Opinion ID: 2626833
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Department is estopped from enforcing its new interpretation of WAC 296-127-018 against the Suppliers

Text: ¶ 60 The majority correctly concludes that the Suppliers established the five elements for a successful estoppel claim against the government by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence. Majority at 901; see also Kramarevcky v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., 122 Wash.2d 738, 743-44, 863 P.2d 535 (1993) (giving elements and standard of proof for estoppel claim against the government). ¶ 61 First, the Department's 1992 memorandum, interpreting WAC 296-127-018 consistently with the Suppliers' current understanding, constitutes a statement by the party to be estopped, which is inconsistent with its later claims. As noted by the majority, the Department sent the policy memorandum to bidders on the Third Runway Project, a group that included Suppliers, expressly holding out the memorandum as its position on whether the method of delivery employed in this case would entitle the end-dump truck drivers to prevailing wages. Majority at 902. ¶ 62 Second, the Suppliers acted in reliance upon L & I's statement in calculating and submitting their bids to work on the Third Runway Project, assuming a lower wage rate was applicable. Majority at 902. ¶ 63 Third, the Suppliers would be injured if the Department were allowed to repudiate its prior statement. Specifically, the Suppliers would be liable for approximately $500,000 in wages, to be paid seven years after the job's completion. Majority at 902. ¶ 64 Additionally, a favorable ruling on the Suppliers' estoppel claim is necessary to prevent a manifest injustice. As the majority explains, [i]t is self-evidently unfair to permit the Department to adopt and publicly distribute an interpretive policy memorandum and later deny the memorandum's plain reading after contractors have relied upon it to their detriment. Majority at 902. ¶ 65 Finally, to find for the Suppliers will not impair governmental functions since the Suppliers simply seek to hold the Department to its previously expressed policy as plainly read. Majority at 903. In sum, the Suppliers have successfully established the five elements of their estoppel claim. Thus, as the majority correctly holds, L & I may not enforce its new interpretation of WAC 296-127-018 in the present case.