Information Resources for Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees 1985-1999 *************************

IACUC Administration and Program Review

IACUC Oversight of Animal Care and Use Program

Excerpted from the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Guidebook developed by Applied Research Ethics National Association and the National Institutes of Health. NIH Publication number 92-3415. The full text of this document is available at

C-1. Policies, Procedures and Responsibilities


Under PHS Policy and USDA Regulations, the IACUC must inspect all institutional animal facilities every six months. These inspections provide an ongoing mechanism for ensuring that the institution maintains compliance with the applicable animal care and use policies guidelines and laws. They can also benefit programs for animal care by serving an educational function for the animal care personnel, research staff and IACUC members. Also, by giving the facility personnel a prior warning, the IACUC can assist an institution to prepare for subsequent visits by outside inspectors. The interaction of an IACUC and the animal care personnel at their institution should be constructive, and not adversarial, as both ultimately share the same goals of good animal care.

Staffing and Scheduling Inspection

The IACUC must schedule the inspections of facilities. This may be accomplished by assigning specific facilities to subcommittees which must contain at least two members as required by the USDA Regulations. No IACUC member should be excluded should he/she wish to attend a particular inspection, and additional ad hoc consultants may be used. The inspection team must have a working knowledge of the Guide and USDA Regulations in order to fully evaluate the facilities which are being inspected. Section C-2 of this Guidebook also provides general guidance in this regard. It is helpful for the team to have a prepared list of the categories to be inspected, such as sanitation, food and water provisions, animal identification, waste disposal, animal health records, environmental control, staff training, etc.

The IACUC may determine whether the supervisory personnel of various facilities should be notified of the date and time of an inspection. Advance notification allows individuals to be available to answer questions, but an unexpected visit shows the facility during usual operations.

Performing Inspections

An updated list of all facilities to be inspected should be maintained by the IACUC. All proposals submitted to the IACUC must contain details of all locations at which animal research is to be performed. The USDA Regulations require inspection of the centrally designated or managed animal resource facilities as well as any other animal containment facilities in which animals are kept for more than twelve hours. PHS Policy requires inspection of all surgical facilities and areas in which animals are maintained longer than 24 hours. It is helpful to keep a list of all facilities by room number, use, species and deficiencies noted in the last inspection. For satellite areas a contact person is useful. For facilities with multiple rooms, a map will assist the inspectors.

Notes should be taken throughout the visit to assist in preparation of the final report. Apparent deficiencies should be discussed with the person in charge of the facility to ensure that the team's perception of the situation is correct. In some cases an apparent deviation will be due to the experimental proposal in process, for example, withholding of food prior to surgery.


After the visit a formal report is prepared. Any deficiencies must be categorized as minor or significant. The latter is defined, by USDA Regulations and PHS Policy, as one of significant threat to animal health or safety. A plan and timetable for correction of all deficiencies must be included in the final report. All individuals to be involved in the corrections should be consulted to ensure that the plan is realistic. If the institution is unable to meet the plan, the IACUC through the Institutional Official must inform Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) officials within fifteen working days of the lapsed deadline. If the activity is federally funded, the relevant agency also must be informed.

The report must be reviewed and approved by a quorum of the IACUC, and in cases involving USDA Regulations, be signed by all those who accept the report. Minority views should be included in the final document. A copy is then sent to the Institutional Official and must be kept on file for a minimum of three years. It is often useful for the report to be delivered in person in order to emphasize the findings and plans for action. Annually, the institution must notify OPRR of the dates of the semiannual inspections and the dates the report was submitted to the Institutional Official.

Program Evaluation

Both the PHS Policy and USDA Regulations include a requirement that semiannually the IACUC conduct an evaluation of the animal care and use program. Neither of these documents includes specific guidance regarding the mechanisms or procedures to employ in conducting this evaluation. OPRR has recommended that institutions use the Table of Contents of the Guide, exclusive of the facility and physical plant chapters, as an outline for program evaluation. The USDA Regulations refer institutions to other portions of those Regulations as a basis on which to conduct this program evaluation.

Key aspects of an animal care and use program that should be emphasized in the semiannual evaluation include IACUC functions and procedures, including proposal review practices, provisions for dealing with whistle blower" or other concerns regarding animal care and use, and the procedures employed to meet reporting requirements. In addition, the institution's occupational health program, veterinary care procedures and personnel qualification review process should be evaluated. Specific procedures to accomplish program evaluation may include presentations by appropriate individuals, e.g., the institutional veterinarian , occupational health personnel, etc. Written institutional policies such as standard operating procedures may be reviewed and modified if necessary.

Program evaluation deals principally with administrative aspects of the animal care and use program. In most instances these aspects will not change nor need to be modified with the same aspects of the facility or physical plant. Thus, when large changes are made in program aspects, a comprehensive evaluation by the committee should be conducted, while the review of that aspect six months later may be merely a brief evaluation of its implementation to date. Ongoing review of established practices allows the opportunity for institutions to detect a gradual change in practices from written procedures, thereby allowing modification of one or the other as appropriate. Institutions that are AAALAC accredited will find their pre-site visit package helpful in identifying areas for inclusion in the semiannual evaluation.

Occupational Health

Purpose of Occupational Health Programs

The health of individuals working in animal care Programs is an area of institutional concern. PHS Policy and the Guide identify the need for an occupational health program for all personnel who work in laboratory animal facilities or who have substantial animal contact. The emphasis of such a program is the prevention of illness, but it also includes provisions for early diagnosis and treatment when such illnesses occur.

Elements of an Occupational Health Program

An effective program will have the following components: 1) replacement medical evaluation; 2) periodic medical surveillance; 3) educational component; 4) provisions for treating illness or injury; and 5) provisions for consultation with other professional staff. The specific elements will be dictated by the extent and nature of the employee's exposure [see table].

Replacement and periodic medical evaluations: Replacement evaluations are conducted to ensure that the individual is capable of the demands and exposure of the job, and also to provide a medical reference baseline. The evaluation may include: clinical history, physical examination, spirometry, baseline tests such as TB test and serum sample collection, appropriate immunizations, educational/instructional component and appropriate feedback to the employee on all test results. Specific tests will depend on the species of animals and the nature of the procedures employed.

Periodic evaluations allow detection of early stages of disease, updating of immunizations and a re-evaluation of medical restrictions.

A uniformity in the evaluation of different individuals and the same person at different times is important to enable accurate comparisons to be made. These comparisons may allow a possible problem to be identified and corrected before it becomes a major health hazard.


There are ethical and legal requirements to inform individuals of health risks and precautions which affect them. This must be part of an employee's overall orientation and job training. Some institutions rely on formal courses.


Barber, A.A (1987). University administration of animal care and use programs. Laboratory Animal Science 37(special issue): 93-96.
NAL call number: 410.9 P94
Descriptors: animal welfare, administration, policy, animal experiments.

Bascom, R. (1997). Developing and implementing personnel safety programs Part 1: Occupational health and safety program in a research animal facility. Lab Animal 26(6): 23-26.
NAL call number: QL55 A1L33
Descriptors: five key institutional activities, administration support for health and safety programs, hazard recognition, institutional trends for health and safety, who is at risk, developing and implementing a work plan, control strategies, tracking program effectiveness.

Bowman, P.J. (1991). A flexible occupational health and safety program for laboratory animal care and use programs. AALAS Bulletin 30(6): 15-17.
NAL call number: SF405.5 A23
Descriptors: zoonoses, PHS policy, factors likely to dictate type and degree of hazards, list of type of personnel that should be included in program, categories of risk, facets of an occupational health programtimelines for physical exams, TB skin tests, chest x-rays, immunizations, serum banking, allergies, injuries, Q Fever.

Bowne, G.W. (1999). Financial management in an animal research facility. Lab Animal 28(1): 33-37.
NAL call number: QL55 A1L33
Descriptors: budget development and maintenance, cost analysis, review of major costs in an animal facility, expenditures, income, equipment and amortization, tracking and monitoring costs, Circular A-2, basic points for saving money, repairing a deficit.

Carey, R. (1990). Public responsibility in medicine and research conference on administration, education and the animal care committee. Journal of Medical Primatology 19(1): 75-6.
NAL call number: QL737 P9J66
Descriptors: animal welfare, legislation and jurisprudence, laboratory animals, research, ACUC.

Donnelly, T.M. (1996). Hazardous chemicals and anesthetics in the laboratory animal facility. Lab Animal 25(4): 39-41.
NAL call number: QL55 A1L33
Descriptors: list of commonly used hazardous chemicals and anesthetics, xylene, DMSO, picric acid, formaldehyde, peracetic acid, chloroform, ether, halothane, nitrous oxide, urethane, common use of each compound in the lab, hazards associated with chemicals, recommended protective action, miscellaneous information about each chemical.

Driscoll, J.W. and T.C. Rambo (1989). Forming an IACUC at a small institution. In Animal Care and Use in Behavioral Research: Regulations, Issues, and Applications J.W. Driscoll (ed.), Beltsville, Maryland: U.S. Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Library pp. 23-28.
NAL call number: aHV4762 A3A64
Descriptors: universities, regulatory requirements, committee responsibility, ACUC.

Ellenberger, M.A., and B.F. Corning (1999). The animal care and IACUC offices: United or divided? Lab Animal 28(1): 44-47.
NAL call number: QL55 A1L3
Descriptors: missions of an animal care program and the IACUC, animal care office, administrative support, advantages and disadvantages of separate vs combined animal care and IACUC offices, factors involved in determining the suitability of program for a facility, recommendations for an effective and efficient IACUC.

Fox, J.G. (1987). Gaining institutional support. Laboratory Animal Science 37(special issue): 115-117.
NAL call number: 410.9 P94
Descriptors: laboratory animals, animal welfare, animal experiments, ACUC.

Gordon, B (1987). Unique problems of animal care and use in small institutions. Laboratory Animal Science 37(special issue): 127-128.
NAL call number: 410.9 P94
Descriptors: animal welfare, research institutes, animal experiments.

Green, R.J. (1997). Developing and implementing personnel safety programs part II: Safety training and education in animal research. Lab Animal 26(6): 27-29.
NAL call number: QL55 A1L33
Descriptors: management responsibility, dealing with time constraints, on-site training, providing regular updates, modular courses, maximizing class time, pre-class assignments, employee interaction, distance learning, computer-based training, top 10 training tips.

Hassall, G. (1999). Committees and conflict resolution. ANZCCART News 12(1): 1-3.
NAL call number: SF405.5 A3
Descriptors: conflict resolution, definitions, disputes, conflicts, conflict resolution continuum, mediation, skills, listening, empathizing, assertiveness, timeliness, mapping, strategies for resolving conflicts.

Herscowitz, H.B. (1987). Institutional responsibilities. Laboratory Animal Science 37(special issue): 118-119.
NAL call number: 410.9 P94
Descriptors: animal welfare, laboratory animals, ACUC.

Hiiemae, K., H. Rozmiarek, J.F. Williams, J.E. LeBeau, and M. Ross (1987). Report of a panel discussion on how to run an effective Animal Care and Use Committee. Laboratory Animal Science 37(special issue): 39-44.
NAL call number: 410.9 P94
Descriptors: animal welfare, animal experiments, policy, institutions.

Hittelman, J. (1987). Operating principles for committees on animal research. Laboratory Animal Science 37(special issue): 97-100.
NAL call number: 410.9 P94
Descriptors: animal welfare, institutions, ACUC.

Holden, F. (1997). Alternatives committee established at Indiana. The Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing Newsletter 14(3): 6-7.
NAL call number: HV4701 J6
Descriptors: subcommittee to IACUC, communications between researchers and campus animal protectionists, monthly round table, institutional support at highest levels, membership includesinformation specialists, public relations/education representative, departmental representatives, IACUC liaison, animal protectionist, veterinarian, research assistant.

Holt, M.A. (1996). Institutional animal care and use issues: creativity and innovation. The Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing Newsletter 13(2): 12-13.
NAL call number: HV4701.J6
Descriptors: animal welfare, committees, innovations.

Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources (U.S.), Committee on Occupational Safety and Health in Research Animal Facilities (1997). Occupational health and safety in the care and use of research animals. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 154 p. This document is available at
NAL call number: RC965.A6O23 1997
Descriptors: Laboratory animal technicians, health risk assessment, animal health technicians, occupational diseases, prevention, guidelines, program design and management, physical, chemical, and protocol-related hazards, allergens, zoonoses, principal elements of an occupational health and safety program, occupational health care services.

James, M.L., L.A. Mininni, and L.C. Anderson (1995). Establishment of an animal alternatives committee. Contemporary Topics in Laboratory Animal Science 34 (3): 61-64.
NAL call number: SF405.5.A23
Descriptors: animal testing alternatives, committees, programs.

Kasting, G. (1996). Revisiting medical surveillance in research animal facilities. Lab Animal (25(4): 27-31.
NAL call number: QL55 A1L33
Descriptors: animal caretaker medical surveillance, occupational safety, hazard recognition, concepts of workplace surveillance, components of a medical surveillance program, recommendations, minimum criteria, reasons for conducting a surveillance program.

Krulisch, L. (ed.) (1992). Implementation strategies for research animal well-being: institutional compliance with regulations: proceedings of a conference held in Baltimore, Md. on December 5-6, 1991 about compliance with USDA regulations for the well-being of canines and nonhuman primates in research. Bethesda, Maryland: Scientists Center for Animal Welfare, 178p.
NAL call number: HV4764 I46 1992
Descriptors: enrichment strategies, dogs, nonhuman primates.

Lamborn, C. and M. Denny (1998). Preparing for an animal rights related crisis. Lab Animal 27(1): 32-35.
NAL call number: QL55 A1L33
Descriptors: crisis management, physical security, research and animal care policy, public relations, outsourcing your physical security program, check list for crisis preparation.

Lewis, S.M., B. Leard, J.L. Martin, and S.A. Martin (1995). An automated feed inventory tracking system for an animal facility. Lab Animal 24(8): 37-40.
NAL call number: QL55 A1L33
Descriptors: automated data handling, simplified reporting capabilities, inventory control, GLP accountability, system and user management.

McGarry, M.P., M.A. Imamovic, and D.J. Piccione. Institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) required facility inspections - objectives and implementation. Laboratory Animal Science 37(4):544 (1987).
NAL call number: 410.9 P94
Descriptors: laboratory animals, public health, conference, ACUC.

National Research Council (1997). Occupational health and safety in the care and use of research animals. ILAR Journal 38(2): 89-93.
NAL call number: QL55.A1I43
Descriptors: laboratory workers, laboratory hazards, occupational health, animal experiments.

Orlans, F.B., R.C. Simmonds, and W.J. Dodd (eds.) (1987). Consensus recommendations on effective institutional animal care and use committees. Laboratory Animal Science 37(special issue): 11-13.
NAL call number: 410.9 P94
Descriptors: laboratory animals, animal welfare, workshop, research institutes, training, ethics, animal experiments.

Orlans, F.B., R.C. Simmonds, and W.J. Dodd (eds.) (1987). Effective animal care and use committees. Laboratory Animal Science 37(special issue): 1-178.
NAL call number: 410.9 P94
Descriptors: animal welfare, laboratory animals.

Poling, J. (1990). An effective IACUC: A Johns Hopkins experience. Animal Welfare Information Center Newsletter 1(4): 1-2,6.
NAL call number: aHV4701.A952
Descriptors: bioethics, animal welfare.

Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research (1991). Animal Care and Use Programs: Regulatory Compliance and Education in an Age of Fiscal Constraint Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research (PRIM & R), Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine and Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts: PRIM & R, 408 pp.
NAL call number: HV4913.A54
Descriptors: educational material, bibliographies, animal welfare.

Rehbinder, C., P. Baneux, D. Forbes, H. van Herck, W. Nicklas, Z. Rugaya, and G. Winkler (1998). FELASA recommendations for the health monitoring of breeding colonies and experimental units of cats, dogs and pigs. Report of the Federation of European Laboratory Animal Science Associations (FELASA) Working Group on Animal Health. Laboratory Animals 32(1):1-17
NAL call number: QL55 A1L3
Descriptors: animal welfare, physiology, breeding standards, cats, dogs, health status, swine, bacterial infections, diagnosis, data collection, mass screening, mycoses, parasitic diseases, virus diseases.

Russell, C.K., F.X. Buckingham, R. Daniels, L. Bertan, P. Fetty , and D. Klein (1994). Monsanto's computer animal proposal system (CAPS). Quality Assurance 3(2): 206-10.
Abstract: Regulations and standards must include the minimum requirements with respect to veterinary care, sanitation, handling, feeding, and housing. Part 1 of the Animal Welfare Act regulations was amended to update, clarify, and expand the list of definitions of terms and standards. Section 9 CFR, Part 1, contains definitions and deals with animal welfare, animal housing, dealers, exhibitors, researc facilities, and humane animal handling. The subjects in 9 CFR, Part 2, pertain to licensing, registration, identification of animals, records, institutional animal care and use committees, and adequate veterinary care. Animal welfare, humane animal handling, pets, transportation, and reporting and recordkeeping requirements are the subjects listed in 9 CFR, Part 3.
Descriptors: organizational models, animal welfare, clinical laboratory information systems, computer networks, facility regulation and control.

Sapolsky, H.M. (1987). Assuring the effectiveness of animal research committees. SCAW Newsletter 9(1): 7-8.
NAL call number: QL55.N48
Descriptors: laboratory animals, animal experiments, policy, legislation, ACUC.

Seps, S.L. (1997). An efficient approach to performing and documenting semiannual institutional animal care and use committee inspections of animal facilities. Contemporary Topics in Laboratory Animal Science 36 (2): 51-53.
NAL call number: SF405.5.A23
Descriptors: laboratories, animal experiments, inspection, documentation

Shepherd, M.J. (1996). Meeting large regulatory requirements in small institutions. Lab Animal 25 (9):35-37.
NAL call number: QL55.A1L33
Descriptors: training, personnel, animal experiments, animal welfare, regulations, programs.

Silverman, J. (1997). Do pressure and prejudice influence the IACUC? Lab Animal 26(5): 23-25.
NAL call number: QL55 A1L33
Descriptors: survey of NIH assured institutions, ethical challenges, questions included: how does the IACUC handle allegations of non-compliance or animal mistreatment, does the dollar value of a grant influence deliberations, what is the perceived role of the community representative- active voice or seen not heard, does the status of an investigator influence deliberations, does the species of animal involved influence deliberations.

Silverman, J. (1994). IACUC handling of mistreatment or noncompliance. Lab Animal 23 (8):30-32.
NAL call number: QL55.A1L33
Descriptors: laboratory animals, animal welfare, committees, animal husbandry, policy, monitoring.

Stephens, M. (1989). Oversight of the care and use of animals in animal behavior research in the United States. In Animal Care and Use in Behavioral Research: Regulations, Issues, and Applications J.W. Driscoll (ed.), United States Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Library, Beltsville, MD, pp. 2-8.
NAL call number: aHV4762 A3A64
Descriptors: Animal Welfare Act, ACUC, field research.

Talham, D.J. (1997). A computerized method for taking animal census. Lab Animal 26(9): 32-35.
NAL call number: QL55 A1L33
Descriptors: manual systems, bar-coded systems, in-house programming, integration with billing and accounting systems, screen shots.

Talham, D.J., R.W. Murray, G.E. Lee, and J.M. Linn (1997). In-house development of an integrated management information system for a laboratory animal facility. Contemporary Topics in Laboratory Animal Science 36(5): 77-80.
NAL call number: SF405.5 A23
Descriptors: commercial software vs. in-house development, system objectives, design and implementation, operational areas, protocol management, animal procurement, animal facilitygenerate delivery schedules, cage cards, receipt of animals, animal census, billing, cost accounting.

Thomas, J.A., and M.E. Greene (1994). Institutional policies and educational programs: Animals in research. Journal of the American College of Toxicology 13(4): 308-313.
NAL call number: RA1190.J61
Descriptors: laboratory animals, toxicity testing, education, communication, policies.

Tillman, P. (1994). Integrating agricultural and biomedical research policies: conflicts and opportunities. ILAR News 36 (2): 29-35.
NAL call number: QL55.A1I43
Descriptors: livestock, agricultural research, medical research, committees, guidelines, regulations, animal welfare.

Tillman, P. (1997). Automating the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee. ILAR Journal 38(4): 184-189.
NAL call number: QL55 A1I43
Descriptors: productivity, e-mail, WWW, communications, training materials, privacy, security.

Tillman, P.C. (1985). Microcomputer assisted management of an institutional animal care and use committee. Laboratory Animal Science 35(5): 540-541.
NAL call number: 410.9 P94

Descriptors: abstract, clerical aspect, record keeping, committee organization.

Wolff, A. and P.D. Smith (1994). Compliance at the institutional and programmatic level. Lab Animal 23 (8): 28-29.
NAL call number: QL55.A1L33
Descriptors: laboratory animals, animal welfare, policy, committees, animal husbandry, animal experiments, control, project control, monitoring.

Useful World Wide Web Sites

A tutorial on the Public Health Service Policy on humane care and use of laboratory animals
A tutorial for new animal care and use committee members, institutional administrators, investigators, animal care personnel, veterinarians, or others who are interested in learning about the PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.

Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories (BMBL) 4th Edition HHS Publication No. (CDC) 93-8395
This 4th edition of the BMBL continues to specifically describe combinations of microbiological practices, laboratory facilities, and safety equipment, and recommend their use in four categories or biosafety levels of laboratory operation with selected agents infectious to humans. For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO). Contact GPO by telephone between 7:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. EST at 1-202-512-1800, by fax at 1-202-512-2250 or on the Internet at or write to: Superintendent of Documents, U.S. GPO, Washington D.C. 20402. The stock number for this document is 017-040-00547-4.

Conflict Resolution in NIH Intramural Research Program
General information on conflict resolution procedures

Guidelines on Classifying Deficiencies Identified During Semiannual Reviews
This guideline is intended to expand upon the specific language in paragraph IV. B. 3. of the Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (PHS Policy), which states: "The reports must distinguish significant deficiencies from minor deficiencies. A significant deficiency is one which, consistent with this Policy, and, in the judgement of the IACUC and the Institutional Official, is or may be a threat to the health or safety of the animals. If program or facility deficiencies are noted, the reports must contain a reasonable and specific plan and schedule for correcting each deficiency."

Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories (BMBL) 5th Edition
Includes a section on work with research animals.

Occupational Health and Safety in the Care and Use of Research Animals
This site provides access to this book produced by the National Academy Sciences in 1997.

Semiannual Program and Facility Review Checklist
This sample checklist is a tool designed to assist IACUCs in conducting thorough semiannual reviews. The sample checklist covers the major topics of the Guide, and the requirements of the PHS Policy. Endnotes are included to reference specific United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulatory requirements that differ from the PHS Policy.

Semiannual Report to the Institutional Official
This sample format may be used as a template to prepare the Semiannual Report to the Institutional Official.

University of California, Davis Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Advisory Committee
A comprehensive site that includes: occupational health and safety in the care and use of research animals; protocols for animal care and use; AUCAAC policy statements; UC Davis policy & procedure manual excerpts; biosafety in animal facilities; how to order controlled substances; analgesic drug doses for laboratory animals; lab animal classes; searching the literature for alternatives to animal use; USDA inspections at Davis and other UC campuses; do you know as much as you ought to? Test yourself! and ; reference documents for researchers and others.

University of Colorado Health Sciences Center Animal Care & Use Program Occupational Health Program
An excellent example of a comprehensive occupational health program. Access is found by scrolling down to Occ Health & Safety in the left frame of the web page. See also Animal Biohazards.

Working Safely with Research Animals

Proceedings of the 4th National Symposium on Biosafety: Working Safely with Research Animals
This site contains the proceedings of a conference by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, Georgia on January 27-31, 1996. The content includes: animal biosafety levels 1-4: an overview; biosafety issues related to xenograft transplantation; sop writing; defining the risks and the risk reduction strategies; infectious risks in using baboons; xenosis from swine: assessing the infectious risks of xenotransplantation; PHS perspective on xenograft transplantation; symposium keynote: practicing safe science in animal research; biosafety and emerging infections: key issues in the prevention and control of viral hemorrhagic fevers; research with small animals; research with nonhuman primates; biohazards in research involving large animals; occupational health and safety program in a research animal facility; strategies for safe use of chemicals in animal research; chemical management in research animal facilities; physical hazards in research animal facilities; chemical containment in the animal care facility; safe practices and procedures when working with chemical hazards; zoonoses in animal care facilities; breakout session on topics including: face protection in animal research; sharps management in animal care; special containment devices for research animals; quality assurance techniques in animal facilities; strategies of managing macaque monkeys and Herpes Virus Simiae (B-virus); working safely with research animals: employee and employer responsibilities; effective management in animal research communication & interaction; occupational health programs; Americans With Disabilities Act issues; controlled access; safety training and education in animal research; risk assessment and; interactions that make OHS programs work.

Top | Articles and Bibliographies

Return to: Title Page | Main Contents | Using this Resource

Last updated June 11, 2005