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.