Bill to Increase MET Registration and Marking Requirements Fails (LB 845)
Legislative Bill 845 sought to repeal the current statute relating to the registration and marking of meteorological evaluation towers (“MET”) and to provide a new definition for METs and new requirements for registration and identification markers. We detailed the provisions of LB 845 in an article shortly after its introduction.
While LB 845 did not advance this year, we anticipate a similar bill in the next session of the Legislature. Key features that we expect in next year’s legislation include:
Definition for METs
An anchored structure, including all guy wires and accessory facilities, on which one or more meteorological instruments are mounted for the purpose of meteorological data collection, that is at least fifty feet (50′) above the surface of the ground at the point of installation and located outside of city limits.
Paint the top half of the tower in seven (7) equal width and alternating bands of aviation orange and white, beginning with orange at the top of the tower and ending with orange at the bottom of the painted area;
Two (2) or more aviation orange spherical marker balls at least twenty one inches (21″) in diameter and attached to each outer guy wire connected to the tower with the top ball no more than twenty feet (20′) from the top wire connection and remaining ball or balls at least at or below midpoint of the tower on the other guy wires.
Yellow safety sleeves installed on each outer guy wire extending at least fourteen feet (14′) up from the anchor point of the guy wire.
METs must be recognizable in clear air during daylight at least sixteen (16) hours from a distance of not less than two thousand feet (2,000′).
METs installed prior to the effective date of legislation, if introduced and adopted, will have two (2) years from the effective date to comply with the marking requirements and ninety (90) days to register the MET.
Failure to Comply
A material failure to comply with the marking and registration requirements will be admissible as evidence of negligence on the part of an owner of a MET in an action in tort for property damage, bodily injury, or death resulting from an aerial collision with such unmarked or unregistered MET.
While we wait for introduction and adoption of new legislation, it is important that MET owners comply with the current requirements for METs. Click here to read our prior article regarding current registration and marking requirements for METs.