|
T Phases 1.3 Not to Exceed
<br />Totat;
<br />$ 2677313
<br />Phase 4 Provide Recommendations & Technical Support to ID
<br />Principal 16 1 $ 250
<br />$ 4,000
<br />Relevant Technology
<br />o� ct Manager i 32 $ 18$
<br />-
<br />$ 6c00p
<br />-
<br />ProJsetAssociate 240 $ 156
<br />$ 37,500
<br />Transfer Strategy
<br />Principal 40 $ 250
<br />$ 10,000
<br />��__.._... ___ .._
<br />j PrtlJOC# Manage� rr � 40 $ _1$8
<br />_
<br />$ 7,500
<br />I
<br />I Acquisition Support
<br />Principal
<br />_ 80 Lam 250
<br />$
<br />20080 .._..._
<br />Project Manager So $ 188
<br />1 $ 15,000
<br />7Phasa4 Not to Exceed
<br />Totel.
<br />Phase S I Conversion Support
<br />Princat 80!
<br />S 250
<br />$_ 20,000
<br />__.__�.�__
<br />Protect Mana er 240
<br />r$ 188
<br />$ 45,000
<br />._..__...____
<br />Installation Data Reconciliation
<br />_.._..__ _____...__0__._
<br />Data Anal st _r , 320
<br />Project Anal stte 160
<br />{_,_��.._...__,.__...._..
<br />i $ 156
<br />$ 156
<br />' S 50000
<br />�$ 25,000
<br />Rebate, Rate Change, & Incentive Coordination
<br />Data Analyst 80
<br />—.... .._._....._........_ ...._--- r----- ...___..__..._.__
<br />.^� 156
<br />$ 12,500
<br />._.—._ --__ —.
<br />Associate 1 8o
<br />' $ 156
<br />$ 121504
<br />final Deliverables --
<br />Prajetf Manager ,__.G 12
<br />$ 188$.
<br />2,250 ,_
<br />Profe¢t Asvwata _ 32
<br />S 156
<br />' $ 5,000
<br />Maintenance Agreement Options' - - - - --
<br />Data Analyst '1.6_0- -
<br />-5— 156
<br />I $ 25 Opo
<br />_Principai_��I 16
<br />I S 250
<br />4,000
<br />-
<br />Project Project 3
<br />Manager
<br />188
<br />6_0
<br />Y.
<br />Pro'ectAssociate
<br />i , _ __ 32
<br />_�.
<br />1
<br />$ 56
<br />50
<br />$ ,00
<br />Technical Support of web -Based Maintenance Programs
<br />-
<br />. PToh!q Mansur G 32 --I4
<br />Data Analyst 40
<br />_
<br />__188
<br />'
<br />__..
<br />$ 6,000
<br />Fieldwork to Collect GPS Data Track Maintain
<br />S 156
<br />$ 6,250
<br />to and System
<br />sID
<br />Auditor so
<br />I S 125
<br />$ 10,000
<br />Ovar /underrt areas
<br />Principal 16
<br />S 250
<br />$_ 4,000
<br />Project agar 32
<br />�-
<br />' G 188
<br />6,000
<br />Data Analyst
<br />Y st 32
<br />^..48
<br />156
<br />Project Assotiata.a�
<br />$ 156
<br />$ 7,500
<br />': (I?(iiHSe.'SNot`tol;xteedTOtelt ,. r '' r`"
<br />`$. X5_7, ;0t14'.
<br />Phases 1- 5 Not to Exceed Total* $ 624,313 t
<br />Ass um ptionsiRationale
<br />• Per the City's RFP, Phase 1, Task 2 includes support of acquisition. It is unclear as to what at this stage
<br />will be needed for acquisition support, given that the City will still be in the feasibility analysis phase at
<br />this point. However, Tanko Lighting retained this in its approach to be consistent with the City's RFP and
<br />included a minimum number of hours to support this goal. If the City provides a better definition of this
<br />Task, Tanko Lighting may need to add additional hours to support a more robust expectation.
<br />• Per the City's RFP, Phases 2 and 5 include an identical task of Identifying Over /Under -Lit Areas. Tanko
<br />Lighting took a conservative approach by including them in both Phases, assuming that planning will take
<br />place in Phase 2 and implementation will take place in Phase 5. However, if the City later determines
<br />that this is redundant, Tanko Lighting can eliminate this Task from one of the Phases (per the City's
<br />preference).
<br />• Tanko Lighting priced the Phase 2 Task 1 audit task based on the inclusion of both the SCE -owned
<br />fixtures (approximately 11,545 fixtures) as well as the City -owned fixtures (approximately 3,000 fixtures)
<br />and a comprehensive scope of work. However, should the City be interested in a more cost effective
<br />approach, Tanko Lighting can minimize the efforts with the audit for the locations where the City has
<br />already conducted an audit and simply provide commissioning (a drive -by level of effort) for these
<br />locations, combined with a comprehensive approach targeted to just the areas where the City has not
<br />previously conducted an audit. Assuming that approximately 60 percent of the City has already been
<br />comprehensively audited — and that Tanko Lighting would only be comprehensively auditing
<br />approximately 40 percent of the City's remaining fixtures (and applying the drive -by level of effort to 60
<br />percent of the fixtures), this approach would save the City approximately $85,875 from Tanko Lighting's
<br />Project Fee Schedule for that task.
<br />• Given Tanko Lighting's experience with the SCE acquisition process in other cities, the final stage before
<br />the completion of the acquisition includes SCE visiting every fixture for final fixture crossover analyses.
<br />Tanko Lighting Statement of Qualifications — City of Santa Ana — RFP #15 -053 Page 5 of 6
<br />25N -27
<br />
|