Agency Pollution Control Agency

Contractor Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions Inc

SWIFT Contract Number 168442

Project Name Calumet Spur/Additional Investigation and Monitori

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Wood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions Inc. (Wood) will oversee the installation of temporary monitoring wells, repairs on the permanent wells at the site, and disposal of the investigation derived waste. Wood will conduct soil and groundwater sampling from the temporary wells and semi-annual sampling of the monitoring well network. Wood will obtain any subcontractors via the MPCA contractor and subcontractor purchasing manual and summarize the field work and sampling results in a report.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 10/28/2019 - 00:00

Original end date Tue, 06/30/2020 - 00:00

Actual end date Tue, 06/30/2020 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $38594.03

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $38594.03

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? State

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 Stephen Frye

Evaluator Email Address stephen.frye@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Satisfied. Contractor did a good job at keeping project on track, given the multiple things that were occurring all at once at this site.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Neutral. The contractor had some project quality issues that were addressed by MPCA’s Petroleum Remediation Program (PRP) contract manager. There were some communication issues finding one of the previously abandoned wells on the property. The contractor proposed sending out a mini excavator to dig up the site location to find it, when in actuality it was abandoned at the same time of the tank removal earlier in the fiscal year.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Neutral.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Neutral. The contractor produced the monitoring report as expected. However, some of the quality issues mentioned above also affected performance for the contractor.

Would you engage the contractor's services again? No

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 3 - neutral