OAR 731-007-0370


When findings are required under ORS 279C.335 (Competitive bidding)(2) and 279C.335 (Competitive bidding)(3)(b) to exempt a Contract or class of Contracts from competitive bidding requirements, the “substantial cost savings” criterion at ORS 279C.335 (Competitive bidding)(2)(b) requires consideration of the type, cost, amount of the Contract, number of Entities available to bid, and “such other factors as may be deemed appropriate.”


Likewise, the statutory definition of “findings” at ORS 279C.330 (“Findings” defined) means the justification for ODOT’s conclusion that includes, but is not limited to, information regarding eight identified areas.


Accordingly, when the Contract or class of Contracts under consideration for an exemption contemplates the use of Alternative Contracting Methods, the “substantial cost savings” requirement may be addressed by a combination of:


Specified findings that address the factors and other information specifically identified by statute; and


Additional findings that address industry practices, surveys, trends, past experiences, evaluations of completed projects required by ORS 279C.355 (Evaluation of public improvement projects not contracted by competitive bidding) and related information regarding the expected benefits and drawbacks of particular Alternative Contracting Methods. To the extent practicable, such findings should relate back to the specific characteristics of the project or projects at issue in the exemption request.


The criteria at ORS 279C.335 (Competitive bidding)(2)(a) that it is “unlikely” that the exemption will “encourage favoritism” or “substantially diminish competition” may be addressed in contemplating the use of Alternative Contracting Methods by specifying the manner in which an RFP process will be utilized, that the procurement will be formally advertised, that competition will be obtained, and that award will be made based upon identified selection criteria.
Last Updated

Jun. 24, 2021

Rule 731-007-0370’s source at or​.us