My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA (2) -2008
Clerk
>
Contracts / Agreements
>
M
>
METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA (2) -2008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 2:37:33 PM
Creation date
9/22/2008 8:44:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Contracts
Company Name
METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
Contract #
N-2008-116
Agency
PUBLIC WORKS
Expiration Date
6/30/2015
Insurance Exp Date
8/8/2008
Destruction Year
2019
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
80
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />t .~ <br />..' <br /> <br />I : <br />; .:/ <br /> <br />'!r\'.l.!..~'~J~6 'r~t')j-:r1 ~J..Jl) <br /> <br />nO.31B p.le <br /> <br />Agreement NO. 4600003098 <br /> <br />EXHIBIT B <br />STATEMENT OF WORK - TASKS, TIMELlNES <br />4600003098 <br />The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California <br /> <br />Project Assessment and Monitoring <br /> <br />Project assessment and monltoling is conducted by: <br /> <br />. Oeveloping and maJntaining a centralized relational program database <br /> <br />. Performing veriflcation Inspections <br /> <br />. Conducting customer satisfaction surveys <br /> <br />. Administering a full-scale process and Impact program analysis <br /> <br />The centralized database wfll be used to generate project status reports on a quarterly <br />basis for comparison against project Implementation targets. Yearly reports and a final <br />project report will also be created from the database. <br /> <br />The followfng questions will be addrassed as part of the Process and Impact Evaluation <br />(final report): <br /> <br />. How effective are the different methods of Implementation (self-install vs. direct- <br />install) in gaining customer participation? <br /> <br />. What Is the net change in water use attributable to Installation of weather-based <br />Irrlgatlon controllers? <br /> <br />. Was this rebate program cost-effective and sustainable? <br /> <br />PhaSed Implementation <br /> <br />Assessment and monitoring. ~ this project will be conducted In three phases. Phase /. <br />which wUl be conducted during Ihe Initial months of Implementation. will develop the <br />researoh approach, draft program documents and Interview instnJments, establish a data <br />collection protocol, and produce a product specification for weather-based Irrigation <br />controllers. <br /> <br />During Phase II (beginning in month three and concurrent with parts of Phase I through <br />month 9). participating agencies will seek to define customer participation and potential <br />water-saving targets. Also, preliminary evaluation results will be produced to provide <br />feedback Into program design. thus Improving overall program effectiveness. <br /> <br />Phase III (month 19 through project conclusion) will involve a hfgher-resolutlon examination. <br />of the performance of controllers and implementation methods In order to address <br />questions of potential impacts jf applied 10 other customers and/or water agencies. <br /> <br />1/1 <br /> <br />Rev/aed 14127103 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.