Agency Transportation Department

Contractor SRF Consulting Group, Inc.

SWIFT Contract Number 192971

Project Name Using GIS to Highlight Highway Segments Sensitive to Deicing Materials

Project Number (if applicable) 1044529

Summarize purpose of the contract, including why it was necessary: To identify roadway-adjacent areas that are likely to have a greater sensitive to deicing chemicals, specifically chlorides, this
project conducted a literature search to describe the effects of deicing chemicals, the factors which mitigate or increase their
impacts, and constructed a geospatial model that uses a variety of descriptive data to estimate the relative sensitivity of the
local environment. The model is to allow users to define roadways that are subject to deicing operations, adjust relative
importance of various factors such as land use and generate a high-medium-low thematic map of the roadways. This tool will allow a more thoughtful and targeted approach to chloride use reduction by enabling an analysis of environmental impact that can be balanced against other concerns such as safety and pavement clearing time targets.

Project Duration

Start Date Fri, 04/30/2021 - 00:00

Original end date Sun, 07/31/2022 - 00:00

Actual end date Sun, 03/31/2024 - 00:00

Did project finish on time? No

Total billable hours utilized (if applicable) {Empty}

Contract Amounts

Original contract: $98558.14

Amendments $56443.87

Contract total $155002.01

Did project finish within budget? No

What was the funding source? federal 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 Halverson,Leif Gordon

Evaluator Email Address Leif.Halverson@state.mn.us

Evaluate the contractor's timeliness Contractor's time needed to be extended due initially because several unknowns that could only be resolved during the data
collection and design stages..

Evaluate the contractor's quality Contractor's quality met expectations

Evaluate the contractor's cost Contractor's cost met expectations.

Evaluate the contractor's overall performance good

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