Bush Unveils Mexico Border Cleanup Plan

Trying to build support for a North American Free Trade Agreement, the Bush Administration on Tuesday unveiled an unprecedented binational effort to clean up the environment along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border, a region where untreated sewage and dumped chemicals course through waterways, tires smolder in landfills and old cars belch leaded-gasoline fumes.

The proposal, financed with at least $850 million in government contributions from both countries through 1994, calls for a broad range of environmental improvements and controls over 10 years.

Among them is completion of a long-delayed international sewage treatment plant for Tijuana and San Diego, and a project to heal the New River, one of the world’s most polluted waterways, which flows north from Mexicali into California’s Imperial County. It also calls for improved drinking water and waste-water treatment systems for the colonias --makeshift settlements in Texas--and increased cooperation between environmental authorities in both countries.

“We have a joint plan of action to correct these problems and we’ve made the financial commitment to get the job done,” President Bush said in announcing the plan before the Town Hall of California in Los Angeles. Mexican officials also outlined the plan’s details in Tijuana on Tuesday.

The joint proposal, however, drew immediate criticism. Environmental activists said it did not go far enough, calling it vague, underfinanced and difficult to enforce. Although U.S. Trade Representative Carla Hills said she expects the plan to improve the free trade pact’s chances on Capitol Hill, one legislator who has been an influential supporter said its weaknesses may hurt the campaign for an open-market agreement.

“Unfortunately, it’s quite disappointing,” said Rep. Bill Richardson (D-N.M.), who met recently with Mexico’s President Carlos Salinas de Gortari to discuss the negotiations. “Our support is eroding, and with this, it will erode further.”

Although Richardson said he still favors the agreement, he estimated that 40 votes in the House of Representatives for fast-track negotiations had been based on assurances that environmental concerns would be allayed by the plan. He described those votes as a wild card that could determine the fate of the agreement because others, for various reasons, have been backpedaling from earlier support.

Despite the large sums involved, Richardson and environmentalists argued that the amounts committed were not nearly enough to undo the damage wrought by two decades of industrialization, mostly by U.S. factories responding to a special Mexican program to allow manufacturing for export only.

“It’s a huge gamble by the Bush Administration,” said environmentalist Mary Kelly, who heads the Texas Center for Policy Studies, based in Austin. “They’re gambling that Congress doesn’t care enough about the environmental issues to really look behind the plan to see if there’s the necessary funding to carry out any portion of it.”

Although most lawmakers had not seen the entire proposal, one prominent Democratic legislative aide said U.S. contributions of $140 million this year and $240 million next year amount to “a start,” especially because the Administration had been talking about as little as $6 million last year.

The Mexican government previously announced a $460-million commitment over the next three years.

However, the legislative aide said it is “a drop in the bucket when you look at what the needs are down there,” citing studies by the University of Texas that estimated the costs at $18 billion. Some credible experts, he added, have put the figure at $50 billion.

The New River project is expected to take about $100 million and three to five years. The colonia improvements will cost $75 million. In addition, Mexico will start requiring treatment of toxic compounds before they enter sewage systems.

Another new aspect of the program includes technical assistance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to its Mexican counterpart, known by its Spanish acronym SEDUE. The governments also will form citizen advisory panels in the border region.

Timothy B. Atkeson, an EPA international activities official, said the plan was most noteworthy in demonstrating the Mexican government’s greatly expanded commitment to reversing environmental degradation along the border. “The biggest new thing,” Atkeson said, “is on their side.”

Roberto A. Sanchez, an environmental expert at the Border College in Tijuana, agreed. “It’s really a commitment from the Mexicans. And it’s encouraging that we are taking this integrated approach. It’s on the right track.”

Still, Sanchez added, “it’s part of the solution but it’s not the whole solution.”

The message that the proposal does not go far enough was heard repeatedly when EPA and SEDUE officials held public meetings on a draft of the plan in 17 border cities last fall.

Although the draft was fine-tuned to produce the plan announced Tuesday, “I think it’s worse than the first,” said Fernando Medina, an environmental activist in Mexicali, the capital of Baja California. “We are very unhappy. There are not enough specifics.”

Tumulty reported from Washington and Stammer from Los Angeles. Times staff writer Judy Pasternak in Los Angeles also contributed to this story.