{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-17","fingerprint":"ewai:us:e7344b","proof":"sha256:f6fd9c90b5b6656ce340e01c186a924fe9cbc2f750291307ca2c46ca3e4bf3bb","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"us:wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25","para_26","para_27","para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33","para_34","para_35","para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63","para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70","para_71","para_72","para_73","para_74","para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78","para_79","para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87","para_88","para_89","para_90","para_91","para_92","para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101","para_102","para_103","para_104","para_105","para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110","para_111","para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117","para_118","para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122","para_123","para_124","para_125","para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129","para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141","para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145","para_146","para_147","para_148","para_149","para_150","para_151","para_152","para_153","para_154","para_155","para_156","para_157","para_158","para_159","para_160","para_161","para_162","para_163","para_164","para_165","para_166","para_167","para_168","para_169","para_170","para_171","para_172","para_173","para_174","para_175","para_176","para_177","para_178","para_179","para_180","para_181","para_182","para_183","para_184","para_185","para_186","para_187","para_188","para_189","para_190","para_191","para_192","para_193","para_194","para_195","para_196","para_197","para_198","para_199","para_200","para_201","para_202","para_203","para_204","para_205","para_206","para_207","para_208","para_209","para_210","para_211","para_212","para_213","para_214","para_215","para_216","para_217","para_218","para_219","para_220","para_221","para_222","para_223","para_224","para_225","para_226","para_227","para_228","para_229","para_230","para_231","para_232","para_233","para_234","para_235","para_236","para_237","para_238","para_239","para_240","para_241","para_242","para_243","para_244","para_245","para_246","para_247","para_248","para_249","para_250","para_251","para_252","para_253","para_254","para_255","para_256","para_257","para_258","para_259","para_260","para_261","para_262","para_263","para_264","para_265","para_266","para_267","para_268","para_269","para_270","para_271","para_272","para_273","para_274","para_275","para_276","para_277","para_278","para_279","para_280","para_281","para_282","para_283","para_284","para_285","para_286","para_287","para_288","para_289","para_290","para_291","para_292","para_293","para_294","para_295","para_296","para_297","para_298","para_299","para_300","para_301","para_302","para_303","para_304","para_305","para_306","para_307","para_308","para_309","para_310","para_311","para_312","para_313","para_314","para_315","para_316","para_317","para_318","para_319","para_320","para_321","para_322","para_323","para_324","para_325","para_326","para_327","para_328","para_329","para_330","para_331","para_332","para_333","para_334","para_335","para_336","para_337","para_338","para_339","para_340","para_341","para_342","para_343","para_344","para_345","para_346","para_347","para_348","para_349","para_350","para_351","para_352","para_353","para_354","para_355","para_356","para_357","para_358","para_359","para_360","para_361","para_362","para_363","para_364","para_365","para_366","para_367","para_368","para_369","para_370","para_371","para_372","para_373","para_374","para_375","para_376","para_377","para_378","para_379","para_380","para_381","para_382","para_383","para_384","para_385","para_386","para_387","para_388","para_389","para_390","para_391","para_392","para_393","para_394","para_395","para_396","para_397","para_398","para_399","para_400","para_401","para_402","para_403","para_404","para_405","para_406","para_407","para_408","para_409","para_410","para_411","para_412","para_413","para_414","para_415","para_416","para_417","para_418","para_419","para_420","para_421","para_422","para_423","para_424","para_425","para_426","para_427","para_428","para_429","para_430","para_431","para_432","para_433","para_434","para_435","para_436","para_437","para_438","para_439","para_440","para_441","para_442","para_443","para_444","para_445","para_446","para_447","para_448","para_449","para_450","para_451","para_452","para_453","para_454","para_455","para_456","para_457","para_458","para_459","para_460","para_461","para_462","para_463","para_464","para_465","para_466","para_467","para_468","para_469","para_470","para_471","para_472","para_473","para_474","para_475","para_476","para_477","para_478","para_479","para_480","para_481","para_482","para_483","para_484","para_485","para_486","para_487","para_488","para_489","para_490","para_491","para_492","para_493","para_494","para_495","para_496","para_497","para_498","para_499","para_500","para_501","para_502","para_503","para_504","para_505","para_506","para_507","para_508","para_509","para_510","para_511","para_512","para_513","para_514","para_515","para_516","para_517","para_518","para_519","para_520","para_521","para_522","para_523","para_524","para_525","para_526","para_527","para_528","para_529","para_530","para_531","para_532","para_533","para_534","para_535","para_536","para_537","para_538","para_539","para_540","para_541","para_542","para_543","para_544","para_545","para_546","para_547","para_548","para_549","para_550","para_551","para_552","para_553","para_554","para_555","para_556","para_557","para_558","para_559","para_560","para_561","para_562","para_563","para_564","para_565","para_566","para_567","para_568","para_569","para_570","para_571","para_572","para_573","para_574","para_575","para_576","para_577","para_578","para_579","para_580","para_581","para_582","para_583","para_584","para_585","para_586","para_587","para_588","para_589","para_590","para_591","para_592","para_593","para_594","para_595","para_596","para_597","para_598","para_599","para_600","para_601","para_602","para_603","para_604","para_605","para_606","para_607","para_608","para_609","para_610","para_611","para_612","para_613","para_614","para_615","para_616","para_617","para_618","para_619","para_620","para_621","para_622","para_623","para_624","para_625","para_626","para_627","para_628","para_629","para_630","para_631","para_632","para_633","para_634","para_635","para_636","para_637","para_638","para_639","para_640","para_641","para_642","para_643","para_644","para_645","para_646","para_647","para_648","para_649","para_650","para_651","para_652","para_653","para_654","para_655","para_656","para_657","para_658","para_659","para_660","para_661","para_662","para_663","para_664","para_665","para_666","para_667","para_668","para_669","para_670","para_671","para_672","para_673","para_674","para_675","para_676","para_677","para_678","para_679","para_680","para_681","para_682","para_683","para_684","para_685","para_686","para_687","para_688","para_689","para_690","para_691","para_692","para_693","para_694","para_695","para_696","para_697","para_698","para_699","para_700","para_701","para_702","para_703","para_704","para_705","para_706","para_707","para_708","para_709","para_710","para_711","para_712","para_713","para_714","para_715","para_716","para_717","para_718","para_719","para_720","para_721","para_722","para_723","para_724","para_725","para_726","para_727","para_728","para_729","para_730","para_731","para_732","para_733","para_734","para_735","para_736","para_737","para_738","para_739","para_740","para_741","para_742","para_743","para_744","para_745","para_746","para_747","para_748","para_749","para_750","para_751","para_752","para_753","para_754","para_755","para_756","para_757","para_758","para_759","para_760","para_761","para_762","para_763","para_764","para_765","para_766","para_767","para_768","para_769","para_770","para_771","para_772","para_773","para_774","para_775","para_776","para_777","para_778","para_779","para_780","para_781","para_782","para_783","para_784","para_785","para_786","para_787","para_788","para_789","para_790","para_791","para_792","para_793","para_794","para_795","para_796","para_797","para_798","para_799","para_800","para_801","para_802","para_803","para_804","para_805","para_806","para_807","para_808","para_809","para_810","para_811","para_812","para_813","para_814","para_815","para_816","para_817","para_818","para_819","para_820","para_821","para_822","para_823","para_824","para_825","para_826","para_827","para_828","para_829","para_830","para_831","para_832","para_833","para_834","para_835","para_836","para_837","para_838","para_839","para_840","para_841","para_842","para_843","para_844","para_845","para_846","para_847","para_848","para_849","para_850","para_851","para_852","para_853","para_854","para_855","para_856","para_857","para_858","para_859","para_860","para_861","para_862","para_863","para_864","para_865","para_866","para_867","para_868","para_869","para_870","para_871","para_872","para_873","para_874","para_875","para_876","para_877","para_878","para_879","para_880","para_881","para_882","para_883","para_884","para_885","para_886","para_887","para_888"],"kind":"front_matter"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"NOTICE: SLIP OPINION","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"(not the court’s final written decision)","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"The opinion that begins on the next page is a slip opinion. Slip opinions are the","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"written opinions that are originally filed by the court.","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"A slip opinion is not necessarily the court’s final written decision. Slip opinions","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"can be changed by subsequent court orders. For example, a court may issue an","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"order making substantive changes to a slip opinion or publishing for precedential","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"purposes a previously “unpublished” opinion. Additionally, nonsubstantive edits","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"(for style, grammar, citation, format, punctuation, etc.) are made before the","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"opinions that have precedential value are published in the official reports of court","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"decisions: the Washington Reports 2d and the Washington Appellate Reports. An","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"opinion in the official reports replaces the slip opinion as the official opinion of","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"the court.","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"The slip opinion that begins on the next page is for a published opinion, and it","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"has since been revised for publication in the printed official reports. The official","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"text of the court’s opinion is found in the advance sheets and the bound volumes","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"of the official reports. Also, an electronic version (intended to mirror the","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"language found in the official reports) of the revised opinion can be found, free of","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"charge, at this website: https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports.","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"For more information about precedential (published) opinions, nonprecedential","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"(unpublished) opinions, slip opinions, and the official reports, see","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions and the information that is linked there.","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"WASHINGTON FARM BUREAU, ) No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"Appellant, )","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"WASHINGTON TRUCKING )","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"ASSOCIATION, )","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"Plaintiff, )","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"v. )","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"EN BANC","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"WASHINGTON STATE )","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY, )","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"Filed: June 25, 2026","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"Respondent. )","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"______________________________ )","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"MONTOYA-LEWIS, J.—When the legislature passed the Washington","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"Climate Commitment Act (CCA), it found that climate change is an existential crisis","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"plaguing our planet and communities. RCW 70A.65.005(1); Climate Change","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"Impacts, NAT’L OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMIN.1 As global temperatures rise, we","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"see increasing wildfires, longer-lasting droughts, and severe hurricanes and flooding.","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"1 https://www.noaa.gov/education/resource-collections/climate/climate-change-impacts","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"[https://perma.cc/T8EV-FS23]FILE","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"IN CLERK’S OFFICE","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WASHINGTON","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"JUNE 25, 2026THIS OPINION WAS FILED","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"FOR RECORD AT 8 A.M. ON","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"JUNE 25, 2026","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"SARAH R. PENDLETON","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"SUPREME COURT CLERKFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"2","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"RCW 70A.65.005(1); Courtney Lindwall, What Are the Effects of Climate Change?,","paragraph_id":"para_58","court_paragraph":2},{"text":"NAT. RES. DEF. COUNCIL.2 Greenhouse gas emissions from the burning of fossil fuels","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"increase these negative impacts on environmental and human health.","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"RCW 70A.65.005(1). Absent preventative measures to limit those emissions, the","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"impacts of global warming include the destruction of hundreds of thousands of","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"species, harm to food production, increased diseases, and forced displacement of","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"entire communities. NAT’L OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC ADMIN., supra.","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"In an effort to address climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"from the largest emitting sources, such as suppliers of fossil fuels, in 2021 the","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"Washington State Legislature enacted the CCA. RCW 70A.65.005, .080(1)(d);","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"LAWS OF 2021, ch. 316.3 The CCA generally imposes caps on the amount of","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"emissions from fuel suppliers but exempts fuel used exclusively for agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"purposes from these caps if the fuel buyer provides the seller with an exemption","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"certificate. LAWS OF 2021, ch. 316; former RCW 70A.65.070(1)(a) (2022); RCW","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"70A.65.020; former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i) (2022).","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"The legislature tasked the Department of Ecology (Ecology) with","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"2 https://www.nrdc.org/stories/what-are-effects-climate-change [https://perma.cc/7Y68-","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"37AE] 3 If an agency promulgated a rule when a former version of a statute was in effect,","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"the validity of that administrative rule is assessed as of the date of its adoption.","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"Wash. Indep. Tel. Ass’n v. Wash. Utils. & Transp. Comm’n, 148 Wn.2d 887, 905-06, 64 P.3d 606","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"(2003); RCW 34.05.570(1)(b). Thus, this opinion cites the CCA provisions in effect in 2022,","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"the year the Department of Ecology adopted the rules challenged here.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"3","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"promulgating a rule to implement the agricultural exemption. Former","paragraph_id":"para_83","court_paragraph":3},{"text":"RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(ii). It did so. The Washington Farm Bureau (WFB) filed a","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"petition for rule making, alleging Ecology’s rule did not provide a workable method","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"for claiming an agricultural exemption, resulting in fuel overcharges. Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"denied the petition. WFB then filed a petition for declaratory judgment and for","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"review of agency action in superior court under the Washington Administrative","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"Procedure Act (APA), ch. 34.05 RCW, asserting that Ecology’s rule and subsequent","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"denial of the petition for rule making exceeded the agency’s statutory authority and","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"constituted arbitrary and capricious action. The court dismissed the petition with","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"prejudice. On direct review, we retained the case.","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"We affirm. We hold that Ecology’s rule largely follows the CCA and did not","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"exceed its statutory authority, and that Ecology’s rule and denial of WFB’s petition","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"for rule making likewise did not rise to the level of arbitrary and capricious action.","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"A. The CCA and Agricultural Fuel Exemptions","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"The Washington State Legislature passed the CCA in 2021 to address the","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"harmful effects of greenhouse gas emissions on our environment and communities.","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"LAWS OF 2021, chs. 315-317; RCW 70A.65.005.","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"The legislature finds that climate change is one of the greatest","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"challenges facing our state and the world today, an existential crisis","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"with major negative impacts on environmental and human health.","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"Washington is experiencing environmental and community impactsFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"4","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"due to climate change through increasingly devastating wildfires,","paragraph_id":"para_108","court_paragraph":4},{"text":"flooding, droughts, rising temperatures and sea levels, and ocean","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"acidification. Greenhouse gas emissions already in the atmosphere will","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"increase impacts for some period of time. Actions to increase resilience","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"of our communities, natural resource lands, and ecosystems can prevent","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"and reduce impacts to communities and our environment and improve","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"their ability to recover.","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"RCW 70A.65.005(1). The legislature recognized the detrimental repercussions of","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"climate change on our planet and its inhabitants, and the ways in which greenhouse","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"gas emissions exacerbate those impacts, and so the legislature took action to reduce","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"and repair harm at the state level. Id. Consequently, the CCA caps and reduces","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"greenhouse gas emissions from Washington’s largest emitting sources and industries","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"through a “cap and invest” program. LAWS OF 2021, ch. 316;","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"former RCW 70A.65.070(1)(a); RCW 70A.65.020. In other words, the program sets","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"an emissions limit and lowers the amount of emissions allowances over time to","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"ensure that Washington meets its greenhouse gas reduction commitments.","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"RCW 70A.45.020.","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"The CCA imposes emissions regulations on “covered entities.”","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"Former RCW 70A.65.060 (2021). Covered entities risk being fined if they fail to","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"comply with the prescribed emissions limits. RCW 70A.15.2200(5)(d). Relevant","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"here, suppliers of fossil fuels are covered entities if they emit 25,000 metric tons of","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"carbon dioxide or more per year. RCW 70A.65.080(1)(d).","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"However, the legislature exempted certain categories of greenhouse gasFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"5","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"emissions from coverage under the cap and invest program. One such exemption","paragraph_id":"para_134","court_paragraph":5},{"text":"applies to emissions from “[m]otor vehicle fuel or special fuel that is used","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"exclusively for agricultural purposes by a farm fuel user” if the “buyer of motor","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"vehicle fuel or special fuel provides the seller with an exemption certificate” as","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"prescribed by Ecology. Former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i). For purposes of the","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"agricultural exemption, “agricultural purposes” means “the performance","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"of activities directly related to the growing, raising, or producing of agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"products,” but does not include transporting agricultural products and","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"farm equipment on public roads. RCW 82.08.865(2)(a). “Farm fuel user” means","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"“[a] farmer” or “a person who provides horticultural services for farmers.”","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"RCW 82.08.865(2)(e). Thus, while the CCA generally caps emissions from fuel","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"suppliers, the agricultural exemption operates to exclude emissions from fuel","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"used for agricultural purposes if the buyer of the fuel provides the seller with","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"an exemption certificate.","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"The cap and invest program uses a market force structure, meaning the CCA","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"relies on market forces by requiring the largest fuel suppliers in the state to purchase","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"allowances or credits equal to their annual greenhouse gas emissions to comply","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"with emissions limits. See RCW 70A.65.010(18)-(19). The exemption certificate","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"framework likewise provides a market-based incentive for suppliers to track and","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"report agricultural exemptions. See former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i). If suppliersFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"6","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"fail to claim those exemptions, the fuel will be more expensive than that","paragraph_id":"para_157","court_paragraph":6},{"text":"of competitors who do claim exemptions on said fuel. The structure of the CCA","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"rests on the presumption that a capitalist market will drive suppliers toward","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"compliance.","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"B. Factual Background","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"The legislature directed Ecology to adopt rules to implement the cap and","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"invest program, and to “determine a method for expanding” this agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"exemption to include emissions from “fuels used for the purpose of transporting","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"agricultural products on public highways.” Former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(ii).","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"Ecology adopted a final rule in 2022, defining “supplier emissions” exempt from","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"emissions regulations as “[m]otor vehicle fuel or special fuel used exclusively for","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"agricultural purposes by a farm fuel user” and “[f]uels used for transporting","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"agricultural products on public highways.” WAC 173-446-040(2)(b)(iii)-(iv).","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"Ecology then became aware that some fuel suppliers had been adding","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"a surcharge to the wholesale price of fuels—even fuel sold to farm users","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"for agricultural purposes—to offset the economic losses from the emissions cap.","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"Ecology responded by publishing interim guidance for fuel exemptions, including","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"information on how to report and document emissions from fuel used for agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"purposes. As part of that guidance, Ecology explained that fuel suppliers could use","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"a Department of Revenue (DOR) form as the exemption certificate to prove fuelFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_176"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_177"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_178"},{"text":"7","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"sales fall under the agricultural exemptions. See former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i).","paragraph_id":"para_180","court_paragraph":7},{"text":"The certificate provides that “[t]his form may be utilized to document fuel","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"transactions that are exempt under these provisions, but fuel users and covered","paragraph_id":"para_182"},{"text":"entities are not required to use it.” Clerk’s Papers (CP) at 599.","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"C. Procedural History","paragraph_id":"para_184"},{"text":"WFB then filed a petition for rule making, asking that Ecology open rule","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"making to establish a more workable method to claim an agricultural exemption","paragraph_id":"para_186"},{"text":"under the CCA before purchasing fuel as well as a process for those","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"in the agricultural industry to receive refunds for surcharges on fuel. Ecology formed","paragraph_id":"para_188"},{"text":"a work group to address the issue and noted it would be nearly impossible to “create","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"a paper-trail of receipts showing that fuel produced was end-used for [agricultural]","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"purposes.” Id. at 247. Ecology also determined that accurate exemption of emissions","paragraph_id":"para_191"},{"text":"is a matter of compliance enforcement as opposed to implementation.","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"Ecology denied WFB’s petition for rule making. Ecology reasoned that","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"the interim guidance it previously issued assisted fuel suppliers in documenting sales","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"of exempt fuel and in avoiding surcharges on that fuel. Ecology also explained that","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"since the guidance was being implemented successfully by many fuel suppliers, it","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"was unnecessary to change the current rules. Moreover, Ecology stated that it lacked","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"authority to allocate refunds for fuel surcharges and that WFB did not identifyFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"8","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"any mandatory duty for Ecology to do so.","paragraph_id":"para_202","court_paragraph":8},{"text":"In superior court, WFB filed a petition for declaratory judgment and","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"for review of agency action under the APA. WFB requested that the court declare","paragraph_id":"para_204"},{"text":"invalid chapter 173-446 WAC because Ecology’s rule implementing the agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_205"},{"text":"fuel exemption failed to create a workable mechanism to receive CCA exemptions,","paragraph_id":"para_206"},{"text":"which imposed a large financial burden on those in the agricultural and","paragraph_id":"para_207"},{"text":"trucking sectors. WFB argued that Ecology exceeded its statutory authority and","paragraph_id":"para_208"},{"text":"acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner by implementing a rule that was contrary","paragraph_id":"para_209"},{"text":"to the CCA, and that Ecology wrongly denied WFB’s petition for rule making, which","paragraph_id":"para_210"},{"text":"could have presented an opportunity to fix the original rule.","paragraph_id":"para_211"},{"text":"The superior court dismissed WFB’s action with prejudice. WFB sought","paragraph_id":"para_212"},{"text":"this court’s direct review, and we retained the case.","paragraph_id":"para_213"},{"text":"ANALYSIS","paragraph_id":"para_214"},{"text":"Under Washington’s APA, a rule promulgated by an agency is valid","paragraph_id":"para_215"},{"text":"unless it is unconstitutional, exceeds the statutory authority of the agency,","paragraph_id":"para_216"},{"text":"was adopted without compliance with statutory rule-making procedures, or","paragraph_id":"para_217"},{"text":"is arbitrary and capricious. RCW 34.05.570(2)(c). Other agency actions","paragraph_id":"para_218"},{"text":"are reviewed for similar considerations, including whether the action exceeds","paragraph_id":"para_219"},{"text":"the agency’s statutory authority or is arbitrary and capricious. RCW 34.05.570(4)(c).","paragraph_id":"para_220"},{"text":"The party challenging an agency action bears the burden to demonstrateFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_221"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_222"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_223"},{"text":"9","paragraph_id":"para_224"},{"text":"its invalidity. RCW 34.05.570(1)(a). Additionally, relief will be granted only","paragraph_id":"para_225","court_paragraph":9},{"text":"if the invalid action substantially prejudiced the party seeking to invalidate it.","paragraph_id":"para_226"},{"text":"RCW 34.05.570(1)(d).","paragraph_id":"para_227"},{"text":"A. Statutory Authority","paragraph_id":"para_228"},{"text":"WFB argues that Ecology exceeded its statutory authority by adopting a rule","paragraph_id":"para_229"},{"text":"applying the CCA’s agricultural exemption exclusively to suppliers rather than farm","paragraph_id":"para_230"},{"text":"fuel users, which allows suppliers to impose surcharges. Ecology agrees that its rule","paragraph_id":"para_231"},{"text":"places the point of regulation on fuel suppliers, not farm fuel users, but asserts that","paragraph_id":"para_232"},{"text":"the rule is consistent with the plain language and statutory framework of the CCA","paragraph_id":"para_233"},{"text":"and is therefore within its statutory authority. We agree and hold that Ecology did","paragraph_id":"para_234"},{"text":"not exceed its statutory authority.","paragraph_id":"para_235"},{"text":"Administrative rules are presumptively valid. Spokane County v.","paragraph_id":"para_236"},{"text":"Dep’t of Fish & Wildlife, 192 Wn.2d 453, 457, 430 P.3d 655 (2018);","paragraph_id":"para_237"},{"text":"Wash. Fed’n of State Emps. v. Dep’t of Gen. Admin., 152 Wn. App. 368, 378,","paragraph_id":"para_238"},{"text":"216 P.3d 1061 (2009). Agency rules are invalid where they are “inconsistent” with","paragraph_id":"para_239"},{"text":"the statutes they implement. Bostain v. Food Express, Inc., 159 Wn.2d 700, 715,","paragraph_id":"para_240"},{"text":"153 P.3d 846 (2007). But where a rule is “reasonably consistent” with the","paragraph_id":"para_241"},{"text":"underlying statute, the rule should be upheld. Id.; Campbell v.","paragraph_id":"para_242"},{"text":"Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs., 150 Wn.2d 881, 892, 83 P.3d 999 (2004).","paragraph_id":"para_243"},{"text":"WFB bears the burden of demonstrating the invalidity of Ecology’s action andFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_244"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_245"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_246"},{"text":"10","paragraph_id":"para_247"},{"text":"must show “compelling reasons” why the rule conflicts with the intent and","paragraph_id":"para_248","court_paragraph":10},{"text":"purpose of the legislation. See RCW 34.05.570(1)(a); see also Weyerhaeuser Co. v.","paragraph_id":"para_249"},{"text":"Dep’t of Ecology, 86 Wn.2d 310, 317, 545 P.2d 5 (1976).","paragraph_id":"para_250"},{"text":"To determine whether a rule is consistent with a statute, we must engage","paragraph_id":"para_251"},{"text":"in statutory interpretation, where our “objective is to ascertain and","paragraph_id":"para_252"},{"text":"carry out the Legislature’s intent.” Dep’t of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, LLC,","paragraph_id":"para_253"},{"text":"146 Wn.2d 1, 9, 43 P.3d 4 (2002); Dep’t of Fish & Wildlife, 192 Wn.2d at 457.","paragraph_id":"para_254"},{"text":"Statutory interpretation is a question of law we review de novo. Campbell & Gwinn,","paragraph_id":"para_255"},{"text":"146 Wn.2d at 9. We discern the plain meaning by considering the language of the","paragraph_id":"para_256"},{"text":"statute and related statutes. Id. at 10-11. It is well established that ‘“[t]he drafters of","paragraph_id":"para_257"},{"text":"legislation . . . are presumed to have used no superfluous words and we must accord","paragraph_id":"para_258"},{"text":"meaning, if possible, to every word in a statute.”’ In re Recall of Pearsall-Stipek,","paragraph_id":"para_259"},{"text":"141 Wn.2d 756, 767, 10 P.3d 1034 (2000) (alterations in original) (quoting","paragraph_id":"para_260"},{"text":"Greenwood v. Dep’t of Motor Vehicles, 13 Wn. App. 624, 628, 536 P.2d 644 (1975)).","paragraph_id":"para_261"},{"text":"WFB argues that in promulgating the cap and invest rule in","paragraph_id":"para_262"},{"text":"chapter 173-446 WAC, Ecology exceeded its authority under the CCA,","paragraph_id":"para_263"},{"text":"former RCW 70A.65.080 (2022), because Ecology failed to create a system","paragraph_id":"para_264"},{"text":"exempting farm fuel users from paying surcharges when purchasing fuel for","paragraph_id":"para_265"},{"text":"agricultural purposes. Specifically, WFB claims that the CCA’s agricultural fuel","paragraph_id":"para_266"},{"text":"exemption applies to end users of fuel, not suppliers. In other words, WFB assertsFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_267"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_268"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_269"},{"text":"11","paragraph_id":"para_270"},{"text":"that the plain language and structure of the CCA demonstrates that the legislature","paragraph_id":"para_271","court_paragraph":11},{"text":"intended to exempt farmers—the end users of agricultural fuel—from increased fuel","paragraph_id":"para_272"},{"text":"costs.","paragraph_id":"para_273"},{"text":"In support of this assertion, WFB emphasizes that the CCA states that Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_274"},{"text":"must maintain the agricultural exemption “in order to provide the agricultural sector","paragraph_id":"para_275"},{"text":"with a feasible transition period” and places the decision of whether to seek","paragraph_id":"para_276"},{"text":"the exemption on agricultural users by providing that the “exemption is available","paragraph_id":"para_277"},{"text":"only if a buyer of motor vehicle fuel or special fuel provides the seller with","paragraph_id":"para_278"},{"text":"an exemption certificate.” Former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i)-(ii) (emphasis added).","paragraph_id":"para_279"},{"text":"WFB argues further that the user-focused purpose of the exemption is reinforced","paragraph_id":"para_280"},{"text":"by the CCA’s reference to RCW 82.08.865, which exempts farm fuel users from","paragraph_id":"para_281"},{"text":"business and operation taxes as well as sales for agricultural purposes. Thus, WFB","paragraph_id":"para_282"},{"text":"would have us conclude that the legislative intent is that those in the agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_283"},{"text":"sector be absolved of the costs associated with the cap and invest program;","paragraph_id":"para_284"},{"text":"if we so concluded, WFB contends we would have to find that Ecology’s regulations","paragraph_id":"para_285"},{"text":"are inconsistent with the plain statutory meaning of the CCA.","paragraph_id":"para_286"},{"text":"We decline to adopt WFB’s position because the plain language of the CCA","paragraph_id":"para_287"},{"text":"places the point of regulation on fuel suppliers, not end users. The CCA generally","paragraph_id":"para_288"},{"text":"restricts fuel suppliers from selling more than a certain allowance of fuel unless they","paragraph_id":"para_289"},{"text":"have an exemption certificate from the buyer showing that the fuel is going to beFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_290"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_291"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_292"},{"text":"12","paragraph_id":"para_293"},{"text":"used exclusively for agricultural purposes by a farm fuel user.","paragraph_id":"para_294","court_paragraph":12},{"text":"RCW 70A.65.080(1)(d); former 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i). The CCA imposes compliance","paragraph_id":"para_295"},{"text":"obligations on covered entities, including large “supplier[s] of fossil fuel.”","paragraph_id":"para_296"},{"text":"RCW 70A.65.080(1)(d) (emphasis added). The CCA indicates that fuel suppliers are","paragraph_id":"para_297"},{"text":"permitted to exceed the emissions cap if the supplier can demonstrate that the excess","paragraph_id":"para_298"},{"text":"emissions were used exclusively for agricultural and related transportation purposes.","paragraph_id":"para_299"},{"text":"Id.; former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i)-(ii); see also Campbell & Gwinn, 146 Wn.2d","paragraph_id":"para_300"},{"text":"at 11. As fuel suppliers are the covered entities regulated by the CCA, fuel suppliers","paragraph_id":"para_301"},{"text":"(not end users) are the entities that can claim agricultural exemptions for fuel used","paragraph_id":"para_302"},{"text":"for agricultural purposes. RCW 70A.65.080(1)(d); former RCW 70A.65.080(7).","paragraph_id":"para_303"},{"text":"While agricultural fuel users benefit from this exemption, the CCA does not","paragraph_id":"para_304"},{"text":"directly regulate those end users. Although the CCA predicates a supplier’s","paragraph_id":"para_305"},{"text":"eligibility to claim agricultural exemptions on the ultimate end-use of the fuel, the","paragraph_id":"para_306"},{"text":"exemptions expressly apply to supplier “emissions [that] are exempt from coverage","paragraph_id":"para_307"},{"text":"in the program,” not end users. Former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i)-(ii)","paragraph_id":"para_308"},{"text":"(emphasis added).","paragraph_id":"para_309"},{"text":"WFB’s argument about the CCA’s reference to RCW 82.08.865 is","paragraph_id":"para_310"},{"text":"similarly misplaced. Former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i) defines “agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_311"},{"text":"purposes” and “farm fuel user” as having the same meanings as provided in","paragraph_id":"para_312"},{"text":"RCW 82.08.865, which defines those terms for purposes of a tax exemption. But theFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_313"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_314"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_315"},{"text":"13","paragraph_id":"para_316"},{"text":"definition of those terms does not modify the definition of “covered entities”—","paragraph_id":"para_317","court_paragraph":13},{"text":"which includes suppliers, not fuel users—or the general language of the agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_318"},{"text":"exemption that applies to the fuel itself.","paragraph_id":"para_319"},{"text":"WFB has not met its burden to show “compelling reasons” why","paragraph_id":"para_320"},{"text":"Ecology’s rule conflicts with the intent and purpose of the CCA’s","paragraph_id":"para_321"},{"text":"agricultural exemption. RCW 34.05.570; Weyerhaeuser, 86 Wn.2d at 317. Instead,","paragraph_id":"para_322"},{"text":"Ecology’s rule is “reasonably consistent” with the CCA and therefore is a valid rule","paragraph_id":"para_323"},{"text":"that does not exceed the scope of the agency’s statutory authority. Bostain, 159","paragraph_id":"para_324"},{"text":"Wn.2d at 715; Campbell, 150 Wn.2d at 892. The chart below is a side-by-side","paragraph_id":"para_325"},{"text":"demonstration of the relevant CCA provisions setting out the agricultural exemption","paragraph_id":"para_326"},{"text":"(left) and the rule promulgated by Ecology to carry out the statutory purpose (right).","paragraph_id":"para_327"},{"text":"See RCW 70A.65.220 (tasking Ecology with adopting rules to implement the","paragraph_id":"para_328"},{"text":"provisions of the CCA).For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_329"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_330"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_331"},{"text":"14","paragraph_id":"para_332"},{"text":"CCA’s Agricultural Exemption","paragraph_id":"para_333","court_paragraph":14},{"text":"Former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i)-(ii)","paragraph_id":"para_334"},{"text":"Ecology’s Rule","paragraph_id":"para_335"},{"text":"WAC 173-446-040(2)(b)(iii)-(iv)","paragraph_id":"para_336"},{"text":"(7) The following emissions are exempt","paragraph_id":"para_337"},{"text":"from coverage in the program, regardless of","paragraph_id":"para_338"},{"text":"the emissions reported under","paragraph_id":"para_339"},{"text":"RCW 70A.15.2200 or provided as required","paragraph_id":"para_340"},{"text":"by this chapter:","paragraph_id":"para_341"},{"text":". . . .","paragraph_id":"para_342"},{"text":"(e)(i) Motor vehicle fuel or special fuel that is","paragraph_id":"para_343"},{"text":"used exclusively for agricultural purposes by","paragraph_id":"para_344"},{"text":"a farm fuel user. This exemption is available","paragraph_id":"para_345"},{"text":"only if a buyer of motor vehicle fuel or","paragraph_id":"para_346"},{"text":"special fuel provides the seller with an","paragraph_id":"para_347"},{"text":"exemption certificate in a form and","paragraph_id":"para_348"},{"text":"manner prescribed by the department. For","paragraph_id":"para_349"},{"text":"the purposes of this subsection, “agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_350"},{"text":"purposes” and “farm fuel user” have the same","paragraph_id":"para_351"},{"text":"meanings as provided in RCW 82.08.865.","paragraph_id":"para_352"},{"text":"(ii) The department must determine a method","paragraph_id":"para_353"},{"text":"for expanding the exemption provided under","paragraph_id":"para_354"},{"text":"(e)(i) of this subsection to include fuels used","paragraph_id":"para_355"},{"text":"for the purpose of transporting agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_356"},{"text":"products on public highways. The department","paragraph_id":"para_357"},{"text":"must maintain this expanded exemption for a","paragraph_id":"para_358"},{"text":"period of five years, in order to provide the","paragraph_id":"para_359"},{"text":"agricultural sector with a feasible transition","paragraph_id":"para_360"},{"text":"period.","paragraph_id":"para_361"},{"text":"(2)(b) The following supplier emissions","paragraph_id":"para_362"},{"text":"are not covered emissions if the supplier","paragraph_id":"para_363"},{"text":"can demonstrate to ecology’s satisfaction","paragraph_id":"para_364"},{"text":"as specified under WAC 173-441-","paragraph_id":"para_365"},{"text":"122(5)(d)(xi) that the emissions originate","paragraph_id":"para_366"},{"text":"from:","paragraph_id":"para_367"},{"text":". . . .","paragraph_id":"para_368"},{"text":"(iii) Motor vehicle fuel or special fuel","paragraph_id":"para_369"},{"text":"used exclusively for agricultural purposes","paragraph_id":"para_370"},{"text":"by a farm fuel user as described in","paragraph_id":"para_371"},{"text":"WAC 173-441-122(5)(d)(xi)(C).[4]","paragraph_id":"para_372"},{"text":"(iv) Fuels used for transporting","paragraph_id":"para_373"},{"text":"agricultural products on public highways","paragraph_id":"para_374"},{"text":"if it meets the requirements in","paragraph_id":"para_375"},{"text":"RCW 82.08.865 as described in","paragraph_id":"para_376"},{"text":"WAC 173-441-122(5)(d)(xi)(C).","paragraph_id":"para_377"},{"text":"This exemption is in effect for emissions","paragraph_id":"para_378"},{"text":"years 2023 through 2027 and is not","paragraph_id":"para_379"},{"text":"available for emissions after 2027.","paragraph_id":"para_380"},{"text":"4 WAC 173-441-122(5)(d)(xi) provides:","paragraph_id":"para_381"},{"text":"Owners and operators may separately indicate the quantity of each fuel type if the fuel","paragraph_id":"para_382"},{"text":"supplier can demonstrate to ecology’s satisfaction that the fuel is used for one of the","paragraph_id":"para_383"},{"text":"following purposes:","paragraph_id":"para_384"},{"text":". . . .","paragraph_id":"para_385"},{"text":"(C) Motor vehicle fuel or special fuel that is used exclusively for agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_386"},{"text":"purposes by a farm fuel user. The supplier must demonstrate to ecology’s satisfaction","paragraph_id":"para_387"},{"text":"that the buyer of the fuel provided the seller with an exemption certificate as","paragraph_id":"para_388"},{"text":"described in RCW 82.08.865. Fuel used for the purpose of transporting agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_389"},{"text":"products on public highways may be included if it is flagged separately and meets the","paragraph_id":"para_390"},{"text":"requirements in RCW 82.08.865. For the purposes of (d)(xi) of this subsection,","paragraph_id":"para_391"},{"text":"“agricultural purposes” and “farm fuel user” have the same meanings as provided in","paragraph_id":"para_392"},{"text":"RCW 82.08.865 and motor vehicle fuel and special fuel have the same meanings as","paragraph_id":"para_393"},{"text":"provided in RCW 82.38.020.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_394"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_395"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_396"},{"text":"15","paragraph_id":"para_397"},{"text":"(Formatting altered.)","paragraph_id":"para_398","court_paragraph":15},{"text":"Ecology’s rule follows the CCA’s agricultural exemption in both form and","paragraph_id":"para_399"},{"text":"substance. An agency rule need only be “reasonably consistent” with the statute.","paragraph_id":"para_400"},{"text":"Bostain, 159 Wn.2d at 715; Campbell, 150 Wn.2d at 892. This rule satisfies","paragraph_id":"para_401"},{"text":"that standard. The CCA sets out an agricultural exemption to the general mandate","paragraph_id":"para_402"},{"text":"for regulations on emissions for large-scale fuel suppliers, and for fuel suppliers","paragraph_id":"para_403"},{"text":"to qualify for the exemption, the CCA provides that the fuel must be “used","paragraph_id":"para_404"},{"text":"exclusively for agricultural purposes by a farm fuel user,” which Ecology expressly","paragraph_id":"para_405"},{"text":"reflected in its rule. Compare RCW 70A.65.080(1)(d);","paragraph_id":"para_406"},{"text":"former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i)-(ii), with WAC 173-446-040(2)(b)(iii). The CCA","paragraph_id":"para_407"},{"text":"also requires Ecology to determine a method for expanding the exemption to include","paragraph_id":"para_408"},{"text":"fuels used for transporting agricultural products on public highways. Former","paragraph_id":"para_409"},{"text":"RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(ii). Ecology did just that by promulgating a rule exempting","paragraph_id":"para_410"},{"text":"fuels used for that precise purpose, those “used for transporting agricultural products","paragraph_id":"para_411"},{"text":"on public highways.” WAC 173-446-040(2)(b)(iv).","paragraph_id":"para_412"},{"text":"At its heart, WFB’s challenge seems to be a disagreement with the legislature,","paragraph_id":"para_413"},{"text":"not with Ecology. WFB’s concern is that agricultural fuel buyers are not adequately","paragraph_id":"para_414"},{"text":"protected from surcharges on fuel that suppliers are imposing to defray the costs of","paragraph_id":"para_415"},{"text":"complying with the CCA. The CCA was not enacted to protect those in the","paragraph_id":"para_416"},{"text":"agricultural sector from emissions-related costs but rather to reduce emissions fromFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_417"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_418"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_419"},{"text":"16","paragraph_id":"para_420"},{"text":"large-scale greenhouse gas emitters in an effort to address climate change—to","paragraph_id":"para_421","court_paragraph":16},{"text":"“increase resilience of our communities, natural resource lands, and ecosystems”","paragraph_id":"para_422"},{"text":"and to “prevent and reduce impacts to communities and our environment and","paragraph_id":"para_423"},{"text":"improve their ability to recover.” RCW 70A.65.005(1), .020. The legislature did not","paragraph_id":"para_424"},{"text":"grant Ecology the statutory authority to regulate fuel sales in the CCA. Absent this","paragraph_id":"para_425"},{"text":"authority, Ecology does not have the power to require fuel suppliers to stop imposing","paragraph_id":"para_426"},{"text":"surcharges. RCW 34.05.570(4)(c)(ii) (agency action must not be “[o]utside the","paragraph_id":"para_427"},{"text":"statutory authority of the agency or the authority conferred by a provision of law”).","paragraph_id":"para_428"},{"text":"In accordance with the CCA, Ecology has determined a method for fuel","paragraph_id":"para_429"},{"text":"suppliers to use a DOR form as the exemption certificate to prove fuel sales fall","paragraph_id":"para_430"},{"text":"under the agricultural exemptions. Compare former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i), with","paragraph_id":"para_431"},{"text":"WAC 173-446-040(2)(b)(iii). With the CCA restrictions on fuel sales, fuel suppliers","paragraph_id":"para_432"},{"text":"will have to bear certain economic losses, and fuel suppliers have autonomy to","paragraph_id":"para_433"},{"text":"decide how to offset those losses, including whether to impose surcharges on all fuel","paragraph_id":"para_434"},{"text":"or on only nonexempt fuel. Although WFB takes issue with the imposition of","paragraph_id":"para_435"},{"text":"surcharges on those in the agricultural sector, nothing in the CCA precludes","paragraph_id":"para_436"},{"text":"fuel suppliers from doing so. This complaint is outside of Ecology’s purview;","paragraph_id":"para_437"},{"text":"that policy-level decision remains within that of the legislature. See Rios v.","paragraph_id":"para_438"},{"text":"Dep’t of Lab. & Indus., 145 Wn.2d 483, 510, 39 P.3d 961 (2002)","paragraph_id":"para_439"},{"text":"(Alexander, C.J., concurring) (noting agency discretion is limited to terms of theFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_440"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_441"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_442"},{"text":"17","paragraph_id":"para_443"},{"text":"statutory scheme providing the agency its authority); see also Campbell & Gwinn,","paragraph_id":"para_444","court_paragraph":17},{"text":"146 Wn.2d at 18 n.9 (directing policy issues to the legislature because “[i]t is","paragraph_id":"para_445"},{"text":"inappropriate for this court to rewrite statutes”). Ecology carried out the directive","paragraph_id":"para_446"},{"text":"of the legislature.","paragraph_id":"para_447"},{"text":"WFB also argues that the CCA’s agricultural exemption is mandatory for","paragraph_id":"para_448"},{"text":"suppliers, not optional. Consequently, WFB contends that even if this court","paragraph_id":"para_449"},{"text":"determines that Ecology lacks authority to provide the benefits of the exemption","paragraph_id":"para_450"},{"text":"directly to farm fuel users, we should find that the plain language of the CCA","paragraph_id":"para_451"},{"text":"requires the reporting requirement to be mandatory for suppliers. According to","paragraph_id":"para_452"},{"text":"WFB, under Ecology’s rules, suppliers may, but are not required to, distinguish","paragraph_id":"para_453"},{"text":"between farm fuel used for agricultural purposes and fuel used for nonexempt","paragraph_id":"para_454"},{"text":"purposes, and the exemption certificate for fuel used for agricultural purposes is","paragraph_id":"para_455"},{"text":"meaningless if fuel suppliers impose surcharges to the costs of exempt fuel.","paragraph_id":"para_456"},{"text":"The rule at issue is WAC 173-441-122(5)(d)(xi)(c) (the emissions reporting","paragraph_id":"para_457"},{"text":"rule), which provides that for “[m]otor vehicle fuel or special fuel that is used","paragraph_id":"para_458"},{"text":"exclusively for agricultural purposes by a farm fuel user,” “[t]he supplier must","paragraph_id":"para_459"},{"text":"demonstrate to [E]cology’s satisfaction that the buyer of the fuel provided the seller","paragraph_id":"para_460"},{"text":"with an exemption certificate as described in RCW 82.08.865.” RCW 82.08.865(1)","paragraph_id":"para_461"},{"text":"indicates that the “exemption is available only if the buyer provides the seller with","paragraph_id":"para_462"},{"text":"an exemption certificate in a form and manner prescribed by the department.”For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_463"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_464"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_465"},{"text":"18","paragraph_id":"para_466"},{"text":"See also former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i) (same).","paragraph_id":"para_467","court_paragraph":18},{"text":"The parties disagree as to whether a challenge to that emissions reporting rule","paragraph_id":"para_468"},{"text":"is before this court. Ecology argues that since WFB failed to request invalidation","paragraph_id":"para_469"},{"text":"of any provision of chapter 173-441 WAC in its petition for review of agency action","paragraph_id":"para_470"},{"text":"before the superior court, any arguments regarding WAC 173-441-122 are not","paragraph_id":"para_471"},{"text":"properly before us. See CP at 6 (petition for declaratory judgment and for review of","paragraph_id":"para_472"},{"text":"agency action seeking relief only from “Ecology’s adoption of the regulatory","paragraph_id":"para_473"},{"text":"framework under WAC 173-446” (emphasis added)). WFB contends that it","paragraph_id":"para_474"},{"text":"challenged both chapters 173-441 WAC and 173-446 WAC directly to Ecology in","paragraph_id":"para_475"},{"text":"its petition for rule making, and the petition for declaratory judgment and review of","paragraph_id":"para_476"},{"text":"agency action included that request for relief by reference. See CP at 627 (petition","paragraph_id":"para_477"},{"text":"for rule making, arguing that “WAC 173-446-040(2)(b) and WAC 173-441-","paragraph_id":"para_478"},{"text":"122(5)(d)(xi) create an arbitrary exemption process that is not consistent with","paragraph_id":"para_479"},{"text":"[RCW] 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i)-(ii)”), 6 (petition for declaratory judgment and review","paragraph_id":"para_480"},{"text":"of agency action “seek[ing] judicial review of Ecology’s denial of their petition for","paragraph_id":"para_481"},{"text":"rulemaking, as well as Ecology’s rules adopted under WAC 173-446”). Although","paragraph_id":"para_482"},{"text":"there was a general reference to WFB’s petition for rule making (to the agency),","paragraph_id":"para_483"},{"text":"since WFB failed to request invalidation of any provision within chapter","paragraph_id":"para_484"},{"text":"173-441 WAC in its petition for review of agency action to the superior court, that","paragraph_id":"para_485"},{"text":"rule making file is not included in the agency record; thus, any arguments regardingFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_486"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_487"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_488"},{"text":"19","paragraph_id":"para_489"},{"text":"the validity of WAC 173-441-122 were not before the superior court and are not now","paragraph_id":"para_490","court_paragraph":19},{"text":"properly before us. See St. Joseph Hosp. & Health Care Ctr. v. Dep’t of Health,","paragraph_id":"para_491"},{"text":"125 Wn.2d 733, 745, 887 P.2d 891 (1995) (declining to decide on the validity","paragraph_id":"para_492"},{"text":"of a rule where the rule making file was not part of the record).","paragraph_id":"para_493"},{"text":"Even if WFB had properly raised its attack on the validity of the emissions","paragraph_id":"para_494"},{"text":"reporting rule in chapter 173-441 WAC by broadly challenging the regulatory","paragraph_id":"para_495"},{"text":"framework of the cap and invest rule in chapter 173-446 WAC, WFB has not","paragraph_id":"para_496"},{"text":"demonstrated that any of the rule provisions are “inconsistent” with the CCA.","paragraph_id":"para_497"},{"text":"Bostain, 159 Wn.2d at 715. Nowhere does the CCA mandate reporting","paragraph_id":"para_498"},{"text":"of exempt emissions. WFB argues that the CCA mandates suppliers to report exempt","paragraph_id":"para_499"},{"text":"fuel uses because it says Ecology “‘must determine a method for expanding","paragraph_id":"para_500"},{"text":"the exemption . . . to include fuels used for the purpose of transporting agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_501"},{"text":"products on public highways.’” Opening Br. at 50-51 (alteration in original) (quoting","paragraph_id":"para_502"},{"text":"former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(ii)). But Ecology is the subject of “must” in that","paragraph_id":"para_503"},{"text":"provision, not emissions or the reporting of those emissions. That “must” requires","paragraph_id":"para_504"},{"text":"only that Ecology expand the exemption to a separate subset of emissions","paragraph_id":"para_505"},{"text":"(transporting agricultural products); it does not require that Ecology impose","paragraph_id":"para_506"},{"text":"mandatory reporting of exempt emissions. Former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(ii).","paragraph_id":"para_507"},{"text":"The legislature has expressly mandated reporting of certain categories","paragraph_id":"para_508"},{"text":"of emissions in other related statutes, such as the Washington Clean Air Act, butFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_509"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_510"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_511"},{"text":"20","paragraph_id":"para_512"},{"text":"chose not to do so in the CCA. See RCW 70A.15.220(5)(a)(i) (providing “the rules","paragraph_id":"para_513","court_paragraph":20},{"text":"must require that . . . [e]missions of greenhouse gases resulting from the combustion","paragraph_id":"para_514"},{"text":"of fossil fuels be reported separately from emission of greenhouse gases resulting","paragraph_id":"para_515"},{"text":"from the combustion of biomass” (emphasis added)); see also Regence Blueshield","paragraph_id":"para_516"},{"text":"v. Off. of Ins. Comm’r, 131 Wn. App. 639, 650, 128 P.3d 640 (2006) (contrasting","paragraph_id":"para_517"},{"text":"“may” as permissive language with “shall” as mandatory language). The absence of","paragraph_id":"para_518"},{"text":"plain language mandating reporting in the CCA indicates the statute is consistent","paragraph_id":"para_519"},{"text":"with Ecology’s rule to make reporting optional for suppliers. The legislature has also","paragraph_id":"para_520"},{"text":"amended the CCA and continues to consider further amendments, such as removing","paragraph_id":"para_521"},{"text":"a five-year limitation on agricultural exemptions and mandating payments to those","paragraph_id":"para_522"},{"text":"in the agricultural sector. See S.B. 5630, 69th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Wash. 2025). At this","paragraph_id":"para_523"},{"text":"juncture, the legislature has not amended the CCA’s voluntary exemption reporting","paragraph_id":"para_524"},{"text":"framework.5","paragraph_id":"para_525"},{"text":"Ecology’s rule is reasonably consistent with the CCA’s agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_526"},{"text":"exemption substantively and structurally. Compare WAC 173-446-040(2)(b)(iii)-","paragraph_id":"para_527"},{"text":"(iv), with former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i)-(ii). Ecology’s rule is reasonably","paragraph_id":"para_528"},{"text":"consistent with the plain language of the CCA, which defines fuel suppliers (not end","paragraph_id":"para_529"},{"text":"5 WFB also appears to argue that Ecology acted outside its statutory authority and in an","paragraph_id":"para_530"},{"text":"arbitrary and capricious manner by subsequently denying its petition for rule making. We reject","paragraph_id":"para_531"},{"text":"that argument because it recycles WFB’s former argument that the denial was based on a flawed","paragraph_id":"para_532"},{"text":"interpretation that the CCA regulates suppliers rather than end users. WFB’s issue here likewise","paragraph_id":"para_533"},{"text":"seems to be with the substance of the original rule and does not provide anything new.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_534"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_535"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_536"},{"text":"21","paragraph_id":"para_537"},{"text":"users) as the covered entities that can claim agricultural exemptions for fuel used for","paragraph_id":"para_538","court_paragraph":21},{"text":"agricultural purposes. RCW 70A.65.080(1)(d); former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e);","paragraph_id":"para_539"},{"text":"Bostain, 159 Wn.2d at 715; Campbell, 150 Wn.2d at 892. Likewise, Ecology’s","paragraph_id":"para_540"},{"text":"voluntary exemption reporting framework is also reasonably consistent with the","paragraph_id":"para_541"},{"text":"CCA because the CCA does not require Ecology to impose mandatory reporting of","paragraph_id":"para_542"},{"text":"exempt emissions.","paragraph_id":"para_543"},{"text":"We presume Ecology’s rules are valid and conclude that WFB did not satisfy","paragraph_id":"para_544"},{"text":"its burden of demonstrating “compelling reasons” that Ecology’s rules conflict with","paragraph_id":"para_545"},{"text":"the intent and purpose of the CCA, which are both aimed at reducing greenhouse gas","paragraph_id":"para_546"},{"text":"emissions from the largest emitting suppliers, while providing more flexibility for","paragraph_id":"para_547"},{"text":"those in the agricultural sector. Spokane County, 192 Wn.2d at 457;","paragraph_id":"para_548"},{"text":"RCW 34.05.570(1)(a); Weyerhaeuser, 86 Wn.2d at 317. Thus, we hold that Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_549"},{"text":"did not exceed its statutory authority.","paragraph_id":"para_550"},{"text":"B. Arbitrary and Capricious Rule Making","paragraph_id":"para_551"},{"text":"WFB argues that Ecology acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner by first","paragraph_id":"para_552"},{"text":"adopting an unworkable agricultural exemption and again by denying WFB’s","paragraph_id":"para_553"},{"text":"subsequent petition for rule making after being alerted to the pitfalls of the","paragraph_id":"para_554"},{"text":"exemption. We reject WFB’s arguments and hold that Ecology did not act in an","paragraph_id":"para_555"},{"text":"arbitrary and capricious manner.","paragraph_id":"para_556"},{"text":"We must give due deference to the specialized knowledge and expertiseFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_557"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_558"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_559"},{"text":"22","paragraph_id":"para_560"},{"text":"of an administrative agency. Port of Seattle v. Pollution Control Hr’gs Bd.,","paragraph_id":"para_561","court_paragraph":22},{"text":"151 Wn.2d 568, 595, 90 P.3d 659 (2004); Schneider v. Snyder’s Foods, Inc.,","paragraph_id":"para_562"},{"text":"116 Wn. App. 706, 716, 66 P.3d 640 (2003). The legislature charged Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_563"},{"text":"with promulgating a rule to implement the agricultural exemption of the CCA","paragraph_id":"para_564"},{"text":"in former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(ii). Thus, “Ecology is in a far better position","paragraph_id":"para_565"},{"text":"to judge what is in the public interest regarding” an agricultural exemption","paragraph_id":"para_566"},{"text":"to a broader effort to address climate change through greenhouse gas emissions.","paragraph_id":"para_567"},{"text":"Hillis v. Dep’t of Ecology, 131 Wn.2d 373, 396, 932 P.2d 139 (1997) (courts give","paragraph_id":"para_568"},{"text":"“substantial judicial deference” to agencies where factual matters are “close to the","paragraph_id":"para_569"},{"text":"heart of the agency’s expertise”); cf. Port of Seattle, 151 Wn.2d at 612 (finding that","paragraph_id":"para_570"},{"text":"because “Ecology is the agency charged with interpreting and applying","paragraph_id":"para_571"},{"text":"the water code, its interpretation of a provision deserves deference, so long as","paragraph_id":"para_572"},{"text":"that interpretation is not contrary to the plain language of the statute”);","paragraph_id":"para_573"},{"text":"see also About Us,6 WASH. STATE DEP’T OF ECOLOGY (stating Ecology’s mission is","paragraph_id":"para_574"},{"text":"“[t]o protect, preserve, and enhance Washington’s environment for current and","paragraph_id":"para_575"},{"text":"future generations”); see also Air & Climate,7 WASH. STATE DEP’T OF ECOLOGY","paragraph_id":"para_576"},{"text":"(listing “Air & Climate” as one of Ecology’s focus areas and stating Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_577"},{"text":"“regulate[s] unhealthy emissions from vehicles, burning, and industrial activities to","paragraph_id":"para_578"},{"text":"6 https://ecology.wa.gov/about-us [https://perma.cc/2RPJ-RN8S]","paragraph_id":"para_579"},{"text":"7 https://ecology.wa.gov/air-climate [https://perma.cc/S6FB-SFPD]For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_580"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_581"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_582"},{"text":"23","paragraph_id":"para_583"},{"text":"help protect air quality and reduce greenhouse gases that warm the planet”).","paragraph_id":"para_584","court_paragraph":23},{"text":"Although such deference does not extend to rule making that is arbitrary and","paragraph_id":"para_585"},{"text":"capricious, WFB bears a heavy burden to show Ecology’s actions rise","paragraph_id":"para_586"},{"text":"to that level. Pierce County Sheriff v. Civ. Serv. Comm’n,","paragraph_id":"para_587"},{"text":"98 Wn.2d 690, 695, 658 P.2d 648 (1983); Schneider, 116 Wn. App. at 716. As we","paragraph_id":"para_588"},{"text":"have stated repeatedly, rule making is arbitrary and capricious when an agency","paragraph_id":"para_589"},{"text":"engages in “willful and unreasoning action, taken without regard to or consideration","paragraph_id":"para_590"},{"text":"of the facts and circumstances surrounding the action.” Abbenhaus v. City of Yakima,","paragraph_id":"para_591"},{"text":"89 Wn.2d 855, 858, 576 P.2d 888 (1978); see also Pierce County Sheriff,","paragraph_id":"para_592"},{"text":"98 Wn.2d at 695; State v. Rowe, 93 Wn.2d 277, 284, 609 P.2d 1348 (1980).","paragraph_id":"para_593"},{"text":"“Where there is room for two opinions, an action taken after due consideration","paragraph_id":"para_594"},{"text":"is not arbitrary and capricious even though a reviewing court may believe it","paragraph_id":"para_595"},{"text":"to be erroneous.” Abbenhaus, 89 Wn.2d at 858-59; Lane v. Port of Seattle,","paragraph_id":"para_596"},{"text":"178 Wn. App. 110, 126, 316 P.3d 1070 (2013). We should not “‘undertake to","paragraph_id":"para_597"},{"text":"exercise the discretion that the legislature has placed in the agency.’” Port of Seattle,","paragraph_id":"para_598"},{"text":"151 Wn.2d at 589 (quoting RCW 34.05.574(1)).","paragraph_id":"para_599"},{"text":"First, WFB argues Ecology acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner","paragraph_id":"para_600"},{"text":"by adopting an agricultural exemption framework that is unworkable for those in the","paragraph_id":"para_601"},{"text":"agricultural sector. Opening Br. at 56-59. Specifically, WFB asserts that Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_602"},{"text":"recognized the difficulties of tracing fuel to an exempt agricultural end use but stillFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_603"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_604"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_605"},{"text":"24","paragraph_id":"para_606"},{"text":"created an exemption program that exempts fuel only if the buyer of the fuel provides","paragraph_id":"para_607","court_paragraph":24},{"text":"the seller with an exemption certificate. Id. Simply stated, WFB alleges that Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_608"},{"text":"acknowledged the problems with its rule but failed to consider other alternatives,","paragraph_id":"para_609"},{"text":"which amounts to “willful and unreasoning’” action. Id. at 58-59 (quoting Puget","paragraph_id":"para_610"},{"text":"Sound Harvesters Ass’n v. Dep’t of Fish & Wildlife, 157 Wn. App. 935, 945, 239","paragraph_id":"para_611"},{"text":"P.3d 1140 (2010)). But WFB conflates enforcement of the CCA with Ecology’s duty","paragraph_id":"para_612"},{"text":"to determine a means for fuel suppliers to claim exemptions. See Abbenhaus, 89","paragraph_id":"para_613"},{"text":"Wn.2d at 858; see also Lane, 178 Wn. App. at 126. Ecology’s acknowledgement of","paragraph_id":"para_614"},{"text":"the challenges of promulgating a workable agricultural exemption framework shows","paragraph_id":"para_615"},{"text":"quite the opposite of willful, unreasoning action: Ecology engaged in “due","paragraph_id":"para_616"},{"text":"consideration” regarding the implementation of the exemption within the confines","paragraph_id":"para_617"},{"text":"of the statute. See Abbenhaus, 89 Wn.2d at 858-59.","paragraph_id":"para_618"},{"text":"For instance, Ecology recognized that the current exemption framework","paragraph_id":"para_619"},{"text":"would make it challenging to “create a paper-trail of receipts showing that fuel","paragraph_id":"para_620"},{"text":"produced was end-used for [agricultural] purposes.” CP at 247. This challenging","paragraph_id":"para_621"},{"text":"accounting issue does not indicate that Ecology disregarded its statutory mandate.","paragraph_id":"para_622"},{"text":"Instead, it indicates that Ecology anticipated it would be challenging to prevent","paragraph_id":"para_623"},{"text":"incorrect or fraudulent CCA exemption claims. In response, Ecology—consistent","paragraph_id":"para_624"},{"text":"with the CCA’s mandate—adopted a voluntary exemption reporting system, which","paragraph_id":"para_625"},{"text":"incentivizes fuel suppliers to accurately document and report exempt sales. AlthoughFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_626"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_627"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_628"},{"text":"25","paragraph_id":"para_629"},{"text":"WFB is correct that optional exemption certificates do not ameliorate surcharges on","paragraph_id":"para_630","court_paragraph":25},{"text":"exempt fuel, WFB does not demonstrate this is an unreasonable method for claiming","paragraph_id":"para_631"},{"text":"exemptions so as to rise to the level of arbitrary and capricious decision-making.","paragraph_id":"para_632"},{"text":"See Abbenhaus, 89 Wn.2d at 858-59 (leaving room for more than one opinion and","paragraph_id":"para_633"},{"text":"deferring to agency decisions that were made with due consideration).","paragraph_id":"para_634"},{"text":"Additionally, Ecology considered other alternatives and determined","paragraph_id":"para_635"},{"text":"they were not feasible. For example, while brainstorming a method for expanding","paragraph_id":"para_636"},{"text":"the agricultural exemption to include fuels used for the purpose of transporting","paragraph_id":"para_637"},{"text":"agricultural products on public highways, Ecology drafted an implementation plan.","paragraph_id":"para_638"},{"text":"The plan included a consultation “with [the Department of Licensing] and","paragraph_id":"para_639"},{"text":"DOR to determine a method, and to coordinate on legislative or budget proposals","paragraph_id":"para_640"},{"text":"needed to authorize implementation of this exemption.” CP at 241.","paragraph_id":"para_641"},{"text":"Ecology considered, as an alternative, “the easiest way” to implement the expansion","paragraph_id":"para_642"},{"text":"of the agricultural exemption framework, which would be to use “dyed fuel”","paragraph_id":"para_643"},{"text":"for agricultural use. Id. “Dyed fuel” is diesel fuel with red dye to visually signify","paragraph_id":"para_644"},{"text":"that there are no federal or state fuel taxes paid and is often used for farming","paragraph_id":"para_645"},{"text":"equipment. Dyed Diesel, WASH. STATE DEP’T OF LICENSING.8 Thus, use of dyed fuel","paragraph_id":"para_646"},{"text":"would avoid added costs and ensure easy implementation of the agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_647"},{"text":"8 https://dol.wa.gov/vehicles-and-boats/prorate-and-fuel-tax/fuel-tax/dyed-diesel","paragraph_id":"para_648"},{"text":"[https://perma.cc/J5MQ-NNLA]For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_649"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_650"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_651"},{"text":"26","paragraph_id":"para_652"},{"text":"exemption. But as Ecology noted, “it is currently illegal to drive on a highway","paragraph_id":"para_653","court_paragraph":26},{"text":"using dyed fuel (i.e., for agricultural use),” meaning that method was not “viable.”","paragraph_id":"para_654"},{"text":"CP at 241; see also RCW 82.38.072; WAC 308-77-114. This demonstrates that","paragraph_id":"para_655"},{"text":"Ecology thought through alternative regulatory structures and determined none were","paragraph_id":"para_656"},{"text":"viable. Ecology’s due consideration of alternative methods and the challenges with","paragraph_id":"para_657"},{"text":"the current agricultural exemption framework does not rise to the level of arbitrary","paragraph_id":"para_658"},{"text":"and capricious action. See Abbenhaus, 89 Wn.2d at 858-59.","paragraph_id":"para_659"},{"text":"Second, WFB argues that Ecology’s subsequent denial of WFB’s petition for","paragraph_id":"para_660"},{"text":"rule making was arbitrary and capricious. Opening Br. at 59-64. Specifically, it","paragraph_id":"para_661"},{"text":"asserts Ecology “knew that some agricultural fuel users were paying CCA","paragraph_id":"para_662"},{"text":"surcharges on exempt fuel” and denied further rule making based on a “flawed","paragraph_id":"para_663"},{"text":"interpretation that the CCA only allowed it to regulate suppliers.” Id. at 61.","paragraph_id":"para_664"},{"text":"WFB also argues Ecology did not take significant actions to address the problems","paragraph_id":"para_665"},{"text":"raised in the work group regarding regulatory exposure for suppliers who have no","paragraph_id":"para_666"},{"text":"way to verify the use of fuel they sell and the imposition of surcharges on farm fuel","paragraph_id":"para_667"},{"text":"users. Id. at 61-63.","paragraph_id":"para_668"},{"text":"WFB relies on Rios as an example of arbitrary and capricious action. 145","paragraph_id":"para_669"},{"text":"Wn.2d 483. At issue in that case was whether the Department of Labor and Industries","paragraph_id":"para_670"},{"text":"(L&I) acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner when it adopted a rule","paragraph_id":"para_671"},{"text":"recommending but not requiring a blood testing program monitoring cholinesteraseFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_672"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_673"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_674"},{"text":"27","paragraph_id":"para_675"},{"text":"levels for agricultural pesticide handlers. Id. at 487-88. The court held that L&I’s","paragraph_id":"para_676","court_paragraph":27},{"text":"failure to act constituted arbitrary and capricious action because L&I “had already","paragraph_id":"para_677"},{"text":"invested its resources in studying cholinesterase-inhibiting pesticides and because","paragraph_id":"para_678"},{"text":"the report of its own team of technical experts had, in light of the most current","paragraph_id":"para_679"},{"text":"research, deemed a monitoring program both necessary and doable.” Id. at 508.","paragraph_id":"para_680"},{"text":"Rios is inapposite to our analysis. Unlike in Rios, where the work group report","paragraph_id":"para_681"},{"text":"found a monitoring program necessary and feasible before denying the request for","paragraph_id":"para_682"},{"text":"rule making, id., here, Ecology’s work group report offered no consensus that","paragraph_id":"para_683"},{"text":"Ecology’s rules and guidance were unworkable, and it was published after Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_684"},{"text":"denied the petition for rule making. Ecology’s decision not to change the rule does","paragraph_id":"para_685"},{"text":"not render it arbitrary and capricious because the rule in and of itself is reasonably","paragraph_id":"para_686"},{"text":"consistent with the CCA. Compare WAC 173-446-040(2)(b)(iii)-(iv), with former","paragraph_id":"para_687"},{"text":"RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(i)-(ii); see also Bostain, 159 Wn.2d at 715; Campbell,","paragraph_id":"para_688"},{"text":"150 Wn.2d at 892.","paragraph_id":"para_689"},{"text":"Ecology demonstrated its due consideration by providing reasons for its denial","paragraph_id":"para_690"},{"text":"of WFB’s petition for rule making. Namely, Ecology issued two guidance","paragraph_id":"para_691"},{"text":"documents and an exemption certificate form as its selected method for claiming","paragraph_id":"para_692"},{"text":"exemptions on fuel used exclusively for agricultural purposes, which has been","paragraph_id":"para_693"},{"text":"successfully implemented by fuel suppliers to track and document sales of exempt","paragraph_id":"para_694"},{"text":"fuels without assessing surcharges on those fuels. Ecology explained that theFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_695"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_696"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_697"},{"text":"28","paragraph_id":"para_698"},{"text":"successful implementation demonstrates that there was no need for a change to","paragraph_id":"para_699","court_paragraph":28},{"text":"Ecology’s rule. Ecology also acknowledged that fuel suppliers imposing surcharges","paragraph_id":"para_700"},{"text":"on farm fuel users deprives end users of the benefits of the CCA exemptions, and in","paragraph_id":"para_701"},{"text":"response, it established a work group to develop recommendations related to","paragraph_id":"para_702"},{"text":"reimbursement. But as Ecology explained, it lacked authority to address this issue","paragraph_id":"para_703"},{"text":"through rule making. The legislature did not appropriate funds to be used for the","paragraph_id":"para_704"},{"text":"requested refunds, and agencies lack authority to allocate money from the state","paragraph_id":"para_705"},{"text":"treasury absent specific statutory authority. WFB’s opinion is that the exemption","paragraph_id":"para_706"},{"text":"method is impractical, but “there is room for two opinions,” and “an action taken","paragraph_id":"para_707"},{"text":"after due consideration is not arbitrary and capricious.” Abbenhaus, 89 Wn.2d at","paragraph_id":"para_708"},{"text":"858-59.","paragraph_id":"para_709"},{"text":"Therefore, WFB failed to demonstrate that Ecology engaged in “willful and","paragraph_id":"para_710"},{"text":"unreasoning action” by adopting an agricultural exemption that, while unsatisfactory","paragraph_id":"para_711"},{"text":"to WFB, was reasonably consistent with the CCA and was taken with due","paragraph_id":"para_712"},{"text":"consideration of the facts and circumstances. Id. at 858. WFB likewise failed to meet","paragraph_id":"para_713"},{"text":"its burden in arguing that Ecology’s denial of WFB’s subsequent petition to reopen","paragraph_id":"para_714"},{"text":"rule making constituted arbitrary and capricious action when, again, the rule in and","paragraph_id":"para_715"},{"text":"of itself was reasonably consistent with the CCA, and Ecology made a reasoned","paragraph_id":"para_716"},{"text":"decision to provide guidance on how to claim the exemption under the existing rule","paragraph_id":"para_717"},{"text":"and lacked authority to take the specific actions WFB requested. Bostain,For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_718"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_719"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_720"},{"text":"29","paragraph_id":"para_721"},{"text":"159 Wn.2d at 715; Campbell, 150 Wn.2d at 892. We give due deference to Ecology’s","paragraph_id":"para_722","court_paragraph":29},{"text":"specialized knowledge and expertise and hold that Ecology did not act in an arbitrary","paragraph_id":"para_723"},{"text":"and capricious manner. Schneider, 116 Wn. App. at 716.","paragraph_id":"para_724"},{"text":"CONCLUSION","paragraph_id":"para_725"},{"text":"The legislature enacted the CCA to limit greenhouse gas emissions in an effort","paragraph_id":"para_726"},{"text":"to address the harms of climate change to our environment and communities.","paragraph_id":"para_727"},{"text":"Although the legislature exempted fuel used exclusively for agricultural purposes","paragraph_id":"para_728"},{"text":"from these emissions limits if the buyer of the fuel provides the seller with an","paragraph_id":"para_729"},{"text":"exemption certificate, the supplier-focused statute does not directly provide","paragraph_id":"para_730"},{"text":"protections for those in the agricultural sector from emissions-related costs. Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_731"},{"text":"promulgated a rule to carry out the expressed statutory purpose of the CCA and","paragraph_id":"para_732"},{"text":"otherwise lacks statutory authority to provide refunds to those in the agricultural","paragraph_id":"para_733"},{"text":"sector. WFB raises concerns regarding Ecology’s method for claiming an","paragraph_id":"para_734"},{"text":"agricultural exemption being unworkable, but Ecology is not required to implement","paragraph_id":"para_735"},{"text":"WFB’s preferred exemption framework; Ecology developed its exemption","paragraph_id":"para_736"},{"text":"certificate framework through due consideration, which provides a method for","paragraph_id":"para_737"},{"text":"tracking and reporting agricultural exemptions that is currently being utilized by","paragraph_id":"para_738"},{"text":"suppliers and is reasonably consistent with the CCA.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_739"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Department of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_740"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_741"},{"text":"30","paragraph_id":"para_742"},{"text":"We affirm. We hold that Ecology’s rule and subsequent denial of WFB’s","paragraph_id":"para_743","court_paragraph":30},{"text":"petition for further rule making did not exceed its statutory authority and did not","paragraph_id":"para_744"},{"text":"constitute arbitrary and capricious action.","paragraph_id":"para_745"},{"text":"______________________________","paragraph_id":"para_746"},{"text":"WE CONCUR:","paragraph_id":"para_747"},{"text":"___________________________ ______________________________","paragraph_id":"para_748"},{"text":"___________________________ ______________________________","paragraph_id":"para_749"},{"text":"___________________________ ______________________________","paragraph_id":"para_750"},{"text":"___________________________ ______________________________","paragraph_id":"para_751"},{"text":"Yu, J.P.T.","paragraph_id":"para_752"},{"text":"Madsen, J.P.T.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_753"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Dep’t of Ecology, No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_754"},{"text":"(González, J., concurring)","paragraph_id":"para_755"},{"text":"1","paragraph_id":"para_756"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_757","court_paragraph":1},{"text":"GONZÁLEZ, J. (concurring) — Deru kui wa utareru (出る杭は打たれる).1","paragraph_id":"para_758"},{"text":"No justice on this court could do their work without the assistance of","paragraph_id":"para_759"},{"text":"brilliant and hardworking law clerks and other staff. I have signed the majority","paragraph_id":"para_760"},{"text":"opinion written with the assistance of the author’s outstanding law clerk, Bailey","paragraph_id":"para_761"},{"text":"Warrior Pahang.","paragraph_id":"para_762"},{"text":"Justice Montoya-Lewis will leave this court in January 2027 when her term","paragraph_id":"para_763"},{"text":"ends since she has decided not to run for another term. She has done exemplary","paragraph_id":"para_764"},{"text":"work these past seven years. Readers of our recent opinions may have noticed that","paragraph_id":"para_765"},{"text":"she has been thanking her staff in her opinions without any problems except for an","paragraph_id":"para_766"},{"text":"1 “Deru kui wa utareru” (出る杭は打たれる) is a Japanese proverb that means “the post that","paragraph_id":"para_767"},{"text":"protrudes will be hammered down.” It is often replaced with the malaprop “Deru kugi wa","paragraph_id":"para_768"},{"text":"utareru” (出る釘は 打たれる), which means “the nail that protrudes up will be hammered","paragraph_id":"para_769"},{"text":"down.” The meanings are quite different in that protruding nails may be dangerous and should","paragraph_id":"para_770"},{"text":"be made flush by hammering. Fences, on the other hand, may benefit from some variations","paragraph_id":"para_771"},{"text":"without posing any danger. Unfortunately, those who are exceptional, outspoken, or challenge","paragraph_id":"para_772"},{"text":"conformity face criticism, jealousy, or pressure to conform. Not all of our traditions are","paragraph_id":"para_773"},{"text":"venerable.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_774"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Dep’t of Ecology, No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_775"},{"text":"(González, J., concurring)","paragraph_id":"para_776"},{"text":"2","paragraph_id":"para_777"},{"text":"opaque reference to it in the concurrence in In re Recall of Clouse, 6 Wn.3d 42, 54,","paragraph_id":"para_778","court_paragraph":2},{"text":"584 P.3d 386 (2026) (Madsen, J., concurring).","paragraph_id":"para_779"},{"text":"This time, a majority of this court refused to sign the majority opinion","paragraph_id":"para_780"},{"text":"assigned to her with that expression of gratitude included, so it goes out without it.2","paragraph_id":"para_781"},{"text":"I understand why some justices object to thanking a staff member in an","paragraph_id":"para_782"},{"text":"opinion, and I will continue to take all the credit in my opinions for the work of","paragraph_id":"para_783"},{"text":"this court’s extraordinary staff. But I lament that we are not flexible enough to","paragraph_id":"para_784"},{"text":"support a different cultural tradition. We should respect that acting within that","paragraph_id":"para_785"},{"text":"2 I respectfully disagree with my concurring colleague. While justices may assert that they have","paragraph_id":"para_786"},{"text":"the right to absolute secrecy in their internal deliberation after an opinion has been issued, no","paragraph_id":"para_787"},{"text":"such right exists. Many justices have donated their papers to libraries. See generally Tony","paragraph_id":"para_788"},{"text":"Mauro, Lifting the Veil: Justice Blackmun’s Papers and the Public Perception of the Supreme","paragraph_id":"para_789"},{"text":"Court, 70 MO. L. REV. 1037, 1039 (2005) (discussing Justice Blackmun’s donated papers);","paragraph_id":"para_790"},{"text":"Elizabeth Garrett, New Voices in Politics: Justice Marshall’s Jurisprudence on Law and Politics,","paragraph_id":"para_791"},{"text":"52 HOW. L.J. 655, 667 (2009) (discussing Justice Marshall’s donated papers). Many of Justice","paragraph_id":"para_792"},{"text":"Utter’s working files on cases of significance are at our state archives. Wash. Sec. of State,","paragraph_id":"para_793"},{"text":"Wash. State Archives, Sup. Ct. Just. Papers, Robert Utter; see also, e.g., Frederick G. Hamley","paragraph_id":"para_794"},{"text":"Papers, 1934-1956, ARCHIVES W. (“The Washington Supreme Court subgroup contains","paragraph_id":"para_795"},{"text":"opinions, apparently drafted by Hamley before the justices discussed the cases. Of particular","paragraph_id":"para_796"},{"text":"significance are notes Hamley kept on cases heard by the court, 1949-1956. On printed forms he","paragraph_id":"para_797"},{"text":"briefly noted the positions of his fellow judges and himself on each case. Also included are","paragraph_id":"para_798"},{"text":"typed drafts and handwritten notes on some cases.”),","paragraph_id":"para_799"},{"text":"https://archiveswest.orbiscascade.org/ark:80444/xv16767 [https://perma.cc/D5KF-C866].","paragraph_id":"para_800"},{"text":"Indeed, opinions of this court have referred to internal proceedings before. For example,","paragraph_id":"para_801"},{"text":"a former chief justice wrote separately to observe in an infamous case that “[t]his case was","paragraph_id":"para_802"},{"text":"heard En Banc February 26, 1960. In justice to the writer of the foregoing [majority] opinion, it","paragraph_id":"para_803"},{"text":"should be stated that it was not reassigned to him for opinion until September 20, 1960.”","paragraph_id":"para_804"},{"text":"Price v. Evergreen Cemetery Co. of Seattle, 57 Wn.2d 352, 355, 357 P.2d 702 (1960) (separate","paragraph_id":"para_805"},{"text":"opinion of Weaver, C.J.), overruled by Garfield County Transp. Auth. v. State, 196 Wn.2d 378,","paragraph_id":"para_806"},{"text":"473 P.3d 1205 (2020).For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_807"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Dep’t of Ecology, No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_808"},{"text":"(González, J., concurring)","paragraph_id":"para_809"},{"text":"3","paragraph_id":"para_810"},{"text":"cultural tradition, one of our colleagues has decided to recognize out loud those","paragraph_id":"para_811","court_paragraph":3},{"text":"who assist us and make us better.","paragraph_id":"para_812"},{"text":"With these observations, I respectfully concur.","paragraph_id":"para_813"},{"text":"______________________________","paragraph_id":"para_814"},{"text":"______________________________For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_815"},{"text":"Wash. Farm Bureau v. Wash. State Dep’t of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_816"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_817"},{"text":"GORDON McCLOUD, J. (concurring)—The debate in this court over","paragraph_id":"para_818"},{"text":"a withdrawn footnote has now delayed the issuance of this opinion for more","paragraph_id":"para_819"},{"text":"than a month.","paragraph_id":"para_820"},{"text":"The debate about whether to adopt one particular academic convention","paragraph_id":"para_821"},{"text":"for expressing gratitude in published articles, about whether that method of","paragraph_id":"para_822"},{"text":"expressing gratitude implicates a particular heritage or value system, and","paragraph_id":"para_823"},{"text":"about whether one justice needs to speak up for another justice who is more","paragraph_id":"para_824"},{"text":"than capable of speaking up for herself is certainly interesting. But there’s","paragraph_id":"para_825"},{"text":"another debate going on in this case, and it is also interesting: whether a","paragraph_id":"para_826"},{"text":"Department of Ecology rule implementing an aspect of the Climate","paragraph_id":"para_827"},{"text":"Commitment Act1 is lawful. Our main job is to resolve that legal dispute.","paragraph_id":"para_828"},{"text":"When and how to express gratitude, whether and when to elevate","paragraph_id":"para_829"},{"text":"transparency, and how best to foster respect for the court are also important.","paragraph_id":"para_830"},{"text":"And I welcome the continuation of that discussion elsewhere.","paragraph_id":"para_831"},{"text":"1 Former RCW 70A.65.080(7)(e)(ii) (2022).For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_832"},{"text":"Wash. Farm Bureau v. Wash. State Dep’t of Ecology, No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_833"},{"text":"(Gordon McCloud, J., concurring)","paragraph_id":"para_834"},{"text":"2","paragraph_id":"para_835"},{"text":"But not in the course of debating a withdrawn footnote in an otherwise","paragraph_id":"para_836","court_paragraph":2},{"text":"unanimous decision.","paragraph_id":"para_837"},{"text":"Yu, J.P.T.","paragraph_id":"para_838"},{"text":"________________________________________________________________________________","paragraph_id":"para_839"},{"text":"______________________________________","paragraph_id":"para_840"},{"text":"Madsen, J.P.T.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_841"},{"text":"Washington Farm Bureau v. Washington State Dep’t of Ecology","paragraph_id":"para_842"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_843"},{"text":"MADSEN, J.∗ (concurring)—I agree with the majority. However, I write","paragraph_id":"para_844"},{"text":"separately to give context to the concurrence by Justice González, which reveals","paragraph_id":"para_845"},{"text":"confidential information about the internal actions of the court. Six justices agreed with","paragraph_id":"para_846"},{"text":"the following concurrence/dissent before the majority revised:","paragraph_id":"para_847"},{"text":"I completely agree with the majority opinion, however I decline to","paragraph_id":"para_848"},{"text":"join the asterisk located above footnote 1 as it is outside of our appellate","paragraph_id":"para_849"},{"text":"record. RAP 9.1(a) (appellate courts consider only the record on review).","paragraph_id":"para_850"},{"text":"It is also a practice with which I disagree. I understand the desire to","paragraph_id":"para_851"},{"text":"recognize the contributions of dedicated court staff, but “[a] majority","paragraph_id":"para_852"},{"text":"opinion is the product of a collegiate court and . . . when filed, it no longer","paragraph_id":"para_853"},{"text":"retains any proprietary aspect so far as the drafter is concerned . . . [i]t","paragraph_id":"para_854"},{"text":"becomes an institutional product that is owned only by the court.” Engberg","paragraph_id":"para_855"},{"text":"v. Meyer, 820 P.2d 70, 170 (Wyo. 1991) (Thomas, J., dissenting). Similar","paragraph_id":"para_856"},{"text":"to the United States Supreme Court, this court “is a collegial institution, and","paragraph_id":"para_857"},{"text":"its decisions reflect the views of a majority of the sitting Justices.”","paragraph_id":"para_858"},{"text":"Holtzman v. Schlesinger, 414 U.S. 1304, 1313, 94 S. Ct. 1, 38 L. Ed. 2d 18","paragraph_id":"para_859"},{"text":"(1973).","paragraph_id":"para_860"},{"text":"I do not mean to detract from the work of law clerks, student","paragraph_id":"para_861"},{"text":"volunteers, and staff—they are invaluable resources and essential to the","paragraph_id":"para_862"},{"text":"work of this court. I write separately because a majority opinion represents","paragraph_id":"para_863"},{"text":"∗ Justice Barbara Madsen is serving as a justice pro tempore of the Supreme Court pursuant to Washington","paragraph_id":"para_864"},{"text":"Constitution article IV, section 2(a).For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_865"},{"text":"No. 103413-0","paragraph_id":"para_866"},{"text":"(Madsen, J.P.T., concurring)","paragraph_id":"para_867"},{"text":"2","paragraph_id":"para_868"},{"text":"the judgment of the court speaking with one voice, not the views or work","paragraph_id":"para_869","court_paragraph":2},{"text":"product of any individual justice or clerk.1","paragraph_id":"para_870"},{"text":"At best, attribution to a law clerk in a majority opinion may create","paragraph_id":"para_871"},{"text":"confusion and invite questions that are left unanswered in the court’s","paragraph_id":"para_872"},{"text":"opinion. E.g., Parker v. Connors Steel Co., 855 F.2d 1510, 1524 (11th Cir.","paragraph_id":"para_873"},{"text":"1988) (the practice of attributing credit to a law clerk “may erroneously","paragraph_id":"para_874"},{"text":"lead some to believe that the law clerk decided the case”). Law clerks serve","paragraph_id":"para_875"},{"text":"vital and instrumental roles; however, it is the justices themselves who","paragraph_id":"para_876"},{"text":"make the final determination in cases. In my view, a majority opinion","paragraph_id":"para_877"},{"text":"should reflect the judgment of the court as a whole rather than emphasize","paragraph_id":"para_878"},{"text":"any one individual’s contribution.","paragraph_id":"para_879"},{"text":"Accordingly, I respectfully concur in part and dissent in part.","paragraph_id":"para_880"},{"text":"______________________________________","paragraph_id":"para_881"},{"text":"Madsen, J.P.T.","paragraph_id":"para_882"},{"text":"1 In the rare case that explicit acknowledgments of law clerk contributions are made, they are often authored by","paragraph_id":"para_883"},{"text":"federal district court judges. See Parker B. Potter, Jr., Judges Gone Wild, 37 Ohio N.U. L. Rev. 327, 345-360","paragraph_id":"para_884"},{"text":"(2011). In that context, such recognition presents fewer concerns, as a district court judge speaks solely in an","paragraph_id":"para_885"},{"text":"individual capacity rather than on behalf of a multimember court, as is the case in the appellate setting.","paragraph_id":"para_886"},{"text":"_________________________________________","paragraph_id":"para_887"},{"text":"Yu, J.P.T.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_888"}],"word_count":8919,"cites":["414 U.S. 1304","855 F.2d 1510"],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"a7a43679e41835591a0b5079c64f704507212043a9bd2d0f47df33c0f069e0f4","source_url":"https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/1034130.pdf","fetched_at":"2026-10-10T08:50:20.18+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25","verification":{"stored_sha256":"a7a43679e41835591a0b5079c64f704507212043a9bd2d0f47df33c0f069e0f4","recomputed_sha256":"a7a43679e41835591a0b5079c64f704507212043a9bd2d0f47df33c0f069e0f4","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-18T00:21:00.198Z"}},"hash":"sha256:f6fd9c90b5b6656ce340e01c186a924fe9cbc2f750291307ca2c46ca3e4bf3bb","version":"legal-2026-10-17","expires":"2026-10-19T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-17+legal-2026-10-17+2026-10-17T17:42:33","content_hash":"sha256:f6fd9c90b5b6656ce340e01c186a924fe9cbc2f750291307ca2c46ca3e4bf3bb","revalidate_after":"2026-10-18T01:21:00.374Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/praxis/wash-103-413-0-2026-06-25","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-5a9bdd19ea21965414083971a55d4550","response_hash":"sha256:f6fd9c90b5b6656ce340e01c186a924fe9cbc2f750291307ca2c46ca3e4bf3bb"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-04T03:15:16.741Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us%3Awash-103-413-0-2026-06-25&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":37224}}