Revocation of General Safety Test Regulations That Are Duplicative of Requirements in Biologics License Applications, 37971-37974 [2015-16366]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
cause exists for dispensing with the
notice and public comment procedures
for this rule. 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). This
final rule only extends the date on
which the pilot program will no longer
be effective. It makes no substantive
changes to our rules. Our current
regulations expressly provide that we
may extend the expiration date of the
pilot program by notice of a final rule
in the Federal Register. Therefore, we
have determined that opportunity for
prior comment is unnecessary, and we
are issuing this rule as a final rule.
In addition, for the reasons cited
above, we find good cause for
dispensing with the 30-day delay in the
effective date of this final rule. 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3). We are not making any
substantive changes in our rules.
Without an extension of the expiration
date for the pilot program, we will not
have the flexibility we need to ensure
the efficiency of our hearing process.
Therefore, we find it is in the public
interest to make this final rule effective
on the publication date.
Executive Order 12866 as
Supplemented by Executive Order
13563
We consulted with the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and
determined that this final rule does not
meet the criteria for a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866, as supplemented by Executive
Order 13563. Therefore, OMB did not
review the final rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
We certify that this final rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
because it affects individuals only.
Therefore, the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, as amended, does not require us to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
Paperwork Reduction Act
This final rule does not create any
new or affect any existing collections
and, therefore, does not require OMB
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act.
BILLING CODE 4191–02–P
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, we are amending subpart J of
part 404 and subpart N of part 416 of
title 20 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as set forth below:
Food and Drug Administration
PART 404—FEDERAL OLD-AGE,
SURVIVORS AND DISABILITY
INSURANCE
Revocation of General Safety Test
Regulations That Are Duplicative of
Requirements in Biologics License
Applications
(1950– )
21 CFR Parts 601, 610, and 680
[Docket No. FDA–2014–N–1110]
AGENCY:
Subpart J—[Amended]
1. The authority citation for subpart J
of part 404 continues to read as follows:
ACTION:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
■
Authority: Secs. 201(j), 204(f), 205(a)–(b),
(d)–(h), and (j), 221, 223(i), 225, and 702(a)(5)
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401(j),
404(f), 405(a)–(b), (d)–(h), and (j), 421, 423(i),
425, and 902(a)(5)); sec. 5, Pub. L. 97–455, 96
Stat. 2500 (42 U.S.C. 405 note); secs. 5, 6(c)–
(e), and 15, Pub. L. 98–460, 98 Stat. 1802 (42
U.S.C. 421 note); sec. 202, Pub. L. 108–203,
118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note).
2. In § 404.936, revise the second
sentence in paragraph (i) to read as
follows:
■
§ 404.936 Time and place for a hearing
before an administrative law judge.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) Pilot program. * * * These
provisions will no longer be effective on
August 12, 2016, unless we terminate
them earlier or extend them beyond that
date by notice of a final rule in the
Federal Register.
PART 416—SUPPLEMENTAL
SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED,
BLIND, AND DISABLED
Final rule.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is amending the
biologics regulations by removing the
general safety test (GST) requirements
for biological products. FDA is
finalizing this action because the
existing codified GST regulations are
duplicative of requirements that are also
specified in biologics license
applications (BLAs), or are no longer
necessary or appropriate to help ensure
the safety, purity, and potency of
licensed biological products. FDA is
taking this action as part of its
retrospective review of its regulations to
promote improvement and innovation,
in response to the Executive order.
DATES: This rule is effective August 3,
2015.
SUMMARY:
Lori
J. Churchyard, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301,
Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002, 240–
402–7911.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
3. The authority citation for subpart N
of part 416 continues to read as follows:
Executive Summary
Authority: Secs. 702(a)(5), 1631, and 1633
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
902(a)(5), 1383, and 1383b); sec. 202, Pub. L.
108–203, 118 Stat. 509 (42 U.S.C. 902 note).
The final rule removes the codified
GST 1 regulations for biological products
which will update outdated
requirements and accommodate new
and evolving technology and testing
capabilities without diminishing public
health protections. FDA is finalizing
4. In § 416.1436, revise the second
sentence in paragraph (i) to read as
follows:
■
20 CFR Part 404
Administrative practice and
procedure, Blind, Disability benefits,
Old-age, Survivors, and Disability
Insurance, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Social Security.
Jkt 235001
[FR Doc. 2015–16397 Filed 7–1–15; 8:45 am]
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
■
List of Subjects
23:22 Jul 01, 2015
them earlier or extend them beyond that
date by notice of a final rule in the
Federal Register.
Carolyn W. Colvin,
Acting Commissioner of Social Security.
Subpart N—[Amended]
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program Nos. 96.001, Social Security—
Disability Insurance; 96.002, Social
Security—Retirement Insurance; 96.004,
Social Security—Survivors Insurance;
96.006, Supplemental Security Income.)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20 CFR Part 416
Administrative practice and
procedure, Aged, Blind, Disability
benefits, Public assistance programs,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Supplemental Security
Income (SSI).
37971
§ 416.1436 Time and place for a hearing
before an administrative law judge.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) Pilot program. * * * These
provisions will no longer be effective on
August 12, 2016, unless we terminate
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Purpose and Coverage of the Final Rule
1 For purposes of this final rule, the terms
‘‘general safety test’’ or ‘‘GST’’ refer to the
requirements found under Title 21 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR), subchapter F, parts 600
through 680 (21 CFR parts 600 through 680),
specifically 21 CFR 610.11, 610.11a, and 680.3(b).
E:\FR\FM\02JYR1.SGM
02JYR1
37972
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
this action because the existing codified
GST regulations are duplicative of
requirements that are also specified in
BLAs, or are no longer necessary or
appropriate to help ensure the safety,
purity, and potency of licensed
biological products. FDA is taking this
action as part of its retrospective review
of its regulations to promote
improvement and innovation, in
response to Executive Order (E.O.)
13563 of January 18, 2011.
Summary of the Major Provisions of the
Final Rule
The final rule removes the
requirements contained in §§ 610.11,
610.11a, and 680.3(b) (21 CFR 610.11,
610.11a, and 680.3(b)) from the
regulations. Section 610.11 requires a
GST for the detection of extraneous
toxic contaminants in certain biological
products intended for administration to
humans. Section 610.11a concerns the
GST requirements for inactivated
influenza vaccine. Section 680.3(b)
concerns GST requirements for
allergenic products. Removal of these
regulations, however, would not remove
GST requirements specified in
individual BLAs. A biological product
manufacturer would continue to be
required to follow the GST requirements
specified in its BLA unless the
manufacturer advised FDA of its
elimination or modification of the test
by a submission filed in accordance
with § 601.12 (21 CFR 601.12). FDA
would review proposed changes to a
manufacturer’s approved biologics
license on a case-by-case basis so that
FDA can ensure that any such action is
appropriate.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
Costs and Benefits
FDA is finalizing this action because
the existing codified GST regulations
are duplicative of requirements that are
also specified in BLAs, or are no longer
necessary or appropriate to help ensure
the safety, purity, and potency of
licensed biological products. Because
this final rule would impose no
additional regulatory burdens, this rule
is not anticipated to result in any
compliance costs and the economic
impact is expected to be minimal.
I. Background
As part of FDA’s retrospective review
of its regulations to promote
improvement and innovation under
Executive Order 13563, FDA is
removing the codified GST
requirements as specified in this rule.
We believe this action is appropriate
because in many instances, the GST
regulations duplicate requirements that
are also specified in the BLA
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:22 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
requirements for biological products
intended for human use under section
351 of the Public Health Service Act
(PHS Act) (42 U.S.C. 262), or they are
outmoded or otherwise unnecessary to
help ensure the continued safety, purity,
and potency of biological products. FDA
published the proposed rule
‘‘Revocation of General Safety Test
Regulations That Are Duplicative of
Requirements in Biological License
Applications’’ in the Federal Register of
August 22, 2014 (79 FR 49727). FDA
corrected the title of that proposed rule
to ‘‘Revocation of General Safety Test
Regulations That Are Duplicative of
Requirements in Biologics License
Applications’’ in the Federal Register of
September 10, 2014 (79 FR 53670).
For a number of years, FDA has not
codified specific test methods as
standards for licensed biological
products, in part because codifying
specific test methods as standards can
diminish the ability of the Agency and
industry to respond to technological
developments. Instead the Agency has
required manufacturers to provide a full
description of manufacturing methods,
including test methods, in
manufacturers’ BLAs (§ 601.2(a) (21 CFR
601.2(a))). Since FDA issued the March
2003 final rule ‘‘Revision to the General
Safety Requirements for Biological
Products’’ in the Federal Register of
March 4, 2003 (68 FR 10157), it has
become increasingly clear that the
codified GST regulations are too
restrictive for certain biological
products because alternatives may be
available which provide the same or
greater level of assurance of safety as the
GST. Thus, the Agency believes that the
GST regulations may not always reflect
the scientific community’s assessment
of the best current testing procedures,
although in certain circumstances the
GST may still be appropriate. The
Agency believes that a more efficient
way of prescribing testing requirements
for particular products would be to
allow such requirements to be specified
in the BLA, which will enhance
flexibility to make appropriate changes
to testing methods.
II. Summary of the Final Rule
FDA is adopting as final, without
material change, the proposed
revocation of general safety test
requirements that are duplicative of
requirements in BLAs.
• The final rule is removing
§§ 610.11, 610.11a, and 680.3(b), the
regulations that require that
manufacturers of biological products
perform a specified test for general
safety of biological products. FDA is
taking this action because the existing
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
codified GST regulations are
duplicative, outmoded, or are otherwise
unnecessary to help ensure the
continued safety, purity, and potency of
licensed biological products.
• As set forth in an approved BLA or
BLA supplement, for products that
present specific safety concerns,
manufacturers will be required to
perform appropriate safety test(s) to
address those concerns. For example,
the BLA may require testing for a
specific toxicity.
• The appropriate tests will be
specified in the manufacturer’s BLA or
BLA supplement rather than codified as
regulations.
• Elimination of the codified GST
regulations would encourage the
implementation of the principles of the
‘‘3Rs,’’ to reduce, refine, and replace
animal use in testing. This addresses the
need to minimize the use of animals in
such testing and promotes more
humane, appropriate and specific test
methods for assuring the safety of
biological products.2
• The finalization of this rule does
not automatically revise a
manufacturer’s BLA or BLA
supplement.
• Manufacturers would continue to
be required to perform the GST unless
the manufacturer’s BLA were revised
through a supplement to eliminate or
modify the test in accordance with
§ 601.12.
• The requirements for a licensed
biological product manufacturer to
report changes in its product, product
labeling, production process, quality
controls, equipment, facilities or
responsible personnel, as established in
its approved BLA, are detailed in
§ 601.12.
• Under § 601.12, manufacturers
must report each change to the Agency
in one of several different types of
submissions. The applicable submission
category depends on the potential for
the change(s) at issue to have an adverse
effect on the identity, strength, quality,
purity, or potency of the particular
biological product as it may relate to the
safety or effectiveness of the product.
• FDA anticipates that changes
involving the discontinuance of the GST
or the reliance on a test other than the
GST would have a moderate potential to
have an adverse effect on the identity,
strength, quality, purity, or potency of
the product as it may relate to the safety
2 Interagency Coordinating Committee on the
Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM)
Authorization Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 285l–3).
Additional information on the Federal
Government’s implementation of the principles of
the 3Rs may be found at the ICCVAM Web site at
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/iccvam.
E:\FR\FM\02JYR1.SGM
02JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
or effectiveness of the product. Such
changes must be identified in a
supplement submitted under § 601.12(c)
(changes requiring supplement
submission at least 30 days prior to
distribution of the product made using
the change).
III. Legal Authority
FDA is issuing this regulation under
the biological products and
communicable disease provisions of the
PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262 and 264), and
the provisions of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act)
(21 U.S.C. 321 et seq.) applicable to
drugs. Under these provisions of the
PHS Act and the FD&C Act, we have the
authority to issue and enforce
regulations designed to ensure, among
other things, that biological products are
safe, pure, and potent and manufactured
in accordance with current Good
Manufacturing Practice, and to prevent
the introduction, transmission, or
spread of communicable disease.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
IV. Comments on the Proposed Rule
and FDA Response
The Agency received two letters of
comments on the proposed rule.
Comments were received from a trade
association, and an animal welfare
organization.
To make it easier to identify the
comments and our responses, the word
‘‘Comment’’ and a comment number
appear in parentheses before each
comment’s description, and the word
‘‘Response’’ in parentheses precedes
each response. We have also numbered
each comment to help distinguish
between different comments. The
number assigned to each comment is
purely for organizational purposes and
does not signify the comment’s value or
importance or the order in which it was
received. Certain comments were
grouped together because the subject
matter of the comments was similar.
A. General Comments
(Comment 1) Both letters of comments
support the proposed rule.
(Response) FDA acknowledges and
appreciates that the comments we
received agree with the need for this
rulemaking. As stated previously, the
rule removes the requirements
contained in §§ 610.11, 610.11a, and
680.3(b) from the regulations because
the existing codified GST regulations
are duplicative of requirements that are
also specified in BLAs, or are no longer
necessary or appropriate to help ensure
the safety, purity, and potency of
licensed biological products. Removal of
these regulations provides a more
efficient way of prescribing testing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:22 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
requirements and enhances flexibility to
make appropriate changes to testing
methods.
B. Comments on Specific Topics
(Comment 2) One comment requests
that FDA encourage manufacturers who
have a GST described in their BLAs for
their licensed products to submit
supplements to their BLAs to eliminate
or modify the test and that FDA take
additional steps to ensure that the final
rule will have the intended effect of
eliminating the use of animals in safety
testing.
(Response) As stated in the preamble
of the proposed rule (79 FR 49727 at
49729), we anticipate that the
elimination of the codified GST
regulations will encourage the
implementation of the principles of the
‘‘3Rs,’’ to reduce, refine, and replace
animal use in testing. Moreover, on our
own initiative, as discussed elsewhere
in this document, we have determined
that the effective date of the final rule
will be 30 days after the date of its
publication in the Federal Register to
give manufacturers the flexibility to
submit supplements to their BLAs for
their licensed products as soon as
possible.
(Comment 3) One comment requests
that we add language to § 601.2 or other
relevant biologics regulation to clarify
our intent to encourage the
implementation of the principles of the
3Rs.
(Response) FDA declines to adopt this
recommended change because the
request to add language to § 601.2 or
other relevant biologics regulations is
outside the scope of this rulemaking.
(Comment 4) One comment requests
that FDA establish user fees with
respect to the continued use of the GST
after the effective date of this final rule,
or that FDA establish other clear
policies that will provide economic
incentives to discontinue the use of the
GST. Further, the comment refers to
Executive Order 13563, which
encourages Federal Agencies to ‘‘. . .
assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including providing
economic incentives to encourage the
desired behavior, such as user fees
. . . .’’
(Response) We decline to adopt these
suggested changes because they are
beyond the scope of this rule. The
proposed rule did not address user fees
or economic incentives. This rule
allows, but does not require, current
BLA holders to submit to FDA
supplements to their BLAs to eliminate
or modify the GST.
(Comment 5) One comment states that
a manufacturer who submits a
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37973
supplement to eliminate or modify a
GST in its BLA will not be able to stop
conducting the GST until FDA
determines that the manufacturer has
appropriately reported this change.
(Response) We disagree in part. As
stated in the preamble to the proposed
rule (79 FR 49727 at 49730), a
manufacturer who desires to
discontinue the GST in its approved
BLA or utilize an alternative method
other than the GST approved in its BLA
must submit a BLA supplement
reporting the change in accordance with
§ 601.12. Should a manufacturer wish to
discontinue the GST described in the
approved BLA, or to utilize an
alternative method other than the GST
approved in its BLA, FDA anticipates
that the change would have a moderate
potential to have an adverse effect on
the identity, strength, quality, purity, or
potency of the product as it may relate
to the safety or effectiveness of the
product. Accordingly, a manufacturer
who desires to make such a change must
submit a BLA supplement reporting the
change in accordance with § 601.12(c).
Within 30 days of the date FDA receives
the submission, FDA will determine if
the change has been reported in the
proper category and if any of the
required information is missing, and
will inform the applicant accordingly. If
FDA does not so notify the applicant,
distribution of the product made using
the change may begin not less than 30
days after receipt of the supplement by
FDA.
V. Conforming Amendments
As part of this final rule, we need to
make conforming changes when the
removed provisions are referenced
elsewhere in the CFR. The final rule
removes ‘‘§ 610.11’’ from § 601.2(c)(1)
and 21 CFR 601.22.
VI. Effective Date
We are making this rule effective 30
days after the date of publication in the
Federal Register. We are making this
change in the interest of reducing
unnecessary regulatory burden to give
manufacturers the flexibility to submit
supplements right away, should they
wish to do so.
VII. Economic 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
E:\FR\FM\02JYR1.SGM
02JYR1
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with FRONTMATTER
37974
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
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 as
defined 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 this final rule generally
increases flexibility for safety testing
and would result in the reduction of
certain regulatory burdens and does not
add any new regulatory responsibilities,
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 $144
million, using the most current (2014)
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.
This final rule amends the biologics
regulations by removing the GST
requirements for biological products
found in §§ 610.11, 610.11a and
680.3(b). FDA is finalizing this action
because the current codified GST
regulations are duplicative of
requirements that are also specified in
biologics licenses, or are no longer
necessary or appropriate to help ensure
the safety, purity, and potency of
licensed biological products. The
removal of the GST regulations for
biological products, however, would not
remove GST requirements specified in
individual BLAs. All manufacturers that
currently conduct a GST are already
required, as part of the standards
specified in their BLAs, to perform the
GST and would thus continue to be
required to perform the GST unless the
BLA were revised to eliminate or
modify the test through a supplement in
accordance with § 601.12. Because this
rule would impose no additional
regulatory burdens, this regulation is
not anticipated to result in any
compliance costs and the economic
impact is expected to be minimal.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
23:22 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
VIII. The Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995
PART 601—LICENSING
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 601 continues to read as follows:
■
This final rule refers to previously
approved collections of information that
are subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). The
collections of information in § 601.12
have been approved under OMB control
number 0910–0338. Therefore, FDA
tentatively concludes that the
requirements in this document are not
subject to review by OMB because they
do not constitute a ‘‘new collection of
information’’ under the PRA.
IX. Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21
CFR 25.30(h) 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.
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1451–1561; 21 U.S.C.
321, 351, 352, 353, 355, 356b, 360, 360c–
360f, 360h–360j, 371, 374, 379e, 381; 42
U.S.C. 216, 241, 262, 263, 264; sec 122, Pub.
L. 105–115, 111 Stat. 2322 (21 U.S.C. 355
note).
§ 601.2
[Amended]
2. Section 601.2 is amended in
paragraph (c)(1) by removing ‘‘610.11,’’.
■
§ 601.22
[Amended]
3. Section 601.22 is amended in the
third sentence by removing ‘‘610.11,’’.
■
PART 610—GENERAL BIOLOGICAL
PRODUCTS STANDARDS
4. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 610 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 355, 360, 360c, 360d, 360h, 360i, 371,
372, 374, 381; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a,
264.
X. Federalism
§ 610.11
FDA has analyzed this final rule in
accordance with the principles set forth
in Executive Order 13132. FDA has
determined that the rule does not
contain policies that would have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the
National Government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. Accordingly, the
Agency has concluded that the rule does
not contain policies that have
federalism implications as defined in
the Executive order and, consequently,
a federalism summary impact statement
is not required.
■
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 601
[Removed and Reserved]
5. Remove and reserve § 610.11.
§ 610.11a
■
[Removed and Reserved]
6. Remove and reserve § 610.11a.
PART 680—ADDITIONAL STANDARDS
FOR MISCELLANEOUS PRODUCTS
7. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 680 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,
355, 360, 371; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a,
264.
§ 680.3
[Amended]
8. In § 680.3, remove and reserve
paragraph (b).
■
Dated: June 26, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015–16366 Filed 7–1–15; 8:45 am]
Administrative practice and
procedure, Biologics, Confidential
business information.
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
21 CFR Part 610
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Biologics, Labeling, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
22 CFR Part 121
21 CFR Part 680
RIN 1400–AD74
Biologics, Blood, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Temporary Modification of Category XI
of the United States Munitions List
Therefore under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Public
Health Service Act, and under authority
delegated to the Commissioner of Food
and Drugs, 21 CFR parts 601, 610, and
680 are amended as follows:
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[Public Notice: 8996]
Department of State.
Final rule; notice of temporary
modification.
ACTION:
The Department of State,
pursuant to its regulations and in the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\02JYR1.SGM
02JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 127 (Thursday, July 2, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37971-37974]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16366]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 601, 610, and 680
[Docket No. FDA-2014-N-1110]
Revocation of General Safety Test Regulations That Are
Duplicative of Requirements in Biologics License Applications
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the
biologics regulations by removing the general safety test (GST)
requirements for biological products. FDA is finalizing this action
because the existing codified GST regulations are duplicative of
requirements that are also specified in biologics license applications
(BLAs), or are no longer necessary or appropriate to help ensure the
safety, purity, and potency of licensed biological products. FDA is
taking this action as part of its retrospective review of its
regulations to promote improvement and innovation, in response to the
Executive order.
DATES: This rule is effective August 3, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lori J. Churchyard, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903
New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,
240-402-7911.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Purpose and Coverage of the Final Rule
The final rule removes the codified GST \1\ regulations for
biological products which will update outdated requirements and
accommodate new and evolving technology and testing capabilities
without diminishing public health protections. FDA is finalizing
[[Page 37972]]
this action because the existing codified GST regulations are
duplicative of requirements that are also specified in BLAs, or are no
longer necessary or appropriate to help ensure the safety, purity, and
potency of licensed biological products. FDA is taking this action as
part of its retrospective review of its regulations to promote
improvement and innovation, in response to Executive Order (E.O.) 13563
of January 18, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For purposes of this final rule, the terms ``general safety
test'' or ``GST'' refer to the requirements found under Title 21 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), subchapter F, parts 600
through 680 (21 CFR parts 600 through 680), specifically 21 CFR
610.11, 610.11a, and 680.3(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of the Major Provisions of the Final Rule
The final rule removes the requirements contained in Sec. Sec.
610.11, 610.11a, and 680.3(b) (21 CFR 610.11, 610.11a, and 680.3(b))
from the regulations. Section 610.11 requires a GST for the detection
of extraneous toxic contaminants in certain biological products
intended for administration to humans. Section 610.11a concerns the GST
requirements for inactivated influenza vaccine. Section 680.3(b)
concerns GST requirements for allergenic products. Removal of these
regulations, however, would not remove GST requirements specified in
individual BLAs. A biological product manufacturer would continue to be
required to follow the GST requirements specified in its BLA unless the
manufacturer advised FDA of its elimination or modification of the test
by a submission filed in accordance with Sec. 601.12 (21 CFR 601.12).
FDA would review proposed changes to a manufacturer's approved
biologics license on a case-by-case basis so that FDA can ensure that
any such action is appropriate.
Costs and Benefits
FDA is finalizing this action because the existing codified GST
regulations are duplicative of requirements that are also specified in
BLAs, or are no longer necessary or appropriate to help ensure the
safety, purity, and potency of licensed biological products. Because
this final rule would impose no additional regulatory burdens, this
rule is not anticipated to result in any compliance costs and the
economic impact is expected to be minimal.
I. Background
As part of FDA's retrospective review of its regulations to promote
improvement and innovation under Executive Order 13563, FDA is removing
the codified GST requirements as specified in this rule. We believe
this action is appropriate because in many instances, the GST
regulations duplicate requirements that are also specified in the BLA
requirements for biological products intended for human use under
section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) (42 U.S.C. 262),
or they are outmoded or otherwise unnecessary to help ensure the
continued safety, purity, and potency of biological products. FDA
published the proposed rule ``Revocation of General Safety Test
Regulations That Are Duplicative of Requirements in Biological License
Applications'' in the Federal Register of August 22, 2014 (79 FR
49727). FDA corrected the title of that proposed rule to ``Revocation
of General Safety Test Regulations That Are Duplicative of Requirements
in Biologics License Applications'' in the Federal Register of
September 10, 2014 (79 FR 53670).
For a number of years, FDA has not codified specific test methods
as standards for licensed biological products, in part because
codifying specific test methods as standards can diminish the ability
of the Agency and industry to respond to technological developments.
Instead the Agency has required manufacturers to provide a full
description of manufacturing methods, including test methods, in
manufacturers' BLAs (Sec. 601.2(a) (21 CFR 601.2(a))). Since FDA
issued the March 2003 final rule ``Revision to the General Safety
Requirements for Biological Products'' in the Federal Register of March
4, 2003 (68 FR 10157), it has become increasingly clear that the
codified GST regulations are too restrictive for certain biological
products because alternatives may be available which provide the same
or greater level of assurance of safety as the GST. Thus, the Agency
believes that the GST regulations may not always reflect the scientific
community's assessment of the best current testing procedures, although
in certain circumstances the GST may still be appropriate. The Agency
believes that a more efficient way of prescribing testing requirements
for particular products would be to allow such requirements to be
specified in the BLA, which will enhance flexibility to make
appropriate changes to testing methods.
II. Summary of the Final Rule
FDA is adopting as final, without material change, the proposed
revocation of general safety test requirements that are duplicative of
requirements in BLAs.
The final rule is removing Sec. Sec. 610.11, 610.11a, and
680.3(b), the regulations that require that manufacturers of biological
products perform a specified test for general safety of biological
products. FDA is taking this action because the existing codified GST
regulations are duplicative, outmoded, or are otherwise unnecessary to
help ensure the continued safety, purity, and potency of licensed
biological products.
As set forth in an approved BLA or BLA supplement, for
products that present specific safety concerns, manufacturers will be
required to perform appropriate safety test(s) to address those
concerns. For example, the BLA may require testing for a specific
toxicity.
The appropriate tests will be specified in the
manufacturer's BLA or BLA supplement rather than codified as
regulations.
Elimination of the codified GST regulations would
encourage the implementation of the principles of the ``3Rs,'' to
reduce, refine, and replace animal use in testing. This addresses the
need to minimize the use of animals in such testing and promotes more
humane, appropriate and specific test methods for assuring the safety
of biological products.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of
Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) Authorization Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C.
285l-3). Additional information on the Federal Government's
implementation of the principles of the 3Rs may be found at the
ICCVAM Web site at https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/iccvam.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The finalization of this rule does not automatically
revise a manufacturer's BLA or BLA supplement.
Manufacturers would continue to be required to perform the
GST unless the manufacturer's BLA were revised through a supplement to
eliminate or modify the test in accordance with Sec. 601.12.
The requirements for a licensed biological product
manufacturer to report changes in its product, product labeling,
production process, quality controls, equipment, facilities or
responsible personnel, as established in its approved BLA, are detailed
in Sec. 601.12.
Under Sec. 601.12, manufacturers must report each change
to the Agency in one of several different types of submissions. The
applicable submission category depends on the potential for the
change(s) at issue to have an adverse effect on the identity, strength,
quality, purity, or potency of the particular biological product as it
may relate to the safety or effectiveness of the product.
FDA anticipates that changes involving the discontinuance
of the GST or the reliance on a test other than the GST would have a
moderate potential to have an adverse effect on the identity, strength,
quality, purity, or potency of the product as it may relate to the
safety
[[Page 37973]]
or effectiveness of the product. Such changes must be identified in a
supplement submitted under Sec. 601.12(c) (changes requiring
supplement submission at least 30 days prior to distribution of the
product made using the change).
III. Legal Authority
FDA is issuing this regulation under the biological products and
communicable disease provisions of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262 and 264),
and the provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the
FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 321 et seq.) applicable to drugs. Under these
provisions of the PHS Act and the FD&C Act, we have the authority to
issue and enforce regulations designed to ensure, among other things,
that biological products are safe, pure, and potent and manufactured in
accordance with current Good Manufacturing Practice, and to prevent the
introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable disease.
IV. Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA Response
The Agency received two letters of comments on the proposed rule.
Comments were received from a trade association, and an animal welfare
organization.
To make it easier to identify the comments and our responses, the
word ``Comment'' and a comment number appear in parentheses before each
comment's description, and the word ``Response'' in parentheses
precedes each response. We have also numbered each comment to help
distinguish between different comments. The number assigned to each
comment is purely for organizational purposes and does not signify the
comment's value or importance or the order in which it was received.
Certain comments were grouped together because the subject matter of
the comments was similar.
A. General Comments
(Comment 1) Both letters of comments support the proposed rule.
(Response) FDA acknowledges and appreciates that the comments we
received agree with the need for this rulemaking. As stated previously,
the rule removes the requirements contained in Sec. Sec. 610.11,
610.11a, and 680.3(b) from the regulations because the existing
codified GST regulations are duplicative of requirements that are also
specified in BLAs, or are no longer necessary or appropriate to help
ensure the safety, purity, and potency of licensed biological products.
Removal of these regulations provides a more efficient way of
prescribing testing requirements and enhances flexibility to make
appropriate changes to testing methods.
B. Comments on Specific Topics
(Comment 2) One comment requests that FDA encourage manufacturers
who have a GST described in their BLAs for their licensed products to
submit supplements to their BLAs to eliminate or modify the test and
that FDA take additional steps to ensure that the final rule will have
the intended effect of eliminating the use of animals in safety
testing.
(Response) As stated in the preamble of the proposed rule (79 FR
49727 at 49729), we anticipate that the elimination of the codified GST
regulations will encourage the implementation of the principles of the
``3Rs,'' to reduce, refine, and replace animal use in testing.
Moreover, on our own initiative, as discussed elsewhere in this
document, we have determined that the effective date of the final rule
will be 30 days after the date of its publication in the Federal
Register to give manufacturers the flexibility to submit supplements to
their BLAs for their licensed products as soon as possible.
(Comment 3) One comment requests that we add language to Sec.
601.2 or other relevant biologics regulation to clarify our intent to
encourage the implementation of the principles of the 3Rs.
(Response) FDA declines to adopt this recommended change because
the request to add language to Sec. 601.2 or other relevant biologics
regulations is outside the scope of this rulemaking.
(Comment 4) One comment requests that FDA establish user fees with
respect to the continued use of the GST after the effective date of
this final rule, or that FDA establish other clear policies that will
provide economic incentives to discontinue the use of the GST. Further,
the comment refers to Executive Order 13563, which encourages Federal
Agencies to ``. . . assess available alternatives to direct regulation,
including providing economic incentives to encourage the desired
behavior, such as user fees . . . .''
(Response) We decline to adopt these suggested changes because they
are beyond the scope of this rule. The proposed rule did not address
user fees or economic incentives. This rule allows, but does not
require, current BLA holders to submit to FDA supplements to their BLAs
to eliminate or modify the GST.
(Comment 5) One comment states that a manufacturer who submits a
supplement to eliminate or modify a GST in its BLA will not be able to
stop conducting the GST until FDA determines that the manufacturer has
appropriately reported this change.
(Response) We disagree in part. As stated in the preamble to the
proposed rule (79 FR 49727 at 49730), a manufacturer who desires to
discontinue the GST in its approved BLA or utilize an alternative
method other than the GST approved in its BLA must submit a BLA
supplement reporting the change in accordance with Sec. 601.12. Should
a manufacturer wish to discontinue the GST described in the approved
BLA, or to utilize an alternative method other than the GST approved in
its BLA, FDA anticipates that the change would have a moderate
potential to have an adverse effect on the identity, strength, quality,
purity, or potency of the product as it may relate to the safety or
effectiveness of the product. Accordingly, a manufacturer who desires
to make such a change must submit a BLA supplement reporting the change
in accordance with Sec. 601.12(c). Within 30 days of the date FDA
receives the submission, FDA will determine if the change has been
reported in the proper category and if any of the required information
is missing, and will inform the applicant accordingly. If FDA does not
so notify the applicant, distribution of the product made using the
change may begin not less than 30 days after receipt of the supplement
by FDA.
V. Conforming Amendments
As part of this final rule, we need to make conforming changes when
the removed provisions are referenced elsewhere in the CFR. The final
rule removes ``Sec. 610.11'' from Sec. 601.2(c)(1) and 21 CFR 601.22.
VI. Effective Date
We are making this rule effective 30 days after the date of
publication in the Federal Register. We are making this change in the
interest of reducing unnecessary regulatory burden to give
manufacturers the flexibility to submit supplements right away, should
they wish to do so.
VII. Economic 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
[[Page 37974]]
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 as defined 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 this final rule generally increases
flexibility for safety testing and would result in the reduction of
certain regulatory burdens and does not add any new regulatory
responsibilities, 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 $144 million, using the most current (2014) 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.
This final rule amends the biologics regulations by removing the
GST requirements for biological products found in Sec. Sec. 610.11,
610.11a and 680.3(b). FDA is finalizing this action because the current
codified GST regulations are duplicative of requirements that are also
specified in biologics licenses, or are no longer necessary or
appropriate to help ensure the safety, purity, and potency of licensed
biological products. The removal of the GST regulations for biological
products, however, would not remove GST requirements specified in
individual BLAs. All manufacturers that currently conduct a GST are
already required, as part of the standards specified in their BLAs, to
perform the GST and would thus continue to be required to perform the
GST unless the BLA were revised to eliminate or modify the test through
a supplement in accordance with Sec. 601.12. Because this rule would
impose no additional regulatory burdens, this regulation is not
anticipated to result in any compliance costs and the economic impact
is expected to be minimal.
VIII. The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule refers to previously approved collections of
information that are subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3501-3520). The collections of information in Sec. 601.12 have been
approved under OMB control number 0910-0338. Therefore, FDA tentatively
concludes that the requirements in this document are not subject to
review by OMB because they do not constitute a ``new collection of
information'' under the PRA.
IX. Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.30(h) 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.
X. Federalism
FDA has analyzed this final rule in accordance with the principles
set forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that the rule
does not contain policies that would have substantial direct effects on
the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. Accordingly, the Agency has concluded
that the rule does not contain policies that have federalism
implications as defined in the Executive order and, consequently, a
federalism summary impact statement is not required.
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 601
Administrative practice and procedure, Biologics, Confidential
business information.
21 CFR Part 610
Biologics, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 680
Biologics, Blood, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the
Public Health Service Act, and under authority delegated to the
Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR parts 601, 610, and 680 are
amended as follows:
PART 601--LICENSING
0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 601 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1451-1561; 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,
355, 356b, 360, 360c-360f, 360h-360j, 371, 374, 379e, 381; 42 U.S.C.
216, 241, 262, 263, 264; sec 122, Pub. L. 105-115, 111 Stat. 2322
(21 U.S.C. 355 note).
Sec. 601.2 [Amended]
0
2. Section 601.2 is amended in paragraph (c)(1) by removing
``610.11,''.
Sec. 601.22 [Amended]
0
3. Section 601.22 is amended in the third sentence by removing
``610.11,''.
PART 610--GENERAL BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS STANDARDS
0
4. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 610 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360, 360c,
360d, 360h, 360i, 371, 372, 374, 381; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a,
264.
Sec. 610.11 [Removed and Reserved]
0
5. Remove and reserve Sec. 610.11.
Sec. 610.11a [Removed and Reserved]
0
6. Remove and reserve Sec. 610.11a.
PART 680--ADDITIONAL STANDARDS FOR MISCELLANEOUS PRODUCTS
0
7. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 680 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360, 371; 42
U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a, 264.
Sec. 680.3 [Amended]
0
8. In Sec. 680.3, remove and reserve paragraph (b).
Dated: June 26, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-16366 Filed 7-1-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P