Agency Pollution Control Agency

Contractor Terracon Consultants, Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 21280/ B15564

Project Name Superfund/ Petroleum Master Contract

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) are authorized to respond to releases of petroleum, hazardous substances, and pollutants or contaminants, which have been reported to the State or in which the State suspects there has been a release. At some of these release sites "responsible persons" have not been identified or are unwilling or unable to proceed with a required stie investigaion and/or corrective action. At that point the State may take over and conduct any appropriate response actions. The MPCA and MDA are performing investigations and other response actions at sites throughout Minnesota and expect to respond to many additional sites each year. These are being conducted by two (2) State agencies through the use of three (3) different programs; the Petroleum Remediation Program (PRP), the Superfund Program and the MDA Incident Response Program.

Project Duration

Start Date Wed, 06/25/2008 - 00:00

Original end date Wed, 06/30/2010 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 06/30/2009 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $242233.25

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $242233.25

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? MERLA

Is this a sole source contract? No

If this was a single source contract, explain why the agency determined there was only a single source for the services (if applicable) {Empty}

Evaluator Name Fred Campbell

Evaluator Email Address fred.campbell@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness All deliverables were received within the original schedule. Overall the contractor had excellent schedule maintenance, and the project was completed within the original schedule

Evaluate the contractor's quality The contractor provided data of excellent quality.

Evaluate the contractor's cost The contractor had satisfactory budget management. Three change orders were needed to adjust the budget: one to add a carbon filter to a treatment system, one for snow removal, one for a passive soil gas survey. One amendment will be needed to upgrade the GW treatment system.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Terracon did a very good job managing two large work orders with several "big ticket" items, including the addition of carbon filtration to the GW treatment system, chemical oxidation pilot test, and various rounds of soil, groundwater and soil gas screening and sampling. Terracon communicated well with MPCA staff and responded quickly to necessary change orders, etc. The costs of some of the tasks were lower than anticipated, so some encumbered funds were not spent. That was the only aspect of Terracon's performance that was less than excellent.

Would you engage the contractor's services again? Yes

Describe any negative action taken during the duration of this contract (i.e., termination, pursuit of suspension, etc.): {Empty}

Please rate the overall experience with the contractor 5 - very satisfied