SESSION OF 2019
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON HOUSE BILL NO. 2389
As Amended by House Committee on Health
and Human Services

Brief*
HB 2389, as amended, would amend the Pharmacy Act
of the State of Kansas to require certain prescription orders
be transmitted electronically.
The bill would require every prescription order issued for
a controlled substance in schedule II-IV that contains opiate
to be transmitted electronically except as follows:
● Electronic prescription orders are not possible due
to technological or electronic system failures;
● Electronic prescribing is not available to the
prescriber due to economic hardship or
technological limitations that are not reasonably
within the control of the prescriber or other
exceptional circumstances exist as demonstrated
by the prescriber;
● The prescription order is for a compounded
preparation containing two or more components or
requires information that makes electronic
submission impractical, such as complicated or
lengthy instructions for use;
● The prescription order is issued by a licensed
veterinarian;

____________________
*Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research
Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental
note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at
http://www.kslegislature.org
 ● The prescriber reasonably determines that it would
be impractical for the patient to obtain the
substances prescribed by electronic prescription in
a timely manner and such delay would adversely
impact the patient's medical condition;
● The prescription order is issued pursuant to drug
research or drug therapy protocols;
● The prescription order is by a prescriber who
issues 50 or fewer prescription orders per year for
controlled substances that contain opiates; or
● The U.S. Food and Drug Administration requires
the prescription order to contain elements that are
not compatible or possible with electronic
prescriptions.
A prescriber would be allowed to request a waiver from
electronically transmitting prescriptions described above for a
period not to exceed six months if the prescriber could not
comply with the electronic transmitting requirements due to
economic hardship, technological limitations, or other
circumstance demonstrated by the prescriber. The bill would
allow the prescriber to request renewal of a waiver granted by
the State Board of Pharmacy (Board), for a period not to
exceed six months. The bill would require requests for
waivers or renewals to be submitted to the Board in a form
and manner prescribed by the Board and to include the
reason for the request and any other information required by
the Board.
If a prescriber prescribes a controlled substance by non-
electronic prescription, the prescriber would be required to
indicate the prescription is made pursuant to a waiver. A
pharmacist would not be required to verify the validity of the
waiver, either with the prescriber or the Board, but would be
allowed to do so in accordance with continuing law.
The bill would take effect July 1, 2021.
2- 2389
Background
The bill was introduced in the House Committee on
Federal and State Affairs at the request of Representative
Barker on behalf of a representative of Walmart.
In the House Committee on Health and Human Services
hearing, proponent testimony was provided by
representatives of the Kansas Association of Chain Drug
Stores, State Board of Pharmacy, and Walmart. The
proponents generally stated implementing electronic
prescription transmittal would increase patient safety and
security, reduce prescription errors, improve medication
adherence, and reduce administrative burden. A
representative of the National Association of Chain Drug
Stores submitted written-only proponent testimony.
Neutral testimony was provided by a representative of
the Kansas Medical Society (KMS). The representative stated
KMS was opposed to the bill as introduced but is in
agreement with an amendment offered jointly by
stakeholders.
The House Committee adopted amendments agreed
upon by stakeholders, to delete a definition in the bill of
“controlled substance,” and to change the electronic
prescription requirement from any controlled substance, to a
controlled substance in schedule II-IV that contains an opiate.
The adopted amendment also added exceptions to the
electronic transmission requirement, deleted the requirement
technological, electrical, or other infrastructure be described
in rules and regulations, and changed the effective date from
January 1, 2020, to July 1, 2021.
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of
the Budget on the bill as introduced, the Board indicates total
staff time associated with complying with the bill could
increase annual expenditures by $51,500 for 0.50 inspector
full-time equivalent (FTE) position and $13,300 for 0.30
licensing FTE position. Licensing staff would be responsible
3- 2389
for processing waiver requests and inspector responsibilities
would include reviewing the requirements set forth in the bill
in pharmacy compliance reviews. The Board indicates short-
term costs would include a 0.5 FTE position for a six-to-eight-
month period for researching guidelines, drafting regulations,
and moving regulations through the adoption process. [Note:
The rules and regulations requirements were removed in the
amended bill.] The Board estimates total salary and benefit
costs associated with the bill would be $116,330 for 1.3 FTE
positions, but is unable to estimate a precise fiscal effect on
other operating expenses.
The Board of Nursing indicates the bill would require
revision of some regulations, and communication would be
needed between the Board of Nursing and advanced practice
registered nurses regarding the provisions of the bill, with an
estimated fiscal effect of less than $5,000.
The Board of Healing Arts indicates the bill would result
in an increase in complaints and investigations, but a precise
fiscal effect could not be determined.
The Kansas Dental Board, the Kansas Board of
Veterinary Examiners, and the Kansas Board of Examiners in
Optometry indicate enactment of the bill would have minimal
to no fiscal effect. Any fiscal effect associated with enactment
of the bill is not reflected in The FY 2020 Governor’s Budget
Report.


4- 2389