Key data
| Regulation | Resolution of September 25, 2026, from the Directorate General for Energy Policy and Mines |
|---|---|
| BOE Publication | November 7, 2026 |
| Effective date | November 7, 2026 |
| Affected developer | VE Sonnedix SPV Gamma, SLU |
| Denied project | Aliaga Solar II photovoltaic solar park — 80 MWp |
| Location | Almogía, province of Málaga |
| Category | Energy / Renewables |
| Year | 2026 |
An 80-megawatt peak project in Almogía (Málaga) closes its administrative path with no possibility of recovery under the current file. The DGPEM resolution, dated September 25, 2026 and published in the BOE on November 7, 2026, rejects all allegations and the appeal filed by VE Sonnedix SPV Gamma, SLU. The Aliaga Solar II case is a direct example of how the accumulation of procedural failures—documentary and grid-related—can definitively close a large-scale renewable project.
What does this resolution establish?
The resolution rejects the request for prior administrative authorization, administrative construction authorization, and declaration of public utility of the Aliaga Solar II photovoltaic solar park and its associated evacuation infrastructure. The two grounds for denial are independent and each one, by itself, would be sufficient to close the file:
- Reason 1 — Environmental filing (January 2023): The environmental impact assessment procedure was terminated and filed due to insufficient documentation. The developer did not provide the required documentation within the deadline, which caused the closure of the environmental process without a favorable resolution.
- Reason 2 — Expiration of grid permits (June 2023): Red Eléctrica declared the expiration of access and connection permits to the transmission grid. Without these valid permits, the project cannot evacuate the generated energy, making its authorization unfeasible.
Additionally, the Aliaga Solar II file had been processed jointly with Aliaga Solar I. In June 2023, both projects were separated to be resolved independently. The developer filed allegations and an appeal, but neither succeeded. The resolution definitively closes the administrative path for this project as originally proposed.
Economic and operational impact
For VE Sonnedix SPV Gamma, SLU, the denial means the loss of all investment made in project development: technical studies, administrative processing, fees, engineering work, and grid permit management. An 80 MWp project in Spain typically involves several million euros in development costs before the first shovel of earth.
From an operational perspective, the impact extends beyond the direct developer:
- The associated evacuation infrastructure, which was also part of the application, remains equally unauthorized.
- Expired access and connection permits cannot be recovered within the same file: they must be requested again, competing with other projects in the queue.
- The environmental procedure must be restarted with complete documentation, which may require one or more additional years of processing.
- The separation from Aliaga Solar I means that both projects follow independent paths, with the fate of one not conditioning the other.
Who does it affect?
- Developers of photovoltaic solar parks with projects under processing in Spain, especially in Andalusia.
- Renewable energy sector companies with access and connection permits close to expiration or with environmental files with pending documentation.
- Investors and funds with positions in special purpose vehicles (SPVs) dedicated to solar projects in the authorization phase.
- Legal and technical advisors managing renewable project portfolios and monitoring the status of grid permits and environmental deadlines.
- CFOs and business development directors at energy companies evaluating the risk of projects in their portfolio.
Practical example
Suppose a developer company has a 60 MWp solar project in Andalusia in its portfolio, processed jointly with another 50 MWp project under the same file. Both obtained access and connection permits to the transmission grid in 2021. If the environmental documentation is not completed before the competent authority files the case—as happened with Aliaga Solar II in January 2023—and moreover the grid permits expire without authorization being obtained—as happened in June 2023—the company will find itself in exactly the same situation as VE Sonnedix SPV Gamma, SLU: without authorization, without valid grid permits, and with the need to restart the entire process from scratch, including a new connection point application in a market where competition for grid nodes is very high.
What should companies do now?
- Audit the status of access and connection permits for all projects in the portfolio: verify expiration dates and whether Red Eléctrica or the corresponding grid operator has notified any risk of expiration. An expired permit is sufficient cause for denial, as this case confirms.
- Review the documentary status of each environmental file: check if there are pending documentation requirements and associated deadlines. Filing due to insufficient documentation, as happened in January 2023 with Aliaga Solar II, is irreversible within the same file.
- Evaluate the impact of separation if there are jointly processed projects: the separation of files can change the deadlines and conditions of each project independently.
- Assess the viability of restart: if a project has lost grid permits and the environmental file is archived, calculate the cost and time of a complete new process before committing further investment.
- Consult with advisors specialized in energy law to evaluate whether there are avenues for patrimonial claims or if restarting the process is the only viable option.
Frequently asked questions
Why was the Aliaga Solar II solar park denied?
For two accumulated reasons: the filing of the environmental impact assessment procedure in January 2023 due to insufficient documentation, and the expiration of access and connection permits to the transmission grid declared by Red Eléctrica in June 2023. Both are independent and each would have been sufficient for denial.
Can VE Sonnedix SPV Gamma, SLU appeal this resolution?
Not through administrative channels: the developer already filed allegations and an appeal that did not succeed. The resolution of September 25, 2026 definitively closes the administrative path. If it wishes to continue with the project, it will have to restart the process from scratch, including a new grid permit application and a new environmental procedure.
What happens to Aliaga Solar I after this resolution?
Aliaga Solar I and Aliaga Solar II were separated in June 2023 to be resolved independently. The denial of Aliaga Solar II does not directly affect the Aliaga Solar I file, which continues its own processing independently.
What risk does the expiration of grid permits pose for other solar developers?
The expiration of access and connection permits to the transmission grid is a direct cause for denial of administrative authorization, as this case confirms. Developers with permits close to expiration must act immediately: once expiration is declared by Red Eléctrica, the permit cannot be recovered within the same file and a new connection point must be requested in a market with high competition.
What documentation is mandatory to avoid filing of the environmental case?
The resolution does not detail the specific documents that were missing in the Aliaga Solar II case. What it does establish is that the procedure was filed in January 2023 due to "insufficient documentation." Developers must respond within the deadline to all requirements from the competent environmental authority: a single unanswered requirement can result in filing of the case, with the consequences illustrated by this case.
Official source
Consult full regulation at official source (BOE-A-2026-23369)
Notice: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific decisions, consult a qualified professional. Source: https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2026-23369
