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, null

AU - More, Simon J.

AU - Bøtner, Anette

AU - Butterworth, Andrew

AU - Calistri, Paolo

AU - Depner, Klaus

AU - Edwards, Sandra

AU - Garin-Bastuji, Bruno

AU - Good, Margaret

AU - Gortazar 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-Hermann

AU - Velarde, Antonio

AU - Willeberg, Preben

AU - Winckler, Christoph

AU - Baldinelli, Francesca

AU - Broglia, Alessandro

AU - Dhollander, Sofie

AU - Beltran-Beck, Beatriz

AU - Kohnle, Lisa

AU - Bicout, Dominique

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.

KW - Borna disease, BDV, Animal Health Law, listing, categorisation, impact

U2 - 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4951

DO - 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4951

M3 - Journal article

VL - 15

JO - E F S A Journal

JF - E F S A Journal

SN - 1831-4732

IS - 7

M1 - e04951

ER -