Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.315 (2026)

Rule-making docket

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Each agency shall maintain a current public rule-making docket. The rule-making docket shall contain the information specified in subsection (3) of this section.

(2) The rule-making docket shall contain a listing of each pending rule-making proceeding. A rule-making proceeding is pending from the time it is commenced by publication of a notice of proposed rule adoption under RCW 34.05.320 until the proposed rule is withdrawn under RCW 34.05.335 or is adopted by the agency.

(3) For each rule-making proceeding, the docket shall indicate all of the following:

(a) The name and address of agency personnel responsible for the proposed rule;

(b) The subject of the proposed rule;

(c) A citation to all notices relating to the proceeding that have been published in the state register under RCW 34.05.320;

(d) The place where written submissions about the proposed rule may be inspected;

(e) The time during which written submissions will be accepted;

(f) The current timetable established for the agency proceeding, including the time and place of any rule-making hearing, the date of the rule's adoption, filing, publication, and its effective date.

[ 1989 c 175 s 6; 1988 c 288 s 302.]

Notes:

Effective date—1989 c 175: See note following RCW 34.05.010.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 2017–2017 · leading case: John Worthington, App./cross-res. v. Wa State Liquor & Cannabis Bd., Res/cross-app. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

John Worthington, App./cross-res. v. Wa State Liquor & Cannabis Bd., Res/cross-app. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “” AR at 60. Four days later, Worthington sent another e-mail to the WSLCB Rules Coordinator that requested an e-mail exchange be added “to the Petition for adoption amendment repeal.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.