Virginia Board of Pharmacy Special Conference Committee June 24, 2026
On June 24, 2026, the Virginia Board of Pharmacy questioned the Danville Area Humane Society about how it uses and records the drugs it administers for sedation and euthanasia. Across four areas of allegations, DAHS acknowledged each one. Its attorney told the committee that “everything that has been alleged should be acknowledged.” The Board entered a disciplinary order. The proceeding was recorded — the audio and full transcript are below.
After the case, DAHS described it to the public as a documentation problem that was minor and already fixed. The specific violation the Board cited is indeed a recordkeeping rule. But the hearing record is broader than the citation: in answering the committee, DAHS acknowledged conduct — not just missing paperwork — affecting how animals were dosed and how the controlled substance was tracked. The two columns below are both accurate; they are simply not the same.
The Board’s formal finding rested on the euthanasia-recordkeeping rule (the sedative’s name and strength). That is the narrow legal violation. What DAHS acknowledged on the record — off-protocol drugs, doses above protocol, an inventory not counted since 2021 — is the fuller picture, and it is in their own words. You can hear it in the recording and read it in the transcript.
DAHS did not contest the allegations; in closing, its attorney told the committee that everything alleged should be acknowledged. The card below collects the four areas DAHS acknowledged and the order the Board entered.
What DAHS acknowledged to the Board of Pharmacy
“Sometimes.”
— DAHS shelter manager, asked whether very small cats typically do not need a smaller dose
“I didn’t know we had to put that in there.”
— on recording IV vs. IP route in the euthanasia logs
“Everything that has been alleged should be acknowledged.”
— Jeremy Swindlehurst, attorney for DAHS, in closing
The quotes above are buttons — press one to hear it in the recording. The summary is also available as a downloadable image for sharing.
After questioning DAHS, the committee deliberated in closed session and returned to read its decision. DAHS had acknowledged all four areas of allegations; the Board wrote its formal violation on the recordkeeping item and adopted the others as written, noting DAHS’s corrections. It entered a disciplinary order.
A note on precision. These details are transcribed from the audio of the decision being read aloud. The official written order is mailed within about two to three weeks; statute and regulation citations and the exact penalty terms should be read against that document when it is public. We will update this page when it is. See verification for what is independently confirmed today.
DAHS acknowledged all four areas of allegations. The Board’s formal violation was written on the recordkeeping item; the others were adopted as written and noted as being corrected. Each item below pairs a plain-English explanation with what was said at the hearing, the recording timestamp, and the rule it concerns. Where DAHS described a corrective step, that is noted — including where the step was still unfinished at the hearing.
Allegation: incorrect euthanasia dosages · acknowledged
The supervising veterinarian’s protocol sets the abdominal (IP) dose for cats at about 3 mL per ten pounds of body weight. The records show a two-pound cat on January 9, 2023 given 3 mL of sodium pentobarbital — the dose set for a ten-pound cat, several times the protocol amount for a cat that size — with other small cats receiving the same. Asked whether very small cats typically don’t need less, the manager answered with a single word.
Committee: “So it’s like a three-pound cat getting the dose of a ten-pound cat. What do you think is the reason for that?”
DAHS: “Sometimes.”
DAHS’s response: the new checklist adds the animal’s weight, which had not been on it; a scale is available to weigh animals.
Allegation area: sedation vs. protocol · acknowledged
The 2020 protocol specified a liquid sedative (acepromazine, 10 mg/mL) given orally, with no dose listed for tablets. The invoices DAHS provided for 2023 were for 10 mg tablets only. Asked how the forms differ, the manager said tablets take about thirty minutes longer to take effect — and that staff waited the extra time rather than use the liquid the protocol called for.
Committee: “So would your staff just wait the extra time, instead of using the liquid?”
DAHS: “Yep.”
DAHS’s response: an updated protocol dated January 2, 2025 adds a secondary sedative and revises dosing, after the director consulted other shelters.
The violation the Board cited · 18 VAC 110-20-580(6)
Virginia’s shelter rule requires euthanasia records to show the drug’s name, strength, date, species, weight, amount, and who administered it. DAHS’s logs did not record the name and strength of the sedative, and did not mark whether the euthanasia drug was given IV or into the abdomen (IP) — even though the protocol dose differs by route. The Board’s notice framed this as records DAHS failed to maintain for more than 1,800 animals in 2023.
Committee: “You didn’t differentiate in these records whether it was IP or IV.”
DAHS: “Yeah — I didn’t know we had to put that in there.”
DAHS’s response: a new form now records the drug name and strength on the front of the logbook, and the new checklist has an IV/IP field; DAHS said it would consider adding the route to the logbook as well.
One clarification. The “1,800+” figure is the set of 2023 euthanasia records the Board flagged, not the year’s euthanasia total. At the hearing a panelist referred to it as “eighteen hundred animals euthanized in 2023,” but official state shelter data put the actual 2023 figure higher — 2,797 of 3,499 animals euthanized, a 79.9% rate. See the Performance Analysis for the year-by-year numbers.
Allegation: inventory · acknowledged
State code requires shelters to count their controlled-substance stock at least every two years. As alleged, DAHS’s last recorded inventory dated to July 2021 — more than two years earlier — and that 2021 count was not signed by the person who conducted it. At the hearing, the annual inventory still had not been completed.
Committee: “How do we know how many bottles are left? Is there a reconciliation, or a running total?”
DAHS: “At my annual inventory I put it down, comparing this against what we had.”
DAHS’s response: the bottle inventory was noted as corrected; the annual inventory was unfinished at the hearing, with reminders now on the director’s and shelter manager’s calendars.
Allegation: staff competency certification · acknowledged
DAHS believed three employees were certified to perform euthanasia, but two were missing the “demonstrated competency” confirmation on their forms. The director said this was an oversight, not the supervising vet judging them incompetent — the vet was willing to complete it — and acknowledged there was no formal annual review to catch it.
Committee: “Would the annual performance review not be a great time to check… this certification?”
DAHS: “That’s a wonderful idea — yes, that can happen.”
DAHS’s response: staff were retrained and documentation updated; DAHS agreed to verify certification at an annual review going forward — though no formal annual review existed at the time of the hearing.
Raised at the hearing · not one of the formal allegations
The committee also asked about an August 2025 entry showing the euthanasia drug logged under an old federal (DEA) registration number on one date and a new number a few days later. DAHS said the old number had expired, a new one was issued, and nothing was used in between. This came up during questioning but was not among the allegations the Board acted on. We are still reviewing the underlying records, and the full exchange is in the transcript.
This was an informal conference before the Board of Pharmacy’s Special Conference Committee — an administrative disciplinary proceeding, not a criminal trial. The committee reviews allegations, hears from the respondent, and may enter an order or refer the matter for a formal hearing.
A committee of the Board met with DAHS, reviewed the allegations, and entered a disciplinary order finding a violation. DAHS acknowledged the allegations.
DAHS can request a formal, trial-type hearing before the full Board within 30 days. Doing so would vacate this committee’s decision and start the contested process over.
How final it is. The committee’s decision becomes the Board’s final order 30 days after it is served, unless DAHS requests that formal hearing within the window.
The size of the penalty is not the size of the problem. A $500 penalty plus one inspection is a modest sanction — the Board did not suspend or revoke DAHS’s controlled-substance registration. We report that plainly. But the sanction’s size reflects the recordkeeping charge the Board wrote its finding on, not a measure of the conduct DAHS acknowledged. A small fine is not a finding that nothing happened — and it is not, as DAHS told the public, reason to “consider the matter closed.”
The recordkeeping allegation concerned more than 1,800 euthanasia records attributed to 2023 (a span the committee noted actually runs about thirteen months, into January 2024). That 1,800+ is the count of records at issue, not the year’s euthanasia total, which official state data put higher — 2,797 of 3,499 animals, a 79.9% rate. DAHS is an open-admission shelter: it does not turn animals away, and its totals include animals referred by veterinarians and brought in by animal control. The director acknowledged the numbers “look awful” and said expanded spay/neuter and transfer programs have brought them down.
That broader euthanasia record is documented elsewhere on this site, with official state figures and the underlying FOIA documents:
The recording is real and the participants are identifiable. Because the audio was noisy, several names were initially uncertain; we matched them against the Board of Pharmacy’s public roster and prior committee minutes. Verified identities below; the transcript notes each correction.
Everything above is drawn from a recording of the open, public meeting. Here it is in full: the hour-long conference where the committee questioned DAHS, and the short session afterward where the Board read its order. The timestamp buttons throughout this page jump the player here to that exact moment, so you can hear any quote in context.
Recorded by a member of the public at the open meeting of the Board’s Special Conference Committee, DHP Perimeter Center, Henrico, Virginia, on June 24, 2026. Audio is unedited; the on-page transcript is cleaned from the recording and marks any uncertain passages. How we verified this →
This page is built from the audio recording and a transcript cleaned from it. We checked the key facts against independent, official sources before publishing, and we are transparent about what still depends on the written order.