HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"EN
27.6.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
166/83
DECISIONS
COMMISSION DECISION
of 13 July 2011
on the State aid No SA.26117 — C 2/10 (ex NN 62/09) implemented by Greece in favour of
Aluminium of Greece SA
(notified under document C(2011) 4916)
(Only the Greek text is authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2012/339/EU)
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
(4) The
Commission
decision
to
initiate
the
procedure
was
published in the Official Journal of the European Union ( 2 ).
The Commission invited interested parties to submit their
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European
comments on the measures.
Union, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 108(2)
thereof,
(5) The
Commission
received
comments
from
two
interested
Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic
parties: from AoG on 12 May 2010 and 4 May 2011
Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof,
and from Public Power Corporation (hereinafter: PPC),
the State owned company which applied one of the
alleged measures (privileged electricity tariff), on
Having regard to the decision by which the Commission
17 May 2010. The comments were transmitted to
decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 108(2)
Greece which was given the opportunity to react; its
of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (
comments were received on 16 July 2010, 6 August

1 ),
2010 and 16 May 2011.
Having called on interested parties to submit their comments
pursuant to the provisions cited above, and having regard to
their comments,
(6) The
Commission
requested
additional
information
from
the Greek authorities on 1 December 2010, to which
Greece replied by letter of 11 February 2011.
Whereas:
II. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE ALLEGED AID
I. PROCEDURE
II(a) THE BENEFICIARY
(1) In
July
2008
the
Commission
received
two
complaints
alleging aid in favour of Aluminium of Greece and its
(7)
AoG is a large company, located in the region of Viotia,
successor company Aluminium SA, 100 % successor of
Greece. It is active in the production of aluminium as
Aluminium of Greece in the aluminium production since
raw material. In July 2007, AoG was split into two newly
July 2007 (hereinafter referred to jointly as AoG). The
created companies, after a division of sectors: (a)
complaints concerned two alleged State aid measures; a
Aluminium SA and (b) Endessa Hellas SA. Aluminium
preferential electricity tariff and the construction of a gas
took over the aluminium production and Endessa Hellas
pipeline linking AoG to the main grid.
took over the electricity production (AoG had acquired
permits for electricity production a few years earlier).
Therefore, Aluminium is the 100 % successor of AoG
(2) By
letter
dated
27
January
2010
the
Commission
in the aluminium production. AoG also owns three elec
informed Greece that it had decided to initiate the
tricity production units, located next to its aluminium
procedure laid down in Article 108(2) of the Treaty on
plant. In 2009 it had a turnover of EUR 427,3 million
the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’) in
(with EBT of EUR 34,4 million) and 960 employees. In
respect of the measures.
2006 (year before the aid measures under scrutiny) it had
a turnover of EUR 470,9 million (23 % increase since
2005), with EBT of EUR 102,5 million (39 % increase
(3) Greece
submitted
its
comments
to
the
Commission’s
since 2005), and 1 047 employees. It belongs to the
opening decision on 31 March 2010.
private business group ‘Mitilineos S.A.’ since 2005.
( 1 ) OJ C 96, 16.4.2010, p. 7.
( 2 ) See footnote 1.

---

L 166/84
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
27.6.2012
II(b) MEASURE 1: PREFERENTIAL ELECTRICITY TARIFF
(14) The
total
construction
cost
of
the
extension
was
EUR
12,64 million. Of that, EUR 9,04 million were paid by
(8) AoG
was
established
in
1960,
with
certain
privileges
the National Gas System Operator, i.e. the owner of the
granted by the Greek State, including electricity supply
national gas transmission system (hereafter: ‘NGSO’), EUR
at reduced price. Under the terms of the statutes laying
3,3 million were paid by AoG and EUR 3,6 million were
down the privileges, the supply of electricity at reduced
financed through the Community Support Framework
rate was due to expire in March 2006, provided that PPC
2000-2006 ( 4 ).
gave AoG due notice thereof two years in advance. On
26 February 2004 (i.e. more than two years before the
privilege’s expiry), PPC duly gave AoG such notice,
following which PPC stopped applying the preferential
III. GROUNDS FOR INITIATING THE FORMAL INVESTI
rate at the end of March 2006.
GATION PROCEDURE
(15) In the opening decision of 27 January 2010, the
Commission questioned whether the privileged electricity
(9) Consequently,
from
March
2006
until
January
2007,
tariff charged to AoG by PPC after March 2006 was at
AoG paid the standard electricity tariff applicable to
the same level as for all large industrial consumers.
large industrial consumers.
Reason for the Commission’s doubts was that the
privileged tariff was set to expire in March 2006, under
the terms of AoG’s establishment statutes laying down
(10) However, AoG challenged the termination of the prefer
the privileges. Reference was made to the fact that PPC
ential rate in court and in January 2007, a first instance
had duly tried to terminate the privilege, however the
court ordered as an interim measure that the preferential
latter was extended by a court’s decision.
rate be resumed pending a judgement on the substance.
This interim decision was in turn appealed by PPC and
overturned in March 2008 (a judgment on the substance
is still pending).
(16) As regards the measure of the extension of the national
gas transmission system to AoG, in the opening decision
of 27 January 2010, the Commission questioned why the
construction cost of the pipeline had mainly been borne
(11) The practical consequence of the court decisions was that
by the State and not by AoG. Those doubts were raised
the preferential rate was again applied to AoG from
in the absence of information from Greece, despite the
January 2007 to March 2008. In this period, according
Commission’s repeated requests, which was also the
to data provided by the Greek authorities, AoG paid EUR
reason why the opening decision included an
17,4 million less than it would have paid under the
information injunction to Greece.
‘standard’ tariff for large industrial consumers.
II(c) MEASURE 2: EXTENSION OF THE GAS GRID TO AoG
IV. COMMENTS FROM GREECE AND INTERESTED
PARTIES
(12) The national gas transmission system in Greece can be
extended at the request of a (potential) customer
IV(a) COMMENTS FROM GREECE AND THE BENEFICIARY
provided that the following conditions are met:
Measure 1: Preferential electricity tariff
(17) Greece acknowledges that for the period between the two
— a favourable opinion is granted by the Regulatory
court decisions (January 2007-March 2008), AoG paid
Authority for Energy (hereinafter ‘RAE’), the Greek
EUR 131,4 million, under the preferential tariff, instead
energy regulator,
of EUR 148,8 million, which would be the charge under
the ‘standard’ tariff for large industrial consumers.
— the grid operator is satisfied that it will be able, in
time, to recoup the cost of the extension through the
(18) However,
Greece
argues
that
the
privileged
pricing
to
tariff revenues from the grid.
AoG, even if it was considered as aid, would be
existing aid.
(13) In the case of AoG, the national grid was extended by
the building of a 29,5 km pipeline that would allow to
connect AoG following the favourable opinion of RAE
(19) In
this respect,
AoG argues that the national court
(15 April 2005) and the approval by the transmission
decision of January 2007 did not entail any substantial
system operator (13 June 2005) (
amendment to the original agreement and that the court

3 ). The operations of the
gas pipeline started on 16 May 2008.
merely decided to ‘suspend’ the notice to end the prefer
ential rate and to postpone the court ruling on the merits
of the dispute between AoG and PPC.
( 3 ) At that time, the transmission system operator was the ‘Public Gas
Corporation’ (hereinafter PGC), a 65 % State owned and controlled
company. The national gas transmission system (including the
( 4 ) In particular the Operational Programme ‘Competitiveness’, Axis 7
connection to AoG) was later transferred to the ‘National Gas
‘Energy and sustainable development’, Measure 7.1 ‘Penetration of
System Operator’ (hereinafter NGSO), established on 30 March
natural gas to domestic and tertiary sector, to industrial consumers
2007 as a 100 % subsidiary of PGC.
and the transport sector’.

---

EN
27.6.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
166/85
Measure 2: Extension of the gas grid to AoG
(26) In
the
light
of
this
provision,
the
Commission
will
assess
hereunder whether the contested measures in favour of
(20) Greece
denies
that
AoG
received
a
selective
advantage
AoG constitute State aid.
through the subsidisation of the construction cost of its
gas pipeline. In particular, Greece argues that national
rules on the basis of which the extension of the grid
was decided are applicable on equal terms to all gas
end-users, therefore AoG was not given any selective
Measure 1: Preferential electricity tariff
advantage.
(a) Advantage
(27) The
Commission
observes
that
the
tariff
paid
by
AoG
is
(21) Furthermore,
Greece
argues
that
the
pipeline
in
question
lower than the standard tariff paid by other large
is not dedicated to AoG but also open to other industrial
industrial consumers. The Commission considers that a
and household end-users in the area. It is part of the
market economy vendor would not accept to charge a
national gas transmission system capacity and property
monthly reduced tariff without any specific justification.
of the NGSO. Moreover, its capacity exceeds the annual
In this regard, Greece did not submit any convincing
consumption of AoG (1,7 billion Nm
arguments permitting to conclude that this preferential

3 /year comparing to
0,7 billion Nm
tariff was a market tariff although the Commission

3 /year).
formally raised this issue in its correspondence. To the
contrary, two significant factors indicate that the tariff
paid by AoG cannot be considered as a price fixed by
(22) AoG has argued that its yearly contractual gas
the market forces:
consumption equals to 13,5 % of the total national
consumption and that its yearly actual gas consumption
equals to 10,5 % of the total national consumption. AoG
also states that the investment brings to the grid operator
annual tariff revenue of EUR 11,6 million, which makes
(a) The first indication refers to PPC’s behaviour. Indeed,
the investment very interesting and profitable for the grid
as soon as it could free itself from the legal constraint
operator. These figures have been confirmed by the
imposed by the 1960 statutes laying down the
Greek authorities.
privileges for AoG, PPC took the decision to move
immediately away from the preferential tariff and
started charging the standard rate for large industrial
customers. This is demonstrated by PPC’s
renouncement notified to AoG in February 2004
IV(b) COMMENTS FROM PPC
(see paragraph 8 above). The Commission considers
(23) PPC supports the Commission’s investigation on the elec
this to constitute a good indication that the tariff set
tricity tariff measure. PPC confirms that the advantage to
by the 1960 statutes doesn’t reflect market price for
AoG would be EUR 17,4 million.
PPC;
V. ASSESSMENT OF THE AID
(b) The second indication derives from a previous
(24) On the basis of the above facts and also of the arguments
Commission decision. On 16 October 2002, the
of Greece and other third parties, the Commission will
Commission approved a subsidy of maximum EUR
assess the measures in question in this section. First, the
178 million, to be granted by Greece to PPC (case
Commission will assess the presence of aid in the
N133/01 ( 5 )). The subsidy aimed at allowing PPC to
measures under scrutiny, in order to conclude if there
be compensated for stranded costs it had to bear in
is aid or not (sub-section V(a)). Secondly, where a
the context of the 1960 privileged tariff in favour of
measure indeed involves aid, the Commission will
AoG, until its expiry in March 2006. The subsidy was
assess its compatibility with the internal market (sub-
approved as no aid to PPC, because it was merely a
section V(b)).
compensation for a disadvantage that it had to bear.
The decision also included a remark that if the
subsidy was to be considered as aid, it would be
aid in favour of AoG and not in favour of PPC. In
V(a) PRESENCE OF AID IN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 107(1)
conclusion, this decision acknowledges that PPC had
TFEU
to bear a privileged tariff in favour of AoG that it
would not have had to bear under normal market
(25) Article 107(1) TFEU states that ‘Save as otherwise
conditions., Thus, the Commission considers that the
provided in the Treaties, any aid granted by Member
advantage for AoG consists of the difference between
State or through State resources in any form whatsoever
the standard tariff for large industrial consumers (that
which distorts or threatens to distort competition by
AoG would have paid in the absence of the special
favouring certain undertakings or the production of
‘privileged’ tariff) and the tariff paid by AoG between
certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between
January 2007 and March 2008.
Member States, be incompatible with the internal
market’.
( 5 ) OJ C 9, 15.1.2003, p. 6.

---

L 166/86
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
27.6.2012
(b) State resources
(f) Measure 1 is unlawful aid
(28) The
lower
pricing
resulted
in
reduced
revenue
for
PPC.
(34) AoG
argues
that
the
first
court
decision
of
January
2007
PPC SA is a company controlled by the State. The Greek
did not involve a substantial amendment to the original
State has a 51 % shareholding and the Greek Ministry of
privilege agreement (see paragraph 16 above). Therefore,
Environment, Energy and Climate Change is supervising
according to AoG, the decision did not grant new aid to
the company (Ministry of Finance until 2009). The Greek
AoG and the measure of privileged electricity pricing
State can appoint the majority of the members of the
remained as existing aid.
Board and it is directly represented in the General
Assembly by the Greek Minister of Environment,
Energy and Climate Change (Minister of Finance until
2009). Therefore, State resources are involved. In
addition, the Commission notes that the prolongation
(35) The
Commission
cannot
accept
AoG’s
argument.
The
decision is imputable to the Greek State, as it was
original terms of the preferential rate, which constituted
adopted by a Greek court, which constitutes a body of
existing aid, provided that the aid would end in March
the State.
2006 on condition that PPC gives due notice. Once this
was done, the existing aid ceased, as it was due to do
under the terms of the original grant of the privileged
(29) Thus, the State resources criterion is fulfilled.
rate. Any granting of a reduced electricity rate which
meets the definition of State aid (as is the case here) is
thus new aid, irrespective of the fact that its terms may
be similar to the earlier existing aid. The case-law of the
(c) Selectivity
Court of justice clearly spells out that the extension of an
(30) The
privileged
tariff
was
applied
only
to
AoG,
therefore
existing aid constitutes a new aid and must be noti
the latter benefited selectively from the measure. Thus,
fied ( 7 ). A fortiori, this is also the case when a terminated
the Commission considers that the measure is selective.
existing aid is reactivated several months later.
(d) Distortion of competition and affectation of trade between
Member States
(36) As
this
new
aid
has
not
been
notified
to
the
Commission
(31) AoG is active in sectors whose products are widely
pursuant to Article 108 TFEU, it is unlawful.
traded among Member States. In particular, there is
aluminium production in 9 Member States, apart from
Greece, i.e. in France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands,
Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom ( 6 ).
As regards the production of electricity, it exists in all
Measure 2: Extension of the gas grid to AoG
Member States as a liberalised economic activity. When
State aid strengthens the position of an undertaking
(a) Advantage
compared with other undertakings competing in trade
between Member States, those other undertakings must
(37) The
investigation
has
shown
that
the
decision
to
extend
be regarded as affected by that aid. Thus, the criterion of
the grid has led to a considerable increase of tariff
distortion of competition and affectation of trade
revenues for NGSO. Indeed, customers like AoG have
between Member States is indeed fulfilled.
to pay tariff to NGSO for their use of the network.

The Commission has found that the measure, i.e. the
construction of the pipeline, was economically rational
for the grid operator and consequently did not entail any
(32) Neither
Greece
nor
the
beneficiary
has
contested
this
advantage to AoG. Indeed, a private grid operator would
point.
have carried out the same investment.
(e) Conclusion on the existence of aid in measure 1
(33) On the basis of the above, the Commission concludes
(38) The
Commission
notes,
according
to
the
submissions
of
that the preferential electricity tariff to AoG constitutes
the Greek authorities, that the investment in question
State aid in favour of the latter within the meaning of
brings NGSO an annual revenue in tariffs of EUR
Article 107(1) TFEU. The amount of aid equals EUR
11,6
million. The Commission has compared this
17,4 million, which is the difference between (a) the
amount to the investment cost (one-off investment)
revenues of PPC from the standard tariff that should
and the operating costs (on a yearly basis) of the
have been applied in period January 2007- March
pipeline, in order to verify if the investment is in
2008, i.e. EUR 148,8 million, and (b) the revenues of
conformity with the Market Economy Investor Principle,
PPC from the tariff that was actually applied in the
i.e. if it generates an adequate return to the investor.
same period, i.e. EUR 131,4 million.
( 7 ) Case 70/72, Commission v Germany [1973] ECR 813, paragraph 14
( 6 ) Source: European Aluminium Association, ‘Aluminium use in
and judgment in Case C-197/99 P, Belgium v Commission [2003]
Europe, country profiles, 2005-2008’, http://www.eaa.net.
ECR I-8461, paragraph 109.

---

EN
27.6.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
166/87
(39) According
to
the
submissions
of
the
Greek
authorities,
Exemptions under Article 107(3) TFEU
the investment cost of the AoG pipeline was EUR
12,64 million in total (9,04 million paid by NGSO and
(45) Further
exemptions
are
laid
out
in
Article
107(3)
TFEU.
3,6 financed by Community support as described under
The exceptions laid down in Article 107(3)(b), (d) and (e)
point 14 above). In addition to the one-off investment
are clearly not applicable and have not been invoked by
cost, the annual operating expenses are evaluated to EUR
the Greek authorities. In the following, the Commission
0,933 million. Therefore, it is clear that the annual
will assess the potential compatibility of measure 1 under
revenue of EUR 11,6 million provides NGSO with a
Article 107(3)(a) and (c).
very high return. The pay-back period of the investment
(including the part financed by Community support) is
lower than 15 months. The return on investment (IRR –
Internal Rate of Return) assuming, hypothetically, a 20-
(46) Article
107(3)(a)
states
that
‘aid
to
promote
the
economic
year exploitation period for the gas connection, is 84 %.
development of areas where the standard of living is
In view of its high level, the Commission is satisfied that
abnormally low or where there is serious under
the return would have been sufficient to motivate a
employment’ may be declared compatible with the
private investor to make the same investment ( 8 ). Thus,
internal market. AoG is located in an assisted area
the Commission considers that the State decision to
under Article 107(3)(a) TFEU, therefore it could poten
extent the gas grid did not grant AoG an advantage
tially be eligible for regional aid.
that it would not have been able to obtain on market
terms.
(47) The
Guidelines
on
national
regional
aid
applicable
at
the
(40) Thus, the advantage criterion is not fulfilled. There is
time of application of the preferential tariff, i.e. in
consequently no need to further assess the other
January 2007 (‘the 2006 Regional aid guidelines’ ( 9 )) set
criteria that need to be fulfilled for a measure to
out the conditions for the approval of regional
constitute State aid under Article 107(1) TFEU.
investment aid.
(b) Conclusion on the existence of aid in measure 2
(48) The
2006
Regional
aid
guidelines
define
operating
aid
as
(41) On the basis of the above, the Commission concludes
aid aimed at reducing a firm’s current expenses. In
that the extension of the gas grid does not constitute
accordance with the Guidelines, operating aid may be
State aid in favour of AoG within the meaning of
granted in regions eligible under the derogation in
Article 107(1) TFEU.
Article 107(3)(a) provided that (i) it is justified in terms
of its contribution to regional development and its nature
V(b)
and (ii) its level is proportional to the handicaps it seeks
COMPATIBILITY OF THE AID WITH THE INTERNAL
to alleviate, and it is for the Member State to demon
MARKET
strate the existence and importance of any handicaps
General
(paragraph 76).
(42) Inasmuch
as
measure
1
constitutes
State
aid
within
the
meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU, its compatibility must
be assessed in the light of the exceptions laid down in
(49) The
Commission
notes
that
current
expenses
are
non-
paragraphs 2 and 3 of that Article.
capital but usually recurrent expenditures necessary for
the operation of a business. In this sense, the preferential
electricity tariff applied to AoG reduced its current
(43) Article 107(2) and 107(3) TFEU provide for exemptions
expenses. Thus, it constitutes operating aid, which was
to the general rule that State aid is incompatible with the
not allowed by the 2006 Regional aid guidelines. The
internal market as stated in Article 107(1).
Greek authorities did not produce any evidence to
demonstrate that the reduction of the electricity tariff
was justified in terms of its contribution to regional
Exemptions under Article 107(2) TFEU
development, or its nature, nor have they shown that it
was proportionate to any handicaps that it would have
(44) The
exemptions
in
Article
107(2)
TFEU
do
not
apply
in
sought to alleviate. Also, the Greek authorities did not
the present case because this measure does not have a
provide any kind of measurement or calculation of the
social character, has not been awarded to individual
handicaps of the region and of the level of the aid, in
consumers, is not designed to make good damage
order to demonstrate that the latter is proportional to the
caused by natural disasters or exceptional occurrences
former.
and has not been awarded to the economy of certain
areas of the Federal Republic of Germany affected by
the division of that country.
(50) On the basis of the above, the Commission concludes
( 8 ) For an indication of returns in the gas transmission sector, see
that the aid can not be declared compatible on the basis
decision of the Commission N 594/09 – Aid to Gaz-System S.A.
of the 2006 Regional aid guidelines.
for gas transmissions networks in Poland, in particular point 17:
‘The return on capital applicable to Gaz-System as of 1 June
2009 amounts to 10,8 %’.
( 9 ) OJ C 54, 4.3.2006, p. 13.

---

L 166/88
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
27.6.2012
(51) As regards compatibility under the general block
Conclusion on compatibility
exemption Regulation, declaring certain categories of
aid compatible with the common market in application
(56) In the view of the above, the Commission concludes that
of Articles 107 and 108 TFEU ( 10 ), the Commission
the aid measure in question is incompatible with TFEU.
considers that on the basis of the financial figures
In particular, the Commission considers that the
submitted by the Greek authorities, AoG is a large enter
difference between (a) the revenues of PPC from the
prise, as demonstrated in paragraph (7) above. According
standard tariff that should have been applied to AoG
to the general block exemption Regulation, Article 1(5),
in period January 2007-March 2008 and (b) the
ad hoc aid to large companies is excluded from the scope
revenues of PPC from the tariff that was actually
of its application.
applied to AoG in the same period is incompatible aid
in favour of AoG.
(52) Also
according
to
the
general
block
exemption
Regu
VI. CONCLUSION
lation, Article 8(3), in case that any aid covered by it is
granted to a large enterprise, the Member State should
(57) On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission concludes
confirm the material incentive effect of the aid, on the
that measure 1 is State aid and is incompatible with the
basis of a document that analyses the viability of the
internal market. The Commission has also come to the
aided project or activity, with and without aid. The
conclusion that the extension of the national gas grid
Commission has not been provided with such evidence.
does not constitute State aid.
(58) Article
14
of
Council
Regulation
(EC)
No
659/1999
( 13 )
lays down that ‘where negative decisions are taken in
(53) In
conclusion,
the
aid
granted
to
AoG
is
not
compatible
under the general block exemption Regulation.
respect of unlawful aid, the Commission shall decide

that the Member State concerned shall take all
necessary measures to recover the aid from the bene
ficiary’.
(54) Article
107(3)(c)
TFEU
states
that
‘aid
to
facilitate
the
development of certain economic activities or of certain
economic areas, where such aid does not adversely affect
(59) Thus, given that the measure at hand is to be considered
trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common
as unlawful and incompatible aid, the amount of aid
interest’ may be declared compatible with the internal
must be recovered in order to re-establish the situation
market.
that existed on the market prior to the granting of the

aid. Recovery shall be hence affected from the time when
the advantage occurred to the beneficiary, i.e. when the
aid was put at the disposal of the beneficiary and shall
bear recovery interest until effective recovery.
(55) The
Commission
considers
that
the
derogation
under
Article 107(3)(c) does not apply in the case at hand.
Indeed, regarding the development of certain economic
areas, AoG is located in an assisted area under
(60) The incompatible aid element of the measure is
calculated as the difference between (a) the revenues of
Article 107(3)(a) and not under 107(3)(c)
( 11 ).
PPC from the standard tariff that should have been
Regarding the development of certain economic activ
applied to AoG in period January 2007-March 2008
ities, the Commission observes that the sector of
and (b) the revenues of PPC from the tariff that was
aluminium production is not subject to specific State
actually applied to AoG in the same period is incom
aid rules that could be applied to the beneficiary. The
patible aid in favour of AoG. The amount of aid thus
other State aid rules adopted on the basis of
granted to AOG in this period is EUR 17,4 million,
Article 107(3)(c) are manifestly not applicable. In

particular, AoG is not eligible for rescue and/or restruc
turing aid. Indeed, AoG was not a firm in difficulty at the
time of the aid, as it did not fulfil any of the criteria of
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
points 9-11 of the 1999 Community Guidelines on State
aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty,
applicable at the time of the preferential tariff appli
cation (
Article 1

12 ). Also, restructuring aid is conditional on the
existence of a sound restructuring plan. Greece did not
provide such a restructuring plan. In conclusion, the aid
1. The
State
aid
amounting
to
EUR
17,4
million
unlawfully
granted to AoG is not compatible under the rescue
granted by Greece in breach of Article 108(3) of the Treaty on
and/or restructuring aid rules.
the Functioning of the European Union, in favour of
Aluminium of Greece SA and its successor Aluminium SA, by
way of a preferential electricity tariff, is incompatible with the
( 10 ) OJ L 214, 9.8.2008, p. 3.
internal market.
( 11 ) In addition, regional operating aid is not allowed under
Article 107(3)(c) TFEU.
( 12 ) OJ C 244, 1.10.2004, p. 2.
( 13 ) OJ L 83, 27.3.1999, p. 1.

---

EN
27.6.2012 Official
Journal
of
the
European
Union L
166/89
2. The
extension
of
the
national
gas
grid
does
not
constitute (a) the total amount (principal and recovery interests) to be
aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the
recovered from the beneficiary;
Functioning of the European Union.
Article 2
(b) a detailed description of the measures already taken and
planned to comply with this Decision;
1. Greece
shall
recover
the
aid
referred
to
in
Article
1,
paragraph 1, from the beneficiary.
(c) documents demonstrating that the beneficiary has been
2. The sums to be recovered shall bear interest from the date
ordered to repay the aid.
on which they were put at the disposal of the beneficiary until
their actual recovery.
2. Greece
shall
keep
the
Commission
informed
of
the
3. The
interest
shall
be
calculated
on
a
compound
basis
in progress of the national measures taken to implement this
accordance with Chapter V of Commission Regulation (EC) No
Decision until recovery of the aid referred to in Article 1,
794/2004 ( 14 ) and to Commission Regulation (EC) No
paragraph 1, has been completed. It shall immediately submit,
271/2008 ( 15 ) amending Regulation (EC) No 794/2004.
on simple request by the Commission, information on the
measures already taken and planned to comply with this
4. Greece
shall
cancel
all
outstanding
payments
of
the
aid Decision. It shall also provide detailed information concerning
referred to in Article 1, paragraph 1, with effect from the date
the amounts of aid and recovery interest already recovered from
of adoption of this decision.
the beneficiary.
Article 3
Article 5
1. Recovery
of
the
aid
referred
to
in
Article
1,
paragraph
1,
shall be immediate and effective.
This Decision is addressed to the Hellenic Republic.
2. Greece
shall
ensure
that
this
decision
is
implemented
within four months following the date of notification of this
Decision.
Done at Brussels, 13 July 2011.
Article 4
For the Commission
1. Within two months following notification of this
Decision, Greece shall submit the following information to
Joaquín ALMUNIA
the Commission:
Vice-President
( 14 ) OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1.
( 15 ) OJ L 82, 25.3.2008, p. 1.

---

Document Outline

• �

---