Periodic Review of Existing Regulations; Retrospective Review Under E.O. 13563, 23520-23522 [2011-10131]
Download as PDF
23520
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
other small entities. As this rulemaking,
if implemented, would impose no
burden on small entities, the
Commission hereby certifies, pursuant
to section 605(b) of the RFA,30 that the
regulations proposed herein will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
VI. Comment Procedures
29. The Commission invites interested
persons to submit comments on the
matters and issues proposed in this
notice to be adopted, including any
related matters or alternative proposals
that commenters may wish to discuss.
Comments are due June 27, 2011.
Comments must refer to Docket No.
RM11–12–000, and must include the
commenter’s name, the organization
they represent, if applicable, and their
address.
30. The Commission encourages
commenters to file electronically via the
eFiling link on the Commission’s Web
site at https://www.ferc.gov. The
Commission accepts most standard
word processing formats and
commenters may attach additional files
with supporting information in certain
other file formats. Commenters filing
electronically do not need to make a
paper filing.
31. Commenters unable to file
comments electronically must mail or
hand deliver an original copys of their
comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the
Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC, 20426. These
requirements can be found on the
Commission’s Web site, see, e.g., the
‘‘Quick Reference Guide for Paper
Submissions,’’ available at https://
www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp or
via phone from FERC Online Support at
(202) 502–6652 or toll-free at 1–866–
208–3676.
32. All comments will be placed in
the Commission’s public files and may
be viewed, printed, or downloaded
remotely as described in the Document
Availability section below. Commenters
on this proposal are not required to
serve copies of their comments on other
commenters.
to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First
Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426.
34. From FERC’s Home Page on the
Internet, this information is available in
the eLibrary. The full text of this
document is available in the eLibrary
both in PDF and Microsoft Word format
for viewing, printing, and/or
downloading. To access this document
in eLibrary, type the docket number
excluding the last three digits of this
document in the docket number field.
35. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the FERC’s Web site during
our normal business hours. For
assistance contact FERC Online Support
at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or tollfree at (866) 208–3676, or for TTY,
contact (202) 502–8659.
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 366
Electric power, and Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
By direction of the Commission.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Commission proposes to revise Chapter
I, Title 18, part 366 of the Code of
Federal Regulations, as follows:
PART 366—BOOKS AND RECORDS
1. The authority citation for part 366
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717 et seq., 16 U.S.C.
791a et seq., and 42 U.S.C. 16451–16463.
2. In § 366.2, redesignate paragraph
(d) as paragraph (e) and add a new
paragraph (d) to read as follows:
§ 366.2 Commission access to books and
records.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Electric Reliability Organization.
The Electric Reliability Organization
certified by the Commission under
§ 39.3 of this chapter will make
available to Commission staff, on an
ongoing basis, access to the complete
electronic tags (e-Tags), or any successor
to e-Tags, used to schedule the
transmission of electric power in
wholesale markets. The complete e-Tag
data to be made available under this
VII. Document Availability
section shall consist of e-Tags for
interchange transactions scheduled to
33. In addition to publishing the full
flow into, out of or within the United
text of this document in the Federal
States’ portion of the Eastern or Western
Register, the Commission provides all
Interconnections, or into or out of the
interested persons an opportunity to
Electric Reliability Council of Texas and
view and/or print the contents of this
into or out of the United States’ portion
document via the Internet through
FERC’s Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov) of the Eastern or Western
Interconnections.
and in FERC’s Public Reference Room
*
*
*
*
during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. *
[FR Doc. 2011–10119 Filed 4–26–11; 8:45 am]
30 5
U.S.C. 605(b).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:08 Apr 26, 2011
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Chapter I
[Docket No. FDA–2011–N–0259]
Periodic Review of Existing
Regulations; Retrospective Review
Under E.O. 13563
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
Notification for request for
comment.
ACTION:
In accordance with Executive
Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review,’’ the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is conducting a
review of its existing regulations to
determine, in part, whether they can be
made more effective in light of current
public health needs and to take
advantage of and support advances in
innovation. The goal of this review of
existing regulations, as with our other
reviews, is to help ensure that FDA’s
regulatory program is more effective and
less burdensome in achieving its
regulatory objectives. FDA is requesting
comment and supporting data on which,
if any, of its existing rules are
outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or
excessively burdensome and thus may
be good candidates to be modified,
streamlined, expanded, or repealed. As
part of this review, FDA also invites
comment to help us review our
framework for periodically analyzing
existing rules.
DATES: Submit either electronic or
written comments by June 27, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by Docket No. FDA–2011–N–
0259, by any of the following methods:
SUMMARY:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following way:
• 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.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Agency name and
Docket No. FDA–2011–N–0259 for this
rulemaking. All comments received may
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
additional information on submitting
comments, see the ‘‘Request for
Comments’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa
Helmanis, Office of Policy, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 3216,
Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002, 301–
796–9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
February 2, 2011, President Barack
Obama issued Executive Order (E.O.)
13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review.’’ One of the
provisions in the new Executive order is
the affirmation of retrospective reviews
of existing significant regulations. FDA
already has several processes in place to
ensure periodic review of its existing
regulations, including those that are
significant, and will continue to
enhance these efforts. Under E.O. 13563,
FDA is reviewing this framework for
retrospective review of regulations and,
through this notice, is soliciting
comments on ways to make this
program more effective.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
I. Background
FDA is responsible for protecting the
public health by: (1) Ensuring the safety
and efficacy of human and veterinary
drugs, biological products, and medical
devices; (2) ensuring the safety and
security of our nation’s food supply,
products that emit radiation, cosmetics;
and (3) regulating the manufacture,
marketing, and distribution of tobacco
products. FDA also promotes the public
health by striving to foster innovative
approaches and solutions for some of
our nation’s most compelling health and
medical challenges.
Currently, FDA has three main
mechanisms that trigger a retrospective
review of an existing regulation. First, a
retrospective review may occur when
there is a significant change in
circumstances, such as advances in
technology, new data or other
information, or legislative change.
Second, whenever FDA is revising an
existing regulation, it reviews that
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:08 Apr 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
regulation to determine if the
underlying science and policy are still
valid and whether the regulations
should be updated based on current
science, policy, data, or technology. The
third mechanism is FDA’s Citizen
Petition process. Under 21 CFR 10.30,
FDA provides a mechanism for the
public to request the Commissioner of
Food and Drugs to issue, amend, or
revoke a regulation by submitting a
Citizen Petition.
Other ongoing mechanisms that FDA
uses to target specific audiences are
biannual letters to State and Local
government officials and small business
entities, which are also posted on FDA’s
Web site. These letters highlight
upcoming regulations that FDA believes
may have an impact on these two
groups. In addition, FDA uses the
Federal Government’s biannual Unified
Agenda of Federal Regulations (Unified
Agenda) to announce reviews
conducted under section 610(c) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). In
section 610(c), Federal Agencies are
required within 10 years of the effective
date of regulations that have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities to
review the regulation and seek public
input on the continued need for the
regulation or on possible changes to the
regulation.
Since the 1980s, FDA has participated
in a variety of reviews to streamline and
improve its regulatory processes. For
example, as previously mentioned,
section 610(c) of the RFA requires
Agencies to review their regulations to
determine whether the rules should be
continued without change, amended, or
rescinded to minimize any significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. These reviews
are announced in the Unified Agenda.
In the 1990s, FDA participated in the
‘‘Reinventing Government’’ initiative
and met 95 percent of its goal for
eliminating outdated or unnecessary
regulations, and 89 percent of its goal
for revising regulations. Following that
initiative, FDA has undertaken other
reviews of its regulations and regulatory
processes including implementing new
efficiencies such as withdrawing
outdated proposed rules that were never
finalized. The most recent withdrawal
was in 2008 (73 FR 75625, December 12,
2008). We currently conduct this review
of pending proposed rules about every
5 years.
Over the past 15 years, there have also
been major legislative changes that have
significantly reformed major program
areas within FDA and added to the
Agency’s responsibilities. When FDA
develops implementing regulations for
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
23521
these legislative mandates, FDA also
takes the opportunity to modify or
revoke related regulations as
appropriate, and streamline various
regulatory processes.
The Food and Drug Administration
Modernization Act of 1997 and, 10 years
later, the Food and Drug Administration
Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA) both
modernized certain FDA programs and
created new ones, mandating numerous
regulations to implement those
programs. FDAAA also expanded FDA’s
user fee authority and charged FDA
with encouraging more research and
development for treatments specifically
for children. In 2009, FDA saw a
significant increase in its authorities
with enactment of the Family Smoking
Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of
2009. Finally, earlier this year, the FDA
Food Safety Modernization Act was
signed into law by President Obama
and, when fully implemented, will
enable FDA to better protect public
health by helping to ensure the safety
and security of the food supply.
II. Request for Comments
FDA is first seeking comment on how
the Agency could revise its existing
review framework to meet the objectives
of E.O. 13563 regarding the
development of a plan with a defined
method and schedule for identifying
certain significant rules that may be
obsolete, unnecessary, unjustified,
excessively burdensome, or
counterproductive. Comments should
address how best to evaluate and
analyze regulations to expand on those
that work and to modify, improve, or
rescind those that do not. To be useful,
comments should address how FDA can
best obtain and consider accurate,
objective information and data about the
costs, burdens, and benefits of existing
regulations and whether there are
existing sources of data that FDA can
use to evaluate the post-promulgation
effects of regulations over time. FDA is
particularly interested in how well its
current processes for reviewing
regulations function and how those
processes might be expanded or
otherwise adapted to meet the objectives
of E.O. 13563. FDA is further interested
in comments about factors that it should
consider in selecting rules for review
and prioritizing review.
Due to limited resources, FDA
generally focuses its retrospective
review efforts on: (1) Regulations that
have a significant public health impact,
(2) regulations that impose a significant
burden on the Agency and/or industry,
and (3) regulations that impose no
significant burden on the Agency and/
or industry. FDA welcomes comments
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
23522
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 81 / Wednesday, April 27, 2011 / Proposed Rules
on other criteria it should be using
when prioritizing its reviews of existing
significant regulations.
In addition, FDA is seeking public
comment on which, if any, regulations
should be reviewed at this time. Please
identify any regulation that should be
modified, expanded, streamlined, or
repealed to make our regulatory
program more effective and less
burdensome. Please be as specific as
possible in your comments. To support
its efforts to support innovation, FDA is
particularly interested in comments that
identify regulations that may be
impediments to innovation and
suggestions for how they can be
improved.
Comments should focus on
regulations that have demonstrated
deficiencies. Comments that reiterate
previously submitted arguments relating
to recently issued rules will be less
useful. Furthermore, the public should
focus on rule changes that will achieve
a broad public impact, rather than an
individual personal or corporate benefit.
Comments should reference a specific
regulation by the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) cite, and provide
specific information on what needs
fixing and why. Lastly, FDA stresses
that this review is for published final
rules; the public should not use this
process to submit comments on
proposed rules.
The most useful comments will
include which specific regulations need
to be changed, strengthened or clarified,
or revoked. It will be most helpful to
include the specific reasons explaining
why the change or revocation is
necessary or desired, and to provide
specific ways to improve the regulation,
particularly any specific language
modifications.
The Agency will be able to more
efficiently review and consider
comments that are submitted in the
format shown in table 1 of this
document:
TABLE 1—FORMAT FOR SUBMITTING COMMENTS
Name of regulation
Type of Product or FDA Center Regulating the Product.
Statute or Code of Federal Regulations cite (if known).
Brief Description of Problem ....................................................................
Available Data on Cost or Economic Impact ...........................................
Proposed Solution ....................................................................................
Interested persons may submit to the
Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) either electronic or written
comments regarding this document. It is
only necessary to send one set of
comments. It is no longer necessary to
send two copies of mailed comments.
Identify comments with the docket
number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Dated: April 20, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011–10131 Filed 4–26–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 936
[SATS No. OK–033–FOR; Docket ID: OSM–
2011–0001]
Oklahoma Regulatory Program
Office of Surface Mining
Reclamation and Enforcement, Interior.
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:08 Apr 26, 2011
Jkt 223001
(For example, is it outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively
burdensome? Why?)
(Quantified benefits and cost if possible. Qualitative description, if
needed.)
(Include the fix and procedure to solve it. For example, what would be
the best way to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal the regulation?)
Proposed rule; public comment
period and opportunity for public
hearing.
ACTION:
We, the Office of Surface
Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
(OSM), are announcing receipt of a
proposed amendment to the Oklahoma
regulatory program under the Surface
Mining Control and Reclamation Act of
1977 (SMCRA or the Act). Oklahoma
proposes revisions to its program by
adding size limitations for permanent
impoundments; adding slope
limitations affecting post-mine contours;
adding a subsidence allegation reporting
requirement; and adding a requirement
for bond calculation at renewal.
Oklahoma is proposing these additions
to its program at its own initiative.
This document provides the times
and locations that the Oklahoma
program and proposed amendment to
that program are available for public
inspection, the comment period during
which you may submit written
comments on the amendment, and the
procedures that we will follow for the
public hearing, if one is requested.
DATES: We will accept written
comments on this amendment until
4 p.m., c.d.t., May 27, 2011. If requested,
we will hold a public hearing on the
amendment on May 23, 2011. We will
accept requests to speak at a hearing
until 4 p.m., c.d.t. on May 12, 2011.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
You may submit comments,
identified by SATS No. OK–033–FOR,
by any of the following methods:
• E-mail: aclayborne@osmre.gov.
Include ‘‘SATS No. OK–033–FOR’’ in
the subject line of the message.
• Mail/Hand Delivery: Alfred L.
Clayborne, Director, Tulsa Field Office,
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement, 1645 South 101st East
Avenue, Suite 145, Tulsa, Oklahoma
74128–4629.
• Fax: (918) 581–6419.
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: The
amendment has been assigned Docket
ID OSM02011–0001. If you would like
to submit comments go to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number for this rulemaking. For
detailed instructions on submitting
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
Public Comment Procedures heading of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
review copies of the Oklahoma
regulations, this amendment, a listing of
any scheduled public hearings, and all
written comments received in response
to this document, you must go to the
address listed below during normal
business hours, Monday through Friday,
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\27APP1.SGM
27APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23520-23522]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10131]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Chapter I
[Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0259]
Periodic Review of Existing Regulations; Retrospective Review
Under E.O. 13563
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Notification for request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In accordance with Executive Order 13563, ``Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review,'' the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) is conducting a review of its existing regulations to determine,
in part, whether they can be made more effective in light of current
public health needs and to take advantage of and support advances in
innovation. The goal of this review of existing regulations, as with
our other reviews, is to help ensure that FDA's regulatory program is
more effective and less burdensome in achieving its regulatory
objectives. FDA is requesting comment and supporting data on which, if
any, of its existing rules are outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or
excessively burdensome and thus may be good candidates to be modified,
streamlined, expanded, or repealed. As part of this review, FDA also
invites comment to help us review our framework for periodically
analyzing existing rules.
DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments by June 27, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FDA-2011-
N-0259, by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
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.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Agency name
and Docket No. FDA-2011-N-0259 for this rulemaking. All comments
received may
[[Page 23521]]
be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For additional information on submitting
comments, see the ``Request for Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Helmanis, Office of Policy, Food
and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 3216,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 2, 2011, President Barack Obama
issued Executive Order (E.O.) 13563, ``Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review.'' One of the provisions in the new Executive order
is the affirmation of retrospective reviews of existing significant
regulations. FDA already has several processes in place to ensure
periodic review of its existing regulations, including those that are
significant, and will continue to enhance these efforts. Under E.O.
13563, FDA is reviewing this framework for retrospective review of
regulations and, through this notice, is soliciting comments on ways to
make this program more effective.
I. Background
FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by: (1)
Ensuring the safety and efficacy of human and veterinary drugs,
biological products, and medical devices; (2) ensuring the safety and
security of our nation's food supply, products that emit radiation,
cosmetics; and (3) regulating the manufacture, marketing, and
distribution of tobacco products. FDA also promotes the public health
by striving to foster innovative approaches and solutions for some of
our nation's most compelling health and medical challenges.
Currently, FDA has three main mechanisms that trigger a
retrospective review of an existing regulation. First, a retrospective
review may occur when there is a significant change in circumstances,
such as advances in technology, new data or other information, or
legislative change. Second, whenever FDA is revising an existing
regulation, it reviews that regulation to determine if the underlying
science and policy are still valid and whether the regulations should
be updated based on current science, policy, data, or technology. The
third mechanism is FDA's Citizen Petition process. Under 21 CFR 10.30,
FDA provides a mechanism for the public to request the Commissioner of
Food and Drugs to issue, amend, or revoke a regulation by submitting a
Citizen Petition.
Other ongoing mechanisms that FDA uses to target specific audiences
are biannual letters to State and Local government officials and small
business entities, which are also posted on FDA's Web site. These
letters highlight upcoming regulations that FDA believes may have an
impact on these two groups. In addition, FDA uses the Federal
Government's biannual Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations (Unified
Agenda) to announce reviews conducted under section 610(c) of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). In section 610(c), Federal Agencies
are required within 10 years of the effective date of regulations that
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities to review the regulation and seek public input on the
continued need for the regulation or on possible changes to the
regulation.
Since the 1980s, FDA has participated in a variety of reviews to
streamline and improve its regulatory processes. For example, as
previously mentioned, section 610(c) of the RFA requires Agencies to
review their regulations to determine whether the rules should be
continued without change, amended, or rescinded to minimize any
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
These reviews are announced in the Unified Agenda.
In the 1990s, FDA participated in the ``Reinventing Government''
initiative and met 95 percent of its goal for eliminating outdated or
unnecessary regulations, and 89 percent of its goal for revising
regulations. Following that initiative, FDA has undertaken other
reviews of its regulations and regulatory processes including
implementing new efficiencies such as withdrawing outdated proposed
rules that were never finalized. The most recent withdrawal was in 2008
(73 FR 75625, December 12, 2008). We currently conduct this review of
pending proposed rules about every 5 years.
Over the past 15 years, there have also been major legislative
changes that have significantly reformed major program areas within FDA
and added to the Agency's responsibilities. When FDA develops
implementing regulations for these legislative mandates, FDA also takes
the opportunity to modify or revoke related regulations as appropriate,
and streamline various regulatory processes.
The Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 and, 10
years later, the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007
(FDAAA) both modernized certain FDA programs and created new ones,
mandating numerous regulations to implement those programs. FDAAA also
expanded FDA's user fee authority and charged FDA with encouraging more
research and development for treatments specifically for children. In
2009, FDA saw a significant increase in its authorities with enactment
of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009.
Finally, earlier this year, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act was
signed into law by President Obama and, when fully implemented, will
enable FDA to better protect public health by helping to ensure the
safety and security of the food supply.
II. Request for Comments
FDA is first seeking comment on how the Agency could revise its
existing review framework to meet the objectives of E.O. 13563
regarding the development of a plan with a defined method and schedule
for identifying certain significant rules that may be obsolete,
unnecessary, unjustified, excessively burdensome, or counterproductive.
Comments should address how best to evaluate and analyze regulations to
expand on those that work and to modify, improve, or rescind those that
do not. To be useful, comments should address how FDA can best obtain
and consider accurate, objective information and data about the costs,
burdens, and benefits of existing regulations and whether there are
existing sources of data that FDA can use to evaluate the post-
promulgation effects of regulations over time. FDA is particularly
interested in how well its current processes for reviewing regulations
function and how those processes might be expanded or otherwise adapted
to meet the objectives of E.O. 13563. FDA is further interested in
comments about factors that it should consider in selecting rules for
review and prioritizing review.
Due to limited resources, FDA generally focuses its retrospective
review efforts on: (1) Regulations that have a significant public
health impact, (2) regulations that impose a significant burden on the
Agency and/or industry, and (3) regulations that impose no significant
burden on the Agency and/or industry. FDA welcomes comments
[[Page 23522]]
on other criteria it should be using when prioritizing its reviews of
existing significant regulations.
In addition, FDA is seeking public comment on which, if any,
regulations should be reviewed at this time. Please identify any
regulation that should be modified, expanded, streamlined, or repealed
to make our regulatory program more effective and less burdensome.
Please be as specific as possible in your comments. To support its
efforts to support innovation, FDA is particularly interested in
comments that identify regulations that may be impediments to
innovation and suggestions for how they can be improved.
Comments should focus on regulations that have demonstrated
deficiencies. Comments that reiterate previously submitted arguments
relating to recently issued rules will be less useful. Furthermore, the
public should focus on rule changes that will achieve a broad public
impact, rather than an individual personal or corporate benefit.
Comments should reference a specific regulation by the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) cite, and provide specific information on what needs
fixing and why. Lastly, FDA stresses that this review is for published
final rules; the public should not use this process to submit comments
on proposed rules.
The most useful comments will include which specific regulations
need to be changed, strengthened or clarified, or revoked. It will be
most helpful to include the specific reasons explaining why the change
or revocation is necessary or desired, and to provide specific ways to
improve the regulation, particularly any specific language
modifications.
The Agency will be able to more efficiently review and consider
comments that are submitted in the format shown in table 1 of this
document:
Table 1--Format for Submitting Comments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of regulation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type of Product or FDA Center ...............................
Regulating the Product.
Statute or Code of Federal Regulations ...............................
cite (if known).
Brief Description of Problem........... (For example, is it outmoded,
ineffective, insufficient, or
excessively burdensome? Why?)
Available Data on Cost or Economic (Quantified benefits and cost
Impact. if possible. Qualitative
description, if needed.)
Proposed Solution...................... (Include the fix and procedure
to solve it. For example, what
would be the best way to
modify, streamline, expand, or
repeal the regulation?)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management
(see ADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments regarding this
document. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. It is no
longer necessary to send two copies of mailed comments. Identify
comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets
Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Dated: April 20, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-10131 Filed 4-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P