On July 20, 2026, Mexico’s Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) published an Agreement in the Official Gazette of the Federation (DOF) that redefines the administrative treatment of mining projects located in federally regulated Protected Natural Areas (ANPs). The measure represents one of the most significant regulatory shifts for the sector in recent years, establishing mandatory criteria for environmental authorities and substantially restricting the possibility of obtaining authorizations for mining activities in these zones.
The Agreement, signed on July 10, 2026 and in effect as of the business day following its publication, instructs SEMARNAT’s various administrative units — including the General Directorate of Environmental Impact and Risk (DGIRA), federal delegations, and decentralized bodies — on how to resolve applications related to mining projects within ANPs. Its legal basis stems from recent case law issued by Mexico’s Supreme Court of Justice (SCJN) in response to challenges brought against the 2023 mining-environmental reform.
In those rulings, the SCJN confirmed that the new provisions applicable to the sector do not violate the principle of non-retroactivity, and reiterated that environmental impact authorization constitutes a procedure independent from the mining concession itself. Accordingly, holding a previously granted concession does not, in itself, create a vested right to carry out extractive activities where current environmental regulations impose new restrictions.
Key implications of the Agreement
The new administrative criterion instructs SEMARNAT to deny authorizations, permits, licenses, and registrations related to mining works or activities within federal Protected Natural Areas, including Environmental Impact Statements (MIAs). This directive applies even to projects whose mining concessions were granted before the May 8, 2023 reform took effect, reinforcing the position that rights derived from a concession do not take precedence over current environmental obligations.
Another significant aspect is the binding nature now given to technical opinions issued by the National Commission for Protected Natural Areas (CONANP). Under this Agreement, such opinions cease to be merely advisory and become determinative within the environmental review process, narrowing the environmental authority’s discretion whenever an impact on an ANP is identified.
Moreover, the scope of these restrictions is not limited to projects physically located within a protected area. Developments situated outside the boundaries of an ANP may also be affected where there is a possibility of indirect environmental impacts on these zones. The Agreement likewise expressly prohibits authorizing the final disposal of mining and metallurgical waste in Protected Natural Areas, wetlands, riverbeds, and other environmentally sensitive federal zones.
Transitional regime and new obligations
The Agreement introduces a transitional provision requiring immediate compliance for certain mining projects. Holders of environmental impact authorizations granted before May 8, 2023 for works located within ANPs must, within a non-extendable 15-business-day period, initiate proceedings under the Mine Restoration, Closure and Post-Closure Program set out in Article 107 Bis of the General Law on Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection (LGEEPA), together with the corresponding financial guarantee.
Importantly, this provision does not entail the automatic revocation of previously issued authorizations. Its purpose is to require that projects be brought into line with the new regulatory framework; it is sufficient, within the stated deadline, to demonstrate the formal commencement of the administrative procedure, even if a final resolution is issued at a later date.
Considerations for the mining sector
Given this new regulatory landscape, companies are advised to conduct an immediate review of their current environmental authorizations, verifying their projects’ location relative to Protected Natural Areas and assessing potential effects arising from proximity or indirect impacts. Likewise, projects subject to the transitional regime should promptly initiate the Restoration, Closure and Post-Closure Program process to avoid administrative contingencies.
Finally, in cases where application of the Agreement could result in disproportionate effects on previously vested rights, it may be advisable to assess the viability of pursuing applicable constitutional remedies — particularly amparo indirecto — depending on the specific circumstances of each project.
