Key data
| Regulation | Resolution of May 22, 2026, from the Directorate General of Energy Policy and Mines |
|---|---|
| Publication | June 10, 2026 |
| Effective date | June 10, 2026 |
| Developer | Falck Renewables Power 3, SL |
| Canceled project | Photovoltaic solar park "El Espino of 121.5 MWp/100 MWn" |
| Location | Velilla de San Antonio and Loeches (Madrid) |
| Start of processing | December 2020 |
| Reason for withdrawal | Unfavorable environmental impact declaration (June 2024) |
| Legal basis for withdrawal | Article 94 of Law 39/2015 |
| Category | Energy |
| Main affected parties | Renewable energy developers, photovoltaic investors, municipalities of Velilla de San Antonio and Loeches |
A 121.5 MW photovoltaic project initiated in December 2020 has just been canceled without obtaining authorization. Falck Renewables Power 3, SL submitted in March 2026 the formal withdrawal of its application for prior administrative authorization for the "El Espino" solar park, located in the Madrid municipalities of Velilla de San Antonio and Loeches. The Resolution of May 22, 2026, from the Directorate General of Energy Policy and Mines, accepts this withdrawal and definitively closes the file.
The trigger was the unfavorable environmental impact declaration issued in June 2024 by the Directorate General of Quality and Environmental Assessment, which concluded that the project would cause significant adverse impacts without sufficient corrective measures to offset them. From that moment on, the project's viability was blocked.
What does this regulation establish?
The resolution formally accepts the withdrawal submitted by Falck Renewables Power 3, SL under article 94 of Law 39/2015, on Common Administrative Procedure. This implies:
- Definitive filing of the file for prior administrative authorization of the photovoltaic solar park "El Espino of 121.5 MWp/100 MWn" and its associated evacuation infrastructure.
- Release of grid access and connection permits associated with the project.
- Closure of the procedure initiated in December 2020 before the Directorate General of Energy Policy and Mines.
The project affected the municipal areas of Velilla de San Antonio and Loeches, in the Community of Madrid. The unfavorable environmental impact declaration, issued in June 2024 by the Directorate General of Quality and Environmental Assessment, was the determining factor: without a favorable EIA, it is not possible to continue with the processing of prior administrative authorization in projects of this nature.
Economic and operational impact
This case concentrates several risks that any photovoltaic developer or investor must consider:
- Timeline risk: The project was in processing for more than five years (December 2020 to March 2026) without obtaining authorization. The costs of development, technical studies, environmental assessments and administrative management accumulated during that period are unrecoverable.
- Environmental risk as a definitive blocker: An unfavorable environmental impact declaration is not an obstacle that can be overcome with minor corrective measures. In this case, the DGA concluded that there were no sufficient corrective measures, leaving the developer with no room for action.
- Release of access and connection permits: The network nodes reserved for this project become available. This may represent an opportunity for other developers seeking connection points in the Madrid area.
- Market signal: The cancellation of a 121.5 MW project in an autonomous community with high energy demand like Madrid shows that land availability and environmental sensitivity of the area are real barriers, not just formal ones.
Who does it affect?
- Renewable energy developers with large-scale photovoltaic projects in processing, especially in areas with environmental restrictions.
- Investors and funds with positions in photovoltaic projects in Spain that have not yet obtained a favorable EIA.
- Advisors and consultants for renewable project development who manage authorization portfolios.
- Municipalities of Velilla de San Antonio and Loeches, which see a power generation project canceled in their territory.
- Other developers interested in connection nodes in Madrid, who now have access and connection permits released by this withdrawal.
Practical example
Imagine you are the development director of a renewable energy development company with an 80 MW photovoltaic project in processing in a peri-urban area of Madrid. Your project has been in environmental assessment for three years and you still don't have an EIA.
The case of "El Espino" tells you the following: if the Directorate General of Quality and Environmental Assessment concludes that your project causes significant adverse impacts without sufficient corrective measures, you will receive an unfavorable EIA that will block any progress in prior administrative authorization. In that scenario, withdrawal—as Falck Renewables Power 3, SL did in March 2026 for a 121.5 MWp project—may be the only way out, with all development costs already incurred with no possibility of recovery.
The operational lesson is clear: environmental assessment is not a parallel procedure, it is the condition for project viability. Anticipating environmental risks before committing significant development resources is the most profitable decision.
What should companies do now?
- Review the environmental status of each project in portfolio: Identify which projects have pending EIA and assess the risk of an unfavorable resolution before committing more development resources.
- Analyze whether the released access and connection permits are usable: The cancellation of "El Espino" releases network nodes in the area of Velilla de San Antonio and Loeches (Madrid). If you have projects in that area, consult with the network operator about the availability of those connection points.
- Strengthen the prior environmental due diligence phase: Before starting formal processing, conduct environmental feasibility studies that anticipate the criteria that the Directorate General of Quality and Environmental Assessment will apply.
- Review development contracts with investors: Ensure that investment agreements explicitly address the risk of unfavorable EIA and exit mechanisms in that scenario.
- Document the processing history of canceled projects: In case of claims or audits, having the complete file from the beginning (in this case, from December 2020) is essential to demonstrate due diligence.
Frequently asked questions
Why was the El Espino solar park in Madrid canceled?
The direct cause was the unfavorable environmental impact declaration issued in June 2024 by the Directorate General of Quality and Environmental Assessment, which concluded that the project would cause significant adverse impacts without sufficient corrective measures. Faced with this situation, Falck Renewables Power 3, SL submitted the withdrawal in March 2026, which was accepted by resolution of May 22, 2026.
What happens to the access and connection permits of the El Espino park after cancellation?
The resolution expressly establishes the release of the access and connection permits associated with the project. This means that the network nodes reserved for "El Espino" in Velilla de San Antonio and Loeches become available for other developers who may request them.
How long was the El Espino solar park in processing before being canceled?
The project was in processing for more than five years: the application for prior administrative authorization was initiated in December 2020 and the withdrawal was submitted in March 2026, being accepted on May 22, 2026 and published on June 10, 2026.
What does an unfavorable environmental impact declaration mean for a photovoltaic project?
An unfavorable EIA blocks the processing of prior administrative authorization. In the case of "El Espino", the Directorate General of Quality and Environmental Assessment concluded in June 2024 that the project would cause significant adverse impacts without sufficient corrective measures, leaving the developer with no possibility to continue with the procedure.
What legal basis did Falck Renewables use to submit the withdrawal?
The withdrawal was submitted under article 94 of Law 39/2015, on Common Administrative Procedure of Public Administrations, which regulates the right of the interested party to withdraw from their application at any time during the procedure.
Official source
Consult complete regulation in official source
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-2026-12601