(a) When an allegation is sustained by an administrative law judge under this title, the administrative law judge may take additional evidence on the appropriate remedy to be recommended, including evidence relating to factors set forth in § 19–108(e) of this title and any other evidence deemed relevant by the administrative law judge.
(b) If the administrative law judge sustains an allegation, the administrative law judge may order any one or more of the following actions:
(1) any remedy that is agreed to by the respondent business entity, the complainant, and the Commission;
(2) referral of the respondent business entity to the Board of Public Works for a determination of debarment pursuant to §§ 16–306 and 16–307 of this article to preclude the business entity from:
(i) bidding on or receiving contract awards on State projects; and
(ii) participating in State contracts as a subcontractor, vendor, or supplier for a period of not more than 3 years;
(3) rescission, suspension, or termination of any current contract between the respondent business entity and the State under the terms of that contract;
(4) exercise of any other rights or remedies available to the State under any current contract between the respondent business entity and the State;
(5) finding that the respondent business entity is not a “responsible bidder” within the meaning of this article with respect to specific contracts that the State has put out for bids or intends to put out for bids;
(6) referral of the matter for criminal prosecution of fraud and other violations under State law if appropriate under the circumstances; or
(7) mediation.