Wash. Rev. Code » Title 90 · Chapter 90.54
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 90.54.210 (2026)

Department shall act on water rights applications that rely on reservations of water established in WAC 173-518-080 or 173-545-090

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) The department shall act on all water rights applications that rely on the reservations of water established in WAC 173-518-080 or 173-545-090, as those provisions existed on March 31, 2016. The legislature declares that the reservations of water established in WAC 173-518-080 and 173-545-090, as those provisions existed on March 31, 2016, are consistent with legislative intent and are specifically authorized to be maintained and implemented by the department.
(2) This section does not affect the department's authority to lawfully adopt, amend, or repeal any rule, including WAC 173-518-080 or 173-545-090.
(3) This section may not be construed to prejudice any reservation of water not referenced in this section.
[ 2016 c 117 s 1.]

Notes:

Effective date—2016 c 117: "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 31, 2016]." [ 2016 c 117 s 2.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2019–2019 · leading case: Magdalena T. Bassett v. Washington State Dep't Of Ecology, 438 P.3d 563 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Magdalena T. Bassett v. Washington State Dep't Of Ecology, 438 P.3d 563 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “In this case, as applied to the Dungeness Rule, RCW 90.54.210 conflicts with the OCPI exception as the Supreme Court interpreted it in Foster.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.54.210(1) — 1 case
Magdalena T. Bassett v. Washington State Dep't Of Ecology, 438 P.3d 563 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “In this case, as applied to the Dungeness Rule, RCW 90.54.210 conflicts with the OCPI exception as the Supreme Court interpreted it in Foster.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.54.210(2) — 1 case
Magdalena T. Bassett v. Washington State Dep't Of Ecology, 438 P.3d 563 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “In this case, as applied to the Dungeness Rule, RCW 90.54.210 conflicts with the OCPI exception as the Supreme Court interpreted it in Foster.”
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.