By Lara Horhor

As amended on September 5, 2025, AB 1503 (Berman) modifies various sections of the Business and Professions Code to extend the sunset date for the California State Board of Pharmacy (PHARM) to January 1, 2030. The sunset bill has made significant changes in response to issues raised in the Board’s Volume 1 and Volume 2 of the Sunset Review Report, and the Joint Sunset Review Oversight Committee’s Background Paper. Key changes in the bill are as follows:

Enforcement of Pharmacy Chains

The Background Paper expressed concerns about the Board’s enforcement capacity, particularly regarding large pharmacy chains and third-party business models that may evade traditional oversight. The bill changes the law to address these concerns.

Existing law authorizes the Board to bring action against a chain community pharmacy under common ownership or management (like CVS or Walgreens) for violations of Pharmacy Law that were expressly encouraged by the common owner or manager. AB 1503 broadens this liability. The Board can sanction any owner or manager who expressly encourages a violation of Pharmacy Law. This closes an existing loophole in enforcement. Chains can no longer protect themselves by creating layers of management and shifting blame to lower-level managers to evade sanctions. The Board can now enforce cases without tracing the misconduct back to a common owner as its source.

The bill has also narrowed the existing defenses chain pharmacies can use against sanctions. Current law states that the Board can fine a chain if three or more pharmacies under common ownership or management commit materially similar violations of Pharmacy Law within five years. Two defenses are available to these pharmacies: (1) the pharmacy could argue that the violation they committed was contrary to a written policy as communicated by the common owner or manager to its employees; and (2) if within 6 months of the violation the common owner or manager has (a) corrected the unlawful policy, (b) communicated the change to its employees, and (c) provided proof of abatement to the Board, its corrective action can negate disciplinary measures.

AB 1503 alters these defenses. The pharmacy must now show that it complied with the written policy, not just establish that the policy exists. Similarly, the bill essentially eliminates the hierarchical defense of corrective action. It is no longer valid for pharmacies to claim that because the corrective action came from a lower-level manager, and not a common owner or manager, it was not enforceable. Recognizing that changes made by local management have weight and authority allows for consistency and enhances accountability.

Enhancement of Oversight and Accountability Through PICs

Another way the bill enhances accountability and oversight is by assigning pharmacists-in-charge (PICs). A pharmacy must assign a PIC, and the Board must be notified of the assignment within 30 days. The PIC must be licensed in California. However, physical presence in California is not required, as long as the PIC holds a California license. The Board must be notified of the PIC’s identity, California license number, and date of designation within 90 days of their designation. If a PIC steps down, the pharmacy has 90 days to notify the Board of a new PIC. PICs are responsible for executive decisions such as setting the pharmacist-to-technician ratio within the pharmacy.

Increased Role of Pharmacy Technicians

AB 1503 significantly increases the role and presence of Pharmacists Technicians. The bill requires the Board to establish a Pharmacy Technician Advisory Committee that makes recommendations to the Board. However, the Board retains final authority to administer and enforce the Pharmacy Law as it relates to the practice and licensing of pharmacies and pharmacists. Pharmacists may now employ three technicians per pharmacist, up from a previously capped one-to-one ratio.

Expanding the Traditional Role of Pharmacists as Dispensers 

The bill has expanded the scope of pharmacist authority. Current law provides that pharmacists may only administer and dispense drugs pursuant to a valid prescription. The bill changes that; pharmacists can “furnish dangerous devices” and “FDA-approved or authorized medications as part of preventive health care services that do not require a diagnosis … and to complete missing information on a prescription for noncontrolled medication if there is evidence to support the change.” This is an expansion of the pharmacist’s authority to act so long as these services are within the “accepted standard of care” of a “prudent and reasonable pharmacist licensed under the Pharmacy Law, with similar education, training, experience, resources, and setting, would use in a similar situation.”

Similarly, current law aims to balance the role of pharmacists and prescribers by prohibiting a pharmacist from refilling a dangerous drug without the prescriber’s authorization, except in limited circumstances. Even under these limited circumstances, a pharmacist must make every reasonable effort to contact the prescriber. In a similar fashion, the law prohibits pharmacists from dispensing more than a 90-day supply of a dangerous drug, even when the prescriber confirms that the type and quantity of the prescription will not change. AB 1503 has removed both requirements. A pharmacist no longer needs to make every reasonable effort to contact the prescriber, and they can dispense more than a 90-day supply of a dangerous drug.

A New Special License, Allowance in Ownership, and Flexibility for Retired Licensees 

The Board now specially recognizes Advanced Pharmacist Practitioners who can perform additional functions. These specially recognized licensees have completed a combination of specified certifications, postgraduate residencies, experience under a collaborative practice agreement, and 10 hours of continuing education, in addition to the continuing education all pharmacists must complete. The license allows them to perform patient assessments, order and interpret drug-therapy-related tests, and perform other functions related to drug therapy.

Changes have also been made to allow for more flexibility in the ownership of pharmacies. Under the old law, if a person wanted to start a pharmacy but their spouse is a doctor, they would have been barred because of the concern that the doctor would assign patients to their spouse’s pharmacy for financial gain. Now, so long as both license applicant and prescriber make statements disavowing any community or financial interest in the pharmacy license and the prescriber does not own more than 10% of that pharmacy, the ban is relieved.

Flexibility has also been established for retired licensees. A pharmacist with a retired license may reactivate their license within three years of its retirement by paying a renewal fee and successfully completing certain continuing education courses within 2 years of the renewal request. If, however, more than three years have passed since a retired license, the license holder must reapply for their pharmacy license.

On October 1, 2025, Governor Newsom signed AB 1503 (Chapter 196, Statutes of 2025).