Page 271 - Water Loss Control

240 Cha pte r F o u r tee n

the actual consumption for the year. The registered consumption value of 9747 cubic feet
is a much more representative value of the water consumed by this account during 2004.
In determining the amount of data analysis error
occurring in billing system operations the water audi-
It is recommended that water tor should determine how billing adjustments are cal-
utility customer billing systems culated. If adjustments are triggered by changes in
include two separate fields for consumption, then an approximation of the number of
adjustments—both overstating and understating actual
customer consumption: one
consumption—should be attempted. If a significant
for registered consumption and
understatement of customer consumption has occurred,
a separate field for billed con-
then an estimate of this difference should be included as
sumption.
an apparent loss and entered in the water audit.

14.5 Billing Policy and Procedure Shortcomings
Apparent losses can occur due to policies and procedures that are shortsighted or
poorly designed, implemented, or managed. Such occurrences can be subtle and numer-
ous. Flowcharting the customer billing process—with a focus on impacts to customer
consumption values—gives insight to the likelihood of these types of apparent losses.
Some of the common occurrences to consider are:
• Despite company goals to meter all customers, the installation of meters in
certain customer classes is ignored: this is common for municipally owned
buildings in water utilities run by local governments.
• Provisions allowing customer accounts to enter “nonbilled” status, a potential
loophole often exploited by customer fraud or poor management by the water
utility.
• Bureaucratic regulations or inefficiencies that cause delays in permitting,
metering, or billing operations.
• Poor customer account management: accounts not initiated, lost, or transferred
erroneously.

The degree to which such shortcomings in billing account management exists is
largely dependant upon the accountability “culture” that exists in the water utility. If
accountability is only casually emphasized, it is likely that numerous opportunities
for missed consumption exist. If sound accountability is trumpeted by the utility’s
leaders and managed down to all levels of staff, then such occurrences are likely to be
isolated and of minor significance. The water auditor should consider including an
estimate of apparent loss that represents the collective policy and procedure short-
comings of the water utility. During the top-down audit, perhaps only a rough
approximation can be ventured. During subsequent audits, bottom-up investigations
can give greater insight to such problems, and corrections can be identified. Before a
definitive strategy is set, however, the auditor should begin to perform more detailed
investigations of the source data and billing functions in order to validate the pre-
liminary loss quantities and obtain a more accurate picture of the apparent losses. The
bottom-up process involves detailed investigation or auditing work, similar to
detailed financial audits that accountants perform. Bottom-up water auditing func-
tions should consider the following activities: