Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 90.44.100 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

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

(1) After an application to, and upon the issuance by the department of an amendment to the appropriate permit or certificate of groundwater right, the holder of a valid right to withdraw public groundwaters may, without losing the holder's priority of right, construct wells or other means of withdrawal at a new location in substitution for or in addition to those at the original location, or the holder may change the manner or the place of use of the water.

(2) An amendment to construct replacement or a new additional well or wells at a location outside of the location of the original well or wells or to change the manner or place of use of the water shall be issued only after publication of notice of the application and findings as prescribed in the case of an original application. Such amendment shall be issued by the department only on the conditions that: (a) The additional or replacement well or wells shall tap the same body of public groundwater as the original well or wells; (b) where a replacement well or wells is approved, the use of the original well or wells shall be discontinued and the original well or wells shall be properly decommissioned as required under chapter 18.104 RCW; (c) where an additional well or wells is constructed, the original well or wells may continue to be used, but the combined total withdrawal from the original and additional well or wells shall not enlarge the right conveyed by the original permit or certificate; and (d) other existing rights shall not be impaired. The department may specify an approved manner of construction and shall require a showing of compliance with the terms of the amendment, as provided in RCW 90.44.080 in the case of an original permit.

(3) The construction of a replacement or new additional well or wells at the location of the original well or wells shall be allowed without application to the department for an amendment. However, the following apply to such a replacement or new additional well: (a) The well shall tap the same body of public groundwater as the original well or wells; (b) if a replacement well is constructed, the use of the original well or wells shall be discontinued and the original well or wells shall be properly decommissioned as required under chapter 18.104 RCW; (c) if a new additional well is constructed, the original well or wells may continue to be used, but the combined total withdrawal from the original and additional well or wells shall not enlarge the right conveyed by the original water use permit or certificate; (d) the construction and use of the well shall not interfere with or impair water rights with an earlier date of priority than the water right or rights for the original well or wells; (e) the replacement or additional well shall be located no closer than the original well to a well it might interfere with; (f) the department may specify an approved manner of construction of the well; and (g) the department shall require a showing of compliance with the conditions of this subsection (3).

(4) As used in this section, the "location of the original well or wells" is the area described as the point of withdrawal in the original public notice published for the application for the water right for the well.

(5) The development and use of a small irrigation impoundment, as defined in RCW 90.03.370(8), does not constitute a change or amendment for the purposes of this section. The exemption expressly provided by this subsection shall not be construed as requiring an amendment of any existing water right to enable the holder of the right to store water governed by the right.

[ 2003 c 329 s 3; (2009 c 183 s 16 expired June 30, 2021); 1997 c 316 s 2; 1987 c 109 s 113; 1945 c 263 s 10; Rem. Supp. 1945 s 7400-10.]

Notes:

Expiration date—2019 c 78; 2009 c 183: See note following RCW 90.03.380.

Intent—1997 c 316: "The legislature intends that the holder of a valid permit or certificate of groundwater right be permitted by the department of ecology to amend a valid permit or certificate to allow full and complete development of the valid right by the construction of replacement or additional wells at the original location or new locations." [ 1997 c 316 s 1.]

Purpose—Short title—Construction—Rules—Severability—Captions—1987 c 109: See notes following RCW 43.21B.001.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 20 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: R.D. Merrill Co. v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 969 P.2d 458 (Wash. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

R.D. Merrill Co. v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 969 P.2d 458 (Wash. 1999). · cites it 25× “We hold that approval of two unperfected groundwater rights was permissible under RCW 90.44.100, which, unlike RCW 90.03.380, does not require beneficial use of the appropriative right obtained *124 under a permit before a change in well location may be approved.”

Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology, 344 P.3d 199 (Wash. 2015). · cites it 16× “Does RCW 90.44.100 authorize WSU to amend its certificates and add well locations? ¶8 4.”

Dep't of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, L.L.C., 146 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 2× “) RCW 90.44.100(1), allowing for amendment of groundwater permits or certificates, states that “the holder of a valid right to withdraw public ground waters may .”

State, Dept. of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, 43 P.3d 4 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 2× “) RCW 90.44.100(1), allowing for amendment of groundwater permits or certificates, states that "the holder of a valid right to withdraw public ground waters may .”

Pub. Util. DIST. v. State, Dept. of Ecology, 51 P.3d 744 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 3× “RCW 90.44.100; see R.D. Merrill, 137 Wash.”

Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1 v. Dep't of Ecology, 146 Wash. 2d 778 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 3× “RCW 90.44.100; see R.D. Merrill, 137 Wn.2d at 130.”

Lummi Indian Nation v. State, 241 P.3d 1220 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 2× “2d at 127 (department can approve changes to water rights only to the extent *271 they are valid); RCW 90.44.100; 13 RCW 90.03.380 (opportunity for review of system-capacity-based certificates); cf.”

Schuh v. Dep't of Ecology, 667 P.2d 64 (Wash. 1983). · cites it 2× “Although such amendment is allowed under the statutes, it will be permitted only if the provisions of RCW 90.44.100, which require that such a change not enlarge the right conveyed by the original permit, are met.”

City of West Richland v. Dep't of Ecology, 103 P.3d 818 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 20× “Considering mainly RCW 90.44.100 and R.D. Merrill Co. v. Pollution Control Hearings Board, 137 Wn.”

Lummi Indian Nation v. State, 241 P.3d 1220 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 2× “2d 458 (department can approve changes to water rights only to the extent they are valid); RCW 90.44.100; [13] RCW 90.03.380 (opportunity for review of system-capacity-based certificates); cf.”

Foster v. Dep't of Ecology, 362 P.3d 959 (Wash. 2015). “¶27 RCW 90.44.100(1) authorizes “the holder of a valid right to withdraw public groundwaters” to construct a new well from which to withdraw the permitted water.”

Crown West Realty, LLC v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 435 P.3d 288 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 3× “Pollution Control Hearings Board place of use of the water, Ecology must conduct a tentative determination of the extent and validity of the applicant’s water right pursuant to RCW 90.44.100. Washington law has created water conservancy boards, available in designated counties…”

Show all 20 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.44.100(1) — 8 cases

Dep't of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, L.L.C., 146 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2002). “) RCW 90.44.100(1), allowing for amendment of groundwater permits or certificates, states that “the holder of a valid right to withdraw public ground waters may .”

State, Dept. of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, 43 P.3d 4 (Wash. 2002). “) RCW 90.44.100(1), allowing for amendment of groundwater permits or certificates, states that "the holder of a valid right to withdraw public ground waters may .”

Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology, 344 P.3d 199 (Wash. 2015). “Does RCW 90.44.100 authorize WSU to amend its certificates and add well locations? ¶8 4.”

City of West Richland v. Dep't of Ecology, 103 P.3d 818 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “Considering mainly RCW 90.44.100 and R.D. Merrill Co. v. Pollution Control Hearings Board, 137 Wn.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.44.100(2) — 4 cases

Mike Hamilton, V Pollution Control Hrgs Bd, 426 P.3d 281 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

Burbank Irrigation Dist. 4 v. Dep't Of Ecology (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.44.100(2)(c) — 4 cases

Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology, 344 P.3d 199 (Wash. 2015). “Does RCW 90.44.100 authorize WSU to amend its certificates and add well locations? ¶8 4.”

Burbank Irrigation Dist. 4 v. Dep't Of Ecology (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).

Cornelius v. Dep't of Ecology (Wash. 2015).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.44.100(3) — 1 case

Crown West Realty, LLC v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 435 P.3d 288 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “Pollution Control Hearings Board place of use of the water, Ecology must conduct a tentative determination of the extent and validity of the applicant’s water right pursuant to RCW 90.44.100. Washington law has created water conservancy boards, available in designated counties…”

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.