What happens to a ready-to-build solar project if a wildfire hits the site?

A forest fire can force a review of the technical, environmental and economic conditions of a solar project, even after it has reached ready-to-build (RTB) status. In some cases, it could also make the project technically unfeasible.

While a fire does not automatically invalidate existing permits or result in project cancellation, changes to site conditions can trigger new administrative requirements and revisions to environmental and fire-protection measures. They can also affect the project’s economic viability.

Jochen Beckmann, a lawyer at Rödl Barcelona, spoke with pv magazine about the legal and administrative consequences a forest fire can have for an authorized solar project in Spain.

Once a project reaches RTB status, it typically holds preliminary administrative authorization (AAP), administrative construction authorization (AAC), an environmental impact statement (DIA) and the corresponding municipal building permit.

According to Beckmann, the situation can change substantially, however, if a forest fire affects part or all of the project site shortly before construction begins.

Such a scenario could arise, for example, from a lightning-induced fire. “Although the event is beyond the developer’s control, changes to the site’s physical and environmental conditions may require authorities to reassess some of the conditions underpinning the project’s existing authorizations,” the lawyer said.

Review of fire protection and safety requirements

Safety is among the first areas that may require reassessment. Authorization of a solar project is based on compliance with the technical and protection requirements applicable at the time of approval. If a fire substantially alters the surrounding environment, the relevant authorities may require a review of the project’s planned safety measures.

The review could affect the project’s self-protection plan (PAU), Beckmann stressed. A reassessment of site conditions may result in additional fire-protection requirements, such as wider vegetation-free safety buffers.

Additional buffer zones could reduce the area available for solar modules, potentially requiring changes to the project’s planned capacity.

Authorities could also require additional fire-protection infrastructure, including firefighting water reserves, hydrants or other specialized equipment. “These measures could increase project costs and affect the project’s original economic assumptions,” Beckmann added.

Updating the environmental assessment

The environmental impact statement (EIS) is based on the environmental conditions in place when the assessment is conducted. A forest fire can significantly alter those conditions and affect elements considered in the original analysis.

Potential consequences that could require reassessment include increased erosion risk, changes in vegetation, altered soil hydrology and impacts on the protection and mitigation measures established for the project.

Spain’s Law 21/2013 establishes monitoring and reporting obligations that are further defined in the conditions attached to each EIS. According to Beckmann, these statements typically require developers to notify the relevant authority of project modifications or significant events that could affect the environmental assessment, including natural events such as forest fires.

In such cases, environmental authorities may require a technical addendum to the environmental monitoring program (EMP). The document would assess changes caused by the fire and, where necessary, establish additional protection, monitoring or restoration measures.

These could include measures to prevent or reduce soil erosion, modifications to drainage and water discharge systems, measures to mitigate flooding and runoff risks during heavy rainfall, and monitoring of the recovery of affected areas.

Such changes can have implications beyond environmental compliance. “New technical requirements could affect project design, construction schedules and the cost of bringing the plant into operation,” Beckmann said.

Force majeure and financial guarantees

Another consideration is the legal classification of the fire and its potential implications for financial guarantees lodged for the project’s development.

A forest fire caused by lightning would generally meet the criteria for a force majeure event, according to Beckmann.

However, classification as force majeure does not automatically result in the return of financial guarantees. The issue becomes particularly relevant if additional technical, environmental or safety requirements imposed after the fire make the project economically unviable or technically impossible to execute.

In such cases, the developer would need to demonstrate a clear causal link between the fire and its inability to proceed with the project.

“Comprehensive documentation of the event and its specific impact on the project’s viability is decisive,” Beckmann said. The return of deposited guarantees could be considered only if the developer can sufficiently demonstrate that the fire and its consequences prevent the project from proceeding.

Documentation should therefore cover the cause and extent of the fire, as well as any resulting technical, environmental and economic changes to the project.