C.F.R. » Title 29 » PART 5—LABOR STANDARDS PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO CONTRACTS COVERING FEDERALLY FINANCED AND ASSISTED CONSTRUCTION (ALSO LABOR STANDARDS PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO NONCONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS SUBJECT TO THE CONTRACT WORK HOURS AND SAFETY STANDARDS ACT) › Subpart A—Davis-Bacon and Related Acts Provisions and Procedures

29 C.F.R. § 5.12

Debarment proceedings

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Debarment standard and ineligible list. (1) Whenever any contractor or subcontractor is found by the Secretary of Labor to have disregarded their obligations to workers or subcontractors under the Davis-Bacon Act, any of the other applicable statutes referenced by § 5.1, this part, or part 3 of this subtitle, such contractor or subcontractor and their responsible officers, if any, and any firm, corporation, partnership, or association in which such contractor, subcontractor, or responsible officer has an interest will be ineligible for a period of 3 years to be awarded any contract or subcontract of the United States or the District of Columbia and any contract or subcontract subject to the labor standards provisions of any of the statutes referenced by § 5.1.

(2) In cases arising under contracts covered by the Davis-Bacon Act, the Administrator will transmit to the Comptroller General the name(s) of the contractors or subcontractors and their responsible officers, if any, and any firms, corporations, partnerships, or associations in which the contractors, subcontractors, or responsible officers are known to have an interest, who have been found to have disregarded their obligations to workers or subcontractors, and the recommendation of the Secretary of Labor or authorized representative regarding debarment. In cases arising under contracts covered by any of the applicable statutes referenced by § 5.1 other than the Davis-Bacon Act, the Administrator determines the name(s) of the contractors or subcontractors and their responsible officers, if any, and any firms, corporations, partnerships, or associations in which the contractors, subcontractors, or responsible officers are known to have an interest, to be debarred. The names of such ineligible persons or firms will be published on SAM or its successor website, and an ineligible person or firm will be ineligible for a period of 3 years from the date of publication of their name on the ineligible list, to be awarded any contract or subcontract of the United States or the District of Columbia and any contract or subcontract subject to the labor standards provisions of any of the statutes referenced by § 5.1.

(b) Procedure. (1) In addition to cases under which debarment action is initiated pursuant to § 5.11, whenever as a result of an investigation conducted by the Federal agency or the Department of Labor, and where the Administrator finds reasonable cause to believe that a contractor or subcontractor has committed violations which constitute a disregard of its obligations to workers or subcontractors under the Davis-Bacon Act, the labor standards provisions of any of the other applicable statutes referenced by § 5.1, this part, or part 3 of this subtitle, the Administrator will notify by registered or certified mail to the last known address or by any other means normally assuring delivery, the contractor or subcontractor and responsible officers, if any, and any firms, corporations, partnerships, or associations in which the contractors, subcontractors, or responsible officers are known to have an interest of the finding.

(i) The Administrator will afford such contractor, subcontractor, responsible officer, and any other parties notified an opportunity for a hearing as to whether debarment action should be taken under paragraph (a) of this section. The Administrator will furnish to those notified a summary of the investigative findings.

(ii) If the contractor, subcontractor, responsible officer, or any other parties notified wish to request a hearing as to whether debarment action should be taken, such a request must be made by letter or by any other means normally assuring delivery, sent within 30 days of the date of the notification from the Administrator, and must set forth any findings which are in dispute and the basis for such disputed findings, including any affirmative defenses to be raised.

(iii) Upon timely receipt of such request for a hearing, the Administrator will refer the case to the Chief Administrative Law Judge by Order of Reference, with an attached copy of the notification from the Administrator and the responses of the contractor, subcontractor, responsible officers, or any other parties notified, for designation of an Administrative Law Judge to conduct such hearings as may be necessary to determine the matters in dispute.

(iv) In considering debarment under any of the statutes referenced by § 5.1 other than the Davis-Bacon Act, the Administrative Law Judge will issue an order concerning whether the contractor, subcontractor, responsible officer, or any other party notified is to be debarred in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section. In considering debarment under the Davis-Bacon Act, the Administrative Law Judge will issue a recommendation as to whether the contractor, subcontractor, responsible officers, or any other party notified should be debarred under 40 U.S.C. 3144(b).

(2) Hearings under this section will be conducted in accordance with part 6 of this subtitle. If no hearing is requested within 30 days of the date of the notification from the Administrator, the Administrator's findings will be final, except with respect to recommendations regarding debarment under the Davis-Bacon Act, as set forth in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

(c) Interests of debarred parties. (1) A finding as to whether persons or firms whose names appear on the ineligible list have an interest under 40 U.S.C. 3144(b) or paragraph (a) of this section in any other firm, corporation, partnership, or association, may be made through investigation, hearing, or otherwise.

(2)(i) The Administrator, on their own motion or after receipt of a request for a determination pursuant to paragraph (c)(3) of this section, may make a finding on the issue of interest.

(ii) If the Administrator determines that there may be an interest but finds that there is insufficient evidence to render a final ruling thereon, the Administrator may refer the issue to the Chief Administrative Law Judge in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) of this section.

(iii) If the Administrator finds that no interest exists, or that there is not sufficient information to warrant the initiation of an investigation, the requesting party, if any, will be so notified and no further action taken.

(iv)(A) If the Administrator finds that an interest exists, the person or firm affected will be notified of the Administrator's finding (by certified mail to the last known address or by any other means normally assuring delivery), which will include the reasons therefore, and such person or firm will be afforded an opportunity to request that a hearing be held to decide the issue.

(B) Such person or firm will have 20 days from the date of the Administrator's ruling to request a hearing. A person or firm desiring a hearing must request it by letter or by any other means normally assuring delivery, sent within 20 days of the date of the Administrator's notification. A detailed statement of the reasons why the Administrator's ruling is in error, including facts alleged to be in dispute, if any, must be submitted with the request for a hearing.

(C) If no hearing is requested within the time mentioned in paragraph (c)(2)(iv)(B) of this section, the Administrator's finding will be final and the Administrator will notify the Comptroller General in cases arising under the DBA. If a hearing is requested, the ruling of the Administrator will be inoperative unless and until the Administrative Law Judge or the Administrative Review Board issues an order that there is an interest.

(3)(i) A request for a determination of interest may be made by any interested party, including contractors or prospective contractors and associations of contractors, representatives of workers, and interested agencies. Such a request must be submitted in writing to the Administrator, Wage and Hour Division, U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210.

(ii) The request must include a statement setting forth in detail why the petitioner believes that a person or firm whose name appears on the ineligible list has an interest in any firm, corporation, partnership, or association that is seeking or has been awarded a contract or subcontract of the United States or the District of Columbia, or a contract or subcontract that is subject to the labor standards provisions of any of the statutes referenced by § 5.1. No particular form is prescribed for the submission of a request under this section.

(4) The Administrator, on their own motion under paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section or upon a request for hearing where the Administrator determines that relevant facts are in dispute, will by order refer the issue to the Chief Administrative Law Judge, for designation of an Administrative Law Judge who will conduct such hearings as may be necessary to render a decision solely on the issue of interest. Such proceedings must be conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth in part 6 of this subtitle.

(5) If the person or firm affected requests a hearing and the Administrator determines that relevant facts are not in dispute, the Administrator will refer the issue and the record compiled thereon to the Administrative Review Board to render a decision solely on the issue of interest. Such proceeding must be conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth in part 7 of this subtitle.

[88 FR 57741, Aug. 23, 2023]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1975–2024 · leading case: Universities Rsch. Assn., Inc. v. Coutu, 450 U.S. 754 (1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Universities Rsch. Assn., Inc. v. Coutu, 450 U.S. 754 (1981). · cites it 2× “*761 29 CFR §§5.12 and 7.9 (1980). 9 Disputes over the proper classification of workers under a contract containing Davis-Bacon provisions must be referred to the Secretary for determination.”
North Georgia Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council v. Neil Edward Goldschmidt, Maynard Jackson, Etc., 621 F.2d 697 (5th Cir. 1980). · cites it 3× “Third, once an objection has been raised to a federal contracting agency’s decision to apply a particular general wage determination category to a project covered by the Davis-Bacon Act, the *702 regulations, 29 C.F.R. § 5.12 (1979), require that the controversy be submitted to…”
Int'l Bhd. Elec v. Farfield Co, 5 F.4th 315 (3rd Cir. 2021). “29 C.F.R. § 5.12 (a)(2); see, e.g., Metro.”
Favel v. Am. Renovation & Constr. Co., 2002 MT 266 (Mont. 2002). · cites it 2× “9 ; and debarment, 29 C.F.R. § 5.12 . The USAF Contracting Officer unilaterally had *426 the authority to terminate the Contract with ARC upon her determination that ARC had breached its Contract with the Air Force.”
Jorge Amaya v. Power Design, Inc., 833 F.3d 440 (4th Cir. 2016). “In the case of a violation, both statutes provide for the withholding of contract funds by the Department of Labor (to pay under- or unpaid employees at the prevailing rate) and the possibility of an up to three-year ban on the award of federal contracts to the breaching…”
United States v. Juan Carlos Bazantes, 978 F.3d 1227 (11th Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “222-8(c) (“[F]ailure to submit the required records upon request or to make such records available may be grounds for debarment action pursuant to 29 C.F.R. 5.12.”). To carry out its reporting responsibilities, Beck included in its contract with Mulkey a clause that required…”
Janik Paving & Constr., Inc. v. William E. Brock, Iii, as Sec'y of the United States Dep't of Labor, 828 F.2d 84 (2d Cir. 1987). · cites it 2× “29 C.F.R. § 5.12 (a)(1) (the “debarment regulations”).”
Found. for Fair Contracting, Ltd. v. G & M E. CONTRACTING & DOUBLE E, LLC, 259 F. Supp. 2d 329 (D.N.J. 2003). “10 , and it may institute debarment proceedings under 29 C.F.R. § 5.12 . The DOL may also conduct investigations for enforcement of contractual provisions under 29 C.”
Tri-Cnty. Contractors, Inc. v. Thomas Perez, 155 F. Supp. 3d 81 (D.D.C. 2016). “§ 6706 (b); 29 C.F.R. § 5.12 . The SCA goes farther — it requires the Secretary to “forward to the Comptroller General .”
North Georgia Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council v. U. S. Dep't of Transp., 399 F. Supp. 58 (N.D. Ga. 1975). · cites it 3× “” 29 C.F.R. § 5.12 . The provision allowing use of general wage determinations is contained in Part 1 of that subtitle and the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 is listed in § 5.”
Glazer Constr. Co. v. United States, 52 Fed. Cl. 513 (Fed. Cl. 2002). · cites it 4× “Safety Standards Act — Overtime Compensation, Apprentices and Trainees, Payrolls and Basic Records, Compliance with Copeland Act Requirements, Subcontracts (Labor Standards), Compliance With Davis-Bacon and Related Act Regulations, or Certification of Eligibility may be grounds…”
Herman B. Taylor Constr. Co. v. David J. Barram, Adm'r, Gen. Servs. Admin., 203 F.3d 808 (Fed. Cir. 2000). “See 29 C.F.R. § 5.12 . The contract further provided that any dispute concerning these labor provisions was to be resolved by the Labor Department: The United States Department of Labor has set forth in 29 C.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.