Crane
What Crane filed with IFA about the water it produced and the water it billed for, 2019–2019 — and what the filing does and does not let anyone verify.
- Non-revenue water, FY2019
- — 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
- 1 of 1 years carry no figure — which by IFA's own note means it had insufficient data to calculate one.
Compliance record
20 violations on EPA's record for this system as of 2026Q2. 19 resolved, and 1 still open.
- Lead Consumer Notice unaddressed, from January 1, 2021
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.
- The FY2019 volumes are not published here because the filing contradicts itself — billed authorized consumption 3.3 MG exceeds this filing's own system input 3.2 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.
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.
| Year | Input (MG) |
|---|---|
| 2019 | — |
Comparable systems
The same size band — under 1,000 connections.
| System | Basis for comparison | NRW |
|---|---|---|
| Newberry Water | under 1,000 connections | 4.2% FY2023 |
| Kingbury Utility Corporation | under 1,000 connections | 35.4% FY2019 |
| Hazleton | under 1,000 connections | 30.5% FY2023 |
| Corunna | under 1,000 connections | 73.4% FY2019 |
| Decker, Town Of | under 1,000 connections | 40.0% FY2023 |
| Ambia, Town Of | under 1,000 connections | 9.1% FY2023 |
| Sugar Creek Utilities - Ninestar Connect | under 1,000 connections | 1.3% FY2021 |
| Carmel Clay | under 1,000 connections | 0.0% FY2023 |
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 CraneSources 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.
- Indiana Finance Authority — compiled water loss audit dataset, Appendix B to the biennial report required by IC 8-1-30.8. Retrieved 2026-09-08 from data/archive/in-ifa-water-loss/2026-09-08-4246fd01ef55.xlsx. https://www.in.gov/ifa/water-loss-audits/