§ 31-57d — Disqualification of certain contractors from bidding on, applying for or participating in public works contracts with the state: Disqualification by Commissioner of Transportation; procedure; causes. Exception permitting disqualified contractor to participate in contract or subcontract.

Connecticut § 31-57d

• Jurisdiction: Connecticut
• Title 31: Labor
• Ch. 557: Employment Regulation

Text

(a) As used in this section, “contractor” means any person, firm or corporation that has contracted or seeks to contract with the state, or to participate in such a contract, in connection with any public works of the state or a political subdivision of the state. (b) Disqualification of a contractor is a serious action that shall be used only in the public interest and for the state government's protection and not for purposes of punishment or in lieu of other applicable enforcement or compliance procedures. The causes for and consequences of disqualification under this section shall be separate from and in addition to causes for and consequences of disqualification under sections 4b-95 , 31-53a and 31-57b . (c) The Commissioner of Transportation may disqualify any contractor, for up to two years, from bidding on, applying for, or participating as a subcontractor under, contracts with the state, acting through the Department of Transportation, for one or more causes set forth under subsection (d) of this section. The commissioner may initiate a disqualification proceeding only after consulting with the Attorney General and shall provide notice and an opportunity for a hearing to the contractor who is the subject of the proceeding. The hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the contested case procedures set forth in chapter 54. The commissioner shall issue a written decision within ninety days of the last date of such hearing and state in the decision the reasons for the action taken and, if the contractor is being disqualified, the period of such disqualification. The existence of a cause for disqualification does not require that the contractor be disqualified. In determining whether to disqualify a contractor, the commissioner shall consider the seriousness of the contractor's acts or omissions and any mitigating factors. The commissioner shall send the decision to the contractor by certified mail, return receipt requested. The written decision shall be a final decision for the purposes of sections 4-180 and 4-183 . (d) Causes for disqualification from bidding on, or participating in, contracts shall include the following: (1) Conviction or entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere for or admission to commission of a criminal offense as an incident to obtaining or attempting to obtain a public or private contract or subcontract, or in the performance of such contract or subcontract; (2) Conviction or entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere or admission to the violation of any state or federal law for embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, receiving stolen property or any other offense indicating a lack of business integrity or business honesty which affects responsibility as a state contractor; (3) Conviction or entry of a plea of guilty or nolo contendere or admission to a violation of any state or federal antitrust, collusion or conspiracy law arising out of the submission of bids or proposals on a public or private contract or subcontract; (4) A wilful failure to perform in accordance with the terms of one or more public contracts, agreements or transactions; (5) A history of failure to perform or of unsatisfactory performance of one or more public contracts, agreements or transactions; or (6) A wilful violation of a statutory or regulatory provision or requirement applicable to a public contract, agreement or transaction. (e) For purposes of a disqualification proceeding under this section, conduct may be imputed as follows: (1) The fraudulent, criminal or other seriously improper conduct of any officer, director, shareholder, partner, employee or other individual associated with a contractor may be imputed to the contractor when the conduct occurred in connection with the individual's performance of duties for or on behalf of the contractor and the contractor knew of or had reason to know of such conduct. The term “other seriously improper conduct” shall not include advice from an attorney, accountant or other paid consultant if it was reasonable for the contractor to rely on such advice. (2) The fraudulent, criminal or other seriously improper conduct of a contractor may be imputed to any officer, director, shareholder, partner, employee or other individual associated with the contractor who participated in, knew of or had reason to know of the contractor's conduct. (3) The fraudulent, criminal or other seriously improper conduct of one contractor participating in a joint venture or similar arrangement may be imputed to other participating contractors if the conduct occurred for or on behalf of the joint venture or similar arrangement and these contractors knew of or had reason to know of such conduct. (f) The commissioner may reduce the period or extent of disqualification, upon the contractor's request, supported by documentation, for the following reasons: (1) Newly discovered material evidence; (2) Reversal of the conviction upon which the disqualification was based; (3) Bona fide change in ownership or management; (4) Elimination of other causes for which the disqualification was imposed; or (5) Other reasons the commissioner deems appropriate. (g) The commissioner may grant an exception permitting a disqualified contractor to participate in a particular contract or subcontract upon a written determination that there is good cause, in the interest of the public, for such action.

Legislative History

(P.A. 93-220, S. 2, 3; P.A. 13-140, S. 7; P.A. 14-122, S. 148.) History: P.A. 93-220 effective July 2, 1993; P.A. 13-140 amended Subsec. (b) by deleting reference to Sec. 31-57a, effective June 18, 2013; P.A. 14-122 made technical changes in Subsec. (a).