Removal of Certain Time of Inspection and Duties of Inspector Regulations for Biological Products, 3586-3589 [2018-01468]
Download as PDF
3586
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 18 / Friday, January 26, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
contemporaneous request for OMB
review of the proposed HIRE Vets
Medallion Program information
collections, in accordance with 44
U.S.C. 3507(d). On October 25, 2017,
OMB issued a notice of action
instructing the Department of Labor
(DOL) to resubmit the information
collections after taking public comments
on the NPRM into consideration. See
OMB ICR Reference Number 201707–
1293–001. VETS published the HIRE
Vets Medallion Program Final Rule in
the Federal Register on November 13,
2017 (82 FR 52186). On the same day,
DOL submitted the ICR that OMB
requested, and OMB approved the ICR
on January 9, 2018. See OMB ICR
Reference Number 201710–1293–002.
For additional substantive information
about this ICR, see the related
documents published in the Federal
Register on August 18, 2017 (82 FR
39371), and November 13, 2017 (82 FR
52186).
The information collection and its
annual burden on the public may be
summarized as follows:
Agency: DOL–VETS.
Title of Collection: Honoring
Investments in Recruiting and
Employing (HIRE) American Military
Veterans (HIRE Vets) Medallion
Program.
OMB Control Number: 1293–0015.
Affected Public: Private Sector—
businesses or other for-profits.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 34,184.
Total Estimated Annual Time Burden:
58,556 hours.
Total Estimated Annual Other Costs
Burden: $1,045,486.
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D).
OMB Control Number: 1293–0015.
Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c).
Dated: January 18, 2018.
J.S. Shellenberger,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Veterans’
Employment and Training Service.
[FR Doc. 2018–01262 Filed 1–25–18; 8:45 am]
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 4510–79–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 25, 2018
Jkt 244001
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 600
[Docket No. FDA–2017–N–7007]
RIN 0910–AH49
Removal of Certain Time of Inspection
and Duties of Inspector Regulations
for Biological Products
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Direct final rule.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) is
amending the general biologics
regulations relating to time of inspection
requirements and also removing duties
of inspector requirements. FDA is taking
this action to remove outdated
requirements and accommodate new
approaches, such as a risk-based
inspection frequency for drug
establishments, thereby providing
flexibility without diminishing public
health protections. This action is part of
FDA’s implementation of Executive
Orders (E.O.s) 13771 and 13777. Under
these E.O.s, FDA is comprehensively
reviewing existing regulations to
identify opportunities for repeal,
replacement, or modification that will
result in meaningful burden reduction
while allowing the Agency to achieve
our public health mission and fulfill
statutory obligations. The Agency is
issuing these amendments directly as a
final rule because we believe they are
noncontroversial and FDA anticipates
no significant adverse comments.
DATES: This rule is effective June 11,
2018. Submit either electronic or
written comments on the direct final
rule or its companion proposed rule by
April 11, 2018. If FDA receives no
significant adverse comments within the
specified comment period, the Agency
intends to publish a document
confirming the effective date of the final
rule in the Federal Register within 30
days after the comment period on this
direct final rule ends. If timely
significant adverse comments are
received, the Agency will publish a
document in the Federal Register
withdrawing this direct final rule within
30 days after the comment period on
this direct final rule ends.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be
considered. Electronic comments must
be submitted on or before April 11,
2018. The https://www.regulations.gov
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
electronic filing system will accept
comments until midnight Eastern Time
at the end of April 11, 2018. Comments
received by mail/hand delivery/courier
(for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are
postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that
date.
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Comments submitted electronically,
including attachments, to https://
www.regulations.gov will be posted to
the docket unchanged. Because your
comment will be made public, you are
solely responsible for ensuring that your
comment does not include any
confidential information that you or a
third party may not wish to be posted,
such as medical information, your or
anyone else’s Social Security number, or
confidential business information, such
as a manufacturing process. Please note
that if you include your name, contact
information, or other information that
identifies you in the body of your
comments, that information will be
posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
• If you want to submit a comment
with confidential information that you
do not wish to be made available to the
public, submit the comment as a
written/paper submission and in the
manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper
Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions.’’)
Written/Paper Submissions
Submit written/paper submissions as
follows:
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for
written/paper submissions): Dockets
Management Staff (HFA–305), Food and
Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
• For written/paper comments
submitted to the Dockets Management
Staff, FDA will post your comment, as
well as any attachments, except for
information submitted, marked and
identified, as confidential, if submitted
as detailed in ‘‘Instructions.’’
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket No. FDA–
2017–N–7007 for ‘‘Removal of Certain
Time of Inspection and Duties of
Inspector Regulations for Biological
Products.’’ Received comments, those
filed in a timely manner (see
ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket
and, except for those submitted as
‘‘Confidential Submissions,’’ publicly
viewable at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Dockets Management Staff
E:\FR\FM\26JAR1.SGM
26JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 18 / Friday, January 26, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
• Confidential Submissions—To
submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be
made publicly available, submit your
comments only as a written/paper
submission. You should submit two
copies total. One copy will include the
information you claim to be confidential
with a heading or cover note that states
‘‘THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS
CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.’’ The
Agency will review this copy, including
the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The
second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information
redacted/blacked out, will be available
for public viewing and posted on
https://www.regulations.gov. Submit
both copies to the Dockets Management
Staff. If you do not wish your name and
contact information to be made publicly
available, you can provide this
information on the cover sheet and not
in the body of your comments and you
must identify this information as
‘‘confidential.’’ Any information marked
as ‘‘confidential’’ will not be disclosed
except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20
and other applicable disclosure law. For
more information about FDA’s posting
of comments to public dockets, see 80
FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or access
the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/
fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/201523389.pdf.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or the
electronic and written/paper comments
received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the
heading of this document, into the
‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts
and/or go to the Dockets Management
Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061,
Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melissa Segal, 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:
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Direct Final Rule
FDA is issuing this direct final rule to
amend the general biologics regulations
relating to time of inspection
requirements and to remove duties of
inspector requirements. FDA is taking
this action to remove outdated
requirements and accommodate new
approaches, such as a risk-based
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 25, 2018
Jkt 244001
inspection frequency for drug
establishments, thereby providing
flexibility without diminishing public
health protections.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of
the Direct Final Rule
This direct final rule revises the time
of inspection requirements contained in
§ 600.21 (21 CFR 600.21) and also
removes the duties of inspector
requirements contained in § 600.22 (21
CFR 600.22). These changes to the
biological product regulations eliminate
outdated requirements and
accommodate new approaches, such as
a risk-based inspection frequency for
drug establishments, thereby providing
flexibility without diminishing public
health protections. Revision and
removal of these regulations does not
change the biological product
establishment inspection requirements
and duties of an investigator
requirements that apply under sections
704 and 510(h) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21
U.S.C. 374 and 360(h)) and section
351(c) of the Public Health Service Act
(PHS Act) (42 U.S.C. 262(c)).
C. Legal Authority
FDA is taking this action under the
biological product provisions of the PHS
Act, and the drugs and general
administrative provisions of the FD&C
Act, including sections 704 and 510(h)
of the FD&C Act and section 351(c) of
the PHS Act.
D. Costs and Benefits
Because this direct final rule does 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.
II. Direct Final Rulemaking
In the document entitled ‘‘Guidance
for FDA and Industry: Direct Final Rule
Procedures,’’ announced and provided
in the Federal Register of November 21,
1997 (62 FR 62466), FDA described its
procedures on when and how the
Agency will employ direct final
rulemaking. The guidance may be
accessed at: https://www.fda.gov/
RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/
ucm125166.htm. We have determined
that this rule is appropriate for direct
final rulemaking because we believe
that it includes only noncontroversial
amendments and we anticipate no
significant adverse comments.
Consistent with our procedures on
direct final rulemaking, FDA is also
publishing elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register a companion proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3587
rule proposing to amend the general
biological products regulations by
removing certain time of inspection
requirements and the duties of inspector
requirements. The companion proposed
rule provides a procedural framework
within which the rule may be finalized
in the event that the direct final rule is
withdrawn because of any significant
adverse comments. The comment period
for the direct final rule runs
concurrently with the companion
proposed rule. Any comments received
in response to the companion proposed
rule will be considered as comments
regarding the direct final rule.
We are providing a comment period
on the direct final rule of 75 days after
the date of publication in the Federal
Register. If we receive any significant
adverse comments, we intend to
withdraw this direct final rule before its
effective date by publication of a notice
in the Federal Register. A significant
adverse comment is defined as a
comment that explains why the rule
would be inappropriate, including
challenges to the rule’s underlying
premise or approach, or would be
ineffective or unacceptable without a
change. In determining whether an
adverse comment is significant and
warrants terminating a direct final
rulemaking, we will consider whether
the comment raises an issue serious
enough to warrant a substantive
response in a notice-and-comment
process.
Comments that are frivolous,
insubstantial, or outside the scope of the
rule will not be considered significant
or adverse under this procedure. A
comment recommending a regulation
change in addition to those in the direct
final rule would not be considered a
significant adverse comment unless the
comment states why the rule would be
ineffective without the additional
change. In addition, if a significant
adverse comment applies to a part of
this rule and that part can be severed
from the remainder of the rule, we may
adopt as final those provisions of the
rule that are not the subject of the
significant adverse comment.
If any significant adverse comments
are received during the comment
period, FDA will publish, before the
effective date of this direct final rule, a
notice of significant adverse comment
and withdraw the direct final rule. If we
withdraw the direct final rule, any
comments received will be applied to
the proposed rule and will be
considered in developing a final rule
using the usual notice-and-comment
procedure.
If FDA receives no significant adverse
comments during the specified
E:\FR\FM\26JAR1.SGM
26JAR1
3588
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 18 / Friday, January 26, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
comment period, FDA intends to
publish a document confirming the
effective date within 30 days after the
comment period ends.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
III. Background
On February 24, 2017, President
Donald Trump issued Executive Order
13777, ‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory
Reform Agenda’’ (82 FR 12285, March 1,
2017). One of the provisions in the
Executive Order requires Agencies to
evaluate existing regulations and make
recommendations to the Agency head
regarding their repeal, replacement, or
modification, consistent with applicable
law. As one step in implementing the
Executive Order, FDA published a
notice in the Federal Register of
September 8, 2017 (82 FR 42492)
entitled ‘‘Review of Existing Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research
Regulatory and Information Collection
Requirements.’’ In that notice, FDA
announced that it was conducting a
review of existing regulations to
determine, in part, whether they can be
made more effective in light of current
public health needs and to take
advantage of, and support, advances in
innovation that have occurred since
those regulations took effect. As part of
this initiative, FDA is updating outdated
regulations as specified in this rule.
FDA’s general biological products
regulations in part 600 (21 CFR part
600) are intended to help ensure the
safety, purity, and potency of biological
products administered to humans. The
revision and removal of certain general
biological products regulations are
designed to eliminate outdated
requirements and accommodate new
approaches, such as a risk-based
inspection frequency for drug
establishments and provide flexibility
without diminishing public health
protections.
A. Section 600.21
The authority for FDA to conduct
establishment inspections is included in
both the FD&C Act and the PHS Act.
Specifically, section 704 of the FD&C
Act and section 351(c) of the PHS Act
authorize the Agency to inspect
establishments that manufacture
biological products. Before July 9,
2012—the date the Food and Drug
Administration Safety and Innovation
Act (FDASIA) (Pub. L. 112–144) was
signed into law—section 510(h) of the
FD&C Act further provided, among
other things, that drug and device
establishments registered with FDA
must be inspected at least once in the
2-year period beginning with the date of
registration and at least once in every
successive 2-year period thereafter.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 25, 2018
Jkt 244001
Section 510(h) of the FD&C Act applies
to biological product establishments
because all biological products are
subject to regulation under the drug or
device provisions of the FD&C Act (in
addition to the biological product
provisions of the PHS Act). Since 1983,
FDA’s biological product regulation at
§ 600.21 has also included a biennial
inspection requirement (‘‘[A]n
inspection of each licensed
establishment and its additional
location(s) shall be made at least once
every 2 years’’); this was consistent with
the pre-FDASIA biennial inspection
requirement in section 510(h) of the
FD&C Act.
With the enactment of FDASIA,
however, the biennial inspection
requirement for drug establishments in
section 510(h) of the FD&C Act was
replaced with a requirement that FDA
inspect drug establishments in
accordance with a risk-based schedule
established by FDA. Accordingly, for
biological product establishments that
are registered as drug establishments
under section 510(h), the requirement in
§ 600.21 regarding the frequency of
inspections is no longer consistent with
the FD&C Act and is outdated (e.g., the
risk-based inspection schedule for drug
establishments may result in scheduling
inspections at intervals of greater than 2
years for certain biological product
establishments). For this reason, and to
provide for greater flexibility in general
with respect to determining the
frequency of biological product
establishment inspections under the
authority provided in the FD&C Act and
the PHS Act, FDA is revising § 600.21 to
remove the biennial inspection
requirement for biological product
establishments that are registered as
drug establishments and for those that
are registered as device establishments.
In addition, § 600.21 includes
provisions concerning inspectional
notice and the timing of pre-licensure
reinspections of biological product
establishments. These provisions are
outdated and unnecessary. Inspectional
notice is addressed in the Agency’s
practices for inspections in its Standard
Operating Procedures and Policies and
in the Investigations Operations Manual
(IOM). With respect to the timing of a
reinspection of a biological product
establishment following the denial of a
biologics license application, the
general biologics licensing provision at
21 CFR 601.4, which was issued
subsequent to § 600.21, sets forth the
administrative procedures following the
denial of a license; accordingly, the
specific provision in § 600.21 regarding
timing of a reinspection following
denial of a license is unnecessary.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Therefore, FDA is removing these
provisions.
B. Section 600.22
Current § 600.22 requires specific
duties of an FDA inspector. These
existing codified requirements are
unnecessary because they are
duplicative of statutory requirements
that apply to biological product
inspections under section 704 of the
FD&C Act. Specifically, the inspection
requirements in section 704 of the FD&C
Act encompass all of the requirements
outlined in § 600.22. Thus, we are
removing § 600.22(a) through (h).
The removal of these regulations,
however, does not change the
establishment inspection requirements
and duties of an investigator
requirements specified in sections 704
and 510(h) of the FD&C Act, section
351(c) of the PHS Act, or the procedures
described in the IOM. Additionally, it
does not change the established process
for risk-based inspection planning and
work planning.
IV. Highlights of the Direct Final Rule
FDA is revising the general biologics
regulations by revising time of
inspection requirements contained in
§ 600.21 and also by removing the
duties of inspector requirements
contained in § 600.22. These changes
are designed to remove the existing
codified requirements that are outdated
and to accommodate new approaches,
such as a risk-based inspection
frequency for biological product
establishments, thereby providing
flexibility without diminishing public
health protections. FDA is issuing these
revisions directly as a final rule because
the Agency believes they include only
noncontroversial amendments and FDA
anticipates no significant adverse
comments.
V. Legal Authority
FDA is issuing this rule under the
biological products provisions of the
PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a,
264, and 300aa–25) and the drugs and
general administrative provisions of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,
355, 356c, 356e, 360, 360i, 371, 374, and
379k–l). 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 prevent the introduction,
transmission, and spread of
communicable disease.
VI. Economic Analysis of Impacts
We have examined the impacts of the
direct final rule under Executive Order
E:\FR\FM\26JAR1.SGM
26JAR1
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 18 / Friday, January 26, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
12866, Executive Order 13563,
Executive Order 13771, 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 us 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). Executive Order
13771 requires that the costs associated
with significant new regulations ‘‘shall,
to the extent permitted by law, be offset
by the elimination of existing costs
associated with at least two prior
regulations.’’ We believe that this direct
final rule is not a significant regulatory
action as defined by Executive Order
12866.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires us to analyze regulatory options
that would minimize any significant
impact of a rule on small entities.
Because the direct final rule does not
impose any additional regulatory
burdens, we certify that this direct final
rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (section 202(a)) requires us to
prepare a written statement, which
includes an assessment of anticipated
costs and benefits, before issuing ‘‘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 $148 million, using the
most current (2016) Implicit Price
Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product.
This direct final rule would not result
in an expenditure in any year that meets
or exceeds this amount.
This rule is being issued to amend the
general biologics regulations by
removing time of inspection
requirements and the duties of inspector
requirements. This action is being taken
to remove outdated requirements,
accommodate new approaches, and
provide flexibility without diminishing
public health protections. Because this
rulemaking would remove regulations to
be consistent with updated practice and
does not impose any additional
regulatory burdens, this rulemaking is
not anticipated to result in any
compliance costs and the economic
impact is expected to be minimal.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:29 Jan 25, 2018
Jkt 244001
VII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
We have determined under 21 CFR
25.31(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.
VIII. Federalism
We have analyzed this direct final
rule in accordance with the principles
set forth in Executive Order 13132. We
have determined that the rule does not
contain policies that 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, we
conclude 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.
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This direct final rule contains no
collection of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management
and Budget under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 600
Biologics, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Public
Health Service Act, and under authority
delegated to the Commissioner of Food
and Drugs, 21 CFR part 600 is amended
as follows:
PART 600—BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS:
GENERAL
1. The authority citation for part 600
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353,
355, 356c, 356e, 360, 360i, 371, 374, 379k–
l; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a, 264, 300aa–
25.
§ 600.21
[Amended]
2. Amend § 600.21 by removing the
last three sentences.
■
§ 600.22
■
[Removed and Reserved]
3. Remove and reserve § 600.22.
Dated: January 23, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018–01468 Filed 1–25–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3589
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 60
[Docket No. FR–6077–I–01]
Federal Policy for the Protection of
Human Subjects: Delay of the
Revisions to the Federal Policy for the
Protection of Human Subjects
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Policy, Development and
Research, HUD.
ACTION: Interim final rule; delay of
effective and compliance dates; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
On January 19, 2017, HUD
and other federal departments and
agencies published a final rule which
revised the Federal Policy for the
Protection of Human Subjects (2018
Requirements). Most of the 2018
Requirements were scheduled to
become effective on January 19, 2018,
with a general compliance date of
January 19, 2018. On January 22, 2018,
the Federal departments and agencies
that adopted the 2018 Requirements
published an interim final rule (‘‘the
interagency interim final rule’’) that
delays the effective date and general
compliance date of the 2018
Requirements for six months, to July 19,
2018. The purpose of the delay is to
provide additional time to regulated
entities for the preparations necessary to
implement the 2018 requirements. Due
to statutory prepublication requirements
applicable to HUD rules, HUD was
unable to be a signatory to the
interagency interim final rule. Through
this interim final rule, HUD adopts the
interagency interim final rule.
DATES: Effective date: February 26, 2018.
Comment due date: March 27, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by docket ID number HHS–
OPHS–2017–0001 by one of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://
www.regulations.gov):
Æ Enter the following link into your
web browser’s address bar: https://
www.regulations.gov/
document?D=HHS-OPHS-2017-0001.
Æ Click the blue ‘‘Comment Now!’’
button in the upper right-hand corner
and follow the instructions on how to
submit a comment.
Æ Alternatively, you can enter the
docket ID number into the ‘‘search’’ box
on the main page of the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (https://
www.regulations.gov) to find the
electronic docket.
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier [For
paper, disk, or CD–ROM submissions]
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26JAR1.SGM
26JAR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 18 (Friday, January 26, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3586-3589]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01468]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 600
[Docket No. FDA-2017-N-7007]
RIN 0910-AH49
Removal of Certain Time of Inspection and Duties of Inspector
Regulations for Biological Products
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, Agency, or we) is
amending the general biologics regulations relating to time of
inspection requirements and also removing duties of inspector
requirements. FDA is taking this action to remove outdated requirements
and accommodate new approaches, such as a risk-based inspection
frequency for drug establishments, thereby providing flexibility
without diminishing public health protections. This action is part of
FDA's implementation of Executive Orders (E.O.s) 13771 and 13777. Under
these E.O.s, FDA is comprehensively reviewing existing regulations to
identify opportunities for repeal, replacement, or modification that
will result in meaningful burden reduction while allowing the Agency to
achieve our public health mission and fulfill statutory obligations.
The Agency is issuing these amendments directly as a final rule because
we believe they are noncontroversial and FDA anticipates no significant
adverse comments.
DATES: This rule is effective June 11, 2018. Submit either electronic
or written comments on the direct final rule or its companion proposed
rule by April 11, 2018. If FDA receives no significant adverse comments
within the specified comment period, the Agency intends to publish a
document confirming the effective date of the final rule in the Federal
Register within 30 days after the comment period on this direct final
rule ends. If timely significant adverse comments are received, the
Agency will publish a document in the Federal Register withdrawing this
direct final rule within 30 days after the comment period on this
direct final rule ends.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before April 11, 2018. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
midnight Eastern Time at the end of April 11, 2018. Comments received
by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions) will be
considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery service
acceptance receipt is on or before that date.
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically, including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov
will be posted to the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be
made public, you are solely responsible for ensuring that your comment
does not include any confidential information that you or a third party
may not wish to be posted, such as medical information, your or anyone
else's Social Security number, or confidential business information,
such as a manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your
name, contact information, or other information that identifies you in
the body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions.'')
Written/Paper Submissions
Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2017-N-7007 for ``Removal of Certain Time of Inspection and Duties
of Inspector Regulations for Biological Products.'' Received comments,
those filed in a timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the
docket and, except for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,''
publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets
Management Staff
[[Page 3587]]
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Melissa Segal, 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:
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Direct Final Rule
FDA is issuing this direct final rule to amend the general
biologics regulations relating to time of inspection requirements and
to remove duties of inspector requirements. FDA is taking this action
to remove outdated requirements and accommodate new approaches, such as
a risk-based inspection frequency for drug establishments, thereby
providing flexibility without diminishing public health protections.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Direct Final Rule
This direct final rule revises the time of inspection requirements
contained in Sec. 600.21 (21 CFR 600.21) and also removes the duties
of inspector requirements contained in Sec. 600.22 (21 CFR 600.22).
These changes to the biological product regulations eliminate outdated
requirements and accommodate new approaches, such as a risk-based
inspection frequency for drug establishments, thereby providing
flexibility without diminishing public health protections. Revision and
removal of these regulations does not change the biological product
establishment inspection requirements and duties of an investigator
requirements that apply under sections 704 and 510(h) of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 374 and 360(h)) and
section 351(c) of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) (42 U.S.C.
262(c)).
C. Legal Authority
FDA is taking this action under the biological product provisions
of the PHS Act, and the drugs and general administrative provisions of
the FD&C Act, including sections 704 and 510(h) of the FD&C Act and
section 351(c) of the PHS Act.
D. Costs and Benefits
Because this direct final rule does 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.
II. Direct Final Rulemaking
In the document entitled ``Guidance for FDA and Industry: Direct
Final Rule Procedures,'' announced and provided in the Federal Register
of November 21, 1997 (62 FR 62466), FDA described its procedures on
when and how the Agency will employ direct final rulemaking. The
guidance may be accessed at: https://www.fda.gov/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm125166.htm. We have determined that this rule is
appropriate for direct final rulemaking because we believe that it
includes only noncontroversial amendments and we anticipate no
significant adverse comments. Consistent with our procedures on direct
final rulemaking, FDA is also publishing elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register a companion proposed rule proposing to amend the
general biological products regulations by removing certain time of
inspection requirements and the duties of inspector requirements. The
companion proposed rule provides a procedural framework within which
the rule may be finalized in the event that the direct final rule is
withdrawn because of any significant adverse comments. The comment
period for the direct final rule runs concurrently with the companion
proposed rule. Any comments received in response to the companion
proposed rule will be considered as comments regarding the direct final
rule.
We are providing a comment period on the direct final rule of 75
days after the date of publication in the Federal Register. If we
receive any significant adverse comments, we intend to withdraw this
direct final rule before its effective date by publication of a notice
in the Federal Register. A significant adverse comment is defined as a
comment that explains why the rule would be inappropriate, including
challenges to the rule's underlying premise or approach, or would be
ineffective or unacceptable without a change. In determining whether an
adverse comment is significant and warrants terminating a direct final
rulemaking, we will consider whether the comment raises an issue
serious enough to warrant a substantive response in a notice-and-
comment process.
Comments that are frivolous, insubstantial, or outside the scope of
the rule will not be considered significant or adverse under this
procedure. A comment recommending a regulation change in addition to
those in the direct final rule would not be considered a significant
adverse comment unless the comment states why the rule would be
ineffective without the additional change. In addition, if a
significant adverse comment applies to a part of this rule and that
part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as
final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of the
significant adverse comment.
If any significant adverse comments are received during the comment
period, FDA will publish, before the effective date of this direct
final rule, a notice of significant adverse comment and withdraw the
direct final rule. If we withdraw the direct final rule, any comments
received will be applied to the proposed rule and will be considered in
developing a final rule using the usual notice-and-comment procedure.
If FDA receives no significant adverse comments during the
specified
[[Page 3588]]
comment period, FDA intends to publish a document confirming the
effective date within 30 days after the comment period ends.
III. Background
On February 24, 2017, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order
13777, ``Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda'' (82 FR 12285, March
1, 2017). One of the provisions in the Executive Order requires
Agencies to evaluate existing regulations and make recommendations to
the Agency head regarding their repeal, replacement, or modification,
consistent with applicable law. As one step in implementing the
Executive Order, FDA published a notice in the Federal Register of
September 8, 2017 (82 FR 42492) entitled ``Review of Existing Center
for Biologics Evaluation and Research Regulatory and Information
Collection Requirements.'' In that notice, FDA announced that it was
conducting a review of existing regulations to determine, in part,
whether they can be made more effective in light of current public
health needs and to take advantage of, and support, advances in
innovation that have occurred since those regulations took effect. As
part of this initiative, FDA is updating outdated regulations as
specified in this rule.
FDA's general biological products regulations in part 600 (21 CFR
part 600) are intended to help ensure the safety, purity, and potency
of biological products administered to humans. The revision and removal
of certain general biological products regulations are designed to
eliminate outdated requirements and accommodate new approaches, such as
a risk-based inspection frequency for drug establishments and provide
flexibility without diminishing public health protections.
A. Section 600.21
The authority for FDA to conduct establishment inspections is
included in both the FD&C Act and the PHS Act. Specifically, section
704 of the FD&C Act and section 351(c) of the PHS Act authorize the
Agency to inspect establishments that manufacture biological products.
Before July 9, 2012--the date the Food and Drug Administration Safety
and Innovation Act (FDASIA) (Pub. L. 112-144) was signed into law--
section 510(h) of the FD&C Act further provided, among other things,
that drug and device establishments registered with FDA must be
inspected at least once in the 2-year period beginning with the date of
registration and at least once in every successive 2-year period
thereafter. Section 510(h) of the FD&C Act applies to biological
product establishments because all biological products are subject to
regulation under the drug or device provisions of the FD&C Act (in
addition to the biological product provisions of the PHS Act). Since
1983, FDA's biological product regulation at Sec. 600.21 has also
included a biennial inspection requirement (``[A]n inspection of each
licensed establishment and its additional location(s) shall be made at
least once every 2 years''); this was consistent with the pre-FDASIA
biennial inspection requirement in section 510(h) of the FD&C Act.
With the enactment of FDASIA, however, the biennial inspection
requirement for drug establishments in section 510(h) of the FD&C Act
was replaced with a requirement that FDA inspect drug establishments in
accordance with a risk-based schedule established by FDA. Accordingly,
for biological product establishments that are registered as drug
establishments under section 510(h), the requirement in Sec. 600.21
regarding the frequency of inspections is no longer consistent with the
FD&C Act and is outdated (e.g., the risk-based inspection schedule for
drug establishments may result in scheduling inspections at intervals
of greater than 2 years for certain biological product establishments).
For this reason, and to provide for greater flexibility in general with
respect to determining the frequency of biological product
establishment inspections under the authority provided in the FD&C Act
and the PHS Act, FDA is revising Sec. 600.21 to remove the biennial
inspection requirement for biological product establishments that are
registered as drug establishments and for those that are registered as
device establishments.
In addition, Sec. 600.21 includes provisions concerning
inspectional notice and the timing of pre-licensure reinspections of
biological product establishments. These provisions are outdated and
unnecessary. Inspectional notice is addressed in the Agency's practices
for inspections in its Standard Operating Procedures and Policies and
in the Investigations Operations Manual (IOM). With respect to the
timing of a reinspection of a biological product establishment
following the denial of a biologics license application, the general
biologics licensing provision at 21 CFR 601.4, which was issued
subsequent to Sec. 600.21, sets forth the administrative procedures
following the denial of a license; accordingly, the specific provision
in Sec. 600.21 regarding timing of a reinspection following denial of
a license is unnecessary. Therefore, FDA is removing these provisions.
B. Section 600.22
Current Sec. 600.22 requires specific duties of an FDA inspector.
These existing codified requirements are unnecessary because they are
duplicative of statutory requirements that apply to biological product
inspections under section 704 of the FD&C Act. Specifically, the
inspection requirements in section 704 of the FD&C Act encompass all of
the requirements outlined in Sec. 600.22. Thus, we are removing Sec.
600.22(a) through (h).
The removal of these regulations, however, does not change the
establishment inspection requirements and duties of an investigator
requirements specified in sections 704 and 510(h) of the FD&C Act,
section 351(c) of the PHS Act, or the procedures described in the IOM.
Additionally, it does not change the established process for risk-based
inspection planning and work planning.
IV. Highlights of the Direct Final Rule
FDA is revising the general biologics regulations by revising time
of inspection requirements contained in Sec. 600.21 and also by
removing the duties of inspector requirements contained in Sec.
600.22. These changes are designed to remove the existing codified
requirements that are outdated and to accommodate new approaches, such
as a risk-based inspection frequency for biological product
establishments, thereby providing flexibility without diminishing
public health protections. FDA is issuing these revisions directly as a
final rule because the Agency believes they include only
noncontroversial amendments and FDA anticipates no significant adverse
comments.
V. Legal Authority
FDA is issuing this rule under the biological products provisions
of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a, 264, and 300aa-25) and
the drugs and general administrative provisions of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353, 355, 356c, 356e, 360, 360i, 371, 374, and
379k-l). 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 prevent the
introduction, transmission, and spread of communicable disease.
VI. Economic Analysis of Impacts
We have examined the impacts of the direct final rule under
Executive Order
[[Page 3589]]
12866, Executive Order 13563, Executive Order 13771, 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 us
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). Executive Order 13771 requires that the costs associated
with significant new regulations ``shall, to the extent permitted by
law, be offset by the elimination of existing costs associated with at
least two prior regulations.'' We believe that this direct final rule
is not a significant regulatory action as defined by Executive Order
12866.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires us to analyze regulatory
options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule on small
entities. Because the direct final rule does not impose any additional
regulatory burdens, we certify that this direct final rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (section 202(a)) requires
us to prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment of
anticipated costs and benefits, before issuing ``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 $148
million, using the most current (2016) Implicit Price Deflator for the
Gross Domestic Product. This direct final rule would not result in an
expenditure in any year that meets or exceeds this amount.
This rule is being issued to amend the general biologics
regulations by removing time of inspection requirements and the duties
of inspector requirements. This action is being taken to remove
outdated requirements, accommodate new approaches, and provide
flexibility without diminishing public health protections. Because this
rulemaking would remove regulations to be consistent with updated
practice and does not impose any additional regulatory burdens, this
rulemaking is not anticipated to result in any compliance costs and the
economic impact is expected to be minimal.
VII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
We have determined under 21 CFR 25.31(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.
VIII. Federalism
We have analyzed this direct final rule in accordance with the
principles set forth in Executive Order 13132. We have determined that
the rule does not contain policies that 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, we conclude 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.
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This direct final rule contains no collection of information.
Therefore, clearance by the Office of Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 600
Biologics, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the
Public Health Service Act, and under authority delegated to the
Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 600 is amended as follows:
PART 600--BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS: GENERAL
0
1. The authority citation for part 600 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 351, 352, 353, 355, 356c, 356e, 360,
360i, 371, 374, 379k-l; 42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a, 264, 300aa-
25.
Sec. 600.21 [Amended]
0
2. Amend Sec. 600.21 by removing the last three sentences.
Sec. 600.22 [Removed and Reserved]
0
3. Remove and reserve Sec. 600.22.
Dated: January 23, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-01468 Filed 1-25-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P