Updates from the FY2024 Appropriations Bills and Accompanying Reports

The FY2024 Consolidated Appropriations Act was passed in two parts during March. These bills, along with the accompanying reports, contain provisions that support human-relevant research methods and recognize the risk to human health posed by animal exploitation across different industries. 

Each year, the Center for Contemporary Sciences focuses effort on educating Members of Congress on issues related to animal exploitation and public health including pandemic prevention and switching to more effective methods for biomedical research and drug development. We advocate for more transparency in federally funded research and encourage federal agencies as well as Members of Congress to support human-relevant research methods. The Bill and its accompanying reports include provisions for agencies like the National Institutes of Health, Food and Drug Administration, and the Environmental Protection Agency to carry out that will benefit humans, animals, and the environment. 


House Department of the Interior/Environment Appropriations Report Language:

“Testing Alternatives”

The EPA is directed to “publish information regarding its work on New Approach Methods (NAMs) to reduce and replace animal testing, including submissions that have been accepted for use and their particular applications, submissions that have been accepted for use and their particular applications, submissions that are currently being evaluated, and submissions that have been rejected.” CCS was behind this request and a similar request that was made last year for published information on rejected NAMs to help the EPA be more transparent on their work in this area. 


House Department of Agriculture/Food and Drug Administration Appropriations Report Language:

“New Alternative Methods”

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is directed to “efficiently and expeditiously utilize existing funds to reduce animal testing and advance alternative methods in a measurable and impactful way,” and publish a report that “provides details on the status of forming the New Alternative Methods Program” including: 

  • A description of program goals and staffing levels by classification;
  • FDA’s priority areas for reducing animal use and advancing alternatives, such as goals, timelines, and funding associated with each of these identified priorities;
  • The metrics the agency will use to measure impact;
  • Plans for communicating information regarding acceptance of alternative methods to the regulated community.

Additionally, language is included directing the FDA to “minimize funding to carry out new animal testing, including in comparing the use of animals to alternative methods, but instead use existing animal data and alternative methods that will reduce animal use in research.” CCS was behind some of the language included in this request, including the specific call for a timeline and plans for communicating information on acceptance of non-animal methods with important stakeholders.  


“Animal Research”

The Agriculture Research Service (ARS) is directed to “ensure that each of its facilities housing animals is adhering to the Animal Welfare Act” and submit quarterly reports, including all violations found by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and the specific actions to that facilities will take to prevent those violations in the future. This is a similar request to one in FY2023 requiring all US Department of Agriculture (USDA) personnel to record any observed violations of the AWA in USDA-operated laboratories on official reports. 


“Fur Farms”

The Agriculture Appropriations Committee recognized that connection between fur farms and zoonotic diseases including SARS-CoV-2 and avian influenza and noted its concern with the “lack of directives from USDA to mitigate disease transmission to, from, and within [fur] farms.” The Committee urged the National Agriculture Statistics Service (NASS) to make the data collected in its annual mink survey public to help understand the “potential risks that fur farms pose to public health and to inform policy decisions.” 



The language included in the report language is promising. Congresses desire to improve the transparency for federal agency programs like the New Alternatives Methods Program at FDA and EPA’s evaluation of human-relevant research methods reflects their commitment to supporting this new technology. Additionally, by recognizing the connection between infectious diseases like avian influenza and animal industries like fur farms, it could be a right step in bringing an end to industries that not only harm animals but put public health at risk. 








Share this Post


Subscribe for email updates...

Skip to content