BECC Approves Criteria in Dramatic Fashion

Cyrus Reed
Texas Center for Policy Studies

In a dramatic special meeting August 31 in El Paso, the Board of Directors of the Border Environment Cooperation Commission unanimously approved the criteria for how environmental infrastructure projects are to be certified, paving the way for project certification of up to five projects at the next meeting. The consensus on the criteria came after U.S. "public" board member Lynda Taylor had announced publicly she was "not in agreement" with the final version because of its failure to reward those projects which demonstrated a high degree of sustainability. Following an announced break, board members, the BECC staff and Taylor met and negotiated a compromise.

"I'm very pleased with the process and the willingness to work on this negotiation," Taylor told the crowd of more than 200,. "I think it's a very good compromise."

"I appreciate the opportunity ...to see what I consider to be the first real public meeting," added Harry Browne of the Interhemispheric Resource Center based in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Browne told the BECC Board that he supported the idea of rating projects according to sustainability because it would hold the BECC publicly, accountable as well as advance sustainability.

Browne told the BECC Board that he supported the idea of rating projects according to sustainability because it would hold the BECC publicly accountable as well as advance sustainability.

Under the final criteria adopted by the BECC, applicants for BECC certification will have to meet "fundamental" criteria in eight areas: general project description, environment and human health, technical feasibility, economic and financial feasibility, social issues, community participation, operation and maintenance and sustainable development. BECC General Manager Roger Frauenfelder noted that the criteria would be revisited in a year.

The issue which generated the most discussion and controversy--and almost caused a stain on the Commission whose middle name is cooperation--was sustainability. While all the board members agreed that some aspect of sustainability--human and institutional capacity building-- should be part of the fundamental criteria, there was disagreement over whether to have an additional rating system whereby projects would be rated low, medium or high for sustainability.

Prior to the public meeting, the Environmental Protection Agency had issued a memo to the BECC, announcing its opposition to rating projects based upon sustainability factors. After some consultation with Non-Governmental Organizations, Lynda Taylor wrote her own memo, much of ,which were incorporated into the "Revised Final Draft" of the criteria presented at the meeting. However, in meetings between the BECC directors the day before the public meeting, the EPA's memo and position became the basis for adopting a rating-less sustainability criteria. This view was echoed by representatives from the NADBank, and eventually by all the board with the exception of Taylor.

Taylor's call for a rating system was backed by all of the members of the audience who spoke publicly and The Public Advisory Council. Council member Thomas Soto told the Board that the Council had supported the "Revised Final Draft" provided to the Council with its rating system because of its "accountability."

"Our main responsibility had to be . . . certification and not certification . . . for funding by NADBank," countered Board President Jorge Bustamante. Bustamante said that rating the projects went beyond this responsibility.

In the end, Taylor and the public which overwhelmingly supported her position won a concession from the other Board Members: allowing all projects meeting a certain number of sustainable factors a special recognition. In return, a specific high-medium-low rating system was scrapped. Some examples of sustainability factors include benefits to low-income inhabitants, pollution prevention, environmental education, and a post-certification participation plan.

The drama beefed up what othervise was a fairly routine meeting. A clearly relieved Bustamante announced that since everyone was now in agreement, he would move onto the BECC's real business: considering environmental infrastructure projects.

A total of five projects were presented before the Board , any of which could be certified at the next public meeting September 28 in Brownsville. The projects included:

• A $11.7 million "reclaimed" water project in El Paso.
• Two $50 million wastewater treatment plants in Ciudad Ju rez.
• A $17.2 million water treatment plant in Brawley, California.
• Wastewater treatment $45 million project in Mexicali to clean-up the New River.
• A $8 million wastewater treatment plant and agricultural reuse in Ensenada, Baja California .

BECC staff said that the first three are the most likely to be considered at the September 28th meeting.

I BECC'un THEE!

Tom Soto
BECC Advisory Council Member

Concerns surrounding the environmental impacts of NAFTA-related activity led to the establishment of the Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC). This Commission and its Advisory Council were part of the environmental side agreements adopted in 1992 that were crucial to Congress' eventual passage of NAFTA legislation.

There are three components to the BECC. Staff executes the charter of the BECC and the directives of the Commission and the Advisory Council; the Commission itself serves as the policymaking body; and finally, the Advisory Council provides an additional "checks and balances" system by counseling the BECC on certain proposals under consideration and on the process used to evaluate those proposals. Each of the three components is comprised of appointees from both sides of the border.

Current BECC activities have focused on the development of criteria to determine which proposals will receive support from the BECC. The BECC staff has done a tremendous job in completing several drafts of the criteria, soliciting and receiving comments from the public and other sectors, including the Department of Interior through Christian Marsh, Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Water and Science. His insights and assistance have been especially valuable in understanding the array of regulatory issues and resource questions.

Although the intent of the NAFTA side agreement is to assure that a high level of environmental integrity is brought to this process, historically, environmental concerns and quality of life issues have rarely been incorporated as considerations for lending. Indeed, throughout the lives of such institutions as the World Bank and other multidirectional banks, lending practices have generally led to environmental degradation.

Even with our vast knowledge about the global impacts of deforestation and the greenhouse effect, lending institutions continue to rely on practices that are not only unsustainable, but environmentally and culturally negligent. This practice extends from the headwaters rainforest of northern California to the tropical rainforests of South America.

As a BECC Advisory Council member, I believe that the BECC can and should be used as a vehicle to set new standards for economic and infrastructure development, with sustainability as the fundamental criterion used to evaluate projects. There are currently some 30 different proposals that have formally been submitted to the BECC for consideration. It is incumbent upon the BECC to ensure that each proposal is consistent with sustainability as the essential determinant for approval. In addition, approval criteria must also include an aggressive community outreach and public hearing process.

The BECC has chosen to direct its resources toward funding projects in three specific areas: wastewater treatment, water quality, and solid waste. Although interrelated, each of these areas is unique with respect to the type of funding and technology needed to improve the existing infrastructure conditions targeted by the proposer. In each case, the criteria adopted by the BECC must be clear and concise concerning which projects receive support, and each project must be as consistent with the adopted standards as the next.

As some attendees pointed out at the BECC public meeting in Tijuana, this concern for clarity and openness is relevant not only to the evaluation process and terminology, but also extends to local planning and economic development decision making arenas where the proposed development is sighted.

My philosophical approach is that an open meeting process and community discussion regarding the direction of the BECC, as well as the proposals it supports, is imperative. To ensure its own success, the BECC must in turn ensure that genuine public outreach and comment is generated.

I firmly believe that people have the right to determine their own landscape; that a community's environment should be determined by the community, in other words, and not by bankers. My experience indicates that supporters of the BECC in Washington will need to be guaranteed that such a public process is in effect, and is constant, viable and visible.

In this vein, the BECC has recently adopted a more aggressive public outreach strategy to be developed by Tracy Williams, the full-time Public Outreach Coordinator for the BECC.

The Advisory Council has been charged with assisting in the public outreach process as well, a responsibility that we look forward to fulfilling. I urge all activists, entrepreneurs, local elected officials, and city staffs to attend the public meetings, as well as the series of public forums that are currently being held within the La Paz zone.

For further information on these meetings, please feel free to contact Ms.Tracy Williams at (011-52-16) 29-23-95. I can be reached via e-mail at PSE@well.sf.ca.us.

NADBank Board Meeting

Sara Foryt
NADBank

The NADBank staff met with its board members on August 14th to discuss and review the Bank's progress. With BECC representatives in attendance, those present discussed (1) how the NADBank and the BECC could coordinate their efforts, and (2) current criteria used for project approval. Specific criteria for potential projects were discussed in depth at the August 31 El Paso BECC public/executive board meeting.

Community residents are encouraged to attend the September 28 BECC meeting in Brownsville, Texas (to be held at the Sheraton Hotel from 9:00-4:00). At that time the first round of projects will beconsidered for certification. In addition, the meeting will include a review of the technical assistance program of the BECC.

Communications Corner

BECCnet Update

BECCnet is a free Internet service that provides information on BECC/NADBank-related activities and news. It also allows people to exchange comments and information related to the U.S.-Mexico border environment with individuals and groups on both sides of the border.

Below are exerpts from messages that have been posted on BECCnet.

--Tracy Williams, 7/11/95
We are sending out a monthly newsletter to include the most current list of projects this Friday. Everyone on the BECC mailing list will receive a copy. Copies of the project lists will also be available during the next public meeting of the Board of Directors on July 28 at the Gran Hotel in Tijuana, B.C. from 9:00 to 5:00 p.m.

--Jackie Lockett, 7/26/95
I live on the border and I see how hard the governments work to meet the needs of their people. And I see how hard the people work to improve their quality of life. Our number one problem is the rapidly expanding population and our number one goal is providing more housing with government funds.

Since we are beginning to talk about "sustainable development" we now have reason to talk about how we need to provide more than housing for our unlimited number of new residents. If we are to have jobs for our people we must also preserve our natural resources. Talking about sustainable development now has provided a platform for those very difficult but needed discussions, not as adversaries but as communities caring about both jobs and our peoples' future.

Please leave the Criteria for Sustainable Development in the BECC Guidelines. Give us the opportunity to continue our discussions!

--Dick Kamp, 8/6/95
The Border Ecology Project (BEP) cautions the BECC and NADBank that public and political support in both countries for the good-faith efforts being made by the Commission can be undermined by failure to implement a sustainable and publicly accountable means to implement a certifying-financing strategy. Failure to develop a real-world strategy to do so will mean a loss of public support for the institutions. The financial, social and environmental crises on the border, and throughout Mexico, necessitate seeking small-scale, manageable, socially- ecologically-financially sustainable solutions to environmental problems that the community can oversee and manage.

Subscribe to BECCnet

The Newly Established North American Integration and Development Center (NAIDC)

Andrea Brown
NAIDC/UCLA

The North American Integration and Development Center is a multidisciplinary research and technical assistance center based in the School of Public Policy and Social Research at the University of California, Los Angeles.

NAIDC's activities are divided into three main areas: Research, Technical Assistance, and Telecommunications, all with a view to the integration of North America. The research mission of the NAID Center focuses on the dynamics and impacts of economic, social, and environmental enterdependence between the United States and Mexico.

Among the trends to be monitored are trade, capital flows, and migration effects on employment and income. The research results wil then be applied to assisting communities that are experiencing economic displacement due to NAFTA. In Watsonville, California, for example, NAID Center staff are working with community members to create an econimic development strategy in response to the movement of the frozen food industry to Mexico.

To further enhance the research and technical assistance mission of the NAIDC, an ambitious program to provide Internet connectivity to a range of partners is being developed. Advanced applications are also being deployed on the World Wide Web, including a sophisticated search engine that queries databases on wide-area networks, and provides online technical assistance to community groups, local governments, and international agencies throughout North America.

The web site at (http://www/webcom.com/~isadra/naid) provides the framework for communications throughout a network on both sides of the border. Soon there will be NAIDNET, an on line bulletin board and discussion group accessed through the web site.

The U.S.-Mexico border has been targeted as a region of particular interest in the areas of economic development, environmental sustainability, and public participation in conjunction with the activities of the Border Environmental Cooperation Comission and the North American Development Bank. Recently, the center received a grant from the Departament of Commerce to train communities on their own website development.

Border Information & Solutions Network (BISN)

Jackie Lockett
President

BISN is a grassroots nonprofit (501.c.3) organization formed in Brownsville, Texas, to provide networking and education to the Texas/Tamaulipas Border. BISN released an Internet Needs Assessment for the Texas/ Tamaulipas Border on September 1. While conducting research for the document, BISN established a Texas/Tamaulipas Steering Committee of 21 members from the area between Brownsville/ Matamoros Laredo/ Nuevo Laredo. Eighteen are linked by Internet and a new communication team has been developed. Within Brownsville, another steering committee of 19 persons and entities involved with Internet service and education has been formed. Internet is a great tool for bringing people together to create new visions. BISN is currently teaching introductory Internet classes for a small donation to try to help raise funds for staff and equipment. BISN has partnered with the San Diego Communications Council and has submitted a gt to DOC t14 on the UT- Brownsville Campus. Simultaneous interpretation was available so that the Tele-conference could be an international event.

BISN is promoting regional activities thru Internet connectivity and the BISN Home Page located at: http://www.vt.com/~bisn/ and 192.154.76.19/bisn/html. BISN is using other regional coordination organizations such as the Great Lakes Information Network and the North American Institute as models.

CEC Web Site Established

The Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) will soon be accessable through the Internet. Beginning in October, the Commission plans to put its publications, reports and studies online. Researchers from across North America will also be able to access the CEC Resource and Public Information Center, a public repository of state-of-the-art environmental resources from the three NAFTA countries. In addtion the CEC publishes the newsletter Eco Region. The CEC website is at: http://www.cec.org. For more information you may call the Commission at (514)350-4300. E-mail: ccastell@ccemtl.org.

BECC E-mail Address

BECC now has an e-mail address at its office in Ciudad Juárez which is: becc1@itsnet.com. In addition, BECC Outreach Coordinator, Tracy Williams, reports that BECC is developing an Internet home page.

Texas Center for Policy Studies to Establish Office in El Paso

Cyrus Reed
TCPS

It's official. The Texas Center for Policy Studies has established a temporary office in El Paso, Texas, in large part to help monitor the progress of the Border Environment Cooperation Commission through a subcontract with the Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy.

Housed in the El Paso Environmental Center from August 25 to December 24, the Texas Center for Policy Studies should help keep tabs on the first projects to be certified by the BECC as well as new applications submitted. Finally, the TCPS will be working with community groups in Ciudad Juárez and El Paso to see if they might benefit by applying for certification through the BECC.

Six projects were presented at the special meeting on August 31. Two of those are the El Paso Wastewater Utilities Public Service Board's wastewater reuse project, and Ciudad Juárez's two wastewater treatment plants. These may be the first two projects certified at the September 28 public meeting in Brownsville. Doing some initial research into the viability and public input on these projects before they are certified may be an important test of the BECC process. In addition, it will demonstrate to what degree documents are publicly accessible at the BECC offices in Ciudad Juárez.

The Texas Center for Policy Studies is also working with groups in the El Paso/ Ciudad Juárez area as part of other projects that relate to the BECC. For example, since 1993, through a grant with the Ford Foundation, the Texas Center for Policy Studies provides research and technical assistance to the Texas Industrial Areas Foundation Network and its 11 community based-organizations. A special focus has been the border organizations, including the El Paso Interreligious Sponsoring Organizations (EPISO). As part of this work, TCPS will work with EPISO on matters related to the BECC. Through its Binational Toxics Project (funded through the C.S. Mott Foundation), TCPS also works with Mexican nonprofits and will be assisting FEMAP, Federaci›n Mexicana de Asociaciónes Privadas de Salud y Desarrollo Comunitario, in both its work in maquilas and its application to the BECC to convert brickmaking facilities to cleaner burning fuels.

Part of the rationale for establishing the El Paso office is to provide eyes and ears close to BECC's main office. From El Paso, it will be relatively easy to visit BECC, check on the status of projects, and see what documentation is available. Interested parties should feel free to call the Texas Center for Policy Studies and suggest how to use this important new resource or request help in reviewing or obtaining copies for applications.

Cyrus Reed's telephone in El Paso: (915) 577-9676, email cyrus_Reed@versa.com.

Letters and Comments

Tell us what you think about BECC activities. We want your ideas and comments. Write us in Spanish or in English, but try to keep your comments to no more than 250 words.

Desarrollo Sustantable Vs. Desarrollo Economico.
Reto de la COCEF - BANNAD
C. Miguel Angel González Robles
Enlace Ecológico, A. C.

Armonizar el desarrollo sustentable con el desarrollo económico para que los proyectos que en este tenor se realicen, tenga una real amortización económica, es uno de los retos de la comisión de cooperación económica fronteriza. Considerando como premisa la integración en proyectos sustentables no solo del crecimiento económico, sino tambien la mitigación de la pobreza externa, la protección de la salud humana, el mejoramiento de los niveles de vida y la conservación de la integridad del medio ambiente.

Lo anterior viene a colación con respecto a los proyectos pendientes de certificación en los cuales, la COCEF tiene que buscar el mecanismo idoneo de retribuir el apoyo que en su caso diera el Banco de Desarrollo de Norteamerica con participantes estatales, federales y municipales para hacer factibles financieramente hablando proyectos que engloben el desarrollo sustentable y tratar de apoyar a lo beneficiado en la obtención de donativos (grants) aportados por organizaciones interesadas en la preservación del medio ambiente y de salud.

Cooperacion Transfronteriza Y Medio Ambiente

Francisco Lara
COLEF

El 11 de julio pasado la Comisión de Cooperación Ecológica Fronteriza (COCEF) convocó a una reunión en Nogales, Sonora con el propósito de informar sobre el papel de la propia Comisión y del Banco Norteamericano de Desarrollo (BANNAD) en la creación de infraestructura ambiental para la frontera. Cualquiera de los presentes pudo atestiguar al fuerte interés de la comunidad por aprender más acerca de ambas instituciones, así como por presentar ideas, recomendaciones y aún proyectos acordes con las prioridades de inversión definidas por la COCEF. Los organiazdores de la reunión, por su parte, trataron de atender todas las intervenciones del público y estimularon la participación en las fases subsecuentes del proceso de presentación y certificación de proyectos.

No cabe la menor duda de que los procedimientos y la actitud del equipo administrativo de la COCEF como del Consejo Directivo han alcanzado un nivel aceptable de eficacia en la promoción de la participación pública. El principio al que parece ceñirse la COCEF es aparentemente el de mantener una agenda de trabajo tan amplia como sea posible para incluir a todos los actores interesados, y a la vez, lo suficientemente estrecha como para excluir al mayor número de personas y grupos no directamente afectados por los problemas ambientales fronterizos.

No obstante estos logros, la reunión de Nogales hizo notorio que los retos para la COCEF en otras áreas substantivas de su responsabilidad siguen siendo formidables. Estos retos incluyen, por una parte, la definición precisa del concepto de sustentabilidad, un criterio esencial para la certificación de las propuestas sometidas a su consideración. También destaca el tema de la cooperación transfronteriza que de manera operativa ha sido definida dentro de los criterios de certificación como la presentación de proyectos que tengan alcance binacional al derramar sus beneficios tanto en México como en los Estados Unidos y se propongan atender problemas ambientales que tengan similar rango de prioridad para ambos lados de la frontera. Aunque estas últimas condiciones no son excluyentes, su cumplimiento si otorga una prioridad alta a los proyectos que las reunan y, notoriamente, sólo unos cuantos de los proyectos presentados en la reunión de Nogales incluøan en su enfoque el aspecto binacional.

Mucho queda por hacer en este renglón y es probable que muy pocos cambios en este sentido se observen en el corto plazo. La construcción de un ambiente favorable a la cooperación transfronteriza y el desarrollo de enfoques binacionales del medio ambiente es un proceso multietápico y la primera de estas etapas debe incluir la información al público y el intercambio de información científica. Estos dos aspectos, además de ser una exigencia sistemática de las comunidades fronterizas, abrirían la posibilidad de apreciar en su justa dimensión la necesidad y la utilidad de cooperar en áreas como el control de la contaminación del agua subterránea o el manejo de contingencias ambientales.

Una segunda fase debiera considerar la coordinación de los esquemas administrativos y la definición de una estructura de incentivos a la cooperación mucho más tangibles. Las relaciones transfronterizas en materia ambiental son asimétricas no sólo por la disparidad de recursos existentes entre ambos países, sino también por las fuertes diferencias en los sistemas legales y administrativos. En la actualidad no existen organismos compatibles para atender problemas de contaminación atmosférica, degradación del suelo, y manejo de recursos fre ticos.Una solución realista a este impasse institucional sería conceder una mayor credibilidad y reconocimiento a las propuestas de los grupos de ciudadanos y funcionarios fronterizos que en forma cotidiana y casi clandestina, intervienen en arreglos y acuerdos de intercambio y cooperación a través de la línea internacional.

Fideicomiso: Accountability of Non-NADBank Funding within BECC Certified Projects

Dick Kamp
Border Ecology Project

It is my understanding that Fideicomisos, or trust funds, will be established on the Mexican side for projects approved for certification by the BECC in order to circumvent the constitutional problem of municipalities receiving rivate and/or foreign funding.

As a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is developed between BECC and NADBank for project procedures and other matters, it seems to be very important to clarify how "non-NADBank" sources of funding will be accountable to BECC for certification conditions as well as to those established under the MOU between NADBank and BECC.

NADBank has repeatedly stressed that it seeks to be a leveraging institution that may provide 10%, 20%--i.e., minority--interest in an approved project (while upgrading the investment rating of the project), as well as potentially taking on some high-risk no-payback projects.

Where do private and other investors become accountable to the communities where BECC-approved loans are made within a Fideicomiso--or with a private loan on the U.S. side?

Comentarios al Borrador De los Criterios para la Presentación y Certificación de Proyectos

Jesús Tamayo
Vice-President, Association of Borderland Scholars, y Centro de Ecología y Desarrollo (CIDE), Mexico, D.F.

La COCEF parece dolerse de una debilidad fundamental. No dudo que tal comisión cuenta hoy con una visión estratégica, de largo plazo, de la cuesti›n fronteriza. Supongo que ha partido de numerosos estudios y analisis y que cuenta hoy con un catálogo básico de problemas locales y regionales, y con análisis sobre su importancia o su urgencia relativas; todo lo cual le ha permitido establecer prioridades sectoriales y regionales. Ello no obstante, sus criterios para la presentación y certificación de proyectos reflejan una visión parcial de la cuestión ambiental fronteriza.

Los criterios de la COCEF están sesgados hacia la presentación de proyectos de abastecimiento de agua, tratamiento de aguas residuales y manejo de residuos sólidos. Sin duda que éstos son problemas ambientales fronterizos muy importantes. Pero no son los únicos. Y quizá no sean los determinantes. No se explica hoy una visión ambiental fronteriza que no atienda los problemas de una industrialización regional acelerada, más veloz que la de la plataforma de exportación del sureste asiático.

Todos sabemos que cualquier proceso de industrialización genera una serie de efectos y demandas. Que los efectos frecuentemente son depredadores y que las demandas frecuentemente se satisfacen a costa de la población local. Nadie ignora que esto sucede en la frontera común.

En la frontera norte de México se localizan hoy procesos industriales que requieren de niveles sofisticados de vigilancia y control por parte de las autoridades, niveles dificiles de alcanzar aún en los paises de origen. Me pregunto por qué no alienta COCEF los proyectos de monitoreo de los procesos y del destino de los desechos industriales, sólidos, gaseosos y líquidos; los proyectos de tratamiento de las aguas residuales de origen industrial; los proyectos de confinamiento de los desechos industriales, los estudios de riesgo urbano, los proyectos de organización social para enfrentar contingencias, o los proyectos relacionados con el "right to know," tan preciado al norte de la frontera. Porqué sólo parece interesarle a la Comisión el tratamiento de aguas residuales?

Un comentario final. La idea de invitar a la presentación de proyectos ambientales que serán apoyados financieramente por la COCEF, parece estar diseñada para recoger lo que en el lamentable lenguaje del PRONASOL se llamaba "demandas sentidas" de la población. Me pregunto qué hará la COCEF con aquellos problemas que, según su visión global y estratégica, requieren ser enfrentados, pero para los que no se propone proyecto alguno.

Impresiones de la reunion en Tijuana

Luis Cervera
COLEF

Al asistir por segunda vez a un foro público de la COCEF, nos quedó un sabor a boca de desorganización y particularmente la sentimos los que fuimos como ponentes de un proyecto candidato a financiamiento. Vimos con tristeza que los moderadores no moderan y que lo mismo da a que alguien tome la palabra hasta 20 minutos ó más y cuando fuimos al frente nos dijeron: "tienen 3 minutos para exponer." Se expusieron trabajos que no estaban dentro de los financiables y que no tenían nada que ver con plantas de tratamiento ni con suministro de agua.

A esto se suma que no existe un orden en la recepción de trabajos para ponencias, estos se van agregando a medida que van llegando. Personalmente creo que los organizadores deben poner mucha atención en este problema y ser muy estrictos en la recepción de trabajos a exponer, así como en los tiempos de exposición. De esta manera los participantes tendremos la certeza de la hora y el tiempo disponible para lo cual iremos preparados incrementándose con esto la calidad del evento.

Algo que se me hizo muy interesante fueron algunos comentarios de personas que conocen la situación del país (México) en materia de plantas de tratamientos de aguas residuales. Ellos ven con suma preocupación la instalación de nuevas plantas tratadoras cuando se tienen muy malas experiencias en otras localizadas en diferentes partes del territorio mexicano. Por ejemplo, citando el caso de Tlaxcala, México donde existe un complejo grande de plantas y que cerca del 70 por ciento de ellas están cerradas por falta de presupuesto para su mantenimiento contínuo y reposición de partes.

También la planta de tratamiento de la ciudad de Tijuana, la cual tiene muchos problemas de operación y mantenimiento llegándose a cerrar hasta por varios días en los cuales dejan fluir las aguas no tratadas al océano. Así hay muchos casos existentes en el país. Estas experiencias deben de ser retomadas dentro de los criterios de la COCEF tratando de evitar al máximo la certificación de proyectos que puedan caer en las condiciones anteriores y mejor estimular el buen funcionamiento de las plantas ya existentes con la debida canalización de fondos.

Por último, algo que navegó en el ambiente del café es que falta muy poco para el 28 de septiembre, fecha en que se empezará la certificación de proyectos y todavía no quedan muy claros los criterios para la certificación de COCEF existiendo muchas dudas e inconformidades al respecto.

Tiajuana BECC Meeting Reports

Udall Center Report

Terry Sprouse and Robert Varady,
Udall Center

Héctor Ozuna, Mayor of Tijuana, welcomed the approximately 380 attendees of the BECC meeting at the Grand Hotel in Tijuana.

General Manager Frauenfelder said that he had disseminated over 1,100 copies of the BECC's draft criteria and received over 100 comments and suggestions in response. He explained the mechanics for approving the criteria, saying that a 60-day period from June 1-July 31 had been allowed in which the BECC received comments.

A special meeting of the BECC Board and Advisory Council was announced for August 31 in El Paso to adopt working criteria, which will be distributed to the public by early September.

At the Brownsville meeting on September 28 the new criteria will be applied to certify the first projects; 30 proposals have been received to date. Frauenfelder said that one year from now the BECC will again ask for input to the criteria in an effort to have an ongoing fine-tuning process.

Following the introduction of the BECC Advisory Board, the meeting was opened up to input from the public on the various aspects of the draft criteria document: (1) technical feasibility; (2) environmental/social inputs; (3) economic & financial feasibility; (4) public participation; and (5) sustainable development.

The "Technical Feasibility" session was chaired by Peter Silva and moderated by Arturo Hererra. A point was brought up during this session by the first speaker, Michelle Kimple of the Southeast Arizona Governments Association, and echoed by other speakers throughout the day: the ambiguity throughout the document, especially in defining the term "sustainability."

The "Environmental/Social Aspects" session was chaired by Antonio Azuela and moderated by Jack Lehman. The question of how environmental impacts would be weighted in the criteria was brought up among other points.

During the "Economic and Financial Feasibility" session chaired by Ygnacio Garza and moderated by Horacio Garza, a question was asked about procedures for communities that meet BECC criteria but do not qualify for NADBank loans. Ygnacio Garza responded that BECC will be searching for money from institutions other than NADBank to help provide funding in such cases.

Prior to the "Public Participation" session chaired by Jorge Bustamante and moderated by Rick Reyes, Bustamante announced in response to many questions he'd received that there was absolutely no connection between COLEF and BECC. Bustamante asserted that the two institutions are completely separate and there is no overlap between his two responsibilities.

Lynda Taylor, chair of the "Sustainable Development" session, moderated by Oscar Romo, announced that in response to the many questions about the definition of "sustainability," the board is working on a vision statement defining more clearly what is meant by "sustainable development." In addition, sustainable development will be made a part of the fundamental requirement for certification. She expected three levels of sustainability to be identified: basic, intermediate, or high sustainability.

In a presentation to this session, Ra£l Hinojosa of UCLA stated that the definition of sustainable development should include poverty elimination and business expansion--both originally intended in the formation of BECC and NADBank according to Hinojosa. Mark Spalding of the California State Bar Association said the Rio Conference definition of sustainability development should be used since both the U.S. and Mexico have already accepted that definition. Cyrus Reed of the Texas Center for Policy Studies read letters from Mexican citizens who supported the incorporation of a strong sustainability component in the BECC criteria.

In general, the various sessions were productive in the sense that the session moderators and chairs responded directly to some of the points brought up by the public. It was also refreshing to see substantial participation by Mexican attendees. This format met with some success, and BECC is to be commended for its willingness to try new approaches. However, BECC officials should further screen speakers and review abstracts of the comments beforehand. At the Tijuana meeting many people exceeded the 5-10 minute time limit and all too often didn't really have anything to say about the criteria per se. In addition, several presentations inappropriately promoted projects, using slides and videotapes, during the draft criteria discussion sessions.

While BECC cannot be faulted for erring on the side of encouraging public participation, additional screening would make the meetings more productive.

Tercera Reunion Publica De La COCEF

Luis Cervera
COLEF

Factibilidad Tecnica

Se considerarán prioritarios aquellos proyectos que contemplen transferencia de tecnología, uso de técnicas apropiadas, costos de vida útil bajos y f cilmente expandibles para cumplir con demandas técnicas futuras. Serán prioritarios aquellos proyectos que involucren la administración de los recursos naturales en forma integral, cumplan criterios de sustentabilidad, hagan uso de fuentes de energía renovables, hagan un uso eficiente de energía, tengan un impacto negativo bajo, presenten un programa de medidas de mitigación, de control y reducción de la contaminación en el sitio del proyecto.

Aspectos Ecologicos y Sociales

Se incluyó el concepto "desarrollo sustentable," mismo que deberá definirse en forma más clara. Se manifestó que los criterios que se encuentran bajo el rubro "desarrollo sustentable" tendrán que concretarse. Igualmente, el análisis costo/beneficio deberá expresarse en términos reales. La presolicitud pide demasiada información en lo relativo a ingeniería y financiamiento. Los proyectos a certificarse deber n tener como objetivo la conservación del hábitat, manifestándose preocupación respecto al peligro de que los proyectos causen impactos negativos en la comunidad, por lo que deben reformularse los criterios. Las comunidades pobres deben recibir apoyo de otras fuentes de financiamiento.

Factibilidad Economica y Financiera

Una de las funciones de la COCEF es verificar la viabilidad de los proyectos y evaluar la sustentabilidad económica de los mismos. Los criterios que definen la mayor prioridad de un proyecto son: la más alta relación beneficio/costo, porcentaje de los costos al usuario signifcativamente menor respecto a los costos de operación, tasa interna de retorno alta, promoción del desarrollo económico local, sustentabilidad ambiental y económica del proyecto. Se opinó que la fuente de financiamiento del BANNAD no es muy generosa, por lo que debe tenerse muy en cuenta el impacto generado por los proyectos en comunidades pequeñas.

Participacion Ciudadana

La participación ciudadana es un factor importante a considerar por lo que será necesario que los solicitantes obtengan la aprobación comunitaria. Para recibir mayor prioridad, los proyectos tendr n que contar con un programa educativo, y con mayor diversidad de participantes de la comunidad. Impartir capacitación y asesoramiento a grupos no gubernamentales para la captación de fondos. Se consideró que los aspectos culturales y ambientales están desarrollados de forma poco clara en el documento de criterios. Una opinión generalizada fue que los criterios deben reforzarse antes de comenzar el proceso de certificación. En cuanto al apartado de participación comunitaria del documento; se mencionó que no se incluyen lineamientos tangibles ya que sólo se considera su colaboración en programas educativos y de difusión. De la misma forma, se juzgó conveniente la no obligatoriedad de solicitar financiamiento del BANNAD una vez que lo certifique la COCEF.

Desarrollo Sustentable

Fueron explicadas las razones de la inclusión del término "desarrollo sustentable" en el documento de criterios, concluyendo algunos que su definición es débil. La disminución de la pobreza debe ser un aspecto prioritario en la certificación de proyectos. Asimismo, se consideró que el análisis de costo/beneficio no deberó constituir un criterio, ya que es dif¡cil valorar económicamente un proceso natural. Los proyectos relacionados con la prevención de la contaminación deben ser prioritarios en la certificación. Por último, se estimó importante que el BANNAD se asuma como corresponsable en la implementación de proyectos.

Summary of the Approved Project Criteria

Clifford Brown
Udall Center

This is a summary of the final draft criteria for BECC project approval. The BECC Board approved the criteria at the August 31 meeting in El Paso (see cover page). BECC reports that the approved standards will be used for a year, then open to public comment and possible modification based on experience.

Proposals will be submitted in two parts: the pre-proposal and the proposal. The first is a concise, descriptive project summary, stating project type and location, the type of problem addressed, planning steps already taken, estimated costs, time schedules, and proposed financing. The pre-proposal is submitted on a form designed by BECC for clarity and consistancy. The second part has no form but is specifically structured, with alphanumeric labeled catagories of fundamental criteria.

Fundamental criteria provide minimum standards; failure to meet a fundamental criterion invalidates the proposal entirely. Beyond the fundamental criteria, favorable ratings on a series of additional sustainable development criteria improves chances of funding. This is a substantive summary and does not contain the exact final wording.

1. General Description.

The project must be (a) within 100 km of border or found to remedy issue in that area and have (b) tasks and budget estimates reasonable to allow completion.

2. Environment and Human Health.

The project must (a) address a critical human health or environmental need; (b) achieve a high level of environmental protection; (c)comply with applicable environmental regulations; (d) conform to existing local/ regional plans; (e) comply with applicable international agreements; and, (f) have an environmental assessment filed.

3. Technical Feasibility.

Appropriate technology must be used; plan the project to be constructed, operated and maintained in a cost-effective manner.

4. Economic and Financial Feasibility.

Private sector projects must have a 2:1 liquidity ratio and acceptable risk as measured by financial leverage ratios. All projects must be able to meet debt payment schedules while paying operation and maintenance costs.

5. Social Aspects.

Projects must comply with all appropriate cultural resource (historical, archeological, ethnic) regulations.

6. Community Participation.

Submit and impliment a Community Participation Plan consisting of developing and using a local steering committee, meeting with local organizations, and conducting at least one advertized public meeting.

7. Operation and Maintenance.

The project plan must include an operation and maintenance program addressing emergencies, occupational health and safety, personnel training, and where applicable, pollution prevention with a closure and post-closure plan.

 

8. Sustainable Development.

Projects must (a) adhere to the principles of sustainable development, (b) build human capacity to sustain the project over the long run, and (c) build institutional capacity to sustain the project.

---

For assistance in joining BECCNet or receiving BECC/COCEF Perspectivas via regular mail, please contact The Udall Center or call the Udall Center at (520) 621-7189.

Articles and letters are solicited, in English or Spanish, presenting pros and cons of various issues and discussions of how individualsand groups in the community might be affected by proposals to or actions by BECC. If possible send material intended for publication on diskette to:

Perspectivas
The Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy
803/811 East First Street
Tucson, AZ 85719
Phone: (520) 621-7189
Fax: (520) 621-9234