Indiana · PWS IN5242001

Bicknell Municipal

What Bicknell Municipal filed with IFA about the water it produced and the water it billed for, 2019–2023 — and what the filing does and does not let anyone verify.

Non-revenue water, FY2023
Not reported in the filing.
Recoverable annually
Not estimable from what IFA publishes. A loss percentage cannot be priced without the volume it is a share of.
Balance check
insufficient
The filing does not publish enough components to decompose system input.

What the record shows

9.9% non-revenue water in FY2019, higher than 16% of the 455 Indiana systems that filed that year.

9.9% non-revenue water in FY2019, against 455 Indiana filings for the same yearA strip of 455 filings on a 0 to 64% axis. The median is 21.7%. This system is 9.9%. 6 filings above 64% are drawn at the right edge.0%10%20%30%40%50%60%This system 9.9%Indiana median 21.7%

Compliance record

67 violations on EPA's record for this system as of 2026Q2, of which 4 are health-based. 62 resolved, 4 archived, and 1 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.

A filed value that cannot be true.
  • The FY2023 volumes are not published here because the filing contradicts itself — billed authorized consumption 61.9 MG exceeds this filing's own system input 51.7 MG.

Each is reproduced exactly as filed and excluded from every figure computed on this page. A number that contradicts its own audit is a finding about the filing, not a gap in ours.

Water balance, FY2023

This filing reports totals but not the components a balance is made of, so the identity input = billed + unbilled authorized + apparent loss + real loss has nothing to be tested against. Absent: system input volume, billed authorized consumption, unbilled authorized consumption, apparent loss, real loss.

insufficient · not checkable

This is recorded as unverifiable and not reported as a pass. The difference is the one between a disclosure gap and a clean bill of health.

Filed history, 2019–2023
Year NRW Input (MG) Recoverable Balance
2023 insufficient
2019 9.9% 68.3 $29,700 inapplicable

Comparable systems

The same size band — 1,000–3,300 connections.

SystemBasis for comparisonNRW
Greenville Water1,000–3,300 connections 15.4% FY2023
Aberdeen Pate Water Co., Inc.1,000–3,300 connections 12.5% FY2023
Lms Conservancy District1,000–3,300 connections 11.1% FY2023
North Manchester1,000–3,300 connections 25.1% FY2023
Yorktown, Town Of1,000–3,300 connections 22.1% FY2023
Valley Rural Utility Company1,000–3,300 connections 32.4% FY2023
Edinburgh Water1,000–3,300 connections 20.2% FY2023
Cedar Lake Municipal Water1,000–3,300 connections 12.5% FY2019

Where is it going?

This page says how much. 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 Bicknell Municipal

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, “Bicknell Municipal — water loss as filed”, Municorn water loss index, https://municorn.us/water-loss/in/bicknell-municipal/ (source filings retrieved 2026-09-08).

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.