industrials, 11%, 476 million. So, uh, the residentials got stuck, and we're afraid they're getting stuck with the, uh, 10,000 megawatts that the Geo- Georgia Power just got approved over there at PSC for data centers.

104. 0:39:10

     So, uh, this is not gonna help affordability. And, uh, the other thing is we got a study here that showed that the capital cost per kilowatt hour is, uh, 41% higher for the SMRs and for the AP1000s. And in, uh, 2002 a study showed that the, uh, SMRs increased the volume of waste in need of, uh, management two to 30 times more than the big nukes. So, uh, I think, uh, we may agree with, uh, Southern Company and Georgia Power.

105. 0:39:41

     They seem to think that we ought to let TVA lead the way. As, uh, I think was mentioned, they've already applied for a permit to build a few SMRs.

106. 0:39:49

     You know, I always thought of the Sierra Club being concerned about global warming and carbon emissions, and nuclear power's clean and doesn't increase the temperature of the earth. Uh, uh, is your only concern about it the cost, or are you worried about any environmental damage?

107. 0:40:08

     Well, both. I went back and read the policy 'cause it's changed over the years. And actually, we don't oppose any nu- any, any new nukes if the safety issue can be addressed. Nobody seems to wanna hang around for 10,000 years and guard this stuff. And also nuclear proliferation 'cause as you've noticed, uh, we got a lot of trouble around the world with the nukes and, uh, conflicts. So those are the two things we wanted to solve. And the other thing is the speed. Uh, I mean, it was mentioned, it'd be, probably be 2040. I mean, uh, if we wanna do something about climate change, we need to be doing clean energy now.

108. 0:40:41

     So yeah, this is, if you wanna power a data center, this is the slowest possible way to go.

109. 0:40:46

     Fine. And you're worried about the cost 'cause you believe that it's gonna be built into power rates. What, I mean, the, the model here as I understand it is that if I am Microsoft or Amazon or Meta and I wanna build a data center, that I can contract to provide my own power. I mean, that's the beauty of these as I understand them, is that they're not, they don't have to be hooked up to the grid. You know, so it would be the sole expense of the center's builder.

110. 0:41:17

     Am I missing something on there? Um-

111. 0:41:19

     I don't think that's legal in Georgia, is it? From a territorial-

112. 0:41:22

     Well, that's why we wanna study it. That's the point, is to figure out this future technology, if there's a way to utilize it that is beneficial for society, or are we gonna sit back here and, y- you know, with the Stone Age Flintstones cars?

113. 0:41:37

     Well, you know, Georgia Power built the first AP1000. It's bankrupting Westinghouse and almost bankrupted Toshiba. So I think, uh, I think a lot of people would l- just like to see TVA try it out and see how that goes.

114. 0:41:49

     Okay. Any other committee members have questions? Senator Albers, you're recognized.

115. 0:41:53

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, just following up, I was very surprised you would be against this, um, especially for studying it, you know? I mean, isn't it true that, you know, many years ago I bought my first flat screen TV for $12,000? And it was 40 inches, and the last one I just got was 85 inches, was 500 bucks. So technology continues to evolve and drive prices and manufacturing down, and that could certainly apply to this as well.

116. 0:42:18

     It does not seem to apply to the nuclear industry.

117. 0:42:21

     Is that-

118. 0:42:21

     And you know, we have some funny incentives here. I mean, uh, as we saw with Vogel three and four, the more money Georgia Power can put in the rate base, the more they get off the, you know, 11 or 12%, uh, profit. So the worse they did as far as overruns, the more money they make, so.

119. 0:42:35

     Well, I, I agree with you there, and that's a whole nother topic altogether. But in lieu of us building a new nuclear reactor in 30 years in our country, studying something to see how innovation could help it get there and be a potential solution or not, why would you ever be against that?

120. 0:42:50

     Well-

121. 0:42:50

     I'm baffled by that. I think you're losing some credibility because of it.

122. 0:42:54

     Well, we have, uh, credibility problems with some people anyway, I guess. I don't know. Uh-

123. 0:42:59

     That's, that's a fair point.

124. 0:43:00

     Yeah. Uh, but I just, uh, the, uh, investor-owned utilities like Southern Company, from listening to Chris Womack, I mean, uh, after those AP1000s, they, I think they wanna let the TVA or one of these government operations, uh, take the lead.

125. 0:43:15

     Yeah.

126. 0:43:16

     It'll be the safe way to go.

127. 0:43:17

     Oh.

128. 0:43:18

     You know, we're conservative in some things.

129. 0:43:19

     Other questions from the committee members?

130. 0:43:21

     I look forward to hearing that one.

131. 0:43:24

     Thank you, Mr. Woodall. We always appreciate your viewpoint and insights. Mr. James Williams, IBEW.

132. 0:43:36

     Uh, good afternoon, everyone. I wanna thank the chair and the committee for allowing me to testify today. Um, I am James Williams. I am the secretary treasurer of the Georgia AFL-CIO, but more importantly today, I'm an electrical worker, uh, union electrical worker member. Um, I've worked in four different nuclear power plants, uh, across the country, both boiling water and pressure steam reactors, um, in various capacities, including as an electrical field engineer at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant when they were finishing that up in 2012. Um- We are in support of this study committee.

133. 0:44:09

     Um, we know that, uh, the current technology, Gen IV reactors, are out there, whether it's using sodium, liquid lead, heavy water, um, various aspects of that. And then also the modular reactor technology that, that is coming out, um, is something that, um, we are all for. Uh, currently right now, the only Gen IV reactor in the United States that is active is at, uh, Oak Ridge Laboratories. It's a ste- it's a test study on a sodium reactor. Um, and yes, the TVA is doing a good job of trying to bring the new technology into the United States, and I think Georgia, um, needs to, uh, step on that bandwagon as well.

134. 0:44:49

     Uh, one of the reasons why, and I'll address the Vogtle cost overages, the... Prior to Vogtle 3 and 4, the last construction of a new reactor was in the 1970s. So everyone that worked on those reactors through the '60s and '70s either retired or have passed away. So part of the cost overruns at Vogtle was training the new workforce to build these reactors. And we now, in Georgia, after Vogtle 3 and 4, have a trained, educated workforce to build and implement these small modular reactors.

135. 0:45:21

     So we're, we're, we're poised and ready to go, uh, for this technology. Um, so with that, and again, um, I've worked in multiple nuclear reactors. I've gone through safety. If we wanna do a deep dive on different reactor technology and the safety and the storage of nuclear waste, um, we can go until we come back to session again on Monday if you want to on that, uh, stuff. Um-

136. 0:45:45

     Appreciate that offer, but I think we'll pass.

137. 0:45:48

     N- not a problem on that. But yeah, as, uh, f- for the IBEW and for, um, the trade building, uh, the trained, skilled building trades members in this state, uh, we're absolutely for this study. And we think it'd be great that, uh, Georgia can be, uh, the vanguard of this technology, uh, in private sector 'cause TVA is, uh, half government, half private r- regulated. And also, uh, for concerns about, um, reactors, anything in the United States that has fissile material in it is regulated by the Atomic Energy Commission and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

138. 0:46:23

     So any of these plants would have to satisfy their regulations and their needs before they could be built or constructed, and even after the fact, they would have to have the checks and balances on that. But we need a diverse energy grid in Georgia. We need diverse power generation in Georgia, so this is another way for us to expand and, um, make a better and more efficient power grid in Georgia, so.

139. 0:46:45

     Do you have any information on the cost of these?

140. 0:46:48

     I do not, because again, um, TVA has the permits for it. Um-

141. 0:46:53

     You're talking about Tennessee Valley Authority?

142. 0:46:55

     Yeah, sorry, sorry.

143. 0:46:56

     Okay.

144. 0:46:56

     Tennessee Valley Authority has the permits for it, and Oak Ridge Laboratories, it's just, it's, it's an experimental model for sodium. Um, so until one is actually built, uh, we won't know the total cost of what it's gonna take. But the concerns about cost overruns from Vogtle 3 and 4 can be nullified by the fact that we now have a trained, skilled workforce to build and construct and implement these reactors in Georgia.

145. 0:47:22

     Okay. When I hear the term modular, I got in my head something much smaller than those giant nuclear reactors.

146. 0:47:29

     Y- yeah, I'd, I like to say instead of thinking of, like, Plant Vogtle, think of more of, like, a nuclear submarine or-

147. 0:47:34

     Okay

148. 0:47:35

     ... a battleship or something like that. These are much smaller, um, reactors, much more containable. 30 acres as opposed to a few thousand acres, uh, for the site. And if they utilize, uh, Gen IV technology, there's much less waste. You can actually, uh, depending on the technology, you can recycle the spent fuel that we have at other sites in these sites. So it'll actually reduce our, our nuclear waste across the country 'cause we could utilize that nuclear waste in these modular reactors.

149. 0:48:06

     Do you know when the, uh, Three Mile Island meltdown or whatever, that, uh, occurred?

150. 0:48:11

     That was 1979.

151. 0:48:13

     Have we had any type of, uh, you know, adverse events at any of our nuclear power plants since '79 that you know of?

152. 0:48:20

     We have not, and-

153. 0:48:23

     When was Chernobyl?

154. 0:48:24

     Uh, Chernobyl was in the '80s, and that was a completely different reactor system and a completely different setup, and they basically ignored every safety procedure that they could possibly have in order for that event to happen. Anytime there is an incident, and I'm talking like Fukushima, uh, Three Mile Island, anytime there's an incident at any reactor in the world, the NRC does an analysis of the American fleet, that's what they call plants as fleets here, um, and they do upgrades. I actually worked on the Fukushima upgrade at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant.

155. 0:48:58

     Uh, I have colleagues that I've, older colleagues that I've worked with before that were on the Three Mile Island project where they upgraded, um, the fleet in the United States to make sure that something like Three Mile Island couldn't happen. And a little fact about Three Mile Island, uh, if you had a peanut butter sandwich with a banana and got a sunburn, you got more radiation than anyone around the Three Mile Island site from that release.

156. 0:49:20

     I'm only asking 'cause those are the big name events.

157. 0:49:23

     Yes.

158. 0:49:24

     And I think that chilled the advancement of nuclear power because of the fears, uh, you know, really for several decades.

159. 0:49:33

     Mm-hmm.

160. 0:49:33

     You know, I, I, I don't know that cost was the main deterrent from us expanding nuclear power, but it seemed like we kinda got a little more scared of, of it and, uh-

161. 0:49:45

     Mi-

162. 0:49:45

     ... that, that might just be my casual reading, but anyway.

163. 0:49:48

     To be frank-

164. 0:49:49

     Yeah

165. 0:49:49

     ... um, I don't know if you recall a movie called the, uh, China Syndrome. Um, that was part of it. Um, yes, Three Mile Island basically shut down. Uh, I worked on Watts Bar Unit 2, which was 75% complete in 1980, and then they just stopped it. Uh, same thing with Bellefonte Nuclear Site in Tennessee or Alabama. Um, they stopped all construction in the '80s because of Three Mile Island. Um- And that, and that was why. So when they decided to finish Watts Bar in or the early two, early to mid-2000s, and it went online, I believe, in 2012, um, it was already a shell.

166. 0:50:29

     It was already 75% complete, so that's why it was able to be done. And, and Vogel Three and Four are the first two ground-up reactors that have been built in the United States since the 1970s. And, um, like I said before, any incident that happens in the world, big or small, the NRC, um, even, I can go into seeing pictures of a wire brush, a f- a flake of a ri- wire brush being in the turbine, um, because somebody didn't do proper procedures, and they analyze the entire fleet and implement policies to change to where something like as small as that would not happen.

167. 0:51:05

     So our, our fleet hasn't been stagnant since the 1980s. They've been continuously doing upgrades and improvements, and anytime anything happens around the world, they do an analysis of the US fleet to find out which reactors may fall purview to this or might, might fall under those conditions, and they design and implement changes to those and then upgrade those facilities to where something like even a Fukushima could not happen in the United States. So it's, it's a very safe industry.

168. 0:51:33

     Thank you. Any committee members have questions? Senator Ginn, you're recognized for a question.

169. 0:51:37

     No. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure if I have a question or not, but one thing-

170. 0:51:40

     All right.

171. 0:51:41

     I wanna make sure-

172. 0:51:41

     Well, let me know if you do, and I'll recognize you.

173. 0:51:43

     Yeah. Let me, let me make sure that, that I, I got this right, but the only time that we've had, uh, rolling blackouts in Georgia, uh, and you, you can say what you want to about my friends at Georgia Power and MEAG and Oglethorpe Power, but the only time we had any blackouts here in Georgia was three years ago. TVA fumbled, and, and, uh, the, we had some, uh, EMCs that were served by TVA-

174. 0:52:08

     Mm-hmm

175. 0:52:08

     ... that, that, uh, uh, had, had experienced it, uh, blackouts in Georgia, and I think that was three years ago, if I'm not mistaken.

176. 0:52:17

     That sounds about right. Um, it was the summer about three years ago, and-

177. 0:52:20

     Act- actually, it was right before Christmas.

178. 0:52:22

     Oh.

179. 0:52:22

     The, uh, cold snap that came in, said the, uh... I don't know.

180. 0:52:26

     There was another incident with, uh, both TVA that affected Georgia Power around that time period, but it was in the summertime when everyone was using their air conditioners to where, um, Georgia Power was at, um, running at 98% capacity. They actually had to turn up the turbines in Georgia to generate the power, otherwise we would've had a rolling blackout incident in the state of Georgia as well.

181. 0:52:48

     All right.

182. 0:52:49

     Because if TVA... Whenever part of the grid falls out, the other part of the grid has to step up and try to over generate to, to compensate for that, and it puts a burden on the, on the entire system.

183. 0:53:01

     Okay. I'm gonna invite you, if you have any documents or research materials or just articles that, elucidating us on this whole new field, to provide them to me-

184. 0:53:13

     Okay

185. 0:53:14

     ... and I'll present them to the committee. Same thing with you, Senator Bearden, 'cause I think you've done more research than most in the room on this issue. And, and Mar- Mr. Woodall, if you're still here, if you got something, we'll accumulate that. If anybody that has suggested changes to this current Senate Resolution 482 would present them, uh, to me or to Senator Bearden, who will give them to me, we'll probably do a committee sub and take this under consideration at a future meeting in the next week or two. All right, uh-

186. 0:53:45

     Thank you

187. 0:53:45

     ... we'll move on. Thank you so much for being with us.

188. 0:53:47

     Yeah.

189. 0:53:47

     We'll move on to our last, uh, issue on the agenda, and that's House Bill 232. As I mentioned, we've been asked not to, um, act on it today, but I'm particularly interested. Uh, I think it, it... Is it Mai-Lin that you came from so far?

190. 0:54:05

     Yeah.

191. 0:54:05

     Would you like to be heard today, or you wanna wait until we bring this up? It will be more than likely after crossover day, which is, uh, sometime March 3rd, something, somewhere around, somewhere around in there, I think.

192. 0:54:19

     I can be there.

193. 0:54:19

     Okay. I did, I knew you had traveled today, so if you wanna give us your views on it, uh, introduce yourself, tell us who you're with and, and what your thoughts are.

194. 0:54:33

     Uh, thank you, Mr., uh, Mr. Chairman. Um, my name is Mai-Lin Petrine. I am the Director of Legal and Regulatory Affairs for the Federation of State Massage Therapy Boards. Uh, it's also known as FSMTB. FSMTB is a nonprofit association of all of the state regulatory boards that license, um, and credential massage therapists. We are here, or we're here to testify in support of House Bill 232.

195. 0:55:04

     Um, this is the same bill that you considered last year. Uh, it has two parts: an hours increase and the Interstate Massage Therapy Compact to create a multi-state license for portability, uh, for massage therapists.

196. 0:55:18

     Okay.

197. 0:55:18

     There's only two changes-

198. 0:55:19

     Of course

199. 0:55:20

     ... to the language, um, and that is the effective dates, obviously, um, changing them for, uh, this legislative session. We believe that you should pass this legislation with no amendments. Um, as the chair referenced earlier, uh, there has been some delays or attempts to delay, uh, the hearing today as well as, um, uh, propose some amendments to the language. FSMTB strongly opposes those amendments. Um, we believe they threaten public safety and protection, which is the primary purpose of massage therapy regulation.

200. 0:55:53

     Um, making any amendments to the language, as you know, a compact is a contract between states, and every state must pass the same exact language, otherwise it's not a contract. Five states have already adopted the language, and we have seven more states in the hopper to pass it. The commission will be stood up, um, hopefully at the end of this legislative session. We would like Georgia to be on that compact commission, one of the original founding members. We think that the Georgia Board of Massage Therapy is- One of the model, I would say, um, agencies.

201. 0:56:27

     I see a lot of poorly run massage therapy regulatory boards across the country. Uh, in fact, the Georgia board considered the proposed amendments at its meeting last December and rejected them for the... because it threatens public safety. You may have received-

202. 0:56:43

     Are these amendments to the compact we're talking about?

203. 0:56:45

     Pardon me?

204. 0:56:46

     Are these amendments to the compact?

205. 0:56:48

     Yes.

206. 0:56:48

     So it hadn't been adopted by any states yet.

207. 0:56:51

     No, it's been adopted by five states.

208. 0:56:53

     By five, okay, and they're already talking about changing it?

209. 0:56:56

     They is AMTA, yes.

210. 0:56:58

     Okay. Can anybody other than the five states that are already members of the compact make changes to it?

211. 0:57:06

     No, not yet.

212. 0:57:07

     Do they have to be agreed upon by all five states?

213. 0:57:09

     Correct, and hopefully all of the seven more that will be joining the, the compact.

214. 0:57:14

     So what you're saying, if, if those amendments are adopted, you no longer want Georgia to be a member of the compact?

215. 0:57:22

     Correct.

216. 0:57:23

     Okay. Do you want them to be a member of the compact with the language as it's currently been drafted?

217. 0:57:29

     Yes.

218. 0:57:29

     Okay.

219. 0:57:31

     Um, th- that language that is in the current bill, 232, was developed via a very robust process over 18 months involving broad stakeholder const- and constituent, um, input, regulators, educators, professionals, and, um,

220. 0:57:53

     individuals were, um... had a three-month public comment period, and we received over 5,000 comments, most of which were incorporated in the final language. Um, as you know, a compact is supposed to be evergreen because you cannot have 47 different states with different language, and if you wanna make a change, you have to get all 47 legislatures to make that change. So it's a very big lift. Um, the stakeholder process referenced in the letter that was received today from the Department of Defense or the Department of War, uh, their process took six days, was only surveying AMTA members, not the other trade association that exists in massage therapy.

221. 0:58:35

     There's about half of the therapists that belong to one trade association, and the other half belong to AMTA. No regulatory board input, no educator input, and no massage school input was, um, solicited. Our opinion is that the attempt to make amendments is a, is an attempt to reach quotas at the sacrifice of quality and integrity in the licensure process and standards. Anybody have any questions? And I'm available to come back at any point, um, to answer any questions or provide you information.

222. 0:59:09

     Okay. So there are two parts to the bill. Did you have any problems with the first part?

223. 0:59:14

     No.

224. 0:59:14

     Okay, just the compact language you're worried about.

225. 0:59:16

     Right.

226. 0:59:17

     Okay.

227. 0:59:17

     We support the other part as well.

228. 0:59:19

     All right. Senator Dolezal, you're recognized for a question.

229. 0:59:22

     Thank you, Chairman. Uh, thank you for being here. You and I had the opportunity to talk in the hallway today. Thank you for doing the work on the bill. Uh, I, I did have a question. Uh, y- a- and I told you this in the hallway. I like compacts 'cause I think they lower the barrier to work. Uh, I don't like increasing licensure requirements because I think they increase the barrier to work. Is, is the main impetus, I think it's y'all l- looking to move from 500 to 650 hours, is that right?

230. 0:59:48

     It's 625.

231. 0:59:49

     625. Is the main desire for that to essentially come in line with this compact?

232. 0:59:53

     No, the compact language was actually drafted and didn't require any state to have a minimum number of hours. Because the minimum number of hours of education varies across the country from between 500 to 1,000, there would never be a way we'd, could all agree on one number that would satisfy everybody. So the state does not have to increase its hours. However, increasing the hours gets you over the 600-hour threshold for your, for those students to be eligible for Pell Grants and federal financial aid, and that increases access to education, particularly in a, a occupation, um, that doesn't require an associate's degree or a bachelor's degree.

233. 1:00:29

     Thank you. Chair, can I ask a follow-up?

234. 1:00:31

     Yeah. Go right ahead.

235. 1:00:33

     So I've seen a lot in my eight years in the Senate. I've never seen the Department of War weigh in on anything, and if I had to guess what they weigh in, I w- I would not have guessed it was massage therapy.

236. 1:00:41

     We received this letter today. It's in our folders.

237. 1:00:44

     Help us understand what's going on, and, and maybe not in talking point terms, but what's the... Give us the backstory on what's happening here.

238. 1:00:53

     Why does the Department of War care about massage therapy?

239. 1:00:56

     So the, the original language was, um, created by a grant funded by the Department of Defense as part of an, its, its effort to increase portability of licenses for military members and their spouses. Um, when they move from, you know, state to state, it takes, it takes in some cases, and I think this is an extreme, you know, six to nine months to get a license, even if you're transferring a good license. And so this multi-state privilege was enacted to be able to, for them to work right away.

240. 1:01:27

     Um, th-

241. 1:01:27

     So if you're a member of the compact, you can go to any other state with a compact and not get re-licensed.

242. 1:01:32

     Correct.

243. 1:01:32

     Okay.

244. 1:01:33

     What's in here that they don't like specifically?

245. 1:01:38

     They don't, they didn't like the fact that we could not get to seven states at last legislative session. It's a p- they have been set to pass a certain number of licensing combacks, compacts to meet a quota, and because of CSG's, um, and AMTA's opposition during the last legislative session, we couldn't get to our seven states. We have seven more in addition to Georgia on deck. We will reach that this year. Their effort to undermine and amend the language, it's actually counterproductive to their effort to get the compact stood up because every state that's already passed it will have to amend it as well, and you're gonna go backwards, and you're abandoning those five states and the legislatures that have done the hard work, um, to pass that law.

246. 1:02:26

     So I'm, I'm just trying to get to like what they're actually asking to be changed. It looks like license exa- exam eligibility, recognition of therapists who passed the NCBTMB exam prior to twen- uh, 2015 is one thing that they want. Are... Is, is this list of things I'm seeing here essentially the, what y'all are fighting over?

247. 1:02:43

     That's some of them. Our... Okay, I'm gonna start to nerd out on regulation, um, just because I'm a lawyer, but I'm not licensed in Georgia, so don't come after me for that. I'm not giving you any legal advice. Um, compacts are meant to be evergreen, and CSG's advice to us when we were developing the c- the, the compact language with them and their legal team was, "Don't put specifics, too many specifics in the statute because you're gonna get into fights at every state about which exam is good and which exam that state accepts, which ones they don't accept." And so we were leaving it up to the commission to draft rules based on the input from all of the states, 'cause the commission is comprised of all of the states, as what exams would be accepted.

248. 1:03:22

     Putting those two exams, listing them by name limits it, 'cause now there are states that have, one, state exams, and they have... and the language that's proposed prohibits the commission from considering state examinations. So now Hawaii, New York, um, California cannot be... Those exams can't be used to satisfy the multi-state licensure requirements.

249. 1:03:45

     So you're, you're with the trade associations, not AMTA, is that correct?

250. 1:03:48

     I'm with the regulatory boards.

251. 1:03:50

     Okay. So essentially this is a somewhat of a fight, if you will, between whoever AMTA is and the regulatory board and the, the Department of Health.

252. 1:03:57

     The trade and the regulator, yes.

253. 1:03:59

     Got it. Okay.

254. 1:03:59

     The trade and the government, yeah.

255. 1:04:01

     Got it. Thank you.

256. 1:04:03

     So by, by joining in a compact, the states are basically giving up their sovereignty over the licensing and, and control of whatever professions are joining these compacts. We're seeing a recurring theme in this committee of different professions that want us to join a compact, and that's what frustrates you, is you're then at the whims of states around the country in a compact instead of our legislature.

257. 1:04:31

     I actually think it's-

258. 1:04:32

     And you, you might get upset and mad like you're already kinda getting a little angry right now what the Department of War is trying to do to you, you know?

259. 1:04:37

     I actually think it's a, the highest exercise of state sovereignty, 'cause you are deciding to enter a contract with other states. You're not being relegated to the federal government coming in under the guise of interstate commerce and taking over the licensing process. Um, it- it's with the... Licensing is with- within the state's police power to protect the health, safety, and welfare, right-

260. 1:05:00

     Yeah

261. 1:05:00

     ... of its citizens. And this is your way of exercising your sovereignty by agreeing with these other states that this is how we're gonna do the multi-state license. It doesn't take any sovereignty away from your ability to license massage therapists in Georgia. It's an extra license. It's not a replacement. So you still can regulate massage therapists in Georgia. You actually then have, um, the power of the entire compact states to identify discipline and bad actors when they go to other places or when they come into your state.

262. 1:05:35

     But you have to accept them if they're in another compact regulated state.

263. 1:05:40

     Yes.

264. 1:05:41

     Okay.

265. 1:05:41

     But you've agreed as part of the Compact Commission, 'cause each state gets a vote on the Compact Commission to decide what the rules of the game are going to be.

266. 1:05:50

     Okay. Senator Williams, uh, you're recognized for a question.

267. 1:05:53

     Thank you. Uh, are you licensed in Georgia through the professional licensing boards through the secretary of state?

268. 1:06:00

     As an attorney?

269. 1:06:01

     No.

270. 1:06:02

     Oh.

271. 1:06:03

     The massage therapist.

272. 1:06:04

     The massage therapist, yes. Mm-hmm.

273. 1:06:06

     Okay. How often does your board meet in Georgia? Do you know?

274. 1:06:10

     The Georgia board, I believe they meet every month.

275. 1:06:13

     Once a month. Are they meeting in person or aren't they just still meeting online? They're not, uh, meeting in person, are they?

276. 1:06:21

     I don't know the answer to that question. I think it's both and, and it rotates, but...

277. 1:06:26

     Okay. What is the continuing education requirements of massage therapist in, in Georgia?

278. 1:06:33

     In Georgia, I don't know the answer to that question. I'm gonna guess it's 24 hours every two years. That's the most common one across the country.

279. 1:06:42

     Okay. Thank you.

280. 1:06:43

     All right. Well, thank you for being with us. I knew you'd... making quite the effort, and we feel like this will shorten greatly, we hope, any further meetings if we consider this bill at a later point.

281. 1:06:53

     Thank you.

282. 1:06:54

     Mr. Jones, you are signed up. You might solve the mystery of what AMTA stands for and give us their position, or you may waive, whatever, uh, you prefer.

283. 1:07:09

     I'm Stan Jones. I'm s- now with Goldome Partners as our lobbying group left the law firm and set up a boutique when we added Wade Eskew. We've represented the Am- American Massage Therapy Association, Georgia chapter, for about 10 years. It is the group of the actual providers, uh, of massage therapy who are the licensees, if you will, and not the licensing boards. Um, the, the questions that have arisen in 2025, and, uh, the American Massage Therapy Association did go to the Department of War and say, "We, we would like to have some revisions to the compact." They were...

284. 1:07:47

     That was generally primarily because the states do have some variation among the, uh, out- continuing education hours, among the hours required for the full license. Georgia was actually below the standard of the compact. So we asked for changes so that more Georgia therapists could participate in it, and also that people in our surrounding states could come here and, and, and essentially increase the workforce. Uh, we strongly prefer the, uh, amended version of the compact.

285. 1:08:18

     We would offer those amendments to the committee as we move forward. Appreciate you're willing to listen to some additional considerations. Uh, they really originated f- From the, the, because they're older therapists who don't have all the standards that we're at least stated in the compact, uh, that Georgia will retain its control over its own standards, but to get the multi-state license, some of our therapists were not, didn't have the right exams or the right number of hours of training to, to do that.

286. 1:08:48

     That's why we're here and have raised these issues. Thank you.

287. 1:08:54

     Okay. Senator Williams, you want to ask that licensing question to a licensee representative?

288. 1:09:00

     Yes, sir. Thank you. Uh, back to my questions on how many, uh, continuing CEUs is required in Georgia for-

289. 1:09:08

     I, I don't know that. I know the number of hours for the initial license were 500, versus the standard in the compact was 625. It can be changed by the compact, by the, uh, Interstate Compact Commission. We'd rather get that set in, in advance. Essentially, we thought some issues re- would keep Georgia people from using it, and also that we needed to grandfather what the actual, you know, panoply of exams is so that the older folks weren't just-

290. 1:09:35

     Do you-

291. 1:09:35

     But I- I'll get that to you-

292. 1:09:37

     Okay

293. 1:09:37

     ... Senator, but I don't know-

294. 1:09:38

     If I could follow up.

295. 1:09:40

     Sure.

296. 1:09:40

     Um, now, when they, massage therapists, when they reach the age of 65, then they get exempt from CEUs?

297. 1:09:51

     I know that's true for lawyers, which I greatly appreciate, but, um, I don't know the answer to that.

298. 1:09:55

     Okay.

299. 1:09:55

     And I will get that for you.

300. 1:09:57

     Okay. I just have, uh, in the professional licensing boards in Georgia, I just know there's a bu- bureaucracy of getting licensed in Georgia. Um, and this is something that I've been very interested in. I'd like to know more about what's required.

301. 1:10:16

     I think we'd all like to speed that up, particularly because of the intense concern about healthcare workforce in particular, and sort of the, the skills of our, all of our citizens would, of other types of licenses also.

302. 1:10:29

     Right. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

303. 1:10:32

     Uh, President Pro Tem Walker, you're recognized for a question.

304. 1:10:37

     Hey, Stan. Uh, thank you for being with us. So increasing the number of education hours required for massage therapists from 500 to 625 hours, is that gonna make the Georgia public safer-

305. 1:10:55

     Well-

306. 1:10:55

     ... or-

307. 1:10:55

     It will make the pu- public safer, and that's, and the, the association supports that change. So there was a separate bill, uh, also that, you know, is, I think it's over in the House right now, and we would like to see that happen. But the, the problem was that there was a lo- 20 or 30, I think it was 20 states were below the 625 standard in the, in the original compact, uh, and Georgia was in that boat. Now, our, our association here does support raising that number.

308. 1:11:26

     Uh, but that doesn't solve all the issues in the-

309. 1:11:29

     Can I just ask a question?

310. 1:11:29

     There's also exam issues-

311. 1:11:30

     Go, go right ahead

312. 1:11:30

     ... in the compact itself.

313. 1:11:32

     Try that again.

314. 1:11:33

     So I've, I've been working with occupational licensing issues for a number of years-

315. 1:11:38

     Yes, you have

316. 1:11:38

     ... and I've not been made aware of any, uh, you know, outcry from the public of being harmed by massage therapists at the current 500 hours of education. And I've gotten a little bit cynical after serving in the Senate for 10 years, and it, one of our colleagues likes to say it's all about the money. He's been serving a lot longer than me. It, from, it, it just strikes me that the 500 to 625 might be more about educators or companies that provide the education having access to more funding to make more money.

317. 1:12:22

     Is that-

318. 1:12:22

     Well, there definitely are massage therapy schools operated by other therapists. Um, I don't think I know enough myself to sort of comment on the sort of qualitative difference in the two, and, uh, that's something we can talk about as we move along.

319. 1:12:37

     Thank you. I, I just want, I don't wanna-

320. 1:12:39

     That's-

321. 1:12:39

     ... put a, another barrier to, uh, Georgians seeking work just so some institution or company can profit off of Pell Grants or whatever it is.

322. 1:12:52

     Well noted. Thank you.

323. 1:12:53

     Thank you.

324. 1:12:54

     I know-

325. 1:12:54

     All right. I don't see any further questions. Thank you so much for being with us here today.

326. 1:12:58

     Thank you.

327. 1:12:58

     And we will, uh-

328. 1:12:59

     You're welcome

329. 1:13:00

     ... retain these materials and anything else you may wanna submit until such time as we can work this one out.

330. 1:13:06

     Thank you.

331. 1:13:06

     I would ask, uh, uh, any of y'all that have an interest in this to continue with your discussions and negotiations amongst yourself. The bill we passed last year was a committee substitute. That was prepared after we had been told that all the parties were in agreement on it. I understand there have been developments since then that maybe have rocked this boat, as, uh, Senator Dolezal pointed out, Department of War certain- suddenly taken interest in it, then, uh, as recently as today, submitted a letter to us.

332. 1:13:39

     So l- you guys all sort it out, if you can, come to us with any agreed upon changes, and I will consider putting that in a, another committee substitute.

333. 1:13:50

     So we'll try to do-

334. 1:13:50

     Now we're gonna take up that bill on Georgia Power, where we try to take away their ability to raise ra- Have a good weekend.

335. 1:14:02

     All right. With that, uh, we are adjourned. Thank you