2004/260/EC: Commission Decision of 30 April 2003 on the aid scheme which Italy — Tuscany Region — is planning to implement for the reduction of the greenhouse gasses emissions (Text with EEA relevance) (notified under document number C(2003) 1327)
Date: 2003-04-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Italy, State aid, Tuscany, control of State aid, greenhouse gas, reduction of gas emissions

L 81/72

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.3.2004

COMMISSION

COMMISSION DECISION

of 30 April 2003

on the aid scheme which Italy — Tuscany Region — is planning to implement for the reduction of
the greenhouse gasses emissions

(notified under document number C(2003) 1327)

(Only the Italian text is authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2004/260/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(3)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article
88(2) thereof,

The Italian authorities, after a request for a prorogation,
submitted information on 6 June 2002, by letter A/
34113 (the legal basis was provided for the first time,
annexed to the latter) and sent additional documents by
letter A/34291 of 12 June 2002.

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic
Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof,

(4)

Having regards to the Decision C(2002)3585 fin (1), by which
the Commission decided to initiate the procedure laid down in
Article 88(2) of the Treaty, in respect of part of the aid C60/
2002 (ex N747/2001),

By letter D/53543 of 6 July 2002, the Commission
asked for further information, which the Italian authori-
ties submitted by letter A/36074 of 8 August 2002. By
the same letter the Italian authorities declared they
considered the preliminary examination of the notifica-
tion to be closed, following their reply.

Having called on interested parties to submit their comments
pursuant to the provisions cited above,

(5)

Whereas:

In that case, according to Article 5(3) of procedure
Regulation No 659/1999 (3), the period of two months,
referred to in Article 4(5) of the same regulation, begins
on the day following receipt of the statement. As a
consequence, within this time, the Commission has to
take a decision on the notified aid.

1. PROCEDURE

(1)

(2)

By letter dated 6 November 2001, registered by the
Commission on 9 November 2001 (A/38755),
the
Italian authorities notified, pursuant to Article 88(3) of
the EC Treaty, the abovementioned aid scheme.

By letter D/55204 of 13 December 2001 the Commis-
sion requested additional information regarding the noti-
fied scheme. As the information provided by the Italian
authorities by both letters A/30363 of 18 January 2002
and A/31888 of 12 March 2002, was incomplete, the
Commission sent two reminders on 21 February (D/
to
50737) and 25 April 2002 (D/51984), pursuant
Art.5(2)of Council Regulation 659/1999 (2).

(1) OJ C 331, 31.12.2002, p. 50.
(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying
down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC
Treaty (OJ L 83 of 27.3.1999, p. 1).

(6)

(7)

Accordingly, the Commission informed Italy, by letter
dated 04.10.2002 (SG(2002)D/231959),
it had
decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article
88(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of part of the aid in
hand.

that

The Commission decision to initiate the procedure was
published in the Official Journal of the European Commu-
nities (4). The Commission called on interested parties to
submit their comments.

(8)

The Commission received no comments from interested
parties.

(3) See footnote 2
(4) See footnote 1

19.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 81/73

(9)

The official response of Italy was submitted by letter of
13.12.2002 (A/39170).

(ii) 3 % of the global energy consumption derived from

renewable sources,

(iii) energy saving equal to 25 000 tonnes of oil.

2. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE AID SCHEME

2.1. Legal basis and object of the aid

(10)

The legal basis is constituted by the Decision No 481 of
the Regional Executive of the Tuscany Region of 20 May
2002. The scheme is intended to reduce the greenhouse
gasses emissions through the promotion of renewable
energy sources and energy saving programmes.

(11)

The scheme involves two types of aid:

(a) Investment aid to promote the utilisation of renew-
able sources of energy to produce electrical power
and heat, through the implementation of:

(i) new biomass installations, preferably integrated

with district-heating networks,

(ii) new solar energy installations,

(iii) new photovoltaic plants,

(iv) new renewable

(wind
energy, solid biodegradable municipal waste and
biogasses) serving the needs of minor islands;

installations

energy

(b) Energy saving measures,

(i) housing sector interventions,

(ii) promotion and spread of heating/conditioning
systems and high efficiency electrical compo-
nents in the housing sector, private and public
office buildings,

(iii) implementation of high efficiency electrical

components inside factories,

(iv) promotion of a wider utilisation of low environ-
mental impact fuels or a more efficient use of
fuel in the industrial sector.

(12)

The expected overall environmental goals of the whole
scheme, over the period 2002-2007, are:

2.2. Form of the aid and investments concerned

(13)

The aid is provided in the form of non-refundable
grants.

(14)

The investments concerned are as follows:

(a) land, which are strictly necessary in order to meet
environmental objectives, up to a maximum percen-
tage of 10 % of total eligible costs;

(b) buildings, plant and equipment intended to reduce
or eliminate pollution and nuisances and investments
to adapt production methods with a view to
protecting the environment;

(c) directly linked expenditures
supervising and testing,
account-rendering basis.

for planning, work
if compulsory and on an

2.3. Aid intensity, recipients and eligible costs

(15)

The intensity of aid is set as follows:

(a) In the case of investment aid promoting renewable

sources of energy:

(i) 40 % gross of eligible investment costs for new

biomass installations,

(ii) 30 % gross of the eligible investment costs for

heat production plants from solar energy,

(iii) 75 % gross of the eligible costs relating to new

photovoltaic installations;

(iv) 40 % gross of the eligible costs of new renew-
able sources installations serving the needs of
minor islands, using wind, solid biodegradable
municipal waste and biogasses sources.

(i) lower atmosphere pollution, engendered by green-
house gasses, corresponding to 700 000 tonnes
CO2,

(b) As it concerns energy saving investments:

40 % gross of the eligible costs for all kinds of inter-
vention.

L 81/74

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.3.2004

(16) All undertakings (small, medium and large) are eligible.
The scheme does not apply to activities linked to the
production, processing or marketing of products listed
in Annex I to the Treaty.

(21) As no data was provided, the Commission confirmed, in
its decision to initiate the formal investigation procedure,
it harboured doubts as to whether the conditions laid
down at point 32, third subparagraph, of the guidelines
were met, namely as it concerns the necessity to allow
foreseen by the scheme in
the rate of aid of 75 %,
support of new photovoltaic installations.

2.4. Budget and duration

(17)

The overall budget foreseen is EUR 29 million over the
whole duration of the regime (i.e. 2002-2007).

3.2. Doubts with regard to the energy saving

measures (7)

2.5. Cumulation of aid

(18) Aid in respect of eligible costs under this scheme may
not be combined with any other aid in the sense of
Article 87(1) of the Treaty, neither with other com-
munity subsidy.

(22)

It had been underlined by the Commission that
the
environmental guidelines state, at point 30, that invest-
ments in energy saving as defined in point 6, are
deemed equivalent to investments to promote environ-
mental protection, provided they are in accordance with
the requirements laid down at point 36. Therefore, the
Italian authorities had been asked to explain in a more
detailed way what the single types of aid laid down in
measure (b) of the notified scheme, consisted in.

3. GROUNDS FOR INITIATING THE PROCEDURE

(19)

The submeasures ‘new biomass installations’, ‘new solar
energy installations’ and ‘new renewable energy installa-
tions serving the needs of minor islands’ of the measure
(a)
‘investment aid promoting renewable sources of
energy’ have been assessed by the Commission in the
light of the Community guidelines for environmental
protection (5), hereinafter also referred to as ‘the guide-
lines’. They have been deemed in compliance with point
32 of the mentioned guidelines and have been conse-
quently authorised, pursuant to Article 87(3)(c) of the
Treaty, by means of the same decision C(2002) 3585fin,
initiating the present proceedings.

3.1. Doubts with regard to the measure concerning
installations’ promoting

‘new photovoltaic

renewable sources of energy (6)

(20)

In the course of the preliminary examination of the noti-
fication, the Commission pointed out that the proposed
maximum aid intensity of 75 %, seemed not
to be
compatible, save on the basis of point 32, third sub-
paragraph of the guidelines, and asked the Italian autho-
rities to demonstrate the necessity of such a rate of aid,
with reference to the basic rate of aid of 40 %, normally
allowed for investments in support of these forms of
energy.

the

planned

envisaged

(23) According to the information provided, some eligible
investments,
scheme,
by
concerning namely the intervention in the housing
sector and the implementation of high efficiency elec-
trical components, seemed only regard control and
measurement of energy consumption, instead of reduc-
tion of energy consumption. As regards the aid aiming
at a wider utilisation of low environmental impact fuels
or a more efficient use of fuel in the industry sector, it
seemed to be intended to contribute to the substitution
of polluting fuels. Whereas collocated among the energy
saving measures, the latter appeared to be aimed rather
at reducing pollution.

(24)

Consequently the Commission expressed its doubts as to
whether the above mentioned investments, aiming at the
energy consumption control and measurement, could
qualify as energy saving measures. The Commission
found that they could eventually represent a part of an
energy
in connection with other
measures, but could not be deemed to constitute energy
saving investments on their own.

saving project,

(25) Moreover

the Commission harboured doubts as

to
whether the substitution of polluting fuels by other
kinds of fuels, supposed to be less polluting, could be
eligible for environmental aid, as the measure was too
broadly described and did not foresee explicitly any link
between the aid and the expected pollution reduction, at
the level of
in the
opinion of the Commission, even if such a measure were
to be eligible as an aid aimed at reducing pollution, an
intensity of 30 % would be acceptable, instead of 40 %
as notified.

the single recipient.

In addition,

(5) OJ C 37, 3.2.2001, p. 3.
(6) See point 11(a)(iii).

(7) See point 11(b).

19.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 81/75

4. COMMENTS FROM ITALY

4.1. Concerning the sub-measure related to new
photovoltaic installations promoting renewable
sources of energy (8)

(30) According to this study, the pay back time of such kind
of investment, in the absence of any aid, would be 32 to
79 years. Therefore, given the average time life of this
kind of installations, which is 25 to 30 years, nobody
would undertake such an investment.

(26)

In their comments, the Italian authorities take the view
that the granting of aid up to the maximum intensity of
75 % is absolutely necessary to make the photovoltaic
installations spread over the territory of the region, as
the investment costs, required by this renewable source
of energy, are significantly higher, even if related to the
more expensive among the other renewable sources of
energy. In their opinion, the basic aid intensity of 40 %,
envisaged at point 32, first sub-paragraph, of the guide-
lines in support to renewable sources of energy, will
deter the potential investors, where photovoltaic installa-
tions are concerned.

(27)

To this purpose, a study has been joined, showing the
non-profitability of 5 different options of photovoltaic
installations,
investment
through the comparison of
costs, effective production of energy, envisaged gross
annual proceeds, deriving from the sale of energy on the
basis of a price of 0,18 EUR/kWh, and pay-back time of
the investments without any aid.

(31) Moreover,

the

confirmed

their
Italian authorities
commitment to respect point 37, first and fourth sub-
paragraph, of the guidelines, concerning calculation of
extra costs, namely for renewable energies, stating that
eligible costs taken into account will be the extra costs
borne by the firm compared with a conventional plant
with the same capacity in terms of the effective produc-
tion of energy. They had already undertaken, during the
notification (9), to notify separately those cases where the
eligible costs would be calculated in a different way.

(32) A schedule has been furthermore submitted, comparing
the investment costs for the production of green electri-
city, by photovoltaic installations (linked to the distribu-
tion network) to other renewable sources (wind, mini-
hydro, biogas, geothermal, biomass) and to grey electri-
city produced by conventional plants. This data has been
obtained from a technical report of ENEA (National
Agency for Energy and Environment),
and more
precisely by its Sustainable Development Unit.

(EUR/Kw)

(28)

The outcome of
following schedule:

this

study is

summarised in the

Energy sources

Investment costs

Capacity

Investment
cost (EUR)

Effective
production
(kWh/day)

Gross
annual
proceeds in
EUR

0,2 kW

1 370,00

5,12

42,00

0,2 kW

3 320,00

0,64

42,00

1,6 kW

17 800,00

0,64

336,00

5 kW

38 280,00

16,00

1 051,20

50 kW

347 050,00

160,00

10 512,00

PBT (pay
back
time)
without
aid (in
years)

32

79

53

36

33

photovoltaic

wind

Minihydro (0-3MW)

Biogas

Geothermal

Biomass

Non renewable

7 746-8 263

1 033-1 291

1 807-2 324

1 291-1 549

2 324

2 324-2 582

413-464

(29)

installation with the same
The double hypothesis of
capacity (0,2 kW)
is due to the different purposes
pursued. The former aims at producing electricity for
marginal purposes (i.e. a weather forecast local plant or
the lighting of an isolated country cemetery); the latter is
intended to work as a water lifting apparatus for agri-
cultural purposes (the appreciable difference in cost is
due to the necessity of a pump for the specific aim).
Both imply the ‘isle-technology’ (installation not linked
to the distribution network); likewise in the case of the
in both the
1,6 kw installation. On the contrary,
hypothesis of more powerful
(5 and
50 kW), the connection to the distribution network is
envisaged.

installations

(8) See point 11(a)(iii).

4.2. As

far

as

energy

saving measures

are

concerned (10)

(33)

Following the opening of the proceedings, the Italian
authorities communicated they decided to modify some
the measure at hands. The
eligible investments of
amended list of investments taken into account, which is
intended to replace the previous one, laid down in the
notification, is the following one:

(a) High efficiency heat generators;

(b) Heat insulation;

(9) See letter No 9709 of 1 August 2002, registered on 9 August 2002

as A/36098
(10) See point 11(b).

L 81/76

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.3.2004

(c) High efficiency lighting;

(d) Reheaters.

the adopted fluorescent
running time per year of 1 000 hours,
energy saving resulting is 17,6 10-3 tep/year per lamp.

lamp of 20 W, an average
the specific

In addition they confirmed the forecast
40 %, with respect to all the submeasures.

intensity of

(d) Reheaters

(34) A technical report has been also enclosed, pointing out
the energy saving engendered by each sub-measure, as
follows:

(a) High efficiency boilers

(35)

The basic energy saving resulting from the implementa-
tion of a boiler with conversion efficiency higher than
0,92, compared to 0,75 of
in a
climatic zone of kind ‘D’, which corresponds to an
average effective thermal need of 6 200 Mcal/year per
boiler,
is 0,15 tep/year per UA (equivalent residential
unit).

the existing boiler,

(36) According to the Italian authorities, 0,02 tep/year for
the increased electric consumption has to be deducted
from the above mentioned rough value, while 0,05 tep/
year, for the consumption decrease due to the absence
engendered by
of pilot
consumption decrease for the production of hot water,
have to be added up.

light, and 0,035 tep/year,

(37)

The final energy saving resulting is 0,185 tep/year,
corresponding to a saving lightly exceeding EUR 150
per year, on the basis of the energy cost, for residential
purpose, of 800 EUR/tep.

(b) Heat insulation

(38)

The minimal eligible thermal resistance of the insulating
is
materials, referred to climatic zones of
to a polystyrene
1,1 m2
equivalent thickness of 4 to 6 cm.

°K/W, which corresponds

‘D’ kind,

(39) Given a thermal conductivity, before the intervention,
related to insulated
between 1,4 and 1,7 W/m2 °K,
surfaces of 100 m2, the expected outcome is an energy
saving between 0,28 and 0,36 tep/year for residential
buildings and between 0,24 and 0,32 in the case of
offices accommodation and commercial premises.

(c) High efficiency lighting

(40)

(41)

Various kinds of
lamps are foreseen in the present
measure; namely compact and tubular fluorescent lamps,
mercury and sodium-vapour lamps.

The average energy saving has been calculated on the
basis of glow-lamps being substituted by compact fluor-
escent lamps with incorporated feeder. On the basis of a
conversion ratio between electricity consumption and
primary energy of 0,22 10-3 tep/kWh, and given a
wattage of the substituted glowlamp of 100 W and of

(42) Heat exchangers, heat pumps and heat retainers, sweat
recycling and steam recompression plants are eligible
under the present submeasure. It's a matter of recycling
heat otherwise lost, hence saving the energy needed to
produce the same quantity of heat.

(43)

In particular in the case of steam recompression plants,
the energy saving (ES) is obtained as follows: ES = (Hv-E/
0,39)/4,187*10-4. As E (energy consumption in order to
compress 1 kg of steam) depends on the temperature
and on the enthalpy gap, we will have a range of energy
saving figures, according to the following schedule:

Temperature gap (°C)

E (kJ/kg)

ES (tep/kg)

< 10

10-20

> 20

75,35

0,0494

99,52

0,0479

146,44

0,0450

The resulting primary energy saving will be consequently
between 45 and 50 tep per compressed steam tonne.

(44)

The Italian authorities committed themselves once again
to calculate the eligible costs net of the benefit accruing
from any increase in capacity, cost savings engendered
during the first five years of the life of the investment
and additional ancillary production during that five-year
period.

5. ASSESSMENT

(45)

(46)

5.1. Presence of aid in the meaning of Article 87(1)

of the EC Treaty

The Commission has assessed the notified scheme on
the basis of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty. Article 87(1)
states that
‘any aid granted by a Member State or
through State resources in any form whatsoever which
distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring
certain undertakings or the production of certain goods
shall, insofar as it affects trade between Member States,
be incompatible with the common market’.

The measures laid down in the planned aid scheme are
realised through grants of public funding, on a discre-
tionary basis. These grants improve the financial situa-
tion of the undertakings in receipt of aid and have the
potential to affect trade between Member States. Such
measures are therefore subject to Article 87(1) of the
Treaty.

19.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 81/77

5.2. Legality of the aid

(51)

(47)

The Italian authorities have fulfilled their obligation
under Article 88(3) of
the Treaty, by notifying the
scheme to the Commission before it came to effect.

Later on, the Commission compared the average extra
costs of the sole initial investment of photovoltaic instal-
lations to the other renewable energies (wind, minihydro
power, biogases, geothermal, biomass) and to non-
renewable (fossil sources), as follows:

5.3. Compatibility of the aid

Energy sources

(EUR/Kw)

Aid
inten sity

Aid
amount

Average
invest-
ment
costs
(EUR/
Kw)

Average
extra
costs
(EUR/
kW)

(48)

The Commission has examined the aid measures in the
light of the Community guidelines on State aid for envir-
onmental protection (hereinafter also referred to as the
guidelines) (11).

photovoltaic

8 004

7 566

75 %

5 674

wind

1 162

720

40 %

288

(a) As far as photovoltaic installations are concerned

minhydro(0-3MW)

2 065

1 627

40 %

651

(49)

(50)

relative

new photovoltaic

In order to assess the necessity of the aid intensity of
installations,
to
75 %,
proposed by the Italian authorities,
the Commission
calculated the investment cost per kW in the five exam-
ples of installation, supplied by Italy, as shown in the
schedule below.

Capacity

Total investment
cost (EUR)

Investment cost
(EUR/kW)

0,2 kW

1 370,00

6 850,00

0,2 kW (12)

1 420,00

7 100,00

1,6 kW

17 800,00

11 125,00

5 kW

50 kW

38 280,00

7 656,00

347 050,00

6 941,00

Biogas

1 420

982

40 %

393

Geothermal

2 324

1 886

40 %

746

Biomass

2 453

2 015

40 %

806

Non renewable

438

0

0 % =

0

to 25 % for

(52) Although the non assisted percentage of the extra costs
the photovoltaic installations,
is equal
compared to 60 % for the other renewable energies, the
average contribution of the beneficiary to the extra costs
of the investment is supposed to amount to 25 % of
7 566 or 1 892 EUR/kW in the case of the photovoltaic
energy, while it attains only 1 209 EUR/kW (60 % of
2 015) for the most expensive among the other renew-
able energies (biomass plants).

Average

7 934,40

(53)

(12) The cost of the pump (EUR 1 900), needed for the specific purpose
foreseen, has been deducted with respect to the investment costs, as
in the opinion of the Commission, it cannot represent an eligible
cost, as it would be anyway necessary, even in the case of a conven-
tional installation.

The average contribution, net of any aid, of the recipi-
ents to the total investment costs, in absolute terms per
kW installed, is therefore EUR 2 330 (8 004-5 674) in
the case of the photovoltaic installations, compared to
EUR 1 647 (2 453-806) for biomass (the most expen-
sive after photovoltaic), EUR 874 (1 162-288) for wind
(the cheapest among the renewable sources), and finally
EUR 438 for conventional plants, producing grey elec-
tricity.

the

cost

average

resulting

investment

Concerning the installations proposed by the Tuscany
Region,
is
7 934,40 EUR/kW, which is in line with the ENEA data,
submitted enclosed to the comments of
the Italian
authorities. According to the latter, the investment costs
per kW, related to photovoltaic installations, have to be
set in a range between 7 746 and 8 263 EUR, particu-
larly when referring to the production of electricity,
linked to the distribution network.

(54) As it concerns the average pay back time, the Commis-
sion notes that, on the basis of an effective production
of 3,2 kWh/day per 1 kW of capacity installed,
it
should be 11 years in the case of photovoltaic, provided
a rate of aid of 75 % of the extra costs is allowed.

(11) See footnote 5.

(55)

The Italian authorities also undertook not to allow any
further support to the installations concerned.

L 81/78

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

19.3.2004

(56)

In the light of the above, the Commission considers
therefore sufficiently proved the necessity of the rate of
aid of 75 %, in the case of the submeasure ‘new photo-
voltaic installations’, pursuant to point 32, third sub-
paragraph of the guidelines.

(57) Nevertheless, it takes the view that a yearly report on
the execution of the scheme, allowing the monitoring of
the gap between the investment costs of the photovol-
renewable
taic technology and those of
sources, has to be submitted by the Italian authorities.

the other

(58) Where a risk of overcompensation arise,

in particular
where the average contribution - net of any aid — of
the recipients to the total investment costs, in absolute
terms per kW installed become lower in the case of
photovoltaic installations than in other renewable ener-
gies plants, a recommendation proposing appropriate
measures might be issued by the Commission to Italy,
pursuant to Article 18 of procedure Regulation (EC) No
659/1999.

(b) As regards measure (b) of the scheme ‘energy savings’

(59)

The submeasures of
the present measure have been
amended, following the view expressed by the Commis-
investigation
sion in its decision to open the formal
procedure.

(60) Accordingly, the Commission is of the opinion that the
modified submeasures comply with the conditions set
down at point 30 of the environmental guidelines, as
they clearly consist
in energy savings measures, as
defined at point 6 of the same guidelines, stating that an
efficient use of natural resources has to be encouraged
and are consequently deemed equivalent to investments
to promote environmental protection.

(61) Moreover, in the light of the technical data submitted,
the new measures foreseen, are deemed to be able to
reach the goal of reducing the amount of energy used by
undertakings in their production cycle (13).

(62)

(63)

(64)

taken into consideration are
Plants and equipment
defined in accordance with the requirements set down at
point 36 of
Investments in land and
buildings are not concerned; neither is forecast invest-
ment in intangible assets.

the guidelines.

Beneficiaries of the aid provided under the measure at
hand will be both SMEs and large enterprises, according
to the guidelines.

The aid intensity of 40 % gross is in line with the ceiling
of aid laid down at point 30 of the guidelines. The
measure does not foresee any increase in the intensity of
aid, neither for firms located in assisted regions, nor for
SMEs.

(13) As regards, in particular, the submeasure A ‘high efficiency heat
generators’, to the extent that hot-water boilers are concerned,
Council Directive 92/42/EEC of 21 May 1992 (OJ L 167,
22.6.1992, p.17), on efficiency requirements for new hot-water
boilers fired with liquid or gaseous fuels, will be observed.

(65) Aid in respect of the eligible costs under this measure
may not be combined with any other aid in the sense of
Article 87(1) of the Treaty, neither with other com-
munity subsidy.

5.4. Closing remarks

(66)

The Commission has taken note that the intensity of aid,
concerning the photovoltaic installations, has been
applied, in the scenarios proposed in the annexe A to
the answer of Italy, to the whole amount of the invest-
just in order to
ment instead of the only extra costs,
show that even in that case the investment in question
needs quite a long depreciation time and consequently
does not look so profitable, from the point of view of an
operator in a competitive market.

(67) At the same time,

it observes that the commitments
concerning the respect of point 37, first and Fourth sub-
paragraphs, have been confirmed by the Italian authori-
ties, implying that the eligible costs taken into considera-
tion will be strictly confined to the extra investment
costs borne by the firm, compared with a conventional
plant with the same capacity in terms of the effective
production of energy.

(68)

(69)

(70)

savings

deriving

from the

investment
Likewise,
concerned, compared to conventional sources,
i.e. the
cost for the connection to the distribution network no
more needed, have not been deducted, namely in the
schedule 6bis of annex A, just to demonstrate that even
in this case the pay back time of the specific installation
would be eight years.

that

The Commission recalls
the Italian authorities
already committed themselves to calculate the eligible
costs net of the benefits accruing from any increase in
capacity, cost savings engendered during the first five
years of the life of the investment and additional ancil-
lary production during that five years period, as laid
down at point 37, third subparagraph of the guidelines.
This should in particular concern fuel savings of a
photovoltaic installation compared with a conventional
one.

5.5. Conclusion

the

submeasure

In the light of the above, the Commission takes the view
that
‘New photovoltaic plants’ of
measure (a) ‘promotion of renewable sources of energy’
of the aid scheme notified as N747/2001, complies with
the requirements set down in the Community guidelines
on State for environmental protection (14), namely at
point 32,
third subparagraph and may consequently
benefit of a derogation pursuant to Article 87(3)(c) of
the EC Treaty.

(14) See footnote 5.

19.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 81/79

(71)

the amended measure (b)

‘energy saving
Likewise,
measures’ of the abovementioned notified aid scheme,
fulfils all the conditions laid down at point 30 of the
environmental guidelines
accordingly
allowed an exemption under Article 87(3)(c) of the EC
Treaty,

and may be

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The aid which Italy — Tuscany Region is planning to imple-
ment for the reduction of the greenhouse gasses emissions,
pursuant to Decision No 481 of the Regional Executive of the
Tuscany Region of 20 May 2002 is compatible with the
common market, subject to the conditions set out in Article 2.

Article 3

A yearly report on the execution of the scheme, allowing the
monitoring of the gap between the investment costs of the
photovoltaic technology and those of
the other renewable
in order to allow the Commission to exclude any
sources,
contingent risk of overcompensation in respect of the former,
has to be submitted by the Italian authorities.

Article 4

Italy shall inform the Commission, within two months of noti-
fication of this Decision, of the measures taken to comply with
Articles 2 and 3.

Article 2

Article 5

The eligible costs taken into consideration in the imple-
1.
mentation of the scheme will be strictly confined to the extra
investment costs necessary to meet the environmental objec-
tives, and in particular, as far as renewable energy is concerned,
to the extra costs borne by the firm, compared with a conven-
tional plant with the same capacity in terms of the effective
production of energy.

2.
Likewise, the eligible costs have to be calculated net of
the benefits accruing from any increase in capacity, cost
savings engendered during the first five years of the life of the
investment and additional ancillary production during that five-
year period.

This Decision is addressed to the Republic of Italy.

Done at Brussels, 30 April 2003.

For the Commission

Mario MONTI

Member of the Commission