Wash. Rev. Code » Title 90 · Chapter 90.74
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 90.74.010 (2026)

Definitions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise.
(1) "Compensatory mitigation" means the restoration, creation, enhancement, or preservation of uplands, wetlands, or other aquatic resources for the purposes of compensating for unavoidable adverse impacts that remain after all appropriate and practicable avoidance and minimization has been achieved. "Compensatory mitigation" includes mitigation that:
(a) Occurs at the same time as, or in advance of, a project's planned environmental impacts;
(b) Is located in a site either on, near, or distant from the project's impacts; and
(c) Provides either the same or different biological functions and values as the functions and values impacted by the project.
(2) "Family forest fish passage program" means the program administered by the recreation and conservation office created pursuant to RCW 76.09.410 that provides public cost assistance to small forestland owners associated with the road maintenance and abandonment processes.
(3) "Forestry riparian easement program" means the program established in RCW 76.13.120.
(4) "Infrastructure development" means an action that is critical for the maintenance or expansion of an existing infrastructure feature such as a highway, rail line, airport, marine terminal, utility corridor, harbor area, or hydroelectric facility and is consistent with an approved land use planning process. This planning process may include the growth management act, chapter 36.70A RCW, or the shoreline management act, chapter 90.58 RCW, in areas covered by those chapters.
(5) "Mitigation" means sequentially avoiding impacts, minimizing impacts, or compensating for remaining unavoidable impacts.
(6) "Mitigation plan" means a document or set of documents developed through joint discussions between a project proponent and environmental regulatory agencies that describe the unavoidable wetland or aquatic resource impacts of a proposed infrastructure development or noninfrastructure development and the proposed compensatory mitigation for those impacts.
(7) "Noninfrastructure development" means a development project that requires the completion of compensatory mitigation that does not meet the definition of "infrastructure development" and is consistent with an approved land use planning process. This planning process may include the growth management act, chapter 36.70A RCW, or the shoreline management act, chapter 90.58 RCW, in areas covered by those chapters.
(8) "Project proponent" means a public or private entity responsible for preparing a mitigation plan.
(9) "Riparian open space program" means the program created pursuant to RCW 76.09.040.
(10) "Watershed" means an area identified as a state of Washington water resource inventory area under WAC 173-500-040 as it exists on June 7, 2012.
[ 2012 c 62 s 3; 1997 c 424 s 2.]

Notes:

Reviser's note: The definitions in this section have been alphabetized pursuant to RCW 1.08.015(2)(k).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2004–2004 · leading case: Port of Seattle v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 90 P.3d 659 (Wash. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Port of Seattle v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 90 P.3d 659 (Wash. 2004). “” RCW 90.74.010(6). The PCHB properly noted the legislature’s limitation on Ecology’s ability to reject an otherwise adequate, out-of-basin plan but concluded that “out-of-basin mitigation should occur only after all reasonable in-basin options have been evaluated.”
Port of Seattle v. PCHB, 90 P.3d 659 (Wash. 2004). “" RCW 90.74.010(6). The PCHB properly noted the legislature's limitation on Ecology's ability to reject an otherwise adequate, out-of-basin plan but concluded that "out-of-basin mitigation should occur only after all reasonable in-basin options have been evaluated.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.74.010(6) — 2 cases
Port of Seattle v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 90 P.3d 659 (Wash. 2004). “” RCW 90.74.010(6). The PCHB properly noted the legislature’s limitation on Ecology’s ability to reject an otherwise adequate, out-of-basin plan but concluded that “out-of-basin mitigation should occur only after all reasonable in-basin options have been evaluated.”
Port of Seattle v. PCHB, 90 P.3d 659 (Wash. 2004). “" RCW 90.74.010(6). The PCHB properly noted the legislature's limitation on Ecology's ability to reject an otherwise adequate, out-of-basin plan but concluded that "out-of-basin mitigation should occur only after all reasonable in-basin options have been evaluated.”
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.