1 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 4910-9X 

Office of the Secretary 

14 CFR Parts 234 and 235

Docket No. DOT-OST-2010-0211

RIN 2105-AE07 

Reports by Air Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals During Air Transport 

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary (OST), Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Transportation (DOT or Department) is issuing a final rule to 

amend the requirement for air carriers to report incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an 

animal during air transport. The final rule will: expand the reporting requirement to U.S. carriers 

that operate scheduled service with at least one aircraft with a design capacity of more than 60 

seats; expand the definition of “animal” to include all cats and dogs transported by covered 

carriers, regardless of whether the cat or dog is transported as a pet by its owner or as part of a 

commercial shipment (e.g., shipped by a breeder); require covered carriers to file a calendar-year 

report in December, even if the carrier did not have any reportable incidents during the calendar 

year; require covered carriers to provide in their December reports the total number of animals 

that were lost, injured, or died during air transport in the calendar year; and require covered 

carriers to provide in their December reports the total number of animals transported in the 

calendar year. 

DATES: This rule is effective January 1, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Blane Workie, Tim Kelly, or Vinh Q. 

Nguyen, Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, U.S. Department of Transportation, 
2 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE, Washington, DC 20590, 202-366-9342 (phone), 202-366-7152 (fax), 

blane.workie@dot.gov, tim.kelly@dot.gov, or vinh.nguyen@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary 

1. Purpose of the Regulatory Action 

The Department is issuing a final rule to amend the requirement for air carriers to report 

incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal during air transport. The Department 

is taking action to provide consumers with a fuller picture of the safety record of airlines in the 

transportation of animals and to clarify which entities are subject to the reporting requirement 

(i.e., any U.S. air carriers that provide scheduled passenger air transportation or only reporting 

carriers), as well as which flights are covered (i.e., only domestic scheduled passenger flights or 

all scheduled passenger flights, including international flights). The legal authority for the 

Department’s regulatory action is 49 U.S.C. 41721. 

2. Summary of Regulatory Provisions 

The final rule: (1) expands the reporting requirement to U.S. carriers that operate 

scheduled service with at least one aircraft with a design capacity of more than 60 seats 

(“covered carriers”); (2) expands the definition of “animal” to any warm- or cold-blooded animal 

which, at the time of transportation, is being kept as a pet in a family household in the United 

States and any dog or cat which, at the time of transportation, is shipped as part of a commercial 

shipment on a scheduled passenger flight, including shipments by trainers and breeders; (3) 

requires covered carriers to file a calendar-year report for December, even if the carrier did not 

have any reportable incidents during the calendar year; (4) requires covered carriers to provide in 

their December reports the total number of animals that were lost, injured, or died during air 
3 

transport in the calendar year; (5) requires covered carriers to provide in their December reports 

the total number of animals transported in the calendar year; and (6) requires covered carriers to 

provide in their December reports a certification signed by an authorized carrier representative 

affirming that the report is true, correct, and complete. 

3. Summary of Regulatory Analysis 

The quantifiable costs of this rulemaking exceed the quantifiable benefits. The present 

value of monetized net benefits for a 20-year analysis period is estimated to be -$729,166 at a 

7% discount rate. However, when unquantified costs and benefits are taken into account, we 

anticipate that the benefits of this final rule will justify the costs. Unquantifiable benefits of the 

final rule include providing consumers with a fuller picture of the safety record of airlines in the 

transportation of animals and producing opportunities for more comprehensive enforcement of 

the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), 7 U.S.C. 54, since the Department shares the reports involving 

animal incidents with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service (APHIS), the government entity that enforces the AWA. 

Background 

The Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century or “AIR–

21” (Pub. L. 106-181), which was signed into law on April 5, 2000, includes section 710, 

“Reports by Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals During Air Transport.” This provision was 

codified as 49 U.S.C. 41721. Section 41721 states than an air carrier that provides scheduled 

passenger air transportation shall submit monthly to the Secretary a report on any incidents 

involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal (as defined by the Secretary of Transportation) 

during air transport provided by the air carrier and that the Secretary of transportation shall 
4 

publish data on incidents and complaints involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal during 

air transport in a manner comparable to other consumer complaint and incident data. 

On August 11, 2003, DOT, through its Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), issued a 

final rule implementing section 710 of AIR–21. See 68 FR 47798. The rule required air carriers 

that provide scheduled passenger air transportation to submit a report to APHIS on any incident 

involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal during air transportation provided by the air 

carrier. Under the rule, the reports would then be shared with DOT, which would publish the 

data, as required by AIR–21, in a format similar to the manner in which it publishes data on 

consumer complaints and other incidents. However, issues arose regarding whether APHIS had 

the capability to accept such information directly from the carriers and pass it on to DOT. In 

order to resolve such issues, on February 14, 2005, DOT made a technical change in the rule to 

require reporting airlines to submit the required information directly to DOT’s Aviation 

Consumer Protection Division (ACPD) rather than APHIS and to make the rule part of DOT’s 

economic regulations. See 70 FR 7392. The rule was codified at 14 CFR 234.13. 

Section 234.13 required air carriers that provide scheduled passenger air transportation to 

submit a report to the ACPD on any incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal 

during air transportation within 15 days after the end of the month during which the incident 

occurred. It defined “animal” as any warm- or cold-blooded animal which, at the time of 

transportation, is being kept as a pet in a family household in the United States. The air transport 

of an animal covered the entire period during which an animal is in the custody of an air carrier, 

from check-in or delivery of the animal to the carrier prior to departure until the animal is 

returned to the owner or guardian of the animal at the final destination of the animal.1

 Section 

 

1

 There are three categories for animals transported in scheduled passenger air transportation: “unassigned in the 

cabin;” “accompanied baggage;” and “live cargo shipments.” Animals categorized as “unassigned in the cabin” are 
5 

234.13 also listed the information that is to be included in each report (e.g., carrier and flight 

number, date and time of the incident). However, because § 234.13 is contained in part 234 of 

Title 14 and that part applies only to the domestic scheduled passenger flights of carriers that 

account for at least 1 percent of domestic scheduled passenger revenue (“reporting carriers”), 

there was confusion regarding which entities are required to submit a report to the ACPD on 

incidents involving loss, injury, or death of an animal during air transportation as well as which 

flights are covered (i.e., only domestic scheduled passenger flights or all scheduled passenger 

flights, including international flights). 

 In August 2010, the Department received a petition for rulemaking on this matter from 

the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), an advocacy group which works to protect the lives 

and advance the interest of animals through the legal system. In its petition, ALDF requests that 

the Department’s regulation requiring the reporting of loss, injury, or death of animals in air 

transport be revised to require airlines to report any such incident involving any animal they 

carry. It contends that the data that are currently collected by the Department capture only 

incidents affecting pets, even though pets make up only part of the total number of animals 

transported by airlines. The ALDF proposed that the rules should apply to all species of animals, 

not just cats and dogs. At about the same time, Senators Richard Durbin, Robert Menendez, and 

Joseph Lieberman wrote to the Secretary of Transportation urging the Department to amend the 

rule so that airlines would be required to report all incidents involving the loss, injury, or death 

 usually small pets that remain with the owner in the cabin for the duration of the flight. Air carriers may allow a 

limited number of passengers per flight to transport their animals as “unassigned in the cabin.” Pursuant to 14 CFR 

part 382, service animals accompanying individuals with a disability are not included in this category. Animals 

categorized as “accompanied baggage” are pets traveling with passengers on the flight that are checked as baggage, 

remain in the custody of the air carrier for the duration of the flight, and are transported in the cargo compartment. 

Animals categorized as “live cargo shipments” are animals that are not associated with passengers on the flight and 

are transported in the cargo compartment. While “accompanied baggage” and “live cargo shipments” may or may 

not be in different areas of the cargo hold of an aircraft, the primary differences between these two categories are 

shipping procedures and price points.
6 

of cats and dogs that occur while they are traveling in an airline’s care, custody, or control, 

regardless of whether the cat or dog is being kept as a pet in a family household in the United 

States or is part of a commercial shipment. 

 On June 29, 2012, the Department published in the Federal Register a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled “Reports by Air Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals During 

Air Transport.” See 77 FR 38747. The Department announced in the NPRM that it was 

proposing to amend the rule regarding the reporting of incidents involving animals during air 

transport. The Department sought comment on whether it should: (1) expand the reporting 

requirement to U.S. carriers that operate scheduled service with at least one aircraft with a design 

capacity of more than 60 seats; (2) expand the definition of “animal” to include all cats and dogs 

transported by the carrier, regardless of whether the cat or dog is transported as a pet by its 

owner or as part of a commercial shipment (e.g., shipped by a breeder); (3) require covered 

carriers to provide in their December reports the total number of animals that were lost, injured, 

or died during air transport that year; and (4) require covered carriers to report the total number 

of animals transported in the calendar year in the December reports. We also solicited comments 

on whether covered carriers should be required to file negative reports if the carrier did not have 

any incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal during a particular month or 

year—i.e., reporting “0” for any reporting category where there were no such incidents. 

 The Department received 5,414 comments in response to the NPRM. Of these, two 

comments were from airlines, representing the views of Delta Air Lines (Delta) and Spirit 

Airlines (Spirit). Two airline associations, Airlines for America (A4A) and the Air Carrier 

Association of America (ACAA), submitted a joint comment. Six animal rights organizations 

each submitted a comment: the ALDF, the American Anti-Vivisection Society (AAVS), the 
7 

Animal Welfare Institute (AWI), the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 

(ASPCA), People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and Where is Jack? Inc. We 

also received comments from two scientific research organizations: the Association of Zoos and 

Aquariums (AZA) and the National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR). Finally, 

5,403 individual consumers submitted comments. The Department has carefully reviewed and 

considered the comments received. The commenters’ positions that are germane to the specific 

issues raised in the NPRM are set forth below, as are the Department’s responses. 

Summary of Final Regulatory Analysis

The regulatory analysis summarized in the table below shows that the estimated 

monetized costs of the reporting requirement exceed the estimated monetized benefits at a 7% 

discount rate. The present value of monetized net benefits for a 20-year analysis period is 

estimated to be -$729,166 at a 7% discount rate. Additional benefits were also identified for 

which quantitative estimates could not be developed. The Department believes that the nonquantifiable benefits of the reporting requirement justify the costs and cause the total benefits of 

the rule to exceed its total costs. Non-quantifiable benefits include providing consumers with a 

fuller picture of the safety record of airlines in the transportation of animals and producing 

opportunities for more comprehensive enforcement of the AWA, 7 U.S.C. 54, since the 

Department shares the reports involving animal incidents with APHIS, the government entity 

that enforces the AWA. A more detailed discussion of the monetized benefits and costs of the 

final rule is provided in the Regulatory Analysis and Notices section below. 

VALUE OF QUANTITATIVE NET BENEFITS FOR RULE REQUIREMENTS 

 Discounting Period/Rate Present value 
8 

Monetized Benefits ........................................ 

Monetized Costs* ............................................ 

Monetized Net Benefits ................................... 

20 years, 7% discounting ............ 

20 years, 7% discounting ............ 

20 years, 7% discounting ............ 

$0 

$729,769 

($729,769) 

* This rule will only impose monetary costs on covered air carriers 

Comments and Responses

1. Entities covered 

Question posed in the NPRM: The NPRM proposed to require all U.S. carriers that 

operate scheduled service with at least one aircraft with a design capacity of more than 60 seats 

to submit a report to the ACPD on any incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal 

during air transport within 15 days after the end of the month during which the incident occurred. 

The then-existing reporting requirement only applied to the domestic scheduled passenger flights 

of carriers that account for at least 1 percent of domestic scheduled passenger revenue. We also 

invited comments on whether there is any benefit to expanding the applicability of the rule any 

further to encompass more U.S. carriers and whether the reporting requirements should apply to 

indirect cargo air carriers operating under the provisions of 14 CFR part 296. 

Comments: Most of the comments the Department received do not address whether the 

rule should be applicable to all U.S. carriers that operate scheduled service with at least one 

aircraft with a design capacity of more than 60 seats. 

A number of animal rights advocacy groups, such as ASPCA, AWI, and AAVS, 

expressed support for expanding the applicability of the rule further to encompass more carriers. 

AWI states that there has been confusion over the airlines and flights covered under the law, and 

this change would clarify the coverage and provide the public with more information. AAVS 

states the change would be an important step to ensure an accurate picture of how animals are 

protected while in air transport. AAVS is also in favor of covering indirect cargo air carriers that 

cater only to pets. 
9 

A4A generally objects to the proposals in the NPRM and states that there would be no 

benefit to expanding the applicability of the rule to encompass more U.S. carriers. A4A also 

states that indirect cargo air carriers operating under the provisions of 14 CFR part 296 should 

not be covered. Spirit, the only carrier to comment on this issue, does not object to expanding 

the reporting requirement to include passenger carriers operating at least one aircraft with more 

than 60 seats. 

DOT response: We carefully considered all of the comments filed on the various issues 

in this rulemaking. On the issue of which entities should be covered we have decided to require 

all U.S. carriers that operate scheduled service with at least one aircraft with a design capacity of 

more than 60 seats to submit a report to the ACPD on any incidents involving the loss, injury, or 

death of an animal during air transportation within 15 days after the end of the month during 

which the incident occurred. 

As discussed above, the 49 U.S.C. 41721 states, “An air carrier that provides scheduled 

passenger air transportation shall submit monthly to the Secretary a report on any incidents 

involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal (as defined by the Secretary of Transportation) 

during air transport provided by the air carrier.” 49 U.S.C. 40102 defines “air carrier” as “a 

citizen of the United States undertaking by any means, directly or indirectly, to provide air 

transportation.” Section 41721 does not contain any language that would limit the applicability 

of the reporting obligation to only large carriers or “reporting carriers” (i.e., U.S. carriers that 

account for at least 1 percent of domestic scheduled passenger revenue). For these reasons, we 

believe that expanding the applicability of the reporting requirement to all U.S. carriers that 

operate scheduled service with at least one aircraft with a design capacity of more than 60 seats 

is more consistent with the language of section 41721. 
10 

Contrary to A4A’s assertions, we believe that expanding the applicability of the 

requirement from just the “reporting carriers” (i.e., U.S. carriers that account for at least 1 

percent of domestic scheduled passenger revenue) to all carriers that operate scheduled service 

with at least one aircraft with a design capacity of more than 60 seats will provide consumers and 

other interested parties a more complete picture of the treatment of animals on scheduled 

passenger flights. However, we agree with A4A in regards to excluding indirect cargo air 

carriers from the reporting requirement. Pursuant to 14 CFR part 296, an indirect cargo air 

carrier is any U.S. citizen who undertakes to engage indirectly in air transportation of property, 

and uses for the whole or any part of such transportation the services of air carrier or a foreign air 

carrier that has received DOT authorization. We have concluded that requiring indirect cargo air 

carriers to report incidents involving animals would exceed the scope of 49 U.S.C. 41721, which, 

as discussed above, states: “An air carrier that provides scheduled passenger air transportation 

shall submit monthly to the Secretary a report on any incidents involving the loss, injury, or 

death of an animal (as defined by the Secretary of Transportation) during air transport provided 

by the air carrier.” Therefore, we will not require such entities to submit a report on any 

incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal during air transportation. 

2. Expand the definition of “animal” 

Question posed in the NPRM: The NPRM proposed to continue to define “animal” as 

any warm- or cold-blooded animal which, at the time of transportation, is being kept as a pet in a 

family household in the United States (i.e., the definition in effect up to this time), but also 

expand the definition to include any dog or cat which, at the time of transportation, is shipped as 

part of a commercial shipment on a scheduled passenger flight. We also invited comments on 
11 

whether the definition of “animal” should be expanded further to include not only dogs and cats 

in commercial shipments but all species of animals in commercial air transportation. 

Comments: This proposal is the most contentious topic of the NPRM. All the animal 

rights advocacy groups believe that “animal” should include all species of animals in commercial 

air transportation, not just cats and dogs. The animal rights advocacy groups state that cats, 

dogs, and household pets make up only a portion of all the animals that are transported by 

carriers. They assert that carriers transport a wide variety of animal species, such as primates, 

rabbits, ferrets, mice, and rats, for research facilities, zoos, and pet retailers. These groups argue 

that carriers should be required to report incidents involving all types of animal, not just cats, 

dogs, and household pets, in order to provide complete and reliable data that will allow 

consumers, carriers, and legislators to make informed decisions regarding the safety of the 

transport of all animals. 

Most individual comments also urge the Department to include all species of animals in 

commercial air transportation, not just cats and dogs, in the definition of “animal.” (The vast 

majority of these individual comments appear to be form letters from members of the animal 

rights advocacy groups.) 

Senators Richard Durbin, Robert Menendez, and Joseph Lieberman filed a comment in 

response to the NPRM reiterating the support expressed in their 2010 letter for expanding the 

definition of “animal” to include all cats and dogs that are in an airline’s care, custody, or 

control, regardless of whether the cat or dog is being transported as a pet by its owner or as part 

of a commercial shipment. 

The scientific research organizations adamantly oppose expanding the definition of 

“animal.” AZA argues that it strongly believes the Congressional intent of the underlying 
12 

authorizing legislation is to focus on the loss, injury, or death of family pets through air 

transportation. AZA states that if the definition of “animal” is expanded to include all species, 

the resource and logistical burden placed upon the airlines could effectively force airlines to 

completely discontinue the transport of all animals, creating catastrophic consequences for the 

AZA zoo and aquarium community and the sustainability of the animal collections in their care. 

NABR urges that any changes to the existing definition of “animal” recognize that the 

term should not apply to dogs and cats bred for use in research. NABR states that the 

Department assumes that dogs and cats that are transported as part of a commercial shipment are 

likely being transported for the purpose of being sold as a pet in a family household and that this 

assumption is flawed as dogs and cats being transported to research facilities in the United States 

are not intended to be sold as pets. NABR states that commercial dealers that breed dogs, cats, 

and other species needed for research purposes must be licensed by the USDA and are subject to 

the standards and regulations mandated by the AWA. NABR states that these commercial 

dealers are inspected by APHIS and reports of the inspections are already available to the public 

on the USDA website. NABR also states that it opposes expanding the definition of “animal” to 

include all species of animals because such an expansion would conflict with the legislative 

history of AIR–21, which does not show an intent to require this type of reporting. 

A4A also opposes expanding the definition of “animal” on the basis that doing so would 

conflict with Congressional intent. A4A argues that the original regulations published in 2003 

specifically analyzed Congress’ intent when it used the term “animal,” and that the Department’s 

research into the statute’s legislative history found that when Congress used the term animal, it 

meant pets. A4A asserts further that passengers care most about pet incidents and do not want 

nor are interested in expanding the definition of “animal.” A4A states that passengers are 
13 

satisfied with the current reporting program and that complaints about animal policies regularly 

ranks last in the 12 categories of complaints that the Department lists every month in its 

consumer report. A4A argues that this indicates that passengers are satisfied with the balance the 

current regulation strikes (i.e., full disclosure of pet incidents without including information on 

commercial animal shipments that A4A says passengers do not care about). 

DOT response: We have decided to define “animal” as any warm- or cold-blooded 

animal which, at the time of transportation, is being kept as a pet in a family household in the 

United States and any dog or cat which, at the time of transportation, is shipped as part of a 

commercial shipment on a scheduled passenger flight. We are not expanding the definition of 

“animal” to cover all species of animals. We believe it would be unduly burdensome to require 

covered carriers to report the death, loss, or injury of all species of animals because there 

potentially could be thousands of individual animals such as fish, rodents, and insects that are 

transported by air carriers in a single commercial shipment. 

As explained below, we do not agree with A4A’s arguments. We believe that expanding 

the definition of “animal” to include any dog or cat which, at the time of transportation, is 

shipped as part of a commercial shipment will provide consumers with a fuller picture of the 

safety record of airlines in the transportation of animals. Many dogs and cats that are being 

shipped on scheduled passenger flights other than as pets by their owners are likely being 

transported for the purpose of being sold as a pet in a family household in the United States. 

Moreover, even though the old definition of “animal” only included any warm- or cold-blooded 

animal which, at the time of transportation, is being kept as a pet in a family household, virtually 

all of the reports of deaths, injuries, and loss involved cats and dogs. Specifically, cats and dogs 

accounted for 95% of deaths, 100% of the injuries, and 98% of the losses. Based on these 
14 

considerations, we believe that expanding the definition of “animal” to include all cats and dogs 

will provide consumers with more complete data that will allow them to make more informed 

decision. 

3. Require covered carriers to provide in their December reports the total number of animals 

that were lost, injured, or died during air transport 

Question posed in the NPRM: The NPRM proposed to require each covered carrier to 

provide in its December report a summary of the total number of animal losses, injuries, and 

deaths for the calendar year. The then-existing requirement did not require covered carriers to 

provide any summary of the total number of animal losses, injuries, and deaths for the calendar 

year. 

Comments: Most of the comments the Department received did not address whether 

carriers should be required to provide in their December report a summary of the total number of 

animal losses, injuries, and deaths. 

Only one of the animal rights advocacy groups specifically addresses this proposal. AWI 

states that the public will benefit from having the airlines’ December reports include the total 

number of animals lost, injured, or killed. 

NABR, the only scientific research organization to address this issue, opposes any 

additional monthly or annual incident reports. NABR asserts that additional monthly or annual 

incident reports are unnecessary for laboratory animal breeders to evaluate carriers, comply with 

current AWA requirements, and carry out their responsibilities to animals and customers. 

A4A also opposes requiring carriers to provide in its December report a summary of the 

total number of animal losses, injuries, and deaths. A4A states that this proposal provides no 

benefit beyond the current requirements. A4A asserts that current animal incident reporting 
15 

practices already provide passengers with very detailed information providing transparency on 

pet incidents, which was the intent of the Act and is what passengers care about most. 

DOT response: We have decided to require covered carriers to provide in their 

December report a summary of the total number of animal losses, injuries, and deaths for the 

year. We do not believe it to be burdensome for the covered carriers to submit this data. To 

comply with this requirement, a covered carrier must simply add up the number of animal 

incidents in each category that it reported in the previous months. This complements the 

requirement to report the total number of animals transported (see below). We have included in 

the final rule a standardized table that covered carriers must use in the December reports when 

reporting the total number of animal losses, injuries, and deaths in the calendar year. 

4. Require covered carriers to include in the December report the total number of animals 

transported in the calendar year. 

Question posed in the NPRM: We invited comments on whether carriers should be 

required to report the total number of animals transported during that year. The then-existing 

rule did not require covered carriers to report the total number of animals transported during that 

year. We also asked whether covered carriers should be required to report only once per year (in 

the December reports) on the total number of animals transported during that year, or whether 

the total number of animals transported should be reported each month. 

Comments: A number of animal rights advocacy groups and U.S. carriers support 

requiring covered carriers to report the total number of animals transported during that year. 

These commenters agree that providing the total number of animal transported will allow 

consumers to calculate rates of animal loss, injury, and death per unit of animals transported for 

each airline (e.g., 1.04 deaths per 10,000 animals transported) and that would help consumers 
16 

and other interested parties to compare the rate of animal incidents from one carrier to another or 

one year to another. AWI states that the public will benefit from having the airlines’ December 

reports include the total number of animals transported during the year. AAVS asserts that this 

information would give consumers information that can be used to correctly compare air carriers 

and their records. AAVS also states that information should be provided monthly as well as in 

December to provide an accurate and up to date understanding of air carriers’ record with 

regards to animal transport. 

ALDF states that requiring carriers to report on the total number of animals transported 

will provide the context necessary to understand the incident reports. ALDF argues that, among 

other benefits, determining the number of incidents per unit of animals transported will allow 

covered carriers to determine whether their practices are reducing the rate of incidents, help 

consumers make more informed decisions on which carrier to entrust their animals to, and 

provide legislators critical information with which to determine if there is a problem that 

warrants stronger legislative remedies. ALDF adds that the carriers should provide this data 

monthly. 

Spirit states that it does not object to the proposal to require airlines to report the total 

number of animals transported annually. Spirit believes that this information would allow 

consumers to compare the total number of animals transported against the number of incidents 

involving animals in air transport, further highlighting the infrequency of these incidents. Spirit 

adds that the Department should not require monthly reporting of the total number of animals 

transported. Spirit argues that incidents involving animals in air transport are random and 

extremely infrequent, and the number of incidents per unit of animals transported in any given 

month has little if any value because the rate of incidents is so low. 
17 

Delta states that it supports requiring carriers to report the total number of animals 

transported during the year, but with two qualifications: 1) the existing definition of “animal” 

should remain unchanged (i.e., any warm- or cold-blooded animal which, at the time of 

transportation, is being kept as a pet in a family household in the United States); and 2) the rate 

calculated by the Department should not be the number of animal incidents “per unit of animals 

transported,” but rather, the number of incidents per passenger enplanement. Delta’s argument 

regarding the definition of “animal” is discussed above. With respect to the rate calculated, 

Delta argues that the process proposed by the Department would lead to the gathering of data 

that can be easily skewed by small sample sizes. Delta asserts that calculating the number of 

incidents per unit of passenger enplanements takes all relevant data into account and conveys an 

incident rate in the full context of each carrier’s operation. Delta believes that this approach 

would be consistent with other data reported by carriers to the Department, e.g., oversales, 

mishandled baggage, consumer complaints, all of which are calculated per passenger 

enplanement. Delta states that since carriers already report these other issues per enplanement, 

the data are readily available and would not require any new data-gathering processes. 

A4A, on the other hand, opposes requiring covered carriers to include in the December 

report the total number of animals transported in the calendar year. A4A argues that the monthly 

consumer report provides very detailed information on every animal incident to consumers and 

that providing general statistics that include commercial animal shipments is not relevant to what 

passengers care about most—transporting pets in the baggage compartment on a flight. A4A 

asserts that carriers would need to reconfigure their systems because current procedures for 

tracking animal incidents are inadequate for tracking the total number of animals transported. 

A4A argues further that the Department vastly underestimates the cost of this proposal. 
18 

DOT response: We have decided to require covered carriers to include in the December 

reports the total number of animals transported in the calendar year. We believe the requirement 

to report the total number of animals transported is important for providing consumers a 

complete picture of a covered carrier’s animal transport record, as the number of animals 

transported by each airline may vary widely. Consumers can use this data to calculate rates of 

animal loss, injury, and death per unit of animals transported for each airline (e.g., 1.04 deaths 

per 10,000 animals transported). While we recognize changes may be needed, we do not agree 

with A4A’s assertion that current procedures for tracking animal incidents are inadequate for 

tracking the total number of animals transported. One of the two air carriers that submitted 

comments in response to the NPRM, Spirit, does not believe it is burdensome to report the total 

number of animals transported in the calendar year. Additionally, for many years the former 

Continental Airlines voluntarily included this information in the animal incident reports that it 

filed with the Department. 

5. Require covered carriers to file negative reports 

Question posed in the NPRM: We solicited comments on whether carriers should be 

required to file negative reports if the carrier did not have any incidents involving the loss, 

injury, or death of an animal during a particular month or year — i.e., reporting “0” for any 

reporting category where there were no such incidents. The then-existing rule did not require 

covered carriers to file negative reports. 

Comments: Most of the comments the Department received did not address whether 

carriers should be required to provide negative reports if the carrier did not have any incidents 

involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal during a particular month or year. 
19 

A couple of animal rights advocacy groups expressed support for negative reporting by 

carriers. Specifically, AWI states that it endorses the proposal to have airlines file reports in 

December even if they have had no animal-related incidents at any time during the year. AWI 

agrees with the Department’s reasoning that “[r]equiring negative reporting in the recap in the 

December report over a signature and certification of an official of the airline provides an 

additional incentive for complete and accurate reporting by carriers.” ALDF asserts that 

negative reporting would improve reporting accuracy and reinforce the importance of these 

requirements. ALDF argues that the negative reports should be provided monthly because it 

would further the goals of accuracy and clarity in the reporting process and help to keep the 

safety of animals as an important issue for carriers every month, rather than simply at the end of 

the year during a busy reporting and travel season. 

A4A and Spirit oppose the negative reporting requirement. A4A argues that a 

requirement to file a “negative” report when there are no animal incidents to report will provide 

no benefit to the public and will incur unnecessary cost to carriers. Spirit asserts that completing, 

filing, and processing negative reports will create an unnecessary burden on the carrier and the 

Department because the reports will not provide the Department with any information that it did 

not already know. Spirit further states that monthly negative reporting would impose an undue 

burden on all air carriers covered by the rule. 

DOT response: We have decided to require covered carriers to file negative reports in 

their December reports if the carrier did not have any incidents involving the loss, injury, or 

death of an animal during the calendar year. Thus, each covered carrier would be required to file 

a report for the previous calendar year by January 15 even if the carrier did not experience any 

incidents involving animals and/or carried no animals during that that year. We do not believe it 
20 

to be unduly burdensome for covered carriers that did not have any incidents involving the loss, 

injury, or death of an animal to enter “0” into the appropriate categories and submit their 

December report. In addition, we believe that requiring covered carriers to affirmatively certify 

that there were no reportable animal incidents during the calendar year provides an additional 

incentive to ensure that the reports are complete and accurate. Covered carriers will not be 

required to file negative reports in any other monthly report (i.e., January through November). 

REGULATORY ANALYSIS AND NOTICES 

A. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review), DOT Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures, and Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review) 

This action has been determined not to be significant under Executive Order 12866 and 

the Department of Transportation’s Regulatory Policies and Procedures. As a result, it has not 

been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with Executive Order 

12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review) and is consistent with the requirements in both orders. Executive Order 

13563 refers to non-quantifiable values, including equity and fairness. A summary of the costs 

and benefits of this final rule follows. For more details, please refer to a copy of the final 

regulatory evaluation, which has been placed in the docket. 
21 

1. Cost of Monthly Reports Other than December Report 

The cost of filing monthly reports is minimal. Aside from the December report, a carrier 

is required to report only during the months where the carrier experiences a reportable animal 

incident. Currently, 15 of the 27 carriers that are affected are already required to collect 

information on incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal. For these 15 carriers, 

which account for approximately 90 percent of the domestic market, there are no additional 

costs. For the 12 other carriers that do not currently have to report, the cost varies depending on 

whether or not there is a reportable incident during any given month. For example, if a carrier 

experiences no reportable incidents all year, then the recurrent cost of filing monthly reports for 

January to November is $0. However, if the carrier experiences a reportable incident every 

month of the year, the cost would be $466.32 per year. This is based on our estimate that it 

would take a paralegal working in scheduled air transportation making $38.86 per hour (the 

average wage rate including benefits) one hour to prepare and submit one monthly report. So, if 

all 12 carriers that do not currently have to report were to each experience a reportable incident 

every month of the year, the total cost would be $5,595.84. Therefore, the cost of monthly 

reports will be between $0 and $5,595.84 per year depending on the number of reportable 

incidents. Even the high estimate would still be a minimal cost. 

2. Cost of the December Report 

Covered carriers are required to submit a December report. In addition to including 

information on any incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal during air transport 

that occurred in the month of December, the December report must include the total number of 

animals that were lost, injured, or died during air transport in the calendar year and the total 

number of animals that were transported in the calendar year. 
22 

The burden on covered carriers to submit in their December report the total number of 

animals that were lost, injured, or died during air transport in the calendar year is minimal. The 

cost varies depending on whether or not a carrier experienced any reportable incidents during the 

calendar year. For example, if a carrier experiences no reportable incidents all year, then the cost 

is $38.86, the estimated cost of a paralegal working in scheduled air transportation to prepare and 

submit one report. If a carrier had one or more animal incidents in a year, it will be required add 

up all the values in any report that it filed throughout the year. We estimate that it will take a 

paralegal working in scheduled air transportation 0.5 hour to find the sum of all the values the 

carrier filed throughout the year. If all 27 covered carriers each experienced a reportable incident 

in the calendar year, the total cost will be $1,573.83 ($524.61 for the carriers to add together all 

the reportable incidents in the calendar year and $1,049.22 for the carriers to prepare and submit 

one report). Therefore, the cost of the December reports will be between $38.86 and $1,573.83 

per year depending on the number of reportable incidents. 

The burden on covered carriers to submit in their December reports the total number of 

animals that were transported in the calendar year is more substantial because it will require 

covered carriers that transport covered animals in the baggage/cargo compartment to create and 

maintain systems that will record and keep track of the number of animals transported 

throughout the year. At the same time, some carriers, such as Spirit Airlines, do not transport 

animals. Additionally, some covered carriers may already have a system in place. These carriers 

will incur no costs. Therefore, we estimate that first year start-up costs for the computer 

hardware and software would be approximately $270,000 for the entire industry.2

 

 

2 This estimate is based on the 2007 Supporting Statement for the obligation of U.S and foreign carriers to file with 

the Department an annual report detailing disability-related complaints the carriers received from passengers in the 

calendar year, as required by 14 CFR part 382, the Department’s rule implementing the Air Carrier Access Act 

(ACAA) in the Department’s Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Air Travel 14 CFR part 382.
23 

We estimate that the subsequent yearly costs to maintain the systems will be minimal. If 

a carrier does not transport animals in the calendar year, such as Spirit Airlines, then there will 

be no cost. If we assumed that annual maintenance costs averaged $40,000 for the entire 

industry, the total cost of maintenance over 20 years discounted at 7% would be about $424,000. 

Factoring in the initial $270,000 start-up cost brings the total cost of the requirement to report in 

the December reports the total number of animals transported in the calendar year to be about 

$694,000. 

3. Cost of Expanded Definition of an Animal 

The cost of the proposed expanded definition of an animal would impact airlines, but the 

cost would still be minimal. Since 2008, the average number of reported incidents per year is 47. 

If we were to assume that it takes a paralegal one hour to prepare and submit a report per 

incident, then we have estimated that the cost to the industry is $1,826.42 per year. This is based 

on our estimate of a paralegal’s salary discussed above. Various trade sources indicate that dogs 

and cats transported as part of a commercial shipment may account for as much as half of all 

dogs, cats, and other household pets that are transported by covered carriers. If we were to 

assume that expanding the definition to include dogs and cats transported as part of a commercial 

shipment would result in an additional 47 reported incidents per year (i.e., a total of 94 

incidents), the additional cost of $1,826.42 is still minimal. 

The benefits of the rule, while difficult to quantify, exceed the costs. Comprehensive 

data are not immediately available as to the total number of animals that air carriers currently 

transport. Neither trade associations for animal transportation providers nor most airlines collect 

data on the number of animals transported annually by air. Trade association (e.g., pet 

transportation firms) and industry (airlines) sources estimate the actual number of pets that 
24 

carriers transport annually at up to 800,000. This rule will provide consumers with a fuller 

picture of the safety record of airlines in the transportation of animals. If the benefit of 

expanding reporting requirements to dogs and cats transported as a commercial shipment were as 

little as a $0.34 per animal shipped, the benefits of the rule would exceed the costs. 

B. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained 

in Executive Order 13132 (“Federalism”). This final rule does not include any provision that (1) 

has substantial direct effects on the States, the relationship between the national government and 

the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 

government; (2) imposes substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments; or 

(3) preempts State law. States are already preempted from regulating in this area by the Airline 

Deregulation Act. See 49 U.S.C. 41713. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements 

of Executive Order 13132 do not apply. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires an agency to review 

regulations to assess their impact on small entities unless the agency determines that a rule is not 

expected to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. I 

certify that this final rule does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 

small entities. A direct air carrier or a foreign air carrier is a small business if it provides air 

transportation only with small aircraft (i.e., aircraft designed to have a maximum passenger 

capacity of not more than 60 seats or a maximum payload capacity of not more than 18,000 

pounds). See 14 CFR 399.73. This rule does not impose new duties or obligations on small 

entities. The rule applies only to U.S. carriers that operate scheduled service with at least one 
25 

aircraft with a design capacity of more than 60 seats. Therefore, this requirement does not affect 

small entities. 

D. Executive Order 13084 

This rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in 

Executive Order 13084 (“Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments”). 

Because this final rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of the Indian 

tribal governments or impose substantial direct compliance costs on them, the funding and 

consultation requirements of Executive Order 13084 do not apply. 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Department has submitted the 

Information Collection Request (ICR) abstracted below to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB). Before OMB decides whether to approve those proposed collections of information that 

are part of this final rule and issue a control number, the public must be provided 30 days to 

comment. Organizations and individuals desiring to submit comments on the information 

collection requirements should direct them to the Office of Management and Budget, Attention: 

Desk Officer for the Office of the Secretary of Transportation, Office of Information and 

Regulatory Affairs, Washington, D.C. 20503, and should also send a copy of their comments to: 

Department of Transportation, Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, Office of the 

General Counsel, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, D.C. 20590. OMB is required to 

make a decision concerning the collection of information requirements contained in this rule 

between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a 

comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of 

publication. 
26 

We will respond to any OMB or public comments on the information collection 

requirements contained in this rule. The Department may not impose a penalty on persons for 

violating information collection requirements which do not display a current OMB control 

number, if required. The Department intends to renew the OMB control number for the 

information collection requirements resulting from this rulemaking action. The OMB control 

number, when renewed, will be announced by separate notice in the Federal Register. 

 The ICR was previously published in the Federal Register as part of the NPRM. See 77 

FR 38750. The Department invited interested persons to submit comments on any aspect of each 

of these three information collections, including the following: (1) the necessity and utility of 

the information collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimate of the burden; (3) ways to enhance 

the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the 

burden of collection without reducing the quality of the collected information. 

 The final rule renews and modifies the information collection titled “Reports by Carriers 

on Incidents Involving Animals During Air Transport” (OMB No. 2105-0552). The collection 

of information contained in the final rule is a requirement that U.S. carriers that operate 

scheduled passenger service with at least one aircraft having a designed seating capacity of more 

than 60 passenger seats report to the Department’s ACPD any incidents involving the loss, 

injury, or death during air transport of cats and dogs that were part of a commercial shipment. 

(Cats and dogs that were being kept as a household pet at the time of such a loss, injury, or death 

are already required to be reported by these airlines.) As discussed above, this requirement 

expands the reporting requirement from 15 carriers to 27 carriers, an increase of 12 carriers. The 

collection of information also requires covered carriers to state in their report for the month of 
27 

December the total number of animals that were lost, injured, or died during air transport in the 

calendar year and the total number of animals that were transported in the calendar year. 

Title: Reports by Carriers on Incidents involving Animals During Air Transport. 

OMB Control Number: 2105–0552 

Type of Request: Modification of expired Information Collection Request 

Respondents: U.S. carriers that operate scheduled passenger service with at least one aircraft 

having a designed seating capacity of more than 60 seats (27). 

Frequency: For each respondent, one information set for the month of December, plus one 

information set during some other months (1 to 12) 

Estimated Annual Burden on Respondents: 27 to 324 hours (Respondents [27] × Frequency [1 to 

12 per year]). 

F. National Environmental Policy Act 

The Department has analyzed the environmental impacts of this proposed action pursuant to the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (NEPA) and has determined 

that it is categorically excluded pursuant to DOT Order 5610.1C, Procedures for Considering 

Environmental Impacts (44 FR 56420, Oct. 1, 1979). Categorical exclusions are actions 

identified in an agency’s NEPA implementing procedures that do not normally have a significant 

impact on the environment and therefore do not require either an environmental assessment (EA) 

or environmental impact statement (EIS). See 40 CFR 1508.4. In analyzing the applicability of 

a categorical exclusion, the agency must also consider whether extraordinary circumstances are 

present that would warrant the preparation of an EA or EIS. Id. Paragraph 4.c.6.i of DOT Order 

5610.1C provides that “actions relating to consumer protection, including regulations” are 

categorically excluded. The purpose of this rulemaking is to amend the requirement for air 
28 

carriers to report incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal during air transport. 

The agency does not anticipate any environmental impacts, and there are no extraordinary 

circumstances present in connection with this rulemaking. 

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Department has determined that the requirements of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to this notice. 

Issued in Washington, D.C., on the 24th day of June, 2014, under the authority delegated at 49 

CFR 1.27(n).

 

 __________________________ 

 Kathryn B. Thomson, 

General Counsel. 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 234 

Air carriers, Consumer protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements 

14 CFR Part 235 

Air carriers, Animal incidents, Consumer protection, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements 

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of Transportation amends 14 

CFR Chapter II as follows: 

PART 234—AIRLINE SERVICE QUALITY PERFORMANCE REPORTS 

1. The authority citation for part 234 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 329 and Sections 41708 and 41709. 
29 

§ 234.13 [Removed] 

2. Section 234.13 is removed. 

3. Part 235 is added to read as follows: 

PART 235—REPORTS BY AIR CARRIERS ON INCIDENTS INVOLVING ANIMALS 

DURING AIR TRANSPORT 

Sec. 

235.1 Definitions. 

235.2 Applicability. 

235.3 Reports by air carriers on incidents involving animals during air transport 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 41721. 

§ 235.1 Definitions. 

For the purposes of this part: 

Air transport includes the entire period during which an animal is in the custody of an air carrier, 

from the time that the animal is tendered to the air carrier prior to departure until the air carrier 

tenders the animal to the owner, guardian or representative of the shipper of the animal at the 

animal’s final destination. It does not include animals that accompany a passenger at his or her 

seat in the cabin and of which the air carrier does not take custody. 

Animal means any warm- or cold-blooded animal which, at the time of transportation, is being 

kept as a pet in a family household in the United States and any dog or cat which, at the time of 

transportation, is shipped as part of a commercial shipment on a scheduled passenger flight, 

including shipments by trainers and breeders. 

§ 235.2 Applicability.

This part applies to the scheduled domestic and international passenger service of any U.S. air 

carrier that operates such service with at least one aircraft having a designed seating capacity of 
30 

more than 60 passenger seats. The reporting requirements of this part apply to all scheduledservice passenger flights of such carriers, including flights that are operated with aircraft having 

60 or fewer seats. 

§ 235.3 Reports by air carriers on incidents involving animals during air transport.

(a) Each covered carrier shall, within 15 days after the end of the month to which the 

information applies, submit to the United States Department of Transportation’s Aviation 

Consumer Protection Division a report on any incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an 

animal during air transport provided by the air carrier, including incidents on flights by that 

carrier that are operated with aircraft having 60 or fewer seats. The report shall be made in the 

form and manner set forth in reporting directives issued by the Deputy General Counsel for the 

U.S. Department of Transportation and shall contain the following information: 

(1) Carrier and flight number; 

(2) Date and time of the incident; 

(3) Description of the animal, including name, if known; 

(4) Name and contact information of the owner(s), guardian, and/or shipper of the 

animal; 

(5) Narrative description of the incident; 

(6) Narrative description of the cause of the incident; 

(7) Narrative description of any corrective action taken in response to the incident; and 

(8) Name, title, address, and telephone number of the individual filing the report on 

behalf of the air carrier. 
31 

(b) Within 15 days after the end of December of each year, each covered carrier shall 

submit the following information (this information may be included in any report that the carrier 

may file for the loss, injury, or death of animals during the month of December): 

(1) The total number of incidents involving an animal during air transport provided by the 

air carrier for the entire calendar year, including incidents on flights by that carrier that are 

operated with aircraft having 60 or fewer seats. The report shall include subtotals for loss, 

injury, and death of animals. Report “0” for any category for which there were no such 

incidents. If the carrier had no reportable incidents for that calendar year, it shall report “0” in 

each category. Covered carriers shall use the following data table when reporting the total 

number of animal incidents during air transport provided by the air carrier for the entire calendar 

year: 

 Total Number in 

the Calendar Year 

Deaths 

Injuries 

Loss 

(2) The total number of animals transported in the calendar year. If the carrier did not 

transport any animals for that calendar year, it shall report “0.” 

(3) The December report must contain the following certification signed by the carrier’s 

authorized representative: “I, the undersigned, do certify that this report has been prepared under 

my direction in accordance with the regulations in 14 CFR part 235. I affirm that, to the best of 

my knowledge and belief, this is a true, correct and complete report.” 

[FR Doc. 2014-15503 Filed 07/02/2014 at 8:45 am; Publication Date: 07/03/2014]