Revocation of the Test for Mycoplasma, 51635-51639 [2020-17085]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 163 / Friday, August 21, 2020 / Rules and Regulations jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES U.S. and Canadian officials have mutually determined that non-essential travel between the United States and Canada poses additional risk of transmission and spread of the virus associated with COVID–19 and places the populace of both nations at increased risk of contracting the virus associated with COVID–19. Moreover, given the sustained human-to-human transmission of the virus, returning to previous levels of travel between the two nations places the personnel staffing land ports of entry between the United States and Canada, as well as the individuals traveling through these ports of entry, at increased risk of exposure to the virus associated with COVID–19. Accordingly, and consistent with the authority granted in 19 U.S.C. 1318(b)(1)(C) and (b)(2),7 I have determined that land ports of entry along the U.S.-Canada border will continue to suspend normal operations and will only allow processing for entry into the United States of those travelers engaged in ‘‘essential travel,’’ as defined below. Given the definition of ‘‘essential travel’’ below, this temporary alteration in land ports of entry operations should not interrupt legitimate trade between the two nations or disrupt critical supply chains that ensure food, fuel, medicine, and other critical materials reach individuals on both sides of the border. For purposes of the temporary alteration in certain designated ports of entry operations authorized under 19 U.S.C. 1318(b)(1)(C) and (b)(2), travel through the land ports of entry and ferry terminals along the United States7 19 U.S.C. 1318(b)(1)(C) provides that ‘‘[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of the Treasury, when necessary to respond to a national emergency declared under the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) or to a specific threat to human life or national interests,’’ is authorized to ‘‘[t]ake any . . . action that may be necessary to respond directly to the national emergency or specific threat.’’ On March 1, 2003, certain functions of the Secretary of the Treasury were transferred to the Secretary of Homeland Security. See 6 U.S.C. 202(2), 203(1). Under 6 U.S.C. 212(a)(1), authorities ‘‘related to Customs revenue functions’’ were reserved to the Secretary of the Treasury. To the extent that any authority under section 1318(b)(1) was reserved to the Secretary of the Treasury, it has been delegated to the Secretary of Homeland Security. See Treas. Dep’t Order No. 100–16 (May 15, 2003), 68 FR 28322 (May 23, 2003). Additionally, 19 U.S.C. 1318(b)(2) provides that ‘‘[n]otwithstanding any other provision of law, the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, when necessary to respond to a specific threat to human life or national interests, is authorized to close temporarily any Customs office or port of entry or take any other lesser action that may be necessary to respond to the specific threat.’’ Congress has vested in the Secretary of Homeland Security the ‘‘functions of all officers, employees, and organizational units of the Department,’’ including the Commissioner of CBP. 6 U.S.C. 112(a)(3). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:00 Aug 20, 2020 Jkt 250001 Canada border shall be limited to ‘‘essential travel,’’ which includes, but is not limited to— • U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents returning to the United States; • Individuals traveling for medical purposes (e.g., to receive medical treatment in the United States); • Individuals traveling to attend educational institutions; • Individuals traveling to work in the United States (e.g., individuals working in the farming or agriculture industry who must travel between the United States and Canada in furtherance of such work); • Individuals traveling for emergency response and public health purposes (e.g., government officials or emergency responders entering the United States to support federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial government efforts to respond to COVID–19 or other emergencies); • Individuals engaged in lawful crossborder trade (e.g., truck drivers supporting the movement of cargo between the United States and Canada); • Individuals engaged in official government travel or diplomatic travel; • Members of the U.S. Armed Forces, and the spouses and children of members of the U.S. Armed Forces, returning to the United States; and • Individuals engaged in militaryrelated travel or operations. The following travel does not fall within the definition of ‘‘essential travel’’ for purposes of this Notification— • Individuals traveling for tourism purposes (e.g., sightseeing, recreation, gambling, or attending cultural events). At this time, this Notification does not apply to air, freight rail, or sea travel between the United States and Canada, but does apply to passenger rail, passenger ferry travel, and pleasure boat travel between the United States and Canada. These restrictions are temporary in nature and shall remain in effect until 11:59 p.m. EDT on September 21, 2020. This Notification may be amended or rescinded prior to that time, based on circumstances associated with the specific threat. The Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is hereby directed to prepare and distribute appropriate guidance to CBP personnel on the continued implementation of the temporary measures set forth in this Notification. The CBP Commissioner may determine that other forms of travel, such as travel in furtherance of economic stability or social order, constitute ‘‘essential travel’’ under this Notification. Further, the CBP Commissioner may, on an individualized basis and for PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 51635 humanitarian reasons or for other purposes in the national interest, permit the processing of travelers to the United States not engaged in ‘‘essential travel.’’ The Acting Secretary of Homeland Security, Chad F. Wolf, having reviewed and approved this document, is delegating the authority to electronically sign this document to Chad R. Mizelle, who is the Senior Official Performing the Duties of the General Counsel for DHS, for purposes of publication in the Federal Register. Chad R. Mizelle, Senior Official Performing the Duties of the General Counsel, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. 2020–18470 Filed 8–19–20; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 9112–FP–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 610 [Docket No. FDA–2018–N–4757] RIN 0910–AH95 Revocation of the Test for Mycoplasma AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS. ACTION: Final rule. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is issuing a final rule to remove the specified test for the presence of Mycoplasma for live virus vaccines and inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures. The rule is being finalized because the existing test for Mycoplasma is overly restrictive in that it identifies only one test method in detail to be used even though other methods also may be appropriate. More sensitive and specific methods exist and are currently being practiced, and removal of the specific method to test for Mycoplasma provides flexibility for accommodating new and evolving technology and capabilities without diminishing public health protections. This action is part of FDA’s implementation of Executive Orders under which 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. DATES: This rule is effective September 21, 2020. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM 21AUR1 51636 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 163 / Friday, August 21, 2020 / Rules and Regulations For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go to https:// www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this final rule 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: Tami Belouin, 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: ADDRESSES: Table of Contents I. Executive Summary A. Purpose of the Final Rule B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Final Rule C. Legal Authority D. Costs and Benefits II. Background A. Introduction B. Need for the Regulation C. Summary of Comments to the Proposed Rule III. Legal Authority IV. Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA Response A. Introduction B. Comments and FDA Response V. Effective Date VI. Economic Analysis of Impacts A. Introduction B. Summary of Costs and Benefits VII. Analysis of Environmental Impact VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 IX. Federalism X. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments XI. References jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES I. Executive Summary A. Purpose of the Final Rule FDA is removing the regulation requiring a specified test for the presence of Mycoplasma for live virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures and inactivated virus vaccines produced from such living cell cultures because the regulation is overly restrictive in that it identifies only one test method in detail to be used even though other methods also may be appropriate. More sensitive and specific methods exist and are currently being practiced, and removal of the required test for Mycoplasma provides flexibility for accommodating new and evolving technology and capabilities without diminishing public health protections. B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Final Rule The final rule removes § 610.30 (21 CFR 610.30), which details the method VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:00 Aug 20, 2020 Jkt 250001 for Mycoplasma testing of samples of the virus harvest pool and control fluid pool of live virus vaccines and inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures. C. 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 (FD&C Act). D. Costs and Benefits Because this final rule will 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. Background A. Introduction On February 24, 2017, Executive Order 13777, ‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda’’ (https:// www.federalregister.gov/documents/ 2017/03/01/2017-04107/enforcing-theregulatory-reform-agenda; 82 FR 12285, March 1, 2017) was issued. 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 part of this initiative, FDA is revoking a regulation as specified in this final rule. B. Need for the Regulation It has become increasingly clear that the requirement specifying a test for Mycoplasma is too restrictive for live virus vaccines and inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures because they specify particular methodologies when alternatives may be available that provide the same or greater level of assurance of safety. Modifications to Mycoplasma testing described in § 610.30 must meet the requirements of 21 CFR 610.9. Thus, the Agency believes that the regulation may no longer reflect the current testing procedures as a general matter and that it is more appropriate, flexible, and efficient to identify appropriate testing requirements for particular products in the biologics license application (BLA). This final rule removes the specified test for the presence of Mycoplasma to provide flexibility for accommodating new and evolving technology and capabilities without diminishing public health protections. Removal of this PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 regulation allows manufacturers of live virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures and inactivated virus vaccines produced from such living cell cultures to select the most scientifically appropriate Mycoplasma testing method to assure the safety, purity, and potency of their vaccines. These newer technologies can result in higher sensitivity and specificity of Mycoplasma detection and could reduce the time required to complete testing for Mycoplasma. Removal of this regulation does not remove Mycoplasma testing requirements specified in individual BLAs. A manufacturer of a live virus vaccine produced from in vitro living cell cultures and inactivated virus vaccines produced from such living cell cultures will continue to be required to follow the Mycoplasma test requirements specified in its BLA, unless the BLA was revised to modify or replace the test through a supplement in accordance with § 601.12(c) (21 CFR 601.12(c)). FDA would review proposed changes to a manufacturer’s approved biologics license in the context of that particular application to ensure that any such action is appropriate. Although the final rule removes the regulation, a manufacturer continues to be required to test for Mycoplasma as specified in its BLA. This action provides regulated industry with flexibility, as appropriate, to employ advances in science and technology as they become available, without diminishing public health protections. As appropriate, the Agency will describe the appropriate tests for particular products in manufacturers’ BLAs. C. Summary of Comments to the Proposed Rule We received comments on the proposed rule from individuals and industry submitters. The comments were generally supportive, with some comments suggesting new testing procedures be proposed. These comments are further summarized in section IV. III. Legal Authority We are issuing this final rule under the biological products provisions of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a, and 264) and the drugs and general administrative provisions of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360, 360c, 360d, 360h, 360i, 371, 372, 374, and 381). 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 E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM 21AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 163 / Friday, August 21, 2020 / Rules and Regulations introduction, transmission, and spread of communicable disease. IV. Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA Response A. Introduction We received comments on the proposed rule from individuals and industry submitters. We describe and respond to the comments in section IV.B. We have combined comments on similar topics and have numbered each comment to help distinguish between different comments. The number assigned to each comment or comment topic is purely for organizational purposes and does not signify the comment’s value or importance or the order in which comments were received. jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES B. Comments and FDA Response (Comment 1) One comment requested that FDA not finalize the rule, but instead amend the proposal to revoke the current test for Mycoplasma. The commenter proposed that FDA include methodologies on newer tests and how they are distinguishable from the present test; comparable data on the accuracy of Mycoplasma detection between the present and newer tests, and any other additional information that would support FDA’s argument that the newer tests are more efficient. (Response 1) FDA interprets this comment to support the proposal to remove the currently described methodology and to amend the regulation to specify alternative acceptable tests. The purpose of this rulemaking is to permit manufacturers of live virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures and inactivated virus vaccines produced from such living cell cultures to select the most scientifically appropriate Mycoplasma testing method to assure the safety, purity, and potency of their vaccines. Thus, FDA declines to amend the regulation to specify alternative acceptable tests because this would not achieve the goal of allowing flexibility, as appropriate, to employ advances in science and technology as they become available without diminishing public health protections. However, FDA acknowledges that guidance is helpful to describe FDA’s current thinking on alternative methods of testing for Mycoplasma in manufacturing samples of live virus vaccines and inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures. FDA notes that recommended alternative methods for Mycoplasma testing for viral vaccines are described in ‘‘Guidance for Industry: Characterization and Qualification of VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:00 Aug 20, 2020 Jkt 250001 Cell Substrates and Other Biological Materials Used in the Production of Viral Vaccines for Infectious Disease Indications’’ (February 2010) (https:// www.fda.gov/media/78428/download). (Comment 2) One comment supported the proposed rule. (Response 2) We acknowledge and appreciate the supportive comment. (Comment 3) One comment did not comment specifically on finalizing the rule, but stated that with changes to technology, it makes sense to update testing procedures. The comment stated that ‘‘a list of the new proposed test methods would be beneficial to compare the overall benefits and disadvantages.’’ Another comment suggested that if the rule is finalized, FDA should provide guidance for alternative methods of testing for Mycoplasma. (Response 3) While the comment states that it would be helpful to have a list of new proposed test methods, FDA does not believe the regulation should be amended to include such a list because that list could become outdated. License holders are welcome to discuss with FDA proposals to change their existing test methods and to submit proposals to FDA to revise the current test methods in use. FDA also acknowledges that guidance is helpful to describe FDA’s current thinking on acceptable alternative methods of testing for Mycoplasma in manufacturing samples of live virus vaccines and inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures. FDA notes that recommended alternative methods for Mycoplasma testing for viral vaccines are described in ‘‘Guidance for Industry: Characterization and Qualification of Cell Substrates and Other Biological Materials Used in the Production of Viral Vaccines for Infectious Disease Indications’’ (February 2010) (https:// www.fda.gov/media/78428/download). (Comment 4) One comment strongly supported removal of the regulation and agreed that more sensitive test methods exist; however, the commenter wanted the scope of the impact to be expanded to include all biological product manufacturers. (Response 4) We acknowledge and appreciate the supportive comment. The request to expand the revocation to include all biological product manufacturers is beyond the scope of this rule making because § 610.30 pertains to manufacturers of live virus vaccines and inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures. PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 51637 V. Effective Date The final rule will become effective 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register. VI. Economic Analysis of Impacts A. Introduction We have examined the impacts of the final rule under Executive Order 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 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 this rule would increase flexibility and does not add any new regulatory responsibilities, we certify that the 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 $154 million, using the most current (2018) Implicit Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. This final rule would not result in an expenditure in any year that meets or exceeds this amount. B. Summary of Costs and Benefits This final rule will amend the biologics regulations under § 610.30 by removing the specified test for Mycoplasma in the production of live virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures and inactivated virus E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM 21AUR1 51638 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 163 / Friday, August 21, 2020 / Rules and Regulations vaccines produced from such living cell cultures. Removing the § 610.30 Test for Mycoplasma will provide manufacturers with the flexibility to determine the most appropriate and effective Mycoplasma testing methods. FDA guidance dated after § 610.30, codified in 1973 (November 20, 1973, 38 FR 32056), outlines up-to-date scientific practices to identify Mycoplasma in production of live virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures and inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures. In practice, a vaccine manufacturer can change its procedures at any time with submission and prior approval of a supplement to its BLA. As a result, we do not expect the repeal of the § 610.30 Test for Mycoplasma to significantly influence the behavior or procedures of vaccine manufacturers. Because manufacturers already have the ability to pursue alternative testing procedures, we anticipate no measurable change in industry or FDA behavior from this final rulemaking. We therefore expect the elimination of the § 610.30 Test for Mycoplasma to be cost neutral. This final rule will therefore produce no quantifiable savings, costs, or transfers. We also expect no public health benefits to be lost as a result of this revocation. Finally, we note that this final rulemaking may drive some manufacturers to streamline their procedures and search for more efficient Mycoplasma testing methods. This optimization may produce some unquantifiable efficiencies. TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF BENEFITS, COSTS AND DISTRIBUTIONAL EFFECTS OF FINAL RULE Units Category Benefits: Annualized .............................. Monetized $millions/year ........ Annualized .............................. Quantified ............................... Qualitative ............................... Costs: Annualized .............................. Monetized $millions/year ........ Annualized .............................. Quantified ............................... Qualitative ............................... Transfers: Federal .................................... Annualized .............................. Monetized $millions/year ........ Primary estimate Low estimate High estimate Year dollars .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 7 3 7 3 Benefits to manufacturers from flexibility to determine appropriate and effective Mycoplasma testing methods. .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 7 3 7 3 Costs to manufacturers to change Mycoplasma testing methods, if voluntarily pursued. .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 7 3 .................... From/To .................................. From: Other ....................................... Annualized .............................. Monetized $millions/year ........ .................... .................... .................... From/To .................................. From: .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... Discount rate (%) Period covered Notes To: .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 7 3 .................... To: Effects: State, Local or Tribal Government: None. Small Business: None. Wages: None. Growth: None. jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES In line with Executive Order 13771, in table 2 we present annualized values of costs and cost savings over an infinite VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 Aug 20, 2020 Jkt 250001 time horizon. There are no quantifiable costs or cost savings from this rule. This final rule would be considered a PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 deregulatory action under Executive Order 13771. E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM 21AUR1 51639 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 163 / Friday, August 21, 2020 / Rules and Regulations TABLE 2—EXECUTIVE ORDER 13771 SUMMARY TABLE [in $ Millions 2016 Dollars, Over an Infinite Time Horizon] Item Primary estimate (7%) Lower estimate (7%) Upper estimate (7%) Present Value of Costs ................................................................................................................ Present Value of Cost Savings ................................................................................................... Present Value of Net Costs ......................................................................................................... Annualized Costs ......................................................................................................................... Annualized Cost Savings ............................................................................................................. Annualized Net Costs .................................................................................................................. ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ We have developed a comprehensive Economic Analysis of Impacts that assesses the impacts of the final rule. The full analysis of economic impacts is available in the docket for this final rule (Ref. 1) and at https://www.fda.gov/ about-fda/reports/economic-impactanalyses-fda-regulations. 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. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 This 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. jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES IX. Federalism We have analyzed this 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. X. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments We have analyzed this rule in accordance with the principles set forth in Executive Order 13175. We have determined that the rule does not contain policies that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:00 Aug 20, 2020 Jkt 250001 or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Accordingly, we conclude that the rule does not contain policies that have tribal implications as defined in the Executive Order and, consequently, a tribal summary impact statement is not required. XI. Reference The following reference is on display at the Dockets Management Staff (see ADDRESSES) and is available for viewing by interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday; it is also available electronically at https:// www.regulations.gov. FDA has verified the website address, as of the date this document publishes in the Federal Register, but websites are subject to change over time. 1. FDA/Economics Staff, ‘‘Elimination of the 21 CFR 610.30 Test for Mycoplasma Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis, Preliminary Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Analysis,’’ 2018. (Available at https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/reports/ economic-impact-analyses-fdaregulations.) List of Subjects in 21 CFR part 610 Biologics, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 610 is amended as follows: PART 610—GENERAL BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS STANDARDS 1. The authority citation for 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. Subpart D—[Removed and Reserved] 2. Remove and reserve subpart D, consisting of § 610.30. ■ PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Dated: July 29, 2020. Stephen M. Hahn, Commissioner of Food and Drugs. [FR Doc. 2020–17085 Filed 8–20–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4164–01–P DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Drug Enforcement Administration 21 CFR Parts 1308 and 1312 [Docket No. DEA–500] RIN 1117–AB53 Implementation of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Department of Justice. ACTION: Interim final rule with request for comments. AGENCY: The purpose of this interim final rule is to codify in the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) regulations the statutory amendments to the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) made by the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (AIA), regarding the scope of regulatory controls over marihuana, tetrahydrocannabinols, and other marihuana-related constituents. This interim final rule merely conforms DEA’s regulations to the statutory amendments to the CSA that have already taken effect, and it does not add additional requirements to the regulations. DATES: Effective August 21, 2020. Electronic comments must be submitted, and written comments must be postmarked, on or before October 20, 2020. Commenters should be aware that the electronic Federal Docket Management System will not accept comments after 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the last day of the comment period. ADDRESSES: To ensure proper handling of comments, please reference ‘‘RIN 1117–AB53/Docket No. DEA–500’’ on all correspondence, including any attachments. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\21AUR1.SGM 21AUR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 163 (Friday, August 21, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51635-51639]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17085]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

21 CFR Part 610

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-4757]
RIN 0910-AH95


Revocation of the Test for Mycoplasma

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is 
issuing a final rule to remove the specified test for the presence of 
Mycoplasma for live virus vaccines and inactivated virus vaccines 
produced from in vitro living cell cultures. The rule is being 
finalized because the existing test for Mycoplasma is overly 
restrictive in that it identifies only one test method in detail to be 
used even though other methods also may be appropriate. More sensitive 
and specific methods exist and are currently being practiced, and 
removal of the specific method to test for Mycoplasma provides 
flexibility for accommodating new and evolving technology and 
capabilities without diminishing public health protections. This action 
is part of FDA's implementation of Executive Orders under which 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.

DATES: This rule is effective September 21, 2020.

[[Page 51636]]


ADDRESSES: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the 
docket number found in brackets in the heading of this final rule 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: Tami Belouin, 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:

Table of Contents

I. Executive Summary
    A. Purpose of the Final Rule
    B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Final Rule
    C. Legal Authority
    D. Costs and Benefits
II. Background
    A. Introduction
    B. Need for the Regulation
    C. Summary of Comments to the Proposed Rule
III. Legal Authority
IV. Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA Response
    A. Introduction
    B. Comments and FDA Response
V. Effective Date
VI. Economic Analysis of Impacts
    A. Introduction
    B. Summary of Costs and Benefits
VII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
IX. Federalism
X. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
XI. References

I. Executive Summary

A. Purpose of the Final Rule

    FDA is removing the regulation requiring a specified test for the 
presence of Mycoplasma for live virus vaccines produced from in vitro 
living cell cultures and inactivated virus vaccines produced from such 
living cell cultures because the regulation is overly restrictive in 
that it identifies only one test method in detail to be used even 
though other methods also may be appropriate. More sensitive and 
specific methods exist and are currently being practiced, and removal 
of the required test for Mycoplasma provides flexibility for 
accommodating new and evolving technology and capabilities without 
diminishing public health protections.

B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Final Rule

    The final rule removes Sec.  610.30 (21 CFR 610.30), which details 
the method for Mycoplasma testing of samples of the virus harvest pool 
and control fluid pool of live virus vaccines and inactivated virus 
vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures.

C. 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 (FD&C Act).

D. Costs and Benefits

    Because this final rule will 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. Background

A. Introduction

    On February 24, 2017, Executive Order 13777, ``Enforcing the 
Regulatory Reform Agenda'' (https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/03/01/2017-04107/enforcing-the-regulatory-reform-agenda; 82 FR 
12285, March 1, 2017) was issued. 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 part 
of this initiative, FDA is revoking a regulation as specified in this 
final rule.

B. Need for the Regulation

    It has become increasingly clear that the requirement specifying a 
test for Mycoplasma is too restrictive for live virus vaccines and 
inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures 
because they specify particular methodologies when alternatives may be 
available that provide the same or greater level of assurance of 
safety. Modifications to Mycoplasma testing described in Sec.  610.30 
must meet the requirements of 21 CFR 610.9.
    Thus, the Agency believes that the regulation may no longer reflect 
the current testing procedures as a general matter and that it is more 
appropriate, flexible, and efficient to identify appropriate testing 
requirements for particular products in the biologics license 
application (BLA).
    This final rule removes the specified test for the presence of 
Mycoplasma to provide flexibility for accommodating new and evolving 
technology and capabilities without diminishing public health 
protections. Removal of this regulation allows manufacturers of live 
virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures and 
inactivated virus vaccines produced from such living cell cultures to 
select the most scientifically appropriate Mycoplasma testing method to 
assure the safety, purity, and potency of their vaccines.
    These newer technologies can result in higher sensitivity and 
specificity of Mycoplasma detection and could reduce the time required 
to complete testing for Mycoplasma. Removal of this regulation does not 
remove Mycoplasma testing requirements specified in individual BLAs. A 
manufacturer of a live virus vaccine produced from in vitro living cell 
cultures and inactivated virus vaccines produced from such living cell 
cultures will continue to be required to follow the Mycoplasma test 
requirements specified in its BLA, unless the BLA was revised to modify 
or replace the test through a supplement in accordance with Sec.  
601.12(c) (21 CFR 601.12(c)). FDA would review proposed changes to a 
manufacturer's approved biologics license in the context of that 
particular application to ensure that any such action is appropriate.
    Although the final rule removes the regulation, a manufacturer 
continues to be required to test for Mycoplasma as specified in its 
BLA. This action provides regulated industry with flexibility, as 
appropriate, to employ advances in science and technology as they 
become available, without diminishing public health protections. As 
appropriate, the Agency will describe the appropriate tests for 
particular products in manufacturers' BLAs.

C. Summary of Comments to the Proposed Rule

    We received comments on the proposed rule from individuals and 
industry submitters. The comments were generally supportive, with some 
comments suggesting new testing procedures be proposed. These comments 
are further summarized in section IV.

III. Legal Authority

    We are issuing this final rule under the biological products 
provisions of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 216, 262, 263, 263a, and 264) and 
the drugs and general administrative provisions of the FD&C Act (21 
U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 355, 360, 360c, 360d, 360h, 360i, 371, 
372, 374, and 381). 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

[[Page 51637]]

introduction, transmission, and spread of communicable disease.

IV. Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA Response

A. Introduction

    We received comments on the proposed rule from individuals and 
industry submitters. We describe and respond to the comments in section 
IV.B. We have combined comments on similar topics and have numbered 
each comment to help distinguish between different comments. The number 
assigned to each comment or comment topic is purely for organizational 
purposes and does not signify the comment's value or importance or the 
order in which comments were received.

B. Comments and FDA Response

    (Comment 1) One comment requested that FDA not finalize the rule, 
but instead amend the proposal to revoke the current test for 
Mycoplasma. The commenter proposed that FDA include methodologies on 
newer tests and how they are distinguishable from the present test; 
comparable data on the accuracy of Mycoplasma detection between the 
present and newer tests, and any other additional information that 
would support FDA's argument that the newer tests are more efficient.
    (Response 1) FDA interprets this comment to support the proposal to 
remove the currently described methodology and to amend the regulation 
to specify alternative acceptable tests. The purpose of this rulemaking 
is to permit manufacturers of live virus vaccines produced from in 
vitro living cell cultures and inactivated virus vaccines produced from 
such living cell cultures to select the most scientifically appropriate 
Mycoplasma testing method to assure the safety, purity, and potency of 
their vaccines. Thus, FDA declines to amend the regulation to specify 
alternative acceptable tests because this would not achieve the goal of 
allowing flexibility, as appropriate, to employ advances in science and 
technology as they become available without diminishing public health 
protections. However, FDA acknowledges that guidance is helpful to 
describe FDA's current thinking on alternative methods of testing for 
Mycoplasma in manufacturing samples of live virus vaccines and 
inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures. 
FDA notes that recommended alternative methods for Mycoplasma testing 
for viral vaccines are described in ``Guidance for Industry: 
Characterization and Qualification of Cell Substrates and Other 
Biological Materials Used in the Production of Viral Vaccines for 
Infectious Disease Indications'' (February 2010) (https://www.fda.gov/media/78428/download).
    (Comment 2) One comment supported the proposed rule.
    (Response 2) We acknowledge and appreciate the supportive comment.
    (Comment 3) One comment did not comment specifically on finalizing 
the rule, but stated that with changes to technology, it makes sense to 
update testing procedures. The comment stated that ``a list of the new 
proposed test methods would be beneficial to compare the overall 
benefits and disadvantages.'' Another comment suggested that if the 
rule is finalized, FDA should provide guidance for alternative methods 
of testing for Mycoplasma.
    (Response 3) While the comment states that it would be helpful to 
have a list of new proposed test methods, FDA does not believe the 
regulation should be amended to include such a list because that list 
could become outdated. License holders are welcome to discuss with FDA 
proposals to change their existing test methods and to submit proposals 
to FDA to revise the current test methods in use.
    FDA also acknowledges that guidance is helpful to describe FDA's 
current thinking on acceptable alternative methods of testing for 
Mycoplasma in manufacturing samples of live virus vaccines and 
inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures. 
FDA notes that recommended alternative methods for Mycoplasma testing 
for viral vaccines are described in ``Guidance for Industry: 
Characterization and Qualification of Cell Substrates and Other 
Biological Materials Used in the Production of Viral Vaccines for 
Infectious Disease Indications'' (February 2010) (https://www.fda.gov/media/78428/download).
    (Comment 4) One comment strongly supported removal of the 
regulation and agreed that more sensitive test methods exist; however, 
the commenter wanted the scope of the impact to be expanded to include 
all biological product manufacturers.
    (Response 4) We acknowledge and appreciate the supportive comment. 
The request to expand the revocation to include all biological product 
manufacturers is beyond the scope of this rule making because Sec.  
610.30 pertains to manufacturers of live virus vaccines and inactivated 
virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures.

V. Effective Date

    The final rule will become effective 30 days after the date of 
publication in the Federal Register.

VI. Economic Analysis of Impacts

A. Introduction

    We have examined the impacts of the final rule under Executive 
Order 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 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 this rule would increase flexibility and does not add 
any new regulatory responsibilities, we certify that the 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 $154 
million, using the most current (2018) Implicit Price Deflator for the 
Gross Domestic Product. This final rule would not result in an 
expenditure in any year that meets or exceeds this amount.

B. Summary of Costs and Benefits

    This final rule will amend the biologics regulations under Sec.  
610.30 by removing the specified test for Mycoplasma in the production 
of live virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell cultures and 
inactivated virus

[[Page 51638]]

vaccines produced from such living cell cultures.
    Removing the Sec.  610.30 Test for Mycoplasma will provide 
manufacturers with the flexibility to determine the most appropriate 
and effective Mycoplasma testing methods. FDA guidance dated after 
Sec.  610.30, codified in 1973 (November 20, 1973, 38 FR 32056), 
outlines up-to-date scientific practices to identify Mycoplasma in 
production of live virus vaccines produced from in vitro living cell 
cultures and inactivated virus vaccines produced from in vitro living 
cell cultures. In practice, a vaccine manufacturer can change its 
procedures at any time with submission and prior approval of a 
supplement to its BLA. As a result, we do not expect the repeal of the 
Sec.  610.30 Test for Mycoplasma to significantly influence the 
behavior or procedures of vaccine manufacturers.
    Because manufacturers already have the ability to pursue 
alternative testing procedures, we anticipate no measurable change in 
industry or FDA behavior from this final rulemaking. We therefore 
expect the elimination of the Sec.  610.30 Test for Mycoplasma to be 
cost neutral. This final rule will therefore produce no quantifiable 
savings, costs, or transfers. We also expect no public health benefits 
to be lost as a result of this revocation. Finally, we note that this 
final rulemaking may drive some manufacturers to streamline their 
procedures and search for more efficient Mycoplasma testing methods. 
This optimization may produce some unquantifiable efficiencies.

                                      Table 1--Summary of Benefits, Costs and Distributional Effects of Final Rule
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                  Units
                                             Primary        Low          High    ---------------------------------------
                 Category                    estimate     estimate     estimate       Year       Discount      Period                 Notes
                                                                                    dollars     rate  (%)     covered
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits:
    Annualized...........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            7               ...............................
    Monetized $millions/year.............  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            3               ...............................
    Annualized...........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            7               ...............................
    Quantified...........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            3               ...............................
                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Qualitative..........................  Benefits to manufacturers from         ...........  ...........               ...............................
                                           flexibility to determine appropriate
                                           and effective Mycoplasma testing
                                           methods.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs:
    Annualized...........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            7               ...............................
    Monetized $millions/year.............  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            3               ...............................
    Annualized...........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            7               ...............................
    Quantified...........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            3               ...............................
                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Qualitative..........................  Costs to manufacturers to change       ...........  ...........               ...............................
                                           Mycoplasma testing methods, if
                                           voluntarily pursued.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers:
    Federal..............................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            7               ...............................
    Annualized...........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            3               ...............................
    Monetized $millions/year.............  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........               ...............................
                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From/To..............................  From:
                                           To:
                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Other................................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            7               ...............................
    Annualized...........................  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........            3               ...............................
    Monetized $millions/year.............  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........  ...........               ...............................
                                          --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From/To..............................  From:
                                           To:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effects:
    State, Local or Tribal Government: None.
    Small Business: None.
    Wages: None.
    Growth: None.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In line with Executive Order 13771, in table 2 we present 
annualized values of costs and cost savings over an infinite time 
horizon. There are no quantifiable costs or cost savings from this 
rule. This final rule would be considered a deregulatory action under 
Executive Order 13771.

[[Page 51639]]



                                  Table 2--Executive Order 13771 Summary Table
                           [in $ Millions 2016 Dollars, Over an Infinite Time Horizon]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Primary          Lower           Upper
                              Item                                estimate  (7%)  estimate  (7%)  estimate  (7%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Present Value of Costs..........................................  ..............  ..............  ..............
Present Value of Cost Savings...................................  ..............  ..............  ..............
Present Value of Net Costs......................................  ..............  ..............  ..............
Annualized Costs................................................  ..............  ..............  ..............
Annualized Cost Savings.........................................  ..............  ..............  ..............
Annualized Net Costs............................................  ..............  ..............  ..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have developed a comprehensive Economic Analysis of Impacts that 
assesses the impacts of the final rule. The full analysis of economic 
impacts is available in the docket for this final rule (Ref. 1) and at 
https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/reports/economic-impact-analyses-fda-regulations.

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. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This 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.

IX. Federalism

    We have analyzed this 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.

X. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    We have analyzed this rule in accordance with the principles set 
forth in Executive Order 13175. We have determined that the rule does 
not contain policies that have substantial direct effects on one or 
more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government 
and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. Accordingly, we 
conclude that the rule does not contain policies that have tribal 
implications as defined in the Executive Order and, consequently, a 
tribal summary impact statement is not required.

XI. Reference

    The following reference is on display at the Dockets Management 
Staff (see ADDRESSES) and is available for viewing by interested 
persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday; it is also 
available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov. FDA has 
verified the website address, as of the date this document publishes in 
the Federal Register, but websites are subject to change over time.

1. FDA/Economics Staff, ``Elimination of the 21 CFR 610.30 Test for 
Mycoplasma Preliminary Regulatory Impact Analysis, Preliminary 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
Analysis,'' 2018. (Available at https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/reports/economic-impact-analyses-fda-regulations.)

List of Subjects in 21 CFR part 610

    Biologics, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under 
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 
610 is amended as follows:

PART 610--GENERAL BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS STANDARDS

0
1. The authority citation for 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.

Subpart D--[Removed and Reserved]

0
2. Remove and reserve subpart D, consisting of Sec.  610.30.

    Dated: July 29, 2020.
Stephen M. Hahn,
Commissioner of Food and Drugs.
[FR Doc. 2020-17085 Filed 8-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.