Pemex summons former manager over irregular 39 million peso severance payment

The Anti-Corruption and Good Governance Secretariat, through the Responsibilities Unit at Petróleos Mexicanos, has summoned Nohemí Almada Mireles, former Procurement Manager for Production at Petróleos Mexicanos, for allegedly authorizing change orders for 39 million pesos without formalizing the modifying agreement required by the contracts. The summons is published by edicts in the Official Gazette of the Federation on Tuesday, September 22, 2026, under case file R.A.1501/2025, and summons the alleged responsible party to testify at 13:00 hours on the thirteenth business day following the publication of the third and final edict.

The agreement ordering the start of the procedure was issued on November 24, 2025, by the Head of the Responsibilities Area of the Responsibilities Unit at Petróleos Mexicanos, based on Article 208 of the General Law of Administrative Responsibilities. The conduct is classified as a presumed serious administrative offense and derives from the Report of Presumed Administrative Responsibility dated November 21, 2025, submitted by the Head of the Complaints and Investigations Area via official letter URPM-ADI-92782025-C4.

As the former official’s address is unknown, notification was carried out by edicts supported by Articles 118 and 193, fraction I, of the General Law of Administrative Responsibilities, as well as Articles 309, fraction I, and 315 of the Federal Code of Civil Procedure, applied supplementarily. The official letter is signed by the Head of the Responsibilities Area, attorney Lizbeth Cruz Bermúdez, dated September 8, 2026.

The Imputed Facts

According to the edict, Nohemí Almada Mireles, in her position as Procurement Manager for Production, determined in the minutes of December 19, 2022, that for service contracts 644010811 and 644010812, the Poza Rica-Altamira Production Asset could issue the required service orders charged to the contract’s final settlement. The minutes established a term of 90 calendar days and a projected amount of 39 million pesos.

That determination resulted in the authorization of change orders for the recognition of the final settlement, dated December 29, 2022, under contracts 644010811 and 644010812, without the formalization of a modifying agreement. The contracts’ objective was the “Reconditioning and Service for Mechanical Pumping Units at the Facilities of the Integral Production Asset Block N02.”

The Invoked Contractual Norm

The authority maintains that clause 24 of both contracts, “Contract Modifications,” and clause 24.1, regarding services for additional quantities or items not foreseen in the unit price catalog, required all modifications to be formalized through a modifying agreement. In the case of additional services, a change order had to be issued, but its negotiation necessarily had to be formalized in the respective modifying agreement.

The edict emphasizes that the mere signing of a change order has no legal effect and cannot be considered a modifying agreement, as it is not binding for the parties.

Terms of the Summons

• Appearance: 13:00 hours on the thirteenth business day, counted from the day following the publication of the third and final edict in the Official Gazette of the Federation and in a daily newspaper of wider national circulation.
• Address: Avenida Marina Nacional number 329, 19th floor, Executive Tower of Petróleos Mexicanos, Colonia Verónica Anzures, C.P. 11300, Miguel Hidalgo Borough, Mexico City.
• Informed guarantees: right against self-incrimination, presumption of innocence, personal defense or by an expert defender and, if applicable, a public defender.
• Access: certified copy of the report, the admission agreement, and the case file records, available on business days from 09:00 to 14:00 and from 16:00 to 18:00 hours.

The case illustrates the use of the edict as a means of notification when the address of the designated public servant is unknown, and places the authorization of additional works in oil contracts without the required documentary support under the scrutiny of the Secretariat of Anti-Corruption and Good Governance. For readers, case file R.A.1501/2025 shows how irregularities in Pemex procurement can escalate to proceedings for serious administrative offenses, with the burden of proof centered on contractual formalization.

Source: Official Gazette of the Federation, September 22, 2026, pp. 254-255 (official reference: R.- 580389).