The House was called to order at 10:00 a.m. by the Speaker (Representative Morris presiding). The Clerk called the roll and a quorum was present.

The flags were escorted to the rostrum by a Sergeant at Arms Color Guard, Pages John Mendez and Sophie DeBolt. The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) led the Chamber in the Pledge of Allegiance. The prayer was offered by Pastor Carrie McClain, River Ridge Covenant Church, Lacey.

Reading of the Journal of the previous day was dispensed with and it was ordered to stand approved.

RESOLUTIONS

HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 4694, by Representatives Miloscia and Priest

WHEREAS, The heroic achievements of Apolo Anton Ohno and J.R. Celski will inspire generations of Americans and sports lovers around the world, and will live forever in the annals of the Olympic Games; and

WHEREAS, Before they became champions on ice, Apolo Anton Ohno and J.R. Celski learned in-line skating in Federal Way at Pattison's West Skating Center, which the New York Times has named "Washington State's Rink of Dreams"; and

WHEREAS, Apolo Anton Ohno decided to become a world champion skater in Copalis Beach, Washington, and went on to become the reigning eight-time United States Short Track Speedskating Champion, and the most decorated American in the history of the Olympic Winter Games, with three Olympics and eight Olympic medals to his name, including two gold, two silver, and four bronze medals; and

WHEREAS, Apolo Anton Ohno united his physical gifts with a strong and determined character and a winning personality that is a tribute not only to him and his coaches, but also to his proud father, Yuki Ohno, who owns the Seattle hair salon Yuki's Diffusions, and who raised Apolo Anton Ohno as a single parent; and

WHEREAS, Apolo Anton Ohno and his dance partner, Julianne Hough, won the Dancing with the Stars championship in 2007, which added to his glory far beyond the short track, and helped him to achieve his current ranking as America's all-time favorite Winter Olympian by the online Smithsonian Magazine poll; and

WHEREAS, John Robert Celski is blessed with a strong family and was inspired to excel by his father, Bob Celski, his mother, Sue Celski, and his two older brothers, Chris and David Celski. He is known the world over as J.R. Celski because that name honors his father and his mother's late brother, Al Mendoza Sabado, Jr.; and

WHEREAS, J.R. Celski got his first skates on his third birthday in Federal Way and was later inspired by Apolo Anton Ohno's 2002 Olympic victories to become a speedskating champion. He won his first short track medal at age 12 and went on to earn medals at the U.S. Junior Championships, World Junior Championships, and U.S. Championships before astounding the speedskating world by becoming a five-time medalist at the 2009 World Championships; and

WHEREAS, J.R. Celski sliced his leg to the bone just five months before the 2010 Olympic Winter Games and thought for a moment that his Olympic dream was over, but his mother ran onto the ice and told him, "No, it's not over, J.R. you're going to be fine." He didn't give up; he healed and trained and worked hard every day and rejoined Team USA; he competed against the best in the world in the men's 1,500 meter race and 5,000 meter relay race; and he won two bronze medals for himself and for our country; and

WHEREAS, Apolo Anton Ohno and J.R. Celski became athletic champions while continuing to pursue their education, which should be an inspiration to the dreams of young men and women everywhere;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Washington State House of Representatives recognize Apolo Anton Ohno and J.R. Celski for being true champions who have brought honor to their sport, to Team USA, to their families, to their home towns of Federal Way and Seattle, to Washington state, and to the United States of America; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That a copy of this resolution be immediately transmitted by the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives to the International Olympic Committee, United States Olympic Committee, United States Speedskating, Pattison's West Skating Center, Yuki Ohno, Apolo Anton Ohno, Bob and Sue Celski, and J.R. Celski.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be adoption of House Resolution No. 4694.

HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 4694 was adopted.

HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 4692, by Representatives Wallace and Sells

WHEREAS, Ann Daley has a long and distinguished career of public service at the federal level for eight years and in Washington State for thirty-one years; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley has served on the staff of United States Senator Alan Cranston, and in the administration of four governors of the State of Washington, including the Honorable Booth Gardner, the Honorable Mike Lowry, the Honorable Gary Locke, and the Honorable Christine O. Gregoire; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley has served as staff to both the House of Representatives and the Senate of the State of Washington, including staff to Speaker Joe King; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley served as assistant treasurer for Washington State; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley was appointed to the board of regents at the University of Washington in 1995; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley has served on numerous other boards and commissions, including both the pollution control and the shoreline hearings boards; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley served as vice president for business and finance at The Evergreen State College; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley has been a strong advocate for education at all levels as fundamentally important to a civil society; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley was lead staff for Governor Gregoire's Washington Learns; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley served as the executive director of the higher education coordinating board twice, and produced two fundamentally important strategic master plans for higher education; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley is regarded as among the best in Washington at bringing diverse interest groups to consensus around sound public policy; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley has always served the public with the utmost integrity, and has earned a reputation as being an intelligent, fair-minded, and even-handed leader; and

WHEREAS, Ann Daley will leave public service at the end of March 2010 to devote full time in her role as Gram Gram to Alyssa, Koby, and James;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the House of Representatives commend Ann Daley for nearly forty years of dedicated service to the people of Washington State; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That copies of this resolution be immediately transmitted by the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives to Ann Daley.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be adoption of House Resolution No. 4692.

HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 4692 was adopted.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

March 3, 2010

Mr. Speaker:

The Senate has passed:

HOUSE BILL NO. 1541

ENGROSSED SECOND SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 1560

SECOND SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 1591

HOUSE BILL NO. 2419

SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 2649

HOUSE BILL NO. 2740

ENGROSSED HOUSE BILL NO. 2830

ENGROSSED HOUSE BILL NO. 2831

ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 2913

SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 2962

and the same are herewith transmitted.

Thomas Hoemann, Secretary

There being no objection, the House advanced to the sixth order of business.

SECOND READING

HOUSE BILL NO. 2488, by Representatives Moeller, Morrell and Hasegawa

Concerning vehicle and vessel quick title.

The bill was read the second time.

There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 2488 was substituted for House Bill No. 2488 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.

SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 2488 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 Moeller spoke in favor of the passage of the bill.

Representative Roach spoke against the passage of the bill.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2488.

ROLL CALL

The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute House Bill No. 2488, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas, 65; Nays, 33; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.

Voting yea: Representatives Anderson, Appleton, Blake, Carlyle, Chase, Clibborn, Cody, Conway, Darneille, Dickerson, Driscoll, Dunshee, Eddy, Ericks, Finn, Flannigan, Goodman, Green, Haigh, Hasegawa, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Hurst, Jacks, Kagi, Kelley, Kenney, Kessler, Kirby, Kretz, Liias, Linville, Maxwell, McCoy, Miloscia, Moeller, Morrell, Morris, Nelson, O'Brien, Ormsby, Orwall, Pedersen, Pettigrew, Priest, Quall, Roberts, Rodne, Rolfes, Santos, Seaquist, Sells, Short, Simpson, Springer, Sullivan, Takko, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, Wallace, White, Williams, Wood and Mr. Speaker.

Voting nay: Representatives Alexander, Angel, Armstrong, Bailey, Campbell, Chandler, Condotta, Crouse, Dammeier, DeBolt, Ericksen, Fagan, Haler, Herrera, Hinkle, Hope, Johnson, Klippert, Kristiansen, McCune, Nealey, Orcutt, Parker, Pearson, Probst, Roach, Ross, Schmick, Shea, Smith, Taylor, Walsh and Warnick.

SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 2488, having received the necessary constitutional majority, was declared passed.

ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6359, by Senate Committee on Higher Education & Workforce Development (originally sponsored by Senators Kilmer, Becker, Shin and Tom)

Promoting efficiencies including institutional coordination and partnerships in the community and technical college system.

The bill was read the second time.

There being no objection, the committee amendment by the Committee on Education Appropriations was adopted. (For Committee amendment, see Journal, Day 46, February 25, 2010).

With the consent of the House, amendment (1360) was withdrawn.

There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill, as amended by the House, was placed on final passage.

Representatives Carlyle, Anderson, Roach, Ross and Ericksen spoke in favor of the passage of the bill.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be the final passage of Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 6359, as amended by the House.

ROLL CALL

The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 6359, as amended by the House, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas, 96; Nays, 2; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.

Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Angel, Appleton, Armstrong, Bailey, Blake, Campbell, Carlyle, Chandler, Chase, Clibborn, Cody, Condotta, Conway, Crouse, Dammeier, Darneille, DeBolt, Dickerson, Driscoll, Dunshee, Eddy, Ericks, Ericksen, Fagan, Finn, Flannigan, Goodman, Green, Haigh, Haler, Hasegawa, Herrera, Hinkle, Hope, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Hurst, Jacks, Johnson, Kagi, Kelley, Kenney, Kessler, Kirby, Klippert, Kretz, Kristiansen, Linville, Maxwell, McCoy, McCune, Moeller, Morrell, Morris, Nealey, Nelson, O'Brien, Orcutt, Ormsby, Orwall, Parker, Pearson, Pedersen, Pettigrew, Priest, Probst, Quall, Roach, Roberts, Rodne, Rolfes, Ross, Santos, Schmick, Seaquist, Sells, Shea, Short, Simpson, Smith, Springer, Sullivan, Takko, Taylor, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, Wallace, Walsh, Warnick, White, Williams, Wood and Mr. Speaker.

Voting nay: Representatives Liias and Miloscia.

ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6359, as amended by the House, having received the necessary constitutional majority, was declared passed.

SENATE BILL NO. 6418, by Senators Marr and Brown

Regarding cities and towns annexed to fire protection districts.

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 Simpson, Angel and Parker spoke in favor of the passage of the bill.

Representative Orcutt spoke against the passage of the bill.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be the final passage of Senate Bill No. 6418.

ROLL CALL

The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Senate Bill No. 6418, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas, 93; Nays, 5; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.

Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Angel, Appleton, Armstrong, Bailey, Blake, Campbell, Carlyle, Chase, Clibborn, Cody, Condotta, Conway, Crouse, Dammeier, Darneille, DeBolt, Dickerson, Driscoll, Dunshee, Eddy, Ericks, Ericksen, Fagan, Finn, Flannigan, Goodman, Green, Haigh, Haler, Hasegawa, Hinkle, Hope, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Hurst, Jacks, Johnson, Kagi, Kelley, Kenney, Kessler, Kirby, Klippert, Kretz, Kristiansen, Liias, Linville, Maxwell, McCoy, McCune, Miloscia, Moeller, Morrell, Morris, Nealey, Nelson, O'Brien, Orwall, Parker, Pearson, Pedersen, Pettigrew, Priest, Probst, Quall, Roach, Roberts, Rodne, Rolfes, Ross, Santos, Schmick, Seaquist, Sells, Shea, Short, Simpson, Smith, Springer, Sullivan, Takko, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, Wallace, Walsh, Warnick, White, Williams, Wood and Mr. Speaker.

Voting nay: Representatives Chandler, Herrera, Orcutt, Ormsby and Taylor.

SENATE BILL NO. 6418, having received the necessary constitutional majority, was declared passed.

HOUSE BILL NO. 3132, by Representative Van De Wege

Eliminating the Columbia River Gorge Compact.

The bill was read the second time.

There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 3132 was substituted for House Bill No. 3132 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.

SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 3132 was read the second time.

Representative Van De Wege moved the adoption of amendment (1386).

Beginning on page 1, line 14, strike all of section 2 and insert the following:

"NEW SECTION. Sec. 2. A new section is added to chapter 43.97 RCW to read as follows:

(1) The governor's office shall work with the state of Oregon to initiate dissolution of the Columbia River Gorge Compact. If the governor's office determines that the Columbia River Gorge Compact cannot be dissolved, the governor's office shall work to renegotiate with the state of Oregon terms of the Columbia River Gorge Compact that reflects accomplishments made since the first agreement in 1987 and reflects the approved Columbia River Gorge scenic area management plan as of June 2007.

(2) The governor may also pursue discussions with Klickitat, Skamania, and Clark counties on developing a source of funding to address the costs of local planning and permitting, and to identify local options for implementing the Columbia River Gorge Compact.

(3) The governor's office shall report to the legislature by December 31, 2010, on the status of dissolving or renegotiating the Columbia River Gorge Compact."

Correct the title.

Representatives Van De Wege and McCune spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.

Amendment (1386) 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 Van De Wege, McCune and Moeller spoke in favor of the passage of the bill.

Representative Orcutt spoke against the passage of the bill.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be the final passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 3132.

ROLL CALL

The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 3132, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas, 92; Nays, 6; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.

Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Appleton, Armstrong, Bailey, Blake, Campbell, Carlyle, Chase, Clibborn, Cody, Condotta, Conway, Crouse, Dammeier, Darneille, DeBolt, Dickerson, Driscoll, Dunshee, Eddy, Ericks, Ericksen, Fagan, Finn, Flannigan, Goodman, Green, Haigh, Haler, Herrera, Hinkle, Hope, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Hurst, Jacks, Johnson, Kagi, Kelley, Kenney, Kessler, Kirby, Klippert, Kretz, Kristiansen, Liias, Linville, Maxwell, McCoy, McCune, Miloscia, Moeller, Morrell, Morris, Nealey, Nelson, O'Brien, Ormsby, Orwall, Parker, Pearson, Pedersen, Pettigrew, Priest, Probst, Quall, Roach, Roberts, Rodne, Rolfes, Ross, Santos, Seaquist, Sells, Shea, Short, Simpson, Smith, Springer, Sullivan, Takko, Taylor, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, Wallace, Walsh, Warnick, White, Williams, Wood and Mr. Speaker.

Voting nay: Representatives Anderson, Angel, Chandler, Hasegawa, Orcutt and Schmick.

ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 3132, having received the necessary constitutional majority, was declared passed.

HOUSE BILL NO. 3182, by Representatives Alexander, DeBolt, Armstrong, Kristiansen, Pearson, Bailey, Rodne, Johnson, Short, Dammeier, Taylor, Crouse, Nealey, Walsh, Roach, Warnick, Klippert, Parker, Ross, Haler, Fagan, Orcutt, Schmick, Angel, Smith, Shea, Ericksen and Kretz

Making unfunded mandates optional on local governments. Revised for 1st Substitute: Making certain unfunded mandates optional for school districts and other political subdivisions.

The bill was read the second time.

There being no objection, Substitute House Bill No. 3182 was substituted for House Bill No. 3182 and the substitute bill was placed on the second reading calendar.

SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 3182 was read the second time.

Representative Alexander moved the adoption of amendment (1404).

On page 13, after line 11, insert the following:

"Sec. 11. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: REPORT TO DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ON BONDS. RCW 39.44.210 and 1995 c 399 s 54 are each amended to read as follows:

For each state or local government bond issued, the underwriter of the issue shall supply the department of ((~~community, trade, and economic development~~)) commerce with information on the bond issue within twenty days of its issuance. In cases where the issuer of the bond makes a direct or private sale to a purchaser without benefit of an underwriter, the issuer shall supply the required information. The bond issue information shall be provided on a form prescribed by the department of ((~~community, trade, and economic development~~)) commerce and shall include but is not limited to: (1) The par value of the bond issue; (2) the effective interest rates; (3) a schedule of maturities; (4) the purposes of the bond issue; (5) cost of issuance information; and (6) the type of bonds that are issued. A copy of the bond covenants shall be supplied with this information.

For each state or local government bond issued, the issuer's bond counsel promptly shall provide to the underwriter or to the department of ((~~community, trade, and economic development~~)) commerce information on the amount of any fees charged for services rendered with regard to the bond issue.

Each local government that issues any type of bond ((~~shall~~)) may make a report annually to the department of ((~~community, trade, and economic development~~)) commerce that includes a summary of all the outstanding bonds of the local government as of the first day of January in that year. Such report ((~~shall~~)) may distinguish the outstanding bond issues on the basis of the type of bond, as defined in RCW 39.44.200, and ((~~shall~~)) may report the local government's outstanding indebtedness compared to any applicable limitations on indebtedness, including RCW 35.42.200, 39.30.010, and 39.36.020."

Renumber remaining sections consecutively and correct title and internal references accordingly.

On page 14, after line 30, insert the following:

"NEW SECTION. Sec. 13. MUNICIPALITIES: REPORTING ON ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES. RCW 43.19.691 and 2005 c 299 s 5 are each repealed."

Renumber remaining sections consecutively and correct title and internal references accordingly.

Representatives Alexander and Kenney spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.

Amendment (1404) was adopted.

Representative Alexander moved the adoption of amendment (1428).

On page 14, beginning on line 13, strike all of section 12 and insert the following:

"Sec. 12. RCW 84.40.175 and 1994 c 124 s 24 are each amended to read as follows:

COUNTIES: VALUATION OF TAX-EXEMPT PUBLIC PROPERTY. At the time of making the assessment of real property, the assessor shall enter each description of property exempt under the provisions of chapter 84.36 RCW, and ((~~value and~~)) list the same in the manner and subject to the same rule as the assessor is required to assess all other property, designating in each case to whom such property belongs. Except as otherwise provided in law, the assessor is not required to value property exempt under the provisions of RCW 84.36.010. However, with respect to publicly owned property exempt from taxation under provisions of RCW 84.36.010, the assessor shall value only such property as is leased to or occupied by a private person under an agreement allowing such person to occupy or use such property for a private purpose when a request for such valuation is received from the department of revenue or the lessee of such property for use in determining the taxable rent as provided for in chapter 82.29A RCW: PROVIDED FURTHER, That this section shall not prohibit any assessor from valuing any public property leased to or occupied by a private person for private purposes."

Representative Alexander spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment.

Amendment (1428) 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 Alexander and Linville spoke in favor of the passage of the bill.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be the final passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 3182.

ROLL CALL

The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Substitute House Bill No. 3182, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas, 96; Nays, 2; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.

Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Angel, Appleton, Armstrong, Bailey, Blake, Campbell, Carlyle, Chandler, Clibborn, Cody, Condotta, Conway, Crouse, Dammeier, Darneille, DeBolt, Dickerson, Driscoll, Dunshee, Eddy, Ericks, Ericksen, Fagan, Finn, Flannigan, Goodman, Green, Haigh, Haler, Herrera, Hinkle, Hope, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Hurst, Jacks, Johnson, Kagi, Kelley, Kenney, Kessler, Kirby, Klippert, Kretz, Kristiansen, Liias, Linville, Maxwell, McCoy, McCune, Miloscia, Moeller, Morrell, Morris, Nealey, Nelson, O'Brien, Orcutt, Ormsby, Orwall, Parker, Pearson, Pedersen, Pettigrew, Priest, Probst, Quall, Roach, Roberts, Rodne, Rolfes, Ross, Santos, Schmick, Seaquist, Sells, Shea, Short, Simpson, Smith, Springer, Sullivan, Takko, Taylor, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, Wallace, Walsh, Warnick, White, Williams, Wood and Mr. Speaker.

Voting nay: Representatives Chase and Hasegawa.

ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL NO. 3182, having received the necessary constitutional majority, was declared passed.

SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6557, by Senate Committee on Environment, Water & Energy (originally sponsored by Senators Ranker, Swecker, Rockefeller, Brandland, Brown, Kohl-Welles, Shin, Fraser and Kline)

Limiting the use of copper and other substances in vehicle brake pads. Revised for 1st Substitute: Limiting the use of certain substances in brake friction material.

The bill was read the second time.

There being no objection, the committee amendment by the Committee on General Government Appropriations was before the House for purpose of amendment. (For Committee amendment, see Journal, Day 46, February 25, 2010).

Representative Chase moved the adoption of amendment (1383) to the committee amendment:

On page 1, line 26 of the amendment, after "at" insert "or above"

On page 3, at the beginning of line 34 of the amendment, strike "analysis" and insert "analyses"

On page 5, line 30 of the amendment, after "demonstrate" strike "it is not feasible to comply with the requirements of this chapter, is necessary to comply" and insert "that complying with the requirements of this chapter is not feasible, does not allow compliance"

On page 6, line 27 of the amendment, after "from" strike "this chapter" and insert "public disclosure"

Representatives Chase and Shea spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment to the committee amendment.

Amendment (1383) to the committee amendment was adopted.

Representative Shea moved the adoption of amendment (1447) to the committee amendment.

On page 3, line 27, after "contract" insert "or that meets the same specifications but is not part of an original equipment service contract"

On page 3, line 30, after "contract" insert "or that meets the same specifications but is not part of an original equipment service contract"

Representative Shea spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment to the committee amendment.

Representative Chase spoke against the adoption of the amendment to the committee amendment.

An electronic roll call was requested.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be the adoption of amendment (1447) to the committee amendment to Substitute Senate Bill No. 6557.

ROLL CALL

The Clerk called the roll on the adoption of amendment (1447) to the committee amendment to Substitute Senate Bill No. 6557 and the amendment was not adopted by the following vote: Yeas, 39; Nays, 58; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.

Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Angel, Armstrong, Bailey, Campbell, Chandler, Condotta, Conway, Crouse, Dammeier, DeBolt, Ericksen, Fagan, Haler, Herrera, Hinkle, Hope, Johnson, Klippert, Kretz, Kristiansen, McCune, Nealey, Orcutt, Parker, Pearson, Priest, Probst, Roach, Rodne, Ross, Schmick, Shea, Short, Smith, Taylor, Wallace, Warnick and Williams.

Voting nay: Representatives Anderson, Appleton, Blake, Carlyle, Chase, Clibborn, Cody, Darneille, Dickerson, Driscoll, Dunshee, Eddy, Ericks, Finn, Flannigan, Goodman, Green, Haigh, Hasegawa, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Hurst, Jacks, Kagi, Kelley, Kenney, Kessler, Kirby, Liias, Linville, Maxwell, McCoy, Miloscia, Moeller, Morrell, Morris, Nelson, O'Brien, Ormsby, Orwall, Pedersen, Pettigrew, Quall, Roberts, Rolfes, Santos, Seaquist, Sells, Simpson, Springer, Sullivan, Takko, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, White, Wood and Mr. Speaker.

Amendment (1447) to the committee amendment was not adopted.

The committee amendment by the Committee on General Government Appropriations was adopted as amended.

There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill, as amended by the House, was placed on final passage.

Representative Chase spoke in favor of the passage of the bill.

COLLOQUY

Representative Shea: “Section 6 of Substitute Senate Bill No. 6557 relates to the process that a motor vehicle manufacturer or brake friction material manufacturer can apply for an exemption from the provisions of this legislation. This exemption may be particularly important for small volume motor vehicle manufacturers, who are defined in the bill as those manufacturers that do not sell more than 1,000 vehicles into the state. Upon qualifying for the exemption, is it the Legislature’s intent that the department automatically renew the exemption for small volume vehicle manufacturers if the low copper brake pad specified in this bill is not available due to safety, feasibility, or financial hardship concerns, and that the manufacturer does not sell more than 1,000 vehicles into the state?”

Representative Chase: “Yes, it is the Legislature’s intent that the department administers the exemption as follows: if the small volume vehicle manufacturer demonstrates that they cannot comply with the restrictions in this legislation due to safety concerns, feasibility or financial hardship, that the department will automatically renew the exemption for manufacturers that do not sell more than 1,000 vehicles in the state.”

Representative Shea spoke against the passage of the bill.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be the final passage of Substitute Senate Bill No. 6557, as amended by the House.

ROLL CALL

The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Substitute Senate Bill No. 6557, as amended by the House, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas, 86; Nays, 12; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.

Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Angel, Appleton, Armstrong, Bailey, Blake, Campbell, Carlyle, Chase, Clibborn, Cody, Conway, Dammeier, Darneille, DeBolt, Dickerson, Driscoll, Dunshee, Eddy, Ericks, Ericksen, Fagan, Finn, Flannigan, Goodman, Green, Haigh, Haler, Hasegawa, Herrera, Hinkle, Hope, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Hurst, Jacks, Johnson, Kagi, Kelley, Kenney, Kessler, Kirby, Liias, Linville, Maxwell, McCoy, McCune, Miloscia, Moeller, Morrell, Morris, Nelson, O'Brien, Ormsby, Orwall, Parker, Pedersen, Pettigrew, Priest, Probst, Quall, Roach, Roberts, Rodne, Rolfes, Ross, Santos, Schmick, Seaquist, Sells, Simpson, Smith, Springer, Sullivan, Takko, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, Wallace, Walsh, Warnick, White, Williams, Wood and Mr. Speaker.

Voting nay: Representatives Chandler, Condotta, Crouse, Klippert, Kretz, Kristiansen, Nealey, Orcutt, Pearson, Shea, Short and Taylor.

SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6557, as amended by the House, having received the necessary constitutional majority, was declared passed.

STATEMENT FOR THE JOURNAL

I intended to vote NAY on Substitute Senate Bill No. 6557.

Jim McCune, 2nd District

SECOND READING

ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6724, by Senate Committee on Government Operations & Elections (originally sponsored by Senators Kilmer, Kauffman, Eide, Berkey, Murray, Shin and Keiser)

Allowing employees of a school district or educational service district to share leave with employees in another agency. Revised for 1st Substitute: Allowing employees of a school district or educational service district to share leave with employees in another agency. (REVISED FOR ENGROSSED: Addressing the shared leave program. )

The bill was read the second time.

There being no objection, the committee amendment by the Committee on Ways & Means, was adopted. (For Committee amendment, see Journal, Day 49, February 28, 2010).

There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the bill, as amended by the House, was placed on final passage.

Representatives Armstrong and Hunt spoke in favor of the passage of the bill.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be the final passage of Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 6724, as amended by the House.

ROLL CALL

The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill No. 6724, as amended by the House, and the bill passed the House by the following vote: Yeas, 98; Nays, 0; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.

Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Angel, Appleton, Armstrong, Bailey, Blake, Campbell, Carlyle, Chandler, Chase, Clibborn, Cody, Condotta, Conway, Crouse, Dammeier, Darneille, DeBolt, Dickerson, Driscoll, Dunshee, Eddy, Ericks, Ericksen, Fagan, Finn, Flannigan, Goodman, Green, Haigh, Haler, Hasegawa, Herrera, Hinkle, Hope, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Hurst, Jacks, Johnson, Kagi, Kelley, Kenney, Kessler, Kirby, Klippert, Kretz, Kristiansen, Liias, Linville, Maxwell, McCoy, McCune, Miloscia, Moeller, Morrell, Morris, Nealey, Nelson, O'Brien, Orcutt, Ormsby, Orwall, Parker, Pearson, Pedersen, Pettigrew, Priest, Probst, Quall, Roach, Roberts, Rodne, Rolfes, Ross, Santos, Schmick, Seaquist, Sells, Shea, Short, Simpson, Smith, Springer, Sullivan, Takko, Taylor, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, Wallace, Walsh, Warnick, White, Williams, Wood and Mr. Speaker.

ENGROSSED SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6724, as amended by the House, having received the necessary constitutional majority, was declared passed.

SENATE JOINT MEMORIAL NO. 8025, by Senators Prentice, Haugen, Fraser, Shin and Roach

Requesting that a retired space shuttle orbiter be transferred to Washington's museum of flight.

The joint memorial was read the second time.

There being no objection, the rules were suspended, the second reading considered the third and the joint memorial was placed on final passage.

Representatives Hasegawa, Orcutt and Linville spoke in favor of the passage of the joint memorial.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) stated the question before the House to be the final passage of Senate Joint Memorial No. 8025.

ROLL CALL

The Clerk called the roll on the final passage of Senate Joint Memorial No. 8025, and the joint memorial passed the House by the following vote: Yeas, 96; Nays, 2; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.

Voting yea: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Angel, Appleton, Armstrong, Bailey, Blake, Campbell, Carlyle, Chandler, Chase, Clibborn, Cody, Condotta, Conway, Crouse, Dammeier, Darneille, DeBolt, Dickerson, Driscoll, Eddy, Ericks, Ericksen, Fagan, Finn, Flannigan, Goodman, Green, Haigh, Haler, Hasegawa, Herrera, Hinkle, Hope, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Hurst, Jacks, Johnson, Kagi, Kelley, Kenney, Kessler, Kirby, Klippert, Kretz, Kristiansen, Liias, Linville, Maxwell, McCoy, McCune, Miloscia, Moeller, Morrell, Morris, Nealey, Nelson, O'Brien, Orcutt, Orwall, Parker, Pearson, Pedersen, Pettigrew, Priest, Probst, Quall, Roach, Roberts, Rodne, Rolfes, Ross, Santos, Schmick, Seaquist, Sells, Shea, Short, Simpson, Smith, Springer, Sullivan, Takko, Taylor, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, Wallace, Walsh, Warnick, White, Williams, Wood and Mr. Speaker.

Voting nay: Representatives Dunshee and Ormsby.

SENATE JOINT MEMORIAL NO. 8025, having received the necessary constitutional majority, was declared passed.

The Speaker (Representative Morris presiding) called upon Representative Moeller to preside.

SECOND READING

ENGROSSED SECOND SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL NO. 6267, by Senate Committee on Ways & Means (originally sponsored by Senators Rockefeller and Honeyford)

Regarding water right processing improvements.

The bill was read the second time.

There being no objection, the committee amendment by the Committee on Agriculture & Natural Resources was before the House for purpose of amendment. (For Committee amendment, see Journal, Day 46, February 25, 2010).

With the consent of the House, amendments (1280) and (1430) to the committee amendment were withdrawn.

Representative Blake moved the adoption of amendment (1421) to the committee amendment:

On page 2, line 25 of the amendment, after "department" insert "under this section"

On page 2, line 26 of the amendment, after "application" insert "under this section"

On page 2, line 30 of the amendment, after "denial" insert "made"

On page 2, line 31 of the amendment, after "department" insert "under this section"

On page 4, line 6 of the amendment, after "of a" strike "contractor" and insert "consultant"

On page 4, line 16 of the amendment, after "subsection" strike "(2)" and insert "(3)"

On page 4, line 26 of the amendment, after "work" strike "performed by" and insert "that would otherwise be assigned to"

On page 4, line 37 of the amendment, after "documentation," insert "review for conflict of interest,"

On page 5, beginning on line 35 of the amendment, after "processed" strike "in the future"

On page 5, line 36 of the amendment, after "regular processing," insert "priority processing,"

On page 7, line 32 of the amendment, after "regular processing," insert "priority processing,"

On page 8, line 12 of the amendment, before "electronic" insert "additional"

On page 9, line 23 of the amendment, after "shall" strike "make" and insert "take"

On page 10, line 7 of the amendment, after "applicant" insert "or returned for correction by the department. The department may return an initial proof of examination for correction within thirty days of the department's receipt of such initial proof from a certified water right examiner. Such proof must be returned to both the certified water right examiner and the applicant. Within thirty days of the department's receipt of such returned proof from the certified water right examiner, the department shall make its final decision under RCW 90.03.330, unless otherwise requested by the applicant"

On page 10, line 19 of the amendment, after "department" strike "deems" and insert "has already conducted a final proof of examination or finds"

On page 16, line 25 of the amendment, after "regular processing," insert "priority processing,"

On page 17, after line 2 of the amendment, insert the following:

"NEW SECTION. Sec. 13. A new section is added to chapter 90.03 RCW to read as follows:

Nothing in this act affects or diminishes the processing of water right applications under any other existing authority, including but not limited to existing authority for the priority processing of applications by the department."

Renumber the remaining sections consecutively and correct any internal references accordingly.

Representatives Blake and Chandler spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment to the committee amendment.

Amendment (1421) to the committee amendment was adopted.

Representative Dunshee moved the adoption of amendment (1450) to the committee amendment.

On page 17, after line 2 of the amendment, insert the following:

"NEW SECTION. Sec. 13. It is the intent of the legislature to recover the actual cost of processing applications for water right permits and to stop subsidizing the processing of water right permits out of general tax revenues. The legislature recognizes that the largest beneficiary of receiving a water permit is the person receiving the water permit.

It is further the intent of the legislature that the backlog of applications be eliminated within five years of the effective date of this section and that thereafter water right permit applications be processed to a conclusion within twelve months of an application being made to the department of ecology.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 14. A new section is added to chapter 90.03 RCW to read as follows:

The water rights processing and dam safety account is created in the state treasury. All receipts from the fees collected under RCW 90.03.470 must be deposited into the account. Moneys in the account may be spent only after appropriation. Expenditures from the account may be used only to support the processing of water right applications and change applications as provided in this chapter and chapters 90.38, 90.42, and 90.44 RCW and the safety inspection of hydraulic works and plans and specifications for such works.

Sec. 15. RCW 90.03.470 and 2005 c 412 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:

The fees specified in this section shall be collected by the department in advance of the requested action.

(1) ((~~For the examination of an application for a permit to appropriate water, a minimum fee of fifty dollars must be remitted with the application.~~

For an amount of water exceeding one-half cubic foot per second, the examination fee shall be assessed at the rate of one dollar per one hundredth cubic foot per second. In no case will the examination fee be less than fifty dollars or more than twenty-five thousand dollars. ~~No fee is required under this subsection (1) for an application filed by a party to a cost-reimbursement agreement made under RCW 90.03.265.~~)) For the examination of an application for a permit to appropriate water or for an application to change, transfer, or amend an existing water right, an examination fee equal to one hundred dollars for each one-hundredth of a cubic foot per second must be remitted with the application, but in no case may the examination fee be less than one thousand dollars or more than fifty thousand dollars.

(2) The following fees apply for the examination of an application to store water((, a fee of two dollars for each acre foot of storage proposed shall be charged, but a minimum fee of fifty dollars must be remitted with the application. In no case will the examination fee for a storage project be less than fifty dollars or more than twenty-five thousand dollars. No fee is required under this subsection (2) for an application filed by a party to a cost‑~~reimbursement agreement made under RCW 90.03.265~~)) and for an application to change a storage right:

(a) For storage of less than one hundred acre feet of water, an examination fee of one thousand dollars must be remitted with the application.

(b) For storage of more than one hundred acre feet of water but less than or equal to one thousand acre feet of water, an examination fee of two thousand dollars must be remitted with the application.

(c) For storage of more than one thousand acre feet of water but less than or equal to ten thousand acre feet of water, an examination fee of seven thousand five hundred dollars must be remitted with the application.

(d) For storage of more than ten thousand acre feet of water, an examination fee of fifteen thousand dollars must be remitted with the application.

(3)(a) ((For the examination of an application to transfer, change, or amend a water right certificate, permit, or claim as authorized by RCW 90.44.100, 90.44.105, or 90.03.380, a minimum fee of fifty dollars must be remitted with the application. For an application for change involving an amount of water exceeding one cubic foot per second, the total examination fee shall be assessed at the rate of fifty cents per one hundredth cubic foot per second. For an application for change of a storage water right, the total examination fee shall be assessed at the rate of one dollar for each acre foot of water involved in the change. The fee shall be based on the amount of water subject to change as proposed in the application, not on the total amount of water reflected in the water right certificate, permit, or claim. In no case will the examination fee charged for a change application be less than fifty dollars or more than twelve thousand five hundred dollars.

~~(b)~~)) (i) The fee paid to the department for an application for change filed with a water conservancy board under chapter 90.80 RCW must be one-fifth of the amounts provided in subsections (1) and (2) of this section. A conservancy board may charge its own processing fees in accordance with RCW 90.80.060.

(ii) The fees in subsections (1) and (2) of this section do not apply to applicants that have entered into a cost-reimbursement agreement with the department under RCW 90.03.265.

(b) The examination fee for a temporary or seasonal change under RCW 90.03.390 is ((~~fifty~~)) two hundred dollars and must be remitted with the application.

(i) An application to process a change relating to donation of a trust water right to the state; or

(ii) An application to process a change when the department otherwise acquires a trust water right for purposes of improving instream flows or for other public purposes((;

(iii) An application filed with a water conservancy board according to chapter 90.80 RCW or for the review of a water conservancy board's record of decision submitted to the department according to chapter 90.80 RCW; or

~~(iv) An application filed by a party to a cost~~‑~~reimbursement agreement made under RCW 90.03.265~~)).

(d) For a change, transfer, or amendment involving a single project operating under more than one water right, including related secondary diversion rights, or involving the consolidation of multiple water rights, only one examination fee and one certificate fee are required to be paid.

(4) ((The fifty-dollar minimum fee payable with the application shall be a credit to the total amount whenever the examination fee totals more than fifty dollars under the schedule specified in subsections (1) through (3) of this section and in such case the further fee due shall be the total computed amount, less the amount previously paid. Within five working days from receipt of an application, the department shall notify the applicant by registered mail of any additional fees due under subsections (1) through (3) of this section.)) (a) The fee amounts specified in this section apply to applications received after the effective date of this section and to all applications that have not been acted on by the department by issuance of a report of examination as of the effective date of this section. For pending applications that were filed prior to the effective date of this section, any fees that were paid under a previous fee schedule must be credited to the amounts required by subsections (1), (2), and (3) of this section. When the department is prepared to take action on an application that was filed prior to the effective date of this section, the department shall notify the applicant that additional fees are due and give the applicant sixty days to remit the additional fees. If the applicant fails to remit the additional fees within the time provided, the department shall cancel the application and inform the applicant of the cancellation.

(b) If the department receives a water right, change, transfer, amendment, or storage application that does not include remittance of the fee amounts required by this section, the department shall return the application to the applicant with instructions on the proper fee amount to be remitted. An application does not establish a priority date until the proper fee is remitted.

(5) The ((~~fees specified in subsections (1) through (3) of this section do not apply to any filings~~)) fee for filing an emergency withdrawal authorization((s)) or temporary drought-related water right change((s)) authorized under RCW 43.83B.410 that ((~~are~~)) is received by the department while a drought condition order issued under RCW 43.83B.405 is in effect is one hundred dollars.

(6) For applying for each extension of time for beginning construction work under a permit to appropriate water, for completion of construction work, or for completing application of water to a beneficial use, a fee of two hundred fifty dollars is required. These fees also apply to similar extensions of time requested under a change or transfer authorization.

(7) For the inspection of any hydraulic works to ((~~insure~~)) ensure safety to life and property, a fee based on the actual cost of the inspection, including the expense incident thereto, is required ((except as follows: (a) For any hydraulic works less than ten years old, that the department examined and approved the construction plans and specifications as to its safety when required under RCW 90.03.350, there shall be no fee charged; or (b) for any hydraulic works more than ten years old, but less than twenty years old, that the department examined and approved the construction plans and specifications as to its safety when required under RCW 90.03.350, the fee charged shall not exceed the fee for a significant hazard dam)).

(8) For the examination of plans and specifications as to safety of controlling works for storage of ten acre feet or more of water, a minimum fee of ((~~ten~~)) five hundred dollars, or a fee equal to the actual cost, is required.

(9) For recording an assignment either of a permit to appropriate water or of an application for such a permit, a fee of ((~~fifty~~)) two hundred dollars is required.

(10) For preparing and issuing all water right certificates, a fee of ((~~fifty~~)) two hundred dollars is required.

(11) For filing and recording a formal protest against granting any application, a fee of fifty dollars is required. No fee is required to submit a comment, by mail or otherwise, regarding an application.

(12) For filing an application to amend a water right claim filed under chapter 90.14 RCW, a fee of ((~~fifty~~)) two hundred dollars is required.

(13) For the registration of a new permit exempt groundwater withdrawal as required by RCW 90.44.050, a fee of three hundred dollars must be remitted.

(14)(a) Each person who holds a water right permit application, a reservoir permit application, or a change, transfer, or amendment application that is pending at any time between the effective date of this section and June 30, 2011, must remit a one-time fee of two hundred dollars to the department to retain an application in good standing. The department shall provide written notice by certified mail to each holder of an application for the fees that are due under this section. The notice must require that the fees be paid within sixty days of the date of receipt, but in no case may payment be due later than June 30, 2011. For ease of administration, the department may distribute the issuance of the notices by geographic area. The surcharge paid under this subsection is a credit against the application fees required in this section.

(b) Applications not in good standing must be canceled. The department shall issue an order to any holder of an application who fails to pay the fee within the prescribed time. The order must state that the application is canceled unless payment is received within thirty days.

(c) The department shall advise an applicant and provide an opportunity for an applicant to withdraw their application without further payment of fees if the department determines that the application would not likely be approved. The department shall summarize the basis for its conclusion to the applicant. The department shall further advise that the applicant has the option of providing an amended application that could include storage or other resource management technique that might make it approvable under RCW 90.03.255 or 90.44.055. The department's advice is not subject to appeal. If the applicant decides to retain the application on file and pays the fee required in this subsection, the department shall maintain the application in good standing until it is able to render a final decision on the application. The final decision is subject to appeal to the pollution control hearings board as provided under chapter 43.21B RCW.

(15) An application or request for an action as provided for under this section is incomplete unless accompanied by the fee or the minimum fee. If no fee or an amount less than the minimum fee accompanies an application or other request for an action as provided under this section, the department shall return the application or request to the applicant with advice as to the fee that must be remitted with the application or request for it to be accepted for processing. If additional fees are due, the department shall provide timely notification by certified mail with return receipt requested to the applicant. No action may be taken by the department until the fee is paid in full. Failure to remit fees within sixty days of the department's notification is grounds for rejecting the application or request or canceling the permit. Cash shall not be accepted. Fees must be paid by check or money order and are nonrefundable.

((~~(14)~~)) (16) For purposes of calculating fees for groundwater filings, one cubic foot per second shall be regarded as equivalent to four hundred fifty gallons per minute.

(((15) Eighty percent of the fees collected by the department under this section shall be deposited in the state general fund. Twenty percent of the fees collected by the department under this section shall be deposited in the water rights tracking system account established in RCW 90.14.240.

(16) Except for the fees relating to the inspection of hydraulic works and the examination of plans and specifications of controlling works provided for in subsections (7) and (8) of this section, nothing in this section is intended to grant authority to the department to amend the fees in this section by adoption of rules or otherwise.)) (17) The fees collected by the department under this section must be deposited in the water rights processing and dam safety account created in section 14 of this act.

(18)(a) The fees specified in this section are effective until the department adopts rules that modify them in accordance with section 18 of this act, except that the fees required in subsections (7) and (8) of this section may be modified at any time.

(b) When information has been previously obtained that directly relates to the processing of an application in subsections (1) and (2) of this section, the department must proportionately reduce the fees associated with that application as a result of the reduced workload of the department.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 16. A new section is added to chapter 90.03 RCW to read as follows:

Within existing appropriations, the department must provide grant funds to assist applicants in the payment of fees required in RCW 90.03.470. The department shall give priority in the distribution of grant money to applicants who designate on their application that the water will be used for agricultural purposes.

Sec. 17. RCW 90.44.050 and 2003 c 307 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:

(1) After June 6, 1945, no withdrawal of public groundwaters of the state shall be begun, nor shall any well or other works for such withdrawal be constructed, unless an application to appropriate such waters has been made to the department and a permit has been granted by it as herein provided: EXCEPT, HOWEVER, That any withdrawal of public groundwaters for stock-watering purposes, or for the watering of a lawn or of a noncommercial garden not exceeding one-half acre in area, or for single or group domestic uses in an amount not exceeding five thousand gallons a day, or as provided in RCW 90.44.052, or for an industrial purpose in an amount not exceeding five thousand gallons a day, is and shall be exempt from the provisions of this section, but, to the extent that it is regularly used beneficially, shall be entitled to a right equal to that established by a permit issued under the provisions of this chapter: PROVIDED, HOWEVER, That the department from time to time may require the person or agency making any such small withdrawal to furnish information as to the means for and the quantity of that withdrawal: PROVIDED, FURTHER, That at the option of the party making withdrawals of groundwaters of the state not exceeding five thousand gallons per day, applications under this section or declarations under RCW 90.44.090 may be filed and permits and certificates obtained in the same manner and under the same requirements as is in this chapter provided in the case of withdrawals in excess of five thousand gallons a day.

(2)(a) The owner of a permit exempt withdrawal established under this section, the beneficial use of which is commenced on or after the effective date of this section, must register the withdrawal with the department on a registration form provided by the department. The registration must include information regarding the ownership and intended purpose of the withdrawal, the amounts withdrawn or proposed to be withdrawn, and the location, size, depth, and other particulars regarding the well. The department shall make the registration form available on its internet site and shall accept the filing of registration forms electronically as well as by conventional mail or personal delivery.

(b) For each permit exempt withdrawal the beneficial use of which is commenced on or after the effective date of this section, the registration form must be accompanied by a fee of three hundred dollars. Upon receiving a completed registration form and fee, the department shall make a record of the registration form and shall return a copy of the registration marked as having been received and registered.

(c) The well or wells being registered must be tagged in accordance with RCW 18.104.040(6). The department shall provide an identification tag for each well and shall instruct the owner to affix the tags to the wells used to withdraw water.

(d) Whenever the owner of a permit exempt withdrawal adds dwelling units or additional purposes for the use of the withdrawal or otherwise increases the amount of water to be withdrawn by more than twenty percent, a new registration form and fee of one hundred dollars must be filed.

(e) All fees collected under this section must be deposited into the water rights processing and dam safety account created in section 14 of this act.

(3) The department may issue either an order under RCW 43.27A.190 or a civil penalty under RCW 90.03.600, or both, to the owner of a new permit exempt withdrawal who fails to file the registration form and fee required in subsection (2) of this section. Before issuing an order or penalty, the department shall inform the owner in writing by registered mail with return receipt that the registration form and fee must be remitted within thirty days. An order issued under this subsection may require the owner to cease withdrawing and using water until the form and fee have been filed. If the owner continues to refuse to file the form and fee, the department may issue an order requiring that the subject well or wells be decommissioned.

(4) A permit exempt withdrawal, the beneficial use of which is commenced on or after the effective date of this section, that has not been registered shall not be recognized as a water right under a general adjudication of water rights held under chapter 90.03 RCW.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 18. A new section is added to chapter 90.03 RCW to read as follows:

To effectuate the purpose of fully recovering the direct administrative costs incurred by the state to process water right and storage applications under this chapter and RCW 90.44.050 and to inspect and approve hydraulic works under this chapter, the department may periodically adopt rules to adjust the fees established in RCW 90.03.470. Any subsequent fees adopted by rule supersede those provided in RCW 90.03.470. Before proposing to adopt any changes to the fees, the department shall consult with the policy committees of the legislature that review water resources legislation.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 19. A new section is added to chapter 90.03 RCW to read as follows:

(1) The department shall submit a report to the legislature prior to December 31, 2012, and biennially thereafter until December 31, 2020, on the status of the backlog of applications for water right permits, the effectiveness of processing water right permit applications to a conclusion within twelve months, and the appropriateness of the fee amounts.

(2) This section expires January 1, 2021.

NEW SECTION. Sec. 20. A new section is added to chapter 90.44 RCW to read as follows:

(1) The department may not require withdrawals of groundwater to be metered or measured for wells authorized under the provisions of RCW 90.44.050 constructed prior to the effective date of this section for single or group domestic uses that do not exceed withdrawing five thousand gallons a day.

(2) This section does not apply to wells the department has required to be metered or measured as of the effective date of this section."

Representatives Dunshee, Simpson, Van De Wege Dunshee (again), Morris, Morris (again) and Van De Wege (again) spoke in favor of the adoption of the amendment to the committee amendment.

Representatives Taylor, Armstrong, McCoy, Chandler, Shea, Warnick, Ericksen, Haler, Taylor (again), Armstrong (again), Ericksen (again), Shea (again) and Klippert spoke against the adoption of the amendment to the committee amendment.

An electronic roll call was requested.

The Speaker (Representative Moeller presiding) stated the question before the House to be the adoption of amendment (1450) to the committee amendment to Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill No. 6267.

ROLL CALL

The Clerk called the roll on the adoption of amendment (1450) to the committee amendment to Engrossed Second Substitute Senate Bill No. 6267 and the amendment was not adopted by the following vote: Yeas, 44; Nays, 54; Absent, 0; Excused, 0.

Voting yea: Representatives Appleton, Blake, Carlyle, Chase, Clibborn, Cody, Conway, Darneille, Dickerson, Dunshee, Eddy, Ericks, Flannigan, Goodman, Green, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Jacks, Kagi, Kenney, Kirby, Liias, Maxwell, Miloscia, Moeller, Morris, Nelson, Ormsby, Orwall, Pedersen, Pettigrew, Quall, Roberts, Seaquist, Sells, Simpson, Sullivan, Takko, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, White, Williams and Mr. Speaker.

Voting nay: Representatives Alexander, Anderson, Angel, Armstrong, Bailey, Campbell, Chandler, Condotta, Crouse, Dammeier, DeBolt, Driscoll, Ericksen, Fagan, Finn, Haigh, Haler, Hasegawa, Herrera, Hinkle, Hope, Hurst, Johnson, Kelley, Kessler, Klippert, Kretz, Kristiansen, Linville, McCoy, McCune, Morrell, Nealey, O'Brien, Orcutt, Parker, Pearson, Priest, Probst, Roach, Rodne, Rolfes, Ross, Santos, Schmick, Shea, Short, Smith, Springer, Taylor, Wallace, Walsh, Warnick and Wood.

Amendment (1450) to the committee amendment was not adopted.

Representative Morris moved the adoption of amendment (1449) to the committee amendment.

On page 17, after line 10 of the amendment, insert the following:

"NEW SECTION. Sec. 16. A new section is added to chapter 90.03 RCW to read as follows:

Sec. 17. RCW 90.03.470 and 2005 c 412 s 2 are each amended to read as follows:

The fees specified in this section shall be collected by the department in advance of the requested action.

(1) ((~~For the examination of an application for a permit to appropriate water, a minimum fee of fifty dollars must be remitted with the application.~~

For an amount of water exceeding one-half cubic foot per second, the examination fee shall be assessed at the rate of one dollar per one hundredth cubic foot per second. In no case will the examination fee be less than fifty dollars or more than twenty-five thousand dollars. ~~No fee is required under this subsection (1) for an application filed by a party to a cost-reimbursement agreement made under RCW 90.03.265.~~)) For the examination of an application for a permit to appropriate water or for an application to change, transfer, or amend an existing water right, an examination fee equal to thirty-five dollars for each one-hundredth of a cubic foot per second must be remitted with the application, but in no case may the examination fee be less than one thousand dollars or more than thirty-five thousand dollars.