Informe Jurídico sobre la Resolución N°109-2023-OEFA/TFA-SE emitida en el marco del procedimiento administrativo sancionador iniciado contra Nexa Resources Atacocha S.A.A.
Date
2024-07-31
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract
El informe detalla un procedimiento administrativo sancionador iniciado por el
OEFA contra Minera Nexa Resources Atacocha S.A.A por no cumplir con los
plazos de cierre según el Plan de Cierre de Minas vigente durante la supervisión,
a pesar de que posteriormente se extendieron esos plazos mediante una
modificación del plan antes del inicio del procedimiento. Las normas pertinentes
incluyen regulaciones sobre el cierre de minas y el derecho administrativo.
Según el análisis jurídico realizado, a pesar de ampliar la vida útil de la unidad
minera mediante la modificación del Estudio de Impacto Ambiental, la referencia
explícita en este sobre la aplicación del Plan de Cierre de Minas vigente durante
la supervisión generó la exigibilidad de cumplir con este durante dicha etapa.
Sin embargo, al inicio del procedimiento sancionador, el OEFA disponía de un
Plan de Cierre de Minas modificado que hacía inexigible la ejecución de las
actividades de cierre en el plazo establecido por el plan vigente durante la
supervisión.
En este contexto, en base a la cooperación entre las entidades competentes en
materia ambiental, la modificación del Plan de Cierre de Minas antes del inicio
del procedimiento administrativo sancionador no debió aprobarse respecto de
los componentes cuestionados por el OEFA durante la supervisión.
Pese a ello, dado que la modificación del Plan de Cierre de Minas fue aprobada
antes del inicio del procedimiento administrativo sancionador, el OEFA debió
aplicar el Principio de Retroactividad Benigna, considerando que este actúa
como una norma complementaria de tipo administrativo en blanco.
This Report outlines an administrative sanctioning procedure initiated by OEFA against Minera Nexa Resources Atacocha S.A.A for failing to meet closure deadlines as stipulated in the Mine Closure Plan during the supervision period, despite subsequently extending these deadlines through a plan amendment prior to the procedure's commencement. Relevant regulations encompass mine closure guidelines and administrative law. According to the legal analysis conducted, despite extending the operational lifespan of the mining unit via an amendment to the Environmental Impact Assessment, explicit mention therein of adhering to the Mine Closure Plan during the supervision period rendered compliance mandatory at that stage. However, at the commencement of the sanctioning procedure, OEFA possessed an amended Mine Closure Plan that rendered the execution of closure activities within the timeframe stipulated by the plan during supervision unnecessary. In this context, based on cooperation among competent environmental entities, the amendment to the Mine Closure Plan prior to the commencement of the administrative sanctioning procedure should not have been approved concerning components contested by OEFA during supervision. Nevertheless, given that the amendment to the Mine Closure Plan was approved prior to the initiation of the administrative sanctioning procedure, OEFA should have applied the Principle of Benign Retroactivity, considering it acts as a supplementary norm of administrative nature in blank.
This Report outlines an administrative sanctioning procedure initiated by OEFA against Minera Nexa Resources Atacocha S.A.A for failing to meet closure deadlines as stipulated in the Mine Closure Plan during the supervision period, despite subsequently extending these deadlines through a plan amendment prior to the procedure's commencement. Relevant regulations encompass mine closure guidelines and administrative law. According to the legal analysis conducted, despite extending the operational lifespan of the mining unit via an amendment to the Environmental Impact Assessment, explicit mention therein of adhering to the Mine Closure Plan during the supervision period rendered compliance mandatory at that stage. However, at the commencement of the sanctioning procedure, OEFA possessed an amended Mine Closure Plan that rendered the execution of closure activities within the timeframe stipulated by the plan during supervision unnecessary. In this context, based on cooperation among competent environmental entities, the amendment to the Mine Closure Plan prior to the commencement of the administrative sanctioning procedure should not have been approved concerning components contested by OEFA during supervision. Nevertheless, given that the amendment to the Mine Closure Plan was approved prior to the initiation of the administrative sanctioning procedure, OEFA should have applied the Principle of Benign Retroactivity, considering it acts as a supplementary norm of administrative nature in blank.
Description
Keywords
Control ambiental--Perú, Procedimiento administrativo--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Sanciones administrativas--Jurisprudencia--Perú, Retroactividad de las leyes--Perú
Citation
Collections
Endorsement
Review
Supplemented By
Referenced By
Creative Commons license
Except where otherwised noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess