This bill amends RCW 90.48.080 by changing the statutory prohibition on discharging organic or inorganic matter into the waters of the state. The amendment deletes the words "or tend to cause," so the statute prohibits discharges that "shall cause pollution of such waters according to the determination of the department, as provided for in this chapter." The department (not specified in the extracted text) is identified as the entity that makes the determination that pollution has occurred. This is a modification of existing law (an amendment to RCW 90.48.080) that alters the statutory language defining prohibited discharges; it does not, in the provided text, add new definitions, specify which department is meant, or include enforcement procedures or penalties. The bill was prefiled 12/16/25, read for the first time 01/12/26, referred to the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy & Technology, and is sponsored by Senators Short, Dozier, and J. Wilson. The extracted material is limited to this single section; other chapters or sections that define terms, procedures, or penalties are not included, so those details are uncertain from the available text.

If passed, the change narrows what counts as an illegal discharge into Washington waters by removing the phrase that covered actions that merely "tend to cause" pollution. In practice, that likely means people and businesses that release materials into state waters will face fewer enforcement actions unless the department makes a finding that the discharge actually causes pollution, so some releases that were previously at risk of being illegal because they could lead to pollution may no longer be actionable. The groups most affected are anyone who throws, drains, runs, or otherwise discharges organic or inorganic matter into state waters and the unnamed state department that enforces the rule. Dischargers may see lower compliance and enforcement risk and therefore lower immediate costs or fewer permit confrontations, while the department may have a narrower set of violations to pursue. Important details are missing from the excerpt — which department is responsible and how terms like "pollution," "waters of the state," penalties, or enforcement procedures are defined — so the full practical impact and any budget or workload changes for the agency are uncertain.