CFA Info

CFA Legislative ALERT

FAA - Air Transport

You will recall our struggle in 1999 to keep Senator Frank Lautenberg's "Boris Bill" provisions out of the Federal Aviation Reauthorization Bill. Through successful grass roots action we were able to get the congressional conference committee to remove all the provisions that could lead to a shut down of air transport of animals in the United States.

• Heads Up
• Background

***This is a "HEADS UP" - background information to prepare for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT) "Proposed Rules" announced September 27, 2002 in the Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 188/Friday, 9/27/02. ALERTS for "Docket No. FAA-2002-13378" will follow after we have time for analysis of the provisions and can provide points to make.

The request for an extension of the 30 day comment period has been granted. The deadline for comments is now December 28, 2002 We will have further information available shortly.

***This rule (Section 199.72 "Reports by air carriers on incidents involving animals during air transport") includes the term GUARDIAN. It would be a first in federal regulation!! Cat and dog fanciers now are well aware of the danger of this word and its significance as the first step toward the loss of property rights for animal owners.

Return to Top

Background:

Inflated and erroneous data was provided in 1999 by the "Boris Bill" Amendment promoters (the ASPCA, Doris Day Animal League and the Humane Society of the United States) concerning "problems" in shipping animals and the need for federal regulation. CFA, AKC, PIJAC and others refuted this information and pointed out that many animal related transport "problems" are either isolated or insignificant incidents not causing injury, loss or death (i.e., shipper arriving without a carrier labeled properly). Some serious incidents are caused by such things as improperly secured carriers, use of tranquilizers or shipping very old/ill animals. We argued that preventing many of these incidents could be best addressed through better education of shippers and training of airline personnel rather than rules that would be impossible or impractical for airlines. We presented research information to show that the environmental conditions in the cargo compartments were within limits consistent for maintaining animal health during normally scheduled flights of commercial transport and did not necessitate the "Boris Bill" excessive requirements involving extensive retrofitting of aircraft. The cost would most likely have resulted in a permanent embargos on carrying any live animals.

We were successful thanks to your outpouring of letters and support. We are as concerned as any animal lovers about safety in air transport, but we do not want to end the ability of pet owners and breeders to ship their animals by air.

The Lautenberg Amendment finally resulted in a regulation compelling "air carriers that provide scheduled passenger air transportation to submit monthly "a report on any incidents involving the loss, injury or death of an animal during air transport provided by the air carrier." This seemed a reasonable and positive compromise to assess whether there really are serious problems with animal transport by air carriers and if so to determine the possible causes and solutions. We were satisfied with this decision.

It has taken more than 28 months for the FAA to draft and publish a proposed rule for implementing these requirements. There was no opportunity for input from organizations like CFA, AKC, or PIJAC whose participants or members are greatly impacted by these proposed air transport reporting rules.

Now the FAA gives us 30 days to comment (Comments are due by October 28, 2002) on "Docket No. FAA-2002-13378". Our first step is to request an extension from the U. S. Department of Transportation. We want 60 days beyond the 30-day period. (NOTE: This 60 day extension has been granted. ) We need to analyze the ramifications of the requirements and have more time to prepare our alerts and points to make and inform cat fanciers who will be impacted by the requirements or airline cost increases resulting from this rulemaking.

Examples of potentially objectionable/unclear report requirements:

1. The reports call for "identification of the owner(s) and/or guardian of the animal". We strongly object to the use of the word "guardian" in federal regulation.
2. We question what "identification" means - the name, address, phone number? This information would become public record, and could mean an invasion of privacy and lead to harassment of shippers (breeders, pet owners, commercial shippers).
3. "The air transport of an animal includes the entire period during which an animal is in the custody of an air carrier, from check-in of the animal prior to departure until the animal is returned to the owner or guardian of the animal at the final destination of the animal." This seems to apply only to a trip when the owner accompanies the animal. It needs clarification. What if ownership does not transfer to the new buyer/owner receiving the animal (per special contract stipulations)? What about breeding cats shipped for lease? What about cats shipped for stud service who may be held for months before return to their owner - is this all to be considered "air transport" and are the airlines responsible for any injury, loss or death? What would that do to the costs of animal air travel?
4. The rules apply only to animals (all warm or cold blooded) kept as a pet in the United States or being transported for the purpose of being sold as a pet in a "family household" in the United States. What is the definition of "pet" - does that include animals being shipped and sold as breeding/show cats?

For a complete copy of the Federal Register with the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on "Reports by Carriers on Incidents Involving Animals" published September 27, 2002 (4 pages) please email me privately.

Return to Top

To correspond with the CFA Legislative Committee, please send email to legislation@cfa.org

Contact CFA | Privacy Policy | Credits | Search | FAQ

Copyright ©1995-2007 The Cat Fanciers' Association, with the exception of the photographic images which are Copyright © by the individual photographers.