# Central Washington County Water Supply Corp — water loss as filed

TWDB · PWS TX2390055 · WASHINGTON County · filings 2015–2024
https://municorn.us/water-loss/tx/central-washington-county-water-supply-corp/

## Summary

Central Washington County Water Supply Corp reported **24.5% non-revenue water** in FY2024, higher than 66% of the 908 Texas systems that filed that year. At the utility's own reported water rates that is **$13,539 a year**, as computed in the filed audit itself.

**The filed balance closes**, to within 0.00% of reported system input.

## Filed history

| Year | Non-revenue water % | System input (MG) | Cost of losses/yr | Balance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | 24.5% | 94.9 | $13,539 | closed |
| 2023 | 29.7% | 117 | $54,928 | closed |
| 2022 | 25.2% | 116.1 | $47,087 | closed |
| 2021 | 21.0% | 87.2 | $29,776 | closed |
| 2020 | 27.8% | 102.4 | $45,194 | closed |
| 2019 | 43.8% | 124.1 | $76,012 | closed |
| 2018 | 38.6% | 110.9 | $56,585 | closed |
| 2015 | 28.1% | 81.5 | $75,823 | closed |

`closed` means the filed components sum to the filed input. `failed` means they do not, by the stated residual.
`insufficient` means the check could not run because figures are missing — never to be read as a pass.

## How the cost figure is built

Apparent loss is water delivered and never billed, so it is valued at the retail rate: revenue, recoverable inside a
budget year without capital work. Real loss is valued at variable production cost, because eliminating a leak saves
treatment and pumping rather than retail price. Where the filed audit carries its own cost of losses — as TWDB's
export does — those figures are used directly and no rate of ours enters the calculation.

## Source

Texas Water Development Board — historical water loss audit data. Retrieved 2026-08-09. https://www.twdb.texas.gov/conservation/data/water-loss-dashboard.asp

Volumes are normalized to million gallons on ingest; the export reports them in the unit each filing states.

Figures are as filed unless stated otherwise. If a number here is wrong it is wrong in the filing or wrong in
our reading of it, and both are worth knowing: ammar@municorn.us

---