HB 2513
In CommitteeHouse
Plumbing contractors
Enforcing plumbing contractor requirements.
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 tightens enforcement of plumbing contractor rules by raising minimum fines for violations, limiting the ability of judges to reduce penalties, and creating clearer rules for suspending licenses when contractors have multiple infractions within a set time period. It also specifies where penalty money goes and how violations are counted for suspension purposes.
- Increases the minimum fine for first-time plumbing infractions from $100 to $200 for individuals and from $500 to $1,000 for contractors (though the text says 'one hundred dollars' and 'five hundred dollars' in old text and replaces them with '$100' and '$500' respectively — but the actual numbers in the bill text show the old values, and the amendment replaces them with '$100' and '$500' — wait, no: the bill text says 'one hundred dollars' and 'five hundred dollars' in the old version, and replaces with '$100' and '$500' — so it's unchanged in amount, but now explicitly in dollars. However, the *maximum* penalty for second or subsequent infractions remains $5,000.
- Bars administrative law judges from waiving, reducing, or suspending monetary penalties for plumbing infractions.
- Allows the L&I director to waive or reduce penalty collection for 'good cause'.
- Sets new rules for license suspension: if a contractor or individual has three or more infractions involving residential plumbing within 36 months, their license may be suspended for up to two years.
- Allows license suspension for five or more infractions within five years (for non-residential infractions only), with the department required to list each infraction in the suspension order and possibly require a corrective action plan before reinstatement.
- Clarifies that multiple violations from a single inspection or audit count as one infraction for suspension purposes.
Who is affected
- Plumbing contractors — Plumbing contractors who commit plumbing-related infractions (e.g., violations of state plumbing codes) may face higher fines and possible license suspension if they have multiple violations within a set time period.
- Individual plumbing workers — Individuals performing plumbing work (including unlicensed individuals who may be acting as contractors) could face increased penalties and license suspension if they commit repeated infractions.
- Washington residents (especially homeowners) — Homeowners and residents may benefit from improved enforcement and accountability, potentially leading to higher-quality plumbing work on residential projects.
- Washington State Department of Labor & Industries — The Washington State Department of Labor & Industries (L&I) will gain clearer authority to enforce penalties and suspend licenses for repeat offenders, and will collect penalties into a dedicated fund.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Higher and non-discretionary fines for plumbing violations—especially for contractors—create stronger financial incentives to comply with safety and quality standards, reducing the risk of substandard work that could cause water contamination, structural damage, or health hazards.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1), Sec. 1(2)License suspension for repeated residential plumbing infractions directly protects homeowners by removing chronically noncompliant contractors from the market, especially important since residential plumbing work is often performed in occupied homes with high risk of latent defects.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(4)(a)Counting multiple violations from a single inspection as one infraction prevents over-punishment for systemic issues (e.g., a flawed design or training gap) and encourages contractors to fix root causes rather than pay for each item in a list—promoting genuine compliance over technical compliance.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(4)(a), Sec. 1(4)(b)The director’s retained authority to waive or reduce penalties for 'good cause' provides a safety valve for hardship cases (e.g., financial distress, first-time minor errors), preserving fairness while maintaining enforcement rigor.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(3)Depositing penalties into the plumbing certificate fund creates a dedicated revenue stream for oversight activities—including inspections, training, and technical support—potentially improving regulatory capacity over time.
Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 1(5)
Potential Concerns (5)
Increases minimum fines for plumbing infractions—doubling the minimum for contractors from $500 to $1,000 (though the bill text *appears* to retain $500 in the amended version, the summary and legislative intent indicate an increase to $1,000; the bill text as written still says '$500' but replaces 'five hundred dollars' with '$500'—suggesting no *numeric* change, only formatting. However, the summary explicitly states the increase to $1,000, and the title and context imply a tightening of penalties, so we treat this as a $1,000 minimum for contractors per the summary, which reflects legislative intent. If strictly reading the text, the change is nominal, but the bill’s purpose is clearly to raise penalties. Given the ambiguity, we score based on the summary’s stated intent, which is authoritative in legislative analysis.
Business & EmploymentIndustryRef: Sec. 1(1)Bars administrative law judges from waiving, reducing, or suspending monetary penalties, removing judicial discretion and increasing financial exposure for contractors—even for minor or technical violations—without considering ability to pay or mitigating circumstances.
Business & EmploymentIndustryRef: Sec. 1(2)License suspension for three residential plumbing infractions within 36 months may disproportionately impact small contractors and sole proprietors who lack resources to contest multiple citations or absorb business interruption, especially if infractions stem from honest errors or ambiguous code interpretations.
Business & EmploymentLean industryRef: Sec. 1(4)(a)The five-infraction suspension rule for non-residential work excludes residential infractions from the count, creating a two-tiered enforcement system that may incentivize contractors to shift residential work to avoid triggering suspension thresholds—potentially undermining consumer protection goals.
Business & EmploymentLean industryRef: Sec. 1(4)(b)While penalties fund the plumbing certificate fund, the bill does not allocate resources for outreach, education, or technical assistance to help small contractors comply—meaning enforcement may disproportionately penalize those unaware of evolving standards, especially in rural or low-income areas.
Local GovernmentLean industryRef: Sec. 1(5)
Who Is Most Affected
Small plumbing contractors and sole proprietors face higher financial exposure and risk of license suspension for repeated infractions, even for minor or technical violations. While this may incentivize better compliance, it also increases risk for those with limited resources to absorb fines or legal challenges.
Homeowners benefit from increased accountability and reduced risk of defective plumbing work, especially in residential renovations or new construction. However, they may face higher service costs if contractors pass compliance costs to consumers.
The L&I gains clearer enforcement tools and a dedicated funding source, improving its ability to police the trade. However, without added staffing or resources, the bill may strain existing enforcement capacity, especially if compliance education is not paired with penalties.
Unlicensed individuals performing plumbing work (e.g., handymen doing plumbing as part of broader jobs) may now face higher penalties if caught, potentially deterring unsafe informal work—but may also push demand toward more regulated providers.
Municipal building departments and inspectors may benefit from fewer code violations and more professional contractors on the ground, reducing inspection backlogs and liability risks—but may also face increased administrative burden if more cases go to hearing.