The content on this page is provided for reference purposes only. This content has not been altered or updated since it was archived.
Minutes From Negotiation Meeting on MDUFA III Reauthorization, February 8, 2012
FDA – Industry MDUFA III Reauthorization Meeting
February 8, 2012, 3:00 pm – 3:45 pm
To discuss MDUFA III reauthorization.
|Malcolm Bertoni||Office of the Commissioner (OC)|
|Nathan Brown||Office of Chief Counsel (OCC)|
|Kate Cook||Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)|
|Christy Foreman||Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH)|
|Don St. Pierre||CDRH|
|Jen Bowman||American Clinical Laboratories Association|
|Brian Connell||Medical Imaging Technology Alliance|
|Donald Horton||Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (representing ACLA)|
|Tamima Itani||Boston Scientific (representing MDMA)|
|Mark Leahey||Medical Device Manufacturers Association|
|Lindsay Morris||Medical Imaging Technology Alliance|
|James Ruger||Quest Diagnostics (representing ACLA)|
|Janet Trunzo||Advanced Medical Technology Association|
Meeting Start Time: 3:00pm
Industry responded to some elements of FDA’s proposals regarding fee structure.
Industry agreed with FDA’s December 22, 2011 update to their December 13, 2011 proposal to calculate an annual inflation adjustment with 60% weighted towards the three-year rolling average of payroll costs and benefits, and 40% weighted towards the three-year rolling average CPI-U for the Washington, DC area.
FDA noted that under the sample fee structure the Agency provided, inflation was absorbed entirely by establishment registration fees, preserving predictability of submission fees. Industry stated they would like the inflation adjustments to be applied across the board to all application types as well as registration fees, but they were not ready to propose a specific fee structure. FDA indicated their willingness to accept a fee structure that would work best for Industry.
Industry asked if collections must align with expenditures for each year in the MDUFA III spend plan. FDA replied that higher collections versus expenditures in earlier years would be acceptable; however, lower collections versus expenditures in earlier years would potentially present a cash flow problem. FDA also noted that higher collections versus expenditures in earlier years would necessarily result in lower collections versus expenditures in later years. Both parties agreed to use FY2017 expenditures as a baseline for MDUFA IV, regardless of the spend plan ultimately agreed upon.
Industry noted MDUFA is intended to provide user fees that are additive to Budget Authority (BA) appropriations. As such, Industry proposed including and updating the 2002 appropriations trigger to a level that reflects more recent BA appropriations for the devices and radiological health program.
Previously, the parties had discussed the potential for expanding the base of registration and listing fee payers by eliminating some of the current exemptions. Industry proposed that all establishments that are required to register should pay the registration fee.
Industry will propose a fee structure and FDA will then propose statutory language.
The next meeting will take place February 10, 2012.
Meeting End Time: 3:45 pm