21.7.2012 Official Journal of the European Union L 195/19 COMMISSION DECISION of 9 March 2012 on State aid No SA.12522 (C 37/08) — France — Enforcing the Sernam 2 Decision (notified under document C(2012) 1616) (Only the French text is authentic) (Text with EEA relevance) (2012/398/EV) THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION, Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 108(2) thereof (1), 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 those provisions (3), Whereas: 1. PROCEDURE 1.1. GENERAL PROCEDURAL CONTEXT (1) On 23 May 2001, the Commission approved aid for the restructuring of SCS Sernam (limited partnership), which became Sernam SA in December 2001 (‘the Sernam 1 Decision’) (3). (20  On 20 October 2004, the Commission adopted a final decision in which it confirms that the aid approved under the Sernam 1 Decision, amounting to EUR 503 million, is compatible with the internal market under certain conditions (the Sernam 2 Decision’) (¥). This Decision also establishes the presence of supple- mentary aid amounting to EUR 41 million which is incompatible with the internal market, to be recovered by France. (") With effect from 1 December 2009, Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty have become Articles 107 and 108, respectively, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The two sets of provisions are, in substance, identical. For the purposes of this decision, references to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU should be understood as references to Articles 87 and 88, respectively, of the EC Treaty where appropriate. () OJ C 208, 14.7.2011, p. 8. (}) Decision of 23 May 2001 concerning State aid case NN122/00 (ex NJ 140/00), OJ C 268, 22.9.2001, p. 15. () Decision of 20 October 2004, OJ L 140, 29.5.2006, p. 1. (3) By letter dated 24 June 2005, a first third party (the first complainant’) complained about the incorrect application of the Sernam 2 Decision (°). (4 On 22 February 2006, this first complainant also brought proceedings for failure to act against the Commission, in so far as the latter, at the time, had taken no action on the complaint. (5) By letter dated 10 April 2006, a second interested party, the Mory Group company (‘the second complainant) also complained to the Commission (9). (6)  The two complainants essentially considered that the Sernam 2 Decision had been incorrectly applied and asked the Commission to initiate a new formal investi- gation procedure on the application by France of the Sernam 2 Decision. (7) By letter dated 16 July 2008, the Commission informed France of its decision to initiate the procedure provided for in Article 108(2) TFEU concerning the application by France of the Sernam 2 Decision (the opening decision’). The Commission in particular expressed doubts as to the compatibility with the Sernam 2 Decision of France’s chosen arrangements purportedly to apply this Decision, and the possibility that these arrangements involve new State aid. (8)  This Commission decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (7). The arguments of the two complainants are summarised in recital 16 of that decision. By means of the same decision, the Commission called on interested parties to submit comments on the application by France of the Sernam 2 Decision. 9) On 8 October 2008, the French authorities presented comments on the opening decision. () This complaint was supplemented in particular by letters dated 13 July, 25 August, 6 September, 5 October, 25 October and 16 December 2005. (®) This complaint was supplemented in particular by correspondence dated 23 April 2007. () OJ C 4, 9.1.2009, p. 5.