AN ACT Relating to contractor compliance with laws prohibiting discrimination; and amending RCW 39.26.160 and 39.26.200.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

Sec. 1.  RCW 39.26.160 and 2012 c 224 s 18 are each amended to read as follows:

(1)(a) After bids that are submitted in response to a competitive solicitation process are reviewed by the awarding agency, the awarding agency may:

(i) Reject all bids and rebid or cancel the competitive solicitation;

(ii) Request best and final offers from responsive and responsible bidders; or

(iii) Award the purchase or contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder.

(b) The agency may award one or more contracts from a competitive solicitation.

(2) In determining whether the bidder is a responsible bidder, the agency must consider the following elements:

(a) The ability, capacity, and skill of the bidder to perform the contract or provide the service required;

(b) The character, integrity, reputation, judgment, experience, and efficiency of the bidder;

(c) Whether the bidder can perform the contract within the time specified;

(d) The quality of performance of previous contracts or services;

(e) The previous and existing compliance by the bidder with laws relating to the contract or services; ((and))

(f) The previous and existing compliance by the bidder with federal and state laws prohibiting discrimination, including but not limited to Title VII of the civil rights act, the Americans with disabilities act, and chapter 49.60 RCW; and

(g) Such other information as may be secured having a bearing on the decision to award the contract.

(3) In determining the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, an agency may consider best value criteria, including but not limited to:

(a) Whether the bid satisfies the needs of the state as specified in the solicitation documents;

(b) Whether the bid encourages diverse contractor participation;

(c) Whether the bid provides competitive pricing, economies, and efficiencies;

(d) Whether the bid considers human health and environmental impacts;

(e) Whether the bid appropriately weighs cost and noncost considerations; and

(f) Life-cycle cost.

(4) The solicitation document must clearly set forth the requirements and criteria that the agency will apply in evaluating bid submissions.

(5) The awarding agency may at its discretion reject the bid of any contractor who has failed to perform satisfactorily on a previous contract with the state.

(6) After reviewing all bid submissions, an agency may enter into negotiations with the lowest responsive and responsible bidder in order to determine if the bid may be improved. An agency may not use this negotiation opportunity to permit a bidder to change a nonresponsive bid into a responsive bid.

(7) The procuring agency must enter into the state's enterprise vendor (([registration]))registration and bid notification system the name of each bidder and an indication as to the successful bidder.

Sec. 2.  RCW 39.26.200 and 2013 2nd sp.s. c 34 s 1 are each amended to read as follows:

(1)(a) The director shall provide notice to the contractor of the director's intent to debar with the specific reason for the debarment. The department must establish the debarment process by rule.

(b) After reasonable notice to the contractor and reasonable opportunity for that contractor to be heard, the director has the authority to debar a contractor for cause from consideration for award of contracts. The debarment must be for a period of not more than three years.

(2) The director may debar a contractor based on a finding of one or more of the following causes:

(a) Conviction for 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;

(b) Conviction or a final determination in a civil action under state or federal statutes of fraud, embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, receiving stolen property, violation of the federal false claims act, 31 U.S.C. Sec. 3729 et seq., or the state medicaid fraud false claims act, chapter 74.66 RCW, or any other offense indicating a lack of business integrity or business honesty that currently, seriously, and directly affects responsibility as a state contractor;

(c) Conviction under state or federal antitrust statutes arising out of the submission of bids or proposals;

(d) Two or more violations within the previous five years of the federal labor relations act as determined by the national labor relations board or court of competent jurisdiction;

(e) Violation of contract provisions, as set forth in this subsection, of a character that is regarded by the director to be so serious as to justify debarment action:

(i) Deliberate failure without good cause to perform in accordance with the specifications or within the time limit provided in the contract; or

(ii) A recent record of failure to perform or of unsatisfactory performance in accordance with the terms of one or more contracts, however the failure to perform or unsatisfactory performance caused by acts beyond the control of the contractor may not be considered to be a basis for debarment;

(f) Violation of ethical standards set forth in RCW 39.26.020; ((and))

(g) Violation of any federal or state law prohibiting discrimination, including but not limited to Title VII of the civil rights act, the Americans with disabilities act, and chapter 49.60 RCW; and

(h) Any other cause the director determines to be so serious and compelling as to affect responsibility as a state contractor, including debarment by another governmental entity for any cause listed in regulations.

(3) The director must issue a written decision to debar. The decision must:

(a) State the reasons for the action taken; and

(b) Inform the debarred contractor of the contractor's rights to judicial or administrative review.

--- END ---