Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administrative Processes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears short technical bill to permit alternate PCHB panels; agency suggests clarifying language
Summary
HB 2,426 would let parties and the Pollution Control Hearings Board agree to alternate hearing compositions (single‑member, administrative appeals judge, or qualified members from other environmental boards) to speed case resolution; ALUHO recommended clarifying attorney‑licensure and Growth Management Hearings Board language.
Matt Sterling, committee staff, summarized HB 2,426 as a narrowly technical change that would allow alternate compositions of the Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB) when all parties and the PCHB agree. The measure would permit single‑member hearings, administrative appeals judges, or members drawn from other environmental hearing boards provided members have environmental law knowledge and at least one is licensed to practice law in Washington.
Representative Birnbaum, sponsor, described months of stakeholder discussions with conservation and business groups and ALUHO and said the bill is designed to improve scheduling flexibility and reduce delay for simpler appeals. Supporters including Washington Conservation Action and FutureWise testified the one‑page bill results from negotiated compromise.
Dominguez Solis, director of the Environmental and Land Use Hearings Office (ALUHO), praised the efficiency goals but recommended two technical clarifications: 1) the bill report indicates an attorney license requirement for alternate compositions but the bill language does not explicitly require at least one attorney; and 2) if the intent is to allow Growth Management Hearings Board members to serve, that should be specified in the bill text. Stakeholders volunteered to work with the sponsor on precise drafting.
Committee members asked about typical appeals that reach the PCHB and whether parties could feel pressured to accept an alternate composition; witnesses said complex cases would likely still prefer full panels and that consent by all parties reduces the risk of coerced outcomes.
The hearing record contained only technical concerns and broad support; the committee closed the PCHB portion with no vote recorded.
