Board of Pharmacy rule relating to licensure and practice of pharmacy
Summary
SB 392 authorizes a legislative rule of the West Virginia Board of Pharmacy concerning licensure and practice of pharmacy. The bill amends and reenacts §64-9-1 of the West Virginia Code to approve the Board’s rule, identified as 15 CSR 01, which was filed in the State Register on August 29, 2024, modified to address objections from the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee, and refiled on October 16, 2024.
In practical terms, the bill does not itself create a new licensing framework or substantive pharmacy regulation in the statute text; rather, it gives legal effect to the Board’s administrative rule governing pharmacy licensure and practice. The measure is a standard rule-authorization bill that allows the Board of Pharmacy to proceed under the approved rule within the state’s regulatory structure.
Impact
The bill’s impact is to authorize a specific Board of Pharmacy legislative rule, thereby incorporating the rule into the state’s regulatory authority under Chapter 64. It affects the Board of Pharmacy, pharmacists, pharmacies, and other regulated licensees or applicants subject to licensure and practice standards in West Virginia. By approving the rule, the Legislature permits the Board to enforce and administer the rule’s requirements as part of state law.
Sentiment
The available context suggests little overt controversy or debate around SB 392. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, and the bill appears to be a routine authorization of a revised administrative rule after review by the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee. The overall sentiment is therefore best characterized as neutral to supportive, with the bill functioning as a procedural approval measure rather than a contested policy change.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. The only notable procedural issue is that the Board’s rule was modified to meet objections from the Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee before being refiled, indicating that any concerns were addressed during the rule review process rather than through public legislative debate. Because no transcripts or votes are available, there is no evidence of organized opposition or competing viewpoints in the record provided.
Making a supplementary appropriation to the Department of Human Services, Bureau for Medical Services – Policy and Programming and State Board of Education – State Department of Education