Wash. Rev. Code » Title 90 · Chapter 90.03

Wash. Rev. Code § 90.03.330

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Upon a showing satisfactory to the department that any appropriation has been perfected in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, it shall be the duty of the department to issue to the applicant a certificate stating such facts in a form to be prescribed by the director, and such certificate shall thereupon be recorded with the department. Any original water right certificate issued, as provided by this chapter, shall be recorded with the department and thereafter, at the expense of the party receiving the same, be transmitted by the department to the county auditor of the county or counties where the distributing system or any part thereof is located, and be recorded in the office of such county auditor, and thereafter be transmitted to the owner thereof.
(2) Except as provided for the issuance of certificates under RCW 90.03.240 and for the issuance of certificates following the approval of a change, transfer, or amendment under RCW 90.03.380 or 90.44.100, the department shall not revoke or diminish a certificate for a surface or ground water right for municipal water supply purposes as defined in RCW 90.03.015 unless the certificate was issued with ministerial errors or was obtained through misrepresentation. The department may adjust such a certificate under this subsection if ministerial errors are discovered, but only to the extent necessary to correct the ministerial errors. The department may diminish the right represented by such a certificate if the certificate was obtained through a misrepresentation on the part of the applicant or permit holder, but only to the extent of the misrepresentation. The authority provided by this subsection does not include revoking, diminishing, or adjusting a certificate based on any change in policy regarding the issuance of such certificates that has occurred since the certificate was issued. This subsection may not be construed as providing any authority to the department to revoke, diminish, or adjust any other water right.
(3) This subsection applies to the water right represented by a water right certificate issued prior to September 9, 2003, for municipal water supply purposes as defined in RCW 90.03.015 where the certificate was issued based on an administrative policy for issuing such certificates once works for diverting or withdrawing and distributing water for municipal supply purposes were constructed rather than after the water had been placed to actual beneficial use. Such a water right is a right in good standing.
(4) After September 9, 2003, the department must issue a new certificate under subsection (1) of this section for a water right represented by a water right permit only for the perfected portion of a water right as demonstrated through actual beneficial use of water.
[ 2003 1st sp.s. c 5 s 6; 1987 c 109 s 89; 1929 c 122 s 5; 1917 c 117 s 34; RRS s 7386. Formerly RCW 90.20.100.]

Notes:

Severability—2003 1st sp.s. c 5: See note following RCW 90.03.015.
Purpose—Short title—Construction—Rules—Severability—Captions—1987 c 109: See notes following RCW 43.21B.001.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2023 · leading case: Lummi Indian Nation v. State
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lummi Indian Nation v. State (2010) wash · cites it 17× “Fourth, if the department is satisfied that water is available and the proposed use is a beneficial use, it issues a permit specifying the amounts of water that can be taken and the beneficial uses to which that water may be applied.”
Cornelius v. Department of Ecology (2015) wash · cites it 9× “2d at 253 ; RCW 90.03.330. Before the right is perfected, the applicant still has an incomplete appropriative right in good standing, but he or she must act with reasonable diligence to perfect the right by developing the water system.”
Lummi Indian Nation v. State (2010) wash · cites it 18× “290(1). Fourth, if the department is satisfied that water is available and the proposed use is a beneficial use, it issues a permit specifying the amounts of water that can be taken and the beneficial uses to which that water may be applied to.”
State, Dept. of Ecology v. Theodoratus (1998) wash · cites it 2× “The report included language purporting to create a vested water right which would entitle the applicant to a water certificate issued under RCW 90.03.330 once a water supply system was capable of delivering water, even though some or most of the lots were vacant.”
Department of Ecology v. Theodoratus (1998) wash · cites it 2× “The report included language purporting to create a vested water right which would entitle the applicant to a water certificate issued under RCW 90.03.330 once a water supply system was capable of delivering water, even though some or most of the lots were vacant.”
Center for Environmental Law & Policy v. Department of Ecology (2016) washctapp · cites it 2× “03 RCW, Ecology will issue to the applicant a certificate and it will be recorded with Ecology. RCW 90.03.330(1). WATER RIGHT PROCEEDINGS ¶11 Shortly after the PCHB issued its final decision in the 401 Certification appeal, on August 6, 2013, Ecology issued a ROE and ordered the…”
Hanson Industries, Inc. v. Kutschkau (2010) washctapp “RCW 90.03.330. Permits and permit applications are considered personal property and must be assigned separately to be transferred.”
HANSON INDUSTRIES INC. v. Kutschkau (2010) washctapp “RCW 90.03.330. Permits and permit applications are considered personal property and must be assigned separately to be transferred.”
Mike Hamilton, V Pollution Control Hrgs Bd (2018) washctapp · cites it 2× “03.380(1). However, water rights “may be transferred to another or to others and become appurtenant to any other land or place of use .”
Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology (2015) wash · cites it 10× “2d at 253 ; RCW 90.03.330. Before the right is perfected, the applicant still has an incomplete appropriative right in good standing, but he or she must act with reasonable diligence to perfect the right by developing the water system.”
Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology (2015) wash · cites it 9× “RCW 90.03.330. Importantly, the perfected right evidenced by the certificate relates back to the date the applicant filed the original application with Ecology.”
American Waterways Operators, Resp v. Pollution Control Hearings Board,et Al, App (2019) washctapp “, RCW 90.03.330(1) (addressing Ecology’s issuance of water right certificates to specific applicant); RCW 90.”
Show all 14 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.03.330(1) — 4 cases
Center for Environmental Law & Policy v. Department of Ecology (2016) washctapp “03 RCW, Ecology will issue to the applicant a certificate and it will be recorded with Ecology. RCW 90.03.330(1). WATER RIGHT PROCEEDINGS ¶11 Shortly after the PCHB issued its final decision in the 401 Certification appeal, on August 6, 2013, Ecology issued a ROE and ordered the…”
Mike Hamilton, V Pollution Control Hrgs Bd (2018) washctapp “03.380(1). However, water rights “may be transferred to another or to others and become appurtenant to any other land or place of use .”
American Waterways Operators, Resp v. Pollution Control Hearings Board,et Al, App (2019) washctapp “, RCW 90.03.330(1) (addressing Ecology’s issuance of water right certificates to specific applicant); RCW 90.”
Center For Environmental Law & Policy v. Dept Of Ecology (2016) washctapp
— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.03.330(2) — 5 cases
Lummi Indian Nation v. State (2010) wash “Fourth, if the department is satisfied that water is available and the proposed use is a beneficial use, it issues a permit specifying the amounts of water that can be taken and the beneficial uses to which that water may be applied.”
Cornelius v. Department of Ecology (2015) wash “2d at 253 ; RCW 90.03.330. Before the right is perfected, the applicant still has an incomplete appropriative right in good standing, but he or she must act with reasonable diligence to perfect the right by developing the water system.”
Lummi Indian Nation v. State (2010) wash “290(1). Fourth, if the department is satisfied that water is available and the proposed use is a beneficial use, it issues a permit specifying the amounts of water that can be taken and the beneficial uses to which that water may be applied to.”
Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology (2015) wash “2d at 253 ; RCW 90.03.330. Before the right is perfected, the applicant still has an incomplete appropriative right in good standing, but he or she must act with reasonable diligence to perfect the right by developing the water system.”
Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology (2015) wash “RCW 90.03.330. Importantly, the perfected right evidenced by the certificate relates back to the date the applicant filed the original application with Ecology.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.03.330(3) — 5 cases
Lummi Indian Nation v. State (2010) wash “Fourth, if the department is satisfied that water is available and the proposed use is a beneficial use, it issues a permit specifying the amounts of water that can be taken and the beneficial uses to which that water may be applied.”
Cornelius v. Department of Ecology (2015) wash “2d at 253 ; RCW 90.03.330. Before the right is perfected, the applicant still has an incomplete appropriative right in good standing, but he or she must act with reasonable diligence to perfect the right by developing the water system.”
Lummi Indian Nation v. State (2010) wash “290(1). Fourth, if the department is satisfied that water is available and the proposed use is a beneficial use, it issues a permit specifying the amounts of water that can be taken and the beneficial uses to which that water may be applied to.”
Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology (2015) wash “2d at 253 ; RCW 90.03.330. Before the right is perfected, the applicant still has an incomplete appropriative right in good standing, but he or she must act with reasonable diligence to perfect the right by developing the water system.”
Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology (2015) wash “RCW 90.03.330. Importantly, the perfected right evidenced by the certificate relates back to the date the applicant filed the original application with Ecology.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.03.330(4) — 4 cases
Lummi Indian Nation v. State (2010) wash “Fourth, if the department is satisfied that water is available and the proposed use is a beneficial use, it issues a permit specifying the amounts of water that can be taken and the beneficial uses to which that water may be applied.”
Lummi Indian Nation v. State (2010) wash “290(1). Fourth, if the department is satisfied that water is available and the proposed use is a beneficial use, it issues a permit specifying the amounts of water that can be taken and the beneficial uses to which that water may be applied to.”
Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology (2015) wash “2d at 253 ; RCW 90.03.330. Before the right is perfected, the applicant still has an incomplete appropriative right in good standing, but he or she must act with reasonable diligence to perfect the right by developing the water system.”
Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology (2015) wash “RCW 90.03.330. Importantly, the perfected right evidenced by the certificate relates back to the date the applicant filed the original application with Ecology.”
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.