HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 4083
City of Palo Alto (ID # 4083)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 9/23/2013
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Approval to Purchase Police RMS System
Title: Approval for the City Manager to Purchase a Police Records
Management System (RMS), and Field-based Reporting Applications in
Partnership With the Cities of Mountain View and Los Altos for Palo A lto’s
Participation in the Tri-Cities CAD and RMS “Virtual Consolidation” Project
and related Budget Amendment Ordinance in the Amount of $100,000 in
Contingency Funding from the Information Technology Internal Service Fund
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Police
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement to
purchase a joint public safety technology Police Records Management System from the
Intergraph Corporation. The system includes Records Management (RMS), applications for
Police field-based reporting and business intelligence. The City has an existing Cooperative
Procurement Agreement with the Cities of Mountain View and Los Altos to share the cost and
maintenance of core public safety applications.
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Intergraph Corporation
for the procurement of the jointly operated Police Records Management System.
2. Allocate $100,000 in contingency funding for the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) and
RMS public safety automated information systems from the Technology Fund
Unrestricted Ending Fund Balance to the Public Safety Computer Aided Dispatch
Replacement Capital Improvement Project.
Background
The City operates several mission-critical public safety systems to record, process, and
coordinate response to Police and Fire Department calls for service, as well as to document
City of Palo Alto Page 2
employee-initiated activity. The primary components of these systems are the Computer Aided
Dispatch (CAD) and Records Management Systems (RMS). These systems are also used to input,
retain, and retrieve information that is used for operational analysis, and to comply with
regulatory reporting requirements for crime and emergency medical service incidents. The
legacy CAD and RMS systems are more than a decade old. They have exceeded their expected
service lifecycle, and are lacking in features and functionality now available in contemporary
public safety systems.
The City Managers of Palo Alto, Mountain View, and Los Altos agreed to a broad initiative of
sharing public safety technology as a method to conserve resources, improve response times,
increase the resiliency and redundancy of these critical systems, as well as to enhance
interoperable communications between the three cities’ first responders. This initiative was
part of a Council Study Session on May 2, 2011 that presented the "virtual consolidation"
concept and the framework to share public safety technology and communication systems.
The cornerstones of the “virtual consolidation” project are CAD and RMS. The cities released a
Request for Qualifications (RFQ) in 2008 followed by a Request for Proposal (RFP) for CAD and
RMS in 2010. The RFP narrowed the field to three (3) vendors and, after product
demonstrations and extensive evaluation, the Intergraph Corporation was selected as the most
suitable provider for CAD and RMS.
In the spring of 2011 Intergraph acquired a new RMS company. Staff determined that the three
cities needed clear direction from Intergraph on their future path for RMS and assurances that
the system functionality would meet or exceed the requirements agreed to in the initial
proposal. Staff directed Intergraph to divide the CAD project and the RMS project into separate
proposals.
In February of 2012 the three cities entered into a Cooperative Procurement Agreement to
share the costs of CAD and RMS and signed a contract with the Intergraph Corporation for the
CAD system.
The Cities and Intergraph have held protracted negotiations on the RMS system over the past
year. The cost of the web-based RMS product is higher than the previously proposed legacy
system. The new product has enhanced capabilities and is better suited for the networked
environment of the larger virtual consolidation concept. The project is within budget but the
current budget for the project does not include funds for a 10% contingency to cover the costs
for change orders and/or for unforeseen issues or problems arising from the implementation of
the systems.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Discussion
The RMS system is estimated to cost approximately $904,000. The difference between this
amount and the vendor’s pricing in the contract amendment is the estimated sales tax. Based
on the agreed upon cost-sharing formula, the City’s portion of the cost for the Records
Management System is approximately $352,560 Combined hardware costs for the CAD and
RMS projects exceeded original estimates and, in order to remain within the budgeted amount
of $1.3 million, Palo Alto cancelled some non-essential items and reduced CAD costs by
$50,000. Palo Alto’s project costs for CAD and RMS replacement total approximately
$1,296,541.1
Staff recommends an additional contingency of $100,000 from the Technology Fund to cover
any change orders, network issues, or unexpected expenses associated with implementation.
This funding will also be used to increase the functionality of the systems based on updated
technologies. For the CAD system this includes integrating the Pulse Point application and web
based dispatcher licenses. Pulse Point alerts individuals to medical emergencies in real time in
order to start lifesaving procedures, such as CPR, prior to EMS personnel arriving on the scene.
The web based dispatcher licenses allow remote CAD access for the dispatchers from locations
other than emergency communications center such as Stanford Stadium and the Mobile
Emergency Operations Center (MEOC). For the RMS this includes data conversion from the
RMS currently in use and enhanced field interview reporting to capture all the data needed by
patrol and investigating officers.
$1,300,000 was budgeted in information technology CIP TE-09000 in 2009. The additional
contingency would raise the not-to-exceed amount of the project to $1,400,000. Any unused
contingency funds would revert back to the Technology fund.
Ongoing maintenance and support costs for the CAD and RMS systems are calculated using the
same cost sharing formula as for the acquisition of the system and a six year commitment is
required from the participating cities (the first year of maintenance is included in the
acquisition cost of the systems). In 2013, Palo Alto paid $114,165 for CAD and RMS
maintenance from the legacy vendor. The combined cost to the City for CAD, RMS, Mobile
Client and field-based reporting in FY 2015/16 will be $139,518 increasing to $169,534 in FY
2019/20. Funding for maintenance of these systems is currently budgeted in the Information
Technology’s application maintenance fund, and the annual increases will be included in the
budget development process for that fund, beginning with the $25,353 increase for the FY
2015/16 base budget. The contract limits annual maintenance cost increases to five percent
annually after the six year extended warranty period.
1 Palo Alto will be reimbursed by Stanford for 25% of the CAD capital cost, approximately $224,439.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Under the tri-cities’ agreement, the City of Mountain View will serve as the lead agency for the
procurement and will host the core set of equipment that comprises the systems (Palo Alto will
serve as the back-up site). The City of Mountain View will invoice the cities of Palo Alto and Los
Altos as required and make payments to the Intergraph Corporation on behalf of all parties.
Each city will be responsible for providing sufficient technical staff to support the enterprise
system’s use and the joint administration of the systems. Each city will be responsible for the
maintenance of its own data and will mutually indemnify each other with respect to the use of
the systems.
The procurement of regional public safety information systems is a critical phase of the tri-city
“virtual consolidation” project. The enterprise wide applications will serve as the centerpiece
for the larger project including a common 9-1-1 phone system and a shared police radio
frequency. The larger project will provide both technical and physical redundancy for all three
cities.
Resource Impact
The initial costs for the project are within the budget established by the original CIP. However,
Staff is requesting an additional $100,000 in contingency funds for change orders and/or other
unanticipated cost (network issues, optional enhancements or ancillary equipment).
Maintenance costs have been fixed at a five percent annual increase for a ten year period
insuring stability and cost management. The annual maintenance cost will be included in the
Information Technology Fund as part of the annual Base Budget development. Staff time for
Police and IT personnel will be impacted significantly by the twelve to eighteen month project.
Policy Implications
This agreement is consistent with existing City policy.
Timeline
Following the execution of the specified agreements, a project start date in October 2013 is
anticipated. Installation of the primary software is scheduled for January 2014, with cutover to
the new systems tentatively scheduled for the third calendar quarter in 2014.
Environmental Review
The project to purchase and implement the RMS system is not subject to CEQA pursuant to
Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15061(b)(3), and it can be seen with certainty
that there is no possibility of a significant effect on the environment.
Attachments:
City of Palo Alto Page 5
ATTACHMENT A - Amendment 1 - WebRMS 091913 (PDF)
ATTACHMENT B - Tri-City Cooperative Procurement Agreement (PDF)
ATTACHMENT C - Exhibit A-1 WebRMS Pricing and Detail Summary 091713 (PDF)
ATTACHMENT D - Exhibit B-1 WebRMS Statement of Work (PDF)
ATTACHMENT E - BAO for RMS 092313 (PDF)
ATTACHMENT F - Tri-Cities CAD Contract Staff Report 1829 (PDF)
FIRST AMENDMENT
TO THE REGIONAL PUBLIC SAFETY AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGREEMENT
BETWEEN INTERGRAPH CORPORATION
AND
THE CITIES OF LOS ALTOS, MOUNTAIN VIEW AND PALO ALTO
This First Amendment, dated XX/XX/XX (“Amendment”), to the Regional Public Safety
Automated Information Systems Agreement dated March 23, 2012, by and between Intergraph
Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, acting on the behalf of its Public Safety business unit, with
its principal office at 19 Interpro Road, Madison, Alabama 35758 (hereinafter referred to as
“Intergraph”) and the Cities of Los Altos, Mountain View, and Palo Alto , all municipal corporations
(individually “City” and collectively “Cities”). Intergraph and the Cities may be referred to
individually as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties”.
Whereas, Intergraph and the Cities have previously entered into a Contract dated March
23, 2012 (“Agreement”);
Whereas, the Cities have requested Intergraph furnish additional products and services
contemplated in Section 5.1 of the Agreement which includes a RMS Subsystem and a FBR
Subsystem; and
Whereas, Intergraph and the Cities desire to modify the scope of this Agreement to
include additional terms and conditions which will define and implement the System, as amended
below, in exchange for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged;
Now, therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements expressed
herein, Intergraph and the Cities agree as follows:
1. Revise references to “Exhibit A – Pricing and Detail Summary” and “Exhibit
A” throughout the Agreement to reference “Exhibit A – Pricing and Detail Summary and
Exhibit A-1 – RMS Pricing and Detail Summary” collectively.
2. Revise references to ”Exhibit B – Statement of Work” and “Exhibit B”
throughout the Agreement to reference “Exhibit B – Statement of Work and Exhibit B-1 – RMS
Statement of Work” collectively.
3. Revise references to “Exhibit E – Payment Milestones” and “Exhibit E”
throughout the Agreement to reference “Exhibit E – Payment Milestones and Exhibit E-1 –
RMS Payment Milestones” collectively.
4. Revise Section 1, Order of Precedence, entirely to read as follows reflect new Exhibits
for the RMS Subsystems (Red):
“The exhibits listed below are incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement. In
interpreting this Agreement and resolving any ambiguities and notwithstanding anything in the
Exhibits C - Intergraph End-User License Agreement to the contrary, the main body of this
Agreement takes precedence over the exhibits and any inconsistency between Exhibits A through
G will be resolved in their listed order.
Exhibit A Pricing and Detail Summary
Exhibit A-1 RMS Pricing and Detail Summary
Exhibit B Statement of Work
Attachment A-1 Acceptance Test Plan Overview
Attachment A-2 Project Deliverable Sign-Off Form
Attachment A-3 Customer Support Center
Attachment A-4 Training Plan
Attachment A-5 Public Safety CAD System Specifications
Attachment A-6 Draft Project Schedule
Attachment A-7 Interface Descriptions
Attachment A-8 Configuration Diagram
Attachment A-9 I/CAD Message Suite for California State Switch
Attachment A-10 Draft Acceptance Test Plan
Attachment A-11 Sample CAD/MPS Cutover Plan
Exhibit B-1 RMS Statement of Work
Attachment B-1: Acceptance Test Plan
Attachment B-2: Project Deliverable Sign-off Form
Attachment B-3: Customer Support Center
Attachment B-4 Training Plan
Attachment B-5: WebRMS System Specifications
Attachment B-6: Project Schedule
Attachment B-7: Interface Descriptions
Attachment B-8: Configuration Diagram
Attachment B-9: Software Requirements Matrix
Attachment B-10: System Configuration Specifications
Exhibit C Intergraph End-User License Agreement
Exhibit D U.S. Maintenance Terms and Conditions for Software
Exhibit E Payment Milestones
Exhibit E-1 RMS Payment Milestones
Exhibit F Intergraph Proposal Response to Mountain View’s Mountain View R08
Multi-Agency Public Safety Automated Systems Phase II – Request for
Proposal dated 02/20/2008 (including subsequent BAFOs, Revised
Pricing dated 10/11/2011 and Fit and Gap clarifications)
Exhibit G Mountain View R08 Multi-Agency Public Safety Automated Systems
Phase II – Request for Proposal”
5. Revise Section 5.1, Agreement Price, entirely to read as follows:
“The Agreement Price in U.S. dollars for all equipment, software and services pursuant to
this Agreement, including those furnished by subcontractors, shall not exceed $2,903,572 USD,
including $865,116 USD for the RMS Amendment, excluding taxes, maintenance and change
orders for non-option items, as specifically detailed in Exhibit A-1 RMS - Pricing and Detail
Summary. The not to exceed price excludes optional items which may be added at a later date
by the Parties using a Change Order. Optional unit pricing shall remain fixed through September
30, 2014 for Exhibit A-1.
6. Add a new Exhibit A-1, RMS Pricing and Detail Summary, which is attached and
incorporated by reference to this Amendment.
7. Add a new Exhibit B-1, RMS Statement of Work, which is attached and incorporated
by reference to this Amendment.
8. Add a new Exhibit E-1, RMS Milestone Payments, which is attached and
incorporated by reference to this Amendment.
9. Except as expressly modified herein, the Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect in accordance with its terms and conditions.
In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have signed this Amendment as of the date written
above.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
Purchasing and Support Services Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW,
a California Charter City and municipal corporation
By:
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
CITY OF LOS ALTOS,
a municipal corporation
By:
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Assistant City Attorney
CITY OF PALO ALTO,
a municipal corporation
By:
City Manager
INTERGRAPH CORPORATION,
a Delaware corporation
________________________________
By:
________________________________
Its:
________________________________
STATE OF ALABAMA)
) ss.
County of Madison)
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ______ day of March, 2012, by
_____________________________, the ___________________ of Intergraph Corporation, a
Delaware corporation.
________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
_______________________
Exhibit A-1
RMS PRICING AND DETAIL SUMMARY
[see attached]
EXHIBIT B-1
RMS STATEMENT OF WORK
EXHIBIT E-1
RMS PAYMENT MILESTONES
TBD
-1-
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF REGIONAL
PUBLIC SAFETY AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS
THIS Cooperative Procurement Agreement (Cooperative Agreement) is dated
February, ______, 2012 for identification, by and between the CITIES OF LOS ALTOS,
MOUNTAIN VIEW AND PALO ALTO, all municipal corporations (hereafter "LOS
ALTOS," "MOUNTAIN VIEW" and "PALO ALTO" respectively and individually "City"
or collectively "Cities."
RECITALS
WHEREAS, in 2007, the Cities began the process to upgrade and or replace their
existing public safety automated systems and agreed to work together to share
resources in order to achieve cost savings by combining separate vendor selection
processes; and
WHEREAS, the Cities continue to explore sharing the procurement and use of
public safety systems, sharing information, and workload where feasible to share costs
and virtually consolidate the provision of services and agreed this is a common and
important goal for all three cities; and
WHEREAS, the Cities released a Request for Qualifications and a Request for
Proposals, evaluated the vendor proposals for a detailed design of Regional Public
Safety Automated Information Systems and negotiated an agreement with Intergraph
Corporation; and
WHEREAS, based on the Request for Proposals, Intergraph Corporation has been
selected as the vendor to provide a fully integrated Regional Public Safety Automated
Information Systems, including but not limited to Computer Aided Dispatch ("CAD"),
Records Management ("RMS") Mobile for Public Safety ("MPS"), Field Based Reporting
("FBR") and various other subsystems and external interfaces; and
WHEREAS, this Cooperative Agreement is intended to address the terms and
conditions under which the Cities will fund, acquire, operate, maintain and upgrade the
Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems for the Cities; and
WHEREAS, the Cities now wish to enter into this Cooperative Agreement for
Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems and to set forth the terms and
conditions under which the Cities will participate in the joint acquisition, installation,
operation and maintenance of the Regional Public Safety Automated Information
Systems.
-2-
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, incorporating the foregoing Recitals, the Cities enter into this
Cooperative Agreement for the Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems
("Cooperative Agreement").
1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this Cooperative Agreement for Regional Public
Safety Automated Information Systems is to set forth the terms and conditions under
which the Cities will fund, acquire, install, operate, maintain and upgrade the Regional
Public Safety Automated Information Systems ("the Systems") acquired pursuant to this
Cooperative Agreement.
2. LEAD CITYCITY. The City of Mountain View shall continue as the Lead
City, for the purposes described below in accordance with its purchasing ordinances
and procedures. As Lead City, the City of Mountain View, on behalf of the Cities, shall:
A. Award and administer the contract dated _________ 2012 between the
Cities and Intergraph Corporation to furnish the Systems pursuant to the agreement
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" ("Intergraph Agreement"). The scope of this Cooperative
Agreement also includes RMS should the Cities decide to amend the Intergraph
Agreement to include that subsystem. As part of the administration of the Intergraph
Agreement, the Lead City will receive payments from the Cities and make payments to
Intergraph Corporation on behalf of the Cities for services rendered by Intergraph or
any third party interfaces.
B. Coordinate, in conjunction with Intergraph Corporation, the master
project schedule for the implementation of the Systems.
C. Host the core components of the Systems, including the provision of
sufficient and suitable space, power and cooling for computing, storage, network and
related equipment necessary to operate the Systems.
D. Host the necessary third-party interfaces required in typical public
safety information systems, such as the connection to the California Law Enforcement
Telecommunications System ("CLETS"), County of Santa Clara Law Enforcement
Telecommunications System ("SLETS"), County of Santa Clara Criminal Justice
Information Control ("CJIC") and others as agreed to by the Cities.
E. Act as the "Message Switching Computer" (MSC) administrator with
respect to the use of the Systems to access CLETS, and maintain the necessary
documentation and agreements with the California Department of Justice (DOJ).
-3-
F. Invoice Los Altos and Palo Alto quarterly in advance for their respective
share of any costs under the Intergraph Agreement to be incurred during the upcoming
quarter. An itemized breakdown of those costs will be provided with the invoice. City-
specific costs will be invoiced at time of procurement.
G. Make periodic payments within thirty (30) days of receiving and
approving a billing statement from Intergraph Corporation in proportion to the
satisfactory completion of Intergraph's services.
3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITIES
A. Executive Sponsorship. In support of the shared use of the Systems
and as necessary, the Police Chief or his/her designee from all the Cities shall jointly
prepare written guidelines for the shared use of Systems, including but not limited to
an informal dispute resolution process.
B. Operation of the Systems. Each City will acquire, install, maintain,
operate and periodically maintain the Systems for a minimum of six (6) years from the
go-live date for the Systems in accordance with this Cooperative Agreement, unless
otherwise agreed to by the Cities in writing. Each City will devote sufficient personnel
resources to allow their employees to develop subject matter expertise in the operation
and management of the Systems in order to successfully implement City-specific
workflow(s) required by their respective City.
C. Project Management Team. A Project Management Team shall be
formed and shall be composed of one representative from each City. The Project
Management Team shall be responsible for the day-to-day supervision of the contract
for the delivery, installation, training, operation and implementation of the Systems of
each City.
D. Core Implementation Team. To ensure a successful project and the
implementation of the systems, a "Core Team" of employees, representing a cross-
section of the various disciplines such as dispatch, fire suppression, police patrol,
records and investigations, will be assembled. Each City will select and assign
employees to perform Core Team duties, including but not limited to, participating in
conference calls, traveling to meetings at various locations, developing system usage
policies and procedures, configuring the systems for use, developing training plans and
materials, attending conferences and training classes provided by Intergraph
Corporation or other parties, and other duties as required.
E. Facility Preparation. Each City shall be responsible for the preparation
of its facilities including but not limited to air conditioning, space, all electrical drops,
cabling and any other items to be furnished by the City per the Intergraph Agreement.
-4-
F. Alterations and Upgrades. Each City shall notify the other Cities at
least ninety (90) days in advance of any modifications to or upgrades not included in
the Intergraph Agreement that it intends to make to the Systems in order to provide the
other Cities with the opportunity to participate in the modification or upgrade or
provide comments on the proposed modification or upgrade. Each City understands
and agrees that the modification or upgrade cannot interfere with the public safety
operations of the other Cities nor can it substantially alter the function and form of the
shared Systems. While the other Cities may elect to participate in the modification or
upgrade, they are under no obligation to do so.
G. Training and User Support. Each City shall assign qualified personnel
to attend training classes and in turn, train other users within their respective City.
Each City will, to the greatest extent possible, be responsible for their own internal
training and user support. Nothing shall preclude the Cities from sharing personnel
resources and materials, if agreeable and beneficial, for training purposes, however
there is no obligation to do so.
H. Systems Administration and Technical Support. Each City shall assign
qualified personnel to perform the Systems administration tasks necessary for
successful operation and use of the Systems. To the greatest extent possible, each City
shall administer its own City-specific data, within the agreed-to Systems policies. Each
City will, to the greatest extent possible, be responsible for its own system
administration and technical support. Nothing shall preclude the Cities from sharing
personnel resources and materials, if agreeable and beneficial, for system
administration and technical support purposes, however there is no obligation to do so.
I. Information Security and Confidentiality. Each City shall be
responsible for the accuracy, timeliness and completeness of information entered into or
through the Systems by their respective Systems users. Each City shall be the owner of
record for all information entered into and stored by the Systems users authorized by
that City. Each City shall act as their own custodian of records for data or records
entered into the Systems.
J. Interfaces and Supporting Systems. Third-party independent systems
are the responsibility of the hosting City.
K. Compliance with Applicable Laws, Policies, Rules and Regulations.
Each City is responsible for compliance with all applicable state and federal laws,
regulations and policies.
L. Software Licenses. At the request of Intergraph Corporation, Mountain
View will hold the software licenses for the benefit of the other Cities and shall transfer
-5-
licenses to Los Altos or Palo Alto in accordance with the Intergraph Agreement if this
Cooperative Agreement is terminated for any reason.
M. Project Deliverable Sign Off. The Cities will prepare a mutually agreed
upon sign off form to document each City’s sign off on the Project
Deliverables/Milestones in Exhibit “_” to the Intergraph Agreement (“Milestones”) as
the Milestones are completed . Each City understands and agrees that Intergraph
Corporation requires Mountain View to sign the Project Deliverable Sign Off on behalf
of all Cities within fifteen (15) workdays of the completion of the Milestones itemized
(insert reference document). Accordingly, each City shall endeavor to sign the mutually
agreed upon sign off form for the Cities at least ten (10) workdays of completion of a
Milestone. If a Milestone is rejected for any reason, the City rejecting the Milestone or
the Cities jointly, as the case may be, will prepare a written description of the
deficiencies within ten (10) workdays of the rejection. The Cities understand and agree
that if Mountain View fail to accept or reject a Milestone on behalf of the Cities within
fifteen (15) workdays, or if the Cities elect to place a Subsystem into production
operation, then Intergraph requires full payment of the contract price for the Milestone.
4. COSTS/FUNDING
A. Cost Allocation Calculation. The parties have agreed to share the cost
of the acquisition, implementation, and ongoing maintenance and support costs to
operate and maintain the Systems ("Total Project Cost") as shown on Exhibit "B." The
City's share of the Total Project Cost shall be calculated using the following formula:
i. Each City shall pay a one-third (1/3) share of fifty percent (50%) of
the Total Project Cost.
ii. Each City shall also pay a proportionate share of the remaining
fifty percent (50%) of the Total Project Cost. This proportionate share shall be
calculated based upon the ratio of population served by each City to the total
population served by the Systems. For purposes of this calculation, the population for
each City shall be the 2010 United States Census information. For purposes of this
calculation, the population of the Stanford Community as shown in the 2010 United
States Census shall be included in the population of Palo Alto.
B. Cost Allocation Calculation Estimate. A Cost Allocation Calculation
Estimate of each Party's share of the Total Project Cost is attached as Exhibit "C" to this
Cooperative Agreement.
-6-
C. Per-User License Costs. Costs for per-user or per-seat software licenses
used with Systems shall be the responsibility of the user City.
D. Computer Workstation Hardware. Costs for computer workstations
and their associated peripheral equipment purchased via the Intergraph Agreement
and for use with the Systems shall be the responsibility of the user City, with the
exception of the "Map Maintenance Workstation," as described in _________ of the
Intergraph Agreement.
E. Fire Specific Costs. Los Altos shall not be responsible for enhancements
and interfaces to the CAD System for fire specific services as denoted above and
described in detail in _______ of the Intergraph Agreement.
F. Quarterly Invoicing. The Cities shall pay the quarterly payment to the
City of Mountain View within thirty (30) calendar days from the receipt of an invoice
from the City of Mountain View.
G. Detail Design Agreement. On behalf of the Cities, Mountain View
retained Intergraph Corporation to provide the Cities with a detailed design for the
Systems. Each City agreed to share in the cost of obtaining these services. The cost of the
detailed system design is Sixty Thousand Dollars. Accordingly, each CITY shall pay
Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000) for the detailed system design.ʺ
5. THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS. It is not the intent of the Cities of this Cooperative
Agreement to create any third-party beneficiary. Any failure to perform under the
terms of this Cooperative Agreement shall not create any claim or right by any
individual or entity who is not a signatory to this Cooperative Agreement.
6. TERM OF COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT. The term of this Cooperative
Agreement shall commence on the date the City of Mountain View awards the contract
to Intergraph Corporation and shall continue through June 30, 2019.
7. TERMINATION. Any City may terminate its participation in this
Cooperative Agreement by giving written notice of not less than ninety (90) days before
the beginning of the next fiscal year (hereby defined as July 1 of each year) and effective
only on July 1 of each year. If a City terminates its participation in this Cooperative
Agreement, it shall pay its portion of costs for which it has been billed pursuant to
Paragraph 4 above to the date of termination. Upon termination of a City's
-7-
participation in this Cooperative Agreement, the City shall relinquish its interest in any
jointly purchased equipment acquired pursuant to this Cooperative Agreement.
8. PERFORMANCE GUARANTEES. By executing this Cooperative Agreement,
each City agrees to complete any and all necessary actions to accomplish successfully
the purpose of this Cooperative Agreement and all other agreements authorized
pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Cooperative Agreement.
9. GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM REGIONAL COOPERATION.
The Cities recognize that the existence of an up-to-date and accurate Geographical
Information System ("GIS") for all Cities is necessary for the effective operation of
centralized CAD System for law enforcement and fire protection services. Each City
agrees to participate and cooperate in all activities necessary to maintain an up-to-date
and accurate GIS.
10. MUTUAL INDEMNIFICATION. In lieu of and notwithstanding the pro-rata
risk allocation which might otherwise be imposed between the parties pursuant to
Government Code Section 895.6, the parties agree that all losses or liabilities incurred by
a party shall not be shared pro rata, but instead, the Cities agree that pursuant to
Government Code Section 895.4, each of the parties hereto shall fully indemnify and
hold each of the other parties, their officers, board members, employees and agents
harmless from any claim, expense or cost, damage or liability imposed for injury (as
defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of the negligent acts or
omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying party, its officers, board members,
employees or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority
or jurisdiction delegated to such party under this Cooperative Agreement. No party,
nor any officer, board member, employee or agent thereof shall be responsible for any
damage or liability occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful
misconduct of other parties hereto, their officers, board members, employees or agents,
under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority or jurisdiction
delegated to such other parties under this Cooperative Agreement.
-8-
11. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
11.1 Notice. All notices required by this Cooperative Agreement will be
deemed given when in writing and delivered personally or deposited in the United
States mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the other party at
the address set forth below or at such other address as the party may designate in
writing:
To Los Altos:
To Mountain View:
To Palo Alto:
Police Services Manager
City of Los Altos
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, CA 94022-3088
Senior Systems Specialist
Police Department
City of Mountain View
P.O. Box 7540
Mountain View, CA
94039-7540
Technical Services Director
City of Palo Alto
275 Forest Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
11.2 Governing Law. This Cooperative Agreement has been executed and
delivered in, and will be construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the
State of California.
11.3 Assignment. The parties may not assign this Cooperative Agreement or
the rights and obligations hereunder without the specific written consent of the others.
11.4 Entire Agreement. This document represents the entire Cooperative
Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. All prior
negotiations and written and/or oral agreements between the parties with respect to
the subject matter of this Cooperative Agreement are merged into this Cooperative
Agreement.
11.5 Amendments. This Cooperative Agreement may only be amended by
an instrument signed by the parties.
11.6 Counterparts. This Cooperative Agreement may be executed in one or
more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which
together shall constitute one and the same instrument.
11.7 Severability. If any provision of this Cooperative Agreement is found
by a court of competent jurisdiction to be void, invalid or unenforceable, the same will
either be reformed to comply with applicable law or stricken if not so conformable, so
as not to affect the validity or enforceability of this Cooperative Agreement.
-9-
11.8 Waiver. No delay or failure to require performance of any provision of
this Cooperative Agreement shall constitute a waiver of that provision as to that or any
other instance. Any waiver granted by a party must be in writing and shall apply to the
specific instance expressly stated.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Cities have caused this Cooperative Agreement to be
executed by their respective governing officials duly authorized by their respective
legislative bodies.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
City Attorney
FINANCIAL APPROVAL:
Finance and Administrative
Services Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW,
a California Charter City and municipal
corporation
By:
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
CITY OF LOS ALTOS,
a municipal corporation
By:
City Manager
-10-
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Assistant City Attorney
CITY OF PALO ALTO,
a municipal corporation
By:
City Manager
JLQ/4/ATY
010-01-31-12A-E^
Pr
i
c
i
n
g
f
o
r
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
,
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Va
l
i
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
1
1
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
3
Vir
t
u
a
l
i
z
e
d
W
e
b
R
M
S
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
U
S
$
U
S
$
U
S
$
IT
E
M
Ite
m
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
B
y
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
U
s
e
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
Q
t
y
U
n
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Sof
t
w
a
r
e
Ma
i
n
t
.
(32
1
)
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
W
e
b
R
M
S
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
S
e
r
v
e
r
#
1
(
L
o
a
d
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
C
l
u
s
t
e
r
)
324
We
b
R
M
S
S
e
r
v
e
r
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
0
0
1
6
)
1
8
7
,
0
0
0
$
8
7
,
0
0
0
$
2
0
,
0
1
6
$
325
We
b
R
M
S
S
e
r
v
e
r
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
-
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
A
g
e
n
c
y
(
R
M
S
0
0
1
6
A
G
Y
)
Pal
o
A
l
t
o
a
n
d
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
2
7
,
5
0
0
$
1
5
,
0
0
0
$
3
,
4
8
0
$
327
Cry
s
t
a
l
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
f
o
r
E
c
l
i
p
s
e
1
328
Sta
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
c
c
i
d
e
n
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
o
r
m
s
(
C
H
P
5
5
5
,
5
5
6
&
5
5
6
D
)
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
)
Th
i
s
b
i
d
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
a
s
u
b
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
o
f
acc
i
d
e
n
t
d
a
t
a
t
o
t
h
e
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
.
1
1
0
,
6
6
6
$
1
0
,
6
6
6
$
2
,
1
3
3
$
330
Sta
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
o
r
m
(
C
H
P
1
8
0
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
3
)
De
v
e
l
o
p
c
u
s
t
o
m
f
o
r
m
m
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
pri
n
t
e
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
.
1
1
1
,
5
5
5
$
1
1
,
5
5
5
$
2
,
3
1
1
$
332
Sta
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
F
o
r
m
a
n
d
P
r
i
n
t
e
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
U
C
R
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
2
)
Re
p
o
r
t
(
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
c
u
s
t
o
m
i
z
i
n
g
t
h
e
pri
n
t
e
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
t
o
l
o
o
k
e
x
a
c
t
l
y
l
i
k
e
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
Vie
w
'
s
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
r
e
p
o
r
t
)
.
1
3
,
6
1
1
$
3
,
6
1
1
$
7
2
2
$
334
Co
m
b
i
n
e
d
C
a
s
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
9
)
Re
p
o
r
t
Wi
l
l
c
r
e
a
t
e
a
n
e
w
F
B
R
f
o
r
m
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
b
e
u
s
e
d
to c
a
p
t
u
r
e
t
h
e
d
a
t
a
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
a
n
d
gen
e
r
a
t
e
a
p
d
f
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
r
i
n
t
e
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
.
1
2
8
,
8
8
8
$
2
8
,
8
8
8
$
5
,
7
7
8
$
(33
9
)
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
W
e
b
R
M
S
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
S
e
r
v
e
r
#
2
(
L
o
a
d
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
C
l
u
s
t
e
r
)
341
We
b
R
M
S
S
e
r
v
e
r
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
-
R
e
d
u
n
d
a
n
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
0
0
1
6
R
D
T
)
1
6
0
,
9
0
0
$
6
0
,
9
0
0
$
1
4
,
0
1
6
$
343
Cry
s
t
a
l
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
f
o
r
E
c
l
i
p
s
e
1
(34
5
)
BI
D
i
r
e
c
t
S
e
r
v
e
r
347
BI
D
i
r
e
c
t
f
o
r
W
e
b
R
M
S
(
S
B
N
D
3
0
9
0
L
)
1
2
4
,
0
0
0
$
2
4
,
0
0
0
$
5
,
5
2
0
$
(34
9
)
BI
D
i
r
e
c
t
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
S
e
r
v
e
r
351
MS
S
Q
L
S
e
r
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
R
2
S
E
R
u
n
t
i
m
e
(
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
o
r
)
(
E
6
5
-
0
0
1
7
5
)
Re
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
(RD
B
M
S
)
1
3
,
7
5
4
$
3
,
7
5
4
$
7
2
0
$
(35
4
)
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
W
e
b
R
M
S
I
n
t
e
r
f
a
c
e
S
e
r
v
e
r
356
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
C
A
G
I
S
-
S
v
r
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
0
0
0
8
)
1
3
0
,
0
0
0
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
$
6
,
9
3
6
$
357
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
L
i
n
k
(
I
P
S
0
0
3
0
-
1
)
1
358
I/In
f
o
r
m
e
r
t
o
i
n
P
U
R
S
U
I
T
(
I
P
S
0
0
0
4
A
)
1
360
Ed
g
e
F
r
o
n
t
i
e
r
P
l
a
t
f
o
r
m
(
I
P
S
2
0
4
2
)
1
1
5
,
0
0
0
$
1
5
,
0
0
0
$
3
,
4
6
8
$
362
Ed
g
e
F
r
o
n
t
i
e
r
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
o
r
P
a
c
k
(
I
P
S
2
0
4
2
A
)
1
5
,
0
0
0
$
5
,
0
0
0
$
1
,
1
6
4
$
364
Ed
g
e
F
r
o
n
t
i
e
r
A
d
a
p
t
e
r
K
i
t
f
o
r
i
n
P
U
R
S
U
I
T
R
M
S
(
I
P
S
2
0
4
4
)
1
3
5
,
0
0
0
$
3
5
,
0
0
0
$
8
,
0
4
0
$
378
EF
I
n
t
e
r
f
a
c
e
t
o
C
o
p
L
o
g
i
c
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
3
)
1
-
w
a
y
I
m
p
o
r
t
1
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
4
,
3
3
3
$
382
EF
E
x
p
o
r
t
t
o
E
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
T
r
a
c
k
e
r
.
c
o
m
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
5
)
2
-
w
a
y
E
x
p
o
r
t
1
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
4
,
3
3
3
$
384
EF
E
x
p
o
r
t
t
o
E
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
O
n
Q
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
6
)
2
-
w
a
y
E
x
p
o
r
t
1
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
4
,
3
3
3
$
386
Cu
s
t
o
m
I
n
t
e
r
f
a
c
e
f
o
r
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
U
C
R
a
n
d
E
C
A
R
S
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
)
1
-
w
a
y
E
x
p
o
r
t
1
4
0
,
0
0
0
$
4
0
,
0
0
0
$
8
,
0
0
0
$
388
Cu
s
t
o
m
I
/
I
n
f
o
r
m
e
r
Q
u
e
r
i
e
s
f
r
o
m
W
e
b
R
M
S
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
7
)
1
-
w
a
y
E
x
p
o
r
t
1
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
4
,
3
3
3
$
390
Cu
s
t
o
m
I
n
t
e
r
f
a
c
e
f
o
r
"
E
n
t
e
r
s
"
t
o
t
h
e
S
t
a
t
e
S
w
i
t
c
h
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
8
)
Inc
l
u
d
e
s
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
(
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
B
o
a
t
,
Sto
l
e
n
a
n
d
M
i
s
s
i
n
g
)
,
P
e
r
s
o
n
(
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
W
a
n
t
e
d
,
Mi
s
s
i
n
g
)
a
n
d
A
r
t
i
c
l
e
(
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
P
a
w
n
,
S
t
o
l
e
n
)
.
1
2
3
,
1
1
0
$
2
3
,
1
1
0
$
2
,
8
8
9
$
394
Int
e
r
f
a
c
e
t
o
C
o
p
l
i
n
k
V
i
a
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
A
c
c
e
s
s
1
396
Int
e
r
f
a
c
e
t
o
C
r
i
m
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
.
c
o
m
V
i
a
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
A
c
c
e
s
s
1
Inc
l
u
d
e
d
a
t
n
o
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
R
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Inc
l
u
d
e
d
a
t
n
o
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Mt
V
i
e
w
_
W
e
b
R
M
S
_
$
0
9
1
8
1
3
$
d
l
s
(
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
)
.
x
l
s
m
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
P
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Pag
e
1
o
f
7
Pr
i
c
i
n
g
f
o
r
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
,
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Va
l
i
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
1
1
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
3
Vir
t
u
a
l
i
z
e
d
W
e
b
R
M
S
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
U
S
$
U
S
$
U
S
$
IT
E
M
Ite
m
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
B
y
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
U
s
e
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
Q
t
y
U
n
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Sof
t
w
a
r
e
Ma
i
n
t
.
(40
1
)
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
F
B
R
W
e
b
S
e
r
v
e
r
403
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
F
i
e
l
d
B
a
s
e
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
S
v
r
L
i
c
(
R
M
S
0
0
0
4
)
1
2
9
,
0
0
0
$
2
9
,
0
0
0
$
6
,
7
0
8
$
404
Ap
a
c
h
e
T
o
m
C
a
t
7
(
F
r
e
e
I
n
t
e
r
n
e
t
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
)
1
405
Mi
c
r
o
s
o
f
t
S
Q
L
S
e
r
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
R
2
E
x
p
r
e
s
s
(
F
r
e
e
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
)
Re
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
(RD
B
M
S
)
1
(43
0
)
Ap
a
c
h
e
/
I
I
S
H
o
s
t
S
e
r
v
e
r
#
1
(
L
o
a
d
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
C
l
u
s
t
e
r
)
432
Ap
a
c
h
e
T
o
m
C
a
t
7
(
F
r
e
e
I
n
t
e
r
n
e
t
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
)
1
(43
4
)
Ap
a
c
h
e
/
I
I
S
H
o
s
t
S
e
r
v
e
r
#
2
(
L
o
a
d
B
a
l
a
n
c
e
C
l
u
s
t
e
r
)
436
Ap
a
c
h
e
T
o
m
C
a
t
7
(
F
r
e
e
I
n
t
e
r
n
e
t
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
)
1
(43
8
)
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
W
e
b
R
M
S
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
S
e
r
v
e
r
#
1
(
F
a
i
l
o
v
e
r
C
l
u
s
t
e
r
)
440
MS
S
Q
L
S
e
r
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
R
2
E
E
R
u
n
t
i
m
e
(
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
o
r
)
(
E
6
6
-
0
0
1
6
5
)
Re
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
(RD
B
M
S
)
1
1
3
,
9
6
6
$
1
3
,
9
6
6
$
2
,
6
5
2
$
(44
2
)
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
W
e
b
R
M
S
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
S
e
r
v
e
r
#
2
(
F
a
i
l
o
v
e
r
C
l
u
s
t
e
r
)
444
MS
S
Q
L
S
e
r
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
R
2
E
E
R
u
n
t
i
m
e
(
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
o
r
)
(
N
o
C
h
a
r
g
e
)
(
E
6
6
-
0
0
1
6
5
N
C
)
Re
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
(RD
B
M
S
)
1
(44
6
)
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
W
e
b
R
M
S
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
T
e
s
t
/
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
e
r
448
We
b
R
M
S
S
e
r
v
e
r
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
-
T
e
s
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
0
0
1
6
T
S
T
)
1
449
Ap
a
c
h
e
T
o
m
C
a
t
7
(
F
r
e
e
I
n
t
e
r
n
e
t
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
)
(
D
e
n
a
l
i
-
7
)
Re
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
(RD
B
M
S
)
1
450
Cry
s
t
a
l
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
f
o
r
E
c
l
i
p
s
e
1
(45
2
)
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
W
e
b
R
M
S
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
T
e
s
t
/
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
e
r
454
MS
S
Q
L
S
e
r
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
R
2
S
E
R
u
n
t
i
m
e
(
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
o
r
)
(
E
6
5
-
0
0
1
7
5
)
Re
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
(RD
B
M
S
)
1
3
,
7
5
4
$
3
,
7
5
4
$
7
2
0
$
(46
0
)
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
W
e
b
R
M
S
F
B
R
T
e
s
t
/
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
e
r
461
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
F
i
e
l
d
B
a
s
e
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
e
r
-
T
e
s
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
0
0
0
4
T
S
T
)
1
462
Ap
a
c
h
e
T
o
m
C
a
t
7
(
F
r
e
e
I
n
t
e
r
n
e
t
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
)
Re
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
(RD
B
M
S
)
1
463
Mi
c
r
o
s
o
f
t
S
Q
L
S
e
r
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
R
2
E
x
p
r
e
s
s
(
F
r
e
e
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
)
Re
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
(RD
B
M
S
)
1
(46
5
)
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
W
e
b
R
M
S
I
n
t
e
r
f
a
c
e
T
e
s
t
/
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
e
r
467
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
L
i
n
k
(
I
P
S
0
0
3
0
-
1
)
1
469
I/In
f
o
r
m
e
r
t
o
i
n
P
U
R
S
U
I
T
-
T
e
s
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
I
P
S
0
0
0
4
A
T
S
T
)
1
471
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
C
A
G
I
S
S
e
r
v
e
r
-
T
e
s
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
0
0
0
8
T
S
T
)
1
479
Ed
g
e
F
r
o
n
t
i
e
r
P
l
a
t
f
o
r
m
-
T
e
s
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
I
P
S
2
0
4
2
T
S
T
)
1
481
Ed
g
e
F
r
o
n
t
i
e
r
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
o
r
P
a
c
k
-
T
e
s
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
I
P
S
2
0
4
2
A
T
S
T
)
1
483
Ed
g
e
F
r
o
n
t
i
e
r
A
d
a
p
t
e
r
K
i
t
f
o
r
i
n
P
U
R
S
U
I
T
R
M
S
-
T
e
s
t
(
I
P
S
2
0
4
4
T
S
T
)
1
(49
6
)
vC
e
n
t
e
r
S
e
r
v
e
r
498
Mi
c
r
o
s
o
f
t
S
Q
L
S
e
r
v
e
r
2
0
0
8
R
2
E
x
p
r
e
s
s
(
F
r
e
e
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
)
Re
l
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
(RD
B
M
S
)
1
499
vC
e
n
t
e
r
S
e
r
v
e
r
1
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Inc
l
u
d
e
d
a
t
n
o
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Inc
l
u
d
e
d
a
t
n
o
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Inc
l
u
d
e
d
a
t
n
o
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Inc
l
u
d
e
d
a
t
n
o
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Inc
l
u
d
e
d
a
t
n
o
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
Inc
l
u
d
e
d
a
t
n
o
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Inc
l
u
d
e
d
a
t
n
o
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Inc
l
u
d
e
d
a
t
n
o
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
No
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
c
o
s
t
Mt
V
i
e
w
_
W
e
b
R
M
S
_
$
0
9
1
8
1
3
$
d
l
s
(
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
)
.
x
l
s
m
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
P
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Pag
e
2
o
f
7
Pr
i
c
i
n
g
f
o
r
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
,
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Va
l
i
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
1
1
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
3
Vir
t
u
a
l
i
z
e
d
W
e
b
R
M
S
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
U
S
$
U
S
$
U
S
$
IT
E
M
Ite
m
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
B
y
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
U
s
e
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
Q
t
y
U
n
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Sof
t
w
a
r
e
Ma
i
n
t
.
(57
0
)
Su
p
e
r
v
i
s
o
r
W
o
r
k
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
574
We
b
R
M
S
C
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
U
s
e
r
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
0
0
1
7
)
C
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
1
1
,
6
0
0
$
1
,
6
0
0
$
3
7
2
$
(59
3
)
We
b
R
M
S
W
o
r
k
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
(
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
/
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
/
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
)
594
RM
S
W
o
r
k
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
:
I
B
M
C
o
m
p
a
t
i
b
l
e
D
u
a
l
C
o
r
e
I
n
t
e
l
o
r
AM
D
,
2
G
B
,
8
0
G
B
H
a
r
d
D
r
i
v
e
,
F
l
o
p
p
y
D
r
i
v
e
a
n
d
1
6
x
C
D
/
D
V
D
-
R
O
M
,
G
i
g
a
b
i
t
Eth
e
r
n
e
t
P
o
r
t
;
1
S
e
r
i
a
l
P
o
r
t
;
1
U
S
B
P
o
r
t
;
W
i
n
d
o
w
s
®
X
P
P
r
o
o
r
7
P
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
(UA
C
D
i
a
b
l
e
d
)
3
2
b
i
t
o
r
6
4
b
i
t
;
D
u
a
l
1
9
"
F
l
a
d
P
a
n
e
l
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
s
;
1
0
2
4
x
7
6
8
,
2
5
6
Vid
e
o
;
I
n
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
:
M
S
O
f
f
i
c
e
W
o
r
d
a
n
d
E
x
c
e
l
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
;
W
e
b
B
r
o
w
s
e
r
for
W
e
b
R
M
S
We
b
R
M
S
W
o
r
k
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
(
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
/
P
a
l
o
Alt
o
/
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
)
24
596
We
b
R
M
S
C
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
U
s
e
r
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
0
0
1
7
)
C
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
2
4
1
,
6
0
0
$
3
8
,
4
0
0
$
8
,
9
2
8
$
597
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
C
A
G
I
S
-
C
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
U
s
e
r
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
0
0
0
9
)
C
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
3
1
,
5
0
0
$
4
,
5
0
0
$
1
,
0
4
4
$
(60
0
)
Mo
b
i
l
e
D
a
t
a
C
o
m
p
u
t
e
r
s
(
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
/
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
/
L
o
s
A
l
t
o
s
)
603
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
F
i
e
l
d
B
a
s
e
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
-
C
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
1
1
0
5
)
C
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
4
0
1
,
5
9
0
$
6
3
,
6
0
0
$
1
4
,
4
0
0
$
(60
9
)
We
b
R
M
S
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
W
o
r
k
s
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
(
D
i
s
p
a
t
c
h
e
r
A
c
a
d
e
m
y
-
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
/
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
)
611
We
b
R
M
S
C
o
n
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
U
s
e
r
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
-
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
(
R
M
S
0
0
1
7
T
R
N
)
5
8
0
0
$
4
,
0
0
0
$
1
,
8
6
0
$
(63
2
)
Ot
h
e
r
H
a
r
d
w
a
r
e
a
n
d
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
635
De
l
l
P
o
w
e
r
E
d
g
e
R
6
2
0
D
u
a
l
E
i
g
h
t
-
C
o
r
e
I
n
t
e
l
P
r
o
c
e
s
s
o
r
s
;
1
9
2
G
B
D
D
R
#
R
A
M
;
T
w
o
(2)
2
G
B
S
D
C
a
r
d
s
,
M
i
r
r
o
r
e
d
;
D
V
D
-
R
O
M
C
o
m
b
o
D
r
i
v
e
;
E
S
X
5
.
1
E
E
+
O
S
;
F
o
u
r
(
4
)
1G
B
N
I
C
,
C
o
p
p
e
r
;
Q
l
o
g
i
c
2
5
6
2
D
u
a
l
C
h
a
n
n
e
l
8
G
B
O
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
F
i
b
r
e
C
h
a
n
n
e
l
H
B
A
;
U
He
i
g
h
t
-
1
,
P
l
u
g
t
y
p
e
-
C
1
3
(
Q
t
y
2
)
V
M
w
a
r
e
5
.
1
E
n
t
e
r
p
r
i
s
e
P
l
u
s
C
P
U
(
Q
t
y
2
)
;
5
y
e
a
r
s
Pro
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
I
T
(
2
4
x
7
H
W
/
S
W
)
;
M
i
s
s
i
o
n
C
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
P
a
c
k
a
g
e
(
4
-
h
o
u
r
s
7
x
2
4
o
n
-
s
i
t
e
sup
p
o
r
t
)
(
T
B
D
H
W
1
)
Ho
s
t
S
e
r
v
e
r
s
f
o
r
W
e
b
R
M
S
V
i
r
t
u
a
l
M
a
c
h
i
n
e
s
3
(64
2
)
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
,
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
643
Pro
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
1
8
0
,
8
0
0
$
8
0
,
8
0
0
$
647
BI-
D
i
r
e
c
t
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
1
1
5
,
9
7
4
$
1
5
,
9
7
4
$
670
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
R
M
S
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
1
2
2
9
,
4
5
2
$
2
2
9
,
4
5
2
$
(68
6
)
Tr
a
i
n
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
768
We
b
R
M
S
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
1
6
,
7
5
6
$
6
,
7
5
6
$
769
FB
R
C
o
n
f
i
g
u
r
a
t
i
o
n
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
1
5
,
3
1
2
$
5
,
3
1
2
$
770
We
b
R
M
S
/
F
B
R
S
y
s
t
e
m
I
T
A
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
v
e
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
1
6
,
7
5
6
$
6
,
7
5
6
$
771
We
b
R
M
S
U
s
e
r
T
r
a
i
n
-
t
h
e
-
T
r
a
i
n
e
r
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
1
8
,
2
0
0
$
8
,
2
0
0
$
772
FB
R
T
r
a
i
n
-
t
h
e
-
T
r
a
i
n
e
r
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
1
6
,
7
5
6
$
6
,
7
5
6
$
773
We
b
R
M
S
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
&
D
e
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
1
5
,
3
1
2
$
5
,
3
1
2
$
774
BI
D
i
r
e
c
t
S
y
s
t
e
m
A
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
o
r
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
1
6
,
7
5
6
$
6
,
7
5
6
$
775
BI
D
i
r
e
c
t
E
n
d
U
s
e
r
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
1
9
,
6
4
4
$
9
,
6
4
4
$
776
Cri
m
e
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
G
I
S
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
1
8
,
2
0
0
$
8
,
2
0
0
$
(78
5
)
Sh
i
p
p
i
n
g
,
I
n
s
t
a
l
l
a
t
i
o
n
,
B
o
n
d
s
,
E
s
c
r
o
w
,
I
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
,
W
a
r
r
a
n
t
y
786
Shi
p
p
i
n
g
a
n
d
I
n
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
1
1
6
0
$
1
6
0
$
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
P
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
Mt
V
i
e
w
_
W
e
b
R
M
S
_
$
0
9
1
8
1
3
$
d
l
s
(
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
)
.
x
l
s
m
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
P
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Pag
e
3
o
f
7
Pr
i
c
i
n
g
f
o
r
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
,
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Va
l
i
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
1
1
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
3
Vir
t
u
a
l
i
z
e
d
W
e
b
R
M
S
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
U
S
$
U
S
$
U
S
$
IT
E
M
Ite
m
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
B
y
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
U
s
e
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
Q
t
y
U
n
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Sof
t
w
a
r
e
Ma
i
n
t
.
(79
5
)
TO
T
A
L
S
Y
S
T
E
M
B
A
S
E
P
R
I
C
E
:
796
Su
b
-
T
o
t
a
l
E
x
c
l
u
s
i
v
e
o
f
D
i
s
c
o
u
n
t
,
E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
W
a
r
r
a
n
t
y
,
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
,
O
p
t
i
o
n
s
&
T
a
x
e
s
1,0
2
9
,
0
4
6
$
1
3
9
,
2
1
0
$
797
On
e
T
i
m
e
S
y
s
t
e
m
D
i
s
c
o
u
n
t
f
o
r
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
p
u
r
c
h
a
s
e
o
n
l
y
(29
6
,
7
1
9
)
$
798
Su
b
-
T
o
t
a
l
E
x
c
l
u
s
i
v
e
o
f
E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
W
a
r
r
a
n
t
y
,
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
,
O
p
t
i
o
n
s
&
T
a
x
e
s
732
,
3
2
7
$
1
3
9
,
2
1
0
$
800
Int
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
F
i
r
s
t
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
(
E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
W
a
r
r
a
n
t
y
)
91,
7
2
8
$
801
Int
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
P
r
o
d
u
c
t
F
i
r
s
t
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
D
i
s
c
o
u
n
t
(6,4
2
1
)
$
802
Int
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
F
i
r
s
t
Y
e
a
r
C
u
s
t
o
m
I
n
t
e
r
f
a
c
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
(
E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
W
a
r
r
a
n
t
y
)
39,
1
6
6
$
803
Th
i
r
d
P
a
r
t
y
C
o
n
t
e
n
t
-
F
i
r
s
t
Y
e
a
r
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
(
E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
W
a
r
r
a
n
t
y
)
8,3
1
6
$
806
Gr
a
n
d
T
o
t
a
l
E
x
c
l
u
s
i
v
e
o
f
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
,
O
p
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
T
a
x
e
s
Tax
E
x
e
m
p
t
i
o
n
a
s
s
u
m
e
d
865
,
1
1
6
$
808
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
F
i
r
s
t
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
(
E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
W
a
r
r
a
n
t
y
)
1
I
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
i
n
B
a
s
e
810
Sec
o
n
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
E
x
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
F
o
r
m
s
a
n
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
I
t
e
m
i
z
e
d
Sep
a
r
a
t
e
l
y
B
e
l
o
w
(
b
e
g
i
n
s
a
f
t
e
r
1
2
M
o
n
t
h
E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
W
a
r
r
a
n
t
y
P
e
r
i
o
d
)
Inc
l
u
d
e
s
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
a
n
d
T
h
i
r
d
-
P
a
r
t
y
Sys
t
e
m
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
1
1
2
4
,
9
0
4
$
811
Sec
o
n
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
c
c
i
d
e
n
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
Fo
r
m
s
(
C
H
P
5
5
5
,
5
5
6
&
5
5
6
D
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
)
1
2
,
2
4
0
$
812
Sec
o
n
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
o
r
m
(CH
P
1
8
0
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
3
)
1
2
,
4
2
7
$
813
Sec
o
n
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
F
o
r
m
a
n
d
Pri
n
t
e
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
2
)
1
7
5
8
$
814
Sec
o
n
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
C
a
s
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
9
)
1
6
,
0
6
6
$
815
Sec
o
n
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
F
i
e
l
d
I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
5
)
1
3
,
0
3
3
$
817
T
h
i
r
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
E
x
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
F
o
r
m
s
a
n
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
I
t
e
m
i
z
e
d
S
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
l
y
B
e
l
o
w
1
1
3
1
,
1
4
8
$
818
Th
i
r
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
c
c
i
d
e
n
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
Fo
r
m
s
(
C
H
P
5
5
5
,
5
5
6
&
5
5
6
D
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
)
1
2
,
3
5
2
$
819
Th
i
r
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
o
r
m
(CH
P
1
8
0
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
3
)
1
2
,
5
4
8
$
820
Th
i
r
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
F
o
r
m
a
n
d
Pri
n
t
e
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
2
)
1
7
9
6
$
821
Th
i
r
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
C
a
s
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
9)
1
6
,
3
7
0
$
822
Th
i
r
d
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
F
i
e
l
d
I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
5
)
1
3
,
1
8
5
$
824
F
o
u
r
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
E
x
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
F
o
r
m
s
a
n
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
I
t
e
m
i
z
e
d
S
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
l
y
B
e
l
o
w
1
1
3
7
,
7
0
6
$
825
Fo
u
r
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
c
c
i
d
e
n
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
Fo
r
m
s
(
C
H
P
5
5
5
,
5
5
6
&
5
5
6
D
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
)
1
2
,
4
6
9
$
826
Fo
u
r
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
o
r
m
(CH
P
1
8
0
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
3
)
1
2
,
6
7
5
$
827
Fo
u
r
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
F
o
r
m
a
n
d
Pri
n
t
e
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
2
)
1
8
3
6
$
Mt
V
i
e
w
_
W
e
b
R
M
S
_
$
0
9
1
8
1
3
$
d
l
s
(
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
)
.
x
l
s
m
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
P
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Pag
e
4
o
f
7
Pr
i
c
i
n
g
f
o
r
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
,
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Va
l
i
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
1
1
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
3
Vir
t
u
a
l
i
z
e
d
W
e
b
R
M
S
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
U
S
$
U
S
$
U
S
$
IT
E
M
Ite
m
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
B
y
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
U
s
e
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
Q
t
y
U
n
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Sof
t
w
a
r
e
Ma
i
n
t
.
828
Fo
u
r
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
C
a
s
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
9)
1
6
,
6
8
8
$
829
Fo
u
r
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
F
i
e
l
d
I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
5
)
1
3
,
3
4
4
$
831
F
i
f
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
E
x
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
F
o
r
m
s
a
n
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
I
t
e
m
i
z
e
d
S
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
l
y
B
e
l
o
w
1
1
4
4
,
5
9
1
$
832
Fif
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
c
c
i
d
e
n
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
o
r
m
s
(CH
P
5
5
5
,
5
5
6
&
5
5
6
D
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
)
1
2
,
5
9
3
$
833
Fif
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
o
r
m
(CH
P
1
8
0
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
3
)
1
2
,
8
0
9
$
834
Fif
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
F
o
r
m
a
n
d
Pri
n
t
e
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
2
)
1
8
7
8
$
835
Fif
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
C
a
s
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
9
)
1
7
,
0
2
3
$
836
Fif
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
F
i
e
l
d
I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
5
)
1
3
,
5
1
1
$
838
S
i
x
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
E
x
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
F
o
r
m
s
a
n
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
I
t
e
m
i
z
e
d
S
e
p
a
r
a
t
e
l
y
B
e
l
o
w
1
1
5
1
,
8
2
1
$
839
Six
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
A
c
c
i
d
e
n
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
o
r
m
s
(CH
P
5
5
5
,
5
5
6
&
5
5
6
D
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
)
1
2
,
7
2
3
$
840
Six
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
V
e
h
i
c
l
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
F
o
r
m
(CH
P
1
8
0
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
3
)
1
2
,
9
4
9
$
841
Six
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
S
t
a
t
e
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
F
o
r
m
a
n
d
Pri
n
t
e
d
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
2
)
1
9
2
2
$
842
Six
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
C
o
m
b
i
n
e
d
C
a
s
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
9)
1
7
,
3
7
4
$
843
Six
t
h
Y
e
a
r
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
f
o
r
-
F
i
e
l
d
I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
5
)
1
3
,
6
8
7
$
845
To
t
a
l
f
o
r
A
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
F
o
u
r
Y
e
a
r
s
'
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
a
f
t
e
r
E
x
t
e
n
d
e
d
W
a
r
r
a
n
t
y
770
,
4
2
7
$
858
(85
9
)
Op
t
i
o
n
s
:
860
(Pr
o
j
e
c
t
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
a
n
d
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
a
r
e
e
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
.
T
h
i
r
d
p
a
r
t
y
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
p
r
i
c
e
s
861
ar
e
v
a
l
i
d
f
o
r
o
n
l
y
9
0
d
a
y
s
.
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
c
a
n
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
f
i
x
e
d
q
u
o
t
e
w
h
e
n
o
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
t
e
m
s
a
r
e
s
e
l
e
c
t
e
d
.
)
862
Op
t
i
o
n
a
l
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
:
863
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
R
M
S
D
a
t
a
C
o
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
1
5
2
,
1
6
4
$
5
2
,
1
6
4
$
864
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
R
M
S
D
a
t
a
C
o
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
S
t
u
d
y
1
1
6
,
9
0
4
$
1
6
,
9
0
4
$
868
Op
t
i
o
n
a
l
I
n
t
e
r
f
a
c
e
s
a
n
d
o
t
h
e
r
C
u
s
t
o
m
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
:
869
EF
I
n
t
e
r
f
a
c
e
t
o
L
i
v
e
S
c
a
n
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
)
1
-
w
a
y
E
x
p
o
r
t
1
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
4
,
3
3
3
$
871
Fie
l
d
I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
R
e
p
o
r
t
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
t
o
C
a
p
t
u
r
e
G
a
n
g
R
e
l
a
t
e
d
F
i
e
l
d
s
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
8
)
1
6
,
3
1
9
$
6
,
3
1
9
$
1
,
2
6
4
$
873
Im
p
o
r
t
G
a
n
g
R
e
l
a
t
e
d
D
a
t
a
t
o
F
i
e
l
d
I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
M
o
d
u
l
e
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
9
)
Cu
s
t
o
m
e
r
i
s
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
f
o
r
a
d
d
i
n
g
F
i
e
l
d
Int
e
r
v
i
e
w
F
i
e
l
d
s
t
o
t
h
e
W
e
b
R
M
S
D
a
t
a
b
a
s
e
1
3
,
6
1
1
$
3
,
6
1
1
$
7
2
2
$
Mt
V
i
e
w
_
W
e
b
R
M
S
_
$
0
9
1
8
1
3
$
d
l
s
(
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
)
.
x
l
s
m
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
P
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Pag
e
5
o
f
7
Pr
i
c
i
n
g
f
o
r
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
,
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Va
l
i
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
1
1
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
3
Vir
t
u
a
l
i
z
e
d
W
e
b
R
M
S
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
U
S
$
U
S
$
U
S
$
IT
E
M
Ite
m
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
B
y
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
U
s
e
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
Q
t
y
U
n
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Sof
t
w
a
r
e
Ma
i
n
t
.
875
Fie
l
d
I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
5
)
Re
p
o
r
t
CO
T
S
F
i
e
l
d
I
n
t
e
r
v
i
e
w
f
o
r
m
w
i
l
l
b
e
cus
t
o
m
i
z
e
d
t
o
m
o
r
e
c
l
o
s
e
l
y
r
e
s
e
m
b
l
e
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
Vie
w
’
s
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
r
e
p
o
r
t
.
1
1
4
,
4
4
4
$
1
4
,
4
4
4
$
2
,
8
8
9
$
880
Op
t
i
o
n
a
l
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
/
F
o
r
m
s
:
881
Eld
e
r
A
b
u
s
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
1
)
C
u
s
t
o
m
R
e
p
o
r
t
1
1
8
,
0
5
5
$
1
8
,
0
5
5
$
3
,
6
1
1
$
883
Ch
i
l
d
A
b
u
s
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
4
)
Re
p
o
r
t
De
v
e
l
o
p
F
B
R
f
o
r
m
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
b
e
u
s
e
d
t
o
c
a
p
t
u
r
e
the
d
a
t
a
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
a
n
d
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
a
pdf
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
r
i
n
t
e
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
.
1
3
6
,
1
1
0
$
3
6
,
1
1
0
$
7
,
2
2
2
$
885
Aff
i
d
a
v
i
t
:
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
i
t
y
o
f
I
d
e
n
t
i
t
y
o
f
V
i
c
t
i
m
s
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
0
)
Re
p
o
r
t
De
v
e
l
o
p
F
B
R
f
o
r
m
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
u
s
e
a
c
u
s
t
o
m
sea
r
c
h
t
o
a
u
t
o
-
f
i
l
l
v
i
c
t
i
m
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
.
T
h
i
s
for
m
w
i
l
l
n
o
t
i
m
p
o
r
t
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
M
S
b
u
t
c
a
n
b
e
ma
n
u
a
l
l
y
s
c
a
n
n
e
d
a
n
d
a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
i
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
afte
r
s
i
g
n
i
n
g
.
1
2
5
,
2
7
7
$
2
5
,
2
7
7
$
5
,
0
5
5
$
887
Juv
e
n
i
l
e
C
o
n
t
a
c
t
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
3
)
Re
p
o
r
t
De
v
e
l
o
F
B
R
f
o
r
m
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
b
e
u
s
e
d
t
o
c
a
p
t
u
r
e
the
d
a
t
a
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
a
n
d
g
e
n
e
r
a
t
e
a
pdf
f
o
r
t
h
e
p
r
i
n
t
e
d
r
e
p
o
r
t
.
1
2
8
,
8
8
8
$
2
8
,
8
8
8
$
5
,
7
7
8
$
889
Sin
g
l
e
N
u
m
b
e
r
i
n
g
S
e
q
u
e
n
c
e
p
e
r
A
g
e
n
c
y
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
6
)
1
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
891
Aff
i
d
a
v
i
t
:
P
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
C
a
u
s
e
a
n
d
B
a
i
l
S
e
t
t
i
n
g
F
o
r
m
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
7
)
For
m
De
v
e
l
o
p
F
B
R
F
o
r
m
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
a
u
t
o
-
f
i
l
l
i
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
inf
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
p
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
c
a
u
s
e
a
f
f
i
d
a
v
i
t
and
a
l
l
o
w
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
e
n
t
r
y
.
T
h
i
s
for
m
w
i
l
l
n
o
t
i
m
p
o
r
t
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
R
M
S
b
u
t
c
a
n
b
e
ma
n
u
a
l
l
y
s
c
a
n
n
e
d
a
n
d
a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
i
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
afte
r
s
i
g
n
i
n
g
.
1
2
8
,
8
8
8
$
2
8
,
8
8
8
$
5
,
7
7
8
$
893
Pre
-
B
o
o
k
i
n
g
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
S
h
e
e
t
F
o
r
m
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
8
)
For
m
De
v
l
o
p
F
B
R
f
o
r
m
t
h
a
t
w
i
l
l
u
s
e
a
c
u
s
t
o
m
sea
r
c
h
t
o
a
u
t
o
-
f
i
l
l
a
r
r
e
s
t
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
i
n
t
o
t
h
e
pre
-
b
o
o
k
i
n
g
f
o
r
m
a
n
d
a
l
l
o
w
a
n
o
f
f
i
c
e
r
t
o
e
n
t
e
r
add
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
t
h
a
t
w
a
s
n
o
t
c
a
p
t
u
r
e
d
a
s
par
t
o
f
t
h
e
a
r
r
e
s
t
.
T
h
i
s
f
o
r
m
w
i
l
l
n
o
t
i
m
p
o
r
t
into
t
h
e
R
M
S
b
u
t
c
a
n
b
e
m
a
n
u
a
l
l
y
s
c
a
n
n
e
d
and
a
t
t
a
c
h
e
d
t
o
t
h
e
a
r
r
e
s
t
,
i
f
d
e
s
i
r
e
d
.
1
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
4
,
3
3
3
$
895
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
-
F
B
R
D
r
i
v
i
n
g
U
n
d
e
r
t
h
e
I
n
f
l
u
e
n
c
e
A
r
r
e
s
t
-
I
n
v
e
s
t
i
g
a
t
i
v
e
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
C
H
P
202
)
(
I
P
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
1
9
)
1
5
7
,
7
7
6
$
5
7
,
7
7
6
$
1
1
,
5
5
5
$
897
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
-
W
e
b
R
M
S
A
d
m
o
n
i
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
S
o
b
r
i
e
t
y
T
e
s
t
s
R
e
p
o
r
t
(
9
0
9
A
)
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
0
)
1
5
7
,
7
7
6
$
5
7
,
7
7
6
$
1
1
,
5
5
5
$
Mt
V
i
e
w
_
W
e
b
R
M
S
_
$
0
9
1
8
1
3
$
d
l
s
(
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
)
.
x
l
s
m
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
P
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Pag
e
6
o
f
7
Pr
i
c
i
n
g
f
o
r
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
,
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
Va
l
i
d
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
1
1
/
1
6
/
2
0
1
3
Vir
t
u
a
l
i
z
e
d
W
e
b
R
M
S
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
U
S
$
U
S
$
U
S
$
IT
E
M
Ite
m
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
B
y
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
a
l
U
s
e
P
u
r
p
o
s
e
Q
t
y
U
n
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
T
o
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Sof
t
w
a
r
e
Ma
i
n
t
.
900
Op
t
i
o
n
a
l
M
a
t
r
i
x
I
t
e
m
C
u
s
t
o
m
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
s
:
901
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
F
B
R
-
A
d
d
t
h
e
A
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
P
a
s
s
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
n
d
E
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
i
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
4
)
1
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
2
1
,
6
6
6
$
4
,
3
3
3
$
903
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
F
B
R
-
A
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
I
n
c
i
d
e
n
t
a
n
d
P
e
r
s
o
n
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
.
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
5
)
1
4
,
3
3
3
$
4
,
3
3
3
$
8
6
7
$
905
inP
U
R
S
U
I
T
F
B
R
-
A
b
i
l
i
t
y
t
o
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
a
n
d
E
v
i
d
e
n
c
e
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
i
n
t
h
e
F
i
e
l
d
(IP
S
R
M
S
C
U
S
T
-
2
6
)
1
1
8
,
0
5
5
$
1
8
,
0
5
5
$
3
,
6
1
1
$
908
Op
t
i
o
n
a
l
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
:
909
Cry
s
t
a
l
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
1
6
,
7
5
6
$
6
,
7
5
6
$
100
3
100
4
No
t
e
s
:
100
5
1
.
A
n
o
v
e
r
a
l
l
s
y
s
t
e
m
d
i
s
c
o
u
n
t
h
a
s
b
e
e
n
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
d
f
o
r
t
h
i
s
o
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
.
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
t
o
s
c
o
p
e
o
f
t
h
e
f
i
n
a
l
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
m
a
y
c
h
a
n
g
e
t
he
d
i
s
c
o
u
n
t
a
m
o
u
n
t
.
A
l
s
o
,
a
n
y
c
r
e
d
i
t
s
g
i
v
e
n
100
6
f
o
r
l
i
n
e
i
t
e
m
s
a
s
p
a
r
t
o
f
a
C
h
a
n
g
e
O
r
d
e
r
w
i
l
l
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
a
r
e
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
f
o
r
t
h
e
l
i
n
e
p
r
o
r
a
t
e
d
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
t
h
e
o
n
e
-
t
i
m
e
s
y
s
t
e
m
di
s
c
o
u
n
t
.
I
t
e
m
s
r
e
m
o
v
e
d
a
f
t
e
r
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
s
i
g
n
i
n
g
100
7
w
i
l
l
r
e
s
u
l
t
i
n
a
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
c
r
e
d
i
t
f
o
r
f
u
t
u
r
e
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
a
n
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
b
e
i
n
g
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
,
n
o
t
a
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
r
e
d
u
c
t
ion
.
T
h
i
s
d
i
s
c
o
u
n
t
i
s
b
a
s
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
a
c
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
100
8
o
f
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
’
s
s
t
a
n
d
a
r
d
T
e
r
m
s
a
n
d
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
.
100
9
2
.
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
M
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
t
o
b
e
p
a
i
d
y
e
a
r
l
y
i
n
a
d
v
a
n
c
e
a
n
d
a
n
u
p
l
i
f
t
i
s
a
p
p
l
i
e
d
i
f
n
o
t
p
a
i
d
i
n
a
d
v
a
n
c
e
.
101
0
3
.
I
t
i
s
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
o
f
t
h
e
c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
t
o
s
u
p
p
l
y
a
l
l
M
i
c
r
o
s
o
f
t
C
l
i
e
n
t
A
c
c
e
s
s
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
s
(
C
A
L
s
)
,
a
n
d
t
o
m
a
i
n
t
a
i
n
c
o
m
p
l
i
an
c
y
w
i
t
h
M
i
c
r
o
s
o
f
t
’
s
l
i
c
e
n
s
i
n
g
p
o
l
i
c
i
e
s
f
o
r
101
1
C
l
i
e
n
t
A
c
c
e
s
s
L
i
c
e
n
s
e
s
.
101
2
4
.
U
n
l
e
s
s
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
n
o
t
e
d
,
p
r
o
j
e
c
t
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
i
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
s
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
m
a
i
n
t
e
n
a
n
c
e
A
R
E
N
O
T
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d i
n
o
p
t
i
o
n
p
r
i
c
i
n
g
.
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
a
r
e
101
3
v
a
l
i
d
f
o
r
6
m
o
n
t
h
s
a
n
d
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
p
r
i
c
i
n
g
i
s
v
a
l
i
d
f
o
r
o
n
e
y
e
a
r
a
f
t
e
r
c
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
s
i
g
n
i
n
g
.
P
r
i
c
i
n
g
f
o
r
o
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
th
i
r
d
p
a
r
t
y
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s
a
n
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
a
r
e
v
a
l
i
d
f
o
r
101
4
9
0
d
a
y
s
f
r
o
m
t
h
e
d
a
t
e
o
n
t
h
i
s
p
r
i
c
i
n
g
p
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
.
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
c
a
n
p
r
o
v
i
d
e
a
f
i
x
e
d
q
u
o
t
e
w
h
e
n
o
p
t
i
o
n
a
l
i
t
e
m
s
a
r
e
s
e
l
e
c
t
ed.
101
5
5
.
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
s
r
e
m
o
t
e
a
c
c
e
s
s
t
o
t
h
e
c
u
s
t
o
m
e
r
s
'
s
e
r
v
e
r
s
t
o
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
t
h
e
e
f
f
o
r
t
a
s
q
u
o
t
e
d
.
101
6
6
.
S
a
l
e
s
t
a
x
i
s
n
o
t
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
i
n
t
h
i
s
q
u
o
t
e
.
F
i
n
a
l
s
a
l
e
s
t
a
x
b
i
l
l
e
d
w
i
l
l
r
e
f
l
e
c
t
t
h
e
a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
t
a
x
r
a
t
e
s
a
t
t
i
m
e
o
f
s
a
l
e
as
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
b
y
l
a
w
.
101
7
7
.
T
h
i
r
d
-
P
a
r
t
y
e
x
t
e
r
n
a
l
i
n
t
e
r
f
a
c
e
c
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
f
o
r
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
T
e
s
t
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
a
r
e
t
h
e
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
of t
h
e
C
i
t
y
o
r
T
h
i
r
d
-
P
a
r
t
y
V
e
n
d
o
r
(
s
)
.
101
8
8
.
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
a
s
s
u
m
e
s
t
h
e
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
E
O
C
w
i
l
l
o
n
l
y
b
e
u
s
e
d
f
o
r
l
i
v
e
o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
t
h
e
c
a
s
e
o
f
c
a
t
a
s
t
r
o
p
h
i
c
d
i
s
a
s
t
e
r
a
t
t
h
e
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
e
w
E
m
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
C
e
n
t
e
r
.
101
9
9
.
S
o
f
t
w
a
r
e
o
n
t
h
e
T
e
s
t
/
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
s
e
r
v
e
r
s
m
a
y
b
e
u
s
e
d
u
p
t
o
3
0
d
a
y
s
p
e
r
y
e
a
r
f
o
r
t
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
p
u
r
p
o
s
e
s
.
B
e
y
o
n
d
t
h
i
s
p
e
r
i
o
d
,
a
sep
a
r
a
t
e
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
e
r
w
o
u
l
d
b
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
.
102
0
1
0
.
W
e
b
R
M
S
i
s
t
o
b
e
i
n
c
l
u
d
e
d
i
n
e
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
C
A
D
V
i
r
t
u
a
l
i
z
e
d
E
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
103
6 Mt
V
i
e
w
_
W
e
b
R
M
S
_
$
0
9
1
8
1
3
$
d
l
s
(
I
n
t
e
r
n
a
l
)
.
x
l
s
m
I
n
t
e
r
g
r
a
p
h
C
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
a
n
d
P
r
o
p
r
i
e
t
a
r
y
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Pag
e
7
o
f
7
Statement of Work
Security, Government and Infrastructure, a Division of Intergraph
Corporation
For the Cities of Mountain View, Palo Alto
and Los Altos
Intergraph Corporation
Statement of Work
For
Records Management Solution and
Field Based Reporting Implementation
[02/20/2013]
Statement of Work Page 1
Table of Contents
Statement of Work Introduction ......................................................................................................... 2
Project Assumptions ........................................................................................................................................ 3
Customer Project Team Structure ................................................................................................................... 4
Project Management Guidelines ...................................................................................................................... 5
Statement of Work Task Format ...................................................................................................................... 7
Initial System Level Project Tasks ..................................................................................................... 8
1. Project Kick‐Off Meeting .............................................................................................. 8
2. Project Schedule Review ............................................................................................ 11
3. System Hardware Ordering ........................................................................................ 12
4. System Hardware Delivery and Installation ............................................................... 13
RMS/FBR Implementation Tasks ...................................................................................................... 16
5. RMS Business Process Analysis .................................................................................. 16
6. RMS Detailed Requirements Analysis (If Purchased, but not required) .................... 17
7. RMS Interface Control Documentation (ICD) Review and Submittal ......................... 18
8. RMS/FBR Customizations Design Review ................................................................... 20
9. RMS COTS Product Installation in Production Environment ...................................... 21
10. RMS Configuration Training ....................................................................................... 22
11. FBR Configuration Training ......................................................................................... 23
12. Customer Configuration Of RMS and FBR .................................................................. 24
13. FBR Workflow Configuration ...................................................................................... 26
14. RMS/FBR Product Customizations Development (If Purchased) ............................... 27
15. RMS Interface Development ...................................................................................... 28
16. BI Direct and Ad Hoc Reporting .................................................................................. 29
17. RMS/FBR Functional Test Development .................................................................... 31
18. RMS/FBR Integration And Testing by Intergraph ....................................................... 32
19. RMS/FBR System Functional Testing .......................................................................... 33
20. RMS Build Test/Training System ................................................................................ 34
21. RMS Product Documentation ..................................................................................... 36
22. RMS/FBR Training ....................................................................................................... 37
23. RMS Cutover Plan ....................................................................................................... 39
24. RMS System Cutover Readiness Review .................................................................... 40
25. RMS/FBR Cutover ....................................................................................................... 41
26. RMS/FBR 30‐day Functional and Reliability Test ....................................................... 43
27. RMS/FBR Project Closure ........................................................................................... 45
Statement of Work Page 2
STATEMENT OF WORK INTRODUCTION
Intergraph has contracted with the Mountain View California known as (“Customer”) to provide the products and
services identified in the Pricing Detail and Deliverables Summary in Exhibit A-1 of the Mountain View CA Agreement
(“Agreement”) and which are necessary to implement an integrated public safety system for the Customer.
The term “System,” refers to the proposed computer system that Intergraph will provide the Customer, and includes
all hardware, system software, application software, interfaces, ancillary systems and services listed in Exhibit A-1 of
the Agreement. The System is comprised of two primary Systems:
Law Enforcement Records Management (RMS) and Field Based Reporting(FBR) System, collectively
referred to herein as RMS/FBR
The software provided by Intergraph for this system will be the latest certified version available at the time of initial
software installation, and will be the major product version used for production operations cutover. If a major
software release occurs during project implementation, this software release will not be included in the project.
Intergraph generally releases one major features version of the software every 12 to 18 months. Major features
releases are generally accompanied by multiple minor point releases, on a quarterly basis. During project
implementation and prior to “live” production operations, if the inclusion of a point release is mutually determined by
both the Customer and Intergraph to be required to meet system requirements, that point release version may be
installed and implemented.
The Statement of Work herein guides the primary activities and responsibilities for the implementation of the System.
It documents project implementation requirements, identifies each major task within the implementation process, sets
expectations for each party and identifies the criteria by which a task will be considered complete. The Statement of
Work herein is tailored to accommodate the Customer’s-specific requirements. Intergraph will implement the RMS
and FBR Mobile Reporting Systems concurrently, each following a separate set of tasks as detailed in this Statement
of Work and the Project Schedule in Attachment B-6. Several tasks, however, will overlap at the beginning and the
end of the project. These tasks are identified as System Level Project tasks in the Statement of Work.
The Statement of Work includes the following Attachments:
Attachment B-1 – Acceptance Test Plan
Attachment B-2 – Project Deliverable Sign-Off Form
Attachment B-3 – Customer Support Center
Attachment B-4 – Training Plan
Attachment B-5 – WebRMS System Specifications
Attachment B-6 – Project Schedule
Attachment B-7 – Interface Descriptions
Attachment B-8 - Configuration Diagram
Attachment B-9 – Software Requirements Matrix
Attachment B-10 – System Configuration Specifications
The remainder of this section details System Level Project Assumptions that bear on the project cost, schedule and
scope, Project Team Composition, and Project Management Responsibilities.
Statement of Work Page 3
PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS
The following list includes Intergraph’s assumptions about the Pricing Detail and Deliverables Summary in Exhibit A-1
of the Agreement. Changes in any of the assumptions will affect the scope, schedule and/or cost of the project.
WebRMS and Field Based Reporting will be implemented in a SQL environment;
All “end-user” training will follow a Train-the-Trainer model.
Training will take place during normal business hours, which is typically from 7:00 am - 5:00 pm, and will not
exceed ten (10) hours per 24-hour period.
Training will be provided per the curriculum described in B-4.
Customer is responsible for the WAN/LAN.
Customer is responsible for the wireless infrastructure.
Customer’s wireless infrastructure is similar for all agencies (cellular 3G/4G) and meets minimum bandwidth
requirements as stated in the System Configuration Specifications in Attachment B-10.
Customer is responsible for the purchase, installation and testing of the client/mobile hardware.
All server hardware will conform to the System Configuration Specifications document in B-10.
Customer is responsible for the purchase of physical servers.
Customer is responsible for the installation and testing of all server hardware.
Intergraph and the Customer will be responsible for testing the final system configuration as documented in
the WebRMS, Configuration Diagram as per Attachment B-8.
The operation and availability of the external systems or third party software is the responsibility of the
Customer and necessary for the success of project.
Intergraph will install FBR-related client software on five (5) workstations. Intergraph will train the
Customer’s System Administrator on how to install the client applications on the remaining FBR-related
workstations, per the licenses purchased for each.
Customer is responsible for any hardware and third party software necessary for implementing the systems,
beyond that provided by Intergraph per the contract agreement.
Customer is responsible for maintaining in good working order the third party systems that it operates and
that interface with Intergraph software as part of this project.
The Intergraph Implementation teams must have access to all servers and workstations that are applicable
to the RMS and FBR project. This includes having a Domain Login with local administrative privileges to
remove/install software, access to registries, the ability to set scheduled tasks and remote access to
applicable desktops.
During system implementation, unrestricted VPN access is required for Intergraph developers and
implementers who will need to have multiple resources connecting at the same time. This requirement
enables rapid development and testing of those interfaces that Intergraph cannot test in-house, resolution of
system configuration issues, and troubleshooting capabilities. Intergraph will also require external VPN
access while on site to access various Intergraph resource libraries. After system cutover, Intergraph will
VPN into the live system only at the Customer’s request, and will follow all of the Customer’s required VPN
access procedures.
Statement of Work Page 4
Intergraph will endeavor to provide assistance to the Customer as it identifies process changes and
develops its training tools and materials to facilitate the transition to the Intergraph systems. This assistance
is expected to be provided during the normal course of project work and training. Any additional assistance
may be provided, if desired, at additional cost.
CUSTOMER PROJECT TEAM STRUCTURE
The Customer is responsible for providing resources to staff the Core Project Teams required for a successful
System implementation. The Core Project Teams, Roles and Responsibilities are described in the following sections.
Core Team Roles and Responsibilities:
Core Project Teams must consist of designated agency personnel with the various skill sets, knowledge and
backgrounds required to implement the new RMS/FBR system. The following list identifies the suggested Core
Project Team roles and corresponding responsibilities.
Project Manager – responsible for the day-to-day coordination of project activities with the Customer of
Core Team and Intergraph
Departmental Sponsors – responsible for making decisions on recommended business process changes
and other related items
System Administrator Personnel – responsible for all system administration and configuration
responsibilities related to the new system, all system interfaces and the mobile system
GIS Administrator – responsible for providing Intergraph Map Lead with mapping updates during the
course of the project and for installing map updates after system implementation
RMS Database Administration Personnel – responsible for monitoring and tuning the RMS database to
meet Customer needs
Training Personnel – responsible for training other agency personnel
Subject Matter Experts (i.e. Dispatch supervisor, Records supervisor) – responsible for representing end-
users’ needs;
Core RMS/FBR Project Team
The Customer’s Core RMS/FBR Project Team will consist of the following personnel:
Project Management
Applications Development Manager
Telecommunications Manager
Business Analysts
GIS Programmer/Analyst
MDC Analysts
Database Administrator
Officers
Statement of Work Page 5
Note: Other Subject Matter Experts can be included in specific meetings pertaining to their functional areas (i.e.,
Internal Affairs, Risk Management, etc.).
PROJECT MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES
In the interest of managing project scope, schedule and cost, all parties agree to adhere to the following:
Project Task Completion Sign-Off Procedure
At the completion of each Task in this Statement of Work, the Intergraph Project Manager and the Customer Project
Manager will jointly sign both the Project Deliverable Sign-Off Form. A template of this form is included in Error!
Reference source not found.-2.
General Project Management Responsibilities
Project management occurs throughout the project and is a component of every task. Overall project management
activities for both Intergraph and the Customer are listed here for reference.
Intergraph’s Project Management Team responsibilities include the following:
Maintaining project communications with the Customer’s Project Manager
Managing the efforts of the Intergraph staff and coordinating Intergraph’s activities with the Customer’s
Project Manager
Conducting monthly status meetings with the Customer’s Project Manager
Conducting weekly project review meetings with the Customer’s Project Manager via telephone conference
calls
Responding to issues raised by the Customer’s Project Managers within ten (10) business days
Preparing and submitting monthly status report which include: the accomplishments of the previous month,
planned activities, and an updated project schedule in Microsoft Project
Preparing and submitting project Change Orders to the Customer’s Project Manager as necessary
Ensuring Intergraph personnel have ample time, resources, and expertise to carry out their respective tasks
and responsibilities
Customer Project Manager Responsibilities include the following:
Maintaining project communications with the Intergraph Project Manager
Managing the efforts of Customer staff and coordinating Customer activities with the Intergraph Project
Manager
Providing input to Intergraph for creation of the monthly status reports
Ensuring that Customer personnel have ample time, resources, and expertise to carry out their respective
tasks and responsibilities
Participating in the status meeting with the Intergraph Project Manager on a monthly basis or as may
otherwise be reasonably required to discuss project status
Statement of Work Page 6
Participating in the weekly project review meetings with the Intergraph Project Manager via telephone
conference calls
Providing responses to issues raised by the Intergraph Project Manager within ten (10) business days
Serving as liaison with all Customer-provided third-party vendors and associated systems
Ensuring that acceptable Change Orders are approved by authorized signature(s)
Ensuring timely payment of invoices
Ensuring Intergraph have access to server and network equipment and work areas on a 24x7 basis, with
pre-authorization for off-hours
Providing workspace for Intergraph personnel as reasonably requested
Escalation Procedures
During the course of project implementation, the Cities will have access to various Intergraph resources to assist on
any issues that may need attention. However, the Project Manager identified below will act as a single point of
contact at Intergraph, and is assigned and empowered to handle any situation before, during, and extending to after
the deployment of the project. If the Cities feel that tasks are not being performed to the reasonable satisfaction of
the Cities, the following hierarchical escalation process will be used to ensure that the appropriate personnel of
Intergraph are aware of such issue(s) and will assist the parties with resolution.
Intergraph’s hierarchical escalation will be as follows:
Intergraph Escalation
Position
Contact Information
Project Manager David Bonini
(510)223-5818
david.bonini@intergraph.com
Executive Manager-
Technical, Project
Operations
Will Daniels
(256)730-8160
will.daniels@intergraph.com
Vice President, Public
Safety Operations
David McDonald
(256)730-8710
david.mcdonald@intergraph.com
Cities’ hierarchical escalation will be as follows:
Cities Escalation
Position
Contact Information
Project Manager TBD
Statement of Work Page 7
Cities Escalation
Position
Contact Information
Mountain View Police Field
Operations Commander
Mountain View Police Chief
Mountain View City
Manager
STATEMENT OF WORK TASK FORMAT
Each task identified in the Statement of Work includes the following: Task Description, Intergraph/Customer
Participants, Prerequisites, Deliverables, Intergraph/Customer Responsibilities and Completion Criteria. All parties
recognize that the tasks defined in the SOW may not be listed chronologically, and that the actual project
implementation tasks and time lines will follow the mutually agreed to Project Schedule, unless otherwise noted.
Statement of Work Page 8
INITIAL SYSTEM LEVEL PROJECT TASKS
The following four (4) tasks occur at the system level and include the RMS/FBR Project Teams.
1. PROJECT KICK-OFF MEETING
The objective of this task is to ensure that all project assumptions are valid and all requirements understood prior to
beginning any significant work. Cost adjustments may apply if assumptions are not correct, or requirements have
evolved, per the agreed upon Change Order process. A meeting for project kick-off will be held on-site after the
SOW has been executed. During this meeting, the following topics will be covered:
Contract Review
A review of Intergraph project team roles, assignments, and support levels
Identification of the Cities project team requirements
Process review of how the system will be implemented
Contract Change Order process
Communication to other personnel who will be involved with utilizing the system
Cities’ facility access and security requirements (during and after normal business hours)
Work space requirements for Intergraph personnel while on site
Facility tour to be conducted by the Cities’ Project Manager
Identification of any known project schedule constraints
Discussion of interfaces and the information needed from the Cities for special interface
development
Review of hardware being supplied by Intergraph and the Cities (if applicable)
Review of software and software versions being supplied by Intergraph and the Cities plus a
clarification of the operating system, Database version to be implemented, and a review of third-
party products specified in the contract pricing
Third-party products specified in the contract pricing
Known project risks
Additionally, Intergraph will provide the Customer with questionaires to gather information regarding workflows in
areas affected by the implementation of the new System.
The software provided by Intergraph for this system will be the latest certified version available at the time of initial
software installation, as mutually agreed upon Intergraph generally follows a software release schedule with a
release of one major Features version software every 12 to 18 months. This major Features release is accompanied
by multiple point “fixes” releases, generally on a quarterly basis. During project implementation and prior to “live”
operations, it will be mutually agreed upon between the Cities and Intergraph which point fixes release version will be
installed and implemented (if one is available).
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Implementation Manager
Statement of Work Page 9
RMS Lead/Business Analyst
Project Manager(s)
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Contract Signature and/or PO/Notice to Proceed (if applicable)
Distribution of Statement of Work to the Project Team
Deliverables:
Intergraph on-site and remote services
Workflow questionnaires
Project kick-off meeting notes
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Review the project organization, roles and responsibilities with the Customer
Conduct the Project Overview including a review of the Statement of Work to answer any outstanding
questions and verify all aspects of the Project approach, per the topics listed above
Issue Business Process Questionnaires and review the expectations regarding completing the
Questionnaires
Issue Map Specification Document
Work with the Customer to identify and document any potential project risks.
Provide meeting minutes, documented risks and action items that affect project schedule, resources and/or
SOW
Inform Customer of VPN requirements for project implementation and continued system maintenance
Ensure technical accuracy of the Interface Descriptions in Attachment B-7.
Work with the Cities personnel in designing and approving the format of an action item log to be used in
conjunction with the Project Schedule. The purpose of the log is to identify outstanding issues, provide
continual status updates on specific tasks, and to identify responsibilities of the parties.
Work with the Cities to complete required California Department of Justice (“DOJ”) fingerprint/background
clearances prior to Intergraph personnel working within any of the three police facilities and/or on DOJ-
connected systems.
Customer Responsibilities:
Review the SOW and work with Intergraph to verify the project approach
Provide location and logistical support for project planning meeting
Provide Subject Matter Experts and any other resources as recommended by the Customer and Intergraph
Statement of Work Page 10
Project Managers
Begin completing the Business Process Questionnaires
Provide Intergraph with VPN access to the Customer as appropriate for this project and continued software
maintenance
Designate and prepare workspace for Intergraph and Subcontractor personnel
Provide a point of contact for vendors for Customer hardware and software components with which the
Intergraph deliverables will interface
To the extent that it is able to do so, introduce Intergraph to third parties, including other vendors, state and
local agencies, that control products and/or databases with which Intergraph products will be interfaced.
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when the Project Kickoff Session has been held with Intergraph Project
Manager in attendance, an action item/issue tracking log and format for maintaining project meeting minutes
has been developed and agreed to by both Intergraph and the Cities.
Statement of Work Page 11
2. PROJECT SCHEDULE REVIEW
The initial Project Schedule is in Attachment B-6 to this Statement of Work. The Project Schedule identifies all tasks
to be completed by Intergraph and the Customer during the lifecycle of the project, the responsible party for each
task and the project milestones.
During this task, the Intergraph and Customer Project Managers, as well as the Customer Department Project
Sponsors, Intergraph resource allocation or scheduling personnel, and other Customer, Intergraph personnel who
can assist in scheduling decisions, will meet to review the schedule. Intergraph and the Customer will verify the
availability of resources to complete scheduled tasks and adjust the schedule to accommodate any known variations
in availability. The Intergraph Project Manager will update the schedule. It is anticipated that Intergraph will have a
final project schedule ready for review within ten (10) days of completing the Project Schedule Review meeting.
The Project Schedule will be updated as necessary over the course of the Project. All changes to the schedule will
be mutually agreed upon and, if required, documented via the mutually agreed upon Change Order process. Any
schedule changes that occur will be a part of the monthly Project Status Report provided by the Intergraph Project
Manager.
Intergraph Team Participation:
Project Manager(s)
Customer Team Participation:
Department Project Sponsors
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Contract signing
Deliverables:
Completed Project Schedule
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Review with the Cities personnel the identified implementation tasks, priorities, inter-dependencies and
other requirements needed to establish the final Project Schedule.
Prepare the final Project Schedule document and deliver it to the Cities Project Manager.
Review the Project Schedule with the Cities personnel and make changes and/or corrections that are
mutually agreed upon.
Customer Responsibilities:
Analyze with Intergraph project personnel the identified requirements and make such implementation
decisions as are reasonably required to finalize the Project Schedule.
Review the final Project Schedule and identify in writing any specific deficiencies found within ten (10)
business days.
Completion Criteria:
Statement of Work Page 12
This task is considered completed upon mutual agreement of the final Project Schedule. To accommodate
unanticipated Task durations, changes in resource availability and Change Orders, updates to the Project
Schedule will continue until project close.
3. SYSTEM HARDWARE ORDERING
The objective of this task is to complete the Customer purchase orders for hardware and operating system server
software required for the RMS/FBR Reporting System. Based on the RMS Pricing and Detail Summary in Exhibit A-1
and the System Configuration Specifications document in Attachment B-10, and the Configuration Diagram in
Attachment B-8 to this Statement of Work, Intergraph and the Customer will agree upon the hardware and software
that the Customer will purchase. The Customer will provide Intergraph with copies of the purchase requisition for
hardware and operating system software. When Intergraph agrees that the purchase requisition is accurate, the
Customer will order the hardware and operating system software for which they are responsible. Intergraph will fulfill
its responsibilities for this task off-site.
As part of this task, Intergraph will facilitate a discussion with the Customer regarding the Customer’s hardware and
network environment, and will prepare and deliver a Site Preparation Plan specific to the Customer. The Customer
will also need to order any other hardware and system software for which it is responsible, and which it will need to
establish the System’s virtual servers.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Lead
Project Manager(s)
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Project Planning Meeting
Deliverables:
Site Preparation Plan specific to Customer
Final hardware and operating system server software purchase requisitions
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Develop and deliver Site Preparation Plan specific to the Customer
Review Site Preparation Plan, System Configuration Specification Document, RMS Configuration Diagram,
Pricing Detail and Deliverables Summary, and hardware purchase requisition with the Customer
Customer Responsibilities:
Review RMS Configuration Diagram, System Configuration Specification Document, and hardware
requisition
Statement of Work Page 13
Approve of the purchase requisition for hardware and operating system server software
Confirm the Customer location for delivery of hardware and operating system server software
Place order for hardware and operating system server software to be shipped directly to the Customer
location
Order other System hardware and operating software for which the Customer is responsible
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete after Intergraph has delivered the required documents to the Customer, both
the Customer and Intergraph have agreed upon the hardware and operating system server software that is to
be ordered and the Customer has placed the order for the System hardware and operating system server
software.
4. SYSTEM HARDWARE DELIVERY AND INSTALLATION
The objective of this task is for the Customer to install all System hardware, and network components. Before the
hardware is delivered, the Customer will review the locations where the Customer is housing the servers to verify that
the sites are ready for hardware installation. The Customer will inventory the system hardware upon its delivery
before installing the hardware. The Customer will install the hardware and operating system server software and any
other components for which it is responsible. Before Intergraph can install the Intergraph Software, the Customer will
need to provide Intergraph with IP addresses and node names for hardware equipment.
The Customer will confirm that the hardware was delivered and installed in accordance with the following:
Attachment B-8 - Configuration Diagram
Attachment B-10 – System Configuration Specifications
Exhibit A-1 – RMS Pricing and Detail Summary
Intergraph will update the WebRMS Configuration Diagram to depict as-built hardware and server software
information.
Intergraph/Intergraph Team Participation:
Project Manager(s)
RMS Hardware Specialist
Customer Team Participation:
Project Manager
System Administrator
Network Administrator
Hardware Specialist
Prerequisites:
Statement of Work Page 14
Completion of System Hardware Ordering Task
Delivery of System hardware
Delivery of Site Preparation Plan specific to Customer
Deliverables:
Server hardware and Operating System installed and servers configured in accordance with WebRMS
Configuration Diagram and the System Configuration Specification Document
Updated WebRMS Configuration Diagram depicting as-built hardware and server software information
Intergraph responsibilities:
Confirm the Customer site(s) is/are ready for hardware installation
Confirm that the hardware and operating system delivered is accurate per the Intergraph-issued purchase
orders
Customer responsibilities:
Provide IP addresses and node names to Intergraph
Supply all Microsoft Client Access Licenses (CALs) and maintain compliancy with Microsoft’s licensing
policies for Client Access Licenses
Take ownership of hardware received
Inventory hardware upon receipt
House hardware until installation
Confirm hardware delivery location meets environmental requirements
Provide the network and wireless infrastructure, ensuring that the network is ready, and power and serial
port requirements have been met
Install the Customer supplied server hardware
Install the Operating System software
Ensure the System Administrator and Network Administrator are available for the duration of the hardware
and server software installation
Provide electrician and data technician support necessary to facilitate equipment movement and installation
activities as necessary to comply with Customer site-specific regulations and union guidelines
Install additional products not purchased under this contract, such as third-party backup software and
telephony software
Configure the Active Directory (Native Mode) domain, if desired (note that Intergraph recommends a
separate server be used as a domain controller)
Supply any required conduit or cable raceways
Install any network devices such as switches or hubs
Completion Criteria:
Statement of Work Page 15
This task is considered complete when the Customer has installed the server hardware and operating system
software as defined in the Configuration Diagram, Attachment B-8, and the System Configuration Specifications
, Attachment B-10; and the Customer’s Project Manager has verified the hardware and server system software
installation has been completed.
Statement of Work Page 16
RMS/FBR IMPLEMENTATION TASKS
The following Law Enforcement Intergraph product(s)/services will be provided in accordance with this Statement of
Work. Note that the term “RMS” includes WebRMS, FBR, and Crime Analysis in the following sections.
5. RMS BUSINESS PROCESS ANALYSIS
Intergraph will conduct Business Process Analysis (BPA) sessions early in the project lifecycle. The purpose of the
BPA sessions is to enable Intergraph to gain an understanding of the current business processes in place with the
Customer. Additionally, these sessions are designed to help Intergraph and the Customer begin to determine the
most effective and efficient use of the proposed solution before it is implemented. Intergraph will conduct two (2) on-
site BPA session, lasting five (5) days each.
Following the conclusion of the BPA session, Intergraph will develop a Business Process Analysis document. This
document will provide a summary of the Customer’s business processes, as discussed during the BPA meetings,
and will be a combination of narrative and workflow diagrams. The document will also list any decisions and issues
identified during the sessions. Intergraph will provide the BPA document to the Customer for review and incorporate
any Customer feedback and comments into the final version.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Business Analyst
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
SMEs Included in portions of the meeting, as required
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Project Planning Meeting
Project Kick-off Meeting
Deliverables:
Intergraph on-site services– two (2) on-site sessions of five (5) days each
Draft Business Process Analysis Document
Final Business Process Analysis Document
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Conduct Business Process Analysis sessions
Develop Business Process Analysis materials, including an agenda
Statement of Work Page 17
Document Business Process Analysis session findings
Develop draft Business Process Analysis Document
Develop final Business Process Analysis Document
Customer Responsibilities:
Coordinate BPA sessions with Intergraph
Identify BPA attendees and ensure they attend the sessions
Provide meeting room for BPA sessions
Review and approve the Business Process Analysis Document for completeness and accuracy
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when Intergraph has delivered the final Business Process Document
incorporating Customer feedback and the customer has accepted it. The customer will approve the document
within ten business days of receipt or provide (in writing) additional feedback and/or comments.
6. RMS DETAILED REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS (IF PURCHASED, BUT NOT REQUIRED)
The purpose of the Detailed Requirements Analysis task is to finalize the requirements for any product
customizations that the Customer is procuring.
If there are additional RMS/FBR customizations that result from the BPA or other project implementation activities,
Intergraph will provide a quotation and change order.
If required and purchased, Intergraph will conduct two (2) on-site requirements analysis sessions, each lasting four
(4) days. During the requirements analysis sessions, Intergraph will review and confirm its understanding of any
customizations it will need to make to the COTS applications to comply with the Customer’s functional requirements.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Technical Lead
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
SMEs Included in portions of the meeting, as required
Third Party Interface Stakeholders
Project Manager
Deliverables:
Intergraph on-site services – two (2) on-site sessions of four (4) days each
Statement of Work Page 18
Detailed RMS Requirements Analysis Summary
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Conduct on-site Requirements Analysis sessions
Develop the draft RMS Requirements Analysis Summary
Develop the final RMS Analysis Summary
Customer Responsibilities:
Coordinate Requirements Analysis Sessions with Intergraph, as required
Identify the appropriate Subject Matter Experts for the Requirements Analysis sessions (note: appropriate
Subject Matter Experts have the authority to make requirements decisions)
Ensure Subject Matter Experts are available to participate in their designated sessions
Provide meeting rooms for the Requirements Analysis sessions
Identify the appropriate attendees for the Analysis Summary Review meeting; ensure they are available to
participate in the meeting; and have the authority to make requirements decisions
Review the Analysis Summary and provide comments, as required
Approve the final Analysis Summary
Completion Criteria:
This task will be considered complete upon review and approval of the completed Requirements Analysis
Summary developed by Intergraph.
7. RMS INTERFACE CONTROL DOCUMENTATION (ICD) REVIEW AND SUBMITTAL
The Interface Descriptions in Attachment B-7 provide a high-level overview of the interfaces that Intergraph will
develop as part of the System. The goal of this task is to identify and obtain the specific information needed to
configure the interfaces described in Attachment B-7. The Customer will provide a point of contact for all Customer
hardware and software components with which the Intergraph deliverables will interface. The Customer will also
introduce Intergraph to third parties, including other vendors, state agencies, and local agencies that control products
and/or databases with which Intergraph products are to be interfaced. Intergraph is responsible for ensuring that the
third party points of contacts are the appropriate sources of information needed to develop the ICDs and for mutually
agreeing with the third party vendors on the operational and technical interface requirements.
Intergraph will interview points of contact, research interface requirements, and gather any available documentation
that can clarify data schema, protocols and query specifications. Intergraph will develop draft ICDs, which will be
provided to the Customer for review. The Customer will review the functional content of the ICDs and provide
feedback to Intergraph within ten (10) business days. After receiving feedback from the Customer on the draft ICDs,
Intergraph will finalize the ICDs and deliver the final documents to the Customer for approval of the functional content
of the ICDs. Intergraph is responsible for ensuring the technical accuracy of the ICDs.
Intergraph Team Participation:
Project Manager
Statement of Work Page 19
RMS Interface Lead
Customer Team Participation:
Project Manager
Subject Matter Experts
Prerequisites:
Completion of RMS Detailed Requirements Analysis (If Purchased)
Deliverables:
Interface Control Documentation
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Lead the interface requirements gathering process, tracking outstanding items requiring resolution
Confer with Customer and third party points of contacts to gather information required to develop ICDs
Ensure that third party points of contacts are appropriate sources of information necessary to develop ICDs
Mutually agree with the third party vendors on the operational and technical interface requirements
Gather all commercially available interface data detailed schema, protocols, and query specifications, as
needed
Prepare draft ICDs and submit to Customer for feedback
Incorporate Customer feedback into draft ICDs
Finalize Interface Control Documents for Customer review and approval
Customer Responsibilities:
Provide points of contact who are knowledgeable of the workflow and data requirements for each Customer
hardware and software component with which Intergraph deliverables will interface
Provide Intergraph with schema, protocols, and query specifications for Customer hardware and software
components with which Intergraph deliverables will interface
Introduce Intergraph to a primary point of contact for third parties, including other vendors, state agencies,
and local agencies that control products and/or databases with which Intergraph products are to be
interfaced
Provide any additional hardware or software that a third party requires for an interface with the third party
system to operate properly
Respond to Intergraph questions and requests for information in a timely manner
Ensure that design decisions are made conclusively and in a timely manner
Review draft ICDs and provide Intergraph feedback on any necessary changes or updates within ten (10)
business days of receipt
Review and approve the functional content of the final ICDs
Statement of Work Page 20
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when the Customer has reviewed and approved the functional content of the
finalized ICDs.
8. RMS/FBR CUSTOMIZATIONS DESIGN REVIEW
The COTS RMS, FBR, and CAGIS applications will meet the majority of the Customer’s RFP requirements. During
the RMS Customizations Design task, Intergraph will develop designs for FBR custom forms, RMS customizations
and confirm with the Customer that the designs are consistent with its expectations. This effort includes the design of
custom report outputs sold in the contract. Those reports are:
State of California Accident Report Forms (CHP555, 556 & 556D) as specified in the most recent revision of
the California Highway Patrol Collision Investigation Manual (to be provided by the customer)
State of California Vehicle Report Form (CHP180)
State of California Incident Form and Printed Report (UCR)
Combined Case Report
Field Interview Information Report
Intergraph will develop design review materials, including GUI layouts which include the mapping of data entry fields
to the printed report output, FBR mock-up input forms, and FBR output report designs for the procured
customizations. Intergraph will present the customization designs in a “Design Review Decisions Document” and
review with the Customer. Should the Customer discover any inaccuracies they will notify Intergraph within ten (10)
business days. Intergraph will document all feedback and decisions provided by the Customer during this review in a
“Design Review Decision Document.”
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Technical Lead
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
SMEs included in portions of the meeting, as required
Project Manager
Deliverables:
Design Review
Design Review Materials
Design Review Decision Document
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Develop a high level system design, depicting the information flows between all system components
Statement of Work Page 21
Develop design for any significant customizations that are procured, such as FBR custom forms or new
RMS modules
Develop materials for the Design Review
Document Design Review Decisions
Customer Responsibilities:
Coordinate meetings with Intergraph, as required
Identify the appropriate Subject Matter Experts for the Design Review (note that appropriate attendees have
the authority to make requirements and design decisions)
Ensure the Subject Matter Experts are available to participate in the Design Review meeting
Review and approve any design materials, as required
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when the Customer has reviewed and accepted the Design Review Decision
Document.
9. RMS COTS PRODUCT INSTALLATION IN PRODUCTION ENVIRONMENT
Intergraph will install the COTS RMS, FBR, and Crime Analysis applications in the Production environment as soon
as Intergraph procures, installs and configures the hardware, providing the Customer with access to the applications
as early as possible in the project lifecycle so it can begin configuration tasks.
Product installation and configuration will include remote services. After the remote installation of the base software,
Intergraph will access the System remotely for subsequent implementation tasks, including configuring components,
setting up interfaces, conducting installation testing, and troubleshooting problems.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Lead
RMS QA Specialists
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
IT Resources
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
VPN access is available
Completion of RMS/FBR System Hardware Delivery and Installation
Deliverables:
COTS RMS, FBR, and Crime Analysis software installed in the Production environment
Statement of Work Page 22
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Install Microsoft SQL Relational Database Management Software
Install COTS WebRMS server software
Install COTS FBR server software
Install COTS FBR client software on five (5) test workstations
Install COTS Crime Analysis server software
Install COTS Crime Analysis client software on two (2) test workstations
Conduct installation “Check Out” testing
Customer Responsibilities:
Provide IT support, as required
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete once the COTS RMS, FBR, and Crime Analysis software has been installed in
the Production environment and is available for testing by the customer.
10. RMS CONFIGURATION TRAINING
Once Intergraph has installed the COTS software, it will conduct the RMS Configuration Training course. The
purpose of this three (3) day course is to inform the RMS Core Team and System Administrators about the
configuration tools they have within the system, as well as the configuration decisions they will need to make.
Examples of decisions include:
What modules will go live at the initial cutover?
What Security Permission Groups are required?
What are the security requirements for each module?
What workflows role need to be defined?
The RMS Configuration Training course will instruct the RMS Core Team and System Administrators how to use
built-in configuration tools. This training will enable them to start configuring the system. This will give the Customer
the opportunity to establish user accounts, define security permission groups, populate code tables, and define
Workflows roles prior to system testing and end-user training. Using bulk loading methods and tools like Microsoft
Excel, Intergraph will assist the customer with loading large tables like code tables and employee data tables.
Intergraph will provide a more detailed System Administrator Training course later in the project lifecycle.
Intergraph Team Participation:
Configuration Trainer
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
Statement of Work Page 23
RMS Core Team, including System Administrators
Project Manager
Deliverables:
RMS Configuration Training Course (3 days)
RMS System Administrator Manual
Prerequisites:
Completion of RMS Detailed Requirements Analysis (If Purchased)
COTS Product Installation in Production Environment
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Conduct RMS Configuration Training course (3 days)
Provide documentation required to support the Customer in their configuration tasks
Customer Responsibilities:
Identify RMS Configuration Training attendees
Provide the RMS Configuration Training facility, which includes one workstation per attendee; one instructor
workstation; and a projector
Ensure RMS Configuration Training attendees attend the full three (3) days of the training session
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete at the conclusion of the RMS Configuration Training session and upon
delivery of the RMS System Administration Manual.
11. FBR CONFIGURATION TRAINING
Once Intergraph has installed the COTS software, it will conduct the FBR Configuration Training course. The
purpose of this two (2) day course is to inform the RMS Core Team and System Administrators about the workflow
configuration tools and options with regard to adding and customizing workflows.
The FBR Configuration Training course will instruct the RMS Core Team and System Administrators how to use and
leverage the FBR administrative tools for successful FBR administration. The class will also allow the Agency to
begin setting up the FBR user groups and roles.
Intergraph will provide a more detailed System Administrator Training course later in the project lifecycle.
Intergraph Team Participation:
Configuration Trainer
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
Statement of Work Page 24
RMS Core Team, including System Administrators
Project Manager
Deliverables:
FBR Configuration Training Course (2 days)
FBR System Administrator Manual
Prerequisites:
Completion of RMS Detailed Requirements Analysis
COTS Product Installation in Production Environment
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Conduct FBR Configuration Training course (2 days)
Provide documentation required to support the Customer in their configuration tasks
Customer Responsibilities:
Identify FBR Configuration Training attendees
Provide the FBR Configuration Training facility, which includes one workstation per attendee; one instructor
workstation; and a projector
Ensure FBR Configuration Training attendees attend the full two (2) days of the training session
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete at the conclusion of the FBR Configuration Training session and upon delivery
of the FBR System Administration Manual.
12. CUSTOMER CONFIGURATION OF RMS AND FBR
During this task, the Customer RMS Core Team and System Administrators will configure the RMS. For example,
they will have the ability to define the following:
Security Permission Groups and Permissions
Record Locking Groups
Code Table Values for every Drop Down Field
Screen Configurations
User Defined Fields
Workflow Management Groups and Processes
The RMS contains many “drop down menus,” which are populated by master code tables. The Customer is
responsible for populating these code tables with allowable code values. For large tables, Intergraph will assist the
customer with loading the data by utilizing bulk loading methods and tools like Microsoft Excel.
Statement of Work Page 25
The Workflow Management Utility provides a powerful tool for the Customer to control the flow of information
throughout the RMS. The Customer has the flexibility to define its Workgroups and the Workflows for each RMS
module.
Concurrent with the FBR configuration period, Intergraph will conduct five onsite RMS/FBR workshops to assist the
customer with their tasks and overcoming challenges that they face. Since each customer is different, there is not a
standard course description for the workshops. Workshops will all be 5 days in duration and intended to be hands on
working sessions. Prior to each workshop, Intergraph will meet and confer with the customer on agendas/goals for
the week as well as schedules.
Intergraph Team Participation:
Configuration Trainer
RMS Lead
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team, including System Administrators
Subject Matter Experts
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
COTS Product Installation in Production Environment
RMS Configuration Training
FBR Configuration Training
Deliverables:
Intergraph remote and onsite services
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Provide guidance to the Customer, as needed via remote and onsite workshops
Customer Responsibilities:
Populate the RMS code tables
Establish RMS user accounts and security permissions
Configure the RMS Workflow Management component
Enter employee data into the Master Employee Index module
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when the Customer has configured the RMS and the RMS is ready for end-
user training. For end-user training to commence, Intergraph requires the Customer complete, at a minimum,
the following configuration tasks:
Statement of Work Page 26
Population of RMS code tables
Security Permission Group definitions
RMS Workflow definitions
Note that while configuration is an ongoing task continuing even after system cutover, the Customer should
define the above minimum configurations before starting end-user training.
13. FBR WORKFLOW CONFIGURATION
The FBR enables each report type (i.e., Incident Report, Field Interview, Crash Report, etc.) to have its own approval
workflow. During this task, Intergraph will work with the Customer to identify the required FBR approval workflow
processes for each FBR report type as well as to define the roles (e.g., Officer, Supervisor, Records, etc.) the
Customer will assign users within the FBR. The Customer will document their FBR workflow roles and processes.
Once the Customer has completed documenting the FBR configurations, Intergraph will assist the customer in
configuring the customer’s FBR Workflows.
Concurrent with the RMS configuration period, Intergraph will conduct five onsite RMS/FBR workshops to assist the
customer with their tasks and overcoming challenges that they face. Since each customer is different, there is not a
standard course description for the workshops. Workshops will all be 5 days in duration and intended to be hands on
working sessions. Prior to each workshop, Intergraph will meet and confer with the customer on agendas/goals for
the week as well as schedules.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Software Engineers
RMS QA Specialists
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team, including System Administrators
Subject Matter Experts
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Completion of RMS/FBR Configuration Training
Deliverables:
FBR Configuration Template
Configured FBR Workflow Component in Production Environment
Statement of Work Page 27
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Provide a blank FBR Configuration Template to the Customer, along with instructions for completing
Support the Customer, as required, as it documents the FBR Workflow requirements in the FBR
Configuration Template
Review the FBR Configuration Template for completeness and accuracy and clarify any issues with the
Customer during weekly meetings and the 5 onsite configuration workshops
Configure the FBR Workflow in the Production environment, per the completed FBR Configuration Template
Conduct FBR Workflow testing in the Production environment
Customer Responsibilities:
Complete the FBR Configuration Template within 10 business days.
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when the agreed upon FBR Workflow has been configured and approved by
the customer as well as deployed in the Production environment and is ready for testing.
14. RMS/FBR PRODUCT CUSTOMIZATIONS DEVELOPMENT (IF PURCHASED)
During this task, Intergraph will develop any customizations approved during of the RMS/FBR Customizations Design
Task and the Design Review Decision Document. Intergraph will install and test the customizations in the Production
Environment. The RMS/FBR system will be ready for Functional Testing upon completion of this task.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Lead
RMS Software Engineers
RMS QA Specialists
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team, including System Administrators
Subject Matter Experts
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
RMS/FBR Customizations Design
Deliverables:
Statement of Work Page 28
Customized RMS application (If Purchased)
Customized FBR application
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Participate in Technical Interchange Meetings to discuss design and implementation of required product
customizations
Implement procured RMS and FBR customizations
Conduct internal unit, integration, and regression testing at Intergraph
Customer Responsibilities:
Review customizations and provide feedback, as required
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when Intergraph has deployed and tested and the customer has approved the
customized RMS and FBR applications, as documented in the Design Review Decision Document, in the
Production environment.
15. RMS INTERFACE DEVELOPMENT
During this task, Intergraph will develop the RMS interfaces per the approved ICDs. Once the interfaces have
passed Intergraph’s internal testing, the interface software will be ready for on-site installation and testing in the
Production environment.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Technical Lead
RMS Interfaces Lead
RMS Software Engineers
RMS QA Specialists
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
SMEs, as Required
Third Party Interface Stakeholders
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Customer review and approval of the Interface Control Documents
Operation or availability of the external system or third-party software
Statement of Work Page 29
Deliverables:
Interface software deployed to the Production environment for testing
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Work with the required stakeholders to review interface requirements and design interfaces
Develop interface use cases
Develop interface test cases
Develop interface software
Conduct internal interface testing, prior to deployment in the Production environment
Install interface software in the Production environment and conduct integration testing
Customer Responsibilities:
For custom interfaces, ensure the required internal and third party stakeholders are available to work with
Intergraph to design interfaces, develop interface software, and test interface software
Provide Subject Matter Expertise to Intergraph, as needed
Verify the physical connectivity between the Customer’s servers, remote agency servers, and external
servers
Provide the following values to Intergraph:
o IP addresses for remote databases
o Socket value for remote systems
o Operator IDs (ORIs, terminal mnemonics, as needed by remote systems
Provide support from the Customer System Administrator to the Intergraph Team, as needed
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when each RMS interface is installed and tested in accordance with the
mutually agreed ICDs and acceptance test plans. The operation or availability of the external system or third-
party software is necessary for task completion.
16. BI DIRECT AND AD HOC REPORTING
During this task, Intergraph will implement the Business Intelligence Direct software (BI Direct) and its Ad hoc
reporting capabilities.
BI Direct offers the ability to perform interactive reporting and analysis on data available in the WebRMS database. BI
Direct provides capabilities for the user to view and modify reports and conduct ad-hoc queries through a secure web
portal. With minimal knowledge of underlying database structures, users can create custom formulas and reports and
analyze data using pre-configured Universes designed for easy reporting use and built with industry terminology.
Statement of Work Page 30
BI reports can be modified and along with Ad hoc reports enable operators to enhance and refine the data in a report
on demand. Report users can modify or build queries that generate an existing report or create a new report. With ad
hoc reporting, operators can also:
View metadata so to see the data that generates the reports and how reports are structured and filtered
Add new tables and charts to existing reports
Modify the format of reports, including the layout of charts and tables
Add new data objects to reports
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Technical Lead
RMS Interfaces Lead
RMS Software Engineers
RMS QA Specialists
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
SMEs, as Required
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Installation and access to BI server and the WebRMS databases that will allow Intergraph to prepare for the
system installation and setting up BI direct product using customer data
VPN access to the BI System servers and WebRMS servers for Intergraph engineers
System Administrator ― Customer is responsible for ensuring that the System Administrator is available to
work with the Intergraph team during installation and configuration.
Deliverables:
Business Intelligence (BI Direct) software products:
Software installation and configuration services
Training services outlined in SOW section 22 and Attachment B-4 – Training Plan including creation of ad
hoc reports
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Provide the software as defined in the contract.
Remote installation and configuration of the BI Direct Solution and SAP BusinessObjects Applications.
Perform training services listed in deliverables of this section including ad hoc reports training.
Perform minor functional training and informal knowledge transfer with System Administrator on all systems
Statement of Work Page 31
installed, reviewing documentation and standard reports.
Customer Responsibilities:
Observe system installation and support as necessary.
Participate in informal knowledge transfer, as well as documentation and system review.
Install additional products not purchased under this contract, such as third-party backup software.
Confirm that the software installation and delivery has been completed by Intergraph.
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when BI is setup and configured and reports are available (both standard
delivered reports and ad hoc) for users with customer data and informal knowledge transfer with System
Administrator has been executed.
17. RMS/FBR FUNCTIONAL TEST DEVELOPMENT
Recognizing that WebRMS is still in development and rapidly evolving, Intergraph will develop the Acceptance Test
Plan as part of this project. Intergraph will provide a Standard Functional Acceptance Test Plan to formally verify
system functionality. Intergraph will also include test procedures that verify the RMS and FBR Performance Criteria.
The Customer will review the Standard Acceptance Test Plan and can add additional site-specific scenarios and
tests, as long as they comply with the functional requirements in the RFP. Intergraph will review all site-specific
scenarios and tests added by the Customer. Intergraph and the Customer will mutually agree upon the final
Functional Test.
The Functional Test criteria and scenarios will include cases to test the ability of the RMS/FBR Systems to work
together as intended. The focus of these criteria and scenarios will be on accessing and transferring data between
the two Systems. Intergraph and the Customer will have input into these integration scenarios.
At the conclusion of the Functional Test development, the Customer will have the ability to use the Functional Tests
to perform independent testing of the RMS and FBR prior to the formal Functional Testing Process with Intergraph.
Intergraph recommends that the Customer perform the independent testing to validate the Functional Test scenarios
and submit any potential changes to Intergraph before formal testing begins.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Technical Lead
Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Completion of the Interfaces Configuration Documentation Review and Submittal
Completion of RMS/FBR Customizations Design
Statement of Work Page 32
Completion of RMS/FBR Configuration Training
Deliverables:
Intergraph remote services to develop Functional Acceptance Test Plan
Functional Tests
Intergraph Responsibilities
Develop and Provide the Standard Functional Acceptance Test Plan
Review and approve Customer revisions to the Functional Tests
Provide input into the Functional Tests that test the integration between the RMS/FBR Systems
Review and approve Customer revisions to the Functional Tests that involve the integration between the
RMS/FBR Systems
Customer Responsibilities:
Review the Functional Tests provided by Intergraph and add any additional tests desired by the Customer
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when the Customer and Intergraph have mutually approved the final
Functional Test Plan.
18. RMS/FBR INTEGRATION AND TESTING BY INTERGRAPH
Once the RMS/FBR Customizations and Interfaces have been tested internally at Intergraph’s facility, Intergraph will
install them in the Production environment. Intergraph will then conduct integration and additional testing activities to
ensure all components are operating as designed. This level of testing is performed by Intergraph and third party
interface stakeholders. It will occur prior to the formal RMS/FBR system Functional Testing. Intergraph will perform
the majority of this task remotely.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Technical Lead
RMS Software Engineers
RMS QA Specialists
RMS Interfaces Lead
Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
IT Resources
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Statement of Work Page 33
Completion RMS/FBR Customization Development
Completion of Interface Development
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Deploy customized RMS and FBR applications to the Production environment
Deploy interfaces to the Production environment
Conduct integration and testing activities remotely
Customer Responsibilities:
Provide IT support, as required
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when the RMS Integration Testing of all RMS Interfaces has been completed
and is operating in accordance with standards as set forth within the mutually agreed ICDs and acceptance test
plans.
19. RMS/FBR SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL TESTING
Per the Acceptance Test Plan in Attachment B-1, the Customer, with on-site assistance from Intergraph will conduct
Functional Testing to confirm RMS/FBR System functionality using the mutually developed Functional Test Plan.
The Customer will verify the operability of each functional item in the Functional Test Plan using a scenario or test
case. Intergraph and the Customer will jointly document and track the results of the test as either pass or fail.
Intergraph will have up to ten (10) business days to correct any functional item that fails a test, or provide a mutually
acceptable written explanation of when the failed item will be addressed. The Customer may conduct additional
Functional Testing within ten (10) business days following the delivery of any corrections.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Technical Lead
RMS Interface Lead
Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Successful completion of all prior RMS/FBR-related tasks
Completion of Intergraph internal RMS/FBR Integration and Functional Testing and mutual confirmation by
the Customer and Intergraph that the RMS/FBR System is ready for testing
Development of Functional Test Document
Statement of Work Page 34
Deliverables:
Intergraph on-site services
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Confirm the basic system capabilities as part of Intergraph standard software certification procedures
Confirm all applicable software, systems and ancillary systems including the redundancy of production
system to be ready for RMS/FBR Functional Testing
Provide on-site assistance during the Functional Testing
Review any discrepancies found by the Customer during the Functional Testing
Correct any functional item that fails a test, or provide a mutually acceptable written explanation of when
Intergraph will correct the failed item
Customer Responsibilities:
Execute Functional Testing
Track and document test results
Conduct re-testing within five (5) business days of receipt of Intergraph provided correction
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when the Customer has provided acknowledgement that the RMS/FBR
System operates in accordance with the Functional Tests and Intergraph has either remedied items that failed
the test or provided a mutually acceptable written explanation of how and when these will be addressed.
20. RMS BUILD TEST/TRAINING SYSTEM
Once the RMS/FBR System has been demonstrated to operate in accordance with the Functional Test Document,
Intergraph will replicate the Production environment into the Test/Training environment. Intergraph will be
responsible for building the Test/Training environment, which it will do remotely.
The Customer and Intergraph will work together to develop mutually acceptable test-case scenarios appropriate to
the Test/Training environment to ensure it operates as intended.
After Intergraph has built the Test/Training environment, this will be tested by both the Customer and Intergraph.
Cutover cannot occur until Intergraph has corrected test failures and the system as a whole passes the tests
indicating that the system will operate as intended in the Test/Training environment and/or mutually acceptable
remedies for the test failures have been developed.
The Customer reserves the right to conduct tests on a corrected Test/Training Environment to ensure that the
failures have been corrected and the Environment operates as intended.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Lead
RMS Software Engineers
Statement of Work Page 35
RMS QA Specialists
RMS Project Manager
Statement of Work Page 36
Customer Team Participation:
IT Resources
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Completion of Functional Testing
Deliverables:
Intergraph on-site services and remote services
RMS/FBR System installed and tested in the Test/Training Environment
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Install the RMS/FBR system in the Test/Training environment and conduct testing to ensure the
Environment operates as intended
Correct any Failures before System Cutover
Customer Responsibilities:
Provide IT support as required
Develop scenarios to test that the Test/Training Environment operates as intended
Document Failures
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when the RMS/FBR System has been installed and tested in the Test/Training
Environment and Intergraph and the Customer both agree that the Test/Training Environment operates as
intended.
21. RMS PRODUCT DOCUMENTATION
Intergraph will deliver the technical and end-user documentation listed under the “Deliverables” section below. To
enable the Customer to copy and distribute the documentation within the Customer to support the project, Intergraph
will deliver documentation in electronic format. If appropriate, the product documentation will be tailored to include
any customizations purchased by the Customer, such as custom FBR forms; however, Intergraph will not be
responsible for customizing the documentation to match the Customer’s system configurations.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Documentation Manager
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
Statement of Work Page 37
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
RMS Product Customizations and Testing
Interface Development and Testing
Deliverables:
Intergraph will deliver the following inPURSUIT product documentation:
System Administration/Technical Documentation:
o RMS System Administrator Manual
o FBR System Administrator Manual
o FBR Client Installation Manual
o RMS Entity Relationship Diagram
o Edge Frontier Technical Manual
User Documentation:
o FBR User Manual
o WebRMS User Manual
o Incident Based Reporting System (IBRS) User Manual
o Crime Analysis Geographical Information System User Manual
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Deliver the product documentation listed above
Customer Responsibilities:
N/A
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete upon delivery, review and acceptance by the Customer of the product
documents listed above under the “Deliverables” section.
22. RMS/FBR TRAINING
Intergraph will provide RMS/FBR Train-the-Trainer courses per the Training Plan in Attachment B-4. The Training
curriculum includes Train-the-Trainer courses designed to prepare Customer trainers for end-user training and
Administration courses designed to prepare Customer technical personnel to operate and support the RMS/FBR
System.
After completion of the Train-the-Trainer courses, the Customer will conduct end-user training for the RMS, FBR and
CAGIS System. Intergraph recommends that the Customer will conduct concurrent training sessions to minimize the
time between training and operational use of the systems in the live environment. It is the Customer’s responsibility
Statement of Work Page 38
to ensure that the majority of end-users are trained prior to Cutover. The Customer and Intergraph will mutually
agree upon the level of end-user training that the Customer needs to complete before Cutover, and the Customer
agrees to fulfill its obligation to train that level of users. Final System Acceptance will not be withheld due to
Customer not completing its training obligations.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Training Manager
RMS Trainers
RMS Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
Designated Customer Trainers
RMS Core Team
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Completion of Functional Testing
Installation and testing of the RMS/FBR in the Testing/Training environment
Delivery of Product Documentation
Deliverables:
Intergraph on-site training services
Intergraph will deliver the following training courses:
o WebRMS Configuration Training (3 days, 1 instructor, 12 students maximum)
o FBR Configuration Training (2 days, 1 instructor, 12 students maximum)
o WebRMS/FBR System IT Administration Training (3 days, 1 instructor, 6 students maximum)
o WebRMS Train the Trainer Training (4 days, 1 instructor, 12 students maximum)
o FBR Train the Trainer Training (3 days, 1 instructor, 12 students maximum)
o Crime Analysis End-User Training (4 days, 1 instructor, 12 students maximum)
o WebRMS Reports Development & Deployment (2 days, 1 instructor, 12 students maximum)
o BI Direct System Administrator Training (2 days, 1 instructor, 6 students maximum)
o BI Direct End User Training (4 days, 1 instructor, 6 students maximum)
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Provide RMS/FBR training for Customer Technical and Training staff members for all installed RMS/FBR
software per a mutually agreed to schedule and as defined in the Pricing Detail Provide one (1) complete
set of printed training materials per student in classes conducted by Intergraph (note that printed training
materials will not include the User Manual, which, due to its large size, will be provided in electronic format
only)
Statement of Work Page 39
Provide machine-readable documents in Microsoft Word, based upon Intergraph’s documentation standard
at the time of delivery. Documentation files will not be password protected
Customer Responsibilities:
Designate and assign personnel to receive training in groups not to exceed the class size listed above
Provide the facilities, supplies and equipment necessary to support training classes, including one full-
function workstation per student, one full-function workstation for the instructor, an LCD, a projection screen,
a whiteboard and connectivity to the server
Provide sufficient copies of the documentation supplied by Intergraph to support all students in the training
classes
Ensure that appropriate Customer Training personnel and system administrator are available to actively
participate in the scheduled training programs and attendees attend scheduled training classes in their
entirety
Ensure that Customer personnel to receive RMS/FBR training are proficient Microsoft Windows users
Provide end-user training to users of the system
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete upon conclusion of the scheduled System Administrator and Train-the-Trainer
courses as per the contract.
23. RMS CUTOVER PLAN
Intergraph and the Customer will jointly develop a Cutover Plan that will detail the steps necessary to move into live
operations. To ensure that the move to live operations goes as smoothly as possible, the Cutover Plan will assign
tasks and responsibilities to both Intergraph and Customer personnel during the final month before cutover to live
operations. The Plan will cover Customer staffing, movement of equipment into final locations, final database clean
out of test events, issue reporting procedures and planned sequence of events for the cutover day.
Intergraph will provide the initial draft of the Cutover Plan to the Customer for review. The Customer will review the
draft and provide feedback to Intergraph within ten (10) business days, which Intergraph will then incorporate the
feedback into a final Cutover Plan.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Lead
Interface Lead
Training Lead
Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
Project Manager
Statement of Work Page 40
Prerequisites:
N/A
Deliverables:
Intergraph remote services
Cutover Plan
Intergraph responsibilities:
Create a draft RMS Cutover Plan
Work with Customer personnel to refine the Cutover Plan
Review and approve the final Cutover Plan
Customer responsibilities:
Review and comment on the draft RMS Cutover Plan within ten (10) business days
Work with Intergraph personnel to refine the Cutover Plan
Review and approve the final Cutover Plan
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when the Customer has received, reviewed and approved the final Cutover
Plan.
24. RMS SYSTEM CUTOVER READINESS REVIEW
The purpose of this meeting between Intergraph and the Customer is to confirm that all preparations for go-live
activities have been completed. This meeting may be conducted via conference call.
The Readiness Review verifies that the following has occurred:
Cutover Plan approval
Pre-Cutover Testing according to the Acceptance Test Plan
Establishment and approval of a schedule for cutover activities
Identification and scheduling of Intergraph and Customer resources required for go-live activities
Notification of planned system cutover to internal and external interface stakeholders supplying systems
integral to go-live operations
Data conversion audit complete and approved (If Purchased)
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Lead
Interface Lead
Data Conversion Lead (if data conversion is purchased)
Statement of Work Page 41
Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Completion of all Pre-Cutover Testing
Completion of all end-user training designated by the Customer as being required for “go-live”
Deliverables:
Completion and acceptance of the Readiness Review
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Provide above noted resources to attend Readiness Review meeting
Customer Responsibilities:
Provide above noted resources to attend Readiness Review meeting
Provide final “go-live” approval
Completion Criteria:
The deliverable will be completed upon conclusion of the Readiness Review meeting and documentation of
Customer approval to proceed with RMS/FBR System cutover.
25. RMS/FBR CUTOVER
Once testing is complete, and Intergraph and the Customer have held the Readiness Review meeting, Intergraph will
certify the RMS/FBR System as operational and ready for production operation. The final decision to cut over to live
operations is ultimately a Customer decision; however, both Intergraph and the Customer will review system status
and jointly make a recommendation to move into production. Intergraph personnel will assist the Customer in placing
the system into productive use. Upon cutover, Intergraph personnel will be on-site at least one (1) day prior to live
operations and will provide post-live on-site support for three (3) days, with on-going focused phone support following
the on-site support period. Intergraph intends to cutover the both the RMS and FBR components of the RMS/FBR
System at the same time; should the Customer decide to cutover RMS a significant period of time before the FBR
Cutover, the Customer and Intergraph will need to initiate a Change Order and adjust the Project Schedule and
Payment Milestones accordingly.
Customer technical personnel must be present to provide support for the system. Customer training personnel and
core team members will be scheduled to provide knowledgeable Customer support to all shifts during the first few
days after cutover to live operations in conjunction with the scheduled Intergraph staff.
As of cutover of the RMS, FBR and CAGIS to live operations, the System enters the extended warranty period, and
the 30-day reliability test period will begin.
Statement of Work Page 42
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Technical Lead
RMS Interface Lead
Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
Project Manager
IT Resources
Trainers
Prerequisites:
Completion of all prior projects tasks pertaining to the implementation of the RMS/FBR System
Completion and acceptance of the Cutover Plan
Completion of the Readiness Review meeting
Deliverables:
Intergraph on-site services during Cutover (Intergraph personnel will be on-site at least one (1) day prior to
live operations and will provide post-live on-site support for three (3) days
Remote technical and training support immediately following the on-site Cutover support
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Assist the Customer staff in placing RMS/FBR into a production status
Monitor the initial operation of RMS/FBR and answer any operational questions raised by the Customer
Assist the training staff in utilizing the RMS/FBR System
Assist the technical staff in supporting the RMS/FBR System
Provide remote support following on-site Cutover support
Customer Responsibilities:
Place the software into production and begin operational use in consultation with Intergraph and in
accordance with the Project Schedule
Provide technical staff to support the System
Provide training staff to answer end-user questions, in conjunction with the Intergraph staff
Provide a detailed list of questions and issues that still require explanation or resolution by Intergraph at the
end of each day during the on-site activities
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete when RMS/FBR is placed into successful live operations by all three Cities.
Statement of Work Page 43
26. RMS/FBR 30-DAY FUNCTIONAL AND RELIABILITY TEST
Per the Acceptance Test Plan Attachment B-1, the Intergraph RMS/FBR System will undergo a 30-day Functional
and Reliability Test during which the System will maintain the functional and reliability standards identified in
Attachment B-1. See the Acceptance Test Plan in Attachment B-1 for a description of the Functional and Reliability
Criteria testing, definitions of error types, and the plan to remedy found errors.
The Customer is responsible for maintaining a log of any discovered problems. The log should contain information
as to the sequence of events leading up to the problem, time of day, node name or unit involved, and other pertinent
details. Intergraph is responsible for remedying found errors per the Acceptance Test Plan.
At the conclusion of the Functional and Reliability Test, Intergraph will provide the Customer a final summary report
documenting all issues that occurred during the thirty (30) day Functional and Reliability period, as well as the
resolution activities for the issues.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Lead
Interface Lead
Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS Core Team
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Cutover to live operations of the RMS/FBR system
Deliverables:
Intergraph remote services
Final summary report documenting all issues that occurred during the thirty (30) day Functional and
Reliability period, as well as the resolution activities for the issues
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Address and/or correct found errors per the appropriate resolution identified in Attachment B-1
Customer Responsibilities:
Use and monitor the RMS/FBR system in a production environment
Maintain a log of problems found
Contact Intergraph personnel in a timely manner in the event of system problems or failures
Begin system monitoring in support of the Extended Warranty period
Statement of Work Page 44
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete after the RMS/FBR System successfully passes the 30-day Functional and
Reliability Test per the Acceptance Test Plan in 0.
27. UCR/BCS RELIABILITY TEST – CONFIRMATION OF SUCCESSFUL RECEIPT OF UCR/BCS DATA
BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
UCR/BCS data will not be available to submit to the state of California at the cutover as no real time statistical data
will be present in the new system. Through normal, day-to-day use of the system data will be collected and entered
into the WebRMS.
The State of California requires that each agency report, on a monthly basis the following:
Monthly Return of Offenses Known to the Police (Return A)
Property Stolen by Classification
Property Stolen by Type and Value (Supplement to Return A)
Monthly Arrest and Citation Register (Adult)
Monthly Arrest and Citation Register (Juvenile)
Monthly Report of Domestic Violence Related Calls for Assistance
Number of Violent Crimes Committed Against Senior Citizens
Monthly Return of Arson Offenses Known to Law Enforcement
Law Enforcement Officers Killed or Assaulted (LEOKA)
Supplementary Homicide Report
Monthly Report of Biased Motivated Crimes (Hate Crimes)
Monthly Report of Anti-Reproductive Rights Crimes
The data is due to be reported to the State by the 10th of the month following the month of cutover. The customer and
Intergraph will work together to resolve issues within 30 days of notification from the state that an error has occurred.
Intergraph Team Participation:
RMS Lead
Interface Lead
Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
RMS UCR/BCS Lead
Records Manager
Project Manager
Statement of Work Page 45
Prerequisites:
Cutover to live operations of the RMS/FBR system
Deliverables:
Intergraph remote services to monitor and resolve issues with submitted report
Intergraph Responsibilities:
Address and/or correct errors reported by the State of California
Customer Responsibilities:
Submit the UCR/BCS report to the State of California
Maintain a log of problems reported by the State
Contact Intergraph personnel in a timely manner in the event of system problems or failures
Assist in the resolution of issues where appropriate
Facilitate communications between the customer, Intergraph and the State of California
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete after the UCR/BCS report has been accepted by the State of California.
28. RMS/FBR PROJECT CLOSURE
During this task, Intergraph and Customer project managers will review project activities and deliverables, and
mutually agree that all RMS and FBR-related items purchased under the Contract have been delivered and are
operational, all RMS- and FBR-specific tasks are complete, major issues identified in use of the system in production
have been corrected and all Payment Milestones to-date have been met.
Intergraph Team Participation:
Project Manager
Customer Team Participation:
Project Manager
Prerequisites:
Completion of Statement of Work RMS Implementation Tasks
Deliverables:
Intergraph remote services
Intergraph/Intergraph responsibilities:
Verify with the Customer Project Manager that all RMS and FBR-related items purchased under the
Statement of Work Page 46
Contract have been delivered and are operational, all RMS and FBR specific tasks are complete, and all
Payment Milestones to-date have been met
Ensure the payment of all invoices for Payment Milestones that have been met to-date
Customer responsibilities:
Verify that all RMS and FBR-related items purchased under the Contract have been delivered and are
operational, all RMS and FBR specific tasks are complete, and all Payment Milestones to-date have been
met
Ensure the payment of all invoices for Payment Milestones that have been met to-date
Completion Criteria:
This task is considered complete upon verification by the Intergraph and Customer project managers that all
RMS/FBR-related items purchased under the Agreement have been delivered and are operational, Statement
of Work RMS Implementation Tasks are complete and all Payment Milestones to-date have been met.
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2014 TO
INCREASE THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMPUTER AIDED DISPATCH
REPLACEMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $100,000 FOR CONTINGENCY FUNDING FOR PALO
ALTO’S PARTICIPATION IN THE TRI-CITIES CAD AND RMS
“VIRTUAL CONSOLIDATION” PROJECT AND DECREASE THE
TECHNOLOGY FUND UNRESTRICTED ENDING FUND BALANCE IN
THE AMOUNT OF $100,000.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and
determines as follows:
A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III
of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on June 10,
2013 did adopt a budget for fiscal year 2014; and
B. As part of the 2009 Capital Budget, the Council approved
$1,300,000 for Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) and Records
Management System (RMS) replacement in Capital Improvement
Project (CIP) TE-09000. During the initial stages of the process
to replace these systems, the City Managers of Palo Alto,
Mountain View, and Los Altos discussed the feasibility of sharing
automated information systems to leverage purchasing power and
lower costs. This initiative was discussed at a Council Study
Session on May 2, 2011 that presented the "virtual consolidation"
concept and the framework to share public safety technology and
communication systems; and
C. Palo Alto’s project costs for CAD and RMS replacement
total approximately $1,296,541; therefore, staff recommends a
contingency of $100,000 to cover any change orders, network
issues, or unexpected expenses associated with implementation of
the system, and the City Council must approve a Budget Amendment
Ordinance for the expenses; and
D. An additional appropriation of One Hundred Thousand
($100,000) is needed to fund contingency costs related to the
Tri-Cities CAD and RMS “Virtual Replacement” Project; and
E. City Council authorization is needed to amend the 2014
budget as hereinafter set forth.
SECTION 2. The sum of One Hundred Thousand ($100,000) is
hereby appropriated to the Public Safety Computer-Aided Dispatch
Replacement capital project and the Technology Fund Unrestricted
Ending Fund Balance is correspondingly reduced.
SECTION 3. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon
adoption.
SECTION 4. The actions taken in this ordinance do not
constitute a project requiring environmental review under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
_________________________
City Clerk
__________________________
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Senior Assistant City
Attorney
__________________________
City Manager
__________________________
Director of Public Works
__________________________
Director of Administrative
Services
City of Palo Alto (ID # 1829)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/21/2012
February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 6
(ID # 1829)
Summary Title: Tri Cities CAD Project
Title: Approval for the City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement with the Cities
of Mountain View and Los Altos to Purchase Public Safety Systems Technology,
Including Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Police Records Management (RMS),
and In-Vehicle Mobile and Reporting Applications for Police and Fire
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Police
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an
agreement to purchase and maintain, for a minimum of six (6) years, a joint public
safety technology platform with the cities of Mountain View and Los Altos. The
platform includes Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Records Management System
(RMS), in-vehicle mobile applications for Police and Fire, in-field reporting and
business intelligence.
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement between the Cities of
Los Altos, Palo Alto and Mountain View for the purpose of procuring,
sharing, and jointly operating regional public safety automated information
systems.
2. Authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the Intergraph
Corporation for the procurement of the jointly operated regional public
safety automated information systems in an amount not to exceed
$1,300,000.
Background
The City operates mission-critical public safety systems to record, process, and
coordinate response to Police and Fire Department calls for service, as well as to
document employee-initiated activity. The primary components of these systems
are the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Records Management System (RMS), and
Field Based Reporting (FBR) systems. These systems are also used to input,
February 21, 2012 Page 2 of 6
(ID # 1829)
retain, and retrieve information that is used for operational analysis, and to
comply with regulatory reporting requirements for crime and emergency medical
service incidents. The existing systems are twelve years old, have exceeded their
expected service life, and are lacking features and functionality now available in
contemporary public safety systems.
During the initial stages of the process to replace these systems in 2007, the City
Managers of Palo Alto, Mountain View, and Los Altos discussed the feasibility of
sharing automated information systems to leverage purchasing power and lower
costs. Currently, the cities operate with three separate systems for CAD, RMS,
Mobile and 9-1-1, and none of these systems are interoperable. Representatives
from the three cities began working collaboratively towards the goal of a shared
procurement process.
These efforts progressed into a broader initiative of sharing additional public
safety technology as a method to share resources, improve response times,
increase the resiliency and redundancy of these critical systems, as well as to
enhance interoperable communications between the three cities’ first
responders.
In 2007, a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was released to 26 potential vendors
of which 12 responded. From that group, six candidates were invited to
participate in a Request for Proposal (RFP) process. Five of those vendors
responded to the RFP. The RFP process was overseen by the City of Mountain
View Purchasing Department. Of those five, three elected to participate in a
product demonstration. Staff from the Police and Fire Departments from all three
cities participated in the product evaluation. After the systems’ demonstrations
and a thorough analysis by staff and the project's consultant, the proposal
submitted by the Intergraph Corporation was identified as representing the best
choice for the three cities.
In August 2010, Intergraph Corporation conducted a detailed system design
process with project stakeholders from the three Cities in order to validate the
proposed system design and ensure that all three cities' requirements would be
met or exceeded. Since the conclusion of this process, project team members
have been working with Intergraph to further refine the scope of the project and
to ensure all required features, functions, and interfaces will be present in the
February 21, 2012 Page 3 of 6
(ID # 1829)
proposed system. The cities equally shared a total of $77,120 in consulting
services and $60,000 in design phase costs. The City of Palo Alto’s portion for
these two costs is $45,681 ($25,681 for consulting and $20,000 for detailed
design review).
In spring of 2011, Intergraph acquired a new RMS company. Staff determined that the
three cities needed clear direction from Intergraph on their future path for RMS and
assurances that the system functionality would meet or exceed the requirements agreed to
in the initial proposal. Staff directed Intergraph to divide the CAD project and the RMS
project into separate proposals. After a second detailed design review of the new RMS
system, staff is confident that the newly acquired product provides a more robust solution
than the initial proposal with the legacy system.
This initiative was discussed at a Council Study Session on May 2, 2011 that presented
the "virtual consolidation" concept and the framework to share public safety technology
and communication systems. Staff anticipates that once the shared systems are
implemented, the Cities will be able to reduce costs in a variety of areas.
Discussion
The project has two separate, but related phases, and each phase has a separate
contract. The primary contract is to purchase the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD)
system and the Mobile applications that operate in the Police and Fire vehicles.
The second contract is to purchase the Police Records Management System (RMS)
which includes an automated in-field reporting system for Police. The CAD
contract is in the final review process with the Intergraph Executive team and will
be at places at Council on February 21st. The RMS contract has a not-to-exceed
price established and details will be finalized by May 1st and submitted to Council
for approval.
The anticipated cost for the CAD and Mobile products is approximately
$2,352,201. The RMS base system will not exceed $675,266. The three Cities’
have developed a cost-sharing agreement for the purchase and maintenance of
these systems. The proposed cost-sharing formula is based on a previous regional
agreement to fund the Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority (SVRIA).
Fifty percent of the project will be divided equally between the three cities. The
remaining fifty percent will be allocated based on population (2010 US Census
data). Stanford University contracts with the City of Palo Alto for Police and Fire
dispatch services and Stanford’s population is included in Palo Alto’s percentage.1
February 21, 2012 Page 4 of 6
(ID # 1829)
Fire Service specific costs will not be included in Los Altos’ portion as those
services are outsourced by the City of Los Altos. The cost for specific “per seat”
software licenses will be borne by the city that requires their use.
Total joint system costs are estimated at $3,027,467. The City’s portion based on
the proposed cost-sharing formula is $897,757 for CAD and $257,726 for RMS for
a total of $1,155,483. Final acquisition cost for the City will be determined by
final software license counts and selected system configuration options, but will
not exceed $1,300,000 without Council approval. There are systems interface and
data conversion costs that are still under negotiation, however, staff is confident
that project costs will not exceed the allocated funding. Intergraph’s pricing for
the CAD/Mobile systems includes a discount of $200,000 that expires on March 1,
2012. As part of the 2009 Capital Budget, Council approved $1,300,000 for CAD
replacement in CIP TE-09000.
Ongoing maintenance and support costs for the CAD system are calculated using
the same cost-sharing formula and a six year commitment is required from the
participating cities (the first year of maintenance is included in the contract). The
cost for Palo Alto will increase from $89,585 annually, starting in FY 2014/15, to
$108,891 in FY 2018/19. The Cities negotiated a fixed five percent increase
annually for an additional five years. Estimated support costs are within currently
budgeted amounts for these services. In 2011, Palo Alto paid $103,535 for CAD
and RMS maintenance on the existing systems. There is a potential for cost
savings by sharing costs for 3rd party services and other intergovernmental
agreements currently borne by all three cities separately. For example, the City of
Palo Alto pays approximately $50,000 annually for DOJ access through Santa Clara
County. It is anticipated that most if not all of that expense will be eliminated by
connecting directly through the City of Mountain View. Additional cost savings
including reduced overtime and personnel costs are anticipated once the system
is implemented.
In the proposed agreement the City of Mountain View will serve as the lead
agency for the procurement and Mountain View and will host the core set of
equipment that comprises the systems (Palo Alto will serve as the back-up site).
The City of Mountain View will invoice the other two participating cities as
required and make payments to the Intergraph Corporation on behalf of all
1 Palo Alto will be reimbursed by Stanford for 25% of the CAD capital cost, approximately $224,439.
February 21, 2012 Page 5 of 6
(ID # 1829)
parties. Each city will be responsible for providing sufficient technical staff to
support the enterprise system’s use and the joint administration of the systems.
Each city will be responsible for the maintenance of its own data and will mutually
indemnify each other with respect to the use of the systems.
The procurement of regional public safety information systems is the first phase
of the tri-city “virtual consolidation” project. The enterprise wide applications will
serve as the centerpiece for the larger project that includes a common 9-1-1
phone system and a shared police radio frequency. “Virtual Consolidation” will
provide both technical and physical redundancy for public safety systems and
communications for all three cities. The Mountain View City Council approved the
tri-city agreement and Intergraph Contract process on January 24, 2012 and the
agreement and contract are on the agenda for the Los Altos City Council meeting
on February 28th.
RESOURCE IMPACT
The initial costs for the project, estimated at $1,155,483, are within the budget
established by the CIP, which has a balance of $1,300,000, and the City will be
reimbursed by Stanford University for a portion of the CAD system expense
(Stanford has their own RMS system). With the estimated Stanford
reimbursement of $224,439, the estimated net City cost is $931,044.
Maintenance costs have been fixed for an eleven year period ensuring stability
and cost management. The Police Department pays allocated charges into the IT
Application Maintenance fund to cover these costs. Staff time for Police and IT
personnel will be impacted significantly by the twelve to eighteen month project.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This agreement is consistent with existing City policy.
TIMELINE
Following the execution of the specified agreements, a project start date in April,
2012 is anticipated. Installation of the primary hardware and software is
scheduled for June 2012, with cutover to the new systems tentatively scheduled
for the second calendar quarter in 2013.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
February 21, 2012 Page 6 of 6
(ID # 1829)
The project to purchase and implement CAD and RMS systems is not subject to
CEQA pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15061(b)(3), and
it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility of a significant effect on
the environment.
Attachments:
Coop Agreement for Procurement 2-16 (PDF)
Prepared By:Charles Cullen, TSD Coordinator
Department Head:Dennis Burns, Police Chief
City Manager Approval: ____________________________________
James Keene, City Manager
COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT FOR THE PROCUREMENT OF REGIONAL
PUBLIC SAFETY AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS
THIS Cooperative Procurement Agreement (Cooperative Agreement) is dated
February, ______, 2012 for identification, by and between the CITIES OF LOS ALTOS,
MOUNTAIN VIEW AND PALO ALTO, all municipal corporations (hereafter "LOS
ALTOS," "MOUNTAIN VIEW" and "PALO ALTO" respectively and individually "City"
or collectively "Cities."
RECITALS
WHEREAS, in 2007, the Cities began the process to upgrade and or replace their
existing public safety automated systems and agreed to work together to share
resources in order to achieve cost savings by combining separate vendor selection
processes; and
WHEREAS, the Cities continue to explore sharing the procurement and use of
public safety systems, sharing information, and workload where feasible to share costs
and virtually consolidate the provision of services and agreed this is a common and
important goal for all three cities; and
WHEREAS, the Cities released a Request for Qualifications and a Request for
Proposals, evaluated the vendor proposals for a detailed design of Regional Public
Safety Automated Information Systems and negotiated an agreement with Intergraph
Corporation; and
WHEREAS, based on the Request for Proposals, Intergraph Corporation has been
selected as the vendor to provide a fully integrated Regional Public Safety Automated
Information Systems, including but not limited to Computer Aided Dispatch ("CAD"),
Records Management ("RMS") Mobile for Public Safety ("MPS"), Field Based Reporting
("FBR") and various other subsystems and external interfaces; and
WHEREAS, this Cooperative Agreement is intended to address the terms and
conditions under which the Cities will fund, acquire, operate, maintain and upgrade the
Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems for the Cities; and
WHEREAS, the Cities now wish to enter into this Cooperative Agreement for
Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems and to set forth the terms and
conditions under which the Cities will participate in the joint acquisition, installation,
operation and maintenance of the Regional Public Safety Automated Information
Systems.
-1-
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, incorporating the foregoing Recitals, the Cities enter into this
Cooperative Agreement for the Regional Public Safety Automated Information Systems
("Cooperative Agreement").
1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this Cooperative Agreement for Regional Public
Safety Automated Information Systems is to set forth the terms and conditions under
which the Cities will fund, acquire, install, operate, maintain and upgrade the Regional
Public Safety Automated Information Systems ("the Systems") acquired pursuant to this
Cooperative Agreement.
2. LEAD CITYCITY. The City of Mountain View shall continue as the Lead
City, for the purposes described below in accordance with its purchasing ordinances
and procedures. As Lead City, the City of Mountain View, on behalf of the Cities, shall:
A. Award and administer the contract dated _________ 2012 between the
Cities and Intergraph Corporation to furnish the Systems pursuant to the agreement
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" ("Intergraph Agreement"). The scope of this Cooperative
Agreement also includes RMS should the Cities decide to amend the Intergraph
Agreement to include that subsystem. As part of the administration of the Intergraph
Agreement, the Lead City will receive payments from the Cities and make payments to
Intergraph Corporation on behalf of the Cities for services rendered by Intergraph or
any third party interfaces.
B. Coordinate, in conjunction with Intergraph Corporation, the master
project schedule for the implementation of the Systems.
C. Host the core components of the Systems, including the provision of
sufficient and suitable space, power and cooling for computing, storage, network and
related equipment necessary to operate the Systems.
D. Host the necessary third-party interfaces required in typical public
safety information systems, such as the connection to the California Law Enforcement
Telecommunications System ("CLETS"), County of Santa Clara Law Enforcement
Telecommunications System ("SLETS"), County of Santa Clara Criminal Justice
Information Control ("CJIC") and others as agreed to by the Cities.
E. Act as the "Message Switching Computer" (MSC) administrator with
respect to the use of the Systems to access CLETS, and maintain the necessary
documentation and agreements with the California Department of Justice (DOJ).
-2-
F. Invoice Los Altos and Palo Alto quarterly in advance for their respective
share of any costs under the Intergraph Agreement to be incurred during the upcoming
quarter. An itemized breakdown of those costs will be provided with the invoice. City-
specific costs will be invoiced at time of procurement.
G. Make periodic payments within thirty (30) days of receiving and
approving a billing statement from Intergraph Corporation in proportion to the
satisfactory completion of Intergraph's services.
3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITIES
A. Executive Sponsorship. In support of the shared use of the Systems
and as necessary, the Police Chief or his/her designee from all the Cities shall jointly
prepare written guidelines for the shared use of Systems, including but not limited to
an informal dispute resolution process.
B. Operation of the Systems. Each City will acquire, install, maintain,
operate and periodically maintain the Systems for a minimum of six (6) years from the
go-live date for the Systems in accordance with this Cooperative Agreement, unless
otherwise agreed to by the Cities in writing. Each City will devote sufficient personnel
resources to allow their employees to develop subject matter expertise in the operation
and management of the Systems in order to successfully implement City-specific
workflow(s) required by their respective City.
C. Project Management Team. A Project Management Team shall be
formed and shall be composed of one representative from each City. The Project
Management Team shall be responsible for the day-to-day supervision of the contract
for the delivery, installation, training, operation and implementation of the Systems of
each City.
D. Core Implementation Team. To ensure a successful project and the
implementation of the systems, a "Core Team" of employees, representing a cross-
section of the various disciplines such as dispatch, fire suppression, police patrol,
records and investigations, will be assembled. Each City will select and assign
employees to perform Core Team duties, including but not limited to, participating in
conference calls, traveling to meetings at various locations, developing system usage
policies and procedures, configuring the systems for use, developing training plans and
materials, attending conferences and training classes provided by Intergraph
Corporation or other parties, and other duties as required.
E. Facility Preparation. Each City shall be responsible for the preparation
of its facilities including but not limited to air conditioning, space, all electrical drops,
cabling and any other items to be furnished by the City per the Intergraph Agreement.
-3-
F. Alterations and Upgrades. Each City shall notify the other Cities at
least ninety (90) days in advance of any modifications to or upgrades not included in
the Intergraph Agreement that it intends to make to the Systems in order to provide the
other Cities with the opportunity to participate in the modification or upgrade or
provide comments on the proposed modification or upgrade. Each City understands
and agrees that the modification or upgrade cannot interfere with the public safety
operations of the other Cities nor can it substantially alter the function and form of the
shared Systems. While the other Cities may elect to participate in the modification or
upgrade, they are under no obligation to do so.
G. Training and User Support. Each City shall assign qualified personnel
to attend training classes and in turn, train other users within their respective City.
Each City will, to the greatest extent possible, be responsible for their own internal
training and user support. Nothing shall preclude the Cities from sharing personnel
resources and materials, if agreeable and beneficial, for training purposes, however
there is no obligation to do so.
H. Systems Administration and Technical Support. Each City shall assign
qualified personnel to perform the Systems administration tasks necessary for
successful operation and use of the Systems. To the greatest extent possible, each City
shall administer its own City-specific data, within the agreed-to Systems policies. Each
City will, to the greatest extent possible, be responsible for its own system
administration and technical support. Nothing shall preclude the Cities from sharing
personnel resources and materials, if agreeable and beneficial, for system
administration and technical support purposes, however there is no obligation to do so.
I. Information Security and Confidentiality. Each City shall be
responsible for the accuracy, timeliness and completeness of information entered into or
through the Systems by their respective Systems users. Each City shall be the owner of
record for all information entered into and stored by the Systems users authorized by
that City. Each City shall act as their own custodian of records for data or records
entered into the Systems.
J. Interfaces and Supporting Systems. Third-party independent systems
are the responsibility of the hosting City.
K. Compliance with Applicable Laws, Policies, Rules and Regulations.
Each City is responsible for compliance with all applicable state and federal laws,
regulations and policies.
L. Software Licenses. At the request of Intergraph Corporation, Mountain
View will hold the software licenses for the benefit of the other Cities and shall transfer
-4-
licenses to Los Altos or Palo Alto in accordance with the Intergraph Agreement if this
Cooperative Agreement is terminated for any reason.
M. Project Deliverable Sign Off. The Cities will prepare a mutually agreed
upon sign off form to document each City’s sign off on the Project
Deliverables/Milestones in Exhibit “_” to the Intergraph Agreement (“Milestones”) as
the Milestones are completed . Each City understands and agrees that Intergraph
Corporation requires Mountain View to sign the Project Deliverable Sign Off on behalf
of all Cities within fifteen (15) workdays of the completion of the Milestones itemized
(insert reference document). Accordingly, each City shall endeavor to sign the mutually
agreed upon sign off form for the Cities at least ten (10) workdays of completion of a
Milestone. If a Milestone is rejected for any reason, the City rejecting the Milestone or
the Cities jointly, as the case may be, will prepare a written description of the
deficiencies within ten (10) workdays of the rejection. The Cities understand and agree
that if Mountain View fail to accept or reject a Milestone on behalf of the Cities within
fifteen (15) workdays, or if the Cities elect to place a Subsystem into production
operation, then Intergraph requires full payment of the contract price for the Milestone.
4. COSTS/FUNDING
A. Cost Allocation Calculation. The parties have agreed to share the cost
of the acquisition, implementation, and ongoing maintenance and support costs to
operate and maintain the Systems ("Total Project Cost") as shown on Exhibit "B." The
City's share of the Total Project Cost shall be calculated using the following formula:
i. Each City shall pay a one-third (1/3) share of fifty percent (50%) of
the Total Project Cost.
ii. Each City shall also pay a proportionate share of the remaining
fifty percent (50%) of the Total Project Cost. This proportionate share shall be
calculated based upon the ratio of population served by each City to the total
population served by the Systems. For purposes of this calculation, the population for
each City shall be the 2010 United States Census information. For purposes of this
calculation, the population of the Stanford Community as shown in the 2010 United
States Census shall be included in the population of Palo Alto.
B. Cost Allocation Calculation Estimate. A Cost Allocation Calculation
Estimate of each Party's share of the Total Project Cost is attached as Exhibit "C" to this
Cooperative Agreement.
-5-
C. Per-User License Costs. Costs for per-user or per-seat software licenses
used with Systems shall be the responsibility of the user City.
D. Computer Workstation Hardware. Costs for computer workstations
and their associated peripheral equipment purchased via the Intergraph Agreement
and for use with the Systems shall be the responsibility of the user City, with the
exception of the "Map Maintenance Workstation," as described in _________ of the
Intergraph Agreement.
E. Fire Specific Costs. Los Altos shall not be responsible for enhancements
and interfaces to the CAD System for fire specific services as denoted above and
described in detail in _______ of the Intergraph Agreement.
F. Quarterly Invoicing. The Cities shall pay the quarterly payment to the
City of Mountain View within thirty (30) calendar days from the receipt of an invoice
from the City of Mountain View.
G. Detail Design Agreement. On behalf of the Cities, Mountain View
retained Intergraph Corporation to provide the Cities with a detailed design for the
Systems. Each City agreed to share in the cost of obtaining these services. The cost of the
detailed system design is Sixty Thousand Dollars. Accordingly, each CITY shall pay
Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000) for the detailed system design.ʺ
5. THIRD-PARTY CLAIMS. It is not the intent of the Cities of this Cooperative
Agreement to create any third-party beneficiary. Any failure to perform under the
terms of this Cooperative Agreement shall not create any claim or right by any
individual or entity who is not a signatory to this Cooperative Agreement.
6. TERM OF COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT. The term of this Cooperative
Agreement shall commence on the date the City of Mountain View awards the contract
to Intergraph Corporation and shall continue through June 30, 2019.
7. TERMINATION. Any City may terminate its participation in this
Cooperative Agreement by giving written notice of not less than ninety (90) days before
the beginning of the next fiscal year (hereby defined as July 1 of each year) and effective
only on July 1 of each year. If a City terminates its participation in this Cooperative
Agreement, it shall pay its portion of costs for which it has been billed pursuant to
Paragraph 4 above to the date of termination. Upon termination of a City's
-6-
participation in this Cooperative Agreement, the City shall relinquish its interest in any
jointly purchased equipment acquired pursuant to this Cooperative Agreement.
8. PERFORMANCE GUARANTEES. By executing this Cooperative Agreement,
each City agrees to complete any and all necessary actions to accomplish successfully
the purpose of this Cooperative Agreement and all other agreements authorized
pursuant to the terms and conditions of this Cooperative Agreement.
9. GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM REGIONAL COOPERATION.
The Cities recognize that the existence of an up-to-date and accurate Geographical
Information System ("GIS") for all Cities is necessary for the effective operation of
centralized CAD System for law enforcement and fire protection services. Each City
agrees to participate and cooperate in all activities necessary to maintain an up-to-date
and accurate GIS.
10. MUTUAL INDEMNIFICATION. In lieu of and notwithstanding the pro-rata
risk allocation which might otherwise be imposed between the parties pursuant to
Government Code Section 895.6, the parties agree that all losses or liabilities incurred by
a party shall not be shared pro rata, but instead, the Cities agree that pursuant to
Government Code Section 895.4, each of the parties hereto shall fully indemnify and
hold each of the other parties, their officers, board members, employees and agents
harmless from any claim, expense or cost, damage or liability imposed for injury (as
defined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of the negligent acts or
omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying party, its officers, board members,
employees or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority
or jurisdiction delegated to such party under this Cooperative Agreement. No party,
nor any officer, board member, employee or agent thereof shall be responsible for any
damage or liability occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful
misconduct of other parties hereto, their officers, board members, employees or agents,
under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority or jurisdiction
delegated to such other parties under this Cooperative Agreement.
-7-
11. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
11.1 Notice. All notices required by this Cooperative Agreement will be
deemed given when in writing and delivered personally or deposited in the United
States mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the other party at
the address set forth below or at such other address as the party may designate in
writing:
To Los Altos:
To Mountain View:
To Palo Alto:
Police Services Manager
City of Los Altos
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, CA 94022-3088
Senior Systems Specialist
Police Department
City of Mountain View
P.O. Box 7540
Mountain View, CA
94039-7540
Technical Services Director
City of Palo Alto
275 Forest Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
11.2 Governing Law. This Cooperative Agreement has been executed and
delivered in, and will be construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the
State of California.
11.3 Assignment. The parties may not assign this Cooperative Agreement or
the rights and obligations hereunder without the specific written consent of the others.
11.4 Entire Agreement. This document represents the entire Cooperative
Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. All prior
negotiations and written and/or oral agreements between the parties with respect to
the subject matter of this Cooperative Agreement are merged into this Cooperative
Agreement.
11.5 Amendments. This Cooperative Agreement may only be amended by
an instrument signed by the parties.
11.6 Counterparts. This Cooperative Agreement may be executed in one or
more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which
together shall constitute one and the same instrument.
11.7 Severability. If any provision of this Cooperative Agreement is found
by a court of competent jurisdiction to be void, invalid or unenforceable, the same will
either be reformed to comply with applicable law or stricken if not so conformable, so
as not to affect the validity or enforceability of this Cooperative Agreement.
-8-
11.8 Waiver. No delay or failure to require performance of any provision of
this Cooperative Agreement shall constitute a waiver of that provision as to that or any
other instance. Any waiver granted by a party must be in writing and shall apply to the
specific instance expressly stated.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Cities have caused this Cooperative Agreement to be
executed by their respective governing officials duly authorized by their respective
legislative bodies.
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
City Attorney
FINANCIAL APPROVAL:
Finance and Administrative
Services Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW,
a California Charter City and municipal
corporation
By:
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
CITY OF LOS ALTOS,
a municipal corporation
By:
City Manager
-9-
-10-
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Assistant City Attorney
CITY OF PALO ALTO,
a municipal corporation
By:
City Manager
JLQ/4/ATY
010-01-31-12A-E^