Weather Mod - Sunset Review - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. 10------ ':Cha.""pt;;"3':S~~;;tA~di"ij;;);:;;i;tR;~;;rii;;;~~ddti;;ri~';:r;':'~;'~'="""" .,_, '"," ',' ':'. _, _-.'..-. '_., . ___ ___ _c. '_':_ _,_ __, "m_"_v,'vn".."n'~..., .................................. Administrative Recommendation '"''''=''''''''' """'- ,::.., ".,,!:,!;!t';_~:!, -. The second issue also is raised with political subdivis!ons in the state who perform their own cloud seeding activities as is currently performed by the Grand Mesa Water Authority, OPR recommends that the statutory language of \36-20- 113, C.R.S. reiated to the two percent value of the contract be clarified. Recommendation 3 - Provide clarification for director to waive fee. During the 1992 legislative repeal of the weather modification advisory committee, the Weather Modification Act was amended with regard to ground-based winter cloud seeding. Under the amendments, winter ground- based cloud seeding activities requirements were separated from other weather modification activities. Specifically, those requirements were relaxed. For exam pie, licensees were required to have only two years experience as a project director as opposed to the nominal requirement of 3 years. Additionally, the amendments provided that p'olitical subdivisions of the state could be issued a permit without a weather modification license. Finally, the statute allowed ground-based weather modification activities to receive a 5 year permiLratber than .require a permit each year. These statutory changes have not been modified in the rules arid regulations. Should the Legislature decide against the elimination of the licensing requirement, OPR recommends that the rules and regulations be modified to reflect the statutorVChanges~-------- Recommendation 4 - Make rules consistent with changes to the Weather. Modification Act.