Georgia · PWS GA1210002 · FULTON County

College Park

What College Park filed with EPD about the water it produced and the water it billed for, 2011–2025 — and what the filing does and does not let anyone verify.

Non-revenue water, FY2025
25.1%
Computed from filed system input and billed consumption.

2026-09-06-69903a9418bc.xlsx2025 Water Audits H56

Where this figure comes from

(system input − billed authorized) ÷ system input × 100

  • system input volume 851.2 sheet 2025 Water Audits , cell H56 · million gallons per year, declared in the header through 2020 and settled for 2021-2025 by EPD's own cost arithmetic and by continuity across the change
  • billed authorized consumption 638 sheet 2025 Water Audits , cell I56 · billed metered plus billed unmetered

From data/archive/ga-epd-water-loss/2026-09-06-69903a9418bc.xlsx (SHA-256 69903a9418bc6d60), retrieved 2026-09-06 from the published source.

Recoverable annually
$29,100
Apparent loss is valued at this utility's own reported retail price of water. Real loss is NOT included — EPD publishes a variable production cost whose unit it does not declare, so no dollar figure is put on the leaked water. The real recoverable total is higher than this by an amount this filing does not let anyone state.

2026-09-06-69903a9418bc.xlsx2025 Water Audits Z56

Where this figure comes from

cost of apparent losses + cost of real losses, both as computed in the filed audit

  • cost of apparent losses, as filed 29,082 sheet 2025 Water Audits , cell Z56

From data/archive/ga-epd-water-loss/2026-09-06-69903a9418bc.xlsx (SHA-256 69903a9418bc6d60), retrieved 2026-09-06 from the published source.

Balance check
inapplicable
EPD derives water losses from system input minus authorized consumption, so this decomposition holds by construction.

What the record shows

25.1% non-revenue water in FY2025, higher than 46% of the 228 Georgia systems that filed that year.

25.1% non-revenue water in FY2025, against 228 Georgia filings for the same yearA strip of 228 filings on a 0 to 64% axis. The median is 26.4%. This system is 25.1%. 4 filings above 64% are drawn at the right edge.0%10%20%30%40%50%60%This system 25.1%Georgia median 26.4%
The reported figure is not stable enough to act on. It has moved an average of 9.9 points a year, against a Georgia median of 4.9, including 27% to 12% between FY2017 and FY2018. A distribution system's real losses do not change that fast — pipe does not deteriorate or repair itself in a single year. A series that moves like this is describing how the water is being measured and recorded, not how much of it is being lost, and which year is closer to true cannot be settled from this filing.

Compliance record

10 violations on EPA's record for this system as of 2026Q2. 6 resolved, and 4 still open.

Counted as distinct violations, not as rows: EPA's export carries one row per enforcement action taken against a violation, so a row count would multiply this system's record several times over. A violation here is a breach of a reporting, monitoring or contaminant-level rule as reported to EPA — it is not a measurement of the water, and this site has none.

Source: US EPA, Safe Drinking Water Information System, via the ECHO national download, 2026Q2. How we hold it.

Water balance, FY2025 · 851.2 MG system input
Billed 638 MG Unbilled authorized 66.6 MG Apparent loss 4.79 MG Real loss 141.9 MG

EPD derives water losses from system input minus authorized consumption, so these parts sum to the whole on every filing. What a filing can get wrong is which of these numbers were measured.

Where these volumes come from
  • System input 851.2 MG sheet 2025 Water Audits , cell H56 · million gallons per year, declared in the header through 2020 and settled for 2021-2025 by EPD's own cost arithmetic and by continuity across the change
  • Billed authorized 638 MG sheet 2025 Water Audits , cell I56 · billed metered plus billed unmetered
  • Unbilled authorized 66.6 MG sheet 2025 Water Audits , cell K56 · unbilled metered plus unbilled unmetered
  • Apparent loss 4.79 MG sheet 2025 Water Audits , cell O56
  • Real loss 141.9 MG sheet 2025 Water Audits , cell P56

From data/archive/ga-epd-water-loss/2026-09-06-69903a9418bc.xlsx (SHA-256 69903a9418bc6d60), retrieved 2026-09-06 from the published source.

Filed history, 2011–2025
Year NRW Input (MG) Recoverable
2025 25.1% 851.2 $29,100
2024 12.0% 1,103 $39,900
2023 22.0% 1,158 $36,800
2022 35.4% 1,413 $31,600
2021 26.2% 1,140 $51,000
2020 39.7% 1,114 $71,100
2019 26.0% 1,158 $90,900
2018 11.8% 1,046 $87,300
2017 27.2% 1,127 $19,700
2016 23.3% 1,169 $20,500
2015 14.6% 1,024 $27,400
2014 13.2% 1,043 $270,000
2013 23.5% 962 $305,000
2012 14.3% 1,059 $257,000
2011 12.2% 1,083 $305,000

Comparable systems

In the same county.

SystemBasis for comparisonNRW
HapevilleFULTON County 10.0% FY2025
PalmettoFULTON County 26.6% FY2025
FairburnFULTON County 7.9% FY2025
Union CityFULTON County 24.3% FY2025
RoswellFULTON County 23.6% FY2025
East PointFULTON County 3.5% FY2025
North Fulton CountyFULTON County 2.4% FY2025
AtlantaFULTON County 36.5% FY2025

Where is it going?

This page says how much — roughly $29,100 a year. It cannot say which accounts, which zones, or which meters. That takes your billing history, your meter reads, and your production data reconciled against each other.

Our Water Loss Recovery Snapshot is three weeks, one flat fee, and the deliverable is a ranked list of specific accounts and zones with dollars and a confidence on each.

See what the Snapshot delivers Email us about College Park

Sources and corrections. Every figure above is either filed by the utility or computed from filed figures, and each one says which. If a number here is wrong, it is either wrong in the filing or wrong in our reading of it — tell us which and we will correct the page and say what changed.

Cite as

Municorn.us, “College Park — water loss as filed”, Municorn water loss index, https://municorn.us/water-loss/ga/college-park/ (source filings retrieved 2026-09-06).

CC BY 4.0 — reuse and redistribution are permitted with attribution to Municorn.us and a link to this page. Terms, and the one caveat that must travel with these figures.

"Water loss" is at least three different quantities depending on the jurisdiction, and nothing here supports a comparison between states.