Emergency Contracting: Flexibilities in Contracting Procedures during an Emergency (2007)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

21 APPENDIX D RESPONSES TO SPECIFIC SURVEY QUESTIONS BY STATES STATE Q. 3 Does State statute or regulation set conditions for waiving contract re- quirements in emergency situations? Q. 4 Does State statute or regulation authorize con- tract award before the requirements can be fully defined? Q. 5 Does State statute or regulation allow for lim- ited competition or sole contract in emergency situations? Alaska Yes Yes Yes Arizona Yes No Yes Connecticut Yes Yes Yes Florida Yes Yes Yes* Hawaii Yes Yes Yes Illinois Yes No Yes Iowa For both 3 & 4: Con- tract–No, Procure–Yes See Q. 3 Yes* Kansas Yes Yes Yes Maine Yes Yes Yes Massachusetts Yes No Yes* Michigan Yes No Yes and No Minnesota Yes No Yes Mississippi Yes No Yes Montana Yes39 No Yes Nebraska Yes No Yes New Hampshire Yes Yes Yes New Jersey Yes No Yes 39 As noted earlier in the discussion, Montana law states that the Transportation Commission may award a contract where the Commission determines that “special circumstances” warrant it.

22 STATE Q. 3 Does State statute or regulation set conditions for waiving contract re- quirements in emergency situations? Q. 4 Does State statute or regulation authorize con- tract award before the requirements can be fully defined? Q. 5 Does State statute or regulation allow for lim- ited competition or sole contract in emergency situations? New Mexico Yes No Yes North Dakota Yes No Yes Ohio Yes Yes Yes* Oklahoma Yes State law does not ad- dress Yes Oregon Yes Yes Yes Pennsylvania Yes Yes Yes* Rhode Island Yes Yes Yes South Carolina Yes Yes Yes Tennessee Yes Yes Yes Vermont Yes Yes Yes Utah Yes Yes Yes West Virginia Yes Yes Yes Wisconsin Yes Yes Yes Wyoming Yes Yes Yes *The survey responses indicated that in these states there is a requirement for multiple bids, although com- petition may be limited. Massachusetts law “recommends” multiple quotes before contract award, according to its response. As noted earlier in the report, most states’ laws, regulations, or policy statements related to emer- gency contracting make some reference to having as much competition as is practical under the circumstances.

23 STATE Q. 6 Does State statute or regulation allow for waiver of re- quirements related to solicitation and award of contracts in emergency situa- tions? Q. 7 Does State stat- ute or regulation allow for waiver of requirements re- lated to the admini- stration of contracts in emergency situa- tions? Q. 8 Has State ever been impeded in dealing with an emergency by limi- tations imposed by FEMA? Q. 9 Has State DOT ever sought re- imbursement from FEMA for emergency transportation- related contract- ing? Alaska Yes No No Yes Arizona Yes No No response to 8 No Connecticut Yes Yes No Yes Florida No No No Yes Hawaii Yes Yes No Yes Illinois Yes No No Yes Iowa Yes No No Yes Kansas Yes Yes No Yes Maine Yes Yes No Yes Massachusetts Yes No No Yes Michigan Yes/No40 Yes No Yes Minnesota Yes Yes Yes41 Yes Mississippi Yes No No Yes42 Montana Yes Yes No Yes Nebraska Yes Yes No No New Hampshire Yes Yes No Yes New Jersey Yes Yes No Yes New Mexico Yes Yes No No 40 As noted in the text above, Michigan’s response indicated that limited competition is permitted, by invitations to pre- qualified bidders, but no sole source for construction contractors. 41 Minnesota’s answers indicated that they had experienced “slow turn-around times for paperwork.” 42 Mississippi indicated that it had applied to FEMA for reimbursement, but did not get it.

24 STATE Q. 6 Does State statute or regulation allow for waiver of re- quirements related to solicitation and award of contracts in emergency situa- tions? Q. 7 Does State stat- ute or regulation allow for waiver of requirements re- lated to the admini- stration of contracts in emergency situa- tions? Q. 8 Has State ever been impeded in dealing with an emergency by limi- tations imposed by FEMA? Q. 9 Has State DOT ever sought re- imbursement from FEMA for emergency transportation- related contract- ing? North Dakota Yes Yes No Yes Ohio Yes No Yes43 Yes Oklahoma Yes No No Yes Oregon Yes Yes No Yes Pennsylvania Yes No No Yes Rhode Island Yes Yes No Yes South Carolina Yes Yes No Yes Tennessee Yes No No Yes Vermont Yes Yes No No Utah Yes Yes No No West Virginia Yes No No No Wisconsin Yes No No Yes Wyoming Yes No No No 43 Ohio’s response stated that, “On extremely rare occasions FHWA will not concur that an emergency exists” and that Ohio then either uses state funds or follows a limited competitive process.