This bill amends existing workers' compensation law (including RCW 51.36.010), adds new sections to chapters 51.36 and 51.44 RCW, and creates a regulatory framework for a state medical provider network and for “centers for occupational health and education.” It requires the (unnamed) department to set minimum standards for providers who treat injured workers, to form an advisory group from existing advisory committees to help develop evidence‑based treatment guidelines and best practices, and to certify a second tier of network providers and separate certified centers based on specified quality and organizational criteria. The changes are primarily procedural and administrative: network providers must, when medically appropriate, follow department evidence‑based coverage decisions and treatment guidelines; injured workers may choose an initial provider from a listed set of provider types and employers may not require a specific provider; once a network exists in the worker’s area nonnetwork care is generally limited to an initial office or emergency visit; the department may pay for initial prescription drugs from an initial visit for filed claims regardless of claim allowance; utilization review is extended to self‑insured employers; the supervisor of industrial insurance (or a self‑insurer) can authorize continued treatment in specified circumstances (with a written order), and certain controlled substances are excluded from some authorizations per chapter 69.50 RCW. The department may certify and decertify centers and second‑tier providers, remove providers for patterns of low‑quality care (with written notice and appeal rights to the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals), require remedial steps, and develop financial and nonfinancial incentives. Employer violations relating to steering care are referenced to existing penalty provisions (RCW 51.14.180 and RCW 51.28.025(2)). The act also adds reporting and operational requirements (annual reports to advisory and legislative committees from 2012 through 2016; stated access goals to reach 50% of injured workers by December 2013 and all workers by December 2015), allows the department to hire additional claims managers with allotment authority subject to chapter 43.88 RCW, and sets several timing rules and deadlines for notices, declarations, utilization review completion, and requests for authorization. The identity of “the department” is not specified in the provided text, multiple provisions and subsections are incomplete or truncated in these excerpts, and some specific thresholds, waiting‑period details, and full statutory language are not included here.

If enacted, the law would push the unnamed state department to build a certified medical provider network and expand specialized "centers for occupational health and education," require providers to meet minimum quality standards and follow evidence‑based treatment rules, and give injured workers an initial choice of listed provider types but generally limit later care to network providers in the worker’s area. Providers who qualify for a second tier could get financial and nonfinancial incentives, while providers who repeatedly deliver poor outcomes can be removed; when providers are removed the department or the self‑insurer must help patients find a new treating provider. State fund claims would also require payment, per the department fee schedule, for any initial prescription tied to the first visit whether or not the claim is allowed, and employers are barred from steering workers to specific clinics. The groups most affected are injured workers (more structured access but more reliance on a local network), health care providers (new credentialing, contract application, billing rules, potential incentives, and risk of removal), self‑insurers and employers (new participation in utilization review, notification and assistance duties), and the department itself (responsible for setting standards, tracking quality measures, expanding centers, reporting, and allowed to hire extra claims managers to reach a target caseload). The bill likely raises administrative costs for the department and could reduce some providers’ fee flexibility; it also increases oversight and transfer responsibilities for self‑insurers. Important details are missing from the excerpts—for example which state department is responsible, many numeric thresholds and some timing provisions—and several sections of the text are incomplete, so exact operational rules, deadlines, and financial impacts are uncertain.