(1) An officer of the Washington state patrol or a designated enterprise services employee may issue a warning of potential exclusion from the capitol campus or a designated area thereof under the authority of this section, if the issuer has a reasonable belief based upon the facts and circumstances to believe that the person through acts or omissions has violated one or more of the rules applicable to the capitol campus under chapters 200-200 through 200-299 WAC, or an applicable statute, regulation, or policy while on the capitol campus.

(2) A warning of potential exclusion shall:

(a) Be in writing, signed by the person issuing it, identify the issuer's name and title, and identify the person subject to the warning, if known.

(b) Contain the date of issuance and effective date, the violation(s) that the person is alleged to have committed, and a citation to any rule or statute violated.

(c) Warn that a future violation of one or more of the rule or statute violated under the warning of potential exclusion may be grounds for the issuance of a notice of exclusion from the capitol campus or a designated area, in addition to any other legal citation, liability, or remedy provided under the law.

(d) Set out the method of appealing the warning, which shall also include the address where the appeal should be sent.

(3) A person subject to a warning need not be charged, tried, or convicted of any crime or be issued an infraction or have an infraction found committed in order for a warning of potential exclusion to be issued or effective. The issuing person need only establish that probable cause existed to support the issuance of the warning.

(4) A person subject to a warning of potential exclusion may appeal the warning to the director as provided on the notice by submitting an appeal together with a copy of the warning within 10 days of receipt of the warning. The director or a designee shall decide the appeal as a brief adjudicative appeal under RCW 34.05.482 through 34.05.494. The deciding officer shall base the final order on a "more probable than not" standard whether the violation identified in the warning did or did not occur. In the event the director denies the appeal, the decision is appealable under the provisions of chapter 34.05 RCW.