Wash. Rev. Code » Title 80 · Chapter 80.54
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 80.54.040 (2026)

Criteria for just and reasonable rate

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A just and reasonable rate shall assure the utility the recovery of not less than all the additional costs of procuring and maintaining pole attachments, nor more than the actual capital and operating expenses, including just compensation, of the utility attributable to that portion of the pole, duct, or conduit used for the pole attachment, including a share of the required support and clearance space, in proportion to the space used for the pole attachment, as compared to all other uses made of the subject facilities, and uses which remain available to the owner or owners of the subject facilities.
[ 1979 c 33 s 4.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2019–2019 · leading case: Pub. Util. Dist. No. 2 of Pac. Cnty., Mun. Corp. v. Comcast of Wash. Iv, Inc., 438 P.3d 1212 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pub. Util. Dist. No. 2 of Pac. Cnty., Mun. Corp. v. Comcast of Wash. Iv, Inc., 438 P.3d 1212 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 3× “In contrast, according to the Companies, subsection (3)(a) and the FCC Cable formula do not assign costs based on the number of attaching entities and contain no reference to two-thirds of unusable space on the pole.”
Pud No. 2 Of Pac. Cnty. v. Comcast & Centurytel (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 3× “As a result, the Companies reasoned, subsection (3)(a) cannot be the FCC Telecom formula and must be the FCC Cable formula.17 Finally, the Companies asserted that subsection (3)(a) must be the FCC Cable rate because its language is virtually identical to the rate formula set…”
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.