Harvard joined a coalition of 23 other Boston-area colleges yesterday in endorsing a 50-point plan to curb campus binge-drinking. But Harvard administrators said the measure would have no effect on the College's alcohol policies.

The plan, the culmination of a year-long collaborative effort, was created to combat "problem drinking" on college campuses in the wake of MIT first-year Scott Krueger's death last fall and the release of a report on the pervasiveness of college binge-drinking last year.

"The goal of the recommendations is to establish minimum criteria that all schools that sign this agreement will try to achieve," said Dean of Students Archie C. Epps III, who represented Harvard at the group's meetings along with Coordinator of Student Activities Susan T. Cooke.

But Epps said Harvard already meets the overwhelming majority of these criteria, which include the prohibition of alcohol delivery to first-year dorms and efforts to control sports-related drinking such as the distribution of alcohol at tailgates and school-wide events.

The schools also pledged to provide more training for residential counselors and advisers, promote alcohol-free campus events and improve communication with local law enforcement.

Epps said Harvard will not change its policy in the few areas where the plan differs from College policy.

For example, the agreement calls upon participating schools to train faculty members to identify problem drinking in students and intervene or offer referrals.

"This doesn't fit our culture in terms of teaching faculty," said Epps, who indicated the College would not offer additional training to faculty.

Other provisions in the agreement include increasing the availability of alcohol-free events and making all fraternity "rushes" alcohol-free, a policy Epps described as "not applicable" to Harvard, which does not recognize final clubs and fraternities as student organizations.

But while Harvard was willing to sign the agreement in spite of its already more forceful policies, not all schools agreed with the University's thinking.

"We felt it was inappropriate to sign an agreement with less-stringent guidelines than we currently have in place," said Colin D. Riley, a spokesperson for Boston University (B.U.). Riley said B.U. is a member of the coalition and supports its work, but decided not to sign the plan.

"It would just be hypocritical for us to sign something and tell our students, 'We're doing this for other schools, but we hold you to a higher standard,'" Riley said.

Epps defended Harvard's decision to sign on, in part to be a "good neighbor" and compare notes with local colleges.

"I don't think we're doing everything at the highest level," Epps said. "We can learn from other schools."

But whether the proposal will help Harvard reach the "highest level," is far from certain.