37938 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Consumption of Furnaces and Boilers.’’ 

It was clearly not DOE’s intention to 

change or eliminate reference materials 

for other products as part of the furnace 

fans rulemaking. At no place in the 

January 2014 final rule did DOE discuss 

such modifications. This final rule 

would simply incorporate once again 

into the CFR the intended and proper 

reference materials that were 

erroneously deleted without making 

substantive changes to any previously 

established provisions. Accordingly, 

DOE finds that there is good cause 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to not issue a 

separate notice to solicit public 

comment on the changes contained in 

this document. Issuing a separate 

document to solicit public comment 

would be impractical, unnecessary, and 

contrary to the public interest. 

III. Procedural Requirements 

DOE has concluded that the 

determinations made pursuant to the 

various procedural requirements 

applicable to the January 3, 2014 test 

procedure final rule for residential 

furnace fans remain unchanged for this 

final rule technical correction. These 

determinations are set forth in the 

January 3, 2014 final rule. 79 FR 500, 

517–520. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 430 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Confidential business 

information, Energy conservation, 

Household appliances, Imports, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Small 

businesses. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on June 27, 

2014. 

Kathleen B. Hogan, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy 

Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DOE amends part 430 of 

Chapter II, subchapter D of title 10, 

Code of Federal Regulations as set forth 

below: 

PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION 

PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER 

PRODUCTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 430 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C. 

2461 note. 

■ 2. Section 430.3 is amended by: 

■ a. Redesignating paragraphs (f)(10) 

through (f)(11) as (f)(11) through (f)(12); 

and 

■ b. Adding new paragraph (f)(10). 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 430.3 Materials incorporated by 

reference. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(10) ASHRAE Standard 103–1993, 

(‘‘ASHRAE 103–1993’’), Methods of 

Testing for Annual Fuel Utilization 

Efficiency of Residential Central 

Furnaces and Boilers, (with Errata of 

October 24, 1996) except for sections 

3.0, 7.2.2.5, 8.6.1.1, 9.1.2.2, 9.5.1.1, 

9.5.1.2.1, 9.5.1.2.2, 9.5.2.1, 9.7.1, 10.0, 

11.2.12, 11.3.12, 11.4.12, 11.5.12 and 

appendices B and C, approved October 

4, 1993, IBR approved for § 430.23 and 

appendix N to subpart B. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–15654 Filed 7–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–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: 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, 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 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 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 37939 

1There 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 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. 

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 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 

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 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 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
37940 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

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 non-quantifiable 

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 

Monetized Benefits.20 years, 7% 

discounting.

$0 

Monetized 

Costs *.

20 years, 7% 

discounting.

$729,769 

Monetized Net 

Benefits.

20 years, 7% 

discounting.

($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 thenexisting 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. 

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. 

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 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 37941 

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 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 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 Web site. 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 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 coldblooded 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 coldblooded 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 

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. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
37942 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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 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. 

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 coldblooded 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 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 37943 

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. 

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. 

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 year. We do not 

believe it 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 nonquantifiable 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. 

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. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
37944 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

2This 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. 

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. 

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

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 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 

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. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 37945 

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, DC 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, DC 

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. 

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 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 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, DC, 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. 

§ 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 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
37946 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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 coldblooded 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 more than 60 passenger 

seats. The reporting requirements of this 

part apply to all scheduled-service 

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. 

(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 7–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Part 882 

[Docket No. FDA–2014–M–0799] 

Medical Devices; Neurological 

Devices; Classification of the 

Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve 

Stimulator to Treat Headache 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Final order. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is classifying the 

transcutaneous electrical nerve 

stimulator to treat headache into class II 

(special controls). The special controls 

that will apply to the device are 

identified in this order, and will be part 

of the codified language for the 

transcutaneous electrical nerve 

stimulator to treat headache 

classification. The Agency is classifying 

the device into class II (special controls) 

in order to provide a reasonable 

assurance of safety and effectiveness of 

the device. 

DATES: This order is effective August 4, 

2014. The classification was applicable 

on March 11, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Hoffmann, Center for Devices 

and Radiological Health, Food and Drug 

Administration, 10903 New Hampshire 

Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm. 1434, Silver Spring, 

MD 20993–0002, 301–796–6476, 

michael.hoffmann@fda.hhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

In accordance with section 513(f)(1) of 

the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic 

Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 

360c(f)(1)), devices that were not in 

commercial distribution before May 28, 

1976 (the date of enactment of the 

Medical Device Amendments of 1976), 

generally referred to as postamendments 

devices, are classified automatically by 

statute into class III without any FDA 

rulemaking process. These devices 

remain in class III and require 

premarket approval, unless and until 

the device is classified or reclassified 

into class I or II, or FDA issues an order 

finding the device to be substantially 

equivalent, in accordance with section 

513(i) of the FD&C Act, to a predicate 

device that does not require premarket 

approval. The Agency determines 

whether new devices are substantially 

equivalent to predicate devices by 

means of premarket notification 

procedures in section 510(k) of the 

FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 360(k)) and part 

807 (21 CFR part 807) of the regulations. 

Section 513(f)(2) of the FD&C Act, as 

amended by section 607 of the Food and 

Drug Administration Safety and 

Innovation Act (Pub. L. 112–144), 

provides two procedures by which a 

person may request FDA to classify a 

device under the criteria set forth in 

section 513(a)(1). Under the first 

procedure, the person submits a 

premarket notification under section 

510(k) of the FD&C Act for a device that 

has not previously been classified and, 

within 30 days of receiving an order 

classifying the device into class III 

under section 513(f)(1) of the FD&C Act, 

the person requests a classification 

under section 513(f)(2). Under the 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES