►
From YouTube: 3/5/2021 - Senate Committee on Commerce and Labor
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
B
A
I
thought
I
saw
senator
lang,
but
please
remember
to
mark
her
present
once
she
arrives.
Thank
you
so
welcome
to
our
audience
joining
us
remotely
and
anyone
listening
over
the
internet.
Today
we
have
a
hearing
on
senate
bill
100..
A
However,
there
are
various
ways
members
of
the
public
can
engage
with
us
and
participate
throughout
the
process.
These
include
registering
to
participate.
You
know
us
when
you
have
the
opportunity
to
testify
on
a
bill
or
provide
public
comment
during
the
meeting
or
submitting
written
comment
to
the
committee
email
and
address
or
fax
number
listed
on
the
agenda.
A
While
the
meeting
registration
is
required
to
participate,
it
does
not
guarantee.
You
will
be
able
to
speak
similar
to
previous
sessions.
Comment
and
public
comment
may
be
limited
due
to
time
constraints,
and
I
will
announce
the
time
frame.
How
many
minutes
for
each
response
for
against
our
neutral.
A
A
When
you're
on
the
phone
lines,
please
pay
attention
to
which
bill
is
being
considered
and
follow.
The
verbal
prompts
provided
by
the
bps
staff
so
that
you
will
know
which
keys
to
press
to
raise
your
hand
or
unmute
yourself.
Staff
will
call
on
you
to
speak
by
the
last
three
digits
of
your
phone
number.
A
Detailed
instructions
for
participating
in
committee
meetings
are
available
on
the
help
page,
which
is
linked
in
the
banner
at
the
top
of
every
page
on
nellis.
If
you
need
assistance
with
any
of
these
processes
or
if
you
would
like
to
receive
electronic
notification
of
the
committee's
agendas
and
minutes,
please
contact
your
committee
staff
at
the
email
listed
on
the
agenda.
A
Any
exhibits
for
the
committee
must
be
submitted
by
electronic
format.
No
later
than
eight
o'clock
am
the
day
before
the
meeting
they
must
be
submitted
to
our
committee
staff.
Contact
information
may
be
found
on
the
committee
page
in
nellis.
In
addition,
any
person
proposing
an
amendment
to
a
bill
being
heard
by
this
committee
must
first
talk
to
the
sponsor
and
let
them
know
you
intend
to
submit
an
amendment.
A
A
The
chair
and
members
may
request
any
testifier
to
submit
documentation
supporting
their
testimony
new
committee
members
during
these
virtual
meetings.
When
an
agenda
item
is
called
for
a
vote,
our
committee
will
be
using
the
wrong
call
to
do
so.
When
the
committee
secretary
calls
your
name,
please
answer
with
a
yes
or
no,
so
that
there
is
no
confusion.
A
This
is
a
committee
bdr
sponsored
on
behalf
of
the
legislative
committee
on
senior
citizens,
veterans
and
adults
with
special
needs.
Remember
if
you
vote
in
favor
of
introducing
the
bdr.
That
does
not
imply
a
commitment
to
support
the
measure
later.
All
this
action
does
is
to
allow
the
bdr
to
become
a
bill
or
resolution
and
be
referred
to
a
community
or
for
possible
hearings.
C
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
heidi:
sievers
cancer,
I'm
the
state
senator
from
district
15
in
northern
nevada,
and
I'm
here
today
to
introduce
the
individuals
who
will
be
presenting
senate
bill
100
and
the
chair
just
went
over
the
list
of
names,
but
we're
going
to
start
out
with
nina
laxalt.
So
again,
I
want
to
thank
you
for
your
attention.
D
E
It's
me
now
right,
madame
chair
members
of
committee,
for
the
record,
my
name
is
needle
laxalt,
representing
the
nevada
state
board
of
physical
therapy.
We
want
to
greatly
express
our
appreciation
to
senator
sivers
ganssert
for
sponsoring
this
bill
for
us
as
well.
I
want
to
thank
terry
miller,
the
committee
manager,
because
she
was
so
helpful
in
guiding
us
through
this
system,
which
is
sort
of
awkward
and
unusual
for
a
lot
of
us
just
starting
to
learn
how
to
use
it
with
me
today.
E
As
you
noted,
I
have
jennifer
nash,
who
is
the
vice
chair
of
the
pt
board,
and
she
will
be
discussing
nevada's
situation
as
it
pertains
to
pt's
charles
harvey,
who
is
the
executive
director
of
the
pt
board
and
he
will
not
be
presenting
but
will
be
available
to
answer
any
questions
about
the
board
itself
and
how
this
might
impact
the
board
kelly
may
douglas
pacific
southwest
regional
liaison
defense,
state
liaison
and
kelly
is
going
to
talk
to
you
about
how
the
compacts
impact
the
military
and
their
moves
and
the
families
and
what
a
benefit
is
for
those
members
of
our
military.
E
Now
some
of
you
who
are
returnees
may
remember
that
we
brought
this
bill
forward
last
session
in
the
form
of
senate
bill
186.
It
passed
this
committee
and
the
senate
floor
unanimously,
but
unfortunately
we
hit
a
couple
bubbles
on
the
assembly,
sign
side
and
weren't
able
to
get
it
past.
The
finish
line,
we
are
hoping
to
be
able
to
answer
any
and
all
questions
that
come
forward
both
in
the
senate
and
in
assembly,
which
will
alleviate
any
concerns
as
to
how
this
compact
word
works
and
the
benefit
that
it
has
to
nevada.
E
I
am
also
hoping
that
the
committee
members
found
the
time
which
I
know
you
have
plenty
of
extra
time
to
read
over
the
document
that
I
submitted
to
you
by
email,
which
is
also
on
nellis,
and
it's
the
frequently
asked
questions
document
that
answers
a
lot
of
the
basic
questions
you
might
have
about
the
compact,
this
particular
compact
itself,
and
how
they
run
and
interact
with
the
states
and
how
states
interact
with
each
other
participating
states.
E
So
the
physical
therapy
license
compact
is
a
state-based
solution
to
the
challenges
of
interstate
portability
for
physical
therapists
and
physical
therapist
assistants.
It
improves
patient
access
to
physical
therapy
service
by
giving
eligible
licenses
licensees
in
the
participating
states
an
easier
and
faster
alternative
to
traditional
licensure,
while
retaining
safeguards
to
protect
the
public.
E
The
pt
compact
is
an
agreement
between
member
states
to
improve
access
to
physical
therapy
services
and
provide
an
expedited
process
to
practice
in
another
member
state.
The
compact
allows
for
a
pt
and
a
pta
assistant
who
is
licensed
in
one
member
state
to
apply
for
a
compact
privilege
to
practice
in
another
member
state.
E
29
states
have
joined
the
compact,
21
are
actively
issuing
privileges
and
eight
are
finalizing
their
procedures.
The
compact
preserves
a
state's
regulatory
and
disciplinary
authority
over
a
pt
or
pta
practicing
in
the
state.
Scope
of
practice
is
determined
in
the
state
where
the
patient
receives
care.
Pt
and
ptas.
Working
in
nevada
under
this
compact
privilege
must
pass
a
nevada,
pt
jurisprudence
exam
in
order
to
ensure
understanding
of
nevada
rules
and
regulations.
F
F
F
This
compact
would
provide
extra
public
protection
because
jurisdictions
are
able
to
then
get
critically
needed
additional
physical
therapy
services
for
state
residents.
When
there
is
a
state
of
emergency
or
local
crisis,
it
is
also
an
optimal
way
to
form
a
compact.
The
pt
compact
privilege
process
is
not
a
multi-state
process
compared
to
some
compacts.
F
It
also
provides
public
safety.
A
person
with
any
encumbrances
or
disciplinary
actions
against
their
license
within
the
past
two
years
cannot
apply
for
the
compact
privilege.
If
this
privilege
is
revoked
in
one
member
state,
privileges
to
practice
in
other
states
are
revoked,
also
improving
the
access
to
service.
F
F
Physical
therapist
and
physical
therapist
assistants
assist
nevadans
to
reduce
pain
and
gain
strength,
flexibility
and
balance
to
optimize
their
function
and
quality
of
life
in
this
great
state,
where
many
older
adults
retire.
We
are
the
11th
in
the
nation
for
rate
of
falls
for
older
adults
and
we
are
45th
or
50th
depending
on
the
resource
dated
january
2020,
for
the
number
of
pts
per
100
000
population.
F
A
E
G
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
kelly
may
douglas
and
I'm
with
the
department
of
defense
defense
state
liaison
office.
Our
office
works
with
state
policy
makers
to
resolve
the
top
quality
of
life
issues
facing
military
service
members
and
their
families.
G
I
cover
the
pacific
southwest,
so
I'm
focused
on
nevada,
in
addition
to
california,
arizona,
hawaii
and
utah
addressing
issues.
Our
licensure
issues
for
our
our
spouses
has
been
a
priority
for
the
department
for
several
years,
and
the
new
administration
has
committed
to
continuing
this.
This
focus
until
we
see
widespread
improvement.
G
68
percent
of
married
service
members
have
indicated
that
their
spouse's
ability
to
maintain
their
career
impacts
their
decision
to
remain
in
the
military
or
not
77,
of
military
spouses
report
they
want
or
need
to
work
and
military
spouses
are
disproportionately
affected
by
state
specific
licensure
requirements
that
cause
delays
and
gaps
in
employment.
G
We
know
that
24
or
the
military,
I'm
I'm
sorry.
The
unemployment
rate
for
military
spouses
was
24
24
before
the
pandemic.
So
we
all
understand
that
that
the
pandemic
has
affected
our
communities
as
a
whole,
but
just
understanding
that
military
spouses
are
disproportionately
affected
by
anything
that
that
that
faces
the
general
population.
G
G
G
In
addition,
any
the
ptlc
will
support
military
spouses,
who
are
residents
of
nevada
and
are
transferred
out
to
continue
working
in
other
compact
states
as
a
physical
therapist
when
they
leave
just
as
far
as
the
importance
of
it.
Compacts
to
the
department
of
defense.
G
Dod
is
supporting
eight
compacts,
including
the
ptlc
this
year
and
more
coming
in
the
future.
The
2021
ndaa,
the
national
defense
authorization
act,
provided
funds
for
dod
to
support
additional
compacts
in
the
future
years.
In
addition,
the
2021
ndaa
directed
the
military
services
to
include
specific
metrics
around
quality
of
life
in
their
basing
decision
models.
G
Licensing
reciprocity
is
one
of
the
required
elements
for
basing
decisions
moving
forward
for
the
services
and
each
service
branch
is
required
to
report
back
to
the
secretary
of
defense
and
congress
on
their
evaluation
models
that
look
at
licensure.
G
Specifically,
the
office
of
the
secretary
of
defense
also
reported
to
the
to
governor
sisalak
in
february
that
nevada
only
partially
met
our
criteria
for
supportive,
licensure
portability
policies
in
summary,
state
policies
that
enhance
existing
licensure
provisions
for
military
spouses,
relieve
one
of
the
many
stressors
of
frequent
military
moves
and
by
enabling
spouses
to
move
to
more
quickly
transfer
their
license
in
order
to
obtain
employment
in
a
new
state.
These
policies
facilitate
greater
career
sustainability
for
military
spouses,
improving
their
families,
financial
security
and
overall
resilience.
G
A
Senator
stevens
cancer
is,
is
ms
douglas.
The
last
presenter.
D
Thank
you
for
the
record,
heidi
seaver's
cancer.
Yes
she's,
the
last
presenter,
but
we
also
had
an
amendment,
and
you
should
have
that
in
your
package.
The
compact
is
very
sensitive
to
the
language
and
it
needs
to
match
up
and
so
you'll
find
that
in
your,
you
should
have
received
that
in
your
package
as
well.
Thank
you.
H
Thank
you
senator.
H
E
Madam
chair
vice
chair
nail,
I'm
going
to
turn
that
this
is
nina
laxalt
for
the
record.
I'm
going
to
turn
that
question
over
to
tj
cantwell,
who
is
online.
Who
is
the
compact
administrator.
A
And
and
for
those
answering
questions,
please
go
direct
to
the
to
the
committee
member.
I
Madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
I'm
tj
cantwell,
I'm
the
physical
therapy,
compact
commission
administrator
to
the
vice
chairs
question
when
we're
referring
to
any
adverse
action
against
any
any
license.
Our
main
focus
is
related
to
physical
therapy
licenses.
So
in
some
cases
individuals
may
hold
a
both
a
physical
therapist
and
a
physical
therapist
assistance
license,
and
so
that
would
refer
to
both
of
those
licenses.
We
do.
I
We
do
not
track
the
any
adverse
actions
or
or
encompasses
that
may
be
held
against
a
another
license
if
they
would
hold
it
for
a
different
profession.
H
I
believe
it's
section,
five,
no
it's
section
six
and
I'm
asking
this
question
because
at
the
end
of
the
bill
right,
you
go
into
the
commission,
but
this
particular
provision.
The
way
I
read
it
affects
the
licensee
specifically,
so
my
questions
are
in
sub
5,
where
it's
talking
about
a
remote
state
may
take
adverse
action
issue,
a
subpoena
for
hearings,
etc,
etc.
H
Right
there
seems
to
be
an
issue
or
I'm
trying
to
get
an
understanding
on
number
one:
conflict
of
law,
choice
of
law
provisions,
because
there's
a
sentence
in
here
in
line
24
and
25,
where
it
says
the
witnesses
or
the
production
of
evidence
from
another
party's
state
must
be
enforced
in
the
latter
state
by
any
court
of
confident
jurisdiction.
So
the
first
so
the
first
thing
that
popped
in
my
mind
was
this
is
a
choice
of
law
situation.
H
You
know,
tort
is
determined
by
the
place
of
the
injury,
and
this
it
just
seems
to
be
the
language
is
so
broad
that
I'm
not
clear
who
has
jurisdiction
and
where
this
could
occur.
If
there's
a
contract
issue,
it's
a
place
of
the
contract,
but
this
seems
to
be
that
you
can
issue
subpoenas.
H
I
Chair
members
of
the
committee
again
tj
cantwell,
the
pt,
combat
commission.
I'm
happy
to
answer
that
question.
So
in
terms
of
jurisdiction,
when
it
comes
to
an
individual,
the
same
jurisdiction
would
apply
as
it
would
today
with
a
licensee
that
would
be
practicing
from
out
of
state.
That
would
be
practicing
on
a
license
in
the
state
of
nevada.
I
Again.
What
this
does
is
allow
that
that
state,
where
the
or
any
complaint
is
brought
for
that
individual,
the
pt
or
pta
to
be
brought
before
the
and
then
be
have
due
process
under
the
laws
of
the
state
where
the
incident
occurred
again.
So
it
would
be
no
different
than
if
somebody
today
was
practicing
say
in
utah
and
they
had
a
license
to
practice
in
nevada.
They
came
to
nevada.
They
worked
under
that
license.
They
were
then
something
happened
in
in
nevada
right.
I
Then
it
would
allow
the
ability
for
the
state
of
nevada
to
be
able
to
take
action
against
that
individual,
even
though
they
originally
and
again
are
licensed
in
utah
and
have
residents
in
utah.
So
it
provides
the
ability
for
the
state
to
still
have
the
same
authority
and
jurisdiction
and
really
responsibility
to
to
affect
due
process
in
that
state
as
far
as
conflicts
of
law.
I
What
a
compact
essentially
is,
it
is,
is
a
contract
between
the
states,
which
is
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
need
to
have
such
very
specific
language,
and
each
state
has
passed
the
same
language
in
order
to
you
know,
join
the
compact
in
the
first
place,
and
so
contract
law
takes
over
in
that
case
again,
where
that
states
jurisdiction,
where
they
have
a
scope
of
practice
and
that
patient's
located
is
what
governs
the
scope
of
practice
for
the
practitioner.
I
However,
when
it
comes
to
again
something
like
that,
where
it
allows
for
states
to
have
joint
investigation,
it
allows
them
to
share
information
again
if
they
have
a
similar.
A
reason
to
you
know
to
share
that
information,
because
there
is
a
ongoing
investigation
going
on
and
potentially
some
legal
action
needs
to
be
taken
again
allows
and
gives
that
state
the
authority
to
do
that,
which
is
adding
to
the
public
protections
of
individuals
and
that
that
is
the
goal,
but
really
in
essence.
I
It
really
does
does
not
differ
from
what
would
happen
today,
underneath
underneath
the
law
where
somebody
was
practicing
in
the
state,
with
a
nevada
license
again
but
may
have
residents
in
a
different
state.
H
H
This
is
where
it
says,
if
otherwise
permitted
by
state
law
recover
from
the
licensee,
the
cost
of
the
disposition
of
cases
etc,
but
the
recovery
of
costs
would
cross
any
state,
and
it
seems
to
be
that
that
that
the
licensee,
the
actual
therapist,
could
incur
significant
costs.
H
There's
no
cap
to
that
cost,
and
so
I
I
was
wondering
you
know.
Why?
Because
are
we?
Because
the
first
thing
I
thought
was
okay,
so
so
our
under
the
compact
are
physical
therapists,
considered
independent
contractors.
H
Is
there
an
issue
where
we
should
have
vicarious
liability
because
they
are
with
an
employer,
or
is
it
just
all
on
the
physical
therapist
to
come
up
with
potentially
thousands
of
dollars
because
of
an
investigation?
Because
you
have
in
this
language
that
it
could
even
be
an
alleged,
it
can
be
an
ev,
an
alleged
violation.
It
doesn't
even
have
to
be
fully
vetted.
It
could
be.
I
believe
that
these
things
occur
and
then
the
licensee
is
then.
I
Pain
chair
members
of
committee,
again
from
the
physical
therapy
compact
commission
perspective,
so
the
the
answer
to
your
question
is
that
language
is
intended
and
I
believe,
actually
reflects
much
of
the
similar
language.
I
That
is
an
existing
law
allowing
for
you
know
the
boards
to
to
you
know,
seek
the
if
you
know,
if
allowed
by
law
by
state
law,
to
seek
the
financial
remedy,
if
they
you
know,
have
have
been
judged
to
be
able
to
do
so
by
you
know
by
court
and
again,
so
it
is
related
to
the
same
law.
I
I
think
miss
nash
may
be
able
to
better
explain
regarding
the
specific
liabilities
that
pts
or
ptas
themselves
are
are
subject
to
today
under
law
again
outside
of
the
compact.
But
as
far
as
I'm
aware,
the
compact
law
and
the
language
in
our
in
our
bill
reflects
again
similar
similar
law.
I
That's
on
the
book
today
allowing
state
boards
and
other
agencies
to
collect
again,
if
allowed
and
judged
to
be
able
to
do
so
to
collect
some
kind
of
remedy
after
a
judicial
proceeding
is
has
taken
place
so,
but
I
defer
to
miss
nash
regarding
you
know,
specifically,
maybe
in
nevada
what
the
liabilities
are
for
pt
or
pta
under
existing
license.
H
F
J
J
Good
morning,
director
harvey
for
the
record,
I
am
unfamiliar
with
any
any
dollars
that
are
cited
in
our
statutes
or
regulations
pertaining
to
this.
J
Vice
chair
neil,
I
would
need
to
refer
that
question
back
to
mr
cantwell.
I
apologize.
I
Vice
remember
the
committee
again,
I
I
guess
I
can't
answer
your
questions
specifically
to
say
what
exactly
would
happen
in
a
case
where
there
would
be
a
legal
proceeding
regarding
that
again,
it's
based
on
really
existing
laws
that
allow
for
states
to
be
able
to
collect
any
fees
back
from
the
thing,
and
I
believe
it
is
the
exist
same
as
your
existing.
Whatever
existing
procedure
would
happen
in
their
state
again,
I
believe
it
says
under
which
was
allowed
within
your
state
law.
I
So
if
there
was
something
to
be
occurred
in
the
state
of
nevada,
your
newer
laws
would
supersede
to
allow
you
know
to
determine
whether
or
not
that
could
be
allowed
and
who
would
be
liable
for
for
those
fees.
If
again,
if
that
was
determined
to
be
allowed
by
by
the
state
of
nevada
again,
so
it
is
meant
to
be
broad
in
the
sense
of
the
the
states.
I
H
A
Thank
you
vice
chair,
madam
position,.
D
Not
a
chair,
yes
for
the
record,
highly
serious
cancer.
D
So
what
I
heard
from
mr
cantwell
was
that
the
compact
defers
to
the
state-
and
so
maybe
mr
harvey
or
jennifer,
could
go
over
what
would
happen
if
it
was
a
regular
state
licensee,
because
I
think
that's
what
we're
saying
is
it's
the
same
policy
for
someone
who's
actually
licensed
in
the
state.
As
someone
who
has
a
privilege
based
on
the
compact
in
the
state,
thank.
B
F
Thank
you
senator
ganser,
and
this
is
jennifer
nash
for
the
record,
and
I
I
do
agree
once
vice
chair
neil
rephrased.
I
understood
better
where
she
was
coming
from
and
would
agree
that
the
compact
privilege
would
be
that
person
would
have
the
same
liabilities
as
myself
as
a
resident
holding
a
regular
license
in
nevada,
so
in
the
profession
of
physical
therapy.
Sometimes
your
employer
does
give
some
liability
coverage
to
you.
A
It
will
probably
not
be
before
the
this
hearing
ends,
but
I'll
make
sure
that
we
get
it,
and
everyone
is
aware
as
to
where
to
find
this
so
appreciate
the
responses,
and
vice
chairman,
we're
going
to
make
sure
that
legal
can
answer
the
question
too,
in
accordance
with
the
battle
law,
for
those
of
you
who
are
listening
or
wondering
why
our
legal
counsel
is
not
here,
they
have
been
inundated
with
bills
and
they
are
frequently
fervently
working
feverishly
working,
spiritually
working
to
make
sure
that
they
get
everything
out
on
time.
A
C
Madam
chair,
I'm
sorry
this
is
senator
pickard,
I
my
raise
hand
feature,
isn't
working.
So
if
I
may
please
proceed,
thank
you
and
it's
wonderful
having
senator
neil
another
attorney
on,
because
she
asked
all
of
my
conflicts
of
laws,
questions
I
just
have
one
left
actually
and
it's
a
practical
one.
C
I'm
wondering
how
does
this
work
in
practice
when
we've
got
such
a
broad
scope
of
work
here
in
nevada,
particularly
after
the
last
session,
where
we've
added
some
things
that
are
a
little
unusual
so
say
somebody
comes
to
nevada
from
from
oregon
or
washington,
and
now
they're
they're
authorized
to
perform
services
that
they're
not
performing
in
their
own
states.
How
do
we
assure
nevadans
that
they're
actually
competent
to
do
the
broader
scope
of
work,
or
do
we
limit
them
to
whatever
their
their
scope
is
in
their
states?.
I
Senator
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
I'm
happy
to
answer
that
again.
The
physical
therapy
combat
commission
has,
in
our.
I
I
The
the
answer
is
the
scope
of
practice
where
the
patient
is
receiving
care
is
what
that
physical
therapist
would
have
to
operate
under,
and
so,
if
you
have
limitations
on
certain
certain
practices
in
the
state
for
physical
therapy
that
individual,
whether
they
came
from
another
state
in
oregon
that
you
know
say,
allow
something
like
again.
They
allow
direct
access
or
dry
needling
things
like
that.
I
It
would
be
the
responsibility
of
that
that
physical
therapist
or
physical
therapist
assistant
to
know
the
laws
of
the
state
of
nevada
in
order
to
follow
those
laws
and
abide
by
them
again
like
they
would
today
under
a
license,
and
so
they
would
still
be
required
to
take
a
jurisprudence
exam
again
to
understand
what
specific
laws
and
requirements
are
in
the
state
of
nevada.
I
What
they
can
and
cannot
do
and
then
and
therefore
be
held
to
those
laws
as
well
and
rules
and
regulations,
and
could
only
practice
under
what
the
state
of
nevada
would
allow
and
therefore
again,
it
would
not
be
a
case
where
they
would
still
be
able
to
do
something.
They
were
allowed
to
do
in
another
state,
and
it
would
be
under
the
jurisdiction
of
the
nevada
state
board
to
regulate
that
and
regulate
that
individual
who's
practicing
under
a
compact
privilege,
again
the
same
as
it
would
be.
If
they're
practicing
under
a
license.
C
Right-
and
I
appreciate
that
mr
cam
well,
I'm
actually
asking
the
inverse
where
they
come
from
a
state
and-
and
you
said,
dry
needling-
you
open
the
door
so
I'll
use
that
one
but
say
they're
not
licensed
they
don't
have
any
experience.
Their
state
doesn't
allow
for
dry
needling.
They
come
here
we
do.
C
Are
they
now
allowed
to
start
sticking
needles
in
people,
even
though
they
may
not
have
practiced
in
that
area?
How
do
we
protect
nevadans
from
that
sort
of
scenario,
and
I'm
not
saying
anybody
actually
would
right?
I
mean
I've
benefited
from
physical
therapy,
they're
they're
great
practitioners.
C
I
just
think
that
we
need
some
understanding
of
if
someone
comes
from
a
state
that
doesn't
allow
a
certain
procedure
and
they
come
to
nevada,
where
we
do
they're
technically
not
qualified,
because
they've
never
been
allowed
to
do
this
in
the
past.
How
do
we
protect
nevadans
from
someone
who
would
say?
Oh
now,
I
can
start
sticking
needles
in
people.
I'm
going
to
do
this.
I
Senator
in
the
members
committee
again
teacher
count
with
the
physical
therapy
compact
commission.
I
would
defer
to
mr
harvey
with
the
board
again
the
same
process
and
procedure
for
ensuring
that
somebody
is
qualified
to
do
a
certain
procedure
or
again
would
be
you
know
qualified
to
do.
Something
else
would
be
again
the
same
process
that
they
would
have
to
apply
for
if
they
are
getting
a
license
in
the
state,
so
whether
they
have
a
compensation
or
advice
license.
So
mr
harvey
would
probably
be
the
best
answer.
How
that's
handled
today.
J
For
the
record
charles
harvey
executive
director
senator
pickard
to
your
point,
there
is
a
formal
process
in
place
for
practitioners
to
perform
the
practice
of
dry
needling
that
speaks
to
that
specific
practice.
As
far
as
other
practices
are
concerned,
the
board
conducts
inspections
where
we
go
out
and
we
we
inspect
facilities,
we
inspect
each
practitioner
and
if
they
are
found
to
be
performing
a
practice
that
they
are
not
qualified
to
perform,
they
would
be.
J
You
know,
notified
at
that
point
to
discontinue
and
a
formal
investigation
would
take
place
at
that
at
that
point.
In
addition,
we
have
a
formal
complaint
procedure
where
any
member
of
the
public
or
another
licensee
can
submit
a
complaint,
and
that
would
that
would
kick
off.
Another
investigative
investigatory
process.
C
Right
I
appreciate
that,
and
so
what
I'm
hearing
is
that
it
would
be
a
reactionary
response,
as
opposed
to
a
proactive
one
and
and
that
there's
not
a
system
in
place
to
make
a
comparison
of
the
the
scope
of
practice
from
the
the
originating
state
as
they
come
into
nevada
and,
and
so
there's
there's
no
way
to
know.
If
this
person
is
qualified
coming
in,
we
wait
until
something
is
until
a
complaint
is
is
formed.
Is
that
accurate.
J
For
the
record,
charles
harvey,
I
neglected
to
mention
that,
before
practicing
in
the
state
of
nevada,
licensees
would
have
to
take
a
jurisprudence.
Exam
that
includes
questions
pertaining
to
our
specific
practice,
act
in
our
nrs
640
and
nac
640,
and
they
that
would
make
them
become
familiar
with
our
specific
statutes
and
regulations
before
they
are
able
to
perform
here
in
nevada.
A
So
I
I
just
have
a
couple.
I
can't
remember
who
said
it
I
think
it's
two
months,
someone
mentioned
that
the
compact
would
allow
pts
coming
from
somewhere
else
to
be
able
to
practice
here
in
the
scope
of
practice,
and
I'm
alluding
now
to
senator
picker's
questions
almost
immediately
rather
than
two
months.
Can
someone
tell
me
why
it
would
take
two
months
for
someone
who
has
applied
for
a
license
to
get
it.
J
Charles
harvey
for
the
record,
the
the
two-month
process
is
approximately
that
once
they
start
the
application
process,
it's
usually
the
criminal
history
background
check
that
takes
the
duration
of
that
two
months.
Once
we
receive
a
complete
application
that
includes
the
the
criminal
history
background
check,
it
takes
approximately
two
days
to
license
someone
in
nevada.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
ms
kelly.
This
question
is
directed
to
you,
I
believe
in
your
opening
statement.
You
mentioned
68
percent
of
military
who
are
married.
The
spouses
say
that
they
want
to
or
need
to
work.
Can
you
speak
to
the
quote,
need
to
work
aspect.
G
Yes,
kelly
may,
for
the
record
kelly
may
douglas
for
the
record.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
So
the
quo
the
68
was
the
response
of
on
a
recent
survey
of
service
members
who
indicated
that
their
spouse's
ability
to
to
obtain
or
to
continue
their
career
affects
their
decision
to
stay
in
the
military.
G
77
was
the
percentage
of
spouses
that
stated
that
they
needed
or
wanted
to
work
on
that
note,
just
as
as
just
as
in
the
civilian
community,
more
and
more
military
families
are
deciding
that
they
have
that
that
they
need
to
be
a
dual
income.
They
need
two
incomes
in
their
family
to
survive.
G
So
not
saying
that
the
military
is
an
anomaly.
It
is
very
much
like
the
civilian
community,
where
we've
seen
this
increase.
This
increased
need
for
to
a
dual
income
situation.
G
So
if
military
spouses
are
not
able
to
get
to
work
immediately
or
or
without
undue
delay,
it
really
affects
their
future
decision
as
a
family
to
stay
in
the
military,
because
they
might
need
to
make
choices
that
will
facilitate
greater
financial
stability.
A
So
I
just
want
to
enter
this
into
the
record
for,
for
those
who
may
not
be
familiar
with
the
with
military
pay-
and
I
know
so
often
people
think
it
people
in
the
military
are
rich
and
that's
far
far
far
from
the
truth,
the
2021
pay
chart
or
someone
who
is
just
entering
the
military,
a
private,
that's
e1,
no
stripes.
A
The
annual
salary
is
20
dollars
and
170.80
cents
for
e2.
It
goes
up
to
22
000
and
for
an
e3
which
is
a
private
first
class.
It's
got
the
the
arrow,
as
some
people
say
in
the
rocker,
under
it,
for
a
sergeant,
it's
28
000
and
for
a
staff
sergeant,
it's
31
000..
A
If
you
look
at
officer
pay
a
second
lieutenant
brand
new
out
of
west
point
or
out
of
rotc
makes
38
000
a
captain
would
make
51
000
and
a
major
would
make
58
000
and
that's
base
pay.
So,
in
every
sense
of
the
word,
especially
if
you
go
back
to
the
enlisted
twenty
thousand
dollars,
we
know
is
less
than
two
thousand
a
month
and
some
place
like
las
vegas.
A
It's
impossible
to
live
off
of
to
less
than
two
thousand
dollars
a
month,
because
many
any
place
that
you
would
find
that
would
be
worth
you
living
and
putting
your
family.
There
is
going
to
cost
you
probably
about
2100
a
month
just
if
it's
got
two
or
three
bedrooms,
so
I
just
wanted
to
enter
that
into
the
record.
A
So
it
would
put
some
perspective
on
the
reason
that
ms
douglas
said
need
to
and
want
to
I'll
also
say
this
a
point
of
privilege
that
we
do
have
another
piece
of
legislation
coming
up
later.
That
will
ask
our
federal
delegation
to
to
begin
the
process
of
developing
a
national,
401k
or
retirement
plan
for
our
military
spouses.
A
One
of
the
things
that
happens
is
because
people
are
married
to
a
military
service
member
if
they
have
a
an
occupation
or
they're
professional,
they
never
get
a
chance
to
get
vested
and
so
for
for
their
support
of
the
military
member.
In
their
20-year
or
more
career,
the
military
member
has
a
pension.
The
spouse
does
not,
and
I
just
think
that's
wrong.
A
We
ought
to
be
taking
care
of
our
service
personnel
much
better
than
that.
I
won't
I
won't
go
on.
I
think
I
think
all
of
you
all
know
how
I
feel
about
military
and
and
veterans.
So
I
think
our
vice
chair
has
another
question.
H
You,
madam
chair,
I
am
I
I
appreciate
the
indulgence
I
I
I
thought
they
were.
You
know
I
was
trying
to
hold
back
on
my
questions
so
since
everybody's
so
quiet,
because
it's
so
early
but.
H
Yeah,
I
don't
know
about
that.
Okay,
but
in
section
six
I
just
have
one
more
question
related
to
it's
line:
39
and
it
is
6
sub
b.
So
I
just
want
a
clarification
here
where
it
says
that
member
states
shall
share
any
investigative
litigation
or
compliance
materials.
H
I
For
the
record,
tj
can't
well,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
the
the
answer
to
that
is,
it
would
be
restricted
to
what
is
allowed
by
the
states,
so
we
actually
in
furthering
rules
and
and
to
further
to
your
point,
you
know
the
rules
do
clarify
and
the
they're
publicly
available.
The
compact
commission
rules
do
clarify
on
that
point
that
it
is
specific
to
the
investigatory
information
depending
on
state
law,
so
state
by
states.
I
We
recognize
that
there
are
different
laws
that
govern
what
can
and
cannot
be
shared
for
investigatory
information,
and
so
we
specify
in
our
rules
that
are
adopted
by
the
full
commission
and
therefore
all
the
states
must
abide
by
them,
is
that
it
is
required
to
only
share
the
information
that
the
that
is
allowed
by
state
law.
So
again,
some
states
have
more
flexible
laws
and
others
have
more
restrictive
ones,
and
so
whatever
that
state
is
allowed
to
share
by
under
their
state
law
is
what
is
is
required
to
be
shared.
H
Okay,
thank
you
for
that
and
then
just
one
final
question
chair
on
it's
a
last
section
of
the
bill
in
article
10.
This
is
on
and
I'm
going
to
tie
these
questions
together
so
because
I
was
reading
the
qualified
immunity
for
the
for
the
commission
on
page
12
and
then
when
I
was
reading
article
10.
H
H
But
when
I
read
that
I
understand
that,
if
you
get
kicked
out
after
termination,
then
you
are
liable
for
everything.
But
this
says
through
so
basically
you're
gonna
strip,
all
of
the
immunity
up
to
the
date
of
termination.
Because
that's
how
that
reads-
and
I
don't
know
if
that's
in
if
that
is
how
it's
supposed
to
read,
because
when
I
read
through
the
termination,
that
is
all
the
way.
I
Madam
chair
members
of
the
committee,
tj
cantwell,
I
that
may
be
one
that
that
I'll
have
to
refer
back
to
our
legal
counsel.
Again.
I
believe
that
those
two
separate
sections
are
referring
to
two
different
things:
again:
qualified
immunity
specifically
related
to
the
the
officers
and
directors
of
the
the
compact
and,
again
very
similar
to
you-
know
a
common
language
related
to
a
qualified
immunity
for
members
of
of
an
any
state
board
or
organization.
I
But
what
would
converge
to
article
10
again,
you're
you're
reading
of
the
of
the
through
again
is
a
new
question.
I
think
we
haven't
haven't
received
before,
but
but
I
would,
I
would
separate
those
two
I
think
and
and
from
way
I
understand
it,
but
that
the
the
qualified
immunity
again
is
is
not
related
to
that
that
the
it's
referring
to
the
fact
that
the
state
that
would
be
potentially
terminated,
you
have
to
pass
a
law
that
the
law
would
have
to
be
repealed.
I
Again.
Once
you
join
the
compact
in
order
to
terminate
your
you
know,
you're
you're
standing
in
the
compact,
so
I
believe
you
know
if
you
were
terminated
by
the
compact
itself,
then
it's
referring
to
the
actual
date
of
which
that
termination
would
take
place
depending
on
you
know,
when
the
when
the
judgment
was
was
taken.
I
But
I
you
know
would
like
to
note
that
there's
not
been
any
any
action,
that's
been
taken
where
we're
not
the
first
compact
nursing
compact's
been
around
for
more
than
20
years,
and
I
believe,
there's
only
been
one
legal
action
taken
in
the
last
20
years
and
they're,
compact
and,
and
that
resulted
and
was
resolved
in
an
arbitration
without
a
you
know,
without
a
state
having
to
to
be
terminated
by
the
compact.
I
Obviously,
that's
not
the
goal
of
any
any
commission
is
to
you
know,
maintain
and
keep
all
the
states
in
there
to
be
able
to
have
access
for
as
many
consumers
as
possible.
But
but
again,
if
you
know
you
allow
me
to
refer
that
to
our
legal
counsel,
I'm
happy
to
get
an
answer
to
you
as
well.
A
Sure
I
don't
see
any
other
hands
raised.
It's
not
anymore.
Questions
by
committee
members
senator
hardy,
you
were
looking.
Did
you
have
a
question?
No.
A
B
A
A
It's
also
the
fact
that
for
many
of
them,
especially
within
the
last
13
years
since
we've
been
involved
in
a
minimum
of
two
of
two
acknowledged
combat
situations,
they
are
there
for
their
spouse,
that
is
deployed
to
iraq,
afghanistan
or
wherever
and
many
times
that
when
the
deployment
happens,
it
is
the
spouse
who
is
left
behind
to
take
care
of
the
family,
etc.
Some
of
them
if
the
spouse
is
going
to
be
long
going
to
be
gone
for
longer
than
nine
months
or
18
months.
A
Some
of
them
elect
to
move
back
home
where
they
have
support
from
family
members.
Much
like
civilians
seek
places
of
refuge
for
their
family
members.
So
I'm
just
trying
to
put
this
on
the
record.
I
think
we
only
have
maybe
five
veterans
in
the
legislature,
and
that
includes
senate
and
assembly,
and
sometimes
it's
it's
better.
If
you,
if
you
can
put
this
all
into
context,
context
the
way
that
the
military
the
military
spouse
is
experiencing
it,
sometimes
it
it
lends
itself
to
greater
understanding.
A
Thank
you,
senator
sievers
cancer
appreciate
it.
Thank
you
madison,
thank
you
and
we'll
make
sure
that
we
get
the
the
answer
to
that
question.
Vice
chair
neil,
if
you
will,
if
you'll
write
your
question
down,
we'll
make
sure
that
we
get
it
to
mr
king,
so
we
can
get
an
answer
and
make
sure
that
that
is
a
part
of
the
record,
even
even
if
we
do
it
at
the
work
session.
A
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we've
answered
that
question
to
your
satisfaction
and
to
anyone
else
who,
may
you
may
have
that
that
same
question?
So
here
man,
yes,
ma'am.
H
A
First
first
is
support,
and
so
I
will
now,
oh
I
said,
closing
hearing,
I'm
sorry
open
hearing
backup
so
we'll
now
go
for
support.
The
time
frame
for
support
is
30
minutes
and
I've
noticed
that
two
minutes
may
not
be
long
enough.
So
we'll
go
three
minutes
and
if
everyone
does
three
minutes
or
just
does
ditto,
we
can
get
at
least
10
people's
comments
on
the
record.
So
thank
you
vice
chair,
I'm
ahead
of
myself
so
broadcast.
Please
open
the
lines
for
support
for
senate
bill.
K
K
K
L
For
the
record,
my
name
is
dr
rj
williams.
I
am
the
nevada
physical
therapy
association
president,
and
I
want
to
thank
you
all
today
for
your
consideration
of
the
bill.
Sv
100
and
I
just
want
to
stand
up
in
support
for
this
bill,
that
the
board
is
putting
forward
and
just
voice
that,
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
association,
as
dr
nash
mentioned
in
her
testimony
earlier
today,
there's
a
growing
concern
of
access
for
our
state
for
physical
therapy.
L
This
would
do
a
great
service
at
helping
improve
that
as
nevada
continues
to
grow
and
we've
seen
things
like
professional
sports
teams
now
in
las
vegas
join
the
attention
and
desire
for
more
people
to
come
to
the
state
is
only
going
to
continue
to
increase,
and
so
by
being
able
to
serve
our
metro
areas
as
well
as
the
rural
areas,
as
she
mentioned,
where
our
neighboring
states
may
be
able
to
to
quickly
gain
access
to
provide
that
care
would
be
absolutely
essential
to
keeping
up
with
the
pace
and
meeting
the
demand
and
giving
people
a
safe
and
healthy
alternative
to
manage
pain
and
other
disabilities,
as
well
as
the
mentioned
military
services,
something
we
also
greatly
support,
knowing
that
we
have
people
that
that
come
to
our
state
for
employment
through
the
service
and
getting
them
quickly
able
to
practice
is
something
that
we
fully
support
so
on
that
by
on
behalf
of
myself
and
the
therapists
as
part
of
the
nevada
association,
we
stand
in
support
today.
A
B
A
Okay,
thank
you,
and
so
with
that
senator
siebrisk
answered,
do
you
have
any
closing
remarks?
I
should
have
asked
that
the
last
time
too,.
D
Thank
you
for
the
record,
senator
heidi
sievers
cancer.
I
want
to
thank
the
chair
and
the
committee
members
for
listening
to
senate
bill
100,
and
I
think
it
really
would
help
veterans
and
their
spouses
their
families
as
well
as
a
lot
of
other
folks
potentially,
so
we
can
have
greater
access
to
care.
So
thank
you
for
your
consideration.
A
B
A
Okay,
so
with
that,
I
will
close
the
hearing
for
the
second
time,
and
I
think
it's
the
final
time
so
thank
you,
senator
stevens
gangster
and
everyone
who
participated
in
providing
us.
A
This
information
certainly
appreciate
it
and
we
will
take
all
of
this
under
advisement
and
trying
to
make
sure
if
there
are
no
real
hiccups,
that
we
process
these
bills
as
soon
as
possible,
because
it's
going
to
get
really
hectic
real
soon
and
so
for
those
where
there's
no
opposition,
we
want
to
try
to
get
that
done
as
soon
as
possible.
So
thank
you
all.
I
appreciate
it
so
now,
I'm
sure
yes.
A
Let's,
let's:
let's:
let's
wait
until
monday,
at
least
okay.
I
just
I
want
to
do
that
to
make
sure
that
there's
nothing
else
that
comes
up
in
terms
of
question
as
well
as
want
to
make
sure
we
get
the
answer
from
our
legal
counsel
for
vice
chair
neil's
question
before
we
do
that.
Okay,
but
I
I
I
appreciate
the
support
and
the
motion,
but
I
want
to
wait
at
least
until
monday:
okay,
okay,
okay,
thank
you!
So
now
we
will
go
to
public
comment.
A
K
K
A
So
I
appreciate
appreciate
everyone's
participation.
All
questions
usually
provide
a
lot
more
insight
to
the
bills.
I
know
I
learned
a
lot
from
that
too.
So,
with
that
we
will
close
this
edition
of
the
senate
committee
on
commerce
and
labor,
and
we
will
be
right
back
here
on
monday
morning.
Thank
you
all
have
a
great.