# Harris County WCID 89 — water loss as filed

TWDB · PWS TX1012370 · HARRIS County · filings 2016–2024
https://municorn.us/water-loss/tx/harris-county-wcid-89/

## Summary

Harris County WCID 89 reported **11.8% non-revenue water** in FY2024, higher than 28% of the 908 Texas systems that filed that year. At the utility's own reported water rates that is **$184,255 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 | 11.8% | 227.7 | $184,255 | closed |
| 2023 | 13.4% | 256.3 | $56,419 | closed |
| 2022 | 6.2% | 225.5 | $51,988 | closed |
| 2021 | 11.0% | 228.1 | $87,711 | closed |
| 2020 | 14.0% | 256.5 | $107,207 | closed |
| 2019 | 30.8% | 293.4 | $118,203 | closed |
| 2018 | 16.9% | 256.9 | $139,115 | closed |
| 2017 | 21.2% | 268.8 | $183,239 | closed |
| 2016 | 17.5% | 256.1 | $134,827 | 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

---