Causes for Disqualification

PURPOSE: This rule provides for the criteria causing disqualification. PUBLISHER’S NOTE: The secretary of state has determined that the publication of the entire text of the material which is incorporated by reference as a portion of this rule would be unduly cumbersome or expensive. This material as incorporated by reference in this rule shall be maintained by the agency at its headquarters and shall be made available to the public for inspection and copying at no more than the actual cost of reproduction. This note applies only to the reference material. The entire text of the rule is printed here. (1) Causes for Disqualification. Disqualification may be imposed for any of the following: (A) Submitting more than one (1) proposal for the same work from an individual, firm, or corporation under the same or different name. A bidder may, however, submit a proposal as principal and as a subcontractor to some other principal, or may submit a proposal as a subcontractor to as many other principals as s/he desires, and by so doing will not be liable to disqualification in the intent of this specification; (B) A preponderance of the evidence that shows collusion exists among the bidders; (C) Conviction of or civil judgment for or finding of any one (1) act, including failure to act, or attempt or conspiracy to act, constituting or furthering any of the following: 1. Commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public or private agreement or transaction, by a contractor; 2. Violation of federal or state antitrust statutes, including those proscribing price fixing between competitors, allocation of customers between competitors, and bid rigging; or 3. Embezzlement, theft, bribery, perjury, assault, false affidavit, false declaration within the meaning of section 576.060, RSMo, false statements or false claims within the meaning of 31 U.S.C. 1020, 31 U.S.C. 3729, 31 U.S.C. 3801 or 49 CFR part 31, obstruction of justice, obstruction of any government operation, false representation, or false report; (D) Violation of the terms of a public agreement or transaction so serious as to affect the integrity of an agency project or program, such as a willful failure to perform in accordance with the terms of one (1) or more public agreements or transactions; (E) A nonprocurement debarment by any federal, state or local governmental agency taken before October 1, 1988, or a procurement debarment by any federal agency taken pursuant to federal regulations, or debarment disqualification or similar action by any other state, county, or local government for an act which would be grounds for disqualification under this section; (F) Making or receiving kickbacks or payments of currency or any item of value in order to obtain or retain any contract or payment thereunder, or in return for an agreement to make or for the making of any false statements or material misrepresentations or omissions of fact to any federal, state, or local governmental agency or private firm relevant to contract compliance; (G) Suspension, debarment, or other disqualification of the contractor, or determination that the contractor is not a responsible bidder for public contracting purposes, by any federal, state, or local governmental agency; or (H) Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) violations categorized as willful, and/or a documented history of serious and/or repeated violations that resulted in serious injury or death per Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, Sections 1910-1990, which is incorporated by reference and made a part of this rule as published by the United States Superintendent of Documents, 732 N Capitol Street NW, Washington, DC 204020001, website: http://bookstore.gpo.gov, on July 1, 2017. This rule does not incorporate any subsequent amendments or additions of this rule. (2) Imputed Conduct. Any contractor that receives payment as a result of a commission contract may not assert as a defense to the department’s disqualification action against such contractor that the conduct of any person, officer, director, partner, employee, agent, or individual associated with such contractor in performing work under the contract should not be imputed to such contractor, if such conduct— (A) Occurred within the course and scope of the person, officer, director, partner, employee, agent, or individual’s relationship with the contractor during the time such contractor was under contract with the commission; and (B) Was illegal under any federal, state, or local law or illegal under any federal or state rule, or violated the contractor’s obligations to the commission under the contract. The contractor’s receipt of payment under a commission contract including any illegal or unsatisfactory conduct, or the contractor’s intent to obtain payment for such conduct, may be used as evidence by the commission of the contractor’s knowledge, approval, or acquiescence of such conduct. AUTHORITY: Art. IV, section 29, Mo. Const., sections 226.020, 226.130, 226.150, 227.030, 227.100, and 227.210, RSMo 2016 and Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations part 29.* Original rule filed Dec. 12, 1996, effective June 30, 1997. Amended: Filed Oct. 6, 2017, effective May 30, 2018. *Original authority: 226.020, RSMo 1939; 226.130, RSMo 1939, amended 1993, 1995; 226.150, RSMo 1939, amended 1977; 227.030, RSMo 1939; 227.100, RSMo 1939, amended 1963, 1967, 1969, 2002; and 227.210, RSMo 1939.