In this task, you are given text for US Congressional and California state bills, your task is to generate a summary for this bill.

Example input: SECTION 1. LIABILITY OF BUSINESS ENTITIES PROVIDING USE OF FACILITIES
TO NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS.

(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Business entity.--The term ''business entity'' means a
firm, corporation, association, partnership, consortium, joint
venture, or other form of enterprise.
(2) Facility.--The term ''facility'' means any real
property, including any building, improvement, or appurtenance.
(3) Gross negligence.--The term ''gross negligence'' means
voluntary and conscious conduct by a person with knowledge (at
the time of the conduct) that the conduct is likely to be
harmful to the health or well-being of another person.
(4) Intentional misconduct.--The term ''intentional
misconduct'' means conduct by a person with knowledge (at the
time of the conduct) that the conduct is harmful to the health
or well-being of another person.
(5) Nonprofit organization.--The term ''nonprofit
organization'' means--
(A) any organization described in section 501(c)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from
tax under section 501(a) of such Code; or
(B) any not-for-profit organization organized and
conducted for public benefit and operated primarily for
charitable, civic, educational, religious, welfare, or
health purposes.
(6) State.--The term ''State'' means each of the several
States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern
Mariana Islands, any other territory or possession of the
United States, or any political subdivision of any such State,
territory, or possession.
(b) Limitation on Liability.--
(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (c), a business
entity shall not be subject to civil liability relating to any
injury or death occurring at a facility of the business entity
in connection with a use of such facility by a nonprofit
organization if--
(A) the use occurs outside of the scope of business
of the business entity;
(B) such injury or death occurs during a period
that such facility is used by the nonprofit
organization; and
(C) the business entity authorized the use of such
facility by the nonprofit organization.
(2) Application.--This subsection shall apply--
(A) with respect to civil liability under Federal
and State law; and
(B) regardless of whether a nonprofit organization
pays for the use of a facility.
(c) Exception for Liability.--Subsection (b) shall not apply to an
injury or death that results from an act or omission of a business
entity that constitutes gross negligence or intentional misconduct,
including any misconduct that--
(1) constitutes a crime of violence (as that term is
defined in section 16 of title 18, United States Code) or act
of international terrorism (as that term is defined in section
2331 of title 18) for which the defendant has been convicted in
any court;
(2) constitutes a hate crime (as that term is used in the
Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C. 534 note));
(3) involves a sexual offense, as defined by applicable
State law, for which the defendant has been convicted in any
court; or
(4) involves misconduct for which the defendant has been
found to have violated a Federal or State civil rights law.
(d) Superseding Provision.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2) and subsection
(e), this Act preempts the laws of any State to the extent that
such laws are inconsistent with this Act, except that this Act
shall not preempt any State law that provides additional
protection from liability for a business entity for an injury
or death with respect to which conditions under subparagraphs
(A) through (C) of subsection (b)(1) apply.
(2) Limitation.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed to
supersede any Federal or State health or safety law.
(e) Election of State Regarding Nonapplicability.--This Act shall
not apply to any civil action in a State court against a business
entity in which all parties are citizens of the State if such State
enacts a statute--
(1) citing the authority of this subsection;
(2) declaring the election of such State that this Act
shall not apply to such civil action in the State; and
(3) containing no other provision.
Example output: Shields a business entity from civil liability relating to any injury or death occurring at a facility of that entity in connection with a use of such facility by a nonprofit organization if: (1) the use occurs outside the scope of business of the business entity; (2) such injury or death occurs during a period that such facility is used by such organization; and (3) the business entity authorized the use of such facility by the organization.
Makes this Act inapplicable to an injury or death that results from an act or omission of a business entity that constitutes gross negligence or intentional misconduct, including misconduct that: (1) constitutes a hate crime or a crime of violence or act of international terrorism for which the defendant has been convicted in any court; or (2) involves a sexual offense for which the defendant has been convicted in any court or misconduct for which the defendant has been found to have violated a Federal or State civil rights law.
Preempts State laws to the extent that such laws are inconsistent with this Act, except State law that provides additional protection from liability. Specifies that this Act shall not be construed to supersede any Federal or State health or safety law.
Makes this Act inapplicable to any civil action in a State court against a business entity in which all parties are citizens of the State if such State, citing this Act's authority and containing no other provision, enacts a statute declaring the State's election that this Act shall not apply to such action in the State.
Example explanation: This Bill focuses on shielding business entities from civil liability relating to an injury or death depending on the conditions of injury, hence the generated summary is correct.
Q: SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ''Preservation of Antibiotics for
Human Treatment Act of 2002''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds as follows:
(1) Several antibiotics and classes of antibiotics either
are used in or are related to antibiotics used in humans to
treat infectious diseases and are also routinely administered
to healthy agricultural animals, generally via feed or water,
in order to promote the animals' growth or to prevent disease.
Such uses do not require a veterinarian's prescription.
(2) Mounting scientific evidence shows that this
nontherapeutic use of antibiotics in agricultural animals can
lead to development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria that can
be transferred to people, making it harder to treat certain
infections.
(3) In 1997 and in 2000, the World Health Organization
recommended that antibiotics used to treat humans should not
also be used to promote animal growth, although such
antibiotics could still be used to treat ill animals. Most
developed countries in the world, with the exception of the
United States and Canada, restrict the use of antimicrobials in
animal production systems for growth promotion.
(4) In July 1998, the National Academy of Sciences, in a
report prepared at the request of the United States Department
of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration, concluded
''there is a link between the use of antibiotics in food
animals, the development of bacterial resistance to these
drugs, and human disease''.
(5) In July 1999, the European Union banned the use for
animal growth promotion of remaining human-use antibiotics
still in use to promote animal growth. Prior to that action,
individual European countries, including the United Kingdom,
Denmark, Finland, and Sweden, had banned the use in animal feed
of specific antibiotics.
(6) In October 2000, the Food and Drug Administration
issued a notice announcing its intention to withdraw approvals
for use of fluoroquinolone antibiotics in poultry, in light of
the fact that increased resistance to fluoroquinolones in
certain bacteria followed approval of those antibiotics for
such use in the mid-1990s. The Food and Drug Administration
concluded that ''the use of fluoroquinolones in poultry is a
significant cause of fluoroquinolone resistant infections in
humans.'' One manufacturer of such drugs is contesting FDA's
proposed withdrawal and continues to market its product.
Previous proceedings by FDA to withdraw approval of animal
drugs have taken substantial amounts of time following
initiation of formal action by FDA, including 6 years in one
instance and 20 in another.
(7) In June 2001, the American Medical Association adopted
a resolution opposing nontherapeutic use of antimicrobials in
animal agriculture. Medical professional organizations that
have taken a similar position include the American College of
Preventive Medicine, the American Public Health Association,
and the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists.
(8) In October 2001, the New England Journal of Medicine
published a guest editorial titled ''Antimicrobials in Animal
Feed--Time to Stop''. The editorial urged a ban on
nontherapeutic use in animals of medically important
antibiotics.
(9) The National Academy of Sciences has found that
eliminating the use of antibiotics as feed additives would cost
each American consumer not more than $5 to $10 per year.
(10) In January 2001, a Federal interagency task force on
antibiotic resistance concluded that ''drug-resistant pathogens
are a growing menace to all people, regardless of age, gender,
or socioeconomic background. If we do not act to address the
problem . . . [d]rug choices for the treatment of common infections
will become increasingly limited and expensive--and, in some cases,
nonexistent.''.
(11) Scientific studies published in major peer-reviewed
research journals have shown that resistance traits can be
transferred among unrelated species of bacteria, including from
nonpathogens to pathogens.
(12) Development of resistance to antibiotics could
significantly impair the ability of the United States to
respond effectively to a bioterrorist attack and is likely to
increase the casualties that result from such an attack.

SEC. 3. PRESERVING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ANTIBIOTICS SUCH AS CIPRO.

(a) Prohibiting the Use of Drugs Related to Cipro in Poultry.--
Section 512(a)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21
U.S.C. 360b(a)(2)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (B), by striking ''and'' at the end;
(2) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period and
inserting ''; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
''(D) such drug is not a member of the fluoroquinolone
class of antimicrobial drugs, or if such drug is a member of
the fluoroquinolone class of antimicrobial drugs, the Secretary
shall have found, based on information submitted to the
Secretary by the sponsor of such drug, that there exists a
reasonable certainty of no harm to human health due to the
development of antimicrobial resistance that is attributable in
whole or in part to the use in animal feed of such drug.
''Nothing in subparagraph (D) shall be construed to affect an approval
under this subsection for a drug of the fluoroquinolone class of
antimicrobial drugs that is used in or for cattle.''.
(b) Definition.--Section 201(w) of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321(w)) is amended--
(1) by striking ''(w) The term'' and inserting ''(w)(1) The
term''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
''(2) With respect to subparagraph (D) of section 512(a)(2) (and in
provisions of this Act that refer to such subparagraph), the term
'animal feed' shall include an article that is a fluid administered to
animals other than man. Such term does not include fluids administered
via hypodermic injection.''.

SEC. 4. REQUIRING PROOF OF SAFETY OF ANTIMICROBIAL NEW ANIMAL DRUGS.

(a) Nontherapeutic Use; Applications Pending on or Submitted After
Enactment.--Section 512(d)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (21 U.S.C. 360b(d)(1)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (H), by striking ''or'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating subparagraph (I) as subparagraph (J);
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (H) the following
subparagraph:
''(I) with respect to a critical antimicrobial drug or a
drug of the same chemical class as a critical antimicrobial
drug, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that there is a
reasonable certainty of no harm to human health due to the
development of antimicrobial resistance that is attributable,
in whole or in part, to the nontherapeutic use of such drug;
or''; and
(4) in the matter after and below subparagraph (J) (as
redesignated by paragraph (2)), by striking ''(A) through (I)''
and inserting ''(A) through (J)''.
(b) Phased Elimination of Nontherapeutic Use in Animals of
Antibiotics Important for Human Health.--Section 512 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360b) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
''(q) With respect to the nontherapeutic use in an animal of--
''(1) a drug that is a critical antimicrobial drug; or
''(2) a drug that is of the same chemical class as a
critical antimicrobial drug;
for which, as of the day before the date of enactment of this
subsection, there was in effect an approval of an application filed
pursuant to subsection (b), the Secretary shall withdraw such approval
on the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of this
subsection unless the Secretary, based on information submitted to the
Secretary by the sponsor of such drug, has determined prior to the date
that is 2 years after such date of enactment that there is a reasonable
certainty of no harm to human health due to the development of
antimicrobial resistance that is attributable in whole or in part to
the nontherapeutic use of such drug.
''(r)(1) If the Secretary grants an exemption under section 505(i)
or under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262)
to a drug that is an antibiotic drug, the Secretary shall rescind each
approval of a nontherapeutic use in an animal of such drug or of a drug
in the same chemical class as such drug upon the expiration of the 2-
year period beginning on the date on which the Secretary grants the
exemption, except as provided in paragraph (3).
''(2) If an application for an antibiotic drug is submitted to the
Secretary under section 505(b) or under section 351 of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262), the Secretary shall rescind each
approval of a nontherapeutic use in an animal of such drug or a drug in
the same chemical class as such drug upon the expiration of the 2-year
period beginning on the date on which the application is submitted to
the Secretary, except as provided in paragraph (3).
''(3) Paragraph (1) or (2), as the case may be, applies unless,
before the date on which approval would be rescinded under such
paragraph, the Secretary determines that the holder of the approved
application has demonstrated that there is a reasonable certainty of no
harm to human health due to the development of antimicrobial resistance
that is attributable, in whole or in part, to the nontherapeutic use in
an animal of such drug.''.
(c) Definitions.--Section 512 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360b), as amended by subsection (b), is further
amended by adding at the end the following:
''(s) For purposes of this section, the term 'nontherapeutic use',
with respect to a critical antimicrobial drug, means any use of such
drug in an animal in the absence of disease in such animal, including
use for growth promotion, feed efficiency, or routine disease
prevention.
''(t) For purposes of this section, the term 'critical
antimicrobial drug' means any drug that is--
''(1) intended for use in animals other than humans that
are--
''(A) intended for use as, or to generate, food for
humans; or
''(B) intended to breed or otherwise produce
animals described in subparagraph (A); and
''(2)(A) composed wholly or partly of any kind of
penicillin, tetracycline, bacitracin, macrolide, lincomycin,
streptogramin, aminoglycoside, sulfonamide; or
''(B) any other drug or derivative thereof that is used in
humans or intended for use in humans to inhibit or destroy
micro-organisms.''.

SEC. 5. ASSISTANCE TO DEFRAY FARMERS' EXPENSES IN PHASING OUT
NONTHERAPEUTIC USE OF MEDICALLY IMPORTANT ANTIBIOTICS;
PREFERENCE FOR FAMILY FARMS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary of Agriculture may make payments to
producers of livestock or poultry who the Secretary determines are
substantially reducing, or have substantially reduced, the
nontherapeutic use of critical antimicrobial drugs in livestock or
poultry in order to defray the costs of such reduction.
(b) Definition.--In this section the terms ''critical antimicrobial
drug'' and ''nontherapeutic use'' have the meanings given such terms in
section 512(s) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (as amended
by this Act).
(c) Priority for Family Farmers.--In awarding payments under
subsection (a), the Secretary of Agriculture shall give priority to
family-owned and family-operated farms or ranches.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section
for fiscal year 2003 and for each subsequent fiscal year.
A:
Preservation of Antibiotics for Human Treatment Act of 2002 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to deem unsafe animal feed containing a new animal drug which is a member of the fluoroquinolone class of antimicrobial drugs, unless the Secretary of Health and Human Services receives information from the drug's sponsor that there exists a reasonable certainty of no harm to human health due to the development of antimicrobial resistance attributable to the use of such drug in animal feed.Requires the Secretary to withdraw or rescind approval of previously approved drugs that are either critical antimicrobial drugs or in the same chemical class as critical antimicrobial drugs, unless the Secretary receives information from the drug's sponsor that there exists a reasonable certainty of no harm to human health due to the development of antimicrobial resistance attributable to the use of such drug in animal feed.Authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to make payments to producers of livestock or poultry who have reduced or are substantially reducing the nontherapeutic use of critical antimicrobial drugs.