[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 70 (Monday, April 13, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19530-19532]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-08360]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 1020
[Docket No. FDA-2015-N-0828]
Performance Standards for Ionizing Radiation Emitting Products;
Fluoroscopic Equipment; Correction
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending a Federal
performance standard for ionizing radiation to correct a drafting error
regarding fluoroscopic equipment measurement. We are taking this action
to ensure clarity and improve the accuracy of the regulations.
DATES: This rule is effective August 26, 2015. Submit electronic or
written comments on this direct final rule or its companion proposed
rule by June 29, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the following way:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written comments in the following ways:
Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper submissions):
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2015-N-0828 for this rulemaking. All comments received may be
posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For additional information on submitting
comments, see the ``Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of
Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Gonzalez, Center for Devices and
Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 4641, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, 301-796-5889.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What is the background of this Rule?
FDA is correcting a drafting error regarding fluoroscopic equipment
measurement in Sec. 1020.32 (21 CFR 1020.32). We are publishing this
direct final rule because it is intended to make a noncontroversial
amendment to Sec. 1020.32, and we do not anticipate any significant
adverse comments. Specifically, this amendment changes the words ``any
linear dimension'' in the current regulation to read ``every linear
dimension'' (Sec. 1020.32(b)(4)(ii)(A)). The alternative performance
standard, Sec. 1020.32(b)(4)(ii)(B), currently contains the same
phrase but remains unchanged. We are amending the language to make the
performance standards mutually exclusive. This will ensure clarity and
improve the accuracy of the regulations.
FDA first proposed the performance standards in the Federal
Register of December 10, 2002 (67 FR 76056), to account for
technological changes in fluoroscopic equipment. The proposed rule did
not specify which measurement of the visible area of an image receptor
determined the applicable performance standard (67 FR 76056 at 76092).
When we addressed comments to the proposed rule in the Federal Register
of June 10, 2005, we agreed with one comment that adding the words
``any linear dimension'' would clarify the determination of the
performance standard (70 FR 33998 at 34007).
FDA ultimately incorporated the phrase in two places, potentially
reducing the clarity of the rule (70 FR 33998 at 34040). Section
1020.32(b)(4)(ii) sets performance standards based on a threshold, so
the language for each standard should be mutually exclusive. That is,
only one standard, and not the other, should apply to the image
receptor in question. However, some image receptors may have linear
dimensions that are both greater than and less than 34 cm, for example,
receptors with a hexagonal shape. In such cases, the performance
standards may not be mutually exclusive, so both standards may appear
to apply. This direct final rule amends Sec. 1020.32(b)(4)(ii)(A) to
read ``every linear dimension'' to ensure the standards are mutually
exclusive. The amendment will improve the clarity and accuracy of the
regulations.
[[Page 19531]]
II. What are the procedures for issuing a direct Final Rule?
In the Federal Register of November 21, 1997 (62 FR 62466), FDA
announced the availability of the guidance document entitled ``Guidance
for FDA and Industry: Direct Final Rule Procedures'' that described
when and how we will employ direct final rulemaking. We believe that
this rule is appropriate for direct final rulemaking because it is
intended to make a noncontroversial amendment for a minor correction to
an existing regulation. We anticipate no significant adverse comments.
Consistent with FDA's procedures on direct final rulemaking, we are
publishing a companion proposed rule elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register. That proposed rule is identical in substance to this
direct final rule. The companion proposal will provide a procedural
framework to finalize a new rule in the event we withdraw this direct
final rule because we receive significant adverse comment. The comment
period for this direct final rule runs concurrently with the comment
period of the companion proposed rule. We will consider any comments
that we receive in response to the companion proposed rule to be
comments also regarding this direct final rule and vice versa.
If FDA receives any significant adverse comments, we will withdraw
this direct final rule before its effective date by publishing a notice
in the Federal Register within 30 days after the comment period ends. A
significant adverse comment is one that explains why the rule would be
inappropriate (including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or
approach), ineffective, or unacceptable without change. In determining
whether an adverse comment is significant and warrants withdrawing a
direct final rule, we consider whether the comment raises an issue
serious enough to warrant a substantive response in a notice-and-
comment process in accordance with section 553 of the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553). Comments that are frivolous,
insubstantial, or outside the scope of the rule will not be considered
a significant adverse comment, unless the comment states why the rule
would be ineffective without the additional change. In addition, if a
significant adverse comment applies to part of a rule and that part can
be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those
parts of the rule that are not the subject of a significant adverse
comment.
If we withdraw this direct final rule, FDA will consider all
comments that we received regarding the companion proposed rule as we
develop a final rule through the usual notice-and-comment procedures of
the APA (5 U.S.C. 552a, et seq.). If we receive no significant adverse
comments during the specified comment period regarding this direct
final rule, we intend to publish a confirmation document in the Federal
Register within 30 days after the comment period ends.
III. What is the legal authority for this Rule?
This rule, if finalized, would amend Sec. 1020.32. FDA's authority
to modify Sec. 1020.32 arises from the same authority under which FDA
initially issued this regulation, the device and general administrative
provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 351,
352, 360e-360j, 360hh-360ss, 371, and 381).
IV. What is the environmental impact of this Rule?
FDA has determined under 21 CFR 25.30(h) and 25.34(a) that this
action is of a type that does not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment. Therefore, neither an
environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is
required.
V. What is the economic analysis of impact of this Rule?
FDA has 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 Agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and
equity). The Agency believes that this final rule is not a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires Agencies to analyze
regulatory options that would minimize any significant impact of a rule
on small entities. Because this rule does not add any additional
regulatory burdens, the Agency certifies that this final rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
Section 202(a) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires
that Agencies prepare a written statement, which includes an assessment
of anticipated costs and benefits, before proposing ``any rule that
includes any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any one year.'' The current threshold after adjustment
for inflation is $141 million, using the most current (2013) Implicit
Price Deflator for the Gross Domestic Product. This final rule would
not result in a 1-year expenditure that meets or exceeds this amount.
The purpose of this final rule is to correct a drafting error
regarding fluoroscopic equipment measurement in a performance standard
for ionizing radiation. The amendment will improve the clarity and
accuracy of the regulations. Because this final rule is a technical
correction and would impose no additional regulatory burdens, this
regulation is not anticipated to result in any compliance costs, and
the economic impact is expected to be minimal.
VI. How does the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 apply to this Rule?
This final rule contains no collection of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
VII. What are the Federalism implications of this Rule?
FDA has 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, the Agency has concluded
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.
VIII. How do you submit comments on this Rule?
Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division
[[Page 19532]]
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 1020
Electronic products, Medical devices, Radiation protection,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Television, X-rays.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part
1020 is amended as follows:
PART 1020--PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR IONIZING RADIATION EMITTING
PRODUCTS
0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 1020 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 351, 352, 360e-360j, 360hh-360ss, 371,
381.
0
2. Revise Sec. 1020.32(b)(4)(ii)(A) to read as follows:
Sec. 1020.32 Fluoroscopic equipment.
(b) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(A) When every linear dimension of the visible area of the image
receptor measured through the center of the visible area is less than
or equal to 34 cm in any direction, at least 80 percent of the area of
the x-ray field overlaps the visible area of the image.
* * * * *
Dated: April 7, 2015.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2015-08360 Filed 4-10-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P