*Original: English*

February 2022

**MEETING OF THE OIE TERRESTRIAL ANIMAL HEALTH STANDARDS COMMISSIONParis, 1–11 February 2022**

**________**

**PART B – Code Commission’s work programme and texts circulated for comments**

**________**

The OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission (the Code Commission) held its meeting electronically from 1 to 11 February 2022. The list of participants is attached as **Annex 1**. 

To facilitate the 89th Annual General Session in semi-hybrid format, the February 2022 meeting report of the Code Commission is being distributed in two parts: **Part A** (available on the OIE website) provides information about the new and revised texts of the *Terrestrial Code* that will be proposed for adoption at the 89th General Session; and **Part B** (herewith) provides information about other topics discussed at the Commission’s February 2022 meeting including texts circulated for comments and information. 

The Code Commission thanked the following Members for providing comments: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China (People’s Rep. of), Chinese Taipei, Colombia, Japan, Mexico, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Norway,  Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Switzerland, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the United Kingdom (UK), the United States of America (USA), Zimbabwe, the Member States of European Union (EU), the African Union Inter-African Bureau for Animal Resources (AU-IBAR) on behalf of African Members of the OIE. The Commission also thanked the following organisations for providing comments: the Global Alliance of Pet Food Associations (GAPFA), the International Meat Secretariat (IMS), the World Renderers Organization (WRO), the International Coalition for Animal Welfare (ICFAW) as well as various experts of the OIE scientific network. 

The Code Commission reviewed all comments that were submitted prior to the deadline and supported by a rationale. The Commission made amendments to draft texts, where relevant, in the usual manner by ‘double underline’ and ‘strikethrough’. In relevant annexes, amendments proposed at this meeting are highlighted with a coloured background to distinguish them from those made previously. Due to the large number of comments, the Commission was not able to provide a detailed explanation for the reasons for accepting or not each of the comments considered, and focused its explanations on significant issues. Where amendments were of an editorial nature, no explanatory text has been provided. The Commission wished to note that not all texts proposed by Members to improve clarity were accepted; in these cases, it considered the text clear as currently written.

The Code Commission encourages Members to refer to previous reports considering longstanding issues. The Commission also draws the attention of Members to those instances where the Scientific Commission for Animal Diseases (the Scientific Commission), the Biological Standards Commission (the Laboratories Commission), a Working Group or an *ad hoc* Group have addressed specific comments or questions and proposed answers or amendments. In such cases the rationale is described in the reports of Scientific Commission, Laboratories Commission, Working Groups or *ad hoc* Groups and Members are encouraged to review these reports together with the report of the Code Commission. These reports are readily available on the OIE website. 

To be considered by the Code Commission at its September 2022 meeting, all comments on relevant texts in this **Part B** must reach OIE Headquarters **by 15 July 2022**. Comments received after the due date will not be submitted to the Commission for its consideration. In addition, the Commission would like to highlight that comments should be submitted through the OIE Delegate of Member Countries or organisations, with which the OIE has a Cooperative Agreement. 

All comments and related documents should be sent by email to the OIE Standards Department at **TCC.Secretariat@oie.int.**

The Code Commission again strongly encourages Members to participate in the development of the OIE’s international standards by submitting comments on this report. Members are also reminded that comments should be submitted as Word files rather than pdf files because pdf files are difficult to incorporate into the working documents of the Commission. Comments should be submitted as specific proposed text changes, supported by a structured rationale or by published scientific references. Proposed deletions should be shown using ‘~~strikethrough~~’ and additions using ‘double underline’. Members should not use the automatic ‘track-changes’ function provided by word processing software as such changes are lost in the process of collating submissions into the Commission’s working documents. Members are also requested **not** to reproduce the full text of a chapter as this makes it easy to miss comments while preparing the working documents.

**Table of Contents:**

1.	Introduction

The proposed agenda for the meeting was discussed, taking into consideration the priorities of the work programme and time availability. The adopted agenda of the meeting is attached as **Annex 2**.

Due to time constraints, the Code Commission did not discuss agenda items 5.1.8. Harmonisation of official recognition of status by the OIE: contagious bovine pleuropneumonia (Chapter 11.5.), African horse sickness (Chapter 12.1.) and 7.2.4. New chapter on infection with Trypanosoma Evansi (Non equine surra) (Chapter 8.X.). The Commission agreed to postpone these items until a future meeting.

2.	Cooperation with other Specialist Commissions

2.1.	Scientific Commission for Animal Diseases (Scientific Commission)

The OIE Secretariat updated the Code Commission on relevant ongoing activities of the Scientific Commission. 

During the February 2022 meeting, the Bureaus (i.e. the President and the two Vice-Presidents) of the Code Commission and the Scientific Commission held a meeting chaired by OIE Deputy Director General, International Standards and Science (OIE DDG ISS), Dr Montserrat Arroyo Kuribreña. The purpose of the meeting was to inform the two Bureaus about the planning and coordination of relevant topics of common interest and, where necessary, prioritise them and agree on the process to manage these topics. 

The Bureaus discussed the following topics: 

‒	the importance of clearly defining the OIE offical status recognition process given that the revised Chapters 11.4., Bovine spongiform encephalopathy; 1.8., Application for official recognition by the OIE of risk status for bovine spongiform encephalopathy; and 8.16., Infection with rinderpest virus  will be proposed for adoption in May 2022 (refer to Part A of this report);

‒	the status of the ongoing assessments for listing or delisting of pathogenic agents;

‒	the work to develop or improve, where needed, the case definitions for some terrestrial animal listed diseases to support notification;

‒	the revised Chapter 8.8. Infection with foot and mouth disease virus.

Dr Arroyo informed the Bureaus about comments received on the OIE Standard Operating Procedure for determining if a disease should be considered as an emerging disease. Dr Arroyo noted that in March 2021 the OIE Headquarters developed a standard operating procedure (SOP) for determining if a disease meets the *Terrestrial Code* definition of an ‘emerging disease’ (ED SOP), and an accompanying guidance document. Both documents were published on the OIE website, and an informative article appeared in the June 2021 edition of the OIE Bulletin emphasising that SOPs are implementation tools that the OIE uses to give effect to international standards. The Bureaus discussed the concerns and discussed possible ways to address them, including whether there was a need to review either the SOP or the *Terrestrial Code*. The Bureaus did not agree with the proposal to amend the *Terrestrial Code,*and**agreed on the need to review the SOP to ensure it was seen as a guidance process for notification, ensuring the involvement of delegates in the process. The Bureaus also agreed that it was needed to improve communications to promote the understanding of delegates on the identification and notification of emerging diseases (e.g. further disseminate the SOP and the guidance document, both of which are currently available through the OIE website) and on the progress of the work for considering potential emerging diseases. 

The Code Commission wished to thank the Scientific Commission for its collaborative work in providing opinions to support the consideration of relevant Member comments received. The Code Commission reminded Members that its consideration of the Scientific Commission contributions is noted under the relevant agenda items of this report.

2.2.	Biological Standards Commission 

The OIE Secretariat provided an update to the Code Commission on relevant activities of the Laboratories Commission, including chapters in the OIE *Manual of Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for*

*Terrestrial Animals*(the *Terrestrial Manual*) that are being revised as well as other items of interest. The Code Commission acknowledged the relevant work of the Laboratories Commission and noted this was important information to ensure alignment of the two Commission’s respective work plans regarding Code and Manual chapters. 

The Commission wished to thank the Laboratories Commission for providing responses to questions to support the decisions of the Code Commission on relevant comments received. The Code Commission reminded Members that its consideration of the Laboratories Commission responses is noted under the relevant agenda items of its report and encouraged Members to read its report together with the reports of the Laboratories Commission.

The Code Commission expressed its interest in the Laboratories Commission’s work to develop a new section that would describe the rationale for the selection of tests for different purposes given in a table in all disease chapters of the *Terrestrial Manual* and asked to be kept informed on this work.

Considering the complementarity of the *Terrestrial Code*and**the*Terrestrial Manual,*and the need to ensure alignment between these two OIE standards, the Code Commission agreed that regular meetings between the Bureaus of both Commissions should be established as it would offer an excellent mechanism to ensure alignment of relevant items on the work programmes and agendas of both Commissions. The Commission requested the OIE Secretariat to convene a meeting for September 2022.

2.3.	Aquatic Animal Health Standards Commission (Aquatic Animals Commission)

The Code Commission discussed with the OIE Secretariat the need to coordinate its revision of the glossary definitions for ‘Competent Authority’, ‘Veterinary Authority’ and ‘Veterinary Services’ in the *Terrestrial Code*with**the Aquatic Animals Commission’s parallel work to revise these definitions in the glossary of the *Aquatic Animal Health Code* (the *Aquatic Code*). 

The Code Commission emphasised the importance of working with the Aquatic Animals Commission to ensure alignment of these definitions in both Codes, except where differences can be justified.

Refer to Part A of this February 2022 Code Commission meeting report for its discussion on the revision of the Glossary definitions for ‘Competent Authority’, ‘Veterinary Authority’ and ‘Veterinary Service’. 

3.	Code Commission’s work programme not including texts circulated for comments

Comments were received from Japan, New Caledonia, South Africa, the UAE and the EU. 

The Code Commission discussed ongoing priority topics on its work programme and considered new work requests, proposals and comments received. The Commission reminded Members that this programme outlines the  current and planned work, to be undertaken to develop *Terrestrial Code* standards. The Commission strongly encouraged Members to provide feedback as to whether they agree with the topics being proposed, as well as their level of prioritisation, in addition to the specific discussions and annexes presented in the report.

The Code Commission noted a comment requesting recommendations from the OIE on Melioidosis and asked the OIE Secretariat to follow up on the issue to gather more information on the request. 

In response to a comment to develop a disease-specific chapter for Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever  as it is a high priority zoonotic disease in Asia and Africa, the Commission noted that this was already included in their work programme and, noting that the Scientific Commission was developing a case definition for this listed disease, the Commission agreed to initiate this work once a draft case definition was available and  recognised this item as a priority. The Commission noted that the Laboratories Commission is currently working to update the relevant *Terrestrial Manual* Chapter 3.1.5. (2022/2023 review cycle) and noted the need to undertake this work in conjunction and close collaboration with the Laboratory Commission. 

In response to comments to review Chapter 10.9. Infection with Newcastle disease in line with the  amendments adopted at the 88th OIE General Session in May 2021, for Chapter 10.4. Infection with high pathogenicity avian influenza viruses, the Commission noted that the revision of this chapter was already included in their work programme but agreed not to prioritize it for the moment given the extensive work that such revision would require. The Commission also acknowledged that, in September 2020, it had agreed that once the revised definition for “poultry” was adopted in the Glossary, any other definitions for poultry described in specific chapters would be deleted and decided to propose only this amendment in Article 10.9.1. at this time. (See item 4.5 of this report. 

The Code Commission thanked Members for their comments expressing support to different items already included in its work programme and noted that even when not individually addressed in this report, they are taken into consideration for prioritisation purposes.    

The Code Commission also thanked the Scientific Commission, the Laboratories Commission, the OIE Working Groups and all OIE *ad hoc* Groups for their contribution to the progress of the different topics. 

3.1.	Ongoing priority topics 

The Code Commission discussed the progress of a number of ongoing priority topics for which no new or revised text is circulated in this report as below.

3.1.1.	Collection and processing of semen of animals (Chapter 4.6.)

Background 

At its September 2019 meeting, the Code Commission requested that an *ad hoc*Group be convened to revise Chapter 4.6. General hygiene in semen collection and processing centres and Chapter 4.7. Collection and processing of bovine, small ruminant and porcine semen, as well as provisions in relevant disease-specific chapters of the *Terrestrial Code*and the *Terrestrial Manual*. This work had been requested to resolve inconsistencies among the chapters and to ensure that the texts reflect the latest scientific evidence and best practices regarding risk mitigation measures in the collection and processing of semen of animals. The *ad hoc*Group was also requested to consider the inclusion of provisions to address equine semen in relevant chapters. 

The *ad hoc*Group met virtually between November‒December 2020 and May‒July 2021 to review and revise Chapter 4.6. At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission considered the work of the *ad hoc*Group and supported the OIE Secretariat’s suggestion to engage an expert to continue the revision of Chapter 4.6. given the limitations of the virtual modality to progress this work. A Commission member was nominated to work with the Secretariat and the expert to progress the development of the draft text.

Update 

The OIE Secretariat informed the Code Commission that processes to engage an expert to incorporate recommendations from species-specific experts were underway. It is expected that revised draft of Chapter 4.6. will be presented for the Commission’s review at its September 2022 meeting. 

3.1.2.	Revision of Section 4 Disease prevention and control (New chapter on biosecurity, revision of Chapter 4.13. on disposal of dead animals and Chapter 4.14. on disinfection)

Background

The Code Commission had agreed to develop some new chapters and to revise some existing chapters of Section 4. Disease prevention and control. To date, a new Chapter 4.18. Vaccination was adopted in 2018, and a revised Chapter 4.4. Zoning and compartmentalisation 

and a new Chapter 4.19. Official control programmes for listed and emerging diseases were adopted in 2021. Work on revising Chapter 4.6. General hygiene in semen collection and processing centres and Chapter 4.7. Collection and processing of bovine, small ruminant and porcine semen is in progress.

In September 2021, the Code Commission agreed that in addition to the ongoing work to revise Chapters 4.6. and 4.7., high priority should also be given to the revision of Chapter 4.13. Disposal of dead animals and Chapter 4.14. General recommendations on disinfection and disinsection as well as to the development of a new Chapter 4.X. Biosecurity. The Commission requested the OIE Secretariat to prepare the terms of reference for this work and to report back at its next meeting.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the preparatory work presented by the OIE Secretariat and agreed that priority should be given to the elaboration of a new chapter on biosecurity and noted that the broad nature of this topic would likely influence the revisions of Chapters 4.13. and 4.14. The Commission noted that the consideration to develop a definition for swill should be included in this work. 

The Commission requested that an *ad hoc* Group be convened to undertake this work and that the initial work of the *ad hoc* Group should be to define the scope and structure for the new chapter. The Commission highlighted that the Scientific Commission could provide valuable contributions to this work and proposed that a representative of the Code Commission together with a representative of the Scientific Commission participate in the *ad hoc* Group. The Commission requested the OIE Secretariat to initiate the work and present the initial outcomes from the *ad hoc* Group for its consideration to define the next steps. 

The Commission reiterated that this was a high priority topic in its work programme and expressed its commitment to work closely with the OIE Secretariat to develop the terms of reference for the *ad hoc* Group to conduct this work.

3.1.3.	Revision of Section 5 Trade measures, import/export procedures and veterinary certification (especially Chapters 5.4. to 5.7.)

Background

At its September 2017 meeting, the Code Commission agreed to include a review of Section 5 Trade measures, import/export procedures and veterinary certification in its work programme given that most of the chapters in this section have not been updated for some time and some are not adequate to support Members in managing the risks of introduction of diseases through the importation of commodities.

At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission reviewed the current chapters of Section 5 and agreed that a revision of Chapters 5.4. to 5.7. should be given priority. The Commission also discussed the scope of the revisions and requested that the OIE Secretariat further develop the scope of this work.

Discussion

With regard to the work to revise Chapters 5.4. to 5.7., the Code Commission reviewed the preparatory work of the OIE Secretariat and discussed a number of points, described below, that it considered important to clarify to develop the terms of reference of the *ad hoc* Group to be convened to initiate this priority work.

**a)	Structure of the revised chapters**

The Code Commission considered the structure of the four current chapters (5.4. to 5.7.) and agreed that whether to keep or change the current structure, the content and number of chapters should be discussed by the *ad hoc* Group.

**b)	Glossary definitions of ‘border post’ and ‘quarantine station’**

The Code Commission agreed that the *ad hoc* Group should consider the revision of two fundamental terms, ‘border post’ and ‘quarantine station’, which are defined in the Glossary in the *Terrestrial Code*, with a view of reassessing the relevance of each Glossary definition and clarifying the difference between these two terms and standardize their use in the Code. The Commission also requested that the *ad hoc* Group discuss whether there is a need to develop other definitions that may be relevant for the revised chapters.

**c)	Guidance/measures that should be included in the chapters**

The Code Commission considered that the revised chapter(s) should provide general guidance, rather than disease-specific recommendations or specific recommendations on vector-borne diseases, which are currently included in some disease-specific chapters. The Commission agreed that the chapters should address the entire process of international trade, including measures taken at origin (from the farm/premises of origin) through to the final destination in the exporting country, in transit, and on arrival (import inspection and possible on-farm post-arrival follow-up). The Commission discussed a Member comment expressing its interests in examining the pathway of waste from international airports and seaports, and agreed that this pathway, as others as the *ad hoc* Group might find relevant, should be considered by the *ad hoc* Group. 

The Code Commission agreed that the scope should  not be limited to only animal health measures (which the current chapters focus on) but should address all measures relevant to trade in the *Terrestrial Code*.

The Code Commission also considered a Member request to develop recommendations on the management of quarantine stations, and agreed to request that this be considered by the *ad hoc* Group.

**d)	Scope of commodities to be covered**

Noting that some of the current four chapters have insufficient provisions for some animal products, the Code Commission agreed that all commodities, as defined in the Glossary, should be addressed in the revised chapter(s), but that in doing so it is important to avoid duplication of, or discrepancies with, recommendations described in other chapters, such as Chapter 5.8. International transfer and laboratory containment of animal pathogenic agents and Chapter 5.9. Quarantine measures applicable to non-human primates.

**e)	To what extent risks posed by illegal or informal cross-border movement of commercial and non-commercial commodities should be considered**

At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission agreed that risks posed by illegal or informal cross-border movement of commercial and non-commercial animal products, including products delivered via postal or courier services, should be considered during the revision because these pathways are a major cause of transboundary animal disease spread. The Commission considered that the inclusion of recommendations to address these risk pathways might be challenging but that could be addressed by developing general provisions to encourage collaborative activities with all relevant authorities and stakeholders such as environment, customs and law enforcement authorities. The Commission agreed to request that this idea be discussed by the *ad hoc* Group. 

**f)	Scope of diseases to be covered**

The Code Commission agreed that the diseases which should be covered in the revised chapters should address not only animal infectious diseases but also zoonotic diseases and non-infectious diseases, as the OIE list of diseases already includes some and is always evolving.

The Code Commission strongly encouraged Members to submit comments on these points regarding the revision of Chapters 5.4. to 5.7. The Commission emphasised that Members active participation at this early stage of the work is important as it will ensure the development of revised chapters that are relevant for Members.

The Code Commission requested that the OIE Secretariat develop draft terms of reference which the Commission will consider, together with Member comments received, at its next meeting.

3.1.4.	Responsible and prudent use of antimicrobial agents in veterinary medicine (Chapter  6.10.)

Background

At its February 2019 meeting, the Code Commission agreed to include in its work programme a review of Chapter 6.10. Responsible and prudent use of antimicrobial agents in veterinary medicine, in response to comments received and in light of the revision of some definitions in Chapter 6.9. Monitoring of the quantities and usage patterns of antimicrobial agents used in food-producing animals, adopted in 2018. The Commission had requested the advice of the OIE Working Group on Antimicrobial Resistance. The Working Group considered this request at its 2019 meeting and recommended that a review of Chapter 6.10. not be undertaken until the relevant work by the Codex Alimentarius Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance (TFAMR) had been progressed, in order to avoid inconsistencies.

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission was informed that the Codex Code of Practice to Minimize and Contain Foodborne Antimicrobial Resistance (CXC 61-2005) had been adopted at Step 5 by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) in November 2020. Noting the progress being made by Codex, the Commission requested that the Working Group review Chapter 6.10. and identify the main areas of the chapter that would benefit from an update, and the best way to progress this work, including whether to expand the scope to non-food producing animals.

At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission considered the Working Group’s recommendations from its April 2021 meeting and requested that the Working Group progress work and also consider whether  other AMR chapters (Chapters 6.7., 6.8., 6.9., or 6.11.) would need to be amended as a consequence of the proposed revision of Chapter 6.10.

Update 

The Code Commission was informed that the revised Codex Code of Practice to Minimize and Contain Foodborne Antimicrobial Resistance had been adopted at the CAC in November 2021.

The Code Commission was also informed that the Working Group, at its October 2021 meeting, had agreed to work intersessionally to draft a revised Chapter 6.10. prior to its next meeting in April 2022, and that it would discuss the need to amend other AMR chapters at its April 2022 meeting. The Working Group report would be then considered by the Code Commission at its next meeting of September 2022.

The Code Commission commended the Working Group for its work and encouraged Members to read the Working Group’s October 2021 report.

3.1.5.	Transport of animals by land, sea and air (Chapters 7.2., 7.3. and 7.4.)

The OIE Secretariat provided an update on the work envisaged to revise the animal transport chapters. The Code Commission considered this work in light of other work in its work programme currently in progress, and agreed to postpone the start of this work until 2023 in order to prioritise the work on animal welfare chapters already underway. 

3.1.6.	Infection with foot and mouth disease virus (Chapter 8.8.)

Comments were received Australia, Brazil, Canada, China (People’s Rep. of), Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, South Africa, Thailand, the UK, USA, the AU-IBAR, the EU and the IMS.

Background

A revised Chapter 8.8. Infection with foot and mouth disease virus has been circulated four times for comments, the last time in the Code Commission’s September 2021 report. 

At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission also considered recommendations of the joint Code Commission-Scientific Commission Taskforce, which met between June and July 2021 and a proposal from the OIE Secretariat on the harmonisation of requirements for official recognition and maintenance of free status and endorsement and maintenance of official control programmes to align with recently adopted revisions in Chapters 14.7. Infection with peste des petits ruminants virus and 15.2. Infection with classical swine fever virus.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received. It discussed selected comments and identified those comments which required further advice from experts, including the Laboratories Commission and the Scientific Commission. The Code Commission agreed to defer the review of the remaining comments until its September 2022 meeting so it could consider all comments together with expert inputs. 

The Code Commission considered draft provisions for the importation of meat of susceptible captive wild animals and wild animals, and meat of domestic small ruminants and pigs from countries or zones infected with FMD virus, where an OIE endorsed official control programme for FMD exists, which were developed by the *ad hoc* Group on Foot and mouth disease virus (June 2020) and endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its February 2021 meeting. The Code Commission highlighted that at its February 2017 meeting, it had noted that the lack of recommendations for the importation of game meat or small ruminants from infected countries or zones was a significant gap in the chapter and requested that work be done to develop these provisions. The Code Commission considered that the proposed text by the *ad hoc*Group required further work, including its re-scoping, and agreed that between its February 2022 and September 2022 meetings, appointed members from the Commission will review the recommendations of the *ad hoc*Group to prepare a proposal to be considered by the Commission for incorporation into the revised chapter.  

3.1.7.	Infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (Chapter 8.11.)

Background****

In May 2017, amendments to Chapter 8.11. Infection with *Mycobacterium tuberculosis*complex were adopted, which included *Mycobacterium bovis, M. caprae*and *M. tuberculosis.*

At its February 2019 meeting, the Code Commission considered the opinion of a panel of experts which had been requested to provide advice as to whether *M. caprae* and *M. tuberculosis*fulfil the listing criteria in Chapter 1.2. of the *Terrestrial Code*, and together with the opinion of the Scientific Commission, agreed that *M. tuberculosis* did not meet the criteria for inclusion in Article 1.3.1. Consequently, the Code Commission proposed to delete *M. tuberculosis* from the chapter and to replace ‘*Mycobacterium tuberculosis* complex’ with ‘*Mycobacterium bovis*and*M. caprae*’ and circulated this for comment in its February 2019 report*.*

At its September 2019 meeting, the Code Commission together with the Scientific Commission considered the request submitted by some Members that *M. tuberculosis* be reinstated as part 

of the *Mycobacterium tuberculosis* complex. The two Commissions agreed that available scientific evidence regarding the transmission of *M. tuberculosis*from animals to humans or animal to animal does not provide a clear position, and therefore the delisting of *M. tuberculosis* will be deferred until new scientific information is available. 

At its September 2020 meeting, the Code Commission noted that a Member had provided, as invited, some scientific evidence regarding transmission of *M. tuberculosis*, which was referred to the Scientific Commission for consideration. 

The OIE Secretariat updated the Code Commission that in September 2020, the *ad hoc*Group on alternative strategies for the control and elimination of *Mycobacterium tuberculosis* complex infection in livestock had been requested to consider the new scientific evidence submitted and whether *M. tuberculosis*still met the listing criteria in Chapter 1.2. 

At its February 2021 meeting, the Scientific Commission considered the *ad hoc* Group assessment that *M. tuberculosis* meets the listing criteria, and confirmed its previous position that it should not be delisted. The Scientific Commission also considered the *ad hoc*Group**proposal to revise the case definition in Chapter 8.11. recommending that notification should not be restricted to *M. bovis*, *M. caprae*, and *M. tuberculosis sensu stricto*, but rather be expanded to include infections by any members of the M. tuberculosis complex (except vaccine strains) as described in the *Terrestrial Manual*, taking into account that none of the prescribed routine diagnostic techniques are able to differentiate amongst individual members of the M. tuberculosis complex. 

At its February 2021 meeting, the OIE Secretariat informed the Code Commission that the Laboratories Commission is reviewing Chapter 3.4.6. Bovine tuberculosis of the *Terrestrial Manual* to broaden its scope to mammalian tuberculosis, including specific information on cattle, goats and camelids and recommended diagnostic tests, with a proposal for adoption in May 2022.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the input from the Scientific Commission and the *ad hoc* Group, as well as the progress of work of the Laboratories Commission relevant for this chapter. 

The Code Commission concurred with the Scientific Commission and agreed to retain *M. tuberculosis*in Chapter 8.11. as part of the M. tuberculosis complex. The Commission decided to withdraw the proposal to delete *M. tuberculosis* from the chapter. 

The Code Commission did not agree with the proposal of the experts to expand the scope of Chapter 8.11. to include any mammalian tuberculosis agents. The Commission explained that the case definition in a disease-specific chapter should refer only to listed pathogenic agents, based on fulfilment of all the criteria in Chapter 1.2., including an assessment of the impact of the pathogenic agent, hence the fact that routine diagnostic tests do not allow for species differentiation was not sufficient. The Code Commission noted that molecular and genomic techniques are available to differentiate amongst the species and, although these could be cost prohibitive to some Members, this is also the case for some other OIE listed diseases. 

In addition, given that the proposed revisions of Chapter 3.4.6. Bovine tuberculosis of the *Terrestrial Manual*will include recommendations on diagnostic tests for goats and camelids, the Code Commission proposed that the review of Chapter 8.11. also include measures for camelids and goats, as well as recommendations for the relevant pathogenic agents, host species concerned, determination of animal health status, recovery of free status, surveillance and provisions on trade. The Commission also considered a comment requesting how to interpret point 1(b) of Article 8.11.4. The Commission acknowledged that the current text might be variously interpreted and agreed to address this point as part of the review, which is in its work plan. 

3.1.8.	West Nile fever	 

Background

In February 2021, after the implementation of the SOP for the process to be followed for assessing a pathogenic agent of terrestrial animals against the criteria in Chapter 1.2., the Code Commission had requested that the Scientific Commission undertake the assessments for pathogenic agents previously identified for assessment in the Code Commission’s work programme (i.e. West Nile fever and paratuberculosis). 

An expert consultation was conducted between February and September 2021 to undertake the assessment. At its September 2021 meeting, the Scientific Commission reviewed the collated expert consultation report and noted the opinion of the Laboratories Commission on criterion 3 of Article 1.2.2. The Scientific Commission agreed with the experts who were unanimous in their assessments against all criteria, and concluded that West Nile fever meets the criteria for listing.

Discussion

	The Code Commission considered the opinion of the experts, the Laboratories Commission and the Scientific Commission, and agreed that West Nile fever meets the criteria for listing. Consequently, the  Commission  decided not to remove this disease from the OIE List at this stage. 

3.1.9.	Trichomonosis (Chapter 11.11.)

Comments were received from Canada, New Zealand, the USA, the AU-IBAR and the EU. 

Background

At its September 2020 meeting, the Code Commission revised Articles 11.11.2., 11.11.3. and 11.11.4., to align with recommendations in Chapter 3.4.15. on ‘Trichomonosis’ of the *Terrestrial Manual*. The proposed amendments were based on the advice of the Reference Laboratory experts for Trichomonosis. The revised articles were circulated for comment twice, the last time in the Commission’s September 2021 report.

In preparation for this meeting, the OIE Secretariat contacted two experts who had drafted the *Terrestrial Manual* chapter for advice on some comments received. 

Discussion

The Code Commission considered comments received and discussed how to address several issues in these articles as well as comments requesting to review other aspects of these articles and the need to develop additional content for this chapter. 

The Code Commission reminded Members that this revision was undertaken to align with recommendations in Chapter 3.4.15. on ‘Trichomonosis’ of the *Terrestrial Manual* and that the Commission, at its September 2021 meeting, had agreed not to expand the scope of the revision beyond this alignment. 

However, after further discussion, and noting that Chapter 11.11. has not been revised since its first adoption in 1968, the Code Commission agreed to add to its work programme a broader revision of the chapter that would be subjected to prioritisation. Given this decision, the Commission agreed to postpone further work on this chapter.

The Code Commission also noted that the development of a case definition for Trichomonosis****is on the list for the joint work with the Scientific Commission, and that it should be completed before commencing this work. 

3.1.10.	Scrapie (Chapter 14.8.)

Background

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission noted that a revision of Chapter 14.8. Scrapie had been on its work programme for many years and therefore it needed to progress this work. The Commission requested the OIE Secretariat to collate all pending issues and to report back to the Commission so it could consider a way forward.

At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission reviewed the background document prepared by the Secretariat and recalled the previous discussions between the Code Commission and the Scientific Commission on this chapter, and noted that the main pending issue was the assessment of scrapie against the listing criteria in accordance with Chapter 1.2., as reported in the September 2014 report of the Scientific Commission. The Code Commission agreed that this assessment should be done before starting any work on Chapter 14.8. The Commission requested that an assessment be presented to the OIE DDG ISS in line with the Standard Operating Procedure for listing decisions for pathogenic agents of terrestrial animals.

Update

The OIE Secretariat informed the Code Commission that the OIE DDG ISS had considered the request for an assessment and concluded that an assessment was not justified. The Code Commission noted that the Scientific Commission was informed of this decision at its February 2022 meeting, and encouraged Members to refer to that report for more information.

3.1.11.	Pet food as safe commodities

Background

At its February 2018 meeting, the Code Commission considered a request from the Global Alliance of Pet Food Associations (GAPFA) to recommence work on the development of provisions for pet food and appreciated the offer by GAPFA to gather scientific information that could inform the assessment of pet food products against the criteria on the safety of commodities in accordance with Chapter 2.2. Criteria applied by the OIE for assessing the safety of commodities.

During 2020 and 2021, GAPFA submitted to the OIE Secretariat summaries of scientific information it had collected to demonstrate  that pet food could be considered as a safe commodity in a number of disease-specific chapters.

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission noted that GAPFA had provided a description of two specific pet food (‘extruded dry pet food’ and ‘wet pet food in hermetically sealed containers’) as well as the internationally standardised processes and treatments involved in their production in order to facilitate the assessment of these commodities as safe commodities.

Update

The Code Commission thanked GAPFA for providing the OIE with its comprehensive analyses and processing information.

With regard to ‘extruded dry pet food’, the Code Commission reminded Members that, in discussing the recent revision of Chapter 10.4. Infection with high pathogenicity avian influenza, extruded dry pet food had been included as a safe commodity in Article 10.4.2.

With regard to ‘wet pet food in hermetically sealed containers’, the Code Commission reminded Members that ‘heat-treated meat products in a hermetically sealed container with an F0 value of 3 or above’, was included as a safe commodity in a number of disease-specific 

chapters. The Commission agreed that ‘heat-treated meat products in a hermetically sealed container with an F0 value of 3 or above’ was equivalent to ‘wet pet food in hermetically sealed containers’ and that ’heat-treated meat products in a hermetically sealed container with an F0 value of 3 or above’ would be the term used in the *Terrestrial Code*.

The Code Commission also agreed to consider the inclusion of ‘extruded dry pet food’ and ‘heat-treated meat products in a hermetically sealed container with an F0 value of 3 or above’ in the list of safe commodities each time a disease-specific chapter is reviewed.

3.1.12.	Honey – definitions and provisions on importation

Background

At its February 2020 meeting, the Code Commission, in response to a comment, requested the OIE Secretariat to assess the need for a review of the recommendations regarding importation of honey, including the need for a Glossary definition for ‘honey’.

Update

The OIE Secretariat presented to the Code Commission a summary as to where and how honey is addressed in the bee disease-specific chapters (Chapters 9.1. to 9.6.) of the *Terrestrial Code*. Based on these considerations, and the fact that the common definition of honey is relevant for the use of the term in the *Terrestrial Code*, the Commission agreed that there were no gaps in the current recommendations for the importation of honey and consequently agreed not to initiate any further work on this matter.

3.1.13.	Framework for the *Terrestrial Code* standards

Background

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission agreed with the OIE Secretariat’s proposal to develop a framework for the development of disease-specific chapters of the *Terrestrial Code*that would define the structure and content of these chapters.**The Commission agreed that having a consistent approach and harmonization (whenever feasible) to the structure and content of disease-specific chapters would improve the ability of Members to navigate the *Terrestrial Code*, especially given the importance of cross-referencing between chapters. The Commission also noted that this work would serve as a useful guide to ensure a consistent approach when undertaking work on the development or revision of a chapter.

Between the September 2021 and February 2022 meetings, the Code Commission members worked electronically with the OIE Secretariat to progress this work. 

Update

The Code Commission noted that the framework has been shared with the Scientific Commission for its inputs and that it would consider this item at its next meeting in September 2022.

3.1.14.	Standardised procedure to manage commodities’ names and their listing as “safe commodities” in *Terrestrial Code* chapters

Background

In September 2021, the Commission discussed a proposal from the OIE Secretariat on a draft Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) to be applied internally when assessing commodities for inclusion in the lists of safe commodities in disease-specific chapters of the *Terrestrial Code*. The Code Commission agreed with the proposed approach and requested the OIE Secretariat to continue developing the SOP and report back at its next meeting.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the proposal of the OIE Secretariat to include in the SOP the standardisation of names of commodities across the *Terrestrial Code*. The Code Commission agreed with the proposed approach, considered the SOP as final and requested to be informed if any points in the SOP requires further amendments.

3.2.	New proposals / requests

The Code Commission considered the following proposals or requests for new developments or revisions of standards  in the *Terrestrial Code*.

3.2.1.	Request from Wildlife Working Group

Background

At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission discussed a proposal from the OIE Working Group on Wildlife (WGW) to develop a new chapter in the *Terrestrial Code* on surveillance of disease of wildlife (as reported in its December 2020 report). The Commission discussed this proposal and highlighted that wildlife disease surveillance is currently addressed in a number of chapters as part of surveillance system requirements (notably in Chapter 1.4. Animal Health Surveillance), and therefore a new chapter dedicated to surveillance of wildlife health could result in duplication or inconsistencies. 

The Code Commission provided detailed feedback on the proposal and requested the Working Group on Wildlife to consider its comments.

Update

The Code Commission was informed that a consultant was being employed to analyse existing OIE Standards and OIE Guidelines to identify gaps and needs with regards to wildlife disease surveillance and health management, and to propose how to best address these needs. The WGW will review the consultant’s report and consider the feedback from the Code Commission at its next meeting in June 2022, to further clarify the purpose and work. 

The OIE Secretariat also presented a brief update on the work of the OIE *ad hoc* Group on Reducing the risk of disease spillover events at markets selling wildlife and along the wildlife supply chain, which had met several times in 2022. The Commission favourably noted the work of this *ad hoc* Group, and acknowledged that it could also provide valuable inputs to identify future work needed in the *Terrestrial Code* on these matters. 

The Code Commission was informed that the OIE and CITES**(Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) have agreed to continue collaborating on wildlife trade and health in alignment with their respective mandates, and that both  organisations have agreed to update their Cooperation Agreement.

The Code Commission requested the OIE Secretariat to report back at its next meeting on these two  issues so that it can continue discussing the possible inclusion of new items related to wildlife health management in its work programme.

3.2.2.	Chapter 7.Z. Animal welfare and laying hen production systems

Dr Arroyo, OIE DDG-ISS, informed the Code Commission that some Members and Partner Organisations had requested that the OIE continue the work on the proposed Chapter 7.Z. Animal welfare and laying hen production systems, given the importance of having a OIE standard that addresses the animal welfare of this production system. Dr Arroyo acknowledged that there is not a clear path forward at this moment because of divergent views regarding this standard but that the OIE would explore the possibility to discuss with Members to define a way forward. 

3.2.3.	Rabbit haemorrhagic disease (Chapter 13.2.)

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission noted recent outbreaks of rabbit haemorrhagic disease (RHD) in North America and West Africa and requested the opinion of the Scientific Commission as to whether the global epidemiological situation for RHD justifies the revision of Chapter 13.2.

The Code Commission noted that Chapter 13.2. Rabbit haemorrhagic disease of the *Terrestrial Code*was first adopted in 1992, and the most recent update was adopted in 2012, and that the corresponding *Terrestrial Manual* Chapter 3.7.2. Rabbit haemorrhagic disease was first adopted in 1991 as Viral haemorrhagic disease of rabbits, and the most recent update was adopted in 2021.

At this meeting, the Code Commission was informed that the Scientific Commission had recommended that Chapter 13.2. be revised as the current chapter does not contain a case definition nor provisions for recovery of free status. The Code Commission was also informed that the Scientific Commission had recommended that RHD be added to the next tranche of the case definition work.  

Further, the OIE Secretariat informed the Code Commission that OIE Headquarters had recently received a question from a Member about the detection of RHD in imported rabbits that are sero-positive without any clinical signs, and whether they should be regarded as a case of the disease and the possible impact this may have on a country’s free status.

Based on these considerations, the Code Commission agreed to add the revision of Chapter 13.2. Rabbit haemorrhagic disease to its work programme and requested the Scientific Commission to progress work on the development of a case definition in line with the *Terrestrial Manual*. The Code Commission reported that it would then revise Article 13.2.1. to include a case definition and develop a new article on recovery of free status and, if necessary, revise other articles, as appropriate.

3.2.4.	Nipah virus encephalitis and Bovine viral diarrhoea

The OIE Secretariat informed the Code Commission that in September 2021 the Scientific Commission had endorsed draft case definitions developed by subject matter experts for Nipah virus encephalitis (NVE) and bovine viral diarrhoea (BVD) and that these had been placed on the OIE website to support Members to notify, when relevant. These case definitions were presented to the Code Commission to consider including the development of respective disease-specific chapters for the *Terrestrial Code* on its work programme. 

The Code Commission highlighted that NVE and BVD are OIE listed diseases that are included in Chapter 1.3. but do not have a corresponding disease-specific chapter. The Commission noted that the development of disease-specific chapters for these two diseases have not been included in its work programme, as no request had been received. The Commission noted that the *Terrestrial Manual*includes chapters**for both diseases: Chapter 3.1.14. Nipah and Hendra virus disease and Chapter 3.4.7. Bovine viral diarrhoea. 

The Code Commission noted that the case definition endorsed by the Scientific Commission describes NVE as an infection of horses, pigs, dogs, and cats (animal hosts), while NVE is listed in Chapter 1.3. as a swine disease. The Code Commission noted that the case definition endorsed by the Scientific Commission describes BVD as an infection of suids, ruminants, and camelids, while in Chapter 1.3. it is listed as a cattle disease. The Commission also noted that the experts also proposed to change the name of ‘Bovine viral Diarrhoea’ to ‘Infection with Bovine pestiviruses’, which would imply the inclusion of a broader range of pathogenic agents. 

The Code Commission reviewed the experts' reports and the Scientific Commission’s opinion and considered that the rationale provided for these two case definitions was not sufficient to support commencing the work on these two OIE listed diseases. The Commission highlighted that if a change was to be proposed for either of these pathogenic agents or its hosts, that this should be done through an assessment against the criteria for the inclusion of diseases, infections, and infestations in the OIE list in accordance with Chapter 1.2. The Commission requested the assessments be undertaken before including these items in its work programme. 

The Code Commission also highlighted that the information contained in the general provisions of each disease-specific chapter of the *Terrestrial Code* to define a disease, the epidemiologically significant hosts, and its occurrence should be based on information in the corresponding chapter in the *Terrestrial Manual*. Noting that the *Terrestrial Manual* chapter for NVE is currently under revision and a revised chapter will be proposed for adoption in May 2022, and that the *Terrestrial Manual* chapter for BVD will be reviewed in the 2022/2023 review cycle, the Commission recommended that the assessments be undertaken in coordination with the update of the *Terrestrial Manual*, to ensure alignment and efficiency of the process.

The Code Commission requested the OIE Secretariat to report back on this proposal after the assessment against the criteria has been completed and both revised *Terrestrial Manual* chapters have been adopted.

Regarding the decision to place the case definitions on the OIE website to support Members notification, the Code Commission considered that these case definitions introduce a contradiction with the current OIE standards, which would impose an undue additional administrative burden on Members. Consequently, it requested the definitions to be removed from the OIE website until the work described above has been completed. 

3.2.5.	Request to clarify Glossary definition for Poultry

The Code Commission considered a comment received regarding the Glossary definition for ‘poultry’. The Member asked for clarification as to whether populations of pet birds kept and bred for selling to hobby holdings, backyard holdings or pet bird owners were specifically addressed in the current definition, and whether this category of bird population may be considered ‘poultry’, depending on the epidemiological situation of each event. 

The Code Commission agreed to include this in its work programme and discussed specific amendments to address the issue (See item 4.1 of this report).  

3.2.6.	Listed diseases names: Discrepancies between Chapter 1.3. and disease-specific chapters

The OIE Secretariat informed the Code Commission of some discrepancies observed between the names of some listed diseases in Chapter 1.3. and those in corresponding disease-specific chapters (i.e. Chapter 12.6., Chapter 12.8. and Chapter 10.5.). 

The Code Commission discussed this issue and agreed to amend the disease names in the list to align with those in the disease-specific chapters as they had been adopted more recently. The Commission decided to propose the revised articles for adoption at the 89th General Session in May 2022, given that these amendments were of editorial nature (refer to Part A of this report).

The Code Commission also acknowledged the discrepancy between the listed disease ‘haemorrhagic septicaemia’ in Article 1.3.2. and Chapter 11.7. Haemorrhagic septicaemia (*Pasteurella multocida* serotypes 6:b and 6:e), but decided not to amend Article 1.3.2. for the time being, considering that the Scientific Commission was considering the possibility of expanding the scope of this disease to include other strains of *Pasteurella multocida*.

3.2.7.	OIE Standard Operating Procedure for determining if a disease should be considered as an emerging disease 

The Code Commission  acknowledged a comment expressing concerns on the OIE Standard Operating Procedure for determining if a disease should be considered as an emerging disease, and requesting the Commission to consider whether amendments to the *Terrestrial Code* should be considered to address them. The Commission noted that similar comments received from some Members in the 88th OIE General Session were discussed at the meeting held by the Bureaus of the Code Commission and the Scientific Commission, together with possible ways to address them (See item 2.1 of this report).

The Code Commission noted that SOPs are documents developed by OIE Headquarters to guide internal processes and should be based on the standards, when relevant. The Commission considered there was no need  to review the current standards related to Member’s notification obligations and agreed not to include new work in this regard in its work programme at this stage. 

3.3.	Prioritisation of items in the Code Commission’s work programme 

Based on a number of considerations and the progress of the different topics since its last meeting, as well as the specific discussions during this meeting, the Code Commission discussed the prioritisation of ongoing and future work, and agreed to include and remove the items as presented below: 

Added items:

‒	Revision of the Glossary definition for ‘poultry’

‒	Revision of the use of the terms ‘meat-and-bone meal’ and ‘greaves’

‒	Revision of selected disease names in Chapter 1.3. (to ensure alignment with disease-specific chapters)

‒	Revision of Chapter 13.2., Rabbit haemorrhagic disease

Removed items

‒	Delisting of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (in Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex)

‒	Delisting of West Nile fever

The Code Commission updated its work programme accordingly. 

In addition to the recent changes introduced in the way the work programme is presented as an annex to provide more information to Members, the Code Commission wished to highlight the introduction of a new system to inform Members on the prioritisation of work on its programme. The Commission explained that the inclusion of an item in the work programme means there is an agreement of the Commission on the need to undertake a certain work, but does not mean that the work would be immediately initiated. This decision as to when to commence each work depends on an overall consideration of priorities, on the progress of ongoing work and on the resources available. This aims at providing a guide to plan and organise the work of the Commission and the OIE Secretariat, as well as to improve Members awareness of the progress of the different topics. The prioritisation order used in the work programme reflects the level of priority agreed by the Code Commission, through the rigorous assessment of each item, in terms of its necessity and urgency. Although the Code Commission reviews its work programme at each meeting and re-considers the prioritisation of items according to changes in necessity and urgency (e.g. in response to Member requests, changes in the epidemiological situation of diseases, etc.), the prioritisation reference would not be significantly modified frequently, because it implies underlying mid-to-long term work planning, in order to make the work of the Code Commission more efficient and predictable. The Commission also highlighted that the prioritisation order used in its work programme is not necessarily parallel to the progress of each work, which actually depends on the complexity of the specific tasks to be undertaken.   

The updated work programme is presented as **Annex 3**, for Member comments.

4.	Texts circulated for comments

4.1.	Glossary definition for Poultry

The Code Commission agreed to consider a comment regarding the Glossary definition for ‘poultry’. The Member asked for clarification as to whether populations of pet birds kept and bred for selling to 

hobby holdings, backyard holdings or pet bird owners were specifically addressed in the current definition, and whether this category of population may be considered ‘poultry’, depending on the epidemiological situation of each event. 

The Code Commission noted that the definition for ‘poultry’ clearly states that pet birds are excluded, provided that they have no direct or indirect contact with poultry or poultry facilities,  and  therefore are not considered to be ‘poultry’ in the context of the *Terrestrial Code*. On the other hand, the Commission acknowledged that it is not clear whether populations of pet birds for breeding or selling are included. To address these concerns, the Commission agreed to amend the definition of ‘poultry’ by adding ‘and companionship’ at the end of the list of categories of birds excluded from the definition of poultry, and deleting ‘as well as pet birds’.

The revised Glossary definition for ‘poultry’ is presented as part of **Annex 4**, for Member comments.

4.2	Slaughter of animals (Chapter 7.5.)

Background 

In February 2018, the Code Commission agreed to revise Chapter 7.5. Slaughter of animals and Chapter 7.6. Killing of animals for disease control purposes and requested that an *ad hoc* Group be convened to undertake this work. The *ad hoc* Group has been convened on several occasions since February 2018 to undertake a comprehensive review, starting with Chapter 7.5., and to consider feedback subsequently received. A revised chapter was circulated for comments in the Commission’s February 2021 report.

At its September 2021 meeting, the Commission requested that the *ad hoc* Group be reconvened to consider comments and amend the revised chapter as appropriate, as well as the revised Glossary definitions for *death*, *euthanasia*, *slaughter* and *stunning* used in Chapter 7.5. and for *distress, pain*and*suffering*used in Chapter7.8. that have been proposed to be moved to the Glossary. 

Discussion 

The Code Commission considered the *ad hoc* Group’s 2021 report including the revised Chapter 7.5. and the revised Glossary definitions for *death*, *euthanasia*, *slaughter*, *stunning*, *distress*,*pain*and*suffering*.

The Code Commission acknowledged and commended the very extensive work undertaken by the *ad hoc* Group to address the significant number of comments received and the detailed rationale that was provided in the *ad hoc* Group’s report. The Code Commission encouraged Members to refer to the December 2021 *ad hoc* Group’s report for the rationale for changes made in the revised chapter.  

The Code Commission reviewed the revised Chapter 7.5 and did not make any additional amendments. The Commission agreed that the current structure based on how animals arrive at the slaughterhouse, i.e. ‘free moving animal’ and ‘animals arriving in containers’ was a good approach, and asked the *ad hoc* Group to clarify the species included in these two categories for the next revision of the text.

The revised Chapter 7.5. Animal welfare during slaughter, is presented as **Annex 6**, for Member comments.

The revised Glossary definitions for *death*, *euthanasia*, *slaughter* and *stunning* and for d*istress*,*pain*and*suffering*are presented as part of **Annex 4**, for Member comments

4.3.	Articles 8.14.6bis. and 8.14.7. of Chapter 8.14. Infection with rabies virus

Comments were received from Argentina, Australia, Canada, China (People’s Rep. of), Chinese Taipei, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland, UK, Zimbabwe, the AU-IBAR and the EU.

Background

Following adoption of revised Chapter 8.14. Infection with rabies virus, in May 2019, the Code Commission, at its September 2019 meeting, acknowledged there was still some work pending on the chapter given that the priority had been to adopt amendments to support the global strategic plan to end human deaths from dog-mediated rabies by 2030 (i.e. the “Zero by 30 initiative”). The pending issues concerned the provisions for vaccination, testing and the shipment of animals (in Article 8.14.7.) and the provisions on risk mitigation measures for the importation of mammals outside of the Orders *Carnivora* and *Chiroptera* (in Articles 8.14.8. and 8.14.10.). In addition, the Code Commission and the Scientific Commission had agreed to seek advice on the relevance of including specific provisions on the control of rabies in wildlife, including oral vaccination. 

At its September 2020 meeting, the Code Commission considered the advice of the October 2019 report of the *ad hoc* Group on Rabies and the Scientific Commission and agreed to add a new Article 8.14.6bis. on recommendations for the importation of dogs from countries or zones infected with rabies virus, and amend the title of Article 8.14.7. These texts were circulated for comments in the Code Commission’s September 2020 report.

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission considered the comments received on the new Article 8.14.6bis and the revised Article 8.14.7. and requested the advice of the Scientific Commission for some comments. The Code Commission also considered the recommendation of the Scientific Commission (September 2018) to amend Articles 8.14.8. to 8.14.10. and agreed not to work on this until new scientific evidence become available. 

The Scientific Commission requested additional advice from the OIE Rabies Reference Laboratory network (RABLAB), which was sought between February and September 2021 and endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its September 2021 meeting (refer to its September 2021 report). 

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received on the new Article 8.14.6bis. and the revised Article 8.14.7., together with the advice from the RABLAB and the Scientific Commission. The Code Commission also considered a draft new article developed by the RABLAB experts providing provisions for the control of rabies in wildlife. The Commission also considered a new draft article on recommendations for implementing a rabies vaccination programme for dogs that had been endorsed by the Scientific Commission. 

**General comments**

The Code Commission did not agree with comments not supporting the proposed reduction in the waiting period from 3 months to 30 days for the importation of vaccinated dogs from infected countries or zones, as no new scientific evidence was provided. The Code Commission, in agreement with the Scientific Commission and the RABLAB experts, agreed that there was a strong scientific basis for the proposed amendment, and encouraged Members to refer to the recently published peer-reviewed scientific paper (Smith *et al*., 2021). The Code Commission also encouraged Members to refer to the Scientific Commission's September 2021 report for more details. 

The Code Commission reminded Members that if they wished to apply more stringent sanitary measures than those recommended in the *Terrestrial Code* they should conduct an import risk analysis in accordance with Chapter 2.1.

**Article 8.14.6bis.**

In point 2, in response to comments expressing practical concerns regarding unique numbering of dogs, the Code Commission replaced ‘number’ by ‘code’, to allow for different methods of individual identification to be applied. 

In point 3(b), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to amend the text so that isolation could be carried out outside a quarantine station (e.g. in an owner’s home). The Commission noted that it would be difficult for a Veterinary Authority to certify isolation under such conditions. It also highlighted that this requirement on isolation is applicable only for unvaccinated dogs.

**Article 8.14.7.**

Comments received on this article were addressed by the responses provided to general comments and comments on Article 8.14.6bis. 

**New Article 8.14.11bis. Recommendations for dog-mediated rabies vaccination programmes**

The Code Commission considered the draft new Article 8.14.11bis. and proposed further amendments. 

While the Code Commission acknowledged that it is not standard practice to include provisions for the implementation of disease-specific vaccination programmes in the *Terrestrial Code*, the Commission agreed with its inclusion given that rabies vaccination programmes in dogs are essential for controlling and eradicating this disease of major public health concern. The Commission reminded Members that, in general, horizontal chapters of the *Terrestrial Code* provide the standards to be implemented by Members to define their national policies and programmes.

**Recommendations for the control of rabies in wildlife**

The Code Commission considered a proposed draft new article providing recommendations for an official control programme for wildlife-mediated rabies, which had been developed by the RABLAB with the support of wildlife rabies experts and endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its September 2021 meeting. The Commission considered that the proposed text, although scientifically sound, was too detailed and prescriptive for the *Terrestrial Code*, and that the establishment of an official control programme for wildlife-mediated rabies was not currently in the scope of the chapter. The Commission requested that the OIE Secretariat continue working on the proposal in collaboration with an appointed member of the Commission in preparation for its next meeting.

The revised new Article 8.14.6bis., the revised Article 8.14.7., and the new Article 8.14.11bis. are presented as **Annex 7**, for Member comments.

4.4.	Infection with Rift Valley fever virus (Chapter 8.15.)

Comments were received from China (People’s Rep. of), New Caledonia, New Zealand, Switzerland, Thailand, USA, the AU-IBAR and the EU.

Background

Proposed amendments to Chapter 8.15. Infection with Rift Valley fever virus were first circulated in the Code Commission’s February 2019 report to clarify the obligations of Members to notify when there is an epidemic of Rift Valley fever (RVF) in an endemic country or zone. The revised chapter was circulated for the third time for comments in the Commission’s February 2020 meeting report.

At its September 2020 meeting, the Code Commission acknowledged comments received and agreed to defer its discussion until it had received the Scientific Commission’s opinion on selected comments.

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission was informed that an *ad hoc*Group on Rift Valley fever would be convened to develop guidance for RVF surveillance during epidemic and inter-epidemic periods, as well as the consideration of other issues such as the development of provisions for the recovery of freedom in a country or zone previously free from RVF.

The *ad hoc*Group meeting was convened in June 2021 and the report was endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its September 2021 meeting.

Discussion

The Code Commission discussed the Member comments previously received, together with the report of the OIE *ad hoc* Group on Rift Valley fever. The Commission commended the *ad hoc* Group on its work and encouraged Members to refer to the report for detailed information.

**General comments**

The Code Commission agreed with the *ad hoc* Group to replace ‘epizootic’ with ‘epidemic’ throughout the chapter. Noting that consideration of the use of terms: enzootic/endemic/epizootic/epidemic is on its work programme, the Commission requested that the OIE Secretariat review the use of these terms in the *Terrestrial Code* and report back at its September 2022 meeting.

**Article 8.15.1.**

In point 2(c), the Code Commission noted the *ad hoc* Group’s conclusion that it was not feasible to propose a uniform international standard for the establishment of a baseline for low RVFV activity, as there were too many epidemiological variations and different ecological situations between countries. In line with this, the Commission agreed to amend the definition for ‘inter-epidemic period’ and explained that the intention of the amendment was to encourage Members to notify RVF outbreaks to the OIE, emphasising that the transition from an inter-epidemic period to an epidemic complies with point 1(e) of Article 1.1.3. of Chapter 1.1. Notification of diseases and provision of epidemiological information. The Commission reminded Members that one of the objectives of the revision of this chapter was to address situations where infections in human are often notified to the World Health Organization without corresponding notifications of animal cases to the OIE, despite epidemiological knowledge that the occurrence of indigenous infections in humans would imply important ongoing virus circulation in the animal population. The Commission highlighted that some proposed amendments to Article 8.15.11. (see below) would help Members identify epidemics.

In points 4(b) and 4(c), in response to a comment that the inclusion of ‘including in a human’ would create an inconsistency with the case definition (i.e. RVF is defined as an infection of susceptible animals, not of humans) as described in point 3, the Code Commission proposed amendments to improve clarity.

**Article 8.15.3.**

In point 2(b), the Code Commission agreed with the *ad hoc* Group to amend this point given the importance to promote interactions with, and collaboration between, human and animal health sectors from the perspective of One Health approach. In the same point, in response to a comment to replace ‘indigenous’ with ‘endogenous’, the Commission explained that replacement of ‘human cases’ with ‘infections in human’ would also address this comment.

With regard to the request that the *ad hoc* Group develop an article on recovery of disease freedom, the Code Commission noted that the *ad hoc* Group had concluded that ‘there was insufficient scientific evidence to support adding an article on fast recovery of freedom to the chapter’, and agreed not to add an article.

**Deleted Article 8.15.5.**

In response to a comment to clarify the rationale of the deletion, the Code Commission explained that there was no difference in terms of RVF status between a ‘country or zone infected with RVFV during the inter-epidemic period’ and a ‘country or zone infected with RVFV during an epidemic’ (i.e. both are infected with RVFV).

**Article 8.15.5. (renumbered)**

In point 3, in response to a comment that insect-proof netting is just one of the protective measures and other effective measures should also be covered, the Code Commission proposed an amendment, taking into consideration relevant recommendations in other vector-borne disease chapters.

In the same point, the Code Commission agreed with the *ad hoc* Group to delete ‘during dawn or dusk, or overnight’, as RVFV vectors also show daylight activity.

In point 4, the Code Commission proposed to replace ‘low risk’ with ‘lower risk’ as it considered ‘low’ in absolute was not possible to assess and Members could only identify relatively lower risk ports and transport routes.

**Article 8.15.6. (renumbered)**

The Code Commission agreed with the *ad hoc* Group to delete point 2(c) to be consistent with proposed amendments to Article 8.15.7.

**Article 8.15.7. and deleted Article 8.15.8. (renumbered)**

The Code Commission agreed with the *ad hoc* Group that the risk mitigation measures for the importation of susceptible animals from a country or zone infected with RVFV should be in a single article, and should take into consideration the possible presence of epidemic areas even in inter-epidemic period. The Commission highlighted, in agreement with the *ad hoc* Group, that it was important  to include in this article the requirement that animals did not originate from an epidemic area.

In point 3 of Article 8.15.7., the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘RVFV’ before ‘epidemic area’ as it was considered clear as written, since ‘epidemic area’ is defined in Article 8.15.1.

**Article 8.15.8. (renumbered)**

In point 2(a), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘in accordance with manufacturer recommendations’ at the end as it considered it was clear as written and reminded Members that ‘vaccination’ is defined in the Glossary and includes a reference to manufacturer recommendations. Noting that there were some variations in this recommendation throughout the *Terrestrial Code*, the Commission requested the OIE Secretariat to review the variations and report back its findings at a future meeting.

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add a point requiring a DIVA test and noted that the *ad hoc* Group had reported that there was no evidence that the semen and embryos derived from seropositive animals following recovery from infection are still infective.

**Article 8.15.9. (renumbered)**

The Code Commission agreed with a comment to merge Article 8.15.10. with Article 8.15.10bis. and acknowledged that the addition of Article 8.15.10bis. had caused confusion. 

In point 1(c), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to replace ‘submitted to maturation’ with ‘maturated’ as it considered that certification  can only address the process applied (i.e. treatment or test).

**Article 8.15.10. (renumbered)**

The Code Commission noted that the *ad hoc* Group had agreed that the current provisions are sufficient to ensure that milk and milk products are safe and indicated that any new information on the risk of RVFV in milk and milk products would be considered should this become available. Thus, the Commission agreed not to make amendments on this point.

**Article 8.15.11. (renumbered)**

The Code Commission noted that the *ad hoc* Group had proposed to revise Article 8.15.12., in response to a request that more detailed guidance for surveillance of RVF be developed. The 

Commission discussed the text proposed by the *ad hoc* Group and made some amendments for clarity and consistency with other chapters in the *Terrestrial Code*. In response to a comment querying why examining mosquito vectors for RVFV is not effective, the Commission encouraged Members to refer to the *ad hoc* Group’s report.

The revised Chapter 8.15. Infection with Rift Valley fever virus is presented as **Annex 8**, for Member comments.

4.5.	Infection with Newcastle disease virus (Article 10.9.1.)

In response to a comment, the Commission proposed to remove the definition of poultry from Chapter 10.9. Infection with Newcastle disease virus as reported in its September 2020 meeting report. While acknowledging that this chapter may benefit from other updates, the Commission wished to note that the current revision will be limited to addressing this change for consistency, and other aspects of the chapter will be considered for prioritisation in the future.  

The revised Article 10.9.1. of Chapter 10.9. Infection with Newcastle disease virus is presented as **Annex 9**, for Member comments.

4.6	Contagious equine metritis (Chapter 12.2.)

Comments were received from Canada, Japan, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Switzerland, the UK and the EU.

Background

At its February 2019 meeting, the Code Commission agreed to amend Chapter 12.2. Contagious equine metritis to include requirements for the temporary movement of horses and it agreed that given this chapter had not been reviewed for some time, a comprehensive revision should be undertaken. The Commission requested that experts be convened to undertake this work. 

An electronic expert consultation was conducted between September and December 2019 and its report, including the draft revised chapter, was endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its February 2020 meeting (refer to the Scientific Commission's February 2020 report). At its September 2020 meeting, the Code Commission considered the revised Chapter 12.2., made additional amendments, and circulated the revised chapter for comments. 

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission reviewed the comments received and agreed to defer its discussion until its September 2021 meeting, given that time constraints did not allow for a detailed discussion. 

The OIE Secretariat sought the advice of the Scientific Commission and the Laboratories Commission on selected comments. The Scientific Commission asked for additional expert advice which was discussed at its September 2021 meeting.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received and the advice sought from the Scientific Commission, the Laboratories Commission and the subject-matter experts. 

General comments

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment that the chapter should include specific provisions for country or zone freedom and requirements for maintenance of freedom after an incursion, as a requirement for a disease to be an OIE listed disease. The Commission highlighted that the criteria for listing were applied to assess diseases to determine if they should be included in the OIE List,  and the existence of specific provisions to define freedom was not a prerequisite. The Code Commission considered the opinion of the Scientific Commission, but agreed with the experts’ advice 

that, due to the epidemiologic characteristics of the disease (i.e. stallions are asymptomatic carriers thus has life-long infective period),  provisions for country or zone freedom from *T. equigenitalis* in the chapter would have to include such extremely strict requirements that it would be logistically and economically difficult to achieve for most Members. The Commission highlighted that the experts also emphasised that infection with *T. equigenitalis* is a concern mainly to the horse industry and that  the disease is manageable at a smaller scale, i.e. at the establishment level. Hence, such recommendations would not present significant added value to manage the risks of the disease for most Members. The Commission agreed not to include such provisions in the chapter at this stage and reminded Members that the lack of provisions in a disease-specific chapter does not impede Members from implementing measures, e.g. to declare freedom at country or zone level, as long as they were in accordance with relevant horizontal chapters of the *Terrestrial Code*. 

Article 12.2.1.

In the first paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘skin and’ before 'mucous membrane', as it considered that the current text was clear as written and in line with the provisions in Chapter 3.6.2. Contagious equine metritis of the *Terrestrial Manual*. 

In the same paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to replace ‘asymptomatic’ with ‘subclinical’ as it considered that the meaning is different and, in this case, it refers to animals that show no sign at all of the disease. The Commission did not agree to replace ‘male horses’ with ‘stallions’ here, and explained that this paragraph aims to define the disease and, in this context, it should refer to all epidemiologically significant hosts, while ‘stallions’ refers to a specific practical context, which is considered in this chapter for risk management purposes. 

In response to comments, the Code Commission agreed to delete ‘antigen or’ in point 2 and replace ‘mare’ with ‘horse’ and delete the whole point 3. The Commission agreed with comments that there was no need to provide differentiated alternatives for ‘males’ and ‘mares’, and noted that according to the *Terrestrial Manual* chapter, antigenic tests were only considered suitable in very limited circumstances. The Commission highlighted that the only test recommended in the *Terrestrial Manual* chapter without limitations was the isolation of the pathogenic agent, and hence agreed to maintain the reference to ‘showing clinical or pathological signs consistent with infection with *T. equigenitalis* or epidemiologically linked to a confirmed or suspected case of infection with *T. equigenitalis*’ in point 2. The Commission noted that this would mean that if genetic material specific to *T. equigenitalis*was identified in a horse without clinical signs, pathological lesions or epidemiological links to a case, it should be confirmed by isolation. 

In the fourth paragraph, the Code Commission agreed to delete the words ‘and vaccines’, given that there are no standards for vaccines in the *Terrestrial Manual*for this disease.

In the penultimate paragraph, the Code Commission deleted ‘for competition or cultural events excluding breeding,’ to harmonise the text with the other revised chapters where the meaning of ‘temporary importation’ of horses was described. The Commission noted that this text should be focused only on the conditions for the movement (i.e. short period, under special conditions ensured by the Veterinary Authorities, and defined conditions for exit) and not on the specific activities to be performed by the imported horses, and explained that the specific conditions to manage the risks for each disease were detailed in a specific article (in this case in Article 12.2.5.). The Commission also agreed that listing ‘exclusions' would not be accurate as it would be impossible to list all activities, and some terms such as ‘cultural events’ could be ambiguous.

Article 12.2.3.

In the title, the Code Commission agreed to replace ‘Establishment’ with ‘Herd’, as the status applies to the animals and not the premises. The Commission applied this change throughout the chapter, as relevant. 

In point 2(c), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to amend the text for clarity. 

In point 2(d), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to specify that stored semen should be subjected to a test for detection of genetic material of *T. equigenitalis*, as stored semen may contain antibiotics that could interfere with culture. 

In point 4(b), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment that there was a discrepancy between the periods for recovery of freedom and the periods to qualify or maintain freedom. The Commission agreed with the opinion of the Scientific Commission that for other diseases the time frame for initial qualification and recovery of status are different. 

In point 4(c), the Code Commission agreed with a comment from the Scientific Commission to amend the text to state that all stored semen from infected horses in the herd should be tested as the pathogenic agent would not be equally distributed in different aliquots. 

Article 12.2.4.

In points 2(a) and 2(b)(i), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to amend the text for clarity.

In point 2(b)(ii), the Code Commission, in agreement with the opinion of the Laboratories Commission, proposed amendments to clarify that horses should be subjected to *T. equigenitalis* identification tests (culture for *T. equigenitalis* or molecular testing) with negative results. 

In the same point, the Code Commission, in agreement with the Laboratories Commission, did not agree with a comment to replace ‘horses’ with ‘the donor stallion’ because this article covers both stallions  and mares.

In the same point, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to include measures to manage the risks of infection during the period between testing and shipping, and added ‘have not been mated after sampling’ at the end of the paragraph. 

Article 12.2.5.

In points 1(a) and 2, the Code Commission proposed to replace ‘animals’ with ‘horses’, for consistency with other text. 

In point 2(a), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to delete ‘stallion’ after ‘teaser’ as not only stallions may be used as teasers (e.g. teaser mares to test stallions).

In point 2(b), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to amend the text to consider any practice that may represent a transmission risk other than genital examinations. The Commission noted that other practices might represent a risk, and that risks associated with genital examination could be managed if performed under adequate conditions by veterinarians.

Article 12.2.6.

In point 3(b), the Code Commission amended the text to align with  amendments made in point 2 (b) of Article 12.2.4. 

In point 3(b), the Code Commission agreed with a comment and amended the text in line with amendments made it point 2(b)(ii), to include measures to manage the risks of infection during the period between testing and shipping. 

Article 12.2.8.

In the third paragraph, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to replace ‘farmers’ with ‘owners, breeders’ for  clarity. 

In point 4, in the first paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to amend the text to provide further details on serological surveillance, as it considered that the text was clear as written and noted that further details are presented in the corresponding chapter of the *Terrestrial Manual*. The Commission agreed to replace ‘culture’ by ‘agent identification’ to align with the *Terrestrial Manual*. 

The revised Chapter 12.2. Contagious equine metritis is presented as Annex 10, for Member comments.

4.7.	Infection with equine influenza virus (Chapter 12.6.)

Comments were received from Argentina, Australia, China (People’s Rep. of), Switzerland and the EU.

Background

At its February 2019 meeting, the Code Commission had proposed amendments to Article 12.6.6. of Chapter 12.6. Infection with equine influenza virus based on the outcomes of work by an OIE Reference Laboratory for equine influenza regarding equine influenza vaccination protocols prior to shipment of horses. The revised article has been circulated four times for comments, the last time in the Commission’s September 2020 report.

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission reviewed the comments received on the revised Article 12.6.6 and a proposal to revise the case definition which had been endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its February 2021 meeting. The Commission noted that the proposed amendments to the case definition would require consequential changes in other articles and agreed to defer its discussion until its September 2021 meeting. 

At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission was not able to discuss this item due to time constraints. 

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received on the revised Article 12.6.6. circulated in its September 2020 report. In addition, it reviewed the entire chapter and proposed further amendments to include the proposed case definition endorsed by the Scientific Commission in February 2021 and align the text as necessary. The Code Commission also included recommendations for the temporary importation of horses in line with the new approach taken for the proposed revised Chapter 12.2. Contagious equine metritis and Chapter 12.7. Equine piroplasmosis.

**Article 12.6.1.**

In the first paragraph, the Code Commission added ‘captive wild equids’ to the definition of the disease as proposed in the case definition endorsed by the Scientific Commission, and added ‘with equine influenza virus (EIV), i.e. influenza A viruses (H7N7 and H3N8)’ to provide further precision regarding the pathogenic agent which was also in line with Chapter 3.6.7. Equine influenza (infection with equine influenza virus) of the *Terrestrial Manual*.

After the second paragraph, the Code Commission added new text to define the occurrence of infection with EIV. 

The Code Commission deleted the paragraph defining ‘isolation’, as it considered that this concept would be covered by the changes made to address the new recommendations for the temporary importation of horses. 

The Code Commission included a new paragraph describing the meaning of ‘a temporary importation’, in line with the text included in the proposed revised Chapter 12.2. and Chapter 12.7. 

**Article 12.6.2.**

The Code Commission amended the text to ensure consistency with similar articles in the *Terrestrial Code*.

The Code Commission added ‘meat and meat products from equids that have been slaughtered in a slaughterhouse/abattoir and have been subjected to ante- and post-mortem inspections with favourable results’, as a ‘safe commodity’ and consequently proposed to delete Article 12.6.8. 

**Article 12.6.3.**

In point 3), the Code Commission added ‘and captive wild’ after ‘domestic’, to  align with the proposed changes in Article 12.6.1. 

**Article 12.6.4.**

In the second paragraph, the Code Commission added ‘captive wild’ after ‘domestic’, to align with the proposed changes in Article 12.6.1. 

In the third paragraph, the Code Commission mission added ‘and be in accordance with relevant requirements and principles described in Chapter 4.4. and Chapter 4.5.’ for consistency with other chapters in the *Terrestrial Code*.

**New Article 12.6.4 bis.**

The Code Commission proposed to add a new Article 12.6.4. ‘Recovery of free status’ for consistency with other chapters in the *Terrestrial Code*. The text was based on the recommendations contained in the last paragraph of current Article 12.6.4., which was consequently proposed to be deleted.  

**Article 12.6.5.**

The Code Commission amended the title of the article to  align with the proposed changes in Article 12.6.1.

**Article 12.6.6.**

The Code Commission amended the title to  align with the proposed changes in Article 12.6.1. and for consistency with other chapters of the *Terrestrial Code*. 

In point 3 (b), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to remove the point, as it considered that there was sufficient data supporting the proposal which had also been endorsed by the Laboratories Commission and the Scientific Commission as noted in previous reports. The Commission reminded Members that countries wanting to apply more stringent requirements can do so if the requirements were justified by an import risk analysis conducted in accordance with Chapter 2.1. 

In the last paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment requesting to replace the test on samples collected on two occasions by a single testing. The Commission noted that the specifications presented in the ‘Table 1’ of *Terrestrial Manual* chapter do not provide sufficient assurance. Additionally, in consultation with the Laboratories Commission, the Commission considered that the specific additional recommendations in the last paragraph would only be justified for rare cases,  i.e. countries that are free from infection with EIV or are undertaking an eradication programme.  

**Article 12.6.7.**

The Code Commission amended the title and text of the article from ‘Recommendations for the importation of domestic equids which will be kept in isolation’ to ‘Recommendations for the temporary importation of domestic horses’ to align with the approach being proposed in the revised Chapter 12.2. Contagious equine metritis and Chapter 12.7. Equine piroplasmosis. 

The Code Commission also amended the content of the article to  align  with the new approach. 

**Article 12.6.8.**

The Code Commission agreed to delete this article as a consequence of the proposal to include ‘meat and meat products from animals that have been slaughtered in a slaughterhouse/abattoir and have been subjected to ante- and post-mortem inspections with favourable results’ in the list of safe commodities in Article 12.6.2. 

The revised Chapter 12.6. Infection with equine influenza virus is presented as **Annex 11**, for Member comments.

4.8.	Equine piroplasmosis (Chapter 12.7.)

Comments were received from Australia, Canada, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Switzerland, Thailand, the USA, the AU-IBAR and the EU.

Background

At its February 2019 meeting, the Code Commission agreed to amend Chapter 12.7. Equine piroplasmosis to include requirements for the temporary movement of horses and it agreed that given this chapter had not been reviewed for some time, a comprehensive revision should be undertaken. The Commission requested that experts be convened to undertake this work. 

An electronic expert consultation was conducted between September and December 2019 and its report, including the draft revised chapter, was endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its February 2020 meeting (refer to the Scientific Commission's February 2020 report). 

At its September 2020 meeting, the Code Commission considered the revised draft Chapter 12.7., made additional amendments, and circulated the revised chapter for comments. 

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission reviewed the comments received and agreed to defer its discussion until its September 2021 meeting, given that time constraints did not allow for a detailed discussion. 

The OIE Secretariat requested the advice of the Scientific Commission and the Laboratories Commission on selected comments. The Scientific Commission asked for additional expert advice and an OIE expert group on equine piroplasmosis and contagious equine metritis was consulted electronically between May and July 2021, the outcome of which was discussed in its September 2021 meeting.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received and the advice  from the Scientific Commission, the Laboratories Commission and subject-matter experts. 

**Title of the chapter**

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment to replace ‘and’ by ‘or’ for alignment with the text of Article 12.7.1. The Commission explained that the title of the chapter corresponds to the name of the OIE listed disease (whose reference in Chapter 1.3. will be updated when the chapter is proposed for adoption) and it covers both pathogenic agents *Theileria equi* and *Babesia caballi.* The text in Article 12.7.1., on the other hand, uses the word ‘or’ as it refers to animals infected with either of the two pathogenic agents.

**Article 12.7.1.**

In the first paragraph, in response to comments and a proposal from the expert group, the Code Commission agreed to amend the text for clarity and to expressly include asymptomatic infections in the scope of the chapter. 

In the second paragraph, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to amend the text for clarity. 

In the third paragraph, the Code Commission, in agreement with the opinion of the Scientific Commission and the expert group, did not agree with comments to include the genera *Ixodes* and *Haemaphysalis* as vectors for equine piroplasmosis. The Commission noted that these genera were not included in the *Terrestrial Manual*chapter. This response applies to similar comments received for other articles. 

In response to a comment seeking clarification on the use of terms ‘competent vectors’ and ‘competent tick vectors’ in the *Terrestrial Code* and requesting the inclusion of genera or species of competent vectors in all relevant chapters, the Code Commission referred Members to the rationale presented in its February 2021 report where it had agreed that there was no added value in defining these terms for the purpose of the *Terrestrial Code*, and that it would not be feasible to provide a detailed and up-to-date list of competent vectors for every disease and that such a list may also vary by region. The Commission highlighted that the detailed provisions for surveillance of arthropod vectors is provided in Chapter 1.5. Surveillance for arthropod vectors of animal diseases.

In points 1, 2, and 3, in response to comments, and in agreement with the opinion of the Scientific Commission and the expert group, the Code Commission amended the text to take account of asymptomatic carriers. 

In point 3, the Code Commission, in agreement with the Scientific Commission, did not agree with a comment that the text should include a requirement for a treatment history in  presence of antibodies specific to *T. equi* or *B. caballi.*The Commission did not consider that this was relevant for this text, as the detection of antibodies specific to *T. equi* or *B. caballi* in a sample from an equid, if associated with clinical or pathological signs consistent with infection with *T. equi* or *B. caballi* or epidemiologically linked to a confirmed or suspected case, should be considered a ‘case’ irrespective of whether the animal had been treated or not. 

In the eighth paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to specify different incubation periods for *T. equi* and *B. caballi*,**as it considered that it was not relevant in this context, nor possible to differentiate the two diseases based on their clinical signs, and for safety reasons the longest incubation period should be retained.

In the penultimate paragraph, the Code Commission agreed to amend the text to harmonise it with the other revised chapters where the meaning of 'temporary importation' of horses was provided. The Commission noted that this text is aimed at clarifying that only horses destined to be exported at the end of the stay, for which the conditions are required to leave the country or zone, should be defined in advance. The fact that some of these animals may eventually be slaughtered as an exceptional outcome in the importing country does not have to be explicitly stated in the definition. 

In the last paragraph, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to delete ‘and vaccines’, noting that there are no standards for vaccines for equine piroplasmosis described in the *Terrestrial Manual*. 

**Article 12.7.3.**

In point 1, the Code Commission, in agreement with the Scientific Commission and the expert group, did not agree with comments requesting that countries should be able to claim historical freedom from *T. equi* or *B. caballi.*It considered that the vast majority of cases of infection with either pathogenic agent was asymptomatic and therefore it would not comply with provisions in Article 1.4.6. 

In point 2(a)(i), the Code Commission, in agreement with the Scientific Commission and the expert group, did not agree with a comment requesting to  reduce ‘six years’ to ‘two years’ for consistency with the provisions for theileriosis. The Commission encouraged Members to refer to the rationale provided by the experts in its 2021 report. 

In points 2(a)(i) and (ii), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to distinguish equine piroplasmosis due to iatrogenic transmission, illegal movement from endemic countries, and/or importation of illegal blood products, as it considered it was not relevant in the context of defining freedom. 

In points 2(a)(ii) and (iii), in response to comments, and in agreement with the Scientific Commission and the expert group, the Code Commission amended the text to reflect that demonstration of the absence of competent vectors alone is not sufficient, and vector surveillance should be always  carried out in conjunction with animal surveillance. The Commission encouraged Members to refer to the rationale provided by the experts in its 2021 report. This response also applied to other related comments. 

In point 2(b), in response to comments, and in agreement with the Scientific Commission and the expert group, the Code Commission amended the text to clarify that the animal health status of a country or zone should not be affected by the temporary importation of seropositive or infective horses, provided the provisions in Article 12.7.6. are met and an epidemiological investigation has been conducted with favourable results ensuring that there had been no transmission of disease. The Commission encouraged Members to refer to the rationale provided by the expert group in its 2021 report. 

In point 2(c), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to simplify the text and refer only to the specific provisions in Article 12.7.9. 

**Article 12.7.5.**

In point 2(b)(i), in response to comments, and in agreement with the Laboratories Commission, the Code Commission amended the text to clarify that the requirement refers to both serological tests and agent identification tests with molecular techniques for the detection of *T. equi* and *B. caballi*. The Commission noted that this recommendation is aligned with the respective *Terrestrial Manual* chapter and with previous opinions of the Laboratories Commission as reported in its February 2020 report.

In point 2(b)(ii), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to remove ‘and throughout the transport to the destination country or zone’, as it considered it was not possible for exporting countries to certify in advance about the compliance during transport to a destination country.

In the same point, the Code Commission agreed with comments to cover the risk of iatrogenic transmission of disease and amended the text in line with changes proposed  elsewhere in the chapter. 

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add a new point 2(b)(iii) requiring that the animals had never  returned a positive test for *T. equi* and *B. caballi*, as it considered it was not proportionate to risk and would not be possible for exporting countries to certify. 

**Article 12.7.6.**

In point 2(b), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to include additional details on the need to identify ticks found during examinations, as it considered that was implicit in the current text.

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add a point 2(d) requiring that temporarily imported horses should be isolated from other horses during their stay in the country, as this was already covered by point 2(a). 

**Article 12.7.8.**

In points 3 and 3(b), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to amend the text to clarify that the requirements apply to equids. 

**Article 12.7.9.**

In the first paragraph of point 1, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to remove unnecessary details.

In the second paragraph of point 1, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to remove the requirement for an active programme of surveillance of equids to detect evidence of infection with 

*T. equi* and *B. caballi*because it was not justifiable for countries with a naive population. In agreement with the Scientific Commission and the expert group, the Code Commission considered that due to the high percentage of subclinical cases, even in a naive population, an active animal surveillance programme would be essential to detect infection with *T. equi* and *B. caballi*.

In point 3, in the first paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to replace ‘detect evidence’ by ‘demonstrate the absence’, as the current wording was consistent with the requirements for country or zone freedom in Article 12.7.3.

The revised Chapter 12.2. Contagious equine metritis is presented as **Annex 12**, for Member comments.

4.9.	New chapter on infection with *Theileria lestoquardi*, *T. luwenshuni* and *T. uilenbergi* (Chapter 14.X.) and revision of Article 1.3.3.

Comments were received from Canada, New Caledonia, South Africa, Switzerland, Thailand, AU-IBAR and the EU (on text circulated in the Code Commission’s September 2017 report).

Background

A new Chapter 14.X. Infection with *Theileria lestoquardi*, *T. luwenshuni* and *T. uilenbergi* was first circulated for comment in the Code Commission’s September 2017 report, following the work of the *ad hoc* Group on Theileriosis that met in February 2017. At the Code Commission’s February 2018 meeting, in response to some comments which questioned the listing of some *Theileria* spp., the Commission agreed to seek expert advice regarding listing and to put on hold its review of comments received.

At its September 2019 meeting, the Code Commission was informed that *Theileria lestoquardi*, *T. luwenshuni* and *T. uilenbergi* had been assessed by experts against the criteria for listing in accordance with Chapter 1.2. and were found to meet the criteria for listing (refer to Annex 19 of February 2019 report of the Scientific Commission). 

At its September 2020 meeting, the Code Commission noted that there were no recommendations for diagnostic tests for these pathogenic agents in the *Terrestrial Manual*. As this would impact the case definition and appropriate diagnostic tests to be recommended in the chapter, the Code Commission agreed not to progress this work until the Laboratories Commission progressed the work on a new chapter for the *Terrestrial Manual*.

At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission was informed that the Laboratories Commission would circulate for comments a new chapter for the *Terrestrial Manual* that would be proposed for adoption in May 2022.

Discussion

**Article 1.3.3.**

Given that *Theileria lestoquardi*, *T. luwenshuni* and *T. uilenbergi* met the criteria for listing in accordance with Chapter 1.2. and that the revised Article 1.3.2. (to replace ‘Theileriosis’ with ‘infection with *Theileria annulata*, *Theileria orientalis* and *Theileria parva*’) will be proposed for adoption in May 2022, the Code Commission agreed that ‘Infection with *Theileria lestoquardi*, *T. luwenshuni* and *T. uilenbergi*’ should be added to Article 1.3.3.

**New Chapter 14.X.**

Given that a new chapter for the *Terrestrial Manual* would be proposed for adoption in May 2022, the Code Commission agreed to consider comments received on the proposed new Chapter 14.X. circulated in its September 2017 report.

Given the similarity in structure and contents between the new chapter and the revised Chapter 11.10. Infection with *Theileria annulata*, *T. orientalis* and *T. parva* which will be proposed for adoption in May 2022 (see Annex XVI of Part A of the  report), the Code Commission proposed to amend Chapter 14.X. where appropriate to align with the revised Chapter 11.10. In this regard, the Commission encouraged Members to refer to the relevant discussions noted in its September 2020 and 2021 meeting reports for the detailed rationale of these amendments.

**General comment on Chapter 14.X.**

In response to comments to include all *Theileria* spp. in one chapter, the Code Commission reiterated that given the host specificity of different *Theileria* spp. and the respective epidemiological roles of host species, maintaining separate chapters was justified and would be easier for Members to understand the relevant recommendations for control and management of *Theileria* in different species, including surveillance. The Commission emphasised that this approach would also facilitate trade, by clarifying necessary information that should be certified on international veterinary certificates. 

**Article 14.X.1.**

In the last paragraph, given that no commercial vaccines are available for infection with *Theileria lestoquardi*, *T. luwenshuni* and *T. uilenbergi* (in accordance with the draft Chapter 3.8.13. in the *Terrestrial Manual* which was circulated in September 2021 report of the Laboratories Commission), the Code Commission agreed to delete the reference to vaccines.

**Article 14.X.5.**

In point 4, given that all the serological tests are rated as ‘not appropriate’ method for individual animal freedom from infection prior to movement in the Table 1 of the draft Chapter 3.8.13. in the *Terrestrial Manual*, the Code Commission proposed to delete the reference to serological tests.

The revised Chapter 14.X. and the revised Article 1.3.3. are presented as **Annex 13** and **Annex 5** respectively, for Member comments.

4.10.	Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) (New Chapter X.X.)  

Background

In September 2019 the Code Commission added the development of a disease-specific chapter for Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) to its work programme and agreed to start work pending adoption of ‘infection of dromedary camels with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus’ as an OIE listed disease in Chapter 1.3. and the adoption of a new corresponding chapter in the *Terrestrial Manual*.

An OIE *ad hoc* Group on MERS-CoV met in 2019 to develop the *Terrestrial**Manual* chapter as well as a case definition which had been placed on the OIE website to facilitate notification by Members. 

The inclusion of ‘Infection of dromedary camels with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus’ in the OIE list of diseases (Article 1.3.9. of the *Terrestrial Code*) and the new Chapter 3.5.2., Middle East respiratory syndrome (infection of dromedary camels with MERS-CoV), in the *Terrestrial Manual* were adopted in May 2021.

Discussion

The Code Commission discussed the development of a new *Terrestrial Code*chapter for infection of dromedary camels with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus and considered the recommendations of the *ad hoc* Group on MERS-CoV as well as the newly adopted *Terrestrial Manual* chapter. 

The Commission noted that several studies had confirmed dromedary camels (*Camelus dromedarius*) as the natural host and zoonotic source of MERS-CoV infection in humans, and that MERS-CoV has been associated with mild upper respiratory signs in dromedary camels. The Commission agreed that while the impact of MERS-CoV on animal health is very low, human infections have a significant public health impact. The Commission noted that other species might be susceptible to infection with MERS-CoV, but their epidemiological significance has not yet been demonstrated.

The Code Commission reminded Members that the Code Commission and the Scientific Commission had agreed that there was a need to better understand the transmission dynamics in animal populations and mechanisms of zoonotic transmission to humans before recommending risk mitigation measures in the *Terrestrial Code*.

Based on these considerations, the Code Commission agreed to develop a new chapter for infection with MERS-CoV, but only include at this stage general provisions, including the definition of its occurrence. 

The Code Commission noted that once this new chapter is adopted, possibly with changes accompanying the commenting process, the case definition on the OIE website should be either aligned or removed. 

The Code Commission noted that, as the new chapter defines the susceptible hosts for the disease (i.e. human and dromedary camels), these should no longer be specified in the name of the listed disease in Article 1.3.9., and should be amended to ‘Infection with Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV)’. The Commission agreed to propose the amendments to Article 1.3.9. only after the proposed new chapter had undergone a few rounds of comments.

The proposed new Chapter X.X. Infection with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus is presented as **Annex 14**, for Member comments.

4.11.	Leishmaniosis (New Chapter X.Y.)

Background

Leishmaniosis was included as an OIE listed disease in Article 1.3.9. of the *Terrestrial Code*. 

In September 2020, the Code Commission agreed to include the development of a new disease-specific chapter on Leishmaniosis in its work plan, pending the review of amendments that were being proposed to the corresponding chapter in the *Terrestrial Manual*. 

In February 2021, the Scientific Commission endorsed a case definition developed by subject matter experts which has been placed on the OIE website to support Members’ notification. A revised Chapter 3.1.11. Leishmaniosis of the *Terrestrial**Manual* was adopted in 2021.

Discussion

The Code Commission discussed the development of a new *Terrestrial Code* chapter for Leishmaniosis and considered the experts’ recommendations and the newly adopted *Terrestrial Manual* chapter.

Based on these considerations, the Code Commission developed a new chapter on ‘Infection with Leishmania spp.’ but only included general provisions, including the definition of its occurrence.  

The Code Commission noted that once this new chapter is adopted, possibly with changes accompanying the commenting process, the case definition on the OIE website should be either aligned or removed.

The Code Commission agreed that the name of the listed disease in Article 1.3.9, Leishmaniosis, should be amended to ‘Infection with Leishmania spp.’ in line with the current conventions for the *Terrestrial Code*. The Commission agreed to propose the amendments to Article 1.3.9. only after the proposed new chapter had undergone a few rounds of comments.

The proposed new Chapter X.Y. Infection with Leishmania spp. is presented as **Annex 15**, for Member comments.

5.	Other updates

5.1.	OIE Observatory

The OIE Secretariat updated the Code Commission on the progress of the OIE Observatory. The Commission was informed that the OIE Observatory will evaluate the implementation of the OIE standards. To this end, information already collected by the OIE as well as data available from other international organisations such as the World Trade Organization will be used. The findings of the Observatory will then be published in a format that maintains confidentiality of the involved parties. A pilot phase was undertaken during 2020 and 2021 to identify internal and external sources of information that could be used to monitor the implementation of OIE standards. The OIE Secretariat informed that, to this end, several prototypes were developed focusing on specific animal diseases and on horizontal topics, which allowed for the identification of possible indicators to develop an implementation review report that is planned to be published at the end of 2022. It also noted that the pilot phase had also informed on OIE processes that could be improved to better address Members’ needs. Lastly, the OIE Secretariat informed that the OIE Panorama had published a special edition about the Observatory in December 2021, which provided further detail.

The Code Commission thanked the information and highlighted that the OIE Observatory would be a valuable source of information for the Commission to identify Members’ needs, to continue ensuring that the *Terrestrial**Code* standards remain fit for purpose to the realities of Members, and for the prioritisation of the Commission’s work. 

Moreover, the Code Commission noted that the OIE Observatory would provide important material to design targeted capacity-building activities for Members around the implementation of OIE standards.

The Code Commission expressed its commitment to further develop the liaison with this OIE programme and requested the OIE Secretariat to update the Commission on the progress and publication of the implementation review report to discuss further actions.

5.2.	OIE Digitalisation strategy

The OIE Secretariat updated the Code Commission on the implementation of the OIE Digitalisation strategy. The OIE Secretariat informed the Commission that digital transformation was identified as a key objective in the OIE 7th Strategic Plan as an important response to trends and challenges arising from societal expectations for modern and agile organisations and the increasing application of information technologies to support regulation for animal health, animal welfare and veterinary public health.

The Secretariat noted that through Strategic Objective two ‘Data governance’ of the 7th Strategic Plan, the OIE would put in place a strong digital culture and drive innovative data use to transform how it worked digitally. It also highlighted that the OIE aims to leverage the opportunities that information technology offers to achieve concrete results to enhance the services it provides to its Members.

The Code Commission was briefed on different initiatives within the OIE Digitalisation strategy that would impact the way the Commission works. The Commission noted that some of the digitalisation work would require identifying key referential data within the *Terrestrial Code,* which are critical for its use and standardising this information in terms of structure, format, and content. The Commission noted that such key referential data would involve items such as: name of diseases, susceptible species, pathogenic agents, definition of occurrence/case, names of commodities including safe commodities, sanitary measures, among others, and highlighted that the Commission has already started working towards these goals with initiatives such as the development of a “Framework for Terrestrial Code standards” (see item 3.1.13. of this report) and the “SOP on Commodities” (see item 3.1.14. of this report), or the joint work with the Scientific Commission to develop missing or incomplete “case definitions”. 

The Code Commission expressed its commitment to contributing to the digital transformation of the OIE and stressed its availability to support the initiatives aiming at improving the access, use and understanding of the OIE standards and their setting process. The Commission requested the OIE Secretariat to be kept informed and involved, as relevant, of the progress of the relevant initiatives under the OIE digitalisation strategy.

5.3.	GBADs - Global Burden of Animal Diseases

The OIE Secretariat informed the Code Commission that the Global Burden of Animal Diseases programme continues to work on developing methodologies to assess the economic burden of animal diseases in a systematic manner including net loss of production, expenditure and trade impacts. It noted that focus was on refining methodologies to enable initial estimates of disease burden, gathering data, and advancing work on the prototype of an analytics platform. The Commission was briefed on the methodology development, initial outcomes from country case studies to test methods developed, recent publications, and activities of the first OIE Collaborating Centre of Animal Health. In addition, the Commission was also informed that an *ad hoc* Group on Economics of Animal Health would be established to undertake a high-level review of the proposed GBADs methodologies for estimating the Global Burden of Animal Health and develop a guideline, based on the review, for OIE Members with the intention of proposing a draft OIE standards on the matter.

The Code Commission expressed its interest in the matter and noted that the outcomes of this programme would be a critical input for the Commission to identify and prioritise this possible future work, and to understand not only the impact of diseases but also the impact of the measures provided in the *Terrestrial Code*. The Commission highlighted that the outcomes of GBADs should be a valuable tool to facilitate its considerations on the need and value of developing standards, such as the inclusion of diseases in the OIE list.

The Code Commission expressed its commitment to further liaison with this programme and offered the possibility for a member of the Commission to join the *ad hoc* Group on Economics of Animal Health when relevant. 

6.	Date of next meeting

The next meeting will be held from 13 to 22 September 2022.

_______________________

OIE •12, rue de Prony • 75017 Paris • FranceTel.: 33 (0)1 44 15 18 88 • Fax: 33 (0)1 42 67 09 87 • www.oie.int • oie@oie.int

2	*OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission/February 2022*

*OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission/February 2022*3

# image1.jpg