June 23, 2015
[To the Editor, Mexico Energy Intelligence]
With reference to your recent article [MEI Market Comment 074], “How The Anáhuac field got dropped from the 3rd cycle of Round One,” please find below some accuracies that we consider important to clarify in order to avoid misinforming those who are interested in participating on the 3rd invitation to bid:
On September , 2014, Minera del Norte S.A. de C.V. (Minosa) appealed before judicial courts the constitutionality of certain dispositions of the Hydrocarbons Law, specifically article 27, that regulate the Exploration and Production Contracts (E&P Contracts).
As part of the legal action mentioned (amparo trial), on November 26, 2014, the judicial court ordered the suspension of any administrative act related to the awarding of E&P Contracts over those surfaces where Minosa’s mineral concession are located. Such suspension will be in force until the amparo trial has been resolved.
Prior to this Ministry’s communication to the National Hydrocarbons Commission (CNH) of the contractual areas [or blocks] to be [included as] part of the 3rd invitation to bid on April 30, 2015, Sener [had previously] requested to the Secretariat of Economy [SE] any information available that may have informed Sener of any existing overlapping between the potentially selected contractual areas [including Anáhuac] and Minosa’s mining concessions. By official notice [date not provided], the Secretariat of Economy [had] answered that no overlapping was found.
[Based on this finding, SENER included Anáhuac field in CNH’s list of onshore fields in Round One—Ed.]-
Nevertheless, on June 10th, 2015, the Secretariat of Economy notified this Ministry [Sener] that they found that Campo Anahuac overlaps a Minosa’s mining concession, after a cartographic verification. Consequently, Sener notified CNH, so that it could remove that field from the invitation to bid.
Finally, we would like to call your attention to the following relevant points:
- The amparo trial has not been resolved yet, therefore it is not a case that will be argued before the Supreme Court yet;
- The energy policy is always set by Sener;
- In the event that the amparo [were] not favorable for Minosa (which [is the outcome that] Sener foresees), CNH may include Campo Anahuac again, as long as [the ruling] is decided before the [final] date to file proposals [for fields to be included in Round One], and
- [Meanwhile], The Secretariat of Economy has not informed Sener that other contractual areas have the same status as Campo Anahuac [that is, located in the area of a coal concession].
We would appreciate if you could publish the clarifications stated above.
Thanks in advance,
The writer is the Undersecretary of Hydrocarbons