Piero Farenti, head of development at Horus Green Energy Investment, explained to Pv Magazine Italia the main innovations introduced by the Testo Unico, spending words of appreciation for several innovations. He then answered questions on innovations such as authorization regimes, new thresholds, related works, the role of regions (and municipalities) and the possibilities of expropriation for projects in PAS.
Pv Magazine Italia asked Piero Farenti, head of development at Horus Green Energy Investment, to explain the main innovations introduced by the Testo Unico Rinnovabili. Some quick notes: BESS are officially RES; regions will have the power to improve the free building and PAS thresholds; expropriation will be possible for PAS; the VIA threshold for PAS has been set at 10 MW and not 12 MW.
What are the main innovations introduced by the Testo Unico in general?
In general, the Testo Unico reorganizes the regulations regarding authorizations for RES plants. It abolishes everything that was provided for in Legislative Decree 387/2003 and Legislative Decree 28/2011, with all the changes that the various simplification decrees had introduced. Finally, there is a single reference text and it should be easier to orient oneself in choosing the right procedure to follow. From a practical point of view, the Decree establishes that there are only three authorization regimes: free construction, simplified authorization procedure and single authorization. It then regulates coordination with the regulations on environmental assessments.
What are the main innovations introduced by the Testo Unico on Stmg?
Finally, it is clearly and unambiguously defined that the authorization regimes apply to the construction of the connected works and infrastructures essential for the construction and operation of the plants, including the connection works to the distribution network and the national transmission network necessary for the injection of the energy produced by the plants themselves, resulting from the connection solution issued by the network operator. For too long we have had various interpretations that told us whether the works included in the Stmg could be authorized or not together with the plants. Now there are no more doubts. Think for example of the new electrical stations, the in-out connections on them, the enhancements or renovations of existing lines, or the connections between new electrical stations. From this point of view, it is a small revolution. Since there is still a year of delegation to the government to improve the law, we could continue for example by abolishing the obligation to follow the royal decree of 11 December 1933 number 1775 which in several regions requires the obligation of double authorization of connection works.
You recently wrote that the regions have the power to improve the free building and PAS thresholds and the power to act on the anti-fractionation rules. What does this mean in practice?
Article 1 states that the regions and local authorities can establish specific rules for the further simplification of administrative regimes, including by raising the power thresholds envisaged for free building and simplified permit procedures. This clearly indicates that the power given to the regions in this sense can only be that of further simplification by raising the power thresholds. With regard to the fight against the cumulative effect and the artful fractionation, in the articles that talk about free building and simplified permit procedures, it is specified that the regions and autonomous provinces can establish rules in this sense. This is, in my opinion, the real power given to the regions by this decree. Objectively, however, it is right to establish precise rules to fight tricks of this type.
In his analysis he also writes that expropriation will be possible for PAS, with a reduction in the self-regulation times of municipalities to 6 months. How many cases of expropriation do you expect in 2025?
These rules finally make PAS a complete authorization regime. The possibility of expropriation means that this regime can be used even in cases where there are complex connection works. In 2025 there will definitely be an increase in cases of expropriation for the servitude or easement of a power line, or even for new primary cabins or electrical stations. Think of a connection estimate that includes 5 km of overhead cable duct. Without the possibility of expropriation it would be impossible to collect all the necessary easements. Or think of a plant smaller than 10 MW that still connects to a new electrical station. This station can be authorized with a PAS, with a great advantage in terms of its construction times. Regarding the reduction of 6 months of self-protection times, this rule corrects the last missing piece to further improve the PAS. In this way, in 6 months it is technically possible to obtain the status of “ready to built” without risks for the investor.
He then explained that BESS are officially RES. This also implies the public utility of BESS projects, correct? What could be the consequences? What could have happened if BESS projects had not been assimilated to photovoltaic projects?
Yes, he hit the nail on the head. If BESS falls under this Decree, it means that there is public utility for BESS. In paragraph 3 of Article 9, the one relating to the single authorization, it is specified which sources require the availability of the areas. These are biomass-fueled plants (including biogas and biomethane), photovoltaic plants and thermodynamic solar plants. There are obviously no BESS. For these plants, as already happens for wind power, it will be possible to proceed with expropriation. It remains to be seen what will happen now in the various regions. The so-called “Sicily model”, which also requires availability for wind power, could also be applied to BESS. If BESS had not been included as plants powered by renewable energy sources, it would have been very complicated to obtain authorization for the related connection works. Therefore, in this sense, the government did well to include them in this Decree.
Can you explain how the National EIA works for photovoltaics? Which systems are most exposed?
Before this decree, for photovoltaic systems managed by MASE, it was not possible to proceed with the EIA. Above 25 MW in areas eligible pursuant to Decree 199/2021, and 30 MW in industrial, artisanal, commercial areas, landfills, quarries and former quarries, it was necessary to proceed directly with the Environmental Impact Assessment. Given the biblical times required for the National EIA and the recent criteria that set the threshold beyond which a project benefits from a priority at 50 MW, photovoltaic systems between 30 and 50 MW no longer had any reason to exist. With this change, where it is believed that there are the conditions for an exclusion from the EIA, it is possible to go back to thinking about photovoltaic systems of these powers.
The VIA threshold for PAS has been set at 10 MW and not 12 MW. What does this mean?
This is a discrepancy that had also been reported during parliamentary proceedings but which was never corrected. Let me explain. For photovoltaic systems in areas eligible pursuant to Decree 199/2021 and for photovoltaic and agrivoltaic systems that allow the continuity of agricultural activities, the VIA exemption threshold is equal to 12 MW. In the previous legislation, this threshold also coincided with the PAS threshold. Now, however, the PAS threshold is equal to 10 MW. A gap has been created, between 10 and 12 MW, where the VIA is not done but you go to Single Authorization. This is a contradiction from the point of view of simplification because it takes a step back compared to what was previously envisaged. In this sense, I expect that many regions can intervene by raising the PAS threshold to at least 12 MW.
Can you explain the thresholds for the administrative regimes applicable to PV projects? Who will be the responsible parties?
In free construction (only a communication is required but no authorization), the following systems are allowed: coplanar systems on buildings or appurtenances up to 12 MW, systems on structures that are not buildings up to 10 MW, systems up to 1 MW on the ground serving buildings, systems in industrial, artisanal, commercial areas, landfills, quarries and former quarries up to 5 MW, agrivoltaic systems with a power of less than 5 MW that allow the continuity of agricultural and pastoral activity. In PAS (municipal jurisdiction), the following systems must be authorized: non-coplanar systems on buildings or appurtenances up to 10 MW, systems in industrial, artisanal, commercial areas, landfills, quarries and former quarries from 5 MW to 15 MW, systems in areas suitable pursuant to Decree 199/2021, systems replacing eternit up to 10 MW. Photovoltaic systems other than those indicated above with a power of up to 300 MW must be subject to a regional Single Authorization (or provincial if delegated by the region). Photovoltaic systems greater than 300 MW must be subject to a National Single Authorization (under the jurisdiction of MASE).
Can you explain the thresholds for the administrative regimes applicable to BESS projects? Who will be the responsible parties?
In free construction (only a communication is required but no authorization) BESS up to 10 MW must be authorized. In PAS (municipal jurisdiction) BESS must be authorized inside industrial plants of any nature, including decommissioned plants, provided that the height of the cabins is not greater than the heights already existing inside the plants themselves. In Regional Single Authorization (or provincial if delegated by the region) stand alone BESS (i.e. those able to autonomously provide services for the benefit of the national electricity grid) up to 200 MW or BESS serving authorized production plants but not yet built up to 300 MW must be authorized. Stand-alone BESS (i.e. those capable of autonomously providing services for the benefit of the national electricity grid) greater than 200 MW or BESS serving authorised but not yet built production plants greater than or equal to 300 MW are subject to the Single National Authorisation (under the jurisdiction of MASE).
Explain that up to 200 MW stand-alone BESS go to the region or province. What does this depend on?
There are some regions (for example Lazio) that have delegated the competence of the Single Authorization to the provinces. In this case, the competence of the authorizations of the BESS will also be of the provinces.
Other considerations?
More could probably have been done, both in terms of thresholds for free construction and PAS, and in terms of thresholds for the VIA. I am curious to understand how the discussion of the acceleration zones will progress even if, for the moment it remains only theoretical and not practical. There is still a year for the government to streamline the procedures. The Agriculture Decree has given a very bad signal to investors, but despite everything there is still a lot of confidence in our country. I hope that starting from this decree that in any case clarifies, we can move more quickly towards the energy transition. There are still many problems to be solved. There are 1,800 projects stuck in the National VIA. There are too many projects that need to resort to administrative courts to see the light. Investors’ trust is still there. Let’s not let it go away.
Link to the article: