LSS utilized FME to create a workspace designed to dramatically reduce the facility footprint of an electric company. Using the workspace, the company reduced their One Call ticket volume by roughly 25%. This presentation will provide an overview of the problem and how FME was used as the solution.
Why Teams call analytics are critical to your entire business
Using FME to Refine Electric Company Facility Data
1. Using FME to Refine Electric
Company Facility Data
Louis Panzer, Locate Support Systems
2. Overview
Introduction
You have GIS – how is it being utilized?
Review of the damage prevention components
Case study: preliminary background
Customized application
Integration of solution with internal data
How are facilities protected better?
How are costs reduced at the same time?
Conclusions
3. You Have GIS:
How is it being utilized?
For many companies, GIS is used to fulfill many
important functions (asset inventory, outage,
repairs, new construction)
The question to ask is, “if digital facility maps are
available, why aren’t they being used for locate
registration and ticket review?”
Some possible answers might be:
GIS department unaware that this need exists
Update issues: what is a correct frequency?
No system in place to regulate ticket flow
Mapping confidence level
4. Review of Damage
Prevention Components
Areas in which maps are utilized in the process
include:
One Call registration
One Call ticket review
Field Locating
(but not as a replacement for a locate)
5. Preliminary Background
Tampa Electric Company previously utilized a
service territory that was registered using grids
These grids resulted in tickets being sent for the
entire Hillsborough county area
100% of these tickets were sent to the field
Due to over notification, $900,000 of 2008
$1.15M budget was spent for no conflict
tickets to be field visited whether a visit
occurred or not
This method of ticket management also resulted
in more risk to facilities
6. Preliminary Background Cont.
YEAR
2006
2007
2008
2009
BUDGET
$1.3M
$1.2M
$1.15M
$1.1M
Ticket count from Sunshine One Call for 2009:
88,500 tickets
Used IRTHNet to pass the tickets through for reports
7. Customized Application
One Call Registration
STEP 1: Refined database with Sunshine One Call
of Florida (IRTH system) to register facilities using
buffered polygons instead of grids.
Polygon
Grid size
8. One Call Registration
• LSS utilized FME to
extract UG lines and
features from Tampa
Electric Oracle
database
• Workspace carved up
data into chunks,
collapsed and merged
the data. Rob?
• These lines and
features were
converted into
polygons to meet
IRTH requirements
(size and vertices) Just the pure 100 foot polygons
9. One Call Registration
Two sets created:
100 foot buffers (for
Sunshine), 25 foot
buffers (for
screener)
Can be created
weekly or even daily
if needed
Zoomed view to show improved coverage
Note facility polygons in blue, grids in red.
10. One Call Registration Results
ACTUAL REDUCTION: 28% avg. (Calculated using
the last 3 months of tickets as an average.
Before
After
Estimated savings over a year: $150,000
11. Results - Step 1:
Ticket Reduction from One Call
ACTUAL REDUCTION: 28% avg. (Calculated using
the last 3 months of tickets as an average
Estimated savings over a year: $150,000
12. Integration with Internal Data
Use of 25 Foot Buffers
Using the 25
foot buffers, the
screener is able
to review
recommendation
s from the
system first. In
a high volume
situation this is a
good
combination of
mapping and
ticket
management
“pre-screening.”
13. Integration
Use of 25 Foot Buffers
A closer detailed
view of the 25 foot
buffers
14. Integration (Results)
Ticket Reduction with Internal Data
ADDITIONAL REDUCTION: 50% AVG.
BRINGS TOTAL DAILY SAVINGS TO: $1,500 AVG.
Estimated total savings over a year: $390,000 +*
* will be higher when excavation stabilizes.
15. Results
ADDITIONAL REDUCTION: 50% AVG.
BRINGS TOTAL DAILY SAVINGS TO: $1,500 AVG.
Estimated total savings over a year: $390,000 +*
* will be higher when excavation stabilizes.
16. Integration with Internal Data
FIRST:
Review all
tickets
using
IRTHNet
Check
work type,
depth and
location
17. Integration Using All the Tools
SECOND
Use GIS,
CIS and
Google to
verify
clears
CIS Address OH/UG Service Check
18. Integration Using All the Tools
SECOND
Use GIS,
CIS and
Google to
verify
clears
G-Tech GIS Viewer
19. Integration Using All the Tools
SECOND
Use GIS,
CIS and
Google to
verify
clears
Google maps check: using front and
overhead views
20. Integration Using All the Tools
THIRD
Make
phone
calls if
needed.
WHEN IN
DOUBT...
SEND IT
OUT!
21. How Does This Process Help
Further Protect Facilities?
Helps GIS to keep database updated
• Full circle GIS review:the process provides a
regular review of the maps (against CIS and G-
tech GIS) to identify when areas need to be
added.
Provides a higher degree of confidence: every
ticket is either thoroughly reviewed or field
located
22. How Does This Process
Reduce Costs?
ROI within 3 months
System can be automated to generate new
shape files when areas have been added
Improves the overall efficiency of the one call
ticket process
Directly reduces locate costs, whether
internal or contracted
23. Conclusions
Ticket management remains a critical piece to the
efficiencies and improved protection
Ticket management works best when integrated
with accurate mapping
Not every company has GIS
Those that do many can use this functionality to
reduce costs
Those that don’t can consider building a GIS
system and funding it with the savings
24. Questions
Louis Panzer
President
louis@locatesupportsystems.com
www.locatesupportsystems.com