NOTICE: Formatting and page numbering in this document may be different
from that in the original published version.
THIRTY SIXTH DAY
MORNING SESSION
House Chamber, Olympia, Monday, February 14, 2000
The House was called to order at 9:00 a.m. by Speaker Ballard. The Clerk called the roll and a quorum was present.
The flag was escorted to the rostrum by a Sergeant at Arms Color Guard, Pages Brandi Lindberg and Caitlin Flynn. The Speaker led the Chamber in the Pledge of Allegiance. Prayer was offered by Father Michael Durka, St. George Church, Olympia.
Reading of the Journal of the previous day was dispensed with and it was ordered to stand approved.
MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE
February 11, 2000
Mr. Speaker:
The Senate has passed:
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 5001,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 5330,
ENGROSSED SECOND SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 5540,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 5590,
SECOND SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 5659,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6034,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6071,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6202,
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6218,
ENGROSSED SENATE BILL NO. 6232,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6244,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6259,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6294,
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6305,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6328,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6336,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6357,
ENGROSSED SENATE BILL NO. 6364,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6365,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6367,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6375,
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6389,
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6395,
ENGROSSED SECOND SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6400,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6419,
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6432,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6442,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6459,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6467,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6589,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6626,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6645,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6675,
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6676,
ENGROSSED SENATE BILL NO. 6677,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6682,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6722,
ENGROSSED SECOND SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6731,
SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6812,
ENGROSSED SENATE JOINT MEMORIAL NO. 8015,
and the same are herewith transmitted.
Tony M. Cook, Secretary
There being no objection, the House advanced to the sixth order of business.
SECOND READING
HOUSE BILL NO. 2994, by Representatives Parlette, G. Chandler, B. Chandler and Linville
Modifying trust water rights.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 2994 was substituted for House Bill No. 2994 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 2994 was read the second time.
Representative G. Chandler moved the adoption of the following amendment (473):
Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert the following:
"Sec. 1. RCW 90.14.140 and 1998 c 258 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) For the purposes of RCW 90.14.130 through 90.14.180, "sufficient cause" shall be defined as the nonuse of all or a portion of the water by the owner of a water right for a period of five or more consecutive years where such nonuse occurs as a result of:
(a) Drought, or other unavailability of water;
(b) Active service in the armed forces of the United States during military crisis;
(c) Nonvoluntary service in the armed forces of the United States;
(d) The operation of legal proceedings;
(e) Federal or state agency leases of or options to purchase lands or water rights which preclude or reduce the use of the right by the owner of the water right;
(f) Federal laws imposing land or water use restrictions either directly or through the voluntary enrollment of a landowner in a federal program implementing those laws, or acreage limitations, or production quotas.
(2) Notwithstanding any other provisions of RCW 90.14.130 through 90.14.180, there shall be no relinquishment of any water right:
(a) If such right is claimed for power development purposes under chapter 90.16 RCW and annual license fees are paid in accordance with chapter 90.16 RCW;
(b) If such right is used for a standby or reserve water supply to be used in time of drought or other low flow period so long as withdrawal or diversion facilities are maintained in good operating condition for the use of such reserve or standby water supply;
(c) If such right is claimed for a determined future development to take place either within fifteen years of July 1, 1967, or the most recent beneficial use of the water right, whichever date is later;
(d) If such right is claimed for municipal water supply purposes under chapter 90.03 RCW;
(e) If such waters are not subject to appropriation under the applicable provisions of RCW 90.40.030; ((or))
(f) If such right or portion of the right is leased to another person for use on land other than the land to which the right is appurtenant as long as the lessee makes beneficial use of the right in accordance with this chapter and a transfer or change of the right has been approved by the department in accordance with RCW 90.03.380, 90.03.383, 90.03.390, or 90.44.100; or
(g) If such right is a trust water right under chapter 90.38 or 90.42 RCW.
Sec. 2. RCW 90.38.020 and 1989 c 429 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
(1)(a) The department may acquire water rights, including but not limited to storage rights, by purchase, gift, or other appropriate means other than by condemnation, from any person or entity or combination of persons or entities. Once acquired, such rights are trust water rights. A water right acquired by the state that is expressly conditioned to limit its use to instream purposes shall be administered as a trust water right in compliance with that condition.
(b) If an aquatic species is listed as threatened or endangered under the federal endangered species act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531 et seq.) for a body of water, certain instream flows are needed for the species, and the holder of a right to water from the body of water chooses to donate all or a portion of the person's water right to the trust water system to assist in providing those instream flows on a temporary or permanent basis, the department shall accept the donation on such terms as the person may prescribe as long as the donation satisfies the requirements of subsection (4) of this section. Once accepted, such rights are trust water rights within the conditions prescribed by the donor.
(2) The department may make such other arrangements, including entry into contracts with other persons or entities as appropriate to ensure that trust water rights acquired in accordance with this chapter can be exercised to the fullest possible extent.
(3) The trust water rights may be acquired on a temporary or permanent basis.
(4) A water right donated under subsection (1)(b) of this section shall not exceed the extent to which the water right was exercised during any of the five years before the donation nor may the total of any portion of the water right remaining with the donor plus the donated portion of the water right exceed the extent to which the water right was exercised during any of the five years before the donation. If, upon appeal from a determination by the department, it is found that exercising the trust water right resulting from the donation or exercising a portion of that trust water right impairs existing water rights in violation of RCW 90.38.902, the donation shall be altered to eliminate the impairment.
(5) Any water right conveyed to the trust water right system that is expressly conditioned to limit its use to instream purposes shall be managed by the department for public purposes to ensure that it qualifies as a gift that is deductible for federal income taxation purposes for the person or entity conveying the water right.
Sec. 3. RCW 90.38.040 and 1994 c 264 s 90 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) All trust water rights acquired by the department shall be placed in the Yakima river basin trust water rights program to be managed by the department. The department shall issue a water right certificate in the name of the state of Washington for each trust water right it acquires.
(2) Trust water rights shall retain the same priority date as the water right from which they originated. Trust water rights may be modified as to purpose or place of use or point of diversion, including modification from a diversionary use to a nondiversionary instream use.
(3) Trust water rights may be held by the department for instream flows and/or irrigation use.
(4) A schedule of the amount of net water saved as a result of water conservation projects carried out in accordance with this chapter, shall be developed annually to reflect the predicted hydrologic and water supply conditions, as well as anticipated water demands, for the upcoming irrigation season. This schedule shall serve as the basis for the distribution and management of trust water rights each year.
(5)(a) No exercise of a trust water right may be authorized unless the department first determines that no existing water rights, junior or senior in priority, will be impaired as to their exercise or injured in any manner whatever by such authorization. Before any trust water right is exercised, the department shall publish notice thereof in a newspaper of general circulation published in the county or counties in which the storage, diversion, and use are to be made, and in such other newspapers as the department determines are necessary, once a week for two consecutive weeks. At the same time the department may also send notice thereof containing pertinent information to the director of fish and wildlife.
(b) Subsection (5)(a) of this section does not apply to a trust water right resulting from a donation for instream flows described in RCW 90.38.020(1). However, the department shall provide the notice described in (a) of this subsection the first time the trust water right resulting from the donation is exercised.
(6) RCW 90.03.380 and 90.14.140 through 90.14.910 shall have no applicability to trust water rights held by the department under this chapter or exercised under this section.
Sec. 4. RCW 90.42.040 and 1993 c 98 s 3 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) All trust water rights acquired by the state shall be placed in the state trust water rights program to be managed by the department. Trust water rights acquired by the state shall be held or authorized for use by the department for instream flows, irrigation, municipal, or other beneficial uses consistent with applicable regional plans for pilot planning areas, or to resolve critical water supply problems.
(2) The department shall issue a water right certificate in the name of the state of Washington for each permanent trust water right conveyed to the state indicating the reach or reaches of the stream, the quantity, and the use or uses to which it may be applied. A superseding certificate shall be issued that specifies the amount of water the water right holder would continue to be entitled to as a result of the water conservation project. The superseding certificate shall retain the same priority date as the original right. For nonpermanent conveyances, the department shall issue certificates or such other instruments as are necessary to reflect the changes in purpose or place of use or point of diversion or withdrawal. Water rights for which such nonpermanent conveyances are arranged shall not be subject to relinquishment for nonuse.
(3) A trust water right retains the same priority date as the water right from which it originated, but as between them the trust right shall be deemed to be inferior in priority unless otherwise specified by an agreement between the state and the party holding the original right.
(4) Exercise of a trust water right may be authorized only if the department first determines that neither water rights existing at the time the trust water right is established, nor the public interest will be impaired. If impairment becomes apparent during the time a trust water right is being exercised, the department shall cease or modify the use of the trust water right to eliminate the impairment.
(5) Before any trust water right is created or modified, the department shall, at a minimum, require that a notice be published in a newspaper of general circulation published in the county or counties in which the storage, diversion, and use are to be made, and in other newspapers as the department determines is necessary, once a week for two consecutive weeks. At the same time the department shall send a notice containing pertinent information to all appropriate state agencies, potentially affected local governments and federally recognized tribal governments, and other interested parties.
(6) RCW 90.14.140 through 90.14.230 have no applicability to trust water rights held by the department under this chapter or exercised under this section.
(7) RCW 90.03.380 has no applicability to trust water rights acquired by the state through the funding of water conservation projects.
(8) Subsections (4) and (5) of this section do not apply to a trust water right resulting from a donation for instream flows described in RCW 90.42.080(1)(b). However, the department shall provide the notice described in subsection (5) of this section the first time the trust water right resulting from the donation is exercised.
Sec. 5. RCW 90.42.080 and 1993 c 98 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:
(1)(a) The state may acquire all or portions of existing water rights, by purchase, gift, or other appropriate means other than by condemnation, from any person or entity or combination of persons or entities. Once acquired, such rights are trust water rights. A water right acquired by the state that is expressly conditioned to limit its use to instream purposes shall be administered as a trust water right in compliance with that condition.
(b) If an aquatic species is listed as threatened or endangered under the federal endangered species act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531 et seq.) for a body of water, certain instream flows are needed for the species, and the holder of a right to water from the body of water chooses to donate all or a portion of the person's water right to the trust water system to assist in providing those instream flows on a temporary or permanent basis, the department shall accept the donation on such terms as the person may prescribe as long as the donation satisfies the requirements of subsection (4) of this section. Once accepted, such rights are trust water rights within the conditions prescribed by the donor.
(2) The department may enter into leases, contracts, or such other arrangements with other persons or entities as appropriate, to ensure that trust water rights acquired in accordance with this chapter may be exercised to the fullest possible extent.
(3) Trust water rights may be acquired by the state on a temporary or permanent basis.
(4) A water right donated under subsection (1)(b) of this section shall not exceed the extent to which the water right was exercised during any of the five years before the donation nor may the total of any portion of the water right remaining with the donor plus the donated portion of the water right exceed the extent to which the water right was exercised during any of the five years before the donation. If, upon appeal from a determination by the department, it is found that exercising the trust water right resulting from the donation or exercising a portion of that trust water right impairs existing water rights in violation of RCW 90.42.070, the donation shall be altered to eliminate the impairment.
(5) The provisions of RCW 90.03.380 and 90.03.390 do not apply to donations for instream flows described in subsection (1)(b) of this section, but do apply to other transfers of water rights under this section.
(((5))) (6) No funds may be expended for the purchase of water rights by the state pursuant to this section unless specifically appropriated for this purpose by the legislature.
(7) Any water right conveyed to the trust water right system that is expressly conditioned to limit its use to instream purposes shall be managed by the department for public purposes to ensure that it qualifies as a gift that is deductible for federal income taxation purposes for the person or entity conveying the water right."
Correct the title.
Representatives G. Chandler and Linville spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Parlette, G. Chandler and Dunshee spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Representative Linville: The bill establishes special procedures that apply if there has been an ESA listing and a person voluntarily donates on a temporary or permanent basis all or part of the person's water right to the trust water right system to assist in providing needed instream flows. Once the bill is enacted, could the state still lease or purchase such a water right for the trust water right system in an area with an ESA listing?
Representative G. Chandler: Yes. The donation procedure established by the bill is simply another option to the procedures currently provided by law for a person to provide, on a voluntary basis, a water right for management in the trust water right system. Through contracts voluntarily entered by water right holders, the Department of Ecology could still lease or purchase water rights in the area of the ESA listing for the trust water right system in the manner currently provided by law.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 2994.
MOTIONS
On motion of Representative Wolfe, Representatives Eickmeyer and Scott were excused. On motion of Representative Schoesler, Representative Radcliff was excused.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 2994 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 88, Nays - 7, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Rockefeller, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 88.
Voting nay: Representatives Cody, Constantine, Fisher, Murray, Regala, Romero and Wolfe - 7.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 2994, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2588, by Representatives Tokuda, D. Sommers, Kagi, Boldt, Kenney, Dickerson, Ogden, Veloria, Haigh, Santos, Romero, O'Brien, Edwards, Constantine, Rockefeller, Miloscia and McIntire
Creating domestic violence fatality review panels.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Second Substitute House Bill No. 2588 was substituted for House Bill No. 2588 and the second substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Second Substitute House Bill No. 2588 was read the second time.
Representative Tokuda moved the adoption of the following amendment (477):
On page 3, line 7, after "(f)" strike all material through "issues" on line 8 and insert "Local health department staff"
Representatives Tokuda and D. Sommers spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
Representative Tokuda moved the adoption of the following amendment (478):
On page 4, line 18, after "review." insert "The coordinating entity and the regional review panels shall maintain the confidentiality of such information to the extent required by any applicable law."
Representatives Tokuda and D. Sommers spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Tokuda and D. Sommers spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 2588.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 2588 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 2588, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2461, by Representatives Reardon, Santos, Ruderman and Grant
Acknowledging the satisfaction of a judgment.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 2461 was substituted for House Bill No. 2461 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 2461 was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representative Reardon spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2461.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2461 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 93, Nays - 2, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 93.
Voting nay: Representatives Esser and Lambert - 2.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Substitute House Bill No. 2461, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
RESOLUTION
HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 2000-4715, by Representatives Edmonds, Kagi, Talcott and Thomas
WHEREAS, Reading is a life skill that invites the reader's imagination to soar within and without the covers of a book; and
WHEREAS, Reading is like a mosaic guiding the reader to look at multiple meanings, and new words and ideas never before thought of; and
WHEREAS, A new world unfolds and knowledge comes to life while children and adults read to learn, read to laugh, and read to explore; and
WHEREAS, Reading can take you to magical kingdoms, lead you to scientific discoveries, guide you through recipes, and direct you to your destinations; and
WHEREAS, The cities of Shoreline and Lake Forest Park put reading as a top priority through the Reading Counts 2000 program; and
WHEREAS, The Shoreline School District has joined with local businesses and government to promote reading throughout the community; and
WHEREAS, We the residents of those cities will unite, take a stand, and make a visible commitment as readers, declaring "Reading 2000, make it count! Spend a day in celebration of reading";
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives honor the Shoreline School District, City of Shoreline, City of Lake Forest Park, and the residents therein for their dedication and commitment to reading; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the members of the House of Representatives join with Shoreline and Lake Forest Park in recognizing March 2nd as Read Across Shoreline and Lake Forest Park Day; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives hereby encourages every citizen of the State of Washington to make reading a priority and to take the time to read with a child.
House Resolution No. 2000-4715 was adopted.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2738, by Representatives Dickerson, Clements, Romero and Miloscia
Giving the office of financial management oversight over state agency personal service contracting practices.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Second Substitute House Bill No. 2738 was substituted for House Bill No. 2738 and the second substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Second Substitute House Bill No. 2738 was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Dickerson and Clements spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Second Substitute House Bill No. 2738.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Second Substitute House Bill No. 2738 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Second Substitute House Bill No. 2738, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2858, by Representatives D. Schmidt, Dunshee, Ruderman and Edwards; by request of Governor Locke
Eliminating certain reports to the legislature.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 2858 was substituted for House Bill No. 2858 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 2858 was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Schmidt and Romero spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2858.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2858 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Substitute House Bill No. 2858, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 3076, by Representatives G. Chandler, Fisher, Mitchell, Cooper, Hankins, Skinner, Ericksen, McDonald, Radcliff, Mulliken and Pflug
Convening a workshop on streamlining project permit processes.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 3076 was substituted for House Bill No. 3076 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 3076 was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives G. Chandler and Fisher spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 3076.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 3076 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Substitute House Bill No. 3076, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
There being no objection, the House advanced to the seventh order of business.
THIRD READING
ENGROSSED HOUSE BILL NO. 1085, by Representatives Dunn, Conway, Lambert and Esser
Penalizing possession of stolen checks.
Representatives Dunn and Conway spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 1085.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 1085 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed House Bill No. 1085, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
There being no objection, the House reverted to the sixth order of business.
SECOND READING
HOUSE BILL NO. 2365, by Representatives Haigh, Pennington, Eickmeyer, Dunshee and Hurst
Exempting certain leasehold interests from leasehold excise tax.
The bill was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Haigh, Dunshee and Pennington spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Representatives Thomas, Carrell and Van Luven spoke against the passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of House Bill No. 2365.
MOTION
On motion of Representative Wolfe, Representative Kastama was excused.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of House Bill No. 2365 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 56, Nays - 38, Absent - 0, Excused - 4.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Bush, Campbell, Carlson, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, DeBolt, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hatfield, Hurst, Kagi, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Lantz, Linville, Lovick, McDonald, McIntire, Miloscia, Morris, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Pennington, Poulsen, Quall, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schual-Berke, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Thomas, Tokuda, Veloria, Wolfe, Wood, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 56.
Voting nay: Representatives Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Cairnes, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Crouse, Delvin, Dunn, Ericksen, Esser, Hankins, Huff, Koster, Lambert, Lisk, Mastin, McMorris, Mielke, Mitchell, Mulliken, Parlette, Pflug, Reardon, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Skinner, D. Sommers, Sump, Talcott, Van Luven, Wensman and Woods - 38.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Kastama, Radcliff and Scott - 4.
House Bill No. 2365, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2406, by Representatives Regala and Buck
Changing salmon recovery provisions.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 2406 was substituted for House Bill No. 2406 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 2406 was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Regala, Buck and Sump spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Representatives Pennington and Ericksen spoke against passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2406.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2406 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 93, Nays - 2, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 93.
Voting nay: Representatives Ericksen and Pennington - 2.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Substitute House Bill No. 2406, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2481, by Representatives Koster, Edmonds, Esser, O'Brien, Schoesler, Barlean, Alexander, Dunn, Thomas and Ruderman
Requiring predesign review of capital projects to consider leasing space as an alternative.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 2481 was substituted for House Bill No. 2481 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 2481 was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Koster, Edmonds and Alexander spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2481.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2481 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 91, Nays - 4, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 91.
Voting nay: Representatives Dickerson, Lantz, Romero and Wolfe - 4.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Substitute House Bill No. 2481, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2671, by Representatives Thomas, Dunshee and Fortunato
Establishing procedures for handling tax billing errors.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 2671 was substituted for House Bill No. 2671 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 2671 was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Thomas and Dunshee spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2671.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2671 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Substitute House Bill No. 2671, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
SIGNED BY THE SPEAKERS
The Speakers signed: ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 2337,
SECOND READING
HOUSE BILL NO. 2673, by Representatives Lambert, Ruderman, Cox, McIntire, Carrell, Edwards, Sump, Miloscia, Woods, Romero, Bush, Stensen, Esser, Keiser, Rockefeller, Morris, Koster, Edmonds, Ericksen, Lantz, Mulliken, Campbell and O'Brien
Allowing e-mail to constituents at any time.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 2673 was substituted for House Bill No. 2673 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 2673 was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Lambert and Ruderman spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2673.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2673 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Substitute House Bill No. 2673, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2848, by Representatives Hatfield, Benson and Keiser; by request of Insurance Commissioner
Safeguarding securities.
The bill was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representative Hatfield spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of House Bill No. 2848.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of House Bill No. 2848 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 94, Nays - 1, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 94.
Voting nay: Representative Doumit - 1.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
House Bill No. 2848, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
I intended to vote YEA on House Bill No. 2848.
MARK DOUMIT, 19th District
HOUSE BILL NO. 2886, by Representatives Barlean, Keiser, Benson and Hatfield
Exempting certain service contracts from regulation.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 2886 was substituted for House Bill No. 2886 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 2886 was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Barlean and Keiser spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2886.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2886 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 94, Nays - 1, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 94.
Voting nay: Representative Sullivan - 1.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Substitute House Bill No. 2886, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2920, by Representatives Dunshee, Radcliff, Thomas, Eickmeyer, Skinner and Santos
Exempting community radio stations from property taxation.
The bill was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Dunshee and Schmidt spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Representative Carrell spoke against passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of House Bill No. 2920.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of House Bill No. 2920 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 86, Nays - 9, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Fisher, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Thomas, Tokuda, Veloria, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 86.
Voting nay: Representatives Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, Esser, Fortunato, Lisk, Talcott, Van Luven and Wensman - 9.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
House Bill No. 2920, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2995, by Representatives G. Chandler and Linville
Modifying provisions concerning apiaries.
The bill was read the second time.
Representative G. Chandler moved the adoption of the following amendment (492):
On page 4, line 37, after "other" strike "advice" and insert "information"
Representatives G. Chandler and Cooper spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives G. Chandler and Cooper spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 2995.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 2995, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 91, Nays - 4, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 91.
Voting nay: Representatives Kastama, Morris, Romero and Thomas - 4.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed House Bill No. 2995, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
There being no objection, the House advanced to the seventh order of business.
THIRD READING
SECOND SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 1987, by House Committee on Finance (originally sponsored by Representatives Schoesler, Grant and G. Chandler)
Providing tax exemptions and credits to encourage a reduction in agricultural burning of cereal grains and field and turf grass grown for seed.
There being no objection, Second Substitute House Bill No. 1987 was returned to second reading for purpose of amendments.
There being no objection, the House reverted to the sixth order of business.
SECOND READING
Representative Grant moved the adoption of the following amendment (491):
On page 2, line 10, strike "exclusively" and insert "more than half of the time"
On page 2, line 32, strike "exclusively" and insert "more than half of the time"
Representatives Grant and Schoesler spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
Representative Grant moved the adoption of the following amendment (496):
On page 2, line 26, strike "2005" and insert "2006"
On page 3, line 6, strike "2005" and insert "2006"
On page 3, line 27, strike "2005" and insert "2006"
On page 3, beginning on line 32, after "in" strike everything through "2006" on line 33 and insert "2001 through 2006. This section expires January 1, 2007"
Representatives Grant and Schoesler spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Schoesler and Grant spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 1987.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 1987, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 1987, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE
February 14, 2000
Mr. Speaker:
The President has signed ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 2337, and the same is herewith transmitted.
Tony M. Cook, Secretary
There being no objection, the House advanced to the seventh order of business.
THIRD READING
ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 1210, by House Committee on Criminal Justice & Corrections (originally sponsored by Representatives Campbell, O'Brien, DeBolt, Bush, Sullivan, Kastama, Conway, Delvin, Lovick, Esser, Carrell and Hurst)
Enhancing penalties for manufacturing methamphetamines inside a conveyance.
Representatives Campbell and O'Brien spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 1210.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 1210 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 1210, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
There being no objection, the House reverted to the sixth order of business.
SECOND READING
HOUSE BILL NO. 2881, by Representatives Crouse, Poulsen and Eickmeyer; by request of Governor Locke
Allowing new forms of regulation of telecommunications companies.
The bill was read the second time.
There being no objection, the committee amendment(s) by the Committee on Technology, Telecommunications and Energy were adopted. (For committee amendment(s), see Journal, 26th Day, February 4, 2000.)
Representative Crouse moved the adoption of the following amendment (499):
Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert the following:
"Sec. 1. RCW 80.36.135 and 1995 c 110 s 5 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) The legislature declares that:
(a) Changes in technology and the structure of the telecommunications industry may produce conditions under which traditional rate of return, rate base regulation of telecommunications companies may not in all cases provide the most efficient and effective means of achieving the public policy goals of this state as declared in RCW 80.36.300, this section, and RCW 80.36.145. The commission should be authorized to employ an alternative form of regulation if that alternative is better suited to achieving those policy goals.
(b) Because of the great diversity in the scope and type of services provided by telecommunications companies, alternative regulatory arrangements that meet the varying circumstances of different companies and their ratepayers may be desirable.
(2) Subject to the conditions set forth in this chapter and RCW 80.04.130, the commission may regulate telecommunications companies subject ((before July 23, 1989,)) to traditional rate of return, rate base regulation by authorizing an alternative form of regulation. The commission may determine the manner and extent of any alternative forms of regulation as may in the public interest be appropriate. In addition to the public policy goals declared in RCW 80.36.300, the commission shall consider, in determining the appropriateness of any proposed alternative form of regulation, whether it will:
(a) ((Reduce regulatory delay and costs;
(b) Encourage innovation in services;
(c) Promote efficiency;
(d) Facilitate the broad dissemination of technological improvements to all classes of ratepayers;
(e) Enhance the ability of telecommunications companies to respond to competition;
(f) Ensure that telecommunications companies do not have the opportunity to exercise substantial market power absent effective competition or effective regulatory constraints; and
(g) Provide fair, just, and reasonable rates for all ratepayers.
The commission shall make written findings of fact as to each of the above-stated policy goals in ruling on any proposed alternative form of regulation)) Facilitate the broad deployment of technological improvements and advanced telecommunications services to underserved areas or underserved customer classes;
(b) Improve the efficiency of the regulatory process;
(c) Preserve or enhance the development of effective competition and protect against the exercise of market power during its development;
(d) Preserve or enhance service quality and protect against the degradation of the quality or availability of efficient telecommunications services;
(e) Provide for rates and charges that are fair, just, reasonable, sufficient, and not unduly discriminatory or preferential; and
(f) Not unduly or unreasonably prejudice or disadvantage any particular customer class.
(3) A telecommunications company or companies subject to traditional rate of return, rate base regulation may petition the commission to establish an alternative form of regulation. The company or companies shall submit with the petition a plan for an alternative form of regulation. The plan shall contain a proposal for transition to the alternative form of regulation((. The commission shall review and may modify or reject the proposed)) and the proposed duration of the plan. The plan must also contain a proposal for ensuring adequate carrier-to-carrier service quality, including service quality standards or performance measures for interconnection, and appropriate enforcement or remedial provisions in the event the company fails to meet service quality standards or performance measures. The commission also may initiate consideration of alternative forms of regulation for a company or companies on its own motion. The commission ((may approve the plan or modified plan and authorize its implementation, if it finds, after notice and hearing, that the plan or modified plan:
(a) Is in the public interest;
(b) Is necessary to respond to such changes in technology and the structure of the intrastate telecommunications industry as are in fact occurring;
(c) Is better suited to achieving the policy goals set forth in RCW 80.36.300 and this section than the traditional rate of return, rate base regulation;
(d) Ensures that ratepayers will benefit from any efficiency gains and cost savings arising out of the regulatory change and will afford ratepayers the opportunity to benefit from improvements in productivity due to technological change;
(e) Will not result in a degradation of the quality or availability of efficient telecommunications services;
(f) Will produce fair, just, and reasonable rates for telecommunications services; and
(g) Will not unduly or unreasonably prejudice or disadvantage any particular customer class.)), after notice and hearing, shall issue an order accepting, modifying, or rejecting the plan within nine months after the petition or motion is filed, unless extended by the commission for good cause. The commission shall order implementation of the alternative plan of regulation unless it finds that, on balance, an alternative plan as proposed or modified fails to meet the considerations stated in subsection (2) of this section.
(4) Not later than sixty days from the entry of the commission's order, the company or companies affected by the order may file with the commission an election not to proceed with the alternative form of regulation as authorized by the commission. ((If a company elects to appeal to the courts the final order of the commission authorizing an alternative form of regulation, it shall not change its election to proceed or not proceed after the appeal is concluded. The pendency of a petition by a company for judicial review of the final order shall not serve to extend the sixty-day period.))
(5) The commission may waive such regulatory requirements under Title 80 RCW for a telecommunications company subject to an alternative form of regulation as may be appropriate to facilitate the implementation of this section((: PROVIDED, That the commission may not grant the authority to price list services except as provided in RCW 80.36.300 through 80.36.370, the regulatory flexibility act, nor may it waive any statutory requirements or grants of legal rights to any person contained in this chapter and chapter 80.04 RCW as amended, except as otherwise expressly provided)). However, the commission may not waive any grant of legal rights to any person contained in this chapter and chapter 80.04 RCW. The commission may waive different regulatory requirements for different companies or services if such different treatment is in the public interest.
(6) Upon petition by ((any person, or upon its own motion)) the company, and after notice and hearing, the commission may rescind ((its approval of)) or modify an alternative form of regulation ((if, after notice and hearing, it finds that the conditions set forth in subsection (3) of this section can no longer be satisfied. The commission or any person may file a complaint alleging that the rates charged by a telecommunications company under an alternative form of regulation are unfair, unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory, or are otherwise not consistent with the requirements of chapter 101, Laws of 1989: PROVIDED, That the complainant shall bear the burden of proving the allegations in the complaint)) in the manner requested by the company.
(7) The commission or any person may file a complaint under RCW 80.04.110 alleging that a telecommunications company under an alternative form of regulation has not complied with the terms and conditions set forth in the alternative form of regulation. The complainant shall bear the burden of proving the allegations in the complaint."
Correct the title.
Representatives Crouse and Poulsen spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Crouse and Poulsen spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 2881.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 2881, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 94, Nays - 1, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 94.
Voting nay: Representative Van Luven - 1.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed House Bill No. 2881, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 3124, by Representatives H. Sommers, Huff, Kessler, Ballasiotes, O'Brien and Alexander
Revising sentencing for sexually violent predators.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 3124 was substituted for House Bill No. 3124 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 3124 was read the second time.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
There being no objection, the House deferred action on Substitute House Bill No. 3124, and the bill held its place on the Third Reading calendar.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2609, by Representatives Carrell, Constantine, Mulliken and G. Chandler
Allowing agents to give notice of dishonored checks.
The bill was read the second time.
Representative Constantine moved the adoption of the following amendment (503):
Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert the following:
"Sec. 1. RCW 62A.3-515 and 1995 c 187 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(a) If a check as defined in RCW 62A.3-104 is dishonored by nonacceptance or nonpayment, the payee or ((holder of the check is entitled to)) person entitled to enforce the check under RCW 62A.3-301 may collect a reasonable handling fee for each instrument. If the check is not paid within fifteen days and after the ((holder of the check)) person entitled to enforce the check or the person's agent sends a notice of dishonor as provided by RCW 62A.3-520 to the drawer at the drawer's last known address, and if the instrument does not provide for the payment of interest or collection costs and attorneys' fees, the drawer of the instrument is liable for payment of interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum from the date of dishonor, and cost of collection not to exceed forty dollars or the face amount of the check, whichever is less, payable to the person entitled to enforce the check. In addition, in the event of court action on the check, the court, after notice and the expiration of the fifteen days, shall award reasonable attorneys' fees, and three times the face amount of the check or three hundred dollars, whichever is less, as part of the damages payable to the ((holder of)) person enforcing the check. This section does not apply to an instrument that is dishonored by reason of a justifiable stop payment order.
(b)(1) Subsequent to the commencement of an action on the check (subsection (a)) but prior to the hearing, the defendant may tender to the plaintiff as satisfaction of the claim, an amount of money equal to the face amount of the check, a reasonable handling fee, accrued interest, collection costs equal to the face amount of the check not to exceed forty dollars, and the incurred court costs, service costs, and statutory attorneys' fees.
(2) Nothing in this section precludes the right to commence action in a court under chapter 12.40 RCW for small claims.
Sec. 2. RCW 62A.3-522 and 1993 c 229 s 69 are each amended to read as follows:
In addition to sending a notice of dishonor to the drawer of the check under RCW 62A.3-520, the ((holder of the check)) person sending notice shall execute an affidavit certifying service of the notice by mail. The affidavit of service by mail must be attached to a copy of the notice of dishonor and must be substantially in the following form:
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL
I, . . . . . ., hereby certify that on the . . . . . . day of . . . . . ., ((19)) 20. . ., a copy of the foregoing Notice was served on . . . . . . by mailing via the United States Postal Service, postage prepaid, at . . . . . ., Washington.
Dated: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(Signature)
The ((holder)) person enforcing the check shall retain the affidavit with the check but shall file a copy of the affidavit with the clerk of the court in which an action on the check is commenced.
Sec. 3. RCW 62A.3-525 and 1993 c 229 s 70 are each amended to read as follows:
No interest, collection costs, and attorneys' fees, except handling fees, are recoverable on any dishonored check under the provisions of RCW 62A.3-515 where ((the holder of the check or)) a person entitled to such recovery or any agent, employee, or assign ((of the holder)) has demanded:
(1) Interest or collection costs in excess of that provided by RCW 62A.3-515; or
(2) Interest or collection costs prior to the expiration of fifteen days after the mailing of notice of dishonor, as provided by RCW 62A.3-515 and 62A.3-520; or
(3) Attorneys' fees either without having the fees set by the court, or prior to the expiration of fifteen days after the mailing of notice of dishonor, as provided by RCW 62A.3-515 and 62A.3-520."
Correct the title.
Representatives Constantine and Carrell spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Carrell and Constantine spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 2609.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 2609, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed House Bill No. 2609, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2884, by Representatives Constantine, Carlson, Grant, Radcliff, Kastama, Mastin, Keiser, Ruderman, Kessler, Dickerson, Tokuda, D. Sommers and Stensen
Providing notice requirements for parents subject to court orders and standards regarding residential time or visitation.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 2884 was substituted for House Bill No. 2884 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Substitute House Bill No. 2884 was read the second time.
Representative Constantine moved the adoption of the following amendment (502):
Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert the following:
"NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. By this act, the legislature intends to supersede the state supreme court's decisions In Re the Marriage of Littlefield, 133 Wn.2d 39 (1997), and In Re the Marriage of Pape, Docket No. 67527-9, December 23, 1999.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. DEFINITIONS. The definitions in this section apply throughout sections 2 through 18 of this act and RCW 26.09.260 unless the context clearly requires otherwise.
(1) "Court order" means a temporary or permanent parenting plan, custody order, visitation order, or other order governing the residence of a child under this title.
(2) "Relocate" means a change in principal residence either permanently or for a protracted period of time.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. APPLICABILITY. (1) The provisions of this act apply to a court order regarding residential time or visitation with a child issued:
(a) After the effective date of this act; and
(b) Before the effective date of this act, if the existing court order does not expressly govern relocation of the child.
(2) To the extent that a provision of this act conflicts with the express terms of a court order existing prior to the effective date of this act, then this act does not apply to those terms of that order governing relocation of the child.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. GRANT OF AUTHORITY. When entering or modifying a court order, the court has the authority to allow or not allow a person to relocate the child.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. NOTICE REQUIREMENT. Except as provided in section 8 of this act, a person with whom the child resides a majority of the time shall notify every other person entitled to residential time or visitation with the child under a court order if the person intends to relocate. Notice shall be given as prescribed in sections 6 and 7 of this act.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 6. NOTICE--CONTENTS AND DELIVERY. (1) Except as provided in sections 7 and 8 of this act, the notice of an intended relocation of the child must be given by:
(a) Personal service or any form of mail requiring a return receipt; and
(b) No less than:
(i) Sixty days before the date of the intended relocation of the child; or
(ii) No more than five days after the date that the person knows the information required to be furnished under subsection (2) of this section, if the person did not know and could not reasonably have known the information in sufficient time to provide the sixty-days' notice, and it is not reasonable to delay the relocation.
(2)(a) The notice of intended relocation of the child must include: (i) An address at which service of process may be accomplished during the period for objection; (ii) a brief statement of the specific reasons for the intended relocation of the child; and (iii) a notice to the nonrelocating person that an objection to the intended relocation of the child or to the relocating person's proposed revised residential schedule must be filed with the court and served on the opposing person within thirty days or the relocation of the child will be permitted and the residential schedule may be modified pursuant to section 12 of this act. The notice shall not be deemed to be in substantial compliance for purposes of section 9 of this act unless the notice contains the following statement: "THE RELOCATION OF THE CHILD WILL BE PERMITTED AND THE PROPOSED REVISED RESIDENTIAL SCHEDULE MAY BE CONFIRMED UNLESS, WITHIN THIRTY DAYS, YOU FILE A PETITION AND MOTION WITH THE COURT TO BLOCK THE RELOCATION OR OBJECT TO THE PROPOSED REVISED RESIDENTIAL SCHEDULE AND SERVE THE PETITION AND MOTION ON THE PERSON PROPOSING RELOCATION AND ALL OTHER PERSONS ENTITLED BY COURT ORDER TO RESIDENTIAL TIME OR VISITATION WITH THE CHILD."
(b) Except as provided in sections 7 and 8 of this act, the following information shall also be included in every notice of intended relocation of the child, if available:
(i) The specific street address of the intended new residence, if known, or as much of the intended address as is known, such as city and state;
(ii) The new mailing address, if different from the intended new residence address;
(iii) The new home telephone number;
(iv) The name and address of the child's new school and day care facility, if applicable;
(v) The date of the intended relocation of the child; and
(vi) A proposal in the form of a proposed parenting plan for a revised schedule of residential time or visitation with the child, if any.
(3) A person required to give notice of an intended relocation of the child has a continuing duty to promptly update the information required with the notice as that new information becomes known.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 7. NOTICE--RELOCATION WITHIN THE SAME SCHOOL DISTRICT. (1) When the intended relocation of the child is within the school district in which the child currently resides the majority of the time, the person intending to relocate the child, in lieu of notice prescribed in section 6 of this act, may provide actual notice by any reasonable means to every other person entitled to residential time or visitation with the child under a court order.
(2) A person who is entitled to residential time or visitation with the child under a court order may not object to the intended relocation of the child within the school district in which the child currently resides the majority of the time, but he or she retains the right to move for modification under RCW 26.09.260.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 8. LIMITATION OF NOTICES. (1) If a person intending to relocate the child is entering a domestic violence shelter due to the danger imposed by another person, notice may be delayed for twenty-one days. This section shall not be construed to compel the disclosure by any domestic violence shelter of information protected by confidentiality except as provided by RCW 70.123.075 or equivalent laws of the state in which the shelter is located.
(2) If a person intending to relocate the child is a participant in the address confidentiality program pursuant to chapter 40.24 RCW or has a court order which permits the party to withhold some or all of the information required by section 6(2)(b) of this act, the confidential or protected information is not required to be given with the notice.
(3) If a person intending to relocate the child is relocating to avoid a clear, immediate, and unreasonable risk to the health or safety of a person or the child, notice may be delayed for twenty-one days.
(4) A person intending to relocate the child who believes that his or her health or safety or the health or safety of the child would be unreasonably put at risk by notice or disclosure of certain information in the notice may request an Representative(s) * was/were excused. parte hearing with the court to have all or part of the notice requirements waived. If the court finds that the health or safety of a person or a child would be unreasonably put at risk by notice or the disclosure of certain information in the notice, the court may:
(a) Order that the notice requirements be less than complete or waived to the extent necessary to protect confidentiality or the health or safety of a person or child; or
(b) Provide such other relief as the court finds necessary to facilitate the legitimate needs of the parties and the best interests of the child under the circumstances.
(5) This section does not deprive a person entitled to residential time or visitation with a child under a court order the opportunity to object to the intended relocation of the child or the proposed revised residential schedule before the relocation occurs.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 9. FAILURE TO GIVE NOTICE. (1) The failure to provide the required notice is grounds for sanctions, including contempt if applicable.
(2) In determining whether a person has failed to comply with the notice requirements for the purposes of this section, the court may consider whether:
(a) The person has substantially complied with the notice requirements;
(b) The court order in effect at the time of the relocation was issued prior to the effective date of this act and the person substantially complied with the notice requirements, if any, in the existing order;
(c) A waiver of notice was granted;
(d) A person entitled to receive notice was substantially harmed; and
(e) Any other factor the court deems relevant.
(3) A person entitled to file an objection to the intended relocation of the child may file such objection whether or not the person has received proper notice.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 10. OBJECTION TO RELOCATION OR PROPOSED REVISED RESIDENTIAL SCHEDULE. (1) A party objecting to the intended relocation of the child or the relocating parent's proposed revised residential schedule shall do so by filing the objection with the court and serving the objection on the relocating party and all other persons entitled by court order to residential time or visitation with the child by means of personal service or mailing by any form of mail requiring a return receipt to the relocating party at the address designated for service on the notice of intended relocation and to other parties requiring notice at their mailing address. The objection must be filed and served, including a three-day waiting period if the objection is served by mail, within thirty days of receipt of the notice of intended relocation of the child. The objection shall be in the form of: (a) A petition for modification of the parenting plan pursuant to relocation; or (b) other court proceeding adequate to provide grounds for relief.
(2) Unless the special circumstances described in section 8 of this act apply, the person intending to relocate the child shall not, without a court order, change the principal residence of the child during the period in which a party may object. The order required under this subsection may be obtained Representative(s) * was/were excused. parte. If the objecting party notes a court hearing to prevent the relocation of the child for a date not more than fifteen days following timely service of an objection to relocation, the party intending to relocate the child shall not change the principal residence of the child pending the hearing unless the special circumstances described in section 8(3) of this act apply.
(3) The administrator for the courts shall develop a standard form, separate from existing dissolution or modification forms, for use in filing an objection to relocation of the child or objection of the relocating person's proposed revised residential schedule.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 11. REQUIRED PROVISION IN RESIDENTIAL ORDERS. Unless waived by court order, after the effective date of this act, every court order shall include a clear restatement of the provisions in sections 5 through 10 of this act.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 12. FAILURE TO OBJECT. (1) Except for good cause shown, if a person entitled to object to the relocation of the child does not file an objection with the court within thirty days after receipt of the relocation notice, then the relocation of the child shall be permitted.
(2) A nonobjecting person shall be entitled to the residential time or visitation with the child specified in the proposed residential schedule included with the relocation notice.
(3) Any person entitled to residential time or visitation with a child under a court order retains his or her right to move for modification under RCW 26.09.260.
(4) If a person entitled to object to the relocation of the child does not file an objection with the court within thirty days after receipt of the relocation notice, a person entitled to residential time with the child may not be held in contempt of court for any act or omission that is in compliance with the proposed revised residential schedule set forth in the notice given.
(5) Any party entitled to residential time or visitation with the child under a court order may, after thirty days have elapsed since the receipt of the notice, obtain Representative(s) * was/were excused. parte and file with the court an order modifying the residential schedule in conformity with the relocating party's proposed residential schedule specified in the notice upon filing a copy of the notice and proof of service of such notice. A party may obtain Representative(s) * was/were excused. parte and file with the court an order modifying the residential schedule in conformity with the proposed residential schedule specified in the notice before the thirty days have elapsed if the party files a copy of the notice, proof of service of such notice, and proof that no objection will be filed.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 13. TEMPORARY ORDERS. (1) The court may grant a temporary order restraining relocation of the child, or ordering return of the child if the child's relocation has occurred, if the court finds:
(a) The required notice of an intended relocation of the child was not provided in a timely manner and the nonrelocating party was substantially prejudiced;
(b) The relocation of the child has occurred without agreement of the parties, court order, or the notice required by this act; or
(c) After examining evidence presented at a hearing for temporary orders in which the parties had adequate opportunity to prepare and be heard, there is a likelihood that on final hearing the court will not approve the intended relocation of the child or no circumstances exist sufficient to warrant a relocation of the child prior to a final determination at trial.
(2) The court may grant a temporary order authorizing the intended relocation of the child pending final hearing if the court finds:
(a) The required notice of an intended relocation of the child was provided in a timely manner or that the circumstances otherwise warrant issuance of a temporary order in the absence of compliance with the notice requirements and issues an order for a revised schedule for residential time with the child; and
(b) After examining the evidence presented at a hearing for temporary orders in which the parties had adequate opportunity to prepare and be heard, there is a likelihood that on final hearing the court will approve the intended relocation of the child.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 14. BASIS FOR DETERMINATION. The person proposing to relocate with the child shall provide his or her reasons for the intended relocation. There is a rebuttable presumption that the intended relocation of the child will be permitted. A person entitled to object to the intended relocation of the child may rebut the presumption by demonstrating that the detrimental effect of the relocation outweighs the benefit of the change to the child and the relocating person, based upon the following factors. The factors listed in this section are not weighted. No inference is to be drawn from the order in which the following factors are listed:
(1) The relative strength, nature, quality, extent of involvement, and stability of the child's relationship with each parent, siblings, and other significant persons in the child's life;
(2) Prior agreements of the parties;
(3) Whether disrupting the contact between the child and the person with whom the child resides a majority of the time would be more detrimental to the child than disrupting contact between the child and the person objecting to the relocation;
(4) Whether either parent or a person entitled to residential time with the child is subject to limitations under RCW 26.09.191;
(5) The reasons of each person for seeking or opposing the relocation and the good faith of each of the parties in requesting or opposing the relocation;
(6) The age, developmental stage, and needs of the child, and the likely impact the relocation or its prevention will have on the child's physical, educational, and emotional development, taking into consideration any special needs of the child;
(7) The quality of life, resources, and opportunities available to the child and to the relocating party in the current and proposed geographic locations;
(8) The availability of alternative arrangements to foster and continue the child's relationship with and access to the other parent;
(9) The alternatives to relocation and whether it is feasible and desirable for the other party to relocate also;
(10) The financial impact and logistics of the relocation or its prevention; and
(11) For a temporary order, the amount of time before a final decision can be made at trial.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 15. FACTOR NOT TO BE CONSIDERED. In determining whether to permit or restrain the relocation of the child, the court may not admit evidence on the issue of whether the person seeking to relocate the child will forego his or her own relocation if the child's relocation is not permitted or whether the person opposing relocation will also relocate if the child's relocation is permitted. The court may admit and consider such evidence after it makes the decision to allow or restrain relocation of the child and other parenting, custody, or visitation issues remain before the court, such as what, if any, modifications to the parenting plan are appropriate and who the child will reside with the majority of the time if the court has denied relocation of the child and the person is relocating without the child.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 16. OBJECTIONS BY NONPARENTS. A court may not restrict the right of a parent to relocate the child when the sole objection to the relocation is from a third party, unless that third party is entitled to residential time or visitation under a court order and has served as the primary residential care provider to the child for a substantial period of time during the thirty-six consecutive months preceding the intended relocation.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 17. SANCTIONS. The court may sanction a party if it finds that a proposal to relocate the child or an objection to an intended relocation or proposed revised residential schedule was made to harass a person, to interfere in bad faith with the relationship between the child and another person entitled to residential time or visitation with the child, or to unnecessarily delay or needlessly increase the cost of litigation.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 18. PRIORITY FOR HEARING. A hearing involving relocations or intended relocations of children shall be accorded priority on the court's motion calendar and trial docket.
Sec. 19. RCW 26.09.260 and 1999 c 174 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsections (4), (5), (((7))) (6), (8), and (((9))) (10) of this section, the court shall not modify a prior custody decree or a parenting plan unless it finds, upon the basis of facts that have arisen since the prior decree or plan or that were unknown to the court at the time of the prior decree or plan, that a substantial change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or the nonmoving party and that the modification is in the best interest of the child and is necessary to serve the best interests of the child.
(2) In applying these standards, the court shall retain the residential schedule established by the decree or parenting plan unless:
(a) The parents agree to the modification;
(b) The child has been integrated into the family of the petitioner with the consent of the other parent in substantial deviation from the parenting plan;
(c) The child's present environment is detrimental to the child's physical, mental, or emotional health and the harm likely to be caused by a change of environment is outweighed by the advantage of a change to the child; or
(d) The court has found the nonmoving parent in contempt of court at least twice within three years because the parent failed to comply with the residential time provisions in the court-ordered parenting plan, or the parent has been convicted of custodial interference in the first or second degree under RCW 9A.40.060 or 9A.40.070.
(3) A conviction of custodial interference in the first or second degree under RCW 9A.40.060 or 9A.40.070 shall constitute a substantial change of circumstances for the purposes of this section.
(4) The court may reduce or restrict contact between the ((nonprimary residential)) child and the parent ((and a child)) with whom the child does not reside a majority of the time if it finds that the reduction or restriction would serve and protect the best interests of the child using the criteria in RCW 26.09.191.
(5) The court may order adjustments to the residential aspects of a parenting plan upon a showing of a substantial change in circumstances of either parent or of the child, and without consideration of the factors set forth in subsection (2) of this section, if the proposed modification is only a minor modification in the residential schedule that does not change the residence the child is scheduled to reside in the majority of the time and:
(a) Does not exceed twenty-four full days in a calendar year; or
(b) Is based on a change of residence of the parent with whom the child does not reside the majority of the time or an involuntary change in work schedule by a parent which makes the residential schedule in the parenting plan impractical to follow; or
(c) Does not result in a schedule that exceeds ninety overnights per year in total, if the court finds that, at the time the petition for modification is filed, the decree of dissolution or parenting plan does not provide reasonable time with the ((nonprimary residential)) parent ((at the time the petition for modification is filed)) with whom the child does not reside a majority of the time, and further, the court finds that it is in the best interests of the child to increase residential time with the ((nonprimary residential)) parent in excess of the residential time period in (a) of this subsection. However, any motion under this subsection (5)(c) is subject to the factors established in subsection (2) of this section if the party bringing the ((motion)) petition has previously been granted a modification under this same subsection within twenty-four months of the current motion. Relief granted under this section shall not be the sole basis for adjusting or modifying child support.
(6) The court may order adjustments to the residential aspects of a parenting plan pursuant to a proceeding to permit or restrain a relocation of the child. The person objecting to the relocation of the child or the relocating person's proposed revised residential schedule may file a petition to modify the parenting plan, including a change of the residence in which the child resides the majority of the time, without a showing of adequate cause other than the proposed relocation itself. A hearing to determine adequate cause for modification shall not be required so long as the request for relocation of the child is being pursued. In making a determination of a modification pursuant to relocation of the child, the court shall first determine whether to permit or restrain the relocation of the child using the procedures and standards provided in sections 2 through 18 of this act. Following that determination, the court shall determine what modification pursuant to relocation should be made, if any, to the parenting plan or custody order or visitation order.
(7) A ((nonprimary residential)) parent with whom the child does not reside a majority of the time and whose residential time with the child is subject to limitations pursuant to RCW 26.09.191 (2) or (3) may not seek expansion of residential time under subsection (5)(c) of this section unless that parent demonstrates a substantial change in circumstances specifically related to the basis for the limitation.
(((7))) (8) If a ((nonprimary residential)) parent with whom the child does not reside a majority of the time voluntarily fails to exercise residential time for an extended period, that is, one year or longer, the court upon proper motion may make adjustments to the parenting plan in keeping with the best interests of the minor child.
(((8))) (9) A ((nonprimary)) parent with whom the child does not reside a majority of the time who is required by the existing parenting plan to complete evaluations, treatment, parenting, or other classes may not seek expansion of residential time under subsection (5)(c) of this section unless that parent has fully complied with such requirements.
(((9))) (10) The court may order adjustments to any of the nonresidential aspects of a parenting plan upon a showing of a substantial change of circumstances of either parent or of a child, and the adjustment is in the best interest of the child. Adjustments ordered under this section may be made without consideration of the factors set forth in subsection (2) of this section.
(((10))) (11) If the court finds that a motion to modify a prior decree or parenting plan has been brought in bad faith, the court shall assess the attorney's fees and court costs of the nonmoving parent against the moving party.
Sec. 20. RCW 26.26.160 and 1992 c 229 s 8 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section the court has continuing jurisdiction to prospectively modify a judgment and order for future education and future support, and with respect to matters listed in RCW 26.26.130 (3) and (((4))) (5), and RCW 26.26.150(2) upon showing a substantial change of circumstances. The procedures set forth in RCW 26.09.175 shall be used in modification proceedings under this section.
(2) A judgment or order entered under this chapter may be modified without a showing of substantial change of circumstances upon the same grounds as RCW 26.09.170 permits support orders to be modified without a showing of a substantial change of circumstance.
(3) The court may modify a parenting plan or residential provisions adopted pursuant to RCW 26.26.130(((6))) (7) in accordance with the provisions of chapter 26.09 RCW.
(4) The court shall hear and review petitions for modifications of a parenting plan, custody order, visitation order, or other order governing the residence of a child, and conduct any proceedings concerning a relocation of the residence where the child resides a majority of the time, pursuant to chapter 26.09 RCW.
Sec. 21. RCW 26.10.190 and 1989 c 375 s 24 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) ((The court shall not modify a prior custody decree unless it finds, upon the basis of facts that have arisen since the prior decree or that were unknown to the court at the time of the prior decree, that a change has occurred in the circumstances of the child or the custodian and that the modification is necessary to serve the best interests of the child. In applying these standards, the court shall retain the custodian established by the prior decree unless:
(a) The custodian agrees to the modification;
(b) The child has been integrated into the family of the petitioner with the consent of the custodian; or
(c) The child's present environment is detrimental to his or her physical, mental, or emotional health and the harm likely to be caused by a change of environment is outweighed by the advantage of a change to the child.)) The court shall hear and review petitions for modifications of a parenting plan, custody order, visitation order, or other order governing the residence of a child, and conduct any proceedings concerning a relocation of the residence where the child resides a majority of the time, pursuant to chapter 26.09 RCW.
(2) If the court finds that a motion to modify a prior custody decree has been brought in bad faith, the court shall assess the attorney's fees and court costs of the custodian against the petitioner.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 22. Captions used in this act are not any part of the law.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 23. Sections 2 through 18 of this act are each added to chapter 26.09 RCW and codified with the subchapter heading "Notice requirements and standards for parental relocation.""
Correct the title.
Representatives Constantine and Carrell spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Constantine, Carrell, Carlson and Kastama spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Representative Carrell: Does the presumption created in section 14 of this act apply to any other sections of RCW title 26?
Representative Constantine: No. The presumption created in section 14 of this act is intended to apply exclusively to section 14 of the act and is not intended to apply by analogy to any other sections of RCW title 26.
Representative Carrell: How does this act apply in situations in which the child resides an equal amount of time with each parent?
Representative Constantine: Under such circumstances, the notice requirements apply to both parties and the presumption to neither.
Representative Lambert spoke against the passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 2884.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 2884 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 91, Nays - 4, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 91.
Voting nay: Representatives Fortunato, Koster, Lambert and Schindler - 4.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 2884, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2946, by Representatives Conway, Clements, Wood, Regala and Hurst
Allowing local planning and zoning of gambling activities.
The bill was read the second time.
Representative Conway moved the adoption of the following amendment (489):
Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert the following:
"NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. A new section is added to chapter 9.46 RCW to read as follows:
Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as limiting the authority of any city, town, city-county, or county to exercise its land use and zoning powers granted or recognized under the law with respect to the location of any gambling activities authorized under this chapter."
Correct the title.
Representatives Conway and Clements spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Conway and Clements spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Representative Clements: By the use of the words "with respect to the location of" are we implying that local governments cannot impose other planning or zoning regulations over gambling establishments, such as requirements for setbacks, design guidelines, parking, landscaping, signage and other site requirements?
Representative Conway. No. It is clear that gambling establishments are subject to general planning and zoning rules that apply to other businesses. This bill also confirms that local governments may determine the location where gambling activities may occur.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 2946.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 2946, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed House Bill No. 2946, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
There being no objection, the House advanced to the seventh order of business.
THIRD READING
SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 3124, by Representatives H. Sommers, Huff, Kessler, Ballasiotes, O'Brien and Alexander
Revising sentencing for sexually violent predators.
Representatives H. Sommers and Ballasiotes spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 3124.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 3124 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Substitute House Bill No. 3124, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
There being no objection, the House reverted to the sixth order of business.
SECOND READING
HOUSE BILL NO. 2420, by Representatives Linville, G. Chandler, Morris, Ericksen, Quall, Kastama, Santos, Grant, Stensen, Keiser, Poulsen, Wensman, Scott, Rockefeller, Reardon, Kenney, Cody, Lovick, Cooper, Koster, Haigh, McDonald, Van Luven, Lantz, Wood, Regala, Edmonds, Hurst, Dunshee, Constantine, Dickerson, Wolfe, Ogden, Ruderman and McIntire
Providing for oil and gas pipeline safety.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Second Substitute House Bill No. 2420 was substituted for House Bill No. 2420 and the second substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Second Substitute House Bill No. 2420 was read the second time.
There being no objection, amendment number 486 was withdrawn.
Representative Linville moved the adoption of the following amendment (493):
Strike everything after the enacting clause and insert the following:
"NEW SECTION. Sec. 1. (1) The intent of this act is to protect the health and safety of the citizens of the state of Washington and the quality of the state's environment by developing and implementing environmental and public safety measures applicable to persons transporting hazardous liquids and gas by pipeline within the state of Washington. The legislature finds that public safety and the environment may best be protected by adopting standards that are equal to, or more stringent than, those adopted by the federal government.
(2) It is the further intent of this act to ensure that the state of Washington fully activate the authority it is currently provided under the federal pipeline safety act (49 U.S.C. Sec. 60101 et seq., as amended). In addition, it is the intent of this act to provide policy direction for the development of state pipeline safety programs in the event of a delegation of authority, or the provision of direct authority, to the state for inspection of interstate pipelines and enforcement of state and federal pipeline safety requirements.
(3) It is also the intent of the legislature that the governor work with the state congressional delegation in seeking the following improvements to the federal pipeline safety act when it is being reauthorized:
(a) The elimination of federal preemption; or
(b) Amendments that direct the federal office of pipeline safety to delegate authority to qualified states for:
(i) The regulation of interstate hazardous liquid and gas pipelines using standards equal to or more stringent than federal standards; and
(ii) The enforcement of state and federal requirements related to pipeline safety.
(4) In working with the state congressional delegation on reauthorization of the federal pipeline safety act, it is the intent of the legislature that the governor also seek the following:
(a) Requirements for rapid shutdown of ruptured pipelines;
(b) Periodic inspection and testing of pipelines; and
(c) Continuing education and certification of pipeline operators.
(5) In addition, it is the intent of the legislature that the governor work with the state congressional delegation in seeking higher levels of funding for state pipeline safety activities.
(6) While the legislature acknowledges that serious accidents have occurred for hazardous liquid and gas pipelines in this nation and elsewhere, it recognizes that there are fundamental differences between hazardous liquid pipelines and gas pipelines and that a different system of safety regulations must be applied for each kind of pipeline.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. The definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter unless the context clearly requires otherwise.
(1) "Commission" means the utilities and transportation commission.
(2) "Department" means the department of ecology.
(3) "Failsafe system" means a system or device that prevents a pipeline from exceeding its maximum operating pressure.
(4) "Gas" means natural gas, flammable gas, or toxic or corrosive gas.
(5) "Hazardous liquid" means: (a) Petroleum, petroleum products, or anhydrous ammonia as those terms are defined in 49 C.F.R. Part 195 in effect March 1, 1998; and (b) carbon dioxide. The department by rule may incorporate by reference other substances designated as hazardous by the secretary of transportation under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 60101(a)(4).
(6) "Local government" means a subdivision of the state or a city or town.
(7) "Person" means an individual, partnership, franchise holder, association, corporation, a state, a city, a county, or any subdivision or instrumentality of a state, and its employees, agents, or legal representatives.
(8) "Pipeline" or "pipeline system" means all parts of a pipeline facility through which hazardous liquid, gas, or carbon dioxide moves in transportation, including, but not limited to, line pipe, pumping units, fabricated assemblies associated with pumping units, metering and delivery stations and fabricated assemblies therein, breakout tanks, and excluding process pipelines as defined in chapter 173-180A WAC, as it exists on the effective date of this act.
(9) "Pipeline company" means a person or entity constructing, owning, or operating a pipeline for transporting hazardous liquid or gas. For the purposes of this act, a pipeline company does not include: (a) Distribution systems owned and operated under franchise for the sale, delivery, or distribution of natural gas at retail; or (b) excavation contractors or other contractors that contract with a pipeline company.
(10) "Reportable release" means a spilling, leaking, pouring, emitting, discharging, or any other uncontrolled escape of a hazardous liquid in excess of one barrel, or forty-two gallons.
(11) "Safety management systems" means management systems that include coordinated interdisciplinary evaluations of the effect of significant changes to a pipeline system before such changes are implemented.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 3. The hazardous liquid pipeline safety account is created in the custody of the state treasurer. All receipts from the federal office of pipeline safety and any other state or federal funds provided for hazardous liquid pipeline safety must be deposited in the account. Moneys in the account may be spent only after appropriation. Expenditures from the account may be used only for funding the pipeline safety program within the department of ecology. Only the director of the department or the director's designee may authorize expenditures from the account.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 4. (1) The department is responsible for the administration and enforcement of all laws related to hazardous liquid pipeline safety to the extent not prohibited by federal law. The department shall immediately seek federal certification in order to administer and enforce all laws related to hazardous liquids pipeline safety. When federal certification is received by the department, authority for the hazardous liquid pipeline safety program as authorized under RCW 81.88.040 shall transfer from the commission to the department. When the department becomes certified to regulate intrastate hazardous liquid pipeline safety, it shall apply the existing federal pipeline safety standards. Upon exercising delegated or direct authority to regulate interstate pipeline safety, the department shall ensure that intrastate and interstate pipelines are regulated to the same safety standards.
(2) By December 1, 2000, the department shall develop for the review of the legislature in the 2001 session a pipeline safety program that promotes protection of public health and the environment. This program shall include the following elements:
(a) Requirements for operators of pipelines to develop and implement structural integrity management plans;
(b) A schedule of inspection and testing within the pipeline system of:
(i) All mechanical components;
(ii) All electronic components; and
(iii) The structural integrity of all pipelines as determined through either pressure testing, internal inspection tool surveys, or a combination of techniques;
(c) Failsafe systems;
(d) Safety management systems;
(e) Requirements related to the rapid location and isolation of all reportable releases from pipelines;
(f) Emergency response procedures and emergency response training;
(g) Reporting requirements related to emergency situations, including emergency shutdowns;
(h) Requirements related to the training and certification of personnel who operate pipelines and pipeline systems;
(i) Measures aimed at the prevention of third-party excavation damage to pipelines through the establishment and required use of a one-number locator system and through development of a training program available to municipal workers and construction workers employed by a pipeline company or employed by a construction company working under contract to a pipeline company.
(j) Recommendations for funding and potential fund sources for implementing the entire program and each program element.
(3) In providing this program to the legislature for review as provided in subsection (2) of this section, the department shall clearly indicate whether federal authority for each program element exists or must be delegated. The department shall also develop a legislative proposal for consideration by the legislature that authorizes the state to implement the program elements for which it has received delegation of authority from the federal office of pipeline safety or direct authority under the federal pipeline safety act. Upon review of the department's program by the legislature in the 2001 session, the department shall implement the program elements for which it has authority.
(4) After the state has received delegation of authority or direct authority to regulate interstate pipeline safety, the program elements in subsection (2) of this section shall be implemented through operations safety plans submitted by operators of pipelines to the department for approval. The department shall approve such plans after they have been deemed fit for service. A plan shall be deemed fit for service when it results in pipelines that are designed, developed, constructed, operated, and periodically modified to provide protection of public safety and the environment.
(5) The department shall serve as the single point of contact within the state for information related to hazardous liquid pipeline safety and shall provide technical assistance on hazardous liquid pipeline safety to local government authorities upon request.
(6) The department shall evaluate proposals developed by the federal office of pipeline safety and other agencies and organizations related to methods and technologies for testing the integrity of hazardous liquid pipeline structure, leak detection, and other elements of pipeline operation.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 5. (1) The department and the commission shall jointly support the governor in seeking delegation of federal authority to inspect hazardous liquid and gas interstate pipelines and enforce state and federal pipeline safety requirements. The department and the commission shall establish and submit to the United States secretary of transportation an inspection program that complies with requirements for delegated interstate agent authority. If the secretary of transportation delegates authority to the state as provided in this subsection, the department and the commission, at a minimum, shall do the following to carry out the delegated federal authority:
(a) Inspect hazardous liquid and gas pipelines periodically as specified in the inspection program;
(b) Provide for the testing of hazardous liquid and gas pipelines as authorized by federal law and regulation; and
(c) File reports with the United States secretary of transportation as required to maintain the delegated authority.
(2) In addition, the department and commission shall inspect any record, map, or written procedure required by federal law to be kept by a pipeline company concerning reportable releases of hazardous liquid, or of gas releases as defined under state regulation, and the design, construction, testing, or operation and maintenance of pipelines.
Sec. 6. RCW 81.88.040 and 1998 c 123 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) The definitions in this subsection apply throughout this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise.
(a) "Pipeline company" means a person or entity constructing, owning, or operating an intrastate pipeline for transporting hazardous liquid or gas, whether or not such a person or entity is a public service company otherwise regulated by the commission. For the purposes of this section, a pipeline company does not include: (i) Distribution systems owned and operated under franchise for the sale, delivery, or distribution of natural gas at retail; or (ii) excavation contractors or other contractors that contract with a pipeline company.
(b) "Hazardous liquid" means: (i) Petroleum, petroleum products, or anhydrous ammonia as those terms are defined in 49 C.F.R. Part 195 in effect March 1, 1998; and (ii) carbon dioxide. The commission by rule may incorporate by reference other substances designated as hazardous by the secretary of transportation under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 60101(a)(4).
(c) "Gas" means natural gas, flammable gas, or gas which is toxic or corrosive.
(2) The commission shall adopt by rule intrastate pipeline safety standards for pipeline transportation and pipeline facilities that: (a) Apply to pipeline companies transporting hazardous liquids or gas; (b) cover the design, construction, and operation of pipelines transporting hazardous liquids or gas; and (c) require pipeline companies to design, construct, and maintain their pipeline facilities so they are safe and efficient. The commission shall only adopt rules pertaining to interstate pipeline safety standards if it is delegated authority or provided direct authority by the federal government to adopt such rules.
(3) A person, officer, agent, or employee of a pipeline company who, as an individual or acting as an officer, agent, or employee of such a company, violates or fails to comply with this section or a rule adopted under this section, or who procures, aids, or abets another person or entity in the violation of or noncompliance with this section or a rule adopted under this section, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor.
(4)(a) A pipeline company, or any person, officer, agent, or employee of a pipeline company that violates a provision of this section, or a rule adopted under this section, is subject to a civil penalty to be assessed by the commission.
(b) The commission shall adopt rules: (i) Setting penalty amounts, but may not exceed the penalties specified in the federal pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. Sec. 60101 et seq.; (ii) establishing procedures for mitigating penalties assessed; and (iii) incorporating by reference other substances designated as hazardous by the secretary of transportation under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 60101(a)(4).
(c) In determining the amount of the penalty, the commission shall consider: (i) The appropriateness of the penalty in relation to the position of the person charged with the violation; (ii) the gravity of the violation; and (iii) the good faith of the person or company charged in attempting to achieve compliance after notification of the violation.
(d) The amount of the penalty may be recovered in a civil action in the superior court of Thurston county or of some other county in which the violator may do business. In all actions for recovery, the rules of evidence shall be the same as in ordinary civil actions. All penalties recovered under this section must be paid into the state treasury and credited to the public service revolving fund.
(5) Nothing in this section duplicates the authority of the energy facility site evaluation council under chapter 80.50 RCW.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 7. (1) Upon receipt of federal certification for hazardous liquids and natural gas pipeline safety, all powers, duties, and functions of the utilities and transportation commission pertaining to hazardous liquid pipeline safety are transferred to the department of ecology. Responsibilities for the safety of gas pipelines shall remain with the commission. Such powers, duties, and functions transferred to the department of ecology do not include rate setting as provided in chapters 80.28, 80.24, and 81.24 RCW. All references to the commission or the utilities and transportation commission in the Revised Code of Washington shall be construed to mean the director or the department of ecology when referring to the functions transferred in this section.
(2)(a) All reports, documents, surveys, books, records, files, papers, or written material in the possession of the utilities and transportation commission pertaining to the powers, functions, and duties transferred shall be delivered to the custody of the department of ecology. All cabinets, furniture, office equipment, motor vehicles, and other tangible property employed by the utilities and transportation commission in carrying out the powers, functions, and duties pertinent to hazardous liquid pipeline safety transferred shall be made available to the department of ecology. All funds, credits, or other assets held in connection with the powers, functions, and duties transferred shall be assigned to the department of ecology.
(b) Any appropriations made to the utilities and transportation commission for carrying out the powers, functions, and duties pertinent to hazardous liquid pipeline safety transferred shall, on the effective date of this section, be divided proportionally based on program responsibilities and shared with the department of ecology.
(c) Whenever any question arises as to the transfer of any personnel, funds, books, documents, records, papers, files, equipment, or other tangible property used or held in the exercise of the powers and the performance of the duties and functions transferred, the director of financial management shall make a determination as to the proper allocation and certify the same to the state agencies concerned.
(3) All employees of the utilities and transportation commission engaged in performing the powers, functions, and duties relative to hazardous liquid pipeline safety are transferred to the jurisdiction of the department of ecology. All employees classified under chapter 41.06 RCW, the state civil service law, are assigned to the department of ecology to perform their usual duties upon the same terms as formerly, without any loss of rights, subject to any action that may be appropriate thereafter in accordance with the laws and rules governing state civil service.
(4) All rules and all pending business before the utilities and transportation commission pertaining to the powers, functions, and duties pertinent to hazardous liquid pipeline safety transferred shall be continued and acted upon by the department of ecology. All existing contracts and obligations shall remain in full force and shall be performed by the department of ecology.
(5) The transfer of the powers, duties, functions, and personnel of the utilities and transportation commission shall not affect the validity of any act performed before the effective date of this section.
(6) If apportionments of budgeted funds are required because of the transfers directed by this section, the director of financial management shall certify the apportionments to the agencies affected, the state auditor, and the state treasurer. Each of these shall make the appropriate transfer and adjustments in funds and appropriation accounts and equipment records in accordance with the certification.
(7) Nothing contained in this section may be construed to alter any existing collective bargaining unit or the provisions of any existing collective bargaining agreement until the agreement has expired or until the bargaining unit has been modified by action of the personnel board as provided by law.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 8. (1) A pipeline safety committee is established to advise the department, the commission, and other appropriate federal, state, and local government agencies and officials on matters relating to hazardous liquid and gas pipeline safety, routing, construction, operation, and maintenance. The committee shall not exceed fifteen members, exclusive of nonvoting state agency representatives. Members of the committee shall be appointed by the governor to staggered three-year terms and shall consist of members of the general public, elected officials from cities and counties in which pipelines are located, and the hazardous liquid and gas pipeline industry. A representative of the department of ecology and of the utilities and transportation commission shall each sit on the committee as nonvoting members. The governor may designate other nonvoting representatives of state agencies to serve on the committee as needed. The chair of the committee shall be appointed by the governor from among the members of the general public. The committee shall review and comment on proposed rules and on the operation of the state pipeline safety program.
(2) All necessary staff support for the committee shall be provided by the department.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 9. A new section is added to chapter 48.48 RCW to read as follows:
(1) In consultation with the emergency management program within the state military department, the department of ecology, the commission, and local emergency services organizations, the chief of the Washington state patrol, through the director of fire protection or his or her authorized deputy, shall:
(a) Evaluate the preparedness of local first responders in meeting emergency management demands under subsection (2) of this section; and
(b) Conduct an assessment of the equipment and personnel needed by local first responders to meet emergency management demands related to pipelines.
(2) The chief of the Washington state patrol, through the director of fire protection or his or her deputy, shall develop curricula for training local first responders to deal with pipeline accidents. The curricula shall be developed in conjunction with pipeline companies and local first responders, and shall include a timetable and costs for providing training as defined in the curricula to all communities housing pipelines. Separate curricula shall be developed for hazardous liquid and gas pipelines so that the differences between pipelines may be recognized and appropriate accident responses provided. The need for a training program for regional incident management teams shall also be evaluated.
(3) In consultation with other relevant agencies, the chief of the Washington state patrol, through the director of fire protection or his or her deputy, shall identify the need and means for achieving consistent application of the national interagency incident management system.
(4) For the purposes of this section, "local first responders" means police, fire, emergency medical staff, and volunteers.
Sec. 10. RCW 19.122.020 and 1984 c 144 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:
Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter:
(1) "Business day" means any day other than Saturday, Sunday, or a legal local, state, or federal holiday.
(2) "Damage" includes the substantial weakening of structural or lateral support of an underground facility, penetration, impairment, or destruction of any underground protective coating, housing, or other protective device, or the severance, partial or complete, of any underground facility to the extent that the project owner or the affected utility owner determines that repairs are required.
(3) "Emergency" means any condition constituting a clear and present danger to life or property, or a customer service outage.
(4) "Excavation" means any operation in which earth, rock, or other material on or below the ground is moved or otherwise displaced by any means, except the tilling of soil less than twelve inches in depth for agricultural purposes, or road and ditch maintenance that does not change the original road grade or ditch flowline.
(5) "Excavator" means any person who engages directly in excavation.
(6) "Identified facility" means any underground facility which is indicated in the project plans as being located within the area of proposed excavation.
(7) "Identified but unlocatable underground facility" means an underground facility which has been identified but cannot be located with reasonable accuracy.
(8) "Locatable underground facility" means an underground facility which can be field-marked with reasonable accuracy.
(9) "Marking" means the use of stakes, paint, or other clearly identifiable materials to show the field location of underground facilities, in accordance with the current color code standard of the American public works association. Markings shall include identification letters indicating the specific type of the underground facility.
(10) "Person" means an individual, partnership, franchise holder, association, corporation, a state, a city, a county, or any subdivision or instrumentality of a state, and its employees, agents, or legal representatives.
(11) "Pipeline" or "pipeline system" means all parts of a pipeline facility through which hazardous liquid, gas, or carbon dioxide moves in transportation, including, but not limited to, line pipe, pumping units, fabricated assemblies associated with pumping units, metering and delivery stations and fabricated assemblies therein, and breakout tanks, and excluding process pipelines and transfer pipelines as defined in chapter 173-180A WAC, as it exists on the effective date of this act.
(12) "Pipeline company" means a person or entity constructing, owning, or operating a pipeline for transporting hazardous liquid or gas. For the purposes of this section, a pipeline company does not include: (a) Distribution systems owned and operated under franchise for the sale, delivery, or distribution of natural gas at retail; or (b) excavation contractors or other contractors that contract with a pipeline company.
(13) "Reasonable accuracy" means location within twenty-four inches of the outside dimensions of both sides of an underground facility.
(((12))) (14) "Underground facility" means any item buried or placed below ground for use in connection with the storage or conveyance of water, sewage, electronic, telephonic or telegraphic communications, cablevision, electric energy, petroleum products, gas, gaseous vapors, hazardous liquids, or other substances and including but not limited to pipes, sewers, conduits, cables, valves, lines, wires, manholes, attachments, and those parts of poles or anchors below ground. This definition does not apply to hazardous liquid or gas pipelines as defined in subsection (11) of this section.
(((13))) (15) "One-number locator service" means a service through which a person can notify utilities and request field-marking of underground facilities.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 11. A new section is added to chapter 19.122 RCW to read as follows:
(1) By December 31, 2000, the utilities and transportation commission shall establish or cause to be established a single state-wide toll-free telephone number to be used for referring excavators to the appropriate one-number locator service.
(2) The utilities and transportation commission, in consultation with the Washington utilities coordinating council, shall establish minimum standards and best management practices for one-number locator services consistent with the recommendations of the governor's fuel accident prevention and response team issued in December 1999. By December 31, 2000, the commission shall provide its recommendations to the appropriate standing committees of the house of representatives and the senate.
(3) One-number locator services shall be operated by nongovernmental agencies.
Sec. 12. RCW 19.122.030 and 1988 c 99 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:
Before commencing any excavation, the excavator shall provide notice of the scheduled commencement of excavation to all owners of underground facilities and to all pipeline companies through a one-number locator service. All owners of underground facilities and all pipeline companies within a one-number locator service area shall subscribe to the service. One number locator service rates for cable television companies will be based on the amount of their underground facilities. If no one-number locator service is available, notice shall be provided individually to those owners of underground facilities and to those pipeline companies known to or suspected of having underground facilities or pipelines within the area of proposed excavation. The notice shall be communicated to the owners of underground facilities and to pipeline companies not less than two business days or more than ten business days before the scheduled date for commencement of excavation, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.
Upon receipt of the notice provided for in this section, the owner of the underground facility and the pipeline company shall provide the excavator with reasonably accurate information as to its locatable underground facilities and the pipeline by surface-marking the location of the facilities or pipeline. If there are identified but unlocatable underground facilities or pipeline, the owner of such facilities and the pipeline company shall provide the excavator with the best available information as to their locations. The owner of the underground facility and the pipeline company providing the information shall respond no later than two business days after the receipt of the notice or before the excavation time, at the option of the owner or pipeline company, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. Excavators shall not excavate until all known facilities and pipelines have been marked. Once marked by the owner of the underground facility and pipeline company, the excavator is responsible for maintaining the markings. Excavators shall have the right to receive compensation from the owner of the underground facility or the pipeline company for costs incurred if the owner of the underground facility or the pipeline company does not locate its facilities in accordance with this section.
The owner of the underground facility and the pipeline company shall have the right to receive compensation for costs incurred in responding to excavation notices given less than two business days prior to the excavation from the excavator.
An owner of underground facilities ((is)) and the pipeline company are not required to indicate the presence of existing service laterals or appurtenances if the presence of existing service laterals or appurtenances on the site of the construction project can be determined from the presence of other visible facilities, such as buildings, manholes, or meter and junction boxes on or adjacent to the construction site.
Emergency excavations are exempt from the time requirements for notification provided in this section.
If the excavator, while performing the contract, discovers underground facilities which are not identified, the excavator shall cease excavating in the vicinity of the facility and immediately notify the owner or operator of such facilities, or the one-number locator service. If the excavator, while performing the contract, discovers an underground pipeline which is not identified, the excavator shall cease excavating in the vicinity of the pipeline and immediately notify the pipeline company and the one-number locator service.
Sec. 13. RCW 19.122.040 and 1984 c 144 s 4 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Project owners shall indicate in bid or contract documents the existence of underground facilities and pipelines known by the project owner to be located within the proposed area of excavation. The following shall be deemed changed or differing site conditions:
(a) An underground facility or pipeline not identified as required by this chapter or other provision of law; and
(b) An underground facility or pipeline not located, as required by this chapter or other provision of law, by the project owner or excavator if the project owner or excavator is also a utility.
(2) An excavator shall use reasonable care to avoid damaging underground facilities and pipelines. An excavator shall:
(a) Determine the precise location of underground facilities and pipelines which have been marked;
(b) Plan the excavation to avoid damage to or minimize interference with underground facilities and pipelines in and near the excavation area; and
(c) Provide such support for underground facilities and pipelines in and near the construction area, including during backfill operations, as may be reasonably necessary for the protection of such facilities and pipelines.
(3) If an underground facility or pipeline is damaged and such damage is the consequence of the failure to fulfill an obligation under this chapter, the party failing to perform that obligation shall be liable for any damages. Any clause in an excavation contract which attempts to allocate liability, or requires indemnification to shift the economic consequences of liability, different from the provisions of this chapter is against public policy and unenforceable. Nothing in this chapter prevents the parties to an excavation contract from contracting with respect to the allocation of risk for changed or differing site conditions.
(4) In any action brought under this section, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 14. By September 1, 2000, the utilities and transportation commission and the department of ecology shall jointly provide notice to all appropriate contractors about new hazardous liquid and gas pipeline safety and excavation requirements.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 15. (1) After a pipeline company has been notified by an excavator pursuant to RCW 19.122.030 that excavation work will uncover any portion of the pipeline, the pipeline company shall ensure that the pipeline section in the vicinity of the excavation is examined for damage prior to being reburied.
(2) An excavator who, in the course of excavation, contacts or damages a hazardous liquid or gas pipeline, shall immediately notify the pipeline company and the one-number locator service. The notice shall also specify, to the best of the excavator's knowledge, whether the damage has resulted in a release of hazardous liquid or gas. If the damage causes an emergency condition, the excavator causing the damage shall also immediately alert the appropriate local public safety agencies and take all appropriate steps to ensure the public safety. No damaged hazardous liquid or gas pipeline may be buried until it is repaired or relocated by the pipeline operator.
(3) Immediately upon receiving information of third-party damage to a hazardous liquid or gas pipeline that does not result in a reportable release of hazardous liquid or gas release as defined in state regulation, the company that owns or operates the pipeline shall immediately conduct a visual inspection of the damaged pipeline to determine whether flow through the pipeline should be terminated. After visual inspection, a pipeline company shall determine whether the damaged pipeline section should be replaced or repaired, or whether pipeline operation may be safely resumed. A record of the company's inspection report and test results shall be provided to the department or the commission consistent with reporting requirements under 49 C.F.R. 195 Subpart B.
(4) Immediately upon receiving information of third-party damage to a hazardous liquid or gas pipeline that results in a reportable release of hazardous liquid or gas release as defined in state regulation, the company that owns or operates the pipeline shall immediately terminate the flow of hazardous liquid or gas until it has visually inspected the damaged pipeline, determined and addressed the cause of the release, and determined that pipeline operation may be safely resumed. Pipeline companies shall immediately notify local first responders and the department of any reportable release of a hazardous liquid from a pipeline. Pipeline companies shall immediately notify first responders and the commission of any gas release as defined in state regulation from a pipeline.
Sec. 16. RCW 19.122.070 and 1984 c 144 s 7 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) Any person who violates any provision of this chapter, and which violation results in damage to underground facilities, is subject to a civil penalty of not more than one thousand dollars for each violation. All penalties recovered in such actions shall be deposited in the general fund.
(2) Any excavator who wilfully or maliciously damages a field-marked underground facility shall be liable for treble the costs incurred in repairing or relocating the facility. In those cases in which an excavator fails to notify known underground facility owners or the one-number locator service, any damage to the underground facility shall be deemed wilful and malicious and shall be subject to treble damages for costs incurred in repairing or relocating the facility.
(3) This chapter does not affect any civil remedies for personal injury or for property damage, including that to underground facilities, nor does this chapter create any new civil remedies for such damage.
(4) This section does not apply to damages to a hazardous liquid or gas pipeline. Damages to a hazardous liquid or gas pipeline are subject to the provisions of section 17 of this act.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 17. A new section is added to chapter 19.122 RCW to read as follows:
(1) Any excavator who fails to notify a one-number locator service as required by RCW 19.122.030 and causes damage to a hazardous liquids pipeline or gas pipeline is subject to a civil penalty of not less than one thousand dollars for the first violation. The maximum civil penalty under this section for multiple violations may not exceed ten thousand dollars for each violation. In determining the amount of the penalty for multiple violations, the department shall consider:
(a) The appropriateness of the penalty in relation to the position of the person charged with the violation;
(b) The gravity of the violation; and
(c) The good faith of the person charged in attempting to achieve compliance with the requirements of the law.
(2) All penalties under this section shall be deposited into the hazardous liquid pipeline safety account established in section 3 of this act.
(3) Any person who willfully or maliciously damages a hazardous liquids pipeline or gas pipeline, or any person who fails to notify a one-number locator service as required by RCW 19.122.030 and causes damage to a hazardous liquids pipeline or gas pipeline, is liable for treble damages for costs incurred in repairing or relocating the pipeline.
(4) This section does not affect any civil remedies for personal injury or for property damage.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 18. Upon receiving delegated or direct authority for pipeline safety, the department shall adopt rules: (1) Setting penalty amounts not in excess of the penalties specified in the federal pipeline safety laws, 49 U.S.C. Sec. 60101 et seq.; (2) establishing procedures for mitigating penalties assessed; and (3) incorporating by reference other substances designated as hazardous by the secretary of transportation under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 60101(a)(4).
NEW SECTION. Sec. 19. If any part of this act is found to be in conflict with federal requirements that are a prescribed condition to the allocation of federal funds to the state, the conflicting part of this act is inoperative solely to the extent of the conflict and with respect to the agencies directly affected, and this finding does not affect the operation of the remainder of this act in its application to the agencies concerned. Rules adopted under this act must meet federal requirements that are a necessary condition to the receipt of federal funds by the state.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 20. This act may be known and cited as the Washington state pipeline safety act.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 21. Sections 1 through 5, 7, 8, 14, 15, and 18 through 20 of this act constitute a new chapter in Title 70 RCW.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 22. 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."
Correct the title.
Representative Linville moved the adoption of the following amendment (510) to amendment (493):
On page 2, line 1 of the amendment, after "ruptured" insert "hazardous liquid"
On page 16, line 6 of the amendment, after "liquid" strike "or gas"
On page 16, line 7 of the amendment, after "liquid" strike "or gas"
On page 16, line 9 of the amendment, after "liquid" strike "or gas"
Representative(s) Linville and G. Chandler spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment to the amendment was adopted.
There being no objection, amendment (501) to amendment (493) was withdrawn.
Representative Schoesler moved the adoption of the following amendment (508) to amendment (493):
On page 2, line 33, after "liquid" strike ",gas, or carbon dioxide" and insert "or gas"
On page 11, line 29, after "liquid" strike ",gas, or carbon dioxide" and insert "or gas"
On page 12, line 36, after "excavation," insert "excluding agricultural tilling of soil as defined in RCW 19.122.020,"
On page 17, line 3, after "excavator" insert ", except a person engaged in the agricultural tillage of soil as defined in RCW 19.122.020,"
Representatives Schoesler and Linville spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment to the amendment was adopted.
Representative Linville moved the adoption of the following amendment (500) to amendment (493):
On page 2, beginning on line 37, after "pipelines" insert "and transfer pipelines"
On page 3, line 26, after "law." insert "Hazardous liquid process pipelines and transfer pipelines will continue to be regulated by the utilities and transportation commission."
Representatives Linville and G. Chandler spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment to the amendment was adopted.
Representative Cooper moved the adoption of the following amendment (497) to amendment (493):
On page 17, after line 32, insert the following:
"NEW SECTION. Sec. 19. The department of labor and industries shall conduct an assessment of the current skills and training required to construct, assemble, maintain, or repair any hazardous liquid or gas pipeline within the state. The department shall report its findings to the legislature by October 1, 2000."
Renumber the remaining sections consecutively, correct internal references, and correct the title.
Representative Cooper spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment to the amendment.
Representative Clements spoke against the adoption of the amendment to the amendment.
The amendment to the amendment was not adopted.
Representatives Linville, G. Chandler, Morris, Cooper, McDonald and Pennington spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment as amended.
The amendment as amended was adopted.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Linville and G. Chandler spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 2420.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 2420 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 2420, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2648, by Representatives Miloscia, Romero and D. Schmidt; by request of Secretary of State
Revising the Washington state quality award program.
The bill was read the second time.
Representative McMorris moved the adoption of the following amendment (523):
On page 3, line 16, beginning with "The" strike all the matter through "law))" on line 17, and insert ")) (7) The council shall cease to exist on July 1, ((1999)) 2004, unless otherwise extended by law."
Representatives McMorris and Romero spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representative Miloscia spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 2648.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed House Bill No. 2648, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 85, Nays - 10, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 85.
Voting nay: Representatives Clements, Dunn, Ericksen, Huff, Lisk, McMorris, Mulliken, Pennington, Schindler and Sump - 10.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed House Bill No. 2648, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2403, by Representatives Kastama, Parlette, Conway, Koster, Lantz, Doumit, Poulsen, Cox, Ruderman, Wood, Linville, Dickerson, Sullivan, Hatfield, O'Brien, Lovick, Constantine, Delvin, Wensman, Pennington, Mitchell, Keiser, Cody, Talcott, Dunn, Haigh, McDonald, Van Luven, Edmonds, Ogden and Esser
Creating the national World War II memorial account.
The bill was read the second time.
There being no objection, amendment 457 was withdrawn.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Kastama and Parlette spoke in favor of passage of the bill.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of House Bill No. 2403.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of House Bill No. 2403 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 95, Nays - 0, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Huff, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Mulliken, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 95.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
House Bill No. 2403, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
HOUSE BILL NO. 2331, by Representatives Campbell, Schual-Berke, H. Sommers, Linville, Doumit, Cody, Wolfe, Conway, Quall, Eickmeyer, Morris, Gombosky, Ruderman, Edmonds, Poulsen, Dunshee, Fisher, Scott, Regala, McIntire, Kastama, Kessler, Wood, Lantz, Ogden, Santos, Edwards, O'Brien, Romero, Stensen, Cooper, Reardon, Tokuda, Veloria, Rockefeller, Lovick, Kenney, Kagi, Haigh, Miloscia, Anderson, Constantine, Dickerson, Keiser, Hurst, Murray, McDonald and D. Sommers
Adopting a patient bill of rights.
The bill was read the second time. There being no objection, Second Substitute House Bill No. 2331 was substituted for House Bill No. 2331 and the second substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.
Second Substitute House Bill No. 2331 was read the second time.
Representative Campbell moved the adoption of the following amendment (504):
On page 2, beginning on line 8, after "payors" strike all material through "RCW" on line 9
On page 4, line 11, after "subsection" insert "(1)"
On page 7, line 2, after "for" strike "no longer than" and insert "at least"
On page 7, line 12, after "implement" strike "of"
On page 8, line 36, after "determines" strike all material through "indicates"
On page 10, line 10, after "terminate" insert "coverage of or payment for"
Representative Campbell spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
There being no objection, amendment (507) was withdrawn.
Representative Schual-Berke moved the adoption of the following amendment (505):
On page 6, after line 3, insert the following:
"(9) The commissioner may adopt rules to implement this section. In developing rules to implement this section, the commissioner shall consider relevant standards adopted by national managed care accreditation organizations and state agencies that purchase managed health care services."
Representatives Schual-Berke spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
Representatives Pflug spoke against the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
Representative Campbell moved the adoption of the following amendment (506):
On page 6, beginning on line 29, after "means" strike all material through "for" on line 30, and insert "covered benefits and limitations related to"
Representative Campbell spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
Representative Schual-Berke moved the adoption of the following amendment (514):
On page 11, beginning on line 28, strike all of subsection (9)
Renumber the remaining subsection consecutively and correct any internal references accordingly.
Representative Schual-Berke and Pflug spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was adopted.
Representative Alexander moved the adoption of the following amendment (470):
On page 17, line 35, strike all of subsection 7 and insert the following:
"(7)(a) An enrollee or an enrollee’s representative may not maintain a cause of action under this section against a health carrier unless:
(i) The affected enrollee or the enrollee’s representative has sought independent review of the health care treatment decision under section 11 of the act;
(ii) The independent review organization has overturned the carrier’s decision to modify, discontinue, or deny a health service; and
(iii) The carrier’s decision to modify, discontinue, or deny an otherwise covered health service caused substantial harm to the enrollee. As used in this subsection, "substantial harm" means loss of life, loss or significant impairment of limb or bodily function, significant disfigurement, severe or chronic pain or disease, or substantial mental impairment that results in the inability of the enrollee to meet his or her basic needs.
(b) This subsection (7) does not prohibit an enrollee from pursuing injunctive relief or declaratory judgement prior to completing independent review if the time required to complete independent review would place the enrollee’s life or health in serious jeopardy."
Representative Alexander spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
Representative Constantine spoke against the adoption of the amendment.
The amendment was not adopted.
Representative Benson moved the adoption of the following amendment (498):
On page 18, line 29, strike "and"
On page 18, line 30, after "41.05 RCW" and insert "and all plans offered by local governments and school districts to the extent they offer fully or partially self-funded health coverage programs."
Representatives Benson, Huff, Mastin, Clements, Mulliken, Pflug and Cox spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
Representatives H. Sommers, Schual-Berke, Conway and Campbell spoke against the adoption of the amendment.
Division was demanded. Speaker Ballard divided the House. The results of the division was 46-YEAS; 49-NAYS. The amendment was not adopted.
Representative Alexander moved the adoption of the following amendment (490):
On page 20, line 12 strike "June 30, 2001" and insert "health insurance products for individuals are available to be purchased in 18 counties in Washington state as determined by the Office of the Insurance Commissioner"
Representatives Alexander, Parlette, DeBolt, Huff, Pennington, Pflug, Mulliken, Mastin and Wensman spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.
Representatives Cody, Schual-Berke, Campbell, Rockefeller, Kastama and Ruderman spoke against the adoption of the amendment.
Division was demanded. Speaker Ballard divided the House. The results of the division was 45-YEAS; 50-NAYS. The amendment was not adopted.
There being no objection, amendment 471 was withdrawn.
The bill was ordered engrossed.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill was placed on final passage.
Representatives Campbell, Schual-Berke, Pflug, Cody, Edmonds, Parlette, Ruderman and Kenney spoke in favor of the passage of the bill.
Representatives Alexander, Mulliken and Huff spoke against passage of the bill.
Representative Schoesler demanded the previous question and the demand was sustained.
Speaker Ballard stated the question before the House to be final passage of Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 2331.
ROLL CALL
The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 2331 and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas - 92, Nays - 3, Absent - 0, Excused - 3.
Voting yea: Representatives Anderson, Ballasiotes, Barlean, Benson, Boldt, Buck, Bush, Cairnes, Campbell, Carlson, Carrell, B. Chandler, G. Chandler, Clements, Cody, Constantine, Conway, Cooper, Cox, Crouse, DeBolt, Delvin, Dickerson, Doumit, Dunn, Dunshee, Edmonds, Edwards, Ericksen, Esser, Fisher, Fortunato, Gombosky, Grant, Haigh, Hankins, Hatfield, Hurst, Kagi, Kastama, Keiser, Kenney, Kessler, Koster, Lambert, Lantz, Linville, Lisk, Lovick, Mastin, McDonald, McIntire, McMorris, Mielke, Miloscia, Mitchell, Morris, Murray, O'Brien, Ogden, Parlette, Pennington, Pflug, Poulsen, Quall, Reardon, Regala, Rockefeller, Romero, Ruderman, Santos, Schindler, Schmidt, Schoesler, Schual-Berke, Skinner, D. Sommers, H. Sommers, Stensen, Sullivan, Sump, Talcott, Thomas, Tokuda, Van Luven, Veloria, Wensman, Wolfe, Wood, Woods, Mr. Speaker Ballard and Mr. Speaker Chopp - 92.
Voting nay: Representatives Alexander, Huff and Mulliken - 3.
Excused: Representatives Eickmeyer, Radcliff and Scott - 3.
Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill No. 2331, having received the constitutional majority, was declared passed.
There being no objection, the House advanced to the eleventh order of business.
There being no objection, the Rules Committee was relieved of Substitute House Bill No. 1218 which was placed on the Third Reading calendar.
There being no objection, the Rules Committee was relieved of the following bills which were placed on the Second Reading calendar:
There being no objection, the House adjourned until 9:00 a.m., Tuesday, February 15, 2000, the 37th Legislative Day.
TIMOTHY A. MARTIN, Chief Clerk CLYDE BALLARD, Speaker
CYNTHIA ZEHNDER, Chief Clerk FRANK CHOPP, Speaker