Skip to main content

Application Process

New Protocol and Amendment Software

All animal use applications and protocol amendments are reviewed and processed through iRIS. You can access the software at For help accessing or using the system, please contact the IACUC secretary. Regina can be reached at (801)-422-3022 or


To help the IACUC evaluate your research project, the researcher is responsible to complete a detailed application. It serves as a detailed description of the use and justification of the animals involvement in the research.

Submission Timeline

There has been a recent change to the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) protocol and amendment submission deadline. We no longer have submission deadlines.

Once an application has been submitted online, it will be routed to the Initial Review Team (IRT) initial screening. There will be two rounds of IRT review (8 days for the first and 7 days for the second) which will give researchers 2 opportunities to make corrections as suggested by the reviewers.

After this process, applications will be recommend for Designated Member Review (DMR) and if approved, the chair will assign at least one member to complete the review and either approve the application or send it back for further correction.

NOTE: Applications with pain category E, new applications with pain category D, all applications with USDA covered animals, and applications from investigators that are new to the IACUC process are not eligible for DMR and will be reviewed at a convened meeting of the IACUC.

Please plan for two months for processing, review, and approval of a protocol. Do not begin research before receiving approval from the IACUC and a protocol number. All personnel involved in the project must complete the online training before the protocol will be approved. IACUC protocols are valid for a period of three (3) years. Post Approval Monitoring (PAM) of each protocol will be conducted by the IACUC Administrator, which may include a telephone conversation or an interview between the reviewer and the PI or staff that are involved in the research.