HOUSE BILL REPORT

                      HB 1918

                     As Reported By House Committee on:

                                Health Care

Title:  An act relating to the practice of pharmacy.

Brief Description:  Revising provisions for the practice of pharmacy.

Sponsor(s):  Representatives Sprenkle, Moyer and Braddock; by request of Department of Health.

Brief History:

   Reported by House Committee on:

Health Care, March 6, 1991, DPS.

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON

HEALTH CARE

Majority Report: That Substitute House Bill No. 1918 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass.  Signed by 10 members:  Representatives Braddock, Chair; Moyer, Ranking Minority Member; Casada, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Cantwell; Edmondson; Franklin; Morris; Paris; Prentice; and Sprenkle.

Staff:  John Welsh (786-7133).

Background:  The practice of pharmacy is regulated by the state Board of Pharmacy, and pharmacy owners, pharmacists, drug manufacturers and owners of drug wholesale businesses must be licensed in order carry out their activities. Itinerant vendors that sell nonprescription drugs must be registered with the board, as well as manufacturers that distribute drug samples.

Owners of pharmacies, pharmacists, drug manufacturers, drug wholesalers, and itinerant vendors have 60 days to pay the fee for the renewal of their license or registration in order to avoid the payment of a penalty fee.  There is no time limit specified for the payment of registration or renewal fees for manufacturers that distribute drug samples, or for pharmacy assistants.

Reports to the board are required by manufactures, retailers, or other persons furnishing precursor drugs to any person within this state.

Manufacturers, distributors, and dispensers of controlled substances must pay registration fees of from $10 to $50 to the board.

The board is not presently authorized to pursue the enforcement of the payment of fines it orders in the Superior Court.

The Uniform Disciplinary Act presently does not include the procedures and sanctions for unprofessional conduct for licensed pharmacists.

Summary of Substitute Bill:  The Pharmacy Practice Act is updated generally with changes of a "housekeeping" nature.

Owners of pharmacies, pharmacists, drug manufacturers, drug wholesalers, itinerant vendors, manufacturers distributing drug samples, and pharmacy assistants must pay the fee for the renewal of the license or registration, respectively, on the date due in order to avoid payment of a penalty fee.

Reports to the board are required by manufactures, retailers, or other persons furnishing specified precursor drugs to any person outside, as well as within, the state.

Fees for the registration of manufacturers, distributors and dispensers of controlled substances are determined by rule and must defray administrative costs.

The board is authorized to enforce an order of payment of a fine in the Superior court.

The board is directed to study and make recommendations for legislation prior to the next session of the Legislature to the extent necessary to integrate the provisions of the Uniform Disciplinary Act with the Pharmacy Practice Act.

Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:  Amendments are added that authorize the board to enforce orders for payment of fines in the Superior court, and require the board to submit proposed legislation which integrates the provisions of the Uniform Disciplinary Act with the Pharmacy Practice Act.

Fiscal Note:  Available.

Effective Date of Substitute Bill:  Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For:  The requirements for the payment of license and registration renewal fees should be streamlined and made uniform.  The board should be made aware of any precursor drugs, used in the manufacture of illicit drugs, delivered to persons outside the state by manufacturers, retailers and other persons residing in the state, for the purpose of curtailing drug abuse.  Registration fees should not be fixed by statute, but should be specified by rule to cover the administrative costs of regulation.

Testimony Against:  None.

Witnesses:  Lars Hennum, Pharmacists of Washington; and Charles James, Pharmacy Board (pro).