Assessment by the Board of Directors regardind the status of the USW Campania Projects at March 31, 2014

As shown by the intricacy of the information presented above, the overall picture in terms of the status of the Impregilo Group with respect to the USW Campania Projects at March 31, 2014 continues to be extremely complex and uncertain.

The recent rulings by the administrative courts regarding the claims put forth for the costs of the RDF facilities that had not been amortized when the service contracts were cancelled (December 15, 2005), as discussed earlier in this Report, are positive and extremely important factors, because they support the Group’s arguments regarding the correctness of its conduct and the resulting assessments made to date.

At the end of March 2014, the Naples Public Prosecutor appealed the decision by which the Court of Naples acquitted of all charges both the individuals and the companies involved “because no crime was committed.” However, the Group is of the opinion that the detailed rationale provided for this decision, filed on February 1, 2014, in which the judges state: “The disastrous attempt to dispose of waste in Campania was not the consequence of either unlawful conduct by the defendants or lack of technical suitability or poor management of the facilities” and also “the source of the problem was not the facilities but the fact that the waste cycle, as organically and efficiently designed, had not been properly implemented, due to the absence of a separate waste collection system, in the initial phase, and because the waste-to-energy facilities of Acerrra and Santa Maria La Fossa had not been built, in the final phase,” fully supports the belief, with which the Company’s counsel wholly concurs, that future developments of these proceedings and of proceedings pending in other venues (administrative, criminal and civil) will prove that the Group acted properly. Taking also into account the recent rulings handed down by the administrative judges regarding the areas in the municipality of Giuliano, which are still pending with regard to merit and for which the risk of an unfavorable outcome was assessed, with the support of the counsel assisting FIBE in the various disputes, as being in the realm of mere possibility, at this time, an accurate timing for the end of the various pending proceedings cannot be reasonably determined.

In view of the complexity and development of the different disputes described in detail in the preceding paragraphs, the possibility that future events, unforeseeable at this point, could occur requiring changes to the assessments made thus far cannot be excluded.