title: RCW 90.56.540

text:
(1) A person is guilty of operating a vessel while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs if the person operates a covered vessel within this state while:
(a) The person has 0.06 grams or more of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of breath, as shown by analysis of the person's breath made under RCW 90.56.550; or
(b) The person has 0.06 percent or more by weight of alcohol in the person's blood as shown by analysis of the person's blood made under RCW 90.56.550; or
(c) The person is under the influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor or drugs; or
(d) The person is under the combined influence of or affected by intoxicating liquor or drugs.
(2) The fact that any person charged with a violation of this section is or has been entitled to use such drug under the laws of this state shall not constitute a defense against any charge of violating this section.
(3) Operating a vessel while intoxicated is a class C felony under chapter 9A.20 RCW.
[ 2000 c 69 s 23; 1991 c 200 s 605. Formerly RCW 88.16.220.]
Notes:
Effective dates—1991 c 200: See RCW 90.56.901.

catchline: Operation of a vessel while under influence of liquor or drugs—Penalty.


doc_type: statute

jurisdiction: wa

title: RCW 90.56.550

text:
(1) Upon the trial of any civil or criminal action or proceeding arising out of acts alleged to have been committed by a person while operating a vessel while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs, if the amount of alcohol in the person's blood or breath at the time alleged as shown by analysis of his blood or breath is less than 0.06 percent by weight of alcohol in his blood or 0.06 grams of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of the person's breath, it is evidence that may be considered with other competent evidence in determining whether the person was under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs.
(2) The breath analysis shall be based upon grams of alcohol per two hundred ten liters of breath. The foregoing provisions of this section shall not be construed as limiting the introduction of any other competent evidence bearing upon the question whether the person was under the influence of intoxicating liquor or any drug.
(3) Analysis of the person's blood or breath to be considered valid under this section shall have been performed according to methods approved by the state toxicologist and by an individual possessing a valid permit issued by the state toxicologist for this purpose. The state toxicologist shall approve satisfactory techniques or methods, to supervise the examination of individuals to ascertain their qualifications and competence to conduct such analyses, and to issue permits that are subject to termination or revocation at the discretion of the state toxicologist.
(4) If a blood test is administered under this section, the withdrawal of blood for the purpose of determining its alcoholic content may be performed only by a physician, a registered nurse, or a qualified technician. This limitation shall not apply to the taking of breath specimens.
(5) The person tested may have a physician, or a qualified technician, chemist, registered nurse, or other qualified person of his or her own choosing administer one or more tests in addition to any administered at the direction of a law enforcement officer. The failure or inability to obtain an additional test by a person shall not preclude the admission of evidence relating to the test or tests taken at the direction of a law enforcement officer.
(6) Upon the request of the person who submits to a test or tests at the request of a law enforcement officer, full information concerning the test or tests shall be made available to the person or his or her attorney.
[ 1991 c 200 s 606. Formerly RCW 88.16.230.]
Notes:
Effective dates—1991 c 200: See RCW 90.56.901.

license: public-domain-government-work

rule_set: Revised Code of Washington

catchline: Breath or blood analysis.

code: rcw

unit: section

court: Washington State Legislature


title: RCW 90.56.560

text:
No physician, registered nurse, qualified technician, or hospital, or duly licensed clinical laboratory employing or using services of the physician, registered nurse, or qualified technician, may incur any civil or criminal liability as a result of the act of withdrawing blood from any person when directed by a law enforcement officer to do so for the purpose of a blood test under RCW 90.56.550. This section shall not relieve any physician, registered nurse, qualified technician, or hospital or duly licensed clinical laboratory from civil liability arising from the use of improper procedures or failing to exercise the required standard of care.
[ 2000 c 69 s 24; 1991 c 200 s 607. Formerly RCW 88.16.240.]
Notes:
Effective dates—1991 c 200: See RCW 90.56.901.

catchline: Limited immunity for blood withdrawal.


title: RCW 90.56.565

text:
(1)(a) A facility that receives crude oil from a railroad car must provide advance notice to the department that the facility will receive crude oil from a railroad car, as provided in this section. The advance notice must include the route taken to the facility within the state, if known, and the scheduled time, location, volume, region per bill of lading, type, vapor pressure, and gravity as measured by standards developed by the American petroleum institute, of crude oil received. Each week, a facility that provides advance notice under this section must provide the required information regarding the scheduled arrival of railroad cars carrying crude oil to be received by the facility in the succeeding seven-day period. A facility is not required to provide advance notice when there is no receipt of crude oil from a railroad car scheduled for a seven-day period.
(b) Twice per year, pipelines that transport crude oil must report to the department the following information about the crude oil transported by the pipeline through the state: The volume of crude oil, gravity of the crude oil as measured by standards developed by the American petroleum institute, type of crude oil, and the state or province of origin of the crude oil. This report must be submitted each year by July 31st for the period January 1st through June 30th and by January 31st for the period July 1st through December 31st.
(2) The department may share information provided by a facility through the advance notice system established in this section with the state emergency management division and any county, city, tribal, port, or local government emergency response agency upon request.
(3) The department must publish information collected under this section on a quarterly basis on the department's internet website. With respect to the information reported under subsection (1)(a) of this section, the information published by the department must be aggregated on a statewide basis by route through the state, by week, and by type of crude oil. The report may also include other information available to the department including, but not limited to, place of origin, modes of transport, number of railroad cars delivering crude oil, and number and volume of spills during transport and delivery.
(4) To further strengthen rail safety and the transportation of crude oil, the department must provide to the utilities and transportation commission data reported by facilities on the characteristics, volatility, vapor pressure, and volume of crude oil transported by rail, as required under subsection (1)(a) of this section.
(5) A facility providing advance notice under this section is not responsible for meeting advance notice time frame requirements under subsection (1) of this section in the event that the schedule of arrivals of railroad cars carrying crude oil changes during a seven-day period.
(6) Consistent with the requirements of chapter 42.56 RCW, the department and any state, local, tribal, or public agency that receives information provided under this section may not disclose any such information to the public or to nongovernmental entities that contains proprietary, commercial, or financial information unless that information is aggregated. The requirement for aggregating information does not apply when information is shared by the department with emergency response agencies as provided in subsection (2) of this section.
(7) The department shall adopt rules to implement this section. The advance notice system required in this section must be consistent with the oil transfer reporting system adopted by the department pursuant to RCW 88.46.165.
[ 2019 c 354 s 2; 2019 c 289 s 7; 2015 c 274 s 8.]
Notes:
Reviser's note: This section was amended by 2019 c 289 s 7 and by 2019 c 354 s 2, each without reference to the other. Both amendments are incorporated in the publication of this section under RCW 1.12.025(2). For rule of construction, see RCW 1.12.025(1).
Finding—Intent—2019 c 289: See note following RCW 88.16.190.
Effective date—2015 c 274: See note following RCW 90.56.005.

catchline: Facilities that receive crude oil from a railroad car—Advanced notice system—Department required to report information—Adoption of rules.


title: RCW 90.56.569

text:
(1) The department must provide to the relevant policy and fiscal committees of the senate and house of representatives updates by December 31, 2019, and December 31, 2021, consistent with the requirements of RCW 43.01.036, as to the progress made in completing state and federal geographic response plans as needed in contingency plans required under RCW 90.56.060, 90.56.210, and 88.46.060.
(2) In its updates of geographic response plans, the department must address situations where oils, depending on their qualities, weathering, environmental factors, and method of discharge, may submerge or sink in water.
(3) All requirements in this section are subject to the availability of amounts appropriated for the specific purposes described.
[ 2018 c 262 s 304; 2015 c 274 s 25.]
Notes:
Findings—Intent—Report—2018 c 262: See notes following RCW 82.23B.010.
Effective date—2015 c 274: See note following RCW 90.56.005.

catchline: Updates to the senate and house of representatives.


title: RCW 90.56.570

text:
To the extent practicable and consistent with RCW 88.46.180, the department shall periodically evaluate and update planning standards for oil spill response equipment required under contingency plans required by this chapter in order to ensure access in the state to equipment that represents the best achievable protection to respond to a worst case spill and provide for continuous operation of oil spill response activities to the maximum extent practicable and without jeopardizing crew safety, as determined by the incident commander or the unified command. The department must coordinate evaluation and update planning requirements under this section with requirements under RCW 88.46.180 to eliminate duplication.
[ 2015 c 274 s 28.]
Notes:
Effective date—2015 c 274: See note following RCW 90.56.005.

catchline: Periodic evaluation and update of planning standards for oil spill response equipment.


title: RCW 90.56.580

text:
(1)(a) A facility constructed or permitted after January 1, 2019, may not load or unload crude oil into or from a rail tank car unless the oil has a vapor pressure of less than nine pounds per square inch.
(b) A facility may not load or unload crude oil into or from a rail tank car unless the oil has a vapor pressure of less than nine pounds per square inch beginning two years after the volume of crude oil transported by rail to the facility for a calendar year as reported under RCW 90.56.565 has increased more than ten percent above the volume reported for calendar year 2018.
(2) The director may impose a penalty of up to twenty-five hundred dollars per day per rail tank car or the equivalent volume of oil for violations of this section. Any penalty recovered pursuant to this section must be credited to the coastal protection fund created in RCW 90.48.390.
(3) This section does not: (a) Prohibit a railroad car carrying crude oil from entering Washington; (b) require a railroad car carrying crude oil to stop before entering Washington; or (c) require a railroad car carrying crude oil to be checked for vapor pressure before entering Washington.
[ 2019 c 354 s 1.]

catchline: Crude oil vapor pressure—Maximum—Penalty.


title: RCW 90.56.900

text:
This chapter, being necessary for the general welfare, the public health, and the public safety of the state and its inhabitants, shall be liberally construed to effect their purposes. No rule, regulation, or order of the department shall be stayed pending appeal under this chapter.
[ 1991 c 200 s 1107; 1971 ex.s. c 180 s 10. Formerly RCW 90.48.907.]

catchline: Construction—Appeal not to stay order, rule, or regulation.


title: RCW 90.56.901

text:
(1) Sections 101 through 429, 501 through 706, 805 through 807, 810 through 817, and 901 through 1118 of this act are necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and shall take effect immediately [May 15, 1991].
(2) Sections 801 through 804, 808, and 809 of this act shall take effect October 1, 1991.
[ 1991 c 200 s 1119.]

catchline: Effective dates—1991 c 200.


title: RCW 90.58.010

text:
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "Shoreline Management Act of 1971".
[ 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 1.]

catchline: Short title.


title: RCW 90.58.020

text:
The legislature finds that the shorelines of the state are among the most valuable and fragile of its natural resources and that there is great concern throughout the state relating to their utilization, protection, restoration, and preservation. In addition it finds that ever increasing pressures of additional uses are being placed on the shorelines necessitating increased coordination in the management and development of the shorelines of the state. The legislature further finds that much of the shorelines of the state and the uplands adjacent thereto are in private ownership; that unrestricted construction on the privately owned or publicly owned shorelines of the state is not in the best public interest; and therefore, coordinated planning is necessary in order to protect the public interest associated with the shorelines of the state while, at the same time, recognizing and protecting private property rights consistent with the public interest. There is, therefore, a clear and urgent demand for a planned, rational, and concerted effort, jointly performed by federal, state, and local governments, to prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state's shorelines.
It is the policy of the state to provide for the management of the shorelines of the state by planning for and fostering all reasonable and appropriate uses. This policy is designed to insure the development of these shorelines in a manner which, while allowing for limited reduction of rights of the public in the navigable waters, will promote and enhance the public interest. This policy contemplates protecting against adverse effects to the public health, the land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the waters of the state and their aquatic life, while protecting generally public rights of navigation and corollary rights incidental thereto.
The legislature declares that the interest of all of the people shall be paramount in the management of shorelines of statewide significance. The department, in adopting guidelines for shorelines of statewide significance, and local government, in developing master programs for shorelines of statewide significance, shall give preference to uses in the following order of preference which:
(1) Recognize and protect the statewide interest over local interest;
(2) Preserve the natural character of the shoreline;
(3) Result in long term over short term benefit;
(4) Protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline;
(5) Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines;
(6) Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shoreline;
(7) Provide for any other element as defined in RCW 90.58.100 deemed appropriate or necessary.
In the implementation of this policy the public's opportunity to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of natural shorelines of the state shall be preserved to the greatest extent feasible consistent with the overall best interest of the state and the people generally. To this end uses shall be preferred which are consistent with control of pollution and prevention of damage to the natural environment, or are unique to or dependent upon use of the state's shoreline. Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines of the state, in those limited instances when authorized, shall be given priority for single-family residences and their appurtenant structures, ports, shoreline recreational uses including but not limited to parks, marinas, piers, and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines of the state, industrial and commercial developments which are particularly dependent on their location on or use of the shorelines of the state and other development that will provide an opportunity for substantial numbers of the people to enjoy the shorelines of the state. Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines and shorelands of the state shall be recognized by the department. Shorelines and shorelands of the state shall be appropriately classified and these classifications shall be revised when circumstances warrant regardless of whether the change in circumstances occurs through man-made causes or natural causes. Any areas resulting from alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines and shorelands of the state no longer meeting the definition of "shorelines of the state" shall not be subject to the provisions of chapter 90.58 RCW.
Permitted uses in the shorelines of the state shall be designed and conducted in a manner to minimize, insofar as practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and environment of the shoreline area and any interference with the public's use of the water.
[ 1995 c 347 s 301; 1992 c 105 s 1; 1982 1st ex.s. c 13 s 1; 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 2.]
Notes:
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.

catchline: Legislative findings—State policy enunciated—Use preference.


title: RCW 90.58.030

text:
As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, the following definitions and concepts apply:
(1) Administration:
(a) "Department" means the department of ecology;
(b) "Director" means the director of the department of ecology;
(c) "Hearings board" means the shorelines hearings board established by this chapter;
(d) "Local government" means any county, incorporated city, or town which contains within its boundaries any lands or waters subject to this chapter;
(e) "Person" means an individual, partnership, corporation, association, organization, cooperative, public or municipal corporation, or agency of the state or local governmental unit however designated.
(2) Geographical:
(a) "Extreme low tide" means the lowest line on the land reached by a receding tide;
(b) "Floodway" means the area, as identified in a master program, that either: (i) Has been established in federal emergency management agency flood insurance rate maps or floodway maps; or (ii) consists of those portions of a river valley lying streamward from the outer limits of a watercourse upon which flood waters are carried during periods of flooding that occur with reasonable regularity, although not necessarily annually, said floodway being identified, under normal condition, by changes in surface soil conditions or changes in types or quality of vegetative ground cover condition, topography, or other indicators of flooding that occurs with reasonable regularity, although not necessarily annually. Regardless of the method used to identify the floodway, the floodway shall not include those lands that can reasonably be expected to be protected from flood waters by flood control devices maintained by or maintained under license from the federal government, the state, or a political subdivision of the state;
(c) "Ordinary high water mark" on all lakes, streams, and tidal water is that mark that will be found by examining the bed and banks and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, as to mark upon the soil a character distinct from that of the abutting upland, in respect to vegetation as that condition exists on June 1, 1971, as it may naturally change thereafter, or as it may change thereafter in accordance with permits issued by a local government or the department: PROVIDED, That in any area where the ordinary high water mark cannot be found, the ordinary high water mark adjoining salt water shall be the line of mean higher high tide and the ordinary high water mark adjoining fresh water shall be the line of mean high water;
(d) "Shorelands" or "shoreland areas" means those lands extending landward for two hundred feet in all directions as measured on a horizontal plane from the ordinary high water mark; floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward two hundred feet from such floodways; and all wetlands and river deltas associated with the streams, lakes, and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of this chapter; the same to be designated as to location by the department of ecology.
(i) Any county or city may determine that portion of a one-hundred-year-flood plain to be included in its master program as long as such portion includes, as a minimum, the floodway and the adjacent land extending landward two hundred feet therefrom.
(ii) Any city or county may also include in its master program land necessary for buffers for critical areas, as defined in chapter 36.70A RCW, that occur within shorelines of the state, provided that forest practices regulated under chapter 76.09 RCW, except conversions to nonforestland use, on lands subject to the provisions of this subsection (2)(d)(ii) are not subject to additional regulations under this chapter;
(e) "Shorelines" means all of the water areas of the state, including reservoirs, and their associated shorelands, together with the lands underlying them; except (i) shorelines of statewide significance; (ii) shorelines on segments of streams upstream of a point where the mean annual flow is twenty cubic feet per second or less and the wetlands associated with such upstream segments; and (iii) shorelines on lakes less than twenty acres in size and wetlands associated with such small lakes;
(f) "Shorelines of statewide significance" means the following shorelines of the state:
(i) The area between the ordinary high water mark and the western boundary of the state from Cape Disappointment on the south to Cape Flattery on the north, including harbors, bays, estuaries, and inlets;
(ii) Those areas of Puget Sound and adjacent salt waters and the Strait of Juan de Fuca between the ordinary high water mark and the line of extreme low tide as follows:
(A) Nisqually Delta—from DeWolf Bight to Tatsolo Point,
(B) Birch Bay—from Point Whitehorn to Birch Point,
(C) Hood Canal—from Tala Point to Foulweather Bluff,
(D) Skagit Bay and adjacent area—from Brown Point to Yokeko Point, and
(E) Padilla Bay—from March Point to William Point;
(iii) Those areas of Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca and adjacent salt waters north to the Canadian line and lying seaward from the line of extreme low tide;
(iv) Those lakes, whether natural, artificial, or a combination thereof, with a surface acreage of one thousand acres or more measured at the ordinary high water mark;
(v) Those natural rivers or segments thereof as follows:
(A) Any west of the crest of the Cascade range downstream of a point where the mean annual flow is measured at one thousand cubic feet per second or more,
(B) Any east of the crest of the Cascade range downstream of a point where the annual flow is measured at two hundred cubic feet per second or more, or those portions of rivers east of the crest of the Cascade range downstream from the first three hundred square miles of drainage area, whichever is longer;
(vi) Those shorelands associated with (f)(i), (ii), (iv), and (v) of this subsection (2);
(g) "Shorelines of the state" are the total of all "shorelines" and "shorelines of statewide significance" within the state;
(h) "Wetlands" means areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands.
(3) Procedural terms:
(a) "Development" means a use consisting of the construction or exterior alteration of structures; dredging; drilling; dumping; filling; removal of any sand, gravel, or minerals; bulkheading; driving of piling; placing of obstructions; or any project of a permanent or temporary nature which interferes with the normal public use of the surface of the waters overlying lands subject to this chapter at any state of water level;
(b) "Guidelines" means those standards adopted to implement the policy of this chapter for regulation of use of the shorelines of the state prior to adoption of master programs. Such standards shall also provide criteria to local governments and the department in developing master programs;
(c) "Master program" means the comprehensive use plan for a described area, and the use regulations together with maps, diagrams, charts, or other descriptive material and text, a statement of desired goals, and standards developed in accordance with the policies enunciated in RCW 90.58.020. "Comprehensive master program update" means a master program that fully achieves the procedural and substantive requirements of the department guidelines effective January 17, 2004, as now or hereafter amended;
(d) "State master program" is the cumulative total of all master programs approved or adopted by the department of ecology;
(e) "Substantial development" means any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds five thousand dollars, or any development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. The dollar threshold established in this subsection (3)(e) must be adjusted for inflation by the office of financial management every five years, beginning July 1, 2007, based upon changes in the consumer price index during that time period. "Consumer price index" means, for any calendar year, that year's annual average consumer price index, Seattle, Washington area, for urban wage earners and clerical workers, all items, compiled by the bureau of labor and statistics, United States department of labor. The office of financial management must calculate the new dollar threshold and transmit it to the office of the code reviser for publication in the Washington State Register at least one month before the new dollar threshold is to take effect. The following shall not be considered substantial developments for the purpose of this chapter:
(i) Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire, or elements;
(ii) Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single-family residences;
(iii) Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements;
(iv) Construction and practices normal or necessary for farming, irrigation, and ranching activities, including agricultural service roads and utilities on shorelands, and the construction and maintenance of irrigation structures including but not limited to head gates, pumping facilities, and irrigation channels. A feedlot of any size, all processing plants, other activities of a commercial nature, alteration of the contour of the shorelands by leveling or filling other than that which results from normal cultivation, shall not be considered normal or necessary farming or ranching activities. A feedlot shall be an enclosure or facility used or capable of being used for feeding livestock hay, grain, silage, or other livestock feed, but shall not include land for growing crops or vegetation for livestock feeding and/or grazing, nor shall it include normal livestock wintering operations;
(v) Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys;
(vi) Construction on shorelands by an owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of a single-family residence for his own use or for the use of his or her family, which residence does not exceed a height of thirty-five feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this chapter;
(vii) Construction of a dock, including a community dock, designed for pleasure craft only, for the private noncommercial use of the owner, lessee, or contract purchaser of single and multiple family residences. This exception applies if either: (A) In salt waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed two thousand five hundred dollars; or (B) in fresh waters, the fair market value of the dock does not exceed: (I) Twenty thousand dollars for docks that are constructed to replace existing docks, are of equal or lesser square footage than the existing dock being replaced, and are located in a county, city, or town that has updated its master program consistent with the master program guidelines in chapter 173-26 WAC as adopted in 2003; or (II) ten thousand dollars for all other docks constructed in fresh waters. However, if subsequent construction occurs within five years of completion of the prior construction, and the combined fair market value of the subsequent and prior construction exceeds the amount specified in either (e)(vii)(A) or (B) of this subsection (3), the subsequent construction shall be considered a substantial development for the purpose of this chapter. All dollar thresholds under (e)(vii)(B) of this subsection (3) must be adjusted for inflation by the office of financial management every five years, beginning July 1, 2018, based upon changes in the consumer price index during that time period. "Consumer price index" means, for any calendar year, that year's annual average consumer price index, Seattle, Washington area, for urban wage earners and clerical workers, all items, compiled by the bureau of labor and statistics, United States department of labor. The office of financial management must calculate the new dollar thresholds, rounded to the nearest hundred dollar, and transmit them to the office of the code reviser for publication in the Washington State Register at least one month before the new dollar thresholds are to take effect;
(viii) Operation, maintenance, or construction of canals, waterways, drains, reservoirs, or other facilities that now exist or are hereafter created or developed as a part of an irrigation system for the primary purpose of making use of system waters, including return flow and artificially stored groundwater for the irrigation of lands;
(ix) The marking of property lines or corners on state owned lands, when such marking does not significantly interfere with normal public use of the surface of the water;
(x) Operation and maintenance of any system of dikes, ditches, drains, or other facilities existing on September 8, 1975, which were created, developed, or utilized primarily as a part of an agricultural drainage or diking system;
(xi) Site exploration and investigation activities that are prerequisite to preparation of an application for development authorization under this chapter, if:
(A) The activity does not interfere with the normal public use of the surface waters;
(B) The activity will have no significant adverse impact on the environment including, but not limited to, fish, wildlife, fish or wildlife habitat, water quality, and aesthetic values;
(C) The activity does not involve the installation of a structure, and upon completion of the activity the vegetation and land configuration of the site are restored to conditions existing before the activity;
(D) A private entity seeking development authorization under this section first posts a performance bond or provides other evidence of financial responsibility to the local jurisdiction to ensure that the site is restored to preexisting conditions; and
(E) The activity is not subject to the permit requirements of RCW 90.58.550;
(xii) The process of removing or controlling an aquatic noxious weed, as defined in RCW 17.26.020, through the use of an herbicide or other treatment methods applicable to weed control that are recommended by a final environmental impact statement published by the department of agriculture or the department jointly with other state agencies under chapter 43.21C RCW;
(xiii) The external or internal retrofitting of an existing structure with the exclusive purpose of compliance with the Americans with disabilities act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.) or to otherwise provide physical access to the structure by individuals with disabilities.
[ 2016 c 193 s 1; 2014 c 23 s 1. Prior: 2010 c 107 s 3; 2007 c 328 s 1; 2003 c 321 s 2; 2002 c 230 s 2; 1996 c 265 s 1; prior: 1995 c 382 s 10; 1995 c 255 s 5; 1995 c 237 s 1; 1987 c 474 s 1; 1986 c 292 s 1; 1982 1st ex.s. c 13 s 2; 1980 c 2 s 3; 1979 ex.s. c 84 s 3; 1975 1st ex.s. c 182 s 1; 1973 1st ex.s. c 203 s 1; 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 3.]
Notes:
Intent—Retroactive application—Effective date—2010 c 107: See notes following RCW 36.70A.480.
Finding—Intent—2003 c 321: "(1) The legislature finds that the final decision and order in Everett Shorelines Coalition v. City of Everett and Washington State Department of Ecology, Case No. 02-3-0009c, issued on January 9, 2003, by the central Puget Sound growth management hearings board was a case of first impression interpreting the addition of the shoreline management act into the growth management act, and that the board considered the appeal and issued its final order and decision without the benefit of shorelines guidelines to provide guidance on the implementation of the shoreline management act and the adoption of shoreline master programs.
(2) This act is intended to affirm the legislature's intent that:
(a) The shoreline management act be read, interpreted, applied, and implemented as a whole consistent with decisions of the shoreline[s] hearings board and Washington courts prior to the decision of the central Puget Sound growth management hearings board in Everett Shorelines Coalition v. City of Everett and Washington State Department of Ecology;
(b) The goals of the growth management act, including the goals and policies of the shoreline management act, set forth in RCW 36.70A.020 and included in RCW 36.70A.020 by RCW 36.70A.480, continue to be listed without an order of priority; and
(c) Shorelines of statewide significance may include critical areas as defined by RCW 36.70A.030(5), but that shorelines of statewide significance are not critical areas simply because they are shorelines of statewide significance.
(3) The legislature intends that critical areas within the jurisdiction of the shoreline management act shall be governed by the shoreline management act and that critical areas outside the jurisdiction of the shoreline management act shall be governed by the growth management act. The legislature further intends that the quality of information currently required by the shoreline management act to be applied to the protection of critical areas within shorelines of the state shall not be limited or changed by the provisions of the growth management act." [ 2003 c 321 s 1.]
Finding—Intent—2002 c 230: "The legislature finds that the dollar threshold for what constitutes substantial development under the shoreline management act has not been changed since 1986. The legislature recognizes that the effects of inflation have brought in many activities under the jurisdiction of chapter 90.58 RCW that would have been exempted under its original provisions. It is the intent of the legislature to modify the current dollar threshold for what constitutes substantial development under the shoreline management act, and to have this threshold readjusted on a five-year basis." [ 2002 c 230 s 1.]
Effective date—1995 c 255: See RCW 17.26.901.
Severability—1986 c 292: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [ 1986 c 292 s 5.]
Intent—1980 c 2; 1979 ex.s. c 84: "The legislature finds that high tides and hurricane force winds on February 13, 1979, caused conditions resulting in the catastrophic destruction of the Hood Canal bridge on state route 104, a state highway on the federal-aid system; and, as a consequence, the state of Washington has sustained a sudden and complete failure of a major segment of highway system with a disastrous impact on transportation services between the counties of Washington's Olympic peninsula and the remainder of the state. The governor has by proclamation found that these conditions constitute an emergency. To minimize the economic loss and hardship to residents of the Puget Sound and Olympic peninsula regions, it is the intent of 1979 ex.s. c 84 to authorize the department of transportation to undertake immediately all necessary actions to restore interim transportation services across Hood Canal and Puget Sound and upon the Kitsap and Olympic peninsulas and to design and reconstruct a permanent bridge at the site of the original Hood Canal bridge. The department of transportation is directed to proceed with such actions in an environmentally responsible manner that would meet the substantive objectives of the state environmental policy act and the shorelines management act, and shall consult with the department of ecology in the planning process. The exemptions from the state environmental policy act and the shorelines management act contained in RCW 43.21C.032 and 90.58.030 are intended to approve and ratify the timely actions of the department of transportation taken and to be taken to restore interim transportation services and to reconstruct a permanent Hood Canal bridge without procedural delays." [ 1980 c 2 s 1; 1979 ex.s. c 84 s 1.]

catchline: Definitions and concepts.


title: RCW 90.58.040

text:
The shoreline management program of this chapter shall apply to the shorelines of the state as defined in this chapter.
[ 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 4.]

catchline: Program applicable to shorelines of the state.


title: RCW 90.58.045

text:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any legal requirement under this chapter, including any standard, limitation, rule, or order is superseded and replaced in accordance with the terms and provisions of an environmental excellence program agreement, entered into under chapter 43.21K RCW.
[ 1997 c 381 s 28.]
Notes:
Purpose—1997 c 381: See RCW 43.21K.005.

catchline: Environmental excellence program agreements—Effect on chapter.


title: RCW 90.58.050

text:
This chapter establishes a cooperative program of shoreline management between local government and the state. Local government shall have the primary responsibility for initiating the planning required by this chapter and administering the regulatory program consistent with the policy and provisions of this chapter. The department shall act primarily in a supportive and review capacity with an emphasis on providing assistance to local government and on insuring compliance with the policy and provisions of this chapter.
[ 1995 c 347 s 303; 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 5.]
Notes:
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.

catchline: Program as cooperative between local government and state—Responsibilities differentiated.


title: RCW 90.58.060

text:
(1) The department shall periodically review and adopt guidelines consistent with RCW 90.58.020, containing the elements specified in RCW 90.58.100 for:
(a) Development of master programs for regulation of the uses of shorelines; and
(b) Development of master programs for regulation of the uses of shorelines of statewide significance.
(2) Before adopting or amending guidelines under this section, the department shall provide an opportunity for public review and comment as follows:
(a) The department shall mail copies of the proposal to all cities, counties, and federally recognized Indian tribes, and to any other person who has requested a copy, and shall publish the proposed guidelines in the Washington state register. Comments shall be submitted in writing to the department within sixty days from the date the proposal has been published in the register.
(b) The department shall hold at least four public hearings on the proposal in different locations throughout the state to provide a reasonable opportunity for residents in all parts of the state to present statements and views on the proposed guidelines. Notice of the hearings shall be published at least once in each of the three weeks immediately preceding the hearing in one or more newspapers of general circulation in each county of the state. If an amendment to the guidelines addresses an issue limited to one geographic area, the number and location of hearings may be adjusted consistent with the intent of this subsection to assure all parties a reasonable opportunity to comment on the proposed amendment. The department shall accept written comments on the proposal during the sixty-day public comment period and for seven days after the final public hearing.
(c) At the conclusion of the public comment period, the department shall review the comments received and modify the proposal consistent with the provisions of this chapter. The proposal shall then be published for adoption pursuant to the provisions of chapter 34.05 RCW.
(3) The department may adopt amendments to the guidelines not more than once each year. Such amendments shall be limited to: (a) Addressing technical or procedural issues that result from the review and adoption of master programs under the guidelines; or (b) issues of guideline compliance with statutory provisions.
[ 2003 c 262 s 1; 1995 c 347 s 304; 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 6.]
Notes:
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.

catchline: Review and adoption of guidelines—Public hearings, notice of—Amendments.


title: RCW 90.58.065

text:
(1) The guidelines adopted by the department and master programs developed or amended by local governments according to RCW 90.58.080 shall not require modification of or limit agricultural activities occurring on agricultural lands. In jurisdictions where agricultural activities occur, master programs developed or amended after June 13, 2002, shall include provisions addressing new agricultural activities on land not meeting the definition of agricultural land, conversion of agricultural lands to other uses, and development not meeting the definition of agricultural activities. Nothing in this section limits or changes the terms of the *current exception to the definition of substantial development in RCW 90.58.030(3)(e)(iv). This section applies only to this chapter, and shall not affect any other authority of local governments.
(2) For the purposes of this section:
(a) "Agricultural activities" means agricultural uses and practices including, but not limited to: Producing, breeding, or increasing agricultural products; rotating and changing agricultural crops; allowing land used for agricultural activities to lie fallow in which it is plowed and tilled but left unseeded; allowing land used for agricultural activities to lie dormant as a result of adverse agricultural market conditions; allowing land used for agricultural activities to lie dormant because the land is enrolled in a local, state, or federal conservation program, or the land is subject to a conservation easement; conducting agricultural operations; maintaining, repairing, and replacing agricultural equipment; maintaining, repairing, and replacing agricultural facilities, provided that the replacement facility is no closer to the shoreline than the original facility; and maintaining agricultural lands under production or cultivation;
(b) "Agricultural products" includes but is not limited to horticultural, viticultural, floricultural, vegetable, fruit, berry, grain, hops, hay, straw, turf, sod, seed, and apiary products; feed or forage for livestock; Christmas trees; hybrid cottonwood and similar hardwood trees grown as crops and harvested within twenty years of planting; and livestock including both the animals themselves and animal products including but not limited to meat, upland finfish, poultry and poultry products, and dairy products;
(c) "Agricultural equipment" and "agricultural facilities" includes, but is not limited to: (i) The following used in agricultural operations: Equipment; machinery; constructed shelters, buildings, and ponds; fences; upland finfish rearing facilities; water diversion, withdrawal, conveyance, and use equipment and facilities including but not limited to pumps, pipes, tapes, canals, ditches, and drains; (ii) corridors and facilities for transporting personnel, livestock, and equipment to, from, and within agricultural lands; (iii) farm residences and associated equipment, lands, and facilities; and (iv) roadside stands and on-farm markets for marketing fruit or vegetables; and
(d) "Agricultural land" means those specific land areas on which agriculture activities are conducted.
(3) The department and local governments shall assure that local shoreline master programs use definitions consistent with the definitions in this section.
[ 2002 c 298 s 1.]
Notes:
*Reviser's note: "Current" first appears in chapter 298, Laws of 2002.
Implementation—2002 c 298: "The provisions of this act do not become effective until the earlier of either January 1, 2004, or the date the department of ecology amends or updates chapter 173-16 or 173-26 WAC." [ 2002 c 298 s 2.]

catchline: Application of guidelines and master programs to agricultural activities.


title: RCW 90.58.070

text:
(1) Local governments are directed with regard to shorelines of the state in their various jurisdictions to submit to the director of the department, within six months from June 1, 1971, letters stating that they propose to complete an inventory and develop master programs for these shorelines as provided for in RCW 90.58.080.
(2) If any local government fails to submit a letter as provided in subsection (1) of this section, or fails to adopt a master program for the shorelines of the state within its jurisdiction in accordance with the time schedule provided in this chapter, the department shall carry out the requirements of RCW 90.58.080 and adopt a master program for the shorelines of the state within the jurisdiction of the local government.
[ 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 7.]

catchline: Local governments to submit letters of intent—Department to act upon failure of local government.


title: RCW 90.58.080

text:
(1) Local governments shall develop or amend a master program for regulation of uses of the shorelines of the state consistent with the required elements of the guidelines adopted by the department in accordance with the schedule established by this section.
(2)(a) Subject to the provisions of subsections (5) and (6) of this section, each local government subject to this chapter shall develop or amend its master program for the regulation of uses of shorelines within its jurisdiction according to the following schedule:
(i) On or before December 1, 2005, for the city of Port Townsend, the city of Bellingham, the city of Everett, Snohomish county, and Whatcom county;
(ii) On or before December 1, 2009, for King county and the cities within King county greater in population than ten thousand;
(iii) Except as provided by (a)(i) and (ii) of this subsection, on or before December 1, 2011, for Clallam, Clark, Jefferson, King, Kitsap, Pierce, Snohomish, Thurston, and Whatcom counties and the cities within those counties;
(iv) On or before December 1, 2012, for Cowlitz, Island, Lewis, Mason, San Juan, Skagit, and Skamania counties and the cities within those counties;
(v) On or before December 1, 2013, for Benton, Chelan, Douglas, Grant, Kittitas, Spokane, and Yakima counties and the cities within those counties; and
(vi) On or before December 1, 2014, for Adams, Asotin, Columbia, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grays Harbor, Klickitat, Lincoln, Okanogan, Pacific, Pend Oreille, Stevens, Wahkiakum, Walla Walla, and Whitman counties and the cities within those counties.
(b) Nothing in this subsection (2) shall preclude a local government from developing or amending its master program prior to the dates established by this subsection (2).
(3)(a) Following approval by the department of a new or amended master program, local governments required to develop or amend master programs on or before December 1, 2009, as provided by subsection (2)(a)(i) and (ii) of this section, shall be deemed to have complied with the schedule established by subsection (2)(a)(iii) of this section and shall not be required to complete master program amendments until the applicable dates established by subsection (4)(b) of this section. Any jurisdiction listed in subsection (2)(a)(i) of this section that has a new or amended master program approved by the department on or after March 1, 2002, but before July 27, 2003, shall not be required to complete master program amendments until the applicable date provided by subsection (4)(b) of this section.
(b) Following approval by the department of a new or amended master program, local governments choosing to develop or amend master programs on or before December 1, 2009, shall be deemed to have complied with the schedule established by subsection (2)(a)(iii) through (vi) of this section and shall not be required to complete master program amendments until the applicable dates established by subsection (4)(b) of this section.
(4)(a) Following the updates required by subsection (2) of this section, local governments shall conduct a review of their master programs at least once every 10 years as required by (b) of this subsection. Following the review required by this subsection (4), local governments shall, if necessary, revise their master programs. The purpose of the review is:
(i) To assure that the master program complies with applicable law and guidelines in effect at the time of the review; and
(ii) To assure consistency of the master program with the local government's comprehensive plan and development regulations adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW, if applicable, and other local requirements.
(b) Counties and cities shall take action to review and, if necessary, revise their master programs as required by (a) of this subsection as follows:
(i) On or before June 30, 2029, and every 10 years thereafter, for King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish counties and the cities within those counties;
(ii) On or before June 30, 2030, and every 10 years thereafter, for Clallam, Clark, Island, Jefferson, Lewis, Mason, San Juan, Skagit, Thurston, and Whatcom counties and the cities within those counties;
(iii) On or before June 30, 2031, and every 10 years thereafter, for Benton, Chelan, Cowlitz, Douglas, Franklin, Kittitas, Skamania, Spokane, Walla Walla, and Yakima counties and the cities within those counties; and
(iv) On or before June 30, 2032, and every 10 years thereafter, for Adams, Asotin, Columbia, Ferry, Garfield, Grant, Grays Harbor, Klickitat, Lincoln, Okanogan, Pacific, Pend Oreille, Stevens, Wahkiakum, and Whitman counties and the cities within those counties.
(5) In meeting the review requirements of subsection (4) of this section, local governments are encouraged to begin the process of developing or amending their master programs early and are eligible for grants from the department as provided by RCW 90.58.250, subject to available funding. Except for those local governments listed in subsection (2)(a)(i) and (ii) of this section, the deadline for completion of the new or amended master programs shall be two years after the date the grant is approved by the department. Subsequent master program review dates shall not be altered by the provisions of this subsection.
(6) In meeting the review requirements of subsection (4) of this section, the following shall apply:
(a) Grants to local governments for reviewing master programs pursuant to the schedule established by this section shall be provided at least two years before the adoption dates specified in subsection (4) of this section. To the extent possible, the department shall allocate grants within the amount appropriated for such purposes to provide reasonable and adequate funding to local governments that have indicated their intent to develop or amend master programs during the biennium according to the schedule established by subsection (4) of this section. Any local government that applies for but does not receive funding to comply with the provisions of subsection (4) of this section may delay the development or amendment of its master program until the following biennium.
(b) Local governments with delayed compliance dates as provided in (a) of this subsection shall be the first priority for funding in subsequent biennia, and the periodic review compliance deadline for those local governments shall be two years after the date of grant approval.
(c) Failure of the local government to apply in a timely manner for a master program development or amendment grant in accordance with the requirements of the department shall not be considered a delay resulting from the provisions of (a) of this subsection.
(7) In meeting the update requirements of subsection (2) of this section, all local governments subject to the requirements of this chapter that have not developed or amended master programs on or after March 1, 2002, shall, no later than December 1, 2014, develop or amend their master programs to comply with guidelines adopted by the department after January 1, 2003.
(8) In meeting the review requirements of subsection (4) of this section, local governments may be provided an additional year beyond the deadlines in this section to complete their master program or amendment. The department shall grant the request if it determines that the local government is likely to adopt or amend its master program within the additional year.
[ 2023 c 80 s 2; (2023 c 80 s 1 expired July 1, 2025); 2020 c 113 s 2; 2011 c 353 s 13; 2007 c 170 s 1; 2003 c 262 s 2; 1995 c 347 s 305; 1974 ex.s. c 61 s 1; 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 8.]
Notes:
Effective date—2023 c 80 s 2: "Section 2 of this act takes effect July 1, 2025." [ 2023 c 80 s 4.]
Expiration date—2023 c 80 s 1: "Section 1 of this act expires July 1, 2025." [ 2023 c 80 s 3.]
Effective date—2020 c 113 s 2: "Section 2 of this act takes effect July 1, 2025." [ 2020 c 113 s 3.]
Intent—2011 c 353: See note following RCW 36.70A.130.
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.

catchline: Timetable for local governments to develop or amend master programs—Review of master programs—Grants.


title: RCW 90.58.090

text:
(1) A master program, segment of a master program, or an amendment to a master program shall become effective when approved by the department as provided in subsection (7) of this section. Within the time period provided in RCW 90.58.080, each local government shall have submitted a master program, either totally or by segments, for all shorelines of the state within its jurisdiction to the department for review and approval.
The department shall strive to achieve final action on a submitted master program within one hundred eighty days of receipt and shall post an annual assessment related to this performance benchmark on the agency website.
(2) Upon receipt of a proposed master program or amendment, the department shall:
(a) Provide notice to and opportunity for written comment by all interested parties of record as a part of the local government review process for the proposal and to all persons, groups, and agencies that have requested in writing notice of proposed master programs or amendments generally or for a specific area, subject matter, or issue. The comment period shall be at least thirty days, unless the department determines that the level of complexity or controversy involved supports a shorter period;
(b) In the department's discretion, conduct a public hearing during the thirty-day comment period in the jurisdiction proposing the master program or amendment;
(c) Within fifteen days after the close of public comment, request the local government to review the issues identified by the public, interested parties, groups, and agencies and provide a written response as to how the proposal addresses the identified issues;
(d) Within thirty days after receipt of the local government response pursuant to (c) of this subsection, make written findings and conclusions regarding the consistency of the proposal with the policy of RCW 90.58.020 and the applicable guidelines, provide a response to the issues identified in (c) of this subsection, and either approve the proposal as submitted, recommend specific changes necessary to make the proposal approvable, or deny approval of the proposal in those instances where no alteration of the proposal appears likely to be consistent with the policy of RCW 90.58.020 and the applicable guidelines. The written findings and conclusions shall be provided to the local government, and made available to all interested persons, parties, groups, and agencies of record on the proposal;
(e) If the department recommends changes to the proposed master program or amendment, within thirty days after the department mails the written findings and conclusions to the local government, the local government may:
(i) Agree to the proposed changes by written notice to the department; or
(ii) Submit an alternative proposal. If, in the opinion of the department, the alternative is consistent with the purpose and intent of the changes originally submitted by the department and with this chapter it shall approve the changes and provide notice to all recipients of the written findings and conclusions. If the department determines the proposal is not consistent with the purpose and intent of the changes proposed by the department, the department may resubmit the proposal for public and agency review pursuant to this section or reject the proposal.
(3) The department shall approve the segment of a master program relating to shorelines unless it determines that the submitted segments are not consistent with the policy of RCW 90.58.020 and the applicable guidelines.
(4) The department shall approve the segment of a master program relating to critical areas as defined by RCW 36.70A.030 provided the master program segment is consistent with RCW 90.58.020 and applicable shoreline guidelines, and if the segment provides a level of protection of critical areas at least equal to that provided by the local government's critical areas ordinances adopted and thereafter amended pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060(2).
(5) The department shall approve those segments of the master program relating to shorelines of statewide significance only after determining the program provides the optimum implementation of the policy of this chapter to satisfy the statewide interest. If the department does not approve a segment of a local government master program relating to a shoreline of statewide significance, the department may develop and by rule adopt an alternative to the local government's proposal.
(6) In the event a local government has not complied with the requirements of RCW 90.58.070 it may thereafter upon written notice to the department elect to adopt a master program for the shorelines within its jurisdiction, in which event it shall comply with the provisions established by this chapter for the adoption of a master program for such shorelines.
Upon approval of such master program by the department it shall supersede such master program as may have been adopted by the department for such shorelines.
(7) A master program or amendment to a master program takes effect when and in such form as approved or adopted by the department. The effective date is fourteen days from the date of the department's written notice of final action to the local government stating the department has approved or rejected the proposal. For master programs adopted by rule, the effective date is governed by RCW 34.05.380. The department's written notice to the local government must conspicuously and plainly state that it is the department's final decision and that there will be no further modifications to the proposal.
(a) Shoreline master programs that were adopted by the department prior to July 22, 1995, in accordance with the provisions of this section then in effect, shall be deemed approved by the department in accordance with the provisions of this section that became effective on that date.
(b) The department shall maintain a record of each master program, the action taken on any proposal for adoption or amendment of the master program, and any appeal of the department's action. The department's approved document of record constitutes the official master program.
(8) Promptly after approval or disapproval of a local government's shoreline master program or amendment, the department shall publish a notice consistent with RCW 36.70A.290 that the shoreline master program or amendment has been approved or disapproved. This notice must be filed for all shoreline master programs or amendments. If the notice is for a local government that does not plan under RCW 36.70A.040, the department must, on the day the notice is published, notify the legislative authority of the applicable local government by telephone or electronic means, followed by written communication as necessary, to ensure that the local government has received the full written decision of the approval or disapproval.
[ 2025 c 58 s 2050. Prior: 2011 c 353 s 14; 2011 c 277 s 2; 2003 c 321 s 3; 1997 c 429 s 50; 1995 c 347 s 306; 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 9.]
Notes:
Explanatory note—2025 c 58: See note following RCW 1.16.050.
Intent—2011 c 353: See note following RCW 36.70A.130.
Finding—Intent—2003 c 321: See note following RCW 90.58.030.
Severability—1997 c 429: See note following RCW 36.70A.3201.
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.

catchline: Approval of master program or segments or amendments—Procedure—Departmental alternatives when shorelines of statewide significance—Later adoption of master program supersedes departmental program.


title: RCW 90.58.100

text:
(1) The master programs provided for in this chapter, when adopted or approved by the department shall constitute use regulations for the various shorelines of the state. In preparing the master programs, and any amendments thereto, the department and local governments shall to the extent feasible:
(a) Utilize a systematic interdisciplinary approach which will insure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts;
(b) Consult with and obtain the comments of any federal, state, regional, or local agency having any special expertise with respect to any environmental impact;
(c) Consider all plans, studies, surveys, inventories, and systems of classification made or being made by federal, state, regional, or local agencies, by private individuals, or by organizations dealing with pertinent shorelines of the state;
(d) Conduct or support such further research, studies, surveys, and interviews as are deemed necessary;
(e) Utilize all available information regarding hydrology, geography, topography, ecology, economics, and other pertinent data;
(f) Employ, when feasible, all appropriate, modern scientific data processing and computer techniques to store, index, analyze, and manage the information gathered.
(2) The master programs shall include, when appropriate, the following:
(a) An economic development element for the location and design of industries, projects of statewide significance, transportation facilities, port facilities, tourist facilities, commerce and other developments that are particularly dependent on their location on or use of the shorelines of the state;
(b) A public access element making provision for public access to publicly owned areas;
(c) A recreational element for the preservation and enlargement of recreational opportunities, including but not limited to parks, tidelands, beaches, and recreational areas;
(d) A circulation element consisting of the general location and extent of existing and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes, terminals, and other public utilities and facilities, all correlated with the shoreline use element;
(e) A use element which considers the proposed general distribution and general location and extent of the use on shorelines and adjacent land areas for housing, business, industry, transportation, agriculture, natural resources, recreation, education, public buildings and grounds, and other categories of public and private uses of the land;
(f) A conservation element for the preservation of natural resources, including but not limited to scenic vistas, aesthetics, and vital estuarine areas for fisheries and wildlife protection;
(g) An historic, cultural, scientific, and educational element for the protection and restoration of buildings, sites, and areas having historic, cultural, scientific, or educational values;
(h) An element that gives consideration to the statewide interest in the prevention and minimization of flood damages; and
(i) Any other element deemed appropriate or necessary to effectuate the policy of this chapter.
(3) The master programs shall include such map or maps, descriptive text, diagrams and charts, or other descriptive material as are necessary to provide for ease of understanding.
(4) Master programs will reflect that state-owned shorelines of the state are particularly adapted to providing wilderness beaches, ecological study areas, and other recreational activities for the public and will give appropriate special consideration to same.
(5) Each master program shall contain provisions to allow for the varying of the application of use regulations of the program, including provisions for permits for conditional uses and variances, to insure that strict implementation of a program will not create unnecessary hardships or thwart the policy enumerated in RCW 90.58.020. Any such varying shall be allowed only if extraordinary circumstances are shown and the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. The concept of this subsection shall be incorporated in the rules adopted by the department relating to the establishment of a permit system as provided in RCW 90.58.140(3).
(6) Each master program shall contain standards governing the protection of single-family residences and appurtenant structures against damage or loss due to shoreline erosion. The standards shall govern the issuance of substantial development permits for shoreline protection, including structural methods such as construction of bulkheads, and nonstructural methods of protection. The standards shall provide for methods which achieve effective and timely protection against loss or damage to single-family residences and appurtenant structures due to shoreline erosion. The standards shall provide a preference for permit issuance for measures to protect single-family residences occupied prior to January 1, 1992, where the proposed measure is designed to minimize harm to the shoreline natural environment.
[ 2009 c 421 s 9; 1997 c 369 s 7; 1995 c 347 s 307; 1992 c 105 s 2; 1991 c 322 s 32; 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 10.]
Notes:
Effective date—2009 c 421: See note following RCW 43.157.005.
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.
Findings—Intent—1991 c 322: See note following RCW 86.12.200.
Project of statewide significance—Defined: RCW 43.157.010.

catchline: Programs as constituting use regulations—Duties when preparing programs and amendments thereto—Program contents.


title: RCW 90.58.110

text:
(1) Whenever it shall appear to the director that a master program should be developed for a region of the shorelines of the state which includes lands and waters located in two or more adjacent local government jurisdictions, the director shall designate such region and notify the appropriate units of local government thereof. It shall be the duty of the notified units to develop cooperatively an inventory and master program in accordance with and within the time provided in RCW 90.58.080.
(2) At the discretion of the department, a local government master program may be adopted in segments applicable to particular areas so that immediate attention may be given to those areas of the shorelines of the state in most need of a use regulation.
[ 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 11.]

catchline: Development of program within two or more adjacent local government jurisdictions—Development of program in segments, when.


title: RCW 90.58.120

text:
All rules, regulations, designations, and guidelines, issued by the department, and master programs and amendments adopted by the department pursuant to RCW 90.58.070(2) or * 90.58.090(4) shall be adopted or approved in accordance with the provisions of RCW 34.05.310 through 34.05.395 insofar as such provisions are not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter. In addition:
(1) Prior to the adoption by the department of a master program, or portion thereof pursuant to RCW 90.58.070(2) or * 90.58.090(4), at least one public hearing shall be held in each county affected by a program or portion thereof for the purpose of obtaining the views and comments of the public. Notice of each such hearing shall be published at least once in each of the three weeks immediately preceding the hearing in one or more newspapers of general circulation in the county in which the hearing is to be held.
(2) All guidelines, regulations, designations, or master programs adopted or approved under this chapter shall be available for public inspection at the office of the department or the appropriate county and city. The terms "adopt" and "approve" for purposes of this section, shall include modifications and rescission of guidelines.
[ 1995 c 347 s 308; 1989 c 175 s 182; 1975 1st ex.s. c 182 s 2; 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 12.]
Notes:
*Reviser's note: RCW 90.58.090 was amended by 2003 c 321 s 3, changing subsection (4) to subsection (5).
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.
Effective date—1989 c 175: See note following RCW 34.05.010.

catchline: Adoption of rules, programs, etc., subject to RCW 34.05.310 through 34.05.395—Public hearings, notice of—Public inspection after approval or adoption.


title: RCW 90.58.130

text:
To insure that all persons and entities having an interest in the guidelines and master programs developed under this chapter are provided with a full opportunity for involvement in both their development and implementation, the department and local governments shall:
(1) Make reasonable efforts to inform the people of the state about the shoreline management program of this chapter and in the performance of the responsibilities provided in this chapter, shall not only invite but actively encourage participation by all persons and private groups and entities showing an interest in shoreline management programs of this chapter; and
(2) Invite and encourage participation by all agencies of federal, state, and local government, including municipal and public corporations, having interests or responsibilities relating to the shorelines of the state. State and local agencies are directed to participate fully to insure that their interests are fully considered by the department and local governments.
[ 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 13.]

catchline: Involvement of all persons and entities having interest, means.


title: RCW 90.58.140

text:
(1) A development shall not be undertaken on the shorelines of the state unless it is consistent with the policy of this chapter and, after adoption or approval, as appropriate, the applicable guidelines, rules, or master program.
(2) A substantial development shall not be undertaken on shorelines of the state without first obtaining a permit from the government entity having administrative jurisdiction under this chapter.
A permit shall be granted:
(a) From June 1, 1971, until such time as an applicable master program has become effective, only when the development proposed is consistent with: (i) The policy of RCW 90.58.020; and (ii) after their adoption, the guidelines and rules of the department; and (iii) so far as can be ascertained, the master program being developed for the area;
(b) After adoption or approval, as appropriate, by the department of an applicable master program, only when the development proposed is consistent with the applicable master program and this chapter.
(3) The local government shall establish a program, consistent with rules adopted by the department, for the administration and enforcement of the permit system provided in this section. The administration of the system so established shall be performed exclusively by the local government.
(4) Except as otherwise specifically provided in subsection (11) of this section, the local government shall require notification of the public of all applications for permits governed by any permit system established pursuant to subsection (3) of this section by ensuring that notice of the application is given by at least one of the following methods:
(a) Mailing of the notice to the latest recorded real property owners as shown by the records of the county assessor within at least three hundred feet of the boundary of the property upon which the substantial development is proposed;
(b) Posting of the notice in a conspicuous manner on the property upon which the project is to be constructed; or
(c) Any other manner deemed appropriate by local authorities to accomplish the objectives of reasonable notice to adjacent landowners and the public.
The notices shall include a statement that any person desiring to submit written comments concerning an application, or desiring to receive notification of the final decision concerning an application as expeditiously as possible after the issuance of the decision, may submit the comments or requests for decisions to the local government within thirty days of the last date the notice is to be published pursuant to this subsection. The local government shall forward, in a timely manner following the issuance of a decision, a copy of the decision to each person who submits a request for the decision.
If a hearing is to be held on an application, notices of such a hearing shall include a statement that any person may submit oral or written comments on an application at the hearing.
(5) The system shall include provisions to assure that construction pursuant to a permit will not begin or be authorized until twenty-one days from the date the permit decision was filed as provided in subsection (6) of this section; or until all review proceedings are terminated if the proceedings were initiated within twenty-one days from the date of filing as defined in subsection (6) of this section except as follows:
(a) In the case of any permit issued to the state of Washington, department of transportation, for the construction and modification of SR 90 (I-90) on or adjacent to Lake Washington, the construction may begin after thirty days from the date of filing, and the permits are valid until December 31, 1995;
(b)(i) In the case of any permit or decision to issue any permit to the state of Washington, department of transportation, for the replacement of the floating bridge and landings of the state route number 520 Evergreen Point bridge on or adjacent to Lake Washington, the construction may begin twenty-one days from the date of filing. Any substantial development permit granted for the floating bridge and landings is deemed to have been granted on the date that the local government's decision to grant the permit is issued. This authorization to construct is limited to only those elements of the floating bridge and landings that do not preclude the department of transportation's selection of a four-lane alternative for state route number 520 between Interstate 5 and Medina. Additionally, the Washington state department of transportation shall not engage in or contract for any construction on any portion of state route number 520 between Interstate 5 and the western landing of the floating bridge until the legislature has authorized the imposition of tolls on the Interstate 90 floating bridge and/or other funding sufficient to complete construction of the state route number 520 bridge replacement and HOV program. For the purposes of this subsection (5)(b), the "western landing of the floating bridge" means the least amount of new construction necessary to connect the new floating bridge to the existing state route number 520 and anchor the west end of the new floating bridge;
(ii) Nothing in this subsection (5)(b) precludes the shorelines hearings board from concluding that the project or any element of the project is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the shoreline management act or the local shoreline master program;
(iii) This subsection (5)(b) applies retroactively to any appeals filed after January 1, 2012, and to any appeals filed on or after March 23, 2012, and expires June 30, 2014;
(c)(i) In the case of permits for projects addressing significant public safety risks, as defined by the department of transportation, it is not in the public interest to delay construction until all review proceedings are terminated. In the case of any permit issued under this chapter or decision to issue any permit under this chapter for a transportation project of the Washington state department of transportation, construction may begin twenty-one days after the date of filing if all components of the project achieve a no net loss of shoreline ecological functions, as defined by department guidelines adopted pursuant to RCW 90.58.060 and as determined through the following process:
(A) The department of transportation, as part of the permit review process, must provide the local government with an assessment of how the project affects shoreline ecological functions. The assessment must include specific actions for avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating impacts to shoreline ecological functions, developed in consultation with the department, that ensure there is no net loss of shoreline ecological functions; and
(B) The local government, after reviewing the assessment required in (c)(i)(A) of this subsection and prior to the final issuance of all appropriate shoreline permits and variances, must determine that the project will result in no net loss of shoreline ecological functions.
(ii) Nothing in this subsection (5)(c) precludes the shorelines hearings board from concluding that the shoreline project or any element of the project is inconsistent with this chapter, the local shoreline master program, chapter 43.21C RCW and its implementing regulations, or the applicable shoreline regulations.
(iii) This subsection (5)(c) does not apply to permit decisions for the replacement of the floating bridge and landings of the state route number 520 Evergreen Point bridge on or adjacent to Lake Washington;
(d) Except as authorized in (b) and (c) of this subsection, construction may be commenced no sooner than thirty days after the date of the appeal of the board's decision is filed if a permit is granted by the local government and (i) the granting of the permit is appealed to the shorelines hearings board within twenty-one days of the date of filing, (ii) the hearings board approves the granting of the permit by the local government or approves a portion of the substantial development for which the local government issued the permit, and (iii) an appeal for judicial review of the hearings board decision is filed pursuant to chapter 34.05 RCW. The appellant may request, within ten days of the filing of the appeal with the court, a hearing before the court to determine whether construction pursuant to the permit approved by the hearings board or to a revised permit issued pursuant to the order of the hearings board should not commence. If, at the conclusion of the hearing, the court finds that construction pursuant to such a permit would involve a significant, irreversible damaging of the environment, the court shall prohibit the permittee from commencing the construction pursuant to the approved or revised permit until all review proceedings are final. Construction pursuant to a permit revised at the direction of the hearings board may begin only on that portion of the substantial development for which the local government had originally issued the permit, and construction pursuant to such a revised permit on other portions of the substantial development may not begin until after all review proceedings are terminated. In such a hearing before the court, the burden of proving whether the construction may involve significant irreversible damage to the environment and demonstrating whether such construction would or would not be appropriate is on the appellant;
(e) Except as authorized in (b) and (c) of this subsection, if the permit is for a substantial development meeting the requirements of subsection (11) of this section, construction pursuant to that permit may not begin or be authorized until twenty-one days from the date the permit decision was filed as provided in subsection (6) of this section.
If a permittee begins construction pursuant to (a), (b), (c), (d), or (e) of this subsection, the construction is begun at the permittee's own risk. If, as a result of judicial review, the courts order the removal of any portion of the construction or the restoration of any portion of the environment involved or require the alteration of any portion of a substantial development constructed pursuant to a permit, the permittee is barred from recovering damages or costs involved in adhering to such requirements from the local government that granted the permit, the hearings board, or any appellant or intervener.
(6) Any decision on an application for a permit under the authority of this section, whether it is an approval or a denial, shall, concurrently with the transmittal of the ruling to the applicant, be filed with the department and the attorney general. This shall be accomplished by return receipt requested mail. A petition for review of such a decision must be commenced within twenty-one days from the date of filing of the decision.
(a) With regard to a permit other than a permit governed by subsection (10) of this section, "date of filing" as used in this section refers to the date of actual receipt by the department of the local government's decision.
(b) With regard to a permit for a variance or a conditional use governed by subsection (10) of this section, "date of filing" means the date the decision of the department is transmitted by the department to the local government.
(c) When a local government simultaneously transmits to the department its decision on a shoreline substantial development with its approval of either a shoreline conditional use permit or variance, or both, "date of filing" has the same meaning as defined in (b) of this subsection.
(d) The department shall notify in writing the local government and the applicant of the date of filing by telephone or electronic means, followed by written communication as necessary, to ensure that the applicant has received the full written decision.
(7) Applicants for permits under this section have the burden of proving that a proposed substantial development is consistent with the criteria that must be met before a permit is granted. In any review of the granting or denial of an application for a permit as provided in RCW 90.58.180 (1) and (2), the person requesting the review has the burden of proof.
(8) Any permit may, after a hearing with adequate notice to the permittee and the public, be rescinded by the issuing authority upon the finding that a permittee has not complied with conditions of a permit. If the department is of the opinion that noncompliance exists, the department shall provide written notice to the local government and the permittee. If the department is of the opinion that the noncompliance continues to exist thirty days after the date of the notice, and the local government has taken no action to rescind the permit, the department may petition the hearings board for a rescission of the permit upon written notice of the petition to the local government and the permittee if the request by the department is made to the hearings board within fifteen days of the termination of the thirty-day notice to the local government.
(9) The holder of a certification from the governor pursuant to chapter 80.50 RCW shall not be required to obtain a permit under this section.
(10) Any permit for a variance or a conditional use issued with approval by a local government under their approved master program must be submitted to the department for its approval or disapproval.
(11)(a) An application for a substantial development permit for a limited utility extension or for the construction of a bulkhead or other measures to protect a single-family residence and its appurtenant structures from shoreline erosion shall be subject to the following procedures:
(i) The public comment period under subsection (4) of this section shall be twenty days. The notice provided under subsection (4) of this section shall state the manner in which the public may obtain a copy of the local government decision on the application no later than two days following its issuance;
(ii) The local government shall issue its decision to grant or deny the permit within twenty-one days of the last day of the comment period specified in (a)(i) of this subsection; and
(iii) If there is an appeal of the decision to grant or deny the permit to the local government legislative authority, the appeal shall be finally determined by the legislative authority within thirty days.
(b) For purposes of this section, a limited utility extension means the extension of a utility service that:
(i) Is categorically exempt under chapter 43.21C RCW for one or more of the following: Natural gas, electricity, telephone, water, or sewer;
(ii) Will serve an existing use in compliance with this chapter; and
(iii) Will not extend more than twenty-five hundred linear feet within the shorelines of the state.
(12) A permit under this section is not required in order to dispose of dredged materials at a disposal site approved through the cooperative planning process referenced in RCW 79.105.500, provided the dredged material disposal proponent obtains a valid site use authorization from the dredged material management program office within the department of natural resources.
[ 2019 c 225 s 1; 2015 3rd sp.s. c 15 s 7; 2012 c 84 s 2; 2011 c 277 s 3; 2010 c 210 s 36; 1995 c 347 s 309; 1992 c 105 s 3; 1990 c 201 s 2; 1988 c 22 s 1; 1984 c 7 s 386; 1977 ex.s. c 358 s 1; 1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 51 s 1; 1975 1st ex.s. c 182 s 3; 1973 2nd ex.s. c 19 s 1; 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 14.]
Notes:
Effective date—Findings—Intent—2015 3rd sp.s. c 15: See notes following RCW 47.01.485.
Findings—2012 c 84: "In adopting the shoreline management act in 1971, the legislature declared that it is the policy of the state to provide for the management of the shorelines of the state by planning for and fostering all reasonable and appropriate uses, to ensure the development of these shorelines in a manner that will promote and enhance the public interest, and to protect against adverse effects to the public health, the land and its vegetation and wildlife, and the waters of the state and their aquatic life, while protecting generally public rights of navigation and corollary rights incidental thereto. The legislature declares that the policies recognized in 1971 are still vital to the protection of shorelines of the state.
The legislature recognizes that the replacement of the Evergreen Point bridge affects shorelines of the state and shorelines of statewide significance. However, the legislature finds that the state route number 520 corridor, including the Evergreen Point bridge, is a critical component of the state highway system and of the Puget Sound region's transportation infrastructure and is essential to maintaining and improving the region's and the state's economy.
The legislature further finds that the Evergreen Point bridge and its approaches are in danger of structural failure and that it is highly likely that the bridge will sustain serious structural damage from an earthquake or windstorm over the next fifteen years. The floating span sustained serious damage during the 1993 storm, which required major repair and retrofit. Retrofitting the span has added weight, which causes the floating span to sit lower in the water, increasing the likelihood of waves breaking over the span and causing traffic hazards. The floating span cannot be further retrofitted to withstand severe windstorms. Recent storms have continued to cause damage to the floating span, including cracks in the pontoons that allow water to enter the pontoons.
The legislature further finds that replacement of the floating span and its approaches presents unique challenges in that it is subject to narrow windows in which work on Lake Washington can be performed because of weather and environmental constraints.
The legislature further finds that significant delays in replacing the floating span and east approach of the Evergreen Point bridge must be avoided in order to: Avoid the catastrophic loss of the bridge; protect the safety of the traveling public; prevent injury, loss of life, and property damage; and provide for a strong economy in the Puget Sound region and in Washington state. In the past, the legislature has only provided exemptions to the shoreline management act for bridges that have sunk, and it is the intent of the legislature to only allow this exemption to the automatic stay provision of the shoreline management act because the Evergreen Point floating bridge is in danger of further damage and sinking." [ 2012 c 84 s 1.]
Effective date—2012 c 84: "This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect immediately [March 23, 2012]." [ 2012 c 84 s 3.]
Intent—Effective dates—Application—Pending cases and rules—2010 c 210: See notes following RCW 43.21B.001.
Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.
Finding—Intent—1990 c 201: "The legislature finds that delays in substantial development permit review for the extension of vital utility services to existing and lawful uses within the shorelines of the state have caused hardship upon existing residents without serving any of the purposes and policies of the shoreline management act. It is the intent of this act to provide a more expeditious permit review process for that limited category of utility extension activities only, while fully preserving safeguards of public review and appeal rights regarding permit applications and decisions." [ 1990 c 201 s 1.]

catchline: Development permits—Grounds for granting—Administration by local government, conditions—Applications—Notices—Rescission—Approval when permit for variance or conditional use.


title: RCW 90.58.143

text:
(1) The time requirements of this section shall apply to all substantial development permits and to any development authorized pursuant to a variance or conditional use permit authorized under this chapter. Upon a finding of good cause, based on the requirements and circumstances of the project proposed and consistent with the policy and provisions of the master program and this chapter, local government may adopt different time limits from those set forth in subsections (2) and (3) of this section as a part of action on a substantial development permit.
(2) Construction activities shall be commenced or, where no construction activities are involved, the use or activity shall be commenced within two years of the effective date of a substantial development permit. However, local government may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record on the substantial development permit and to the department.
(3) Authorization to conduct construction activities shall terminate five years after the effective date of a substantial development permit. However, local government may authorize a single extension for a period not to exceed one year based on reasonable factors, if a request for extension has been filed before the expiration date and notice of the proposed extension is given to parties of record and to the department.
(4) The effective date of a substantial development permit shall be the date of filing as provided in RCW 90.58.140(6). The permit time periods in subsections (2) and (3) of this section do not include the time during which a use or activity was not actually pursued due to the pendency of administrative appeals or legal actions or due to the need to obtain any other government permits and approvals for the development that authorize the development to proceed, including all reasonably related administrative or legal actions on any such permits or approvals.
[ 1997 c 429 s 51; 1996 c 62 s 1.]
Notes:
Severability—1997 c 429: See note following RCW 36.70A.3201.

catchline: Time requirements—Substantial development permits, variances, conditional use permits.


title: RCW 90.58.147

text:
(1) A public or private project that is designed to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage shall be exempt from the substantial development permit requirements of this chapter when all of the following apply:
(a) The project has been approved by the department of fish and wildlife or, for forest practices hydraulic projects within the scope of RCW 77.55.181, the department of natural resources if the local government notification provisions of RCW 77.55.181 are satisfied;
(b) The project has received hydraulic project approval by the department of fish and wildlife pursuant to chapter 77.55 RCW or approval of a forest practices hydraulic project within the scope of RCW 77.55.181 from the department of natural resources if the local government notification provisions of RCW 77.55.181 are satisfied; and
(c) The local government has determined that the project is substantially consistent with the local shoreline master program. The local government shall make such determination in a timely manner and provide it by letter to the project proponent.
(2) Fish habitat enhancement projects that conform to the provisions of RCW 77.55.181 are determined to be consistent with local shoreline master programs.
(3) Public projects for the primary purpose of fish passage improvement or fish passage barrier removal are exempt from the substantial development permit requirements of this chapter.
[ 2021 c 289 s 2; 2019 c 150 s 2; 2003 c 39 s 49; 1998 c 249 s 4; 1995 c 333 s 1.]
Notes:
Findings—Purpose—Report—Effective date—1998 c 249: See notes following RCW 77.55.181.

catchline: Substantial development permit—Exemption for projects to improve fish or wildlife habitat or fish passage.


title: RCW 90.58.150

text:
With respect to timber situated within two hundred feet abutting landward of the ordinary high water mark within shorelines of statewide significance, the department or local government shall allow only selective commercial timber cutting, so that no more than thirty percent of the merchantable trees may be harvested in any ten year period of time: PROVIDED, That other timber harvesting methods may be permitted in those limited instances where the topography, soil conditions or silviculture practices necessary for regeneration render selective logging ecologically detrimental: PROVIDED FURTHER, That clear cutting of timber which is solely incidental to the preparation of land for other uses authorized by this chapter may be permitted.
[ 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 15.]

catchline: Selective commercial timber cutting, when.


title: RCW 90.58.160

text:
(1) Seabed mining for hard minerals and surface drilling for oil or gas is prohibited in the waters of Puget Sound north to the Canadian boundary and the Strait of Juan de Fuca seaward from the ordinary high water mark and on all lands within one thousand feet landward from said mark.
(2)(a) For purposes of this section, "hard minerals" means natural deposits of valuable minerals including, but not limited to, metals and placer deposits of metals, nonmetallic minerals, gemstones, ores, sediments, gold, silver, copper, lead, iron, manganese, silica, chrome, platinum, tungsten, zirconium, titanium, garnet, and phosphorus.
(b) "Hard minerals" does not include rock, gravel, sand, silt, coal, or hydrocarbons.
[ 2021 c 181 s 3; 1971 ex.s. c 286 s 16.]

catchline: Prohibition against seabed mining for hard minerals and surface drilling for oil or gas, where.