Standards Department

[TCC.Secretariat@woah.org]

Report of the Meeting of 

WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health

Standards Commission

Original: English (EN)

13 to 22 September 2022

Paris

Introduction and Member contribution

The WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission (hereafter the ‘Code Commission’) thanked the following 

Members for providing comments: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China (People’s Republic of), Chinese 

Taipei, Japan, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Mexico, Norway, Republic of Korea, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland, 

Thailand, the United Kingdom (UK), the United States of America (USA), Members of the WOAH Americas Region, the 

Member States of the European Union (EU), the African Union Inter-African Bureau for Animal Resources (AU-IBAR) on 

behalf of African Members of WOAH. The Commission also thanked the following organisations for providing comments: 

the Global Alliance of Pet Food Associations (GAPFA), the International Coalition for Farm Animal Welfare (ICFAW), the 

World Renderers Organization (WRO), as well as various experts of the WOAH scientific network.

The Code Commission reviewed all comments that were clear, submitted prior to the deadline and were supported by a 

rationale. Due to the large number of comments, the Commission was not able to provide a detailed explanation on 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 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 in yellow to distinguish them 

from those made previously. 

Status of annexes

Texts in Annexes 4 to 21 are presented for comments and will be proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in 

May 2023. Texts in Annexes 3 and 22 to 28 are presented for comments. 

How to submit comments

The Code Commission strongly encourages Members and International Organisations that have a Cooperative Agreement 

with WOAH to participate in the development of WOAH International Standards by submitting comments on this report and 

on relevant annexes of this report. All comments should be submitted to WOAH through the WOAH Delegates of Members 

or from organisations with which the WOAH has a Cooperative Agreement.

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, 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 the relevant entity and Members are encouraged to review these reports together with the report of the 

Code Commission. These reports are no longer annexed to the Commission’s report. Instead, they are available on the 

dedicated webpages on the WOAH website, e.g., ad hoc Group reports: 

https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/standards/standards-setting-process/ad-hoc-groups/

Comments should be submitted as Word files rather than pdf files. Comments should be presented in the relevant annex, 

and include any amendments to the proposed text, supported by a rationale or by published scientific references. Proposed 

deletions should be indicated in ‘strikethrough’ and proposed additions with ‘double underlined’. Members should not use 

the automatic ‘track-changes’ function provided by Word processing software, as such changes may be lost in the process 

of collating submissions into working documents. 

Deadline for comments 

Comments on relevant texts in this report must reach the Headquarters by 30 December 2022 to be considered at the 

February 2023 meeting of the Code Commission.

Where to send comments

All comments should be sent to the Standards Department at: TCC.Secretariat@woah.org 

Date of the next meeting

The Code Commission noted the dates for its next meeting: 7 to 17 February 2023.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 2

Table of Contents

1. Welcome.................................................................................................................................................................... 5

1.1. Deputy Director General-International Standards and Science ...................................................... 5

1.2. Director General .............................................................................................................................. 5

2. Adoption of the agenda............................................................................................................................................ 5

3. Cooperation with Other Specialist Commissions.................................................................................................. 5

3.1. Scientific Commission for Animal Diseases .................................................................................... 5

3.2. Biological Standards Commission ................................................................................................... 6

3.3. Aquatic Animals Health Standards Commission ............................................................................. 7

4. Work Programme and priorities .............................................................................................................................. 7

4.1. Ongoing priority topics (other than texts circulated for comments) ................................................. 7

4.1.1. New chapter on biosecurity (Chapter 4.X.)........................................................................... 7

4.1.2. Revision of Chapters 5.4. to 5.7. .......................................................................................... 8

4.1.3. New chapter on Animal welfare and laying hen production systems (Chapter 7.Z.)............ 9

4.1.4. Revision of Chapter 7.5. Slaughter of animals (Chapter 7.5.) and Glossary definitions for 

‘death’, ‘distress’, ‘euthanasia’, ‘pain’, ‘slaughter’, ‘stunning’ and ‘suffering’. ....................... 9

4.1.5. Revision of Chapter 7.6. ‘Killing for disease control purposes’............................................. 9

4.1.6. New chapter on infection with Trypanosoma evansi (Surra).............................................. 10

4.1.7. Harmonisation Code chapters related to official recognition of status by the WOAH ........ 10

4.1.8. Terminology ........................................................................................................................ 11

4.1.8.1. Use of terms ‘animal-based measures’ and ‘measurables’.................................... 11

4.1.8.2. Use of terms ‘Competent Authority’, ‘Veterinary Authority’, ‘Veterinary Services’’ 11

4.2. Items under consideration for inclusion in the work programme................................................... 12

4.2.1. Surveillance of diseases of wildlife (from Wildlife Working Group) .................................... 12

4.2.2. Infection with Brucella abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis (Chapter 8.4.)........................... 12

4.2.3. Infection with peste des petits ruminants virus (Chapter 14.7.).......................................... 13

4.2.4. Melioidosis .......................................................................................................................... 13

4.3. New proposals and requests for inclusion in the work programme............................................... 13

4.3.1. Electronic certification (Chapter 5.2. Certification procedures) .......................................... 13

4.3.2. Request to revise Terrestrial Code Chapter 5.8. International transfer and Laboratory 

containment of animal pathogenic agents .......................................................................... 14

4.3.3. Use of antiparasitic drugs ................................................................................................... 14

4.3.4. The ‘Five domains’ as an animal welfare concept.............................................................. 15

4.3.5. Requests to revise Chapter 8.10. ‘Japanese encephalitis’ and Chapter 12.11. ‘Venezuelan 

equine encephalomyelitis’................................................................................................... 15

4.3.6. Avian mycoplasmosis (Chapter 10.5.)................................................................................ 16

4.4. Follow-up on chapters recently adopted........................................................................................ 16

4.4.1. Infection with Theileria annulata, T. orientalis and T. parva (Chapter 11.10.).................... 16

4.5. Prioritisation of items in the work programme ............................................................................... 17
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 3

5. Texts circulated for comments and proposed for adoption in May 2023 .......................................................... 18

5.1. User’s Guide .................................................................................................................................. 18

5.2. Glossary definition for ‘poultry’....................................................................................................... 18

5.3. Infection with foot and mouth disease virus (Chapter 8.8.) ........................................................... 19

5.4. Infection with rabies virus (Articles 8.14.6bis. and 8.14.7. of Chapter 8.14) ................................. 25

5.5. Infection with Rift Valley fever virus (Chapter 8.15.) ..................................................................... 27

5.6. Infection with Newcastle disease virus (Article 10.9.1.) ................................................................ 28

5.7. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (Chapter 11.4.; Chapter 1.8.; Glossary definition for ‘protein 

meal’ and use of related terms)..................................................................................................... 29

5.8. Contagious equine metritis (Chapter 12.2.)................................................................................... 35

5.9. Infection with equine influenza virus (Chapter 12.6.) .................................................................... 37

5.10. Equine piroplasmosis (Chapter 12.7.) ........................................................................................... 38

5.11. Infection with Theileria lestoquardi, T. luwenshuni and T. uilenbergi (New Chapter 14.X.) and 

revision of Article 1.3.3. ................................................................................................................. 41

5.12. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) (New Chapter X.X.).................... 42

5.13. Infection with leishmania spp. (leishmaniosis) (New Chapter X.Y.) .............................................. 43

5.14. Terminology: Use of terms ‘fetal’, ‘foetal’, ‘fetus’ and ‘foetus’........................................................ 43

5.15. Terminology: Use of terms ‘bovid’, ‘bovidae’, ‘bovine’ and ‘cattle’ ................................................ 43

5.16. Terminology: Use of terms ‘enzootic’, ‘endemic’, ‘epizootic’ and ‘epidemic’ ................................. 44

6. Texts circulated for comments.............................................................................................................................. 45

6.1. Revision of Chapter 4.6. ‘Collection and processing of semen of animals’................................... 45

6.2. Responsible and prudent use of antimicrobial agents in veterinary medicine (Chapter 6.10.)..... 46

6.3. Infection with Coxiella burnetii (Q fever) (New Chapter 8.X.)........................................................ 47

6.4. Infection with Mycoplasma mycoides subsp. Mycoides SC (Contagious bovine pleuropneumonia) 

(Chapter 11.5.)............................................................................................................................... 48

6.5. Infection with bovine pestiviruses (bovine viral diarrhoea) (New Chapter 11.X.).......................... 48

6.6. African horse sickness (Chapter 12.1) .......................................................................................... 49

6.7. Infection with Camelpox virus (New Chapter X.Z.)........................................................................ 49

7. Updates on WOAH initiatives relevant to the Code Commission....................................................................... 50

7.1. WOAH Observatory ....................................................................................................................... 50

7.2. Global Burden of Animal Diseases (GBADs) ................................................................................ 50

7.3. WOAH Wildlife health framework .................................................................................................. 51

7.4. WOAH Global animal welfare strategy .......................................................................................... 51

7.5. Terrestrial Code data standardisation ........................................................................................... 51

7.5.1. Framework for Terrestrial Code standards ......................................................................... 51

7.5.2. Commodities ....................................................................................................................... 52

7.5.3. Codification ......................................................................................................................... 52

8. Updates on other standard-setting bodies and international organisations..................................................... 53

8.1. Update on Codex’s works.............................................................................................................. 53

8.2. IATA Live Animal Regulation amendments ................................................................................... 53
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 4

List of Annexes

Annex 1. Adopted Agenda

Annex 2. List of Participants

Annex 3. Item 4.5. – Work programme

Annex 4. Item 5.1. – User’s guide

Annex 5. Items 5.2. and 5.7. – Glossary definitions

Annex 6. Item 5.3. – Chapter 8.8. Infection with foot and mouth disease virus

Annex 7. Item 5.4. – Articles 8.14.6bis, 8.14.7. and 8.14.11bis of Chapter 8.14. Infection with rabies virus

Annex 8. Item 5.5. – Chapter 8.15. Infection with Rift Valley fever virus

Annex 9. Item 5.6. – Article 10.9.1. of Chapter 10.9. Infection with Newcastle disease virus

Annex 10. Item 5.7. – Chapter 11.4. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy

Annex 11. Item 5.7. – Chapter 1.8. Application for official recognition by the OIE of risk status for bovine 

spongiform encephalopathy

Annex 12. Item 5.8. – Chapter 12.2. Contagious equine metritis

Annex 13. Item 5.9. – Chapter 12.6. Infection with equine influenza virus

Annex 14. Item 5.10. – Chapter 12.7. Equine piroplasmosis

Annex 15. Item 5.11. – Chapter 14.X. Infection with Theileria lestoquardi, T. luwenshuni and T. uilenbergi

Annex 16. Item 5.11. – Article 1.3.3. of Chapter 1.3. Diseases, infections and infestations listed by the OIE.

Annex 17. Item 5.12. – Chapter X.X. Infection with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV)

Annex 18. Item 5.13. – Chapter X.Y. Infection with Leishmania spp. (Leishmaniosis)

Annex 19. Item 5.14. – Terminology ‘fetal, ‘foetal’, ‘fetus’ and ‘foetus’

Annex 20. Item 5.15. – Terminology ‘bovid’, ‘bovidae’, ‘bovine’ and ‘cattle’

Annex 21. Item 5.16. – Terminology ‘enzootic’, ‘endemic’, ‘epizootic’ and ‘epidemic’: Articles 4.19.1 & 9.3.1.

Annex 22. Item 6.1. – Chapter 4.6. General hygiene in semen collection, processing and storage

Annex 23. Item 6.2. – Chapter 6.10. Responsible and prudent use of antimicrobial agents in veterinary medicine

Annex 24. Item 6.3. – Chapter 8.X. Infection with Coxiella burneti (Q fever)

Annex 25. Item 6.4 – Chapter 11.5. Infection with mycoplasma mycoides susp. Mycoides SC (Contagious Bovine 

Pleuropneumonia)

Annex 26. Item 6.5. – Chapter 11.X. Infection with Bovine Pestiviruses (Bovine viral diarrhoea)

Annex 27. Item 6.6. – Chapter 12.1. Infection with African horse sickness virus

Annex 28. Item 6.7. – Chapter X.Z. Infection with Camelpox virus
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 5 

1. Welcome 

1.1. Deputy Director General-International Standards and Science

Dr Montserrat Arroyo, the WOAH Deputy Director General, International Standards and Science (WOAH DDG ISS), 

welcomed members of the Code Commission and thanked them for their ongoing contributions to the work of WOAH. 

Dr Arroyo commended the Commission for its ambitious agenda and extended her appreciation to the members’ 

employing institutions and national governments.

Dr Arroyo briefed the Commission on the intent to host the 90th General Session as a physical meeting with a focus 

on reconnecting after the previous virtual and hybrid General Sessions. She encouraged Commission members to 

present highlights of its September 2022 report in regional webinars as this was proving to be an excellent mechanism 

to strengthen the engagement of Members. She also informed the Commission that the new WOAH acronym will be 

introduced progressively in WOAH Standards. Dr Arroyo provided a summary of ongoing WOAH initiatives for 

digitalisation, including the development and planning for new digital tools. Dr Arroyo updated the Commission on the 

new WOAH Research Coordination Group aiming at enhancing WOAH coordination on related research activities by 

sharing available information, collecting, and disseminating research needs. Dr Arroyo also highlighted the 

establishment of a WOAH Coordination for Terrestrial Standards aiming to achieve efficient and integrated 

management of the process to develop new or revised standards for terrestrial animals, by integrating the planning

of activities of WOAH teams providing technical support, coordination, and input to WOAH Standard-setting work for 

terrestrial animals. 

Dr Arroyo informed the Code Commission of the development of a new dedicated access point to provide access to 

previous editions of the Terrestrial Code which includes also the relevant amendments introduced over time. Dr 

Arroyo noted that this access point is accessible at the WOAH website and was built from resources of the WOAH 

Documentary portal, highlighting that all contents were fully available to the public

Dr Arroyo also updated the Commission on the progress on specific topics discussed at their previous meeting, in 

February 2022, and informed the Commission that WOAH Standard Operating Procedure for determining whether a 

disease is emerging had been revised in response to the comments discussed with the Code Commission and the 

Scientific Commission and the revised version was already available on the WOAH website. 

The members of the Code Commission thanked Dr Arroyo for the excellent support provided by the WOAH 

Secretariat, and strongly supported the new initiatives.

1.2. Director General

Dr Monique Eloit, the WOAH Director General, met the Code Commission and thanked its members for their support 

and commitment to achieving WOAH objectives. She informed the Commission that supporting and strengthening 

regional activities and capacity building will be increasingly important moving forward. Dr Eloit updated the 

Commission on the review of the WOAH Science System currently underway and emphasised that the science 

system needs to align with current best practices and be an agile and responsive system. Dr Eloit discussed WOAH’s 

role in the prevention of disease, specifically in the context of wildlife and explained some of WOAH's work under the 

Wildlife Health Framework. The Code Commission thanked Dr Eloit, highlighted the importance of meeting face-toface again, and provided feedback on these updates.

2. Adoption of the agenda 

The proposed agenda was discussed and adopted, taking into consideration the priorities of the work programme and time 

availability. The agenda and the list of participants are presented in Annexes 1 and 2 respectively. 

3. Cooperation with Other Specialist Commissions

3.1. Scientific Commission for Animal Diseases

The Secretariat updated the Code Commission on relevant ongoing activities of the Scientific Commission, including 

the plans to develop guidelines on BSE surveillance and to conclude the assessments of the potential impact of the 

revision of the BSE standards on the official status recognition.

The Code Commission considered the conclusion of the Scientific Commission provided in its February 2022 report 

on the assessment of paratuberculosis against the listing criteria, which had been requested by the Code 

Commission. The Commission noted that the experts who performed the assessment and the Scientific Commission 

similarly concluded that if the criteria were strictly applied, the disease would have to be delisted, but recommended 

to keep the disease on the list and recommended rather to revise the criteria in Chapter 1.2. of the Terrestrial Code. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 6 

The Code Commission expressed strong concerns about this conclusion and stressed that the current criteria had 

been developed to assist the decision-making process regarding listing diseases through the standards-setting 

process and had been adopted by Members. The Commission agreed not to propose delisting paratuberculosis at 

this stage but stressed that the current criteria should be applied in any assessment, or no assessment should be 

done until the issues with the current criteria are discussed. 

The Code Commission was also updated on the progress of the work to develop case definitions to support Member’s 

notification which was being led by the Scientific Commission. The Code Commission thanked the Scientific 

Commission for progressing this work and highlighted the commitment of the Code Commission to consider the 

prioritisation of the case definitions for inclusion in the Terrestrial Code. The Code Commission reaffirmed the 

importance of providing Members with standards for them to comply with their notification obligations, and 

encouraged Members to comment on the relevant texts currently being circulated (See items 5.12, 5.13, 6.3, 6.5 and 

6.7 of this report). 

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’s contributions is noted under the relevant agenda items of this report 

and encouraged Members to read this report together with the reports of the Scientific Commission. 

3.2. Biological Standards Commission

The Secretariat updated the Code Commission on relevant ongoing activities of the Biological Standards 

Commission.

The Secretariat also updated the Code Commission on chapters in the Terrestrial Manual that were identified, by the 

Biological Standards Commission, for update in 2022/2023 and 2023/2024 review cycle. Given that the revision of 

the chapters could have potential impacts on the corresponding chapters in the Terrestrial Code, the Code 

Commission emphasised the importance of close interaction with the Biological Standards Commission to ensure 

early identification of coordination needs and strive for efficient and complementary processes for the development 

and review of the Terrestrial Code and Terrestrial Manual. 

On the margin of this meeting, the Bureaus (i.e., the President and the two Vice-Presidents) of the Code Commission 

and the Biological Standards Commission held a meeting chaired by WOAH DDG ISS. The purpose of the meeting 

was for the Secretariat and the two Bureaus to update on the work of each Commission on relevant topics of common 

interest, and to discuss and agree on the planning and coordination of those relevant topics.

The Bureaus discussed the following topics:

• the Terrestrial Manual chapters to be reviewed in the 2022/2023 and 2023/2024 review cycle, and the progress 

of development and revision of Terrestrial Code chapters

• the Biological Standards 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

• considerations on the Glossary definition for ‘case’

• specific comments received on the revised Chapter 12.7. Equine piroplasmosis (See item 5.10 of this report) 

• specific comments received on the revised Chapter 11.4. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (See item 5.7 of 

this report) 

• clarifications regarding testing for confirmation of occurrence of FMD (See item 5.3 of this report). 

The Bureaus noted that the Manual chapters were regularly updated to reflect advances in scientific knowledge and 

that these updates should be an opportunity to identify needs to update the Code, in terms of changes in diagnostic 

tests and vaccines available or other relevant points. Both Bureaus agreed that experts undertaking the review of a 

Manual chapter could be requested to provide advice on potential need to consequentially amend an existing Code 

chapter, for the Biological Standards Commission to consider and eventually make high-level recommendations in 

this regard to the Code Commission, when appropriate.

Following the discussion with the Biological Standards Commission, the Code Commission acknowledged that there 

was no need to review the Glossary definition for ‘case’ and agreed to remove this item from their work programme. 

The Code Commission wished to thank the Biological Standards Commission for providing inputs to support the 

decisions of the Code Commission on relevant comments received. The Code Commission reminded Members that 

its consideration of the Biological Standards Commission's responses is noted under the relevant agenda items of its 

report and encouraged Members to read its report together with the Biological Standards Commission’s reports. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 7 

3.3. Aquatic Animals Health Standards Commission

On the margin of this meeting, the Bureaus (i.e., the President and the two Vice-Presidents) of the Code Commission 

and the Aquatic Animals Commission held a meeting chaired by WOAH DDG ISS. The purpose of the meeting was 

for the Secretariat and the two Bureaus to update on the work of each Commission on relevant topics of common 

interest, and to discuss and agree on the planning and coordination of those topics and to exchange experiences and 

harmonise approaches to horizontal chapters. Both Commissions committed to continue meeting through this avenue 

on an annual basis to ensure enhanced coordination in the future. The Bureaus discussed issues of mutual interest 

in the Aquatic Code and the Terrestrial Code notably:

• the approach taken by both Commissions in the development of their work plan/work programme and prioritisation 

of items;

• the approach for the review of the use of Glossary definitions for ‘Competent Authority’, ‘Veterinary Authority’, 

‘Veterinary Services’ and ‘Aquatic Animal Health Services’ in the Terrestrial Code and the Aquatic Code (See item 

4.1.8.2 of this report); 

• electronic certification (See item 4.3.1 of this report); 

• progress on Section 4 and specifically the work to develop a new chapter on biosecurity in the Terrestrial Code 

(to exchange the Aquatic Animals Commission’s experience in the development of Chapter 4.1. Biosecurity for 

Aquaculture establishments in the Aquatic Code (adopted in May 2021) with the Code Commission);

• revision of Chapters 5.4. to 5.7. in the Terrestrial Code (to inform the Aquatic Animals Commission of the status);

• revision of Chapter 4.3. Application of Compartmentalisation in the Aquatic Code (to exchange the Code 

Commission’s experience in the last revision of Chapter 4.4. Zoning and compartmentalisation and development 

of Chapter 4.5. Application of compartmentalisation in the Terrestrial Code with the Aquatic Animals Commission);

• revision of Chapter 6.10. Responsible and prudent use of antimicrobial agents in veterinary medicine in the 

Terrestrial Code (to inform the Aquatic Animals Commission of the status).

4. Work Programme and priorities

Comments were received from Australia, the USA, Members of the WOAH Americas Region, the EU and GAPFA. 

The Code Commission discussed ongoing priority topics on its work programme and pending issues with recently adopted 

chapters and considered comments and new requests received. The specific discussion is captured in the relevant items 

of this section of the report.

The Commission acknowledged a comment from the GAPFA, with reference to a Commission’s agreement 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. The Commission agreed 

not to initiate the revision of Code chapters only to address this request, noting that most of the indicated priority diseases’ 

chapters had recently been revised. Nonetheless, the Commission highlighted that this would be considered, as 

appropriate, when chapters are revised. (See items 5.3 and 5.5 of this report).

The Commission reminded Members that this programme outlines the current and planned work to be undertaken to 

develop Terrestrial Code standards. The Commission acknowledged the increased interest shown by Members for the 

discussion of the work programme, and strongly encouraged Members to continue to provide feedback as to whether they 

agree with the topics being proposed, as well as their level of prioritisation.

4.1. Ongoing priority topics (other than texts circulated for comments) 

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.

4.1.1. New chapter on biosecurity (Chapter 4.X.)

Background

In September 2017, the Presidents of the Code Commission and Aquatic Animals Commission discussed the 

proposed changes to the Aquatic Code’s Glossary definitions for ‘biosecurity’ and ‘biosecurity plan’ with a view 

to developing a new chapter on biosecurity in aquatic establishments. Considering the importance of 

biosecurity for disease prevention and control and the lack of a dedicated chapter in the Terrestrial Code

describing the standards on biosecurity, the Code Commission agreed to develop a new chapter on biosecurity

and added this to its work programme.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 8 

In September 2021, the Code Commission reiterated the importance of having a chapter on biosecurity in the 

Terrestrial Code, and in February 2022 asked the Secretariat to progress work to define the scope and 

structure of a draft chapter.

The Secretariat prepared a discussion paper, which was presented to the Scientific Commission and the Code 

Commission for consideration at their September 2022 meetings, as the basis for their discussions on the 

scope of the new chapter. 

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the discussion paper and the input from the Scientific Commission.

The Commission discussed in length the meaning of ‘biosecurity’ and how the term is used in the Terrestrial 

Code. It agreed that currently, the scope of ‘biosecurity’ in the Terrestrial Code is wider than biosecurity only 

at establishment level. The Commission agreed with the opinion of the Scientific Commission that the scope 

of the new chapter should be at a high level describing the overarching principles of biosecurity, using the 

Glossary definition and how the concept is used throughout the Terrestrial Code as a starting point. The 

Commission requested that an ad hoc Group be convened to draft an outline of a new chapter on Biosecurity

in terrestrial animals, including a description of what each article may cover, and to review current, or add new, 

Glossary definitions as deemed necessary.

The Commission requested that a progress report from the ad hoc Group be presented to the Scientific 

Commission and the Code Commission at their February 2023 meetings.

4.1.2. Revision of Chapters 5.4. to 5.7.

Comments were received from Argentina and the EU.

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 some of the 

chapters in this section required updating to better 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 the 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 Secretariat further develop the scope of this work.

At its February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission requested that an ad hoc Group be convened to progress 

this work and discussed a number of points that it considered important to develop the Terms of Reference of 

the ad hoc Group to be convened for this work, and encouraged Members to submit comments, and 

emphasised the importance of Members’ active participation at this early stage to ensure that the revised 

chapters meet Members’ needs.

Discussion

In September 2022, the Code Commission considered comments received and reviewed the draft Terms of 

Reference for the ad hoc Group.

The Code Commission noted comments that the scope of these chapters may no longer be limited to animal 

health, as experiences and current practices have indicated that other aspects such as animal welfare also 

need to be addressed. The Commission agreed that the potential inclusion of veterinary public health or animal 

welfare aspects in the revised chapter(s) could be considered by the ad hoc Group, while acknowledging that 

Chapters 7.2. to 7.4. of Section 7. Animal Welfare provide specific recommendations on transport of livestock.

The Commission agreed that any provisions included in the revised Chapters 5.4. to 5.7. should be general in 

nature to avoid duplication.

The Code Commission requested that all relevant proposals and comments of Members be provided to the 

ad hoc Group for its consideration. The Commission did not agree with a comment to include model 

international veterinary certificates in Chapter 5.4, and explained that the model veterinary certificates are 

currently provided in Chapters 5.10. to 5.13. of the Terrestrial Code, and a revision of these chapters is not 

included in the current work programme. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 9 

The Code Commission agreed that the revised chapters should focus on procedural aspects, i.e., who does 

what and when, in the entire process of international trade, including measures taken at origin, from the 

farm/premises of origin to the point of international departure in the exporting country; in transit; and on arrival 

(import inspection and possible on-farm post-arrival follow-up). The Commission reminded Members that 

recommendations on certification procedures (including recommendations on electronic certification) are 

described in Chapters 5.1 and 5.2. The Commission also agreed that the revised chapters should not go into 

the details of specific measures that would be addressed in the veterinary certificates for importation. 

The Code Commission requested that the report of the first meeting of the ad hoc Group that will be held in 

November 2022 be presented for consideration at its February 2023 meeting.

4.1.3. New chapter on Animal welfare and laying hen production systems (Chapter 7.Z.)

Background

A new Chapter 7.Z. Animal welfare and laying hen production systems was presented for adoption at the 88th

General Session in May 2021, but was not adopted by the Assembly. 

Since May 2021, a number of Members and partner organisations have submitted comments noting the 

importance of having a WOAH standard for animal welfare and laying hen production systems. 

Update

The Secretariat informed the Code Commission that headquarters has undertaken a number of activities to 

understand better the different points of view and to determine the feasibility of possible future work. The 

Commission requested to be kept informed to consider the next steps when relevant. 

4.1.4. Revision of Chapter 7.5. Slaughter of animals (Chapter 7.5.) and Glossary definitions for 

‘death’, ‘distress’, ‘euthanasia’, ‘pain’, ‘slaughter’, ‘stunning’ and ‘suffering’.

Comments on Chapter 7.5. were received from Australia, Canada, China (People’s Republic of), Japan, New 

Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Switzerland, Thailand, the UK, the USA, the EU and ICFAW.

Comments on Glossary definitions were received from Australia, Norway, the USA, the UK and the EU.

Background

In February 2018, the Code Commission agreed to revise Chapter 7.5. ‘Slaughter of animals’, together with 

Chapter 7.6. ‘Killing of animals for disease control purposes’ and requested that an ad hoc Group be convened 

to undertake this work as well as the revision of some Glossary definitions. In September 2019, the Code 

Commission proposed for comments the revised definitions for ‘euthanasia’, ‘slaughter’, ‘stunning’, ‘death’, 

‘distress’, ‘pain’ and ‘suffering’ which arose from the work of the ad hoc Group on the revision of Chapters 7.5. 

and 7.6.

The ad hoc Group has been convened on several occasions to draft the revised Chapter 7.5. and to consider 

comments. A revised draft chapter has been circulated for comments three times: in February 2020, February 

2021 and February 2022.

Discussion

The Code Commission reviewed comments received on the draft Chapter 7.5. and on the related Glossary 

definitions used in Chapters 7.5 and 7.6., i.e., ‘euthanasia’, ‘slaughter’, ‘stunning’, ‘distress’, ‘pain’, and 

‘suffering’, and requested that the ad hoc Group be reconvened to consider the comments and report back to 

the Commission at its February 2023 meeting. The Commission agreed with the ad hoc Group’s proposal to 

delete the definition of ‘death’ as this term is deemed to be aligned with the common use of this term and 

therefore there is no need for a specific Glossary definition. 

4.1.5. Revision of Chapter 7.6. ‘Killing for disease control purposes’

Background

In February 2018, the Code Commission agreed to revise Chapter 7.6. ‘Killing of animals for disease control 

purposes’, together with a revision of Chapter 7.5. ‘Slaughter of animals’ and requested that an ad hoc Group 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 10

be convened to undertake this work. The ad hoc Group met virtually in June 2022 to commence work on the 

revised Chapter 7.6., now that work on the revision of Chapter 7.5. was well advanced. 

Discussion

In September 2022, the Secretariat presented an update on the progress made by the ad hoc Group on the 

revision of Chapter 7.6. The Commission agreed with the approach taken, thanked the ad hoc Group for its 

diligence and requested that it be reconvened to continue the work and present a revised draft chapter to the 

Commission at its February 2023 meeting. 

4.1.6. New chapter on infection with Trypanosoma evansi (Surra)

Background

The Code Commission and the Scientific Commission had agreed that three separate chapters on animal 

trypanosomes with different coverage of trypanosome species and host animals would be developed. 

In addition to the new Chapter 8.18. Infection with Trypanosoma brucei, T. congolense, T. simiae and T. vivax

adopted in May 2021, a draft new Chapter 8.X. Infection with Trypanosoma evansi (Surra) and a revised 

Chapter 12.3. Dourine had been proposed and extensively discussed since 2015. Due to the need to clarify 

the scope of these chapters in terms of host species and pathogenic agents, in February 2018, both 

Commissions agreed to put Chapters 8.X. and 12.3. on hold to progress first the discussions related to Chapter 

8.18. Both Commissions had also agreed that, notwithstanding the diagnostic issues, the scope of the new 

Chapter 8.X. should address surra of multiple species including horses and that the scope of Chapter 12.3. 

should remain as dourine of equids, and that the work would continue after the adoption of the new Chapter 

8.18.

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission was informed that experts had been consulted to develop 

case definitions for surra and dourine that were considered by the Scientific Commission at its February 2021 

meeting and that an ad hoc Group would be convened to draft a new Chapter 8.X. Infection with T. evansi

(Surra), and revise Chapter 12.3. Dourine. The Code Commission requested the ad hoc Group to consider 

relevant Member comments that were received in 2018.

In June 2021, a meeting of the ad hoc Group was convened to draft Chapter 8.X. Infection with Trypanosoma 

evansi (Surra). The Scientific Commission, at its September 2021 meeting, reviewed the report of the meeting, 

and made some modifications to the proposed draft text.

Discussion

The Code Commission reviewed the draft new Chapter 8.X. and the ad hoc Group report, together with the 

opinion of the Scientific Commission.

The Code Commission identified a range of critical points that were not clearly explained in the supporting 

reports, including the lack of information on the epidemiological significance of susceptible species that should 

be addressed in this chapter and on the rationale for addressing commodities, either as ‘safe commodities’ or 

through articles containing risk mitigation measures for importation. 

The Code Commission requested that advice on these points be sought from the subject-matter experts. The 

Commission also requested that the wording and structure of the draft text be reviewed to ensure alignment 

with other chapters of the Terrestrial Code, where relevant. 

The Commission agreed not to circulate the proposed draft text for comments yet and requested the 

Secretariat to prepare a revised draft addressing the abovementioned points, to be considered by the 

Commission together with the additional information from the experts, at its next meeting.

4.1.7. Harmonisation Code chapters related to official recognition of status by the WOAH 

Background

At its September 2018 meeting, the Code Commission agreed to harmonise the provisions for official 

recognition and maintenance of free status, and endorsement and maintenance of official control programmes 

in disease-specific chapters with official recognition of status (excluding Chapter 11.4. ‘Bovine spongiform 

encephalopathy’). 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 11

Common provisions concerning procedures applicable to the diseases for which WOAH grants official 

recognition of status were addressed in Chapter 1.6. ‘Procedures for self-declaration and for official recognition 

by the OIE’, instead of being repeated in relevant disease-specific chapters. The revised Chapter 1.6. was 

adopted at the 88th General Session in May 2021. 

In February 2019, the Code Commission agreed to use Chapter 14.7. ‘Infection with peste des petits ruminants 

virus (PPR)’, as the ‘model chapter’ to present relevant amendments to Members. The revised articles of 

Chapter 14.7. were circulated four times and adopted at the 88th General Session in May 2021. Similar 

changes were also included in a revised Chapter 15.2. ‘Classical swine fever’ which was adopted in May 2022, 

and as part of the ongoing revision of Chapter 8.8. ‘Foot and mouth disease’. 

Discussion

The Commission considered the amendments proposed by the Secretariat and endorsed by the Scientific 

Commission to Chapter 11.5. Infection with Mycoplasma mycoides subsp. Mycoides SC (Contagious bovine 

pleuropneumonia) and to Chapter 12.1. Infection with African horse sickness virus (see items 6.4 and 6.6 of 

this report, respectively). 

The Commission noted that once the revised Chapters 11.5, 12.1., and 8.8. are adopted, the work to 

harmonise the provisions for official recognition will be completed. 

4.1.8. Terminology

4.1.8.1. Use of terms ‘animal-based measures’ and ‘measurables’

Background

In September 2020, the Code Commission asked the Secretariat to review terms in the animal welfare 

chapters in Section 7, used to assess the impact on the welfare of animals, either directly observed 

in animals or indirectly through the management and resources provided to them. The terms reviewed 

included ‘animal-based measures’, ‘animal-based measurables’, ‘resource-based measures’, 

‘management-based measures’ and ‘outcome’.

Discussion

The Commission considered the discussion paper prepared by the Secretariat and agreed that the 

terminology used should be harmonised throughout the animal welfare chapters. It agreed that 

‘measures’ should be used instead of ‘measurables’. The Commission requested that the Secretariat 

propose some explanatory text on these terms (‘animal-based measures’, ‘resource-based 

measures’, ‘management-based measures’ and ‘outcome’) to add to Chapter 7.1. ‘Introduction to the 

recommendations for animal welfare’. This text will clarify the meanings of these terms for the 

purposes of the Terrestrial Code and explain how they should be used in Section 7. ‘Animal Welfare’. 

This assessment, including a proposed process to subsequently amend the relevant chapters, will 

be presented to the Commission at a future meeting. 

4.1.8.2. Use of terms ‘Competent Authority’, ‘Veterinary Authority’, ‘Veterinary Services’’ 

Background 

At the 89th General Session, in May 2022, revised Glossary definitions for ‘Competent Authority’, 

‘Veterinary Authority’ and ‘Veterinary Services’ in the Terrestrial Code were adopted. The revision of 

these definitions was done in coordination with the Aquatic Animals Commission. Revised Glossary 

definitions for ‘Competent Authority’, ‘Veterinary Authority’ and ‘Aquatic Animal Health Services’ for

the Aquatic Code were also adopted in May 2022. 

Both Commissions agreed to revise the use of these definitions in the Terrestrial Code and Aquatic 

Code, respectively, to ensure consistent use. 

Discussion

The Code Commission considered an analysis prepared by the Secretariat on the use of the terms

‘Competent Authority’, ‘Veterinary Authority’ and ‘Veterinary Services’ in the Terrestrial Code (2022 

edition), based on the rationale for the use of these terms provided by the Code Commission in its 

September 2021 report. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 12

The Commission discussed and considered different issues observed and, while noting that in 

general the terms were consistently used, it agreed on a number of amendments that would need to 

be addressed. 

The Commission agreed on the need for a number of amendments. However, before proposing these 

amendments for comments, the Commission wished to discuss its conclusions with the Aquatic 

Animals Commission to ensure alignment with proposed changes for the use of corresponding terms 

in the Aquatic Code. The two Commissions agreed to circulate proposed amendments in their

respective February 2023 report to allow Members to consider them at the same time. 

Nonetheless, the Commission agreed to propose amendments to the use of these terms in the User’s 

Guide at this meeting (See item 5.1 of this report) 

4.2. Items under consideration for inclusion in the work programme

The Code Commission discussed a number of topics for which a proposal or request for inclusion in the Commission’s

work programme had been previously considered but a decision was not yet made due to different considerations. 

4.2.1. Surveillance of diseases of wildlife (from Wildlife Working Group)

Background

At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission discussed a proposal from the WOAH Working Group 

on Wildlife 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 and provided feedback on this proposal and 

requested the Working Group on Wildlife to consider its comments before progressing with this work. 

In February 2022, the Code Commission was informed of the progress of different work relevant to this request 

and agreed to continue discussing the possible inclusion of new items related to wildlife health management 

in its work programme at its next meeting. 

Discussion 

Considering the update provided by the Secretariat on the WOAH Wildlife health framework (see item 7.3. of 

this report), the Commission agreed to include a new item to its work programme with a focus to consider how 

the Terrestrial Code addresses wildlife health, based on the further recommendations from the Working Group 

on Wildlife. 

The Commission highlighted the need of close coordination with all the Specialist Commissions to ensure a 

consistent approach is taken for all WOAH Standards.

4.2.2. Infection with Brucella abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis (Chapter 8.4.)

Background

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission considered a request to prioritise the revision of Chapter 

8.4. Infection with Brucella abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis, notably Articles 8.4.4. and 8.4.5. which include 

the provisions on country or zone free from infection with Brucella in bovids with vaccination and without 

vaccination. The Code Commission had noted that the Biological Standards Commission had been working 

to update the corresponding Manual Chapter 3.1.4. and agreed to wait until that work progressed to consider 

the inclusion of the revision of this chapter in its work programme. 

Discussion 

Given that the updated Manual Chapter 3.1.4. was adopted at the May 2022 General Session, the Code 

Commission discussed the request again. The Commission noted the global situation of the disease, including 

the situation on Members’ self-declaration of freedom from the disease, but considered there was no new 

element justifying the revision of the chapter, especially in terms of potential alternatives to the current 

provisions. The Commission decided not to include the revision of Chapter 8.4. Infection with Brucella abortus, 

B. melitensis and B. suis in its work programme at this stage, but invited Members to submit any proposal with 

a scientific justification to amend the current Articles 8.4.4. and 8.4.5.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 13

4.2.3. Infection with peste des petits ruminants virus (Chapter 14.7.)

Background

At its September 2021 meeting, noting a new publication of the ‘FAO/OIE Guidelines for the Control and 

Prevention of Peste des Petits Ruminants (PPR) in Wildlife Populations (2021)’, the Code Commission 

requested that the Secretariat assess whether amendments regarding wildlife should be considered for 

Chapter 14.7.

Discussion 

The Code Commission was informed that the PPR Global Research and Expertise Network (GREN), at its 

December 2021 meeting, had considered that there is still no evidence to recognise the wildlife species as 

epidemiologically significant and current scientific evidence still did not confirm maintenance and reinfection 

from wildlife back to domestic animals. 

Considering the GREN’s position, the Code Commission decided not to propose any amendment to Chapter 

14.7.at the moment and requested that the Secretariat follow this topic and report back to the Commission 

when new relevant information became available.

4.2.4. Melioidosis

Background

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission noted a comment on its Work programme requesting 

recommendations on Melioidosis and asked the Secretariat to follow up on the issue and collect relevant 

information.

Discussion 

The Commission considered additional information provided by the Secretariat and acknowledged that there 

was no specific request to develop a Code chapter, and that no relevant notifications of the disease had been 

recently submitted to WOAH as per Article 1.1.5. of the Code. 

The Commission noted that Melioidosis (infection with Burkholderia pseudomallei) was not a listed disease

and that the Terrestrial Manual Chapter 3.6.11. had been recently revised in 2018 to include provisions on this 

disease, and the title of the chapter was changed from ‘Glanders’ to ‘Glanders and melioidosis’. This was 

mainly linked to the need for recommendations for differential diagnosis.

The Commission encouraged Members to refer to the Terrestrial Manual Chapter for recommendations on 

the diagnosis of this disease and decided not to include a new item in its work programme in response to this 

request. 

4.3. New proposals and requests for inclusion in the work programme

The Code Commission considered the following proposals or requests for new developments or revisions of 

standards in the Terrestrial Code. 

4.3.1. Electronic certification (Chapter 5.2. Certification procedures) 

The Secretariat updated the Code Commission on the activities that WOAH had recently implemented to gain 

a better understating of e-certification practices implemented by WOAH Members, including the completion of 

a WTO Standards and Trade Development Facility project on Electronic veterinary certification. The 

Secretariat also informed the Commission of the relevant work of other international organisations on ecertification and Single Window and noted that the implementation of e-certification for animals and animal 

products was still limited while the use of electronic phytosanitary certificates was well established in many 

countries. The Secretariat also reported that in 2021 Codex adopted revised Guidelines for design, production, 

issuance and use of generic official certificates (CXG 38-2011), specifically related to transitioning to paperless 

certification. 

Given that in practice a single veterinary certificate may contain information relevant to food safety and animal 

health for products of animal origin, the Secretariat proposed that the Commission consider developing similar 

guidance to that of Codex to ensure alignment of standards for e-certification
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 14

The Code Commission agreed to revise Chapter 5.2, Certification procedures, of the Terrestrial Code to 

address e-certification in more detail, and to align, as relevant, with the Codex Guidelines. The Commission 

was informed that WOAH would also develop Reference data models for the WOAH model certificates for 

international trade in live animals and animal products, to align with Reference data models for food products 

that are included in the Codex Guidelines.

The Commission noted that the implementation of electronic veterinary certification can contribute to 

facilitating international trade, lowering administrative costs, minimising human errors when certifying, and 

also minimising the risk of trade fraud. 

The Code Commission agreed to include the revision of Chapter 5.2. in its work programme, and to undertake 

this work in collaboration with the Aquatic Animals Commission, to address jointly the corresponding Chapter 

5.2. in the Aquatic Code. 

4.3.2. Request to revise Terrestrial Code Chapter 5.8. International transfer and Laboratory 

containment of animal pathogenic agents 

The Commission considered a new request from a Member to improve clarity within the Terrestrial Code on 

the ability of Members to hold pathogenic agents within laboratories without affecting their animal health status. 

The Code Commission discussed how this concept was currently addressed in the Terrestrial Code and noted 

that in addition to Chapter 5.8., references relevant to this concept were already included among the 

recommendations for laboratories in Chapter 3.2. Quality of Veterinary Services (Article 3.2.10.), and in 

Chapter 3.4. (Article 3.4.7.), and acknowledged that Chapters 1.7. to 1.12., containing the questionnaires for 

official recognition of status by WOAH, included specific requests for Members to provide information 

regarding the handling of live pathogenic agents in laboratories. The Commission noted that there were 

currently no articles specific to this concept in the disease-specific chapters. 

The Commission also noted that the Terrestrial Manual Chapter 1.1.4. outlined the principles on which the 

specific management of biological risks associated with veterinary laboratories and experimental animal 

handling facilities should be based, and Terrestrial Manual Chapter 1.1.3. described the transport of biological 

materials.

Based on the abovementioned considerations, the Code Commission agreed that this specific request should 

be addressed in the context of official status recognition by WOAH, by amending Chapter 1.6. The 

Commission agreed to include this item as priority 3 of its work programme and proposed to share this 

proposal with the Scientific Commission for its consideration.

4.3.3. Use of antiparasitic drugs 

The Code Commission considered the document “Responsible and prudent use of anthelmintic chemicals to 

help control anthelmintic resistance in grazing livestock species”, developed by the WOAH Expert Group on 

Antiparasitic Resistance (EEG-APR) and published on the WOAH website in December 2021, and discussed 

the merits of developing the Terrestrial Code standards related to the use of antiparasitic drugs. 

The Code Commission acknowledged the importance of parasitic diseases for animal and public health and 

the relevance of the use of antiparasitic drugs in veterinary medicine. The Commission agreed on the need 

for WOAH to consider addressing this issue in collaboration with other international organisations. The 

Commission considered that it could be valuable to consider extending the scope to cover not only 

anthelmintics but also the use of, and the resistance to, other antiparasitic agents, notably ectoparasiticides, 

and noted that the use of these veterinary medicinal products was critical for the prevention and management 

of parasitic diseases and vector-borne diseases listed in the Terrestrial Code. 

The Commission highlighted that anthelmintics and other ectoparasiticides are outside of the Glossary 

definition of antimicrobial agents but welcomed the initiative and recommended that WOAH focus on how to 

build on the work done to develop the document before considering the development of an international 

standard. In addition, the Commission stressed the importance of having a good representation of experts 

from different regions of the world on the EEG-APR), especially from regions where parasitic diseases are 

highly significant due to their geographical and climatic conditions. The Commission also highlighted the 

importance of ensuring that sound scientific evidence is available to support the potential development of 

standards. 

The Commission expressed its willingness to contribute to any future work on this topic and requested the 

Secretariat to report back, as relevant. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 15

4.3.4. The ‘Five domains’ as an animal welfare concept

Background 

In February 2022, the Code Commission considered a comment to add the ‘five domains’ concept in Chapter 

7.7. Dog population management. Although the Commission recognised the importance of the ‘five domains’

concept, it agreed not to make any changes until it could consider this concept in more detail. The Commission 

requested that the Secretariat works with the WOAH Animal Welfare Collaborating Centres to provide more 

information about this proposal for consideration at its September 2022 meeting. 

Discussion 

The Code Commission reviewed a document drafted by the Secretariat and the WOAH Animal Welfare 

Collaborating Centres. 

The Commission noted that the ‘five domains’ as an animal welfare concept is recognised internationally, and 

it may be relevant to include it in Chapter 7.1. ‘Introduction to the recommendations for animal welfare’. 

However, as this is still a relatively new concept, the Code Commission requested the Secretariat to continue 

to work with the WOAH Collaborating Centres to develop draft text for possible inclusion in Chapter 7.1. as 

well as an assessment of the impact of its inclusion in other chapters in the Code. 

The Code Commission agreed that more information was required to explain the concept to Members and to 

clarify how it is linked to the ‘five freedoms’ concept and requested the Secretariat to work in collaboration with 

WOAH Collaborating Centres to develop an explanatory note for consideration at its February 2023 meeting.

4.3.5. Requests to revise Chapter 8.10. ‘Japanese encephalitis’ and Chapter 12.11. ‘Venezuelan 

equine encephalomyelitis’

The Code Commission considered requests to review Chapters 8.10. Japanese encephalitis and 12.11. 

Venezuelan Equine Encephalomyelitis which were raised during the 89th General Session in May 2022, as 

well as comments from Members. 

The Code Commission reviewed and discussed a paper prepared by the Secretariat presenting an analysis 

of the different elements presented in these requests, such as the impact on trade for the movement of horses 

from infected countries, the discrepancies observed between the chapters of the Terrestrial Code and 

Terrestrial Manual, as well as the opinion of the International Horse Sports Confederation (IHSC) and 

discussions of the Scientific Commission at its September 2015 meeting. 

The Commission noted that Chapter 8.10. Japanese encephalitis was first adopted in 1992, and the most 

recent update was adopted in 2000, but the corresponding Terrestrial Manual Chapter 3.1.10. was updated in 

2021. 

The Commission agreed that the current Chapter 8.10. Japanese encephalitis was partly obsolete given the 

latest information provided in Chapter 3.1.10 of the Terrestrial Manual. The Commission agreed to include the 

revision of Chapter 8.10 in its work programme. 

The Commission also noted that the revisions of Chapter 12.4. Equine encephalitis (Eastern and Western)

(no update since its first adoption in 1968) and Chapter 12.11. Venezuelan equine encephalomyelitis (the 

most recent update adopted in 1998) had been included in its work programme in February 2020 but that work 

had not been yet initiated. 

Considering the epidemiological similarities across these three diseases, the Commission agreed to approach 

the revisions of these three disease-specific chapters together, to ensure a consistent logic is applied to all 

three chapters. The Commission also agreed that Chapter 8.20. West Nile fever, even if more recently 

updated, should also be taken into consideration. 

While acknowledging that a major revision of these chapters will be needed, the Code Commission requested 

the Secretariat to first undertake, in consultation with subject matter experts and the Scientific Commission, a 

scientific assessment of the susceptible animals, their epidemiological role and their relevance for surveillance 

and disease prevention and control, to further discuss the approach for the different chapters and then identify

the next steps and priorities. In this regard, the Commission suggested assessing these diseases against the 

criteria for the inclusion of diseases, infections and infestations in the WOAH list of notifiable terrestrial animal 

diseases in accordance with Chapter 1.2. of the Terrestrial Code. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 16

The Code Commission requested the Secretariat to report back at its next meeting on the progress of his 

work. 

4.3.6. Avian mycoplasmosis (Chapter 10.5.)

Background

The Code Commission considered a comment at the 89th General Session in May 2022 that Chapter 10.5. 

only addressed M. gallisepticum and not M. synoviae, while both pathogens were listed separately in Chapter 

1.3., and the corresponding Manual chapter addressed both pathogens. 

Discussion

The Code Commission noted that until 2004, only Mycoplasma gallisepticum had been dealt with in the 

Terrestrial Code (both as a Listed disease and in the disease-specific chapter) and that the current Chapter 

10.5. was first adopted in 1982, and last updated in 2021. The Commission also noted that M. synoviae was 

added to the list in 2005, based on recommendations of the ad hoc Group on diseases/pathogenic agent 

notification (November 2004), but it had not been addressed in any disease-specific chapter.

The Code Commission acknowledged that the corresponding Terrestrial Manual Chapter 3.3.5. Avian 

mycoplasmosis (M. gallisepticum, M. synoviae) was first adopted in 1991 focusing on M. gallisepticum, and 

M. synoviae was added later, in 2008. The Commission noted that the Manual chapter was last updated in 

2021 and addressed both pathogens.

The Code Commission agreed on the need to clarify the way these pathogenic agents are used in the Code

and that there should be a coherent approach between the Code and the Manual, and agreed to include this 

item in its work programme, as priority 3. 

The Commission considered that while other mycoplasma species are mentioned in the Manual chapter, it 

was also clear that only M. gallisepticum, and M. synoviae are considered relevant for the Terrestrial Code, 

and agreed that it was not necessary to review the current listing. 

The Commission requested the Secretariat to seek expert advice on the inclusion of the two pathogens, M. 

gallisepticum and M. synoviae in one single Code chapter, including essential provisions such as a case 

definition, and to undertake this work in coordination with the Scientific Commission.

4.4. Follow-up on chapters recently adopted

The Code Commission discussed the following topics related to texts which were adopted at the last General Session 

in May 2022.

4.4.1. Infection with Theileria annulata, T. orientalis and T. parva (Chapter 11.10.)

Comments received from Australia and the AU-IBAR. 

Background

In September 2017, the revised Chapter 11.10. Infection with Theileria annulate, T.orientalis and T.parva was 

first circulated for comments, but it was put on hold while expert advice was sought regarding the listing 

assessment, in response to comments received in February 2018 meeting. 

In September 2019, the Code Commission was informed that T.orientalis (Ikeda and Chitose) meets the 

criteria for listing in accordance with the criteria in Chapter 1.2. of the Code based on the assessment by 

experts.

The revised Chapter was adopted during the 89th General Session in May 2022, but, at the time of adoption, 

the President of the Code Commission noted that some comments raised during or submitted before the 

General Session would be considered at the Code commission’s September 2022 meeting. 

Discussion
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 17

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment that T.orientalis should be delisted, noting that the listing 

assessment had been well justified and that the chapter only refers to T.orientalis Ikeda and T.orientalis 

Chitose and not the other strains of T.orientalis.

The Commission did not agree with a comment that African buffaloes should be covered in the chapter as 

epidemiologically significant hosts, as it considered that only bovines (including water buffaloes) were referred 

to in the report of February 2017 ad hoc Group on theileriosis. 

Nevertheless, the Commission requested the Secretariat to seek further advice from experts, the Biological 

Standards Commission and the Scientific Commission if needed, to review and consider the references 

provided by the Members along with their comments, before further considering this item for inclusion in their 

work programme. 

4.5. Prioritisation of items in the 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:

- Wildlife Health (preliminary discussions – overarching work) 

- Consideration of inclusion of the ‘Five Domains’ concept

- Consideration of use of terms: Competent Authority / Veterinary Authority / Veterinary Services

- Consideration of use of terms: fetal / foetal/ fetus / foetus

- Consideration of use of terms: bovid / bovidae / bovine / cattle

- Revision of Chapter 1.6. Procedures for official recognition of animal health status, endorsement of an 

official control programme, and publication of a self-declaration of animal health status, by the OIE

- Revision of Chapter 5.2. Certification procedures

- Revision of Chapter 8.10. Japanese encephalitis

- Revision of Chapter 10.5. Infection with Mycoplasma gallisepticum (Avian mycoplasmosis) 

- Development of new Chapter 8.X. Q fever

- Development of new Chapter 11.X. Infection with bovine pestiviruses (bovine viral diarrhoea)

Removed items

- All texts adopted at the 89th General Session, in May 2022

- Revision of the Glossary definition for ‘case’

- Listing assessment of Paratuberculosis 

The Code Commission updated its work programme accordingly. 

The Commission reminded that the prioritisation order used in the work programme reflects the level of priority agreed 

upon by the Commission, through the rigorous assessment of each item, in terms of its necessity and urgency. 

The Code Commission highlighted that the inclusion of an item in the work programme means there is a collective 

agreement of the Commission on the need to undertake certain work but this 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, the progress of ongoing work and the resources available. The prioritisation order aims at providing a guide 

to plan and organise the work of the Commission and the Secretariat, as well as to improve Members' awareness of 

the progress of the different topics. The Commission highlighted that the prioritisation order used in its work 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 18

programme is not necessarily parallel to the progress of each work, which depends on the complexity of the specific 

tasks to be undertaken.

The Commission reminded that, although it 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.), it would not significantly modify the prioritisation order frequently, 

for reasons of efficiency and predictability. 

The updated work programme is presented in Annex 3, for comments.

5. Texts circulated for comments and proposed for adoption in May 2023 

The Code Commission discussed the following new or revised texts which are circulated for comments and will be 

proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

5.1. User’s Guide

Background

At this meeting, following the recent adoption of a revised definition for the terms ‘Veterinary Authority’, ‘Competent 

Authority’ and ‘Veterinary services’, the Commission discussed their use across the Code (See item 4.1.8.2 of this 

report), and agreed to address the amendments needed in the Users’ Guide. 

Discussion

The Commission noted that, in the User’s guide, in the last sentence of Point C(6), ‘Veterinary Services’ was used in 

the context of issuing veterinary certificates and WOAH Members’ obligations of disease notification, and noticed that 

this was not in line with the revised Glossary definition. The Commission decided to replace ‘Veterinary Services’ with 

‘Veterinary Authority’, and circulate this proposal to Members at this meeting. 

The Commission reminded Members that the proposed changes to these texts referred only to this specific 

terminology issue for consistency purposes and did not intend to open the discussion of other aspects or parts of the 

texts. 

The revised point C(6) of the User’s guide is presented as Annex 4 for comments and will be proposed for adoption 

at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

5.2. Glossary definition for ‘poultry’ 

Comments were received from Japan, Switzerland, the USA and the EU. 

Background

In February 2022, the Code Commission agreed to consider a comment to clarify the Glossary definition for poultry, 

and whether “populations of pet birds kept and bred for selling to hobby holdings, backyard holdings or pet bird 

owners” in the current definition, could be considered as ‘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. On the other hand, the Commission 

acknowledged that it was not clear whether populations of pet birds for breeding or selling are included or not in the 

definition. To address this point, the Commission agreed to amend the definition to make it clear that populations of 

pet birds for breeding or selling are excluded from the definition of poultry. 

The proposed revised definition was circulated for comments in the Commission’s February 2022 report.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received. 

The Code Commission reminded Members that the definition of ‘poultry’ had been adopted at the 88th General 

Session in 2021 and considered it appropriate for its objectives. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 19

The Commission did not agree with a comment to replace ‘exclusively’ with ‘primarily’, as it would change the intended 

rigour of the definition. It did not agree either with a comment that pet birds kept in a commercial operation for breeding 

or selling should be considered poultry due to its higher risk of virus transmission and the subsequent animal and 

public health risks. While acknowledging that there may be a disease spread risk, albeit not deemed high, from such 

bird populations, the Commission agreed that this was also the case for any other category of specific bird populations 

currently listed in the last paragraph of the Glossary definition.

The revised Glossary definition for ‘poultry’ is presented as part of Annex 5 for comments and will be proposed for 

adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

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

Comments were received from Australia, Brazil, Canada, China (People’s Rep. of), Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, 

South Africa, Thailand, the UK, the 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 

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 amendments in Chapters 

14.7. Infection with peste des petits ruminants virus and 15.2. Infection with classical swine fever virus.

At its February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission considered the comments received. It discussed selected 

comments and identified those comments which required further advice from experts, including the Biological 

Standards Commission and the Scientific Commission. The Code Commission decided to defer the review of the 

remaining comments until its September 2022 meeting so it could consider all comments together with expert inputs. 

The Commission also 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 

a WOAH 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 

Commission considered that the proposed text by the ad hoc Group required further work and appointed members 

from the Commission to review the recommendations of the ad hoc Group to prepare a proposal to be considered by 

the Commission for incorporation into the revised chapter.

Discussion

General Comments

The Code Commission acknowledged a comment regarding the use of the term ‘Member Country’, noted that this 

term is used in other chapters for diseases for which WOAH grants official recognition of status and agreed that this 

should be considered by WOAH Headquarters. 

In response to comments that the proposed amendments to the chapter seem to promote the use of vaccines in FMD 

prevention and control rather than pursuing FMD eradication, the Code Commission explained that the objective of 

these changes was to promote the safe movement and trade of animals and animal products and highlighted that: 

i) vaccination is a key tool for FMD control programmes and many countries had already achieved eradication through 

vaccination and ii) the chapter was also a key tool for Members wanting to progress towards the cessation of 

vaccination while possibly using a zoning approach. The Commission emphasised that recommended measures for 

the movement of vaccinated animals take into consideration the fact that these animals originate from FMD free 

countries, zones or compartments, and referred to the discussions below on the relevant articles. 

The Code Commission noted a comment requesting that WOAH consider extending the official recognition of disease 

status to compartments free from FMD and acknowledged that this was not under its mandate and referred it to 

WOAH Headquarters. 

Article 8.8.1.

General provisions
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 20

In point 2, in response to comments on the taxonomy of the susceptible animals, the Code Commission proposed 

amendments to clarify the families and subfamilies concerned, i.e., ‘families Suidae and Cervidae, the subfamilies 

Bovinae and Caprinae of the family Bovidae, and Camelus bactrianus’. The Code Commission also proposed to 

amend the text to clarify that these are to be referred to in the chapter as ‘susceptible animals’ and applied this term 

throughout the text where relevant.

In point 2bis, the Code Commission noted the specific discussion and agreement reached at this meeting with regard 

to the use of the term ‘cattle’ in the Terrestrial Code (See item 5.15 of this report) and proposed to replace ‘cattle’ 

with ‘bovine’, and applied this change throughout the chapter. The Commission did not agree with a comment to 

modify the taxonomy reference as it considered the text correct as currently proposed. 

In point 3, the Commission also considered a new proposal from the Biological Standards Commission, which was 

discussed at its September 2022 meeting, to reformulate the structure of point 3, because the process for virus 

isolation requires confirmatory testing with an antigen or a ribonucleic acid detection test to confirm the identity of the 

isolated virus. The Commission did not agree with the proposed amendments, because it considered that, irrespective 

of laboratory techniques required to confirm the identity of the pathogenic agent or any clinical or epidemiological 

consideration, the recovery of infective virus identified as FMDV in a sample from an animal was sufficient to confirm 

the occurrence of infection with FMDV while that was not the case when the diagnosis was only based on the direct 

detection of antigen or ribonucleic acid from a sample.

In point 3(a), in reference to previous discussions of the Biological Standards Commission and the Scientific 

Commission, the Code Commission noted that the three Commissions had agreed that it was not necessary to refer 

to the characterization of the agent as part of the definition of occurrence of the disease. Nonetheless, in response 

to comments received on this point in this chapter and others, and in agreement with the Biological Standards 

Commission, the Code Commission agreed to add ‘and identified as such’ after ‘isolated’ to ensure understanding 

that adequate confirmation of the diagnosis is always required. 

In point 4, the Code Commission agreed with a comment that transmission of FMDV would constitute a case as 

defined in point 3 and would thus need to be notified to WOAH within 24 hours of detection. Therefore, it proposed 

to add a new sentence ‘Transmission of FMDV shall be notified to the OIE’ at the end of the point for clarity.

In point 5, the Code Commission noted a comment on defining the latent period and requested the Secretariat to 

refer this comment to the Biological Standards Commission for its consideration, explaining that such detail should 

be in the Terrestrial Manual and not the Terrestrial Code.

In point 6, the Code Commission proposed to replace ‘this species’ with ‘African buffalo’ for clarity. In response to a 

comment seeking clarification about the use of the term ‘rare’, the Commission, in agreement with the opinion of the 

Scientific Commission at its February 2022 meeting, explained that it referred to the frequency of the event, and not 

to its epidemiological impact, which would certainly depend on many other factors. 

At the same point, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to provide a more detailed definition for the 

length of the carrier state of all susceptible animals and reiterated its rationale described in its September 2020 report 

that this was detailed for a chapter of the Terrestrial Code.

Article 8.8.1bis.

In response to a comment disagreeing with the addition of point 1, the Code Commission reiterated that it considered 

UHT sufficient to destroy the FMDV, and this was aligned with the current version of the WOAH Technical Disease 

Card on FMD. The Code Commission explained that if a commodity is considered safe, whether it is for human or 

animal consumption or other usage is irrelevant. It reminded Members that this was the reason for the proposed 

deletion of Article 8.8.36.

In point 3, in response to a comment to remove protein meal as a safe commodity in view of EC1069/2009 regulation 

stating that selected by-products originating from animals including protein meal should not enter the feed chain for 

human consumption, the Commission reminded Members that the Code does not address specific Members' 

regulations, but provides international standards applicable to all Members, which are expected to implement them 

in their national context. Furthermore, it also noted that protein meal is a commodity which uses standardized 

protocols in its processing and treatment, and therefore would meet the criteria in Chapter 2.2. of the Code. The 

Commission acknowledged a separate comment requesting to define the standard process for rendering and 

requested Secretariat to consult the industry in this regard.

In response to a comment requesting the addition of ‘gamma irradiated foetal bovine serum (irradiated at 25 kGy 

while in a frozen state of −10 °C or below)’ to the list of safe commodities, the Code Commission requested the 

Secretariat to consult the industry on whether the proposed treatment is a standardised protocol for irradiated foetal 

bovine serum. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 21

In response to comments on the inclusion of fresh maturated deboned meat on the list of safe commodities, the Code 

Commission noted that ‘maturated meat’ involves a series of processing steps that may differ between countries. As 

there is no universally standardised agreement on these steps and specifications on the time-pH holding conditions 

that have to be prescribed, the Code Commission did not consider maturated deboned meat’ to meet the criteria to 

be defined as a safe commodity. 

Considering the wording of the last paragraph of Article 8.8.27., the Code Commission agreed to add a new point 6), 

to include ‘limed hides, pickled pelts, and semi-processed leather’ to the list as safe commodities, and to remove that 

paragraph from Article 8.8.27. 

Following up on its agreement in its February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission also considered 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. The Commission agreed that these commodities complied with the criteria in 

Chapter 2.2. and agreed to add a new point 7) ‘extruded dry pet food’ to the list as safe commodities, and to amend 

point 2) for consistency with other chapters. 

Article 8.8.2.

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment to reinstate ‘measures’ after ‘biosecurity’, and it reiterated that 

it would be redundant considering the Glossary definition for ‘biosecurity’, which means ‘a set of measures’.

The Code Commission agreed with a comment to remove the first three paragraphs for consistency with other 

chapters, noting that the content of these paragraphs is already covered by the relevant horizontal chapters. 

In response to a comment on whether the reference in point 2 of Article 1.4.6 excludes countries having wild African 

buffalo populations from acquiring free status because this species is known to be persistently infected, the Code 

Commission noted that point 2 of Article 1.4.6. states ‘unless otherwise specified in the relevant chapters of the 

Terrestrial Code’, and for FMD, having known infected susceptible animals, whether wild or not, would indeed 

preclude freedom status. 

In point 2, a comment was received on defining ‘current knowledge of’ and ‘authority over’, with the rationale that 

difficulties were encountered in the annual reconfirmation submitted for another disease for the same point. The Code 

Commission clarified that this requirement was harmonized across the chapters of diseases for which WOAH grants 

official status recognition, and refers to the knowledge and competency that the Veterinary Authority has over 

domestic and captive wild animal populations in its jurisdiction. In the same point, the Code Commission did not agree 

with a comment to add ‘all susceptible species in the country or zone’ after ‘current knowledge of’, as this addition 

would not provide any added value.

In point 3, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment requesting to delete the point, in agreement with the 

Scientific Commission's opinion that the presence of wild and feral susceptible animals may have an impact on the 

animal health status of the country or zone and should be monitored. The Commission noted that this response was 

also relevant for a similar comment on point 1 d) of Article 8.8.3. 

In the same point, the Commission noted a comment questioning if the current wording implied that a dedicated 

surveillance system should be established for wild and feral susceptible animals, noting that the range of susceptible 

animals of FMD is much wider than other diseases and that the clinical signs of FMD in wild animals may be unclear 

to be detected. The Commission noted the opinion of the Scientific commission at its February 2022 meeting that the 

intention of this provision was not to require active surveillance but to ensure that a passive surveillance system is in 

place to support and maintain the FMD free status of a country or zone, and considering that this is already covered 

by point 4) of this article and the general principles for surveillance in Chapter 1.4., it proposed to delete ‘and indication 

of disease occurrence through passive surveillance’ for clarity. 

In point 4(b)(ii), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment that the amended provisions allowing the 

importation of vaccinated animals into a country or zone officially free from FMD where vaccination is not practised 

implied an unjustified additional burden on FMD-free importing countries to maintain its animal health status. The 

Commission highlighted that these provisions aimed at providing recommendations for the safe movement of animals,

and that importing countries had to implement them based on risk analysis. Nonetheless, the Commission agreed 

with the opinion of the Scientific Commission at its February 2022 meeting, and considering the concerns raised by 

Members and the significance of the change, the Commission proposed amendments in point 5) to limit the 

introduction of vaccinated animals only to those from FMD-free countries/zones where vaccination is practised (and 

not from infected countries/zones). The Commission also noted that the Scientific Commission would develop 

guidelines on FMD surveillance to assist Members in this regard. 

In the last paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to delete the paragraph and reinstate the 

requirement to establish a protection zone in the case of an incursion of stray African buffalo. The Code Commission 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 22

reiterated that the Taskforce did not consider this to be necessary and referred the Member to the September 2021 

report of the Scientific Commission for further information. In the same paragraph, the Code Commission agreed with 

a comment to clarify the conditions to maintain the free status despite an incursion of African buffalo and proposed 

to change ‘the relevant conditions are’ with ‘it is demonstrated that the provisions in this article continue to be’ and to 

add ‘where vaccination is not practised’ after ‘free from FMD’.

Article 8.8.3.

In the third paragraph, the Code Commission agreed to delete the paragraph to align the structure of the article with 

similar articles (status definition) in other chapters. Nonetheless, the Commission agreed that the content of the

paragraph was important and moved it to the end of point 1(e) of this article. 

In response to a comment on whether the reference in point 2 of Article 1.4.6. excludes countries having wild African 

buffalo populations known to be persistently infected from acquiring free status where vaccination is practised, the 

Code Commission reiterated its explanation given above, under Article 8.8.2.

In point 1(b) the Code Commission did not agree with a comment that the point was redundant.

In point 1(c), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘all susceptible species in the country or 

zone’ after ‘current knowledge of’ as this addition would not provide any added value.

In point 1(d), the Code Commission amended the text to follow the changes introduced in point 3 of Article 8.8.2. 

In point 1(g), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment that this point appears to be redundant if the 

country or zone complies with point 2 of Article 1.4.6. and explained that point 1(g) complements point 2(a)(iii) of 

Article 1.4.6. with reference to the specific recommendations of this chapter on FMD. 

In point 2, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to amend the text as considered it was clear as written 

that the duration for which surveillance should be undertaken is 24 months.

Article 8.8.3bis.

In the first paragraph, the Code Commission agreed with comments to amend the text for clarity. 

In response to a comment querying why the last paragraph was proposed to be deleted, the Code Commission 

explained that it was for harmonisation purposes for all disease-specific chapters for which WOAH grants official 

recognition of status (See item 4.17 of this report) and noted that it was covered by Article 1.6.1. 

Article 8.8.4.bis

In point 2(c) the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to delete ‘population immunity is closely monitored’, 

as it considered this a critical point for a compartment free with vaccination to be established and approved. 

Article 8.8.5bis.

In response to a comment questioning the level of detail in this new article, the Commission highlighted that while a 

dedicated horizontal Article 4.4.6. provides general recommendations, these disease-specific provisions are relevant 

due to the importance of this disease and are necessary for the purposes of official status recognition.

In the fourth paragraph, the Code Commission agreed with comments that the two options for recovery of free status 

after vaccination is implemented in a protection zone, established in a free country or zone where vaccination was 

not practised (i.e., towards free with or without vaccination) needed to be clarified and proposed amendments to the 

text for clarity.

In the fifth paragraph, in response to comments that the establishment of a containment zone is optional, the Code 

Commission proposed to add ‘If the Veterinary Authority establishes’ at the beginning of the second sentence to 

clarify this.

In the same paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment that if FMD occurred in a protection 

zone, the significance of protection will be lost. The Code Commission clarified that a protection zone per se is not a 

protected area, and the objective of the protection zone is to prevent the entry of the pathogenic agent into the rest 

of a free country or zone. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 23

In the last paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment that requested to add ‘established as a 

temporary measure in response to an increased risk of disease’ after ‘protection zone’, as it considers that the text 

clearly defines that the protection zone should be limited to less than 24 months from the date of its approval by the 

WOAH. 

In the same paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to replace ‘Member Country’ with 

‘Veterinary Authority’, as a status is requested by and granted to a Member. The Commission noted that this response 

also applied to similar comments received in other points of the chapter. 

Article 8.8.6.

In the first paragraph, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to amend the text for consistency of terminology. 

In the last paragraph, the Commission agreed with a comment to review the time limit for recovery of free status of 

the containment zone. The Commission acknowledged that its previous response, at its September 2021 meeting, 

focused on the recovery of free status of the entire country or zone, but did not necessarily address the possibility for 

a Member to follow the official process to have two different zones with distinct animal health statuses, one for the 

area inside of the containment zone and the other for the area outside of the containment zone. In agreement with 

the Scientific Commission and acknowledging that these changes would require yearly adoption by the World 

Assembly, the Commission proposed to amend this period from 18 months to 24 months, which would also align with 

that of the protection zone. 

In the same paragraph, in response to a comment querying about the consequences of recovery not being achieved 

within that time limit, the Commission explained that even if no consequences are described in this paragraph, it

should be understood that the officially recognised status for the country or zone would be suspended in such a case. 

The Commission referred to the opinion of the Scientific Commission on this point at its February 2022 meeting. 

Article 8.8.7.

The Code Commission acknowledged a comment regarding the processes to demonstrate freedom and noted that it 

had been forwarded to the Scientific Commission for consideration at its February 2022 meeting. 

In point 3, in response to a comment, the Code Commission proposed to add ‘or transmission of FMDV’ as the 

transmission of FMDV in vaccinated populations would also affect freedom status. The Commission applied this 

addition throughout the text where relevant.

In point 3(a), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘or without’ before emergency vaccination 

and explained that the shortened waiting period of 6 months was to take into account the application of emergency 

vaccination. For the same reason, in the last paragraph of the point, the Code Commission did not agree to add 

‘neither stamping-out policy nor’ before ‘emergency vaccination’. The Commission clarified that reduced waiting 

periods apply only if emergency vaccination is practised, and if emergency vaccination is not applied, the waiting 

periods in this article do not apply and Article 8.8.3. applies. 

In point 3, in the third paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to replace ‘Article 8.8.3’ with 

‘Article 8.8.2’, explaining that point 3 refers to a country or zone previously free from FMD where vaccination is 

practised, and therefore the correct reference for recovery is Article 8.8.3.

In point 5, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to amend the text to clarify the requirements for lifting 

restrictions, noting these were not described elsewhere in this article. 

In the last paragraph of point 5, the Commission agreed with a comment to include a reference to Article 8.8.4bis for 

completeness and consistency with point 4. 

Article 8.8.9bis.

In the title, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to remove ‘or not’ after ‘practised’ because this article 

deals specifically with animals which had been vaccinated, as such animals may still exist in a zone free from 

vaccination where vaccination is not practised, and referred the Member to the different provisions in this chapter for 

the conditions for determination of status at origin. 

Article 8.8.11.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 24

The Code Commission noted a comment to reorganise the articles containing trade provisions and, following its 

agreement regarding the standardisation of content across the Terrestrial Code, the Commission agreed to include 

the relevant commodity in the title of the article and applied this change across the chapter. 

In points 3 and 4, the Code Commission acknowledged diverging comments requesting on one side to use only one 

test (i.e., either a virological test or serological test for FMD), and on the other, requesting additional measures to the 

proposed scheme. Noting the opinions of the Biological Standards Commission (September 2022 meeting) and the 

Scientific Commission (February 2022 meeting), the Commission agreed that while the tests individually may have 

limitations, the application of two tests in parallel would improve the sensitivity of the process, which added to the 

other complementary mitigation measures. The Commission also highlighted that these provisions were meant for 

the importation of animals from FMD free countries, which implies that the absence of the pathogenic agent in the 

population has been duly demonstrated in compliance with the relevant provisions of this chapter and officially 

recognized by WOAH, and hence the risks of the animals being either infected with FMD or previously exposed would 

be marginal. The Commission agreed not to further amend the text. 

In point 6, in response to a comment querying what is meant by place of shipment, the Code Commission clarified 

that this meant the place where the animals leave the exporting country for international trade.

The Code Commission acknowledged a comment providing the experience of countries in the South American region 

regarding vaccination and the evaluation of transmission in vaccinated animals.

Article 8.8.11bis.

In point 4, in response to a comment, the Code Commission referred to its explanation in Article 8.8.11. regarding the 

place of shipment. 

Article 8.8.12.

In point 5, the Code Commission agreed with a proposal of the Scientific Commission at its February 2022 meeting, 

and proposed amendments to the text to clearly explain the two different options (a quarantine station or an 

establishment in an area with no occurrence of FMD), while the testing procedures are the same.

Article 8.8.14.

In point 1(c), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to provide further details regarding the time period 

in which animals are required to be kept in an artificial insemination centre before collection, noting that this article 

applies to FMD free countries or zones. The Commission also noted the alignment with Chapters 4.6. and 4.7. will 

be addressed by the ongoing work to update those chapters. 

Article 8.8.18.

In point 3, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to include a reference to Chapter 4.10, as in vitro produced 

embryos are also micromanipulated. The amendment also applied to Article 8.8.19.

Article 8.8.19.

In point 1(c)(ii), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to add ‘and not more than 60 days’ to align with the 

requirements for semen donors. 

Article 8.8.22ter.

The Code Commission proposed a new article for the importation of fresh meat of domestic small ruminants 

(excluding feet, head, and viscera) from FMD infected countries and zones where an official control programme 

exists, based on the proposed draft texts and rationale developed by the ad hoc Group on foot and mouth disease 

virus (June 2020). The Commission agreed that the maturation process described for the meat of small ruminant 

carcasses was comparable to that for the meat of bovines and could be used in the same way as one of the risk 

mitigation measures required. 

While acknowledging that the original request from the Commission to this ad hoc group was also to consider 

recommendations for the trade of wild animal meat from infected countries or zones, the Commission decided not to 

include such draft provisions as it would be difficult to provide for such commodities, standard recommendations 

compatible with current export supply chains, feasible from practical and cost perspectives and simple to be certified 

by Veterinary Authorities. The Commission considered that for the time being, such trade would be managed 

bilaterally based on a specific risk analysis.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 25

Article 8.8.25.

In point 1(b) the Commission agreed to delete the reference to Article 8.8.36, as it was no longer applied.

Article 8.8.27.

The Commission agreed to delete the last paragraph as the relevant commodities were added to Article 8.8.1bis.

Article 8.8.28.

In point 1, the Commission did not agree with a comment to add “or come from areas where animal grazing is not 

allowed for this type of commodity” in the end, as it considered this excessive as all other measures provided in this 

article were sufficient to mitigate risks related to straw and forage. 

Article 8.8.35.

In point 1, the Commission did not agree with a comment to reinstate the point and reiterated its response provided 

in its September 2020 report, that this was a consequence of the addition of UHT milk to the list of safe commodities 

in Article 8.8.1bis and referred to the February 2020 report of the Scientific Commission for further information. 

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment regarding this article and the deleted Article 8.8.36., requesting 

that two separate articles be retained with appropriate measures to inactivate FMDV to the level of confidence 

dependent on end use. The Commission reiterated that the provisions in disease-specific chapters are intended to 

deal with the risk of the commodity itself regardless of its usage. The Commission also highlighted that the current 

draft article provides measures equivalent to those in the previous article 8.8.36. 

Article 8.8.40.

In response to a comment regarding the surveillance requirements related to the introduction of vaccinated animals, 

the Code Commission referred Members to the responses provided to comments in Article 8.8.2. 

Article 8.8.41.

In the first paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘field samples or’ before ‘FMDV 

isolates’, as it considered it was not practical to include this as a standard requirement. Nonetheless, the Commission 

acknowledged that field samples could be helpful to establish the molecular, antigenic and other biological 

characteristics of the causative virus notably when the national laboratories might not have all the necessary 

capacities. 

Article 8.8.42.

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

The revised Chapter 8.8. Infection with foot and mouth disease virus is presented as Annex 6 for comments and will 

be proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

5.4. Infection with rabies virus (Articles 8.14.6bis. and 8.14.7. of Chapter 8.14)

Comments were received from Argentina, Chinese Taipei, Singapore, Switzerland and the EU.

Background

Following the adoption of revised Chapter 8.14. Infection with rabies virus, in May 2019, the Code Commission, at its 

September 2019 meeting, acknowledged that 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 ad hoc Group on Rabies and the 

Scientific Commission (October 2019 report) and agreed to add a new Article 8.14.6bis. on recommendations for the 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 26

importation of dogs from countries or zones infected with rabies virus, and amend the title of Article 8.14.7 and 

circulate the amended articles for comments. 

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission considered comments received on the revised articles and 

requested the advice of the Scientific Commission for some comments. The Code Commission also decided, in 

agreement with the Scientific Commission, not to propose any amendment to Articles 8.14.8. to 8.14.10. until new 

scientific evidence becomes available. 

Between February and September 2021, the Scientific Commission requested additional advice from the WOAH 

Rabies Reference Laboratory network (RABLAB), which was endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its September 

2021 meeting. 

At its February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission considered the comments received, together with the advice 

from the RABLAB and the Scientific Commission. The Commission also considered a draft new article developed by 

the RABLAB experts providing provisions for the control of rabies in wildlife, and a new draft article on 

recommendations for implementing a rabies vaccination programme for dogs, which had been endorsed by the 

Scientific Commission. 

Discussion

In preparation for this meeting, the Secretariat requested the advice of the Scientific Commission on selected 

comments received on the circulated texts. The Scientific Commission, at its September 2022 meeting, considered 

the opinion of experts of the RABLAB to address those points. 

The Code Commission considered the comments received on the new Article 8.14.6bis. and the revised Article 

8.14.7., together with the opinion of the Scientific Commission at its September 2022 meeting. 

General comments

The Code Commission noted a first comment 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, but agreed that no specific 

evidence or reference had been provided. 

The Code Commission also acknowledged another comment not supporting the proposed changes, based on a risk 

assessment conducted to assess the risks related to a possible reduction of the waiting period after rabies antibody 

titration test to 30 days compared with 90 days of the current EU legislation, for dogs moving from certain non-EU 

countries to the EU. The Commission thanked the Members for the information provided and referred to the opinion 

of the Scientific Commission on this assessment (see SCAD’s September 2022 meeting report for details). The 

Commission highlighted that such risk assessments that were based on assumptions and modelling may be relevant 

to a specific context and could support a Member wishing to apply more stringent sanitary measures than those 

recommended in the Code, if scientifically sound and conducted in accordance with Chapter 2.1., while it was not fit 

for extrapolation to the global context.

Article 8.14.6bis.

In view of the above, and of the fact that any dog naturally infected and presenting a serology titer as described in 

the article should show signs of rabies at the time of, or less than ten days after the test the Code Commission did 

not agree to modify the waiting period for the importation of vaccinated dogs from infected countries or zones from 

30 days to 3 months, and encouraged the Members to refer to the rationale provided in previous reports of this 

Commission, the Scientific Commission and the RABLAB experts. 

Article 8.14.11bis.

In point 2(a) the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to include cats, as it considered the article was 

focused on dogs and was aimed at addressing vaccination programmes for dog-mediated rabies for which cats were 

not considered to play a significant epidemiological role. 

In point 3(a) the Code Commission agreed with a comment to replace “a database” with “an animal identification 

system”, for consistency with related text in Chapter 7.7. Dog population management. 

At the same point, it acknowledged a comment stating that this requirement may not be feasible when using an oral 

rabies vaccine but considered that it was not needed to change the text, since, as stated in the Terrestrial Manual, 

parenteral vaccination should remain the foundation of mass vaccination campaigns of dogs. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 27

Recommendations for the control of rabies in wildlife

The Code Commission reviewed a draft new article developed based on the previous discussions between the Code 

Commission, the Scientific Commission and the WOAH Working Group on wildlife about specific provisions on the 

control of rabies in wildlife in the chapter. 

The Code Commission acknowledged the proposed article providing recommendations for an official control 

programme for wildlife-mediated rabies and thanked the RABLAB experts and the Scientific Commission for their 

work.

Noting that the chapter is focused on dog-mediated rabies, the Commission decided that it was premature to include 

control of wildlife-mediated rabies and not to propose this addition to the Members for the time being. The Commission 

agreed to continue working on the current revision and come back to this topic upon Members’ request, after the 

adoption of the currently proposed amendments. 

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 comments, and will be proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

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

Comments were received from Australia, China (People’s Rep. of, Chinese Taipei, New Zealand, Switzerland and 

the EU.

Background

In February 2019, the Code Commission amended Chapter 8.15. Infection with Rift Valley fever virus 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 comments for the third time in the Commission’s February 2020 meeting 

report.

An ad hoc Group meeting was convened in June 2021 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 report of the meeting was endorsed by 

the Scientific Commission at its September 2021 meeting.

At its February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission discussed the comments previously received, together with the 

report of the ad hoc Group, and made additional amendments, and circulated the revised chapter for comments. 

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received.

Article 8.15.1.

In point 4(b), in response to a comment to add ‘locally acquired’ before ‘human infected with RVFV’, the Code 

Commission agreed that humans are dead-end hosts, and thus infection in humans that has been acquired in a 

different geographical area would not be linked to infection in animals. However, the Commission did not agree to 

amend the text as it considered the draft text adequately addressed this scenario.

Article 8.15.2.

The Code Commission reminded Members that the Commission, at its February 2022 meeting, had 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, as appropriate, when a disease-specific chapter was 

under review. The Commission reviewed a number of scientific references1 regarding virus inactivation, together with 

information provided by the GAPFA, and agreed that these two products met the criteria for safe commodities and 

should be added to the list of safe commodities in this article.

Article 8.15.6.

1 Daouam et al. (2014). Heat stability of the Rift Valley Fever Virus Clone 13 live vaccines. Trials in Vaccinology, 3 (2014), 61-64.; ICTV 

9th Report. Family: Bunyaviridae; WOAH Technical disease card for Rift Valley fever. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 28

In point 2(b), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘where RVF exists’ at the end of the point, 

and noted that “epidemic area” was defined in Article 8.15.1 for the purposes of this chapter.

Article 8.15.8.

In response to a comment that there were no recommendations for in vitro produced embryos for sheep, goat or 

cattle, the Code Commission requested that WOAH Secretariat seek experts’ advice on the inclusion of in vitro

embryos in this article.

The Commission also discussed the trade in in vitro produced embryos in a broader context, and agreed that there 

was a need to consider how to address risks posed by in vitro produced embryos in international trade in some other 

chapters of the Terrestrial Code, recognising that this may be difficult in some cases due to a lack of scientific data.

In point 2b, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘with animal vaccinated against RVF’ after 

‘subjected to a serological test’. The Commission reminded Members that the ad hoc Group on RVF (June 2021), 

had noted that there was insufficient scientific evidence to indicate that semen remains infective following recovery 

of infected animals and had concluded that the risk mitigation measures in the current article should be sufficient to 

prevent disease transmission. At the same point, the Commission did not agree to add ‘and RT-PCR negative results 

from the semen’ at the end of the point, again noting that there was insufficient scientific evidence to indicate that 

semen remains infective following recovery of infected animals. The Commission encouraged Members to provide 

scientific references to support the proposed amendments for the Commission’s future consideration.

Article 8.15.9.

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘by-products’ in this article, given that no scientific 

evidence was provided to support this proposal. Further, the Commission emphasised that the Glossary definition for 

meat and meat products did not cover inedible foodstuff, and thus they could not include all “by-products”. The 

Commission also reminded Members of the ongoing work on the use of the term ‘animal by-products’ in the Terrestrial 

Code and that the possible development of a specific definition has been included in the Commission’s work 

programme.

Article 8.15.11.

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add a sentence referring to surveillance for high vector 

activity and noted that this is already addressed in the second paragraph. The Commission considered that ‘low 

vector activity’ was more relevant than ‘high vector activity’ in the provisions of this chapter.

In the third paragraph, the Code Commission proposed to add ‘indigenous’ before ‘infections in humans’ to ensure 

alignment with point 2(b) of Article 8.15.3. 

The revised Chapter 8.15. Infection with Rift Valley fever virus is presented as Annex 8 for comments and will be 

proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

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

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

Background

At its February 2022 meeting, in response to a comment, the Code Commission proposed to remove the definition of 

poultry from Chapter 10.9. Infection with Newcastle disease virus, given that the revised Glossary definition for poultry

was adopted in 2021, and that there was no need to include a definition in disease-specific chapters such as Chapter 

10.4. Infection with highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses or Chapter 10.9. Infection with Newcastle disease virus. 

While acknowledging that Chapter 10.9. may benefit from other updates, the Commission informed Members that the 

current revision would be limited to addressing this change for consistency with other chapters, and that a review of 

other aspects of the chapter would be considered for prioritisation in the future. 

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received.

Article 10.9.1.

In point 3, the Code Commission agreed to delete ‘as defined in point 2 above’ as it was not relevant anymore.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 29

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

comments and will be proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

5.7. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (Chapter 11.4.; Chapter 1.8.; Glossary definition for ‘protein meal’ 

and use of related terms)

Background

In February 2018, following preliminary work and discussions, the Code Commission and the Scientific Commission 

agreed to an in-depth review of Chapter 11.4. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). WOAH convened four ad 

hoc Group meetings between July 2018 and March 2019 to draft a revised Chapter 11.4. 

At its September 2019 meeting, the Code Commission reviewed the ad hoc Group’s reports together with the opinion 

of the Scientific Commission and circulated the revised Chapter 11.4. for comments.

At its February 2020 meeting, the Code Commission considered comments received and requested that the joint ad 

hoc Group on BSE risk assessment and surveillance be reconvened to address comments of a technical nature as 

well as to review Chapter 1.8. Application for official recognition by the OIE of risk status for bovine spongiform 

encephalopathy to ensure alignment with the proposed changes in Chapter 11.4.

At its September 2020 meeting, the Code Commission reviewed the joint ad hoc Group report and the draft revised 

Chapters 11.4. and 1.8. and made some additional amendments and circulated the revised chapters for comments 

in its September 2020 report.

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission considered comments received and amended the chapters, as 

appropriate, and circulated the revised chapters.

In preparation for the September 2021 meetings, nominated members of the Code Commission and the Scientific 

Commission met to discuss key aspects of the revision of Chapters 11.4. and 1.8. to ensure agreement on how to 

address the main concerns raised by Members, the decisions made on the revised chapters and their impact on the 

WOAH official status recognition, as well as on the adapted procedures that will be required. Both Commissions 

addressed specific issues of relevance at their respective September 2021 meetings.

At its September 2021 and February 2022 meetings, the Code Commission considered comments received and 

amended the chapters, as appropriate, and circulated the revised chapters, proposing the chapters for adoption at 

the 89th General Session in May 2022.

In the 89th General Session held in May 2022, the President of the Code Commission reported that several Members 

had submitted positions on the revised chapter prior to the General Session, and that while some supported the 

adoption of the text as proposed, others expressed concerns or did not support its adoption. He also noted that some 

Members had submitted very detailed comments, and acknowledged that significant amendments had been made to 

the text at the last two Commission meetings and therefore Members might not have had enough time to adequately 

review the amended text. Therefore, he proposed that the Assembly withdraw the proposed revised Chapter 11.4. 

(as well as Chapter 1.8.) from adoption. He emphasised that the revision of the chapter was not a matter of urgency 

and that it was important to make every effort to reach an agreement by consensus. He also explained that the 

postponement would provide WOAH with more time to further review the impact on the assessment of official BSE 

status already recognised and to develop guidelines on surveillance that would help Members adapt the proposed 

new provisions on BSE surveillance. He indicated that the Code Commission would consider comments received 

prior to this General Session, as well as any additional comments submitted at its next meeting in September 2022 

and explained that revised chapters would be presented to the Assembly at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

Discussion 

Chapter 11.4. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy

Comments were received, prior to the 89th General Session, from Australia, Brazil, China (People’s Republic of), 

France (on behalf of the 27 Member States of the EU), Japan, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, the 

UK, the AU-IBAR and the WRO.

Additional comments were received prior to this meeting, from Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Republic of Korea, 

Singapore, South Africa, the UK, the AU-IBAR and the WRO.

General comments
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 30

The Code Commission acknowledged various comments reiterating concerns on how the revised chapter addressed 

atypical BSE, and noted that new detailed comments were received in that regard. The Commission reviewed its 

previous discussions and reminded that at its September 2020 meeting it had recognised the difficulties of strictly 

applying the criteria in Article 1.2.2. to atypical BSE and that there were still gaps in scientific knowledge regarding 

atypical BSE, and therefore the Commission had agreed that keeping atypical BSE as a listed disease was an interim 

solution. The Commission noted that no new scientific evidence had become available since 2020, and decided to 

seek the Scientific Commission’s opinion on whether atypical BSE should continue to be notifiable to WOAH, and 

whether and how atypical BSE should be considered in the risk assessment, as these two points were critical to 

address Members’ concerns. 

The Scientific Commission discussed these issues at its September 2022 meeting and concluded that there was no 

evidence to consider that point 1 of Article 1.2.2. was met for atypical BSE, but whilst there was no evidence to date 

that atypical BSE was transmissible under natural conditions, the potential for recycling of the atypical BSE agent 

could not be ruled out and should be avoided. It also concluded that there was no evidence that atypical BSE was an 

indicator of a BSE agent being recycled in a bovine population and it should not be part of the exposure assessment 

in Article 11.4.2. of the revised BSE Code chapter, and noted that risk mitigation measures put in place for classical 

BSE would also likely be relevant for preventing recycling and amplification of atypical BSE in a bovine population. 

The Code Commission considered the Scientific Commission’s conclusions and proposed relevant amendments to 

the revised Chapter 11.4., based on the following positions: 

• Since atypical BSE does not meet the criteria for listing, reference to atypical BSE is not justified in this 

chapter in the context of notification obligation to WOAH in accordance with Chapter 1.1. of the Terrestrial 

Code; 

• Since there is no scientific evidence that atypical BSE is an indicator of a BSE agent being recycled in a 

bovine population, reference to atypical BSE is not justified in the BSE risk assessment described in Article 

11.4.2.; 

• Nevertheless, since the potential for recycling of atypical BSE agent cannot be ruled out and should be 

avoided, reference to BSE (i.e., including both classical and atypical) is justified in the contexts of general 

reference to the disease, of risk mitigation measures for BSE, and of BSE surveillance.

The Code Commission noted comments expressing concerns with the proposed approach for some of the trade 

provisions: one stated that it was essential that any changes to the chapter do not increase the administrative burdens 

or trade barriers for countries that hold a negligible BSE risk status, given the global context and epidemiology with 

respect to diminishing overall BSE and vCJD risks; and another comment argued that it would be more proportionate 

to have different trade recommendations for different commodities, and that taking into account the two 

subpopulations as currently proposed for the trade provisions would not be justified for countries that hold a negligible 

BSE risk status due to the additional costs and difficulty to implement compared with the expected risk mitigation 

results. The Commission discussed at length these comments and agreed that the BSE risk posed by bovines born 

before the date from which the risk of BSE agents being recycled within the bovine population has been negligible

(here after referred to as ‘the date’) was not considered to be significant for meat and blood, and consequently 

proposed to delete the reference to different subpopulations in Articles 11.4.10. (on recommendations for importation 

of fresh meat and meat products) and 11.4.13. (on recommendations for importation of blood and blood products). 

On the other hand, the Commission agreed not to modify Articles 11.4.7. (on recommendations for importation of live 

bovines) and 11.4.12. (on recommendations for importation of bovine-derived protein meal) on this regard as it 

considered that a relatively higher BSE risk in these commodities should be properly managed.

The Code Commission noted concerns raised by some Members on the potential impact on official status recognition 

and the determination and publication of the date. The Code Commission noted these had been addressed by the 

Scientific Commission at its February 2022 meeting and encouraged Members to follow the discussions on

procedures related to official status recognition in the reports of the Scientific Commission. The Code Commission 

also noted comments expressing interest in the guidelines for BSE surveillance which was being developed by 

WOAH. The Code Commission encouraged Members to refer to the relevant reports of the Scientific Commission for 

further details on these and other matters relevant to this work. The Code Commission reiterated that these guidelines 

would not create a need for any further modifications to the chapter. 

In response to a comment that the BSE surveillance described in the proposed Article 11.4.18. did not change the 

testing requirement nor substantially reduced the cost of testing, the Code Commission explained that the proposed 

surveillance (passive surveillance) targeted only the risk populations, including clinical suspects, casualty slaughter 

and fallen stock as described in the article, and did not target ‘routine slaughter bovines’, which is one of the 

subpopulations that the current point-based surveillance focused on. Nevertheless, the Commission modified some 

terms of Article 11.4.18., for clarity, and encouraged members to review the October 2018 report of ad hoc Group on 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 31

BSE surveillance, which provides a clear rationale for the need of new surveillance provisions, including the fact that 

the new proposed method would be much less burdensome and costly. 

The Code Commission proposed to replace ‘cattle’ with ‘bovine(s)’ throughout this chapter for consistency (See item 

5.15 of this report).

Article 11.4.1.

In the first paragraph, in line with the above-mentioned considerations, and in agreement with the conclusions of the 

Scientific Commission, the Code Commission amended the text accordingly, notably to specify that ‘BSE’ is a disease 

caused by both classical and atypical BSE agents, and to clarify the epidemiological role of atypical BSE agents. 

In point 1, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to replace ‘contaminated feed’ with ‘feed contaminated 

with prions from bovines’ as it considered the text clear as currently written.

In point 2, the Code Commission proposed to add a sentence to clarify the purpose of the chapter, for harmonisation 

with other chapters on zoonotic diseases, such as Chapter 8.14. Infection with rabies virus and Chapter 8.15. Infection 

with Rift Valley virus.

In point 3, in line with the above-mentioned considerations and in agreement with the recommendations of the 

Scientific Commission, the Code Commission amended point 3 of Article 11.4.1. to clarify that a ‘case of BSE’ meant 

only the occurrence of classical BSE. At the same point, in agreement with the Biological Standards Commission and 

the ad hoc Group on the revision of BSE standards and the maintenance of official BSE risk status (June 2022), the 

Commission maintained its position on the use of the abbreviation ‘PrPSc’ in line with the Terrestrial Manual.

Article 11.4.1bis.

The Code Commission disagreed with a comment that gelatine and collagen made from certain bovines cannot be 

regarded as safe commodities, and encouraged Members to refer to the June 2020 report of ad hoc Group on BSE 

risk assessment and surveillance for the detailed rationale to include them as safe commodities.

Article 11.4.2.

In point 1(a), the Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘Depending on the outcome of the entry 

assessment, an exposure assessment (in point 1(b) below) may not be required’. The Commission explained that 

even when it could be demonstrated that there had been no imported commodities that could lead to exposure to 

classical BSE agents and that classical BSE agents had not been detected within the bovine population of a country, 

zone, or compartment, the exposure assessment itself should always be carried out to ensure compliance with point 

1 of draft Article 11.4.3., so as to conclude that the likelihood of bovines being exposed to BSE is negligible, in 

particular through overall risk mitigation measures. 

Article 11.4.3.

The Commission did not agree with a comment to maintain a condition on age for indigenous classical BSE cases 

(e.g., as in point 3 (b) of current Article 11.4.3.), the Code Commission reiterated that such requirements were neither 

considered proportionate to the risk nor supported by robust scientific evidence.

In point 1, based on the position explained in the general comments above, particularly the fact that the potential for 

recycling of the atypical BSE agent could not be ruled out and should be avoided, the Code Commission proposed 

to reinstate the deleted point 1(a) and point 1(b), given that in any country seeking recognition of negligible or 

controlled risk status, any risks posed by BSE should be properly mitigated either by livestock industry practices 

described in point 1(a), or by a ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban described in point 1(b).

In point 3(a), in response to comments to refer to both classical BSE and atypical BSE, the Code Commission clarified 

that, based on the above-mentioned position, a ‘case of BSE’ now referred only to classical BSE and amended the 

text of this point and of point 3(b) accordingly. 

The Code Commission did not agree with comments to reinstate provisions applicable to feed and birth cohort animals 

when an indigenous case of BSE is identified. The Commission reminded Members that the ad hoc Group on BSE 

risk assessment that met in July 2018 concluded that, based on 16-year surveillance data, the complete destruction 

of all feed cohort and birth cohort animals would not provide a significant gain in risk reduction.

In response to a comment to add ‘identified all cases and’ before ‘confirmed’, the Code Commission reiterated that 

the occurrence of a limited number of indigenous cases of BSE in bovines born after the date from which the risk of 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 32

BSE agents being recycled within the bovine population has been negligible did not necessarily reflect a breakdown 

of effective control measures, and that isolated pockets of residual infectivity in a complex network of rendering, feed 

production, distribution and storage may account for rare, sporadic opportunities of exposure to contaminated protein 

meal. The Commission considered that the ‘subsequent investigations’ could lead to finding other cases of BSE if the 

source of infection was identified, recognising that the source of infection may not necessarily be identified.

In point 4, based on the position explained in the general comments paragraph above, the Code Commission 

proposed to add ‘or bovines affected with atypical BSE’ as this point provides for overall BSE risk mitigation measures 

that should apply both for classical and atypical BSE.

Article 11.4.5bis.

In the first paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to provide further clarification on the 

contents and requirements of the ‘investigation report’, as it considered that the text was clear as currently written.

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment that if the investigations could not identify the BSE agent, 

environmental BSE risks posed by persistent infectivity in pockets should be removed through measures such as 

replacement of the feed line of the infected farm. The Commission considered that such measures would not 

necessarily be justified, emphasising that a recently published modelling study on cases born after reinforced feed 

bans (BARB), which was referred to in February 2022 Code Commission report) showed an exponential decline in 

the number of the BARB cases. The Commission reiterated that the occurrence of a limited number of indigenous 

cases of BSE in animals born after the date from which the risk of BSE agents being recycled within the bovine 

population has been negligible did not necessarily reflect a failure of effective control measures.

Article 11.4.10.

Based on the considerations explained for the General comments above, the Code Commission proposed to delete 

the reference to the subpopulations of bovines born before or after the date. 

The Commission also proposed to delete point 4, as it considered that the implementation of these measures was

assessed in the BSE risk assessment when the official BSE risk status was recognised.

Article 11.4.12.

In response to comments that protein meal should not be traded because inadequate treatment of protein meal could 

result in BSE agents being recycled and amplified, resulting in countries losing a previously acquired negligible risk 

status due to outbreaks of BSE, the Code Commission explained that the risk of BSE agents being recycled within 

the bovine population in an importing country would be managed to a negligible level by implementing the multilayered recommendations provided in this chapter.

In the first paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with comments to delete the reference to ‘animal 

identification system’ or to move it to point 1. The Commission reiterated that this point referred to an animal 

identification system, as defined in the Glossary, meaning that it could involve identification and registration by 

animals individually or collectively by epidemiological unit or group, and thus it considered the point relevant and 

feasible as written.

In point 2, in response to comments opposing the addition of the point because it could result in unnecessary trade 

restrictions, the Code Commission noted that the concern would be addressed by the amendments proposed to 

Article 11.4.17.

Article 11.4.13.

Based on the considerations explained in the general comments above, the Code Commission proposed to delete 

the reference to subpopulations of bovines born before or after the date from which the risk of BSE agents being 

recycled within the bovine population has been demonstrated to be negligible.

Article 11.4.14.

The Code Commission proposed to delete ‘for the preparation of...medical devices’ in point 1, as it was covered by 

point 2 and the destination or end-use of the commodities was not the responsibility of the exporting countries.

In response to a comment to restrict the trade of all commodities with the greatest BSE infectivity from countries with 

controlled BSE risk, the Code Commission reiterated that in these countries, the BSE risk of commodities derived 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 33

from bovines born after the date from which the risk of BSE agents being recycled within the bovine population has 

been demonstrated to be negligible was negligible.

In point 1, the Code Commission did not agree with comments to add ‘and tonsils’, noting that the ad hoc Group had 

proposed that the restriction applicable to tonsils be removed based on scientific evidence (EFSA Journal 

2011;9(1):1947). The Commission encouraged Members to refer to the March 2019 report of ad hoc Group on BSE 

risk assessment and surveillance. 

In point 1(b), in response to a comment to reinstate the deleted ‘or a negligible BSE’, the Code Commission reiterated 

that the stricter recommendations than those provided in the current chapter for countries, zones or compartments 

posing a negligible BSE risk would not be proportionate or justified. 

In points 1 and 2, the Code Commission agreed with comments and amended the text for clarify, as the meaning of 

the term ‘protein products’ was unclear.

In point 3, in response to a comment querying how this recommendation related to Article 11.4.17. (Procedures for 

reduction of BSE infectivity in bovine-derived protein meal), the Code Commission explained that the 

recommendations in Article 11.4.17. were not for ‘inactivation’ but for ‘reduction’ of BSE infectivity in bovine protein 

meal, and they could not guarantee a complete inactivation of BSE agents. The Commission highlighted that 

measures should not be considered in isolation, but rather be taken in combination with other requirements, such as 

the consideration of the BSE risk at origin. The Commission also noted that ‘protein meal’ was a commodity for which 

it was extremely difficult to demonstrate the exact components and origins (e.g. age of animals, birth date of the 

animals, or whether commodities with the greatest BSE infectivity were excluded) and that was the reason why the 

chapter recommended it not to be traded from countries, zones or compartments posing an undetermined BSE risk 

or controlled BSE risk (as described in Article 11.4.14.). 

Article 11.4.15bis.

In point 3, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add the same parameters for temperature, time 

and pressure as those in Article 11.4.17. for protein meal and reminded that the transesterification process of fat was 

not the same as that used for protein meal, and that the proposed treatment was deemed sufficient to mitigate any 

risk. The Commission encouraged Members to refer to the June 2021 report of ad hoc Group on the revision of BSE 

standards and its impact on the official status recognition. 

Article 11.4.17.

The Code Commission agreed with a comment to clarify the animal origin of protein meal referred to in the article 

and made necessary amendments. 

In response to comments questioning the intent or needs of this article, the Code Commission explained that it aimed 

at providing recommendations to mitigate the BSE risk associated with protein meal and reminded Members that this 

article was referred to in Article 11.4.12. and point 2(b)(iii) of Article 1.8.5.

The Code Commission agreed with comments and added a new point 2 to allow alternative procedures to achieve at 

least an equivalent level of reduction in BSE infectivity. The Commission noted that, as is the case for other diseasespecific chapters, this would allow proper consideration of equivalent measures and potential future technical 

innovation.

Article 11.4.18.

In response to comments requesting clarification on this article, the Code Commission explained that the goal of BSE 

surveillance was to detect a potential emergence or re-emergence of classical BSE within the bovine population, and 

the objective of the provisions in Article 11.4.18. as proposed were to detect classical BSE agents within the bovine 

population through passive surveillance and laboratory confirmation of suspicions, including discrimination between 

classical and atypical BSE strains. 

The Code Commission did not agree with comments to set a minimum number of clinical suspects to be tested or an 

age limit for testing or to maintain current provisions on BSE surveillance (i.e. point-based active surveillance). The 

Commission explained that the current point-based surveillance was no longer justified, as pointed out in the October

2018 report of the ad hoc Group on BSE surveillance. The Commission explained that the rationale not to set a 

minimum number of clinical suspects to be tested or age limit for testing had been provided in detail in the reports of 

relevant ad hoc Group meetings and encouraged Members to refer to the relevant parts of the October 2018 report 

of the ad hoc Group on BSE surveillance and the June 2020 report of the ad hoc Group on BSE risk assessment and 

surveillance. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 34

In point 1, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to propose some amendments to the summary of 

clinical signs associated with BSE, as it considered that more detail was not needed in the Code, and noted that more 

detailed clinical signs could be described in the future guidelines on BSE surveillance.

In point 2, in response to a comment the Code Commission amended the first and fourth paragraphs to clarify that 

all animals that lie on the clinical spectrum of BSE should be targeted by the BSE surveillance and, out of those 

animals, only animals listed in points 2(a) to 2(d) should be reported and followed up with appropriate laboratory 

testing.

In point 3(b), the Code Commission deleted the word 'compulsorily' as it was redundant since already implied in the 

Glossary definition of ‘notifiable disease’.

The revised Chapter 11.4. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy is presented as Annex 10 for comments and will be 

proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

Chapter 1.8. Application for official recognition by the OIE of risk status for bovine spongiform 

encephalopathy

Comments were received, prior to the 89th General Session, from Australia, France (on behalf of the 27 Member 

States of the EU), New Caledonia and USA (on behalf of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil. Canada, Chile, Curacao, Mexico, 

Paraguay, Peru, Saint Lucia, Uruguay). 

Additional comments were received, prior to this meeting, from New Zealand, the UK and the AU-IBAR. 

General comments

With regard to comments expressing concerns on the way the revised chapter addressed atypical BSE, the Code 

Commission made amendments to the revised Chapter 1.8., for it to be in line with the amendments proposed in this 

meeting to the revised Chapter 11.4.

In accordance with the rationale explained for Chapter 11.4., the Code Commission amended the second paragraph 

in Article 1.8.1. to clearly define that the term ‘case of BSE’ used in this chapter means only the occurrence of classical 

BSE. The Commission explained that, when reference to both the occurrence of classical BSE and the occurrence 

of atypical BSE is necessary, atypical BSE would be explicitly mentioned (e.g. in point 2 of Article 1.8.2.).

Article 1.8.5.

In point 2, the Code Commission agreed to delete the first paragraph, as it considered that the content was not correct 

anymore, following the amendments proposed in this meeting to the revised Chapter 11.4. Similarly, in point 3, the 

Code Commission agreed to delete the first paragraph.

In point 2, in the third paragraph, the Code Commission proposed to delete the references to articles in Chapter 11.4., 

as it considered it unnecessary in this chapter which should only provide a questionnaire for official status recognition.

Article 1.8.6.

In the fifth paragraph, the Code Commission proposed to delete the paragraph referring to point 2 of Article 11.4.18. 

for a more logical flow, given that the requirements described in the point were also referred to in the second 

paragraph.

In point 2, the Code Commission proposed to change the title from ‘Compulsory notification’ to ‘BSE reporting system’ 

as the term ‘notification’ was defined in the Glossary of the Terrestrial Code with the meaning of notification of a listed 

disease to the WOAH, which was not the intent of this point. The Commission explained that ‘reporting’ means 

reporting of animals described in points 2(a) to 2(d) of Article 11.4.18. to the Veterinary Services. The Commission 

also proposed to delete the first paragraph as it considered it unnecessary in this chapter, which should only provide 

a questionnaire for official status recognition. 

In point 3(b), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment that an applicant member should provide the same 

level of information on laboratories located outside of the country as the one inside the country, as it considered that 

it would be difficult to implement.

In point 4, in the second paragraph and in point 4(b), the Code Commission agreed with a comment and replaced 

‘farmer’ with ‘bovine breeder, owner or keeper’ to align with other uses of the terms in the Terrestrial Code. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 35

The revised Chapter 1.8. Application for official recognition by the OIE of risk status for bovine spongiform 

encephalopathy is presented as Annex 11 for comments and will be proposed for adoption at the 90th General 

Session in May 2023.

Glossary definition for protein meal and use of related terms

No Member comments were received for the Glossary definition for protein meal.

The use of terms ‘meat-and-bone meal’ and ‘greaves’ throughout the Terrestrial Code:

Background

At its September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission requested the Secretariat to review the use of terms ‘meatand-bone meal’ and ‘greaves’ throughout the Terrestrial Code to determine where these terms would need to be 

replaced with ‘protein meal’, should the new proposed definition for ‘protein meal’ be adopted.

At its February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission acknowledged that six disease-specific chapters (Chapter 8.1., 

Chapter 8.4., Chapter 8.11., Chapter 10.4., Chapter 14.8. and Chapter 15.3.) used the terms ‘greaves’ or ‘meat-andbone meal’ and considered the context where the terms were used. The Commission agreed to propose the Glossary 

definition for protein meal for adoption in May 2022 and to propose the deletion of the definition described in point 

4(b) of Article 11.4.1. However, due to time constraints, the Commission agreed to postpone the discussion on the 

potential replacement of the terms ‘greaves’ or ‘meat-and-bone meal’ in other chapters until its next meeting.

Discussion

The Code Commission reviewed the Terrestrial Code chapters in which the terms ‘meat-and-bone meal’ and ‘greaves’

were used, and considered whether the terms should be replaced with ‘protein meal’.

The Commission noted that the term ‘greaves’ appears only in Chapter 14.8. Scrapie, apart from Chapters 11.4. and 

1.8. currently under revision, and the revision of the chapter was included in the Commission’s work programme. The 

Commission agreed to address this issue when the chapter on scrapie would be revised and not to delete the 

definition of ’greaves’ from the Glossary until then.

The Code Commission agreed to propose the deletion of the Glossary definition for ‘meat-and-bone meal’ if the 

proposed definition for ‘protein meal’ was adopted in May 2023, and to replace the term ‘meat-and-bone meal’ with 

‘protein meal’ throughout the Terrestrial Code for the 2023 edition of the Terrestrial Code. 

The Glossary definition for ‘protein meal’ (and deletion of the definition for ‘meat-and-bone meal’) is presented as part 

of Annex 5 for comments and will be proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

5.8. Contagious equine metritis (Chapter 12.2.)

Comments were received from China (People’s Republic of), New Zealand, South Africa, Switzerland, the UK, the 

USA 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 to undertake a comprehensive revision. The 

Commission requested that experts be convened to undertake this work. 

An electronic expert consultation was conducted in 2019 and its report, including the draft revised chapter, was 

endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its February 2020 meeting. At its September 2020 meeting, the Code 

Commission considered the draft revised chapter, 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, due to time constraints, and the Secretariat sought the advice of the 

Scientific Commission and the Biological Standards Commission on selected comments. At its February 2022 

meeting, the Code Commission considered the comments received, the advice provided by the Scientific 

Commission, the Biological Standards Commission, and subject-matter experts, and circulated the revised chapter.

Discussion
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 36

General comments

In response to a comment opposing the Commission’s decision not to replace ‘asymptomatic’ with ‘subclinical’, the 

Commission reiterated that ‘subclinical’ refers to a state where a disease is not detectable by clinical observations, 

while ‘asymptomatic’ refers to a disease not causing any sign of infection, illness, or disease, and that ‘subclinical’ 

was the correct term in the context of this chapter

Article 12.2.1.

In the first paragraph, in point 1, the Code Commission considered a comment to remove ‘and identified’ because

T. equigenitalis is noted at the beginning of the sentence and therefore it was implied that T. equigenitalis has been 

identified. While agreeing with the rationale provided, the Commission, in agreement with previous discussions with 

the Biological Standards Commission and the Scientific Commission for other disease-specific chapters, agreed that 

there was value in maintaining the reference to avoid misunderstanding. It amended the text for consistency with 

other chapters. 

The Code Commission agreed with a comment opposing the proposed deletion of the previous point 3 because 

Chapter 3.6 2. Contagious Equine Metritis of the Terrestrial Manual includes PCR as a recommended test. The 

Commission also agreed that as infection with T. equigenitalis is always asymptomatic in stallions, and some cases 

in mares, the detection of nucleic acid should be enough, to define the occurrence of the disease. Consequently, the 

Commission added a new point 2) to reflect this. 

In the new point 3, the Commission removed the reference to genetic material to avoid duplication with the new point 

2). In response to comments, the Code Commission agreed to reinstate the detection of antigen, noting that while 

the Terrestrial Manual considers these tests suitable with limitations and not commonly used, a positive result would 

still be valid.

In the tenth paragraph, the Commission acknowledged a comment proposing that “temporary importation” be 

considered for inclusion in the Glossary given that it is now being proposed in more than one chapter. The 

Commission explained that this text does not define a term, but rather presents a set of conditions to contextualise 

specific provisions contained in the chapter and therefore did not agree to create a glossary definition. 

Article 12.2.2.

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment to exclude ‘geldings’ from the list of safe commodities because 

they could be infected with T. equigenitalis and this could pose a risk of transmission of the disease through some 

manipulations. The Commission explained that ‘geldings’ met Criterion 1 of Article 2.2.2 of Chapter 2.2. of the Code, 

namely ‘the pathogenic agent is not present in the tissues from which the animal product is derived in an amount able 

to cause infection in a human or animal by a natural exposure route’. The Commission also highlighted that the 

objective of this article was to ensure the safe trade of animals, which in this case was successfully achieved. 

Article 12.2.3.

In point 2(c), in response to a comment, the Code Commission confirmed that all horses, including foals and other 

juvenile horses, should be tested. The Commission explained that this was in accordance with Chapter 3.6.2. 

Contagious Equine Metritis of the Terrestrial Manual, which states that foals born from carrier mares may also become 

carriers. The Commission also noted that even though geldings are considered safe for trade (i.e., listed as safe 

commodities) they should be tested for surveillance purposes as it could provide evidence on the presence of the 

pathogenic agent in the herd. 

At the same point, the Commission agreed with a comment to amend the text for alignment with Chapter 3.6.2. of the

Terrestrial Manual and added ‘nor subjected to antiseptic washing of genital mucous membrane’ after ‘antibiotics’

In point 2(d), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to elaborate the reference to aliquots in terms of 

straws, batches and dates of collection, because it would not be possible to provide a reference that would apply to 

all situations. The Commission also noted that this would be too prescriptive and highlighted that this measure should 

not be considered in isolation and should be understood as being part of a set of measures to demonstrate freedom 

of the herd. 

In point 4(c), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to align the wording, as appropriate, with Chapter 3.6.2. 

of the Terrestrial Manual and other relevant Code chapters. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 37

At the same point, the Commission agreed with a comment to amend the text for clarity and to specify that sampling 

should be done for each collection of semen. The Commission also agreed to remove the reference to Article 12.2.8. 

as it was not relevant to this point. 

Article 12.2.8.

In point 1(c), the Code Commission agreed with a comment to simplify wording by referring to the provisions for early 

warning systems in Article 1.4.5. 

The revised Chapter 12.2. Contagious equine metritis is presented as Annex 12, for comments and will be proposed 

for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

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

Comments were received from Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, the UK, the USA. and the EU.

Background

At its February 2019 meeting, the Code Commission proposed amendments to Article 12.6.6. of Chapter 12.6. 

‘Infection with equine influenza virus’, based on the outcomes of work by a WOAH Reference Laboratory on equine 

influenza vaccination protocols prior to shipment of horses, and circulated the revised article for comments.

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission reviewed the comments received on the revised Article 12.6.6. 

and agreed with 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 due to time constraints.

At its February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission considered the comments received on the revised Article 12.6.6. 

circulated in its September 2021 report, reviewed the entire chapter and proposed further amendments to other 

articles to incorporate the changes proposed by the Scientific Commission regarding the case definition and include 

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’. 

The revised Chapter 12.6. has been circulated two times for comments, the last time in the Commission’s February 

2022 report. 

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received. 

Article 12.6.1.

In the first paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to include ‘feral and wild equids’ in the 

definition of the disease. The Commission noted that while feral and wild equids are susceptible, they were not 

considered to play a significant role in the epidemiology of the disease, and their inclusion would not be relevant to

the purpose of this chapter. 

In the same paragraph, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to remove the reference to the serotype 

H7N7. It noted that even if no cases have been recently reported, serotype H7N7 is considered to be part of the 

pathogenic agent, in accordance with Chapter 3.6.7. ‘Equine influenza (infection with equine influenza virus)’ of the 

Terrestrial Manual. However, the Commission did agree with a comment to amend the text to align better with the 

corresponding chapter of the Terrestrial Manual. 

In points 1 and 2, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘in the absence of clinical signs or’ 

before ‘showing’. The Commission considered that detection of antigen or genetic material, or the demonstration of 

seroconversion, in an animal not showing clinical signs, should only be considered a case if associated with 

pathological lesions or epidemiologically linked to a suspected or confirmed case of infection with EIV, as stated in 

the current text. 

After point 3, the Code Commission did not agree with a proposal to reinstate the definition of ‘isolation’ for the 

purposes of this chapter, as it considered it unnecessary because the term could be understood as a common 

dictionary definition. Nonetheless, the Commission noted that the upcoming work on the revision of Code Chapters 

5.4. to 5.7. should consider whether provisions should be provided on ‘isolation’ as a pre-export or post-arrival

measure. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 38

In the seventh paragraph, in response to a comment, the Commission agreed to modify the infective period from 21 

days to 10 days, based on the scientific references reviewed, which specified that the incubation period is 1–3 days 

and that infected horses have been found to shed the virus up to 10 days via nasal discharge. The Commission 

reviewed the chapter and amended the text where relevant to apply this change. The Commission noted that this 

information was not specified in Chapter 3.6.7. ‘Equine influenza’ of the Terrestrial Manual and requested the 

Secretariat to seek the opinion of the Biological Standards Commission. 

In the eighth paragraph, the Commission acknowledged a comment that, as the description of “temporary importation” 

is now being proposed in more than one chapter, it should be considered for inclusion in the Glossary. The 

Commission reiterated its explanation provided in the discussion for Chapter 12.2., that this text does not define a 

term, but rather presents a set of conditions to contextualise specific provisions contained in the chapter and agreed

not to modify the text.

Article 12.6.2.

In point 3, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘excluding respiratory track offal’ after ‘equids’, 

as it considered that while this material could potentially be a source of infection for dogs it does not represent a 

significant risk for international trade. 

Article 12.6.4.

In the third paragraph, in response to a comment questioning the inclusion of a reference to the relevant requirements 

and principles described in Chapter 4.4. and Chapter 4.5., the Commission explained that is a standard approach for 

some of the disease-specific chapters (e.g., Chapters 8.8. Infection with foot and mouth disease virus and 10.4. 

Infection with high pathogenicity avian influenza viruses) to include recommendations for free compartments.

Article 12.6.6.

In response to a comment, the Code Commission amended the text where relevant to ensure that the use of the term 

‘wild equids’ was appropriate. 

In points 2 and 3, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to amend the text to clarify the hierarchy and 

connection between the different points and subpoints. 

In point 3(b), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to replace ‘180 days’ with ‘365 days’. The 

Commission noted that Chapter 3.6.7. Equine influenza of the Terrestrial Manual specifies that, while immunity after 

infection or vaccination could last more than 1 year, more frequent booster vaccinations are recommended. The 

Commission highlighted that while recommendations for vaccination could vary in different situations, the provisions 

in the current text were needed to ensure the safe importation of animals. 

Article 12.6.7.

The Code Commission agreed with a comment to delete ‘domestic’ from the title of the article, as horses per se are 

domestic animals. The Commission made this amendment where relevant throughout the article. 

The Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘OR’ between points 1(a) and (b), because both 

conditions were needed for the temporary importation of horses. The Commission reminded Members that the 

objective of this article is to facilitate the international movement of “high health status horse subpopulation”, and 

these horses need to be identified and registered as defined in Chapter 4.17.; for other cases, Article 12.6.6. applies. 

The revised Chapter 12.6. Infection with equine influenza virus is presented as Annex 13, for comments and will be 

proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

5.10. Equine piroplasmosis (Chapter 12.7.)

Comments were received from China (People’s Republic of), New Zealand, Switzerland, the UK, the USA 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. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 39

An electronic expert consultation was conducted in 2019 and its report, including the draft revised chapter, was 

endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its February 2020 meeting. At its September 2020 meeting, the Code 

Commission considered the draft revised chapter, made additional amendments, and circulated it 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 

Secretariat requested the advice of the Scientific Commission and the Biological Standards Commission on selected 

comments. The Scientific Commission asked for additional expert advice and an expert group on equine 

piroplasmosis (and contagious equine metritis) was consulted electronically between May and July 2021, the outcome 

of which was discussed at its September 2021 meeting.

At its February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission discussed the Member comments previously received, together 

with the advice from the Scientific Commission and the Biological Standards Commission and circulated the revised 

chapter for comments.

Discussion 

The Code Commission considered the comments received.

General

In response to a comment to recommend that ‘equid’ be retained, the Code Commission explained that in Articles 

12.7.1. and 12.7.6. ‘equids’ had been replaced with ‘horses’ as the temporary importation described in the articles 

should only apply to horses, not other equids such as donkeys and mules.

In response to a comment requesting to replace ‘asymptomatic’ with ‘subclinical’, the Commission reiterated its 

position and explained that ‘subclinical’ refers to a state where a disease is not detectable by clinical observations, 

while ‘asymptomatic’ refers to a disease not causing any sign of infection, illness, or disease. This response applies 

to similar comments received for Articles 12.7.1. and 12.7.9. in this chapter.

Article 12.7.1.

In the third paragraph, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to include other competent tick vectors to avoid 

potential conflicts with the corresponding Terrestrial Manual chapter (most recent updates were adopted in May 

2021). This response applied to similar comments received for other articles in this chapter.

In points 1 to 3, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to add ‘or may not’ after ‘may’ and rather 

proposed to delete ‘which may be’ to ensure alignment with other disease-specific chapters, notably chapters on 

Theileriosis.

In point 1, the Code Commission proposed to amend the point to align with other disease-specific chapters.

In point 2, the Code Commission proposed to delete ‘antigen or’ as the corresponding Manual chapter did not provide 

any references to the antigen tests.

In the ninth paragraph, the Commission acknowledged a comment proposing that “temporary importation” should be 

defined in the Glossary as it was now being proposed to be included in more than one chapter. The Commission 

explained that this text did not define a term, but rather presented a set of conditions in a specific context, so it is not 

appropriate to define such term.

The Commission also proposed additional amendments to align the text of the article with other disease-specific 

chapters. 

Article 12.7.2.

The Code Commission proposed to amend the first paragraph to improve readability and agreed to propose similar 

amendments in other disease-specific chapters. 

In point 6, the Code Commission agreed with a comment and proposed to add ‘in accordance with the relevant 

chapters of the Terrestrial Code’.

Article 12.7.3.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 40

In point 1, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment that the option to self-declare historical freedom 

should remain. The Commission reiterated that the vast majority of the cases of infection was asymptomatic, and 

thus it would not comply with point 2(b)(ii) of Article 1.4.6.

In point 2(a), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment that the presence of equids should be considered 

when recognizing the free country or zone and thus ‘for at least the past 10 years’ should be deleted and ‘six years’ 

should be replaced with ‘two years’. The Commission considered that specific situations such as the absence of 

equids in an area should not be described in the Terrestrial Code and rather should be dealt with in bilateral 

discussions between trading partners. 

In point 2(b), in response to a comment requesting clarification on the meaning of “an epidemiological investigation 

has been conducted with favourable results”, the Code Commission proposed to amend the text for clarity. 

Article 12.7.5.

In point 2(b)(i), the Code Commission, in agreement with the Biological Standards Commission, did not agree with a 

comment to remove the requirement for an agent identification test and to clarify that the serological test is validated 

to international standards. The Commission emphasised that the Terrestrial Code refers only to Terrestrial Manual

as a reference for diagnostic tests. The Commission noted that the requirement to use a combination of PCR and 

serological tests was based on expert advice and stressed that the use of PCR alone is not recommended. A 

comment to reinstate complement fixation test (CFT) in Table 1 of the corresponding Manual Chapter 3.6.8. was 

considered by the Biological Standards Commission at its September 2022 meeting and it agreed that the CFT was 

not sensitive enough and did not detect subclinically infected carriers and thus was not suitable for certifying animals 

for movement.

The Code Commission agreed with a comment previously discussed to add point 2(b)(iii) “Horses have not been 

treated with antiparasitic drugs capable of masking an infection with T. equi and B. caballi for at least 6 months prior 

to sampling”. The Commission noted that while it could be a challenge for Veterinary Authorities to certify the 

requirement related to the absence of such treatment, the Commission had agreed with the Biological Standards 

Commission, that such treatment, for example with imidocarb dipropionate, prior to exportation, would transitorily 

suppress parasitemia and consequently the antibodies titters would decrease, and could interfere with a diagnosis, 

consequently entailing a risk of importing carrier horses. The Commission explained that the withdrawal period of ‘6 

months’ was suggested by a subject matter expert based on due consideration of the available published evidence, 

listed below.

• UETI MW, MEALEY RH, KAPPMEYER LS, et al. (2012) Re-emergence of the apicomplexan Theileria equi in the 

United States: elimination of persistent infection and transmission risk. PLoS ONE. 2012; 7(9), e44713. 

• GRAUSE JF, UETI MW, NELSON JT, et al. (2013) Efficacy of imidocarb dipropionate in eliminating Theileria equi 

from experimentally infected horses. Vet. J. 2013 Jun; 196(3), 541-6. 

• THANKGOD E. ONYICHE, KEISUKE SUGANUMA, IKUO IGARASHI, NAOAKI YOKOYAMA, XUENAN XUAN 

AND ORIEL THEKISOE (2019). A review of equine piroplasmosis: epidemiology, vector ecology, risk factors, host

immunity, diagnosis and control. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2019, May 16, 16(10): 1736. 

• A Literature Review of Equine Piroplasmosis. APHIS, United States Department of Agriculture. Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 30 September 2010. Available from:

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_health/animal_diseases/piroplasmosis/downloads/ep_literature_review_sept

ember_2010.pdf

• WISE, L. N., KAPPMEYER, L. S., MEALEY, R. H., & KNOWLES, D. P. (2013). Review of equine piroplasmosis. 

J. Vet. Intern. Med. 2013 Nov-Dec; 27(6):1334-1346. 

• BELLOLI, C., CRESCENZO, G., LAI, O., CAROFIGLIO, V., MARANG, O., & ORMAS, P. (2002) Pharmacokinetics 

of imidocarb dipropionate in horses after intramuscular administration. Equine Vet. J. 2002 Sep; 34(6), 625-629.

• C.M. BUTLER, A.M. NIJHOF, J.H. VAN DER KOLK, O.B. DE HASETH, A. TAOUFIK, F. JONGEJAN, D.J. 

HOUWERS. (2008) Repeated high dose imidocarb dipropionate treatment did not eliminate Babesia caballi from 

naturally infected horses as determined by PCR-reverse line blot hybridization. Vet. Parasitol. 2008 Feb 14;151(2-

4):320-2.

Article 12.7.6.

In response to a comment, the Code Commission proposed to delete ‘of the genera Dermacentor, Rhipicephalus, 

Hyalomma and Amblyomma’ as it considered it too detailed and superfluous. On the other hand, the Commission 

proposed to keep the latter part of the point as it considered it useful for Members.

Article 12.7.7.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 41

The Code Commission proposed to replace ‘been preventively treated’ with ‘received preventive treatment’ for clarity.

Article 12.7.8.

The Code Commission proposed to add ‘vessel’ after ‘vehicle’ as it considered it necessary for completeness. 

Article 12.7.9.

In point 5, in the third paragraph, in response to a comment to replace ‘the number and types of traps’ with 

‘surveillance methods’, the Code Commission proposed to replace with ‘collection methods’ to allow the use of other 

collection methods other than traps.

In point 5, in the fifth paragraph, the Code Commission proposed to amend the text, to avoid using the term 

‘entomological surveillance’ which might be confusing.

The revised Chapter 12.7. Equine piroplasmosis is presented as Annex 14 for comments and will be proposed for 

adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

5.11. Infection with Theileria lestoquardi, T. luwenshuni and T. uilenbergi (New Chapter 14.X.) and revision 

of Article 1.3.3.

Comments were received from Australia, Switzerland and the EU.

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 comments which 

questioned the listing of some Theileria spp., the Commission agreed to seek expert advice regarding listing and to 

put on hold the 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 the 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 other

measures to be recommended in the chapter, the Code Commission agreed not to progress this work until the 

Biological Standards Commission has progressed the work on a new chapter for the Terrestrial Manual. 

At its February 2022 meeting, given that a new chapter for the Terrestrial Manual was to be proposed for adoption in 

May 2022, the Code Commission discussed the comments previously received on the proposed new Chapter 14.X. 

for the Terrestrial Code, and circulated the proposed chapter and a revised Article 1.3.3. for comments.

In May 2022, the Terrestrial Manual Chapter 3.8.13. Theileriosis in sheep and goats (infection with Theileria 

lestoguardi, T. luwenshuni and T. uilenbergi) was adopted.

Discussion 

The Code Commission considered the comments received.

Article 1.3.3.

The Code Commission noted comments that supported the circulated text.

Article 14.X.1.

In response to a comment requesting clarification on whether ‘occurrence of infection’ referred just to active infection 

or to both active and previous infection, the Code Commission explained that, as defined in the Glossary, the term 

‘infection’ means active infection, and that was the reason why point 3 stated that the detection of antibodies would 

be considered ‘occurrence of infection with Theileria’ only if the animal had epidemiological links to a suspected or 

confirmed case or if there is cause for suspicion of previous association with Theileria. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 42

In points 1 and 2, the Code Commission agreed with a comment and amended the text to align with other chapters. 

In point 2, the Code Commission agreed with a comment to delete ‘antigen or’, because there were no antigen tests 

described in the corresponding Terrestrial Manual chapter.

Article 14.X.2. 

In point 6, the Code Commission proposed to add ‘collected in accordance with the relevant chapters of the Terrestrial 

Code’ for clarification.

Article 14.X.3.

In point 1(c), the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to delete the point and reiterated that if a country 

demonstrates the absence of competent vectors and the vector is essential for the transmission of the disease, the 

country should be considered free from the disease without having to demonstrate the absence of cases. 

Nonetheless, the Commission noted that the Member pointed out that iatrogenic transmission was also a potential 

means of transmission of the disease, and requested the Member to provide scientific evidence to support a potential 

modification on this regard. 

In point 3, the Code Commission did not agree with a comment to delete the point, and instead, proposed to delete 

point 2 as it was already covered in point 1 which states that the importation of sheep and goats is carried out in 

accordance with this chapter, i.e. Articles 14.X.4. and 14.X.5.

In the same point, the Code Commission agreed to delete ‘or vaccinated’ in response to comments that reference to 

vaccine was removed from Article 14.X.1. and no commercial vaccines were available for the disease, as described 

in the corresponding Terrestrial Manual chapter.

The revised Chapter 14.X. Infection with Theileria lestoquardi, T. luwenshuni and T. uilenbergi and the revised Article 

1.3.3. are presented as Annex 15 and Annex 16, respectively, for comments and will be proposed for adoption at the 

90th General Session in May 2023.

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

Comments were received from China (People’s Republic of), New Zealand, Switzerland, and the EU.

Background

In September 2019, the Code Commission agreed to add the development of a disease-specific chapter for Middle 

East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) to its work programme, if the proposed inclusion of ‘infection 

of dromedary camels with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus’ as a WOAH listed disease in Chapter 1.3. 

was adopted, as well as a new chapter on this disease in the Terrestrial Manual. 

Following the adoption of the abovementioned texts in May 2021, in its February 2022 meeting the Code Commission 

agreed to develop a new chapter for infection with MERS-CoV, but proposed to include only general provisions such 

as a definition of its occurrence. A new Chapter X.X. Infection with MERS-CoV was first circulated for comment in the 

Code Commission’s February 2022 report.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received. 

Article X.X.1. 

The Code Commission amended the text to align it with the Terrestrial Manual and other chapters in the Terrestrial 

Code. 

In response to a comment, the Code Commission agreed to replace ‘human infections have a significant public health 

impact‘ with “it causes severe disease in humans” for alignment with the Terrestrial Manual and the report of the ad 

hoc Group on Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (January 2019). 

The new Chapter X.X. Infection with Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is presented as 

Annex 17 and will be proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 43

5.13. Infection with leishmania spp. (leishmaniosis) (New Chapter X.Y.)

Comments were received from Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, the USA and the EU.

Background

In September 2020, the Code Commission agreed to include the development of a new disease-specific chapter on 

Leishmaniosis in its work programme, 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 WOAH website to support Members’ 

notification. A revised Chapter 3.1.11. Leishmaniosis of the Terrestrial Manual was adopted in 2021.

In February 2022, the Code Commission agreed to develop a new chapter for infection with Leishmania spp. 

(Leishmaniosis), including only a single article for general provisions, and the new Chapter X.Y. Infection with 

Leishmania spp. (Leishmaniosis) was first circulated for comment in the Code Commission’s February 2022 report.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the comments received and amended the text of the chapter for alignment with 

the Terrestrial Manual and other chapters in the Terrestrial Code. 

In the first paragraph, the Commission replaced ‘infection with Leishmania spp.’ with ‘Leishmaniosis’ for consistency 

with other chapters that first describe the disease and then define the occurrence of infection. It also added ‘protozoan’ 

before ‘parasites’ to align with the Terrestrial Manual chapter. 

In the same paragraph, the Commission agreed with comments to replace ‘Phlebotomus sandfly’ with ‘phlebotomine 

sandfly belonging to the genera Phlebotomus (Old World) or Lutzomyia (New World)’, in line with the Terrestrial 

Manual chapter. 

The new Chapter X.Y. Infection with Leishmania spp. (Leishmaniosis) is presented as Annex 18 and will be proposed 

for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

5.14. Terminology: Use of terms ‘fetal’, ‘foetal’, ‘fetus’ and ‘foetus’

Background

In September 2021 meeting, the Code Commission agreed to replace ‘foetal’/‘foetus’ with ‘fetal’ /‘fetus’ as this 

reflected the current usage in scientific literature. It requested that the Secretariat review the use of these terms in 

the Terrestrial Code to determine where they would need to be amended.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered an analysis prepared by the Secretariat describing the use of the terms in the 

English version of the Terrestrial Code, noting that the terms ‘foetal/foetus’ were used in Chapters 4.10. and 7.5., as 

well as in the pathogen name, i.e. Tritrichomonas foetus, in Chapter 4.7. and Chapter 4.8. 

The Commission agreed not to amend the pathogen name, Tritrichomonas foetus, noting that this is the scientific 

name for this pathogenic agent and agreed to replace ‘foetal’/‘foetus’ with ‘fetal’ /‘fetus’, respectively, in Article 4.10.3. 

of Chapter 4.10. and to circulate this for comment. The Commission also acknowledged the need for amendments in 

Chapter 7.5. but noted that these would be addressed in the ongoing revision of that chapter (See Item 4.1.4. of this 

report). 

The Commission reminded Members that this item refers only to the English version of the Code and that the 

proposed changes to these texts referred only to this specific terminology issue for consistency matters and did not 

intend to open the discussion of other aspects or parts of the texts. 

The revised Article 4.10.3. of Chapter 4.10. ‘Collection and processing of micromanipulated oocytes for embryos from 

livestock and horses’ is presented as Annex 19 for comments and will be proposed for adoption at the 90th General 

Session in May 2023.

5.15. Terminology: Use of terms ‘bovid’, ‘bovidae’, ‘bovine’ and ‘cattle’ 

Background
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 44

In September 2020, as part of the discussion on Chapter 8.8., the Code Commission acknowledged comments 

requesting clarification of the term ‘bovine’ and agreed that this should be defined for the purposes of that chapter. 

Nonetheless, as the terms ‘bovids’ and ‘bovines’ were used with specific definitions for different disease-specific 

chapters and the term ‘bovine’ was used in several articles of Chapter 8.8, the Commission requested the Secretariat 

to propose a definition for the purposes of that chapter, in consultation with relevant experts as necessary.

In September 2021, the Code Commission agreed with a proposal of a joint Scientific Commission-Code Commission 

Taskforce, to replace ‘bovines’ with ‘cattle’ in Chapter 8.8, for consistency with Chapter 11.4. BSE and added specific 

references to water buffaloes in addition to cattle where applicable.

In February 2022, as part of the discussion on Theileriosis (Chapter 11.10.), the Code Commission noted a comment 

that water buffalos and African buffalos were also bovines. Acknowledging that there were some variations in the use 

of terms ‘bovines’, ‘bovids’ and ‘cattle’ in the Terrestrial Code, the Commission agreed to consider this issue in detail 

and requested the Secretariat to review the use of the terms throughout the Code to assess and prioritise the work 

needed to ensure consistency.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered an analysis prepared by the Secretariat presenting different meanings of these 

terms (i.e. dictionary definitions & scientific taxonomy classification) and the contexts in which they were used in the 

Terrestrial Code, noting that these terms were widely used, and relevant references were found in the User’s guide, 

Article 1.3.2., and Chapters 1.8, 1.10., 4.3., 4.7., 4.8., 4.12., 6.8., 6.11., 6.13., 7.2., 7.3., 7.4, 7.5., 7.6., 7.9., 7.11., 

7.12., 8.2., 8.3., 8.4., 8.5., 8.7., 8.8., 8.11., 8.18., 11.1., 11.2., 11.3., 11.4., 11.5., 11.6., 11.7., 11.8., 11.9., 11.10., 

11.11., and 14.7. and title of section 11; as well as in some of the texts currently being circulated. 

• The Code Commission concluded that the term ‘cattle’ (used in the English version of the Code) was too 

vernacular, and its meaning was not precise in zoological terms and was not possible to be correctly translated 

into the other WOAH official languages. The Commission thus agreed not to use the term ‘cattle’ anymore, and 

base its future use of terms following the taxonomical classification, as follows:

• ‘Ruminant(s)’ (in Spanish ‘Rumiante(s)’, in French ‘Ruminant(s)’), meaning all members of the sub-order 

Ruminantia; 

• ‘Bovid(s)’ (in Spanish ‘Bóvido(s)’, in French ‘Bovidé(s)’), meaning all members of the family Bovidae, including the 

sub-families Bovinae, Caprinae and Antilopinae; 

• ‘Bovine(s)’ (in Spanish ‘Bóvino(s)’, in French ‘Bovin(s)’), meaning all members of the tribe Bovini, including the 

genus Bos, Bubalus, Bison, and Syncerus; and, if relevant for a given chapter, a dedicated definition ‘bovine’ 

should be provided to specify the genus or species concerned. 

The Code Commission agreed to include the necessary amendments to the texts being currently reviewed in line 

with this approach in the three languages, and observed that, in the English version, Article 1.3.2., lists ‘cattle’ 

diseases and infections, whereas the title of Section 11 is ‘Bovidae’, and agreed that these should be urgently aligned 

and amended accordingly, highlighting that this would be in line with the title of Section 3.4. of the Terrestrial Manual

is ‘Bovinae’. The Commission agreed to circulate the proposed amendments to the English version only and 

requested the Secretariat to assess the changes required to apply the agreed approach consistently in the French 

and Spanish versions and to report back at the next meeting. 

The Code Commission agreed to progressively address the rest of the chapters when they would be under review. 

The Commission also acknowledged a lack of species-level definition in some chapters which had not been recently 

reviewed (e.g., Chapter 11.1., 11.2., 11.7.), and agreed that the clarification of species concerned should be 

sufficiently addressed, which will be important in terms of notification to WOAH. 

The Commission reminded Members that the proposed changes to these texts referred only to this specific 

terminology issue for consistency and did not intend to open the discussion of other aspects or parts of the texts. 

The revised texts in the User’s guide, Article 1.3.2. and the title of Section 11, are presented in Annex 20 for comments 

and will be proposed for adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

5.16. Terminology: Use of terms ‘enzootic’, ‘endemic’, ‘epizootic’ and ‘epidemic’

Background

At its February 2021 meeting, in the context of the development of the new chapter on official control programmes 

for listed and emerging diseases (Chapter 4.19), the Commission acknowledged that the use of the terms ‘epizootic’, 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 45

‘epidemic’ and other related terms was heterogenic across the Terrestrial Code, and agreed on the need to address 

this in detail and added the work to its work programme. 

In June 2021, the ad hoc Group on Rift Valley fever suggested considering replacing ‘epizootic’ with ‘epidemic’ 

throughout Chapter 8.15 Infection with Rift Valley fever, noting that the terminology ‘epizootic’ and ‘inter-epizootic’ 

had been replaced in the wider scientific community by ‘epidemic’ and ‘inter-epidemic’. At its February 2022 meeting, 

the Commission agreed with the Group to replace ‘epizootic’ with ‘epidemic’ throughout the chapter and requested 

the Secretariat to review the use of these terms in the Terrestrial Code and report back to the Commission at its next 

meeting. 

Discussion

The Code Commission considered an analysis prepared by the Secretariat on the use of the terms ‘enzootic’ and 

‘epizootic’, in the Terrestrial Code (2022 edition). The Commission noted that the terms are widely used in some other 

chapters, and also used as part of some disease names (i.e., infection with epizootic hemorrhagic disease virus, 

enzootic bovine leukosis, enzootic abortion of ewes).

Taking into consideration the above, the Commission agreed to use only the terms ‘epidemic’ and ‘endemic’ in the 

text of the Terrestrial Code chapters, but not to modify the disease names as these names are scientifically 

recognised, this may have practical implications and they are already used in the listed diseases and the Terrestrial 

Manual. 

The Commission agreed to apply this change in the ongoing revision of Chapter 11.4., and to propose amendments 

to Chapter 4.19. (Article 4.19.1.) and 9.3. (Article 9.3.1.) to replace ‘epizootic/enzootic’ with ‘epidemic/endemic’. The 

Commission noted that the change would also need to be applied in Chapters 5.5., 5.6, 5.7., 5.12., and 8.15., but 

agreed to address them as part of their future revision. 

The Commission reminded Members that the proposed changes to these texts referred only to this specific 

terminology issue for consistency and did not intend to open the discussion on other aspects or parts of the texts. 

The revised Article 4.19.1. and Article 9.3.1. are presented in Annex 21 for comments and will be proposed for 

adoption at the 90th General Session in May 2023.

6. Texts circulated for comments

The Code Commission discussed the following new or revised texts which are circulated for comments. 

6.1. Revision of Chapter 4.6. ‘Collection and processing of semen of animals’

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 during 2020 and 2021 and produced a revised draft Chapter 4.6. At its September 

2021 meeting, the Code Commission considered the work of the ad hoc Group and supported the WOAH 

Secretariat’s suggestion to engage an expert to undertake a technical review of the draft chapter developed by the 

ad hoc Group and to develop a revised draft aligned with the style used in the Terrestrial Code. 

The WOAH Secretariat informed the Commission that a call for tender, restricted to ad hoc Group members, was 

published in May 2022, and the tender was granted to one of the members, who undertook this work with the support 

of a Commission member.

Discussion

The Code Commission considered the report of the ad hoc Group together with the draft Chapter 4.6 developed by 

the assigned expert. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 46

The Code Commission commended the work of the ad hoc Group and the expert, and acknowledged the difficulty to 

provide, in a single chapter, recommendations for the collection and processing of semen for a broad range of species 

given the practical differences in processes and facilities between species. 

The Code Commission agreed to amend the title of Chapter 4.6. from ‘General hygiene in semen collection and 

processing centres’ to ‘General hygiene in semen collection, processing and storage’, and to change the Glossary 

definition for ‘artificial insemination centre’ to ‘semen collection centre’, to better align with the revised chapter. 

However, the Commission agreed to propose the change to the Glossary definition once the Commission has 

considered feedback from Members on the revised chapter. The Commission also made some additional 

amendments to improve readability and clarity.

The Code Commission noted that while the approach originally proposed by the ad hoc Group for the draft text was 

to provide general recommendations which are applicable to all species and additional species-specific 

recommendations for some species, the general epidemiological concepts of space, time, hygiene, and biosecurity

practices should apply to all species. The Commission also agreed that the chapter should provide common principles 

applicable to the collection, processing, and storage of semen of bovine, ovine, caprine, porcine, equine, and cervid 

donor animals, and noted that if some standard practices in a country deviate from these recommendations, these 

should not be covered by the standards but rather specific conditions to be approved by each Veterinary Authority 

based on a risk analysis. 

The Code Commission noted that the draft text included a reference to Chapter 4.7. while the current Chapter 4.7 

only applies to bovine, porcine, and small ruminants, while the proposed draft also applies to equine and cervids. The 

Commission emphasised that this inconsistency will be addressed during the anticipated revision of Chapter 4.7.

The Code Commission agreed to circulate the revised Chapter 4.6. General hygiene in semen collection, processing 

and storage for comments, as a clean text given the extensive number of amendments. 

The revised Chapter 4.6. General hygiene in semen collection, processing and storage is presented as Annex 22, for 

comments.

6.2. 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, which was adopted in 2018. The Commission had requested 

the advice of the WOAH Working Group on Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR Working Group). The AMR Working 

Group considered this request at its 2019 meeting and recommended that a review of Chapter 6.10. not be 

undertaken until the work of the Codex Alimentarius Task Force on Antimicrobial Resistance had been progressed, 

in order to avoid inconsistencies.

At its February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission was informed that the revised Codex Code of Practice to 

Minimize and Contain Foodborne Antimicrobial Resistance (CXC 61-2005) had been adopted at the Codex 

Alimentarius Commission in November 2021, and that the AMR Working Group, at its October 2021 meeting, had 

agreed to work on a draft revised Chapter 6.10.

Discussion

The Code Commission was informed that a Subgroup of the AMR Working Group had met via video conference nine 

times between January and June 2022 to draft a revised chapter. The draft chapter and the report of the Subgroup 

meetings which documented the rationale for the proposed amendments were validated by the AMR Working Group 

at its August 2022 meeting. The Commission was also informed that the Subgroup took into account other relevant 

documents including the Codex Code of Practice CXC 61-2005 when drafting the revised chapter.

The Code Commission was also informed that, as requested, the AMR Working Group, at its next meeting in October 

2022, will consider whether the other AMR related chapters (i.e., Chapters 6.7., 6.7., 6.9. and 6.11.) will need to be 

amended as a consequence of the proposed revisions of Chapter 6.10.

The Code Commission commended the AMR Working Group for its comprehensive work and very clear report and 

encouraged Members to read the Working Group’s August 2022 meeting report. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 47

The Code Commission discussed the draft revised chapter together with the report of the Subgroup meetings. For 

the details of the rationale for amendments proposed by the Subgroup of the Working Group, the Commission 

encouraged Members to refer to the Subgroup’s report. 

The Code Commission made some additional amendments to improve clarity and ensure alignment with other 

chapters of the Terrestrial Code, where relevant. The rationale for amendments made by the Code Commission is

described below.

Article 6.10.1.

In the first paragraph, noting that the term ‘veterinary medical use of antimicrobial agents’ was defined in Chapter 

6.9. Monitoring of the quantities and usage patterns of antimicrobial agents in food-producing animals, the Code 

Commission proposed to add ‘for treatment, control and prevention of diseases’ to clarify the scope of the chapter. 

The Commission also proposed that the definition for the term ‘veterinary medical use of antimicrobial agents’ be 

moved into the Glossary, and deleted from Chapter 6.9., once the chapter has been adopted.

In the same paragraph, the Code Commission discussed whether the term ‘food and non-food producing animals’ 

should be clarified and agreed that no change was needed to the draft text as it considered that this wording is clear 

as written regarding what animals are covered in this chapter. The Commission reminded Members that the term 

‘animal’ was defined in Glossary of the Terrestrial Code. 

In the second paragraph, the Code Commission proposed to replace ‘food animal producers’ with ‘animal breeders, 

owners and keepers’ throughout the chapter for clarity.

Article 6.10.3.

In point 2, in the ninth paragraph, the Code Commission proposed to replace ‘consider expediting’ with ‘implement 

timely’ for clarity.

Article 6.10.4.

In point 1(d), the Code Commission proposed to add ‘and submit them’ for clarity.

Article 6.10.6.

In point 1(d), the Code Commission proposed to add ‘available’ before ‘diagnostic laboratory information’ and delete 

‘where possible’ for clarity.

In point 2, in the last paragraph, the Code Commission proposed to delete ‘or to broaden the spectrum of activity’ as 

it considered that ‘to increase therapeutic effectiveness’ was adequate and inclusive of this.

In point 4, the Code Commission proposed to delete the current point 4(b) as it considered that the proposed new 

point 4(b) addressed this.

Article 6.10.9.

The Code Commission agreed with the proposal from the Working Group to add a new Article 6.10.9. on 

Responsibilities of breeders, owners and keepers of non-food producing animals. 

The revised Chapter 6.10. ‘Responsible and prudent use of antimicrobial agents in veterinary medicine’, is presented 

as Annex 23, for comments.

6.3. Infection with Coxiella burnetii (Q fever) (New Chapter 8.X.)

Background

The Code Commission considered a new proposal to include in its work programme the development of a new chapter 

on Infection with Coxiella burneti (Q fever) in the Terrestrial Code based on a case definition developed by experts 

and endorsed by the Scientific Commission at its February 2022, that was placed on the WOAH website to support 

Members notification.

The Code Commission had noted that there was currently no chapter in the Terrestrial Code for this disease and 

agreed to add this item to its work programme. The Commission reiterated its commitment to swiftly progress to have 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 48

in the Code a chapter for each of the listed diseases, at least with a single article, to ensure Members have the 

adequate basis on WOAH Standards to fulfil their notification obligations, as agreed with the Scientific Commission 

and WOAH Headquarters.

Discussion

The Commission discussed the development of a new Terrestrial Code chapter for Q fever and considered the case 

definition that was endorsed by Scientific Commission, the experts’ recommendations, opinions from Biological 

Standards Commission and Terrestrial Manual Chapter 3.1.17. Q fever.

The Code Commission drafted a new Chapter 8.X. Infection with Coxiella burneti (Q fever) which has one single 

article for the general provisions, including the definition of its occurrence.

The Commission agreed that the name of the listed disease in Article 1.3.1, should be amended to ‘Infection with 

Coxiella burneti (Q fever)’. The Commission agreed to propose amendments to Article 1.3.1. closer to adoption as a 

consequence of the work on the disease-specific chapters. It also noted that once this new chapter is adopted,

possibly with changes accompanying the commenting process, the case definition temporarily on the WOAH website 

should be either aligned or removed.

The proposed new Chapter 8.X. Infection with Coxiella burneti (Q fever) is presented as Annex 24, for comments.

6.4. Infection with Mycoplasma mycoides subsp. Mycoides SC (Contagious bovine pleuropneumonia) 

(Chapter 11.5.) 

Background

The Code Commission had agreed to review Chapter 11.5. Infection with Mycoplasma mycoides subsp. Mycoides

SC (Contagious bovine pleuropneumonia) to harmonise the provisions for official recognition and maintenance of 

free status, and endorsement and maintenance of official control programmes with other disease-specific chapters 

with official recognition of status (see item 4.1.7. of this report). 

The last amendment of Chapter 11.5. was adopted in 2014 (to include the OIE endorsed official control programme 

for CBPP which started in 2014). The ad hoc Group on CBPP proposed additional revisions to the chapter at its 

meeting in October 2015. The Scientific Commission, at its February 2016 meeting, reviewed and endorsed most of 

the proposed amendments. 

Discussion

The Code Commission reviewed the amendments proposed by the ad hoc Group on CBPP and by the Scientific 

Commission. 

The Commission agreed with the proposed amendments and made some further amendments for harmonisation, 

clarity and consistency with other chapters. 

The revised Chapter 11.5. ‘Infection with mycoplasma mycoides susp. Mycoides SC (Contagious Bovine 

Pleuropneumonia)’ is presented as Annex 25 for comments.

6.5. Infection with bovine pestiviruses (bovine viral diarrhoea) (New Chapter 11.X.) 

Background

In February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission was informed that in September 2021 the Scientific Commission 

had endorsed a draft case definition developed by subject matter experts for bovine viral diarrhoea (BVD) to be placed 

on the WOAH website to support Members' notification and considered including the development of a diseasespecific chapter for the Terrestrial Code on its work programme. The Code Commission reviewed the experts’ reports 

and the Scientific Commission’s opinion and considered that the rationale provided for the draft case definition was 

not sufficient to support commencing the work on this listed disease. The Commission also pointed out that the draft 

case definition described bovine viral diarrhoea (BVD) as an infection of suids, ruminants and camelids, while the 

disease was listed as a cattle disease in Article 1.3.2., and highlighted that if a change was to be proposed for either 

of the pathogenic agents or its hosts, it should be done through an assessment against the criteria in Chapter 1.2 of 

the Code. The Commission requested the assessments be undertaken before including these items in its work 

programme.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 49

At its February 2022 meeting, Scientific Commission considered the opinion of the Code Commission and 

subsequently reviewed the text and endorsed a new case definition that was placed on the WOAH website to facilitate 

notification by Members. 

Discussion

The Code Commission discussed the development of a new Terrestrial Code chapter for BVD based on the amended 

case definition that was endorsed by the Scientific Commission and agreed to include this in its work programme. 

The Commission noted that the Scientific Commission had agreed to remove swine and camelids and limited the 

susceptible animals to Bos taurus, Bos indicus, and Bubalus bubalis, and agreed to draft a new chapter on ‘Infection 

with Bovine Pestiviruses (Bovine viral diarrhoea)’ which has one single article for the general provisions, including 

the definition of its occurrence. 

The Code Commission agreed that, following the proposed new chapter, the name of the listed disease in Article 

1.3.2, should be amended to ‘Infection with Bovine Pestiviruses (Bovine viral diarrhoea)’. The Commission agreed to 

propose amendments to Article 1.3.2. closer to adoption, as a consequence of the work on the disease-specific 

chapter. It also noted that once this new chapter is adopted, possibly with changes accompanying the commenting 

process, possibly with changes accompanying the commenting process, the case definition temporarily on the WOAH 

website should be either aligned or removed.

The proposed new Chapter 11.X. Infection with Bovine Pestiviruses (Bovine viral diarrhoea) is presented as 

Annex 26, for comments.

6.6. African horse sickness (Chapter 12.1)

Background

The Code Commission had agreed to review Chapter 12.1. African horse sickness to harmonise the provisions for 

official recognition and maintenance of free status, and endorsement and maintenance of official control programmes 

with other disease-specific chapters with official recognition of status (see item 4.1.7. of this report). 

At its February 2021 meeting, the Scientific Commission reviewed and endorsed the amendments proposed by the 

ad hoc Group on African horse sickness (December 2016 report). At its September 2021 meeting, the Scientific 

Commission finalised its discussion on one additional point on protection zone and agreed to refer to ‘area’ instead 

of ‘zone’ for clarity in Article 12.1.2.

Discussion

The Code Commission reviewed the amendments proposed by the ad hoc Group on ‘Infection with African horse 

sickness virus’ and by the Scientific Commission. 

The Commission agreed with the proposed amendments and made some further amendments for harmonisation, 

clarity and consistency with other chapters. 

The revised Chapter 12.1. Infection with African horse sickness virus is presented as Annex 27, for comments.

6.7. Infection with Camelpox virus (New Chapter X.Z.)

Background

At its September 2020 meeting, the Code Commission agreed with a request from a Member to include the 

development of a new Terrestrial Code Chapter on Camelpox in their work programme, and requested the Secretariat 

to seek expert advice. The Code Commission also agreed with the Scientific Commission on the prioritisation of this 

disease for developing a case definition to support Members notification. 

A new case definition of Camelpox was developed by subject matter experts and endorsed by the Scientific 

Commission at its February 2022 meeting, and was presented to the Code Commission for consideration for inclusion 

in the Terrestrial Code. A Chapter 3.5.1. Camelpox of the Terrestrial Manual was adopted in May 2021. 

Discussion
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 50

The Code Commission discussed the development of a new Terrestrial Code chapter for Camelpox and considered 

the case definition that was endorsed by Scientific Commission, the experts’ recommendations, opinions from 

Biological Standards Commission and the recently adopted Chapter in the Terrestrial Manual. 

Based on these considerations, the Commission drafted a new Chapter X.Z. ‘Infection with Camelpox virus’ which 

has one single article for the general provisions, including the definition of its occurrence.

In the proposed point (2) of Article X.Z.1., unlike other chapters in the Code, the observation of characteristic orthopox 

virions in a sample from a susceptible animal was included, considering the specific fact that the virus is one of the 

biggest viruses and the shape of the virus is easily distinguishable from other viruses.

The Commission agreed that, following the proposed new chapter, the name of the listed disease in Article 1.3.9, 

should be amended to ‘Infection with Camelpox virus’. The Commission agreed to propose amendments to Article 

1.3.9. closer to adoption as a consequence of the work on the disease-specific chapter. The Commission noted that 

once this new chapter is adopted, possibly with changes accompanying the commenting process, the case definition 

temporarily on the WOAH website should be either aligned or removed.

The Commission also acknowledged that this new chapter might need to be included in a new Section 16 on ‘Other 

diseases and infections’, together with the proposed new chapters for Infection with Middle East Respiratory 

Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) and infection with Leishmania spp. (Leishmaniosis), currently being circulated. 

The proposed new Chapter X.Z. Infection with Camelpox virus is presented as Annex 28, for comments.

7. Updates on WOAH initiatives relevant to the Code Commission

The Code Commission was updated on several WOAH programmes and activities relevant to its work.

7.1. WOAH Observatory

The Secretariat updated the Code Commission on the progress of the WOAH Observatory since the last update at 

the February 2022 Commission meeting. The Secretariat reported on the key activities undertaken and confirmed 

that the first WOAH Observatory annual report is planned to be published in December 2022. Challenges faced in 

finding suitable information to assess the implementation of WOAH standards were acknowledged. The Secretariat 

reported on a survey undertaken with Members in the context of the WOAH Aquatic animal health strategy. The 

Secretariat also informed the Commission that the Observatory team was in the process of consolidation as part of 

a broader team dedicated to data integration. It also noted that the next steps would include the development of 

“thematic analysis’ reports which would be focused on the implementation of standards for a given topic, for which 

the input of the Commission could be important and discussed possible ideas for the first case. 

The Code Commission thanked the Secretariat for the information and highlighted that the WOAH Observatory 

outputs would be a valuable source of information for the Commission and the Members to identify needs for the 

development and improvement of the Terrestrial Code standards and their applicability by Members. The Commission 

also highlighted that these outputs should also contribute to raising awareness and promoting Members' engagement

in implementation of the WOAH Standards. 

Moreover, the Code Commission noted that the use and impact of WOAH Standards for international trade was a 

recurrent topic raised by Members; however, little information is currently available on this matter. The Commission 

noted that it could be interesting to progressively explore how this could be further developed in support of Members.

The Code Commission reiterated its commitment to foster a continuous liaison with this WOAH programme and 

requested the Secretariat to update the Commission on the progress and publication of the annual report to discuss 

further actions.

7.2. Global Burden of Animal Diseases (GBADs)

The Secretariat informed the Code Commission on the progress of the Global Burden of Animal Diseases programme 

to work on developing methodologies to assess the economic burden of animal diseases in a systematic manner 

including net loss of production, expenditure on preventing and controlling animal diseases and trade impacts. 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 WOAH Collaborating Centre of Animal Health. 

The Code Commission reiterated its interest in the matter and highlighted the value that the outcomes of this 

programme could have as input to identify and prioritise possible future work for the Commission. 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 51

The Code Commission expressed its commitment to further liaison with this programme and highlighted that the 

outcomes of GBADs should be a valuable tool to facilitate its considerations on the need and value of developing 

relevant standards.

7.3. WOAH Wildlife health framework

The Secretariat informed the Code Commission on the progress of the WOAH Wildlife Health Framework. The 

Secretariat noted that wildlife health work at WOAH was supported by the expertise of the Wildlife Working Group 

(WWG), a network of Collaborating Centres’ experts around the world, the network of WOAH wildlife focal points, 

and international partners, featuring complementary expertise and skills to better support WOAH‘s work, and that 

additionally, several tools were also important to better address wildlife health, such as WOAH international 

standards, the WAHIS notification system, and now a new WOAH Wildlife Health Framework. 

The Secretariat reported that the WOAH Wildlife Health Framework aimed at protecting wildlife health with a focus 

on public health and conservation and that the first objective of this programme was to support Members to better 

prevent pathogens spillover at the wildlife/human/livestock/environment interface, and the second one focused on 

the surveillance and management of wildlife diseases. 

The Secretariat reported that the activities were currently focusing on stock taking and needs assessments, while 

tools production and implementation was happening in parallel, especially at the regional and national levels. The 

Secretariat noted that several ongoing reviews were being undertaken through consultancies to assess how WOAH 

tools currently take into account wildlife health and to identify opportunities to better integrate wildlife disease 

surveillance and health management. The Secretariat informed that their outcomes will be submitted to the WWG to 

provide recommendations, strategic guidance and key actions to take on and be proposed to the Specialist 

Commissions as relevant, to refine and adjust the current programme.

The Code Commission provided feedback on the role WOAH standards could play and expressed its interest in the 

matter. The Commission noted that the outcomes of this work would be a critical input for the Commission to identify 

and prioritize possible future work, and to understand needs for further development of the Terrestrial Code. The 

Code Commission expressed its commitment to further liaise with this programme and agreed to include a specific 

work item in their work programme for which the scope will be further defined in future discussions, noting that the

input and agreement of Members will be essential in standard-setting process. 

The Code Commission requested the Secretariat to report back at its next meeting on the progress of this topic. 

7.4. WOAH Global animal welfare strategy

Background

As part of the ongoing implementation of the WOAH Global Animal Welfare Strategy (GAWS), a two-year work plan 

(2022-2023) has been developed. The work plan includes nine activities that address the four strategic pillars of the 

Strategy: ‘Development of animal welfare standards’, ‘Capacity building activities’, ‘Implementation of animal welfare 

standards and policies’ and ‘Communication with governments and the public’.

Discussion

The Secretariat updated the Commission on the status of implementation of the Strategy’s work plan and highlighted 

that it included the development of e-learning modules on reptiles, pig production systems and killing for disease 

control purposes to be added on the WOAH training portal; that plans to reactivate the Regional Animal Welfare 

Strategies and Platforms in some WOAH Regions; and that the Fourth WOAH Global Animal Welfare Forum: ‘Animal 

Welfare Economics’ will be held as a virtual event on 12-13 October 2022. 

7.5. Terrestrial Code data standardisation

7.5.1. Framework for Terrestrial Code standards

Background 

At its February 2021 meeting, the Code Commission agreed with a proposal from the Secretariat 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 this would serve as a useful guide to 

ensure a consistent approach when undertaking work on the development or revision of a chapter in terms of

structure and content, also ensuring consideration of essential components to achieve complementarity and 

avoid discrepancies within and between different parts of the Terrestrial Code.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 52

At its September 2021 meeting discussed a proposed draft and agreed with the proposed approach and 

requested the Secretariat to seek the opinion of the Scientific Commission and report back at its next meeting.

Discussion

The Secretariat informed the Code Commission that the project had been shared with the Scientific 

Commission for their input, which was going to discuss it at its September 2022 meeting. 

The Commission highlighted that this will be a valuable WOAH internal resource, which should also guide 

experts involved in standards development to present the necessary rationale for their proposals in a 

consistent manner. The Commission noted that it could also provide valuable information to facilitate Member 

understanding and implementation of standards. 

The Commission thanked the Secretariat for progressing with this work and requested the Secretariat to 

present a consolidated version for their upcoming meeting, incorporating some agreements reached by the 

Commission during their relevant discussions in this meeting.

The Code Commission noted that, once agreed, this framework should be applied to the development of new 

chapters and the revision of existing ones.

7.5.2. Commodities

Background 

In its September 2021 meeting, the Commission agreed with a proposal from the Secretariat for a 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. 

In its February 2022 meeting, the Code Commission agreed that the SOP should also cover the 

standardisation of names of commodities across the Terrestrial Code and agreed with the proposed SOP and 

requested to be informed if any points in the SOP require further amendments.

Discussion

The Secretariat informed the Code Commission that the SOP had been shared internally with all teams 

involved in standards setting and that work was being conducted to define the inventory of terminology 

currently used across the Code and to develop common reference names for future standards-setting work. 

The Commission acknowledged that the work involved approximately more than 500 articles and that some 

heterogeneity had been observed across chapters. 

The Commission thanked the Secretariat for progressing with this work and requested the Secretariat to 

present a consolidated version of the inventory for consideration by the Commission when available.

7.5.3. Codification

The Secretariat updated the Code Commission on the status of a WOAH initiative to codify animal disease 

names, their causal agents and host species, which had been implemented in accordance with Strategic 

Objective two ‘Data governance’ of WOAH 7th Strategic Plan.

The Code Commission was also briefed on several issues on the Terrestrial Code content that had been 

identified in the course of the codification work, such as discrepancies of listed disease names between 

Chapter 1.3. and disease-specific chapters (which was rectified by adopting revised Chapter 1.3. in May 2022), 

different terminologies to refer to host animals (e.g., bovid, Bovidae, bovine and cattle (see item 5.15 of this 

report)) and unclear host animals which are covered by each disease-specific chapter (e.g., whether wild 

animals are included is sometimes unclear).

The Code Commission emphasised the importance of the work and expressed its commitment to contributing 

to the WOAH’s initiative. The Commission explained that the identified issues had been or will be addressed 

in the ongoing works to develop case definitions and other relevant Code Commission’s works. 

The Commission requested that the Commission be kept informed of and involved with, as relevant, the 

progress of the work.
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 53

8. Updates on other standard-setting bodies and international organisations

The Code Commission was updated on the work of other standard-setting bodies and international organisations relevant 

to its work. 

8.1. Update on Codex’s works

The Secretariat updated the Code Commission on recent relevant developments in the Codex Alimentarius during 

the past year (from September 2021 to August 2022). 

The Commission noted the adoption at the Codex Alimentarius Commission in November 2021 of revised Codex 

Guidelines for Design, Production, Issuance and Use of Generic Official Certificates (CXG 38-2001) which include 

Guidance on Paperless Use of Electronic Certificates and revised Code of Practice to Minimize and Contain 

Foodborne Antimicrobial Resistance (CXC 61-2005). The Commission acknowledged that some provisions of draft 

Chapter 6.10. Responsible and prudent use of antimicrobial agents in veterinary medicine (see item 6.2 of this report)

were aligned with the referred Codex Code of Practice and new Guidelines on integrated monitoring and surveillance 

of foodborne AMR (CXG 94-2021).

The Code Commission acknowledged that the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene (CCFH) had requested the Joint 

FAO/WHO Expert Meeting on Microbiological Risk Assessment (JEMRA) to collate the relevant scientific information 

on Salmonella and Campylobacter in chicken meat in preparation for an update of the existing Guidelines for the 

Control of Campylobacter and Salmonella in Chicken Meat (CXG 78-2011) which includes references to the 

Terrestrial Code Chapters 6.5. and 6.6. The Commission noted that this may trigger a potential need to review the 

Terrestrial Code chapters, and requested that the Secretariat provide an update on the progress of this work in CCFH 

at its February 2023 meeting.

8.2. IATA Live Animal Regulation amendments 

Background

Since 2006, WOAH has been a member of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) Live Animal and 

Perishable Board (LAPB) and has been actively engaged.

In 2022, a Temporary Task Force under the LAPB was convened to discuss the revision of Chapter 8.1. of the IATA 

Live Animal Regulations and proposed to restructure some of its texts regarding tranquillization. It created a new 

subsection regarding sedation, tranquilization and use of psychoactive drugs in their chapter on ‘Animal Welfare and 

Health Requirements’.

Given the importance of alignment between the IATA Live Animal Regulations (LAR) and in the Terrestrial Code, 

these IATA modifications could impact the recommendations on the use of tranquilizers in Article 7.4.7 of Chapter 

7.4. ‘Transport of animals by air’ in the Terrestrial Code. 

Discussion

The Code Commission noted the amendments being made in the IATA’s LAR and recommended that no immediate 

change to Chapter 7.4. be proposed given that the amendments being proposed in IATA’s LAR did not conflict with 

the current text in Chapter 7.4. The Commission agreed that minor amendments could be made to ensure better 

alignment and agreed that this would be considered during the future revision of Chapter 7.4.

____________

.../Annexes
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 54

Annex 1. Adopted Agenda

MEETING OF THE WOAH TERRESTRIAL ANIMAL HEALTH STANDARDS COMMISSION

Paris, 13 to 22 September 2022

________

1. Welcome 

1.1. Deputy Director General

1.2. Director General 

2. Adoption of agenda

3. Cooperation with other Specialist Commissions

3.1. Scientific Commission for Animal Diseases

3.1.1. Listing assessment: Paratuberculosis 

3.2. Biological Standards Commission

3.3. Aquatic Animals Commission

4. Code Commission’s work programme not including texts proposed for comments or adoption

4.1. Ongoing work items (not in order of priority)

4.1.1. Revision of Chapter 4.6. Collection and processing of semen of animals 

4.1.2. New chapter on biosecurity (Chapter 4.X.)

4.1.3. Revision of Chapters 5.4. to 5.7.

4.1.4. Revision of Chapter 6.10. Responsible and prudent use of antimicrobial agents in veterinary medicine

4.1.5. New chapter on Animal welfare and laying hen production systems (Chapter 7.Z.)

4.1.6. Revision of Chapter 7.6. Killing for disease control purposes

4.1.7. New chapter on infection with Trypanosoma evansi (Chapter 8.X.)

4.1.8. Harmonisation of official recognition of status by the WOAH: contagious bovine pleuropneumonia

(Chapter 11.5.), African horse sickness (Chapter 12.1.)

4.1.9. New chapter on Camelpox 

4.1.10. Terminology

4.1.10.1. Use of terms ‘animal-based measures’ and ‘measurables’

4.1.10.2. Use of terms ‘enzootic’, ‘endemic’, ‘epizootic’ and ‘epidemic’

4.2. Items under consideration for inclusion in work programme

4.2.1. Surveillance of diseases of wildlife (from Wildlife Working Group)

4.2.2. Infection with Brucella abortus, B. melitensis and B. suis (Chapter 8.4.)

4.2.3. Infection with peste des petits ruminants virus (Chapter 14.7.)

4.2.4. Melioidosis

4.2.5. Bovine viral diarrhoea (Case definition)

4.2.6. Terminology

4.2.6.1. Use of terms ‘bovid’, ‘bovidae’, ‘bovine’ and ‘cattle’

4.2.6.2. Use of terms ‘fetal’, ‘foetal’, ‘fetus’ and ‘foetus’

4.2.6.3. Use of terms ‘Competent Authority’, ‘Veterinary Authority’ and ‘Veterinary Services’

4.3. New proposals and requests for inclusion in work programme

4.3.1. Electronic certification - Proposal to revise Chapter 5.2.

4.3.2. Request to revise Chapter 5.8. 

4.3.3. Request on Antiparasitic resistance 

4.3.4. Inclusion of the ‘Five Domains’ concept in Section 7 

4.3.5. Request to revise Chapter 8.10. Japanese encephalitis 
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 55

4.3.6. Request to revise Chapter 12.11. Venezuelan equine encephalomyelitis 

4.3.7. Avian mycoplasmosis – Chapter 10.5 (Mycoplasma gallisepticum, M. synoviae, M. meleagridis and M. 

iowae) 

4.3.8. Q fever 

4.4. Prioritisation of items in work programme

5. Follow-up of chapters recently adopted

5.1. Infection with Theileria annulata, T. orientalis and T. parva (Chapter 11.10.)

6. Texts circulated for comments

6.1. In May 2022 General Session

6.1.1. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (Chapter 11.4.), Application for official recognition by the OIE of risk 

status for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (Chapter 1.8.), Glossary A (‘protein meal’) and revision of the 

use of terms ‘meat-and-bone meal’ and ‘greaves’ throughout the Terrestrial Code 

6.2. In February 2022 meeting report

6.2.1. Glossary definition for “Poultry”

6.2.2. Slaughter of animals (Chapter 7.5.) and Glossary definitions for ‘death’, ‘distress’, ‘euthanasia’, ‘pain’, 

‘slaughter’, ‘stunning’ and ‘suffering’.

6.2.3. Infection with rabies virus (Articles 8.14.6bis. and 8.14.7. of Chapter 8.14.) 

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

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

6.2.6. Contagious equine metritis (Chapter 12.2.)

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

6.2.8. Equine piroplasmosis (Chapter 12.7.)

6.2.9. New chapter on infection with Theileria lestoquardi, T. luwenshuni and T. uilenbergi (Chapter 14.X.) and 

revision of Article 1.3.3.

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

6.2.11. Leishmaniosis (New Chapter X.Y.)

6.3. Previously circulated

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

7. WOAH and HQ’s initiatives relevant to TAHSC (Updates)

7.1. WOAH Observatory

7.2. GBADs

7.3. WOAH Wildlife health framework 

7.4. WOAH Global Animal welfare strategy

7.5. Terrestrial Code data standardisation

7.5.1. Framework for Terrestrial Code standards

7.5.2. Commodities

7.5.3. Codification

7.5.4. Code navigation tool

7.6. Standard operating procedure for determining whether a disease should be considered as emerging (revision of 

the SOP) 

7.7. SOP for listing

7.8. WOAH Rebranding

8. Updates on works of other standard-setting bodies and international organisations

8.1. Update on Codex’s works

8.2. IATA Live Animal Regulation amendments (Impact in the Code)

9. Meeting review

10. Date of next meeting

__________________________
Report of the Meeting of the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Standards Commission / September 2022 56

Annex 2. List of Participants

MEETING OF THE WOAH TERRESTRIAL ANIMAL HEALTH STANDARDS COMMISSION

Paris, 13 to 22 September 2022

________

MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION

Dr Etienne Bonbon

(President)

Senior Veterinary Advisor

Food and Agriculture Organization of 

the United Nations,

Rome, 

ITALY

Dr Salah Hammami

(Vice-President)

Epidemiologist and virologist,

National School of Veterinary 

Medicine,

Sidi Thabet,

TUNISIA

Dr Gaston Maria Funes

(Vice-President)

Counsellor for Agricultural Affairs,

Embassy of Argentina to the EU,

Brussels,

BELGIUM

Dr Bernardo Todeschini

(member)

Agricultural Attaché,

Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and 

Food Supply,

Brussels,

BELGIUM

Dr Kiyokazu Murai

(member)

Animal Health Division,

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry 

and Fisheries,

Tokyo,

JAPAN

Dr Lucio Ignacio Carbajo Goñi

(member)

Agricultural Attaché,

Ministry of Agriculture, Food and 

Environment,

Béjar (Salamanca)

SPAIN

WOAH HEADQUARTERS

Dr Gillian Mylrea 

Head

Standards Department

Dr Francisco D’Alessio

Deputy Head

Standards Department

Dr Yukitake Okamura

Chargé de mission

Standards Department

Dr Leopoldo Stuardo

Chargé de Mission

Standards Department

Ms Elizabeth Marier

Chargée de mission

Standards Department

Dr Serin Shin

Chargée de mission

Standards Department
© World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), 2022

This document has been prepared by specialists convened by the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH). Pending adoption by the World 

Assembly of Delegates, the views expressed herein can only be construed as those of these specialists.

All WOAH publications are protected by international copyright law. Extracts may be copied, reproduced, translated, adapted or published in 

journals, documents, books, electronic media and any other medium destined for the public, for information, educational or commercial 

purposes, provided prior written permission has been granted by the WOAH. 

The designations and denominations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion 

whatsoever on the part of the WOAH concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the 

delimitation of its frontiers and boundaries.

The views expressed in signed articles are solely the responsibility of the authors. The mention of specific companies or products of 

manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by the WOAH in 

preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned.