Laserfiche WebLink
<br />DECISION AND PERKIT-Page Two <br /> <br />5. The applicant must furnish a permit fee, as specified in <br />Article 20, Title 36. C.R.S. 1973, before any permit can be issued. The <br />total permit fee, in this ease $100, has been paid. . <br /> <br />6. The Applicant has furnished proof of financial liability in <br />that the certificate of insurance tendered with the application in the <br />amount of $2,000,000 expressly includes the Western Kansas Groundwater <br />Management District HI and the State of Colorado. <br /> <br />7. The Applicant has submitted an operational plan for the <br />proposed project which is incorporated into these findings by reference. <br />Said plan involves seeding in Colorado for up to 15 miles west of the <br />Colodrado-Kansas border but with a target area downwind and east of <br />Colorado. No Colorado counties are within the planned target area. <br /> <br />Applicant. by his own admissions. indicates that there may be <br />instances when seeding could unintentionally impact limited areas of <br />Colorado just west of the Colorado-Kansas border but precautions will be <br />taken to reduce or eliminate such impacts. Nevertheless. Applicant could <br />not conclusively state that such impacts would not occur. <br /> <br />8. Under the letal theory of comity, Colorado may accept the <br />factual findings rendered by another state pursuant to an applicant that <br />applies to both states by virtue of the same project. <br /> <br />Applicant will supply to Ithe Director a weather modification <br />approval which has been issued for this project by the Kansas State Water <br />Board following their meeting of April 14, 1983. It should be noted that <br />the Kansas statute K.S.A. 82a-1411 contains similar requirements to the <br />Color.do statute, particularly C.R.S. 1973, 36-20-112. <br /> <br />To the extent possible. Colorado will support the findings of <br />the State of Kansas Water Resources Board. Furthermore since the project <br />does not target areas within Colorado. this state will not require the <br />same element of proof as normallY required for applications designed to <br />directly affect Colorado. <br /> <br />9. From examination of the documents and reports submitted as part <br />of the application. the program appears to use current state of the art <br />techniques. <br /> <br />10. The project subject to the conditions of the permit. does not <br />appear to involve a high degree of riSk of substantial harm to land, <br />people, health, safety. property. or the environment. <br /> <br />11. !he project. subject to the terms and conditions of the <br />permit. is designed to include adequate SAfeguards to prevent substantial <br />harm to land. people, health. safety, property. or the enviro~ent. <br /> <br />12. The project will not adversely affect another project, sub~ect <br />to the terms and conditions of the permit as well as the measure set <br />forth in the application to insure that said project will not adversely <br />affect another project. <br /> <br />13. The project is designed to minimize risk and allow for <br />scientific gains or economic benefit to the residents of the area. <br /> <br />PERMIT GRANTED <br /> <br />A Weather Kodification Permit is hereby issued to the Applicant. <br />such Permit being applicable solely to the operation described in the <br />renewal application of March 15. 1983 as modified by the TERMS AND <br />CONDITIONS prescribed below. <br />