PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 12, 2013
Compounding Clarity Act of 2013 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) to revise requirements for the regulation of compounding drugs.
Revises the exemption of compounded drugs from certain new drug, labeling, and biological product requirements. Adds an exemption for drug products compounded by a licensed pharmacist or a licensed physician, pursuant to a non-patient-specific purchase order, which: (1) will be administered by a health care practitioner within a physician's office, a hospital, or another health care setting; and (2) meet other specified criteria.
Revises requirements for exempted bulk drug substances.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits the sale of a drug product by an entity other than the pharmacy or physician that compounded it.
Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to develop a system for receiving and reviewing submissions from state boards of pharmacy: (1) describing actions taken against compounding pharmacies, or (2) expressing concerns that a compounding pharmacy may be acting in violation of one or more requirements of this section. Requires the Secretary to review such submissions and determine whether the pharmacy involved may be in violation of one or more compounding requirements.
Authorizes the Secretary to inspect a pharmacy's records to determine whether the pharmacy is in violation of one or more FFDCA requirements.
Exempts from certain new drug, labeling, and biological product requirements a drug product compounded for human use by a licensed pharmacist in a registered outsourcing facility if specified conditions, including labeling requirements, are met.
Establishes annual registration requirements for any outsourcing facility. Requires a facility to report to the Secretary biannually on what drugs are compounded in it and to submit adverse event reports. Subjects such facilities to a risk-based inspection schedule.
Requires the Secretary to: (1) publish a list of drugs presenting demonstrable difficulties for compounding that are reasonably likely to lead to an adverse effect on the safety or effectiveness of the drug, taking into account the risk and benefits to patients; and (2) convene an advisory committee on compounding before creating the list.
Requires the Secretary to assess an annual establishment fee on each outsourcing facility and a reinspection fee, as necessary.
Prohibits the intentional falsification of a required prescription, a purchase order, or patient name for a compounded drug.
Prohibits the intentional failure of an outsourcing facility to register.
People & committees
Rep. Griffith, H. Morgan [R-VA-9] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3089 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3089 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3089 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3089 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.