This bill creates a new chapter in Title 53 RCW establishing environmental justice requirements for certain port districts. It requires each "qualifying port district" (as defined by reference to RCW 53.54.010) to include an environmental justice implementation plan in its strategic plan or other major planning documents. The required plan must include goals, metrics, equitable public engagement methods, legal compliance strategies, the community engagement plan required by the bill, and timelines. Qualifying port districts must adopt a community engagement plan by January 1, 2026, and that plan must align with specified federal nondiscrimination and accessibility authorities referenced in the bill. For significant port actions initiated after January 1, 2026, the bill requires qualifying port districts to obtain an assessment from the University of Washington Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, conducted in collaboration with the county department of health, on likely adverse cumulative impacts and mitigation recommendations before approving the action. A "significant port action" is defined in the bill as any capital improvement, purchase, or construction of $8,000,000 or more or any action that increases the number of gates at an airport. The county health department must lead consultation with overburdened communities and vulnerable populations, publicly provide assessment results, perform outreach, and hold at least one accessible public meeting. Port districts must publicly adopt an action plan implementing assessment recommendations or explain constraints and alternatives if mitigation is not feasible. The bill authorizes port district commissions to expend money to mitigate environmental and cumulative health impacts arising from their powers, to participate in related programs, and to contract with nonprofit, private, and public entities to do so. It expressly allows use of funds including from the fund authorized in RCW 53.54.040. The University of Washington department is directed to periodically review and report on the effectiveness, costs, and benefits of mitigation strategies. The bill states it does not create a private right of action or right of review against a qualifying port district. Affected entities named include qualifying port districts and commissions, the UW department, county health departments, the state Department of Health, and others referenced for guidance or coordination. This is a new law that creates procedural requirements and planning duties, requires assessments and public consultation for certain large projects, and authorizes expenditure and contracting authority to mitigate environmental impacts. It does not create new criminal offenses or change penalties. Important details are referenced but not included in the extracted facts: the precise statutory definitions of "overburdened communities," "vulnerable populations," and "cumulative environmental health impact" from RCW 70A.02.010; which port districts meet the RCW 53.54.010 criterion; the content of environmental justice council guidance and the office of equity role; details of the referenced fund in RCW 53.54.040; and the specific "established methodologies" for evaluating cumulative impacts.

If enacted, port districts that have authority for aircraft noise abatement will have to build environmental justice goals and a community engagement plan into their planning documents by January 1, 2026, and must get an independent assessment from the University of Washington (working with the county health department) before approving any major project costing $8,000,000 or more or any action that adds airport gates. Those ports will need to hold county-led consultations with overburdened communities and vulnerable populations, publicly share assessment results and either adopt mitigation measures or explain why mitigation isn’t feasible, and may spend port funds (including specified port funds) or contract with outside groups to carry out mitigation. The UW will review how well mitigation works and report on outcomes, costs, and benefits. The entities most affected are qualifying port districts, county health departments, and the UW department doing assessments; ports will likely face higher planning costs, additional staffing or consultant needs, potential project delays for assessments and public meetings, and new options to spend funds on mitigation. Overburdened communities will see formal consultation and a clearer opportunity to influence large projects, though the exact protections depend on definitions and methodologies cited elsewhere (RCW 70A.02.010, RCW 53.54.010, and other guidance) that are not included here, leaving some implementation details and which ports qualify unclear.