Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Epinephrine Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill broadening allowable epinephrine delivery forms, keeps effective-on-passage language
Summary
The Judiciary Committee advanced House Bill 63 with an amendment that expands the definition of epinephrine delivery systems, changes who may authorize a child’s supply, and permits limited emergency use of a filled prescription for another person; the measure was passed as amended with a plan for a floor amendment to exclude multidose vials.
The Judiciary Committee voted to advance House Bill 63 after adopting an amendment that widens the bill’s focus from specific auto-injectors and nasal sprays to a broader definition of epinephrine delivery systems and makes several technical changes.
The amended measure removes a restriction that limited the statute to auto-injectors and nasal-spray products and replaces the term “physician” with “primary health care provider” in the consent language to reflect that nurse practitioners and physician assistants also write these prescriptions. The amendment also adds a provision, written at the suggestion of Dr. Ballard of the Department of Health and Human Services, allowing a legally filled epinephrine prescription for one person to be used for another person in an emergency without violating law.
Committee members discussed a remaining drafting concern raised by several senators about whether the bill should be interpreted to permit use of multidose vials or ampules drawn by unlicensed persons. Members said they do not intend to open the statute to allow nonlicensed providers to draw up epinephrine from ampules or multidose vials and agreed to tidy that point on the floor; the committee planned a floor amendment to explicitly exclude multidose vials or ampules from the bill’s coverage.
The amendment file cited in committee was numbered 18-20 s (also referred to as 1820 s by members). Committee members also confirmed the bill’s effective date language remains “effective on passage,” to avoid gaps for schools and camps while newer delivery forms come to market.
The committee adopted the committee amendment by voice vote and proceeded to move the bill forward “as amended.” No recorded roll-call tally was read during the voice votes.
Key details recorded in committee discussion: the amendment was drafted by the Office of Legislative Services to allow future delivery forms to be covered without returning to committee; the change from “physician” to “primary health care provider” was intended to reflect current prescribing practice; and committee members requested an explicit exclusion of multidose vials or ampules to preserve current clinical safety practices. A staff member (Caitlin) was asked to circulate amendment copies during committee discussion.
The committee action advances HB 63 to the next stage with the adopted amendment and signals the sponsors’ intent to add a floor amendment clarifying that multidose vials and single-dose ampules are not intended to replace auto-injector/other simple delivery products for unlicensed users.
