Texas Board of Pharmacy orders $1,000 penalty for Odessa Regional pharmacy director over expired technician registration

The Texas State Board of Pharmacy on Aug. 5, 2025 voted to impose a $1,000 administrative penalty on William Frimpong, pharmacy director at Odessa Regional Medical Center, after an administrative law judge found Frimpong failed to properly supervise a pharmacy technician who worked with an expired registration. John, a board staff presenter, said staff prepared the board order consistent with Board Rule 281.65 and the informal conference panel recommendation.

The board’s action follows a Proposal for Decision (PFD) issued May 29, 2025 by an administrative law judge at the State Office of Administrative Hearings in the contested case TSPP v. William Frimpong. The ALJ found by a preponderance of the evidence that Frimpong, while acting as the pharmacy’s pharmacist in charge (PIC), allowed a technician with an expired registration to perform duties. John told the board the ALJ’s conclusion left staff recommending the standard $1,000 penalty under the board’s sanction schedule.

Derek Davis, attorney for Frimpong, said the defense did not ask the board to “ignore the violation” but emphasized extensive mitigating evidence presented at hearing, including that the lapse arose from an existing hospital notification process that sent renewal notices to the prior PIC. Davis argued the violation was an oversight fixed promptly after discovery and warned that disciplining a preceptor could hamper recruitment of pharmacists to West Texas.

Frimpong told the board he supervises five full‑time pharmacists and that, at the time of the lapse, only one other preceptor at the hospital was authorized by pharmacy schools. He described changes the hospital has made to prevent recurrence, including revised HR notification timelines (notifications at three months, two months, one month and 15 days prior to expiration) and monthly quality‑improvement reporting on licensure.

Board members asked about the relationship between discipline and preceptor status. Megan, board counsel, explained Board Rule 283.6 disqualifies a pharmacist from serving as a preceptor during the period an order imposing penalties is in effect and for three years immediately preceding an application, but that a pharmacist may petition the board in writing for approval to act as a preceptor after an order is entered. Davis and Frimpong said they had sought consideration of a preceptor waiver earlier in the proceedings but were told the waiver could not be considered as part of the disciplinary process.

The board recessed into executive session for legal consultation under Texas Government Code §551.071 and returned to open session. After discussion, a board member moved to accept the informal conference outcome and the prepared board order imposing the $1,000 administrative penalty; the motion passed with one opposition. The board recorded that the waiver process remains available after the order is entered and may be pursued by petition under Rule 283.6.

Discussion: the transcript shows the board wrestled with consistent application of the sanction schedule, the weight of mitigating factors found by the ALJ, and the practical effects on preceptor availability in West Texas.

Decision: board order imposing $1,000 administrative penalty; petitioner (Frimpong) may file a petition under Rule 283.6 to request preceptor approval after the order is entered.