[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,98],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6668725,"mediaKeyId","2218957-88d3fad1f27e7b44b0bbc23c49e74e4e","parentId",2218957,"title","Texas board pushes proposed rules after mixed results from drone prescription pilots","audioSeconds",843,"startMs",2669000,"endMs",3512000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2218957-88d3fad1f27e7b44b0bbc23c49e74e4e&start=2669&end=3512","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2218957-88d3fad1f27e7b44b0bbc23c49e74e4e/thumbnail_2669000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6668725/Texas/Texas-board-pushes-proposed-rules-after-mixed-results-from-drone-prescription-pilots","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6668725-fdd91c17db8bb311d14a7eb1b3192d8d/orig.mp4?Expires=1775730178&Signature=k3gPVMH8yAwcPRNmGzbp53pc6aLPZ-X1XENqNmQResNCLgIwiAlLcG-4jlSvRgrYqW9bNNRzCNv~KOvWZiN-jlLMfqvLEX3IvLujcRWWB5NwSQhMxoZbDHdsWidLmFe5Cts4c0txawG6SxupohTzU6BL5zWI70fwA5YYdaXp1mU49T7Q4IlLn8fH~vmHMWkJ7YaN1zfWD85cvzs6tSYMCcmHPikidKHMA3iPF2GYjMn5CCdpBaZedV6TfRud-MTKwhnN7YpyF7nDIpVH1jCNqk~-cQ2MFyYNOY1CA0f5ZH2OKWC2aWvxgysiyF41nI8hU6vxvX8l9eDowwUtuBbHvQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Texas State Board of Pharmacy","date","2025-02-04T18:15:35.287Z","article","The Texas State Board of Pharmacy on Wednesday voted to propose permanent rules allowing prescription delivery by drone after hearing pilots and public comment from Amazon, health systems and drone vendors.

Board members said the task force reviewing the pilot recommended language that would allow delivery by contract carriers and unmanned aircraft systems but would exclude controlled substances, sterile compounded preparations and drugs requiring storage below a pool temperature. The board voted to use that task force language as the basis for rulemaking.

The task force report—presented by board staff—proposes adding definitions for “contract carrier” and “common carrier,” requiring pharmacies to maintain custody and chain‑of‑custody records for deliveries, to use tamper‑evident packaging, to confirm a patient or agent is present before delivery, and to bar drone delivery of specific categories of drugs. The report also would place responsibility for delivery problems on the dispensing pharmacy and require pharmacies’ pharmacists‑in‑charge to adopt written policies and personnel training for drone delivery.

Amazon Pharmacy pharmacist in charge Eddie Okobo told the board Amazon has tested drone deliveries and “we know we can deliver safely and quickly by drone, and delight our Texas customers.” Okobo said Amazon had delivered a small number of prescription orders during its pilot and intends technical and operational changes to increase eligible orders and delivery volume.

Board members pressed vendors on volume and testing. An Amazon representative said the pilot had delivered five prescription orders during the test period but that Amazon had delivered “hundreds” of nonprescription packages by drone and is working on technical fixes to show eligibility in real time. Board members said the low number of prescription orders limited their ability to assess some operational risks but noted broader vendor experience in non‑U.S. and commercial services.

Zipline counsel Kelvin Pincellic and Zipline representative Althea McKinney described large-scale global and U.S. experience with pharmaceutical and cold‑chain deliveries: Pincellic said Zipline has performed nearly 1.3 million commercial deliveries and more than 950,000 pharmaceutical deliveries worldwide, including roughly 240,000 cold‑chain deliveries. Zipline explained its aircraft and payload (“droid”) design, autonomy and safety redundancies and said its short flight times and validated packaging support temperature‑sensitive deliveries.

Memorial Hermann executives described hospital use and field visits to Zipline facilities and endorsed the task force recommendations as a safe alternative to improve patient access. Walmart representatives reported 216 prescription deliveries in their Arkansas pilot with no reported patient complaints.

After public comment and the task force overview, board member Donnie Lewis moved to use the task force language and propose the rule; the motion was seconded and the board approved moving the language forward to the formal rulemaking stage for public comment.

The board’s proposed language would require pharmacies to document chain of custody, use appropriate packaging, confirm patient presence at delivery, and maintain federal registration and compliance for unmanned aerial systems. The task force’s draft also clarifies that the pharmacy is responsible for resolving delivery errors and adverse events.

Board staff said the proposal will be published for public comment under the board’s rulemaking process and that stakeholders will have an opportunity to respond before any final adoption.

Ending: The board did not adopt final rules at the meeting; it voted to propose the task force language and seek public comment as part of the formal rulemaking process. The board also noted future agenda items and public hearings would follow prior to any final rule adoption.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","BOARD MEETING | February 4, 2025 | Morning Session","oneSentenceSummary","The Texas State Board of Pharmacy on Wednesday voted to propose permanent rules allowing prescription delivery by drone after hearing pilots and public comment from Amazon, health systems and drone vendors.","taxTitle","Texas State Board of Pharmacy, Boards & Commissions, Executive, Texas","taxId",36447,"location","Texas","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6668710,"Board asks staff to draft compromise after industry asks to drop notarization for controlled‑substance inventories",982,7246000,8228000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2218957-88d3fad1f27e7b44b0bbc23c49e74e4e&start=7246&end=8228","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2218957-88d3fad1f27e7b44b0bbc23c49e74e4e/thumbnail_7246000.jpg","/articles/6668710/Texas/Board-asks-staff-to-draft-compromise-after-industry-asks-to-drop-notarization-for-controlledsubstance-inventories","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6668710-f1f26eba1457eb9d98feda78d8eecfc5/orig.mp4?Expires=1775730178&Signature=kzVtvssKfHnY5J6mAZirKjYOZ7DnGBWF3~0QVCYZcUlLw1WhMueGfi41VeXmL7bQimvjiV15Y0kLQBuyQ9mB~5oDgaLaKcSMO9ZHBOcE9Hhkl7kXr~IYq-wVXqtrlNQNAnVFUgCpNgPPNShXhjIYg~JJoLmHml~W9A2Y2OwYN9l3MY-~OL3tBIKmaRrDcsU13ddTayi5aAOH3tBM~YVvT1qG3UOHhH2m2CrIB8WQHjnxx2pWOFondY~q4Yh7Sjq-~3-J2EDw7vaKJHqjE3u~x5hi6LBosLHeNFR5W~Z~8cOwUTQGnLqHoppvM3twmoXIotI1FFH04vzM6-dKmKYysw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Retail pharmacy representatives asked the Texas State Board of Pharmacy to remove a long‑standing Texas rule that requires notarized signatures for controlled‑substance inventories, calling the notarization requirement an unnecessary administrative burden for pharmacists.

CVS representative Lauren Paul and Walgreens’ Janu Philip told the board that Texas is an outlier; they said an electronic inventory with a digital signature provides the same identity verification as a notarized paper signature and would reduce time and workflow disruption for pharmacists. Paul said notarization is not a DEA requirement and forces extra printing, manual signatures and extra notarization steps.

Walgreens’ Janu Philip added that notaries authenticate only the signer’s identity and do not verify the inventory’s accuracy; neither company reported examples of fraud involving contested inventory attestations.

Board members discussed options and potential safeguards. Several members favored removing the notary requirement for electronically documented inventories while keeping an attestation requirement for non‑electronic processes. One pragmatic compromise discussed was allowing an electronic signature for inventories when tracked in the system and requiring a pharmacist‑in‑charge attestation or a second supervisory signature for non‑electronic inventories.

The board directed staff to draft proposed rule language for the main meeting that would remove the notarization requirement and present replacement accountability language (for example, an electronic signature or second signature/PIC attestation for non‑electronic inventories). No final rule change was made at the meeting; staff will prepare draft language for the board’s review.","CVS and Walgreens urged removal of a Texas rule requiring notarized signatures on controlled‑substance inventories; the board asked staff to draft alternative language that would remove notarization but preserve accountability, including a second sign‑off or PIC attestation for non‑electronic inventories.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":80,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":83,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6668715,"CVS and Walgreens back rule change to exempt central fill/central field pharmacies from standard tech ratios",350,7596000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2218957-88d3fad1f27e7b44b0bbc23c49e74e4e&start=7246&end=7596","/articles/6668715/Texas/CVS-and-Walgreens-back-rule-change-to-exempt-central-fillcentral-field-pharmacies-from-standard-tech-ratios","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6668715-981c9ce68da570d355447672a7c5f800/orig.mp4?Expires=1775730178&Signature=O8e82gJp8yFDqb9D1SOlQq4T7WI6o0wXlRf4ypeFrgsNLwki23GR4CNx-2PKMn4FfQ7F2gCx4JwwaECnVa1pAnXT~o8hL9pPWwjI9l4pnYvs9v55HHAJzjN6svXRTfLscOfZrHbl1R6ymy90HzJHFk4d-hM6aCAOF6itZgV-f3NvUHt8EhFmQ8xzfmDoDJb71DnpQHKrr8lbxpftf0Yr~V-neARZLYXnZAv6gnZnZ9Dc3Ee1b-pmhweUwrbhg0~~ZArNS-ZoyxmqNaTyzwF~1eCTT0cL9QQLkojgfw6gwwonBXCKmUzbRmpD3~EDD0hYgCGwJ~V0H~emvPDMzA22rw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","CVS Health and Walgreens representatives asked the Texas State Board of Pharmacy to amend tech‑ratio rules so that certain central‑fulfillment or “central field” facilities without patient‑facing contact are exempt from the board’s on‑site technician ratio.

Lauren Paul of CVS and Janu Philip of Walgreens told the board that central‑fulfillment facilities perform different, more automated tasks than traditional community pharmacies and usually do not interact directly with patients. They said the facilities have extensive automation, barcode scanning, and other controls that reduce the level of pharmacist supervision required at patient‑facing locations.

Board staff reviewed draft language that would add a subparagraph stating that the on‑site ratio requirement in personnel rules does not apply to a central field pharmacy as defined in a separate rule (the draft definition said a central field pharmacy has no patient‑facing contact). The draft also defines “patient‑facing contact” as any direct interaction between a pharmacy employee and a patient or a patient’s agent.

Board members discussed operational differences, automation, and the potential for unintended consequences. Some members cautioned that a too‑broad exemption could reduce oversight of activities that, while not patient‑facing, could still carry safety risk. Other members said a narrow, definition‑based exemption would address a real business model mismatch without undermining safety.

After discussion the board voted to propose the staff‑draft language and send it for public comment. The motion passed with one abstention recorded; staff will present public comment and any recommended revisions at a future meeting.","Retail chains asked the board to treat large central fulfillment facilities differently from patient‑facing pharmacies; the board voted to propose language exempting ‘central field’ pharmacies that have no patient‑facing contact from the standard on‑site technician ratio.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6668720,"Board proposes multiple rule cleanups and a new definition of common ownership for pharmacies",215,1200000,1415000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2218957-88d3fad1f27e7b44b0bbc23c49e74e4e&start=1200&end=1415","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2218957-88d3fad1f27e7b44b0bbc23c49e74e4e/thumbnail_1200000.jpg","/articles/6668720/Texas/Board-proposes-multiple-rule-cleanups-and-a-new-definition-of-common-ownership-for-pharmacies","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6668720-2e5ac10650ae35efa6db5e4d5bd80928/orig.mp4?Expires=1775730178&Signature=RO12WrXyB~hGgQf07dMbzT7~WVovHX5apKjsPnk59tSnAfBxs9WcMI8xtJ00pVyIa0E~hBxenIuQeiR2cGqW1gw-qEKsXwgsTl7zrMFEgkamhlo7jOImJsksKsar92UNPQhnGkaJziRr0falmNBlWzVHEOVvlAQf~BELO1FArJ-vYjx--zlTfs91~LYq55j7z0sCZ6Cdp6zRiDgvWHQIwsmMvlD8LF2hXwCR36~gyaR-kV3jmVd82O4L2ZtQdVTQyWtTi4r30GAlxXJOMefP94cMPx-ti3~ngJsDg-2aIolvhKyzAeEZawr0yu6-4b6t5ncdzkNkbmMM6vkbUhF2qQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Texas State Board of Pharmacy voted to propose a series of rule amendments that the agency described as cleanup and clarification, including updates to statutory citations and a new definition to clarify \"common ownership\" among pharmacies.

Staff told the board that several sections of Texas Pharmacy Act citations in board rules needed revision following a statutory repeal and other code reorganizations. One change amends references to the Texas Pharmacy Act to include chapters 551 through 569 of the Texas Occupations Code. Another amendment removes a now‑repealed cross reference in the Texas Controlled Substances Act (section 481.074), which board staff said no longer exists and therefore cannot be cited in rule text.

The board also heard discussion and questions about proposed language to define \"common ownership\" and \"owner of record.\" The draft defines common ownership as \"two or more pharmacies with an identical owner of record with the board,\" and defines owner of record as the direct owner listed on the pharmacy application or the most recent approved change‑of‑ownership form. Board staff said the intent is to stop parties from claiming that an upstream parent or an owner‑of‑the‑owner creates common ownership for the purposes of transfers of repackaged drugs.

Board members asked how the definition would affect health systems that operate multiple hospitals or pharmacies under different business entities with separate tax IDs. Staff and board members discussed the practical consequence that hospitals within a health system may have separate business entities and tax IDs while still sharing operational connections; one board member said the change could unintentionally prevent appropriate transfers of repackaged drugs among facilities within the same health system.

Because of those concerns, the board directed staff to examine consistency across pharmacy classes (A, B, C) and to return with potential language changes. Nevertheless, the board voted to propose the definitions and the rule cleanup for public comment, and staff emphasized that any final decision would follow the public comment period.

Ending: The board agreed to publish the proposed rule changes for public comment; staff will return with public comment summaries and any recommended revisions before final adoption.","The Texas State Board of Pharmacy voted to propose several rule amendments that update statutory citations, clarify 'owner of record' and add a definition of 'common ownership' to limit use of parent‑company arguments in inter‑pharmacy transfers.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Texas board pushes proposed rules after mixed results from drone prescription pilots

Board asks staff to draft compromise after industry asks to drop notarization for controlled‑substance inventories

CVS and Walgreens back rule change to exempt central fill/central field pharmacies from standard tech ratios

Board proposes multiple rule cleanups and a new definition of common ownership for pharmacies