1999/600/EC: Commission Decision of 21 April 1999 on the state aid granted by Germany to Dieselmotorenwerk Rostock GmbH (notified under document number C(1999) 1121) (Text with EEA relevance) (Only the German version is authentic)

• Articles: 6

Article 1

The financial measures which Germany implemented between February 1996 and April 1997 for the rescue of Dieselmotorenwerk Rostock GmbH (at the time Dieselmotorenwerk Vulkan GmbH), including the provisions on the transfer of ownership of this enterprise contained in the agreement of 28 April 1997, are compatible with the common market within the meaning of Article 92(3)(c) of the EC Treaty.

Article 2

The state aid of up to DEM 118,35 million which Germany has granted for the restructuring of Dieselmotorenwerk Rostock GmbH since May 1997 is incompatible with the common market.

Article 3

The state aid of DEM 10 million which Germany intends to grant for social measures linked to the redundancies at Dieselmotorenwerk Rostock GmbH is compatible with the common market within the meaning of Article 92(3)(a) of the EC Treaty.

Article 4

1. Germany shall take the necessary measures to recover from the recipient the aid referred to in Article 2 and unlawfully made available to it.

2. Recovery shall be effected in accordance with the procedures of national law. The sums to be recovered shall bear interest from the date on which they were made available to the recipient until their actual recovery. Interest shall be calculated on the basis of the reference rate used for calculating the grant equivalent of regional aid.

Article 5

Germany shall inform the Commission, within two months following notification of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with it.

Article 6

This decision is addressed to the Federal Republic of Germany.

Done at Brussels, 21 April 1999.

For the Commission

Karel VAN MIERT

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ C 119, 17.4.1997, p. 8.

(2) OJ C 169, 4.6.1998, p. 8.

(3) The sales agreement (Kauf- and Abtretungsvertrag) of 11 August 1992 was concluded between the Treuhandanstalt and DMS, on the one hand, and BVV and Schichau Seebeckwerft AG, on the other. This privatisation was governed by the Treuhand regime of 1992 (Commission Decision of 8 December 1992). An individual notification to the Commission was not required under those rules since the size of DMR and the financial transactions involved were below the relevant thresholds.

(4) As at 31 December 1995. See Commission Decision 98/2405/EC of 22 July 1998 (not yet published in the Official Journal) on the misuse of restructuring aid for MTW-Schiffswerft and Volkswerft Stralsund, two companies formerly belonging to Bremer Vulkan Verbund, and on the unauthorised provision of an investment loan of DEM 112,4 million to MTW. Section II.5 of that decision contains a detailed description of the cash concentration system. As stated in Section IV of that decision, it is very likely that the main debtors, one of these being DMR, received some of the misused aid. However, since the funds were mixed, it has not been possible to obtain evidence in full.

(5) This guarantee is fully secured by land charges (Grundschulden) amounting to DEM 35 million.

(6) Received by the Commission on 6 October 1998.

(7) Arthur D. Little, Überarbeitete Geschäftsplanung 1999-2001 (Chapter 3.4).

(8) Notification of the privatisation of WPM.

(9) For information purposes:

(a) WPM

Liquidity aid: DEM 1,5 million

Supplies and services: DEM 0,6 million

User fees: DEM 0,2 million

(b) MMG

Increase in capital (physical assets, land): DEM 1,7 million

Increase in capital (capital contribution): DEM 6,00 million.

(10) The main yards were: Bremer Vulkan Werft, Schichau Seebeckwerft, Flender Werft, MTW-Schiffswerft and Volkswerft.

(11) See footnote 4. More than 99 % of the shares of VIH had been held by BVV, which exercised full financial and operational control over the group. VIH's and BVV's bankruptcy procedures are being overseen by the same administrator.

(12) See footnote 2.

(13) In the interests of a comprehensive presentation of the restructuring programmes, the detailed contents of the letters of 30 September and 21 December 1998 are discussed in Section II of this Decision.

(14) C & L Treuarbeit Deutsche Revision AG, Bericht No 18 10 0147, Dieselmotorenwerk Vulkan GmbH Rostock, Prüfung des Jahresabschlusses zum 31.12.1995 (paragraph 125).

(15) See Section II.4.

(16) OJ C 368, 23.12.1994, p. 12.

(17) KPMG Deutsche Treuhand Gesellschaft, Prüfungsbericht zum Jahresabschluß 1996.

(18) The administrator decided not to sell VIH's shares in Neue Sulzer Diesel together with the DMR shares since, in this way, a higher price could be obtained.

(19) As stated above, the decision does not extend to the subsidiaries.

(20) For a detailed description of the measures, see Sections II.4 and II.9.

(21) See footnote 18 (point 3.2.5).

(22) OJ C 74, 10.3.1998, p. 9 (point 4.15).