No. 39056 (5-year Review): Rule R156-17b. Pharmacy Practice Act Rule

DAR File No.: 39056
Filed: 01/05/2015 02:53:01 PM

NOTICE OF REVIEW AND STATEMENT OF CONTINUATION

Concise explanation of the particular statutory provisions under which the rule is enacted and how these provisions authorize or require the rule:

Title 58, Chapter 17b, provides for the licensure of pharmacists, pharmacy interns, pharmacy technicians, dispensing medical practitioners, pharmacy technician trainees, and various classifications of pharmacies. Subsection 58-1-106(1)(a) provides that the Division may adopt and enforce rules to administer Title 58. Subsection 58-17b-201(3) provides that the Utah State Board of Pharmacy's duties and responsibilities shall be in accordance with Section 58-1-202. Subsection 58-1-202(1)(a) provides that one of the duties of each board is to recommend appropriate rules to the Division director. This rule was enacted to clarify the provisions of Title 58, Chapter 17b, with respect to pharmacists, pharmacy interns, pharmacy technicians, dispensing medical practitioners, pharmacy technician trainees, and various classifications of pharmacies.

Summary of written comments received during and since the last five-year review of the rule from interested persons supporting or opposing the rule:

Since this rule was last reviewed in February 2010, it has been amended several times with the following different effective dates of rule amendments which have been filed (08/21/2014, 12/23/2013, 08/08/2013, 11/29/2012, 11/21/2011, 07/26/2011, 10/22/2010, and 08/02/2010). The Division received an 08/11/2014 letter from Eagle Gate College Group with respect to pharmacy technician license education requirements. The Division and Board considered the written comments, but no additional changes to the proposed rule were filed based on the written comments. The Division also received a 12/16/2013 letter from Lis Houchen with the National Association of Chain Drug Stores with respect to proposed rule amendments filed in November 2013. The Division and Board considered the written comments, but no additional changes to the proposed rule were filed based on the written comments. The Division also received July 2013 written comments from Linda Duke with respect to pharmacy technician-in-training amendments and July 2013 written comments from David Pittan with respect to licensing exemption amendments under which a prescribing practitioner may dispense certain medications in the practitioner's place of business. The Division and Board considered the written comments received, but no additional changes to the proposed rule were filed based on the written comments and comments made during a July 2013 public rule hearing. The Division also received a 11/04/2012 email from Hunter Finch in which he notified the Division of an incorrect statute citation in the rule. The Division filed a nonsubstantive rule change with Administrative Rules on 11/29/2012 in DAR No. 37082 in response to the written email from Mr. Finch. The Division also received too many numerous comments to list here which were submitted in June 2010 in response to a Division proposed rule filing filed in June 2010 which proposed changing the supervising ratio of pharmacist to pharmacy technician. The Division and Board considered the written comments received, but no additional changes to the proposed rule were filed based on the written comments and comments made during a June 2010 public rule hearing.

Reasoned justification for continuation of the rule, including reasons why the agency disagrees with comments in opposition to the rule, if any:

This rule should be continued as it provides a mechanism to inform potential licensees of the requirements for licensure as allowed under statutory authority provided in Title 58, Chapter 17b, with respect to pharmacists, pharmacy interns, pharmacy technicians, dispensing medical practitioners, pharmacy technician trainees, and various classifications of pharmacies. The rule should also be continued as it provides information to ensure applicants for licensure are adequately trained and meet minimum licensure requirements and provides licensees with information concerning unprofessional conduct, definitions, and ethical standards relating to the profession.

The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Division of Administrative Rules, or at:

Commerce
Occupational and Professional Licensing
HEBER M WELLS BLDG
160 E 300 S
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111-2316

Direct questions regarding this rule to:

• Rich Oborn at the above address, by phone at 801-530-6767, by FAX at 801-530-6511, or by Internet E-mail at [e-mail]

Effective:

01/05/2015

Authorized by:

Mark Steinagel, Director

---