Texas · PWS TX0790253 · FORT BEND County

Sugar Land - New Territory

What Sugar Land - New Territory filed with TWDB about the water it produced and the water it billed for, 2015–2024 — and what the filing does and does not let anyone verify.

Non-revenue water, FY2024
15.8%
Computed from filed system input and billed consumption.
Recoverable annually
$421,556
As computed in the filed audit itself: apparent loss valued at this utility's own reported retail price of water, real loss at its own reported variable production cost. Not our estimate.
Balance check
closed
The filed water balance closes.

What the filing says

Sugar Land - New Territory serves 5,193 retail connections and about 14,532 people. Because it reports more than 3,300 connections, it is on an annual water loss audit cycle with TWDB.

What the record shows

15.8% non-revenue water in FY2024, higher than 43% of the 908 Texas systems that filed that year.

The reported figure is stable, moving 5.47 points a year against a Texas median of 5.81, so the level is more likely to reflect the system than the paperwork.

Water balance, FY2024 · 713.9 MG system input
Billed 600.9 MG Unbilled authorized 16.8 MG Apparent loss 30.7 MG Real loss 65.5 MG

Components sum to within 0.00% of reported system input, inside the 0.5% tolerance.

Filed history, 2015–2024
Year NRW Input (MG) Recoverable Balance
2024 15.8% 713.9 $421,556 closed
2023 20.0% 818.7 $654,264 closed
2022 21.8% 815.2 $619,906 closed
2021 19.2% 668.1 $372,235 closed
2020 19.6% 766.7 $432,792 closed
2019 18.2% 745.4 $269,137 closed
2018 15.7% 773.8 $286,215 closed
2017 10.6% 886.8 $208,099 closed
2015 36.3% 217.4 $198,350 closed

How to read the recoverable figure

Apparent loss is water that reached a customer and was never billed — under-registering meters, data-handling errors, unauthorized use. It is valued at the retail rate, because recovering it is revenue, and it is recoverable inside a budget year without capital work. Real loss is valued at variable production cost only: eliminating a leak saves what it cost to treat and pump the water, not what it would have sold for. Adding those two at the same rate is how a loss study produces a number nobody in a finance department believes.

As computed in the filed audit itself: apparent loss valued at this utility's own reported retail price of water, real loss at its own reported variable production cost. Not our estimate.

Comparable systems

Same county, or the same size band — 3,300–10,000 connections.

SystemBasis for comparisonNRW
Pecan Grove MUDFORT BEND County 10.0%
Quail Valley Utility DistrictFORT BEND County 13.3%
Fort Bend County MUD 25FORT BEND County 18.9%
Fort Bend County MUD 30FORT BEND County 8.4%
Sugar Land - GreatwoodFORT BEND County 7.2%
Fort Bend County MUD 23FORT BEND County 23.0%
Fort Bend County MUD 142FORT BEND County 6.1%
Fort Bend County MUD 58FORT BEND County 14.3%

Where is it going?

This page says how much — roughly $421,556 a year. It cannot say which accounts, which zones, or which meters. That takes your billing history, your meter reads, and your production data reconciled against each other.

Our Water Loss Recovery Snapshot is three weeks, one flat fee, and the deliverable is a ranked list of specific accounts and zones with dollars and a confidence on each.

See what the Snapshot delivers Email us about Sugar Land - New Territory

Sources and corrections. Every figure above is either filed by the utility or computed from filed figures, and each one says which. If a number here is wrong, it is either wrong in the filing or wrong in our reading of it — tell us which and we will correct the page and say what changed.