Astorga and Others vs. Environmental Assessment Service (SEA)

On December 3, 2021, the claimants filed a judicial complaint under Article 17, No. 6 of Law No. 20.600 against Resolution Exenta No. 202199101608, issued on October 20, 2021, by the Committee of Ministers. This resolution rejected an administrative complaint against Resolution Exenta No. 12 (RCA), which had granted environmental approval for the “Concesión Vial Puente Industrial” project in the Biobío Region. The claimants contended that the project failed to adequately consider risks outlined in Article 11 of Law No. 19.300, including public health (letter a), adverse effects on water and soil (letter b), disruption of human systems and customs (letter c), and impacts on cultural heritage and environmental values (letter d). They also asserted that climate change scenarios were insufficiently evaluated, particularly concerning effects on water resources, natural systems, and extreme precipitation events. The Committee of Ministers defended its decision, arguing that all observations had been reviewed and addressed. They stated that SEIA regulations do not explicitly require the consideration of climate change, but that the most adverse simulated scenarios indirectly accounted for it by addressing concerns about maximum precipitation and water flow. Additionally, they dismissed the need for indigenous consultation, stating that no culturally significant sites or indigenous resources were affected. They highlighted sufficient mitigation measures for impacts on the Los Batros wetland, including fauna relocation and horticultural compensation, while maintaining that the project complies with legal and environmental standards. On December 28, 2023, the Environmental Tribunal rejected the claimants' judicial challenge. The tribunal found the administrative process generally adequate, noting a minor procedural deviation regarding the lack of evaluation of cumulative and synergistic effects on soil, but ruled this deviation insufficient to invalidate the resolution. It confirmed that public observations concerning health risks, climate change, and wildlife were properly addressed under Law No. 19.300 and SEIA regulations. The tribunal also dismissed the need for indigenous consultation and determined there were no significant impacts on the Los Batros wetland, cultural heritage, or human activities systems. On January 17, 2024, a group of claimants filed a cassation recourse on the merits against this ruling. However, on July 29, 2024, the Supreme Court declared the recourse inadmissible due to a clear lack of legal grounds.