Status of Certain Additional Over-the-Counter Drug Category II Active Ingredients, 34895-34902 [E8-13826]
Download as PDF
34895
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 73, No. 119
Thursday, June 19, 2008
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
16 CFR Part 437
[Project No. R511993]
RIN 3084-AB04
Business Opportunity Rule
Federal Trade Commission.
Extension of period to submit
rebuttal comments in response to the
Revised Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: In a Federal Register notice
published on March 26, 2008,1 the FTC
requested comment on its Revised
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(‘‘RNPR’’ or ‘‘Notice’’) in connection
with the Business Opportunity Rule.
The Notice stated that comments must
be submitted on or before May 27, 2008,
and that rebuttal comments must be
submitted on or before June 16, 2008. In
response to a request to extend the
rebuttal comment period received on
June 5, 2008, the Commission has
extended the rebuttal comment period
for an additional 15 days.
DATES: Rebuttal comments addressing
the Revised Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking published at 73 FR 16110
for the Business Opportunity Rule must
be submitted on or before July 1, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written rebuttal
comments. Comments should refer to
‘‘Business Opportunity Rule: File No.
R511993’’ and may be submitted by any
of the following methods. If, however,
the comment contains any material for
which confidential treatment is
requested, it must be filed in paper
form, and the first page of the document
must be clearly labeled ‘‘Confidential.’’2
The Notice was announced in a press release
on March 18, 2008, available at: (https://
www.ftc.gov/opa/2008/03/busrule.shtm) (‘‘Press
Release’’).
2 The comment must be accompanied by an
explicit request for confidential treatment,
including the factual and legal basis for the request,
and must identify the specific portions of the
comment to be withheld from the public record.
The request will be granted or denied by the
Commission’s General Counsel, consistent with
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
1
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:49 Jun 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
1. Web Site: Comments filed in
electronic form should be submitted
by using the following web link:
(https://secure.commentworks.com/
ftc-bizopRNPR/) and following the
instructions on the web-based form.
To ensure that the Commission
considers an electronic comment, you
must file it on the web-based form at
the weblink (https://
secure.commentworks.com/ftcbizopRNPR/). If this notice appears at
https://www.regulations.gov, you may
also file an electronic comment
through that website. The
Commission will consider all
comments that regulations.gov
forwards to it. You may also visit the
FTC website at (https://www.ftc.gov/
opa/2008/03/busrule.shtm) to read
the RNPR and the news release
describing it.
2. Mail or Hand Delivery: A
comment filed in paper form should
include ‘‘Business Opportunity Rule:
File No. R511993‘‘ both in the text
and on the envelope, and should be
mailed or delivered to the following
address: Federal Trade Commission/
Office of the Secretary, Room H-135
(Annex S), 600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW, Washington, DC 20580. The
Commission is requesting that any
comment filed in paper form be sent
by courier or overnight service, if
possible.
The FTC Act and other laws the
Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. All timely and responsive
public comments will be considered by
the Commission and will be available to
the public on the FTC website, to the
extent practicable, at https://www.ftc.gov.
As a matter of discretion, the FTC makes
every effort to remove home contact
information for individuals from the
public comments it receives before
placing those comments on the FTC
website. More information, including
routine uses permitted by the Privacy
Act, may be found in the FTC’s privacy
policy, at (https://www.ftc.gov/ftc/
privacy.shtm).
Commission, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW, Washington, DC 20580.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March
26, 2008, the Commission published a
Revised Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(‘‘RNPR’’ or ‘‘Notice’’), 73 FR 16110,
which solicited comment on a revised
proposal for the Business Opportunity
Rule. The Notice stated that the period
for submitting initial comments on this
proposal would close on May 27, 2008,
and that the period for submitting
rebuttal comments would close on June
16, 2008.
On June 5, 2008, the Commission
received a request from Venable LLP
(‘‘Venable’’) seeking a 30-day extension
of the rebuttal comment period. In
support of its extension request,
Venable argues that there were
numerous substantive comments
submitted in the initial comment period
that merit rebuttal. Nevertheless, the
bulk of the initial comments were
submitted on the last day of the
comment period and were unavailable
for public viewing for about one week
after the comment period closed. Thus,
Venable seeks an extension.
The Commission believes that a 15day extension should be sufficient to
enable Venable and all other
commenters to prepare and submit
rebuttal comments without unduly
delaying the progress of this proceeding.
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined to extend the rebuttal
comment period until July 1, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Status of Certain Additional Over-theCounter Drug Category II Active
Ingredients
Monica Vaca (202) 326-2245, Division of
Marketing Practices, Room 286, Bureau
of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–13899 Filed 6–18–08: 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 310
[Docket No. FDA–2008–N–0297]
RIN 0910–AF95
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
applicable law and the public interest. See
Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 C.F.R 4.9(c) (2008).
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ACTION:
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
Proposed rule.
19JNP1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
34896
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 119 / Thursday, June 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is proposing that
certain ingredients in over-the-counter
(OTC) drug products are not generally
recognized as safe and effective
(GRASE) or are misbranded. FDA is
issuing this proposed rule because we
did not receive any data and
information on these ingredients in
response to our request on December 31,
2003 (68 FR 75585). This proposed rule
is part of FDA’s ongoing review of OTC
drug products.
DATES: Submit written or electronic
comments on the proposed rule and on
FDA’s economic impact determination
by September 17, 2008. Please see
section IV of this document for the
proposed effective date of any final rule
that may publish based on this proposal.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. FDA–2008–N–
0297 and RIN number 0910–AF95, by
any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following ways:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions in the
following ways:
• FAX: 301–827–6870.
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier [For
paper, disk, or CD–ROM submissions]:
Division of Dockets Management (HFA–
305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.
To ensure more timely processing of
comments, FDA is no longer accepting
comments submitted to the agency by email. FDA encourages you to continue
to submit electronic comments by using
the Federal eRulemaking Portal, as
described previously, in the ADDRESSES
portion of this document under
Electronic Submissions.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name, docket
number, and Regulatory Information
Number (RIN) for this rulemaking and
may be accompanied by a supporting
memorandum or brief. All comments
received may be posted without change
to https://www.regulations.gov, including
any personal information provided.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the
heading of this document, into the
‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts
and/or go to the Division of Dockets
Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852, between 9
a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William E. Gilbertson or Gerald M.
Rachanow, Center for Drug Evaluation
and Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 22, MS5411, Silver Spring,
MD 20993, 301–796–2090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What is the Purpose of This
Document?
II. What Past FDA Actions Are Relevant
to This Proposed Rule?
A. What Categories of Products Were
Included in the Call-for-Data
Notice?
B. What Data Were Submitted in
Response to the Call-for-Data
Notice?
III. What Is the Regulatory Process
When No Data Are Submitted to
Support Ingredients?
IV. What is FDA’s Proposed Effective
Date?
V. Analysis of Impacts
A. What Are the Costs and Benefits
Associated With This Proposed
Rule?
B. What Regulatory Alternatives Has
FDA Considered?
C. What Is the Small Business Impact?
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
VII. Environmental Impact
VIII. Federalism
I. What is the Purpose of This
Document?
In this rule, FDA proposes to add to
§ 310.545 (21 CFR 310.545) certain
ingredients and categories of OTC drug
products that are not GRASE and are
misbranded in the absence of an
approved new drug application (NDA):
Ingredients
• Any external analgesic drug
products containing aloe vera or urea
• Any topical antimicrobial drug
products containing aloe vera
• Any drug products containing urea
for any labeled claims
• Ammonia as a reflex stimulant
Drug Categories
• All skin protectant blister guard
drug products
• Any skin protectant drug products
labeled with claims or directions for use
as a nipple protectant (previously
referred to as breast creams for use
when nursing), except lanolin
• Any drug products formulated as a
wet dressing other than skin protectant
and astringent drug products formulated
and labeled in accordance with 21 CFR
part 347
• Any drug products labeled with
claims or directions for the following
uses:
• Bed-wetting deterrent
• Blemish remedy other than
topical acne drug products
formulated and labeled in
accordance with 21 CFR part 333,
subpart D
• Bunion remedy
• Drawing salve (for drawing or
removing splinters, slivers, or
similar items), except ichthammol
• Foot balm, bath, or other topical
dosage forms for any ‘‘foot’’ claims
(including relieving foot muscle
strains and soreness from working
out), other than topical antifungal
drug products formulated and
labeled in accordance with 21 CFR
part 333, subpart C and external
analgesic drug products formulated
and labeled in accordance with the
tentative final monograph
(proposed 21 CFR part 348)
published on February 8, 1983 (48
FR 5852)
• Impotency cure
• Medicated bath preparation
• Nonantimicrobial skin wound
cleanser (previously listed as
‘‘detergents’’ in call-for-data notices
• Topical products for treatment or
prevention of male urethral
problems
• Treatment or prevention of
prickly heat
• Urinary acidifier
• Urinary alkalinizer
• Weight control drug products
with ingredients formulated as an
impregnated body wrap
• Wound wash saline
FDA notes that the names of several
active ingredients have changed from
the way they appeared in the December
31, 2003, call-for-data notice. FDA is
using the new names in the proposed
amendments to § 310.545. Table 1 lists
the old and new ingredient names:
TABLE 1.—ACTIVE INGREDIENTS WITH NAME CHANGES
Old name
Current name
Aromatic spirits of ammonia
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:49 Jun 18, 2008
Ammonia spirit, aromatic
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Category
Ammonia as a reflex stimulant
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 119 / Thursday, June 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
34897
TABLE 1.—ACTIVE INGREDIENTS WITH NAME CHANGES—Continued
Old name
Current name
Category
Benzophenone-3
Oxybenzone
Medicated bath
Carbolic acid
Phenol
Foot balm, bath
Formalin
Formaldehyde solution
Foot balm, bath
Natural pine needle oil
Pine needle oil
Foot balm, bath
Oil of eucalyptus
Eucalyptus oil
Foot balm, bath
Oil of peppermint
Peppermint oil
Foot balm, bath
Peru balsam
Peruvian balsam
Medicated bath
Phenol sodium
Phenolate sodium
Nonantimicrobial skin wound cleanser
Trisodium phosphate
Sodium phosphate, tribasic
Foot balm, bath
FDA is proposing that any OTC drug
product containing any of these
ingredients that are not considered
GRASE for the uses discussed in this
document must first be the subject of an
approved NDA before it may be initially
introduced (or initially delivered for
introduction) into interstate commerce.
The following product categories, for
which data were submitted in response
to the December 31, 2003, call-for-data
notice, will be discussed in future issues
of the Federal Register: Lubricants and
vaginal moisturizers, nasal moisturizers,
urinary analgesics/antiseptics, wrinkle
removers, lanolin as a nipple protectant,
and ichthammol as a drawing salve.
FDA is not discussing those product
categories, or specific active ingredients
in those categories, in this document.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
II. What Past FDA Actions Are Relevant
to This Proposed Rule?
A. What Categories of Products Were
Included in the Call-for-Data Notice?
In the Federal Register of December
31, 2003, FDA published a call for data
for certain categories of ingredients in
OTC drug products that FDA had not
reviewed to date. We listed the
following 22 categories (68 FR 75585 at
75589 to 75590): Ammonia as a reflex
stimulant; bed-wetting deterrents;
blemish remedies (excluding topical
acne active ingredients in
§ 310.545(a)(1) and § 333.310 (21 CFR
333.310)); breast creams (for use when
nursing) (now called ‘‘nipple
protectants’’); bunion remedies; drawing
salves (excluding products labeled for
the treatment of boils in 21 CFR 310.531
and including products labeled for the
drawing or removal of splinters, slivers,
or similar items); foot balms, baths, and
creams (excluding topical antifungal
active ingredients in § 310.545(a)(22)
and § 333.210 (21 CFR 333.210) and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:49 Jun 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
including claims for relieving foot
muscle strains and soreness from
working out); impotency cures;
impregnated body wraps for weight
reduction; lubricants and vaginal
moisturizers; medicated bath
preparations; nasal moisturizers;
nonantimicrobial skin wound cleansers;
prickly heat products; skin protectant
blister guard; urethral creams for males;
urinary acidifiers; urinary alkalinizers;
urinary analgesics/antiseptics; wet
dressings (excluding astringent active
ingredients in § 310.545(a)(18)(ii) and
§ 347.10 (21 CFR 347.10)); wound wash
saline; and wrinkle removers. Most
categories identified in the call for data
included a list of specific active
ingredients for review.
FDA also requested the submission of
data and information (68 FR 75585 at
75588) on:
• Aloe vera as an active ingredient in
OTC topical antimicrobial and external
analgesic drug products
• Urea as an active ingredient in OTC
external analgesic drug products, or for
any other OTC drug use
FDA invited interested persons to
submit data and information on these
categories and ingredients by June 28,
2004.
B. What Data Were Submitted in
Response to the Call-for-Data Notice?
Data were submitted for the following
product categories: Nipple protectants
(for use when nursing); drawing salves
labeled for the drawing or removal of
splinters, slivers, or similar items;
lubricants and vaginal moisturizers;
nasal moisturizers; urinary analgesics/
antiseptics; and wrinkle removers. For
two of the product categories, FDA
received data and information on only
one ingredient in each category. In the
category of nipple protectants, FDA
received data on a product containing
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
lanolin. FDA did not receive any data or
information on the following
ingredients that were listed for the
nipple protectant category in the callfor-data notice: Cetyl alcohol, cocoa
butter, cod liver oil, dimethicone,
glycerin, glyceryl monostearate, hard
fat, mineral oil, petrolatum, and white
petrolatum. In the category of drawing
salves, FDA received data on a product
containing ichthammol. FDA did not
receive any data or information on the
following ingredients that were listed
for the drawing salves category in the
call-for-data notice: Ergot fluid extract,
juniper tar (oil of cade), magnesium
sulfate, pine tar, rosin, rosin cerate, and
sulfur. Based on the submissions
received, the following products are not
included in this proposed rule and will
be discussed in a future issue of the
Federal Register: Lubricants and vaginal
moisturizers, nasal moisturizers, urinary
analgesics/antiseptics, wrinkle
removers, lanolin for use as a nipple
protectant, and ichthammol for use in
drawing salves.
FDA did not receive any data or
information on products or active
ingredients in the following product
categories: Ammonia as a reflex
stimulant; bed-wetting deterrents;
blemish remedies (excluding topical
acne active ingredients in
§ § 310.545(a)(1) and 333.310); bunion
remedies; foot balms, baths, and creams
(excluding topical antifungal active
ingredients in § § 310.545(a)(22) and
333.210 and including claims for
relieving foot muscle strains and
soreness from working out); impotency
cures; impregnated body wraps for
weight reduction; medicated bath
preparations; nonantimicrobial skin
wound cleansers; prickly heat products;
skin protectant blister guard; urethral
creams for males; urinary acidifiers;
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
34898
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 119 / Thursday, June 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
urinary alkalinizers; wet dressings
(excluding astringent active ingredients
in § § 310.545(a)(18)(ii) and 347.10); and
wound wash saline. FDA also did not
receive any data or information on aloe
vera and urea for topical uses.
Therefore, FDA has no data and
information to review to determine if
any of these products or ingredients are
GRASE and not misbranded for OTC
use.
III. What Is the Regulatory Process
When No Data Are Submitted to
Support Ingredients?
Under the procedures for classifying
OTC drugs as GRASE and not
misbranded and for establishing OTC
drug monographs (§ 330.10 (21 CFR
330.10)):
• An advisory review panel reviews
the data and information submitted in
response to a call for data and then
submits a report with its
recommendations to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner)
(§ 330.10(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(5)).
• After reviewing the advisory review
panel’s report and recommendations,
the Commissioner publishes a proposed
order with the panel’s report and a
monograph listing proposed GRASE
conditions and a statement of the
proposed nonmonograph conditions
(§ 330.10(a)(6)).
• After reviewing comments and new
data submitted in response to the
publication of the advisory review
panel’s report, the Commissioner
publishes a tentative final monograph
(TFM) proposing conditions under
which a category of drugs or specific
OTC drugs are GRASE and not
misbranded (§ 330.10(a)(7)(i)).
• The Commissioner may also
publish a separate tentative order, such
as this document, containing a
statement of those active ingredients
reviewed and proposed to be excluded
from the monograph because they
would result in a drug product not being
GRASE or would result in misbranding.
This order may be published when FDA
receives no substantive comments in
opposition to the advisory review
panel’s report or no new data and
information (§ 330.10(a)(7)(ii)).
• After reviewing the entire
administrative record, the
Commissioner publishes a final order
containing a monograph establishing
conditions under which a category of
OTC drugs or a specific or specific OTC
drugs are GRASE and not misbranded
(§ 330.10(a)(9)). If there are no GRASE
conditions, the Commissioner includes
the category or the specific OTC drugs
in § 310.545, which lists active
ingredients for which the data are
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:49 Jun 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
inadequate to establish GRASE status
(i.e., identifies nonmonograph
ingredients and uses).
FDA did not receive any data and
information on most of the ingredients
and drug categories in the call-for-data
notice for an advisory review panel to
evaluate and upon which a panel could
issue a report. Thus, for those
ingredients and drug categories, there is
no data or report for the Commissioner
to evaluate and no basis for FDA to
publish a TFM. Therefore, the
Commissioner is publishing a tentative
order (proposed rule) listing these
ingredients and drug categories as
nonmonograph conditions.
IV. What Is FDA’s Proposed Effective
Date?
FDA is proposing that any final rule
that may issue based on this proposal be
implemented 180 days after its
publication in order to provide for safe
and effective use of OTC drug products
at the earliest possible time.
Manufacturers are encouraged to
comply voluntarily at the earliest
possible date.
FDA points out that publication of a
final rule under this proceeding would
not preclude a manufacturer from
testing an ingredient to support future
use. Where a manufacturer believes it
has adequate data to establish that an
active ingredient is GRASE when used
for a specific indication, such data may
be submitted in an appropriate citizen
petition to amend or to establish an OTC
drug monograph, as appropriate (see 21
CFR 10.30). Data to support safety and
effectiveness can be developed under an
investigational new drug (IND)
application to support submission and
review of an NDA. An NDA, if
approved, would make the drug eligible
for prescription or OTC marketing
status. For ingredients subject to a final
monograph, an NDA may be submitted
for a deviation from the monograph (see
21 CFR 330.11 describing an NDA
deviation). A product cannot continue
to be marketed legally while FDA
reviews a petition or NDA.
V. Analysis of Impacts
FDA has examined the impacts of the
proposed rule under Executive Order
12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601–612), and the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public
Law 104–4). Executive Order 12866
directs agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity). The agency
believes that this proposed rule is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
by the Executive order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires agencies to analyze regulatory
options that would minimize any
significant impact of a rule on small
entities. Because few products will
likely be affected and those effects
would probably be small, FDA does not
believe that this proposed rule would
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
FDA requests comment on this issue.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that agencies prepare a written
statement, which includes an
assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits, before proposing ‘‘any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may
result in the expenditure by State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100,000,000
or more (adjusted annually for inflation)
in any one year. ’’The current threshold
after adjustment for inflation is $127
million, using the most current (2006)
Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross
Domestic Product. FDA does not expect
this proposed rule to result in any 1year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
The purpose of this proposed rule is
to classify OTC drug products
containing certain active ingredients as
not GRASE (i.e., nonmonograph) for
certain uses for which FDA did not
receive any safety and effectiveness data
and information. This proposed rule
amends § 310.545 to include these
product categories and ingredients.
We are not able to identify the
number of products that would be
affected by this proposed rule, but the
number is probably low. Based on our
experience, when no data are received
after a Federal Register request, it often
indicates that manufacturers have little
or no interest in those ingredients, have
phased out or are in the process of
phasing out those ingredients, or in
some cases are removing the drug
claims at issue from the product label.
Without actually reading the label for
each and every manufacturer’s product,
we cannot distinguish the numbers of
products containing the proposed
nonmonograph ingredients from those
with monograph ingredients. In
addition, some of the affected products
are sold alongside cosmetics and drugcosmetic combination products and we
would need to read the actual labels to
determine their classifications.
Many of the products affected could
still be marketed as OTC drugs if they
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 119 / Thursday, June 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
were reformulated with an active
ingredient that is contained in a
monograph and complied with that
monograph’s labeling conditions. For
example, blemish remedies covered by
this proposal could be reformulated to
contain a topical acne active ingredient
included in § 333.310. Other products
could be marketed as cosmetics, some
with a simple label change and no
reformulation. For example, some foot
balms and baths covered by this
proposal might be able to be marketed
as cosmetic products with certain label
changes (i.e., deletion of any drug
claims). For a few of the product
categories, such as bed wetting
deterrents and impotency cures, there
are currently no OTC drug substitute
products on the market, but there are
prescription drugs approved for the
conditions.
A. What Are the Costs and Benefits
Associated With This Proposed Rule?
For products that cannot be
reformulated or relabeled to remain on
the market, the cost of the rule is the
short-run loss of economic profits from
the lost sales of those goods once they
are removed from the market. Over the
long-run, however, manufacturers will
be able to produce alternative goods on
their existing equipment to partly or
fully offset these losses. For the
products that remain on the market, the
costs include one-time costs to
reformulate or relabel the product. We
do not know the number of
manufacturers that would be affected or
the number of products and
stockkeeping units (SKUs) (individual
products, packages, and sizes) that
might need to be relabeled. Many of the
products in these categories were
probably discontinued some time ago
but a few manufacturers will continue
to market them until a final rule
prohibits such marketing.
The one-time costs to relabel a
product include designing the new
carton and the inventory loss of any
unused current labeling. FDA assumes
the same weighted average cost to
relabel, inflated to reflect current (2006)
dollars, that it estimated for the final
rule requiring uniform label formats of
OTC drug products (64 FR 13254 at
13279 to 13281, March 17, 1999) (i.e.,
$3,600 x 1.22), $4,392 per SKU.1 We
also have estimated inventory loss using
data from a study of the costs of the
uniform label format rule. With a 6month implementation period, we have
estimated the inventory loss to be
1 The annual Producer Price Index (PPI) for pulp,
paper, and allied products, series Id: WPU09 (the
major cost driver for labeling) rose by 22 percent
between 1998 and 2006 (from 174.1 to 209.8) https://
data.bls.gov.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:49 Jun 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
between $610 and $3,660 per SKU,
depending on product sales, for an
estimated weighted average inventory
loss of $1,220.2 For example, if there
were 100 SKUs that needed to be
relabeled, the total one-time incremental
costs would be about $561,200 (100 x
($4,392 + $1,220)).
The cost to reformulate an OTC drug
product varies greatly depending on the
nature of the product, dosage form,
availability of alternative active
ingredients, and size of company. If
there are monograph ingredients
available in the affected product
category, the reformulation costs for
another product (such as product
validation, stability testing, and change
in master production documents) would
range from $100,000 to $500,000.3 The
decision to reformulate would depend
on the manufacturer’s product portfolio
and projected sales for the reformulated
product. Using the midpoint of the
range, $300,000, if there were 50
products reformulated the total
incremental costs would be about $15
million ($300,000 x 50).
We are not able to estimate the total
foregone economic profit from the lost
sale of products that would be
discontinued by the manufacturers, but
sales of the products affected by the
proposed rule were never large relative
to other OTC drug products. The loss
would be largely a short-run loss
because other products, including OTC
drugs, cosmetics, and dietary
supplements, could be manufactured on
the same equipment as the replaced
products. In addition, manufacturers
could increase production of some of
their other existing products or conduct
contract manufacturing for other
products.
FDA cannot quantify the benefits
associated with this proposed rule.
Potential benefits include removal from
the market of OTC drug products or
ingredients that have not been shown to
be safe and effective. For the classes of
products affected by this proposed rule,
consumers would have substitute
products available, either OTC or by
prescription. The potential benefits from
the rule would result from those
substitute products having been shown
to be safe and effective.
B. What Regulatory Alternatives Has
FDA Considered?
2 The original values from the uniform label
formats rule (64 FR 13254), inventory loss between
$500 and $3,000 and a weighted average of $1,000,
were inflated by 22 percent. The weighting ratio for
calculating the average was 80 percent small and
private label firms to 20 percent large firms.
3 Value based on previously published
estimations (70 FR 75988 at 75995, December 22,
2005 and 67 FR 78158 at 78167, December 23,
2002).
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34899
We have few alternatives available to
us when we determine there are no data
or qualitative information available to
demonstrate a product’s safety and
effectiveness. Even without evidence of
harm caused by the use of these
products, they cannot remain on the
market because there is no evidence that
they are safe and effective. The two
most plausible regulatory alternatives to
this proposed rule are a shorter and a
longer implementation period. With a
shorter implementation period, the
products at issue would be removed
from the market sooner, but the labeling
costs for 100 SKUs would rise to
$622,000 with a 3-month compliance
period.4 We could allow a longer
implementation period so
manufacturers could reduce their
inventory of cartons and labels. Costs
for relabeling 100 SKUs would fall to
$500,200 with a 12-month compliance
period, but consumers would be
exposed to these products that have not
been shown to be safe and effective for
a longer period of time. Furthermore, it
is probable that few products will, in
fact, bear substantial labeling costs.
Manufacturers have been aware of the
status of these ingredients since the
December 31, 2003, call-for-data notice
and have had sufficient notice and time
to adjust their supply of labels to limit
the impact in the event this rule
becomes final. The 6-month
implementation period used in the cost
model probably understates the actual
average time that manufacturers will
have to change labels.
C. What is the Small Business Impact?
The Small Business Administration
defines an entity as small in the
pharmaceutical manufacturing industry
if it has fewer than 750 employees. Over
90 percent of firms in the
pharmaceutical industry are classified
as small. We assume that 90 to 100
percent of the entities that would be
affected by this proposed rule are also
small.
The economic impact on individual
firms will vary based on the number of
affected products they manufacture, and
how they respond to the rule. Their
response could be to withdraw, relabel,
or reformulate the product. If a small
entity withdraws the product, its
production line could be used for
alternative OTC drug, dietary
supplement, and cosmetic products, or
4 The weighted average inventory loss would
increase to $1,830 per SKU with a 3-month
compliance period, but decrease to the irreducible
(label inventory can never be used up entirely so
whenever there are label changes, there is always
some portion of inventory that is scraped) inventory
loss of $610 per SKU with a compliance period of
12 months or longer.
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
34900
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 119 / Thursday, June 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
for contract manufacturing in those
industries, thereby limiting economic
losses. Labeling costs due to the
proposed rule, as explained in this
section, would likely be small. The
largest potential cost would be
reformulation. However, we do not
know if a sufficient number of small
entities would reformulate a large
enough number of products to
constitute a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. FDA requests comment on this
issue.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed rule contains no
collections of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management
and Budget under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
VII. Environmental Impact
FDA has determined under 21 CFR
25.31(a) that this action is of a type that
does not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human
environment. Therefore, neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required.
VIII. Federalism
FDA has analyzed this proposed rule
in accordance with the principles set
forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA
has determined that the proposed rule,
if finalized as proposed, would have a
preemptive effect on State law. Section
4(a) of the Executive order requires
agencies to ‘‘construe * * * a Federal
statute to preempt State law only where
the statute contains an express
preemption provision or there is some
other clear evidence that the Congress
intended preemption of State law, or
where the exercise of State authority
conflicts with the exercise of Federal
authority under the Federal statute.’’
Section 751 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (the act) (21 U.S.C.
379r) is an express preemption
provision. Section 751(a) of the act (21
U.S.C. 379r(a)) provides that ‘‘ * * * no
State or political subdivision of a State
may establish or continue in effect any
requirement— * * * (1) that relates to
the regulation of a drug that is not
subject to the requirements of section
503(b)(1) or 503(f)(1)(A); and (2) that is
different from or in addition to, or that
is otherwise not identical with, a
requirement under this Act, the Poison
Prevention Packaging Act of 1970 (15
U.S.C. 1471 et seq.), or the Fair
Packaging and Labeling Act (15 U.S.C.
1451 et seq.).’’
Currently, this provision operates to
preempt States from imposing
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:49 Jun 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
requirements related to the regulation of
nonprescription drug products. (See
Section 751(b) through (e) of the act for
the scope of the express preemption
provision, the exemption procedures,
and the exceptions to the provision.)
This proposed rule, if finalized as
proposed, would classify as not GRASE
all of the ingredients in the product
categories listed in the December 31,
2003, request for data and information
for which FDA did not receive any data
and information. Although any final
rule would have a preemptive effect, in
that it would preclude States from
issuing requirements related to these
OTC drug products that are different
from or in addition to, or not otherwise
identical with a requirement in the final
rule, this preemptive effect is consistent
with what Congress set forth in section
751 of the act. Section 751(a) of the act
displaces both State legislative
requirements and State common law
duties. We also note that even where the
express preemption provision is not
applicable, implied preemption may
arise. See Geier v. American Honda Co.,
529 US 861 (2000).
FDA believes that the preemptive
effect of the proposed rule, if finalized
as proposed, would be consistent with
Executive Order 13132. Section 4(e) of
the Executive order provides that ‘‘when
an agency proposes to act through
adjudication or rulemaking to preempt
State law, the agency shall provide all
affected State and local officials notice
and an opportunity for appropriate
participation in the proceedings.’’ FDA
is providing an opportunity for State
and local officials to comment on this
rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 310
Administrative practice and
procedure, Drugs, Labeling, Medical
devices, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs, it is proposed that
21 CFR part 310 be amended as follows:
PART 310—NEW DRUGS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 310 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 355, 360b–360f, 360j, 361(a), 371, 374,
375, 379e; 42 U.S.C. 216, 241, 242(a), 262,
263b–263n.
2. Section 310.545 is amended by
redesignating the text of paragraph
(a)(20) as paragraph (a)(20)(i), by adding
new paragraph (a)(20)(i) heading, by
adding and reserving paragraph
(a)(20)(ii), by adding paragraphs
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(a)(10)(viii), (a)(18)(vii), (a)(18)(viii),
(a)(20)(iii), (a)(27)(iii), (a)(30) through
(a)(45), and (d)(52), and by revising
paragraph (d) introductory text and
paragraph (d)(2) to read as follows:
§ 310.545 Drug products containing
certain active ingredients offered over-thecounter (OTC) for certain uses.
(a) * * *
(10) * * *
(viii) Aloe vera and urea drug
products. Any product labeled with
claims or directions for use as an
external analgesic.
*
*
*
*
*
(18) * * *
(vii) Blister guard drug products—
Approved as of (date 180 days after
publication of a final rule in the Federal
Register).
Beta-hydroxyquinolone
Eugenol
Pyroxylin solution
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as a skin
protectant blister guard
(viii) Nipple protectant drug products
(in association with breast feeding)—
Approved as of (date 180 days after
publication of a final rule in the Federal
Register).
Cetyl alcohol
Cocoa butter
Cod liver oil
Dimethicone
Glycerin
Glyceryl monostearate
Hard fat
Mineral Oil
Petrolatum
White petrolatum
*
*
*
*
*
(20) Weight control drug products.—
(i) Ingredients—Approved as of
February 10, 1992.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Impregnated body wraps—
Approved as of (date 180 days after
publication of a final rule in the Federal
Register).
Amino acids
Collagen
Magnesium sulfate
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use for weight
control
*
*
*
*
*
(27) * * *
(iii) Aloe vera drug products. Any
product labeled with claims or
directions for use as a topical
antimicrobial.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 119 / Thursday, June 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
(30) Ammonia as a reflex stimulant.
Ammonia inhalants
Ammonia spirit, aromatic
Any other ammonia ingredient labeled
with claims or directions for use as a
reflex stimulant
(31) Bed-wetting deterrents.
Belladonna
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as a bedwetting deterrent
(32) Blemish remedies (excluding
topical acne active ingredients in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section and
§ 333.310 of this chapter).
Allantoin
Aloe vera gel
Calamine
Ethyl alcohol
Eugenol
Menthol
Oil of eucalyptus
Oil of peppermint
Propylene glycol
Sodium alkylarylpolyether sulfonate
Titanium dioxide
Triclocarban
Triclosan
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as a blemish
remedy
(33) Bunion remedies. Any
ingredient(s) labeled with claims or
directions for use to treat and/or prevent
bunions.
(34) Drawing salves (excluding
products labeled for the treatment of
boils in § 310.531 of this chapter)—
includes products labeled for the
drawing or removing of splinters, slivers,
or similar items.
Ergot fluid extract
Juniper tar (oil of cade)
Magnesium sulfate
Pine tar
Rosin
Rosin cerate
Sulfur
(35) Foot balms, baths, and other
topical dosage forms for any ‘‘foot’’
claims (including relieving foot muscle
strains and soreness from working out),
excluding topical antifungal active
ingredients in paragraph (a)(22) of this
section and § 333.210 of this chapter
and excluding external analgesic active
ingredients in paragraphs (a)(10)(i) and
(a)(10)(ii) of this section and §§ 348.10
and 348.12 of the external analgesic
drug products tentative final monograph
published on February 8, 1983 (48 FR
5852).
Amyl salicylate
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:49 Jun 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
Benzalkonium chloride
Cajeput oil
Di-isobutyl phenoxy ethoxy
ethyldimethyl benzyl ammonium
chloride
Essential oils
Eucalyptus oil
Formaldehyde solution
Glyceryl monostearate
8-Hydroxyquinoline
Iodized botanical oil
Iron sulfate
Isopropyl alcohol
Lanolin
Lithium chloride
Magnesium sulfate
O-benzyl-p-chlorophenol
Oil of thyme
Peppermint oil
Pine needle oil
Potassium iodide
Propylene glycol
Sodium bicarbonate
Sodium chloride
Sodium hypochloride
Sodium lauryl sulfate
Sodium phosphate, tribasic
Sodium sesquicarbonate
Sodium sulfate
Talc
Tragacanth mucilage
Water soluble chlorophyllins
Witch hazel
Zinc oxide
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as a foot
balm, bath, or other topical dosage form
for any ‘‘foot’’ claims (including
relieving foot muscle strains and
soreness from working out)
(36) Impotency cures.
Yohimbine
Yohimbine hydrochloride
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as an
impotency cure
(37) Medicated bath preparations.
Acetylated lanolin
Alkyl aryl polyether alcohol
Colloidal sulfur
Cottonseed oil
Di-isopropyl sebacate
Drometrizole
Iron sulfate
Isopropyl myristate
Isopropyl palmitate
Isostearic acid
Lanolin alcohols extract
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34901
Lanolin oil
Liquid petrolatum
Lithium chloride
Magnesium sulfate
Mineral oil
Natural and essential oils
Nonoxynol-5
Octoxynol-3
Oxybenzone
PEG–4 dilaurate
PEG–8 dioleate
PEG–40 sorbitan peroleate
PEG–200 dilaurate
Peruvian balsam
PPG–15
Pine needle oil
Potassium iodide
Stearyl ether oleth-2
Sodium bicarbonate
Sodium carbonate
Sodium chloride
Sodium hyposulfate
Sodium lauryl sulfate
Sodium sesquicarbonate
Sodium sulfate
Tar distillate
Vitamin E
Water soluble chlorophyllins
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as a
medicated bath preparation
(38) Nonantimicrobial skin wound
cleansers (previously listed as
‘‘detergents’’ in call-for-data notices).
Tincture of Green Soap
Phenolate sodium
Poloxamer 188
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as a
nonantimicrobial skin wound cleanser
(39) Prickly heat products.
Aluminum hydroxide gel
Zinc carbonate
Zinc oxide
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use for prickly
heat
(40) Urethral topical products for
males. Any product labeled with claims
or directions for use to treat and/or
prevent male urethral problems.
(41) Urinary acidifiers.
Ammonium chloride
Ascorbic acid
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as an
urinary acidifier
(42) Urinary alkalinizers.
Sodium bicarbonate
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as an
urinary alkalinizer
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
34902
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 119 / Thursday, June 19, 2008 / Proposed Rules
(43) Wet dressings (excluding
astringent active ingredients in
paragraph (a)(18)(ii) of this section and
skin protectant and astringent active
ingredients in §§ 347.10 and 347.12 of
this chapter).
Aloe vera
Calcium polysulfide
Calcium thiosulfate
Oxyquinoline sulfate
Sodium propionate
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as a wet
dressing
(44) Wound wash saline.
Sodium chloride solution
Sterile sodium chloride solution
Any other ingredient labeled with
claims or directions for use as wound
wash saline
(45) Urea. Any product containing
urea for any labeled claims.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Any OTC drug product that is not
in compliance with this section is
subject to regulatory action if initially
introduced or initially delivered for
introduction into interstate commerce
after the dates specified in paragraphs
(d)(1) through (d)(52) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) February 10, 1992, for products
subject to paragraph (a)(20)(i) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(52) [Date 180 days after date of
publication of a final rule in the Federal
Register], for products subject to
paragraphs (a)(10)(viii), (a)(18)(vii),
(a)(18)(viii), (a)(20)(iii), (a)(27)(iii), and
(a)(30) through (a)(45) of this section.
Dated: June 9, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and
Planning.
[FR Doc. E8–13826 Filed 6–18–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Notice No. 84; Re: Notice No. 68]
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
RIN 1513–AB26
Proposed Establishment of the
Tulocay Viticultural Area (2006R–009P)
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Withdrawal of notice of
proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:49 Jun 18, 2008
Jkt 214001
SUMMARY: The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
and Trade Bureau announces the
withdrawal of its proposal to establish
the Tulocay viticultural area in southern
Napa County, California. We take this
action because of questions regarding
the actual name of the proposed
viticultural area and to avoid the use of
potentially misleading statements on
wine labels.
DATES: The withdrawal of the proposal
to establish the Tulocay viticultural area
is effective on June 19, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
N. A. Sutton, Regulations and Rulings
Division, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 925 Lakeville St., 158,
Petaluma, CA 94952; telephone 415–
271–1254.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
TTB Authority
Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act), 27
U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary
of the Treasury to prescribe regulations
for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits,
and malt beverages. The FAA Act
provides that these regulations should,
among other things, prohibit consumer
deception and the use of misleading
statements on labels, and ensure that
labels provide the consumer with
adequate information as to the identity
and quality of the product. The Alcohol
and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
(TTB) administers the regulations
promulgated under the FAA Act.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR
part 4) allows the establishment of
definitive viticultural areas and the use
of their names as appellations of origin
on wine labels and in wine
advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB
regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets forth
standards for petitions for the
establishment of viticultural areas and
contains the list of approved viticultural
areas.
Definition
Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB
regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) defines
a viticultural area for American wine as
a delimited grape-growing region
distinguishable by geographical
features, the boundaries of which have
been recognized and defined in part 9
of the regulations. These designations
allow vintners and consumers to
attribute a given quality, reputation, or
other characteristic of a wine made from
grapes grown in an area to its
geographic origin. The establishment of
viticultural areas allows vintners to
describe more accurately the origin of
their wines to consumers and helps
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
consumers to identify wines they may
purchase. Establishment of a viticultural
area is neither an approval nor an
endorsement by TTB of the wine
produced in that area.
Requirements
Section 4.25(e)(2) of the TTB
regulations outlines the procedure for
proposing an American viticultural area
and provides that any interested party
may petition TTB to establish a grapegrowing region as a viticultural area.
Section 9.3(b) of the TTB regulations
requires the petition to include—
• Evidence that the name of the
viticultural area is locally and/or
nationally known as referring to the area
specified in the application;
• Historical or current evidence that
the boundaries of the viticultural area
are as specified in the application;
• Evidence relating to the
geographical features (climate, soil,
elevation, physical features, etc.) which
distinguish the viticultural features of
the proposed area from surrounding
areas;
• The specific boundaries of the
viticultural area, based on features
which can be found on United States
Geological Survey (USGS) maps of the
largest applicable scale; and
• A copy of the appropriate USGS
map(s) with boundaries prominently
marked.
Publication of Notice No. 68
On November 8, 2006, TTB published
in the Federal Register (71 FR 65432),
as Notice No. 68, a notice of proposed
rulemaking to establish the ‘‘Tulocay’’
American viticultural area in southern
Napa County, California. We undertook
that action in response to a petition filed
by Aaron Pott, a winemaker, and
Marshall Newman of Newman
Communications, on behalf of vintners
and grape growers in the Tulocay region
of Napa County, California. As
explained in Notice No.68, the proposed
Tulocay viticultural area lies entirely
within Napa County and also entirely
within the existing Napa Valley
viticultural area (27 CFR 9.23), which in
turn is entirely within the existing,
multi-county North Coast viticultural
area (27 CFR 9.30). Notice No. 68
invited comments from the public on
the proposal, and the comment period
closed on January 8, 2007.
Comments Received in Response to
Notice No. 68
TTB received 20 comments in
response to Notice No. 68 during the
comment period. Of those, 8 comments
supported the petition and 12 comments
requested that the proposed Tulocay
E:\FR\FM\19JNP1.SGM
19JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 119 (Thursday, June 19, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34895-34902]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-13826]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 310
[Docket No. FDA-2008-N-0297]
RIN 0910-AF95
Status of Certain Additional Over-the-Counter Drug Category II
Active Ingredients
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 34896]]
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing that
certain ingredients in over-the-counter (OTC) drug products are not
generally recognized as safe and effective (GRASE) or are misbranded.
FDA is issuing this proposed rule because we did not receive any data
and information on these ingredients in response to our request on
December 31, 2003 (68 FR 75585). This proposed rule is part of FDA's
ongoing review of OTC drug products.
DATES: Submit written or electronic comments on the proposed rule and
on FDA's economic impact determination by September 17, 2008. Please
see section IV of this document for the proposed effective date of any
final rule that may publish based on this proposal.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA-2008-
N-0297 and RIN number 0910-AF95, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the following ways:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions in the following ways:
FAX: 301-827-6870.
Mail/Hand delivery/Courier [For paper, disk, or CD-ROM
submissions]: Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
To ensure more timely processing of comments, FDA is no longer
accepting comments submitted to the agency by e-mail. FDA encourages
you to continue to submit electronic comments by using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal, as described previously, in the ADDRESSES portion
of this document under Electronic Submissions.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency
name, docket number, and Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this
rulemaking and may be accompanied by a supporting memorandum or brief.
All comments received may be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of
Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852,
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William E. Gilbertson or Gerald M.
Rachanow, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 22, MS5411, Silver
Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-2090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What is the Purpose of This Document?
II. What Past FDA Actions Are Relevant to This Proposed Rule?
A. What Categories of Products Were Included in the Call-for-Data
Notice?
B. What Data Were Submitted in Response to the Call-for-Data
Notice?
III. What Is the Regulatory Process When No Data Are Submitted to
Support Ingredients?
IV. What is FDA's Proposed Effective Date?
V. Analysis of Impacts
A. What Are the Costs and Benefits Associated With This Proposed
Rule?
B. What Regulatory Alternatives Has FDA Considered?
C. What Is the Small Business Impact?
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
VII. Environmental Impact
VIII. Federalism
I. What is the Purpose of This Document?
In this rule, FDA proposes to add to Sec. 310.545 (21 CFR 310.545)
certain ingredients and categories of OTC drug products that are not
GRASE and are misbranded in the absence of an approved new drug
application (NDA):
Ingredients
Any external analgesic drug products containing aloe vera
or urea
Any topical antimicrobial drug products containing aloe
vera
Any drug products containing urea for any labeled claims
Ammonia as a reflex stimulant
Drug Categories
All skin protectant blister guard drug products
Any skin protectant drug products labeled with claims or
directions for use as a nipple protectant (previously referred to as
breast creams for use when nursing), except lanolin
Any drug products formulated as a wet dressing other than
skin protectant and astringent drug products formulated and labeled in
accordance with 21 CFR part 347
Any drug products labeled with claims or directions for
the following uses:
Bed-wetting deterrent
Blemish remedy other than topical acne drug products
formulated and labeled in accordance with 21 CFR part 333, subpart D
Bunion remedy
Drawing salve (for drawing or removing splinters,
slivers, or similar items), except ichthammol
Foot balm, bath, or other topical dosage forms for any
``foot'' claims (including relieving foot muscle strains and soreness
from working out), other than topical antifungal drug products
formulated and labeled in accordance with 21 CFR part 333, subpart C
and external analgesic drug products formulated and labeled in
accordance with the tentative final monograph (proposed 21 CFR part
348) published on February 8, 1983 (48 FR 5852)
Impotency cure
Medicated bath preparation
Nonantimicrobial skin wound cleanser (previously listed
as ``detergents'' in call-for-data notices
Topical products for treatment or prevention of male
urethral problems
Treatment or prevention of prickly heat
Urinary acidifier
Urinary alkalinizer
Weight control drug products with ingredients formulated
as an impregnated body wrap
Wound wash saline
FDA notes that the names of several active ingredients have changed
from the way they appeared in the December 31, 2003, call-for-data
notice. FDA is using the new names in the proposed amendments to Sec.
310.545. Table 1 lists the old and new ingredient names:
Table 1.--Active Ingredients With Name Changes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Old name Current name Category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aromatic spirits of ammonia Ammonia spirit, aromatic Ammonia as a reflex stimulant
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 34897]]
Benzophenone-3 Oxybenzone Medicated bath
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbolic acid Phenol Foot balm, bath
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Formalin Formaldehyde solution Foot balm, bath
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural pine needle oil Pine needle oil Foot balm, bath
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oil of eucalyptus Eucalyptus oil Foot balm, bath
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oil of peppermint Peppermint oil Foot balm, bath
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peru balsam Peruvian balsam Medicated bath
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phenol sodium Phenolate sodium Nonantimicrobial skin wound cleanser
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trisodium phosphate Sodium phosphate, tribasic Foot balm, bath
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FDA is proposing that any OTC drug product containing any of these
ingredients that are not considered GRASE for the uses discussed in
this document must first be the subject of an approved NDA before it
may be initially introduced (or initially delivered for introduction)
into interstate commerce.
The following product categories, for which data were submitted in
response to the December 31, 2003, call-for-data notice, will be
discussed in future issues of the Federal Register: Lubricants and
vaginal moisturizers, nasal moisturizers, urinary analgesics/
antiseptics, wrinkle removers, lanolin as a nipple protectant, and
ichthammol as a drawing salve. FDA is not discussing those product
categories, or specific active ingredients in those categories, in this
document.
II. What Past FDA Actions Are Relevant to This Proposed Rule?
A. What Categories of Products Were Included in the Call-for-Data
Notice?
In the Federal Register of December 31, 2003, FDA published a call
for data for certain categories of ingredients in OTC drug products
that FDA had not reviewed to date. We listed the following 22
categories (68 FR 75585 at 75589 to 75590): Ammonia as a reflex
stimulant; bed-wetting deterrents; blemish remedies (excluding topical
acne active ingredients in Sec. 310.545(a)(1) and Sec. 333.310 (21
CFR 333.310)); breast creams (for use when nursing) (now called
``nipple protectants''); bunion remedies; drawing salves (excluding
products labeled for the treatment of boils in 21 CFR 310.531 and
including products labeled for the drawing or removal of splinters,
slivers, or similar items); foot balms, baths, and creams (excluding
topical antifungal active ingredients in Sec. 310.545(a)(22) and Sec.
333.210 (21 CFR 333.210) and including claims for relieving foot muscle
strains and soreness from working out); impotency cures; impregnated
body wraps for weight reduction; lubricants and vaginal moisturizers;
medicated bath preparations; nasal moisturizers; nonantimicrobial skin
wound cleansers; prickly heat products; skin protectant blister guard;
urethral creams for males; urinary acidifiers; urinary alkalinizers;
urinary analgesics/antiseptics; wet dressings (excluding astringent
active ingredients in Sec. 310.545(a)(18)(ii) and Sec. 347.10 (21 CFR
347.10)); wound wash saline; and wrinkle removers. Most categories
identified in the call for data included a list of specific active
ingredients for review.
FDA also requested the submission of data and information (68 FR
75585 at 75588) on:
Aloe vera as an active ingredient in OTC topical
antimicrobial and external analgesic drug products
Urea as an active ingredient in OTC external analgesic
drug products, or for any other OTC drug use
FDA invited interested persons to submit data and information on
these categories and ingredients by June 28, 2004.
B. What Data Were Submitted in Response to the Call-for-Data Notice?
Data were submitted for the following product categories: Nipple
protectants (for use when nursing); drawing salves labeled for the
drawing or removal of splinters, slivers, or similar items; lubricants
and vaginal moisturizers; nasal moisturizers; urinary analgesics/
antiseptics; and wrinkle removers. For two of the product categories,
FDA received data and information on only one ingredient in each
category. In the category of nipple protectants, FDA received data on a
product containing lanolin. FDA did not receive any data or information
on the following ingredients that were listed for the nipple protectant
category in the call-for-data notice: Cetyl alcohol, cocoa butter, cod
liver oil, dimethicone, glycerin, glyceryl monostearate, hard fat,
mineral oil, petrolatum, and white petrolatum. In the category of
drawing salves, FDA received data on a product containing ichthammol.
FDA did not receive any data or information on the following
ingredients that were listed for the drawing salves category in the
call-for-data notice: Ergot fluid extract, juniper tar (oil of cade),
magnesium sulfate, pine tar, rosin, rosin cerate, and sulfur. Based on
the submissions received, the following products are not included in
this proposed rule and will be discussed in a future issue of the
Federal Register: Lubricants and vaginal moisturizers, nasal
moisturizers, urinary analgesics/antiseptics, wrinkle removers, lanolin
for use as a nipple protectant, and ichthammol for use in drawing
salves.
FDA did not receive any data or information on products or active
ingredients in the following product categories: Ammonia as a reflex
stimulant; bed-wetting deterrents; blemish remedies (excluding topical
acne active ingredients in Sec. Sec. 310.545(a)(1) and 333.310);
bunion remedies; foot balms, baths, and creams (excluding topical
antifungal active ingredients in Sec. Sec. 310.545(a)(22) and 333.210
and including claims for relieving foot muscle strains and soreness
from working out); impotency cures; impregnated body wraps for weight
reduction; medicated bath preparations; nonantimicrobial skin wound
cleansers; prickly heat products; skin protectant blister guard;
urethral creams for males; urinary acidifiers;
[[Page 34898]]
urinary alkalinizers; wet dressings (excluding astringent active
ingredients in Sec. Sec. 310.545(a)(18)(ii) and 347.10); and wound
wash saline. FDA also did not receive any data or information on aloe
vera and urea for topical uses. Therefore, FDA has no data and
information to review to determine if any of these products or
ingredients are GRASE and not misbranded for OTC use.
III. What Is the Regulatory Process When No Data Are Submitted to
Support Ingredients?
Under the procedures for classifying OTC drugs as GRASE and not
misbranded and for establishing OTC drug monographs (Sec. 330.10 (21
CFR 330.10)):
An advisory review panel reviews the data and information
submitted in response to a call for data and then submits a report with
its recommendations to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the
Commissioner) (Sec. 330.10(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(5)).
After reviewing the advisory review panel's report and
recommendations, the Commissioner publishes a proposed order with the
panel's report and a monograph listing proposed GRASE conditions and a
statement of the proposed nonmonograph conditions (Sec. 330.10(a)(6)).
After reviewing comments and new data submitted in
response to the publication of the advisory review panel's report, the
Commissioner publishes a tentative final monograph (TFM) proposing
conditions under which a category of drugs or specific OTC drugs are
GRASE and not misbranded (Sec. 330.10(a)(7)(i)).
The Commissioner may also publish a separate tentative
order, such as this document, containing a statement of those active
ingredients reviewed and proposed to be excluded from the monograph
because they would result in a drug product not being GRASE or would
result in misbranding. This order may be published when FDA receives no
substantive comments in opposition to the advisory review panel's
report or no new data and information (Sec. 330.10(a)(7)(ii)).
After reviewing the entire administrative record, the
Commissioner publishes a final order containing a monograph
establishing conditions under which a category of OTC drugs or a
specific or specific OTC drugs are GRASE and not misbranded (Sec.
330.10(a)(9)). If there are no GRASE conditions, the Commissioner
includes the category or the specific OTC drugs in Sec. 310.545, which
lists active ingredients for which the data are inadequate to establish
GRASE status (i.e., identifies nonmonograph ingredients and uses).
FDA did not receive any data and information on most of the
ingredients and drug categories in the call-for-data notice for an
advisory review panel to evaluate and upon which a panel could issue a
report. Thus, for those ingredients and drug categories, there is no
data or report for the Commissioner to evaluate and no basis for FDA to
publish a TFM. Therefore, the Commissioner is publishing a tentative
order (proposed rule) listing these ingredients and drug categories as
nonmonograph conditions.
IV. What Is FDA's Proposed Effective Date?
FDA is proposing that any final rule that may issue based on this
proposal be implemented 180 days after its publication in order to
provide for safe and effective use of OTC drug products at the earliest
possible time. Manufacturers are encouraged to comply voluntarily at
the earliest possible date.
FDA points out that publication of a final rule under this
proceeding would not preclude a manufacturer from testing an ingredient
to support future use. Where a manufacturer believes it has adequate
data to establish that an active ingredient is GRASE when used for a
specific indication, such data may be submitted in an appropriate
citizen petition to amend or to establish an OTC drug monograph, as
appropriate (see 21 CFR 10.30). Data to support safety and
effectiveness can be developed under an investigational new drug (IND)
application to support submission and review of an NDA. An NDA, if
approved, would make the drug eligible for prescription or OTC
marketing status. For ingredients subject to a final monograph, an NDA
may be submitted for a deviation from the monograph (see 21 CFR 330.11
describing an NDA deviation). A product cannot continue to be marketed
legally while FDA reviews a petition or NDA.
V. Analysis of Impacts
FDA has examined the impacts of the proposed rule under Executive
Order 12866 and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), and
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). Executive
Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and benefits of
available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is necessary, to
select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including
potential economic, environmental, public health and safety, and other
advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The agency believes that
this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action as defined by
the Executive order.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires agencies to analyze
regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule
on small entities. Because few products will likely be affected and
those effects would probably be small, FDA does not believe that this
proposed rule would have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. FDA requests comment on this issue.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that agencies prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment
of anticipated costs and benefits, before proposing ``any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year. ''The current threshold after adjustment
for inflation is $127 million, using the most current (2006) Implicit
Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. FDA does not expect this
proposed rule to result in any 1-year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
The purpose of this proposed rule is to classify OTC drug products
containing certain active ingredients as not GRASE (i.e., nonmonograph)
for certain uses for which FDA did not receive any safety and
effectiveness data and information. This proposed rule amends Sec.
310.545 to include these product categories and ingredients.
We are not able to identify the number of products that would be
affected by this proposed rule, but the number is probably low. Based
on our experience, when no data are received after a Federal Register
request, it often indicates that manufacturers have little or no
interest in those ingredients, have phased out or are in the process of
phasing out those ingredients, or in some cases are removing the drug
claims at issue from the product label. Without actually reading the
label for each and every manufacturer's product, we cannot distinguish
the numbers of products containing the proposed nonmonograph
ingredients from those with monograph ingredients. In addition, some of
the affected products are sold alongside cosmetics and drug-cosmetic
combination products and we would need to read the actual labels to
determine their classifications.
Many of the products affected could still be marketed as OTC drugs
if they
[[Page 34899]]
were reformulated with an active ingredient that is contained in a
monograph and complied with that monograph's labeling conditions. For
example, blemish remedies covered by this proposal could be
reformulated to contain a topical acne active ingredient included in
Sec. 333.310. Other products could be marketed as cosmetics, some with
a simple label change and no reformulation. For example, some foot
balms and baths covered by this proposal might be able to be marketed
as cosmetic products with certain label changes (i.e., deletion of any
drug claims). For a few of the product categories, such as bed wetting
deterrents and impotency cures, there are currently no OTC drug
substitute products on the market, but there are prescription drugs
approved for the conditions.
A. What Are the Costs and Benefits Associated With This Proposed Rule?
For products that cannot be reformulated or relabeled to remain on
the market, the cost of the rule is the short-run loss of economic
profits from the lost sales of those goods once they are removed from
the market. Over the long-run, however, manufacturers will be able to
produce alternative goods on their existing equipment to partly or
fully offset these losses. For the products that remain on the market,
the costs include one-time costs to reformulate or relabel the product.
We do not know the number of manufacturers that would be affected or
the number of products and stockkeeping units (SKUs) (individual
products, packages, and sizes) that might need to be relabeled. Many of
the products in these categories were probably discontinued some time
ago but a few manufacturers will continue to market them until a final
rule prohibits such marketing.
The one-time costs to relabel a product include designing the new
carton and the inventory loss of any unused current labeling. FDA
assumes the same weighted average cost to relabel, inflated to reflect
current (2006) dollars, that it estimated for the final rule requiring
uniform label formats of OTC drug products (64 FR 13254 at 13279 to
13281, March 17, 1999) (i.e., $3,600 x 1.22), $4,392 per SKU.\1\ We
also have estimated inventory loss using data from a study of the costs
of the uniform label format rule. With a 6-month implementation period,
we have estimated the inventory loss to be between $610 and $3,660 per
SKU, depending on product sales, for an estimated weighted average
inventory loss of $1,220.\2\ For example, if there were 100 SKUs that
needed to be relabeled, the total one-time incremental costs would be
about $561,200 (100 x ($4,392 + $1,220)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The annual Producer Price Index (PPI) for pulp, paper, and
allied products, series Id: WPU09 (the major cost driver for
labeling) rose by 22 percent between 1998 and 2006 (from 174.1 to
209.8) https://data.bls.gov.
\2\ The original values from the uniform label formats rule (64
FR 13254), inventory loss between $500 and $3,000 and a weighted
average of $1,000, were inflated by 22 percent. The weighting ratio
for calculating the average was 80 percent small and private label
firms to 20 percent large firms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The cost to reformulate an OTC drug product varies greatly
depending on the nature of the product, dosage form, availability of
alternative active ingredients, and size of company. If there are
monograph ingredients available in the affected product category, the
reformulation costs for another product (such as product validation,
stability testing, and change in master production documents) would
range from $100,000 to $500,000.\3\ The decision to reformulate would
depend on the manufacturer's product portfolio and projected sales for
the reformulated product. Using the midpoint of the range, $300,000, if
there were 50 products reformulated the total incremental costs would
be about $15 million ($300,000 x 50).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Value based on previously published estimations (70 FR 75988
at 75995, December 22, 2005 and 67 FR 78158 at 78167, December 23,
2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are not able to estimate the total foregone economic profit from
the lost sale of products that would be discontinued by the
manufacturers, but sales of the products affected by the proposed rule
were never large relative to other OTC drug products. The loss would be
largely a short-run loss because other products, including OTC drugs,
cosmetics, and dietary supplements, could be manufactured on the same
equipment as the replaced products. In addition, manufacturers could
increase production of some of their other existing products or conduct
contract manufacturing for other products.
FDA cannot quantify the benefits associated with this proposed
rule. Potential benefits include removal from the market of OTC drug
products or ingredients that have not been shown to be safe and
effective. For the classes of products affected by this proposed rule,
consumers would have substitute products available, either OTC or by
prescription. The potential benefits from the rule would result from
those substitute products having been shown to be safe and effective.
B. What Regulatory Alternatives Has FDA Considered?
We have few alternatives available to us when we determine there
are no data or qualitative information available to demonstrate a
product's safety and effectiveness. Even without evidence of harm
caused by the use of these products, they cannot remain on the market
because there is no evidence that they are safe and effective. The two
most plausible regulatory alternatives to this proposed rule are a
shorter and a longer implementation period. With a shorter
implementation period, the products at issue would be removed from the
market sooner, but the labeling costs for 100 SKUs would rise to
$622,000 with a 3-month compliance period.\4\ We could allow a longer
implementation period so manufacturers could reduce their inventory of
cartons and labels. Costs for relabeling 100 SKUs would fall to
$500,200 with a 12-month compliance period, but consumers would be
exposed to these products that have not been shown to be safe and
effective for a longer period of time. Furthermore, it is probable that
few products will, in fact, bear substantial labeling costs.
Manufacturers have been aware of the status of these ingredients since
the December 31, 2003, call-for-data notice and have had sufficient
notice and time to adjust their supply of labels to limit the impact in
the event this rule becomes final. The 6-month implementation period
used in the cost model probably understates the actual average time
that manufacturers will have to change labels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The weighted average inventory loss would increase to $1,830
per SKU with a 3-month compliance period, but decrease to the
irreducible (label inventory can never be used up entirely so
whenever there are label changes, there is always some portion of
inventory that is scraped) inventory loss of $610 per SKU with a
compliance period of 12 months or longer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. What is the Small Business Impact?
The Small Business Administration defines an entity as small in the
pharmaceutical manufacturing industry if it has fewer than 750
employees. Over 90 percent of firms in the pharmaceutical industry are
classified as small. We assume that 90 to 100 percent of the entities
that would be affected by this proposed rule are also small.
The economic impact on individual firms will vary based on the
number of affected products they manufacture, and how they respond to
the rule. Their response could be to withdraw, relabel, or reformulate
the product. If a small entity withdraws the product, its production
line could be used for alternative OTC drug, dietary supplement, and
cosmetic products, or
[[Page 34900]]
for contract manufacturing in those industries, thereby limiting
economic losses. Labeling costs due to the proposed rule, as explained
in this section, would likely be small. The largest potential cost
would be reformulation. However, we do not know if a sufficient number
of small entities would reformulate a large enough number of products
to constitute a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. FDA requests comment on this issue.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This proposed rule contains no collections of information.
Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
VII. Environmental Impact
FDA has determined under 21 CFR 25.31(a) that this action is of a
type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required.
VIII. Federalism
FDA has analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the
principles set forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that
the proposed rule, if finalized as proposed, would have a preemptive
effect on State law. Section 4(a) of the Executive order requires
agencies to ``construe * * * a Federal statute to preempt State law
only where the statute contains an express preemption provision or
there is some other clear evidence that the Congress intended
preemption of State law, or where the exercise of State authority
conflicts with the exercise of Federal authority under the Federal
statute.'' Section 751 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the
act) (21 U.S.C. 379r) is an express preemption provision. Section
751(a) of the act (21 U.S.C. 379r(a)) provides that `` * * * no State
or political subdivision of a State may establish or continue in effect
any requirement-- * * * (1) that relates to the regulation of a drug
that is not subject to the requirements of section 503(b)(1) or
503(f)(1)(A); and (2) that is different from or in addition to, or that
is otherwise not identical with, a requirement under this Act, the
Poison Prevention Packaging Act of 1970 (15 U.S.C. 1471 et seq.), or
the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (15 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.).''
Currently, this provision operates to preempt States from imposing
requirements related to the regulation of nonprescription drug
products. (See Section 751(b) through (e) of the act for the scope of
the express preemption provision, the exemption procedures, and the
exceptions to the provision.) This proposed rule, if finalized as
proposed, would classify as not GRASE all of the ingredients in the
product categories listed in the December 31, 2003, request for data
and information for which FDA did not receive any data and information.
Although any final rule would have a preemptive effect, in that it
would preclude States from issuing requirements related to these OTC
drug products that are different from or in addition to, or not
otherwise identical with a requirement in the final rule, this
preemptive effect is consistent with what Congress set forth in section
751 of the act. Section 751(a) of the act displaces both State
legislative requirements and State common law duties. We also note that
even where the express preemption provision is not applicable, implied
preemption may arise. See Geier v. American Honda Co., 529 US 861
(2000).
FDA believes that the preemptive effect of the proposed rule, if
finalized as proposed, would be consistent with Executive Order 13132.
Section 4(e) of the Executive order provides that ``when an agency
proposes to act through adjudication or rulemaking to preempt State
law, the agency shall provide all affected State and local officials
notice and an opportunity for appropriate participation in the
proceedings.'' FDA is providing an opportunity for State and local
officials to comment on this rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 310
Administrative practice and procedure, Drugs, Labeling, Medical
devices, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, it is
proposed that 21 CFR part 310 be amended as follows:
PART 310--NEW DRUGS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 310 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360b-360f,
360j, 361(a), 371, 374, 375, 379e; 42 U.S.C. 216, 241, 242(a), 262,
263b-263n.
2. Section 310.545 is amended by redesignating the text of
paragraph (a)(20) as paragraph (a)(20)(i), by adding new paragraph
(a)(20)(i) heading, by adding and reserving paragraph (a)(20)(ii), by
adding paragraphs (a)(10)(viii), (a)(18)(vii), (a)(18)(viii),
(a)(20)(iii), (a)(27)(iii), (a)(30) through (a)(45), and (d)(52), and
by revising paragraph (d) introductory text and paragraph (d)(2) to
read as follows:
Sec. 310.545 Drug products containing certain active ingredients
offered over-the-counter (OTC) for certain uses.
(a) * * *
(10) * * *
(viii) Aloe vera and urea drug products. Any product labeled with
claims or directions for use as an external analgesic.
* * * * *
(18) * * *
(vii) Blister guard drug products--Approved as of (date 180 days
after publication of a final rule in the Federal Register).
Beta-hydroxyquinolone
Eugenol
Pyroxylin solution
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as a
skin protectant blister guard
(viii) Nipple protectant drug products (in association with breast
feeding)--Approved as of (date 180 days after publication of a final
rule in the Federal Register).
Cetyl alcohol
Cocoa butter
Cod liver oil
Dimethicone
Glycerin
Glyceryl monostearate
Hard fat
Mineral Oil
Petrolatum
White petrolatum
* * * * *
(20) Weight control drug products.--(i) Ingredients--Approved as of
February 10, 1992.
* * * * *
(iii) Impregnated body wraps--Approved as of (date 180 days after
publication of a final rule in the Federal Register).
Amino acids
Collagen
Magnesium sulfate
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use for
weight control
* * * * *
(27) * * *
(iii) Aloe vera drug products. Any product labeled with claims or
directions for use as a topical antimicrobial.
* * * * *
[[Page 34901]]
(30) Ammonia as a reflex stimulant.
Ammonia inhalants
Ammonia spirit, aromatic
Any other ammonia ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use
as a reflex stimulant
(31) Bed-wetting deterrents.
Belladonna
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as a
bed-wetting deterrent
(32) Blemish remedies (excluding topical acne active ingredients in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section and Sec. 333.310 of this chapter).
Allantoin
Aloe vera gel
Calamine
Ethyl alcohol
Eugenol
Menthol
Oil of eucalyptus
Oil of peppermint
Propylene glycol
Sodium alkylarylpolyether sulfonate
Titanium dioxide
Triclocarban
Triclosan
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as a
blemish remedy
(33) Bunion remedies. Any ingredient(s) labeled with claims or
directions for use to treat and/or prevent bunions.
(34) Drawing salves (excluding products labeled for the treatment
of boils in Sec. 310.531 of this chapter)--includes products labeled
for the drawing or removing of splinters, slivers, or similar items.
Ergot fluid extract
Juniper tar (oil of cade)
Magnesium sulfate
Pine tar
Rosin
Rosin cerate
Sulfur
(35) Foot balms, baths, and other topical dosage forms for any
``foot'' claims (including relieving foot muscle strains and soreness
from working out), excluding topical antifungal active ingredients in
paragraph (a)(22) of this section and Sec. 333.210 of this chapter and
excluding external analgesic active ingredients in paragraphs
(a)(10)(i) and (a)(10)(ii) of this section and Sec. Sec. 348.10 and
348.12 of the external analgesic drug products tentative final
monograph published on February 8, 1983 (48 FR 5852).
Amyl salicylate
Benzalkonium chloride
Cajeput oil
Di-isobutyl phenoxy ethoxy ethyldimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride
Essential oils
Eucalyptus oil
Formaldehyde solution
Glyceryl monostearate
8-Hydroxyquinoline
Iodized botanical oil
Iron sulfate
Isopropyl alcohol
Lanolin
Lithium chloride
Magnesium sulfate
O-benzyl-p-chlorophenol
Oil of thyme
Peppermint oil
Pine needle oil
Potassium iodide
Propylene glycol
Sodium bicarbonate
Sodium chloride
Sodium hypochloride
Sodium lauryl sulfate
Sodium phosphate, tribasic
Sodium sesquicarbonate
Sodium sulfate
Talc
Tragacanth mucilage
Water soluble chlorophyllins
Witch hazel
Zinc oxide
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as a
foot balm, bath, or other topical dosage form for any ``foot'' claims
(including relieving foot muscle strains and soreness from working out)
(36) Impotency cures.
Yohimbine
Yohimbine hydrochloride
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as an
impotency cure
(37) Medicated bath preparations.
Acetylated lanolin
Alkyl aryl polyether alcohol
Colloidal sulfur
Cottonseed oil
Di-isopropyl sebacate
Drometrizole
Iron sulfate
Isopropyl myristate
Isopropyl palmitate
Isostearic acid
Lanolin alcohols extract
Lanolin oil
Liquid petrolatum
Lithium chloride
Magnesium sulfate
Mineral oil
Natural and essential oils
Nonoxynol-5
Octoxynol-3
Oxybenzone
PEG-4 dilaurate
PEG-8 dioleate
PEG-40 sorbitan peroleate
PEG-200 dilaurate
Peruvian balsam
PPG-15
Pine needle oil
Potassium iodide
Stearyl ether oleth-2
Sodium bicarbonate
Sodium carbonate
Sodium chloride
Sodium hyposulfate
Sodium lauryl sulfate
Sodium sesquicarbonate
Sodium sulfate
Tar distillate
Vitamin E
Water soluble chlorophyllins
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as a
medicated bath preparation
(38) Nonantimicrobial skin wound cleansers (previously listed as
``detergents'' in call-for-data notices).
Tincture of Green Soap
Phenolate sodium
Poloxamer 188
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as a
nonantimicrobial skin wound cleanser
(39) Prickly heat products.
Aluminum hydroxide gel
Zinc carbonate
Zinc oxide
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use for
prickly heat
(40) Urethral topical products for males. Any product labeled with
claims or directions for use to treat and/or prevent male urethral
problems.
(41) Urinary acidifiers.
Ammonium chloride
Ascorbic acid
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as an
urinary acidifier
(42) Urinary alkalinizers.
Sodium bicarbonate
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as an
urinary alkalinizer
[[Page 34902]]
(43) Wet dressings (excluding astringent active ingredients in
paragraph (a)(18)(ii) of this section and skin protectant and
astringent active ingredients in Sec. Sec. 347.10 and 347.12 of this
chapter).
Aloe vera
Calcium polysulfide
Calcium thiosulfate
Oxyquinoline sulfate
Sodium propionate
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as a wet
dressing
(44) Wound wash saline.
Sodium chloride solution
Sterile sodium chloride solution
Any other ingredient labeled with claims or directions for use as wound
wash saline
(45) Urea. Any product containing urea for any labeled claims.
* * * * *
(d) Any OTC drug product that is not in compliance with this
section is subject to regulatory action if initially introduced or
initially delivered for introduction into interstate commerce after the
dates specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(52) of this section.
* * * * *
(2) February 10, 1992, for products subject to paragraph (a)(20)(i)
of this section.
* * * * *
(52) [Date 180 days after date of publication of a final rule in
the Federal Register], for products subject to paragraphs
(a)(10)(viii), (a)(18)(vii), (a)(18)(viii), (a)(20)(iii), (a)(27)(iii),
and (a)(30) through (a)(45) of this section.
Dated: June 9, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
[FR Doc. E8-13826 Filed 6-18-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S