Five questions from the DocTayo newsletter for 20 October 2026. The correct answer is marked, and every one carries the statute or rule it rests on — so you can check any of them rather than taking my word for it.
Question 1A prescription for a Schedule II stimulant arrives, facially complete and from a prescriber you know. Under federal law, who carries responsibility for whether it was properly issued?
- The prescriber alone; the pharmacist's duty is to fill it as written
- The prescriber, with a corresponding responsibility on the pharmacist who fills it
- The pharmacist alone, once the prescription has been presented for filling
- Neither, so long as the prescription is facially complete and signed
A controlled substance prescription is effective only if issued for a legitimate medical purpose by an individual practitioner acting in the usual course of his professional practice. The regulation puts responsibility for proper prescribing on the prescriber — and then says, in the same sentence, that “a corresponding responsibility rests with the pharmacist who fills the prescription.” That clause is what the whole doctrine hangs on, and it is why “the doctor wrote it” is not a defense. A facially complete prescription knowingly filled outside the usual course of professional practice makes the pharmacist a party to the violation.
21 C.F.R. § 1306.04(a)
Reading “the responsibility…is upon the prescribing practitioner” and stopping before the corresponding-responsibility clause in the same sentence.
Question 2What must be true before a practitioner may issue a prescription for a controlled substance?
- Authorized to prescribe controlled substances by the jurisdiction in which licensed, and either registered with DEA or exempt from registration
- Registered with DEA; state authority is a separate matter that does not bear on validity
- Authorized by the state; DEA registration is required only for Schedule II
- Holding an active NPI and a state license in any jurisdiction
Both conditions hold at once, and the regulation joins them with “and.” The individual practitioner must be authorized to prescribe controlled substances by the jurisdiction in which licensed to practice, and must be either registered or exempted from registration under §§ 1301.22(c) and 1301.23 (which is how commissioned officers of the uniformed services and the Public Health Service prescribe). Neither prong substitutes for the other, and the registration requirement is not limited to Schedule II.
21 C.F.R. § 1306.03(a)(1)–(2)
Treating a DEA number as the whole of prescriptive authority. It is federal permission layered on state authority, not a replacement for it.
Question 3Which of these must appear on a controlled substance prescription under federal law?
- The patient's date of birth
- The patient's full name and address
- A diagnosis or ICD-10 code supporting the therapy
- The prescriber's NPI
The federal list is short and specific. All prescriptions for controlled substances must be dated as of, and signed on, the day issued, and must bear the full name and address of the patient, the drug name, strength, dosage form, quantity prescribed, directions for use, and the name, address and registration number of the practitioner. Date of birth, a diagnosis code and the NPI are all things a payer, a state board or an e-prescribing standard may demand — and often does — but none of them is a federal element under this section.
21 C.F.R. § 1306.05(a)
Confusing what your dispensing software makes mandatory with what federal law makes mandatory. The question asks for the federal floor.
Question 4A physician asks you to fill a prescription written in the practice's own name, so the office has a supply of a Schedule III injectable to administer to patients on site. What is the correct response?
- Fill it; the practice holds its own DEA registration
- Fill it, but record it separately as an office-use dispensing
- Decline — a prescription may not be issued to obtain controlled substances for general dispensing to patients; the office must order through its own registration
- Fill it only if the quantity is consistent with a single patient's course of therapy
A prescription is an order for an individual patient. The regulation says a prescription “may not be issued in order for an individual practitioner to obtain controlled substances for supplying the individual practitioner for the purpose of general dispensing to patients.” Office stock is a distribution, and it travels through the practice's own registration and ordering process, not across the pharmacy counter on a prescription. The practice holding a DEA registration is exactly why a lawful route exists — and exactly why this is not it.
21 C.F.R. § 1306.04(b)
The practice being DEA-registered feels like it legitimizes the request. It legitimizes a different mechanism.
Question 5Under current federal law, which changes may a pharmacist make to a Schedule II prescription after consulting the prescriber?
- Dosage form, strength, quantity and directions — but never the patient's name
- Any element except the prescriber's signature
- There is no current federal list; DEA has reserved that guidance and directs pharmacists to state law
- None — a Schedule II prescription may not be altered in any respect
This is the question most study material still gets wrong. The familiar may/may-not table comes from an older edition of DEA's Pharmacist's Manual. In the 2022 edition the section “Acceptable Changes to a Prescription” reads, in full, “[Reserved].” DEA replaced it with guidance issued 18 October 2022 saying pharmacists “should adhere to state regulations or policy regarding those changes that a pharmacist may make to a schedule II prescription after oral consultation with the prescriber” — and that this will remain in effect until DEA codifies new regulations. None has been codified. So the answer to “may I change the quantity?” is now a state-law question. In most states the familiar list survives, in the board's rules rather than in federal law. Option A is not a silly answer; it is simply no longer a federal one.
DEA, Changes Pharmacists May Make to Schedule II Paper Prescriptions (DEA-DC-063 / EO-DEA257, 18 Oct 2022); Pharmacist's Manual (2022 ed.), “Acceptable Changes to a Prescription” [Reserved]
Answering from a study guide that reprints the withdrawn federal list as though it were still federal law. Check your own board instead.
Want these every Tuesday?
Five questions a week, plus what actually changed in pharmacy law and one thing worth knowing before you sit. Free.
Unsubscribe in one click.
Want a lot more than five?
The question banks run to hundreds of items with full rationales, written the same way: New York MPJE, Texas MPJE and NAPLEX.
← The federal rules people lose marks on · Refills, partial fills, and the clocks attached to them →
All questions of the week →