Regulatory Impact Analysis and

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

Final Rule

Contingency Plans for the Handling of Animals

Docket No. APHIS-2006-0159

RIN 0579-AC69

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Inspection Service

January 2012
2

Contingency Plans for the Handling of Animals 

Introduction

The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) was signed into law in 1966 and has been 

amended four times (1970, 1976, 1985, and 1990). The original intention of the Act was 

to regulate the care and use of animals in the laboratory. Over the years, it has evolved 

into the only Federal law in the United States that regulates the treatment of animals in 

research, exhibition, transport, and use by dealers. There are other laws, policies, and

guidelines that may include additional species coverage or specifications for animal care 

and use. However, the Animal Welfare Act is the minimum acceptable standard that 

regulates animal care and use in the United States. The Act regulates the treatment of 

live or dead dogs, cats, nonhuman primates, guinea pigs, hamsters, rabbits, and any 

warm-blooded animals that are used or are intended for use in research, teaching, testing, 

experimentation, for exhibition purposes, or as pets. 

Businesses and organizations that buy and/or sell warm-blooded animals, exhibit 

them to the public, transport animals commercially, or use animals in experiments or as 

teaching tools must be licensed or registered by the United States Department of 

Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS). Businesses or 

organizations that grow, buy, or sell animals for food and fiber, and those that use fish 

and other cold-blooded animals are exempt, as are facilities that use rats, mice, or birds 

that are bred for use in research. 

While the Animal Welfare Act mandates contingency plans for marine mammals, 

there are no contingency plan requirements for other animals covered under the Act. 

Under 9 CFR § 3.101(b), facilities housing marine mammals must provide reliable and 
3

adequate sources of water and electric power. In addition, the facilities are required to 

submit contingency plans regarding emergency sources of water and electric power for 

approval to the Deputy Administrator of Animal Care, APHIS. Contingency plans must 

incorporate evacuation procedures in the event of a disaster and a description of backup 

systems or arrangements for relocating marine mammals requiring artificially cooled or 

heated water.

The World Health Organization categorizes disasters as either natural or 

manmade. Natural disasters are the result of natural phenomena and account for 80 

percent of all disasters around the world (Sen and Chander 2003). Manmade disasters on 

the other hand occur as a result of man’s intervention or non-intervention. Lack of 

preparedness can leave businesses and organizations and the animals in their care 

vulnerable, as was the case in the southern United States in 2005. The hurricane season’s 

devastating impact that year underscores the need for contingency planning for the 

handling of all animals, particularly those regulated by APHIS and protected under the 

Animal Welfare Act. 

While there are no estimates of how many animals in research facilities or other 

licensed and registered establishments were harmed or died because of Hurricane 

Katrina, we expect that this natural disaster was devastating for these regulated animals. 

AWA licensees and registrants caring for large numbers of animals who did not have 

contingency plans in place likely found it difficult to evacuate or otherwise ensure the 

animals’ safety. In one instance, after facility personnel were evacuated, authorities were 

not notified for 10 days that animals had been abandoned. By that time, approximately
4

90 percent of the animals either had died or needed to be humanely euthanized.

1

This 

was one of many tragic outcomes that could have been prevented or mitigated if the 

facility had had a contingency plan in place.

Other natural disasters have also had devastating impacts on regulated businesses

or organizations and on the animals in their care. In the wake of Tropical Storm Allison,

in 2001, 4,700 research animals, valued at $7.4 million, died. Animal-based research at 

the facility was delayed for approximately 18 months, at a cost of $105 million (LAMA 

Disaster Preparedness Resource). Since this incident, the facility has implemented 

contingency planning to avoid a repeat of such losses. 

In 2007, Animal Care reported that over one million animals, including dogs, cats, 

guinea pigs, nonhuman primates, hamsters, and rabbits, were used by registered research 

facilities.2This large number of animals used by research facilities underscores the 

importance of contingency plans to protect these animals and mitigate impacts of natural 

and manmade disasters.

In accordance with requirements of the Office of Management and Budget for 

significant rulemaking, the economic analysis provides a cost-benefit analysis, as 

required by Executive Orders 12866 and 13563, which direct agencies to assess all costs 

and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select 

regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety effects, and equity). Executive Order 13563

emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of 

harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. The economic analysis also examines 

 

1 Dr. Jodie Kulpa-Eddy, USDA APHIS, Animal Care.

2

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_welfare/content/printable_version/2007_AC_Report.pdf
5

the potential economic effects of this rule on small entities, as required by the Regulatory

Flexibility Act.

Final Rule and Contingency Plan Components

The final rule will amend the current regulations and require all licensees and 

registrants, which include research facilities, dealers, exhibitors, intermediate handlers, 

and carriers, to develop and document contingency plans for the handling of animals 

during emergencies. The contingency plans should identify common emergencies, such 

as electrical outages, faulty HVAC systems, fires, and animal escapes, as well as natural 

disasters the regulated entity is most likely to experience. 

Because contingency planning is already a requirement for marine mammal

facilities, there is a wealth of information available from various Federal and State 

agencies and private organizations that addresses animal disaster planning. In addition,

since Hurricane Katrina there has been heightened awareness of the need to plan for 

disasters. As a result, many Federal, State, and private organizations have developed 

guidelines for handling animals during emergencies. A list of resources that may aid in 

the development and implementation of contingency plans is presented in table 1. In 

addition, APHIS will provide a guidance document to assist regulated entities in 

complying with this rule.

Because the regulated entities are in various industry classification categories, it is 

difficult to develop a standard contingency plan. However, key elements of the plan

should be disaster mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery (FEMA 2008). 

Organizations and businesses can identify Federal and State agencies that are associated 

with specific disaster mitigation. Mitigation includes any activities that prevent an 
6

emergency, reduce the chances of an emergency, or reduce the damaging effects of 

unavoidable emergencies. Preparedness includes plans and preparations made to save 

lives and to assist in response and recovery. Response refers to actions taken to save 

lives and prevent further property damage during an emergency situation. Recovery

includes actions taken to return to a normal or safer situation following an emergency.

Emergencies may require secondary sources of water and food, backup systems in 

the event of power outages or faulty HVAC systems, means of evacuation in the event of 

fire or floods, and procedures for recapturing animals that escape. Items that may be 

considered and incorporated into a contingency plan are shown in table 2, categorized by

cost. Listed actions and purchases for disaster preparedness are grouped into those 

requiring no financial expenditures (but that do demand time), ones expected to cost less 

than $500, and others that are more expensive.
7

Table 1: List of Available Sources on Disaster Planning and Management

Books and Articles

Dorn, C. Richard. “Veterinary Service and Animal Care Emergency Operations Plans.” Journal of American Veterinary 

Medical Association. 1 Oct. 1993. 

Heath, Sebastian E. Animal Management in Disasters. St. Louis: Mosby, Inc., 1999.

Russell, Ray L. “Business Aspects of Disaster Planning and Recovery.” Journal of American Veterinary Medical 

Association. 1 Oct. 1993.

Vogelweid, C. M. “Developing Emergency Management Plans for University Laboratory Animal Programs and 

Facilities.” Contemporary Topics of Laboratory Animal Science. Sept. 1998.

Example Checklists

ARENA/ OLAW: Institutional Animal Care & Use Committee Guidebook; 2

nd edition, 2002 (Excerpt ~ Emergency 

Preparedness- Section B.6) - pages 71-81 <http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/guidebook_excerpt.doc> 

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). “Animal Disaster Plan Worksheet for Planners and Emergency 

Managers.” 21 Mar. 2006. <http://www.fema.gov/emergency/managers/dispws> 

Useful Websites

American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA). Disaster Preparedness Response Guide. April 2009. 

http://www.avma.org/disaster/

FEMA Independent Study Program. Animals in Disaster. Module A (IS-10) and Module B (IS-11). May 2007.

 http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/IS/IS11a.asp

Humane Society of the United States. “Disaster Planning.” Disaster Services, 2010. 

 http://www.humanesociety.org/search/search.jsp?query=disaster+planning

Information Resources for Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees. “Disaster Planning.” AWIC Resource Series 

No. 7. 28 June 2001. (Published by USDA - ARS, APHIS, NAL, Tim Allen M.S., ed.) 

<http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/pubs/IACUC/iacuc.htm>

Louisiana State University Emergency Animal Shelter. Disaster Response Manual. 2006. Complied by Susan K. Mikota 

DVM <http://lsuemergencyanimalshelter.org/index.htm>

National Institutes of Health. Office of Extramural Research. Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare. Disaster Planning 

and Response Resources. 22 March 2006. <http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/disaster_planning.htm> 

University of California. Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Veterinary Medicine Extension. DANR Guide 

to Disaster Preparedness. 1999. http://www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/vetext/DANR/DANRGuide2_02-03Intro.pdf
8

Table 2: Costs to Develop a Disaster Protection and Business Continuity Plan

No Cost

Meet with your insurance provider to review current coverage.

Create procedures to quickly evacuate or shelter-in-place. Practice the plans.

Talk to your people about the company’s disaster plan. Two-way communication is essential, before, 

during, and after a disaster.

Create an emergency contact list. Include employee emergency contact information.

Know what type of emergencies might affect your company both internally and externally.

Decide in advance what you will do if your building in unusable.

Create a list of critical business contractors and others whom you will use in an emergency.

Create an inventory list of equipment, including computer hardware, software and peripherals, for 

insurance purposes.

Talk to utility service providers about potential alternatives and identify back-up options.

Promote family and individual preparedness among your co-workers. Include emergency preparedness 

information in staff meeting discussions, in newsletters, on company Intranet, periodic employee emails 

and other internal communication tools.

Under $500

Buy a fire extinguisher and smoke alarm.

Decide which emergency supplies the company can feasibly provide, if any, and talk to your co-workers 

about what supplies individuals might want to keep in a personal and portable science kit.

Set up a telephone call tree, password-protected page on the company Website, an email alert or a call-in 

voice recording to communicate with employees in an emergency.

Provide first aid and CPR training to key co-workers.

Use and keep up-to-date computer and anti-virus software and firewalls.

Attach equipment and cabinets to walls or other stable equipment. Place heavy or breakable objects on low

shelves.

Elevate valuable inventory and electric machinery off the floor in case of flooding.

If applicable, make sure your building’s HVAC system is working properly and well-maintained.

Back-up your records and critical data. Keep a copy offsite.

More than $500

Consider additional insurance such as for business interruption, flood or earthquake.

Purchase, install and pre-wire a generator to the buildings essential electrical circuits. Provide for other 

utility alternatives and back-up options.

Install automatic sprinkler systems, fire hoses and fire-resistant doors and walls.

Make sure your building meet standards and codes. Consider a professional engineer to evaluate the wind, 

fire or seismic resistance of your building.

Consider a security professional to evaluate and/or create your disaster preparedness and business 

continuity plan.

Update your building’s HVAC system to secure outdoor air intakes and increase filter efficiency.

Send safety and key emergency response employees for training and relevant conferences.

Provide employees with first aid and CPR training.

Source: FEMA Website http://www.ready.gov/sites/default/files/documents/files/cost.pdf
9

As shown in table 1, there are a number of sources available that provide useful

information for the development of contingency plans. The APHIS Website provides 

links to animal disaster planning and training and is linked to the Federal Emergency

Management Agency, FEMA. FEMA provides two training modules on disaster 

planning. The first (IS-10 Animals in Disaster, Module A: Awareness and Preparedness) 

includes sections on typical hazards, how these affect animals, and what can be done by

owners to reduce the impact of disasters. It is intended to help animal owners, care 

providers and industries to better understand emergency management. The second (IS-11 

Animals in Disaster, Module B: Community Planning) is intended to guide emergency

management officials and animal owners, care providers, and industries in preparing 

community disaster plans. Both training modules provide online courses that may be

downloaded and printed for ease of use. Another source of information is the American 

Veterinary Medical Association, which provides a disaster preparedness and response 

guide that is available online. Presented below are some suggested general steps that 

should be taken by regulated entities in the formation and implementation of contingency

plans.

I. Evaluation of facility contingency planning needs

a. Identify possible disasters (extent and type)

b. Identify agencies and organizations associated with specific disaster 

mitigation

c. Assess building structures

d. Map the area and post the map

II. Development of the emergency plan—continuous planning and employee 

training/drills
10

a. Form a response team—emergency organization (direction and 

control)

b. Prioritize response activities

c. Identify and list resources

i. Supplies

ii. Assistance

d. Communication resources

e. Animal identification and tracking

f. Transportation (caging, equipment) services

g. Alternate facility location 

h. Documentation and vital record keeping/preservation

III. Response and recovery

a. Cautionary check of the surroundings

b. Familiarization with insurance policy and sources of financial 

assistance

c. Repair costs

d. Evaluation of response actions

e. Re-evaluation of mitigation measures

Specific Considerations

While principal components and steps involved in developing a contingency plan, 

as identified in the outline above, are common for all regulated entities, exhibitors and 

zoos, research facilities and veterinary businesses, private dealers and carriers, all have 

different areas of focus. The emphasis should be on preventing harm and loss of life for 

humans and animals and minimizing other impacts of disasters. Presented below are a 

few key elements that specific types of businesses or organizations may consider.

Exhibitors/Zoos. A component of contingency plans for these facilities may be 

transport options. Zoos house large animals that require special transport equipment. 

Food and water requirements if an evacuation should be required are critical in disaster 

planning. Because the majority of zoo animals are exotic and many can cause harm to 

humans if not confined, special consideration should be given to securing these animals
11

and training employees to handle them in the case of a disaster. Disaster training can

complement the training already required for handlers of exotic animals. 

Research Facilities. Research facilities comprise 10 percent of licensees and 

registrants and are largely composed of university and pharmaceutical facilities. They

have proven in the past to be extremely vulnerable during disasters. Harm to animals

from disasters can cause enormous losses in terms of research time and funding.

Research facilities should have a good communication system in place to ensure animals 

are cared for in the event of evacuation and during the recovery period. Special attention

also should be given to mitigating the impact of more common emergencies, such as 

HVAC failures and power failures.

Carriers/Dealers (Private Businesses). In addition to a comprehensive 

evacuation plan for the animals, carriers and dealers should have up-to-date records on 

the animals to help maintain the animals’ health and safety during the recovery phase. 

Expected Benefits and Costs of the Rule

A disaster not only results in economic losses, but can also present public health 

and environmental challenges. Contingency planning can alleviate the impact of 

catastrophic and common disasters and prevent often tragic outcomes. Although not yet 

mandatory, many of the over 10,000 licensees and registrants, particularly zoos and ones

involved in research and conservation activities, have already developed and 

implemented contingency planning as evidenced by the facilities’ Websites In addition, 

many communities have coordinated efforts and emergency operation plans with State 

and Federal agencies to handle animals during both catastrophic and common 

emergencies. 
12

While it is difficult to quantify the benefits of contingency planning, they are 

numerous. First, contingency planning can prevent loss of animal life and the resulting 

undisposed carcasses that can pose a threat to public health. Second, loss of valuable 

research resources and income can be mitigated with contingency planning. Third, 

having a contingency plan can reduce the time of recovery from disasters and thus 

provide cost savings to the affected businesses and organizations and allow for business 

continuity. Finally, required contingency planning will reassure the general public that

facilities have measures in place to ensure the welfare of the animals in times of 

catastrophic and common emergencies. 

The costs of developing a contingency plan are expected to vary by the type and 

size of business. Businesses dealing with larger and more exotic animals are likely to 

require more detailed contingency planning. Businesses dealing with fewer and smaller

non-exotic animals may require less time to document and develop their plans. These 

smaller entities may be able to adopt some of the practices in table 2 for which the cost is 

minimal. Overall, the economic impact of the final rule on businesses is not expected to 

be significant, particularly since many of the licensees and registrants already have 

contingency plans in place. APHIS estimates that it will take between 4 and 6 hours to 

develop and document a contingency plan. This estimate is based on the time required to 

identify resources for the plan’s preparation and documentation. Contingency planning 

also requires record keeping, ensuring that the contingency plans are kept current, and 

employee training. The cost of these activities is also expected to vary by type and size 

of business, and the type of animals. Organizations offer training courses on general 

disaster planning specific to the type of animals. FEMA offers free training, while 
13

organizations such as the United Animals Nation, the American Red Cross and the 

American Humane Society offer courses that cost from $50 to $300. These courses cover 

the development and implementation of contingency plans. The type of training required 

may be specific to the type of organization or business.

Capital costs associated with developing a contingency plan will depend on the 

size and type of regulated entity. As noted, we expect that many entities, especially zoos 

and research facilities, already have plans in place and as a result have emergency

equipment on hand, such as generators in case of power failures. These facilities are not

likely to incur additional equipment costs. Equipment costs for those entities that do not 

currently have contingency plans will vary relative to the size of the regulated entity and 

the number of animals cared for. 

An alternative to the final rule would be to require that all licensees and 

registrants submit the contingency plans that they develop to APHIS for review, as is

already required of marine mammal facilities. As there are over 10,000 licensees and 

registrants, APHIS believes that this alternative would be unduly costly and time 

prohibitive. Rather, APHIS will have access upon request to the contingency plan of any

affected regulated entity, but will not require the submission of contingency plans for 

Agency review.

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

In accordance with § 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Public Law 

96-354), this analysis considers the expected economic impact of the final rule on small 

businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. 
14

Need for and Objective of the Rule

APHIS is taking action to improve the care of animals during and following 

catastrophic disasters and other emergencies, such as electrical failures, HVAC system 

failures, and animal escapes. Impacts of recent disasters in the United States have been 

devastating and the outcome for animals often has been tragic. Although the well-being 

of many animals is protected in various ways under the Animal Welfare Act, contingency

planning is currently only required for marine mammals. The final rule will help ensure 

the welfare of other animals regulated under the AWA by requiring that research 

facilities, dealers, exhibitors, intermediate handlers, and carriers develop, document, and 

update contingency plans that may include evacuation, relocation, recapture, and back-up 

systems.

In addition, the employees of all licensees and registrants will be required to be 

familiar with the contingency plans via employer-based training. Finally, while APHIS 

will not require the submission of the contingency plans, the plans are to be available for 

review by APHIS upon request. 

Summary of Significant Issues Raised by Public Comment

Many commenters stated that the proposed rule will cause a serious financial 

impact, especially on small businesses, which make up the majority of those affected. 

Several commenters stated that a cost-benefit study has not been conducted and asked 

that APHIS withdraw the rule until one has been conducted or until APHIS has evaluated 

whether the rule is truly necessary.

A preliminary regulatory impact analysis was conducted for the proposed rule and 

this document contains the final regulatory impact analysis. APHIS has estimated that 
15

about 5 hours, on average, will be required by a regulated entity to develop a contingency

plan, using guides provided by the Agency. Depending on the size and type of regulated 

entity and its circumstances, this cost will vary. We note that many of the larger 

facilities, in particular, already have contingency plans. In addition to the costs 

associated with the development of a contingency plan, there may also be certain 

expenditures necessitated by the plan itself. As an example, a plan may call for a back-up 

generator to supply electricity in case of a power outage. We expect such costs to total 

within a reasonable range; each regulated entity will determine the best way to fulfill the 

contingency plan criteria based on its unique circumstances (i.e., size, type of regulated 

entity, location, etc.). The costs of developing a plan and related equipment purchases 

should be viewed in terms of the benefits of reduced risk of harm to the animals under a 

regulated entity's care when there is an emergency or disaster. A reasonably-scaled 

contingency plan that has identified potential emergencies and natural disasters 

contributes to a regulated entity's long-term operational strength and financial security.

One commenter stated that the rule does not comply with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act because it shifts the burden of investigating what would be required for a 

contingency plan to businesses. One commenter expressed concern that the Small 

Business Administration was not consulted when developing the proposed rule.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires that Federal agencies endeavor to fit 

regulatory and informational requirements to the scale of the businesses, organizations, 

and governmental jurisdictions subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies 

are required to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain the 

rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals have been given serious 
16

consideration. APHIS recognizes that each regulated entity is the best judge of the 

particular measures that should be included in its contingency plan. In providing general 

criteria and guidance documents, APHIS is minimizing the burden of the rule for small 

entities by allowing each one to determine for itself how best to meet the requirements in 

accordance with the general criteria and guidance documents. APHIS also consulted 

with the Small Business Administration in the preparation of the proposed rule and this 

final rule. 

One commenter stated that since the rule is significant and an Initial Regulatory

Flexibility Analysis was prepared that APHIS is required to publish a compliance guide 

which will help regulated industries comply with the regulation.

Compliance guides will be made available by APHIS to the public.

Two commenters asked whether they would have to build additional alternative 

facilities and if USDA is ready to help shoulder some of the costs until a facility can be 

repaired. One commenter expressed concern that they would need to purchase disaster 

insurance. 

We do not intend to require the building of alternative facilities. While the costs 

for development and execution of the plan are expected to be borne by the regulated 

entity, they will be determined based on the emergencies and potential natural disasters

most likely to be experienced by the regulated entity. The purpose of a contingency plan 

is to help ensure that licensees and registrants are able to respond in a timely and 

appropriate manner should an emergency or disaster occur. Disaster insurance is not 

required by this rule, and promoting the purchase of disaster insurance is not an objective 

of this rule. 
17

Three commenters expressed concern that the number of animals lost during 

Hurricane Katrina as stated in the economic analysis of the proposed rule is greater than 

the total number of regulated animals in Louisiana.

In the preliminary regulatory impact analysis, APHIS may have inadvertently

implied that the number of animals covered under the Animal Welfare Act that were 

harmed or killed as a result of Hurricane Katrina was comparable to the 50,000 pets that 

reportedly were negatively impacted by the disaster. The total number of animals used in 

research in Louisiana in fiscal year 2005 was approximately 12,446.

3

 Other animals 

regulated under the AWA include those in the care of breeders (Class A licensees), 

dealers (Class B licensees), and exhibitors (Class C licensees). While estimates of the 

total population of regulated animals harmed or killed by Hurricane Katrina are not 

available, it is not likely that those figures would exceed 50,000. As stated previously, 

there is a difference in scale between the number of animals for which pet owners are 

responsible versus the number of animals for which research facilities and other licensed 

and registered facilities are responsible. Therefore, AWA licensees and registrants caring 

for large numbers of animals who did not have contingency plans in place likely found it 

difficult to evacuate or otherwise ensure the animals’ safety during Hurricane Katrina. 

Our intent in the proposed rule was to illustrate this fact rather than to compare the 

number of regulated animals negatively impacted to the number of pets that were 

negatively impacted.

One commenter suggested that a tiered contingency plan system be implemented 

to accommodate small businesses.

 

3

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_welfare/content/printable_version/2007_AC_Report.pdf
18

As a practical matter, one would expect that the smaller the business, the smaller 

the scale of the contingency plan that the business would be expected to prepare, just as a 

large entity with numerous animals would require a larger scale, more complex 

contingency plan. Because we recognize that individual circumstances may be different 

between research facilities, dealers, exhibitors, carriers, and intermediate handlers, we 

have provided general contingency plan criteria and largely left it up to the discretion of 

regulated facilities to determine how best to fulfill the criteria. Because the response to 

each criterion will be appropriate to the size of each individual entity, it is reasonable to 

describe the contingency plan system provided for by the final rule as appropriate for 

each facility.

Several commenters expressed concern regarding the cost and time required to 

draft a contingency plan. One commenter stated that the rule may be imposing redundant 

paperwork requirements because of similar requirements at the State and local levels.

Many regulated facilities are currently required to have contingency plans by

other organizations (e.g., accrediting institutions, State and local regulators). Many of 

these plans will meet this rule’s requirements, and paperwork redundancies should be 

minimal. Those regulated facilities that do not already have plans in place will incur

costs in developing their contingency plans. However, having a contingency plan will 

help ensure the welfare of animals cared for by a regulated entity. At the same time, 

contingency plans will help regulated facilities to mitigate their financial losses due to 

emergencies or natural disasters and allow them to more quickly resume normal 

operations, while meeting the animal welfare objective. 
19

Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities Affected

The final rule may affect research facilities, dealers, exhibitors, intermediate 

handlers, and carriers that fall into nine categories of the North American Industry

Classification System (NAICS). For the purpose of this analysis and following Small 

Business Administration (SBA) guidelines, the potentially affected entities are classified 

within the following industries: All Other Animal Production (NAICS 112990); Pet and 

Pet Supplies Stores (NAICS 453910);

4

Schedule Freight Transport (NAICS 48112); 

General Freight Trucking, Local (NAICS 484110); General Freight Trucking, LongDistance, Truckload (NAICS 484121); General Freight Trucking, Long-Distance, Less 

than Truckload (NAICS 484122); Research and Development in Physical Engineering 

and Life Sciences (NAICS 541710); Veterinary Services (NAICS 541940); Zoos and 

Botanical Gardens (NAICS 712130); Nature Park and Other Similar Institutions (NAICS

712190); Environment Conservation and Wildlife Organizations (NAICS 813312); and 

Pet Care Services (NAICS 812910).

Establishments in the industry category of All Other Animal Production (NAICS 

112990) are considered small by SBA standards if annual sales are not more than $0.75 

million. According to the 2007 Census of Agriculture, 97 percent of farming businesses 

are considered small.

5

Establishments in the category Research and Development in 

Physical Engineering and Life Sciences (NAICS 541712) are considered small if they

employ not more than 500 employees. According to the 2007 Economic Census, of the 

11,974 establishments 10,551 operated the entire year. 82 percent of those businesses that 

 

4 Businesses are included in this category if they deal in exotic pets such as primates.

5 This percentage is for all farming businesses in the United States including businesses classified within 

NAICS 112990.
20

operated the entire year meet this criterion. Establishments in the category Scheduled

Freight Air Transportation (NAICS 481112) are considered small if they employ not 

more than 1,500 employees. According to the Economic Census, there were 489 

establishments in 2007 of which 441 operated the entire year. Of the establishments that 

operated the entire year, 96 percent had less than 1,000 employees so we can assume that 

the majority are small by SBA standards. Entities within the following categories are 

considered small by SBA standards if annual sales are not more than $25.5 million:

General Freight Trucking, Local (NAICS 484110); General Freight Trucking, LongDistance, Truckload (NAICS 484121); and General Freight Trucking, Long-Distance, 

Less than Truckload (NAICS 484122). In terms of General Freight Trucking, Local 

(NAICS 484110), there were 27,682 establishments in 2007 of which 21,353 operated the 

entire year. Of the businesses that operated the entire year, 99 percent had annual sales of 

$10 million or less and therefore we can assume the majority are small by SBA standards. 

Establishments in the category General Freight Trucking, Long-Distance, Truckload 

(NAICS 484121) totaled 30,759 in 2007. Of this total, 24,567 operated the entire year 

and 94 percent had revenue of $10 million or less so we can assume that in this industry

category, the majority are small by SBA standards. For establishments in the General 

Freight Trucking, Long-Distance, Less than Truckload (NAICS 484122) category, 

according to the Economic Census, there were 8,010 in 2007 of which 7,044 operated the 

entire year. Of entities that operated the entire year, 1,013 or 14 percent had sales over 

$10 million and we can assume the majority are small by SBA size standards. 

Establishments in the Pet and Pet Supplies Stores (NAICS 453910) are considered 

small if their annual sales are not more than $19.0 million. Of the 7,501 establishments 
21

that operated the entire year, six had annual sales ranging from $10 to $25 million, and 

one had annual sales greater than $25 million. Given this information and based on the 

SBA size standards, we can assume the majority of the entities in this industry category

are small. Except for businesses within the industry category Environment Conservation 

and Wildlife Organizations (NAICS 813312), establishments in the other industry

categories named above are considered small if their annual sales are not more than $7

million. Of the 28,400 establishments in the category Veterinary Services (NAICS 

541940), 26,155 operated the entire year. Of the entities that operated the entire year, 240 

had annual sales greater than $5 million. We can assume that the majority are small by

SBA standards. In terms of Nature Park and Other Similar Institutions (NAICS 712190), 

there were 701 establishments of which 615 operated the entire year and 98 percent had 

annual sales less than $5 million. This is below the $7 million threshold and we can 

assume the majority are small by SBA standards. According to the 2007 Economic 

Census, Zoos and Botanical Gardens (NAICS 712130) totaled 569. Of this total, 499 

operated the entire year and 79 percent had annual sales less than $5 million. Therefore, 

we can assume that the majority of entities in this industry category are small by SBA 

standards. Pet Care Services (NAICS 812910) are also considered small by SBA 

standards if annual sales are less than $7 million. In 2007, there were 11,353 

establishments of which 9,338 operated the entire year and 99.8 percent had annual sales 

less than $5 million. We can assume the majority of businesses in this category are 

considered small by SBA standards. Environment Conservation and Wildlife 

Organizations (NAICS 813312) business are considered small by SBA standards if 

annual sales do not exceed $14 million. Of the 6,276 establishments in 2007, 5,751 
22

operated the entire year and of those that operated the entire year 98 percent had annual 

sales less than $10 million. The majority of entities in this industry category are assumed 

small by SBA standards.

There are approximately 10,351 licensees and registrants that fall under the 

various industry classifications: 4,975 Class A licensees (breeders), 1,109 Class B 

licensees (wholesale dealers), 2,660 licensed and registered exhibitors, 1,123 registered 

research facilities, and 484 registered transport carriers and handlers. Breeders comprise 

48 percent of the entities, followed by exhibitors at 25 percent, and dealers and research 

facilities make up about 11 percent each. While no economic data are available on 

business size for the specific entities, we may assume the majority of the establishments 

are small, based on the industry estimates obtained from the Economic Census and the 

Census of Agriculture. 

Based on information available to APHIS, it is expected that many licensees and 

registrants will incur costs in developing and documenting contingency plans. This cost 

will vary by the size and type of entity. As shown in table 2, the cost of developing a 

contingency plan may range from little to no financial outlay to hundreds of dollars. 

Overall, we do not anticipate a significant economic impact on the affected entities. One 

of the major benefits of contingency planning is the mitigation of loss of animals in a 

disaster, which can have devastating economic impacts. In addition, contingency

planning can mitigate the suffering that animals may undergo while awaiting rescue and 

thereby more fully ensure the welfare of the animals. Another benefit is improved public 

safety; in the event that dangerous animals escape, contingency planning will provide for 

expeditious recapture of these animals, thus lessening the risk of harm to humans. 
23

Description and Estimate of Compliance Requirements

The final rule is expected to result in increased compliance costs of developing

and documenting contingency plans, and training of employees to carry out the plans. It

is estimated that approximately four to six (or an average of five) hours will be required 

to develop the contingency plans.

6

Training costs will vary depending on the type and 

size of the business. APHIS will provide guidance documents to assist the licensees and 

registrants in developing their plans, alleviating the compliance burden. 

Significant Alternatives to the Rule

Based on our review of available information, APHIS does not expect this rule to

have significant economic impacts on the regulated small entities overall. In the absence 

of significant impacts, we have not identified significant alternatives that could minimize 

such impacts.

Summary

Preparedness for emergencies and disasters can reduce the harm to animals and 

their loss of life. The devastating impact of the 2005 hurricane season underscores the 

need for contingency planning for all animals covered under the Animal Welfare Act. 

Currently, only facilities that house marine mammals are required under 9 CFR § 3.101 

to develop contingency plans. The final rule will require that all licensees and registrants 

develop and document contingency plans for all other animals covered under the Act. In 

addition, training to carry out contingency plans will be required of a regulated entity’s 

employees. The majority of establishments that will be affected by this rule are small,

 

6 This estimate is based on the time required to utilize available resources such as FEMA’s Website to 

develop and document contingency plans.
24

based on industry estimates obtained from the Economic Census and the Census of 

Agriculture. 

The final rule will impose certain costs to develop and document the contingency

plans and provide employee training, but these costs are not expected to be excessive. 

The cost of training personnel will vary depending on the type and size of business. Many

of the larger facilities, in particular, already have contingency plans in place. APHIS 

recognizes that each entity is the best judge of the particular measures that should be 

included in its contingency plan, and will provide general criteria and guidance 

documents to minimize compliance costs. Each entity will determine for itself how best 

to meet the rule’s requirements. 
25

References

Animals in Research, 2007, 

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_welfare/content/printable_version/2007_

AC_Report.pdf

Census of Agriculture, 2007, http://www.nass.usda.gov/Census_of_Agriculture/index.asp

Economic Census, 2007, http://www.census.gov/econ/census07/

FEMA, 2008, http://www.fema.gov/business/guide/index.shtm

LAMA Disaster Preparedness Resource, www.lama-online.org

Sen, A. and M. Chander, Disaster Management in India: the Case of Livestock and 

Poultry.” Review of Science and Technology 22(3), 915-930

Small Business Administration. A Guide for Government Agencies How to Comply with 

the Regulatory Flexibility Act. http://archive.sba.gov/advo/laws/rfaguide.pdf

Small Business Administration. Small Business Standard Match to North American 

Industry Classification System http://www.sba.gov/content/small-business-sizestandards