Deal #805

Location #1

Spatial accuracy level
Coordinates
Location
Toledo, Norte de Santander, Colombia - Cubará, Boyacá, Colombia

Latitude
7.0421
Longitude
-72.1965
Facility name
Siriri
Target country
Colombia
Contract area
Area in operation
Comment on location
The exploration block is located both in the Municipalities of Toledo (Norte de Santander) and Cubará (Boyacá). The size of the block for EXPLORATION is 41821.68404 hectares. 14860.40684 are in current extraction (According to official data from the ANH)

Land area

Size under contract (leased or purchased area, in ha)
[2019-02, current] 14860
Comment on land area
The current distribution and the polygon of the area were found in the Agencia Nacional de Hidrocarburos, the colombian institute in charge of the Mining Projects in Colombia. I downloaded the data from http://www.anh.gov.co/Asignacion-de-areas/Paginas/Mapa-de-tierras.aspx

Intention of investment

Intention of investment
[current] Oil / Gas extraction (14860 ha)
Comment on intention of investment
Oil/Gas - Just 14860 under extraction, the rest is still in exploration.

Nature of the deal

Nature of the deal
Exploitation permit / license / concession (for mineral resources)
Comment on nature of the deal
Thomas Siron: There is no land rights transfer but the state authorize an enterprise to explore and exploit the subsoil in an indigenous reserve ("resguardo"). / There was an update in the contract on October 20, 2006. The government allowed the exploration for 6 years and afterwards the company will have the permission to exploit the field until it is economically possible. Source: http://www.bvc.com.co/recursos/emisores/especiales/2007/EmisionesPrimarias2007/EopetrolEmisionPrimaria2007/Prospecto_Ecopetrol.pdf - Page 125

Negotiation status

Negotiation status
[2006-10-20] Concluded (Contract signed)
Comment on negotiation status
Before the exploitation, according to the Constitution and OIT Convention 169, the State has to consult indigenous people who live in the affected area. In this case, U'Wa people refused the exploitation (one organization expressed it during the consulting process and other organization refused to participate in the process) but in 2006, the State Council decided that the project could go forward. I couldn't find recent informations about the state of the project.

Implementation status

Implementation status
[current] In operation (production)
Comment on implementation status
Before the exploitation, according to the Constitution and OIT Convention 169, the State has to consult indigenous people who live in the affected area. In this case, U'Wa people refused the exploitation (one organization expressed it during the consulting process and other organization refused to participate in the process) but in 2006, the State Council decided that the project could go forward. I couldn't find recent informations about the state of the project. According to the ANH in 2017 there was 14860 Has under oil extraction. See excel file in the sources. The extraction of Gas was possible in 2009 and they were extracting 30 Milliong of cubic feets per day. (https://www.portafolio.co/economia/finanzas/pozo-gibraltar-resulto-reserva-gas-condensado-petroleo-451834)

Contract #1

Contract date
2006-10-20
Comment on contract
Contract for exploration in SIRIRI oil block. The company could exploit the field after 6 years until it is not economically anymore.

Number of total jobs created

Jobs created (total)
Yes
Planned number of jobs (total)
290
Current number of jobs (total)
[2008-12-02] 290
Comment on jobs created (total)
Source: https://beta.landmatrix.org/media/uploads/portafoliocoeconomiafinanzasu-was-piden-nueva-york-veto-ecopetrol-158760.pdf

Number of domestic jobs created

Jobs created (domestic)
Yes
Planned number of jobs (domestic)
290
Planned employees (domestic)
290
Current number of jobs (domestic)
[2008-12-02] 290
Comment on jobs created (domestic)
Source: https://beta.landmatrix.org/media/uploads/portafoliocoeconomiafinanzasu-was-piden-nueva-york-veto-ecopetrol-158760.pdf

Operating company

Comment on investment chain
Ecopetrol explotes the Siriri block at 100%. The Siriri block had been given in concession to the Occidental Petroleum Company INC, Oxy. But, which entered in conflict with the U'Wa people too, and the concession was transfered to Ecopetrol in 2002. / For this specific case they had a contract with REPSOL to share risks. Previous to the presence of ECOPETROL, Dutch Shell and Occidental Petroleum were in charge of this block.

 

Network of parent companies and tertiary investors/lenders. Please right-click the nodes to get more details.

Legend
  • Is parent company of
  • Is tertiary investor/lender of
  • Left-click to reveal related parent companies and tertiary investors/lenders.
  • Right-click on investors to get more information.
  • Left-click to hide related parent companies and tertiary investors/lenders.

Data source #1

Data source type
Media report
File
Date
2006-01-01

Data source #2

Data source type
Personal information
Includes in-country-verified information
Yes

Data source #3

Data source type
Media report
File
Date
2007-01-08

Data source #4

Data source type
Media report
File
Date
2010-01-01

Data source #5

Data source type
Media report
File
Date
2003-12-31

Data source #6

Data source type
Media report
File

Data source #7

Data source type
Media report
File

Data source #8

Data source type
Government sources
File
Publication title
listado areas_170217
Date
2017-02-17
Comment on data source
Official list of mining project. There you could also find geographical information.

Data source #9

Data source type
Research Paper / Policy Report
File
Publication title
The Guardians of Mother Earth
Date
2016-05-02
Includes in-country-verified information
Yes

Data source #10

Data source type
Media report
File
Publication title
U’WA DETERMINED TO RESIST NEW OIL DRILLING PLANS

Data source #11

Data source type
Other (Please specify in comment field)
File
Date
2018-09-17
Comment on data source
Official statement from the Indigenous community

Data source #12

Data source type
Government sources
File
Publication title
Colombia - U'wa
Date
2015-06-19

Data source #13

Data source type
Media report
File
Publication title
Pozo Gibraltar 3 resultó ser una reserva de gas y 'condensado', no de petróleo
Date
2009-05-05
Includes in-country-verified information
Yes

Data source #14

Data source type
Company sources
File
Publication title
PROSPECTO DE INFORMACIÓN CONSTITUTIVO DEL PROGRAMA DE EMISIÓN Y COLOCACIÓN DE ACCIONES DE ECOPETROL
Date
2007-08
Comment on data source
Report on stock opening of ECOPETROL

Names of communities / indigenous peoples affected

Comment on communities / indigenous peoples affected
An indigenous community of 6000 members has been affected since the 90s due to interest of different companies on their territories for oil extraction. In 2004 ECOPETROL has tried to contact the communities to discuss the exploration on their territories or close to them. The group refuses to participate, since they argue that just the fact of participating will be used by the company and the government as a form of consultation. Source:https://beta.landmatrix.org/media/uploads/argentinaindymediaorgnews200612474178php.pdf https://beta.landmatrix.org/media/uploads/portafoliocoeconomiafinanzasu-was-piden-nueva-york-veto-ecopetrol-158760.pdf

Recognitions status of community land tenure

Recognition status of community land tenure
Indigenous Peoples traditional or customary rights recognized by government
Comment on recognitions status of community land tenure
See source number 11 for more details. On the header.

Consultation of local community

Community consultation
Limited consultation
Comment on consultation of local community
The company tried to reach the communities, but they refuse to participate in any discussions regarding oil extraction on their territories. https://beta.landmatrix.org/media/uploads/argentinaindymediaorgnews200612474178php.pdf

How did the community react?

Community reaction
Rejection

Negative impacts for local communities

Negative impacts for local communities
Environmental degradation
Violence
Comment on negative impacts for local communities
There is a pipeline through their territory. It has been attacked many times by the FARC and ELN, causing environmental disasters. Oil has ended up in the rivers, the fauna has diminished and the water sources have dried. Source: https://intercontinentalcry.org/the-guardians-of-mother-earth/ https://beta.landmatrix.org/media/uploads/portafoliocoeconomiafinanzasu-was-piden-nueva-york-veto-ecopetrol-158760.pdf

Promised benefits for local communities

Promised benefits for local communities
Roads

Presence of organizations and actions taken (e.g. farmer organizations, NGOs, etc.)

Presence of organizations and actions taken (e.g. farmer organizations, NGOs, etc.)
Amazon Watch https://beta.landmatrix.org/media/uploads/portafoliocoeconomiafinanzasu-was-piden-nueva-york-veto-ecopetrol-158760.pdf

Former land owner (not by constitution)

Former land owner
Other
Comment on former land owner
Explored by Occidental Petroleum and Dutch Shell

Former land use

Former land use
Smallholder agriculture
Forestry
Conservation
Other

Former land cover

Former land cover
Cropland
Forest land

Detailed crop, animal and mineral information

Resources area
Hydrocarbons (e.g. crude oil)
Resources yield
Gas
Comment on resources
Gas - 30 Million of daily cubic feet. Source: https://www.portafolio.co/economia/finanzas/pozo-gibraltar-resulto-reserva-gas-condensado-petroleo-451834

Use of produce

Has domestic use
Yes
Has export
Yes

How much water is extracted?

Comment on how much water is extracted
ESP

Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure (VGGT)

Application of Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure (VGGT)
Partially
Comment on VGGT
Officially they have an Environmental Assesment Plan and have measured Environmental Impacts. Are following the colombian legislation, but, I am no lawyer to say if there are legal loopholes there. The government seems to be in favor. They are exploring 500 mts from the officially indigenous territories. There are ongoing legal processes.

Overall comment

Overall comment
Import of error check - Coordinator's overview comment: Multiple issues - return to & see reviewer's comments. Check second investor is Spanish Import of error check - Reviewer's overview comment: It would be necessary to find more recent news about the state of the oil exploitation project and to set it in the context of a long fight of U'Wa people for the demarcation of their territory and against the oil exploitation inside it (which became a national and international cause). There is an important controversy between indigenous and State about the process of previous consultation that as to be made before any exploitation in an indigenous territory. State tends to reduce it to an informative process while indigenous claim for their right to veto a project of exploitation. It seems that the company is already exploiting 15 thousand hectares of the field. The results were kind of disappointing. There is a legal dispute between the oil company and the indigenous group. The indigenous refuse to participate in the consultation process because they argue it will be used as a legal certification that they were consulted, without further consequences. There has been environmental issues from the attacks to the pipeline close in the area from the FARC and ELN groups. There has been a marked militarization of the area.

June 17, 2019, 5:08 p.m.

overwritten

This version

Compare with previous version

March 30, 2016, 12:55 a.m.

overwritten

Show this version

Compare with previous version

March 9, 2013, 7:07 p.m.

overwritten

Show this version

Compare with previous version

Feb. 15, 2013, 5 p.m.

active

Show this version

First version

There are no comments to this deal yet.

Add a comment

(mandatory)
(mandatory)
(mandatory)

I've read and agree to the Data Policy.