Key data
| Regulation | Resolution of 12 June 2026, from the General Directorate of Energy Policy and Mines |
|---|---|
| BOE Publication | 27 June 2026 |
| Entry into force | 27 June 2026 |
| Promoting company | Arena Green Power 20, SLU |
| Cancelled project | Wind farm «Las Américas 12» — 50.01 MW of installed capacity |
| Location | Province of Asturias |
| Connection substation | Pesoz 400 kV |
| Original application date | December 2023 |
| EIA deadline (RDL 23/2020) | 23 January 2026 |
| Legal basis for withdrawal | Article 94 of Law 39/2015 |
| Enforcement of guarantees | Not enforced (file archived) |
| Category | Energy |
A 50.01 MW project that had been under processing since December 2023 has just disappeared from Asturias's energy map. The General Directorate of Energy Policy and Mines has accepted the withdrawal of Arena Green Power 20, SLU for the wind farm «Las Américas 12», publishing the resolution in the BOE on 27 June 2026. The reason: the impossibility of obtaining a favourable environmental impact statement (EIA) before the 23 January 2026 deadline imposed by the Royal Decree-Law 23/2020.
What does this resolution establish?
The resolution from the General Directorate of Energy Policy and Mines formally accepts the withdrawal submitted by Arena Green Power 20, SLU, ending the prior administrative authorization process for the wind farm «Las Américas 12» and its associated evacuation infrastructure.
The key points of the regulatory framework that led to this situation are as follows:
- The RDL 23/2020 set a maximum deadline for renewable projects with access and connection permits to obtain a favourable EIA. For this project, that deadline expired on 23 January 2026.
- Without an EIA within the deadline, the access and connection permits at the Pesoz 400 kV substation were at risk of automatic expiration, making it impossible to continue the project.
- The company argued that the delay was attributable to the failure to issue sectoral reports by consulted public administrations, not to its own lack of diligence.
- Upon acceptance of the voluntary withdrawal in accordance with Article 94 of Law 39/2015, the file is archived without enforcement of the deposited economic guarantees.
The distinction between voluntary withdrawal and expiration due to non-compliance is critical: in the former case, the promoter can recover the guarantees; in the latter, they could be enforced. Arena Green Power chose to withdraw before expiration was declared.
Economic and operational impact
The cancellation of a 50 MW project is not a minor formality. The economic and operational implications for the promoter and the sector are significant:
- Loss of grid position: Access and connection permits at the Pesoz 400 kV substation, which are scarce and highly contested, are released. Another promoter may request them, but Arena Green Power loses them permanently for this project.
- Sunk costs: Years of processing, environmental impact studies, engineering, administrative fees and legal resources invested in the project are not recoverable, although the economic guarantees are returned.
- Reputational and financial risk: For a promoter with a project portfolio, cancelling a 50 MW asset can affect the valuation of its pipeline to investors and financiers.
- Market signal: This case shows that the slowness in issuing sectoral reports by public administrations is a systemic risk that can derail projects that are completely viable from a technical and economic standpoint.
Who does it affect?
- Developers of wind and solar farms with projects under processing in Spain, especially those with EIA deadlines approaching expiration.
- Investors and infrastructure funds with exposure to renewable assets in the development phase (greenfield).
- Legal advisors and permit consultants managing renewable project portfolios.
- CFOs and business development directors of energy companies that must provision regulatory risks in their financial models.
- Financing entities (banks, debt funds) that finance the development phase of renewable projects and need to assess the risk of permit expiration.
Practical example
Imagine you are the development director of a developer with three wind projects under processing in northern Spain, each with access and connection permits granted under RDL 23/2020. One of them has been waiting for 18 months for a sectoral report from the Ministry of Defence on aeronautical easements.
The case of «Las Américas 12» tells you exactly what can happen: if that report doesn't arrive before your EIA deadline, you face the same dilemma as Arena Green Power. You can withdraw voluntarily—as they did, recovering the guarantees but losing your grid position—or wait for the Administration to declare expiration, risking loss of the deposited economic guarantees as well.
The operational key is to anticipate: document from now that delays are attributable to the Administration (as Arena Green Power did in its submission), and assess whether it's worth requesting an extraordinary extension or initiating withdrawal before the deadline expires.
What should companies do now?
- Audit the EIA deadlines of all projects in your portfolio: Identify which ones have the RDL 23/2020 deadline approaching expiration and prioritize management of those files immediately.
- Document delays attributable to the Administration: Record with dates and receipts each pending sectoral report request. This documentation is your shield if you need to argue that the delay is not yours, as Arena Green Power did.
- Evaluate the option of voluntary withdrawal versus expiration: If a project cannot obtain the EIA within the deadline, withdrawing voluntarily under Article 94 of Law 39/2015 allows the file to be archived without enforcement of economic guarantees.
- Review the deposited economic guarantees: Quantify the amount at risk in each project and ensure that your exit strategy (withdrawal vs. expiration) is aligned with the protection of those guarantees.
- Incorporate the risk of administrative delay in your financial models: This case confirms that slowness in sectoral reports is a real and frequent risk. Provision scenarios of 12 to 24 months delay in your valuations of greenfield projects.
- Consult with specialized energy law advisors: Before making decisions on projects with tight deadlines, assess with experts the viability of administrative remedies or requests for extraordinary extensions.
Frequently asked questions
Why was the Las Américas 12 wind farm in Asturias cancelled?
Arena Green Power 20, SLU withdrew from the project because it could not obtain a favourable environmental impact statement (EIA) before the 23 January 2026 deadline required by RDL 23/2020. Without that EIA, the access and connection permits at the Pesoz 400 kV substation threatened to expire, making it impossible to continue the project.
Does Arena Green Power lose the economic guarantees by cancelling the project?
No. Upon acceptance of the voluntary withdrawal in accordance with Article 94 of Law 39/2015, the file is archived without enforcement of the deposited economic guarantees. This is the key difference between withdrawing voluntarily and waiting for the Administration to declare the file expired.
What deadline does RDL 23/2020 set for obtaining the EIA in renewable projects?
RDL 23/2020 established maximum deadlines for projects with access and connection permits to obtain a favourable environmental impact statement. For the wind farm «Las Américas 12», that deadline expired on 23 January 2026. Each project may have a different deadline depending on when its permits were granted, so it is essential to verify the specific deadline for each file.
What happens to the access and connection permits at the Pesoz 400 kV substation?
When the project is cancelled, the access and connection permits at the Pesoz 400 kV substation are released. Arena Green Power loses them permanently for this project. That grid capacity can be requested by other promoters in future allocation processes.
Can a promoter claim if the delay in the EIA was the Administration's fault?
Yes. Arena Green Power expressly argued that the delay was attributable to the failure to issue sectoral reports by consulted public administrations, not to its own lack of diligence. This argument was part of the withdrawal file. Although in this case it did not prevent the project's cancellation, documenting administrative delays is essential to protect economic guarantees and for potential claims of patrimonial liability.
Official source
Consult complete regulation in official source (BOE-A-2026-13998)
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-2026-13998