Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 51.18.020 (2026)
Entrance criteria
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Prior to allowing initial entrance into the state's retrospective rating plan, the department shall review each proposed retrospective rating group to ensure that the following criteria are met:
(1) The entity sponsoring the retrospective rating group must have been in existence for at least four years;
(2) The entity sponsoring the retrospective rating group must exist primarily for a purpose other than that of obtaining or offering insurance coverage or insurance related services;
(3) The entity sponsoring the retrospective rating group must have a written workplace safety and accident prevention plan in place for the proposed retrospective rating group and must propose methods by which the retrospective rating group will cooperate with department claims management activities;
(4) All employers in the retrospective rating group must be members of the sponsoring entity;
(5) All employers in the retrospective rating group must have an industrial insurance account in good standing with the department;
(6) Fifty percent of the original employers in the retrospective rating group must have been members of the sponsoring entity for one year prior to the group's entrance into the retrospective rating plan;
(7) The retrospective rating group must be composed of employers who are substantially similar considering the services or activities performed by the employees of those employers;
(8) The initial premium level for the retrospective rating group must be at least one million five hundred thousand dollars and shall be based on the standard premium of the proposed group members' most current previous coverage period; and
(9) The formation and operation of the retrospective rating group must seek to substantially improve workplace safety and accident prevention for the employers in the group.
[ 1999 c 7 s 3.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2
cases, 2005–2005 · leading case: Tri-City Constr. Council, Inc. v. Westfall, 112 P.3d 558 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).
Tri-City Constr. Council, Inc. v. Westfall, 112 P.3d 558 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “RCW 51.18.020(7), .040(1); former WAC 296-17--90421(1) (2000).”
Tri-city Const. Council, Inc. v. Westfall, 112 P.3d 558 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “RCW 51.18.020; WAC 296-17-90409. Both sponsors and employers must have an industrial insurance account with the Department in good standing.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 51.18.020(7) — 2 cases
Tri-City Constr. Council, Inc. v. Westfall, 112 P.3d 558 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “RCW 51.18.020(7), .040(1); former WAC 296-17--90421(1) (2000).”
Tri-city Const. Council, Inc. v. Westfall, 112 P.3d 558 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “RCW 51.18.020; WAC 296-17-90409. Both sponsors and employers must have an industrial insurance account with the Department in good standing.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.