Through Resolution 40303 of 2022 (“Resolution 40303”), the Ministry of Mines and Energy (“MME”) established the guidelines to promote the coexistence of hydrocarbons, mining and/or energy projects in cases of partial or total overlap of areas, when technically and operationally feasible.

On August 20, 2025, the MME issued Resolution 40358 (“Resolution 40358”), by which it amended Resolution 40303 as follows:

• Regarding Article 3 of Resolution 40303, on relevant definitions, the following amendments were introduced:

1. A definition of conflict of coexistence was added: the concurrence of activities, works or infrastructure of two or more projects in the same area, requiring reconciliation of socio-environmental, technical, operational or safety components.
2. The definition of operational coexistence agreement was modified, highlighting that (i) it is an agreement to resolve disputes arising from a conflict of coexistence; and (ii) the parties must reconcile private interests with the general interests of the projects.
3. The definitions of specific infrastructure, incoming project and existing project were included, clarifying the roles and rights of the projects in conflict.
4. The definition of overlapping of projects was simplified by removing the reference to the overlapping of actions, activities, works and infrastructure.

• Regarding Article 4 of Resolution 40303, on information regarding overlapping projects, the following amendments were introduced:

1. The main objective of operating the National Information System of Projects of the Mining and Energy Sector (“SNIPSME”) was removed, replacing it with the definition and identification of project overlap.
2. Whereas Resolution 40303 established that the SNIPSME would obtain information from the systems currently operating for each subsector, Resolution 40358 now provides that the National Hydrocarbons Agency (“ANH”), the National Mining Agency (“ANM”), the Mining and Energy Planning Unit (“UPME”), and the Colombian Geological Survey (“SGC”) must request project information directly from owners on a semi-annual basis.
3. Specific obligations were added for network operators and natural gas distributors.

• Regarding Article 16 of Resolution 40303, on guidelines for direct negotiation, the following amendments were introduced:

1. The initial five (5) business-day term granted to the developer who first became aware of the conflict of coexistence to notify the other developer in writing of the characteristics and activities of its project was eliminated.
2. The requirement to notify the ANH, ANM, UPME, or MME of a coexistence conflict to request their support has been eliminated. It is now at developers discretion of overlapping projects to decide whether if they require the support of the aforementioned authorities. 
3. The parties shall have a period of fifteen (15) business days as of date of written notice of the dispute to mutually agree upon and schedule an initial negotiation meeting. If either party declines or otherwise fails to attend such meeting, the other party may request in writing that the MME compel attendance and arrange for said meeting to occur within an additional fifteen (15) business days. 
4. The direct negotiation stage is limited to thirty (30) business days, extendable for an additional thirty (30) days by mutual agreement. Resolution 40303 had established a duration of one hundred twenty (120) business days, extendable for sixty (60) more.
5. If the coexistence agreement requires extensions, suspensions or contractual amendments, the interested party must process them before the competent authority, which may deny them if they do not comply with the applicable rules, the public interest or the purpose of the contract.
6. The provision requiring mining subsector developers to update coexistence agreements when necessary (recommended prior to a contractual stage change) and notifying the authority was repealed.
7.  The possibility for developers to request suspension of direct negotiation until the environmental license or other required authorization was obtained was eliminated.
8. If the existing project fails to attend the negotiation meeting, it shall be deemed not to oppose the incoming project and to have waived the coexistence agreement. If the absentee is the incoming project, it shall be deemed to have withdrawn from the coexistence agreement and must restart the procedure.

• 4    Article 16A was added to Resolution 40303, setting out cases in which it is not necessary to process an operational coexistence agreement, unless specific regulations provide otherwise. These cases include:
  (i) when the incoming project does not require an environmental license and there is no overlap of specific infrastructure;
  (ii) when the existing project only holds subsurface rights and cannot prove rights over the surface where the new project will be developed;
  (iii) when the overlap relates solely to areas defined in environmental studies, without direct interference with infrastructures or activities; or
  (iv) when the party alleging incompatibility fails to submit technical and scientific studies demonstrating the material impossibility of coexistence.
   
• 5    Regarding Article 17 of Resolution 40303, on failed negotiations, the following amendments were introduced:

1.  Under Resolution 40303, negotiations were considered failed only if the parties formally recorded their lack of agreement. By contrast, Resolution 40358 deems negotiations failed automatically when the period set by Article 16 (30 business days plus extension) ends, with no need for a formal declaration. 
2. Parties can no longer choose their dispute resolution method. Now, if negotiations fail, they must appoint an independent expert within thirty business days to evaluate the relevant conditions related to the conflict. If the expert finds coexistence possible and parties refuse, the MME may require them to sign a coexistence agreement, unless economic or financial infeasibility is proven. 
3. In cases where the parties do not reach an agreement on the appointment of the expert, the Resolution establishes the corresponding mechanism for the selection of said expert and the preparation of the expert report.

All other articles and provisions of Resolution 40303 remain in force in their original terms.

For further information on Resolution 40358, please visit the following link