This bill creates a new chapter in Title 70A RCW called the "Salish Sea protection and marine clean fuels act" and establishes a new state law that, beginning January 1, 2028, prohibits use in regulated waters of marine gas oil or marine diesel oil with sulfur content greater than 0.1 percent by weight in specified vessel equipment (auxiliary engines, main engines, and auxiliary boilers) for ocean-going vessels as defined in the bill. The bill defines key terms (for example, regulated waters as waters within three nautical miles of the state shoreline and several ISO fuel grades for marine gas oil and marine diesel oil), requires English-language recordkeeping and additional onboard documentation when compliance is achieved by fuel switching, authorizes the Department of Ecology to request records, access vessels, and collect fuel samples, and authorizes the department to adopt rules (including vessel exclusions). The department may allow payment of noncompliance fees in lieu of meeting the fuel standard if a person notifies the department prior to entry and demonstrates certain specified conditions (for example, unplanned redirection, inadequate fuel supply, inadvertent purchase of defective fuel, or inability to complete modifications); the bill directs how those noncompliance fees are to be allocated to ports for specified port-related emission reduction activities or, if a port declines, to an existing air quality and health disparities account. The bill also creates new fee and penalty structures and administrative processes. The department must collect a fee from affected vessels that make a port visit after January 1, 2028 and deposit all fees into a newly created vessel sulfur pollution account in the state treasury to be used only, after appropriation, for implementing, administering, and enforcing the chapter. Violations of the chapter, rules adopted under it, or orders issued under it are subject to civil penalties of $10,000 per day for each violation, with penalty amounts to be set taking into account prior history and the severity of public health or environmental impacts; penalties are appealable to the pollution control hearings board and collected penalties must be deposited in the natural climate solutions account (RCW 70A.65.270). The act reenacts and amends RCW 43.21B.110 to specify the pollution control hearings board’s jurisdiction and to list certain exclusions, includes a severability clause, and states that sections 1–6 constitute the new chapter. Several details are not present in the provided text. The sentence describing how the department must set the vessel fee is cut off, the full text of the reenacted and amended RCW 43.21B.110 is not included, references to "section 4" and "section 5" are made but those sections are not provided, the identity of "the department" is not always explicit in the second chunk, and there is an unresolved internal cross-reference in Sec. 3(4)(a). These missing portions prevent a complete description of some rulemaking, fee-setting, and procedural details.

If enacted, most ocean-going vessels entering Washington waters within three nautical miles will need to run much lower‑sulfur marine fuels by January 1, 2028 or follow documented fuel‑switching procedures and keep detailed records; operators who cannot meet the requirement in specific situations may instead pay noncompliance fees if they notify the department before entry. The Department of Ecology will inspect records, collect fuel samples, set fee levels and rules, and enforce the law; violations carry civil penalties of $10,000 per day per violation, appealable to the pollution control hearings board. This will most directly affect vessel owners and masters, who will likely face higher fuel or retrofit costs, new onboard recordkeeping and supplier reporting obligations, and the risk of steep daily penalties if found noncompliant; ports may receive noncompliance fees but can only spend them on port electrification or local pollutant‑reduction projects under enforceable agreements (or decline the fees, which would then go to an air quality account). The Department of Ecology gains new enforcement and fee revenue authority to run the program, but key implementation details such as exact fee amounts, specific exemptions, and some rule provisions are not included in the provided text and remain uncertain.