►
Description
House Health Committee- March 16, 2022- House Hearing Room 1
A
Right,
thank
you
and
before
we
get
started,
do
any
of
the
members
have
any
personal
orders.
Chairman
williams,
thank.
B
You,
chairman,
terry,
I
couldn't
help
but
notice
that
chairman
zachary's,
better
half
and
his
son
are
in
the
audience.
I
see
holly
and
tyson
zachary
back
there.
So
don't
take
it
out
on
chairman
zachary
in
front
of
if
his
bill
was
really
bad
in
front
of
his
family.
A
Thank
you
very
much
all
right.
Thank
you
any
further
personal
orders,
okay
seen
them
and
we
have
a
nine
bills
on
our
calendar
and
I'm
gonna.
Take
a
few
things
out
of
order.
Item
number
one
house
bill:
two
six
six
has
been
rolled
one
week.
A
Item
number
nine
house
bill.
2705
has
been
rolled
one
week
and
without
objection
I've
got
a
bill
to
present
another
committee.
So
we're
gonna.
Take
up
item
number
seven
house
bill
two
one,
seven
one
and
I
will
pass
the
gavel.
A
Amendment
amendment
15056.
C
A
Thank
you,
chairman
committee
federal
law
was
updated
in
2020
to
allow
opioid
treatment
programs
to
report
to
state
prescription,
drug
monitoring,
databases
like
our
csmd,
and
this
bill
would
line
us
up
with
federal
law.
The
amendment
put
some
clarification
language
in
there
because
inpatient
treatment
is
part
of
a
different
program.
So
with
that
I'd
be
happy
to
answer.
C
C
Any
questions
of
the
sponsor
seeing
none
are
we
ready
for
the
question
any
objection
to
the
question.
All
right.
We
are
voting
on
the
amendment
zero
one,
five,
zero,
five,
six,
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
aye,
all
those
opposed
the
eyes
have
it.
The
amendment
is
on
the
bill
on
the
bill,
as
amended
chairman
terry,
you
are
recognized
renew
my
motion.
Any
questions
of
the
sponsor
on
the
bill
as
amended,
saying
none
any
objection
to
the
question.
Seeing
none
were
voting
on
the
bill
as
amended.
C
A
C
Chairman,
currently,
the
department
of
health
hires,
the
executive
director
of
the
board
of
pharmacy
house
bill
2662
changes.
All
of
that
it
gives
the
the
board
of
pharmacy
the
authority
to
hire
and
fire
the
executive
director.
And
with
that,
mr
chairman,
I
renew
my
motion.
Okay,.
C
A
Motion
gave
a
motion
a
second
on
the
amendment.
Okay,
let's
get
the
bill
in
proper
order,
so
all
those
in
favor
of
amendment
zero,
one,
five,
five,
six
seven
say
aye
aye
opposed
eyes,
have
it?
Okay,
we
are
back
on
the
bill
as
amended
any
questions
for
the
sponsor
of
the
bill.
A
A
A
A
That
brings
us
to
item
number
four
house
bill:
702
leader,
lambreth,.
F
F
A
Without
objection,
we
can
put
this
on
the
bill.
All
those
and
we're
gonna
vote
on
amendment
zero,
one,
five,
one,
six,
seven,
all
those
in
favor
say
aye
opposed
eyes
have
it.
We
are
back
on
the
bills,
amended
you're,
recognized.
F
Thank
mr
chairman,
this
bill
comes
from
a
friend
of
ours
in
the
senate,
had
a
constituent
of
theirs
that
is
in
their
mid-20s
and
wanted
to
get
a
kidney
transplant
and
needed
a
kidney
transplant
and
had
family
members
that
were
willing
to
be
tested
to
provide
that
transplant,
and
this
young
person
had
been
through
covid
had
not
been
vaccinated
and
when
they
got
to
that
check
box
on
the
evaluation,
they
were
told
by
the
doctors
at
that
facility
that
they
would
not
do
the
transplant
simply
because
they
were
unvaccinated
for
covid.
F
That
is
certainly
a
consideration
that
that
doctors
should
take
into
account.
That's
part
of
the
workup
that
they
can
do,
and
I
know
we've
had
that
conversation
in
subcommittee,
but
this
just
says
it
can't
be
the
sole
reason
that
you're
denied
an
opportunity
for
a
transplant.
It
could
be
a
consideration,
but
it
can't
be
the
sole
reason
and,
mr
chairman,
that's
what
the
bill
does
all.
A
Right,
do
we
have
questions
so
sponsor
the
bill
chairman
kumar,
you
recognized.
G
The
body
will
reject
it
and
to
because,
for
that,
avoiding
rejection
of
the
transplanted
organ
is
paramount
at
that
time,
and
for
that
reason,
anti-rejection
therapy
is
necessary
and
those
drugs
make
it
possible
for
transplantation
to
be
accepted
and
for
it
to
happen
when
we,
those
drugs,
also
take
about
the
immunity
of
a
person
when
we
take
out
immunity.
That
person
is
more
prone
to
infections
infections,
that
an
immunocompetent
person
would
not
be
bothered
by.
G
So
that
is
a
medical
reasoning
to
protect
people
against
infection
with
all
means
possible
that
there
would
be
concerns
upon
giving
a
transplant
talking,
somebody's
humility
out
and
leaving
them
open
and
susceptible
to
infections.
But
again,
mr
leader,
thank
you
for
letting
me
explain
that.
I
think
it
needs
to
be
on
direction.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thank.
F
You,
mr
chairman,
thank
you
you're
right,
dr
kumar.
Thank
you
and
obviously
you
are
extraordinarily
wise
and
knowledgeable
in
these
areas
and-
and
I
trust
your
evaluation
of
it.
However,
I'm
not
saying
that
it
can't
be
an
evalua
a
a
part
of
that
evaluation.
F
This
bill
just
says
it
can't
be
the
sole
reason,
and
so
I
know
we
as
friends
respectfully
disagree
on
this
issue,
but
I
would
prefer
for
not
just
one
single
checkbox
to
be
able
to
knock
somebody
out
from
being
able
to
even
be
considered
for
an
organ
donor
transplant,
and
so
again
thank
you
for
sharing
your
background
experience
on
this.
I
deeply
appreciate
you
respect
it.
F
A
All
right,
representative
hall,
you
recognize
call
for
the
question.
Mr,
is
there
objection
yeah?
A
You
withdraw
the
asked,
would
you
withdraw
okay?
This
is
withdrawn
representation.
You
recognize.
Thank
you,
mr.
H
Chairman
later
in
your
description,
I
don't
believe
I
heard
you
say
the
person
had
covet,
but
they
just
had
not
had
the
vaccination.
Is
that
correct.
F
F
I've
had
covet,
she
felt
like
she
has
enough
natural
immunities
to
be
able
to
sustain
anything
and
was
having
that
conversation
with
the
doctor
and
when
they
just
cut
the
conversation
off
and
said
ma'am
if
you're
not
vaccinated,
it
doesn't
matter
what
else
is
going
on.
We
we
got
a
checklist
and,
if
you're
not
vaccinated,
you
cannot
get
an
organ
transplant.
I
just
don't
think
that's
appropriate.
I
think
there
should
be
a
more
in-depth
conversation
on
that.
F
It
should
take
the
whole
patient
into
consideration
and
in
the
subcommittee
we
had
a
conversation
as
to
what's
going
on
nationally
on
this.
There
is
a
best
practices,
it's
not
a
requirement.
F
It
is
a
best
practices
that
comes
from
these
institutions
that
a
patient
should
be
vaccinated
for
covenant
and
other
vaccinations,
but
even
with
that
standard
it
doesn't
say
that
it's
the
sole
reason
and
that's
why
we
structured
this.
This
way
to
say:
look
we
just
want
to
make
sure
that
doctor
and
patient
are
able
to
have
a
full
conversation
on
it
and
there's
not
just
one
thing
that
knocks
them
out.
A
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
leader,
thank
you
and
just
to
clarify
that
particular
physician
to
our
other
chairman's
point
and
to
at
this
point,
if
that
particular
physician
believes
that
by
the
chemotherapy,
therapeutic
agents
that
you
would
be
getting,
would
it
would
prohibit
you
or
should
prohibit
you
from
getting
it?
They
could
document
that
and
then
not
give
it
to
you.
It
just
can't
be
for
the
one
reason
correct.
F
I
I
You
know
we
always
get
in
here
in
committees
up
here
all
the
time.
All
the
malpractice
costs
the
malpractice
costs.
Well,
maybe
we're
contributing
into
it
by
non-doctors,
starting
to
practice
medicine.
I
I
just
think
if,
if
the
doctor
thinks
it's
in
the
best
interest
of
the
patient
not
to
go
forward
with
something,
then
we
don't
need
to
get
involved
in
that.
F
Yes,
sir,
no
I'm
not
asking
to
make
a
mental
determination
and
not
asking
this
committee
to
make
a
determination
medically
what
what
this
bill
would
force
is
a
full
conversation
on
that,
so
that
that
doctrine,
patient
genuinely
engage
in
that
full
conversation
about
every
aspect
of
the
patient,
not
just
the
one
aspect,
and
so
that
what
you
described
is
literally
the
conversation
that
it
would
force
so
that
there's
not
a
box.
That's
checked
that
says:
hey!
F
We
go
no
further,
we're
just
requiring
that
they
dig
a
little
deeper
and
take
that
full
patient
into
consideration
in
every
aspect
and
then
make
a
determination
because
we
we
are
talking
about
an
organ
transplant.
So
without
a
transplant
many
of
these
folks
there
may
be
a
risk
that
they
could
die
of
covid,
but
without
an
organ
transplant,
many
of
them
will
die.
I
mean
they
have
a
death
sentence
on
them
and
when,
when
you're
dealing
with
that
kind
of
circumstance,
I
just
want
every
box
checked,
not
just
one
to
stop
the
conversation
mitchell.
I
And
I
agree
with
you:
it's
just
an
organ
transplant
is
such
a
precious
thing
getting
that
match
and
the
limited
number
of
organs
that
are
available.
I
mean
step
back
from
that
situation.
I
You
know,
let's
give
that
person
getting
that
organ
transplant,
the
best
shot,
so
they
don't
have
a
rejection
and
you
know
maybe
the
person
who's
offering
up
the
transplant.
Maybe
steps
back
and
said:
hey,
you
know
for
my
loved
one.
Maybe
I
should
get
a
vaccine,
you
know,
let's,
let's
do
everything
we
can
to
make
certain
that
person
has
the
best
chance
of
survival.
That
would
make
the
most
sense.
I
would
think.
F
Without
respect
that
that's
what
this
bill
does
I
mean
it
forces
that
conversation
and
there's
nothing
that
stops
the
doctor
from
having
that
conversation
with
the
patient
to
say,
look
to
maximize
your
chances
here,
I
recommend
you
go
get
a
vaccine,
we're
going
to
wait
x,
amount
of
time
we're
going
to
go
forward,
but
again
it
should
be
a
full
conversation.
So
I
I
don't
disagree
with
that.
Conversation
should
happen
and
this
bill
does
not
prohibit
that
conversation.
A
J
K
K
Similar
to
this
bill
prohibit
discrimination
in
terms
of
whether
someone
is
qualified
for
a
transplant
or
not
on
the
basis
of
disability.
So
that
is
another.
That's
a
prohibition
that
already
exists
on
covered
entities
in
regards
to
transplants.
J
Which,
to
my
knowledge,
is
something
that
would
is
something
someone
can't
control
whether
they've
incurred
some
sort
of
disability,
not
something
that
was.
They
chose.
K
A
You
without
objection,
if
there's
no
further
question
while
we're
out
before
we
have
legal,
that's
not
okay!
Without
objection,
we'll
go
back
into
session,
representative
byrd,
you
recognize.
L
F
Bill
does
not
preclude
that.
I
mean
we
leave
that
as
an
option,
especially
since
others
have
mentioned
the
organ
donor
list.
Would
it
where
it's
really
going
to
help
is
specifically
in
the
circumstance
on
the
folks
that
brought
the
bill
is
if
you
have
a
private
donor.
So
that's
not
a
score
system
from
my
understanding,
there's
no
score
really
evaluated
with
that.
There's
still
a
consultation
with
the
doctor
on
whether
or
not
you'll
be
a
good
recipient.
F
Everything
else
I
mean
so
there's
still
a
process
they
go
through,
but
yeah
I
mean
there's
nothing
in
this
bill
that
precludes
you
know
not
being
vaccinated
from
from
reducing
that
score
for
purposes
of
getting
an
organ
donation.
But
again
it
can't
be
the
sole
reason.
It
can't
be
the
only
thing
that
it's
just
100.
A
A
M
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Mr
chairman,
I
do
have
a
an
amendment
drafting
code,
one
five,
three,
two
four.
A
M
Thank
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
In
committee
members,
this
is
just
an
administration
cleanup
bill
from
the
department
of
health
related
to
some
legislation
we
passed
during
the
special
session.
They
felt
like
there
needed
to
be
just
a
little
more
clarity
related
to
one
of
those
bills.
Does
three
things
and
simple,
very
simple:
clarifies
the
department
of
health
retains
the
authority
to
carry
out
its
routine
mission
for
public
health
number
two.
M
It
prevents
confusion
over
disagreements
between
the
mayors
and
the
commissioner
regarding
the
appointment
of
the
health
officer
and
then
number
three
just
clarifies
that
the
governor
does
have
the
authority
to
issue
executive
orders
for
all
95
counties
during
a
state
of
emergency.
There
was
some
question
about
the
six
counties:
the
four
metros
that
came
up
during
the
pandemic
in
the
state
of
emergency.
It
just
brings
clarity
to
that
and
that's
all
it
does,
and
with
that
I'll,
take
any
questions.
A
A
That
brings
us
to
item
number
six
house
bill.
2162.,
chairman
eldridge,
you're
recognized.
You
have
a
motion.
A
second.
A
Rewrites
the
bill
amendment
zero
one,
five,
zero.
Four
eight-
is
that
correct.
That
is
correct,
sir
okay,
you
have
a
motion.
Second,
on
the
amendment.
Let's
get
this
bill
in
without
objection.
Let's
get
this
amendment
on
the
bill.
All
those
in
favor
say
aye
opposed
eyes.
Have
it
we're
back
on
the
bills
a
minute
you're
recognized.
A
That
would
require
we
just
voted
to
put
the
amendment
on
there,
so
you
can
no
longer
call
out
okay.
Sir,
thank
you.
You
are
recognized.
D
Thank
you
house,
bill
2162
is
dealing
with
unlicensed
facilities
for
the
elderly.
This
has
become
a
real
issue
in
tennessee
in
the
last
little
while
and
it's
impacting
some
of
our
most
vulnerable
vulnerable
people.
D
D
This
bill
is
seeking
to
create
a
registry
for
these
unlicensed
facilities,
to
add
some
transparency
for
identifying
bad
actors,
while
also
empowering
families
and
people
to
make
a
decision
about
where
they're
going
to
go.
If
they
want
to
go
to
one
of
these
homes,
the
bill
also,
can
it
furthers
the
ability
of
the
state
to
act
against
unlicensed
facility
operators
when
individuals
under
their
care
are
subject
to
dangerous
conditions.
D
D
They
have
a
chance
to
make
make
this
right
in
there,
but
it
would
make
it
a
class
d
felony
and
I'd
like
to
give
you
all
a
little
background
about
this
bill.
Last
year
I
received
a
phone
call
from
acorn
the
coroner
in
hamlin
county
about.
I
went
out
to
to
a
home
that
had
about
16
people
13
to
16
people
in
it.
This
is
like
a
brick
rancher,
a
1
600
square
foot
rancher
there
was
raw
sewage
in
the
front
yard,
the
lady
that
had
passed
away.
D
D
D
D
Nobody
really
knew
who
was
in
charge
of
what
was
going
on,
so
the
administration
formed
a
strike
force
to
study
what
was
happening
and-
and
I
appreciate
them,
taking
an
interest
in
this.
I
appreciate
them
taking
the
time
to
look
into
who
is
in
charge
for
these
people,
and
I
also
want
to
thank
the
commission
on
aging
and
disabilities.
D
A
M
Gang
you
recognize
thank
you,
chairman
committee,
this.
This
legislation
is
brought
by
our
governor
and
administration
and
administration,
and
it's
addressing
a
very
critical
problem
that
our
state
is
beginning
to
face.
So
I
appreciate
the
sponsor
carrying
it
for
the
administration
and
I
would
encourage
this
committee
to
support
this
wholeheartedly.
Thank
you.
J
J
J
D
Folks,
here
to
speak,
to
speak
on
that,
but
the
thing
that
for
me
personally
is
and
being
in
business,
I
know
we're
we're.
You
know
we
like
to
know
that
people
are
doing
the
right
thing
for
the
right
reason.
I
don't
know
how
the
people
with
fire
suppression
the
sprinkler
systems,
and
they
would
be
that
interest.
J
J
When
I
think
the
purpose
of
the
bill
is
to
really
regulate
these
entities
make
sure
they're
not
operating
out
there
in
in
a
gray
area
and
to
make
sure
our
folks
are
taken
care
of
and
nobody's
being
taken
advantage
of,
and
that
seems
to
me
to
be
the
spirit
of
the
bill
and
at
least
as
I've
read
it
and
you
presented
it,
which
you
did
well
this
section
just
that's.
Would
you
be
amenable
to
amending
that
single
section
out
of
the
bill
because
it
just
it
seems
like
it's.
It's
misplaced
in
this
legislation.
A
N
O
Mr
chairman,
members
of
committee,
I'm
james
dunn,
executive
director,
on
behalf
of
the
commission
on
aging
disability,
I'm
here
today
on
behalf
of
the
governor,
the
strike
force
or
various
departments
and
agencies
who
have
worked
on
this
on
this
strike
force,
and
I
want
to
number
one
think
immediately.
The
sprinkler
contractors,
association
and
holly
kirby,
whom
I
have
spoke
with
about
this
bill,
and
I
want
to
thank
all
of
you
because
I
know
our
members
have
really
are
not
our
members.
O
Our
liaisons
have
really
been
wearing
you
out
when
we
found
out
that
the
sprinklers
association
took
issue
with
section
two.
Of
course
we
took
it
upon
ourselves
to
do
our
best
to
provide
you
with
accurate
information.
We
certainly
respect
the
will
of
the
general
assembly
and
believe
that
you
need
to
be
able
to
make
informed
decisions.
O
Section
two
complements
the
bill
and
it
complements
the
bill
because
currently,
plumbers
are
not
allowed
to
put
in
place
sprinklers
as
part
of
our
task
force.
We
have
found
over
a
hundred
facilities
so
far
that
are
not
in
compliance
with
licensure,
so
it
is
more
and
more
difficult,
in
particular,
in
our
rural
areas,
for
people
to
get
those
sprinklers
put
in
place
and
again,
the
provision
in
there
brought
by
the
department
of
commerce
and
a
good
idea
that
was
recommended
really
is
intended
to
bring
more
people
into
compliance.
O
So
the
bad
actors
don't
do
what
they're
supposed
to
do
anyway
right.
Those
are
the
people
that
we're
trying
to
get
at,
but
for
the
people
who
are
trying
to
do
what
they
need
to
do.
We
need
to
make
it
easier
for
them,
and
I
will
tell
you,
the
sprinklers
contractors
association
will
tell
you
that
there
are
different
requirements
on
training
that
there
are
different
requirements
on
insurance.
This
is
all
true.
This
is
all
true,
but
we
are
for
competition.
O
We
are
for
competition
at
tcad
and
we
believe,
frankly,
that
more
people
who
can
put
sprinklers
in
place
the
more
facilities
that
we
will
have
then
the
more
protected
that
our
aging
population,
our
elderly
population,
our
disabled
population
and
mental
health
populations,
will
all
be
protected.
But
to
representative
eldridge's
point
the
primary
meat
of
this
bill
really
is
the
registry,
and
this
doesn't
change
anything
regulatory.
O
Why
so
to
speak,
so
mental
health
did
department
of
health
who
currently
regulates
these
licensures
if
they
adjudicated
someone
and
determined
that
they
were
not
operating
with
a
license
at
that
point
of
time,
tcad
then,
as
a
repository,
would
take
that
information
it
would
be
put
up
on
a
list.
The
public
would
be
able
to
see
it.
O
This
would
not
impact
by
the
way
anyone
who
was
caring
for
a
relative.
It
would
not
impact
those
in
any
kind
of
way,
but
I
stand
by
if
there
are
any
further
questions-
and
I
thank
the
chairman
and
members
of
this
committee.
A
All
right,
representative
clemens,
would
you
like
to
ask
a
question.
J
I
it
seems
it
just
seems
odd
to
me.
I
haven't
heard
from
the
sprinkler
association.
I
didn't
even
know
they
were
working
this
bill,
but
you
know
this.
You
can't
help
but
see
this
section
jump
out,
and
I
I
guess
yeah.
We
want
all
these
houses
in
compliance.
We
want
them
to
have
sprinklers,
obviously,
but
there's
a
requirement
in
the
code
for
these
facilities
to
have
sprinklers
installed
by
people
trained,
install
these
systems.
J
So
I
it
just
seems
to
be
a
glaring
beacon
of
of
a
section
of
a
code
that,
as
explained
its
purpose,
its
spirit
and
its
intent.
It
just
doesn't
fit,
and
I
I
don't
know
what
else
you
can
add.
That
would
convince
me
otherwise,
but
go
ahead.
O
O
Me
well,
I
would,
I
would
just
say,
representative
clemens
number
one
thank
you
for
your
concern
and
and
thank
you
for
your
diligence
on
this
bill.
It's
an
important
policy,
I
would
say
to
you:
we've
got
1.3
million
tennesseans,
who
are
age,
60
and
older.
O
So
what
we're
trying
to
do,
and
what
the
governor
I
believe
is
trying
to
do-
is
proactively
mitigate
this,
and
so
one
of
the
things
that
we
can
do
to
do,
that
is
to
deregulate
in
a
very
narrow
way,
the
installation
of
sprinklers
and
all
we're
asking
for
really
is
that
if
there
are
five
or
fewer
folks
in
a
residential
facility
that
plumbers
in
those
scenarios
would
be
able
to
put
in
place
sprinklers,
we're
not
getting
it
commercial,
we're
not
getting
at
the
larger
facilities,
etc.
O
So
we
believe
that
this
is
a
good
compromise
on
the
front
side,
and
that's
why
we
have
told
the
sprinkler
association
who
has
asked
for
additional
provisions
and
compromises
that
we
intend
to
move
forward
with
the
bill
as
it
is
written.
J
Yeah,
I
mean
it
just
further
emphasized
that
what
the
spirit
and
intent
of
this
bill
is
I'm
familiar
with
the
aging
population
of
the
state
of
tennessee
and
the
percentage
thereof,
and
I
think
the
heart
and
soul
of
this
bill
goes
to
to
that.
I
just
think
this
part
tucked
in
here
has
no
role
or
doesn't
and
doesn't
further
the
spirit
of
the
legislation.
J
In
that
way,
I
would
just
like
to
see
it
be
a
separate
piece
of
legislation
and
that's
why
I
asked
if
the
sponsor
would
be
amenable
to
amending
it
out
and
we
can
run
it
as
a
separate
bill
and
just
vote
on
that
and
that's
a
separate
issue
altogether,
but
I,
it
just
seems
misplaced
in
this
bill.
That's
that's
my
point
thanks,
mr
chairman,.
O
I
believe,
if
we
could,
I'm
at
the
will
of
this
body
and
and
of
course,
representative
eldridge,
but
I
believe,
there's
ample
support
for
this
bill
in
the
spirit
of
what
it's
trying
to
accomplish,
and
I
would
encourage
this
committee
to
support
it,
and
I
would
also
say
to
you
that
the
sprinklers
association
is
here,
and,
moreover,
so
is
mr
gary
farley,
the
assistant
commissioner
of
the
department
of
commerce,
who
I
know
will
testify
that
this
is
not
an
issue
on
a
safety
matter
and
that
they
would
be
okay
with
plumbers
installing
these
sprinklers.
O
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
leader,
gain.
You
recognize.
M
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
You
know
I'm
in
the
insurance
business
and
I
would
love
to
carve
out
my
competition
and
that's
exactly
what
we're
doing
right
here
and
and,
commissioner,
if
you
could
answer
this
question
in
most
counties
and
cities,
they
have
what
they
call
code
enforcement.
Is
that
correct?
Yes,
sir,
and
don't
they
inspect
these
installations?
A
Thank
you,
representative
mitchell,
you're
recognized.
I
What
what
you're
doing
is
not
bringing
people
up
to
compliance
you're,
lowering
the
bar
to
so
they
can
get
to
compliance.
I
mean
in
talking
about
competition
and
free
market.
I
really
don't
care
about
competition
free
market.
I
care
about
the
safety
of
those
five
lives
or
less
that
you're
talking
about
it's
only
five
lives
in
these
homes.
I
I
mean
that's
a
ridiculous
statement.
You
know
if
it
was
one
of
your
loved
ones
as
one
of
those
five
people.
You
know
we
passed
the
laws
up
here
for
the
spot,
fire
sprinkler
contracting
licensing
program.
For
a
reason
you
know
we
have
licensing
contractors
licensed
electricians
for
a
reason
and
if
their
work
is
shoddy,
thank
god
the
sprinklers
kick
on
and
fix
that
problem.
I
O
O
Everyone
is
busy
so
we're
not
always
able
to
meet
with
everyone,
but
but
we
have
tried
to
meet
with
everyone,
and
I
would
just
tell
you
that
this
bill
does
go
a
far
away
to
protect
folks
and
to
the
assistant
leader's
point
to
the
assistant
leader's
point,
who
works
in
insurance
and
knows
these
things
well,
and
many
of
you
have
worked
on
local
governments
know
these
things
well.
C
All
right,
thank
you
and
chairman
whitson
recognized.
P
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
director
dunn,
thank
you
and
I
just
want
to
let
you
know
your
staff
did
reach
out
to
me
and
they
articulated
both
sides
of
this
issue
and
they
did
a
great
job
doing
it.
I
think
this
is
probably
the
best
bill
that
we
will
have
before
us
this
session,
nothing
more
important.
I
know
a
family
reason
that
we
did
this
and
or
that
we're
doing
this,
and
I
and
representative.
I
really
appreciate
you
bringing
this.
O
That
is
correct
right
now,
but
I
will
tell
you:
I
am
not
a
subject
matter
on
the
on
the
issue.
Mr
farley,
who
is
in
charge
of
the
fire
marshal's
office,
is
here
and
perhaps
could
speak
to
it
a
little
bit
better,
but
that
is
my
understanding.
Plumbers
currently
cannot
install
the
sprinklers
as
sprinkler
contractors
can
again.
That's
why
the
provision
I
think
that
is
in
there
is
very
narrow.
It
is
for
residential
units
with
five
or
fewer
residents.
P
And-
and
I
understand
that
five
people
were
just
as
important
to
me
as
six
people
and-
and
I
agree
with
my
friend
not
as
passionately
from
davidson
county
on
on
this
concern-
I
just
if
it's
if
this
bill
is
that
good.
I
don't
want
to
see
it
derailed
for
this
this
issue
and
I
think
it's
very
important.
We
resolve
that
before
we
move
forward.
I
want
to
support
this
bill.
P
O
Representative
you're,
very
compassionate
man
and
you've
always
been
kind
to
me.
I
appreciate
it.
You've
always
done
a
great
deal
for
the
elderly
and
disabled
population.
You're
known
for
that.
We
do
appreciate
your
support
on
this
bill.
I
will
tell
you
the
bill
has
been
thought
about
in
depth
over
the
course
of
time,
and
it
is
in
a
good
stature.
I
do
believe
I
do
I
do
believe,
and
so
we
would.
We
would
ask
to
to
move
the
bill
along
if
we,
if
again.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
representative
eldridge.
I
truly
commend
you
for
what
you're
trying
to
do
in
the
heart
of
this
bill.
I
think
we
all
support,
but
the
more
I
listen,
the
more
questions
I
have
in
regards
to
the
sprinkler
piece.
Well,
one
of
the
things
I
heard
was,
if
I,
if
I
heard
it
correctly,
the
sprinkler
people,
persons
who
are
qualified
to
do
it
now
didn't
have
a
problem
with
the
plumbers
doing
it.
H
I'm
also
hearing
that
the
plumbers
are
not
certified
and
I
would
hate
to
see
a
quality
bill
like
this
held
up
because
of
concerns
about
this.
So
I
guess
what
I'm
getting
at
is
there?
Is
it
feasible
or
possible
to
separate
this
so
that,
and
we
have
more
time
to
study
and
understand
what
is
happening
in
regards
to
the
sprinklers.
O
If,
if
I,
if
I
may
just
speak
to
this-
and
this
goes
to
represent
winston's
point
as
well-
I'm
I'm
sorry
if
you
does,
the
chairman
need
to
recognize
someone
else
up
now.
You're
recognized.
Thank
you,
sir.
O
As
lawmakers,
if
you
so
decide
that
these
plumbers
can
do
this,
then
they
can
they're
already
laying
water
lines
they're,
maybe
not
putting
sprinkler
heads
on
them,
maybe
they're
putting
other
faucets
on
them
and
different
things.
O
All
we're
asking
for
is
that
they're
able
to
put
sprinkler
heads
in
sprinkler
lines
in
these
small
residential
units
with
five
or
fewer
residents
and
represent
whitson
to
you
to
your
point
to
both
of
your
points.
We've
got
a
hundred
over
a
hundred
facilities.
Right
now
that
we
have
determined
are
out
of
compliance
in
the
state
about
8
to
15
people
per
facility.
It
fluctuates
some
of
them
smaller,
some
larger.
O
H
H
It
may
not
be
the
intent,
but
I
I
thought
I
heard
the
presenter
speak
in
regards
to
eight
to
15
persons
in
a
unit,
and
now
I
think
this
bill
is
talking
about
five
or
less,
and
I
guess
we're
talking
about
two
different
forms
of
qualifications
and-
and
I
really
I
think
we
need
to
hear
from
I'm
going
to
turn
both
sides
of
the
issue
on
this,
but
at
the
same
time
I
wouldn't
want
to
see
this
bill
held
up
because
of
this
issue.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
O
Mr
chair
members,
committee,
what
I
said
was
was,
on
average,
did
in
mental
health.
Both
have
group
homes
who
include
folks
who
are
under
this
number
of
what
what
we've
said.
I
think
three
three
or
more
again
these
are
non-relatives,
so
this
is
putting
a
dent
in
the
situation,
but
again
we're
talking
about.
We've
got
1.3
million
tennesseans
out
there.
O
You
know,
if,
if
you
don't,
if
you
don't
have
the
six
to
seven
thousand
dollars
a
month
to
be
in
an
assisted
living
facility,
if
you
are
not
in
medicaid,
which
is
the
bulk
of
this
population
as
its
population
ages,
if
we
don't
start
to
do
more
to
expand
on
facilities
group
homes
that
can
house
these
people
we're
going
to
be
we're
going
to
be
in
real
trouble,
so
I
would
encourage
you
to
act
sooner
rather
than
later
on
this.
I
believe
the
bill
is
good.
I
don't
want
to
belabor
the
point
too
much.
A
All
right,
speaker,
marshall,
recognized.
C
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
just
have
a
simple
question:
is:
do
the
plumbers
want
to
do
this
job?
Can
they
do
the
job
and
what
is
the
difference
in
cost
from
a
plumber
that
can
go
in?
I
know
some
great
plumbers
that
I
feel
like
could
do
this.
What's
what
would
be
the
difference
in
the
cost,
from
a
plumber
doing
it
and
a
registered
licensed
group?
O
Mr
speaker,
it's
always
very
important
to
me
that
I
give
you
good
and
accurate
information.
I
do
not
know
the
answer
to
that
question.
We
can
find
the
answer
to
it.
We
can
get
it
back
to
you.
I
don't
I
don't
know
if
if
mr
farley
would
know
that
or
or
not,
I
do
not
know
the.
I
do
not
know
the
answer.
I'm
happy
to
try
to
find
it.
C
A
Do
we
have
any
further
questions
for
done?
Do
okay,
wait,
let's
finish
with
done
before,
we
got
some
more
questions
for
you
before
we
move
on.
We
have
several
people
on
the
list
here,
chairman
kumar,
you
recognize.
G
A
You
are
on
the
list.
Thank.
G
Q
Q
O
I
would
just
say
to
you
number
one:
I
I
love
your
passion
on
this
subject
and
I
don't
disagree
with
you.
The
good
news
is
the
codes
are
all
the
same,
whether
the
plumber
or
whether
the
sprinkler
contractor
installs
it
the
codes
are
all
the
same.
So
in
that
way
we
do
have
universal
application
inequity,
in
my
humble
opinion,
and
if
we
do
nothing
and
we
are
under
the
pre-existing
system
which
now
exists,
we'll
just
end
up
with
a
bunch
of
facilities
that
don't
have
any
sprinklers
at
all.
Q
O
I
think
someone
who
has
no
competence
on
the
subject
probably
would
not
be
fit,
but
a
plumber,
however,
who
otherwise
can
lay
lines
of
the
sort,
makes
sense
to
me
that
it's
closely
related
enough-
or
at
least
it
is
in
the
department
of
commerce's
eyes
who
regulates
these
things,
which
is
good
enough
for
me.
Q
R
R
I
do
believe
that
any
qualified
plumber
can
probably
install
sprinkler
systems.
It's
not
over
the
top
hard
to
do.
I.
I
truly
believe
that
I
believe
that
they
can
do
it
in
a
more
economical
way,
very
much
so
than
than
a
bigger
company.
I'm
I'm
not
even
sure
at
this
point
in
the
world
that
we
live
in
today,
whether
you
could
even
get
a
larger
company
to
come
out
and
do
these
jobs.
As
a
matter
of
fact,
that
could
be
a
part
of
why
this
is
being
brought
in
this
posture.
R
You
know,
I
believe
that
that
codes,
especially
where
I'm
from
I
do
believe
that
codes
takes
care
of
of
any
malfunctions
it
would
be.
You
know,
I
think,
that
the
plumbers
will
will
very
easily
go
into
these
facilities
or
these
homes
evidently,
and
and-
and
I
think
they'll
do
a
good
qualified
job.
As
a
builder,
I'm
always
concerned,
you
give
the
state
an
inch
and
they
take
a
mile.
R
That
is
my
concern,
but
that's
one
reason:
I'm
here
to
keep
everybody
reeled
in
so
so
so
we
you
know
we'll
we'll,
but
but
I
have
full
confidence
that
say,
for
instance,
my
plumber
could
go
in
and
do
this
job
in
a
very
timely
in
a
very
qui
good
quality
and
in
a
very
just
just
a
way
that
that
would
probably
save
these
folks
a
lot
of
money
and
that's
probably
what
a
lot
of
this
is
and
and
just
trying
to
in
the
world.
R
We
live
in
right
now,
just
trying
to
get
somebody
to
do
it.
So
I
hope
that
helps
the
committee
out
just
a
little
bit
but
I'll
be
in
favor
of
this
because
I
think
it
is.
It
is
an
issue
that
we
need
to
deal
with
and
we
need
to
deal
with
swiftly
and
then
we
need
to
build
on
it.
O
Yes,
sir
representative
hicks,
I
never
thought
about
this
bill
as
a
jobs
bill.
That's
an
interesting
perspective,
but
coming
from
a
man
who
has
done
construction
for
40
years,
there's
a
lot
of
credibility
in
what
you're
saying.
So.
Thank
you
for
the
comment.
We
agree.
We
believe
that's
practical.
We
believe
that's
common
sense,
it's
good
to
hear
it
from
a
subject
matter.
Expert.
Thank
you,
sir.
E
Thank
you,
sir,
and
to
my
fellow
contractor.
I
appreciate
your
words,
but,
but
I
I'm
gonna
add
another
piece
and,
and
while
I
do
believe
that
the
plumbers
are
competent
and
capable
of
of
running
the
lines,
the
difference
is
is
head.
Placement
is
spray.
Application.
E
E
I
I
I
think
that
that
my
my
colleague
from
davidson
county
also
brought
up
the
point
of
if,
if
it's,
if
it's
good
enough
for
somebody
who
is
disabled
living
a
house,
it
should
be
good
enough.
For
me,
I
have
a
sprinkler
system
in
my
home
and
you
know
I
no
idea
the
difference
in
price
from
a
plumber
versus
a
a
licensed
sprinkler
installer,
but
I
do
know-
and
I've
installed
many
every
project
I've
ever
built-
has
a
sprinkler
system
and
they're
great
differences.
E
So
comparing
the
two
while
it
may
seem
similar-
and
it
is
similar
it
is,
it
is
traveling
water.
The
nuance
is
what
makes
all
the
difference
in
the
world
it's
why
they're
currently
licensed
it's?
Why
we
currently
have
a
separate
engineering
review?
It's
why
we
have
a
fire
inspector
come
in
and
inspect
it.
We
don't
have
the
plumber,
the
plumbing
inspector
does
not
inspect
a
fire
sprinkler
system.
E
These
are
all
reasons
that
it
is
extremely
different
and
and
and
nuanced
and-
and
I
agree
with
many
of
the
comments
that
I've
heard
if
we
strip
this
out,
it's
a
great
bill,
and
you
know
if,
if
the
problem
is
coming
up
with
the
the
extra
money
from
the
state
to
to
pay
the
additional
cost,
if
that,
if
that's
what
it
is
to
pay
for
an
expert
I'd,
be
willing
to
figure
out
how
we
figure
out
how
to
come
up
with
that
additional
money,
because
these
people
deserve
to
have
exactly
what
I've
got
in
the
best
manner
that
they
can
get
it.
O
I
I
would
just
say
that
it,
it
is
it's
very
rare,
probably
that
any
of
us
can
afford
to
put
sprinklers
in
our
in
our
own
home,
but
for
those
who
can,
even
if
you
can
you
gotta,
you
gotta
use
the
license
sprinkler
contractor
and
to
to
your
to
your
point,
how
we
ended
up
with
over
a
hundred
unlicensed
facilities
that
don't
have
sprinkler
systems
may
be
really
a
result
of
over
regulation,
maybe
maybe
at
a
future
point
we
should
start
looking
at
how
we
can
make
this
easier
for
the
sprinkler
contractors
as
well,
but
unfortunately
we
just
don't
have
enough
of
those
folks
to
go
around
as
what
I
understand
and
I
think
the
people
who
live
in
the
rural
areas
understand
that
issue.
A
On
the
list,
if
you
can
speaking
to
the
microphone,
tell
us
who
you're
with
and
who
you
are.
N
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
members.
N
All
right,
can
you
hear
me
now
all
right,
yeah
section
two
of
the
bill
allows
license
sprinkler,
either
llp
or
contractor-based
contractor's
license
requirements
to
install
nfpa,
13d
sprinkler
systems
and
group
homes
with
five
or
fewer
residents
for
a
group
home
with
six
or
more
residents.
A
commercial
sprinkler
system
installed
by
a
sprinkler
contractor
will
still
be
required.
N
Sorry
about
that,
the
2012
international
building
code
currently
allows
nfp
13d
sprinkler
system,
which
is
a
residential
sprinkler
system
in
a
group
home
with
five
or
fewer
residents.
Current
state
current
law
requires
a
fire
sprinkler
system
contractor
to
install
all
sprinkler
systems
in
tennessee,
both
residential
and
commercial
systems.
The
proposal
would
be
would
allow
a
licensed
plumber
to
install
these
nfpa
13d
systems,
which
are
on
which
are
only
allowed
in
non-commercial
residential
structures.
N
N
The
bill,
however,
would
allow
a
licensed
plumber
to
install
the
residential
sprinkler
system
in
accordance
with
nfpa
13d
using
the
domestic
water
supply.
Nfpa
13d
allows
materials
and
methods
that
plumbers
are
familiar
with,
and
the
systems
will
still
require
an
inspection
to
verify
that
it
was
installed
correctly.
Inspection
by
firing
spectrum.
N
The
state
fire
marshal's
office
does
not
consider
this
change
to
put
vulnerable
adults
at
risk,
but
it
would
lower
the
cost
of
insulation
allowing
more
small
group
home
owners
to
comply
with
building
code
requirements.
In
the
last
year
we
have
found
approximately
107
unlicensed
group
homes
that
would
have
required
sprinkler
systems
to
become
licensed
facilities.
N
As
of
march
the
15th,
there
are
211
sprinkler
contractors
that
are
licensed
to
do
business
in
the
state
of
tennessee.
Also
in
the
last
year,
our
office
has
worked
with
several
large
commercial
venues
that
required
sprinklers,
but
had
to
be
built
without
but
had
been
built
without
them.
Both
the
property
owners
and
my
office
struggled
to
get
licensed
contractors
to
return
phone
calls
and
even
give
us
quotes.
N
N
If
my
office
thought
that
this
bill
would
not
would
put
vulnerable
residents
at
risk,
we
would
not
speak
in
support
of
this
bill,
but
my
office
believes
that
this
bill
is
a
reasonable
solution
to
a
serious
problem
and
that
a
licensed
plumber
can
safely
and
more
affordably
install
the
nfpa
13d
system
in
group
homes.
And
I
don't
take
any
questions.
C
N
I
I
think
there
are
plumbers
out
there
that
would
want
to
do
this.
We'd
have
to
it
had
to
be
advertised
and
and-
and
let
them
know
that
this
is
a
an
alternative
based
on
what
I've
seen.
I
think
it
would
be
more
affordable
for
a
13
d
system.
A
domestic
system
could
be
more
affordable
done
by
a
plumber
than
it
would
be
a
licensed
contractor,
because
what
happens
is
a
commercial
licensed
contractor
putting
in
sprinkler
systems
the
bigger
jobs,
the
commercial
jobs?
N
N
That's
what
I'm
hearing
from
licensed
contractors
now
on
some
of
these
jobs.
We've
got
wedding
barns
and
things
like
that
that
have
been
built
without
sprinklers,
and
they
really
they
really
don't.
They
got
more
work
to
do
and
then
come
out
and
retrofit
something.
So
I
think
it
would
be
a
less
cost.
A
What
leader
gantt
you
recognize.
M
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
so
commissioner,
thank
you
for
being
here.
Yes,
so
when
a
fire
inspection
is
done
on
an
application
like
we're,
we're
talking
about
you're
going
to
find
that
problem,
if
there's
an
installation
by
a
plumber
or
another
contractor,
usually
in
most
cases,
is
that
correct?
Yes,
sir
and
you're
going
to
make
sure
it's
addressed
before
anybody
is
in
that
you
know,
building
correct.
N
I
Yes,
sir,
thank
you,
mr
chairman,
will
you
know
when
a
a
sprinkler
contractor
has
to
go
out
and
get
his
insurance?
You
know
he
has
to
notify
them.
They
will
be
doing
this
type
of
work,
so
they
have
to
pay
a
higher
premium.
I
Is
your
office
going
to
require
that
those
plumbers
notify
their
insurance
to
to
require
them
to
get
the
additional
coverage
that
you
know
their
premiums
are
going
to
go
up
as
well,
because
you
know
there's
going
to
be
more
risks
now?
What.
N
I
Represent
mitchell,
yes,
sir,
and
you
know,
we've
heard
a
lot
about
money
and
cost
and
people's
ability
to
put
sprinklers
in-
and
you
know
not
a
lot
about
safety
and
life
and
health,
and
I
think
that's
more
of
your
role.
I
I
thought
the
other
role
was
taking
care
of
our
aging
and
and
helpless
population
disabled
population,
but
wouldn't
a
place
that
has
a
sprinkler
system,
wouldn't
their
insurance
rate
in
a
a
good
sprinkler
system,
wouldn't
their
insurance
rates
be
a
whole
lot
less
than
some
place
that
doesn't
have
a
sprinkler
system.
N
Of
all,
I
think
a
13-d
system
is
a
good
sprinkler
system
and
I
think
sprinklers
do
save
lives
and
are
are
a
safety
mechanism
that
that
is
a
good.
So
I
I
and
I
didn't
catch
the
rest
of
that
question.
So.
I
N
I
And
you,
you
probably
answer
this
question
because
you
know
got
a
lot
of
firemen,
friends
and
they've
told
me,
you
know
when
they
get
a
call
and
they
say
it's
a
place
with
a
sprinkler
system.
You
know
most
places
they
have
to
run
in
they're,
not
even
at
a
brisk
walk
with
a
place
with
a
sprinkler
system,
because,
most
of
the
time
the
fire
is
out
before
they
get
there.
So
you
know
the
safety.
The
safety
of
these
folks,
I
think,
is
paramount,
and
you
know
I
I
I've
just
never
seen
a
bill.
I
I
N
I
N
Yes,
sir
code,
anything
five
or
under
in
a
group
home
they're
required
and
they
are
allowed
to
have
a
13
d
system,
anything
that
is
six
or
more
moves
up
to
the
13r
system,
which
is
a
more
stricter
or
if,
if
buildings
get
bigger,
it
goes
to
a
nfpa
13
system,
like
mr
freeman's,
some
of
his
buildings
that
he's
built.
I
I
O
If
I
might
just
add
on
to
chief
farley
here,
I
I
would,
I
would
say
to
I
mean
this
is
really
what
this
is
about,
so
the
the
registry,
the
regime,
the
registry
it.
That
is
the
bulk
of
this
bill.
That
is
the
bulk
of
this
bill,
but
the
provision
in
there-
and
I
think
this
is
why
the
da's
conference
has
decided
to
support
this
bill.
If
a
person
is
on
that
registry
and
they
continue
to
operate
subsequent
because
what
we
find
is-
and
we
want
to
encourage
people
to
be
licensed.
O
We
want
more
of
these
places
that
can
house
these
folks
not
fewer
right,
so
we
want
them
to
come
into
compliance,
but
the
idea
is
that,
if
you're
on
that
registry
and
you
operate
subsequent,
you
then
become
subject
to
the
class
d
felony
we're
going
to
get
at
the
worst
of
the
worst
I'm
telling
y'all.
There
are
people
who
literally
move
around
this
state
and
use
different
people
and
set
up
pop-up
places.
We
try
to
shut
them
down
and
then
they
go
to
other
places
pop
them
up.
O
I
mean
so
that
protection
that
protection
is
in
place.
I
just
I
don't
want
to
lose
sight
this
registry
and
protecting
these
vulnerable
people
is
really
what
this
is
all
about.
So
I
think
I
I
really
think
that
the
department
of
commerce
should
be
commended,
because
what
they're
trying
to
do
is
offer
up
a
solution
that
will
that
will
result
in
more
facilities
being
able
to
be
in
compliance
and
be
licensed.
I
believe
that's
the
reason
for
the
provision,
so
thank
you.
Chief.
Q
N
Well,
right
now,
a
licensed
plumber
has
to
be
have
a
license
to
operate
as
a
licensed
plumber,
and
a
licensed
sprinkler
contractor
has
to
have
a
license
to
act
as
a
sprinkler
contractor.
What
this
does
it?
It
gives
the
authority
to
allow
a
plumber
to
do
a
sprinkler
work
right
now.
They're
not
approved
to
do
that.
Well,.
Q
Q
Job
or
would
your
office
be
okay,
getting
rid
of
certification
altogether?
No
sir,
why
not
you're
looking
at
it
coach
is
looking
at
it
at
the
final
of
the
day
as
long
as
someone's
licensed
to
do
it.
Why
should
they
be
certified
to
know
who
is
a
licensed
just?
Why
should
be
certified
to
put
in
a
sprinkler
system
to
know
who.
Q
Q
A
Let
me
let
me
ask
something
here:
if
I
get
a
clarification
on
this
for
a
second,
so
explain
to
me,
there
are
there's
13
d.
Is
that
correct
and
then
there's
a
13
and
then
what's
the
other
one
13r.
N
A
So
so
I
guess
the
question
I
guess
for
the
the
chairman
was
actually
from
to
give
me
clarification
in
this
situation.
Is
a
13d
and
he's
asking
about
certification
and
you
you're?
Would
you
be
saying
that
someone
needs
to
be
certified
for
the
13r
and
the
13,
but
this
is
specifically
allowing
a
non-certified
person
to
install
a
13d.
Do
you
do
you
believe
that
someone
needs
a
certification
for
a
13d?
N
Believe
that
a
plumber
could
could
use
to
install
a
13d
system,
a
13r
and
a
13
system,
it
needs
to
be
a
licensed
sprinkler
contractor
right
because.
Q
N
N
Q
N
Q
Q
N
Q
H
You,
mr
chairman,
I
I
guess
I
need
some
clarity.
I've
heard.
H
C
H
I've
heard
both
witnesses
reference
what
what
the
sprinkler
system
is
capable
of
in
this
time
frame
that
we're
looking
that
we're
in
and
whether
they
have
a
concern,
a
problem
about
this.
I
want
to
know
if
there's
any
representation
from
the
sprinkler
system,
companies
that
could
speak
for
themselves
as
opposed
to
our
present
witnesses.
Speaking
on
their
behalf.
N
A
We
do
have
somebody
here
from
from
them
that
they're
next
on
the
list,
thank
you
hoping
to
have
them
up
here
and
it's
my
plan
to
have
them
up
here.
So
thank
you,
sir
representative
hicks
you're
recognizing.
C
O
Say
that's
accurate
if
you
would
like
we
can
get
you
more
specific
information,
but
the
majority
of
them
outside
we've
had
quite
a
few
of
memphis
outside
of
the
majority
of
our
royal
areas
and.
R
And
would
you
agree
that
that
is
sort
of
part
of
the
issue
in
getting
someone
out
to
those
rural
areas
to
try
to
put
these
in?
I
mean,
I
know
mr
farley
know
him
well
and,
and
he
is
really
trying
to
work
with
the
state
on
this,
because
I
mean
he's
really
done
a
great
job
in
trying
to
take
care
of
this
issue.
I
can
tell
because
it's
in
the
rural
areas
is
the
big
issue
here.
R
O
Yeah,
you
know
I
would
say
to
representative
hicks.
If
y'all
should
pass
this
bill
and
section
two
be
in
it,
there
would
be
nothing.
I'm
not
aware.
I
mean
you
could
speak,
I'm
not
in
this
subject
matter
expertly,
but
I
don't
believe
that
there
would
be
anything
that
would
preclude
a
sprinkler
contractor
from
hiring
plumbers
so
that
maybe
they
could
further
work
in
these
extended
rural
areas.
I
don't
know
I
I
don't
know.
N
I
I
that
would
be
somebody
from
a
contractor
have
to
make
that
decision.
Representative.
L
Yeah
in
rural
counties,
especially
in
wayne
county,
we
consider
anyone
that
would
is
willing
to
crawl
into
your
house
license,
and
so
we
get
what
we
can
take
in
in
wayne
county.
But
I've
got
a
guy
that
he's
done
my
plumbing
electrician
for
years
and
he's
got
like
a
seventh
grade
education,
and
I
would
trust
him
with
anything
like
that.
I
think
it
boils
down
to
experience
more
than
it
does
that
that
that
piece
of
paper
anyway,
okay.
A
Thank
you
any
further
questions,
mr
farley,
okay,
chairman
vaughn,
all
right,
all
right,
sig,
no
further
questions.
Thank
you
guys
for
your
testimony.
We
do
have
brian
briggs
from
the
national
fire
sprinkle
sprinklers
association.
Thank
you,
chairman
members
of
the
committee,
and
just
for
the
record.
Yeah
tell
us
who
you
are,
who
you're
with
and
make
sure
that
microphone's
on.
S
S
So
we
do
completely
understand
the
importance
of
this
bill.
As
we
spoke
with
representative
eldridge
earlier.
We
do
support
this
bill
completely.
It's
very
important
and
it
needs
to
be
tracked
and
they
do
need
to
be
identified,
but
our
position
are.
We
do
oppose
section
two
as
plenty
as
several
of
you
have
spoke.
S
S
S
As
representative
freeman
said,
my
contractors
know
what
the
sprinkler
heads
are
designed
to
do.
They
know
the
placement
they
know
the
density.
They
know
the
shadowing
areas
that
the
heads
will
do
and
work,
I'm
not
disputing
that.
The
plumbers
can't
get
the
water
to
the
head.
I
absolutely
agree
they
can
do
it,
they
can
get
the
water
to
the
head,
but
they
don't
understand
the
design
of
it.
Sprinkler
systems
are
designed
for
life
safety
in
this
situation.
S
S
S
We
have
personally
spoke
to
several
of
our
contractors
who
do
work
in
rural
areas,
but
retrofitting
any
project
is
always
costly.
It
doesn't
matter
if
you're
going
in
and
doing
any
type
of
work.
You've,
probably
all
remodeled
your
house
at
some
point.
If
you'd
have
done
it
on
the
front
end,
it
would
have
been
a
lot
cheaper,
but
anytime,
you
do
any
type
of
retro
work
on
your
house.
It's
going
to
cost
you
a
little
more
so,
but
as
far
as
the
state
fire
marshal's
office,
we
do
we
understand
they
do
a
great
job.
S
A
Thank
you.
I've
got
a
few
members
that
want
to
ask
some
questions.
Chairman
vaughan,
you're
recognized.
B
B
That's
one
of
the
things
I'm
concerned
about.
I
know
that
in
my
jurisdiction
that
that
our
inspectors
constantly
tell
our
our
licensed
contractors
that
they
are
not
there
to
supervise
them,
they
are
there
to
review
their
work.
The
other
issue
is
how
much
work
on
the
front
end.
Do
you
do
from
a
design
perspective.
S
S
You
are
correct:
yes,
only
first
off
I'll
answer,
your
first
question.
Typically,
it
doesn't
happen
this
way,
because
our
our
wonderful
homebuilders
that
y'all
are
y'all
do
under
you
do
get
a
relationship
with
your
inspector
a
lot
of
times.
They
will
come
in
and
say
you
need
to
move
that
header
over.
You
need
more
braces.
You
need
more
supporting
you
need
this.
S
It
takes
in
state
of
tennessee
three
to
five
years
to
become
a
licensed
sprinkler
contractor
per
your
state
laws
that
require
that
so
and
that's
to
to
understand
the
design
of
a
system
so
that
you
understand
what
this,
how
the
sprinkler
head
is
supposed
to
react
during
a
fire,
a
plumber
there's
so
many
different
heads
on
the
market.
Every
head
is
designed
to
do
different
things
for
a
different
application
and
there's
a
residential,
fast
response
head.
S
A
Thank
you
and
for
the
members
of
the
committee.
We
are
at
our
allotted
time,
so
I
appreciate
your
your
testimony
with
that
we're
gonna
have
to
go
back
into
session.
Yes,
sir,
without
objection,
I
would
take
a
motion
to
adjourn
okay
with
objection.
We
are
adjourned.
All
bills
will
be
rolled
to
next
week.
The
remaining
bills
will
be
taken
up
next
week.