Proposals for two large toxic-waste dumps in Texas, both of which would be located within 20 miles of the Rio Grnnde,Bio Bravo, have spurred unprecedented binational enocern among governmental and non-governmental organizations alike. heinica1 Waste Management. Inc. is proposing to build what would be one of the United States’ largest toxic-waste landfills in Tetrell County, about 100 miles upriver from Del Rio Texas. A newly formed eom-pany called Texcor, Inc. wants to create a landfill for uranium mirting and other radioactive waste in Kinney f.ounty, nearEaglePass,Tezas. These sites receive a license from the Texas Water Commission, the state’s primary envi ronmental agency. before beginning operation. The two proposals have garnered strong opposition, both in Texas and Mexico, prompting at one point a brief binational citizens’ blockade of the international bridge between Eagle Pass and Piedras Negras, oahuila. The pm posals have also sparked fornml diplomatic protests by Mexico to Washing-ton. D.C., and were a prominent issue at the U.S.-Mexico Border Governors’ Conference in San Diego, California this April. In an unprecedented move, the state of Cchhoila, the municiplo Ciudad Acufla, and Mexican environ-mantalists intervened in the Texas state to oppose the granting of permits (for either site.) At first glance, the proposed Chcm Waste site looks like an ideal spot for disposal of toxic waste. hut appearances can he deceptive. Although the landfill would be located in somewhat isolated desert territory, the area’s steep canyons. giant underground caves, sink holes and limestone formations contain several potential pathways by which contamination from toxic waste could reach the ground water supply, says Robert Kier, an expert hydroge-ologist hired by the City of Del Rio to evaluate the proposed site The aquifer below the proposed site, known as Trinity Plateau of the Edwards supplies several fresh-water springs, – among them San Felipe Springs. the of Del Rio’s sole water source. The aquifer also crosses the border into Mexico, although less is known about its exact configuration there. “If pollution escaped from the proposed landfill.” says Kier, “there is little doubt that it could reach the San Felipe Springs and other important fresh-water spri in the area.” Opponents of the Chem Waste site are also concerned about the company’s history of environmental violations its other facilities. Says Del Rio City Attorney Jim Bayne: “This company has been assessed some of the largest penalties thr violations of hazardous- waste laws in the United States.” A re- port by the environmental group Greenpeace, U.S.A. brands Chemical Waste Management’s parent company. Management, Inc. as “one of the world’s biggest polluters.” Greenpeace based its assessment on the company’s record-setting payment of over $45 mu-lion in penalties and settlements in environmental cases over the last decade. Opponents of Texcor, on the other hand, are concerned that the company not have a track record to show it safely operate its proposed radioactive-waste dump. According to Madge Belcher. a long-time Kinney County rancher and president of Communities Against Radioactive Environment ARW, Texcor has never operated any waste-management siteorany other type of industrial facility. But what seems to most frustrate opponents on both sides of the border is the contradiction between the current goernmental efforts to clean up the Rio Grande-spurred on by the desire to eliminate environmental objections NAFFA-and the thought of major toxic-waste facilities being located nearby. “Itisincredible for the United States. on the one hand, to expect the government of Mexico to spend over $400 milliontocleanuptheRioGrande,”says Belcher,”and,ontheotherhand, tosanc-tion radioactive and hazardous waste close to that same river.”
Menu
