Other Languages1. The Growth Management Act (GMA) does not apply directly to a site-specific decision such as siting a wetlands mitigation bank, although the GMA applies to the development regulations and comprehensive plans. 2. Certification of a wetlands mitigation bank by the Department of Ecology does not legally obligate a county to issue required permits for the bank. 3. The Department of Ecology’s certification of a wetlands mitigation bank does not make the Growth Management Act (GMA) or the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) inapplicable. 4. The substantive provisions of the Growth Management Act (GMA) do not apply to the Department of Ecology’s certification of a wetlands mitigation bank.
1. The Department of Fish and Wildlife may not require hydraulic project approval permits under RCW 77.55.021 to regulate planting, growing, or harvesting of farm-raised geoduck clams by private parties. 2. The planting, growing, and harvesting of farm-raised geoduck clams would require a substantial development permit under the Shoreline Management Act if a specific project or practice causes substantial interference with normal public use of the surface waters, but not otherwise. 3. Where a geoduck clam culture project would require a substantial development permit, the local government and the Department of Ecology would have a variety of enforcement options available; in some cases, conditional use permits might also be used to regulate this practice.
The State of Washington does not have the requisite authority, under federal law, to regulate radioactive emissions from a federal nuclear facility‑-except for air emissions, which may be monitored by the State Department of Ecology under the federal Clean Air Act amendments of 1977.
1. RCW 43.21A.190 provides that the Ecological Commission shall provide advice and guidance to the Director of the Department of Ecology with regard to the adoption of rules and regulations. The Commission's role is limited to providing advice and guidance. The Commission does not have the authority to prevent the Director from adopting regulations, that members of the Commission disapprove. This applies to regulations that the Director adopts in connection with the Shoreline Management Act. 2. RCW 43.21A.190, by its terms, does not apply to the Department of Ecology's responsibilities in the area of water resources. Thus, the Director need not seek the advice and guidance of the Ecological Commission on water resource regulations. The Commission does not have the authority to prevent the Director from adopting regulations relating to water resources.
1. Chapter 70.105 RCW requires local governments to adopt hazardous waste plans for the management of moderate-risk waste. A local government can implement such plans through its board of health. 2. A local health board can assess a fee against a sewer district for services the board performs in connection with the implementation of a local hazardous waste plan. However, the fee must be no greater than the actual cost of providing the relevant services. 3. The authority granted to the Department of Ecology to regulate hazardous waste does not preempt the authority of a local health board to adopt a local hazardous waste plan for the management of moderate-risk waste and to charge a fee in connection with the implementation of the plan.
(1) In view of the amendment to chapter 128, Laws of 1972, 1st Ex. Sess. (Referendum 26) which is contained in chapter 242, Laws of 1972, 1st Ex. Sess., the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant thereto may not be made available to counties or other public bodies for the acquisition of trucks or other vehicles to be used in the transporting of garbage from its source in residential, commercial and industrial areas either to drop-box or transfer stations or directly to landfills and recovery facilities.
(2) The foregoing bond proceeds may, however, continue to be used for the acquisition of land and equipment for use in relation to the operation of sanitary landfills, resource recovery facilities, drop-box and transfer stations, and equipment for the transfer of solid waste from such stations to landfills and recovery facilities.
Chapter 90.70 RCW authorizes the Puget Sound Water Quality Authority to make recommendations regarding the protection of wetlands. However, chapter 90.70 RCW does not empower the Authority to set minimum standards for wetlands protection or to require local governments to adopt the Authority's recommendations.
If, in order to attain "maximum net benefits" and protect the public welfare and interest against the long range detrimental effects of a perpetual water use not so restricted, the state department of ecology, in issuing a surface water right permit pursuant to RCW 90.03.290, determines to include a provision authorizing use of such waters unconditionally for specified initial period of time (e.g., fifty years), with any authorization to withdraw for further periods of time made dependent upon subsequent determinations by the department involving public needs for the waters involved, that action is likely to be upheld by the courts.
1. In reviewing a water conservancy board record of decision concerning a water right transfer application, the Department of Ecology is not limited to reviewing the record established by the water conservancy board but may base its decision upon an independent factual investigation. 2. In reviewing a water conservancy board record of decision concerning a water right transfer application, the Department of Ecology is not required to: 1) defer to the water conservancy board’s findings of fact, or 2) defer to the board’s interpretation of the law. 3. A water conservancy board, in making a decision concerning a water right transfer application, is not legally required to follow policies or guidelines of the Department of Ecology which have not been adopted as statutes or administrative rules; however, the Department of Ecology may refer to and follow its own policies or guidelines in reviewing the local board’s decision.