Excerpts from the DailyHerald.com:
Spending $1.4 million, the city of Naperville will test two fire engines and two maintenance companies for the next 10 years.
Fire Chief Mark Puknaitis said the plan will allow the department to see which engine better withstands the test of time and which maintenance company provides better service.
The city will compare a $565,300 Pierce engine the department has favored in the past with a $559,308 E-One engine with similar specifications. Global Emergency Products of Aurora will maintain the Pierce for an estimated $172,000 during the next 10 years, while Fire Service Inc., of Naperville, will service the E-One for an estimated $134,000.
Fire engines have been maintained by city mechanics in the fleet services division of public works, but the number of mechanics certified to work on fire engines is down from six in 2014 to three. Using maintenance companies that specialize in fire engines will decrease the wait of between 16 and 30 hours for city crews to conduct the work.
The new arrangement comes after the city planned to begin leasing an engine last year for $75,000, but never entered into a contract.
“The outright purchase of vehicles continues to be the best option for us financially,” Finance Director Rachel Mayer said, adding it will save an estimated $240,000 per engine throughout the life of the vehicle.
Contracting out the maintanence work also seems to be the best option for equipment reliability, Puknaitis said.
thanks Scott
#1 by Bill Post on April 28, 2017 - 10:41 AM
Marty thanks for the information. Perhaps Pierce is fed up with what appears to be Chicago’s double dealing in the bid requesting process. You probably noticed that I recently brought up that when the last contract for aerial ladders opened in 2009, it took about a year and three separate bid requests before the city finally decided on and signed a contract. Considering that Pierce supplied Chicago’s aerial ladders and tower ladders from 2001 until 2008, and then to have their bids rejected 3 times, Pierce probably feels that it’s not worth it. In the third round of bidding in 2009 E/One was the lowest bidder and Pierce was the second lowest bidder according to what I read and yet neither of them was rewarded the contract. I really wonder why the city rejected the bids received (not once but twice) before finally settling on a manufacturer after a third round of bids and even then the contract went to the 2nd highest bidder.
#2 by Marty Coyne on April 28, 2017 - 8:10 AM
Bill, it is my understanding that Pierce wants nothing to do with Chicago and has not and will not bid on city contracts.
#3 by Bill Post on April 28, 2017 - 5:05 AM
That’s real good idea. I have to hand it to Chief Puknaitis for being willing and open minded enough to try out two different brands of apparatus and see how well they hold up over the years they are in service. I can’t help but think of Chicago doing the same thing but it is only wishful thinking on my part. It’s true that Chicago is still using some Pierce trucks and tower ladders, but I have my doubts about Chicago being willing to buy a few Pierce engines. The two Pierce engines that were at Engines 9 and 10 until a few years ago I am not including as they were confined to the airport.
Even though it is not common these days, during the late 1960’s and the 1970’s Chicago did buy apparatus from several different manufacturers in the same year. But that was a while back. Actually in 2000, Chicago bought the American LaFrance that was at Engine 23 and is now a spare squad, the Freightliner at Engine 92, and the three Spartans that are at Engines 81, 97, and 127.
#4 by Rich on April 28, 2017 - 4:48 AM
Naperville used to be very into e one. At one time in the early 90s that’s all the had was e one.
#5 by michael m on April 27, 2017 - 9:47 PM
It will be interesting to see which engine ultimately holds up better over a 10 year period. Any Idea which Engine Company will get the Pierce and which one will get the E-One? Naperville has purchased E-Ones in the past.
#6 by Mike C on April 27, 2017 - 7:50 PM
It would be interesting to see who provides better maintenance and service if Global and Fire Service Inc didn’t know they were competing against one another during this experiment. I know for a fact that one of these dealers has often neglected their customers when a department switched to their competition. I know of a specific situation where a department had heavy corrosion on one of their vehicles. When they contacted their dealer the dealer was negligent to fixing until they caught wind this same department was in the market for another vehicle.