Import Tolerances for Residues of Unapproved New Animal Drugs in Food, 52401-52412 [2021-19967]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
52401
Name of Product/Data/Publication/Information/Service
Current fee
New fee
NOAA National Center for Environmental Information
Provision of Global Nighttime VIIRS day/night band data in HDF5 format ............................................................
Provision of regional data from the VIIRS instrument on a daily basis ..................................................................
29,975.00
14,720.00
(*)
(*)
* Indicates a product no longer offered.
[Docket No. FDA–2001–N–0075 (formerly
Docket No. 2001N–0284)]
Medicine (HFV–150), Food and Drug
Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 240–402–0850,
charli.long-medrano@fda.hhs.gov.
With regard to the information
collection: JonnaLynn Capezzuto, Office
of Operations, Food and Drug
Administration, Three White Flint
North, 10A–12M, 11601 Landsdown St.,
North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301–796–
3794, PRAStaff@fda.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
RIN 0910–AF78
Table of Contents
[FR Doc. 2021–20194 Filed 9–20–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–HR–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 10, 20, 25, 500, and 510
Import Tolerances for Residues of
Unapproved New Animal Drugs in
Food
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Final rule.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA, the Agency, we)
is issuing a final rule that establishes
procedures by which we may establish,
amend, or revoke tolerances for residues
of new animal drugs in any edible
portion of any animal imported into the
United States (import tolerances). These
import tolerances provide a basis for the
legal marketing of such animal-derived
food.
DATES: This rule is effective January 19,
2022. Submit written comments
(including recommendations) on
information collection issues under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
by October 21, 2021 (see section IX, the
‘‘Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995’’
section of this document).
ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on
the information collection are received,
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) recommends that written
comments be submitted to https://
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
Find this particular information
collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under
Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or
by using the search function. All
comments should be identified with the
OMB control number 0910–NEW. Also
include the FDA docket number found
in brackets in the heading of this
document.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
SUMMARY:
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. Table of Abbreviations/Commonly Used
Acronyms in This Document
III. Background
A. History and Scope of This Rulemaking
B. General Overview of the Final Rule
IV. Legal Authority
V. Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA
Response
A. General Comments on the Proposed
Rule and FDA Response
B. Comments on Information To Support
Establishment of an Import Tolerance
and FDA Response
C. Comments on Environmental Review
and FDA Response
VI. Effective Date
VII. Economic Analysis of Impacts
VIII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
X. Federalism
XI. Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Final Rule
This rule codifies procedures and
food safety criteria by which tolerances
for residues of unapproved new animal
drugs in any edible portion of any
animal imported into the United States
(import tolerances) may be established
or amended. These import tolerances
provide a basis for the legal marketing
of such animal-derived food. The
regulation also specifies procedures by
which import tolerances may be
revoked.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of
the Final Rule
With regard to the final rule: Charli
Long-Medrano, Center for Veterinary
This final rule codifies procedures
and food safety criteria pertaining to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
establishment, amendment, and
revocation of import tolerances in new
subpart C of part 510 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (21 CFR part 510).
Major provisions include:
• The scope and definitions;
• who may initiate proceedings to
establish an import tolerance;
• contents of a submission requesting
establishment of an import tolerance;
• sources of data and information
supporting the safety of a proposed
import tolerance;
• Agency procedures for
establishment, amendment, or
revocation of an import tolerance;
• public disclosure of import
tolerance-related actions (actions under
consideration, establishment,
amendment, or revocation); and
• environmental impact assessment
of import tolerance-related actions.
In addition, conforming amendments
are being made in §§ 10.25, 20.100,
25.20, 500.80, 500.82, 500.88, and
500.92 (21 CFR 10.25, 20.100, 25.20,
500.80, 500.82, 500.88, and 500.92). A
technical amendment is being made in
§ 10.25 (21 CFR 10.25) to include food
additive petitions under 21 CFR 571.1
in the non-exhaustive list of petitions
specified in FDA regulations.
The procedures and food safety
criteria in the final rule are
fundamentally the same as in the
proposed rule; however, the final rule
has been minimally reorganized to
clarify that import tolerances
established at the Commissioner’s
initiative follow the same procedures as
those established at the request of an
interested person. We have also made
nonsubstantive wording changes for
clarity.
C. Legal Authority
Our authority for issuing this final
rule is provided by the new animal drug
provisions of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) by which
we establish tolerances for residues of
new animal drugs and under provisions
of the FD&C Act that give the Agency
general rulemaking authority to issue
regulations for the efficient enforcement
of the FD&C Act.
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
52402
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
D. Costs and Benefits
1. Costs of the Final Rule
All entities affected by this final rule
will incur the one-time cost for reading
and understanding this rule. Based on
the small number of firms that we
estimate could request an import
tolerance per year, only about five firms
would need to read and understand this
rule over the next 10 years. The total
costs for reading and understanding the
rule range from around $530 to around
$660. Table 1 includes a summary of
these costs.
TABLE 1—ONE-TIME COSTS FOR READING AND UNDERSTANDING THE RULE
[2020 Dollars]
Low
High
Reading time (hours) ...................................................................................................................
Wage ($ per hour) .......................................................................................................................
Affected entities ...........................................................................................................................
Number of people reading per entity ...........................................................................................
0.75
$140.30
5
1
0.85
$140.30
5
1
1
$140.30
5
1
Total cost ..............................................................................................................................
$530
$585
$660
2. Benefits of the Final Rule
The procedures codified herein clarify
the import tolerance submission process
for the establishment, amendment, and
revocation of these tolerances. This
should result in improving the
efficiency of the program for both
industry and government. However, we
lack data to quantify these efficiency
gains.
II. Table of Abbreviations/Commonly
Used Acronyms in This Document
Abbreviation
What it means
ADAA ........................................................................................................
ADI ............................................................................................................
CFR ..........................................................................................................
CNADA .....................................................................................................
Codex MRL ...............................................................................................
CVM ..........................................................................................................
FAO ..........................................................................................................
FDA ...........................................................................................................
FD&C Act ..................................................................................................
GMP ..........................................................................................................
GFI ............................................................................................................
JECFA ......................................................................................................
JMPR ........................................................................................................
MRL ..........................................................................................................
NADA ........................................................................................................
US .............................................................................................................
VICH .........................................................................................................
Animal Drug Availability Act of 1996.
Acceptable Daily Intake.
Code of Federal Regulations.
Application for Conditional Approval of a New Animal Drug.
MRL established by the Codex Alimentarius Committee.
Center for Veterinary Medicine.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
Good Manufacturing Process.
Guidance for Industry.
Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives.
Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues.
Maximum Residue Limit.
New Animal Drug Application.
United States.
International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements
for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal Products.
World Health Organization of the United Nations.
WHO .........................................................................................................
III. Background
A. History and Scope of This
Rulemaking
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Medium
In 1996, the President signed into law
the Animal Drug Availability Act of
1996 (ADAA) (Pub. L. 104–250), which
amended the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
360b(a)) to authorize the establishment
of import tolerances that would provide
a basis for the legal marketing of
imported animal-derived food
containing residues of new animal drugs
neither approved nor conditionally
approved in the United States
(unapproved new animal drugs).
Without an import tolerance, any
amount of residue of an unapproved
new animal drug in imported, animalderived food would cause that food to
be adulterated under section
402(a)(2)(C)(ii) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 342(a)(2)(C)(ii)) because the drug
VerDate Sep<11>2014
22:26 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
would be deemed unsafe under section
512 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360b).
Such food could be denied entry into
the United States under section
801(a)(3) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
381(a)(3)). It remains unlawful to import
animal-derived food containing a
residue of an unapproved new animal
drug, unless an import tolerance has
been established for such drug and any
residue of the new animal drug in the
imported animal-derived food does not
exceed that import tolerance. These
regulations establish procedures under
which the Agency will establish,
amend, or revoke import tolerances for
residues of unapproved new animal
drugs.
The ADAA also specified that in
establishing import tolerances, FDA
must rely on data sufficient to
demonstrate that a proposed tolerance is
safe based on similar food safety criteria
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
used to establish a tolerance under a
new animal drug application (NADA).
For establishment of import tolerances,
food safety data can be submitted by the
drug manufacturer or be available from
a relevant international organization
such as the Codex Alimentarius
Commission, provided such data are not
inconsistent with criteria used to
establish a tolerance for new animal
drugs in NADAs.
The regulations make it clear that the
Commissioner may start a review
process to establish, amend, or revoke
an import tolerance on his or her own
initiative under § 10.25(b). These
regulations also establish when import
tolerance-related actions (actions
resulting in establishment, amendment,
or revocation) and their basis will be
publicly disclosed.
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
B. General Overview of the Final Rule
In issuing this rule, the Agency
finalizes the provisions in the January
2012 proposed rule (77 FR 3653,
January 25, 2012). This final rule
reflects revisions the Agency made after
considering all comments received.
This final rule amends part 510 by
adding sections to establish the scope of
new subpart C (§ 510.201 (21 CFR
510.201)); to define certain relevant
terms (§ 510.202 (21 CFR 510.202)); to
establish who may initiate proceedings
to establish or amend an import
tolerance (§ 510.203 (21 CFR 510.203));
to describe the content, options for
submission, and administration of a
request to establish or amend an import
tolerance (§ 510.205 (21 CFR 510.205));
and to describe the review of
information to establish or amend an
import tolerance (§ 510.206 (21 CFR
510.206)). Provisions describing when
and how information relating to import
tolerances will be publicly disclosed,
previously in proposed § 510.205, are
now described and organized in
redesignated § 510.207 (21 CFR
510.207). Procedures that FDA follows
in establishment, denial of a request for
establishment, and amendment of an
import tolerance are described in
redesignated § 510.209 (21 CFR
510.209). Procedures for revocation of
an import tolerance are described in
redesignated § 510.210 (21 CFR
510.210). Procedures for requesting
reconsideration or administrative stay of
a decision to establish, amend, or revoke
an import tolerance are specified in
redesignated §§ 510.212 and 510.213 (21
CFR 510.212 and 510.213), respectively.
IV. Legal Authority
We are issuing these regulations
under the legal authority provided by
section 512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360b(a)(6)) relating to the
establishment of import tolerances for
unapproved new animal drugs and
under section 701(a) of the FD&C Act
(21 U.S.C. 371(a)), which gives FDA
general rulemaking authority to issue
regulations for the efficient enforcement
of the FD&C Act.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
V. Comments on the Proposed Rule and
FDA Response
We received 17 comments on the
proposed import tolerance rule by the
close of the comment period, each
commenting on one or more aspects of
the proposed rule. We received
comments from a wide array of
members of the public, including trade
organizations, academia, public
advocacy groups, consumers, and
government agencies. The comments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
addressed numerous provisions of the
proposed rule, including our specific
requests for comments set forth in the
proposed rule. Some comments
addressed issues that are outside of the
scope of this rule. Because such
comments were beyond the scope of this
rule, we do not include a discussion of
them here.
A. General Comments on the Proposed
Rule and FDA Response
(Comment 1) Several comments
expressed concern that establishment of
import tolerances for unapproved new
animal drugs is unfair to domestic
producers who cannot legally use these
drugs, thereby putting them at a
competitive disadvantage.
(Response 1) The ADAA amended the
FD&C Act to permit FDA to establish a
tolerance for residues of a new animal
drug in any edible portion of any animal
imported into the United States when
the intended use of the new animal drug
is not approved for use in the United
States. The legislative history notes
there may be appropriate instances (e.g.,
the disease treated does not exist in the
United States) in which food-producing
animals in other countries are treated
with animal drugs that are not approved
in the United States. Thus, Congress
enacted this provision to provide a legal
means by which food that may contain
residues of these drugs may be imported
into the United States. Under the FD&C
Act, lawful use of the same animal drug
in the United States requires that the
new animal drug be approved or
conditionally approved by FDA. This
requires additional information and data
from the sponsor to establish, among
other things, that the drug is effective
for its intended use and safe for the
animals receiving the drug.
(Comment 2) One comment states that
establishing import tolerances would
result in an increase in the volume of
contaminated seafood into the United
States.
(Response 2) FDA notes that one
consequence of establishing an import
tolerance may be an increase in
imported edible tissues from foodproducing animals treated with the drug
that is the subject of an import
tolerance. However, these imported
tissues will not be permitted entry if
they contain residues above the import
tolerance, the maximum concentration
of residues of the new animal drug in
the edible tissues that is determined to
be safe for human consumers.
(Comment 3) A few comments express
concern that import tolerances risk
exposing U.S. consumers to unsafe
tissue residues.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52403
(Response 3) Section 512(a)(6) of the
FD&C Act requires that the Agency rely
on human food safety criteria similar to
those used to establish tolerances for
approved new animal drugs when
establishing import tolerances. The
human food safety criteria and review
processes resulting in establishment of
tolerances for domestically approved
new animal drugs and for import
tolerances for unapproved new animal
drugs are fundamentally the same.
Whether the Agency is establishing an
import tolerance or a tolerance in the
course of approving or conditionally
approving a new animal drug, we
require data and information to
demonstrate that the residues of the new
animal drug in the edible products of
treated animals are safe for human
consumers. Imported tissues will not be
allowed entry into the United States if
they contain residues above the import
tolerance.
(Comment 4) One comment states that
the rule should include a requirement
that the country in which the
unapproved new animal drug is legally
used have an equivalent animal drug
regulatory program. In addition, a few
comments recommend requiring that
the requester submit: A record of the
foreign country’s approval actions and
the approved uses of the new animal
drug in other countries; information on
alternative treatments or competing new
animal drugs and an explanation of why
the use of an unapproved new animal
drug is necessary in light of alternatives;
and an affidavit that there are no FDAapproved new animal drugs to treat the
disease or condition for which the
unapproved new animal drug is
indicated. The comments also
recommend that the requester be
required to comply with the
requirement to report adverse drug
events and that food containing such
new animal drug residues originate from
a country that has approved the drug
and is actively monitoring its use.
(Response 4) We disagree. Under the
FD&C Act, to establish an import
tolerance, FDA only must consider
information related to the human food
safety of the unapproved new animal
drug that is the subject of the import
tolerance. The data sufficient to
demonstrate that residues of the
unapproved new animal drug that is the
subject of a proposed import tolerance
are safe is based on similar food safety
criteria used to establish tolerances for
new animal drugs approved in the
United States. That is, the human food
safety standard for domestically
approved new animal drugs and new
animal drugs for which an import
tolerance is established is the same:
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
52404
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Reasonable certainty of no harm. The
data that may be considered include
data submitted to appropriate regulatory
authorities in any country where the
new animal drug is lawfully used and
data available from an appropriate
international organization, to the extent
such data are not inconsistent with the
criteria used to establish a tolerance for
applications for new animal drugs in the
United States.
The FD&C Act does not require the
Agency to consider the use of the drug
in other countries (including the
disease(s) for which the unapproved
new animal drug is indicated and
whether there are approved drugs or
alternative treatments available), or that
the country(ies) where the drug is
approved have an equivalent regulatory
program (e.g., any post-approval
monitoring). In addition, the FD&C Act
does not impose adverse drug event
reporting requirements for the
establishment of import tolerances.
Once an import tolerance is established,
imported animal-derived food that
contains residues of the unapproved
new animal drug may enter the United
States if those residues are below the
import tolerance. There is no
requirement that the imported food
originate from a country that has
approved the drug.
(Comment 5) Two comments state
that U.S. consumers should be informed
at the point of sale or through product
labeling that imported edible tissues
from food-producing animals may
contain residues of new animal drugs
that are not approved for use in the
United States.
(Response 5) FDA does not agree that
such public disclosure is needed to
address the safety of residues from
drugs for which import tolerances are
established. The purpose of the
legislation was to ensure that any edible
portion of any animal imported into the
United States is safe so long as such
residues are below the established
import tolerance.
(Comment 6) One comment states that
establishing import tolerances
undermines the new animal drug
approval process. The commenter
further states that FDA’s estimate that
an import tolerance review will require
100 hours of a mid-level FDA
employee’s time is evidence that the
import tolerance review will be less
stringent.
(Response 6) We disagree that
establishment of import tolerances
undermines the new animal drug
approval process. Congress recognized
that there may be appropriate instances
in which food-producing animals in
other countries are treated with animal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
drugs that are not approved in the
United States. For example, the disease
being treated does not exist in the
United States, or the particular animal
industry either may not exist in the
United States or is very small, resulting
in a limited or nonexistent market for
the drug in the United States. Nor do we
agree that our estimate that an import
tolerance review will generally require
100 hours of a mid-level FDA
employee’s time is evidence that import
tolerance review is less stringent than
review of proposed tolerances as part of
a new animal drug application. The
human food safety standard for
domestically approved drugs and drugs
for which an import tolerance is
established is the same: Reasonable
certainty of no harm. Whether a person
is requesting that the Agency establish
an import tolerance or approve an
NADA, the requester or sponsor,
respectively, is required to furnish FDA
with evidence demonstrating that the
residues of the new animal drug in the
edible products of treated animals are
safe for human consumption. In our
experience, it requires about 100 hours
of a mid-level FDA employee’s time to
review this evidence, whether
submitted under a new animal drug
application or a request to establish an
import tolerance.
(Comment 7) One comment states that
tolerances should only be considered for
an unapproved animal drug that is used
solely for therapeutic purposes,
asserting that the ADAA was intended
to establish import tolerances for
situations where a drug is used for
treating diseases and conditions that do
not occur in the United States.
(Response 7) We disagree. The plain
language of the statute does not limit the
establishment of import tolerances to
new animal drugs intended to be used
solely for therapeutic purposes.
Generally, the reason an animal drug
developer does not seek approval of the
new animal drug in the United States
(with attendant tolerances) is because
the particular animal-rearing industry
may not exist in the United States at a
scale to justify the expense of seeking
FDA approval. In some cases, the new
animal drug may be used for nontherapeutic purposes.
B. Comments on Information To
Support Establishment of an Import
Tolerance and FDA Response
(Comment 8) One comment notes that
the phrase ‘‘some assurance that the
drugs are manufactured under GMP
conditions,’’ a comment provided by a
Veterinary Medicine Advisory
Committee during a public meeting held
on this topic in January 2002, and
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
discussed in the preamble to the
proposed rule, seems to go beyond the
scope of what is necessary to ensure
public safety and should be interpreted
with broad flexibility.
(Response 8) We agree. As noted
previously, section 512(a)(6) of the
FD&C Act provides that FDA shall rely
on data sufficient to demonstrate that a
proposed tolerance is safe based on
similar food safety criteria used to
establish tolerances for NADAs filed
under section 512(b)(1) of the FD&C Act.
Section 512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act does
not require the Agency to consider other
requirements, such as an assurance of
good manufacturing processes (GMPs),
applicable to the new animal drug
approval process in determining
whether the Agency should grant a
request to establish an import tolerance.
(Comment 9) Two comments assert
that conditions of use of unapproved
animal drugs do not need to be
considered in establishing import
tolerances so long as residues in
imported tissues are below the import
tolerance.
(Response 9) We disagree. Information
about the conditions of use of the new
animal drug must be considered when
deciding to establish or amend an
import tolerance so that the relevance of
the submitted human food safety data,
particularly tissue residues that may
result from the lawful dosing regimen,
can be determined. The tissue residue
concentration is affected by the dosing
regimen, i.e., the dose level and
duration for which the animal is treated.
Knowing that the new animal drug
tissue concentrations reported in the
human food safety studies are the result
of animals dosed under the same
conditions of use as described in the
request provides FDA with assurance
that the residue data are an appropriate
basis to make decisions regarding
whether to establish or amend an import
tolerance.
(Comment 10) One comment
expressed concern that proposed
§ 510.205, now § 510.205(e)(5), which
provides that a request for an import
tolerance may include other human
food safety information as deemed
necessary by the Commissioner, is too
broad, and that the possibility of ad hoc
requirements may serve to curtail the
initiation of requests or frustrate the
efforts of those who do submit import
tolerance requests.
(Response 10) The Agency does not
intend to use this provision to require
more human food safety information
than is necessary to assess whether
residues of unapproved new animal
drugs in edible tissues of treated
animals are safe for human
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
consumption. The Agency will use
similar criteria as for the approval of
NADAs in making its determinations,
including any other information the
Commissioner deems necessary to
assure safe and effective use. See section
512(d)(1)(D) of the FD&C Act. Similarly,
the Agency must ensure that a request
for a particular import tolerance
includes all the relevant information
needed to make an appropriate human
food safety determination. For example,
the requester may not have submitted
enough information for FDA to
adequately assess the toxicity of the new
animal drug or the requester may not
have provided enough detail about the
proposed analytical method. The
information requested will not be ad
hoc because it must be relevant to the
criteria and review standards for human
food safety, which are the same for
approval of new animal drugs and
establishment of import tolerances.
(Comment 11) One comment asks
whether the Agency employs analysts to
verify the accuracy of translations of
materials submitted in a foreign
language.
(Response 11) The Agency will rely
on the requester’s assertion that it is
submitting a complete and accurate
translation of any materials submitted in
a foreign language. As provided for in
18 U.S.C. 1001, any person, in any
matter within the jurisdiction of the
Agency, who knowingly and willfully
falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any
trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
makes any materially false, fictitious, or
fraudulent statement or representation;
or makes or uses any false writing or
document knowing the same to contain
any materially false, fictitious, or
fraudulent statement or entry, may be
subject to criminal fines or
imprisonment.
(Comment 12) One comment requests
that electronic submission of import
tolerance request dossiers be an option.
There should be no need for paper
submissions.
(Response 12) We agree that
electronic submission of import
tolerance requests should be an option
and are providing for electronic
submission of requests in § 510.105(b) of
this final rule. At present, the Center for
Veterinary Medicine (CVM) Office of
New Animal Drug Evaluation (ONADE)
can receive and process electronic
submissions for import tolerance files.
Submissions to CVM can be made after
first registering with FDA’s Electronic
Submissions Gateway (ESG) and CVM’s
Electronic Submission System.
Additional information and a user guide
on eSubmitter can be obtained at either
the ‘‘CVM eSubmitter Resource Center’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
website or the ‘‘Getting Started with
eSubmitter’’ website. Contact
ESGHelpDEsk@fda.hhs.gov for help
with the ESG or cvmesubmitter@
fda.hhs.gov for help using CVM’s
eSubmitter tool.
(Comment 13) Several comments
question how FDA will evaluate an
established acceptable daily intake
(ADI), especially considering different
food consumption patterns of different
countries. Comments also question
whether FDA considers subpopulations,
such as children and immunecompromised people who may be
particularly sensitive to the effects of
exposure to drug residues. Comments
express concerns that safety standards
are being loosened and unsafe residues
will be allowed in foods.
(Response 13) The ADI established for
residues of an unapproved new animal
drug in edible tissues of food-producing
animals that is used in evaluating an
import tolerance request is based on the
same toxicity data and information as is
used to establish an ADI for a
domestically approved new animal drug
and is evaluated using the same
standards and methodology that is used
for a domestic drug approval. The
toxicity data that FDA uses to determine
the ADI are described in guidances
available on our website (https://
www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/
guidance-industry/human-food-safetyguidances). The guidances for
toxicology studies are documents that
are internationally harmonized through
the International Cooperation on
Harmonisation of Technical
Requirements for Registration of
Veterinary Medicinal Products (VICH)
Expert Working Groups. The ADI,
expressed in a micrograms or milligrams
of the new animal drug per kilogram of
body weight per day (mg/kg bw/day or
mg/kg bw/day), is the amount of drug
residue that can be consumed on a daily
basis for up to a lifetime without
adverse effects or harm to the health of
a consumer.
The ADI is meant to be applied to a
general population, including sensitive
subpopulations. The ADI determination
uses conservative procedures to ensure
that the final value is protective of a
general population, such as application
of a safety factor to account for human
variability in sensitivity to the toxicity
of the new animal drug, and tests for
specific subpopulations if needed
(asthmatic persons, allergic persons,
etc.). Additionally, the application of
the ADI to safe concentrations of the
drug residues in edible tissues uses a
lower average human body weight (60
kg) and conservative estimates of food
consumption, such as a high milk
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52405
consumption factor of 1.5 liter per day.
Therefore, the Agency believes using the
same methodology to calculate ADI for
import tolerances as U.S.-approved
animal drugs is appropriate.
(Comment 14) One comment states
that the rule should explicitly prohibit
the setting of import tolerances for
residues of new animal drugs that
induce cancer when ingested by
humans or animals.
(Response 14) We disagree that the
rule should explicitly prohibit the
Agency from considering new animal
drugs of carcinogenic concern (new
animal drugs that induce cancer when
ingested by people or animals). Section
512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act provides FDA
the authority to consider requests to
establish import tolerances using food
safety criteria similar to those that are
applied to the approval of new animal
drugs. Under section 512(d)(1)(I) of the
FD&C Act, the Agency may approve
NADAs for drugs of carcinogenic
concern as long as the compound does
not adversely affect the animals and no
residue of a carcinogenic compound
will be found in food produced from
those animals. Pursuant to section
512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act, FDA will
consider requests for import tolerances
for animal drugs of carcinogenic
concern using similar food safety
criteria as it would for a new animal
drug application for approval. Thus, if
FDA determines that a new animal drug
for which an import tolerance request
has been submitted is a new animal
drug of carcinogenic concern, the
requester will be directed to comply
with the ‘‘no residue’’ requirements of
§§ 500.80 through 500.92 (21 CFR part
500, subpart E, Regulation of
Carcinogenic Compounds Used in FoodProducing Animals). Any regulatory
method for ascertaining the marker
residue in the target tissue will be made
publicly available pursuant to
§ 510.207(b) of the final rule. We have
revised §§ 510.205(e) and 510.207(b) of
the final rule and made conforming
changes to §§ 500.80, 500.82, 500.88,
and 500.92 to clarify the process for
evaluating a new animal drug of
carcinogenic concern under these
circumstances.
(Comment 15) One comment states
that the rule should specifically prohibit
the setting of import tolerances for
antimicrobial animal drugs that are in
the same classes as drugs used in
human medicine.
(Response 15) We disagree. Rather
than declining to establish import
tolerances for residues of antimicrobial
new animal drugs that are in the same
classes as drugs used in human
medicine, we intend to apply the same
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
52406
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
human food safety standard (reasonable
certainty of no harm) as we apply to all
new animal drugs, including
antimicrobial new animal drugs, seeking
approval under an NADA or application
for conditional approval of a new
animal drug (CNADA). For requests for
import tolerances for antimicrobials,
FDA evaluates the impacts on human
health, including the potential
transmission of antimicrobial resistant
bacteria of human health concern
through the consumption of animalderived food products. To assess these
impacts, FDA recommends conducting
the qualitative risk assessment
described in Guidance for Industry (GFI)
#152 entitled ‘‘Evaluating the Safety of
Antimicrobial New Animal Drugs with
Regard to Their Microbiological Effects
on Bacteria of Human Health Concern,’’
October 23, 2003.1 In addition, we
recommend that requesters address the
step-wise approach outlined in GFI
#159 (VICH GL36), ‘‘Studies to Evaluate
the Safety of Residues of Veterinary
Drugs in Human Food: General
Approach to Establish a Microbiological
ADI,’’ March 5, 2013,2 to assure the
Agency that any impacts of
antimicrobial new animal drug residues
on the intestinal flora of human
consumers are minimal. By addressing
these important human food safety
endpoints for antimicrobial new animal
drugs, requesters will be able to assure
the Agency that the imported animalderived food products are safe for
human consumption.
(Comment 16) A comment stated that
the rule should specifically prohibit the
setting of import tolerances for
veterinary drugs that have extralabel use
restrictions in the United States or that
are banned from use in domestic
livestock enterprises (including
aquaculture).
(Response 16) As noted previously,
whether a person is requesting the
Agency establish an import tolerance or
approve an NADA, the requester or
sponsor, respectively, is required to
furnish FDA with evidence
demonstrating that the residues of the
new animal drug in the edible products
of treated animals are safe for human
consumption. If the requester can satisfy
the human food safety requirements, the
Agency may establish an import
tolerance for a food-producing species
for which there is no extralabel use
restriction, even if an extralabel use
1 Available at: https://www.fda.gov/media/69949/
download.
2 Available at: https://www.fda.gov/regulatoryinformation/search-fda-guidance-documents/cvmgfi-159-vich-gl36-studies-evaluate-safety-residuesveterinary-drugs-human-food-general-approach.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
prohibition exists for other foodproducing species.
(Comment 17) One comment requests
that the requirement that the
unapproved animal drug be registered
(lawfully used) in another country
should be revised to allow a request for
an import tolerance to simultaneously
progress with registration of the drug in
foreign countries.
(Response 17) The statute gives us
discretion to ‘‘consider and rely on data
submitted by the drug manufacturer,
including data submitted to appropriate
regulatory authorities in any country
where the new animal drug is lawfully
used.’’ As we noted in the preamble to
the proposed rule, the Agency has
interpreted this statutory language to
mean that we may establish an import
tolerance for a new animal drug that is
not approved or conditionally approved
in the United States but that is lawfully
used in another country. Thus, foreign
lawful use in at least one country must
occur before a request to establish an
import tolerance is submitted to the
Agency.
(Comment 18) One comment requests
that FDA revise the evidentiary standard
for revocation of an import tolerance to
be ‘‘evidence to show a reasonable basis
from which serious questions may be
inferred about the ultimate safety of the
unapproved new animal drug residue
and any substance that may be formed
as a result of the unapproved new
animal drug’s use.’’ The comment raises
the concern that the proposed rule
appears to require consumers to bring
conclusive evidence to obtain a review
of the import tolerance.
(Response 18) We disagree. The
standard for revoking an import
tolerance is provided for in section
512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act, which states
that the Agency may revoke an import
tolerance ‘‘if information demonstrates
that the use of the new animal drug
under actual use conditions results in
food being imported into the United
States with residues exceeding the
tolerance or if scientific evidence shows
the tolerance to be unsafe.’’ The final
rule reflects this standard in
§ 510.210(a). An import tolerance can be
revoked upon petition or by the
initiative of the Commissioner.
C. Comments on Environmental Review
and FDA Response
(Comment 19) In the preamble to the
proposed rule, the Agency requested
comments and supporting information
relevant to the issue of whether import
tolerances will have a significant effect
on the environment in the United States
or abroad. FDA received two comments
indicating that available information
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
shows that FDA’s establishment of
import tolerances should present no
appreciable risk to the environment
from either the consumption or disposal
of edible tissues containing residues of
animal drugs. Two comments support
creation by FDA of a categorical
exclusion from the requirement to
prepare an environmental assessment
(EA) for an import tolerance request. For
example, one comment presents
evidence why risks to the environment
should not be significant, showing
calculations and summarizing
information indicating that residues in
certain media (e.g., wastewater, soil)
would be below threshold criteria
already established by FDA in guidance
documents or in existing categorical
exclusions for other actions. Thus, the
basis for establishing a new categorical
exclusion for import tolerances is
already in place.
(Response 19) We agree with the
comments’ assessment of the low risk of
significant environmental impacts from
either the consumption or disposal of
edible tissues containing residues of
animal drugs. Since the 2012 proposed
rule, we have reviewed EAs for several
import tolerance requests for new
animal drugs used in both aquatic and
terrestrial environments (aquatic:
Azamethiphos and lufenuron in
salmonids, benzocaine in Atlantic
salmon and rainbow trout, and
emamectin and teflubenzuron in
Atlantic salmon; terrestrial: Monensin
and monepantel in sheep; see https://
www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/
Products/ImportExports/
ucm315830.htm). Regardless of the
environment in which the drugs were
used, each EA described the
introduction of drug residues into the
domestic environment as being through
the consumption of food resulting in: (1)
Excreta entering sewage treatment
facilities and (2) waste of edible tissues
disposed of in landfills. Each EA
resulted in a finding by the Agency of
no significant environmental impact;
thus, for each import tolerance action a
finding of no significant impact was
prepared.
In response to comments that FDA
create a categorical exclusion from the
requirement to prepare an EA for an
action on an import tolerance, the
Agency is considering proposing a new
categorical exclusion specific to
establishment, amendment, or
revocation of an import tolerance. This
would require review by the White
House Council on Environmental
Quality, as well as additional
rulemaking with public notice and
comment. The Agency is currently
evaluating available information to
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
52407
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
determine if this category of actions
would individually or cumulatively
result in significant effects on the
environment and will proceed as
appropriate.
(Comment 20) One comment notes
that establishment of an import
tolerance should also have no
appreciable environmental effect
outside the United States. If the new
animal drug is not expected to have
significant environmental impacts in the
country where it is registered for use, it
is hard to imagine a situation where
movement of residues to another
country or into the global commons,
such as the open ocean, would present
a significant environmental risk.
(Response 20) We agree with the
comment’s assessment of the low risk of
significant environmental effects abroad
of residues of new animal drugs
appropriately registered in the country
they are used based on our experience
to date. An analysis of effects abroad is
not currently required in the EA for
establishment of an import tolerance;
however, when necessary, such an
analysis will be completed by the
Agency.
VI. Effective Date
The rule is effective January 19, 2022.
VII. Economic Analysis of Impacts
We have examined the impacts of the
final rule under Executive Order 12866,
Executive Order 13563, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601–612), and
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). Executive Orders
12866 and 13563 direct 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). 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 the final rule will simply codify
the procedures that are currently used
for the import tolerance program, 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 $158 million, using the
most current (2020) 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.
Summary of Cost and Benefits
Firms are currently able to request
that we establish or amend an import
tolerance. The final rule will not change
the current procedures for these
requests. Thus, we include only the
incremental costs of reading and
understanding the final rule on import
tolerance procedures.
In table 2, FDA provides the
Regulatory Information Service Center
and Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs Consolidated
Information Center accounting
information.
TABLE 2—ECONOMIC DATA: COSTS AND BENEFITS STATEMENT
Units
Primary
estimate
Low
estimate
High
estimate
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
Category
Benefits:
Annualized, Monetized $millions/year ......................
Annualized Quantified ...............................................
Qualitative .................................................................
Costs:
Annualized, Monetized $millions/year ......................
Annualized ................................................................
Quantified ..................................................................
Qualitative .................................................................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Transfers:
Federal Annualized Monetized $millions/year ..........
Year
dollars
Discount
rate
(%)
Period
covered
(years)
..................
..................
..................
..................
7
3
7
3
..................
..................
..................
..................
Notes
Codifying current practices of the
import tolerance program could
improve the efficiency of the program.
<$0.0001
<$0.0001
..................
..................
..................
<$0.0001
<$0.0001
..................
..................
..................
<$0.0001
<$0.0001
..................
..................
..................
2020
2020
..................
..................
..................
7
3
7
3
..................
10
10
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
7
3
..................
..................
7
3
..................
..................
From/To ....................................................................
From:
Other .........................................................................
Annualized, Monetized $millions/year ......................
..................
..................
From/To ....................................................................
From:
To:
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
To:
Effects:
State, Local or Tribal Government: No Effect.
Small Business: The final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities that manufacture unapproved drugs that are the subject of an import tolerance request.
Wages: No effect.
Growth: No effect.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
52408
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
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
(FDA–2001–N–0075) and at https://
www.fda.gov/about-fda/reports/
economic-impact-analyses-fdaregulations.
VIII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21
CFR 25.30(h) that this action is of a type
that does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. Therefore,
neither an environmental assessment
nor environmental impact statement is
required.
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule contains information
collection provisions that are subject to
review by OMB under the PRA (44
U.S.C. 3501–3521). The title,
description, and respondent description
of the information collection provisions
are shown in the following paragraphs
with an estimate of the annual reporting
burden. Included in the estimate is the
time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing
each collection of information.
Title: Reporting Requirements to
Establish, Amend, or Revoke an Import
Tolerance (21 CFR 510.205)
Description: The FD&C Act, as
amended by the ADAA, authorizes the
establishment and revocation of
tolerances for unapproved new animal
drugs where edible portions of animals
imported into the United States may
contain residues of such drugs (import
tolerances) (section 512(a)(6) of the
FD&C Act). Import tolerances provide a
basis for the legal marketing of imported
animal-derived food containing residues
of new animal drugs neither approved
nor conditionally approved in the
United States (unapproved new animal
drugs). Without an import tolerance,
any amount of residue of an unapproved
new animal drug in imported, animal-
derived food would cause that food to
be adulterated under section
402(a)(2)(C)(ii) of the FD&C Act because
the drug would be deemed unsafe under
section 512 of the FD&C Act. Such food
could be denied entry into the United
States under section 801(a)(3) of the
FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 381(a)(3)). It
remains unlawful to import animalderived food containing a residue of an
unapproved new animal drug, unless an
import tolerance has been established
for such drug and any residue of the
new animal drug in the imported
animal-derived food does not exceed
that import tolerance.
This final rule amends our regulations
in part 510 to establish new information
collection provisions regarding requests
to establish, amend, or revoke import
tolerances for residues of unapproved
new animal drugs in food. This final
rule establishes procedures by which a
person may make such requests, as well
as procedures for reconsideration of
action or an administrative stay of
action to establish, amend, or revoke an
import tolerance. The regulations make
it clear that the Commissioner may start
a review process to establish, amend, or
revoke an import tolerance on his or her
own initiative under § 10.25(b). These
regulations also establish when import
tolerance-related actions (actions
resulting in establishment, amendment,
or revocation) and their basis will be
publicly disclosed.
The information required to be
submitted in a request to establish an
import tolerance is set forth in
§ 510.205(e). The request must identify
the drug; describe the conditions of use;
describe the proposed import
tolerance(s) for residues of the new
animal drug; provide human food safety
information to support the proposed
import tolerance(s); provide other
human food safety information as
deemed necessary by the Commissioner;
describe practicable methods for
determining the quantity, if any, of the
new animal drug in or on food, and any
substance formed in or on food because
of its use; include an environmental
assessment; and provide any
information required under §§ 500.80
through 500.92, where applicable. The
information required to be submitted in
a request to amend an import tolerance
is set forth in § 510.205(f) and the
information required to be submitted in
a withdrawal of a request is set forth in
§ 510.205(g).
The information submitted to us in a
request to establish, amend, or revoke
import tolerances is necessary to allow
us to establish import tolerances that
would provide a basis for the legal
marketing of imported animal-derived
food containing residues of new animal
drugs neither approved nor
conditionally approved in the United
States (unapproved new animal drugs).
We will use the information collected
through the import tolerances procedure
to complete our evaluation.
Comments regarding the information
collection topics solicited in the
proposed rule are discussed in the
preamble in section V. See, in
particular, comments 4, 9, 10, 12, 18,
and 19. None of the comments
suggested we modify the estimated
annual burden associated with the
information collection. However, we
have revised the analysis of the
information collection provisions to
accurately reflect the final rule. We
added a row to table 3 to report the new
burden of § 510.205(g) (withdrawal of a
request), and we removed a row from
table 3 to reflect that the collections of
information in our procedural
regulations at 21 CFR part 10 (in
particular, 21 CFR 10.20, 10.30, 10.33,
and 10.35) already are approved under
OMB control number 0910–0191.
Description of Respondents:
Respondents to the collection of
information are: manufacturers of the
unapproved new animal drug that is the
subject of the request, foreign producers
who use the unapproved new animal
drug and their trade associations, and
importers of animal-derived food
bearing or containing residues of the
unapproved new animal drug.
We estimate the burden of this
information collection as follows:
TABLE 3—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN 1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
510.205(e)(1) through (8); contents of request ...................
510.205(a) through (e); request to establish an import tolerance based on permanent Codex MRL 2 .....................
510.205(a) through (e); request to establish an import tolerance not based on permanent Codex MRL 2 ...............
510.205(f), request to amend an import tolerance ..............
510.205(g), withdrawal of a request ....................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
Number of
responses per
respondent
Number of
respondents
21 CFR Section; activity
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Average
burden per
response
Total annual
responses
Total hours
2
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
50
100
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
80
32
1
80
32
1
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
52409
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 3—ESTIMATED ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN 1—Continued
21 CFR Section; activity
Total ..............................................................................
Number of
respondents
Number of
responses per
respondent
Total annual
responses
Average
burden per
response
........................
........................
........................
........................
Total hours
215
1 There
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.
2 A Codex MRL is a permanent maximum residue limit (MRL) that has been established by the Codex Alimentarius Committee.
We base our estimate of the number
of respondents and number of responses
per respondent in table 3 on our
experience since the passage of the
ADAA and the number of actual
requests received. We base our estimate
of the average burden per response on
our experience with the human food
safety technical section of an NADA, as
discussed previously in this document.
A request to establish or amend an
import tolerance must include human
food safety data and other information.
The information submitted is similar to
that submitted to establish a tolerance
under an NADA. The collection of
information required for submission of
NADAs has been reviewed under the
PRA. A proportion of the time estimated
in that proposed extension for the
paperwork associated with the human
food safety technical section of an
NADA was used to estimate the time
(hours per response) presented in table
3 for the preparation of a request to
establish or amend an import tolerance
not based on a permanent Codex MRL,
approximately 80 hours. We believe a
request to establish or amend an import
tolerance based on a permanent Codex
MRL will be less burdensome,
approximately 50 hours. Based on the
Agency’s experience with establishing
tolerances for approved new animal
drugs, the Agency believes that requests
to revoke an import tolerance, as well as
petitions for reconsideration of an
action or for an administrative stay of an
action, will be infrequent occurrences.
If there is a permanent Codex MRL for
a new animal drug, the final rule
requires the requester to provide the
permanent Codex MRL and monographs
and reports from the Joint FAO/World
Health Organization of the United
Nations (WHO) Expert Committee on
Food Additives (JECFA) and/or the Joint
FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide
Residues (JMPR) that support the
development of the Codex MRL.
If there is not a permanent Codex
MRL, or upon notification by FDA, the
final rule requires the requester to
provide full reports of investigations
made with respect to the human food
safety of the new animal drug including
data submitted to the appropriate
regulatory authority in any country in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
which the new animal drug is lawfully
used. We may regard a request as
incomplete unless it includes full
reports of adequate tests by all methods
reasonably applicable to show whether
or not food derived from animals
receiving the new animal drug will be
safe for human consumption.
The information collection provisions
of this final rule have been submitted to
OMB for review as required by section
3507(d) of the PRA. Before the effective
date of this final rule, FDA will publish
a notice in the Federal Register
announcing OMB’s decision to approve,
modify, or disapprove the information
collection provisions in this final rule.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond
to, a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
X. Federalism
We have analyzed this final rule in
accordance with the principles set forth
in Executive Order 13132. FDA has
determined that the rule does not
contain policies that 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.
XI. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Executive Order and, consequently, a
tribal summary impact statement is not
required.
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 10
Administrative practice and
procedure, News media.
21 CFR Part 20
Confidential business information,
Courts, Freedom of information,
Government employees.
21 CFR Part 25
Environmental impact statements,
Foreign relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 500
Animal drugs, Animal feeds, Cancer,
Labeling, Packaging and containers,
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
21 CFR Part 510
Administrative practice and
procedure, Animal drugs, 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 parts 10, 20,
25, 500, and 510 are amended as
follows:
PART 10—ADMINISTRATIVE
PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES
1. The authority citation for part 10
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 551–558, 701–706; 15
U.S.C. 1451–1461; 21 U.S.C. 141–149, 321–
397, 467f, 679, 821, 1034; 28 U.S.C. 2112; 42
U.S.C. 201, 262, 263b, 264.
2. In § 10.25, revise paragraph (a)(1) to
read as follows:
■
§ 10.25 Initiation of administrative
proceedings.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(1) In the form specified in other
applicable FDA regulations, e.g., the
form for a color additive petition in
§ 71.1, for a food additive petition in
§ 171.1 or § 571.1, for a new drug
application in § 314.50, for a request to
establish or amend an import tolerance
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
52410
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
in § 510.205, for a new animal drug
application in § 514.1, or
*
*
*
*
*
PART 20—PUBLIC INFORMATION
3. The authority citation for part 20
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 18 U.S.C. 1905; 19
U.S.C. 2531–2582; 21 U.S.C. 321–393, 1401–
1403; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242, 242a, 242l, 242n,
243, 262, 263, 263b-263n, 264, 265, 300u300u-5, 300aa-1.
4. In § 20.100, add paragraph (c)(47) to
read as follows:
■
§ 20.100 Applicability; cross-reference to
other regulations.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(47) Requests to establish or amend
import tolerances, in § 510.205 of this
chapter.
PART 25—ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
CONSIDERATIONS
5. The authority citation for part 25
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321–393; 42 U.S.C.
262, 263b-264; 42 U.S.C. 4321, 4332; 40 CFR
parts 1500–1508; E.O. 11514, 35 FR 4247, 3
CFR, 1971 Comp., p. 531–533, as amended by
E.O. 11991, 42 FR 26967, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp.,
p. 123–124 and E.O. 12114, 44 FR 1957, 3
CFR, 1980 Comp., p. 356–360.
6. In § 25.20, add paragraph (q) to read
as follows:
■
§ 25.20 Actions requiring preparation of an
environmental assessment.
*
*
*
*
*
(q) Establishment, amendment, or
revocation of an import tolerance in
accordance with subpart C of part 510
of this chapter.
subpart, FDA will continue to consider
the compound for approval under the
general safety provisions of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act for risks
other than cancer or continue its review
of the import tolerance request under
the provisions of §§ 510.201 through
510.213 of this chapter (Subpart C—
Import Tolerances for Residues of
Unapproved New Animal Drugs in
Food).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 9. In § 500.82(b), revise the definition
of ‘‘Sponsor’’ to read as follows:
§ 500.82
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
Sponsor means the person or
organization proposing or holding an
approval by FDA for the use of a
sponsored compound or the person
initiating a request for an import
tolerance under § 510.205 of this
chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 10. In § 500.88, add paragraph (d) to
read as follows:
Regulatory method.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) If the sponsor initially submitted
a request for an import tolerance under
§ 510.205 of this chapter, FDA will
make the complete regulatory method
for ascertaining the marker residue in
the target tissue publicly available
pursuant to § 510.207(b) of this chapter.
■ 11. In § 500.92, revise paragraph (a) to
read as follows:
§ 500.92
Implementation.
(a) This subpart E applies to all new
animal drug applications, food additive
petitions, color additive petitions, and
requests for import tolerances
concerning any compound intended for
use in food-producing animals
(including supplemental applications
and amendments to petitions).
*
*
*
*
*
PART 500—GENERAL
7. The authority citation for part 500
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 342, 343,
348, 351, 352, 353, 360b, 371, 379e.
8. In § 500.80, in paragraph (a), add a
new fourth sentence; and revise
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
■
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
§ 500.80
PART 510—NEW ANIMAL DRUGS
12. The authority citation for part 510
continues to read as follows:
■
Scope of this subpart.
(a) * * * The requirements of this
subpart shall also apply to a request for
an import tolerance under § 510.205 of
this chapter. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(c) If FDA concludes on the basis of
the threshold assessment or at a later
time during the approval process or
during the review of a request for an
import tolerance that the data show that
the sponsored compound and its
metabolites should not be subject to this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352,
353, 360b, 371, 379e.
■
13. Add subpart C to read as follows:
Subpart C—Import Tolerances for Residues
of Unapproved New Animal Drugs in Food
Sec.
510.201 Scope.
510.202 Definitions.
510.203 Initiation of a proceeding to
establish or amend an import tolerance.
510.205 Content and administration of a
request.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Subpart C—Import Tolerances for
Residues of Unapproved New Animal
Drugs in Food
§ 510.201
Definitions.
*
§ 500.88
510.206 Review of information supporting
actions to establish or amend an import
tolerance.
510.207 Disclosure of information
submitted in a request.
510.209 Establishment, denial, or
amendment of an import tolerance.
510.210 Revocation of an import tolerance.
510.212 Administrative reconsideration of
action.
510.213 Administrative stay of action.
Sfmt 4700
Scope.
This subpart applies to tolerances for
residues of new animal drugs not
approved or conditionally approved for
use in the United States, but lawfully
used in another country and present in
imported, animal-derived food and food
products.
§ 510.202
Definitions.
The following definitions of terms
apply when used in this subpart:
CNADA means an application for
conditional approval of a new animal
drug submitted under section 571 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act,
and includes all amendments and
permissible supplements.
Import tolerance means a tolerance
for a residue of a new animal drug not
approved or conditionally approved for
use in the United States, but present in
any imported edible portion of any
animal.
NADA means a new animal drug
application submitted under section 512
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act, including all amendments and
permissible supplements, for approval
of a new animal drug.
Request means a request to establish
or amend an import tolerance.
§ 510.203 Initiation of a proceeding to
establish or amend an import tolerance.
(a) Any interested person may request
that the Commissioner establish or
amend an import tolerance. Such a
request must be in the form specified in
§ 510.205 of this chapter.
(b) The Commissioner may initiate a
proceeding to establish or amend an
import tolerance on his or her own
initiative pursuant to § 10.25(b) of this
chapter.
§ 510.205
request.
Content and administration of a
(a) Pertinent information previously
submitted to and currently retained in
the files of the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) may be
incorporated in, and will be considered
as part of, a request on the basis of
specific reference to such information. If
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
the requester refers to any nonpublic
information other than its own, the
requester shall obtain a written right of
reference to that nonpublic information
and submit the right of reference with
the request. Any reference to published
information offered in support of a
request should be accompanied by
reprints or copies of such references.
(b) Requests shall be submitted and
addressed to the Document Control Unit
(HFV–199), Center for Veterinary
Medicine, Food and Drug
Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855. Requests may be
submitted in an electronic format as
authorized by FDA. See FDA′s
Electronic Submissions Gateway
website: https://www.fda.gov/industry/
electronic-submissions-gateway.
(c) Any material submitted in a
foreign language shall be accompanied
by a complete and accurate English
translation. Translations of literature
printed in a language other than English
shall be accompanied by copies of the
original publication.
(d) The request must be dated and
must be signed by the requester or by
his or her authorized attorney, agent, or
official and shall state the requester’s
correspondence address. If the requester
or such authorized representative does
not reside or have a place of business
within the United States, the requester
must also furnish the name and post
office address of, and the request must
be countersigned by, an authorized
attorney, agent, or official residing or
maintaining a place of business within
the United States.
(e) The request must include the
following information:
(1) The established name and all
pertinent information concerning the
new animal drug, including chemical
identity and composition of the new
animal drug, and its physical, chemical,
and biological properties;
(2) The conditions of use for the new
animal drug, including the route of
administration and dosage, together
with all labeling, directions, and
recommendations regarding the uses in
countries in which the new animal drug
is lawfully used;
(3) The proposed import tolerance(s)
for residues of the new animal drug;
(4) Human food safety information to
support the proposed import
tolerance(s) in either of the following
forms:
(i) If a permanent maximum residue
limit (MRL) has been established by the
Codex Alimentarius Committee (Codex
MRL), the requester shall provide the
permanent Codex MRL and monographs
and reports from the Joint Expert
Committee on Food Additives (JECFA)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
of the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) and the World
Health Organization (WHO) of the
United Nations and/or monographs and
reports from the Joint FAO/WHO
Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR)
that support the development of the
permanent Codex MRL. FDA may
request additional information as
needed.
(ii) If no permanent Codex MRL has
been established, or upon notification
by FDA, the requester must provide full
reports of investigations made with
respect to the human food safety of the
new animal drug. A request may be
regarded as incomplete unless it
includes full reports of adequate tests by
all methods reasonably applicable to
show whether or not any imported
edible portion of any animal receiving
the new animal drug will be safe for
human consumption. The reports must
include detailed data derived from
appropriate animal and other biological
experiments in which the methods used
and the results obtained are clearly set
forth, including data submitted to the
appropriate regulatory authority in any
country where the new animal drug is
lawfully used. The request must also
include a statement that all such reports
have been submitted or contain an
explanation of why such reports were
not submitted. With respect to each
nonclinical laboratory study contained
in the request, the requestor must
submit either a statement that the study
was conducted in compliance with the
good laboratory practice regulations set
forth in part 58 of this chapter, or, if the
study was not conducted in compliance
with such regulations, a brief statement
of the reason for the noncompliance,
and how this may have impacted the
study;
(5) Other human food safety
information as deemed necessary by the
Commissioner;
(6) A description of practicable
methods for determining the quantity, if
any, of the new animal drug in or on
food, and any substance formed in or on
food because of its use;
(7) An environmental assessment
under § 25.40 of this chapter; and
(8) Any information required under
§§ 500.80 through 500.92 of this chapter
(Subpart E, Regulation of Carcinogenic
Compounds Used in Food-Producing
Animals), where applicable.
(f) A request to amend an established
import tolerance must contain
information to support each proposed
change. The request may omit
statements made in the original request
for which no change is proposed.
(g) The requester may withdraw the
request at any time before the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
52411
notification provided for in § 510.207(a)
of this chapter has been made publicly
available.
§ 510.206 Review of information
supporting actions to establish or amend
an import tolerance.
In establishing or amending an import
tolerance, the Commissioner shall rely
on data sufficient to demonstrate that a
proposed tolerance is safe based on
similar food safety criteria used by the
Commissioner to establish tolerances for
applications for new animal drugs filed
under section 512(b)(1) of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. In
establishing or amending an import
tolerance, the Commissioner will give
appropriate consideration to the
anticipated residue concentrations and
conditions of use of the new animal
drug specified.
§ 510.207 Disclosure of information
submitted in a request.
(a) When a request is determined to be
complete for FDA’s consideration, the
Commissioner will provide public
notification of the request containing
the name of the requester and a brief
description of the request in general
terms. A copy of the notification will be
sent to the requester at the time the
information is made available to the
public.
(b) Any notification establishing,
amending, or revoking an import
tolerance will be made publicly
available. A summary of the basis for
the decision will be publicly released in
accordance with the provisions of part
20 of this chapter. If FDA determines
that the new animal drug referred to in
the request is a new animal drug that
induces cancer when ingested by people
or animals, and the requester complies
with the requirements of §§ 500.80
through 500.92 of this chapter (Subpart
E, Regulation of Carcinogenic
Compounds Used in Food-Producing
Animals), the regulatory method for
ascertaining the marker residue in the
target tissue will be made publicly
available. All information and safety
data submitted with the request, or
previously submitted information
incorporated in, and considered as part
of, a request on the basis of specific
reference to such information, shall be
available for public disclosure, also in
accordance with the provisions of part
20 of this chapter. Trade secrets and
confidential commercial or financial
information are exempted from release
under § 20.61 of this chapter.
§ 510.209 Establishment, denial, or
amendment of an import tolerance.
(a) If an import tolerance is
established or amended, the
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
52412
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 21, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Commissioner will provide public
notification of the action, which will be
effective from the date of public
notification. A copy of the notification
will be sent to any requestor at the time
the information is made available to the
public.
(b) If a request to establish or amend
an import tolerance is denied, a
notification of the denial will be made
publicly available, and a copy of the
denial letter, including the reasons for
such action, will be sent to the
requester.
(c) A tolerance established in an
approved NADA or conditionally
approved CNADA will supersede an
existing import tolerance. In the event
the conditionally approved CNADA is
not renewed or is withdrawn, or such
drug does not achieve approval under
section 512 of the Federal Food, Drug,
and Cosmetic Act within 5 years
following the date of the conditional
approval, the Agency will reinstate the
import tolerance unless § 510.210(a)(1)
or (a)(2) is applicable at that time.
§ 510.210 Revocation of an import
tolerance.
(a) The Commissioner, on his or her
own initiative or on the petition of an
interested person, under § 10.25 of this
chapter, may revoke an import tolerance
if:
(1) Scientific evidence shows an
import tolerance to be unsafe; or
(2) Information demonstrates that the
use of a new animal drug under actual
use conditions results in food being
imported into the United States with
residues exceeding the import tolerance.
(b) The Commissioner will provide
public notification under § 510.207(b)
that will specify the basis for the
decision and will be effective at the time
the information is made available to the
public.
(c) A petition for revocation must be
submitted in the form specified in
§ 10.30 of this chapter.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with RULES1
§ 510.212 Administrative reconsideration
of action.
(a) The Commissioner may at any
time, on his or her own initiative or on
the petition of an interested person
under part 10 of this chapter, reconsider
part or all of a decision to establish, not
establish, amend, or revoke an import
tolerance.
(b) A petition for reconsideration
must be submitted in accordance with
§ 10.20 of this chapter and in the form
specified in § 10.33 of this chapter no
later than 30 days after the date of
public notification of the decision
involved. The Commissioner may, for
good cause, permit a petition to be filed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:53 Sep 20, 2021
Jkt 253001
more than 30 days after public
notification of the decision. The petition
for reconsideration must demonstrate
that relevant information contained in
the administrative record was not
previously or not adequately considered
by the Commissioner. No new
information may be included in a
petition for reconsideration.
(c) An interested person who wishes
to rely on information not included in
the administrative record shall submit
either a petition to amend an import
tolerance under § 510.205 or to revoke
an import tolerance under § 510.210 and
§ 10.25 of this chapter.
§ 510.213
Administrative stay of action.
(a) The Commissioner may at any
time, on his or her own initiative or on
the request of an interested person
under part 10 of this chapter, stay or
extend the effective date of a decision to
establish, not establish, amend, or
revoke an import tolerance.
(b) A request for stay must be
submitted in accordance with § 10.20 of
this chapter and in the form specified in
§ 10.35 of this chapter no later than 30
days after public notification of the
decision involved. The Commissioner
may, for good cause, permit a petition
to be filed more than 30 days after
public notification of the decision.
Dated: September 10, 2021.
Janet Woodcock,
Acting Commissioner of Food and Drugs.
[FR Doc. 2021–19967 Filed 9–20–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Wage and Hour Division
29 CFR Part 791
RIN 1235–AA37
Rescission of Joint Employer Status
Under the Fair Labor Standards Act
Rule: Delay of Effective Date
Wage and Hour Division
(WHD), Department of Labor (DOL).
ACTION: Final rule; delay of effective
date.
AGENCY:
This action delays until
October 5, 2021, the effective date of the
rule titled ‘‘Rescission of Joint Employer
Status Under the Fair Labor Standards
Act Rule,’’ published in the Federal
Register on July 30, 2021, to conform to
the effective date requirements of the
Congressional Review Act.
DATES: The effective date of the rule
published at 86 FR 40939 on July 30,
2021, is delayed to October 5, 2021.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy DeBisschop, Division of
Regulations, Legislation, and
Interpretation, Wage and Hour Division,
U.S. Department of Labor, Room S–
3502, 200 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20210; telephone: (202)
693–0406 (this is not a toll-free
number). Copies of this final rule may
be obtained in alternative formats (Rich
Text Format (RTF) or text format (txt),
a thumb drive, an MP3 file, large print,
braille, audiotape, compact disc, or
other accessible format), upon request,
by calling (202) 693–0675 (this is not a
toll-free number). TTY/TDD callers may
dial toll-free 1–877–889–5627 to obtain
information or request materials in
alternative formats.
Questions of interpretation and/or
enforcement of the agency’s regulations
may be directed to the nearest WHD
district office. Locate the nearest office
by calling WHD’s toll-free help line at
(866) 4US–WAGE ((866) 487–9243)
between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. in your local
time zone, or logging onto WHD’s
website for a nationwide listing of WHD
district and area offices at https://
www.dol.gov/whd/america2.htm.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July
30, 2021, the Department published a
final rule titled ‘‘Rescission of Joint
Employer Status Under the Fair Labor
Standards Act Rule’’ (Joint Employer
Rescission Final Rule) to rescind the
final rule titled ‘‘Joint Employer Status
Under the Fair Labor Standards Act,’’
which had been published on January
16, 2020. 86 FR 40939 (July 30, 2021).
The effective date set forth in the Joint
Employer Rescission Final Rule is
September 28, 2021, 60 days after
publication.
Pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act (CRA), the Department submitted
the required report and information on
the Joint Employer Rescission Final
Rule to each House of the Congress and
the Comptroller General. 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A)–(B). The Department has
been informed that the Senate did not
receive the submission until August 6,
2021. The Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) designated
the Joint Employer Rescission Final
Rule as a major rule, as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2). Accordingly, in order to
conform to the effective date
requirements of the CRA, the
Department in this final rule is
extending the effective date of the Joint
Employer Rescission Final Rule to
October 5, 2021, 60 days after the Senate
received the Department’s submission. 5
U.S.C. 801(a)(3).
Section 553(b)(3)(B) of the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
E:\FR\FM\21SER1.SGM
21SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 180 (Tuesday, September 21, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52401-52412]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19967]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 10, 20, 25, 500, and 510
[Docket No. FDA-2001-N-0075 (formerly Docket No. 2001N-0284)]
RIN 0910-AF78
Import Tolerances for Residues of Unapproved New Animal Drugs in
Food
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, we) is
issuing a final rule that establishes procedures by which we may
establish, amend, or revoke tolerances for residues of new animal drugs
in any edible portion of any animal imported into the United States
(import tolerances). These import tolerances provide a basis for the
legal marketing of such animal-derived food.
DATES: This rule is effective January 19, 2022. Submit written comments
(including recommendations) on information collection issues under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) by October 21, 2021 (see section
IX, the ``Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995'' section of this document).
ADDRESSES: To ensure that comments on the information collection are
received, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) recommends that
written comments be submitted to https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting
``Currently under Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the
search function. All comments should be identified with the OMB control
number 0910-NEW. Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets
in the heading of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
With regard to the final rule: Charli Long-Medrano, Center for
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-150), Food and Drug Administration, 7500
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 240-402-0850, [email protected].
With regard to the information collection: JonnaLynn Capezzuto,
Office of Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint
North, 10A-12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852, 301-796-
3794, [email protected].
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. Table of Abbreviations/Commonly Used Acronyms in This Document
III. Background
A. History and Scope of This Rulemaking
B. General Overview of the Final Rule
IV. Legal Authority
V. Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA Response
A. General Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA Response
B. Comments on Information To Support Establishment of an Import
Tolerance and FDA Response
C. Comments on Environmental Review and FDA Response
VI. Effective Date
VII. Economic Analysis of Impacts
VIII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
X. Federalism
XI. Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Final Rule
This rule codifies procedures and food safety criteria by which
tolerances for residues of unapproved new animal drugs in any edible
portion of any animal imported into the United States (import
tolerances) may be established or amended. These import tolerances
provide a basis for the legal marketing of such animal-derived food.
The regulation also specifies procedures by which import tolerances may
be revoked.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Final Rule
This final rule codifies procedures and food safety criteria
pertaining to the establishment, amendment, and revocation of import
tolerances in new subpart C of part 510 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (21 CFR part 510). Major provisions include:
The scope and definitions;
who may initiate proceedings to establish an import
tolerance;
contents of a submission requesting establishment of an
import tolerance;
sources of data and information supporting the safety of a
proposed import tolerance;
Agency procedures for establishment, amendment, or
revocation of an import tolerance;
public disclosure of import tolerance-related actions
(actions under consideration, establishment, amendment, or revocation);
and
environmental impact assessment of import tolerance-
related actions.
In addition, conforming amendments are being made in Sec. Sec. 10.25,
20.100, 25.20, 500.80, 500.82, 500.88, and 500.92 (21 CFR 10.25,
20.100, 25.20, 500.80, 500.82, 500.88, and 500.92). A technical
amendment is being made in Sec. 10.25 (21 CFR 10.25) to include food
additive petitions under 21 CFR 571.1 in the non-exhaustive list of
petitions specified in FDA regulations.
The procedures and food safety criteria in the final rule are
fundamentally the same as in the proposed rule; however, the final rule
has been minimally reorganized to clarify that import tolerances
established at the Commissioner's initiative follow the same procedures
as those established at the request of an interested person. We have
also made nonsubstantive wording changes for clarity.
C. Legal Authority
Our authority for issuing this final rule is provided by the new
animal drug provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FD&C Act) by which we establish tolerances for residues of new animal
drugs and under provisions of the FD&C Act that give the Agency general
rulemaking authority to issue regulations for the efficient enforcement
of the FD&C Act.
[[Page 52402]]
D. Costs and Benefits
1. Costs of the Final Rule
All entities affected by this final rule will incur the one-time
cost for reading and understanding this rule. Based on the small number
of firms that we estimate could request an import tolerance per year,
only about five firms would need to read and understand this rule over
the next 10 years. The total costs for reading and understanding the
rule range from around $530 to around $660. Table 1 includes a summary
of these costs.
Table 1--One-Time Costs for Reading and Understanding the Rule
[2020 Dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low Medium High
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reading time (hours)............................................ 0.75 0.85 1
Wage ($ per hour)............................................... $140.30 $140.30 $140.30
Affected entities............................................... 5 5 5
Number of people reading per entity............................. 1 1 1
-----------------------------------------------
Total cost.................................................. $530 $585 $660
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Benefits of the Final Rule
The procedures codified herein clarify the import tolerance
submission process for the establishment, amendment, and revocation of
these tolerances. This should result in improving the efficiency of the
program for both industry and government. However, we lack data to
quantify these efficiency gains.
II. Table of Abbreviations/Commonly Used Acronyms in This Document
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviation What it means
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADAA................................... Animal Drug Availability Act of
1996.
ADI.................................... Acceptable Daily Intake.
CFR.................................... Code of Federal Regulations.
CNADA.................................. Application for Conditional
Approval of a New Animal Drug.
Codex MRL.............................. MRL established by the Codex
Alimentarius Committee.
CVM.................................... Center for Veterinary Medicine.
FAO.................................... Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United
Nations.
FDA.................................... U.S. Food and Drug
Administration.
FD&C Act............................... Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act.
GMP.................................... Good Manufacturing Process.
GFI.................................... Guidance for Industry.
JECFA.................................. Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee
on Food Additives.
JMPR................................... Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on
Pesticide Residues.
MRL.................................... Maximum Residue Limit.
NADA................................... New Animal Drug Application.
US..................................... United States.
VICH................................... International Cooperation on
Harmonisation of Technical
Requirements for Registration
of Veterinary Medicinal
Products.
WHO.................................... World Health Organization of
the United Nations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Background
A. History and Scope of This Rulemaking
In 1996, the President signed into law the Animal Drug Availability
Act of 1996 (ADAA) (Pub. L. 104-250), which amended the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 360b(a)) to authorize the establishment of import tolerances
that would provide a basis for the legal marketing of imported animal-
derived food containing residues of new animal drugs neither approved
nor conditionally approved in the United States (unapproved new animal
drugs).
Without an import tolerance, any amount of residue of an unapproved
new animal drug in imported, animal-derived food would cause that food
to be adulterated under section 402(a)(2)(C)(ii) of the FD&C Act (21
U.S.C. 342(a)(2)(C)(ii)) because the drug would be deemed unsafe under
section 512 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360b). Such food could be denied
entry into the United States under section 801(a)(3) of the FD&C Act
(21 U.S.C. 381(a)(3)). It remains unlawful to import animal-derived
food containing a residue of an unapproved new animal drug, unless an
import tolerance has been established for such drug and any residue of
the new animal drug in the imported animal-derived food does not exceed
that import tolerance. These regulations establish procedures under
which the Agency will establish, amend, or revoke import tolerances for
residues of unapproved new animal drugs.
The ADAA also specified that in establishing import tolerances, FDA
must rely on data sufficient to demonstrate that a proposed tolerance
is safe based on similar food safety criteria used to establish a
tolerance under a new animal drug application (NADA). For establishment
of import tolerances, food safety data can be submitted by the drug
manufacturer or be available from a relevant international organization
such as the Codex Alimentarius Commission, provided such data are not
inconsistent with criteria used to establish a tolerance for new animal
drugs in NADAs.
The regulations make it clear that the Commissioner may start a
review process to establish, amend, or revoke an import tolerance on
his or her own initiative under Sec. 10.25(b). These regulations also
establish when import tolerance-related actions (actions resulting in
establishment, amendment, or revocation) and their basis will be
publicly disclosed.
[[Page 52403]]
B. General Overview of the Final Rule
In issuing this rule, the Agency finalizes the provisions in the
January 2012 proposed rule (77 FR 3653, January 25, 2012). This final
rule reflects revisions the Agency made after considering all comments
received.
This final rule amends part 510 by adding sections to establish the
scope of new subpart C (Sec. 510.201 (21 CFR 510.201)); to define
certain relevant terms (Sec. 510.202 (21 CFR 510.202)); to establish
who may initiate proceedings to establish or amend an import tolerance
(Sec. 510.203 (21 CFR 510.203)); to describe the content, options for
submission, and administration of a request to establish or amend an
import tolerance (Sec. 510.205 (21 CFR 510.205)); and to describe the
review of information to establish or amend an import tolerance (Sec.
510.206 (21 CFR 510.206)). Provisions describing when and how
information relating to import tolerances will be publicly disclosed,
previously in proposed Sec. 510.205, are now described and organized
in redesignated Sec. 510.207 (21 CFR 510.207). Procedures that FDA
follows in establishment, denial of a request for establishment, and
amendment of an import tolerance are described in redesignated Sec.
510.209 (21 CFR 510.209). Procedures for revocation of an import
tolerance are described in redesignated Sec. 510.210 (21 CFR 510.210).
Procedures for requesting reconsideration or administrative stay of a
decision to establish, amend, or revoke an import tolerance are
specified in redesignated Sec. Sec. 510.212 and 510.213 (21 CFR
510.212 and 510.213), respectively.
IV. Legal Authority
We are issuing these regulations under the legal authority provided
by section 512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360b(a)(6)) relating to
the establishment of import tolerances for unapproved new animal drugs
and under section 701(a) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 371(a)), which
gives FDA general rulemaking authority to issue regulations for the
efficient enforcement of the FD&C Act.
V. Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA Response
We received 17 comments on the proposed import tolerance rule by
the close of the comment period, each commenting on one or more aspects
of the proposed rule. We received comments from a wide array of members
of the public, including trade organizations, academia, public advocacy
groups, consumers, and government agencies. The comments addressed
numerous provisions of the proposed rule, including our specific
requests for comments set forth in the proposed rule. Some comments
addressed issues that are outside of the scope of this rule. Because
such comments were beyond the scope of this rule, we do not include a
discussion of them here.
A. General Comments on the Proposed Rule and FDA Response
(Comment 1) Several comments expressed concern that establishment
of import tolerances for unapproved new animal drugs is unfair to
domestic producers who cannot legally use these drugs, thereby putting
them at a competitive disadvantage.
(Response 1) The ADAA amended the FD&C Act to permit FDA to
establish a tolerance for residues of a new animal drug in any edible
portion of any animal imported into the United States when the intended
use of the new animal drug is not approved for use in the United
States. The legislative history notes there may be appropriate
instances (e.g., the disease treated does not exist in the United
States) in which food-producing animals in other countries are treated
with animal drugs that are not approved in the United States. Thus,
Congress enacted this provision to provide a legal means by which food
that may contain residues of these drugs may be imported into the
United States. Under the FD&C Act, lawful use of the same animal drug
in the United States requires that the new animal drug be approved or
conditionally approved by FDA. This requires additional information and
data from the sponsor to establish, among other things, that the drug
is effective for its intended use and safe for the animals receiving
the drug.
(Comment 2) One comment states that establishing import tolerances
would result in an increase in the volume of contaminated seafood into
the United States.
(Response 2) FDA notes that one consequence of establishing an
import tolerance may be an increase in imported edible tissues from
food-producing animals treated with the drug that is the subject of an
import tolerance. However, these imported tissues will not be permitted
entry if they contain residues above the import tolerance, the maximum
concentration of residues of the new animal drug in the edible tissues
that is determined to be safe for human consumers.
(Comment 3) A few comments express concern that import tolerances
risk exposing U.S. consumers to unsafe tissue residues.
(Response 3) Section 512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act requires that the
Agency rely on human food safety criteria similar to those used to
establish tolerances for approved new animal drugs when establishing
import tolerances. The human food safety criteria and review processes
resulting in establishment of tolerances for domestically approved new
animal drugs and for import tolerances for unapproved new animal drugs
are fundamentally the same. Whether the Agency is establishing an
import tolerance or a tolerance in the course of approving or
conditionally approving a new animal drug, we require data and
information to demonstrate that the residues of the new animal drug in
the edible products of treated animals are safe for human consumers.
Imported tissues will not be allowed entry into the United States if
they contain residues above the import tolerance.
(Comment 4) One comment states that the rule should include a
requirement that the country in which the unapproved new animal drug is
legally used have an equivalent animal drug regulatory program. In
addition, a few comments recommend requiring that the requester submit:
A record of the foreign country's approval actions and the approved
uses of the new animal drug in other countries; information on
alternative treatments or competing new animal drugs and an explanation
of why the use of an unapproved new animal drug is necessary in light
of alternatives; and an affidavit that there are no FDA-approved new
animal drugs to treat the disease or condition for which the unapproved
new animal drug is indicated. The comments also recommend that the
requester be required to comply with the requirement to report adverse
drug events and that food containing such new animal drug residues
originate from a country that has approved the drug and is actively
monitoring its use.
(Response 4) We disagree. Under the FD&C Act, to establish an
import tolerance, FDA only must consider information related to the
human food safety of the unapproved new animal drug that is the subject
of the import tolerance. The data sufficient to demonstrate that
residues of the unapproved new animal drug that is the subject of a
proposed import tolerance are safe is based on similar food safety
criteria used to establish tolerances for new animal drugs approved in
the United States. That is, the human food safety standard for
domestically approved new animal drugs and new animal drugs for which
an import tolerance is established is the same:
[[Page 52404]]
Reasonable certainty of no harm. The data that may be considered
include data submitted to appropriate regulatory authorities in any
country where the new animal drug is lawfully used and data available
from an appropriate international organization, to the extent such data
are not inconsistent with the criteria used to establish a tolerance
for applications for new animal drugs in the United States.
The FD&C Act does not require the Agency to consider the use of the
drug in other countries (including the disease(s) for which the
unapproved new animal drug is indicated and whether there are approved
drugs or alternative treatments available), or that the country(ies)
where the drug is approved have an equivalent regulatory program (e.g.,
any post-approval monitoring). In addition, the FD&C Act does not
impose adverse drug event reporting requirements for the establishment
of import tolerances. Once an import tolerance is established, imported
animal-derived food that contains residues of the unapproved new animal
drug may enter the United States if those residues are below the import
tolerance. There is no requirement that the imported food originate
from a country that has approved the drug.
(Comment 5) Two comments state that U.S. consumers should be
informed at the point of sale or through product labeling that imported
edible tissues from food-producing animals may contain residues of new
animal drugs that are not approved for use in the United States.
(Response 5) FDA does not agree that such public disclosure is
needed to address the safety of residues from drugs for which import
tolerances are established. The purpose of the legislation was to
ensure that any edible portion of any animal imported into the United
States is safe so long as such residues are below the established
import tolerance.
(Comment 6) One comment states that establishing import tolerances
undermines the new animal drug approval process. The commenter further
states that FDA's estimate that an import tolerance review will require
100 hours of a mid-level FDA employee's time is evidence that the
import tolerance review will be less stringent.
(Response 6) We disagree that establishment of import tolerances
undermines the new animal drug approval process. Congress recognized
that there may be appropriate instances in which food-producing animals
in other countries are treated with animal drugs that are not approved
in the United States. For example, the disease being treated does not
exist in the United States, or the particular animal industry either
may not exist in the United States or is very small, resulting in a
limited or nonexistent market for the drug in the United States. Nor do
we agree that our estimate that an import tolerance review will
generally require 100 hours of a mid-level FDA employee's time is
evidence that import tolerance review is less stringent than review of
proposed tolerances as part of a new animal drug application. The human
food safety standard for domestically approved drugs and drugs for
which an import tolerance is established is the same: Reasonable
certainty of no harm. Whether a person is requesting that the Agency
establish an import tolerance or approve an NADA, the requester or
sponsor, respectively, is required to furnish FDA with evidence
demonstrating that the residues of the new animal drug in the edible
products of treated animals are safe for human consumption. In our
experience, it requires about 100 hours of a mid-level FDA employee's
time to review this evidence, whether submitted under a new animal drug
application or a request to establish an import tolerance.
(Comment 7) One comment states that tolerances should only be
considered for an unapproved animal drug that is used solely for
therapeutic purposes, asserting that the ADAA was intended to establish
import tolerances for situations where a drug is used for treating
diseases and conditions that do not occur in the United States.
(Response 7) We disagree. The plain language of the statute does
not limit the establishment of import tolerances to new animal drugs
intended to be used solely for therapeutic purposes. Generally, the
reason an animal drug developer does not seek approval of the new
animal drug in the United States (with attendant tolerances) is because
the particular animal-rearing industry may not exist in the United
States at a scale to justify the expense of seeking FDA approval. In
some cases, the new animal drug may be used for non-therapeutic
purposes.
B. Comments on Information To Support Establishment of an Import
Tolerance and FDA Response
(Comment 8) One comment notes that the phrase ``some assurance that
the drugs are manufactured under GMP conditions,'' a comment provided
by a Veterinary Medicine Advisory Committee during a public meeting
held on this topic in January 2002, and discussed in the preamble to
the proposed rule, seems to go beyond the scope of what is necessary to
ensure public safety and should be interpreted with broad flexibility.
(Response 8) We agree. As noted previously, section 512(a)(6) of
the FD&C Act provides that FDA shall rely on data sufficient to
demonstrate that a proposed tolerance is safe based on similar food
safety criteria used to establish tolerances for NADAs filed under
section 512(b)(1) of the FD&C Act. Section 512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act
does not require the Agency to consider other requirements, such as an
assurance of good manufacturing processes (GMPs), applicable to the new
animal drug approval process in determining whether the Agency should
grant a request to establish an import tolerance.
(Comment 9) Two comments assert that conditions of use of
unapproved animal drugs do not need to be considered in establishing
import tolerances so long as residues in imported tissues are below the
import tolerance.
(Response 9) We disagree. Information about the conditions of use
of the new animal drug must be considered when deciding to establish or
amend an import tolerance so that the relevance of the submitted human
food safety data, particularly tissue residues that may result from the
lawful dosing regimen, can be determined. The tissue residue
concentration is affected by the dosing regimen, i.e., the dose level
and duration for which the animal is treated. Knowing that the new
animal drug tissue concentrations reported in the human food safety
studies are the result of animals dosed under the same conditions of
use as described in the request provides FDA with assurance that the
residue data are an appropriate basis to make decisions regarding
whether to establish or amend an import tolerance.
(Comment 10) One comment expressed concern that proposed Sec.
510.205, now Sec. 510.205(e)(5), which provides that a request for an
import tolerance may include other human food safety information as
deemed necessary by the Commissioner, is too broad, and that the
possibility of ad hoc requirements may serve to curtail the initiation
of requests or frustrate the efforts of those who do submit import
tolerance requests.
(Response 10) The Agency does not intend to use this provision to
require more human food safety information than is necessary to assess
whether residues of unapproved new animal drugs in edible tissues of
treated animals are safe for human
[[Page 52405]]
consumption. The Agency will use similar criteria as for the approval
of NADAs in making its determinations, including any other information
the Commissioner deems necessary to assure safe and effective use. See
section 512(d)(1)(D) of the FD&C Act. Similarly, the Agency must ensure
that a request for a particular import tolerance includes all the
relevant information needed to make an appropriate human food safety
determination. For example, the requester may not have submitted enough
information for FDA to adequately assess the toxicity of the new animal
drug or the requester may not have provided enough detail about the
proposed analytical method. The information requested will not be ad
hoc because it must be relevant to the criteria and review standards
for human food safety, which are the same for approval of new animal
drugs and establishment of import tolerances.
(Comment 11) One comment asks whether the Agency employs analysts
to verify the accuracy of translations of materials submitted in a
foreign language.
(Response 11) The Agency will rely on the requester's assertion
that it is submitting a complete and accurate translation of any
materials submitted in a foreign language. As provided for in 18 U.S.C.
1001, any person, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the Agency,
who knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any
trick, scheme, or device a material fact; makes any materially false,
fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or makes or uses
any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any
materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry, may be
subject to criminal fines or imprisonment.
(Comment 12) One comment requests that electronic submission of
import tolerance request dossiers be an option. There should be no need
for paper submissions.
(Response 12) We agree that electronic submission of import
tolerance requests should be an option and are providing for electronic
submission of requests in Sec. 510.105(b) of this final rule. At
present, the Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) Office of New Animal
Drug Evaluation (ONADE) can receive and process electronic submissions
for import tolerance files. Submissions to CVM can be made after first
registering with FDA's Electronic Submissions Gateway (ESG) and CVM's
Electronic Submission System. Additional information and a user guide
on eSubmitter can be obtained at either the ``CVM eSubmitter Resource
Center'' website or the ``Getting Started with eSubmitter'' website.
Contact [email protected] for help with the ESG or
[email protected] for help using CVM's eSubmitter tool.
(Comment 13) Several comments question how FDA will evaluate an
established acceptable daily intake (ADI), especially considering
different food consumption patterns of different countries. Comments
also question whether FDA considers subpopulations, such as children
and immune-compromised people who may be particularly sensitive to the
effects of exposure to drug residues. Comments express concerns that
safety standards are being loosened and unsafe residues will be allowed
in foods.
(Response 13) The ADI established for residues of an unapproved new
animal drug in edible tissues of food-producing animals that is used in
evaluating an import tolerance request is based on the same toxicity
data and information as is used to establish an ADI for a domestically
approved new animal drug and is evaluated using the same standards and
methodology that is used for a domestic drug approval. The toxicity
data that FDA uses to determine the ADI are described in guidances
available on our website (https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/guidance-industry/human-food-safety-guidances). The guidances for
toxicology studies are documents that are internationally harmonized
through the International Cooperation on Harmonisation of Technical
Requirements for Registration of Veterinary Medicinal Products (VICH)
Expert Working Groups. The ADI, expressed in a micrograms or milligrams
of the new animal drug per kilogram of body weight per day ([micro]g/kg
bw/day or mg/kg bw/day), is the amount of drug residue that can be
consumed on a daily basis for up to a lifetime without adverse effects
or harm to the health of a consumer.
The ADI is meant to be applied to a general population, including
sensitive subpopulations. The ADI determination uses conservative
procedures to ensure that the final value is protective of a general
population, such as application of a safety factor to account for human
variability in sensitivity to the toxicity of the new animal drug, and
tests for specific subpopulations if needed (asthmatic persons,
allergic persons, etc.). Additionally, the application of the ADI to
safe concentrations of the drug residues in edible tissues uses a lower
average human body weight (60 kg) and conservative estimates of food
consumption, such as a high milk consumption factor of 1.5 liter per
day. Therefore, the Agency believes using the same methodology to
calculate ADI for import tolerances as U.S.-approved animal drugs is
appropriate.
(Comment 14) One comment states that the rule should explicitly
prohibit the setting of import tolerances for residues of new animal
drugs that induce cancer when ingested by humans or animals.
(Response 14) We disagree that the rule should explicitly prohibit
the Agency from considering new animal drugs of carcinogenic concern
(new animal drugs that induce cancer when ingested by people or
animals). Section 512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act provides FDA the authority
to consider requests to establish import tolerances using food safety
criteria similar to those that are applied to the approval of new
animal drugs. Under section 512(d)(1)(I) of the FD&C Act, the Agency
may approve NADAs for drugs of carcinogenic concern as long as the
compound does not adversely affect the animals and no residue of a
carcinogenic compound will be found in food produced from those
animals. Pursuant to section 512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act, FDA will
consider requests for import tolerances for animal drugs of
carcinogenic concern using similar food safety criteria as it would for
a new animal drug application for approval. Thus, if FDA determines
that a new animal drug for which an import tolerance request has been
submitted is a new animal drug of carcinogenic concern, the requester
will be directed to comply with the ``no residue'' requirements of
Sec. Sec. 500.80 through 500.92 (21 CFR part 500, subpart E,
Regulation of Carcinogenic Compounds Used in Food-Producing Animals).
Any regulatory method for ascertaining the marker residue in the target
tissue will be made publicly available pursuant to Sec. 510.207(b) of
the final rule. We have revised Sec. Sec. 510.205(e) and 510.207(b) of
the final rule and made conforming changes to Sec. Sec. 500.80,
500.82, 500.88, and 500.92 to clarify the process for evaluating a new
animal drug of carcinogenic concern under these circumstances.
(Comment 15) One comment states that the rule should specifically
prohibit the setting of import tolerances for antimicrobial animal
drugs that are in the same classes as drugs used in human medicine.
(Response 15) We disagree. Rather than declining to establish
import tolerances for residues of antimicrobial new animal drugs that
are in the same classes as drugs used in human medicine, we intend to
apply the same
[[Page 52406]]
human food safety standard (reasonable certainty of no harm) as we
apply to all new animal drugs, including antimicrobial new animal
drugs, seeking approval under an NADA or application for conditional
approval of a new animal drug (CNADA). For requests for import
tolerances for antimicrobials, FDA evaluates the impacts on human
health, including the potential transmission of antimicrobial resistant
bacteria of human health concern through the consumption of animal-
derived food products. To assess these impacts, FDA recommends
conducting the qualitative risk assessment described in Guidance for
Industry (GFI) #152 entitled ``Evaluating the Safety of Antimicrobial
New Animal Drugs with Regard to Their Microbiological Effects on
Bacteria of Human Health Concern,'' October 23, 2003.\1\ In addition,
we recommend that requesters address the step-wise approach outlined in
GFI #159 (VICH GL36), ``Studies to Evaluate the Safety of Residues of
Veterinary Drugs in Human Food: General Approach to Establish a
Microbiological ADI,'' March 5, 2013,\2\ to assure the Agency that any
impacts of antimicrobial new animal drug residues on the intestinal
flora of human consumers are minimal. By addressing these important
human food safety endpoints for antimicrobial new animal drugs,
requesters will be able to assure the Agency that the imported animal-
derived food products are safe for human consumption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Available at: https://www.fda.gov/media/69949/download.
\2\ Available at: https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/cvm-gfi-159-vich-gl36-studies-evaluate-safety-residues-veterinary-drugs-human-food-general-approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Comment 16) A comment stated that the rule should specifically
prohibit the setting of import tolerances for veterinary drugs that
have extralabel use restrictions in the United States or that are
banned from use in domestic livestock enterprises (including
aquaculture).
(Response 16) As noted previously, whether a person is requesting
the Agency establish an import tolerance or approve an NADA, the
requester or sponsor, respectively, is required to furnish FDA with
evidence demonstrating that the residues of the new animal drug in the
edible products of treated animals are safe for human consumption. If
the requester can satisfy the human food safety requirements, the
Agency may establish an import tolerance for a food-producing species
for which there is no extralabel use restriction, even if an extralabel
use prohibition exists for other food-producing species.
(Comment 17) One comment requests that the requirement that the
unapproved animal drug be registered (lawfully used) in another country
should be revised to allow a request for an import tolerance to
simultaneously progress with registration of the drug in foreign
countries.
(Response 17) The statute gives us discretion to ``consider and
rely on data submitted by the drug manufacturer, including data
submitted to appropriate regulatory authorities in any country where
the new animal drug is lawfully used.'' As we noted in the preamble to
the proposed rule, the Agency has interpreted this statutory language
to mean that we may establish an import tolerance for a new animal drug
that is not approved or conditionally approved in the United States but
that is lawfully used in another country. Thus, foreign lawful use in
at least one country must occur before a request to establish an import
tolerance is submitted to the Agency.
(Comment 18) One comment requests that FDA revise the evidentiary
standard for revocation of an import tolerance to be ``evidence to show
a reasonable basis from which serious questions may be inferred about
the ultimate safety of the unapproved new animal drug residue and any
substance that may be formed as a result of the unapproved new animal
drug's use.'' The comment raises the concern that the proposed rule
appears to require consumers to bring conclusive evidence to obtain a
review of the import tolerance.
(Response 18) We disagree. The standard for revoking an import
tolerance is provided for in section 512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act, which
states that the Agency may revoke an import tolerance ``if information
demonstrates that the use of the new animal drug under actual use
conditions results in food being imported into the United States with
residues exceeding the tolerance or if scientific evidence shows the
tolerance to be unsafe.'' The final rule reflects this standard in
Sec. 510.210(a). An import tolerance can be revoked upon petition or
by the initiative of the Commissioner.
C. Comments on Environmental Review and FDA Response
(Comment 19) In the preamble to the proposed rule, the Agency
requested comments and supporting information relevant to the issue of
whether import tolerances will have a significant effect on the
environment in the United States or abroad. FDA received two comments
indicating that available information shows that FDA's establishment of
import tolerances should present no appreciable risk to the environment
from either the consumption or disposal of edible tissues containing
residues of animal drugs. Two comments support creation by FDA of a
categorical exclusion from the requirement to prepare an environmental
assessment (EA) for an import tolerance request. For example, one
comment presents evidence why risks to the environment should not be
significant, showing calculations and summarizing information
indicating that residues in certain media (e.g., wastewater, soil)
would be below threshold criteria already established by FDA in
guidance documents or in existing categorical exclusions for other
actions. Thus, the basis for establishing a new categorical exclusion
for import tolerances is already in place.
(Response 19) We agree with the comments' assessment of the low
risk of significant environmental impacts from either the consumption
or disposal of edible tissues containing residues of animal drugs.
Since the 2012 proposed rule, we have reviewed EAs for several import
tolerance requests for new animal drugs used in both aquatic and
terrestrial environments (aquatic: Azamethiphos and lufenuron in
salmonids, benzocaine in Atlantic salmon and rainbow trout, and
emamectin and teflubenzuron in Atlantic salmon; terrestrial: Monensin
and monepantel in sheep; see https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/Products/ImportExports/ucm315830.htm). Regardless of the environment in
which the drugs were used, each EA described the introduction of drug
residues into the domestic environment as being through the consumption
of food resulting in: (1) Excreta entering sewage treatment facilities
and (2) waste of edible tissues disposed of in landfills. Each EA
resulted in a finding by the Agency of no significant environmental
impact; thus, for each import tolerance action a finding of no
significant impact was prepared.
In response to comments that FDA create a categorical exclusion
from the requirement to prepare an EA for an action on an import
tolerance, the Agency is considering proposing a new categorical
exclusion specific to establishment, amendment, or revocation of an
import tolerance. This would require review by the White House Council
on Environmental Quality, as well as additional rulemaking with public
notice and comment. The Agency is currently evaluating available
information to
[[Page 52407]]
determine if this category of actions would individually or
cumulatively result in significant effects on the environment and will
proceed as appropriate.
(Comment 20) One comment notes that establishment of an import
tolerance should also have no appreciable environmental effect outside
the United States. If the new animal drug is not expected to have
significant environmental impacts in the country where it is registered
for use, it is hard to imagine a situation where movement of residues
to another country or into the global commons, such as the open ocean,
would present a significant environmental risk.
(Response 20) We agree with the comment's assessment of the low
risk of significant environmental effects abroad of residues of new
animal drugs appropriately registered in the country they are used
based on our experience to date. An analysis of effects abroad is not
currently required in the EA for establishment of an import tolerance;
however, when necessary, such an analysis will be completed by the
Agency.
VI. Effective Date
The rule is effective January 19, 2022.
VII. Economic Analysis of Impacts
We have examined the impacts of the final rule under Executive
Order 12866, Executive Order 13563, the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601-612), and the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104-4). Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct 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). 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 the final rule will simply codify the procedures that
are currently used for the import tolerance program, 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 $158
million, using the most current (2020) 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.
Summary of Cost and Benefits
Firms are currently able to request that we establish or amend an
import tolerance. The final rule will not change the current procedures
for these requests. Thus, we include only the incremental costs of
reading and understanding the final rule on import tolerance
procedures.
In table 2, FDA provides the Regulatory Information Service Center
and Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Consolidated
Information Center accounting information.
Table 2--Economic Data: Costs and Benefits Statement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Units
------------------------------------
Category Primary Low High Period Notes
estimate estimate estimate Year Discount covered
dollars rate (%) (years)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits:
Annualized, Monetized $millions/year .......... .......... .......... .......... 7 .......... ......................................
.......... .......... .......... .......... 3 .......... ......................................
Annualized Quantified............... .......... .......... .......... .......... 7 .......... ......................................
.......... .......... .......... .......... 3 .......... ......................................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qualitative......................... Codifying current practices of the
import tolerance program could
improve the efficiency of the
program.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs:
Annualized, Monetized $millions/year <$0.0001 <$0.0001 <$0.0001 2020 7 10 ......................................
<$0.0001 <$0.0001 <$0.0001 2020 3 10 ......................................
Annualized.......................... .......... .......... .......... .......... 7 .......... ......................................
Quantified.......................... .......... .......... .......... .......... 3 .......... ......................................
Qualitative......................... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... ......................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transfers:
Federal Annualized Monetized .......... .......... .......... .......... 7 ..........
$millions/year.
.......... .......... .......... .......... 3 ..........
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From/To............................. From:
To:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other............................... .......... .......... .......... .......... 7 .......... ......................................
Annualized, Monetized $millions/year .......... .......... .......... .......... 3 .......... ......................................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From/To............................. From:
To:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effects:
State, Local or Tribal Government: No Effect........................................................................................................
Small Business: The final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities that manufacture unapproved drugs that
are the subject of an import tolerance request..
Wages: No effect....................................................................................................................................
Growth: No effect...................................................................................................................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 52408]]
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 (FDA-2001-N-
0075) and at https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/reports/economic-impact-analyses-fda-regulations.
VIII. Analysis of Environmental Impact
The Agency has determined under 21 CFR 25.30(h) that this action is
of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a significant
effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an environmental
assessment nor environmental impact statement is required.
IX. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule contains information collection provisions that are
subject to review by OMB under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521). The
title, description, and respondent description of the information
collection provisions are shown in the following paragraphs with an
estimate of the annual reporting burden. Included in the estimate is
the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing
each collection of information.
Title: Reporting Requirements to Establish, Amend, or Revoke an
Import Tolerance (21 CFR 510.205)
Description: The FD&C Act, as amended by the ADAA, authorizes the
establishment and revocation of tolerances for unapproved new animal
drugs where edible portions of animals imported into the United States
may contain residues of such drugs (import tolerances) (section
512(a)(6) of the FD&C Act). Import tolerances provide a basis for the
legal marketing of imported animal-derived food containing residues of
new animal drugs neither approved nor conditionally approved in the
United States (unapproved new animal drugs). Without an import
tolerance, any amount of residue of an unapproved new animal drug in
imported, animal-derived food would cause that food to be adulterated
under section 402(a)(2)(C)(ii) of the FD&C Act because the drug would
be deemed unsafe under section 512 of the FD&C Act. Such food could be
denied entry into the United States under section 801(a)(3) of the FD&C
Act (21 U.S.C. 381(a)(3)). It remains unlawful to import animal-derived
food containing a residue of an unapproved new animal drug, unless an
import tolerance has been established for such drug and any residue of
the new animal drug in the imported animal-derived food does not exceed
that import tolerance.
This final rule amends our regulations in part 510 to establish new
information collection provisions regarding requests to establish,
amend, or revoke import tolerances for residues of unapproved new
animal drugs in food. This final rule establishes procedures by which a
person may make such requests, as well as procedures for
reconsideration of action or an administrative stay of action to
establish, amend, or revoke an import tolerance. The regulations make
it clear that the Commissioner may start a review process to establish,
amend, or revoke an import tolerance on his or her own initiative under
Sec. 10.25(b). These regulations also establish when import tolerance-
related actions (actions resulting in establishment, amendment, or
revocation) and their basis will be publicly disclosed.
The information required to be submitted in a request to establish
an import tolerance is set forth in Sec. 510.205(e). The request must
identify the drug; describe the conditions of use; describe the
proposed import tolerance(s) for residues of the new animal drug;
provide human food safety information to support the proposed import
tolerance(s); provide other human food safety information as deemed
necessary by the Commissioner; describe practicable methods for
determining the quantity, if any, of the new animal drug in or on food,
and any substance formed in or on food because of its use; include an
environmental assessment; and provide any information required under
Sec. Sec. 500.80 through 500.92, where applicable. The information
required to be submitted in a request to amend an import tolerance is
set forth in Sec. 510.205(f) and the information required to be
submitted in a withdrawal of a request is set forth in Sec.
510.205(g).
The information submitted to us in a request to establish, amend,
or revoke import tolerances is necessary to allow us to establish
import tolerances that would provide a basis for the legal marketing of
imported animal-derived food containing residues of new animal drugs
neither approved nor conditionally approved in the United States
(unapproved new animal drugs). We will use the information collected
through the import tolerances procedure to complete our evaluation.
Comments regarding the information collection topics solicited in
the proposed rule are discussed in the preamble in section V. See, in
particular, comments 4, 9, 10, 12, 18, and 19. None of the comments
suggested we modify the estimated annual burden associated with the
information collection. However, we have revised the analysis of the
information collection provisions to accurately reflect the final rule.
We added a row to table 3 to report the new burden of Sec. 510.205(g)
(withdrawal of a request), and we removed a row from table 3 to reflect
that the collections of information in our procedural regulations at 21
CFR part 10 (in particular, 21 CFR 10.20, 10.30, 10.33, and 10.35)
already are approved under OMB control number 0910-0191.
Description of Respondents: Respondents to the collection of
information are: manufacturers of the unapproved new animal drug that
is the subject of the request, foreign producers who use the unapproved
new animal drug and their trade associations, and importers of animal-
derived food bearing or containing residues of the unapproved new
animal drug.
We estimate the burden of this information collection as follows:
Table 3--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
21 CFR Section; activity Number of responses per Total annual Average burden Total hours
respondents respondent responses per response
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
510.205(e)(1) through (8); 2 1 2 1 2
contents of request............
510.205(a) through (e); request 2 1 2 50 100
to establish an import
tolerance based on permanent
Codex MRL \2\..................
510.205(a) through (e); request 1 1 1 80 80
to establish an import
tolerance not based on
permanent Codex MRL \2\........
510.205(f), request to amend an 1 1 1 32 32
import tolerance...............
510.205(g), withdrawal of a 1 1 1 1 1
request........................
[[Page 52409]]
Total....................... .............. .............. .............. .............. 215
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of
information.
\2\ A Codex MRL is a permanent maximum residue limit (MRL) that has been established by the Codex Alimentarius
Committee.
We base our estimate of the number of respondents and number of
responses per respondent in table 3 on our experience since the passage
of the ADAA and the number of actual requests received. We base our
estimate of the average burden per response on our experience with the
human food safety technical section of an NADA, as discussed previously
in this document.
A request to establish or amend an import tolerance must include
human food safety data and other information. The information submitted
is similar to that submitted to establish a tolerance under an NADA.
The collection of information required for submission of NADAs has been
reviewed under the PRA. A proportion of the time estimated in that
proposed extension for the paperwork associated with the human food
safety technical section of an NADA was used to estimate the time
(hours per response) presented in table 3 for the preparation of a
request to establish or amend an import tolerance not based on a
permanent Codex MRL, approximately 80 hours. We believe a request to
establish or amend an import tolerance based on a permanent Codex MRL
will be less burdensome, approximately 50 hours. Based on the Agency's
experience with establishing tolerances for approved new animal drugs,
the Agency believes that requests to revoke an import tolerance, as
well as petitions for reconsideration of an action or for an
administrative stay of an action, will be infrequent occurrences.
If there is a permanent Codex MRL for a new animal drug, the final
rule requires the requester to provide the permanent Codex MRL and
monographs and reports from the Joint FAO/World Health Organization of
the United Nations (WHO) Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA)
and/or the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) that
support the development of the Codex MRL.
If there is not a permanent Codex MRL, or upon notification by FDA,
the final rule requires the requester to provide full reports of
investigations made with respect to the human food safety of the new
animal drug including data submitted to the appropriate regulatory
authority in any country in which the new animal drug is lawfully used.
We may regard a request as incomplete unless it includes full reports
of adequate tests by all methods reasonably applicable to show whether
or not food derived from animals receiving the new animal drug will be
safe for human consumption.
The information collection provisions of this final rule have been
submitted to OMB for review as required by section 3507(d) of the PRA.
Before the effective date of this final rule, FDA will publish a notice
in the Federal Register announcing OMB's decision to approve, modify,
or disapprove the information collection provisions in this final rule.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.
X. Federalism
We have analyzed this final rule in accordance with the principles
set forth in Executive Order 13132. FDA has determined that the rule
does not contain policies that 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.
XI. 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.
List of Subjects
21 CFR Part 10
Administrative practice and procedure, News media.
21 CFR Part 20
Confidential business information, Courts, Freedom of information,
Government employees.
21 CFR Part 25
Environmental impact statements, Foreign relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
21 CFR Part 500
Animal drugs, Animal feeds, Cancer, Labeling, Packaging and
containers, Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
21 CFR Part 510
Administrative practice and procedure, Animal drugs, 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
parts 10, 20, 25, 500, and 510 are amended as follows:
PART 10--ADMINISTRATIVE PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES
0
1. The authority citation for part 10 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 551-558, 701-706; 15 U.S.C. 1451-1461; 21
U.S.C. 141-149, 321-397, 467f, 679, 821, 1034; 28 U.S.C. 2112; 42
U.S.C. 201, 262, 263b, 264.
0
2. In Sec. 10.25, revise paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 10.25 Initiation of administrative proceedings.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) In the form specified in other applicable FDA regulations,
e.g., the form for a color additive petition in Sec. 71.1, for a food
additive petition in Sec. 171.1 or Sec. 571.1, for a new drug
application in Sec. 314.50, for a request to establish or amend an
import tolerance
[[Page 52410]]
in Sec. 510.205, for a new animal drug application in Sec. 514.1, or
* * * * *
PART 20--PUBLIC INFORMATION
0
3. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552; 18 U.S.C. 1905; 19 U.S.C. 2531-2582; 21
U.S.C. 321-393, 1401-1403; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242, 242a, 242l, 242n,
243, 262, 263, 263b-263n, 264, 265, 300u-300u-5, 300aa-1.
0
4. In Sec. 20.100, add paragraph (c)(47) to read as follows:
Sec. 20.100 Applicability; cross-reference to other regulations.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(47) Requests to establish or amend import tolerances, in Sec.
510.205 of this chapter.
PART 25--ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS
0
5. The authority citation for part 25 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321-393; 42 U.S.C. 262, 263b-264; 42
U.S.C. 4321, 4332; 40 CFR parts 1500-1508; E.O. 11514, 35 FR 4247, 3
CFR, 1971 Comp., p. 531-533, as amended by E.O. 11991, 42 FR 26967,
3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 123-124 and E.O. 12114, 44 FR 1957, 3 CFR,
1980 Comp., p. 356-360.
0
6. In Sec. 25.20, add paragraph (q) to read as follows:
Sec. 25.20 Actions requiring preparation of an environmental
assessment.
* * * * *
(q) Establishment, amendment, or revocation of an import tolerance
in accordance with subpart C of part 510 of this chapter.
PART 500--GENERAL
0
7. The authority citation for part 500 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 342, 343, 348, 351, 352, 353,
360b, 371, 379e.
0
8. In Sec. 500.80, in paragraph (a), add a new fourth sentence; and
revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 500.80 Scope of this subpart.
(a) * * * The requirements of this subpart shall also apply to a
request for an import tolerance under Sec. 510.205 of this chapter. *
* *
* * * * *
(c) If FDA concludes on the basis of the threshold assessment or at
a later time during the approval process or during the review of a
request for an import tolerance that the data show that the sponsored
compound and its metabolites should not be subject to this subpart, FDA
will continue to consider the compound for approval under the general
safety provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act for risks
other than cancer or continue its review of the import tolerance
request under the provisions of Sec. Sec. 510.201 through 510.213 of
this chapter (Subpart C--Import Tolerances for Residues of Unapproved
New Animal Drugs in Food).
* * * * *
0
9. In Sec. 500.82(b), revise the definition of ``Sponsor'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 500.82 Definitions.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
Sponsor means the person or organization proposing or holding an
approval by FDA for the use of a sponsored compound or the person
initiating a request for an import tolerance under Sec. 510.205 of
this chapter.
* * * * *
0
10. In Sec. 500.88, add paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 500.88 Regulatory method.
* * * * *
(d) If the sponsor initially submitted a request for an import
tolerance under Sec. 510.205 of this chapter, FDA will make the
complete regulatory method for ascertaining the marker residue in the
target tissue publicly available pursuant to Sec. 510.207(b) of this
chapter.
0
11. In Sec. 500.92, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 500.92 Implementation.
(a) This subpart E applies to all new animal drug applications,
food additive petitions, color additive petitions, and requests for
import tolerances concerning any compound intended for use in food-
producing animals (including supplemental applications and amendments
to petitions).
* * * * *
PART 510--NEW ANIMAL DRUGS
0
12. The authority citation for part 510 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 331, 351, 352, 353, 360b, 371, 379e.
0
13. Add subpart C to read as follows:
Subpart C--Import Tolerances for Residues of Unapproved New Animal
Drugs in Food
Sec.
510.201 Scope.
510.202 Definitions.
510.203 Initiation of a proceeding to establish or amend an import
tolerance.
510.205 Content and administration of a request.
510.206 Review of information supporting actions to establish or
amend an import tolerance.
510.207 Disclosure of information submitted in a request.
510.209 Establishment, denial, or amendment of an import tolerance.
510.210 Revocation of an import tolerance.
510.212 Administrative reconsideration of action.
510.213 Administrative stay of action.
Subpart C--Import Tolerances for Residues of Unapproved New Animal
Drugs in Food
Sec. 510.201 Scope.
This subpart applies to tolerances for residues of new animal drugs
not approved or conditionally approved for use in the United States,
but lawfully used in another country and present in imported, animal-
derived food and food products.
Sec. 510.202 Definitions.
The following definitions of terms apply when used in this subpart:
CNADA means an application for conditional approval of a new animal
drug submitted under section 571 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act, and includes all amendments and permissible supplements.
Import tolerance means a tolerance for a residue of a new animal
drug not approved or conditionally approved for use in the United
States, but present in any imported edible portion of any animal.
NADA means a new animal drug application submitted under section
512 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, including all
amendments and permissible supplements, for approval of a new animal
drug.
Request means a request to establish or amend an import tolerance.
Sec. 510.203 Initiation of a proceeding to establish or amend an
import tolerance.
(a) Any interested person may request that the Commissioner
establish or amend an import tolerance. Such a request must be in the
form specified in Sec. 510.205 of this chapter.
(b) The Commissioner may initiate a proceeding to establish or
amend an import tolerance on his or her own initiative pursuant to
Sec. 10.25(b) of this chapter.
Sec. 510.205 Content and administration of a request.
(a) Pertinent information previously submitted to and currently
retained in the files of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may be
incorporated in, and will be considered as part of, a request on the
basis of specific reference to such information. If
[[Page 52411]]
the requester refers to any nonpublic information other than its own,
the requester shall obtain a written right of reference to that
nonpublic information and submit the right of reference with the
request. Any reference to published information offered in support of a
request should be accompanied by reprints or copies of such references.
(b) Requests shall be submitted and addressed to the Document
Control Unit (HFV-199), Center for Veterinary Medicine, Food and Drug
Administration, 7500 Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855. Requests may be
submitted in an electronic format as authorized by FDA. See FDA's
Electronic Submissions Gateway website: https://www.fda.gov/industry/electronic-submissions-gateway.
(c) Any material submitted in a foreign language shall be
accompanied by a complete and accurate English translation.
Translations of literature printed in a language other than English
shall be accompanied by copies of the original publication.
(d) The request must be dated and must be signed by the requester
or by his or her authorized attorney, agent, or official and shall
state the requester's correspondence address. If the requester or such
authorized representative does not reside or have a place of business
within the United States, the requester must also furnish the name and
post office address of, and the request must be countersigned by, an
authorized attorney, agent, or official residing or maintaining a place
of business within the United States.
(e) The request must include the following information:
(1) The established name and all pertinent information concerning
the new animal drug, including chemical identity and composition of the
new animal drug, and its physical, chemical, and biological properties;
(2) The conditions of use for the new animal drug, including the
route of administration and dosage, together with all labeling,
directions, and recommendations regarding the uses in countries in
which the new animal drug is lawfully used;
(3) The proposed import tolerance(s) for residues of the new animal
drug;
(4) Human food safety information to support the proposed import
tolerance(s) in either of the following forms:
(i) If a permanent maximum residue limit (MRL) has been established
by the Codex Alimentarius Committee (Codex MRL), the requester shall
provide the permanent Codex MRL and monographs and reports from the
Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO)
of the United Nations and/or monographs and reports from the Joint FAO/
WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) that support the development
of the permanent Codex MRL. FDA may request additional information as
needed.
(ii) If no permanent Codex MRL has been established, or upon
notification by FDA, the requester must provide full reports of
investigations made with respect to the human food safety of the new
animal drug. A request may be regarded as incomplete unless it includes
full reports of adequate tests by all methods reasonably applicable to
show whether or not any imported edible portion of any animal receiving
the new animal drug will be safe for human consumption. The reports
must include detailed data derived from appropriate animal and other
biological experiments in which the methods used and the results
obtained are clearly set forth, including data submitted to the
appropriate regulatory authority in any country where the new animal
drug is lawfully used. The request must also include a statement that
all such reports have been submitted or contain an explanation of why
such reports were not submitted. With respect to each nonclinical
laboratory study contained in the request, the requestor must submit
either a statement that the study was conducted in compliance with the
good laboratory practice regulations set forth in part 58 of this
chapter, or, if the study was not conducted in compliance with such
regulations, a brief statement of the reason for the noncompliance, and
how this may have impacted the study;
(5) Other human food safety information as deemed necessary by the
Commissioner;
(6) A description of practicable methods for determining the
quantity, if any, of the new animal drug in or on food, and any
substance formed in or on food because of its use;
(7) An environmental assessment under Sec. 25.40 of this chapter;
and
(8) Any information required under Sec. Sec. 500.80 through 500.92
of this chapter (Subpart E, Regulation of Carcinogenic Compounds Used
in Food-Producing Animals), where applicable.
(f) A request to amend an established import tolerance must contain
information to support each proposed change. The request may omit
statements made in the original request for which no change is
proposed.
(g) The requester may withdraw the request at any time before the
notification provided for in Sec. 510.207(a) of this chapter has been
made publicly available.
Sec. 510.206 Review of information supporting actions to establish or
amend an import tolerance.
In establishing or amending an import tolerance, the Commissioner
shall rely on data sufficient to demonstrate that a proposed tolerance
is safe based on similar food safety criteria used by the Commissioner
to establish tolerances for applications for new animal drugs filed
under section 512(b)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. In
establishing or amending an import tolerance, the Commissioner will
give appropriate consideration to the anticipated residue
concentrations and conditions of use of the new animal drug specified.
Sec. 510.207 Disclosure of information submitted in a request.
(a) When a request is determined to be complete for FDA's
consideration, the Commissioner will provide public notification of the
request containing the name of the requester and a brief description of
the request in general terms. A copy of the notification will be sent
to the requester at the time the information is made available to the
public.
(b) Any notification establishing, amending, or revoking an import
tolerance will be made publicly available. A summary of the basis for
the decision will be publicly released in accordance with the
provisions of part 20 of this chapter. If FDA determines that the new
animal drug referred to in the request is a new animal drug that
induces cancer when ingested by people or animals, and the requester
complies with the requirements of Sec. Sec. 500.80 through 500.92 of
this chapter (Subpart E, Regulation of Carcinogenic Compounds Used in
Food-Producing Animals), the regulatory method for ascertaining the
marker residue in the target tissue will be made publicly available.
All information and safety data submitted with the request, or
previously submitted information incorporated in, and considered as
part of, a request on the basis of specific reference to such
information, shall be available for public disclosure, also in
accordance with the provisions of part 20 of this chapter. Trade
secrets and confidential commercial or financial information are
exempted from release under Sec. 20.61 of this chapter.
Sec. 510.209 Establishment, denial, or amendment of an import
tolerance.
(a) If an import tolerance is established or amended, the
[[Page 52412]]
Commissioner will provide public notification of the action, which will
be effective from the date of public notification. A copy of the
notification will be sent to any requestor at the time the information
is made available to the public.
(b) If a request to establish or amend an import tolerance is
denied, a notification of the denial will be made publicly available,
and a copy of the denial letter, including the reasons for such action,
will be sent to the requester.
(c) A tolerance established in an approved NADA or conditionally
approved CNADA will supersede an existing import tolerance. In the
event the conditionally approved CNADA is not renewed or is withdrawn,
or such drug does not achieve approval under section 512 of the Federal
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act within 5 years following the date of the
conditional approval, the Agency will reinstate the import tolerance
unless Sec. 510.210(a)(1) or (a)(2) is applicable at that time.
Sec. 510.210 Revocation of an import tolerance.
(a) The Commissioner, on his or her own initiative or on the
petition of an interested person, under Sec. 10.25 of this chapter,
may revoke an import tolerance if:
(1) Scientific evidence shows an import tolerance to be unsafe; or
(2) Information demonstrates that the use of a new animal drug
under actual use conditions results in food being imported into the
United States with residues exceeding the import tolerance.
(b) The Commissioner will provide public notification under Sec.
510.207(b) that will specify the basis for the decision and will be
effective at the time the information is made available to the public.
(c) A petition for revocation must be submitted in the form
specified in Sec. 10.30 of this chapter.
Sec. 510.212 Administrative reconsideration of action.
(a) The Commissioner may at any time, on his or her own initiative
or on the petition of an interested person under part 10 of this
chapter, reconsider part or all of a decision to establish, not
establish, amend, or revoke an import tolerance.
(b) A petition for reconsideration must be submitted in accordance
with Sec. 10.20 of this chapter and in the form specified in Sec.
10.33 of this chapter no later than 30 days after the date of public
notification of the decision involved. The Commissioner may, for good
cause, permit a petition to be filed more than 30 days after public
notification of the decision. The petition for reconsideration must
demonstrate that relevant information contained in the administrative
record was not previously or not adequately considered by the
Commissioner. No new information may be included in a petition for
reconsideration.
(c) An interested person who wishes to rely on information not
included in the administrative record shall submit either a petition to
amend an import tolerance under Sec. 510.205 or to revoke an import
tolerance under Sec. 510.210 and Sec. 10.25 of this chapter.
Sec. 510.213 Administrative stay of action.
(a) The Commissioner may at any time, on his or her own initiative
or on the request of an interested person under part 10 of this
chapter, stay or extend the effective date of a decision to establish,
not establish, amend, or revoke an import tolerance.
(b) A request for stay must be submitted in accordance with Sec.
10.20 of this chapter and in the form specified in Sec. 10.35 of this
chapter no later than 30 days after public notification of the decision
involved. The Commissioner may, for good cause, permit a petition to be
filed more than 30 days after public notification of the decision.
Dated: September 10, 2021.
Janet Woodcock,
Acting Commissioner of Food and Drugs.
[FR Doc. 2021-19967 Filed 9-20-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P