Wash. Rev. Code » Title 34 · Chapter 34.05
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.350 (2026)

Emergency rules and amendments

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) If an agency for good cause finds:
(a) That immediate adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule is necessary for the preservation of the public health, safety, or general welfare, and that observing the time requirements of notice and opportunity to comment upon adoption of a permanent rule would be contrary to the public interest;
(b) That state or federal law or federal rule or a federal deadline for state receipt of federal funds requires immediate adoption of a rule; or
(c) In order to implement the requirements or reductions in appropriations enacted in any budget for fiscal year 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, or in an omnibus transportation appropriations act for the 2021-2023 biennium related to setting toll rates or ferry fares, which necessitates the need for the immediate adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule, and that observing the time requirements of notice and opportunity to comment upon adoption of a permanent rule would be contrary to the fiscal needs or requirements of the agency,
the agency may dispense with those requirements and adopt, amend, or repeal the rule on an emergency basis. The agency's finding and a concise statement of the reasons for its finding shall be incorporated in the order for adoption of the emergency rule or amendment filed with the office of the code reviser under RCW 34.05.380 and with the rules review committee.
(2) An emergency rule adopted under this section takes effect upon filing with the code reviser, unless a later date is specified in the order of adoption, and may not remain in effect for longer than one hundred twenty days after filing. Identical or substantially similar emergency rules may not be adopted in sequence unless conditions have changed or the agency has filed notice of its intent to adopt the rule as a permanent rule, and is actively undertaking the appropriate procedures to adopt the rule as a permanent rule. This section does not relieve any agency from compliance with any law requiring that its permanent rules be approved by designated persons or bodies before they become effective.
(3) Within seven days after the rule is adopted, any person may petition the governor requesting the immediate repeal of a rule adopted on an emergency basis by any department listed in RCW 43.17.010. Within seven days after submission of the petition, the governor shall either deny the petition in writing, stating his or her reasons for the denial, or order the immediate repeal of the rule. In ruling on the petition, the governor shall consider only whether the conditions in subsection (1) of this section were met such that adoption of the rule on an emergency basis was necessary. If the governor orders the repeal of the emergency rule, any sanction imposed based on that rule is void. This subsection shall not be construed to prohibit adoption of any rule as a permanent rule.
[ 2021 c 333 s 717; 2011 1st sp.s. c 2 s 1; 2009 c 559 s 1; 1994 c 249 s 3; 1989 c 175 s 10; 1988 c 288 s 309; 1981 c 324 s 4; 1977 ex.s. c 240 s 8; 1959 c 234 s 3. Formerly RCW 34.04.030.]

Notes:

Effective date—2021 c 333: See note following RCW 43.19.642.
Effective date—2011 1st sp.s. c 2: "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 [May 31, 2011]." [ 2011 1st sp.s. c 2 s 2.]
Effective date—2009 c 559: "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 [May 19, 2009]." [ 2009 c 559 s 2.]
Severability—Application—1994 c 249: See notes following RCW 34.05.310.
Effective date—1989 c 175: See note following RCW 34.05.010.
Legislative affirmation—Severability—1981 c 324: See notes following RCW 34.05.010.
Effective date—1977 ex.s. c 240: See RCW 34.08.905.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1992–2022 · leading case: Hillis v. Dep't of Ecology, 131 Wash. 2d 373 (Wash. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hillis v. Dep't of Ecology, 131 Wash. 2d 373 (Wash. 1997). · cites it 2× “RCW 34.05.350 allows for immediate adoption of temporary emergency rules while regular rule making proceeds.”
Hillis v. State, Dept. of Ecology, 932 P.2d 139 (Wash. 1997). · cites it 2× “RCW 34.05.350 allows for immediate adoption of temporary emergency rules while regular rule making proceeds.”
Cannon v. Dep't of Licensing, 50 P.3d 627 (Wash. 2002). “350(l)(a), the State Toxicologist found that “immediate adoption, amendment or repeal of a rule” was “necessary for the preservation of the public health, safety, or general welfare” and “that observing the time requirements of notice and opportunity to comment upon adoption of…”
State v. MacKenzie, 60 P.3d 607 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “[15] RCW 34.05.350; RCW 34.05.310(4)(a), (d); RCW 34.”
Neah Bay Chamber of Com. v. Dep't of Fisheries, 832 P.2d 1310 (Wash. 1992). “The 1990 emergency rule is State Register 90-13-056 (1990), which provides the public policy rationale for the regulation: Pursuant to RCW 34.05.350 the agency for good cause finds that immediate adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule is necessary for the preservation of the…”
Towle v. State Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, 971 P.2d 591 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “RCW 34.05.350(2). Consequently, the performance of another boat belonging to a licensed applicant cannot count in the applicant's favor; therefore, it would be arbitrary and capricious for the Department to use that information to an applicant's detriment.”
Towle v. Dep't of Fish & Wildlife, 94 Wash. App. 196 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “RCW 34.05.350(2). Consequently, the performance of another boat belonging to a licensed applicant cannot count in the applicant’s favor; therefore, it would be arbitrary and capricious for the Department to use that information to an applicant’s detriment.”
Robert Sudar v. Fish & Wildlife Comm'n, 347 P.3d 1090 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “In addition to remedies available under RCW 34.05.350(3), courts may review emergency rules to determine whether such actions are contrary to law or arbitrary and capricious.”
State, Dep't of Licensing v. Cannon, 50 P.3d 627 (Wash. 2002). “Reg. XX-XX-XXX (May 16, 2001) (State's Toxicologist's finding of an emergency rule to be codified at WAC 448-13-035, 448-13-040); see also St.”
Schreiner Farms, Inc. v. Smitch, 940 P.2d 274 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “Under RCW 34.05.350(2), an emergency rule adopted under this section may not remain in effect longer than 120 days after filing.”
Twin Harbors Fish & Wildlife Advocacy, V State Fish & Wildlife (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “The APA provides the procedure for agency rulemaking, including prenotice inquiry (RCW 34.05.310), proposed rule contents and publication rules (RCW 34.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.350(1) — 1 case
State v. MacKenzie, 60 P.3d 607 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “[15] RCW 34.05.350; RCW 34.05.310(4)(a), (d); RCW 34.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.350(1)(a) — 1 case
State, Dep't of Licensing v. Cannon, 50 P.3d 627 (Wash. 2002). “Reg. XX-XX-XXX (May 16, 2001) (State's Toxicologist's finding of an emergency rule to be codified at WAC 448-13-035, 448-13-040); see also St.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.350(2) — 3 cases
Towle v. State Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, 971 P.2d 591 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “RCW 34.05.350(2). Consequently, the performance of another boat belonging to a licensed applicant cannot count in the applicant's favor; therefore, it would be arbitrary and capricious for the Department to use that information to an applicant's detriment.”
Towle v. Dep't of Fish & Wildlife, 94 Wash. App. 196 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “RCW 34.05.350(2). Consequently, the performance of another boat belonging to a licensed applicant cannot count in the applicant’s favor; therefore, it would be arbitrary and capricious for the Department to use that information to an applicant’s detriment.”
Schreiner Farms, Inc. v. Smitch, 940 P.2d 274 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “Under RCW 34.05.350(2), an emergency rule adopted under this section may not remain in effect longer than 120 days after filing.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.350(3) — 1 case
Robert Sudar v. Fish & Wildlife Comm'n, 347 P.3d 1090 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “In addition to remedies available under RCW 34.05.350(3), courts may review emergency rules to determine whether such actions are contrary to law or arbitrary and capricious.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.350(l)(a) — 1 case
Cannon v. Dep't of Licensing, 50 P.3d 627 (Wash. 2002). “350(l)(a), the State Toxicologist found that “immediate adoption, amendment or repeal of a rule” was “necessary for the preservation of the public health, safety, or general welfare” and “that observing the time requirements of notice and opportunity to comment upon adoption of…”
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.