150 days to approve an EIA: how fast can it be prepared?
What we learned automating a technical case file with Polisense in Arequipa
A detailed Environmental Impact Assessment for the mining sector used to take about 400 business days to be evaluated, until 2024. Today it takes close to 300. And Peru's National Service for Environmental Certification for Sustainable Investments (SENACE) has set itself a target of 150 to 160 business days by 2026. It plans to get there by simplifying procedures, connecting its systems with those of other government agencies, and using artificial intelligence to check whether a case file is complete before evaluating it in depth.
If that target is met, the bottleneck moves. It stops being in the evaluation stage and becomes the preparation stage. A project holder who used to have twelve months of evaluation time to fit in field campaigns, public participation, and desk work suddenly has half of that. And the part that gets squeezed the most isn't the field work (that has its own seasonality, permits, and logistics, and doesn't speed up with software) but the desk work: gathering, cleaning, cross-referencing, and the traceable write-up of everything that already exists. That's the part we decided to automate.
The case: Majes and Santa Rita
We worked with the Regional Management of Science, Technology and Innovation (CTI) of the Regional Government (GORE) of Arequipa on the analysis of two state-owned parcels with potential for developing an industrial park linked to renewable energy, green hydrogen, and electro-intensive industries: the Majes parcel, located in the Majes-Pedregal irrigation area, and the Santa Rita de Siguas parcel. Both fall under the Projects on Assets (PEA) mechanism, which allows investments to be developed on state-owned land.
The assignment consisted of preparing and presenting a comparative technical case file for both parcels, evaluating their characteristics, suitability, and conditions for the project's development, with the goal of giving the developing company the technical elements needed to select the most suitable option.
Recommendations were also put forward, grounded in the cross-referencing of territorial and infrastructure information, resource availability, accessibility, and other relevant factors to support the decision-making process.
How it was built
The case file was built on four layers of evidence, each one separately identified:
Registry file
Official coordinates in the UTM system of the Peruvian land registry, surface areas, registry entries, and the project's phases.
GORE Arequipa report
Certifies the PEA mechanism, who the title holder is, and the land title status.
Geospatial calculations
Area of each polygon and distance between the parcels, calculated from the case file's own coordinate tables.
Public sources
More than 50 sources organized by topic: solar resource and climate, photovoltaic and transmission projects, ports and logistics, legal and environmental framework.
What the system resolved in days
On that basis, the system resolved in days things that usually take weeks of desk work:
- Located the parcels relative to the Majes electrical substation, 138/60/10 kV and already operating, and relative to the 500/220 kV transmission corridor planned for the area.
- Calculated the logistics route to the port of Matarani, about 129 kilometers by road from El Pedregal.
- Cross-checked the solar resource stated in the case file against radiation studies for the country's southern desert strip.
- Sorted out which permits apply and in what sequence, across the National Environmental Impact Assessment System (SEIA), the Electrical Concessions Law, archaeological certification, and coordination with the National Water Authority (ANA).
What the system couldn't resolve
It's also important to show the limitations.
The system flagged what it couldn't resolve:
What we know
- • Location relative to the Majes substation (138/60/10 kV) and the planned 500/220 kV corridor.
- • Logistics route to the port of Matarani (~129 km by road).
- • Cross-check of the stated solar resource against regional radiation studies.
- • Permit sequence: SEIA, electrical concessions, archaeological certification, and ANA.
What we still need to validate
- • Could not confirm whether the 500/220 kV corridor route crosses the parcels, because that requires overlaying the coordinates against the officially approved line.
- • Nor could it validate the solar resource, because that requires a weather station measuring on-site for at least twelve months.
Automation doesn't replace technical field verification.
Three lessons for anyone preparing case files
Traceability matters more than speed
In this case file, every statement has a source code behind it. That's what holds the document up when the authority raises questions.
Declaring the gaps is also a result
The gaps that were left open point precisely to where the field budget should be spent. Good desk work guides the field work and makes it cheaper.
The bottleneck moved, and it's worth looking at it head-on
If SENACE meets its 150-to-160-day target, a consultancy's edge will come to depend on how many quality case files it can prepare in parallel with the same senior team.
That's a question of capacity, and capacity is either hired or automated.
A concrete invitation
We're opening three free pilots with consultancies registered with SENACE.
You give us a real project already underway, we deliver the desk work in the format you already use, and your team reviews it the way it would review a junior analyst's work.
No cost and no commercial commitmentWe don't sign environmental management instruments. That's the responsibility of a consultancy registered with SENACE and licensed professionals who put their name behind it.
Polisense's work is the groundwork beforehand — all the data analysis that can be automated.
“If you prepare environmental instruments for mining or energy in Peru and this is useful or debatable to you, write to me. Technical objections are welcome.”