OAR 731-070-0020
General Selection Policies

(1)

The Department may exercise broad discretion, subject to the ultimate approval of the Commission, in evaluating proposals in accordance with the criteria stated in OAR 731-070-0010 (Definitions for the Oregon Innovative Partnerships Program) to 731-070-0360. To conduct a meaningful evaluation of a proposal, ODOT may refine its examination of the proposal so that the features offered by a particular proposal are translated into, or examined in light of, the general criteria identified in section (3) of this rule.

(2)

In light of the exemption from the public contracting requirements of ORS Chapters 279A, 279B and 279C contained in ORS 367.806 (Agreements)(5), the Department may consider factors including public need, technical and financial feasibility, transportation efficiency, cost effectiveness, and acceleration of project delivery when evaluating proposals for Transportation Projects. The evaluation process must appreciate economy and potential savings to the public, but proposal selection will be determined on a best-value basis, taking into account the policies described in this rule and the applicable criteria identified in OAR 731-070-0110 (Initial Review of Unsolicited Proposals) and 731-070-0140 (Evaluation of Unsolicited and Competing Proposals), rather than on a lowest responsible bidder determination.

(3)

In evaluating unsolicited proposals and in selecting projects for which to solicit proposals under OAR 731-070-0042 (Solicitation of Proposals for OIPP Projects), the Department may give precedence to proposals and projects that will satisfy one or more of the following policies:

(a)

Projects that will address an urgent or state-identified transportation need in a manner that will materially advance the project delivery time-frame in light of current or anticipated levels of funding and existing transportation plans.

(b)

Projects that use primarily rights-of-way and publicly-owned real property that already are owned or under the long-term control of ODOT or other public entities that have authority to put the real property to the use proposed.

(c)

Projects for which planning, reliable feasibility determinations, comparable, successful prior projects or case studies demonstrate a strong potential to attract or generate a substantial contribution of non-state or non-tax resources to pay project cost items like capital, operation and maintenance, and provide a reasonable return on that investment in terms of:

(A)

A private partner’s investment, if any; and

(B)

Transportation benefits to the public.

(d)

Projects for which planning, reliable feasibility determinations, comparable, successful prior projects or case studies demonstrate a low risk of failure (in terms of the completion of infrastructure improvements), practicable means of mitigating the risk of failure, or a high reward-to-risk ratio (in terms both of the benefits to the public and the private partner’s investment incentive).

(e)

Proposals that identify specific, reliable, confirmable and economically-viable, non-state or non-traditional sources of funding that will be available to supplement or replace state funding or other state resources for the project.

(f)

Projects for which there is a demonstration of clear and substantial public support.

(g)

Proposals that identify innovative construction approaches that will result in shorter build time, reduced construction cost or improved function in comparison to conventional approaches.

Source: Rule 731-070-0020 — General Selection Policies, https://secure.­sos.­state.­or.­us/oard/view.­action?ruleNumber=731-070-0020.

731–070–0005
Purpose and Intent of the Oregon Innovative Partnerships Program 731–070–0010
Definitions for the Oregon Innovative Partnerships Program 731–070–0020
General Selection Policies 731–070–0040
Protection of ODOT from Proposer “Monopolization” of Site Claims 731–070–0042
Solicitation of Proposals for OIPP Projects 731–070–0044
Negotiations 731–070–0046
Solicitation Documents 731–070–0048
Public Notice of Solicitation 731–070–0050
Submission of Unsolicited Proposals for OIPP Projects 731–070–0055
Fees to Accompany Unsolicited Proposals 731–070–0060
Contents and Format of Detailed or Competing Proposals 731–070–0080
Additional Proposer Organizational Disclosure Requirements 731–070–0110
Initial Review of Unsolicited Proposals 731–070–0120
Commission Preliminary Review of Unsolicited Proposals 731–070–0130
Competing Proposals 731–070–0140
Evaluation of Unsolicited and Competing Proposals 731–070–0160
Use of a Process that Permits ODOT Feedback and Ability of Proponents to Supplement or Refine Proposals after Initial Submission 731–070–0170
Commission Review and Selection of Proposals 731–070–0180
Protests of Rejection of Proposal/Award of Contract to Competitor in Competing Proposals Context 731–070–0200
Negotiation of Agreements for Transportation Projects 731–070–0210
ODOT Objection to Subcontractors 731–070–0220
Legal Sufficiency Review of Final Agreement 731–070–0230
Commission Review of Final Agreement 731–070–0280
Public Records Requests 731–070–0290
Designation of Sensitive Business, Commercial or Financial Information and Trade Secrets 731–070–0295
Consultation with Local Government, Metropolitan Planning Organization or Area Commission on Transportation 731–070–0300
ODOT Rights Reserved 731–070–0310
Extensions of Time: Waivers 731–070–0320
ODOT’s Authority to Suspend, by “Order,” the Acceptance of Specified Categories of Unsolicited Proposals 731–070–0330
ODOT’s Authority to Prioritize the Processing of Submitted Proposals in Accordance with ODOT’s Assessment of Need and Urgency. 731–070–0350
Discretionary Order Requiring the Prequalification of Proposers — Detailed Unsolicited or Competing Proposals
Last Updated

Jun. 8, 2021

Rule 731-070-0020’s source at or​.us