Texas · PWS TX0570010 · DALLAS County

Garland

What Garland filed with TWDB about the water it produced and the water it billed for, 2016–2024 — and what the filing does and does not let anyone verify.

Non-revenue water, FY2024
19.2%
Computed from filed system input and billed consumption.
Recoverable annually
$9.26M
As computed in the filed audit itself: apparent loss valued at this utility's own reported retail price of water, real loss at its own reported variable production cost. Not our estimate.
Balance check
closed
The filed water balance closes.

What the filing says

Garland serves 116,563 retail connections and about 250,099 people. Because it reports more than 3,300 connections, it is on an annual water loss audit cycle with TWDB.

What the record shows

19.2% non-revenue water in FY2024, higher than 54% of the 908 Texas systems that filed that year.

The reported figure is stable, moving 8.54 points a year against a Texas median of 5.79, so the level is more likely to reflect the system than the paperwork.

Water balance, FY2024 · 11,798 MG system input
Billed 9,534 MG Unbilled authorized 137.1 MG Apparent loss 195.8 MG Real loss 1,931 MG

Components sum to within 0.00% of reported system input, inside the 0.5% tolerance.

Filed history, 2016–2024
Year NRW Input (MG) Recoverable Balance
2024 19.2% 11,798 $9.26M closed
2023 8.5% 12,065 $5.55M closed
2021 15.7% 10,830 $8.24M closed
2020 30.3% 11,816 $17.1M closed
2019 21.4% 11,106 $10.1M closed
2018 18.4% 10,705 $7.72M closed
2016 11.6% 10,519 $3.78M closed

How to read the recoverable figure

Apparent loss is water that reached a customer and was never billed — under-registering meters, data-handling errors, unauthorized use. It is valued at the retail rate, because recovering it is revenue, and it is recoverable inside a budget year without capital work. Real loss is valued at variable production cost only: eliminating a leak saves what it cost to treat and pump the water, not what it would have sold for. Adding those two at the same rate is how a loss study produces a number nobody in a finance department believes.

As computed in the filed audit itself: apparent loss valued at this utility's own reported retail price of water, real loss at its own reported variable production cost. Not our estimate.

Comparable systems

Same county, or the same size band — over 50,000 connections.

SystemBasis for comparisonNRW
IrvingDALLAS County 10.8%
Grand PrairieDALLAS County 25.0%
MesquiteDALLAS County 39.4%
CarrolltonDALLAS County 9.5%
RichardsonDALLAS County 17.7%
RowlettDALLAS County 17.8%
Cedar HillDALLAS County 6.3%
DesotoDALLAS County 29.6%

Where is it going?

This page says how much — roughly $9.26M 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 Garland

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.