Disaster Preparedness in Biocontainment Animal Research Facilities: Developing and Implementing an Incident Response Plan (IRP)

Abstract

Preparing for the wide variety of disasters that can occur is challenging for any animal research facility, but the level of concern for human and animal health rises significantly when infectious agents and toxins are part of the scenario. Federal regulations provide detailed requirements for the development of an incident response plan (IRP) when select agents and toxins (SATs) are used. In addition to the usual issues associated with disaster planning, the IRP must address concerns associated with the potential theft, loss, or release of SATs that may affect both institutional personnel and the surrounding community. The level of detail in the IRP and the intensity of training should be appropriate for the level of risk involved. Regulations describe certain basic requirements but do not address the risks of SAT-exposed animals, which have been the subject of additional guidance to help implement regulatory requirements. A 2008 joint publication of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service describes scenarios in which SAT-exposed animals are handled in the same manner as the agent or toxin itself for the purpose of reporting a SAT theft, loss, or release. Events that resulted from the impact of Hurricane Ike at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston provide a valuable opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of the federal regulations and to build on lessons learned from this disaster. These lessons can help to supplement the regulatory requirements and improve the safety and security of handling both SATs and animals exposed to them during and after an emergency situation.

Safety considerations for working with animal models involving human health hazards

“…The BMBL states that biocontainment facilities should give advance consideration to emergency and disaster recovery plans, as a contingency for man‐made or natural disasters. In all cases, it is prudent to conduct a thorough site‐specific risk assessment based on location‐specific natural disasters and common emergency situations to minimize any potential harm to animals, the environment, and/or the public when hazardous materials are involved …”

Disaster and Contingency Planning for Scientific Shared Resource Cores

“…In a disaster situation, the principle responsibilities for cores, regardless of the services and support provided by the core, are similar [In this article, we exclude specific reference to and recommendations for disaster and business continuity planning for laboratory animal facilities because there are long standing, well-recognized requirements for institutions that conduct laboratory animal research to develop plans to protect animal welfare and preserve animal life when possible during emergencies or other conditions that compromise animal care.] [13][14][15][16][17] The key elements for a core disaster plan are indicated as follows.…”

Working Safely with Experimental Animals Exposed to Biohazards

“…The Guide requires that institutions develop disaster plans that take into account the well-being of animals and personnel during unexpected events and that location-based risk should be accounted for in the disaster plan. Animals exposed to select agents/toxins must be incorporated into the IRP in order to better protect their security and health, the health of the public, and the environment in the event of a disaster (Swearengen et al, 2010). By federal regulation, the CDC requires all entities using select agents and toxins to have an incident response plan (IRP) that is designed to address physical security concerns that may occur during a disaster by conducting analyses of the likelihood of various disasters and the resulting damage (CDC, 2002).…”