TobaccoReporter logo

Category: Global Regulation

  • Ghana Outlaws Vape Sales and Promotion

    Ghana Outlaws Vape Sales and Promotion

    Ghana has banned all recreational use of vaping and e-cigarette products.

    In a press release, the country’s Food and Drugs Authority (FDA) states that the “sale, advertisement and recreational use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) such as vapes and other non-nicotine tobacco products by the public” is illegal.

    However, ENDS can be registered as a prescription-only medicine for the purposes of cessation therapy.

    The FDA claims it has sent notice to manufacturers, importers, wholesalers, and retailers to remove all advertisements on social media, billboards and neon signs immediately and refrain from the importation of the products.

    The FDA states that there “will be repercussions including sanctions” for failure to adhere to the rules.

  • Ninth Circuit Denies Lotus MDO Review

    Ninth Circuit Denies Lotus MDO Review

    Entrance to United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit . Headquartered in San Francisco, California, the Ninth Circuit is by far the largest of the 13 courts of appeals. (Credit: Eric BVD)

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on June 30 declined to review a Food and Drug Administration marketing denial order for Lotus Vaping Technologies’ flavored e-liquid products.

    The FDA issued marketing denial orders for Lotus’ flavored products, finding that the petitioners’ applications lacked sufficient evidence showing that the flavored products would provide a benefit to adult users that outweighs the risks such products pose to youth.

    Lotus challenged the ruling in court, but the judges held that the text of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act authorizes the FDA to require that manufacturers submit comparative health risk data, which necessarily includes comparisons of flavored e-liquids to tobacco-flavored e-liquids.

    The judges also held that the FDA did not arbitrarily or capriciously deny Lotus’ applications and that any error the agency committed by failing to consider Lotus’ marketing plans was harmless.

  • Best Practices

    Best Practices

    Photo: doidam10

    How to approach environmental assessments for the best chance of success

    By Adam Bonin and Antony Jones

    An Environmental Assessment (EA) is an analysis prepared in accordance with the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to determine if a product’s approval would significantly affect the environment. It applies to all federal actions in the U.S., including regulations, policies, projects, licensing and permission granting. The assessments give insights into potential risks associated with a product’s manufacture, use and disposal and help manufacturers develop effective mitigation strategies to reduce or avoid possible environmental consequences.

    EAs therefore help regulatory agencies identify potential adverse environmental impacts from the manufacture, use and disposal of electronic nicotine-delivery systems and oral nicotine products. They are a small yet important part of premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs) and modified-risk tobacco product submissions. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration requires manufacturers to submit EAs for each individual tobacco product, or stock-keeping unit, within a PMTA.

    An inadequate or absent EA will result in either a “refuse-to-accept” or a “refuse-to-file” order from the FDA. In 2021, the FDA rejected 4.5 million vaping applications on the grounds that they “lacked an adequate environmental assessment.” With companies spending millions on PMTA submissions, they cannot afford to miss out on approval due to such a small part of the process. So, what does a good EA look like?

    What to Include in an Environmental Assessment

    In general, an EA includes an executive summary, applicant details, description of the proposed action and purpose and need of the proposed action. Further EA sections include the identification of alternatives, including the proposed action and no action alternative, potential environmental impacts of the alternatives (affected environment [or existing conditions] and environmental impacts), cumulative impacts and mitigation measures. An EA is appropriate for submission if it is determined that the impacts of the proposal will not be significant or the FDA concludes a finding of no significant impact. Mitigation measures may be recommended if impacts are anticipated, to reduce them below the significance threshold.

    The initial stage of the EA process is building a well-defined project description, covering the purpose and need for the regulatory decision (marketing granted order) that triggers the requirement for an EA under the NEPA. The applicant will also need to include details of product components, product formulation (where applicable) and predicted sales projections for the first and fifth years. It is particularly important to include the mass of individual metals in product hardware components (e.g., devices, pods) to assess potential impacts at the end of life.

    A good EA includes a thorough screening and comprehensive modeling of product components (e.g., e-liquid ingredients), with all conclusions and results backed up with hard data. The evaluation of the potential release of materials to the environment should be quantitively assessed, with the resulting potential concentrations in the environment explicitly stated and compared with relevant ecotoxicity standards to determine the possible impact.

    Throughout, it is important to appropriately manage confidential information. EAs include both confidential and nonconfidential appendices, and it is important that these are prepared correctly. For example, if there is proprietary information in the e-liquid formulation, this would be best listed in the confidential appendices, as would sales and marketing projections. It can be difficult to know which information is appropriate for inclusion in the confidential apprentices, and working with an experienced team offers the best chance of success.

    Determining the Possible Impacts

    E-liquids typically consist of a mixture of ingredients, including propylene glycol, vegetable glycerin and nicotine. The formulation can be screened using a predictive tool to determine which ingredients are of most ecotoxicological concern and should be carried forward into the analysis. The selected ingredients can be assessed for estimated acute and chronic aquatic toxicity for aquatic organisms, including plants, fish and invertebrates, and then be assessed in subsequent fate and transport modeling.

    The EA should analyze the plausible scenarios for the impact of the identified substances being released into the environment, including quantitative release modeling. For example, this could include the possible impact of the material being released into surface water or soils at quantities considered reasonable based on predicted sales data.

    The project supply chain should also be documented, including details of manufacturing and shipping to retail entities. The environmental and social resources around U.S. manufacturing facilities require characterization to provide an understanding of the affected environment (existing or baseline conditions). The potential impacts of projects can then be evaluated based on changes to the baseline conditions—for example, if chemical mixtures or raw ingredients are accidentally released into surface water or chemicals are released down the drain during manufacturing.

    It is important that the EA is realistic. In our experience, the inclusion of conservative analyses appears to be the soundest approach. It may be tempting to conduct modeling for a wide variety of release scenarios, but if they are deemed unlikely by the FDA, you may receive a deficiency for evaluating unreasonable scenarios.

    Tips and Tricks

    • Start early. Considering the EA process early in the application can improve efficiencies, particularly for characterizing natural resources around U.S.-based facilities and engaging with manufacturers and other vendors to understand product supply chains.
    • Use a robust standard operating procedure. In an EA, it is vital that every section includes explicit information that satisfactorily evaluates the product against FDA requirements.
    • Choose an experienced team. Many businesses do not have employees with sufficient NEPA experience; in this case, we recommend working with a consultancy. NEPA-specific jargon and other regulatory nuances can be challenging for new practitioners.
    • Stay up to date. Attending FDA and NEPA meetings can be a great way to stay up to date with any changes in the guidance. In addition, manufacturers can engage directly with an FDA project manager if they receive deficiency comments.
    Adam Bonin is a senior consultant at Broughton with over 22 years of scientific consulting experience. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree in environmental management from the University of Rhode Island and a doctorate in environmental microbiology from Portland State University. Bonin also completed a postdoctoral appointment in microbial ecology at Oregon Health and Science University.
    Antony Jones is a managing consultant at Broughton with more than 22 years of experience in risk assessment with a focus on characterizing and reducing risks across the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, food, nicotine and environmental industries. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree in biology from the University of York and a doctorate in molecular biology and microbiology from Newcastle University. Jones also completed a postdoctoral appointment at King’s College London.

    Broughton is a global scientific consultancy-based Contract Research Organization serving industries in pharmaceuticals, next-generation nicotine-delivery products and cannabinoids. Its team has developed a robust and proven approach for preparing defensible NEPA-compliant EAs for the FDA PMTA. For more information, visit www.broughton-group.com/us-pmta-and-mrtp-nepa-environmental-assessments-ea.

  • CTP Reports Progress on Reagan-Udall Review

    CTP Reports Progress on Reagan-Udall Review

    Image: Tobacco Reporter archive

    Brian King, director of U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), published a statement summarizing the CTP’s progress in addressing the recommendations from the Reagan-Udall evaluation.

    At the request of FDA Commissioner Robert Califf, the Reagan-Udall Foundation evaluated the CTP’s operations. In December, the foundation submitted its report, which identified several problems hindering the agency’s ability to regulate the industry and reduce tobacco-related disease. Among other recommendations, the foundation urged the CTP to make process improvements and increase transparency.

    According to King, the CTP has made significant strides in putting its plans for improvement into action. The agency, he said, is on track to issue proposed goals this summer, and to release the final plan by December 2023. The CTP intends to hold a public meeting in summer 2023 to seek stakeholder feedback about the strategic plan.

    Meanwhile, said King, the CTP Ombuds Office is leading the creation of an operational strategy to improve transparency and information sharing across all programmatic areas, including through the establishment of transparency liaisons. Externally, the center is planning for upcoming public meetings to gather stakeholder input. CTP also published a webpage of all the tobacco products-related citizen petitions received by the center to provide the public with information about such citizen petitions that is easy to access and user-friendly.

    According to King, the center has reviewed 99 percent of tobacco product applications submitted over the past three years, authorizing 23 tobacco-flavored e-cigarette products and devices. The CTP is currently planning a public meeting to take place in fall 2023 regarding the application review process.

    Meanwhile, the center is in the process of finalizing rules related to menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars and continues to work toward publishing a proposed rule that would establish a maximum nicotine level to reduce the addictiveness of cigarettes and certain other combusted tobacco products.

    CTP also recently proposed new requirements for tobacco product manufacturers regarding the manufacture, design, packing and storage of their products.

    King also highlighted the CTP Office of Science leadership’s participation in conferences and external meetings. For example, representatives from the Office of Science recently presented at the Food and Drug Law Institute’s Nicotine Product Regulatory Science Symposium, the E-Cigarette Summit and the TMA annual meeting (see Todd Cecil’s TMA presentation here).

    “I am proud of the significant progress the center has made to date in addressing the external evaluation recommendations, and I am confident that we’ll continue to make important strides in continuing to build and strengthen FDA’s tobacco program in the future,” said King.

    A comprehensive list of CTP status updates for each Reagan-Udall Foundation recommendation is available here.

  • FDA Issues Warning Letters to 189 Retailers

    FDA Issues Warning Letters to 189 Retailers

    Credit: Monticello

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued warning letters to 189 retailers for selling unauthorized products, specifically Elf Bar and Esco Bars, according to a press release.

    “The FDA is prepared to use all of its authorities to ensure these and other illegal and youth-appealing products stay out of the hands of kids,” said FDA Commissioner Robert M. Califf. “We are committed to a multipronged approach using regulation, compliance and enforcement action and education to protect our nation’s youth.”

    The warning letters were the result of a nationwide retailer inspection blitz over the past several weeks, according to the FDA.

    “All players in the supply chain—including retailers—have a role in keeping illegal e-cigarettes off the shelves,” said Brian King, director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products. “This latest blitz should be a wake-up call for retailers of Elf Bar and Esco Bars products nationwide. If they’re waiting for a personal invitation to comply with the law, they might just get it in the form of a warning letter or other action from the FDA.”

    Elf Bar and Esco Bar products do not have the required marketing authorization from the FDA. The FDA has authorized 23 tobacco-flavored e-cigarette products and devices to date. The distribution and sale of unlawfully marketed products is subject to compliance and enforcement action.

    As of June 16, the FDA has issued more than 570 warning letters to firms for manufacturing, selling and/or distributing illegal tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, and filed civil money penalty complaints against 12 e-cigarette manufacturers.

  • Second Circuit Appeals Court Rules for FDA

    Second Circuit Appeals Court Rules for FDA

    Credit: Andrey Popov

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration acted reasonably in denying vapor maker Magellan Technology’s request for a marketing order for its flavored vaping products, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ruled May 16.

    The court upheld the FDA’s finding that Magellan failed to show the product would provide a benefit to adult users that would outweigh the risks to youth.

    The agency found Magellan’s evidence—four nonclinical studies—was insufficient to establish that the flavored pods would be more effective than tobacco-flavored electronic nicotine-delivery systems in helping smokers switch to e-cigarettes to stop smoking altogether, according to Bloomberg Law.

    The manufacturer of Hyde and Juno brand e-cigarettes sued the FDA and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, claiming the agencies violated the Administrative Procedure Act.

    New York-based Magellan Technology accused the agencies of refusing to review the company’s premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs) for 12 products, a process that cost the company $1 million. Magellan claims the FDA “arbitrarily” and “capriciously” rejected the applications.

    “Magellan had already spent over $1 million on the PMTAs at the time the RTA [refuse-to-accept] order [was] issued and plans to spend over $10 million on the PMTAs in total,” the suit states.

    Texas-based retailer Vapor Train 2 is also a plaintiff in the suit. The companies asked a Texas federal court to temporarily stay the RTA order that the FDA issued to Magellan, according to the lawsuit filed Thursday.

    The companies are expected to appeal the ruling. Magellan could now seek an en banc review of the case (a rehearing by the full 2nd Circuit) or could appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. 

  • Justice Groups Push Back Against Flavor Ban

    Justice Groups Push Back Against Flavor Ban

    Image: Tobacco Reporter archive

    A coalition of more than 50 criminal justice reform groups sent a letter to U.S. President Joe Biden warning that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s proposed ban on flavored tobacco products will lead to overpolicing in communities of color, according to The Hill.

    Prohibition-style policies, like the one proposed, “have serious racial justice implications,” wrote the organizations, which include Blacks in Law Enforcement, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the National Latino Officers Association and the Sentencing Project.

    “Banning the legal sale of menthol cigarettes through licensed businesses will lead—and, in fact, has already led in some states—to illegal, unlicensed distribution in communities of color while triggering criminal laws in all 50 states, increasing the incidence of negative interactions with police and ultimately increasing incarceration rates,” the letter said. “There are far better solutions for reducing menthol cigarette use than criminalizing these products and turning this issue over to the police.”

    The aim of the flavor ban is not only to make smoking less attractive but also to advance health equity, according to Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra

    “FDA has the power to provide smokers with less harmful options and information to help accelerate reductions in smoking,” the coalition wrote in its letter. “Rushing forward with a total ban without these alternatives in place contradicts everything we know—and everything the administration has been saying in other spheres—about why harm reduction works and criminalization doesn’t.” The coalition urged the FDA to reconsider the ban and find solutions opposed to criminalization.

  • Putin Signs Tobacco Law

    Putin Signs Tobacco Law

    Photo: sezerozger

    Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed a new tobacco law, reports Interfax.

    The legislation requires the licensing of production, tobacco imports, nicotine-containing products and raw materials. It also compels manufacturers to register their machinery and mothball any unused equipment.

    While the law does not require retailers to obtain licenses, it bans the retail sale of tobacco products and nicotine-containing products not in consumer packaging and imposes restrictions on the movement of products.

    Titled “On the State Regulation of Production and Turnover of Tobacco Products, Nicotine-Containing Products and Raw Materials for Their Production,” the law is modeled on Russia’s regulatory framework for the tobacco industry. Observers expect Russia to extend the Federal Service for Alcohol Market Regulation’s remit to include tobacco and nicotine-containing products.

    Prepared by the Ministry of Finance, the legislation passed the State Duma on June 1 and the Federation Council on June 7. The law will come into force on Sept. 1, 2023, and the articles introducing licensing will take effect March 1, 2024.

  • FDA Urged to Wrap Up E-Cigarette Reviews

    FDA Urged to Wrap Up E-Cigarette Reviews

    Photo: BillionPhotos.com

    U.S. lawmakers are urging the Food and Drug Administration to wrap up its review of pending e-cigarette premarket tobacco product applications, reports Law360.

    In a letter to FDA Commissioner Robert Califf, 50 members of Congress requested the agency finalize its review of pending applications for e-cigarette products; deny applications for all nontobacco-flavored e-cigarette products, including menthol; and utilize the enforcement tools that have been given to the agency to remove all synthetic nicotine products from the market, including those with pending applications.

    The lawmakers’ call comes after the FDA failed to meet a court-ordered deadline of Sept. 9, 2021, to complete its review of all pending e-cigarette applications submitted to the agency. In its most recent filings with the court, the FDA has indicated that it will not be able to finalize its review of products with the largest market share until December 2023.

    “FDA’s repeated delays in removing flavored e-cigarettes from the market is putting children’s health at risk,” said Colorado Representative Diana DeGette in a statement. “FDA needs to step up its enforcement of these harmful products and get them off our store shelves now. Every day that these products remain on the market, the more harm they cause to young people’s health.”

    While the FDA has completed its review of many e-cigarette products, it has not yet completed its review of thousands of pending applications—including those for popular products manufactured by Juul Labs, Reynolds Vapor Co. and Smok.

    The lawmakers urged the agency to complete its review of all its pending applications no later than Dec. 31, 2023.

  • Debt Ceiling Could Stress FDA Budget

    Debt Ceiling Could Stress FDA Budget

    Image: Tobacco Reporter archive

    The proposed debt ceiling budget could stress the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s budget, according to Inside Health Policy.

    The legislation’s nondefense federal funding cap makes it harder for programs like the FDA’s budget to get funding increases, and it could threaten some agencies’ existing funds, according to Steven Grossman, director of the Alliance for a Stronger FDA. “This is never a good situation for agencies whose mission and responsibilities keep expanding each year, as is the case with FDA,” he wrote.

    The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 caps nondefense federal spending at $704 billion for the next two years. According to Grossman, after taking out funding for Veterans Affairs medical care and appropriations adjustments, the remaining nondefense funds are about $637 billion, which is roughly unchanged from fiscal 2023.

    There is still room to determine how much funding can be specifically allocated to the FDA, though, according to Grossman, despite the FDA’s funding being limited by the macro-budgetary levels determined by the debt ceiling.

    “FDA’s mission and responsibilities are incredibly consequential and visible,” he wrote. “It needs resources to protect public health and safety and to set standards for products that encompass 20 percent of all consumer spending (about $2.7 trillion).”

    The House GOP’s FDA funding bill cleared the Appropriations FDA-agriculture subcommittee last month; it would provide $6.6 billion in total funding with $3.5 billion in flat discretionary funding.