Company defends running ventanas at Environmental Court
Again the state company and the Super faced off in court. Codelco maintains Complaint against Ventanas is wrong, inaccurate and ambiguous.
After the Environmental Tribunal (TA) dismissed the request for closure from Codelco, Ventanas by the Superintendence of the Environment (SMA) in the day yesterday, the copper producer and regulator lived another meeting on environmental justice, now to define the merits: should Codelco submit Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for two areas requested by the SMA?.
What is the conflict?
The Super says that Ventanas Foundry belonging to Codelco must submit EIA for two storage areas, sites specifically called “Dump Sector” and “Industry Security Deposit”. As alleged by Codelco in its appeal against the SMA, the requirement is imprecise, ambiguous and worked by officials in the state during the healing process raised by the regulatory statements are misinterpreted.
“In any way should anything environmentally assessed is meant by such modifications, operations or work performed”, says Gonzalo Cubillos, state company’s attorney. Codelco holds that are works that are in operation since 1964 and 1991, which would exempt the copper company to submit an EIA to “cover” their changes in these operations. According to what Codelco established, the law provides that the SEIA will govern only as of the date on which the regulation is issued, which occurred only in April 1997.
“So it seems wrong that these works have been environmentally assessed because unfortunately this is the will expressed by the SMA. As we found a nonsense requirement raised and try to find a way to take charge, “Cubillos argued. According to Codelco, the increase in the operating surface scum sector – would have increased from 7.9 hectares to 15 hectares, occurred gradually and was referred to within the operation of the project at the time was reported to SERNAGEOMIN. He also argued that one cannot question the management in this Ventanas sector.
On the other side, the SMA said that both sectors challenged in Ventanas must inevitably enter a EIA into the system. Additionally, the Super stresses that in the case against Codelco the rules of due process were not violated, and motivation was preventive and corrective. According to the provisions of the regulator, the law protects their actions, which was never developed by surprise, as he even manifest Codelco’s CEO, Thomas Keller.
“The income requirement was as of December 2013 and the audits were in May (…) So it was no surprise” sets Emanuel Ibarra, SMA’s Lawyer. Finally the regulator was emphatic in stating that Ventanas, by changing their management process in 2004 to meet the requirements of mining safety regulations, must submit for casting environmental assessment.
Source:Pulso
