# Rogers — water loss as filed

TWDB · PWS TX0140004 · BELL County · filings 2015–2023
https://municorn.us/water-loss/tx/rogers/

## Summary

Rogers reported **18.6% non-revenue water** in FY2023, higher than 57% of the 785 Texas systems that filed that year. At the utility's own reported water rates that is **$31,948 a year**, as computed in the filed audit itself. **The series is not stable enough to act on**: it moves 13.4 points a year against a Texas median of 5.8.

**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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 18.6% | 45.8 | $31,948 | closed |
| 2022 | 38.2% | 52.1 | $101,995 | closed |
| 2020 | 10.3% | 56.6 | $12,455 | closed |
| 2019 | 36.0% | 54.7 | $61,847 | closed |
| 2018 | 31.3% | 49.9 | $48,292 | closed |
| 2017 | 23.5% | 42.8 | $28,332 | closed |
| 2016 | 24.3% | 47 | $54,186 | closed |
| 2015 | 31.8% | 44.3 | $67,819 | 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

---