2.8.91 Official Journal of the European Communities No L 215/11- COMMISSION DECISION of 26 March 1991 on aid granted b& the French Government to the undertaking Saint-Gobain (Eurofloat) at Salaise-sur-Sanne (glass sector) (Only the French text is authentic) (91/390/EEC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 93 (2) thereof, Having given the parties concerned notice, in accordance’ with the abovementioned Article, to submit their comments, and having regard to such comments, Whereas: I The French group Saint-Gobain comprises several hundred companies in the following industries: insulation, paper and wood, pipe work, packaging, building materials, reinforcement fibres, industrial ceramics, services and miscellaneous, and glazing. The glazing section, which accounts for some 20 % of the group’s sales, manufactures, processes and distributes glazing for motor vehicles, the building industry and special applications. Saint-Gobain’s glazing section operates 11 float-glass production plants in the Community and has major shareholdings in two others. One of the five float-glass lines which it directly operates was brought into service in 1989 at Salaise-sur-Sanne (Istre) under the name ‘Eurofloat’. It has a production capacity of 120 000 tonnes a year of clear glass for the building industry. I In May 1990, the Commission learned from the press that the Salaise-sur-Sanne plant had received a subsidy of FF 32 million. - Since Saint-Gobain had apparently received aid for an investment project. in a region not included among those receiving regional aid, the Commission asked the French Government, by letter dated 23 May 1990, to send it information on the aid within 30 working days. In its letter, the Commission stressed that it would be obliged to initiate the Article 93 (2) procedure if it did not receive a reply or if the reply was not satisfactory. The Commission did not receive any reply within the period specified and accordingly decided, on 18 July 1990, to initiate the Article 93 (2) procedure in respect of the FF 32 million subsidy: it considered that the subsidy constituted unlawful aid and could not be deemed compatible with the common market, since it was liable to distort competition and affect trade within the meaning of Article 92 (1) of the EEC Treaty, without any of the exceptions provided for in that Article being applicable. The Commission noted that the Saldise-sur-Sanne area was not situated within any of the régions eligible for regional aid pursuant to Article 92 (3) (a) or (c), that the investment aided could not be deemed to be an important project of common European interest within the meaning of Article 92 (3) (b) and that aid for the construction of a new flat-glass production line did not facilitate the development of the sector in question within - the meaning of Article 92 (3) (c). In addition, the Commission expressed doubts as to the need for the aid; in view of Saint-Gobain’s financial situation, it supposed that market forces would in themselves have been sufficient to ensure that the aided investment was carried out, without State assistance. By letter dated 3 August _1990,' the Commission gave the French Government formal notice to submit its comments. m The French Government first, by letter dated 11 July 1990, replied late to the Commission’s letter of 23 May 1990, requesting that the deadline be extended to the end of July. It then submitted its comments, after the initiation of the procedure, by letter dated 12 September 1990. It expressed - the view that the amount of FF 32 million was an aggregate total made up of the following: FF 260 000 paid by the ‘Agence national pour Pemploi’, FF1 329 000 paid by the ‘Conseil général de I'Isere’, FF 27 million paid by the ‘Syndicat intercommunal’ for the development and improvement of land and a further payment of FF 2 499 400 by the ‘Syndicat intercommunal’ in respect of the additional cost of the land. According to the French Governmeént, the last two payments did not constitute aid within the meaning of Article 92 (1) of the Treaty.