Privacy Act Regulations; Correction, 52647 [C1-2017-24300]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 218 / Tuesday, November 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
(6) You may view this service information
that is incorporated by reference at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call
202–741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on October
30, 2017.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Director, System Oversight Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2017–24166 Filed 11–13–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
I. Background
18 CFR Part 1301
Privacy Act Regulations; Correction
Correction
In rule document 2017–24300,
appearing on pages 51757–51758 in the
issue of Wednesday, November 8, 2017,
make the following correction:
■ On page 51757 in the second column,
remove Amendatory instruction 2.
Dates: This correction is effective on
November 8, 2017.
[FR Doc. C1–2017–24300 Filed 11–9–17; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 1301–00–D
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 866
[Docket No. FDA–2017–N–5881]
Medical Devices; Immunology and
Microbiology Devices; Classification of
the Automated Indirect
Immunofluorescence Microscope and
Software-Assisted System
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Final order.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or we) is
classifying the automated indirect
immunofluorescence microscope and
software-assisted system into class II
(special controls). The special controls
that apply to the device type are
identified in this order and will be part
of the codified language for the
automated indirect immunofluorescence
microscope and software-assisted
system’s classification. We are taking
this action because we have determined
that classifying the device into class II
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:31 Nov 13, 2017
(special controls) will provide a
reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness of the device. We believe
this action will also enhance patients’
access to beneficial innovative devices,
in part by reducing regulatory burdens.
DATES: This order is effective November
14, 2017. The classification was
applicable on April 9, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steven Tjoe, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 4550, Silver Spring,
MD 20993–0002, 301–796–5866,
steven.tjoe@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Jkt 244001
Upon request, FDA has classified the
automated indirect immunofluorescence
microscope and software-assisted
system as class II (special controls),
which we have determined will provide
a reasonable assurance of safety and
effectiveness. In addition, we believe
this action will enhance patients’ access
to beneficial innovation, in part by
reducing regulatory burdens by placing
the device into a lower device class than
the automatic class III assignment.
The automatic assignment of class III
occurs by operation of law and without
any action by FDA, regardless of the
level of risk posed by the new device.
Any device that was not in commercial
distribution before May 28, 1976, is
automatically classified as, and remains
within, class III and requires premarket
approval unless and until FDA takes an
action to classify or reclassify the device
(see 21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)). We refer to
these devices as ‘‘postamendments
devices’’ because they were not in
commercial distribution prior to the
date of enactment of the Medical Device
Amendments of 1976, which amended
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (the FD&C Act).
FDA may take a variety of actions in
appropriate circumstances to classify or
reclassify a device into class I or II. We
may issue an order finding a new device
to be substantially equivalent under
section 513(i) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360c(i)) to a predicate device that
does not require premarket approval.
We determine whether a new device is
substantially equivalent to a predicate
by means of the procedures for
premarket notification under section
510(k) of the FD&C Act and part 807 (21
U.S.C. 360(k) and 21 CFR part 807,
respectively).
FDA may also classify a device
through ‘‘De Novo’’ classification, a
common name for the process
authorized under section 513(f)(2) of the
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52647
FD&C Act. Section 207 of the Food and
Drug Administration Modernization Act
of 1997 established the first procedure
for De Novo classification (Pub. L. 105–
115). Section 607 of the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation
Act modified the De Novo application
process by adding a second procedure
(Pub. L. 112–144). A device sponsor
may utilize either procedure for De
Novo classification.
Under the first procedure, the person
submits a 510(k) for a device that has
not previously been classified. After
receiving an order from FDA classifying
the device into class III under section
513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, the person
then requests a classification under
section 513(f)(2).
Under the second procedure, rather
than first submitting a 510(k) and then
a request for classification, if the person
determines that there is no legally
marketed device upon which to base a
determination of substantial
equivalence, that person requests a
classification under section 513(f)(2) of
the FD&C Act.
Under either procedure for De Novo
classification, FDA is required to
classify the device by written order
within 120 days. The classification will
be according to the criteria under
section 513(a)(1) of the FD&C Act.
Although the device was automatically
placed within class III, the De Novo
classification is considered to be the
initial classification of the device.
We believe this De Novo classification
will enhance patients’ access to
beneficial innovation, in part by
reducing regulatory burdens. When FDA
classifies a device into class I or II via
the De Novo process, the device can
serve as a predicate for future devices of
that type, including for 510(k)s (see 21
U.S.C. 360c(f)(2)(B)(i)). As a result, other
device sponsors do not have to submit
a De Novo request or premarket
approval application (PMA) in order to
market a substantially equivalent device
(see 21 U.S.C. 360c(i), defining
‘‘substantial equivalence’’). Instead,
sponsors can use the less-burdensome
510(k) process, when necessary, to
market their device.
II. De Novo Classification
For this device, FDA issued an order
on November 14, 2014, finding the
NOVA View® Automated Fluorescence
Microscope not substantially equivalent
to a predicate not subject to PMA. Thus,
the device remained in class III in
accordance with section 513(f)(1) of the
FD&C Act when we issued the order.
On December 11, 2014, Inova
Diagnostics, Inc. submitted a request for
De Novo classification of the NOVA
E:\FR\FM\14NOR1.SGM
14NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 218 (Tuesday, November 14, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 52647]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: C1-2017-24300]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
18 CFR Part 1301
Privacy Act Regulations; Correction
Correction
In rule document 2017-24300, appearing on pages 51757-51758 in the
issue of Wednesday, November 8, 2017, make the following correction:
0
On page 51757 in the second column, remove Amendatory instruction 2.
Dates: This correction is effective on November 8, 2017.
[FR Doc. C1-2017-24300 Filed 11-9-17; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 1301-00-D