25G - AGMT METER INFRASTRUCTURE - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

za AMI Feasibility Report I Client Name: City of Santa Ana 5.5 AMI BUSINESS MODEL APPROACH There are several distinct business models available to the City in the execution of the AMI program. These refer to the role that the AMI and MDMS vendors play in the implementation and operation of the network and software applications. While this is discussed in more depth elsewhere in this report, the primary options include the following: ❑ Utility Own and Operate - City would be responsible for the installation of the system and then would own and operate the network and applications. All responsibilities would be held by the City and the applications would reside within the City's data center. ❑ Design, Build, Run, Transfer - This most usually involves the AMI system where the AMI vendor will design the AMI network, install all network infrastructure and the applications, and then turn the system over to City once the system passes an acceptance test. This places more risk during implementation onto the AMI vendor. The applications and network all ultimately revert to the City just as in the previous model. • Network as a Service (NAAS) - The AMI vendor installs, owns, and manages the network equipment. While the City would operate the AMI system, the vendor would have resources to respond to problems and ensure that the network meets defined service level agreements. ❑ Managed Services - There are variations in this category, but options would include everything from traditional Software as a Service (SaaS) approach to where the vendor will essentially operate and manage the City network from the vendor's operations center. This option is offered by most of the major AMI vendors. It is sometimes entitled hosting or cloud options, but with managed services, the vendor takes on a specific role in operating the network, not just hosting the servers. The AMI vendor is responsible for meeting overall data delivery service level agreements. This leverages the expertise that the vendors have for their AMI systems and minimizes the additional resources required by the City. Black & Veatch recommends the City to investigate the managed services model option for the AMI HES, network, MDMS and customer portal. The vendor would be responsible for the network installation and 0&M. The AMI vendor would also manage the overall AMI HES, network and MDMS systems. Customer portal will be managed by the vendor. The City can retain the option to bring the systems back in-house at a later date if the situation changes. A major benefit of this approach is that the vendor can ramp up essentially immediately to operate the system while the City would take time to establish the organization, hire, and train resources. It is critical that the AMI operations team be in existence before the first AMI meter is installed. At this point, when the first meter is deployed, there is an operational AMI system, the system must be monitored and managed in order to ensure performance and, ultimately, to ensure correct and timely bills are generated. 25G-142