Reports by Air Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals During Air Transport, 37938-37946 [2014-15503]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
• Office of the Secretary

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 128 (Thursday, July 3, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37938-37946]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15503]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

[[Page 37939]]

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 Sec.  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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ There are three categories for animals transported in 
scheduled passenger air transportation: ``unassigned in the cabin;'' 
``accompanied baggage;'' and ``live cargo shipments.'' Animals 
categorized as ``unassigned in the cabin'' are 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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

[[Page 37940]]

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%        $0
                                   discounting.
Monetized Costs *...............  20 years, 7%        $729,769
                                   discounting.
Monetized Net Benefits..........  20 years, 7%        ($729,769)
                                   discounting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This rule will only impose monetary costs on covered air carriers.

Comments and Responses

1. Entities Covered

    Question posed in the NPRM: The NPRM proposed to require all U.S. 
carriers that operate scheduled service with at least one aircraft with 
a design capacity of more than 60 seats to submit a report to the ACPD 
on any incidents involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal 
during air transport within 15 days after the end of the month during 
which the incident occurred. The then-existing reporting requirement 
only applied to the domestic scheduled passenger flights of carriers 
that account for at least 1 percent of domestic scheduled passenger 
revenue. We also invited comments on whether there is any benefit to 
expanding the applicability of the rule any further to encompass more 
U.S. carriers and whether the reporting requirements should apply to 
indirect cargo air carriers operating under the provisions of 14 CFR 
part 296.
    Comments: Most of the comments the Department received do not 
address whether the rule should be applicable to all U.S. carriers that 
operate scheduled service with at least one aircraft with a design 
capacity of more than 60 seats.
    A number of animal rights advocacy groups, such as ASPCA, AWI, and 
AAVS, expressed support for expanding the applicability of the rule 
further to encompass more carriers. AWI states that there has been 
confusion over the airlines and flights covered under the law, and this 
change would clarify the coverage and provide the public with more 
information. AAVS states the change would be an important step to 
ensure an accurate picture of how animals are protected while in air 
transport. AAVS is also in favor of covering indirect cargo air 
carriers that cater only to pets.
    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

[[Page 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 
cold-blooded animal which, at the time of transportation, is being kept 
as a pet in a family household in the United States and any dog or cat 
which, at the time of transportation, is shipped as part of a 
commercial shipment on a scheduled passenger flight. We are not 
expanding the definition of ``animal'' to cover all species of animals. 
We believe it would be unduly burdensome to require covered carriers to 
report the death, loss, or injury of all species of animals because 
there potentially could be thousands of individual animals such as 
fish, rodents, and insects that are transported by air carriers in a 
single commercial shipment.
    As explained below, we do not agree with A4A's arguments. We 
believe that expanding the definition of ``animal'' to include any dog 
or cat which, at the time of transportation, is shipped as part of a 
commercial shipment will provide consumers with a fuller picture of the 
safety record of airlines in the transportation of animals. Many dogs 
and cats that are being shipped on scheduled passenger flights other 
than as pets by their owners are likely being transported for the 
purpose of being sold as a pet in a family household in the United 
States. Moreover, even though the old definition of ``animal'' only 
included any warm- or cold-blooded animal which, at the time of 
transportation, is being kept as a pet in a family household, virtually 
all of the reports of deaths, injuries, and loss involved cats and 
dogs. Specifically, cats and dogs accounted for 95% of deaths, 100% of 
the injuries, and 98% of the losses. Based on these 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.

[[Page 37942]]

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 cold-blooded animal which, at the time of 
transportation, is being kept as a pet in a family household in the 
United States); and (2) the rate calculated by the Department should 
not be the number of animal incidents ``per unit of animals 
transported,'' but rather, the number of incidents per passenger 
enplanement. Delta's argument regarding the definition of ``animal'' is 
discussed above. With respect to the rate calculated, Delta argues that 
the process proposed by the Department would lead to the gathering of 
data that can be easily skewed by small sample sizes. Delta asserts 
that calculating the number of incidents per unit of passenger 
enplanements takes all relevant data into account and conveys an 
incident rate in the full context of each carrier's operation. Delta 
believes that this approach would be consistent with other data 
reported by carriers to the Department, e.g., oversales, mishandled 
baggage, consumer complaints, all of which are calculated per passenger 
enplanement. Delta states that since carriers already report these 
other issues per enplanement, the data are readily available and would 
not require any new data-gathering processes.
    A4A, on the other hand, opposes requiring covered carriers to 
include in the December report the total number of animals transported 
in the calendar year. A4A argues that the monthly consumer report 
provides very detailed information on every animal incident to 
consumers and that providing general statistics that include commercial 
animal shipments is not relevant to what passengers care about most--
transporting pets in the baggage

[[Page 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 non-
quantifiable values, including equity and fairness. A summary of the 
costs and benefits of this final rule follows. For more details, please 
refer to a copy of the final regulatory evaluation, which has been 
placed in the docket.
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.

[[Page 37944]]

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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This estimate is based on the 2007 Supporting Statement for 
the obligation of U.S. and foreign carriers to file with the 
Department an annual report detailing disability-related complaints 
the carriers received from passengers in the calendar year, as 
required by 14 CFR part 382, the Department's rule implementing the 
Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) in the Department's Nondiscrimination 
on the Basis of Disability in Air Travel 14 CFR part 382.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.

[[Page 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] x 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

0
1. The authority citation for part 234 continues to read as follows:

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


Sec.  234.13  [Removed]

0
2. Section 234.13 is removed.

0
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.


Sec.  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

[[Page 37946]]

that the animal is tendered to the air carrier prior to departure until 
the air carrier tenders the animal to the owner, guardian or 
representative of the shipper of the animal at the animal's final 
destination. It does not include animals that accompany a passenger at 
his or her seat in the cabin and of which the air carrier does not take 
custody.
    Animal means any warm- or cold-blooded animal which, at the time of 
transportation, is being kept as a pet in a family household in the 
United States and any dog or cat which, at the time of transportation, 
is shipped as part of a commercial shipment on a scheduled passenger 
flight, including shipments by trainers and breeders.


Sec.  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.


Sec.  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