PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 26, 2013
Delivering Antimicrobial Transparency in Animals Act of 2013 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to revise reporting requirements for the sponsor of a new animal drug containing an antimicrobial active ingredient. Requires a sponsor's annual report to the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to specify for each dosage form the known or estimated amounts of the antimicrobial active ingredient sold or distributed for use in each food-producing animal for which the new animal drug is approved.
Repeals the requirement that such report list, for each dosage form, the target animals, indications, and production classes specified on the approved label of the product.
Requires live poultry dealers, swine contractors, or feed lot operators who purchase, contract, or manufacture animal feed in final formulation bearing or containing a new animal drug with an antimicrobial active ingredient to report annually to the Secretary information about such ingredient by food-producing animal for which the new animal drug is approved and, if applicable, by production class of the animal. Exempts dealers, contractors, or operators from this reporting requirement if the value of their live animals does not exceed $10 million or such other sum as the Secretary may specify. Authorizes the Secretary to specify alternative reporting requirements.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Establishes requirements for: (1) publicly available summaries of the information in the annual reports, including data by antimicrobial class; and (2) how to report data with fewer than three sponsors of such approved new animal drugs.
Requires the Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (FDA), to increase collaboration and coordination with the Secretary of Agriculture (USDA) to expand and coordinate the collection of data on the use of antimicrobial drugs in or on food-producing animals, as well as provide information to the Secretary of Agriculture for use by: (1) the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service to help inform its collection of data through the National Animal Health Monitoring System, and (2) the Economic Research Service to help inform its collection of data through the Agricultural Resource Management Survey.
Requires the Secretary to publish a final version of draft guidance #213 entitled “New Animal Drugs and New Animal Drug Combination Products Administered in or on Medicated Feed or Drinking Water of Food-Producing Animals: Recommendations for Drug Sponsors for Voluntarily Aligning Product Use Conditions with GFI #209.” Requires the Comptroller General (GAO), within three years after such publication, to evaluate: (1) the voluntary approach used by the FDA to eliminate injudicious use of antimicrobial drugs in food-producing animals, and (2) the effectiveness of FDA data collection activities regarding antimicrobial resistance.
People & committees
Rep. Waxman, Henry A. [D-CA-33] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
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.820 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.820 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.820 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.820 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.