21.1.1999 Official Journal of the European Communities L 16/31 COMMISSION DECISION of 11 January 1999 authorising certain Member States to provide for derogations from certain provi- sions of Council Directive 77/93/EEC in respect of seed potatoes originating in Canada (notified under document number C(1998) 4562) (Only the Spanish, Greek, Italian and Portuguese texts are authentic) (1999/50/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Directive 77/93/EEC of 21 December 1976 on protective measures against the intro- duction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community ('), as last amended by Council Directive 98/2/EC (%), and in particular Article 14(1) thereof, Having regard to the request made by Greece, Italy and Portugal, Whereas, pursuant to the provisions of Directive 77/ 93/EEC, seed potato tubers originating in the American continent may not, in principle, be introduced into the Community; Whereas, however, Directive 77/93/EEC permits deroga- tions from that rule, provided that it is established that there is no risk of spreading harmful organisms; Whereas in Greece, Italy and Portugal the planting and growing of seed potatoes of certain North American vari- eties for ware potato production has been an established practice; whereas part of the supply of seed potatoes of these varieties has been ensured by imports from Canada; Whereas, by Decisions 96/6/EC (), 97/89/EC (*) and 98/ 92/EC (°), the Commission approved derogations based on the concept of ‘area freedom’, subject to certain technical conditions to prevent the risk of harmful organisms spreading; whereas that approval expired on 31 March 1998; whereas the Commission also provided that those derogations would provide for the opportunity to seek confirmation of the proper functioning of the concept of ‘area freedom’; Whereas it is known that Canada is still not completely free from potato spindle tuber viroid or from Clavibacter () OJ L 26, 31. 1. 1977, p. 20. () OJ L 15, 21. 1. 1998, p. 34. () OJ L 2, 4. 1. 1996, p. 24. () OJ L 27, 30. 1. 1997, p. 45. () OJ L 18, 23. 1. 1998, p. 30. michiganensis (Smith) Davis e al ssp. sepedonicus (Spieckermann et Kotthoff) Davis et al; Whereas information supplied by Canada has shown that Canada has further developed its programme to eradicate these harmful organisms in the provinces of New Bruns- wick and Prince Edward Island; whereas there are good reasons to believe that the programme to eradicate potato spindle tuber viroid has become fully effective in those provinces, and that the programme to eradicate Clavi- bacter michiganensis ssp. sepedonicus has become largely effective in certain areas of Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick; whereas there had been no confirmed findings of the disease on samples drawn from seed pota- toes originating in Prince Edward Island and New Bruns- wick and introduced pursuant to Decision 98/92/EC; whereas therefore it has not been established that there are sufficient elements which would militate against the proper functioning of the aforementioned concept of ‘area freedom’ and therefore against the recognition of the provisions implemented there as equivalent to the Community provisions on combating Clavibacter michi- ganensis spp. sepedonicus; Whereas, moreover, as a result of inspections carried out in 1998 by the Food and Veterinary Office in the importing Member State, it became apparent that the technical conditions imposed on the importing Member State should not be modified; Whereas it can therefore be established that there is no risk of the harmful organisms in question spreading, provided that the seed potatoes originate in areas declared, on scientific evidence, free from both potato spindle tuber viroid and from Clavibacter michiganensis ssp. sepedonicus, and that certain special technical condi- tions are complied with; Whereas the Commission will ensure that Canada makes all technical information available which is necessary to monitor the functioning of the protective measures required under the aforementioned technical conditions and to assess the functioning of the aforementioned concept of ‘area freedom’;