Agency Health Department

Contractor Regents of the Univ of Minn

SWIFT Contract Number 188929

Project Name High Spatial Resolution Sampling in the Crow Watershed to Assess NDMA Precursor Hot Spots and Comparison to Other Watersheds

Project Number (if applicable) {Empty}

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: To protect drinking water consumers from NDMA and other toxic nitrosamines, one approach is to first
identify and then curb the main sources of precursors. Prior research at the University of Minnesota has
established that NDMA precursors are elevated in certain rivers upstream of the Minneapolis-St Paul Twin
Cities Area. This study will build on that work to provide more spatial and temporal density to sampling efforts.
The aim is to use this information to identify the sources of the precursors on the landscape. Additionally, this
work will take advantage of state-of-the art non-targeted laboratory analysis to identify the specific organic
compounds in the river samples that act as precursors. This research will prove valuable to drinking water
systems in Minnesota and other agricultural states if it allows management of NDMA precursors in more costeffective
ways than using water treatment technologies.

Project Duration

Start Date Tue, 03/16/2021 - 00:00

Original end date Fri, 06/30/2023 - 00:00

Actual end date Thu, 08/31/2023 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $169652.00

Amendments {Empty}

Contract total $169652.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Clean Water Funds

Is this a sole source contract? Yes

If this was a single source contract, explain why the agency determined there was only a single source for the services (if applicable) U of M - used Joint Powers Authority

Evaluator Name Anita Smith

Evaluator Email Address anita.smith@state

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Contractor's timeliness was acceptable.

Evaluate the contractor's quality Quality of contractor's work was acceptable.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Cost was acceptable.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance The Minnesota Department of Health was satisfied with the overall performance of the work.

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.): None.

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