Legislature(2011 - 2012)BARNES 124
04/02/2012 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB251 | |
| HB259 | |
| HB266 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 251 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 259 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 266 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 259-PHARMACY AUDITS
3:29:13 PM
CHAIR OLSON announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 259, "An Act establishing procedures and
guidelines for auditing pharmacy records; and providing for an
effective date."
CHAIR OLSON reminded members that at previous hearings
amendments were moved, discussed, and tabled. He then announced
his intention to dispense with the amendments, begin discussion
of the draft committee substitute, and set it aside for members
to review.
3:29:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to take from the table Amendment 4,
labeled 27-LS0675\I.5, Martin, 3/14/12, which read, as follows:
Page 3, lines 15 - 16:
Delete all material and insert:
"(b) This section does not apply to
(1) a criminal investigation; or
(2) an investigation or audit by a
governmental agency, including state Medicaid
programs."
There being no objection, Amendment 4 was before the committee.
[The committee treated the amendment as though an objection had
been made for the purpose of discussion.]
3:29:59 PM
KONRAD JACKSON, Staff, Representative Kurt Olson, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Olson, Chair, House
Labor and Commerce Standing Committee, stated that Amendment 4
was previously discussed at the March 26, 2012 House Labor and
Commerce Standing Committee meeting. He explained that
Amendment 4 would exempt audits from governmental agencies and
has been incorporated into the proposed committee substitute
(CS) [Version D], which the committee will take up later in the
meeting.
3:31:02 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to withdraw the motion to adopt
Amendment 4. There being no objection, Amendment 4 was
withdrawn.
3:31:24 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to take from the table Amendment 3,
labeled 27-LS0675\I.4, Martin, 3/14/12, which read:
Page 2, line 30, following "provider,":
Insert "documented telephone calls from the
prescriber or prescriber's agent,"
There being no objection, Amendment 3 was before the committee.
[The committee treated the amendment as though an objection had
been made for purpose of discussion.]
3:31:42 PM
MR. JACKSON explained Amendment 3 was previously discussed. He
referred to page 2, line 29 of the bill, which read,"...a
pharmacy may use any record...." He explained that since a
pharmacy keeps a record of any calls to prescribers and
prescribers' agents that the language in Amendment 3 is not
needed. He clarified that this language will not be included in
the proposed CS since it was deemed unnecessary.
3:32:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to withdraw the motion to adopt
Amendment 3. There being no objection, Amendment 3 was
withdrawn.
3:32:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to take from the table Amendment 2,
labeled 27-LS0675\I.3, Martin, 3/14/12, which read:
Page 2, following line 23:
Insert a new paragraph to read:
"(11) an auditor may not assess a charge-
back, recoupment, or other penalty against a pharmacy
based on a prescription that is mailed or delivered by
request of a patient as part of a routine business
practice;"
Renumber the following paragraphs accordingly.
There being no objection, Amendment 2 was before the committee.
[The committee treated the amendment as though an objection had
been made for purpose of discussion.]
3:32:41 PM
MR. JACKSON explained that Amendment 2 addressed a concern about
clarification on wording. He said that Amendment 2 has been
incorporated into the proposed CS that members will see shortly.
The language was modified on line 3 of the amendment by deleting
"based on" and inserting "solely because" and deleting the word
"that" after the word "prescription" to further clarify that
chargebacks or assessments would not be based solely on the
mailing or delivery of a prescription. He reiterated that this
language would clarify that if a prescription is mailed out the
pharmacists will not be penalized.
3:33:41 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked him to reference the bill version.
MR. JACKSON noted that the working document is the original
version of HB 259. He pointed out that a proposed CS, Version D
is prepared, but is not yet before the committee.
3:34:19 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to withdraw Amendment 2. There
being no objection, Amendment 2 was withdrawn.
3:34:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to take from the table Amendment 1,
labeled 27-LS0675\I.2, Martin, 3/14/12, which read:
Page 2, following line 5:
Insert a new paragraph to read:
"(3) an auditor may not audit more than 75
prescriptions during a single audit;"
Renumber the following paragraphs accordingly.
There being no objection, Amendment 1 was before the committee.
[The committee treated the amendment as though an objection had
been made for purpose of discussion.]
3:34:53 PM
MR. JACKSON explained that Amendment 1 would limit the number of
prescriptions requested during an audit to 75. He related that
audits take considerable time for the pharmacists to prepare
for; however, the administration expressed concern that when
substantial errors occur during an audit once the threshold is
reached the limit to 75 prescriptions creates difficulties for
the auditors. The language in the proposed CS - soon to be
before the committee [Version D] - is that the language will be
revised to include a 10 percent trigger. He explained if an
auditor discovers a 10 percent or greater error rate during an
audit the 75 prescription cap goes away.
3:35:48 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON withdrew Amendment 1. There being no
objection, Amendment 1 was withdrawn.
3:35:59 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 259, labeled 27-LS0675\D, Martin,
3/30/12.
CHAIR OLSON objected for purpose of discussion. [Version D was
before the committee.]
3:36:28 PM
MR. JACKSON explained the changes contained in the proposed CS
for HB 259, Version D. He referred to page 2, lines 9-12 to
paragraph (4). The original bill imposed a cap of two years
after the date the claim was submitted. The new language in
paragraph 4 would allow for a cap of two years or the term of a
contract to apply.
MR. JACKSON referred to page 2, lines 13-15 to paragraph (5) of
version D, which was changed to allow for consultation with a
pharmacist licensed in this state or in another state. He
pointed out if the consultation was limited to pharmacists in
Alaska that not enough consultants would be available.
MR. JACKSON stated that Version D removed paragraphs (6), (7),
(8), (11), (16), and (18) from the original version of HB 259
since the Department of Administration (DOA) and Mr. Barnhill
had serious concerns with the language in those paragraphs.
MR. JACKSON referred to page 2, lines 6-8, to paragraph (3),
which inserts the language in previously withdrawn Amendment 1.
He reiterated that this amendment was just withdrawn. This
language would remove the cap of 75 prescriptions during a
single audit in the event of a 10 percent or greater error rate.
3:38:03 PM
MR. JACKSON referred to page 2, lines 24-26, to paragraph (9),
which inserts the language in previously withdrawn Amendment 2,
which would disallow assessments solely on the basis of mailing
or delivering a prescription.
MR. JACKSON referred to page 3, lines 13-16, to subsection (b),
which inserts the language in previously withdrawn Amendment 4,
which would exempt governmental agencies.
MR. JACKSON explained the last change is to add an effective
date of July 1, 2013, to give people an opportunity to allow for
a transition period for HB 259.
3:38:31 PM
CHAIR OLSON removed his objection.
[HB 259 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SSHB251 Draft Proposed CS ver O.pdf |
HL&C 4/2/2012 3:15:00 PM |
HB 251 |
| SSHB251 Sponsor Statement ver O.pdf |
HL&C 4/2/2012 3:15:00 PM |
HB 251 |
| SSHB251 Explanation of Changes ver R to ver O.pdf |
HL&C 4/2/2012 3:15:00 PM |
HB 251 |
| SSHB251 Explanation of Changes-Original bill to ver O.pdf |
HL&C 4/2/2012 3:15:00 PM |
HB 251 |
| SSHB251 Sectional Analysis of Draft CS ver O.pdf |
HL&C 4/2/2012 3:15:00 PM |
HB 251 |
| HB259 Draft Proposed CS ver D.pdf |
HL&C 4/2/2012 3:15:00 PM |
HB 259 |