Connecticut Board approves settlements, fines in four pharmacy enforcement cases

The Connecticut Board of Pharmacy on Aug. 27 accepted settlement agreements in four enforcement cases, imposing monetary payments and manager restrictions in response to lapses that included unlicensed shipments into Connecticut, security failures involving controlled substances, repeated recordkeeping violations and an unreported remodeling project.

The actions affect a nonresident pharmacy, three Connecticut-licensed pharmacists or pharmacies and include fines ranging from $1,000 to $30,000, probationary conditions and requirements that respondents notify the commission before resuming managerial duties.

Board attorney Attorney Ando told the board that in case 2024-1310 a nonresident pharmacy shipped injectable doses into Connecticut without a Connecticut nonresident pharmacy license. "Respondent will pay a voluntary monetary payment in the amount of $4,000," Attorney Ando said, and the agreement includes a term that the respondent "will not reapply for a Connecticut non resident pharmacy license for a period of 30 days." The board approved the department's proposal; the record shows one commissioner stepped down and abstained from that vote.

In case 2023-2206, the board reviewed allegations tied to a Connecticut pharmacist investigated after the medical examiner reported an untimely death and the discovery of multiple controlled substances in a deceased floater pharmacist's possession. Attorney Ando outlined charges that included failures in security and reporting of losses. The settlement requires the respondent to pay a voluntary monetary payment of $1,000 and complete continuing-education coursework on policy management, recordkeeping, security and diversion. Attorney Ando described a new condition: if the respondent returns to work as a pharmacy manager, a one-year probationary period will apply, during which quarterly self-inspections and a sworn attestation of compliance must be submitted to the department. The board approved the agreement; Commissioner Kristen Linder, who had stepped down for the matter, abstained.

The board approved a larger settlement in case 2025-1254 involving an independent Connecticut pharmacy with repeated violations across inspections, including unsecured syringes and needles, incomplete controlled-substance inventories and deficiencies in recordkeeping. Attorney Ando said the department proposed a voluntary monetary payment of $30,000, a requirement that the respondent step down as pharmacy manager and that the respondent notify the commission in writing when a new manager is appointed. The board voted to approve the agreement; the member who had stepped down on that matter abstained.

Finally, in case 2020-41115 the board accepted a settlement with a Connecticut pharmacy that completed a remodel before notifying the commission. The department proposed a $2,500 voluntary payment and required compliance with notice and disclosure laws; the board approved the settlement.

Discussion during the cases focused on specifics that informed the sanctions. For the nonresident pharmacy matter, Attorney Ando said investigators found approximately a small number of injectable doses had been shipped to Connecticut and that inspection records from the pharmacy's home state were provided during investigation. On the diversion and security matters, board members emphasized the role of inventory controls, partial-fill procedures and ongoing inspection schedules in preventing loss and diversion. For the pharmacist with the $1,000 settlement, Ando noted the department added the sworn-attestation requirement because the respondent had voluntarily stepped down as manager and the board sought controls if the individual resumed managerial responsibilities.

All approved settlements were presented as voluntary payment agreements negotiated by the department's counsel. Where commissioners had served as step-downs on a case, the minutes record they abstained during the vote. The board accepted the motions by voice vote in open session; the formal motions and approvals are recorded in the commission minutes.

The board's actions close these docketed matters administratively but, as Attorney Ando said, do not prevent further enforcement developments in other jurisdictions: several nonresident pharmacy matters remain under review in multiple states, and the department continues to coordinate investigations.

Board staff indicated these settlements are intended to correct practice and ensure future compliance rather than to impose license suspensions; in two matters the respondents had already paid the agreed monetary amounts and begun education or remediation steps.

The board moved next to licensing and new-application items on the agenda.