Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Licensing Applications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board initiates rulemaking to update pharmacy‑technician application questions, members press for substance‑use clarity
Summary
The board voted to start rulemaking to amend the pharmacy technician application (CCR tit.16 §1793.5) to align with Well‑Being First recommendations and to revise mental/physical health questions; members pressed staff to preserve clarity about substance‑use disorder treatment in the questionnaire.
The California State Board of Pharmacy voted to initiate rulemaking to amend the pharmacy technician application questions incorporated by reference in CCR tit.16 §1793.5, the board said at its November 2025 meeting. Staff described the package as aligning application language with the Lauren Aubryne Healthcare Provider Protection Act and the Well‑Being First initiative to reduce stigma and support health care worker well‑being.
Several board members urged care in how mental‑ and physical‑health questions are worded. Licensee member Nicole Thiebaud said she was "struggling with the recommendation to remove any kind of reference to, like, having substance use disorder treatment or alcohol treatment" and warned that dropping a separate question could cause applicants to miss disclosures important for public safety: "I feel like that's relevant." Trevor Chandler, who moved to initiate rulemaking, said staff should incorporate Nicole's suggestion to ensure the question remains clear while not discouraging applicants seeking treatment: "We want to encourage people that are a part of the recovery community…and make note of the challenges there."
The motion (moved by Trevor Chandler, seconded by KK John) directs staff to submit the proposed text to the Director of the Department of Consumer Affairs and the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency for review, to set the matter for hearing if requested, and to authorize the executive officer to complete adoption should no adverse comments or hearings be requested during the 45‑day comment period. Public comment included a pharmacy technician, Chasney Johnson, who said she welcomed mental‑health questions and described observations about patient safety and onboarding.
The board adopted the initiation motion by roll call; members recorded unanimous support. Staff will draft the formal regulatory package and return with proposed text for public posting, a 45‑day comment period and subsequent hearings if requested.
