BOARD02598

• Board Meeting Date: 9/18/1974
• Description: Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

in regulations from the other state agencies, and even including the
Revenue Department, so that we will have a comprehensive code. The
regulations that are now being promulgated and developed should, if
possible, be developed in format that will make it easier to fit them
into an eventual code. And in particular in connection with House Bill
1041, there are three agencies that are required to do this work and I
submit model regulations by Septenlbpr 30. There is this agency, the
Forest Service, and the Colorado Geological Survey. In addition, the
Land Use Commission is developing some regulations, but they are not
under that September 30 deadline.

It would be helpful and I think we can do it, particularly in view of
the time frame that you have developed for yourselves of approving
something on December 4. If the three lead agencies here, the Forest
Service, this agency, and the Geological Survey can use the same format.
And for example, when you get to penalties if you could all recommend
the same penalty. .Right nen-I there is a discrepancy. I think you have
a hundred dollars in here; the Geological Survey has five hundred
dollars.

And is it necessary to tell the county commissioners or the city council
three different times, here are three different permit procedures, here
are three different types of penalties? It would seem that we could
have one section that would be uniform in all three sets of model regu-
lations. And that an effort should be made to do that. As they say,
there are three agencies that are statutorily charged with dOing this.

In addition, matters of state interest that are itemized in House Bill
1041 include new communities, archaeological sites, shore lands of major
reservoirs, extensions to water and sewage. We anticipate that for
each of these others there will be companion regulations. And again,
it would be desirable; it is going to take work but I think we have the
time and willpower to get that job done. In order to do it and leaning
a little on my past experience in the legislature in drafting compre-
hensive legislation, whether it was the criminal code where we revised
all our criminal statutes, more recently the water pollution statute,
I found it very helpful to have a dlafting committee, a small committee
that would prepare a first draft and then circulate it out to a larger
committee and get back to the smaller committee and play it back and
forth before you finally throw it out to the general public. And in
.that t~ay you can save time. .

Obviously with a group such as this to do the detailed, nitpicking type
of thing that needs to be eventually done on these regulations requires I
a great deal of time and not everyone in the audience is going to have
the patience. They have the interest to see the net product. They
want to have the input if it is done wrong, but I would hope that a
drafting committee of some sort can be established that can then meet
and compare notes with counterparts in the other agencies.

Let me mention a couple of things in particular. I notice in your first
paragraph here, "1.1 Statutory authorization," there is reference to

-12-