This bill creates a new chapter in Title 28B RCW by recodifying many sections now in chapter 49.04 RCW and adds new statutory sections that govern approval and registration of apprenticeship programs. It directs the Washington apprenticeship council to approve and register apprenticeship programs when the apprenticeship committee and program standards conform to this new chapter and applicable rules. Initial registration is provisional for 12 months and must be made permanent after that period unless extended or rescinded for specified reasons. The bill makes procedural changes to state approval of apprenticeship programs. It requires expedited consideration of programs that already have current federal approval, limiting state review to elements where state law or rules impose greater or unique requirements, and directs the council to adopt policies to implement that expedited review. It creates a competitor objection process: objections may be filed only after provisional approval and must be submitted within 30 days; provisional status may be extended in six‑month intervals while objections are resolved. The bill authorizes fee‑shifting and sanctions for unjustified objections: an administrative law judge or the council may require a competitor to pay an applicant’s reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs if the objection was not “substantially justified” (defined as having a reasonable basis in law or fact when filed). It also authorizes sanctions, including attorneys’ fees, costs, and a monetary penalty up to $10,000 payable to the Department of Labor and Industries, for two or more frivolous objections and provides examples of circumstances that may make an objection frivolous. The apprenticeship council must include in its annual report a list of programs that applied for state approval with their provisional or permanent status, reasons for any denials, status of competitor objections, and an analysis comparing the state’s approval rate to the federal office of apprenticeship and to other states with federally recognized state apprenticeship agencies. The bill directs the code reviser to correct statutory references in the next technical corrections bill. Affected entities named include the apprenticeship council, the Department of Labor and Industries, apprenticeship programs and committees, competitors, administrative law judges, and federally approved programs. Important gaps in the extracted text remain: the recodified provisions’ full contents are not included here; the bill text provided does not supply complete statutory definitions (for example of “competitor,” “apprenticeship committee,” or “current approval by the federal government”), detailed procedures for objection adjudication, mediation, appeals, or how administrative law judges are engaged, nor the specific standards the council must use beyond the expedited review limitation.

If enacted, the law shifts apprenticeship approval into a new chapter and puts clear deadlines and processes around state registration: most new programs will get a 12‑month provisional registration that must become permanent unless extended for objections or other specified reasons, and programs that already have federal approval should get faster state review limited to state‑specific issues. The apprenticeship council will need to adopt expedited review policies and include program application status and comparative approval rates in its annual report, while competitors can formally object within 30 days of provisional approval but face potential liability for attorneys’ fees and up to $10,000 in penalties for frivolous challenges. The people and organizations most affected are the apprenticeship council (more reporting and rulemaking duties), apprenticeship program sponsors and committees (faster paths to state recognition if federally approved but potential delays and costs from objections during the provisional year), the Department of Labor and Industries (may receive penalties and continues to have a role in reviews), and competitors (who gain a limited objection option but take on legal and financial risk). Key operational details—what counts as a “competitor,” the full objection adjudication steps, and the specific approval standards the council will apply—are not provided here, so how burdensome or protective these changes will be in practice depends on rules and procedures the council adopts later.