L 86/20 Official Journal of the European Union 24.3.2006 COMMISSION COMMISSION DECISION of 9 November 2005 on the measure implemented by France for Mines de potasse d’Alsace (notified under document number C(2005) 4204) (Only the French text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (2006/238[EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) thereof, Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof, Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above (1) and having regard to their comments, Whereas: 1. PROCEDURE (1)  In 1994, the Commission approved a EUR 76 million capital injection by the French State for Entreprise miniere et chimique (hereinafter EMC), to be transferred by EMC to the company Mines de potasses d'Alsace (MDPA) in the form of a capital increase. In its decision (?), the Commission considered the measure to be compatible with the common market since it was intended to offset the extra social costs of retired workers (heating, accommodation, bridging allowance and severance grant) borne by MDPA by virtue of the special legal status of miners (3). 20 In 1996, the Commission approved (*) for the same reasons, three capital injections each of EUR 38 million by the French State for EMC for the years 1995, 1996 () O] C 37, 3.2.2001, p. 22. () 0] C 196, 19.7.1994, p. 5. () Introduced by Decree No 46-1433 of 14 June 1948 on the status of employees of mining establishments and the like. () 0] C 168, 12.6.1996, p. 11. and 1997, to be transferred by EMC to MDPA in the form of capital increases. (3)  On 7 December 1998, the French authorities notified three more capital injections each of EUR 42 million that would be granted in 1998, 1999 and 2000 to EMC and transferred to MDPA. According to the French authorities, these measures were designed to compensate MDPA for certain social and environmental costs incurred as a result of its closure. (4)  The additional information communicated by France to the Commission on 22 January 1999 revealed that, in addition to the transfer of the aid granted by France, EMC had subscribed to capital increases for MDPA every year since 1995. By letter of 14 March 2000, the French authorities informed the Commission that part of the aid notified in 1998 had already been granted to the firm. In its reply of 10 April 2000, the Commission stated that this aid was to be regarded as unlawful. (5) By letter of 10 October 2000, the Commission informed France that it had decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the above measures. The decision was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (°). The Commission invited interested parties to submit their comments on the aid. (6)  The Commission received comments from the French authorities on 28 November 2000 and on 21 and 23 March 2001. A meeting between the French authorities and Commission representatives took place on 2 December 2004. France sent information to the Commission by letters dated 8 February 2005 and 23 September 2005. () O C 37, 3.2.2001, p. 22.