# Hamlin — water loss as filed

TWDB · PWS TX1270002 · JONES County · filings 2015–2024
https://municorn.us/water-loss/tx/hamlin/

## Summary

Hamlin reported **14.8% non-revenue water** in FY2024, higher than 40% of the 908 Texas systems that filed that year. At the utility's own reported water rates that is **$50,446 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 | 14.8% | 90.2 | $50,446 | closed |
| 2023 | 13.4% | 94.6 | $33,993 | closed |
| 2022 | 20.5% | 103.3 | $48,129 | closed |
| 2021 | 18.1% | 100.9 | $40,147 | closed |
| 2020 | 22.8% | 115.7 | $57,968 | closed |
| 2019 | 22.4% | 111.8 | $56,042 | closed |
| 2018 | 31.2% | 120.8 | $77,981 | closed |
| 2017 | 31.3% | 110.4 | $69,500 | closed |
| 2016 | 30.3% | 102.6 | $80,714 | closed |
| 2015 | 35.2% | 112 | $96,823 | 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

---