Significant events for the 2019 financial year

Acea Ato 5 provides integrated water services on the basis of a thirty-year agreement signed on 27 June 2003 by the company and the Frosinone Provincial Authority (representing the Authority for the Ato comprising 86 Municipalities). In return for being awarded the concession, Acea Ato 5 pays a fee to all the Municipalities based on the date the related services are effectively acquired.

The management of the integrated water service in the Ato 5 region – Southern Lazio – Frosinone involves a total of 86 Municipalities (the management of the Municipality of Paliano still remains to be acquired, while the Municipalities of Conca Casale and Rocca D'Evandro are "outside the scope") for a total population of about 490,000 inhabitants, a population served of 469,836 inhabitants, with a service coverage equal to approximately 97% of the territory. The number of users is 199,823.

The drinking water system comprises supply, abstraction and distribution plants and networks that use 7 main sources from which an equal number of aqueduct systems originate.

The sewerage and treatment system comprised a network of sewers and collectors connected to wastewater treatment terminals.

There are 219 sewerage pumping stations managed by the Company and 132 purification plants, of which 116 are biological plants, 14 are "Imhoff tanks" and 2 are percolators, including also the "inaccessible" and those outside Ato (Rocca d'Evandro and Conca Casale).

With regard to 2019, the digitisation of the networks of the managed area continued, with the inclusion of data in the GIS - Geographic Information System. According to the 2019-2022 plan for significant activities, as of 31.12.2019 5,496 km of the water supply network had been digitised (1,205 km of supply network and 4,291 km of distribution network).

With regard to the acquisition of the plants relating to the management in the Municipality of Paliano, in November 2018 the Council of State finally decided on the appeal filed by the Municipality of Paliano against the decision of the Regional Administrative Court no. 6/2018 – which upheld the appeal filed by the Company against the Municipality of Paliano, in order to obtain the annulment of the measure by which the Municipality opposed its refusal to transfer the service – with decision no. 6635/2018 rejected the appeal filed by the Municipality of Paliano and consequently upheld the decision handed down by the Regional Administrative Court of Latina, reaffirming that the safeguard regime granted to AMEA was "limited to a period of three years from the date of signing of the Management Agreement between AATO 5 and Acea Ato 5; this deadline therefore expired in 2006, so that, after that date, AMEA's management was to be considered without title".

Since Acea Ato 5 has so far failed to initiate compliance proceedings with a view to verifying the voluntary compliance of the Municipality, which is suitable for preventing the possible appointment of an acting commissioner as has already happened in similar cases, a series of meetings have taken place at the Operational Technical Secretariat of AATO 5 Lazio Meridionale - Frosinone aimed at seeking an amicable settlement of the dispute and at initiating the preparatory activities for the transfer to Acea Ato 5 of the management of the IWS in the Municipality of Paliano. In this perspective, the Parties – with minutes of 26 November 2018 and 29 November 2018 – performed the update of the previous survey of networks and existing plants in the Municipality of Paliano, necessary for the management of the IWS.

To date, the parties are sharing the IWS handover report, which should also result in the waiver of pending litigation between them.

With regard to the Municipality of Atina, whose management of the IWS has been transferred to Acea Ato 5 as of 19 April 2018, it should be noted that Municipal Council Resolution no. 14 of 17 April 2019, by which the Municipality resolved to "establish the sub/optimal territorial area called Atina Territorial Area 1, with reference to optimal territorial area no. 5, for the continuity of the autonomous and direct management of the water service pursuant to art. 147, paragraph 2 bis of Italian Legislative Decree no. 152/2006, declaring the Integrated Water Service 'local public service without economic importance'".

AATO 5 appealed the above resolution before the Lazio Regional Administrative Court - Latina Section - also serving the Company and the Lazio Region.

As far as Acea Ato 5 is concerned, while the legal action taken by the AGB is suitable to protect the interests of the Company, it has deemed it appropriate to file suit.

With regard to significant events that took place during the year, it should be noted that:

Lazio Administrative Court appeal on termination of the Management Agreement

Resolution no. 7 of the Conference of Mayors of 13 December 2016 resolved to terminate the Management Agreement. On 26 and 27 June 2018, appeal documents were served, proposed by the Area Authority and the Municipality of Ceccano and other Municipalities by the Ato 5, against sentence no. 638/2017 of the Lazio Regional Administrative Court - Latina branch, by which the Administrative Judge upheld the appeal filed by the Company against resolution no. 7 of 13 December 2016, by which the Conference of Mayors resolved to terminate the contractual relationship with Acea Ato 5, annulling the measure. Such appeals do not present any arguments of particular novelty or relevance with respect to what has already been submitted for the examination of the Court of First Instance, nor have the appellants proposed an application for interim relief. In any case, the Company filed the formal documents for both disputes, for which as of today there is no information regarding the scheduling of the hearing.

Injunction order for payment of € 10,700,000 and counterclaim by AATO 5 for concession fees

With regard to the € 10,700,000 receivables for higher costs incurred in the 2003-2005 period, pursuant to the Settlement agreement of 27 February 2007, on 14 March 2012, Acea Ato 5 lodged an appeal for an injunction order concerning the receivables recognised by the AATO to the company.

Accepting the appeal, the Court of Frosinone issued Injunction Order no. 222/2012, enforceable immediately, notice of which was served to the Area Authority on 12 April 2012.

By notice dated 22 May 2012, the AATO sent notice of its opposition to the injunction order (Civil Judgement 1598/2012), requesting the cancellation of the order and, as a precautionary measure, the suspension of its provisional enforcement. Moreover, as a counter-claim, it submitted a claim for the payment of concession fees totalling € 28,699,699.48.

Acea Ato 5 appeared before the court in the proceedings against the injunction order, challenging the adversary's demands and in turn formulating a counterclaim for the payment of the entire amount of higher costs incurred by the Operator and originally requested, totalling € 21,481,000.00.

Following the hearing on 17 July 2012, the Judge – in an Order filed on 24 July – suspended the temporary enforcement of the injunction order, and postponed to a later date the discussion of the merits of the issue.

The judge also rejected the request for an order of payment of the concession fees submitted by the AATO. During the hearing on 21 November 2014, the judge withdrew the reservations on the motions for admission of evidence filed by the parties and fixed the hearing for the final statements on 15 November 2016. During the hearing, the judge granted the terms for the conclusions and replies and deferred the decision on the case. In sentence 304/2017, published on 28 February 2017, the civil judge revoked the injunction decree issued in 2012, rejected the subordinate re-conventional request by Acea Ato 5 and ordered the deferral of the case in the preliminary proceedings concerning the re-conventional request by the AATO as regards the payment of the concession fees.

At the hearing of 17 November 2017, the Judge, having acknowledged the counterparty request, postponed the hearing to 27 February 2018. At the outcome of the aforementioned hearing, the new Judge who took charge of the case, having noted the discrepancies that emerged in the respective accounts of Acea Ato 5 and AATO 5, granted a postponement to 4 May 2018, inviting the parties to clarify the reasons for such discrepancies and specifying that if they could not the court would appoint an expert to do so. At this hearing there was a further postponement until 21 September 2018.

At this meeting, in light of the Conciliation Panel established on 11 September 2018 with AATO 5 – pursuant to art. 36 of the Management Agreement to which the question concerning the determination of concession fees was also referred, among others – the Parties asked the judge for a postponement, the hearing being scheduled for 15 February 2019, then postponed to 17 September 2019.

The appeal (Civil Judgement docket no. 6227/17) against the sentence of the Court of Frosinone, which revoked the Injunctive Decree of € 10,700,000 initially issued by that Court, must be considered in connection with this judgement on the assumption of the nullity of the resolution of the Conference of Mayors no. 4/2007 and the Transaction Act adopted by the Area Authority in violation of the public regulations requiring the identification of the financial coverage of the act itself.

The first hearing was automatically postponed to 11 May 2018. On this occasion the Court, having heard the respective positions of the parties, postponed the case to 20 November 2020 for the oral discussion and the ruling of the sentence pursuant to art. 281 sexies of the code of civil procedure.

The Company did not consider cancelling the receivable or setting aside any risk provisions for two reasons:

• the issue in question, which relates to the recognition of the amount owed by the Operator (of € 10,700,00.00) in connection with the 2007 settlement, the subject of sentence no. 304/2017 of the Court of Frosinone, appealed by Acea Ato 5 SpA to the Court of Appeal of Rome (RG no. 6227/2017), was referred to the Conciliation Board for further investigation, including legal matters;
• the legal assessments made by the lawyers illustrate, on the one hand, the validity of the appeal and, on the other hand, the fact that the nullity of the transaction does not per se determine the non-existence of the receivable.

The validity of the appeal and the decision not to cancel the receivable were further confirmed by the conclusions of the Conciliation Board, established by the Area Authority and the Operator, in accordance with the provisions of article 36 of the Management Agreement, in order to reach a settlement of the various disputes pending between the parties.

In its Conciliation Proposal sent to the parties on 27 November 2019 and currently being examined by the AATO 5 Conference of Mayors, the Conciliation Board has in fact, among other things:

• ascertained the existence of significant differences between the concession fees approved in the various tariff arrangements and the amounts to be paid to the Municipalities. In the opinion of the Board, the actual existence of such differences leads one to believe that Resolution no. 4/2007 of the Area Authority was based on credible elements, also found afterwards, where it identified the "savings on the concession fees to be paid to the Municipalities" (which could constitute the financial funding to pay a loan stipulated by the Area Authority) as the financial coverage for the payment to the Operator of the sums envisaged in the settlement. This conclusion, highlighting the plausibility of the sources of coverage identified by the Area Authority to finance the settlement, confirms the validity of the appeal filed by the Company against sentence no. 304/2017, by which the Court of Frosinone declared the nullity of Resolution no. 4/2007 of the Area Authority and of the settlement agreement precisely because of the alleged failure to identify the related financial coverage in violation of the disclosure regulations, since the reference to "unspecified savings on the concession fees to be paid to Municipalities" was not considered adequate and sufficient;
• considered that there are valid and grounded reasons to grant the Operator's request for recognition of higher operating costs incurred in the three-year period 2003-2005 to the reduced extent agreed to by the parties in the settlement, thus confirming the existence of the corresponding receivable in the Company's financial statements.

Updating of the concession fee

With resolution no. 1 of 26 March 2018, Conference of Mayors ordered that the payment of the instalments of loans taken out by Municipalities, from the second half of 2013 until the end of the Concession, shall be disbursed directly by the Manager. Consequently, with the tariff update ordered on 1 August 2018, by immediately implementing the provisions made by ARERA contained in the sanctioning measure DSAI/42/2018/Idr, with regard, among other things, to the fees relating to unmanaged Municipalities, the mortgage component of the Concession Fee was adjusted in 2019 by adding the amount of the same specified in the annex to aforesaid resolution no. 1 of 26 March 2018. No adjustment of the mortgage component was implemented for the years 2013-2017, as Resolution no. 1 of 26 March 2018 did not imply any change to the amount of the mortgage component approved in the various tariff arrangements. In addition, any recalculation of loan costs (MTp) must be approved by the Conference of Mayors and must be included in the Economic and Financial Plan (EFP) of the next tariff update in view of the fact that, even at the time of approval of the tariff update 2018-2019, approved by the Conference of Mayors on 1 August 2018, nothing was established regarding the fees for the above years.

For the reasons set out below, the Company did not consider that the obligation to pay this difference to the Area Authority had failed, and therefore it did not reduce the provisions in its financial statements for concession fees: 

• the aforementioned Resolution of the Conference of Mayors has made no provision for the difference;
• in compliance with the regulations in force, the quantification of the concession fees is the exclusive responsibility of the Area Authority and therefore any recognition of the difference (with consequent extinction of the relative obligation) can only take place following the revision of the tariffs for the years 2013-2017 and the relative Economic and Financial Plan (EFP) by the Area Authority;
• when reviewing the tariffs for the two-year period 2018-2019 and the related EFP, the Area Authority implemented the reduction in concession fees only as from 2018 (with a substantial reduction of about € 1,658 thousand in 2018), leaving those for the 2013-2017 years unchanged;
• for the 2013 financial year, the AGB had issued invoices to the Company for the difference between the concession fee resulting from the relevant tariff and the charges for the loans that the Operator had paid to the Municipalities based on the aforementioned Resolution;
• the exact quantification of the concession fees for the aforementioned years and the assessment of their reallocation and treatment for tariff purposes was an open issue for both parties, so much so that it was referred to the Conciliation Board established between AATO 5 and the Operator, in accordance with the provisions of art. 36 of the Agreement.

It should also be noted that since it is a so-called "pass-through cost" in the tariff definition, i.e. charged as a tariff without any economic return for the Operator (a sort of collection on behalf of third parties), its effect is substantially neutral in the Operator's financial statements: it is recorded as revenue and at the same time and in equal measure as a cost. For this reason, even if the Company mistakenly did not fulfil its obligation to pay the difference and recognised out-of-period income as an adjustment to the amount due for the concession fee, it would have had to recognise out-of-period income of the same amount following a reduction in the adjustments for the years 2013-2017, with clear economic effects that are insignificant from both a statutory and fiscal point of view.

It should be noted that on 27 November 2019 the aforementioned Conciliation Board submitted to the Company and to the Area Authority a specific Conciliation Proposal, with an attached deed still to be signed. In these documents, the Conciliation Board has, among other things, put forward a proposal to reduce the tariff adjustments claimed by the Operator by the difference of € 12,798 thousand between the concession fees approved in the various tariff arrangements for the years 2013-2017 and the amounts to be paid directly to the Municipalities on the basis of Resolution no. 1 of 26 March 2018. This proposal for allocation to offset existing receivables confirms the Operator's indebtedness of this difference, corroborating the Company's decision not to release the related liabilities in its financial statements.

Conciliation Board with AATO 5

With regard to relations with AATO 5, the Company has tried to reach a settlement of the various disputes pending against the Area Authority, convinced of the need to put an end to a very long season of clear conflict between the Granting Body and the Licensee Company, culminating with the resolution passed by the Conference of Mayors of Ato 5 aimed at the termination of the Management Agreement that forced the Company to appeal to the Latina Regional Administrative Court that annulled the above resolution.

In this context, in recent years and especially during 2018 an enormous effort has been made – including organisational efforts – to reconstruct the relations between the Company, the Area Authority and the individual Municipal Administrations of Ato 5.

Similarly, the possibility of establishing a Conciliation Board with the Area Authority has therefore become concrete, with the aim of settling the main issues still in dispute by the parties.

In this regard, on 11 September 2018 AATO 5 and the Company signed report no. 1 in which the parties expressed their mutual willingness to open a Conciliation Board on:

• case pending before the Court of Frosinone, docket no. 1598/2012 on concession fees 2006-2011. This question consists in ascertaining that the concession fees for the period 2006-2011 have been paid in full: while Acea Ato 5 claims to have paid the entire amount due, the Area Authority claims that it is still owed more (€ 1,751,437.89). The dispute is the subject of a case pending before the Court of Frosinone;
• verification of the actual use of the sums paid by Acea Ato 5 to the Area Authority as a fee pursuant to art. 13 of the Integrated Water Service Management Agreement. In the meantime this matter has been substantially settled by the parties, given the recalculation of the concession fee;
• settlement of the dispute related to the 2007 transaction, which is the subject of judgement no. 304/2017 of the Court of Frosinone, appealed by Acea Ato 5 to the Rome Court of Appeal (docket no. 6227/2017). The first hearing of the appeal proceedings is scheduled for 20 November 2020, and Acea Ato 5 – even though it considered the above sentence to be incorrect and therefore appealed it – nevertheless pointed out that Acea Ato 5 did not in any way deny the existence of the receivable claimed by the Manager and therefore claims the right to recover the receivable itself, also fearing further initiatives to protect the interests of the Company. The Operational Technical Secretariat has expressed its willingness to ask the Conciliation Board to study the Manager's claim, even from a legal point of view;
• damage suffered by Acea Ato 5 as a result of delays in the delivery of services by the Municipalities of Cassino, Atina and Paliano;
• handover of the ASI and Cosilam plants;
• penalties applied by AATO 5 against the Manager and annulled by the Latina Administrative Court by judgement no. 638/2017;
• interest for late payment of concession fees by Acea Ato 5;
• reconstruction of the 2012/2018 concession fees and request for the Operator's repayment plan to the Area Authority for the debt positions relating to the concession fee.

Two other issues were then referred for the assessment of the Board concerning the discounting of the 2006/2011 adjustments and the non-invoicing of the 2006/2011 adjustments due to the correction of the 2012 volumes.

Also in minutes no. 1 of 11 September 2018, the Parties shared the rules for appointing the Conciliation Board, specifying that:

• it shall be called upon to verify the possibility of an attempt at an amicable settlement between the Parties with respect to all and/or even some of the above matters;
• after an extensive investigation that must concern all the individual points under examination, the Conciliation Board must present the Parties with a proposal for conciliation;
• the Parties will be free to accept or reject the conciliation proposal presented by the Conciliation Board, i.e. to accept it in full or even only in part, without any obligation to give their reasons;
• therefore, the appointed Board will have the task of carrying out a preliminary activity on behalf of both Parties with respect to the matters entrusted to it, without prejudice to subsequent decisions that will be left to the individual Parties;
• the conciliation proposal presented by the Board and, more generally, the report and/or deeds drawn up by the Board may not be used in judicial proceedings by one Party against the other as a possible recognition of its own reasons and/or those of others;
• the appointed Board does not act as an Arbitration Board.

The Parties also shared the criteria for the appointment of the Board and, in particular, each Party appointed its own member. The Chairman of the Conciliation Board was selected by the Prefect of Frosinone, at the joint request of the Parties, and was jointly appointed on 16 May 2019. The Board officially took office on 27 May 2019, thus starting the 120-day period within which it had to arrive at a proposal for an amicable settlement of the issues submitted for its assessment.

On 17 September 2019, the Conciliation Board announced that it had completed the preliminary work on all the items assigned to the roundtable. However, it noted that due to the number and complexity of the issues under examination, a considerable amount of work was required to prepare a document presenting a comprehensive and reasoned conciliation proposal.

The Conciliation Board therefore requested and obtained from the parties an extension of 30 days from 24 September 2019.

Following a detailed and in-depth investigation, the Conciliation Board prepared a draft of the Conciliation Proposal, presented to the Parties' legal counsel at the meeting held on 11 November 2019.

At that meeting, the Parties invited the Board to draw up a draft of the Conciliation that would take into account the report illustrated in that meeting, as well as the proposals made by the Operator, to be submitted for examination and approval to the relevant Bodies.

On 26 November 2019, the Conciliation Board submitted the final Conciliation Proposal to the Parties together with the draft of the Conciliation Deed.

On 4 February 2020, the Company informed the OTS of AATO 5 that on 19 December 2019 the BoD approved the Conciliation Proposal formulated by the Conciliation Board and the draft of the Conciliation Deed between AATO 5 and Acea Ato 5 and that, moreover, the Chairman was given a mandate to sign the Conciliation Deed, confirming in particular the commitment to carry out interventions for a total amount of € 4,500 thousand without any tariff recognition, in conciliation and for the reasons set out above.

As of today the Conference of Mayors has not yet been scheduled for final approval of the two documents.

However, in light of the conduct throughout the conciliation process, and in particular during the final meeting held on 11 November 2019 in which the Conciliation Board explained the Conciliation Proposal to the legal representatives of the parties and as the Company's BoD had already approved the related Conciliation Deed on 19 December 2019 and then communicated this decision to AATO 5 on 4 February 2020, the Company believed that as at 31 December 2019 an implicit obligation had already arisen for the commitments envisaged in the Conciliation Deed, and in particular for the aforementioned commitment to carry out interventions in the territory without any tariff recognition, having already created a valid expectation in the AATO 5 Area Authority and in the Municipalities of the territory that the Company intends to honour these commitments and bear the related charges. Based on the information available as at 31 December 2019, considering the approval of the Conciliation Deed by the Conference of Mayors to be probable and consequently also considering the related implied obligation to be likely, at the end of the year the Company decided to recognise a provision of this amount.

Criminal proceeding no. 3910/18

With regard to criminal proceeding no. 3910/18 r.g.n.r. of the Public Prosecutor in the Court of Frosinone, on 2 January 2019 a preventive seizure decree was issued on 18 December 2018 by the Judge for Preliminary Investigations at the Court of Frosinone as part of criminal proceedings no. 3910/18 r.g.n.r, pending for the alleged violation of art. 4 of Italian Legislative Decree no. 74/2000 (inaccurate declaration). Pursuant to the aforementioned provision, the preventive seizure of financial resources in the accounts held in the name of Acea Ato 5 up to a value of € 3,600,554.51 was ordered. On 11 January 2019, a request for a review was filed, whose discussion hearing was scheduled for 1 February 2019 before the Court of Frosinone, as a unified bench. At the outcome of the aforementioned hearing in the Council Chamber, the Court of Frosinone upheld the proposed re-examination request and, as a result, cancelled the preventive seizure decree, ordering the restitution to the person entitled thereto. Based on the aforementioned restitution order, the Company sent a formal request to the Single Justice Fund for the restitution of the sums released. As of today the process of returning the released funds has been completed.

ARERA sanctioning measure concerning IWS tariff regulation

With determination no. DSAI/42/2018/Idr of 21 May 2018, ARERA started a sanctioning procedure regarding the tariff regulation of the integrated water service, the result of the audit carried out by the ARERA in collaboration with the Special Energy Unit and the water system of the Guardia di Finanza from 20 to 24 November 2017 at the Company's offices.

On 4 July 2019, ARERA published Resolution 253/2019/S/IDR of 25 June 2019 imposing administrative fines on Acea Ato 5, pursuant to article 2, paragraph 20, letter c) of Italian Law 481/95, for a total amount of € 955,000.00 for violations alleged in Determination DSAI/42/2018/idr. On 16 October 2019, the Company paid the entire penalty imposed on it.

On 3 October 2019 the Company filed an appeal with the Lombardy Regional Administrative Court against the aforesaid measure to have it thrown out, and to have the amount of the fine reviewed.

Moreover, following the submission of the appeal, the Company sent a specific request to the Authority asking for details of the timing of the approval procedures for the 2016-2019 tariffs, as well as the 2018-2019 update.

With regard to the appeal, as of today there is no information as to the date of the hearing, nor has a request for withdrawal been filed, pending the communication of a notice of expiry.

AGCM sanctioning measure - Proceeding PS9918

On 5 July 2018, in implementation of the resolution adopted by the Italian Competition Authority on 27 June 2018, an audit took place at the registered office of the Company following the initiation of the proceeding pursuant to art. 27, para. 3 of Italian Legislative Decree no. 206 of 2005, as well as pursuant to art. 6 of the 'Regulation on preliminary investigations concerning misleading and comparative advertising, unfair trade practices, violations of consumer rights in contracts, unfair terms' (hereinafter Regulation). The proceedings were opened in response to reports made to the Authority by the Consumer Associations CO.DI.CI. and Federconsumatori Frosinone regarding alleged incorrect and aggressive behaviour towards consumers and small businesses by Acea Ato 5 SpA in the period January 2015 - June 2018.

On 10 January 2019 a hearing was held at the AGCM – in response to a formal request formulated at the same time as the requests for information referred to in the provision of objective extension of the proceeding. During the aforementioned hearing, the Company highlighted the constant attention it had shown its consumers, implementing for this purpose a series of measures and improvements in the procedures concerning the management of the activities disputed by the Authority. Reaffirming what has already been fully explained in the feedback sent to the Authority, the Company provided further information and documentation regarding the activities implemented (collaboration with the OTUC, opening of the consumer counter, activities aimed at solving historical arrears) in a perspective of constant attention to consumer issues.

On 20 February 2019, the AGCM, with regard to the PS/9918 proceeding, announced that it had extended the deadline for the conclusion of the proceeding to 23 May 2019.

On 28 February 2019 the AGCM announced that it had extended the deadline for the conclusion of the preliminary phase of procedure PS/9918 – set at 20 March 2019 – with the simultaneous clarification of the high charges against the Company. In particular, the Authority abandoned some of the initial disputes, confirming instead that it had detected some critical issues concerning: (i) initiation of collection procedures pending complaint for the period prior to the corporate procedure of 2018; (ii) consumption limitations, for the period prior to the change made in January 2019 to the procedure implemented by the Company with regard to the limitation period; (iii) management of hidden water losses. On 20 March 2019 the Company filed a defence brief and supporting documentation.

On 4 July 2019, the Authority notified the Company of the sanctioning measure with a pecuniary administrative sanction totalling € 1.0 million was imposed. The Company made a specific addition to the financial statements. On 3 October 2019 the Company filed an appeal with the Lazio Regional Administrative Court – registered under docket no. RG 12290/2019 section I – against the aforesaid sanctioning measure, requesting its cancellation with precautionary suspension. In the Chamber of Council of 6 November 2019 to discuss the request for precautionary suspension, the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio issued Order no. 7223 with which it rejected the application for precautionary suspension.

The decision of the Regional Administrative Court does not address the individual grounds of the appeal, which will only be ruled on at the hearing, yet to be scheduled. In particular, according to the administrative judge "with regard to the extent of the financial penalty imposed and the feared consequences on the business activity, it does not appear to be extremely serious and urgent as per art. 119, paragraph 4 of the Italian Criminal Code for the granting of the requested precautionary protection, also taking into account the fact that the claimant company is in any case entitled to file a request for payment in instalments".

In view of the aforesaid decision, since the Company has the power to do so, on 3 December 2019 the Company submitted to the Authority a request for payment in instalments, which the Authority accepted on 21 January 2020. A hearing on the merits has yet to be scheduled.

Criminal proceeding no. 2031/2016

With regard to criminal proceeding no. 2031/2016 concerning the financial years 2015, 2016 and 2017, on 4 January 2019 the current Chairman of the Company was served with an invitation to appear in person subject to investigation and information of guarantee for alleged offences attributable to false financial statements and false corporate communications. This measure also affected the Chairmen of the Company and the representatives of the control bodies in office in those financial years. Investigations are still ongoing.

See also the additional information contained in the paragraph "Information on services under concession" and with reference to the proceedings Italian legislative decree no. 231/2001 in the paragraph of this "Report on Major Risks and Uncertainties". Moreover, with reference to additional complex cases related to legal controversies, filed or being filed, between Acea Ato 5 and the Environmental Authority, see the "Update on primary legal controversies" paragraph of this document.

Notice of IRAP assessment and tax audits

On 3 January 2019 notice was served by the Revenue Agency - Dir. Prov. of Frosinone - Audit Office of a notice of assessment for IRAP for the year 2013. The Company has lodged an appeal. On 3 July 2019, a hearing was held at the Frosinone Tax Commission. On 23 October 2019 sentence no. 475/1/2019 was filed by the Provincial Tax Commission of Frosinone rejecting the appeal filed by the Company against the administrative fine imposed by the Revenue Agency for violations ascertained by the Guardia di Finanza for 2013.

It is the intention of the Company to challenge the aforementioned judgement and to lodge an appeal before the Regional Tax Commission.

The deadline for this action is six months from the date of filing of the judgement, therefore 23 April 2020.

During 2019, the Italian Tax Police also continued its audit of income taxes for the years 2014 to 2018.

On 31 December 2019 the parent company Acea SpA and the subsidiary Acea Ato 5 were served by the Inland Revenue – Dir. Prov. of Frosinone - Audit Office - of two notices of assessment for IRES for 2013 and 2014.

These notices of assessment are a consequence of the findings of the tax assessment reports drawn up on 25 October 2018 (mentioned above) and on 30 October 2019, in which the auditors of the Guardia di Finanza found:

• for the tax year 2013:

1. undue decrease in income of € 10,703,757;
2. positive income components not recorded and not declared for € 829,552;
3. negative income elements unduly deducted for € 1,559,616.

With this tax assessment report, the points mentioned in numbers 2. and 3. are resolved, given that the critical points noted in the report and initially ascribed to the tax year 2013 had an impact on subsequent years;

• for the tax year 2014:
• positive undeclared income components of € 18,800,000.

The Company appealed against these sanctions before the Provincial Tax Commission of Frosinone on 28 February 2020. Supported by the opinion of its tax advisors, the Company believes that there is a risk of losing the case in the "remote" tax proceedings.

With regard to the remaining findings relating to the 2015-2018 financial years, contested with the PVC of 30 October 2019 and against which no notice of assessment has been served to date, the Company, supported by its tax advisors, has made the necessary assessments regarding the related risk and has set aside a provision for tax risks.

The Company operates in Ato 1 Calore Irpino which promotes and develops the initiative for the Management of the Integrated Water Service in Municipalities in the Province of Avellino and Benevento. Currently, the Authority – governed by the Extraordinary Commissioner referred to in DGR no. 813/2012 and merged into the regional EIC at the end of 2018 – has not yet assigned the management of the Integrated Water Service (aqueduct, sewerage and treatment) to a single operator. Gesesa manages the Integrated Water Service in 22 Municipalities in the province of Benevento for a total resident population of about 123,000 inhabitants spread over an area of about 710 square kilometres with a water infrastructure of about 1,541 km, a sewerage network of 553 km and about 300 plants managed. The total number of user accounts amounts to about 57,000, for which 2019 consumption has been estimated at about 8 million cubic metres of water.

The sewerage service is provided to approximately 80% of users while the purification service reaches about 40% of users.

During 2019, the Company began to establish the foundations consistent with the resolutions of the Board for a new path of growth and development aimed at achieving strategic objectives that provide for company growth. In this regard, a capital increase operation was already approved to aggregate new operations with the direct assignment of the Integrated Water Service by new Municipalities, using an instrument that is given by the regulatory provisions contained in Italian Legislative Decree 175/2016 containing the "Consolidated Law on companies in which the public administration participates". Art. 4 of the aforementioned regulation allows Municipalities to acquire company shareholdings in activities producing a service of general interest, subject to the body's verification of the economic convenience of the direct or externalised management of the service entrusted to private operators.

This gives the Company the opportunity to proceed with new acquisitions of IWS and therefore to continue its development in the territory falling under Ato 1, pending the identification of the single operator, implementing a management development that, upon reaching at least 25% of the population served, would establish the Company as an interlocutor able to request the direct awarding of the entire territory as Sole Manager.

With regard to the bi-annual updating of the 2018-2019 tariffs, the activity was conditioned by the taking over of the Ente Idrico Campano (hereinafter EIC) in the legal relations established by the Calore Irpino Area Governing Body as from 1 October 2018.

The Company prepared the 2016 and 2017 financial statements as well as the Works Programme for the preparation of the proposed tariff revision with the definition of the VRGs and Thetas for the years 2018-2019, reviewing the investment planning for the years 2018-2019, also taking into account the results of the audit of 16-20 October 2017 contained in ARERA determination no. DSAI/26/2018/IDR of 10 April 2018 concerning the initiation of proceedings for the adoption of sanctions and prescriptive measures concerning the tariff regulation of the Integrated Water Service.

At present, the 2018-2019 tariff proposal submitted on 22 May 2019 is in the process of being approved by the EIC and will subsequently be sent to ARERA for ratification.

As a result of the above, revenues were recognised on the basis of the VRG currently being approved by the EIC.

The management agreement, which came into force on 1 January 2002 with a twenty-year duration, was signed on 20 December 2001. On the basis of this agreement, the Manager receives in exclusive custody the integrated water service of the Ato 3 made up of all the public services for the collection, supply and distribution of water for domestic uses, sewerage and wastewater treatment. The Area includes 49 Municipalities, of which 6 managed via agreements inherited from the previous operator, Fiorentinagas. In return for awarding the concession, the Operator pays a fee to all the Municipalities, including accumulated liabilities incurred prior to the awarding of the related contracts.

With regard to the new tariff structure, with resolution no. 29/2016 of 5 October 2016 the AIT approved the tariffs for the second 2016-2019 regulatory period (MTI-2) pursuant to the ARERA resolution no. 664/2015. With resolution 687/2017R/idr ARERA approved the tariffs proposed by the Tuscany Water Authority on 12 October 2017. Following the approval of the new tariff structure envisaged by the ARERA Resolution no. 665/2017/R/idr (TICSI), Publiacqua has billed according to the new structure since August. Finally, with resolution no. 24 of 7 December 2018 the AGB approved the 2018-2019 tariffs. At the same time it approved the extension of the Company's concession until 2024, the Company began a market survey with the main financial institutions, aimed at verifying the availability and economic conditions to proceed with the disbursement of a medium/long-term bank loan aimed in part at extinguishing existing financial exposures and in part at supporting the investments provided for in the new approved Intervention Plan. On 18 June 2019 the banks were invited to submit a binding offer on the basis of a term sheet. Following the offers received, on 31 July 2019 the Company signed the new loan for € 140.0 million divided among five lending banks. The Base Line must be used for the full repayment of the existing Loan stipulated on 30 March 2016 with BNL and Banca Intesa for the payment of the ancillary costs of the new Loan and for the requirements related to the realisation of the investments envisaged in the EFP, while the Investment Line will be used to fully cover the requirements for further investments envisaged in the EFP. Among the conditions precedent to the disbursement of the loan, the lending banks have requested ARERA's approval of the new Tariff Plan, including the extension of the concession.

On 26 November 2007 Acea was definitively awarded the tender called by the Area Authority of Perugia Ato 1 for selection of the minority private business partner of Umbra Acque SpA (concession expiry 31 December 2027). A stake in the company (40% of the shares) was acquired on 1 January 2008.

The company performed its activities in all 38 Municipalities constituting Atos 1 and 2.

The tariff applied to users for the year 2019 is the rate applied to users was determined by Resolution No. 489 2018/R/idr of 27 September 2018 with which ARERA approved the updating of tariff arrangements for the two-year period 2018-2019, previously proposed by the Assembly of Mayors of the AURI with Resolution no. 9 of 27 July 2018. Finally, we inform you that on 29 December 2018 the request to extend the duration of the assignment to 31 December 2031 pursuant to art. 5.2 and 5.3 of the Convention and Resolution 656/2015/R/IDR.