Medical Devices; Ophthalmic Devices; Classification of the Eyelid Weight, 22012-22016 [2014-08940]
Download as PDF
22012
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 76 / Monday, April 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
assessment or environmental impact
statement under the National
Environmental Policy Act in the
absence of extraordinary circumstances.
The FAA has determined this
rulemaking action qualifies for the
categorical exclusion identified in
paragraph 312f and involves no
extraordinary circumstances.
H. Regulations Affecting Intrastate
Aviation in Alaska
Section 1205 of the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat.
3213) requires the FAA, when
modifying its regulations in a manner
affecting intrastate aviation in Alaska, to
consider the extent to which Alaska is
not served by transportation modes
other than aviation, and to establish
appropriate regulatory distinctions. As
discussed in the Helicopter Air
Ambulance, Commercial Helicopter,
and Part 91 Helicopter Operations final
rule which instituted the requirements
being delayed by this action, the FAA
finds that there is no need to make any
regulatory distinctions in the provisions
of this rule. See 79 FR 9932, 9971–72.
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this
immediately adopted final rule under
the principles and criteria of Executive
Order 13132, Federalism. The agency
determined that this action will not
have a substantial direct effect on the
States, or the relationship between the
Federal Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, and, therefore,
does not have Federalism implications.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this final rule with
request for comments under Executive
Order 13211, Actions Concerning
Regulations that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
(May 18, 2001). The agency has
determined that it is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under the executive
order and it is not likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
VI. How To Obtain Additional
Information
A. Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of a rulemaking
document my be obtained by using the
Internet—
1. Search the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:49 Apr 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ or
3. Access the Government Printing
Office’s Web page at: https://
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
Copies may also be obtained by
sending a request (identified by notice,
amendment, or docket number of this
rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of Rulemaking,
ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by
calling (202) 267–9680.
B. Comments Submitted to the Docket
Comments received may be viewed by
going to https://www.regulations.gov and
following the online instructions to
search the docket number for this
action. Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of the FAA’s dockets
by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the
comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.).
C. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Parts 91, 120,
and 135
Air taxis, Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends chapter I of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 135—OPERATING
REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND
ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND
RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON
BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT
1. The authority citation for part 135
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 41706,
40113, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709, 44711–
44713, 44715–44717, 44722, 44730, 45101–
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2. Amend § 135.293 by removing the
phrase ‘‘After the next scheduled
competency check after April 22, 2014’’
from the beginning of paragraph (a)(9)
and adding paragraph (h) to read as
follows:
■
§ 135.293 Initial and recurrent pilot testing
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Rotorcraft pilots must be tested on
the subjects in paragraph (a)(9) of this
section when taking a written or oral
knowledge test after April 22, 2015.
Rotorcraft pilots must be checked on the
maneuvers and procedures in paragraph
(c) of this section when taking a
competency check after April 22, 2015.
Issued under authority provided by 49
U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), and 44703 in
Washington, DC, on April 15, 2014.
Michael G. Whitaker,
Deputy Administrator, Federal Aviation
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014–09034 Filed 4–17–14; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires FAA to comply with
small entity requests for information or
advice about compliance with statutes
and regulations within its jurisdiction.
A small entity with questions regarding
this document, may contact its local
FAA official, or the person listed under
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
heading at the beginning of the
preamble. To find out more about
SBREFA on the Internet, visit https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/
rulemaking/sbre_act/.
PO 00000
45105, Pub. L. 112–95, 126 Stat. 58 (49 U.S.C.
44730).
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 886
[Docket No. FDA–2013–N–0069]
Medical Devices; Ophthalmic Devices;
Classification of the Eyelid Weight
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Final rule.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or Agency) is
classifying the eyelid weight into class
II (special controls). The Agency is
exempting the external eyelid weight
from premarket notification, but
continuing to require premarket
notification for implantable eyelid
weights in order to provide a reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness of
the device. Both external and
implantable eyelid weight devices are
subject to special controls. The eyelid
weight may be adhered to the outer skin
of the upper eyelid (external eyelid
weight) or implanted into the upper
eyelid (implantable eyelid weight), and
is intended for the gravity assisted
treatment of lagophthalmos (incomplete
eyelid closure).
DATES: Effective Date: July 21, 2014.
Compliance Dates: Premarket
notification submissions (510(k)s) for
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\21APR1.SGM
21APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 76 / Monday, April 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
eyelid weights filed on or after the
effective date of this rule are expected
to comply with the requirement of
special controls at the time that the
510(k) is submitted.
Premarket notification submissions
(510(k)s) for eyelid weights filed before
the effective date of this rule, but not yet
cleared for marketing, are expected to
comply with the requirement of special
controls prior to receiving marketing
clearance.
External eyelid weights exempt from
premarket notification under this rule
and not currently marketed are expected
to comply with the requirement of
special controls prior to introducing
devices into interstate commerce.
Eyelid weights (both implantable and
external) legally marketed before the
effective date of this rule are expected
to comply with the requirement of
special controls by April 21, 2015. See
section V of this document,
‘‘Compliance Dates,’’ for further
information.
Tina
Kiang, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 2414, Silver Spring,
MD 20993–0002, 301–796–6860,
Tina.Kiang@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Background
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 301 et
seq.), as amended by the Medical Device
Amendments of 1976 (the 1976
amendments) (Pub. L. 94–295), the Safe
Medical Devices Act of 1990 (Pub. L.
101–629), the Food and Drug
Administration Modernization Act of
1997 (FDAMA) (Pub. L. 105–115), the
Medical Device User Fee and
Modernization Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107–
250), the Food and Drug Administration
Amendments Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110–
85), and the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation
Act (Pub. L. 112–144), among other
amendments, established a
comprehensive system for the regulation
of medical devices intended for human
use. Section 513 of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360c) established three categories
(classes) of devices, depending on the
regulatory controls needed to provide
reasonable assurance of their safety and
effectiveness. The three categories of
devices are class I (general controls),
class II (special controls), and class III
(premarket approval).
Under section 513 of the FD&C Act,
FDA refers to devices that were in
commercial distribution before May 28,
1976 (the date of enactment of the 1976
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:49 Apr 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
amendments), as ‘‘preamendments
devices.’’ FDA classifies these devices
after the Agency takes the following
steps: (1) Receives a recommendation
from a device classification panel (an
FDA advisory committee); (2) publishes
the panel’s recommendation for
comment, along with a proposed
regulation classifying the device; and (3)
publishes a final regulation classifying
the device. FDA has classified most
preamendments devices under these
procedures.
FDA refers to devices that were not in
commercial distribution before May 28,
1976, as ‘‘postamendments devices.’’
These devices are classified
automatically by statute (section 513(f)
of the FD&C Act) into class III without
any FDA rulemaking process. These
devices remain in class III and require
premarket approval, unless and until:
(1) FDA reclassifies the device into class
I or II; (2) FDA issues an order
classifying the device into class I or II
in accordance with section 513(f)(2) of
the FD&C Act, as amended by FDAMA;
or (3) FDA issues an order finding the
device to be substantially equivalent,
under section 513(i) of the FD&C Act, to
a predicate device that does not require
premarket approval. The Agency
determines whether new devices are
substantially equivalent to predicate
devices by means of premarket
notification procedures in section 510(k)
of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(k)) and
part 807 of the regulations (21 CFR part
807).
A person may market a
preamendments device that has been
classified into class III through
premarket notification procedures,
without submission of a premarket
approval application (PMA) until FDA
issues a final regulation under section
515(b) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360e(b)) requiring premarket approval.
Section 510(m) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360(m)) provides that a class II
device may be exempted from the
premarket notification requirements
under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act,
if the Agency determines that premarket
notification is not necessary to assure
the safety and effectiveness of the
device.
II. Regulatory History of the Device
In the Federal Register of February 8,
2013 (78 FR 9349), FDA proposed to
classify eyelid weight devices intended
for the gravity-assisted treatment of
lagophthalmos (incomplete eyelid
closure) into class II (special controls)
and proposed special controls for these
devices. FDA also proposed to exempt
the devices from premarket notification
requirements if the device is an external
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22013
eyelid weight. FDA invited interested
persons to comment on the proposed
regulation by May 9, 2013. FDA
received three comments on the
proposed rule.
III. Summary of the Final Rule
In accordance with 21 CFR
860.84(g)(2), FDA is classifying eyelid
weights into class II (special controls).
FDA is codifying the classification of
eyelid weights by adding § 886.5700.
A. External Eyelid Weights
Under section 510(m) of the FD&C
Act, FDA has determined that premarket
notification is not necessary to assure
the safety and effectiveness of external
eyelid weights, and the Agency is
exempting these devices from premarket
notification requirements. The Agency
has also identified special controls for
these devices. On or before the effective
date of this final rule, firms who wish
to market external eyelid weight devices
that are not already legally marketed are
required to either (1) comply with the
particular mitigation measures set forth
in the special controls in
§ 886.5700(b)(1) or (2) use alternative
mitigation measures, but demonstrate to
the Agency’s satisfaction that those
alternative measures identified by the
firm will provide at least an equivalent
assurance of safety and effectiveness. As
discussed in sections IV and V, in
response to comments regarding
compliance with the special controls for
existing legally marketed devices, FDA
has extended the compliance date for
special controls to 1 year from the
effective date of this rule to allow
manufacturers of existing legally
marketed devices adequate time to
review the design history files and
complete any needed testing and
implement any required labeling
changes for their devices.
FDA also made changes to the final
rule as related to external eyelid weights
in response to the comments and for
clarification. Proposed
§ 886.5700(b)(1)(iii) has been edited to
remove the words ‘‘required for the safe
and effective use of the device as
outlined in § 801.109(c) of this chapter’’
to minimize any confusion since this
section describes special controls and
the labeling requirements in 21 CFR part
801 are a general control. FDA also
removed the special controls for
external eyelid weights related to
magnetic resonance (MR) compatibility
testing (see additional discussion in
section IV).
B. Implantable Eyelid Weights
FDA has determined that premarket
notification is necessary to provide
E:\FR\FM\21APR1.SGM
21APR1
22014
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 76 / Monday, April 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness of implantable eyelid
weights, and, therefore, this device type
is not exempt from premarket
notification requirements. The Agency
has also identified special controls for
these devices. On or before the effective
date of this final rule, firms who wish
to market external eyelid weight devices
that are not already legally marketed are
required to either (1) comply with the
particular mitigation measures set forth
in the special controls in
§ 886.5700(b)(2) or (2) use alternative
mitigation measures, but demonstrate to
the Agency’s satisfaction that those
alternative measures identified by the
firm will provide at least an equivalent
assurance of safety and effectiveness. As
discussed in section IV, in response to
comments regarding compliance with
the special controls for existing legally
marketed devices, FDA has extended
the compliance date for special controls
to 1 year from the effective date of this
rule to allow manufacturers of existing
legally marketed devices adequate time
to review the design history files and
complete any needed testing and
implement any required labeling
changes for their devices.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. Analysis of Comments and FDA’s
Response
FDA received three comments on the
proposed rule. One of the comments
was supportive of FDA’s proposed rule,
including the classification and the
special controls for both the external
and implantable eyelid weights and the
exemption of external eyelid weights
from premarket notification
requirements (510(k)). A second
comment agreed with the proposed
classification into class II, but indicated
that the risks associated with long-term
use of external eyelid weights were
similar to those for implantable eyelid
weights, and that as such external eyelid
weights should not be exempted from
the premarket notification requirements.
FDA disagrees with the comment. FDA
believes that the identified special
controls adequately mitigate the risks to
health for the device regardless of the
duration of use. The increased risks
associated with implanted eyelid
weights are related to the need for the
device to be provided sterile and the
increased biocompatibility
requirements. These risks are
significantly reduced with external
eyelid weight devices. FDA believes that
compliance with the special controls in
§ 886.5700(b)(1) provides a reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness for
external eyelid weight devices without
the need for premarket notification.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:49 Apr 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
The third comment requested
clarification on whether existing eyelid
weight manufacturers (for both
implantable and external eyelid weight
devices) need to address the identified
special controls. The special controls
established in this rule apply to existing
legally marketed devices, as well as to
new eyelid weight devices not currently
marketed for which marketing authority
is sought and to any modification of a
currently legally marketed eyelid
weight. In response to this comment,
FDA has extended the compliance date
for special controls for manufacturers of
existing legally marketed devices to 1
year from the effective date of this rule,
as outlined in section V, ‘‘Compliance
Dates.’’
Submission of a new 510(k) solely to
demonstrate conformance to the special
controls is not needed unless complying
with the special controls leads to
changes to the device that would
independently trigger the need for a
new 510(k) under § 807.81(a)(3).
However, manufacturers should
maintain documentation in their design
history file (see § 820.30 (21 CFR
820.30)) to demonstrate that they meet
the special controls. To ensure that
manufacturers of existing legally
marketed devices have adequate time to
review their design history files and
complete any needed testing and
implement any required labeling
changes for their devices, FDA has
extended the compliance date for
existing legally marketed devices to
comply with the special controls to 1
year after the effective date of this final
rule. Manufacturers with questions
regarding their existing devices are
encouraged to interact with FDA via the
pre-submission process.
The third comment further suggested
that the biocompatibility testing
requirements as described in the
proposed special controls are more
extensive and burdensome than the
requirements under which existing
legally marketed eyelid weights devices
were originally reviewed. The comment
stated that, for external eyelid weights,
limited biocompatibility testing with
supportive literature review and
reference to material in predicate
devices should be acceptable in lieu of
a full battery of biocompatibility testing.
FDA agrees that based on the material
and manufacturing processes being
used, a full battery of biocompatibility
testing may not be required. Discussion
of the specific biocompatibility testing
requirements for existing legally
marketed eyelid weight devices is
beyond the scope of this rule; however,
FDA encourages manufacturers to
review existing Agency guidance on this
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
topic and contact FDA via the presubmission process to discuss specific
biocompatibility requirements for their
devices.
The third comment further requested
clarification on whether a labeling
change to address MR compatibility
would trigger additional compliance
expectations regarding MR testing and
suggested that because external eyelid
weights are removable devices, MR
compatibility should not be a
requirement for these devices. FDA
agrees with the commenter that removal
of the device when the patient is in the
MR environment would mitigate this
risk and has thus removed MR testing
compatibility testing as a special
control. However, to ensure that the
patient is aware that the device should
be removed in these circumstances, the
special control regarding labeling has
been revised to include a requirement
for a warning stating that the patient
should be instructed to remove the
device prior to entering an MR
environment.
Finally, the third comment also
requested clarification on the special
control for implanted eyelid weights:
‘‘testing demonstrating the sterility and
shelf life of the device’’ and suggested
that the shelf life of the implanted
device is limited by the ability of the
associated packaging to maintain a
protective barrier and not by the device
itself, and therefore, validated packaging
and sterilization procedures would
satisfy this requirement. Although FDA
agrees that validation of the packaging
and sterilization processes is important
to comply with this special control,
each manufacturer must assess the
materials and processes used to
manufacture their device when
determining the testing necessary to
provide assurance that the sterility and
functionality of the device are
maintained over its shelf life.
V. Compliance Dates
This final rule will become effective
July 21, 2014.
The special controls established in
this rule for external eyelid weights and
the special controls established in this
rule for implantable eyelid weights
apply to any external or implantable
eyelid weight respectively, whether the
device is an existing legally marketed
device, a new eyelid weight device not
currently marketed for which marketing
authority is sought, or a modification of
a currently legally marketed eyelid
weight. Devices of this type that were
legally marketed before the effective
date of this rule may continue to be
legally marketed; however 1 year after
the effective date of this rule, such
E:\FR\FM\21APR1.SGM
21APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 76 / Monday, April 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
devices must comply with applicable
special controls in order to continue to
be legally marketed. Submission of a
new 510(k) solely to demonstrate
conformance to the special controls is
not needed unless complying with the
special controls leads to changes to the
device that would independently trigger
the need for a new 510(k) under
§ 807.81(a)(3). However, manufacturers
should maintain documentation in their
design history file (see § 820.30(j)) to
demonstrate that they meet the special
controls. One year after the effective
date of this rule, any external eyelid
weight that does not comply with the
special controls established in
§ 886.5700(b)(1) or implantable eyelid
weight that does not comply with the
special controls established in
§ 886.5700(b)(2) this rule will be
considered adulterated and misbranded
(sections 501(f)(1)(B) and 502(o) of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 351(f)(1)(B) and
352(o)) until such time as the device: (1)
Complies with the special controls and
any premarket notification
requirements; (2) is approved in a PMA
application; or (3) is classified into class
I or II under section 513(f)(2) or (3) of
the FD&C Act.
A 510(k) submission for an eyelid
weight either filed before the effective
date of this rule, but not yet cleared for
marketing or filed after the effective date
of this rule may be cleared for marketing
only if the device complies with the
special controls established for this
device type. The submitter may
demonstrate that the special controls
have been met by incorporating
previously submitted information by
reference, or by providing newly
generated information. A submitter’s
first 510(k) submission for an
implantable eyelid weight filed
following the publication of this final
rule should be a traditional 510(k)
submission. Filing of a special 510(k)
submission for a modified implantable
eyelid weight is only appropriate after
FDA has cleared an initial 510(k)
submission that establishes that the
device complies with the special
controls established for the device type.
VI. Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21
CFR 25.34(b) 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.
VII. Analysis of Impacts
FDA has examined the impacts of the
final rule under Executive Order 12866,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:49 Apr 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
Executive Order 13563, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), and
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). Executive Orders
12866 and 13563 direct 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 final rule is
not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires Agencies to analyze regulatory
options that would minimize any
significant impact of a rule on small
entities. Because the final regulation
classifies a previously unclassified preamendment device type, there are only
five registered establishments listed in
the Establishment Registration and
Device Listing database, and the
regulation designating the classification
of eyelid weights as class II is consistent
with the historical regulatory oversight
given to this device type, the Agency
certifies that the final rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
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 $141
million, using the most current (2012)
Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross
Domestic Product. FDA does not expect
this final rule to result in any 1-year
expenditure that would meet or exceed
this amount.
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule establishes special
controls that refer to currently approved
collections of information found in
other FDA regulations. These
collections of information are subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520). The collections of information in
21 CFR part 807, subpart E, have been
approved under OMB control number
0910–0120; the collections of
information in 21 CFR part 801 have
been approved under OMB control
number 0910–0485.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
22015
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 886
Medical devices, Ophthalmic goods
and services.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 886 is
amended as follows:
PART 886—OPHTHALMIC DEVICES
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 886 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e,
360j, 371.
2. Add § 886.5700 to subpart E to read
as follows:
■
§ 886.5700
Eyelid weight.
(a) Identification. An eyelid weight is
a prescription device made of gold,
tantalum, platinum, iridium, or surgical
grade stainless steel that is rectangular
in shape and contoured to the shape of
the eye. The device is intended for the
gravity assisted treatment of
lagophthalmos (incomplete eyelid
closure).
(1) The external eyelid weight is
adhered to the outer skin of the upper
eyelid.
(2) The implantable eyelid weight is
implanted into the upper eyelid.
(b) Classification. (1) Class II (special
controls) for the external eyelid weight.
The external eyelid weight is exempt
from the premarket notification
procedures in subpart E of part 807 of
this chapter subject to the limitations in
§ 886.9. The special controls for the
external eyelid weight are:
(i) Testing demonstrating the
biocompatibility of the device; and
(ii) Labeling must include the
following information:
(A) Specific instructions regarding the
proper placement, sizing, and removal
of the device; and
(B) A warning stating that the patient
should be instructed to remove the
device prior to entering a magnetic
resonance environment.
(2) Class II (special controls) for the
implantable eyelid weight. The special
controls for the implantable eyelid
weight are:
(i) Testing demonstrating the
biocompatibility of the device;
(ii) Testing demonstrating the sterility
and shelf life of the device;
(iii) Nonclinical testing evaluating the
compatibility of the device in a
magnetic resonance environment.
(iv) Patient labeling to convey
information regarding the safety and
compatibility of the device in a
magnetic resonance environment, the
conditions under which a patient with
E:\FR\FM\21APR1.SGM
21APR1
22016
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 76 / Monday, April 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
the device can be safely scanned, and a
mechanism for a healthcare provider to
obtain detailed information about
magnetic resonance safety and
compatibility if needed.
Dated: April 15, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014–08940 Filed 4–18–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 173
[Public Notice 8703]
RIN 1400–AD50
Availability of Public Diplomacy
Program Material Within the United
States
Department of State.
Interim final rule with request
for comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of State
(‘‘Department’’) is amending its
regulations to implement Section 1078
of the National Defense Authorization
Act of 2013. This statutory provision,
which entered into effect on July 2,
2013, amends previous law to allow the
Department and the Broadcasting Board
of Governors (‘‘BBG’’) to make public
diplomacy program material available
within the United States, upon request,
following the dissemination of such
material abroad, and requires the
Department to issue regulations
implementing this change.
DATES: This interim final rule will
become April 21, 2014. The Department
will accept comments on the interim
final rule from the public until June 20,
2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• Online: Persons with access to the
Internet may view this rule and provide
comments by going to the
regulations.gov Web site at: https://
www.regulations.gov.
• Mail (paper, disk, or CD–ROM
submission): Director, Office of Policy
and Outreach, Bureau of International
Information Programs, U.S. Department
of State, State Annex 5 (SA–5), Floor 5,
2200 C Street NW., Washington, DC
20522–0505.
• Email: IIP_Inquiries@state.gov. You
must include the RIN (1400–AD50) in
the subject line of your message.
Inspection of Public Comments: All
comments received before the close of
the comment period will be available for
public inspection, including any
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:49 Apr 18, 2014
Jkt 232001
personally identifiable or confidential
business or financial information that is
included in a comment. The Department
of State will post all comments received
before the close of the comment period
at https://www.regulations.gov. You may
search on the RIN for this rule, 1400–
AD50.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim
DeBlauw, Director, Office of Policy and
Outreach, Bureau of International
Information Programs, U.S. Department
of State, SA–5, Floor 5, 2200 C Street
NW., Washington, DC 20522–0505;
phone: (202) 632–9938; fax (202) 632–
9901.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Section 1078 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013,
Public Law 112–239 (‘‘NDAA’’), which
entered into effect on July 2, 2013,
amends and clarifies, respectively,
section 501 of the United States
Information and Educational Exchange
Act of 1948, as amended (22 U.S.C.
1461; ‘‘the Smith-Mundt Act’’) (‘‘Section
501’’), governing the domestic
distribution of certain information about
the United States, its people, and
policies (‘‘Program Material’’) prepared
for dissemination abroad; and section
208 of the Foreign Relations
Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1986
and 1987 (22 U.S.C. 1461–1a) (‘‘Section
208’’), governing the creation of such
material for the purpose of influencing
domestic public opinion.
The revised Section 501 authorizes
the use of public diplomacy funds for
the preparation, dissemination and use
of Program Material ‘‘intended for
foreign audiences abroad.’’ With respect
to Program Material disseminated
abroad on or after July 2, the
Department and/or the BBG may, upon
request, make such material available
within the United States, and both the
Department and BBG must issue
necessary regulations to establish
procedures to maintain such material,
for reimbursement of reasonable costs
incurred in fulfilling requests for such
material, and to ensure that persons
seeking the release of such material
have secured and paid for necessary
U.S. rights and licenses. (The BBG
published its interim final rule on July
2, 2013, with a final rule published on
November 8, 2013 (78 FR 67025).)
The mission of U.S. public diplomacy
is to support the achievement of U.S.
foreign policy goals and objectives,
advance national interests, and enhance
national security by informing and
influencing foreign publics, and by
expanding and strengthening the
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
relationship between the people and
Government of the United States and
citizens of the rest of the world. Public
diplomacy outreach includes
communications with foreign audiences
abroad through Program Material
prepared with, and efforts supported by,
funds appropriated or otherwise made
available for this purpose. Prior to the
2013 NDAA, such material could not be
disseminated within the United States
but could be available at the Department
following its release abroad, upon
request, for examination only to limited
categories of requesters (i.e.,
representatives of U.S. press
associations, newspapers, magazines;
research students and scholars;
Members of Congress).
Regulatory Analysis
Administrative Procedure Act
The Department is of the opinion that
this rulemaking is exempt from the
notice-and-comment provisions of 5
U.S.C. 553 under the good cause
exception of 5 U.S.C. 553(b). There is
good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) and
(d)(3) to have this rule effective at the
time of publication. Because one of the
purposes of this rule and the law
underlying this rule is to allow
information dissemination outside of
the Freedom of Information Act for
Program Material, and because of the
already-past effective date of the law,
the intent of the law would be frustrated
if the Department could not begin
implementing this rule and responding
to domestic requests for Program
Material as soon as possible.
Accordingly, the Department finds that
normal public rulemaking procedures
are impracticable and unnecessary, and
that there is good cause under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(B) and (d)(3) to exempt this rule
from public rulemaking procedures and
to implement this rule upon
publication. Without prejudice to the
Department’s determination that there is
good cause to exempt this rule from
public rulemaking procedures, in the
interests of transparency and public
participation, the Department is
publishing this rule as an interim final
rule with a 60-day provision for public
comment.
Furthermore, because this is a
substantive rule that relieves restrictions
imposed by previous versions of 22
U.S.C. 1461 and 1461–1a, the
Department may implement this rule at
the time of publication under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(1). This rule does not require or
prompt the public to take any action;
rather, it functions to relieve the
prohibition that prevented the
Department from responding to requests
E:\FR\FM\21APR1.SGM
21APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 76 (Monday, April 21, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22012-22016]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-08940]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 886
[Docket No. FDA-2013-N-0069]
Medical Devices; Ophthalmic Devices; Classification of the Eyelid
Weight
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is
classifying the eyelid weight into class II (special controls). The
Agency is exempting the external eyelid weight from premarket
notification, but continuing to require premarket notification for
implantable eyelid weights in order to provide a reasonable assurance
of safety and effectiveness of the device. Both external and
implantable eyelid weight devices are subject to special controls. The
eyelid weight may be adhered to the outer skin of the upper eyelid
(external eyelid weight) or implanted into the upper eyelid
(implantable eyelid weight), and is intended for the gravity assisted
treatment of lagophthalmos (incomplete eyelid closure).
DATES: Effective Date: July 21, 2014.
Compliance Dates: Premarket notification submissions (510(k)s) for
[[Page 22013]]
eyelid weights filed on or after the effective date of this rule are
expected to comply with the requirement of special controls at the time
that the 510(k) is submitted.
Premarket notification submissions (510(k)s) for eyelid weights
filed before the effective date of this rule, but not yet cleared for
marketing, are expected to comply with the requirement of special
controls prior to receiving marketing clearance.
External eyelid weights exempt from premarket notification under
this rule and not currently marketed are expected to comply with the
requirement of special controls prior to introducing devices into
interstate commerce.
Eyelid weights (both implantable and external) legally marketed
before the effective date of this rule are expected to comply with the
requirement of special controls by April 21, 2015. See section V of
this document, ``Compliance Dates,'' for further information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tina Kiang, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 2414, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-6860,
Tina.Kiang@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C.
301 et seq.), as amended by the Medical Device Amendments of 1976 (the
1976 amendments) (Pub. L. 94-295), the Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990
(Pub. L. 101-629), the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act
of 1997 (FDAMA) (Pub. L. 105-115), the Medical Device User Fee and
Modernization Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-250), the Food and Drug
Administration Amendments Act of 2007 (Pub. L. 110-85), and the Food
and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act (Pub. L. 112-144),
among other amendments, established a comprehensive system for the
regulation of medical devices intended for human use. Section 513 of
the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360c) established three categories (classes) of
devices, depending on the regulatory controls needed to provide
reasonable assurance of their safety and effectiveness. The three
categories of devices are class I (general controls), class II (special
controls), and class III (premarket approval).
Under section 513 of the FD&C Act, FDA refers to devices that were
in commercial distribution before May 28, 1976 (the date of enactment
of the 1976 amendments), as ``preamendments devices.'' FDA classifies
these devices after the Agency takes the following steps: (1) Receives
a recommendation from a device classification panel (an FDA advisory
committee); (2) publishes the panel's recommendation for comment, along
with a proposed regulation classifying the device; and (3) publishes a
final regulation classifying the device. FDA has classified most
preamendments devices under these procedures.
FDA refers to devices that were not in commercial distribution
before May 28, 1976, as ``postamendments devices.'' These devices are
classified automatically by statute (section 513(f) of the FD&C Act)
into class III without any FDA rulemaking process. These devices remain
in class III and require premarket approval, unless and until: (1) FDA
reclassifies the device into class I or II; (2) FDA issues an order
classifying the device into class I or II in accordance with section
513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act, as amended by FDAMA; or (3) FDA issues an
order finding the device to be substantially equivalent, under section
513(i) of the FD&C Act, to a predicate device that does not require
premarket approval. The Agency determines whether new devices are
substantially equivalent to predicate devices by means of premarket
notification procedures in section 510(k) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360(k)) and part 807 of the regulations (21 CFR part 807).
A person may market a preamendments device that has been classified
into class III through premarket notification procedures, without
submission of a premarket approval application (PMA) until FDA issues a
final regulation under section 515(b) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360e(b)) requiring premarket approval.
Section 510(m) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(m)) provides that a
class II device may be exempted from the premarket notification
requirements under section 510(k) of the FD&C Act, if the Agency
determines that premarket notification is not necessary to assure the
safety and effectiveness of the device.
II. Regulatory History of the Device
In the Federal Register of February 8, 2013 (78 FR 9349), FDA
proposed to classify eyelid weight devices intended for the gravity-
assisted treatment of lagophthalmos (incomplete eyelid closure) into
class II (special controls) and proposed special controls for these
devices. FDA also proposed to exempt the devices from premarket
notification requirements if the device is an external eyelid weight.
FDA invited interested persons to comment on the proposed regulation by
May 9, 2013. FDA received three comments on the proposed rule.
III. Summary of the Final Rule
In accordance with 21 CFR 860.84(g)(2), FDA is classifying eyelid
weights into class II (special controls). FDA is codifying the
classification of eyelid weights by adding Sec. 886.5700.
A. External Eyelid Weights
Under section 510(m) of the FD&C Act, FDA has determined that
premarket notification is not necessary to assure the safety and
effectiveness of external eyelid weights, and the Agency is exempting
these devices from premarket notification requirements. The Agency has
also identified special controls for these devices. On or before the
effective date of this final rule, firms who wish to market external
eyelid weight devices that are not already legally marketed are
required to either (1) comply with the particular mitigation measures
set forth in the special controls in Sec. 886.5700(b)(1) or (2) use
alternative mitigation measures, but demonstrate to the Agency's
satisfaction that those alternative measures identified by the firm
will provide at least an equivalent assurance of safety and
effectiveness. As discussed in sections IV and V, in response to
comments regarding compliance with the special controls for existing
legally marketed devices, FDA has extended the compliance date for
special controls to 1 year from the effective date of this rule to
allow manufacturers of existing legally marketed devices adequate time
to review the design history files and complete any needed testing and
implement any required labeling changes for their devices.
FDA also made changes to the final rule as related to external
eyelid weights in response to the comments and for clarification.
Proposed Sec. 886.5700(b)(1)(iii) has been edited to remove the words
``required for the safe and effective use of the device as outlined in
Sec. 801.109(c) of this chapter'' to minimize any confusion since this
section describes special controls and the labeling requirements in 21
CFR part 801 are a general control. FDA also removed the special
controls for external eyelid weights related to magnetic resonance (MR)
compatibility testing (see additional discussion in section IV).
B. Implantable Eyelid Weights
FDA has determined that premarket notification is necessary to
provide
[[Page 22014]]
reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness of implantable eyelid
weights, and, therefore, this device type is not exempt from premarket
notification requirements. The Agency has also identified special
controls for these devices. On or before the effective date of this
final rule, firms who wish to market external eyelid weight devices
that are not already legally marketed are required to either (1) comply
with the particular mitigation measures set forth in the special
controls in Sec. 886.5700(b)(2) or (2) use alternative mitigation
measures, but demonstrate to the Agency's satisfaction that those
alternative measures identified by the firm will provide at least an
equivalent assurance of safety and effectiveness. As discussed in
section IV, in response to comments regarding compliance with the
special controls for existing legally marketed devices, FDA has
extended the compliance date for special controls to 1 year from the
effective date of this rule to allow manufacturers of existing legally
marketed devices adequate time to review the design history files and
complete any needed testing and implement any required labeling changes
for their devices.
IV. Analysis of Comments and FDA's Response
FDA received three comments on the proposed rule. One of the
comments was supportive of FDA's proposed rule, including the
classification and the special controls for both the external and
implantable eyelid weights and the exemption of external eyelid weights
from premarket notification requirements (510(k)). A second comment
agreed with the proposed classification into class II, but indicated
that the risks associated with long-term use of external eyelid weights
were similar to those for implantable eyelid weights, and that as such
external eyelid weights should not be exempted from the premarket
notification requirements. FDA disagrees with the comment. FDA believes
that the identified special controls adequately mitigate the risks to
health for the device regardless of the duration of use. The increased
risks associated with implanted eyelid weights are related to the need
for the device to be provided sterile and the increased
biocompatibility requirements. These risks are significantly reduced
with external eyelid weight devices. FDA believes that compliance with
the special controls in Sec. 886.5700(b)(1) provides a reasonable
assurance of safety and effectiveness for external eyelid weight
devices without the need for premarket notification.
The third comment requested clarification on whether existing
eyelid weight manufacturers (for both implantable and external eyelid
weight devices) need to address the identified special controls. The
special controls established in this rule apply to existing legally
marketed devices, as well as to new eyelid weight devices not currently
marketed for which marketing authority is sought and to any
modification of a currently legally marketed eyelid weight. In response
to this comment, FDA has extended the compliance date for special
controls for manufacturers of existing legally marketed devices to 1
year from the effective date of this rule, as outlined in section V,
``Compliance Dates.''
Submission of a new 510(k) solely to demonstrate conformance to the
special controls is not needed unless complying with the special
controls leads to changes to the device that would independently
trigger the need for a new 510(k) under Sec. 807.81(a)(3). However,
manufacturers should maintain documentation in their design history
file (see Sec. 820.30 (21 CFR 820.30)) to demonstrate that they meet
the special controls. To ensure that manufacturers of existing legally
marketed devices have adequate time to review their design history
files and complete any needed testing and implement any required
labeling changes for their devices, FDA has extended the compliance
date for existing legally marketed devices to comply with the special
controls to 1 year after the effective date of this final rule.
Manufacturers with questions regarding their existing devices are
encouraged to interact with FDA via the pre-submission process.
The third comment further suggested that the biocompatibility
testing requirements as described in the proposed special controls are
more extensive and burdensome than the requirements under which
existing legally marketed eyelid weights devices were originally
reviewed. The comment stated that, for external eyelid weights, limited
biocompatibility testing with supportive literature review and
reference to material in predicate devices should be acceptable in lieu
of a full battery of biocompatibility testing. FDA agrees that based on
the material and manufacturing processes being used, a full battery of
biocompatibility testing may not be required. Discussion of the
specific biocompatibility testing requirements for existing legally
marketed eyelid weight devices is beyond the scope of this rule;
however, FDA encourages manufacturers to review existing Agency
guidance on this topic and contact FDA via the pre-submission process
to discuss specific biocompatibility requirements for their devices.
The third comment further requested clarification on whether a
labeling change to address MR compatibility would trigger additional
compliance expectations regarding MR testing and suggested that because
external eyelid weights are removable devices, MR compatibility should
not be a requirement for these devices. FDA agrees with the commenter
that removal of the device when the patient is in the MR environment
would mitigate this risk and has thus removed MR testing compatibility
testing as a special control. However, to ensure that the patient is
aware that the device should be removed in these circumstances, the
special control regarding labeling has been revised to include a
requirement for a warning stating that the patient should be instructed
to remove the device prior to entering an MR environment.
Finally, the third comment also requested clarification on the
special control for implanted eyelid weights: ``testing demonstrating
the sterility and shelf life of the device'' and suggested that the
shelf life of the implanted device is limited by the ability of the
associated packaging to maintain a protective barrier and not by the
device itself, and therefore, validated packaging and sterilization
procedures would satisfy this requirement. Although FDA agrees that
validation of the packaging and sterilization processes is important to
comply with this special control, each manufacturer must assess the
materials and processes used to manufacture their device when
determining the testing necessary to provide assurance that the
sterility and functionality of the device are maintained over its shelf
life.
V. Compliance Dates
This final rule will become effective July 21, 2014.
The special controls established in this rule for external eyelid
weights and the special controls established in this rule for
implantable eyelid weights apply to any external or implantable eyelid
weight respectively, whether the device is an existing legally marketed
device, a new eyelid weight device not currently marketed for which
marketing authority is sought, or a modification of a currently legally
marketed eyelid weight. Devices of this type that were legally marketed
before the effective date of this rule may continue to be legally
marketed; however 1 year after the effective date of this rule, such
[[Page 22015]]
devices must comply with applicable special controls in order to
continue to be legally marketed. Submission of a new 510(k) solely to
demonstrate conformance to the special controls is not needed unless
complying with the special controls leads to changes to the device that
would independently trigger the need for a new 510(k) under Sec.
807.81(a)(3). However, manufacturers should maintain documentation in
their design history file (see Sec. 820.30(j)) to demonstrate that
they meet the special controls. One year after the effective date of
this rule, any external eyelid weight that does not comply with the
special controls established in Sec. 886.5700(b)(1) or implantable
eyelid weight that does not comply with the special controls
established in Sec. 886.5700(b)(2) this rule will be considered
adulterated and misbranded (sections 501(f)(1)(B) and 502(o) of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 351(f)(1)(B) and 352(o)) until such time as the
device: (1) Complies with the special controls and any premarket
notification requirements; (2) is approved in a PMA application; or (3)
is classified into class I or II under section 513(f)(2) or (3) of the
FD&C Act.
A 510(k) submission for an eyelid weight either filed before the
effective date of this rule, but not yet cleared for marketing or filed
after the effective date of this rule may be cleared for marketing only
if the device complies with the special controls established for this
device type. The submitter may demonstrate that the special controls
have been met by incorporating previously submitted information by
reference, or by providing newly generated information. A submitter's
first 510(k) submission for an implantable eyelid weight filed
following the publication of this final rule should be a traditional
510(k) submission. Filing of a special 510(k) submission for a modified
implantable eyelid weight is only appropriate after FDA has cleared an
initial 510(k) submission that establishes that the device complies
with the special controls established for the device type.
VI. Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.34(b) 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.
VII. Analysis of Impacts
FDA has examined the impacts of the final rule under Executive
Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601-612), and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104-4). Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct 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 final rule is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires Agencies to analyze
regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule
on small entities. Because the final regulation classifies a previously
unclassified pre-amendment device type, there are only five registered
establishments listed in the Establishment Registration and Device
Listing database, and the regulation designating the classification of
eyelid weights as class II is consistent with the historical regulatory
oversight given to this device type, the Agency certifies that the
final rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
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 $141 million, using the most current (2012) Implicit
Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. FDA does not expect this
final rule to result in any 1-year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule establishes special controls that refer to
currently approved collections of information found in other FDA
regulations. These collections of information are subject to review by
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The collections of information in 21
CFR part 807, subpart E, have been approved under OMB control number
0910-0120; the collections of information in 21 CFR part 801 have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0485.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 886
Medical devices, Ophthalmic goods and services.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part
886 is amended as follows:
PART 886--OPHTHALMIC DEVICES
0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 886 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 360, 360c, 360e, 360j, 371.
0
2. Add Sec. 886.5700 to subpart E to read as follows:
Sec. 886.5700 Eyelid weight.
(a) Identification. An eyelid weight is a prescription device made
of gold, tantalum, platinum, iridium, or surgical grade stainless steel
that is rectangular in shape and contoured to the shape of the eye. The
device is intended for the gravity assisted treatment of lagophthalmos
(incomplete eyelid closure).
(1) The external eyelid weight is adhered to the outer skin of the
upper eyelid.
(2) The implantable eyelid weight is implanted into the upper
eyelid.
(b) Classification. (1) Class II (special controls) for the
external eyelid weight. The external eyelid weight is exempt from the
premarket notification procedures in subpart E of part 807 of this
chapter subject to the limitations in Sec. 886.9. The special controls
for the external eyelid weight are:
(i) Testing demonstrating the biocompatibility of the device; and
(ii) Labeling must include the following information:
(A) Specific instructions regarding the proper placement, sizing,
and removal of the device; and
(B) A warning stating that the patient should be instructed to
remove the device prior to entering a magnetic resonance environment.
(2) Class II (special controls) for the implantable eyelid weight.
The special controls for the implantable eyelid weight are:
(i) Testing demonstrating the biocompatibility of the device;
(ii) Testing demonstrating the sterility and shelf life of the
device;
(iii) Nonclinical testing evaluating the compatibility of the
device in a magnetic resonance environment.
(iv) Patient labeling to convey information regarding the safety
and compatibility of the device in a magnetic resonance environment,
the conditions under which a patient with
[[Page 22016]]
the device can be safely scanned, and a mechanism for a healthcare
provider to obtain detailed information about magnetic resonance safety
and compatibility if needed.
Dated: April 15, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-08940 Filed 4-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P