Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 38747 

Office of the Regional Counsel, Southwest 

Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Room 663, Fort 

Worth, Texas 76137. 

(h) Subject 

Joint Aircraft Service Component (JASC) 

Code: 6300: Main Rotor Drive System and 

6400: Tail Rotor System. 

Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on June 21, 

2012. 

M. Monica Merritt, 

Acting Manager, Rotorcraft Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–15978 Filed 6–28–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

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: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: The Department is proposing 

to amend its existing rule regarding the 

reporting of incidents involving animals 

during air transport, 14 CFR 234.13, to 

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, 

to 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), 

and to require all covered carriers to 

provide in their December reports the 

total number of animals that were lost, 

injured, or died during air transport. We 

also seek comment on requiring carriers 

to report the total number of animals 

transported in the calendar year in the 

December reports. 

DATES: Comments should be filed by 

August 28, 2012. Late-filed comments 

will be considered to the extent 

practicable. 

ADDRESSES: You may file comments 

identified by the docket number DOT– 

OST–2010–0211 by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Mail: Docket Management Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Ave. SE., Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m. ET, Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

Instructions: You must include the 

agency name and docket number DOT– 

OST–2010–0211 or Regulatory 

Identification Number (RIN) for the 

rulemaking at the beginning of your 

comment. All comments will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. 

Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form of all comments 

received in any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment if 

submitted on behalf of an association, a 

business, a labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 

19477–78), or you may visit http:// 

DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov or to the street 

address listed above. Follow the online 

instructions for accessing the docket. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Vinh Q. Nguyen, Trial Attorney, Office 

of the Assistant General Counsel for 

Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 

20590, 202–366–9342 (phone), 202– 

366–7152 (fax), vinh.nguyen@dot.gov. 

You may also contact Blane A. Workie, 

Deputy Assistant General Counsel, 

Office of the Assistant General Counsel 

for Aviation Enforcement and 

Proceedings, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Ave. 

SE., Washington, DC 20590, 202–366– 

9342 (phone), 202–366–7152 (fax), 

blane.workie@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The current rule regarding reporting 

of incidents involving animals during 

air transport derives from 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. It 

included section 710, ‘‘Reports by 

Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals 

During Air Transport,’’ and was codified 

as 49 U.S.C. 41721. Section 41721 

contains the following provisions: 

(a) In General.—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. The report shall be in such form and 

contain such information as the Secretary 

determines appropriate. 

* * * * * 

(d) Publication of Data.—The Secretary 

shall 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. 

(e) Air Transport.—For purposes of this 

section, the air transport of an animal 

includes the entire period during which an 

animal is in the custody of an air carrier, 

from check-in of the animal prior to 

departure until the animal is returned to the 

owner or guardian of the animal at the final 

destination of the animal. 

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 the Animal and 

Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) 

of the United States Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) 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 any 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 is codified at 14 

CFR 234.13. 

Section 234.13 requires 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 

of the end of the month during which 

the incident occurred. It defines 

‘‘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 covers the 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
38748 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

1 DOT defines small carriers based on the 

standard published in 14 CFR 399.73: ‘‘For the 

purposes of the Department’s implementation of 

chapter 6 of title 5, United State Code (Regulatory 

Flexibility Act), a direct air carrier or foreign air 

carrier is a small business if it provides air 

transportation only with small aircraft as defined in 

§ 298.3 of this chapter (up to 60 seats/18,000 pound 

payload capacity).’’ 

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. Section 

234.13 also lists the information that is 

to be included in each report (e.g., 

carrier and flight number, date and time 

of the incident). However, because 

section 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 has been confusion 

regarding which entities are required to 

submit a report to the ACPD on 

incidents involving loss, injury, or death 

on 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). 

On August 10, 2010, 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 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 transported as a pet by its 

owner or as part of a commercial 

shipment. In addition to the letter, 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 animals 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’s proposal would 

apply to all species of animals, not just 

cats and dogs. 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

This NPRM proposes to expand the 

applicability of the rule to require all 

U.S. carriers that operate scheduled 

service with at least one aircraft with a 

design capacity of more than 60 

passenger 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. Under the current 

rule, most of the reports on incidents 

involving animals during air transport 

have been submitted by ‘‘reporting 

carriers,’’ as defined in 14 CFR 234.2. At 

the present time, there are 15 ‘‘reporting 

carriers.’’ These airlines account for the 

vast majority of domestic traffic. 

Nevertheless, we believe that it is 

important to expand the requirement to 

all carriers that operate scheduled 

service with at least one aircraft with a 

design capacity of more than 60 seats to 

provide consumers and other interested 

parties a more complete picture of the 

treatment of animals on scheduled 

passenger flights. By expanding the 

applicability from the reporting carriers 

(i.e., U.S. carriers that account for at 

least 1 percent of domestic scheduled 

passenger revenue) to U.S. carriers that 

operate domestic or international 

scheduled passenger service with at 

least one aircraft with more than 60 

seats, we would be requiring reports of 

loss, injury or death of an animal from 

36 carriers instead of only 15 carriers. 

These 36 carriers carry about 99.6 

percent of domestic passengers and 98 

percent of international passengers that 

travel on U.S. airlines. 

Consistent with section 605 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 

U.S.C. 605(b), as amended by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement and 

Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), we are 

not proposing to expand this rule to 

carriers that operate scheduled service 

with only aircraft that have a design 

capacity of 60 seats or less as these 

carriers are considered small 

businesses.1 We invite comment on 

whether there is any benefit to 

expanding the applicability of the rule 

any further to encompass more U.S. 

carriers. We are not considering 

expanding the requirement to report on 

the loss, injury or death of animals to 

foreign air carriers that operate flights to 

and from the U.S. or to charter flights, 

as Congress mandated the reporting of 

such information only by U.S.-flag 

airlines that operate scheduled 

passenger service. However, we are 

aware of an indirect cargo air carrier 

operating under the provisions of Part 

296 of the Department’s regulations that 

specializes in providing air 

transportation only to pets. We seek 

comment on whether the reporting 

requirements should apply to such 

entities. 

The existing rule defines an animal as 

a pet in a family household. The NPRM 

proposes to expand this definition to 

include cats and dogs that are part of a 

commercial shipment. More 

specifically, the NPRM proposes to 

retain that portion of the definition of 

‘‘animal’’ that refers 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 add to this definition ‘‘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 proposing this expansion in 

the definition of an animal because 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, based on 

the data we collected of loss, injury or 

death of household pets transported in 

commercial aviation from May 2005 to 

November 2011, we found that virtually 

all of the reports of deaths (95%), 

injuries (100%), and loss (98%) 

involved cats and dogs. Nevertheless, 

we seek comment on whether the 

definition of an animal should be 

expanded further to include not only 

dogs and cats in commercial shipments 

but all species of animals in commercial 

air transportation. We are seeking 

comment, rather than proposing specific 

language, on expanding the definition of 

an animal to apply to all species of 

animals, as suggested by the Animal 

Legal Defense Fund. We are not 

proposing language at this time for two 

reasons. First, the overwhelming 

majority of losses, injuries, and deaths 

of household pets reported to DOT by 

airlines have involved cats and dogs. 

Second, the legislative history of AIR– 

21 does not appear to show an intent to 

require reporting of incidents involving 

commercial shipment of animals such 

as fish and birds that are being shipped 

from breeders/wholesalers to retailers. 

The rule would continue not to cover 

animals that accompany a passenger at 

his or her seat in the cabin as the air 

carrier does not take custody of such 

animals. In any event, the likelihood of 

the loss, injury, or death of such animals 

is very minimal. 

We further propose in this NPRM to 

require each covered carrier to provide 

in its December report a summary of the 

total number of animal losses, injuries, 

and deaths and the total number of 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 38749 

animals transported for the calendar 

year. Thus, each covered carrier would 

be required to file a report for the month 

of December even if the carrier did not 

experience any incidents involving 

animals and/or carried no animals 

during that month or even that year. We 

seek comment on requiring carriers to 

report the total number of animals 

transported during that year. We believe 

the additional requirement of reporting 

the number of animals transported may 

be important for providing a complete 

picture of a covered carrier’s animal 

transport record, as the number of 

animals transported by each airline may 

vary widely. If we were to gather this 

data from the airlines, we would use it 

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 include this information in our 

published animal incident reports. 

Without this information, consumers 

and others will not be able to compare 

the rate of animal incidents from one 

carrier to another or one year to another. 

We ask commenters to provide the 

following information to assist our 

consideration of the question of 

requiring carriers to report the total 

number of animals transported. How 

many cats, dogs and other household 

pets are currently transported per year 

on scheduled flights of U.S. air carriers? 

Has this number been increasing or 

decreasing in recent years? Are current 

procedures for tracking animal incidents 

adequate for tracking the total number 

of animals transported? If yes, then what 

additional annual costs would be 

involved for tracking the total number of 

animals transported? If not, what new 

procedures would need to be put in 

place? What exactly would be involved? 

In terms of costs: What are the set-up 

costs for such a system? What are 

annual costs of running it? Are the 

annual costs fixed or do they depend on 

the number of animals transported? 

Please describe capital costs, labor 

hours, and other costs separately. 

In order to limit the burden on the 

covered carriers, we seek comment on 

whether we should require covered 

carriers to report only once per year in 

the December reports on the total 

number of animals transported during 

the previous year, or whether the total 

number of animals transported should 

be reported each month. We also solicit 

comment on whether carriers should be 

required to file negative reports even 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. Negative reports would 

require carriers to affirmatively certify 

that there were no reportable animal 

incidents during that period; they are an 

additional incentive to ensure that the 

reports are complete and accurate. We 

also invite interested persons to 

comment on whether the Department 

should continue not requiring carriers to 

file negative monthly reports of animal 

incidents (i.e., not requiring reports 

stating there were no incidents of death, 

loss, or injury of an animal). 

The Department is seeking comment 

on these issues. Our final action will be 

based on the comments and supporting 

evidence filed in this docket and on our 

own analysis. 

Regulatory Analyses and Notices 

A. Executive Order 13563 and 12866 

and DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures 

Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 

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, distributive impacts, and 

equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying both costs and benefits, of 

reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, 

and of promoting flexibility. 

This action has been determined not 

to be significant under Executive Order 

12866 and DOT’s Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures and was not reviewed 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). The costs associated 

with this rule would be minimal. 

1. Cost of Monthly Reports Other Than 

December Report 

The cost of filing monthly reports 

would be minimal. Aside from the 

December report, a carrier would be 

required to report only during the 

months where the carrier experiences a 

reportable animal incident. Currently, 

15 of the 36 carriers that would be 

affected are already required to collect 

information on incidents involving the 

loss, injury, or death of an animal. For 

these 15 carriers, who account for 

approximately 90 percent of the 

domestic market, there would be no 

additional costs. For the 21 other 

carriers who do not currently have to 

report, the cost would vary 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 $401.52. This is based on 

our estimate that it would take a 

Paralegal working in scheduled air 

transportation making $33.46 (the 

average wage rate plus benefits) one 

hour to prepare and submit one monthly 

report. So, if all 21 carriers, who do not 

currently have to report, each 

experience a reportable incident every 

month of the year, the total cost would 

be $8,431.92. Therefore, the cost of 

monthly reports would be between $0 

and $8,431.92 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 

All covered carriers would be 

required to submit a December report. 

However, the burden on covered 

carriers to submit a December report 

that includes the total number of 

animals that were lost, injured, or died 

during air transport would be minimal. 

This report would merely be an 

arithmetic total of the values in any 

report that a covered carrier filed 

throughout the year. 

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 2006, the average 

number of reported incidents per year is 

46. 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 $1540 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 

46 reported incidents per year (i.e., a 

total of 92 incidents), the additional cost 

of $1540 is still minimal. 

The benefits of the rule, while 

difficult to quantify, exceed the costs. 

Good 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 airlines 

collect data on the number of animals 

transported annually by air. Trade 

association (e.g., pet transportation 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
38750 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

firms) and industry (airlines) sources 

estimate the actual number of pets that 

carriers transport annually at up to 

800,000. This proposal would 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 

cent per animal shipped, the benefits of 

the rule would exceed the costs. 

A copy of the preliminary regulatory 

evaluation has been placed in the 

docket. We invite comment on the 

quantification of costs and benefits for 

this proposed requirement, as well as 

the methodology used to develop our 

cost and benefit estimates. We also seek 

comment on how unquantified costs 

and benefits could be measured. 

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Pursuant to section 605 of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 

U.S.C. 605(b), as amended by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement and 

Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), I certify 

that this rulemaking would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The NPRM would impose no new duties 

or obligations on small entities. As 

discussed above, consistent with the 

RFA, as amended by the SBREFA, we 

are not proposing to expand this rule to 

carriers that operate scheduled service 

with only aircraft that have a design 

capacity of 60 seats or less as these 

carriers are considered small businesses. 

C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism) 

This action would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, and therefore will 

not have federalism implications. 

D. Executive Order 13084 

This notice has been analyzed in 

accordance with the principles and 

criteria contained in Executive Order 

13084 (‘‘Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments’’). 

Because the provision on which we are 

seeking comment would 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 

In accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, (Pub. L. 104–13, 

49 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Department 

is seeking to renew with change the 

information collection titled ‘‘Reports 

by Carriers on Incidents Involving 

Animals During Air Transport’’ (OMB 

No. 2105–055). This information 

collection expired on June 6, 2011. This 

NPRM proposes to modify the 

information collection requirement. 

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

before an agency submits a proposed 

collection of information to OMB for 

approval, it must publish a document in 

the Federal Register providing notice of 

the proposed collection of information 

and a 60-day comment period, and must 

otherwise consult with members of the 

public and affected agencies concerning 

the proposed collection. 

The collection of information 

proposed in the NPRM 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 would expand the 

reporting requirement from 15 carriers 

to 36 carriers, an increase of 21 carriers. 

We also propose to require covered 

carriers to state in their report for the 

month of December the total number of 

animals that were lost, injured, or died 

during air transport. We solicit 

comment on whether we should also 

require carriers to provide information 

about the total number of animals 

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 (36). 

Frequency: For each respondent, one 

information set for the month of 

December, plus one information set 

during some months (1 to 12). 

Estimated Annual Burden on 

Respondents: 36 to 432 hours 

(Respondents [36] × Frequency [1 to 12 

per year]). 

Comments are invited on: (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. Comments 

submitted in response to this notice will 

be summarized or included, or both, in 

the request for OMB approval of these 

information collections. 

F. 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 rulemaking. 

Issued this 22nd day of June 2012, in 

Washington, DC. 

Robert S. Rivkin, 

General Counsel. 

List of Subjects in Parts 234 and 235 

Air carrier, Animal incidents, 

Consumer protection, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, the Department of 

Transportation proposes to amend 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. 

2. Section 234.13 is removed. 

§ 234.13 [Removed] 

3. A new 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 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2012 / Proposed Rules 38751 

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 more than 60 passenger 

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 applicable; 

(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. 

(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. 

(2) The December report must contain 

the following certification signed by 

your 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. 2012–16024 Filed 6–28–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. CPSC–2012–0037] 

16 CFR Part 1500 

Codification of Animal Testing Policy 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed Statement of Policy on 

Animal Testing 

SUMMARY: The Consumer Product Safety 

Commission (CPSC or Commission) 

proposes to codify its statement of 

policy on animal testing, as amended, 

which was previously published in the 

Federal Register. The amended 

statement of policy on animal testing is 

intended for manufacturers of products 

subject to the Federal Hazardous 

Substances Act (FHSA) to find 

alternatives to animal testing and reduce 

the number of animal tests under the 

FHSA. 

DATES: Written comments and 

submissions in response to this notice 

must be received by September 12, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CPSC–2012– 

0037, by any of the following methods: 

Electronic Submissions 

Submit electronic comments in the 

following way: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

To ensure timely processing of 

comments, the Commission is no longer 

accepting comments submitted by 

electronic mail (email) except through 

www.regulations.gov. 

Written Submissions 

Submit written submissions in the 

following way: 

Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for 

paper, disk, or CD–ROM submissions), 

preferably in five copies, to: Office of 

the Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission, 4330 East West Highway, 

Bethesda, MD 20814; telephone (301) 

504–7923. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this proposed 

statement of animal testing policy. All 

comments received may be posted 

without change, including any personal 

identifiers, contact information, or other 

personal information provided, to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information, trade secret information, or 

other sensitive or protected information 

electronically. Such information should 

be submitted in writing. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Leslie E. Patton, Ph.D., Project Manager, 

Office of Hazard Identification and 

Reduction, U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, 4330 East West 

Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814; 

telephone (301) 504–7848; 

lpatton@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

The Federal Hazardous Substances 

Act (FHSA), 15 U.S.C. 1261–1278, 

requires appropriate cautionary labeling 

on certain hazardous household 

products to alert consumers to the 

potential hazards that a product may 

present. Among the hazards addressed 

by the FHSA are products that are toxic, 

corrosive, irritants, flammable, 

combustible, or strong sensitizers. The 

FHSA and the Commission regulations 

at 16 CFR part 1500 provide certain test 

methods related to testing on animals to 

determine the existence of the hazards 

addressed by the FHSA. 

On May 30, 1984, the Commission 

adopted an animal testing policy that 

minimized the number of test animals 

required for toxicity testing and clarified 

when animal testing might be needed 

(1984 Policy) published in the Federal 

Register on May 30, 1984 (49 FR 22522). 

These guidelines advised product 

manufacturers to use alternatives to 

animal testing whenever possible, 

including: (1) Prior human experience, 

(2) existing animal or limited human 

test results, and (3) expert opinion. The 

1984 Policy stated: 

It is important to keep in mind that neither 

the FHSA nor the Commission’s regulations 

require any firm to perform animal tests. The 

statute and its implementing regulations only 

require that a product be labeled to reflect the 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1