Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Drone Delivery topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Texas board pushes proposed rules after mixed results from drone prescription pilots
Summary
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.
Get email alerts on the Drone Delivery topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
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.

