(A) Except as provided in division (B) of this section, an auditing entity is subject to all of the following conditions when performing a pharmacy audit in this state:

(1) If it is necessary that the pharmacy audit be performed on the premises of a pharmacy, the auditing entity shall give the pharmacy that is the subject of the audit written notice of the date or dates on which the audit will be performed and the range of prescription numbers from which the auditing entity will select pharmacy records to audit. Notice of the date or dates on which the audit will be performed shall be given not less than ten business days before the date the audit is to commence. Notice of the range of prescription numbers from which the auditing entity will select pharmacy records to audit shall be received by the pharmacy not less than seven business days before the date of the audit is to commence.

(2) The auditing entity shall not include in the pharmacy audit a review of a claim for payment for the provision of dangerous drugs or pharmacy services if the date of the pharmacy's initial submission of the claim for payment occurred more than twenty-four months before the date the audit commences.

(3) Absent an indication that there was an error in the dispensing of a drug, the auditing entity or payer shall not seek to recoup from the pharmacy that is the subject of the audit any amount that the pharmacy audit identifies as being the result of clerical or recordkeeping errors in the absence of financial harm. For purposes of this provision, an error in the dispensing of a drug is any of the following: selecting an incorrect drug, issuing incorrect directions, or dispensing a drug to the incorrect patient.

(4) The auditing entity shall not use the accounting practice of extrapolation when calculating a monetary penalty to be imposed or amount to be recouped as the result of the pharmacy audit.

(B)

(1) The condition in division (A)(1) of this section does not apply if, prior to the audit, the auditing entity has evidence, from its review of claims data, statements, or physical evidence or its use of other investigative methods, indicating that fraud or other intentional or willful misrepresentation exists.

(2) The condition in division (A)(3) of this section does not apply if the auditing entity has evidence, from its review of claims data, statements, or physical evidence or its use of other investigative methods, indicating that fraud or other intentional or willful misrepresentation exists.

(3) Division (A)(4) of this section does not apply when the accounting practice of extrapolation is required by state or federal law.

Added by 130th General Assembly File No. TBD, SB 258, §1, eff. 3/23/2015.