FantasticSearch

Principles to be complied with when granting a derogation referred to in Article 15(5) Derogations provided in accordance with Article 15(5) shall respect the following principles: 1. Costs 1.1. Costs referred to in Article 15(5) shall be the costs of complying with the emission levels associated with best available techniques and include both capital costs and operating costs. Wider social or economic costs shall not be included.

1.2. The evaluation of the costs shall be quantitative, and supported by a qualitative assessment.

1.3. Costs taken into account in the evaluation shall:

(a) represent net value costs, after deduction of any financial benefits from applying best available techniques;

(b) include the cost of accessing financial capital required to finance the best available techniques;

(c) be calculated using a discount rate to take account of differences in monetary value over time.

1.4. The application for a derogation shall clearly identify the source of the costs and the methods used to calculate them, including the discount rate mentioned in point 1.3(c) and the estimation of uncertainties associated with the costs evaluation.

1.5. Costs evaluated by the operator shall be assessed by the competent authority, based on information from other sources such as technology providers, peer-reviewed research, expert judgements or data from other installations where best available techniques were recently installed.

2. Environmental benefits 2.1. Environmental benefits referred to in Article 15(6) shall be environmental benefits of complying with the emission levels associated with best available techniques.

2.2. The evaluation of environmental benefits shall be quantitative (in monetary terms) and supported by a qualitative assessment. Established pollutant damage costs shall be used where available.

2.3. The evaluation of environmental benefits shall consider a discount rate applied to any monetised benefits which addresses differences in value to society over time.

2.4. The application for a derogation shall clearly identify the source of the environmental benefits information and the methods used to calculate the environmental benefits, including the discount rate mentioned in point 1.3(c) and the estimate of uncertainties associated with the evaluation of the environmental benefits.

2.5. Environmental benefits evaluated by the operator shall be assessed by the competent authority, based on expert judgement or data from other installations where the best available techniques were recently installed.

3. Disproportionality of costs compared to environmental benefits 3.1. For the purpose of determining if there is a disproportionality, the costs of complying with the emission levels associated with best available techniques, and the benefits of such compliance, shall be compared.

3.2. The comparison mechanism shall include the following elements:

(a) a method to address uncertainties in evaluating costs and environmental benefits;

(b) a specification of the margin by which the costs should exceed the environmental benefits.