Auditing Your Rates Configuration

OUUG Conference - March 5, 2020

Agenda§ Introductions:

§ Utility Solutions Partners § City of Long Beach background§ Santee Cooper background

§ Rates Configuration Audit Activities

§ Santee Cooper Results

§ City of Long Beach Results

§ Streamlining Rule-Based Configuration

§ Q & A

§ Fran Couzens§ Sr Solution Architect§ 30+ years IT, Utility and CIS experience§ 20+ years experience with CCB & its

predecessors

Who is USP?

@ 2019 Utility Solutions Partners 4

§ System Integration and managed services firm

§ Solely focused on the Oracle Utilities Product Suite

§ Water, Wastewater, Electric, Gas, and Solid Waste Utilities

§ Over a decade of knowledge and experience with Oracle Utilities Product Suite

§ Highly skilled professionals, Oracle Utilities Experts

USP Service Offerings

@ 2019 Utility Solutions Partners 5

Upgrades:� Staged Approach� Assessment� Technical Upgrade� Functional Upgrade

Implementations:� Oracle Utilities Integrated

Application Suite� Staged Approach� Defined Roles and

Responsibilities� Accelerated Delivery Model

Consulting:� Targeted and Actionable Advice� Strategic Roadmap Solutions� Program and Project

Management� Best Practices� QA

Managed Support:

� Comprehensive Support Packages

� Product Optimization and Upgrades

� Enhancements, Interfaces, Reports

� Environment, Issues, Database Administration

� PaaS / Hosting Support

§ Norma Black – CIS Project Manager§ City of Long Beach for 17 years

§ 25+ years in utilities

§ Core team member of original CCB implementation

The City of Long Beach, California was incorporated in 1897. Long Beach is known for its waterfront attractions, including the RMS Queen Mary, the Aquarium of the Pacific, the Port of Long Beach, its sandy beaches and eclectic neighborhoods for approximately 500,000 residents and businesses.

CC&B at City of Long Beach§ Provides Gas, Water, Sewer & Refuse services

§ Number of Service Agreements:§ Gas – 146,487 (including transportation)§ Water / Sewer - 89,514§ Refuse – 117, 266

§ Implemented CC&B version 2.3.1 in 11/2013 currently on version 2.5.0.1

§ Using mostly Component-based rates, adding 7 new Rule-based rates

§ Managed Services provider currently maintaining configuration

Why did we want the audit?

§ Became Aware of Improvement Possibilities

§ Changing Resources (Internally & Externally)

§ Complexity of Rates

§ Taking Inventory

§ Stephanie Burgess - Retail Billing Manager

§ 19 years at Santee Cooper

§ CC&B Data Steward – 9 years

§ Business Lead on last 2 CC&B upgrade projects

Who is Santee Cooper?

A major resource for improving the quality of life for all South Carolinians, Santee Cooper provides reliable and affordable electricity, clean and safe drinking water, environmental stewardship and programs that recruit industry and jobs. Santee Cooper is a public power utility owned by the state.

Santee Cooper Background

§ Electric utility serving Horry, Georgetown and Berkeley Counties in South Carolina

§ 189,000 Retail Customers- 158,000 Residential and 31,000 Commercial

§ Implemented CC&B version 2.1 in March 2009, with Component-based rates

§ Recently upgraded to version 2.6.0.1 and migrated all current rates to Rule-based rates

§ Configuration currently managed in-house

Why did we want the audit?

§ Found a lot of inefficiencies in the rates after migration to the Rule-based rates

§ Wanted to be sure we made the most of Rule-based capabilities

§ Our internal expert was retiring

Rates ConfigurationAudit Activities

Rate Schedule Review§ Review configuration of Rate Schedules and related configuration

tables to:§ Verify all charges calculated correctly, as documented in tariff, ordinance,

or other authoritative documents§ Evaluate information presented to external customer, and to internal end-

users§ Evaluate that appropriate standards and best practices in configuration are

followed§ Evaluate efficiency of configuration (ease of maintenance,

understandability)

Classify issues into categories:

§ Financial: Potential for either revenue loss, customer over charge or accounting issues.

§ Maintainability and invalid configuration: Redundancy, extraneous configuration, and violation of best practices, resulting in cumbersome maintenance practices. Also includes miscellaneous errors.

§ End User Impacts: Resulting in meaningless or irrelevant bill calculation lines, or other unnecessary data. This category also includes items that can be improved, such as error identification. Potential to improve end-user productivity.

§ Readability: Incorrect or incomplete descriptions. This hampers the work of individuals needing to troubleshoot or update rate schedules.

Results of Audit

§ Report including:

§ Findings grouped by category of issue, explained in detail

§ Spreadsheets to track review and findings

§ Recommendations to resolve issues

§ Presentation

§ Explanation of findings

§ Discuss open questions

§ Explore recommendations

Examples of Issues Found

§ Rules with configuration errors, configured to ignore the errors

§ Incorrect Bill Factor referenced

§ Eligibility Criteria Errors including:§ Errors in Insufficient data logic – resulting in incorrect default charge or no charge

§ Missing on Rate Components and Calc Rules that should have (unnecessary Bill Calc Lines)

§ Missing Bill Factor prices - some characteristic values not included

§ Incorrect rounding or historic normalizing methods

Examples of Issues Found (continued)

§ Bill lines with financial impact not printed on bill (but included in total)

§ Incorrect Distribution Codes

§ Bill Calc Line Characteristic (for reporting) missing or incorrect

§ Retaining calculated SQs that aren’t needed

§ Configuration to identify errors – generic bill seg errors which can be more specific

§ Cross Reference & Calc Line Category issues (totals, taxes, etc.)§ Missing references§ Invalid references

Examples of Maintainability Issues Found § Never used configuration:

§ Rate schedules§ Rate versions§ Calculation Groups

§ Extraneous configuration § Not applicable to the rate schedule§ Not ever applicable to production

§ Values used for pricing instead of Bill Factors

§ Inconsistency of approach for same process in different rate schedules (e.g. taxing)

§ Descriptions:

§ Configuration that does not match descriptions

§ Incorrect and incomplete descriptions on Rate Components, SQ Rules, Calculation Rules, Eligibility criteria

Santee Cooper Findings

Rates Reviewed

§ Recently transitioned to Rule-based engine

§ 32 billing rate schedules

All but 1 had issues

Financial Issues Discovered

§ Commercial TOU rate§ Missing on-peak demand charge§ Incorrectly crediting for off-peak demand charge when on-peak kW was higher than off-peak

§ Unfulfilled Contract Charges§ Demand portion of the unfulfilled contract charge not assessed for some rates§ Unfulfilled contract charge could charge for an extra month

§ Taxes§ Some miscellaneous charges not taxed properly§ Some light fixture rental charges not being charged franchise fees§ Metered traffic lights were charged franchise fees and unmetered were not§ Commercial Solar Share customers were not getting rider credits

End-User Impact Findings

§ Eliminate unnecessary entries on Service Quantity tab of on Bill Segment § Only present those that are of interest to end-users

§ Eliminate unnecessary internally displayed Bill Calc Lines on Bill Segment§ Or move to end of bill lines

§ Change errors to be more easily identified § Provide indicator to identify cause of bill segment error

City of Long Beach Findings

Component-based Rates Schedules Reviewed

§ 32 billing rate schedules

§ 6 adjustment rates schedules

Most Impactful

§ Roll Out charges (48 weekly charges per year instead of 52)

§ Excess bill calc lines that didn’t apply

§ Total lines inaccuracies (internally displayed)

§ Bill print line for temporary service suspension credit not printing

§ Incorrect Distribution Code

§ Values vs Bill Factor

§ Maintainability – eliminating unused, invalid and unneeded configuration

Streamlining Rule-Based Configuration

Opportunities to Streamline

§ Maximize reusability through shared calc groups

§ Promotes consistency

§ Reduces maintenance efforts

§ Reduces likelihood of errors

§ Don’t put single-use rules in separate calc group

§ Use eligibility on Exec Calc Group rule - not on every rule in executed group

§ Share SQI’s across rate schedules where makes sense (e.g. Billable KW)

§ Combine functions into single rule (e.g. Item charges, Calculate SQ, Seasonal SQ charges)

Maximize Reusability