# Northwest Harris County MUD 36 — water loss as filed

TWDB · PWS TX1012848 · HARRIS County · filings 2015–2024
https://municorn.us/water-loss/tx/northwest-harris-county-mud-36/

## Summary

Northwest Harris County MUD 36 reported **12.2% non-revenue water** in FY2024, higher than 30% of the 908 Texas systems that filed that year. At the utility's own reported water rates that is **$54,857 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 | 12.2% | 128 | $54,857 | closed |
| 2023 | 12.8% | 132.2 | $61,691 | closed |
| 2022 | 11.1% | 132 | $63,081 | closed |
| 2021 | 17.9% | 115.1 | $92,255 | closed |
| 2020 | 9.7% | 118.5 | $32,239 | closed |
| 2019 | 10.8% | 106 | $29,312 | closed |
| 2018 | 11.7% | 107.1 | $30,560 | closed |
| 2016 | 15.2% | 112.6 | $42,324 | closed |
| 2015 | 9.8% | 100.8 | $28,379 | 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

---