SB 6318
In CommitteeSenate
Commercial shellfish fees
Concerning commercial shellfish fees.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill updates and caps licensing and testing fees for commercial shellfish operations in Washington, including harvesters, shippers, and shucker-packers, to ensure the Department of Health can cover the costs of shellfish safety and inspection programs. It also clarifies that shellfish fees are exempt from the state’s general fee-recovery rule and takes effect immediately.
- Sets maximum annual license fees for commercial shellfish operations—including harvesters ($416), shellstock shippers ($469–$752), and shucker-packers ($856–$1,912)—based on operation type and size.
- Establishes biotoxin testing fees for shellfish harvesters and processors (excluding geoduck intertidal harvesters), ranging from $484 to $3,304 depending on number of harvest sites and operation type.
- Caps the export certificate fee at $75 for shellfish exporters.
- Confirms that shellfish-related fees under chapter 69.30 RCW are exempt from the state’s general requirement that licensing fees fully cover program costs (i.e., fees may exceed direct costs if needed for program sustainability).
- Applies retroactively to fees set on or after February 1, 2026, and takes effect immediately upon passage (emergency clause).
Who is affected
- Shellfish harvesters — Commercial shellfish harvesters (e.g., those who grow, harvest, and deliver shellfish but do not process or ship out of state) will face new or adjusted annual license fees capped at $416.
- Shellstock shippers and wholesalers — Shellstock shippers and wholesalers (including those with small or large acreage or wholesale-only operations) will face updated license fees ranging from $469 to $752, depending on size.
- Shucker-packer facilities — Shucker-packer facilities (those that shuck and pack shellfish) will face higher license fees based on plant size—up to $1,912—and additional biotoxin testing fees based on number of harvest sites.
- Biotoxin testing customers (shellfish harvesters and processors) — Companies harvesting certain shellfish species (excluding geoduck in intertidal areas) must pay biotoxin testing fees ranging from $484 to $3,304, depending on operation type and number of harvest sites.
- Exporters of shellfish — Businesses exporting shellfish outside the U.S. will pay a capped export certificate fee of $75 per certificate.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
The bill establishes clear, capped fee structures for shellfish operations — including small harvesters ($416), micro-shippers ($469), and small shucker-packers ($856) — reducing uncertainty and preventing arbitrary fee hikes. This stability helps small-scale operators plan budgets and avoid unexpected financial shocks, supporting continued participation in the industry.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(a)-(g), Sec. 2(2)(a)-(k), Sec. 2(3)By exempting shellfish fees from the general fee-recovery rule, the bill allows the Department of Health to set fees above direct costs to ensure program sustainability. This helps guarantee robust shellfish safety monitoring (e.g., biotoxin testing), which directly protects consumers from foodborne illness — a public health benefit that accrues broadly to Washingtonians.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1)(b)Mandatory biotoxin testing fees (e.g., $484–$3,304) fund critical monitoring of paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) and other toxins. This protects public health by preventing toxic shellfish from entering the food supply, especially important as climate change increases frequency of harmful algal blooms in Puget Sound and coastal waters.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)-(k)The fee caps prevent runaway licensing costs — e.g., shucker-packer fees capped at $1,912 — which could otherwise price out small operators. This supports continued small-business participation in the shellfish industry, preserving jobs in coastal communities where this sector is a key employer.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(a)-(g)The retroactive application to fees set on or after February 1, 2026, and immediate effect, ensures timely implementation of updated fee structure, reducing legal uncertainty and allowing the Department of Health to plan and budget reliably for shellfish safety programs. This supports consistent regulatory enforcement and public health protection.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 4 and Sec. 5
Potential Concerns (5)
The bill maintains the general state policy that licensing fees should be fully borne by the regulated profession (i.e., fee-for-service cost recovery), but explicitly carves out shellfish fees as exempt from this rule — meaning fees may exceed direct program costs. This creates a precedent that could be used to justify higher fees for other industries in the future, potentially increasing compliance costs across regulated sectors.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 1(1)(a)While the bill caps fees, it does not cap the *amount* of fees the Department of Health may collect — only the *maximum per-license* amount. If the number of licensees declines (e.g., due to high fees or market consolidation), the state may still collect sufficient revenue, but smaller operations may be disproportionately burdened relative to revenue generated, potentially reducing participation in the industry.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1(1)(b) and Sec. 2Biotoxin testing fees are tiered by number of harvest sites, which may incentivize consolidation (fewer, larger sites) over decentralized small-scale harvesting. This could reduce entry opportunities for new or small-scale harvesters who rely on multiple small plots, potentially reducing labor demand in small-scale harvesting.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)-(k)The $75 export certificate cap may benefit exporters by capping a known cost, but does not address broader export-related compliance burdens (e.g., documentation, traceability, international certification), which disproportionately affect small exporters with fewer economies of scale.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(3)The bill does not adjust fees for inflation or operational cost changes over time; fees are fixed caps, not indexed. If program costs rise (e.g., due to increased biotoxin monitoring needs from climate-driven algal blooms), the Department may face budget shortfalls and may need to raise fees *de facto* through rulemaking, potentially without legislative oversight.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(1)(a)-(g) and Sec. 2(2)(a)-(k)
Who Is Most Affected
Small-scale harvesters (e.g., individuals or families operating <50 acres) benefit most from the $416 cap and lower biotoxin fees for 2 or fewer sites. This group is often family-run, with limited capital reserves — so predictable, capped fees reduce financial risk and support continued operations.
Medium- to large shucker-packer facilities (especially >5,000 sq ft) face the highest fees ($1,912 license + up to $3,304 testing), but benefit from fee certainty and may absorb costs more easily than small operators. The policy may favor consolidation, potentially reducing competition for smaller shucker-packers.
Exporters benefit from the $75 cap on export certificates, reducing a predictable cost. However, they still face other regulatory burdens (e.g., international certification, documentation), which disproportionately affect small exporters with fewer resources.
Consumers benefit from robust, self-funded shellfish safety programs (e.g., biotoxin testing), reducing risk of foodborne illness. This is a broad public health benefit, not tied to income or status.
The Department of Health gains predictable, legally protected funding for shellfish safety programs, enabling stable staffing, lab capacity, and monitoring. This improves program reliability and responsiveness to emerging threats like harmful algal blooms.