ML20042C130

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Annual Financial Rept,1981
ML20042C130
Person / Time
Site: Rancho Seco
Issue date: 03/19/1982
From: Rodriquez R
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8203300242
Download: ML20042C130 (1)
v • d • e


Text

. _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _.

1

~

esuun-SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT O 6201 S Street, Box 15830, Sacramento, California 95813; (916) 452 3211 RJR 82-165 2l' }'$$0iff'){f O. \\

March 19, 1982 s

,W

\\-M

.?

t y,

' $Q

~

~

Ql 1%l,f y, y;%:}

N DIRECTOR

~ '#

'(f NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0f'f11SSION

'{ /

WASHINGTON DC 20555 I

l I

DOCKET NO. 50-312 f

ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT I

In accordance with 10 CFR 50.71 the Sacramento Municipal Utility District hereby submits eight (8) copies of its financial report for the year 1981.

P,.

J. 9 driguez fianager Nuclear Operations Enclosure i

ks 8203300242 820319 PDR ADOCK 05000312 I

PDR AN ELECTRIC SYSTEM S E RVIN G MORE THAN 600.000 IN THE HEART OF C All F O R N I A L

? h?

r s'-l'.

r

~

~

.y. -

_4:

~.:

x..:

.y i.

I n-:

c s-y-

f:

tg = -

I o

c, A

7

't

's d

-,. ' g, I t

W g

t t

s 1

5 y s-s

~p.

p n

m

.t*

m f.

  • ./~{

o

f. n 5

+A g

4

.q

.e u i :: Q, {

e -

n 2,

t

,g;n. 2 -p

> - i <.;-

'ye r-S

,.h t '}Y s

t,

> mL '.:::'., i ?;k' sbN

,"' ' f s

wa..

r N~.:e%..

37

,e D$

J.,.i.,

.. j k,...-:

,._gugB.7 Am x. ~ ~ mez >3; m;

w

c. p n.

'#55S9W

>h

~#^

~ %

_'}.

.g l,

Pe.

. w.

-yyg u 4 (G-

,. o.g v* %*jg%_ %

c'P

~

~

,,,y.

y

. W.

M '%s ~

y;,,

3$

y.g

-A ww;qw

, s;e,z,.

w

. _.gg g*w*dz.~,,-;'l/. '7

. Ag..

Isg Og* Ads { &

../.o e,;

., n g

t,q m

i? e.n.p.

f y

l

..=s.

y m,:.,,..

m wr n vn;..

g.. -

n-Sacramento Municipal I

i Utility District 1981 Annual Report

.~

< h 'r-(:

.(Q l

i Sacr:rn nto Municipal Utility District COVER While hydroelectric production in 1981 fell significantly below average, record snowfall in December offered promise of improved energy production for 1982.

i flydroelectric generation, already a vital part of SMUD's resource picture, will play an even greater role in the next few years as the District further develops this energy source. Currently work is under way to expand existing facilities. The District is also actively pursuing new hydroelectric resources which will eventually provide electricity for an ever-growing Sacramento community, j

i INSIDE Throughout this Report are views of a newly n ".

completed extension of the District's operation.

The Foothill Service Center Foothill Service Center E 5 FairOaks opened in October in the g gi,ti,a, rapidly growing northern McClellan A.F.B. 5 D FM i

portion of Sacramento 1

County. A model for future commercial construction, the center utilizes both Ay y.

passive solar design and E SMUD Main Offices active solar systems to 7l

, 3,,,,,,,,,

achieve energy efficiency.

i 1

. _ _..t.

E Elk Grove 5 Freeport in CONTENTS E Franklip Mission 1

y ;y, Management Report 2 e

'j-Operating Review 4

\\

E Galt i

Objectives 12 5 Countland I

Financial Report 14 Statisticalliighlights 24

_ k

' "' Y ~.

Ten-Year Summary 22

, g,,,,,g,,,,

SMUD Directory 25

\\

i 1

'l 1

i i,

l Sacramento Municipal Utility District i

i 1

i I

"Ihe Sacramento Municipal Utility I)istrict, under the governance of its customer-elected MISSION lloard and subje(t to regulations pertaining to the utility industry, will:

I, l

l

.e

-' y.- * ; f l i

Ji

= igg m

. 7;' ail BOARD 4

11 i

=

'I tzJ OF DIRECTORS ff;.

, g *%

'hg I'lectricity for people in er a 750-square nule area, i

M':

g including California's

,,Il j capital city, is provided by the Sacramento Municipal i

f A*"I Utility District. l'ive 6

Directors, serving stag-(

gered terms of four years each, are elected by the people SNtUD serves.

In 1981, the floard estab.

lished both a formal l

Ntission Statement and I

Ann I.. Ta3 lor John T. kehoe Paul W. Carr Objectives which are f

We President, thrct tor, Ward I thres tor, Ward 2 President, Direttor, Ward 3 featured throughout this (Named President January IW2)

(Named he President Report.

i january lw2) q D

L.5 j

umc:.

e 3

6 w,

L

.t W

f.

d l

'4 S

i go,'.

4

t. -

s s

%J I

I

}

1 Y

l, j

Donald C. hicClain Rnhard D. Castro Wi 'iam C. Walbridge, l

threstor. Ward 4 Director, Ward S G neral Manager, with Shif t Supervisor lhll Spencer in control room at Rancho Seco l

Sacramento Municipal Utility District i

PLANNING Will. Sacramento enjoys one of the hnvest electric energy source in our homes. With M AKl IT Il APPEN rates in the United States. I his enviable ever-increasing energy use, conservation position was attained because farsighted becomes an essential part of SMUlys people developed economically viable resource planning. In fact, cost-effective resources to meet the needs of a rapidly conservation programs are a significant growing community. The energy needs future resource in themselves. For example, of today are met by the hydroelectric and by 1985 conservation's contribution to peak l

nuclear capacity planned and built over the growth reduction could be equal to nearly I

  1. ~

last 30 years. 'I hese domestic resources h.we half the output of Itancho Seco, SMUD's kept Sacrarnento electric customers from largest single energy source.

l l paying for expensive i nported oil today, but Capital intensive generation projects and ewanded conservation programs are costly j) what of the future?

Tomorrow's energy mix will be far more as are efforts to maintain and espand the j! diverse and costly than the generating existing system. Ilowever, these are resources serving our needs today. That investments in the future availability and i

is why this year SMUD took substantial reliability of Sacramento's electricity supply, steps to establish a formalized I.ong-Itange and they must le made if we are to serve Plan for the District. The plan includes a our growing community properly.

comprehensive set of goals and objectives Electricity prices will increase to fund that will hcip us to maintain system these investments in the future, but SMUD Paul W. Carr reliability and give us direction in rates will continue to be low when compared I'resklent developing new generation sources.

with power bills paid by the rest of the This planning ef fort was accomplished at nation. Sacramentans will continue to enjoy j

numerous public meetin>;s which attracted the economy and reliability they have come considerable interest and attention.

to expect. Planning will make it happen, r

w.m Community interest is both healthy aad

' encouraging. A publicly owned power i system needs the participation of the people it serves. Af ter all, decisions made today will influence both the cost and availability of s

electricity for many years.

Paul W. Carr

}

When SMUD began serving electricity in President 19 87, the average customer used slightly more than 1,S00 kilowatt. hours per year.

,)

h

~ cnergy in about two months. Modern Today's typical residence uses that much Ek' devices run by electricity heat and cool our Wm. C. Walbridge homes; refrigerate, prepare and cook food; General Manager William C. Waltnidge and perform countless other tasks that General Manager improve our quality of F9 This electric usage comparison is important because it emphasi/es the need for development of conservation. As shown in the " Statistical liighlights" in this Report, both peak demand and energy use increased again in 1981, and this trend will continue as the number of customers grows and we shif t to greater reliance on electricity as the

i(("G Q9tpo%RP w'lf3W *;, e

'l O; ' >-

.y ; ^

?'

,,n;;.Q

,t fb i-

]

9

Q4 y

y 4

? = + -.;, s.. ?.@;&qs,y;,,,p 25

..%gswsa,;ggidg;pQggggagdggg _.

^

'A _]

$k j f-We -.: ~.re agS.7w;p s w -

em a 7:pm g

s

v-

,4 cm y

+

.sw.

.a

,, w-w.L:.

x.,

, -. a., c < ~.,

.J

,n i.

y, e

a p;

%a.- - 2 m.

m,

.a t

b, _ T ':

li

{'

I ' I g

.. ti 4

j; k p

4n 3

kl

' % f,.x.

W I

2, c

(

.5 d i u y

2

[

--t

~.f I

j pc l F

i

1. m s.

!...} }Y k

h> '

, MW.i P.

4 f " y p){i t '

y C

n i;

! y;;;

_g

A U

N{'

h dj &

h M

( J, e1 y Md s

Q[.

' ~

q 3= 4 y" 'g lQ1 l1, q.

,6

=,9 y - )y y:v L.- q, s,

...y pr,.

Y Y T' hg G

n jffj j,[,

n.:= w

]@'Ig g 3 c

n,e n-4 e

p *. j

<s a

wew -

4 M Aq c

q;...

p,x 2~ mp.

"98 a:-

l[4(]j d

r f.;M

-- I '

1

~

P-c, y
i 9 gi

,- p

,m' 3 y

)$i;w.

(

b b

N o g; n,a v 2" p+* m% -

N'~

R.

o:

e-m % y @ p,p.

G y

gg:e%

F,~ ' ~

s s s.

ve

~

g h

r

  1. . weggg;t

- we,

, w~ J, n

m-h Nkf a w.,

+

m m%.

i n

e.. p-

<.. = -

  • yn
/A m >.c

.J

-7

,,.g

. w: -

wa w%b3 n,C

w.. : ? 1 Q$$[ [

lsN

'n['Q.s

- g

~

.[j $1@

M M

b,, '

$5 h

O Q 9

e A

m ^L e

c i

s n

.44 fd E

"JW k.[

f, 4,

  • R.

J

~w ',

3' -

f.'

.~

.g m.

+:.

5 p/.9;'.y V e

g saq p

4 y1

) $j. ad

,f 3 ;

3 9

E.bhl I N:

{c _ &c. ?

h. -

3

'n m

+

a 3. ' ); +ff[

Af d4-c gr ww w.

m

{ O.

7,'

h ef 4[.d.:

{;f m

u:

h

['L c1

I

~ 4

f%

se n

,f N

O

?

' u M

g m

o A

'y r}

g lj j

i x

L 1

W s

r h

Of Sj a l l

-h Q,;,;j h & M.yl;; & &

d' Y MJ >

s ca4&gG & d k b'~'

Y.

.hf%

-qn Wp.MB#$y,if.m4h g + f e Mppg '

(

m:

gy.<

s W h,

...f_'%!@

.q.*

,1 CQ~q

~

k ) g;- MN

S:cr:.m:nto Municipal Utility District b

. : p rn!! al r m! to 1/

1 r:

o:,

c OPERATING REVIEW Sacramento's rapid gnnvth has had a begin on the project in 1982. SMUD has also significant impact on the electric system applied to the Federal Energy llegulatory serving our community. During 1981, Commission for a license on a project to e

important steps were taken to maintain divert water from the Rubicon River into the reliability of that system, enhance the Loon Lake.

efficiency of its operation, and plan for Power from new hydroelectric resources is the future.

also being sought. A license for construction Specific programs for achieving this of a seven megawatt plant at the existing important work were adopted by the Board Camp Far West Dam was received in 1981, of Directors in a formal Mission Statement and preliminary construction began. The highlighted throughout this Report. A major construction phase of this project 1.ong-Range Plan for meeting established will take place in 1982, and the plant is objectives was also approved.

scheduled to go into service in 1983. South Of major importance to this planning Sutter Water District will own the project.

process is new power generation to meet SMUD will operate the plant and purchase future energy needs, and much was the power it produces.

accomplished during 1981.

Solar Funding Geothermal Construction Creation of the world's first commercial-size For example, a remote Sonoma County solar photovoltaic power olant also moved a hilltop of ters a promising source of new step closer to reality during 1981. A unique generation. Construction began in April on financing plan will permit the phased the District's first geothermal power plant.

construction of a 100-megawatt plant. In I ate in 19S3, geothermal steam from deep 1981, SMUD received approval for Federal beneath this rugged countryside will be and State appropriations for the development generating 65 meg watts of electricity, of the first megawatt. According to the Negotiations for additional geothermal project schedule, construction of the first capacity in this area continued while megawatt could begin on land adjacent to construction was beginning.

Rancho Seco nuclear power plant in 1982.

Northern Nevada's deserts may yield another valuable source of geothermal Cogeneration Plans energy. The District belongs to a utility C,ogeneration wd. l also be used to help meet task force known as the Northern Nevada fu um eng mquirements. Negotiations Geothermal Group (NORNEV). This task are under way to des elop 60 megawatts of s

force has awarded a contract for the design

'"8*"*""'

'".89" Sacramento County by 1986.

of a 10-megawatt power plant which will use withm the area,s plentiful supply of geothermal hot water to generate electricity.

Reduced Output liydmelectric Expansion While considerable progress was made on future generation projects during the year, Work on expansion of the existing output 6im existing facdities was less hydroelectric project progressed on schedule. Construction of a 400-kilowatt

"""" '" 8' " 8 '

Non-nuclear maintenance problems mini-generator began during 1981. A license reduced Rancho beco s output m 1981. An application was filed for a 10-megawatt inspection of the plant,s massive steam power plant at Jones Fork on Union Valley turbine ro' ors revealed cracking which Reservoir. Construction is scheduled to i

'%m.

EIEEIEEN,4, 4

3 l*4 s

N!? My.M>s t

amuumaeunes W

enmuuuuuun 1.., ':'.: -

r

~...

j '.

  • s,

.lr

g l-

')'

s *, 4

..S'

' ~

8, l'* n ; s} i. 'ya. ;i 3 +.'14,; 3

^

+

h g

q s., ",

?,.:,,

5, 2.

>4.- g.

~

.? ' 1 '.

  • * +

-+

-y

'd.,.

^q.

~

' M

  • ,,[,'

r y;. 3

-r.

  • ' -s y', A N

'"..,,t*

A' i 5 '.

f3

.m.

g, c,,". 3

.,e

,c gf-J y,4,p2

~

M

[,

4

/ ~' '

' i-.: '

s' 2 -

9 a +,,.

f,. m.

v ?,L i,. '...

r - 4* ' -

Y

,s

u.

' I t s/-;f(;.s/??,:. $

5'-.,, '

I O

2

- n s.s,-

h Ag

. m%

z

' ' ' h,"

s v

D (*

g,

~

e:.

e 5

'l 944

'g N

w v _.,

'h %

s O

s.

g s

.," j,*, - -

g

' ' ' 'N

,L. l

$[

s :

.g-s g.

'p,r v.

s

. y-h,.

w;f y&~ 4:.

4-

.~

y.

-_y p f,y v,;.h yA.9 1

.c,

  • z<

^4

'--f t.

  • ~ ? &f,,.

,1 4

.vp w

Q5 m

W dy t 4 i.

~

l l

Sacramento Municipal Utility District

,i y

i,

-1.

1 it n

i

'I e

.L ;ill'

s l

<**s'[

il-s C ""~~

-,O1

~-

Ol'i.RAIING lilNil W required repair and ulti;nately replacement of equipment. The 913-megawatt plant generated 2.6 billion kilowatt-hours in 1981.

Over the past five years, Rancho Seco has averaged 4.6 billion kilowatt-hours per year.

Ilydroelectric production was also down j

in 1981 due to reduced precipitation. Plants with a combined capacity of 650 megawatts generated 1.3 billion kilowatt-hours. Duriog the previous year, a record 2.6 billion was generated. Increased precipitation in the 6

closing months of the year offered promise L

~

of improved hydroeleciric production in 1982.

b^.

!.22W

'N Service Center Opens Qq% _ -

5

'~

While the search for new generation and the production of present-day energy is of paramount importance, the main'enance of the entire electric system is also vital to reliability. In this regard, the District took a major step forward during 19S1.

A new service center in the far northern portion of Sacramento County was

~

increasing the total served to 343,159. Peak dedicated in October. The facility was designed to efficientiv serve a r$pidly demand increased to a record 1,617 megawatts, and custone wt a new use mcord of 5.7 expanding portion of'the electric system and billion kilowatt-hours.

act as an example of energy conservation technology in commercial construction. Iloth Peak demand and energy use will continue to increase as the number of passive design and active solar systems were customers served grows, but conservation used to make the I:oothill Service Center's eHorts am helping to curb that growth rate.

68,000 square feet of work area one of the Conservation is an important part of the region's most ambitious models for f uture planning process today, and SMUD is a construction.

leader m this area. Many pregams A slump in new construction activity dmloped at SMUD help residential reduced hiring, but provided an opportunity customers plan their energy use. Others for the District to move ahead with conversion provide the technical expertise needed by of the existing distribution system to higher, business and mdustry.

more efficient voltages. Advanced planning enabled crews to take advantage of the I..mancial Ach..h.es yt reduced construction work load, and their efforts will result in substantial future in order to finance capital programs savings of energy.

mentioned earlier and to meet higher operating costs, the District sold two bond issues and had one rate increase. A 12 Customer Growth percent rate increase went into effect for all While the building boom of recent years was customers in April. The two bond issues reduced, the District still added 8,06S new totaling 5110 million were sold in April (550 customers to the electric system in 1981, milhon) and August ($60 million) 19S1.

l

~ ~

py ~jA

[...

g.

. ' - - ~, '

MTR w

.,2 s.

ir: i; 2 ;2 a b,+, eg, hf%l ^4,yi u l.p6lu.,

, s,g k +.1 s a:A.

.s x

.:hxw.b.

  • s.,*

.A F

't j '

a u

' z

?l _,

r.

/

/

i m

s z

(p w

.A f c' o

l y

b.

Y

'/.*

r-f a fu j

L, a

[J t sa

-- j (u

s 2

YbQ,,?

O, O;1 f &%b.E n,y q

V:

mage lo;m

(,.

F.'j e t., j L;'.,

2 r

I.-

r..a

% Ul ii

,x~,

Y' f.

P

, 50 ;.%' tt ck '

lf

.W,j_-

4 _._

p&rgn y, e

g.

g, c, a,,Wey p

.... g.ggwq

. ~.

w

{p c'

1 l't t

o i

, IIe.

ja

}!'; 3- '

s-h?

s.

4,

{7

{^

s_

<4 p

i9 '

s b4 so

(~

R N

[.%

i M. 4 f$~

a y.

ff.

'g,3

,, 7,1% y

'q%w@cip 'A at A.

U 4

Y g

La w.s h;

5

.y y-,., n._,,..n.,p

.. n.

,,,,.n

,7, p

.1 <

/

%)'-

\\

, c 'i f

p,

'6

?.Cr

+

6_ ~,.,

~

s

" r y;, n c/

[ *[w,5

~

'U-td Eh 3s

< j: R,

y

~

. 3 s

....n og p; :.

s.

i j,-

' YL

'Y515A_ _ibal.. - -

s-.

^

Sacramento Municipal Utility District 1

i O Provide rcliable an,I coyricons scrcice to its

)

I custornct+

.CA C, M C #1.'.:: D

~

()PI 1( AlING f(1 Vil W Capital from both bond issues was carmarked

'~~

]

Labor Agreement Reached for new construction.

The District and PGandE are presently Feaowing lengthy negotiations with the 3

I discussing possible amendments to the 1970 Internationalllrotherhood of Electrical i

l'ower Sale and integration Agreement. It is Workers (IllEW), the lloard of Directors i

not expected that any modification will alter approved a three-year wage and benefits

)

the District's ability to obtain backup power package which went into effect on January 1, j

to serve its load. Ilowever, the outcome of 1982. The negotiated settlemot included the discussions may impact the cash flows a 9.6 percent wage increase the first year.

relating to energy exchanged between the A formula based on the Consumer Price District and PGandE.

Index will determine wage rates for the other i

two years covered by the agreement.

j Approximately 900 of the District's 2,001 Legal Actions i

personnel are m.cluded m. the barga..mmg g

During the year, a tentative settlement was unit represented by the lilEW.

reached in a claim filed against the District In December, the lloard of Directors j

4 by I'acific Gas and Electric Company. PGandE approved a record $391 million budget for l

filed the $50-million claim as a result of plant 1982. This represents an increase of 34 outages at Rancho Seco in 1975 and 1976. The percent. New construction totalling $187 i

i settlement was announced in December and million was cittJ as the primary reason for involved the District, PGandE, and four budgetary growth. Expenditures include j

vendors. This settlement calls for a cash federally mandated modifications affecting payment from the District to PGandE of $7.9 Rancho Seco and construction at the million. The District will receive payments District's rothermal project.

l 4

and discounts from other entities totaling 1

approximately $2.8 million and vill be entitled to bill l'GandE at higher rates for capacity

(

i after the agreeme it is signed. The net cost to l

the District is expected to be approximately l-

[

$2.4 million.

l Settlement of another l'acific Gas and f

j Electric Company claim was also reached g/~

~

in "arly 1982. I'GandE made purchases of capacity from outside the Northern s

California area during the summers of 1979, s

1980 and 1981, to maintain reliable electric L

l service in Northern California at times when Rancho Seco was out of service. Under the SMUD-PGandE contract, SMUD is, under i

some circumstances, obligated to reimburse l

PGandE for a portion of such purchases.

PGandE's claim, presented in a far larger

(

{'

amount, was settled for $5.8 million.

(

Other pending litigation affecting the j

District is described in full detail in the

.t Notes to Financial Statements appearing l

elsewhere in this Report.

g

~ ~

{.

l g,j% e

< g syfQ L

' 4-3y.,

l e

i

'. ia.

p.

j n

(o o

.. e a ; ;:gg

/ t

'4 4

g

)

\\.~y th

=_

.g w,,

{

_...t,

)

t

's n

\\ M

\\

v Y,

j}

j &*

l

%%e. _S, t

- hmt p pT Y_ l

,al-s

\\

a

\\

s j

s f

N

' " ~f ?J.

e 4%j7 ss kh %

hb.

. n.,+a.w

._ i

..;f

  • 1 v;. y d-h; fhp,$. QsQ

,,,, ~

)

n..v +x w

y e x;g,9, y,n;;sp. y~.gg, yw z

py s, s*W

)

pf

r '
q**'

s, sa c

.[

. r,

~-'

t

)

.fh,'

1

_ ;P; '.

d y M

khh4kl

(

A 235

'~

y.

4.

+ t M

V 4

3

{

f-I J

s l

s.m..im.oio.i uiinir imia r

o t

l

,. _ew7 w.

,mp py3. ecjh,0 :,. g m.g.1y sVM1 )

4 ng h i, J.Mj W W 4 ? ? t r e j an ( p y P/)4[9mP m ?q yj ~ "

P T 8[ W C " "#

fj [N}E f l

N IC 7

7 g

_t >;

g

,f r

.-.h

]

o,

') w

..y "

  • M n s/L : ' hid i

I F5 21

.~

g

~

\\

'~

e 3

.x\\

(9 8. a_%

M,' " ~

1 i

m

..n

,1 "t

5

\\

i.

(

..v.

'h >a,

's 4

J

{

_z f,

\\

t I.

=):

1 l

0 y

)

s+

g c ;%.

-t s..

.=.S.

t l

.y

.t

-./

i t

~

A 4

j..

j 1:

q.;.4 7j 3

4 N

g[,~1[,,'

~

. n.,syv gy

~ (f.

j.

f.. ll;.9; ; - &

~

g ed i

w h

b

';; S y

  • '*k

{ _,

s.

k.

p f:(~,,

/,

0-

  • [Y m.

"%,e y

t-g j->

e O

.i i

..y,

-- --. s w

s--n J f B,)

l~ {

\\

m

,s g\\

O ~ 4

.c.

.y

'[.

1 y

ti.+,

g; y.

.u -

~

L.

g, gfL g

.~

b li; c.-

8 I

Ll+,$

4 4

..c==

I

~~

J b_f c; r i 1.

lA.T."

R

'M i

wp.,_.

,n h.'

Q y

sp g

y

?'

1;. -

e ih li.

4

q g
V.'
dt.

p J

g

~, -

a 1-

~ "

  • f -

f"i 'W ** ~.%

'? 5A U

f.,

f hI e-'

.I i

,.'I J'5' b

-}

} '

Q)

W' ( _ f l

,m i.Qq;x.'*g

~

^

s

.)--

q y

y v

F ylu l

=

m e;

d m

  • ~ ~ " 7 ", #

' 7A m

^ " '

"~~

A y

t Sacramento Municipal Utility District I

I!> A I j\\ N( l S I i l i i 7'r ASSETS t)1 Cl Mm R 31 M-1981 1980 E. LECTitlC UTILE IY Pl. ANT Plant in service, at original cost 5 963,631,079 5 893,252,657 1.ess - accumulated depreciation 204,313,158 183,973,944 5 759,317,921

$ 709,278,713 Construction work in progress 85,658,152 77,491,680 Nuclear fuel, at cost less amortization 134,296,121 113,398,987

$ 979,272,194

$ 900,169,380 j

ltEEEltVE Reserve funnis, consisting of casir and securities at iUNUS cast which approxintates market:

For revenue bonds 5 39,154,509 5 27,570,228 For nuclear plant decommissioning (Note 1) 9,347,194 3,733,725 5 48,501,703

$ 31,303,953 M1 CUltitENT ASSETS Cash and marketable occurities, at cost which approximates market -

General fund 5 46,175,589

$ 28,566,364 Restricted for payment of debt service 16,159,408 13,930,301 A'ccrued interest receivable 6,584,540 2,597,769 Accounts receivable - net -

Customers 9,442,662 8,790,800 Sale of surplus power 8,364,283 15,323,171 losurance claim 3,127,296 Suppliers ' Note 4) 2,672,113 25,000

(

Oth"r 1,960,889 1,536,295 Materials and supplies, at average cost 21,142,559 18,500,643 Prepaym"nts and special deposits 6,331,226 1,192,614 Purcluseo power rate increase -

escrow deposit (Note 5) 29,890,937 19,077,662 5 151,851,502

$ 109,540,619

[

DEFEltRED Deferred settlemer.t tharges (Note 4)

S 5,100,000 Cil AitGES Other 9,569,487 8,293,919 5

14,669,487 8,293,919 51,194,294,886

$1,049,307,871 1he accompanying notes Arc an integral part of these balance sheets.

11 I

l

)

i l

S:cramento Municipal Utility District l

)

)

CAPITALIZATION AND LIAlllLITIES Ol camLR 31, M

f 1981 1980 CAPITALIZATION Customers' equity employed in the business -

llalance, beginning of year S 421,522,814

$ 386,271,433 Net revenue for the year 14,209,961 35,251,381

~Iotal customers' equity

$ 435,732,775

$ 421,522,814

)

1.ong-term debt (Note 2) 607,819,668 509,576,740

$1,013,552,443

$ 931,099,554 Current Liabilities:

LIABILITIES Commercial paper (Note 3)

$ 40,129,612

$ 39,936,608 Accounts payable (Note 4) 32,141,798 17,492,178 Accrued salaries, wages and vacation pay 3,422,026 4,388,177 l

Long-term debt due within one year 11,813,195 17,216,453 Accrued interest payable 10,331,330 6,935,742 Customers' deposits 4,250,269 3,234,806

}

l'urchased power rate increase (Note 5) 31,441,635 21,292,669

)

Energy exchange payable (Note 1) 3,424,829 Other 4,440,555 3,977,959 l

$ 141,395,249

$ 114,474,592 Accrualfor Decontmissioning (Note 1) 9,347,194 3,733,725 Comntilntents and Contingencies (Note 6)

$1,194,294,886

$1,049,307,871 1;

Sacramento Stunicipal Utility District STATEN1ENTS OF NET REVENUE iI:AR$ FNDI D Di CE.MBI R 31, f

1981 1980 1979 OPERATING REVENUES Residential

$ 82,788,985

$ 68,446,205

$ 60,836,900 Commercial and industrial 69,878,710 59,538,580 52,643,857 Sales of surplus power (Note 1) 3" 938,797 50,123,552 36,782,957 Other 2,295,721 2,670,409 2,536,610 Total operating; revenues

$194,802,213

$180,778,746

$152,800,324 i

OPERATING Operation -

EXPENSES l'urchased power (Notes 1 and 5)

$ 30,045,358

$ 16,471,974

$ 16,372,899 Nuclear fuel used for generation 18,940,165 IV,601,196 21,212,516 l'roduction 22,491,258 19,767,590 10,730,213 Other (Note 4) 36,729,658 25,805,044 21,606,979 hiaintenance 31,177,454 23,129,117 15,953,421 Depreciation and decommissioning (Note 1) 31,016,096 27,453,759 22,694,566 Total operating expenses

$170,399,989

$132,228,680

$108,570,594 Net operating revenue

$ 24,402,224

$ 48,550,066

$ 44,229,730 OTilER INCON1E Allowance for equity funds used during construction (Note 1) 3,777,059 3,555,268 2,035,702 l

Interest income and other 18,043,183 8,918,715 6,147,848 Net revenue before interest expense

$ 46,222,466

$ 61,024,049

$ 52,413,280 INTEREST Interest on debt 37,212,324 29,470,088 27,130,261 EXPENSE Allowance for borrowed funds used during construction (Note 1)

(5,199,819)

(3,697,420)

(2,193,976)

Net revenue for the year 5 14,209,961

$ 35,251,381

$ 27,476,995 Ihe accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements, l

l w

1 1

Sacramento Municipal Utility District

?

a hk;u+w nn:y.,

rm&cmgh:h^

' g;

'~

~

, ww+,.y y............. e g

qm :ogggggrQfg

! '3;;ap,f:. ~;

. yu+. w Es sw a o

a

~c V:

Jl3&4:$$$;hf

? lfhS N ', (gQ i$.

.[+!..,

I Y

f n.-

Q 43.,,,

N

., v.

_y%

~

s,

&, g*

%~

N 1.

w p m++

p p;..j x fi *.%

,c l

2 s

- k w.

. ~. D

__J

Sacrament 2 N1unicipal Utility District OBJECTIVES The Niission Statement, adopted in 1981 by the SN1UD Board of Directors, is featured throughout this l{eport. ~1he following long-range objectives have been established to provide more precise direction and measure the success of Distnct goals.

q E ~1 SN1UD N1ission and Functions E213 Project Atanagement

'li> define the overall business of SN1UD and li> establish and implement a formal communicate the District mission to SN1UD mechanism of managing major projects.

employees, customers and the communi Lu-, I..inancial Integn.ty C2.3 Energy Supply Planning To maintain the financial stability of SN1UD To construct or contract for sufficient bulk while achieving a balance between the power to meet the forecasted load and requirements to supply the lowest long reserve requirement.

term cost power to the customer and the r

~n molu mmen <, of he M hok UNb[IONAL AllEAS CR Conservation li> effectively promote the efficient and CD The N1anagement Process effective use of energy and to keep peak To develop and maintain a management load of the District at the optimum level in process that effectively utilizes all the accordance with the economics of alternative management functions so as to ensure that costs.

SN1UD meets its established objectives with CJ Quality of Service li> develop standards reflecting acceptable CJ llelationship Between N1anagement and reliable levels of Quality of Service Staff and the Board and to plan for their implementation. The li) develop a relationship between the Board concept of Quality of Service includes all of Directors and the management staff actions which affect the delivery of power which results in an effective process of to customers and the interface of the SN1UD governance which ensures that the Board employee with the customer.

meets its responsibilities to the customers and community and that SN1UD staff ym -

Public Safety manages the utility District with excellence.

eu u To promote public safety and :o minimize potential hazard of SN1UD activities to the C3 Governmental Affairs public.

To maintain liaison with regulatory and legislative bodies and to provide UZ.1 EmploYce Itelations constructive mput which reflects the long lii develop and maintain a climate that and short-term interests of SN1UD encourages people to perform thoughtfully customers.

and well. To help each person achieve job satisfaction through work which contributes CC2 Public Affairs to personal and District objectives and li> demonstrate the District is a well-I offers the opponunity to gain recognition, organized, well-managed organization advancement, personal growth and financial working in the best interest of the customer.

reward. 'li) promote the safety of all SN1UD

'li) systematically ensure through accurate l,

employees.

and truthful communication that SN1UD's goals nd objectives gain acceptance with E"'31 Productivity and Cost Nianagement the customer and the community.

To effectivelv determine and control all costs within the District and to ensure high levels of productivity.

Sacramento Municipal Utility District

(

STATEMENTS OF CIIANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION

}

) LARS LNDI D DI CLMBER 31.

(

1981 1980 1979 FUNDS Opera tions -

PROVIDED FROM

)

Net revenue for the year 5 14,209,961

$ 35,251,381

$ 27,476,995 f

Add non-cash charges -

Depreciation and decommissioning 31,016,096 27,453,759 22,694,566 Write-offs of generation projects 190,476 76,018 2,491,945 Add - Interest on debt 37,212,324 29,470,088 27,130,261 4

li>tal available for revenue bond i

debt service

$ 82,628,857

$ 92,231,246

$ 79,793,767 Add - Nuclear fuel used for generation 18,940,165 19,601,196 21,212,516 liital available for total debt service

$101,569,022

$111,852,442 5101,006,283 Sale of electric revenue bonds

$110,000,000 S 50,000,000 Sale of commercial paper - net 193,004 39,936,608 Decrease in working capital (excluding commercial paper) 15,366,123 Other - net 558,507 liital f unds provided

$212,320,533 5167,155,173

$151,006,283 mm-mmmmmune Debt service -

FUNDS Revenue bonds S 42,651,089

$ 36,802,255

$ 34,040,486 USED FOR General obligation bonds 8,343,441 8,314,393 8,912,377 Total debt service

$ 50,994,530

$ 45,ll6,MS

$ 42,952,863 Additions to plant and nuclear fuel 125,448,897 116,211,971 103,707,051 Increase in working capital 15,583,230 M2,963 Additions to reserve funds 17,197,750 3,320,055 2,919,015 Interest on commercial paper 3,096,126 532,229 Other - net 1,954,270 784,391 liital funds used

$212,320,533

$167,155,173

$151,006,283 Numlrer of tintes delst service is covered by funds available:

l Revenue bonds 1.94 2.51 2.34 Total debt 1.99 2.48 2.35 l

I T he accompanying notes are in integral part of these statements.

I h

t Sacramento Municipal Utility District i

i

)

NOTES TO HN ANCI AL STATEMENTS

"'0"

'""SY

~

^"

  1. ~"

NOTE 1 fROAf INCOAfE 7 AXES. The Sacramento meet District requirements.

Summary of Sigmficant Munici 3al Utility District was formed and The PGandE contract establishes an I

Accounting Policies operates under the State of C,alifornia energy exchange account. With the Municipal Utility District Act. The Act exception of energy deliveries to PGandE in confers upon the District the rights and excess of 350 million kwh, for which powers to fix rates and charges for PGandE makes payments to the District, all commodities or services furnished, to incur exchanges af energy between the parties are indebtedness and issue bonds or other made without payment. Energy delivered to obligations and, under certain circumstances, and obtained from PGandE under the to levy and collect ad valorem property exchange account is recorded as surplus taxes. The District's power to levy property power sales and purchased power expense, taxes is restricted by the California respectively, with the corresponding Constitution, Article Xill A, which places amounts due from or to PGandE reflected as limits on the taxing power of all California a deferred charge or as a current liability.

public agencies. The District is exempt from Prior to 1981, energy exchange transactions payment of fetSal and state income taxes.

were netted and reported as Sales of Surplus

'""U AfE7710D Ol' ACCOUN77NG. The District's transactions are separately reported as Sales I

books and accounts are based upon the j

urplus ownan urchawtl I.own, o

Uniform System of Accounts for Public prior years have been reclassified for Utilities and Licensees prescribed by the

~

comparability.

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the same accounting system which investor-DEPRECIATION, AAf0RTIZATION, AND owned electric utilities operating in California DECOAfAUSSIONING. The District provides are required to follow.

for depreciation on the historical cost of ctric properties on a straight-line e

SURPLUS POWER SALES. The District sells service-life basis at rates determmed by to Pacific Cas and Electric Company

." E ""

""8*$" tion rates for District plant for the (PGandE) the District's unused cap'acity and deprecia energy generated but not required for years 1981,1980 and 1979 were:

District load. In addition, the District 1981 1980 1979 Intangible plant 3.06 %

3.06 %

3.06'7e Generation -

Ilvdro 1.50 1.53 1.43 N'uclear (excluding decommissioning) 3.52 3.44 3.30 Transmiss:an 2.74 2.86 2.62 Distribution 2.90 2.94 3.00 General 4.52 5.04 5.47 Composite 2.93 2.93 2.85 B

The costs of replacement property units are on the original cost of nuclear fuel plus charged to plant. Repair and maintenance estimated costs of disposal escalated for costs are charged to expense, including such inflation to the anticipated time of disposal.

costs associated with refueling the Rancho Provisions for disposal costs, aggregating

/

Seco nuclear plant. Rancho Seco was

$31,028,000 at December 31,1981, are refueled in 1981 and 1980, but not in 1979.

reflected as a reduction of the investment The District amortizes the cost of nuclear in nuclear fuel.

fuel on a unit-of-production method, based

I S: cram:nto Municipal Utility District

)

)

)

)

)

NOITS TO HN ANCIM STATEMENTS Decommissioning of the nuclear plant has and 1979 amounted to approdmately 6.8 NOTE 1 been estimated at $103.5 million in current percent,6.1 percent and 5.9 percent, Summary of Significant dollars. This amount will be reviewed and respecti.ely, of eligible nuclear fue: and Accounting Policies adjusted periodically to reflect the latest plant under construction.

Mm'i"w D practices of nuclear plant dccommissioning.

t he District maintains a reserve fund to IUlmENT Pls1N. The District's s

collect decommissioning costs over the employees are covered by a contributory 1

remaining life of the plant. Ihe $105.5 retirement plan administered by the Public milh.on is used as a basis for maintaining the Employees Ret.irement System (PL.RS)..T he DMM's plicy is to fun [1 retirement costs as accrual for l cash depos$ ecommissioning and for making accrued. Contributions for 1981,1930, and its into the fund. I-und 1979 amounted to $8,328,000, $6,642,0W management is under District control.

and $5,121,000, respectively. PERS has

<1LLOWelNCI l'OR filNDS llSL'D DilRING reported that the District's share of the CONSTRllCllON. 'l he total allowance for actuarially determined unfunded obligation funds used during construction in 1981,1980 as of June 30,1980 (date of latest actuarial

)

report), was approximately $62 million.

l 1 ong-term debt ut.tstanding at December 31,1981 and 1980 was as ft.' lows:

NOTE 2 1981 1980 l

Revenue Bonds almusands ot dollus) Long-Term Debt Electric Revenue llonds,4%G - 11%9,1982-2019

$477,400

$370,600 White Rock Project lionds,3%S -70,1982-2010 87,155 88,605 f

UARP Refunding Ilonds,3%G -3%9,1982-1991 43,000 46,600 Electric System lionds, 3 % 9 -3 5 9, 1982-1983 1,710 2,855

'lotal Revenue Bonds

$609,265

$508,660 General Obligation Bonds, 23 -4 %, 1982-1992 10,114 17,889

'Ibtal lionds

$619,379

$526,549 I

Purchase Agreement, 3 % %, 1982-2000 1,302 1,348

$620,681 5527,897 1.ess - tiond discount, White Rock Project, Series C 1,048 1,104 l

l L ess-Amount due within one year 11,813 17,216

$607,820

$509,577 l

Debt maturities for the next five years are: 1982 - $11,813,000,1983 - $12,978,000; 1984 -

f

$13,247,000; 1985 - $14,044,000; 1986 - $14,606,(00.

m l=he District is authon.ied to issue value of the District's commercial paper was NOTE 3 commercial paper not to exceed $50 million outstanding at an effective interest rate of wnh a Lrm not to exceed 270 days. A line of 7.81 percent. The approximately effective Commercial Paper credit is maintained to support the sale of interest rate for the commercial paper sold in commercial paper. The District compensates 1981 was 7.51 percent, the approximate g

the bank for the line of credit by fee payments. average commercial paper outstanding 1he line of credit was not used in 1981.

was $40,052,000, and the average term As of December 31,1981,540.22;.000 par was 25 days.

)

o

l Sacramento Municipal Utility District

}

i, r

NOTES TO HN ANCI AL STATEMENTS NOTE 4 During 1981 the District reached tentative 1976 for purposes of surplus power billings PGandE Settlements settlements of two disputed claims advanced to PGandE.

by PGandE. The claims sought recovery of The in-service date change will give rise to alleged costs incurred by PGandE as a n sult approximately $2.7 million of additional of Rancho Seco being out of service at billings to be collected from PGandE over various times due to unplanned shutdowns the next ten years, which amount has been t

resulting from mechanical failures. The deferred until recovered. Pursuant to an District agreed to settle the claims to avoid action by the District's lloard of Directors, the higher costs of protracted negotiation the remaining $2.4 million of settlement and/or litigation.

costs will be deferred and recovered from j

The first claim was based on outages that the District's customers through increased occurred during 1975 and 1976. PGandE future rates over a three-year period.

sought recovery of $50 million alleged to be The second claim sought recovery of $4 the difference between payments due under million alleged to be the cost incurred by a contract which took effect when Rancho PGandE to obtain capacity from outside the Seco began commercial operation and those northern California area during a 1979 due under an earlier contract. Under the outage at Rancho Seco. PGandE informally settlement, the District will pay PGandE $7.9 presented additional claims for similar million and will recover $2.8 million from outages in 1980 and 1981 which escalated the certain suppliers of equipment and services total claimed, including interest, to $12.2 l

for the Rancho Seco plant. In addition, the million. The District agreed to pay PGandE date of commercial availability of the Rancho $5.8 million in settlement, which was

~

Seco plant will be changed to December 1, charged to operations in 1981.

NOTE 5 On May 25,1978 and November 1,1979, June 25,1979, the United States District Purchased Power Rate interim rate increases for power purchased Court for the Eastern District of Californi-Increase from the Central Valley Project (CVP) were granted a motion for summary judgment placed into effect by the U.S. Department of against the District. On August 13,1981, ne Energy. The estimated annual billing United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth increase to the District under these interim Circuit reversed the District Court judgment rates is approximately $7.7 million. The and remanded the case to the District Court proposed rates will not become final until for trial. On January 27,1982, the Ninth they are confirmed and approved by the Circuit denied a petition of the United States y

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

for rehearing.

The District is presently depositing into The District carmot at this time estimate escrow that poition of each monthly bill how much, if any, of the amounts paid into representing the increase over the rates in escrow will be returned to it if it is successful effect before May 25,1978, pending in the lawsuit. Currently, the entire billing conclusion of a lawsuit filed against the increase is included in Purchased Power District by the United States to obtain a Expense with the cumulative amount of judicial ruling on the District's contention

$31,442,000 recorded as Purchased Power that the criteria being used in the rate Rate Increase, a current liability. The proceedings are not in accord with a rate deposits in escrow at December 31,1981, modification formula in the contract under were $29,891,000.

I which the District purchases CVP power. On a

Sacram:nts Municip:1 Utility District NOTES TO HNANCI AL STATEMENTS Estimated construction and nuclear fuel facilities violates the antitrust laws.

NOTE 6 expenditures in 1982 are $186,522,000 and Management i; unable to predict what Commitments and

$25,298,000, respectively. The total cost of effect, if any, the ultimate outcome of these Contingencies nuclear fuel under contracts for future suits may have on future operations. But, reloads (covenng the period 1982 to 1990) is after evaluating this claim and discussing it estimated to be approximately $183,000,000.

with staff counsel and with the law firm The District is a defendant in various retained to defend the District, management actions including a suit filed by 13 electrical is of the opinion that the effect on the contractors alleging that the District's accompanying financial statements w;11 not practice of constructing its own distribution be material.

AUDITORS' REPORT To the lloard of Directors of Sacramento Municipal Utility District:

AUDITORS' REPORT We have examined the balance sheets of Sacramento Municipal Utility District (a political sub-division of the State of California) as of December 31,1981 and 1980, and the related statements of net revenue and changes in financial position for each of the three years in the period ended December 31,1981. Our examinations were made in accordance with generally accepted audit-ing standards and, accordingly, included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.

In our auditors' report dated January 30,1981, our opinion on the 1980 and 1979 financial statements was qualified as twing subject to the settlement of two claims by Pacific Cas and Electric Company. Additionally, such opinion was qualified as being subject to the settlement of a lawsuit filed against the District by the United States. As explained in Note 4, the claims of Pacific Gas and Electric Company have been settled and the resulting financial effect recorded during 1981. Accordingly, our present opinion on the 1980 and 1979 financial statements, as presented herein, is different from that expressed in our previous report regarding the Pacific Gas and Electric Company claims. Our present opinion continues the qualification relating to the lawsuit filed against the District by the United States.

As discussed further in Note 5, during 1978 and 1979, the U.S. Department of Energy placed into elfect interim rate increases. The District has recorded the related billings of $31,442,000 as purchased power expense but is currently placing funds for payment in escrow. The District contends that the interim rate increases are not in accordance with its purchased power con-tract. The United States has filed a lawsuit against the District to obtain a judicial ruling on this matter. The District cannot determine at this time how much, if any, of the $29,891,000 depos-ited in escrow will be refunded if it is successful in this action.

In our opinion, subject to the effect of any adjustments that might have been required had the 2i outcome of the lawsuit discussed above been known, the financial statements referred to above present fairly the financial position of Sacramento Municipal Utility District as of December 31, 1981 and 1980, and the results of its operations and the changes in its financial position for each of the three years in the period ended December 31,1981, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles applied on a consistent basis.

San l'rancisco, Cahfornia ARTilUR ANDERSEN & CO.

January 29,1982

S:: cram:nto Municipal Utility District

,n;, _ t :.

ri

~

t a t

t, 1981 1980 M

OPERATING Customers c Year-End 343,159 335,091 STATISTICS KWil Sales (in thousands):

Sales to Customers -

Residential 2,794,412 2,587,168 Commercial, Industrial, and Other 2,900,053 2,764,700 Total 5,694,465 5,351,868 Sale of Surplus Power 1,312,902 3,322,822 Total 7,007,367 8,674,690 Revenue (in thousands of dollars):

Sales to Customers -

Residential

$ 82,789

$ 68,446 j

Commercial, In<lustrial, and Other 73,174 62,209 j

liital

$ 155,963

$ 130,655 Sale of Surplus Power 38,839 50,124 Total

$ 194,802

$ 180,779 Average KWII Sales per Residential Customer 9,211 8,776 Average Revenue per Residential KWil Sold 2.96c 2.65c Power Supply (KWIi in thousands):

Ilydroelectric Generation 1,267,717 2,595,983 Nuclear Generation 2,624,286 4,408,698 Purchases 3,467,830 1,915,860 System Peak Demand - KW 1,617,028 1,573,967 Equivalent Full-Time Employees at Year-End 2,001 1,868 M

FINANCIAL Operating Rcrenues

$ 194,802

$ 180,779 STATISTICS Operating Openses I

(in thousands of dollars)

Purchased Power

$ 30,045 16,472 Operation, Maintenance, and Taxes 109,339 88,303 Depreciation and Decommissioning 31,016 27,454 g

Total operating expenses 5 170,400

$ 132,229 Net operating revenue

$ 24,402

$ 48,550 Other income 21,820 12,474 Net revenue before interest expense

$ 46,222

$ 61,024 Interest byense 32,012 25,773 Net revenue for the year 5

14,210

$ 35,251 Times Debt Service Earned - Revenue Bonds 1.9 2.5 Bonds Repaid

$ 17,170

$ 16,485 Electric Utility Plant - net

$ 979,272

$ 900,169 Capitalization:

Long-Term Debt

$ 607,820

$ 509,577 Customers' Equity 5 435,733

$ 421,523

Sacr mento Municipil Utility District 1979 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1973 1972 324,438 309,735 296,541 282,621 273,259 264,159 254,646 245,449 2,678,806 2,458,990 2,222,998 2,102,704 2,034,017 1,903,777 1,873,373 1,732,798 2,792,225 2,691,876 2,544,239 2,504,313 2,376,723 2,227,059 2,334,503 2,204,425 5,471,031 5,150,866 4,767,237 4,607,017 4,410,740 4,130,836 4,207,876 3,937,223 3,898,668 3,126,428 3,376,057 1,425,488 2,552,978 9,369,699 8,277,294 8,143,294 6,032,505 6,963,718 4,130,836 4,207,876 3,937,223

$ 60,837

$ 53,955

$ 44,497

$ 40,553

$ 35,188

$ 32,497

$ 29,686

$ 26,624 55,180 51,164 44,316 41,405 35,497 32,430 30,957 28,048

$ 116,017

$ 105,119

$ 88,813

$ 81,958

$ 70,685

$ 64,927 5 60,643

$ 54,672 36,783 31,725 35,270 25,824 31,061

$ 152,800

$ 136,844

$ 124,083

$ 107,782

$ 101,746

$ 64,927

$ 60.M3

$ 54,672 9,446 9,091 8,597 8,491 8,500 8,244 8,416 8,116 2.27e 2.19e 2.00e 1.93c 1.73e 1.71e 1.58e 1.54e 1,673,322.

1,705,497 209,717 1,038,936 2,023,803 2,584,467 1,853,006 1,591,129 5,717,476 4,965,812 5,870,832 2,181,261 2,472,624 207,223 2,255,072 1,911,454 2,356,530 3,121,918 2,733,314 1,603,556 2,586,927 2,636,552 1,546,785

-1,577,785 1,353,589 1,329,983 1,272,389 1,201,188 1,173,588 1,099,188 1,7M 1,678 1,559 1,442 1,447 1,375 1,302 1,242

$ 152,800

$ 136,844 5 124,083

$ 107,782

$ 101,746 5 64,927

$ 60,643

$ 54,672 16,373 11,907 9,480 12,479 10,560 8,959 9,914 10,6(X) 69,502 55,905 56,205 36,367 38,838 16,8;l 14,504 13,153 22,695 21,769 20,795 20,552 18,227 8,010 7,698 7,337

$ 108,570

$ 89,581 5 86,480

$ 69,398

$ 67,625

$ 32,886 5 32,116

$ 31,090

$ 44,230

$ 47,263

$ 37,603

$ 38,384

$ 34,121

$ 32,047

$ 28,527

$ 23,582

[

8,183 6,241 5,284 5,254 8,986 29,976 23,377 15,017 5

$ 52,413

$ 53,5(M

$ 42,887

$ 43,638

$ 43,107 5 62,023

$ 51,904

$ 38,599 24,936 23,920 24,568 24,946 23,226 25,762 22,524 18,658

$ 27,477

$ 29,584 5

18,319 18,692

$ 17,881

$ 36,261

$ 29,380

$ 19,941 2.3 2.5 2.2 2.2 2.I 2.4 2.4 2.!

16,047.

15,566 16,657

$ 15,648

$ 15,145 11,053 6,607 5

6,237

$ 829,455

$ 771,499

$ 739,185 5 729,178

$ 722,081

$ 705,812 5 649,036

$ 571,896

$ 526,737

$ 493,205

$ 469,225

$ 484,827

$ 478,159

$ 494,165

$ 509,671

$ 420,093

' S 386,271

$ 358,794

$ 329,210

$ 310,892

$ 292,200

$ 274,319

$ 238,059

$ 208,679 L

Sacramento Stunicipal Utility District LG Attract anti retain hi;;l1 spiality couployees.m i

STATISTICAL l

l l

l lilGilLIGilTS 1981 1980 3

1979

? 2. 23.., :.~ 3 PEAK DEh1AND 973 (h1W) g 1977 0

400 800 1200 1600 g.-

w m.v

, 3 NUCLEAll 6.5 3.0 I

GENERATION (BILLIONS KWill 5.2 2.4 3.9 1.8

~,

'Tr s

_.g IlYDROELECTRIC 2.6 1.2 GENERATION (BILLIONS KWil) 4 0

0 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 Nuclear iIvdroelectric p

-m Mm CUSTON1ERS AT 4.0 6.5 YEAR END (IlUNDREDS OF TilOUSANDS) 5.2 3.0 u-3.9 a ;._..,

2.0 KWil SALES 2.6 (UILLIONS) 1.0 1.3 0

0 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 Customers Sales

(

l Sacr:ments Municipal Utility Di:trict I

r BOARD OF DIRECTORS Paul W. Carr, President SMUD Ann L. Tavlor, Vice President DIRECTORY Richard D. Castro John T. Kehoe Donald C. AkClain OFFICERS William C. Walbridge, General Afanager John J. Mattimoc, Assistant General Manager and Chief Engineer William K. latham, Assistant General Manager, Operations Kenneth J. Mellor, Assistant General Manager and Treasurer f

Earl M. Gabrielli, Assistant General Manager, Commercial i

William J. flammond, Assistant General Manager, Services David S. Kaplan, General Counsel and Secretary DEPARTMENT Betty Boles, land MANAGERS William J. Condon, Data Processing Diane L. Demanett, Customer Services John D. Dunn, Transmission & Distribution Operations Leo A. Fassler, Distribution Planning George F. Fraser, Distribution Construction John P. Ililtz, Ilydro Operations Phillip R. Ilollick, Conservation Donald W. Ilowton, Consumer Relations Gordon B. Merrill, Purchases and Stores Dallas G. Raasch, Generation Engineering John L. Ravera, Engineering Ronald J. Rodriguez, Nuclear Operations Pamela O. Stewart, Personnel Frank M. Tindal, Controller, Accounting John II. Michelmore, Director of Planning and Budget

]

Donald W. Martin, Executive Assistant

\\

BOND COUNSEL Orrick, flerrington, & Sutcliffe, San Francisco TRUSTEE AND PAYING Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association, AGENT San Francisco PAYING AGENTS Citibank, N. A., New York The First National Bank of Chicago, Chicago ENGINEERS R. W. Ikck and Associates, Sacramento 1

AUDITORS Arthur Andersen & Co., San Francisco FINANCING Ichman Brothers Kuhn Loeb Incorporated, New York CONSULTANTS MAIN OFFICES Sacramento Municipal Utility District 6201 S Street (P.O. Box 15830), Sacramento, CA 95817 (916) 452-3211 b

n; 3,,.: y.y, y g e

g.

^..

~?.

Rd..

,,r -

x

.h y

_}*,.y

...;w p,. % - (*.

z...,. -

4

i -;
6 y '7%

. E... f a

_.e 4-

[

w s,y,, w%.

m&,_.

G m

tW, L

y" '

_' f, qM

+

,w. y g-

,g.-

~

}

Y*

+ w

.. ~..

S.g

- t}%

j

  1. a,,

}

c D.

.r-g.

v 1

s.

  • +

o

-+

,s.

g.

e-

,. 3 3

fv k *-

1.

. 3,.

(

7.. -

4. --~

q'4, - *:

+

. f. u..

..e g...

,e w'9

s

/-

U,,

,RC_

I

}.

g

,q y

+*

..(

7 y_ y..

g: -+4

,g g,_

e,_

g....

y,

,7 ~ n,.

4;

'y

.. y 3 m q;s 3

m

- s

_ _s-

.z m

-y

- g s

  • s
e

." Q 3

/

~

q:

.;.g 7...

N...

. 5.-.-

-I

. s k

8

~

' +, _. 9

,.y J.

- -. %..e.f

.fs p _

.t, V;.

i, w-

.7 gg' A.

+,

.h ',."

. - +

~

,e

?',1 a

.g.

4~

y.,

v. ;;

.3

' o,.

i

. _} q '[, 6 [ j.

{ L_g

-l [ '4s,;

4y.

,. y..

as,

, c;;

y,

^*

+..x-4

.%,.'d' (' Q.. _

v gi\\

' Qs-,".....'.' --

et

.s g*

W li',.-.,

(

1

f-? l l ' #.'

~

?..( trk ? C.,".

I, ' '* ' "',' i..

b.4 p

p

., * ^

l w

Sg y.w,.: -8 ih:SM, UEP_

~1 p>,

1 f,

t: ' ;s..f-l(

SACRAMENTO. MUNiglPAL

{ (4.ys.4gg~ ;;qg..gg' UTILITY DIST g.y 3

.k >

5

g,[-..

~

g.

k

- ' *.,,... ' _ " ~..... 40 _

-._: - ~. i.%

s.

g

-Q,

I ' '},5,; ^, [7 i 3 -

...( }. -

4-

-[ S; h. _'

QQ$ _,

,' 'h jg $

.kp 4 -

j b-

' a..." c ;;.1.u.a..._a g atauaag m.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20042C130&oldid=4543167"