# Shady Grove SUD — water loss as filed

TWDB · PWS TX1160042 · HUNT County · filings 2015–2024
https://municorn.us/water-loss/tx/shady-grove-sud/

## Summary

Shady Grove SUD reported **36.3% non-revenue water** in FY2024, higher than 83% of the 908 Texas systems that filed that year. At the utility's own reported water rates that is **$102.5M a year** (derived). The figure is trending worse across the record.

**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 | 36.3% | 100.4 | $102.5M | closed |
| 2023 | 33.0% | 87.7 | $104,321 | closed |
| 2022 | 30.5% | 86.1 | $86,648 | closed |
| 2021 | 9.5% | 32.1 | $10,054 | closed |
| 2020 | 6.3% | 31.2 | $3,443 | closed |
| 2019 | 12.5% | 32.5 | $6,837 | closed |
| 2018 | 8.0% | 32.7 | $6,876 | closed |
| 2017 | 12.7% | 31 | $7,901 | closed |
| 2016 | 11.1% | 30 | $8,010 | closed |
| 2015 | 13.1% | 30 | $7,818 | 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

---