Construction Law Blog

Blog Disclaimer: The content provided on this website is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Transmission of this information is not intended to create, and receipt does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. The information provided is intended for general information which may or may not reflect the most current developments. Read More

- OR -

Federal Court Reaffirms a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business’ Right to Due Process

Date: April 21, 2015  /  Author: Matt Paxton  /  Categories: Construction News and Notes, Regulatory Administration, Government Contracts, MBE/DBE/WBE  /  Comments (0)

The Veterans Benefit Act of 2003 established a procurement program for Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (“SDVOSB”) concerns.  This program provides that contracting officers may restrict competition to SDVOSB, and award a sole source or set aside contract where certain criteria are met.  The Small Business Administration (“SBA”) then issued rules establishing a SDVOSB Concern Program.  The SBA’s program establishes the criteria to be used in federal contracting to determine service disabled veteran status, business ownership and control requirements, and guidelines for establishing sole source and set aside procurement opportunities in protest and appeal procedures (see Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) 13 CFR § 125.8-125.10).

Determining the Severity of WISHA Violations

Date: February 24, 2015  /  Author: Matt Paxton  /  Categories: Department of Labor & Industries, Regulatory Administration  /  Comments (0)

The Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act of 1973 (“WISHA”) is a statute that empowered the Department of Labor and Industries (“L&I”) to create and enforce safety and health regulations for nearly all employers and employees in the state.  WISHA was the first fully-operational state safety and health program approved by the federal government.  Under WISHA, L&I may conduct investigations into employers that it believes to be in violation of a safety of health statute or regulation, and issue a citation.  These citations are posted at or near the place of violation, and also are posted online as a matter of public record.

Who is Covered by the Miller Act on Federal Public Works Projects?

Date: February 19, 2015  /  Author: John P. Ahlers  /  Categories: Government Contracts, Contracting, Regulatory Administration, Liens/Bond Claims, Claims  /  Comments (0)

Historically, the common law doctrine of sovereign immunity prevented liens against public property, and federal statutes allowed only those in privity of contract with the federal government to sue to enforce contractual rights.  To address this concern, Congress enacted the Heard Act in 1894.  In 1935, Congress repealed the Heard Act and enacted the Miller Act in its place.  The Miller Act requires that all general contractors post payment bonds on contracts in excess of $25,000.00.  If the contracting officer determines that a payment bond in the full amount of the contract is impractical, he or she may set a different amount for the payment bond.  Bonds of half the contract amount are common on federal jobs.

General Contractor is Primarily Responsible for Compliance with Safety Regulations

Date: January 15, 2015  /  Author: Matt Paxton  /  Categories: Department of Labor & Industries, Regulatory Administration  /  Comments (0)

In Washington, general contractors are primarily responsible for compliance with the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act of 1973 ("WISHA"), even when it comes to the conduct of their subcontractors.  If a subcontractor commits a violation, the Washington Department of Labor and Industries ("L&I") may still issue a general contractor a citation.  The Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals - the quasi-judicial administrative body charged with reviewing L&I citations - has found a limited exception to a general contractor's "primary responsibility," but only if the general contractor has a safety program that is effective in practice and the violation was the result of unpreventable misconduct.

New Year Brings Changes in Minimum Wage and OSHA Reporting Requirements

Date: January 13, 2015  /  Author: John P. Ahlers  /  Categories: Regulatory Administration, Construction News and Notes, Recent Legislation, Employment  /  Comments (0)

Minimum Wage Increases in 20 States:  On January 1, 2015, employers in 20 states and the District of Columbia, as well as those who perform work on federal contracts and subcontracts, will see an increase in the minimum wage.  In nine states which make adjustments to keep up with rising inflation (i.e. Washington), the increase is automatic.  In 11 other states and the District of Columbia, the minimum wage is being raised as a result of new laws approved by the legislatures or by vote of referendum.  To assist you in determining which states have raised the minimum wage and what the minimum wage is in those states, the U.S. Department of Labor provides an interactive map and state-by-state report (available here), which employers can use to determine the applicable minimum wage in a state.  Also, as previously reported in this blog (available here), the new minimum wage for federal contractors and subcontractors is $10.10 as a result of an interim final rule issued on December 15, 2014.

OSHA Reporting Requirements:  Beginning January 1, 2015, employers covered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration ("OSHA") are required to report all work-related fatalities within eight hours, and all inpatient hospitalizations, amputations and losses of an eye within 24 hours.  Previously, employers were required to report all workplace fatalities and when three or more workers were hospitalized in the same incident.  Employers may report these serious incidents to OSHA by calling the nearest OSHA area office during normal business hours (list available here); calling the 24-hour OSHA hotline at 1-800-321-OSHA (6742); or reporting online here.

WISHA Compliance: Tough to Argue with “Gravity”

Date: December 11, 2014  /  Author: Brad Westmoreland  /  Categories: Regulatory Administration, Construction News and Notes  /  Comments (0)

One of the responsibilities of the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries (“L&I”) is to oversee the administration of the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act (“WISHA”).  L&I accomplishes this task by certifying compliance and assessing penalties for violations of safety and health regulations on the jobsite.  When a violation occurs, L&I levies a base penalty that is determined in one of two ways.  If the law has already specified a penalty amount for the particular violation that has occurred, L&I fines the offender for that sum.  If there is no specified rate for the violation, L&I matches the penalty with a gravity score assigned to the violating condition.

SCAM ALERT - BUSINESS OWNERS

Date: November 4, 2014  /  Author: Lawrence S. Glosser  /  Categories: Out of the Ordinary, Regulatory Administration, Construction News and Notes  /  Comments (0)

Please be aware that companies doing business as ANNUAL BUSINESS SERVICES, COMPLIANCE SERVICES, or CORPORATE RECORDS SERVICE (not to be confused with the Washington corporation, Compliance Services, Inc.) are mailing unsolicited notices to business entities in Washington State requesting that "Annual Minutes" and a fee of $125.00 be sent to them for filing.  You can see an example here.

Architect Held to a Higher Standard of Care

Date: August 28, 2014  /  Author: John P. Ahlers  /  Categories: Regulatory Administration, Construction News and Notes, Indemnity, Construction Defect  /  Comments (0)

Unlike other professionals, a unique problem faced by architects is that there are codes and ordinances that specifically detail how their jobs are to be performed.  Lawyers are ethically prohibited from contracting to guarantee the outcome of the case.  Doctors are practically precluded from guaranteeing the outcome of a particular medical procedure.  Architects, on the other hand, are required by law to comply with codes when designing improvements in real property.

Householder Exemption Does Not Excuse Subcontractor Performing Unlicensed Electrical Work on a Residential Project Owned by General Contractor

Date: June 24, 2014  /  Author: Paul R. Cressman Jr.  /  Categories: Regulatory Administration, Construction News and Notes, Department of Labor & Industries  /  Comments (0)

On April 28, 2014, Division I of the Washington Court of Appeals held that the householder exception of RCW 19.28.261(6) does not permit a subcontractor to perform unlicensed electrical work on a residential project owned by a general contractor.

WSDOT to Exclude Non-Minority Women-Owned Business from DBE Participation Goals

Date: April 29, 2014  /  Author: Ellie Perka  /  Categories: Government Contracts, Contracting, Regulatory Administration, Construction News and Notes, Rants and Raves, Recent Legislation, Employment, MBE/DBE/WBE  /  Comments (0)

The Washington State Department of Transportation ("WSDOT") is moving forward with its proposal to exclude non-minority women-owned businesses from Washington's Disadvantaged Business Enterprise ("DBE") program goals for federally-funded contracts.  In early March 2014, WSDOT submitted its proposal to the U.S. Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration ("FHWA").  If approved by FHWA, this significant change will go into effect in Washington for the rest of federal fiscal year (FFY) 2014 and remain in place through FFY 2017.  WSDOT's proposal was originally reported on the Ahlers & Cressman blog on January 9, 2014.  Read our original article here.