Agency Agriculture Dept

Contractor University of MN - Bioproducts & Biosystems Eng

SWIFT Contract Number B33837

Project Name Validation of the MN Feedlot Assessment Runoff

Project Number (if applicable) N/A

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: Feedlots can contribute to the fecal coliform and nutrient loadings of impaired streams and therefore need to be included in TMDLs (Total Maximum Daily Loads) studies. A site-specific evaluation tool, The Minnesota Feedlot Annualized Runoff Model (MinnFARM), has been developed at the University of Minnesota to make relative assessments of pollutant loading by estimating annual pollutant loads. It is widely used for planning and assessing feedlots in Minnesota. However, MinnFARM was developed as a prioritization tool and not for TMDLs loading. Additional testing of MinnFARM, and possibly revisions of its algorithms, is needed for TMDL projects.

The overall goal of the project was to assess, and possibly improve, MinnFARM as tool in predicting loading from feedlots. Key steps of the project are to (1) collect and evaluate existing observed data on feedlot runoff, (2) evaluate the accuracy of the MinnFARM model for both loading at the feedlot edge and load reductions in buffer areas, and (3) modify or add algorithms in MinnFARM to improve its accuracy and usefulness.

Project Duration

Start Date Mon, 05/18/2009 - 00:00

Original end date Sat, 04/30/2011 - 00:00

Actual end date Thu, 06/30/2011 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? Yes

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $67000.00

Amendments $0

Contract total $67000.00

Did project finish within budget? Yes

What was the funding source? Clean Water Legacy Funds

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 Robert Sip

Evaluator Email Address Rob.Sip@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness No issues. Project was completed on time. Contractor and project manager were in constant contact to avoid any issues regarding timelines and deadlines.

Evaluate the contractor's quality The contractor produced a high quality product that will be used to provide useful information regarding the need for additional research regarding feedlot open lot runoff.

Evaluate the contractor's cost Costs for the project were reasonable. There were no surprises or cost over-runs. Again, the contractor and project manager were in constant contact and there were no issues that arose.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance Without question, the contractor has a reputation of high quality work and high integrity.

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