Removal of Review and Reclassification Procedures for Biological Products Licensed Prior to July 1, 1972, 38145-38147 [2015-16367]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
BILLING CODE 1505–01–C
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 601
[Docket No. FDA–2015–N–2103]
Removal of Review and
Reclassification Procedures for
Biological Products Licensed Prior to
July 1, 1972
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) proposes to
remove two regulations that prescribe
procedures for FDA’s review and
classification of biological products
licensed before July 1, 1972. FDA is
taking this action because the two
regulations are obsolete and no longer
necessary in light of other statutory and
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
00:11 Jul 02, 2015
Jkt 235001
regulatory authorities established since
1972, which allow FDA to evaluate and
monitor the safety and effectiveness of
all biological products. In addition,
other statutory and regulatory
authorities authorize FDA to revoke a
license for products because they are
not safe and effective, or are
misbranded. FDA is taking this action as
part of its retrospective review of its
regulations to promote improvement
and innovation.
DATES: Submit either written or
electronic comments on the proposed
rule by September 30, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions in the
following ways:
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for
paper submissions): Division of Dockets
PO 00000
Frm 00127
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket No. FDA–
2015–N–2103 for this rulemaking. All
comments received may be posted
without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
additional information on submitting
comments, see the ‘‘Comments’’ heading
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number(s), found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the
‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts
and/or go to the Division of Dockets
Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Paul
E. Levine, Jr., Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
EP02JY15.094
[FR Doc. C1–2015–12778 Filed 7–1–15; 08:45 am]
38145
38146
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Silver Spring, MD 20993–0002, 240–
402–7911.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Purpose of the Proposed Rule
FDA proposes to remove two
regulations that prescribe procedures for
FDA’s review and classification of
biological products licensed before July
1, 1972, because the two regulations are
obsolete and no longer necessary in
light of other statutory and regulatory
authorities established since 1972.
These other statutory and regulatory
authorities allow FDA to evaluate and
monitor the safety and effectiveness of
all biological products and authorize
FDA to revoke a license for products
because they are not safe and effective,
or are misbranded.
Statement of Legal Authority
FDA is taking this action under the
biological products provisions of the
Public Health Service Act (the PHS Act),
and the drugs and general
administrative provisions of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the
FD&C Act).
Summary of the Major Provisions of the
Proposed Rule
The proposed rule removes §§ 601.25
and 601.26 (21 CFR 601.25 and 601.26),
which prescribe procedures for FDA’s
review and classification of biological
products licensed before July 1, 1972.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Costs and Benefits
Because this proposed rule would not
impose any additional regulatory
burdens, this regulation is not
anticipated to result in any compliance
costs and the economic impact is
expected to be minimal.
I. Background
In the Federal Register of March 15,
1972 (37 FR 5404), the Director of the
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
announced that the Division of
Biologics Standards, NIH would review
the effectiveness of all licensed
biologicals. In the Federal Register of
June 29, 1972 (37 FR 12865), FDA
announced the transfer of regulatory
authority of biological products from the
Division of Biologics Standards, NIH to
FDA. After obtaining regulatory
authority of biological products, the
Commissioner of FDA proposed
procedures for reviewing the safety,
effectiveness, and labeling of all
biological products licensed at the time
of the transfer, including biological
products licensed before July 1, 1972
(37 FR 16679, August 18, 1972). The
procedures for review of biological
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
products licensed before July 1, 1972,
were codified in 21 CFR 273.245 (38 FR
4319 at 4321, February 13, 1973) and
later redesignated to § 601.25 (38 FR
32048, November 20, 1973). The
procedures for review of biological
products licensed before July 1, 1972,
were supplemented by procedures
codified in § 601.26 (47 FR 44062,
October 5, 1982).
II. Current Methods for Ensuring the
Safety and Effectiveness of Biological
Products
Since providing the procedures under
§§ 601.25 and 601.26, FDA established
many new regulations to assess and
ensure the safety and efficacy of
biological products. FDA established the
Current Good Manufacturing Practice
(cGMP) regulations, which contains the
minimum current good manufacturing
practice for preparation of drug
products, including biological products.
The cGMP regulations help FDA ensure
that such products meet the
requirements for product safety,
effectiveness, and labeling. FDA also
ensures the safety and effectiveness of
biological products through application
of other regulations, such as the
reporting of biological product
deviations by licensed manufacturers
(see 21 CFR 600.14), postmarketing
reporting of adverse experiences (21
CFR 600.80), and labeling regulations
(for example, 21 CFR part 201).
Biological products that do not meet the
requirements under these regulations
are subject to license revocation under
§ 601.5, which allows FDA to revoke
any biologics license for a product that
fails to meet applicable standards and
comply with regulations designed to
ensure the safety, purity, and potency of
the licensed product, and that the
product is not misbranded.
In addition, FDA continues to ensure
the safety and effectiveness of licensed
biological products through the
development and application of
additional standards and mechanisms.
These mechanisms assist FDA in
evaluating and monitoring the safety
and effectiveness of biological products.
III. Description of the Proposed Rule
The proposed rule removes §§ 601.25
and 601.26 of the regulations, which
prescribe procedures for FDA’s review
and classification of biological products
licensed before July 1, 1972. FDA is
taking this action because these
regulations are obsolete and no longer
necessary in light of other statutory and
regulatory authorities established since
1972, which allows FDA to evaluate and
monitor the safety and effectiveness of
all biological products.
PO 00000
Frm 00128
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
IV. Legal Authority
FDA is issuing this regulation under
the biological products provisions of the
PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262 and 264) and
the drugs and general administrative
provisions of the FD&C Act (sections
201, 301, 501, 502, 503, 505, 510, 701,
and 704) (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 355, 360, 371, and 374). Under
these provisions of the PHS Act and the
FD&C Act, we have the authority to
issue and enforce regulations designed
to ensure that biological products are
safe, pure, and potent; and to prevent
the introduction, transmission, and
spread of communicable disease.
V. Analysis of Impacts
FDA has examined the impacts of the
proposed 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 proposed rule is not a
significant regulatory action as defined
by 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 rule proposes to
remove regulations that are obsolete and
no longer necessary in light of other
current statutory and regulatory
authorities, the Agency proposes to
certify 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 proposed rule to result in any 1year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 127 / Thursday, July 2, 2015 / Proposed Rules
38147
VI. 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 adverse
effect on the human environment.
Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor an environmental
impact statement is required.
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).
VII. Federalism
FDA has analyzed this proposed rule
in accordance with the principles set
forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA
has determined that the proposed rule,
if finalized, would 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 tentatively
concludes that the proposed 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.
Dated: June 26, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
requirements for submitting comments,
and for information on how to request
a public hearing or view or obtain
copies of the petition and supporting
materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karen A. Thornton, Regulations and
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street
NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005;
phone 202–453–1039, ext. 175.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2015–16367 Filed 7–1–15; 8:45 am]
Background on Viticultural Areas
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
FDA tentatively concludes that this
proposed rule contains no collection of
information. Therefore, clearance by
OMB under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 is not required.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
IX. Comments
Interested persons may submit either
electronic comments regarding this
document to https://www.regulations.gov
or written comments to the Division of
Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It
is only necessary to send one set of
comments. Identify comments with the
docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Received
comments may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and
will be posted to the docket at https://
www.regulations.gov.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 601
Administrative practice and
procedure, Biologics, Confidential
business information.
Therefore, under the FD&C Act, the
PHS Act, and under authority delegated
to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs,
it is proposed that 21 CFR part 601 be
amended as follows:
PART 601—LICENSING
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–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:02 Jul 01, 2015
Jkt 235001
§ 601.25
■
§ 601.26
■
[Removed]
2. Remove § 601.25.
[Removed]
3. Remove § 601.26.
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
27 CFR Part 9
[Docket No. TTB–2015–0010; Notice No.
154]
RIN 1513–AC19
Proposed Establishment of the
Champlain Valley of New York
Viticultural Area
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, Treasury.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax
and Trade Bureau (TTB) proposes to
establish the ‘‘Champlain Valley of New
York’’ viticultural area in Clinton and
Essex Counties, New York. The
proposed viticultural area does not lie
within or contain any established
viticultural area. TTB designates
viticultural areas to allow vintners to
better describe the origin of their wines
and to allow consumers to better
identify wines they may purchase. TTB
invites comments on this proposed
addition to its regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received by
August 31, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Please send your comments
on this notice to one of the following
addresses:
• Internet: https://www.regulations.gov
(via the online comment form for this
notice as posted within Docket No.
TTB–2015–0010 at ‘‘Regulations.gov,’’
the Federal e-rulemaking portal);
• U.S. Mail: Director, Regulations and
Rulings Division, Alcohol and Tobacco
Tax and Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street
NW., Box 12, Washington, DC 20005; or
• Hand delivery/courier in lieu of
mail: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and
Trade Bureau, 1310 G Street NW., Suite
400, Washington, DC 20005.
See the Public Participation section of
this notice for specific instructions and
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00129
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
TTB Authority
Section 105(e) of the Federal Alcohol
Administration Act (FAA Act), 27
U.S.C. 205(e), authorizes the Secretary
of the Treasury to prescribe regulations
for the labeling of wine, distilled spirits,
and malt beverages. The FAA Act
provides that these regulations should,
among other things, prohibit consumer
deception and the use of misleading
statements on labels and ensure that
labels provide the consumer with
adequate information as to the identity
and quality of the product. The Alcohol
and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
(TTB) administers the FAA Act
pursuant to section 1111(d) of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002,
codified at 6 U.S.C. 531(d). The
Secretary has delegated various
authorities through Treasury
Department Order 120–01, dated
December 10, 2013, to the TTB
Administrator to perform the functions
and duties in the administration and
enforcement of this law.
Part 4 of the TTB regulations (27 CFR
part 4) authorizes TTB to establish
definitive viticultural areas and regulate
the use of their names as appellations of
origin on wine labels and in wine
advertisements. Part 9 of the TTB
regulations (27 CFR part 9) sets forth the
standards for the preparation and
submission to TTB of petitions for the
establishment or modification of
American viticultural areas (AVAs) and
lists the approved American viticultural
areas.
Definition
Section 4.25(e)(1)(i) of the TTB
regulations (27 CFR 4.25(e)(1)(i)) defines
a viticultural area for American wine as
a delimited grape-growing region having
distinguishing features, as described in
part 9 of the regulations, and a name
and a delineated boundary, as
established in part 9 of the regulations.
These designations allow vintners and
consumers to attribute a given quality,
reputation, or other characteristic of a
wine made from grapes grown in an area
to the wine’s geographic origin. The
E:\FR\FM\02JYP1.SGM
02JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 127 (Thursday, July 2, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 38145-38147]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-16367]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 601
[Docket No. FDA-2015-N-2103]
Removal of Review and Reclassification Procedures for Biological
Products Licensed Prior to July 1, 1972
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposes to remove two
regulations that prescribe procedures for FDA's review and
classification of biological products licensed before July 1, 1972. FDA
is taking this action because the two regulations are obsolete and no
longer necessary in light of other statutory and regulatory authorities
established since 1972, which allow FDA to evaluate and monitor the
safety and effectiveness of all biological products. In addition, other
statutory and regulatory authorities authorize FDA to revoke a license
for products because they are not safe and effective, or are
misbranded. FDA is taking this action as part of its retrospective
review of its regulations to promote improvement and innovation.
DATES: Submit either written or electronic comments on the proposed
rule by September 30, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written submissions in the following ways:
Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper submissions):
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2015-N-2103 for this rulemaking. All comments received may be
posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For additional information on submitting
comments, see the ``Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number(s), found in brackets in the heading of this document,
into the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the
Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul E. Levine, Jr., Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903
New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301,
[[Page 38146]]
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 240-402-7911.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
Purpose of the Proposed Rule
FDA proposes to remove two regulations that prescribe procedures
for FDA's review and classification of biological products licensed
before July 1, 1972, because the two regulations are obsolete and no
longer necessary in light of other statutory and regulatory authorities
established since 1972. These other statutory and regulatory
authorities allow FDA to evaluate and monitor the safety and
effectiveness of all biological products and authorize FDA to revoke a
license for products because they are not safe and effective, or are
misbranded.
Statement of Legal Authority
FDA is taking this action under the biological products provisions
of the Public Health Service Act (the PHS Act), and the drugs and
general administrative provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act).
Summary of the Major Provisions of the Proposed Rule
The proposed rule removes Sec. Sec. 601.25 and 601.26 (21 CFR
601.25 and 601.26), which prescribe procedures for FDA's review and
classification of biological products licensed before July 1, 1972.
Costs and Benefits
Because this proposed rule would not impose any additional
regulatory burdens, this regulation is not anticipated to result in any
compliance costs and the economic impact is expected to be minimal.
I. Background
In the Federal Register of March 15, 1972 (37 FR 5404), the
Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced that the
Division of Biologics Standards, NIH would review the effectiveness of
all licensed biologicals. In the Federal Register of June 29, 1972 (37
FR 12865), FDA announced the transfer of regulatory authority of
biological products from the Division of Biologics Standards, NIH to
FDA. After obtaining regulatory authority of biological products, the
Commissioner of FDA proposed procedures for reviewing the safety,
effectiveness, and labeling of all biological products licensed at the
time of the transfer, including biological products licensed before
July 1, 1972 (37 FR 16679, August 18, 1972). The procedures for review
of biological products licensed before July 1, 1972, were codified in
21 CFR 273.245 (38 FR 4319 at 4321, February 13, 1973) and later
redesignated to Sec. 601.25 (38 FR 32048, November 20, 1973). The
procedures for review of biological products licensed before July 1,
1972, were supplemented by procedures codified in Sec. 601.26 (47 FR
44062, October 5, 1982).
II. Current Methods for Ensuring the Safety and Effectiveness of
Biological Products
Since providing the procedures under Sec. Sec. 601.25 and 601.26,
FDA established many new regulations to assess and ensure the safety
and efficacy of biological products. FDA established the Current Good
Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) regulations, which contains the minimum
current good manufacturing practice for preparation of drug products,
including biological products. The cGMP regulations help FDA ensure
that such products meet the requirements for product safety,
effectiveness, and labeling. FDA also ensures the safety and
effectiveness of biological products through application of other
regulations, such as the reporting of biological product deviations by
licensed manufacturers (see 21 CFR 600.14), postmarketing reporting of
adverse experiences (21 CFR 600.80), and labeling regulations (for
example, 21 CFR part 201). Biological products that do not meet the
requirements under these regulations are subject to license revocation
under Sec. 601.5, which allows FDA to revoke any biologics license for
a product that fails to meet applicable standards and comply with
regulations designed to ensure the safety, purity, and potency of the
licensed product, and that the product is not misbranded.
In addition, FDA continues to ensure the safety and effectiveness
of licensed biological products through the development and application
of additional standards and mechanisms. These mechanisms assist FDA in
evaluating and monitoring the safety and effectiveness of biological
products.
III. Description of the Proposed Rule
The proposed rule removes Sec. Sec. 601.25 and 601.26 of the
regulations, which prescribe procedures for FDA's review and
classification of biological products licensed before July 1, 1972. FDA
is taking this action because these regulations are obsolete and no
longer necessary in light of other statutory and regulatory authorities
established since 1972, which allows FDA to evaluate and monitor the
safety and effectiveness of all biological products.
IV. Legal Authority
FDA is issuing this regulation under the biological products
provisions of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 262 and 264) and the drugs and
general administrative provisions of the FD&C Act (sections 201, 301,
501, 502, 503, 505, 510, 701, and 704) (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 355, 360, 371, and 374). Under these provisions of the PHS Act and
the FD&C Act, we have the authority to issue and enforce regulations
designed to ensure that biological products are safe, pure, and potent;
and to prevent the introduction, transmission, and spread of
communicable disease.
V. Analysis of Impacts
FDA has examined the impacts of the proposed 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 proposed rule is not a
significant regulatory action as defined by 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 rule proposes to remove regulations that
are obsolete and no longer necessary in light of other current
statutory and regulatory authorities, the Agency proposes to certify
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
proposed rule to result in any 1-year expenditure that would meet or
exceed this amount.
[[Page 38147]]
VI. 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
adverse effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.
VII. Federalism
FDA has analyzed this proposed rule in accordance with the
principles set forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that
the proposed rule, if finalized, would 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 tentatively concludes that the proposed 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.
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
FDA tentatively concludes that this proposed rule contains no
collection of information. Therefore, clearance by OMB under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
IX. Comments
Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to https://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at https://www.regulations.gov.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 601
Administrative practice and procedure, Biologics, Confidential
business information.
Therefore, under the FD&C Act, the PHS Act, and under authority
delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, it is proposed that 21
CFR part 601 be 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. 601.25 [Removed]
0
2. Remove Sec. 601.25.
Sec. 601.26 [Removed]
0
3. Remove Sec. 601.26.
Dated: June 26, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-16367 Filed 7-1-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P