SEDENA Asks for More Resources to Develop Airports

A leaked document revealed that companies managed by the Ministry of Defense (SEDENA) asked the Ministry of Finance (SHCP) to consider additional resources in the 2023 Federal Budget to carry out administrative and operational activities, as well as to supply materials. 

The document leaked by hacktivist group Guacamaya revealed conversations between SEDENA and SHCP where the first asked for over US$107 million for the tourism-focused holding company called Grupo Aeroportuario Ferroviario y de Servicios Auxiliares Olmeca-Maya-Mexica (GAFSAOMM), which operates AIFA, as well as the airports of Palenque, Chetumal, Tulum and the Mayan Train. According to the document, the resources would be used for personal services, materials, supplies and public investment. In addition, SEDENA asked for another US$65 million for operation and investment expenses for Tren Maya S.A. de C.V., a company that the ministry manages too, which will provide services regarding railway transportation, as well as complementary and commercial services regarding concessions, permits, licenses and authorizations obtained from the government to construct, operate and exploit the Mayan Train project. 

Other airports managed by SEDENA also asked for resources. The Señor Pakal, Palenque International Airport (AIPSP) in Chiapas asked for US$21.6 million, Cuna del Mestizaje International Airport (AICCM) asked for over US$31 million and Felipe Carrillo Puerto International Airport (AIFCP) in Quintana Roo asked for US$10.3 million. Jointly, these and other airports asked for a total of US$235 million, which according to SEDENA would be used for general services and supplying materials. 

Leaked documents also revealed that there are technical aspects that must be solved before operating these airports. On Oct. 12, 2022, MBN reported that the Federal Civil Aviation Agency (AFAC) warned SEDENA about potential planning errors at AIFCP and AICCM. According to the documents, AFAC questioned SEDENA about the total surface of AIFCP, whose information considered to be incomplete and asked for verification to ensure there are no obstacles near the runway. As for AICCM, the aviation authority pointed out that the proximity of the Mayan Train’s Section 6 to the airport’s approach and safety areas might compromise the safety of the Mayan Train’s users. “The airport’s chosen location will, therefore, not be feasible,” reads AFAC’s message.