Panel considers bill to change timing of pharmacy law exam, allow multiple prescription transfers and drop Parkinson's registry reporting

Senator Bob Holstrom opened discussion of LB887 by summarizing four main provisions: allow accredited pharmacy programs to decide when the multistate pharmacy jurisprudence examination (MPJE) occurs (including before graduation), correct prior drafting that misapplied certification requirements to interns, permit transferring a prescription multiple times so long as authorized refills remain, and eliminate a Parkinson's Disease Registry reporting requirement that DHHS has not accepted since 2020.

Haley Perzborn, CEO of the Nebraska Pharmacist Association and a licensed pharmacist, testified in support of the bill and walked through the provisions. She said the transfer change addresses a real-world problem where current law often limits patients to a single transfer even when refills remain; LB887 would allow additional transfers between pharmacies if the original prescription remains valid. "The bill allows transfers so long as they do not exceed the authorized refills and the prescription remains valid, maintaining safety while improving continuity of care," Perzborn said.

Witnesses also discussed the MPJE change. Ali During Anderson, pharmacy faculty at the University of Nebraska College of Pharmacy, said allowing students to take the law exam after the P3 year would reduce scheduling bottlenecks and better align exam timing with coursework. Teri Miller of Creighton University described the Uniform MPJE (UMPJE) now available in several border states and urged immediate effectiveness so students could use the new testing window.

Proponents noted the Parkinson's Disease Registry reports have not been accepted by DHHS since 2020 and that similar data are available in the state's prescription-drug monitoring program (PDMP). Perzborn said removing the redundant reporting requirement would reduce administrative burden.

Committee members asked technical questions about existing transfer language and whether this bill duplicates or clarifies current law; proponents described the problem in current statute where transfers between the same company are handled differently than transfers between distinct pharmacies. No committee vote was recorded during the hearing.