TY - JOUR
T1 - Assessment of listing and categorisation of animal diseases within the framework of the Animal Health Law (Regulation (EU) No 2016/429)
T2 - Borna disease
AU - EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW)
AU - More, Simon
AU - Bøtner, Anette
AU - Butterworth, Andrew
AU - Calistri, Paolo
AU - Depner, Klaus
AU - Edwards, Sandra
AU - Garin-Bastuji, Bruno
AU - Good, Margaret
AU - Gortázar Schmidt, Christian
AU - Michel, Virginie
AU - Miranda, Miguel Angel
AU - Nielsen, Søren Saxmose
AU - Raj, Mohan
AU - Sihvonen, Liisa
AU - Spoolder, Hans
AU - Stegeman, Jan Arend
AU - Thulke, Hans H
AU - Velarde, Antonio
AU - Willeberg, Preben
AU - Winckler, Christoph
AU - Baldinelli, Francesca
AU - Broglia, Alessandro
AU - Dhollander, Sofie
AU - Beltrán-Beck, Beatriz
AU - Kohnle, Lisa
AU - Bicout, Dominique
N1 - © 2017 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.
PY - 2017/7
Y1 - 2017/7
N2 - Borna disease has been assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on the eligibility of Borna disease to be listed, Article 9 for the categorisation of Borna disease according to disease prevention and control rules as in Annex IV and Article 8 on the list of animal species related to Borna disease. The assessment has been performed following a methodology composed of information collection and compilation, expert judgement on each criterion at individual and, if no consensus was reached before, also at collective level. The output is composed of the categorical answer, and for the questions where no consensus was reached, the different supporting views are reported. Details on the methodology used for this assessment are explained in a separate opinion. According to the assessment performed, Borna disease cannot be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention as laid down in Article 5(3) of the AHL because there was no compliance on criterion 5 A(v). Consequently, the assessment on compliance of Borna disease with the criteria as in Annex IV of the AHL, for the application of the disease prevention and control rules referred to in Article 9(1) is not applicable, as well as which animal species can be considered to be listed for Borna disease according to Article 8(3) of the AHL.
AB - Borna disease has been assessed according to the criteria of the Animal Health Law (AHL), in particular criteria of Article 7 on disease profile and impacts, Article 5 on the eligibility of Borna disease to be listed, Article 9 for the categorisation of Borna disease according to disease prevention and control rules as in Annex IV and Article 8 on the list of animal species related to Borna disease. The assessment has been performed following a methodology composed of information collection and compilation, expert judgement on each criterion at individual and, if no consensus was reached before, also at collective level. The output is composed of the categorical answer, and for the questions where no consensus was reached, the different supporting views are reported. Details on the methodology used for this assessment are explained in a separate opinion. According to the assessment performed, Borna disease cannot be considered eligible to be listed for Union intervention as laid down in Article 5(3) of the AHL because there was no compliance on criterion 5 A(v). Consequently, the assessment on compliance of Borna disease with the criteria as in Annex IV of the AHL, for the application of the disease prevention and control rules referred to in Article 9(1) is not applicable, as well as which animal species can be considered to be listed for Borna disease according to Article 8(3) of the AHL.
U2 - 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4951
DO - 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4951
M3 - Article
C2 - 32625602
SN - 1831-4732
VL - 15
JO - EFSA Journal
JF - EFSA Journal
IS - 7
M1 - e04951
ER -