Source: https://www.fda.gov/inspections-compliance-enforcement-and-criminal-investigations/warning-letters/zeller-power-products-llc-570909-05092019
Timestamp: 2019-08-23 16:24:01
Document Index: 610835456

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 321', '§ 351', 'art 820', 'art 820', '§ 352', '§ 352', '§ 360', '§ 331', '§ 360', 'art 830', 'art 830', 'art 830']

Zeller Power Products, LLC - 570909 - 05/09/2019 | FDA
Zeller Power Products, LLC - 570909 - 05/09/2019
Zeller Power Products, LLC MARCS-CMS 570909 — May 09, 2019
Zeller Power Products, LLC
Division of Medical Device and Radiological Health Operations West
CMS # 570909
Douglas R. Austin, Owner
Wallace, ID, 83873
The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) conducted an inspection of your firm’s medical device operations, Zeller Power Products, LLC., located at 6585 Arville Street, Suite A, Las Vegas, NV, from November 6 - 9, 2018. During the inspection, an FDA investigator determined that your firm is a medical device manufacturer (i.e. Specification Developer and Complaint File Establishment) of Class III Automated External Defibrillator (AED) Battery intended to replace the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) battery used in Cardiac Science PowerHeart AED G3 automated external defibrillators. Under section 201(h) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act), 21 U.S.C. § 321(h), these products are devices because they are intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions or in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or to affect the structure or any function of the body.
Observations Pertaining to Quality System Regulation Provisions and Regulations
This inspection revealed your devices are adulterated within the meaning of section 501(h) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 351(h), in that the methods used in, or the facilities or controls used for, their manufacture, packing, storage, or installation are not in conformity with the current good manufacturing practice requirements of the Quality System regulation found at Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 820. We received your response dated December 12, 2018, concerning our investigator's observations noted on the Form FDA 483, List of Inspectional Observations (FDA 483) that was issued on November 9, 2018. We address the response below, in relation to each of the noted observations. These violations include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Failure to validate the design, as required by 21 CFR 820.30(g). For example:
a. Your firm was unable to provide documentation demonstrating design validation for the battery shelf-life of five years from the date of manufacturer, the full operational replacement guarantee of four years from the date of installation, and the number of shocks from a battery of up to (b)(4) shocks as indicated by the device specification for your Automated External Defibrillator Battery (part number ZP9146Y). During the inspection, your Management Representative provided a product informational sheet for the Zeller Power Products Automated External Defibrillator Battery and stated that statistics were most likely taken by Mr. Austin from the specifications of the OEM battery by Cardiac Science. The FDA investigator explained that the batteries produced for Zeller Power Products are not Cardiac Science products and the Zeller design and specifications must be validated.
b. In addition, your Management Representative stated the software installed on the printed circuit boards (PCBs) included in each battery has not been validated. This software is written to make the battery compatible with the Cardiac Science defibrillator and is programmed during production to tell the defibrillator the battery has not been used and is ready for use. Your firm representative stated this software has not been validated.
We reviewed your firm's response and conclude it is not adequate. You indicated that the Zeller battery was built according to OEM specifications and that the product is a result of (b)(4). However, the device has not been validated to determine that it conforms to OEM specifications or defined user needs and intended uses. Furthermore, your response indicated that you have established correlation between the firm’s five-year shelf life and the OEM’s self-discharging rate of cells, but it is unclear if you have verified and/or validated the battery’s shelf life.
In response to this Warning Letter, you should provide your plans to ensure that the Zeller AED battery has been designed and validated based on the requirements set forth in QSR Part 820. You have not provided any test results for validation of the estimated shelf life, full operational replacement guarantee, or that the typical number of shocks up to (b)(4) shocks have been achieved according to the device specification. There is no assurance that the results of the design validation were documented, and risk analysis performed according to the requirements of 21 CFR 820.30(g). Also, you should provide evidence that software testing has been conducted and demonstrates that the software in the battery adheres to defined specifications.
This is a repeat observation from the previous FDA inspection, dated January 20 – 22, 2016.
2. Failure to establish procedures for design control, as required by 21 CFR 820.30(a). For example:
Your Management Representative stated your firm has not established design control procedures. You were unable to provide documentation of design plan, design inputs, design validation, design reviews, and risk analysis for the Automated External Defibrillator Battery (part number ZP9146Y). During the inspection, records associated with the device component and finished device specifications were provided for review. However, these records do not identify documentation of a plan, inputs to create the device, outputs from those design plans and inputs, verification and/or validation of the design, design review after each major project step, and risk analysis for the design of the device.
We reviewed your firm's response and conclude it is not adequate. You indicated you have implemented a Design, Development, and (b)(4) procedure (BSP-04). You referenced the use of the device master record (DMR) which includes BOM, work instructions, drawings, and specification requirements. Based on our review of your procedure, you have not adequately defined and documented all the design control requirements. Also, the design outputs that are essential for the proper functioning of the device are not defined and documented in terms of the requirements for design inputs. The company did not provide the sources used to develop any inputs for FDA review. In response to this Warning Letter, we request that you update your procedure to include the requirements for a design plan that describes or reference the design and development activities and define responsibilities for implementation.
3. Failure to establish procedures for receiving, reviewing, and evaluating complaints by a formally designated unit, as required by 21 CFR 820.198(a). For example:
a. Your firm has not established complaint handling procedures, and records of complaints received do not include an evaluation for MDR reporting to FDA.
b. During the inspection, your firm representative indicated your firm handles all complaints unless an investigation was required, which would be transferred to (b)(4) to determine the root cause for adequate corrective action(s). The FDA investigator reviewed examples of complaints received by the firm (e.g. defibrillator not working when the battery is installed) and was told that these types of complaints are mostly resolved over the phone with instruction by Mr. Austin on how to properly install the battery into the device. You have not documented these complaint activities to determine if further investigation was needed, as required by 21 CFR 820.198(b).
c. In addition, our FDA investigator reviewed your Returned Goods Authorization (RGA) forms returned by customers for the use of Zeller AED batteries, for issues such as: disconnected battery wires, defective cells, and battery reporting as not calibrated. These RGAs were not documented as complaints and failed to include an evaluation for reporting adverse events to FDA.
We reviewed your firm's response and conclude it is not adequate. Your response indicated your Customer Complaint for Medical Device procedure (BSP-18) was established for applying dissatisfaction and complaints affecting all medical devices. Your procedures reference the use of MDR procedure (BSP-19) to be used in the event that a complaint represents an MDR event. However, in response to the Warning Letter, we request you provide evidence you have conducted a retrospective review, via the use of your customer complaint form, to verify complaints are received, reviewed, and evaluated to determine if an investigation is necessary or not and if the complaint represents a reportable event. There is no documentation to determine your firm's Returned Material Authorization (RMA) tracking service has been established to evaluate final root cause and ensures negative trends are identified.
4. Failure to establish procedures for acceptance activities, as required by 21 CFR 820.80(a). For example:
a. Your firm has not established procedures for acceptance activities to verify finished devices received by your firm from your contract manufacturer conform to specified requirements.
b. During the inspection, you stated there are no procedures or activities performed with the Zeller Power Products Automated External Defibrillator Batteries, except to check the quantities, shipping documents, and external packaging conditions. You stated you have not received any production records or certificates of conformance to verify the devices manufactured are conforming to specified requirements until they are released to customers.
We reviewed your firm’s response and conclude it is not adequate. You indicated your Quality Control procedure (BSP-10) was established to inspect products to verify as conforming to specified requirements. However, it is unclear if certificates of conformance are provided as evidence that the determination of acceptance or rejection will be documented according to your acceptance criteria. Your response did not include the Final Inspection Voltage Test Log and Form used to document the determination the product is conforming to specified requirements. In response to the Warning Letter, we request you provide the referenced forms to verify receiving acceptance activities and final inspection.
5. Failure to establish procedures to control product that does not conform to specified requirements, as required by 21 CFR 820.90(a). For example:
􀁸 Your firm has not established procedures for handling nonconforming materials and products. Nonconforming material procedures must be established and followed in the event a nonconforming material or product is found.
This observation was verbally discussed during the closeout meeting on 11/9/2018 and not included on the Form FDA 483. However, it was determined after further review by the Agency and the information provided during the inspection, that this observation is significant and is noted on the Warning Letter to ensure compliance with the requirements of 21 CFR 820.90(a).
6. Failure to establish procedures for corrective and preventative action, as required by 21 CFR 820.100(a). For example:
􀁸 Your firm has not established procedures for implementing corrective and preventive actions. CAPA procedures must be established and followed in the event a nonconforming product and other quality problems are found.
We reviewed your firm’s response and conclude it is not adequate. You indicated your Continual Improvement procedure (BSP-14) outlines the process for documenting corrective and preventive actions. However, your Corrective Action Request (CAR) form was not included to verify all CAPA activities have been documented. Also, as per your response letter (dtd. 11/28/18), there are no training records to demonstrate the employees have attended an online course to understand the CAPA process. In response to the Warning Letter, we request you provide examples of your Corrective Action Request forms which would demonstrate the process is documented and all activities under this section, and their results, have been implemented.
Observation Pertaining to Other Regulations
In addition to being a manufacturer of the AED Battery (part number ZP9146Y), your firm is a “labeler” of the device as defined in 21 CFR 801.3. The inspection revealed that your devices are misbranded within the meaning of section 502(c) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 352(c), in that your firm failed to have on the label or labeling of the device information that is required by or under the authority of this Act. In addition, your devices are misbranded within the meaning of section 502(t)(2) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 352(t)(2), in that there was a failure to furnish material or information required by or under section 519 of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 360i, respecting the device. Furthermore, it is a prohibited act under section 301(q)(1)(B) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 331(q)(1)(B), to fail to furnish any notification or other material or information required by or under section 519 of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 360i.
7. Failure to ensure that the label of every medical device shall bear a unique device identifier (UDI) that meets the requirements of 21 CFR 801 Subpart B and 21 CFR Part 830, as required by 21 CFR 801.20(a).
The label for the Automated External Defibrillator Battery (part number ZP9146Y) does not include a UDI. Class III devices manufactured and labeled after September 24, 2014, must bear a UDI, unless an exception or alternative applies.1 No exception or alternative to the requirements of 21 CFR 801 Subpart B and 21 CFR Part 830 applies to the Automated External Defibrillator Battery (part number ZP9146Y) manufactured and labeled after September 24, 2014.
We reviewed your firm’s response dated November 28, 2018, and its adequacy cannot be determined at this time. The response indicated that you have established and implemented an Identification and Traceability procedure (BSP-08). You stated that you obtained a UDI from (b)(4), and indicated that you are in the process of implementing new procedures for printing labels that contain the UDI for all devices. Your response also stated that BSP-08 would be updated by December 31, 2018, to incorporate the UDI requirements.
Your firm has not provided any additional updates to date. In response to this letter, please provide evidence of implementation of the following documents: records to verify identification and traceability controls, a copy of the revised labeling to verify that requirements have been met, training records, updated SOP (BSP-08) which includes the requirements for developing and assigning UDIs to your devices, the requirements for printing labels that contain the UDI for all devices, label verification procedures, and recordkeeping. Without this information, we cannot make assessment with response to adequacy of your firm’s response.
8. Failure to provide required information to Global Unique Device Identification Database (GUDID) as required by 21 CFR 830.300(a). For example:
Labelers of devices required to bear a UDI are required to submit specific data pertaining to these devices to FDA’s GUDID on or before September 24, 2014.2 Your firm has failed to submit the information required under 21 CFR Part 830 Subpart E for each version or model required to bear a UDI, as specified by 21 CFR 830.300(a).
We reviewed your firm’s response dated November 28, 2018, and conclude it is not adequate. Your response indicated that your firm requested access to FDA’s GUDID (a copy of the New Account Request form is attached to the response). To date no records pertaining to the AED Battery (part number ZP9146Y) have been submitted to GUDID.
A review of the FDA Registration and Listing Database found that your firm is registered/listed for 2019 as a manufacturer and not according to its current type of operations. Your firm was inspected as a Specification Developer and a Complaint File Establishment for your own device (AED Battery). Your firm is considered a manufacturer of this device. Zeller Power Products, LLC is correctly registered as a manufacturer. However, the manufacturing activities your firm performs on the AED battery mean that your firm is both a Specification Developer and a Compliant File Establishment.
You indicated all your manufacturing activities are handled from your office located at 21 Bank Street, Wallace, ID 83873. Our investigator reviewed inspectional records that are maintained at your Las Vegas, Nevada facility. You indicated you were available via telephone to answer any questions related to the inspection from your Wallace, ID office. Our review indicated the Wallace, ID establishment has not been registered with the FDA. A concurrent review by the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) determined Zeller Power Products, LLC should also register the establishment located at 21 Bank Street, Wallace, ID 83873, as a Specification Developer and a Compliant File Establishment because this establishment handles design, customer communications, complaint handling, sales and shipping of the devices.
AED Final Order for a premarket approval (PMA)
The Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) stated a final order was issued on February 3, 2015 calling for a premarket approval (PMA) for this device. The AED Final Order calls for a PMA to be submitted for AED batteries. Zeller Power Products can continue to market and distribute your device without a PMA until February 3, 2020. If you submit a PMA, you may continue to distribute your device until a not approvable or denial decision is issued and can continue distribution if an approval order is issued. At this time, Zeller Power Products is still within the boundaries of the final order since the deadline to comply with the final order for AED accessories is not until February 2, 2020.
Your firm's response should be sent via e-mail to: US Food and Drug Administration, Division 3/West, Office of Medical Device and Radiological Health Operations at ORADevices3FirmResponse@fda.hhs.gov Please identify your response with CMS case #570909 when replying. If you have any questions about the contents of this letter, please contact Compliance Officer Charles J. Chacko at 214-253-4939, or via email at charles.chacko@fda.hhs.gov.
Finally, you should know that this letter is not intended to be an all-inclusive list of the violations at your firm’s facility. It is your firm’s responsibility to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulation administered by FDA. The specific violations noted in this letter and in the Inspectional Observations, FDA 483, issued at the close of the inspection may be symptomatic of serious problems in your firm’s manufacturing and quality management systems. Your firm should investigate and determine the causes of the violations and take prompt actions to correct the violations and bring the products into compliance.
Bram Zuckerman, M.D.
OHT2: Office of Cardiovascular Devices
Cc: Sean K. Turner, Management Representative
6585 Arville St., Suite A
Las Vegas, NV 89118-6826
1 See the UDI Final Rule, 78 FR 58786 (September 24, 2013) at 58815-58816. More information about compliance dates for UDI requirements can be found at FDA’s website (https://www.fda.gov/medical-devices/unique-device-identification-udi/compliance-dates-udi-requirements).