Legislature(2021 - 2022)BARNES 124
02/23/2022 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
Note: the audio
and video
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB323 | |
| HB306 | |
| SJR15 | |
| HB307 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 306 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 307 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 323 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SJR 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 306-EXTEND BOARD OF PHARMACY
3:28:35 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the next order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 306, "An Act extending the termination date of
the Board of Pharmacy; and providing for an effective date."
3:28:46 PM
GREG SMITH, Staff, Representative Andi Story, Alaska State
Legislature, introduced HB 306 on behalf of Representative
Story, sponsor. He explained that HB 306 would extend the Board
of Pharmacy's termination date from 6/30/22 until 6/30/28, a
six-year extension recommended by the Division of Legislative
Audit. He explained that the Board of Pharmacy was established
for purposes of controlling and regulating the practice of
pharmacy in Alaska, which is necessary to protect the public's
health, safety, and welfare. The board is comprised of seven
members, of which five must be licensed pharmacists and two must
be members of the public with a direct financial interest in the
health care industry. The Board of Pharmacy was first created
in 1913, those provisions were repealed, and a new board was
enacted in 1955. An audit was completed by the Division of
Legislative Audit in 2021 and that report is in the committee's
packets.
3:30:10 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS [opened invited testimony].
3:30:22 PM
KRIS CURTIS, CPA, CISA, Legislative Auditor, Division of
Legislative Audit, provided invited testimony regarding the
division's sunset audit of the Board of Pharmacy. She stated
that the July 2021 audit report concluded that, overall, the
board is serving the public's need by effectively conducting its
meetings and actively amending regulations, but that the
division found improvements are needed with the board's
licensing function. She said the audit further concluded that
the Division of Corporations, Business and Professional
Licensing staff actively worked at implementing the new
requirements for the controlled substance prescription database,
but at the time of the audit, occupational boards were not
effectively monitoring or enforcing those requirements. She
said the division recommends the legislature extend this board
six years, two years less than the allowed maximum in statute of
eight years to reflect the need for more timely oversight of the
board's evolving role in combatting the opioid crisis.
MS. CURTIS referred to Exhibit 4, Licensing and Registration
activity, on page 13 of the audit report. As of January 2021,
she related, there were 4,280 active individual and facility
licenses, a 14 percent increase compared to the 2017 audit due
to the addition of three new license types. [Speaking to
Exhibit 6, Schedule of Revenues and Expenditures] on page 15,
she stated that as of January 2021 the board had a surplus of
nearly $800,000, but that at its February 2021 meeting the board
decided not to reduce the fees because it planned to hire a new
licensing examiner position which would increase expenditures in
the future. [The board] was also concerned that establishing a
disciplinary matrix that covered noncompliance with the
controlled substance prescription database requirements would
likely increase future investigative expenditures. She then
drew attention to [Exhibit 5, License, Registration, and Permit
Fees] on page 14.
3:32:56 PM
MS. CURTIS recounted that the 2017 sunset audit concluded that
changes to laws governing the database would significantly
change the board's role in helping combat the misuse and abuse
of controlled substances. She noted that the [2017] audit
recommended only a four-year extension to allow the legislature
to evaluate the board's progress in administering these new
laws. Therefore, she advised, a large portion of the [2021]
audit report is dedicated to evaluating the board's progress in
administering the controlled substance prescription database
(CSPD). She referenced the background information section of
the report and recalled that Senate Bill 196, passed in 2008,
required the board to establish and maintain a CSPD. The law
intent was to improve patient care and foster the goal of
reducing the misuse, abuse, and diversion of controlled
substances. The law requires that each dispenser electronically
submit information to the board regarding each prescription
dispensed of controlled substances. The CSPD electronically
collects this information from in-state pharmacies as well as
other dispensers.
MS. CURTIS explained that after the law's passage it became
apparent that important authority was omitted, thereby limiting
the ability of the database to meet its intent. Subsequent
changes to the law in 2017 and 2018 dramatically impacted how
the Board of Pharmacy administers the database. She called
attention to the audit report conclusions regarding the
database starting on page 16. The first of the three
significant changes, she continued, requires licensees of the
six occupational boards which prescribe or dispense controlled
substances to now register with the CSPD. The second
significant change requires that data regarding prescriptions
and dispensed substances be reported daily to the CSPD. The
third requires practitioners to check the database prior to
dispensing, prescribing, or administering medications, with
certain exclusions. She said the audit concluded that in
general these changes made the database more capable of
combating the opioid crisis.
3:35:15 PM
MS. CURTIS stated that implementing the new CSPD laws requires
the coordination of six occupational boards. The Board of
Pharmacy administers the database and provides information to
the other occupational boards, while all the occupational boards
are responsible for monitoring compliance of their respective
licensees. As of January 2021, she continued, each board was at
a different stage in implementing the laws and none of the
boards were fully monitoring or enforcing the new requirements.
She explained that Exhibit 7 on page 17 summarizes the degree
each of the six boards has monitored the requirements to
register with the database and report to the database. Only the
Board of Pharmacy, she continued, was monitoring both the
registration and reporting requirements; none of the boards were
monitoring whether their individual licensees were complying
with reviewing the database prior to dispensing, prescribing, or
administering medications. Starting second quarter 2020, the
prescription drug monitoring program coordinator began providing
summary information on a quarterly basis to the boards regarding
the percent of their licensees that are reviewing the database,
but detailed information about individual licensee's compliance
is not included.
MS. CURTIS spoke to Exhibit 8 on page 18 of the audit report.
She related that according to [the 2021 Prescription Drug
Monitoring Program (PDMP) Legislative Report] from the Alaska
Drug Monitoring Program, most prescribers are not reviewing the
CSPD. She said the division also found that enforcement was
limited by inadequate disciplinary matrices. In general, she
explained, a disciplinary matrix guides the resolution of a
board's cases. Board disciplinary matrices did not cover the
CSPD requirements during the audit period. She drew attention
to Exhibit 9 on page 20 of the audit report summarizing the
status of disciplinary matrices as of January 2021. She related
that several board matrices covered a failure to register with
the database but not a failure to review the database or report
to the database.
3:37:24 PM
MS. CURTIS discussed the provision of unsolicited notifications
on page 20. She said statutes authorize the Board of Pharmacy
to provide unsolicited notifications to a pharmacist or a
practitioner if a patient has received one or more prescriptions
[for controlled substances] inconsistent with the generally
recognized standards of safe practice. Generally recognized
standards of safe practice must be defined by the respective
boards, she stated, and at the time of the audit those standards
had not been fully defined. Only two applicable boards had set
prescription limitations in regulations. The State Medical
Board set a limitation for just their initial prescriptions of
50 morphine milligram equivalents (MME); the Board of Dental
Examiners set a limitation of 60 MME. She noted that page 20 of
the report explains that the Board of Pharmacy may, but is not
required to, send patient-specific utilization notifications to
pharmacists and practitioners. The division found that these
patient-specific notifications were not issued during the audit
period and instead the prescription drug monitoring coordinator
sent summary data to the applicable occupational boards in the
form of standard board reports and to practitioners in the form
of prescriber report cards.
3:38:48 PM
The House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee was recessed at
3:38 p.m. to a call of the co-chair.
5:09:50 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS called the House Labor and Commerce Standing
Committee meeting back to order at 5:09 p.m. Representatives
Nelson, Kaufman, Schrage, Spohnholz, and Fields were present at
the call back to order. Representatives Snyder and McCarty
arrived as the meeting was in progress.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS continued the committee's hearing on HB 306.
5:10:23 PM
MS. CURTIS resumed her invited testimony regarding the Division
of Legislative Audit's sunset audit of the Board of Pharmacy.
She brought attention to the five recommendations in the audit
report found under the Findings and Recommendations section
beginning on page 25. She said the first recommendation is that
the board chair and the DCBPL director should improve procedures
and training to ensure applicants meet requirements prior to
licensure. The division's licensing testing found several
errors, the most concerning finding being that 20 percent of
facility licenses tested did not include all the required
regulatory documentation. This included the finding that three
of the facility licenses tested answered yes to a professional
fitness question, but their application was not further reviewed
by a supervisor. Statutes state that a board may deny a license
if the board finds the applicant has been convicted of a crime
or acted in a way that does not conform to minimum professional
standards. Policy states that if the person answers yes to one
of the series of questions to determine the person's
professional fitness, it should be reviewed by a supervisor and
possibly forwarded to investigations for follow-up. Three cases
were found where that did not occur, but the license was issued.
MS. CURTIS continued her review of the audit's recommendations.
She said the second recommendation is that the board should
adopt regulations for renewing outsourcing facilities and third-
party logistics provider licenses. When these new license types
were brought on, the renewal section of the regulations was not
updated. She related that the third recommendation is that the
applicable occupational boards and DCBPL's director should
continue to coordinate efforts to improve the monitoring and
enforcement of CSPD requirements. Ms. Curtis specified that the
fourth recommendation is that the DCCED commissioner should
allocate sufficient resources to ensure licensees holding a Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) registration number are
accurately and consistently recorded in DCBPL's licensing
database. This helps ensure there could be electronic
crossmatch with the controlled substance prescription database.
She said the fifth recommendation is that DCCED's commissioner
should allocate sufficient resources to ensure the CSPD
requirements are enforced.
MS. CURTIS noted that the commissioner's and board chair's
responses begin on page 47. She said that both the commissioner
and the chair discuss some of the corrective action that has
already been taken. She further noted that generally the
commissioner and board chair agree with the recommendations and
the conclusion.
5:12:49 PM
REPRESENTATIVE NELSON asked Ms. Curtis whether the Board of
Pharmacy is meeting online.
MS. CURTIS replied that through the pandemic the boards shifted
to meeting online, and whether the boards continue doing online
meetings is dependent upon their business need.
5:13:23 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ asked whether any statutory changes are
needed to ensure maximum participation in the prescription drug
monitoring program.
5:14:02 PM
SARA CHAMBERS, Director, Division of Corporations, Business and
Professional Licensing (DCBPL), Department of Commerce,
Community, and Economic Development (DCCED), responded that when
the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) became mandatory
as part of the Medicaid reform bill that the legislature
grappled with in about 2016, there was a clear desire on the
part of the legislature to move in a particular direction. But,
she continued, legislation, regulations, and policy sometimes
don't work as intended and tweaks are needed. She said the
administration has identified some areas where that could be
improved, and the Department of Health and Social Services
(DHSS) has also identified some areas for improvement. It has
been heard from the Board of Veterinary Examiners in both House
and Senate bills that there are some problems in statute that
the Board of Veterinary Examiners and Board of Pharmacy cannot
overcome in regulation, which makes it very difficult to use and
a hot topic among the boards and staff. The other remaining
boards have identified some areas where the focus of the PDMP
needs to be narrowed or further focus needs to be clarified and
then be prepared to resource up if those clarifications are
indicating a greater intent than maybe what was expressed at
that time.
5:15:55 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ opined that excluding people from
participating in the PDMP because the PDMP isn't working well
isn't what is wanted. Instead, she said, the statute should be
modernized to make it serve those who are trying to utilize it.
She noted that veterinarians are required to log in daily, yet
veterinarians don't prescribe many opioids. She said small
details like that could be refined, through working with Ms.
Chambers, to make the PDMP serve the licensees better while
ensuring that the opioid epidemic health crisis is addressed.
MS. CHAMBERS replied that the board chairs meet every other
week, are interested, want to be engaged in those conversations,
and DCBPL would be happy to facilitate that conversation.
5:17:02 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS continued with the invited testimony.
5:17:19 PM
JUSTIN RUFFRIDGE, Chair, Board of Pharmacy, provided invited
testimony. He said the board has taken much effort to respond
to the COVID-19 pandemic, while ensuring that licenses continue
to be renewed and available specifically in an emergency
capacity. Some of the recommendations brought forth in the
audit, he stated, are recommendations that the board has already
addressed in regulations that are awaiting processing. The PDMP
continues to be an issue that he and the PDMP board chairs work
on bi-weekly at the PDMP meeting. He said he agrees with Ms.
Chambers' statements and the questions from Co-Chair Spohnholz
about opportunities to potentially address some of the issues
within the PDMP and move forward on some of those changes that
could be efficient and help serve the ultimate purpose.
Overall, he continued, the board is functioning at high capacity
and would welcome any questions. He agreed with renewing the
board for the maximum time that Auditor Curtis put forward.
5:18:57 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked whether the members of the board are
mostly owners of independent pharmacies or with national chains.
MR. RUFFRIDGE answered that during his time on the board there
has been a decent number of representatives from different
practice types. He said the previous chair was with the Walmart
national chain, but currently none of the board members are from
national chain pharmacies. He referenced a regulatory or
statutory requirement that individuals serving on the board
represent Alaska's judicial districts and that potentially there
is over-representation from the Southcentral [Third] Judicial
District in the current board representatives.
5:20:36 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ asked whether it is a recommendation or a
statutory requirement that members of the Board of Pharmacy
reflect Alaska's judicial districts.
MR. RUFFRIDGE replied that as far as he is aware, it is part of
the current statutory definition that the Board of Pharmacy
represent the judicial districts whenever possible. However, he
noted, language is included that gives an out if that isn't
possible or if there are no individuals willing to serve from
the other districts.
5:21:32 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that HB 306 was held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 306 ver A 2.22.22.PDF |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 306 |
| HB 306 Sponsor Statement 02.09.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 306 |
| HB 306 Sectional Analysis Ver A 02.09.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 306 |
| HB 306 Supporting Document - Legislative Audit Division Sunset Review BOP 07.15.21.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 306 |
| HB 306 Letters of Support as of 02.22.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 306 |
| HB 306 Fiscal Note DCCED-CBPL 2.18.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 306 |
| HB 307 ver. A 2.23.22.PDF |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 307 |
| HB 307 Sponsor Statement 2.21.2022.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 307 |
| HB 307 Supporting Document - Interior Energy Project January 2022 Update to Legislature 2.23.2022.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 307 |
| HB 307 Letter of Support - AIDEA 02.22.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 307 |
| HB 307 Fiscal Note DCCED-AIDEA 2.18.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 307 |
| HB 323 ver. A 2.22.22.PDF |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 323 |
| HB 323 Sponsor Statement 2.17.2022.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 323 |
| HB 323 Sectional Analysis 02.17.2022.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 323 |
| HB 323 Research DLA 02.17.2022.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 323 |
| HB 323 Fiscal Note DCCED-CBPL 2.18.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 323 |
| HB 323 Letter of Support 2.22.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 2/28/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 323 |
| SJR 15 CS (HL&C) ver. B 2.22.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM |
SJR 15 |
| SJR 15 Supporting Document - Canada Press Release 2.17.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM |
SJR 15 |
| SJR 15 Letter of Comment 2.23.22.pdf |
HL&C 2/23/2022 3:15:00 PM |
SJR 15 |