Wash. Rev. Code » Title 90 · Chapter 90.80
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 90.80.080 (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) The board must provide a copy of its record of decision to the applicant. The board shall submit its record of decision on the transfer application to the department for review. The board shall also submit its report of examination to the department summarizing factual findings on which the board relied in reaching its record of decision and a copy of the files and records upon which the board's record of decision is based. The board shall also promptly transmit notice by mail to any person who objected to the transfer or who requested notice of the board's record of decision.
(2) Upon receipt of a board's record of decision, the department shall promptly post the text of the record of decision transmittal form on the department's internet site. The director shall review each record of decision made by a board for compliance with applicable state water law.
(3) Any party to a transfer, third party who alleges his or her water right will be impaired by the proposed transfer, or other person may file a letter of concern or support with the department and the department may consider the concern or support expressed in the letter. Such letters must be received by the department within thirty days of the department's receipt of the board's record of decision.
(4) The director shall review the record of decision of the board and shall affirm, reverse, or modify the action of the board within forty-five days of receipt. The forty-five day time period may be extended for an additional thirty days by the director or at the request of the board or applicant. If the director fails to act within the prescribed time period, the board's record of decision becomes the decision of the department and is appealable as provided by RCW 90.80.090. If the director acts within the prescribed time period, the director's decision to affirm, modify, or reverse is appealable as provided by RCW 90.80.090, and the director's decision to remand is appealable as provided by *RCW 90.80.120(2)(b).
[ 2001 c 237 s 12; 1997 c 441 s 11.]

Notes:

*Reviser's note: RCW 90.80.120 was amended by 2004 c 10 s 5, changing subsection (2)(b) to subsection (3)(b).
Finding—Intent—Severability—Effective date—2001 c 237: See notes following RCW 90.82.040.
Intent—2001 c 237: See note following RCW 90.66.065.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2008–2023 · leading case: City of Union Gap v. Dep't of Ecology, 148 Wash. App. 519 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Union Gap v. Dep't of Ecology, 148 Wash. App. 519 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “The Conservancy Board submitted its decision to the Department of Ecology for review pursuant to RCW 90.80.080 (requires the board to submit its findings and decision on a transfer application to the department for review).”
Crown West Realty, LLC v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 435 P.3d 288 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “RCW 90.80.080(4). 10 No. 35610-8-III Crown West v.”
City of Union Gap v. State Dept. of Ecology, 195 P.3d 580 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “The Conservancy Board submitted its decision to the Department of Ecology (Ecology) for review pursuant to RCW 90.80.080 (requires the board to submit its findings and decision on a transfer application to the department for review).”
Benton Cnty. Water Conservancy Bd. v. Dep't of Ecology (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “RCW 90.80.080; WAC 173-153-150. Ecology generally has 45 days to affirm, reverse, or modify an action by a conservancy board.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.80.080(4) — 2 cases
Crown West Realty, LLC v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 435 P.3d 288 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “RCW 90.80.080(4). 10 No. 35610-8-III Crown West v.”
Benton Cnty. Water Conservancy Bd. v. Dep't of Ecology (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “RCW 90.80.080; WAC 173-153-150. Ecology generally has 45 days to affirm, reverse, or modify an action by a conservancy board.”
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.