16 • Alternatives to Animal Use in Research, Testing, and Education 
mal science or medicine; who has respon- 
sibility for activities involving animals at 
the institution; 
• one practicing scientist experienced in re- 
search using animals; 
• one member whose primary concerns are 
in a nonscientific area; and 
• one individual who is not affiliated with 
the institution in any way. 
The minimum committee structure required by 
the PHS policy is thus more rigorous than that man- 
dated by Federal law. The Animal Welfare Act and 
the Health Research Extension Act do not require, 
for example, that the committee veterinarian be 
trained in laboratory -animal medicine. The acts 
require a minimum committee of three individ- 
uals, whereas the PHS policy requires five. 
Institutional regulation generally entails compli- 
ance with some type of minimum standards for 
an animal facility, usually those of the NIH Guide 
for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals . Com- 
pliance can be checked in-house or through ac- 
creditation by the American Association for Ac- 
creditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC), 
a voluntary private organization. As of April 1985, 
a total of 483 institutions had received AAALAC 
accreditation, which requires site visits that include 
interviews, inspection of facilities, and review of 
policies and records. Accredited institutions in- 
clude hospitals, universities, facilities of the Vet- 
erans’ Administration (VA), and pharmaceutical 
manufacturers (see app. D). 
A number of scientific and professional socie- 
ties, universities, and corporations have promul- 
gated statements of policy concerning their mem- 
bers' or employees’ standards of conduct in animal 
use. These policies generally require: 
• humane care and use of animals, 
• minimization of the number of animals used, 
• alleviation of pain and suffering, and 
• supervision of animal use by qualified personnel . 
Twelve of fifteen such policies reviewed by OTA 
encourage or require consideration of the use of 
alternatives. But only 3 of the 15 include enforce- 
ment provisions or mention sanctions against vio- 
lators. 
Regulation Within Federal Agencies 
Six Federal departments and four independent 
agencies use laboratory animals intramurally and 
account for approximately one -tenth of the animal 
use in the United States. Beginning in December 
1986, Federal facilities in those departments and 
agencies using animals will be required by the 1985 
amendments to the Animal Welfare Act to install 
institutional animal committees. Each committee 
shall report to the head of the Federal agency con- 
ducting the experimentation. 
Most Federal agencies that use animals in re- 
search or testing have formal policies and admin- 
istrative structures to ensure that the animals re- 
ceive humane treatment. At the request of the 
Executive Office of Science and Technology Pol- 
icy, the Interagency Research Animal Committee 
developed a 450-word policy statement, Principles 
for the Utilization and Care of Vertebrate Animals 
Used in Testing , Research , and Education , to be 
followed by all Federal agencies supporting ani- 
mal use (see ch. 13). 
No one Federal agency policy on animal care 
and use has all the characteristics needed to ad- 
dress all issues adequately. Combining certain 
aspects from each would produce an effective 
uniform Federal policy. Almost all policies today 
require adherence to the NIH Guide and the Ani- 
mal Welfare Act. Most agencies also require an 
attending veterinarian and an animal care and use 
committee at each facility. The committees gen- 
erally review research protocols to ensure that 
animals are not used in excessive numbers, that 
adequate provisions are made for animal care and 
pain relief, and that alternatives are used when- 
ever possible. Most committees and attending 
veterinarians have little enforcement power, and 
those who have such power rarely use it. 
Some agencies ’policies have features that would 
be considered advantageous by animal welfare ad- 
vocates. NIH and the National Aeronautics and 
Space Administration have lay people on their ani- 
mal care and use committees . The VA requires all 
its animal facilities to acquire AAALAC accredita- 
tion. The Department of Defense has a separate 
policy and committee for nonhuman primates. The 
Air Force has solicited evaluation of its policies by 
a panel of independent experts and plans to im- 
plement the group’s recommendations. 
