Ann: EdenCrete - GDOT Sales and Marketing Update, page-28

It also totally proves the first 3 projects were won on tender alone.

The other relevant topic it brings up, besides more oversight this way as the usage still has to be justified in the original proposal for funds from the FHWA, is this clause;

Q10: Can States require (or provide an administrative preference for) in-State or local products?
A10: No. Nothing in this rulemaking repeals the FHWA prohibition on in-State preference for materials selection, pursuant to 23 CFR 635.409(a).

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/construction/cqit/fr_qa.cfm

So it is actually specifically prohibited for GDoT to specify EdenCrete as a "subsidy" or "trial" to encourage an Australian company based in another state because they own a building in Georgia.