SECTION 260:65-19-5. Project designation consideration

(a)   General. The Administrator and the Director shall consider factors in this section to determine whether a state construction project merits consideration for use of the design-build delivery system.

(b)   Consideration factors. Each factor of this subsection must be considered prior to requesting or designating a project for use of the design-build delivery system.

(1)   Time constraints. The time period the state agency desires for project completion.

(2)   Department capabilities. The capabilities of the Department staff and whether the staff has the ability and experience to effectively manage a project that utilizes design-build.

(3)   State agency funding. The state agency can demonstrate it has adequate funding to pay for services of the design-build firm, a design consultant and construction services.

(4)   Project components. The features of the project merit nomination of the project for execution using the design-build delivery approach.

(A)   Project features that are compatible with using the design-build delivery method include:

(i)   Projects for which the definitive space program and functional building requirements can be clearly defined by the state agency prior to the selection of the design-build team, with low likelihood of these requirements changing during the design phase. Examples include, but not limited to: general purpose storage warehouses, multifamily housing or dormitory type projects.

(ii)   Repetitive type projects. For example, site adaptation of a standard or prototypical design that has been previously constructed at another location.

(iii)   Projects with certain unique factors that require special knowledge or experience to produce the least cost design.

(iv)   Pre-engineered structures.

(v)   Performance based projects.

(vi)   Projects where the time to completion is a critical factor.

(B)   Projects features that are incompatible with using the design-build delivery method include:

(i)   Projects where the cost to prepare the Request For Proposal (RFP) and the cost to respond to the RFP by the design-build firms are not justified relative to the anticipated benefits.

(ii)   Projects where the scope of work is hard to define. Examples include: complex renovation projects and highly technical projects where the evaluation of alternative design approaches is critical.

(iii)   Projects which are design driven, such as museums, research laboratories, medical facilities, technology centers, courthouses and executive office buildings.

(iv)   Projects where the state agency or the Department desires to be closely involved during the design process to exercise discretionary control over the completed project.

(c)   State agency request. A state agency shall issue a written request for consideration of formal designation of a state construction project for the design-build delivery method to the Director after careful review of the factors in (b) of this Section. The request shall specify reasons the state agency believes the project merits consideration for design-build delivery system and the funding amount the state agency has available for the project.

(d)   Director consideration. Upon receipt of a state agency request for design-build services for a project, the Director shall consider whether the project merits designation for a delivery-build system and whether the state agency has adequate funds for the project.

(e)   Administrator consideration. The Director may request the Administrator to consider whether a project merits designation for a design-build delivery system.

(f)   Administrator notification. Upon completion of the consideration of the state agency request, the Administrator shall advise the requesting person whether the project has been determined to reasonably merit official designation for a design-build delivery system. The Administrator shall provide a written response stating reasons for the determination.

[Source: Added at 31 Ok Reg 1423, eff 9-12-14]