229 



II. Important Considerations for Successful NPS Legislation 



For several years, NACA has participated in the Clean Water Working 

 Group (CWWG) , a coalition of 37 agricultural and soil and water 

 conservation organizations representing many millions of American 

 farmers, ranchers, livestock, producers, water suppliers and 

 conservation workers. Two years ago CWWG advanced reauthorization 

 principles which we believe are still valid. I would like to 

 comment on several of these considerations in the current context 

 of CWA reauthorization. 



1. Risk/benefit Considerations: Agriculture and NACA share the 

 public's respect and concern for the environment and are committed 

 to our role in its protection. However, it is essential that risk 

 based decision making form the basis of clean water protection 

 strategies. The Clinton Administration's Executive Order on 

 Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866) recognizes the 

 importance of risk analysis as a cornerstone of regulatory policy 

 development . 



Risk analysis is a way of organizing what we know about a 

 particular risk; for each there may be several courses of action, 

 each with its own costs and benefits. It takes into account the 

 frequency with which adverse impacts will occur and the likely 

 magnitude of the impact . It also provides a mechanism for 

 estimating the relative costs, and it provides decision makers with 

 the tools to make more informed, science-based decisions. 



Such a risk assessment process, supplemented with an effective 

 cost-benefit analysis, will help focus limited resources on 

 essential programs and requirements, while also going a long way to 

 foster awareness and understanding among agricultural producers. 



2. Targeted Response: HR 394 8 would apply mandatory NPS programs 

 nationwide, with no targeting of resources and funds to impaired 

 waters. While it is true that NPS programs work best when they are 

 locally developed, and site-specific in design and implementation, 

 severe resource and manpower limitations quickly appear when one 

 considers the development and nationwide implementation of complex, 

 multi-year programs. For this reason, it is most appropriate that 

 NPS programs embodied in a reauthorized CWA be targeted to impaired 

 watersheds that are identified on the basis of sound monitoring and 

 scientific assessment of water quality. 



3. Adequate Timelines: Identification of impaired waters, 

 development and approval of NPS plans, coordination of efforts and 

 funds, and effective installation and maintenance of NPS management 

 measures will take almost a decade, barring severe climatic 

 setbacks. After that, another five years probably will be 

 necessary before significant water quality improvement will be 

 observed. Thus, effective NPS policy should allow 10 years for 



