ML20054C200
| ML20054C200 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 04/14/1982 |
| From: | SOYLAND POWER COOPERATIVE, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054C197 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8204200230 | |
| Download: ML20054C200 (16) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:Power Cooperative. Irte. 1980 Annual Report T' ' E:= PEAKING POWER A REO :. g tw ,_mj, Et'"a", y '. . STATION r~ -nr a .
.. m
,,Qn,ning for Balanced Energy Supply 9 PDR ADOCK 05000
l Service Area , L.-
+u..s.
t . . . - .
\.~.
,.m..
wI5 i... l l 7.r' o .e . Jo -C ...ot t
~L,,,7 % c. v.
J
.oo..... ,.
; /, .,_-
,g,g w ___
l l
%(r ... . .. w w . u . ,
__4 7.. i p 1
} g. E a c, .-c C o.s..% = ,
L_
- .. ! au.=oi. v .u. , ' **l ,_ .~ L-
,..c Coo.... .w.
l' , . ...%
.E.6.c j u -. . . ~
1UWA { 7....-
. ,-..i
' . ~ - _, -
J.......u l' _ . , I
' ,;. . . co .. . .. .. .
N g.; . . .. .
._"..-j w......
i
. ..u...
,j _M j i
iu.-o.. .c.o.o c m.. . . . . . .- .
. _. 7u - .. r coo,... ,, .. co ..c
..- ,,.c,.., .a..e. u. . -
a co """^
^
co**
.......;.... f. %. ~.. u<
4.- --
~ ~ ' , *~ c oo. . . . . . .
/ o... l _
, ._4 / u l
- co ....,... l e u..< co ......
... p . . . ,
p - I J
.L, w.,
-.,Gl . .
.. _ . . ~ ,.u_ f c-1, u . . <
- s. c. 6, . .
u co.sceM,.o.v6,. e .
' coa.'.;;...cgu;.<
e, . ,, insconi
~~ c coo *' * ** -
c;;,'.,;.n' __( p.
" = '.
un . . .
..a .< c m.... .
e--- ' Oe Site of Soyland's . . - .
. . c , ..c b, o.. . i. .. . -
-} [ .c,.. %.... c u..<
--c oo ' .'.' *. ' .
Coal.f. ired 450 MW. -- <* a<
. . a ca..u. .'., .
Generating Station . I - +co. '.*. . . . . . J.... 1 i co.e . .u... .< .-_ ,
' r--
p Soyland licadquarters. - j
. pmt,- ,-
Decatur, Ilk.nois wo..y ( f .. co ,, ri c,.v.c co.u....... co ,, . <m- f . c.~. . . .. . {i s u..< too.... .. .. i ..a a6. ,o,,, ,,& , ,
- - c,a..c Coo.. .. .v.
Eo**,-..
. . . f r . c , .e . .. --
c oc. . . . . . . . -. ,~' [-.
.,00,........ u . ..
e , . c . . < c o e. . . . . . .
,.w.., Sov. e. ,
16 t rwo.e 6. t .c t. c coo.. . . e v .
.d. u.' *rf ,,
# i EENTUCKY f .
.'M- I h .. __ . .
l Member Cooperatives Clay Electric Co-operative,Inc. Flora, Illinois llenry I., Gill, Alanager Clinton County Electric Cooperative,Inc. Breese, Illinois Robert it'. Vander Playni, Alanaqct Coles-Moultrie Electric Cooperative . Mattoon, Illinois C. E. l~crquson, Alanager Corn Helt Electric Cooperative,Inc. , Bloomington, Illinois jetfrey D. Reeves, Alanager Eastern Illinois Power Cooperative Pax ton, Illinois Dennis I.. l' at hi< k, Alanaqcr Edgar Electric Co-operative Association Paris, Illinois Alaurit e C. Johnson, Alanaqcr Farmers Mutual Electric Company Genesco, Illinois Ldgar G. Arnn, Alanaqcr Illini Electric Cooperative Champaign, Illinois it' alter R. Smith, Alanaqct % lilinois Valley Electric Cooperative,Inc. Prin( eton, Illinois (homas R. Ah Donald, Alanaqcr McDonough Power Cooperative Mac omb, Illinois Rober' II. Pendell, Alanaqct Monroe County Electric Co-Operative, Inc. Waterloo, Illinois Joseph J. Ivllin. A!Jnager Shelby Electric Cooperative Shelbyville, Illinois it'illiam I . l.cCrone, Alanaqcr Southwestern Electric Cooperative,Inc. Greenville, Illinois Robert II. Nect e, slanaqcr Tri-County Electric Cooperative,Inc. M t. Vernon, Illinois Alh n Snk, Alanaqct Wayne-White Counties Electric Cooperative N l' air firld, Illinois l11ll1.ndit off, Alanager 1
?
l - I L Board of Directors
< U
%m 'y .,
. w :
[ E [ l I L g^ hj c na - ygf
.g+,
I
\
y e{ ca.79 ( ;, f b i , ki pf h NMEUNNM Officers and directors seated from left: Walter R. Smith, Allen Sisk, Dennis L. Tachick, William D. Champion, Royal 11. Newman, general manager; French L. Fraker, attomey; Lyndall Pigg, Rick Moore, Joseph J. Fellin, Byron G. McCoy,llenry L. Gill and William E. LeCrone. Standing from left: Maurice C. Johnson, Preston A. Mos-bacher, Robert E. Pendell, William L. Stanford, Bill Endicott, Jack A. Compton (retired), L. Eugene Boldt, Jeffrey D. Reeves, D. E. llanes, Thomas R. Mcdonald, James F. Beatty, John Reed, Jack D. Ludwig, Eugene Dressler, Inin W. Wessel, Edgar G. Arnn, Paul Mallinson and Robert W. Vander Pluym. C. E. Ferguson, Donald F. Sanders and Robert 11. Necce are not pictured. 2 mm 2 -
President Walter R. Smith 121 I W. Ilealy Champaign, Illinois 61820 Vic e President Sec retary-Treasurer Assistant Secretary Allen Sisk Dennis L. Tachick William D. Champion P.O. Drawer 309 i Meiidian Terrace RI D 1, Box 66 Mt. Vernon, Illinois 62864 Paxton, Illinois 60957 Gays, Illinois 61928 1 dgar G. Arnn Maurice C. Johnson Robert II. Necce 314 Last Palace Row 519 Last Wood Street P.O. Box 409 Genesco, Illinois 61251 Paris, Illinois 61914 Greenville, Illinois 62246 l James F. Beatty William L. LeCrone Robert L. Pendell RFD 1, Box 120 1509 West North First Street 161 Doe Run Philo, Illinois 61864 Shelbyville, Illinois 62565 Macomb, Illinois 61455
- L. Eugene Boldt Jack Ludwig Lyndall Pigg l
Stewardson, Illinois 62463 RI D 1 RFD1 I ithian, Illinois 61844 Bushnell, Illinois 61422 , Lugene Dressler l RI~D 1 Paul Mallinson John Reed l Li Paso, Illinois 61738 RI D 2 RfD 1 Geneseo, Illinois 61254 Cambridge, Illinois 61238 Bill Lndimtt 32 Park Lane Buon G. McCoy jef f Reeses I air field 62837 RI D 3 120 Cheltenham Paris, Illinois 61944 Normal, Illinois 61761 Joseph J. I ellin 42-1 Sunset Lane Thomas R. Mcdonald Donald I'. Sanders l Waterloo, Illinois 62298 P.O. Box 70 Rf D 2 l P inceton, Illinois 61356 Ramsey, til;nois 62080 C. I . I ciguson 1400 Annis Rick Moore William L. Stanford Mattoon, Illinois 61938 RI D 1 RI D i i air field, Illinois 62837 Flora, Illinois 62839 llenry L. Gill P.O. Box 517 Preston A. Mosbacher Robert W. Vander Pluym flora, Illinois 628 M RI D I 915 North Main Street Prairie du Rocher, Illinois 62277 Breese, Illinois 62230 D. L. Ilanes RI D 6 Irvin W. Wessel Mt. Vernon, Illinois 62864 Rf D 4 Centralia, Ilknois 62801 3 (-
9 President's Report WMter R. Smit lL Since Soyland's 1980 Annual Meeting on August pressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) plant to meet 25, many significant events have been made to Soyland's peaking and reserve requirements and happen to keep the projects on schedule. Each, and authoriicd Royal Newman to negotiate terms with all, of these events have required thousands of man- various contractors and vendors to obtain proposals hours of Soyland's staff personnel, and Soyland's and with Reynolds, Smith & llills for environmental, consultants, in planning and design and in hard economic feasibility and site studies. negotiations for land, fuel supply, major plant hard- The prices initially proposed by the equipment ware items, etc., for the coal fired facility, together vendors and contractors, including the cavern maker, with coordination with Illinois Power Company and were so high as to render the CAES project not WIPCO in expediting the Clinton Nuclear Plant feasible in relation to Soyland's other alternatives for construction and its licensing procedures. Due to its peaking and reserve needs. Ilowever, Royal New-design changes required by new regulations, many of man and Richard Rurich, through long and difficult which resulted from NRC re-evaluations subsequent negotiations, have been successful in reducing the to the Three-Mile Island incident, the completion proposed costs many millions of dollars tolevels that date for fuel loading at the Clinton reactor has been appear to render CAES the best choice for Soyland. rescheduled from April 1982 to January 1983. Of Royal was also successful in getting for Soyland an course, this eight-month delay increases the expense exemption from the Federal fuel Use Act, which was of interest during construction as well as escalation in granted on April 22,1981. With this major hurdic conwuction costs due to inflation and high cost crossed, Environment Science & Engineering was replacement power. awarded a contract by Battelle Labs (through a grant As previously reported, Prairie Alliance has from DOE) for technology and site selection study petitioned to intervene in the licensing procedure by for Soyland's CAES plant, it is gratifying to report NRC for an oparating license for the Clinton Station. that all systems are "go" for the CAES project, which NRC has accepted 12 of Prairie Alliance's 19 conten- has many pluses for Soyland. This will be the first tions and has allowed it to intervene, which means a such facility installed in the United States, although full-blown public hearing. We all hope the hearing will other utilities in the U.S. are working hard to utilire be scheduled soon, and can be expedited sufficiently the same concept. to prevent any further delays in obtaining an operat- During the fall of 1980 it became apparent that ing license prior to the scheduled fuel loading date of the Soyland Board of Directors could function more January 1,1983. It is the responsibility of all of us to effectively if the standing committees (Technical, do all within our power to expedite the licensing Finance, and Executive) were expanded so that each process. Pririe Alliance does not have to answer to Board member would be directly involved in the the end-use consumer for the increased costs caused detailed studies and discussions in which recom-by delays; we do have to be responsible for the end mendations to the Board are developed. The Board of result. So, let us all remain alert, and exert our best Directors authorized these enlargements at its efforts to expediting the political processes necessary November 3,1980, meeting. The committees were to accomplish Soyland's goals as an all-requirements thus expanded and have worked well in that regard, supplier of the bulk-power needs of its member- The Board also authorized an oversight committee, cooperatives. T hose requirements are destined to consisting of two members from each of the standing , grow as petroleum-based energy supplies become committees with no member-cooperative represented more scarce and higher priced. by more than one director. The Board chairman is an in behalf of Soyland's Board of Directors, I am ex-officio member of each of the committees. This proud to report that all events for the 450-MW coal- method of developing policy for Soyland appears to fired plant are on schedule and under budget. At the be working well and provides the guidance and Nosember 3,1980, meeting of the Board,it declared support to the staf f that it needs to accomplish the its commitment in principle to the concept of a Com- many-faceted aspects of all the events necessary to 4
accomplish Soyland's goals and objectives. American citizens. During the February 9,1981, Board meeting, the Soyland submitted its draft Environmental Pike County site was selected as the preferred site for Analysis Report to REA on June 4,1981, for the Soyland's coal-fired power plant. The leadership of coal-fired plant. From this, REA will develop the Pike County, and all its citizens, together with Con- Environmental Impact Statement which REA is gressman Paul Findley were very helpful and support- required to do before approving the loan guarantec. ive in this site selection. If the site studies for the Much has been done; much is yet to do. As pre-CAES facility should recommend the same site, this viously stated, Soyland is on schedule and undcr-would enable Soyland to utilize the waste heat from budget and all facets are falling into place through the the CAES unit to either preheat the boiler feed water dedicated efforts of a very competent staff and a or to heat the air for boiler combustion. Also, the Board of Directors which recognizes the future timestone mined to create the compressed air cavern significance of its present actions. , could be utilized in the stack-gas scrubber, thus r reducing the cost of that necessary ingredient in the Respectfully, > 5 scrubbing process. Walter R. Smith After many months of hard negotiations by the staf f, with the aid and counsel of the standing com-mittees, several important contracts were authorized i and signed at the April 3,1981, Board meeting, to , s wit:
" de \k
~
- 1. ~1 hirty-year fuel supply with Peabody Coal /
Company and Mid-America Transportation Company. T [ ',
- 2. Turbine-generator contract with Brown Boveri f s Corporation. j i j
- 3. Steam generator (boiler and its associated l .. .
support facilities) with Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation. I
-)
- 4. Authorized Environmental Science and 17 y Engineering, Inc. to proceed with the Trans- f* W q%
mission Line Siting 'Mudy. 7 ! During this came Board meeting, it was determined , M yf that quarterly meetings of the Board of Directors was $' 4 s / too intrequent, in view of the high volume of impor- % '# r), tant events under constant consideration and the significance of timely decisions. ~Ihereupon, the (g j [
,g ]
Iloard resolved to meeting the second Wednesday in , &' d M'*- ; even-numbered months, beginning June 10,1981. It M [ ., ((([L is believed that this will result in a more secure future g/ j .., j OJ 7 [ J y.%' , for Soyland, especially during this period of putting /
;qp M' , '-
together all the many required facets of a project of i ' ,p;. 9e , J
;, ' A this magnitude. ; v. y~ I ., +
-;c. y' y . .j i rom time to time, it has appeared that some 01 V 1 ,-s, p~ .
-i the directors of Soyland's member-cooperatives do fs '
- . :.;#M -
4 s not fully realize the magnitude of the projects neces- ,[, , ,c ,g sary lot Soyland to attain its corporate goals. Many W
,{
.n.;.4f Q wJ ga#p q millions of dollars are being invested now by Soyland X . s. i , Q, 4. %
- in its obligation to assure adequate future power j ' [[;"*
supply, under its own control, with full knowledge 6"
.. K
+
. ,. P that the end-use consumer of each and all of its y'
f^ /l;9.Y 4 p_yy _ . g f.
+
members will ultimately benefit by it. In addi- b [m s ,y h f' M4.m@Nv,; .@ l~ tion, all of society will benefit by Soyland's fortitude gf ridgN %; i M ' anJ innos ations through many generations of lidg$$MUG '7j j .,' rg,; 5
1 Manager's Report .[ Royal B. Newmaq . It is with great pleasure that I am able to report that the actual cost instead of a " market price" rcopener pre-Soyland has taken significant steps forward during the past ferred by many coal companies. Our contract ensures ~ year in the planning of a balanced energy supply for our that an existing coal mine would continue to produce member distribution cooperatives. Great strides have been southern Illinois coal, and allows Soyland to design and 4' taken in our coal-fired project, in the Clinton Nuclear Sta- build a power plant that can rely on a dependable and - tion construction, and in the Compressed Air Energy proven coal reserve. ,, Storage project. I would briefly like to emphasi/e the major Many factors were involved in the decision to choose points of each to show how Soyland has planned to ensure Pike County as the preferred location for the 1987 coal- , successful projects while supplying our members with fired plant. One of the most obvious advantages was that ., reliable, economical energy in the years to come. We have Soyland had much more success in optioning Pike County ; unique aspects to the projects and have achieved remark- site property than land at the other two sites,as well as the -
~
able progress with our small staff. fact that Soyland could option this land at over a million .E With Soyland having successfully negotiated two of the dollars less than the second cheapest site. Another major three major packages that f orm the power block of its coal- factor in the decision was that with the Pike site it would , [ , fired plant, the turbine-generator and the boiler package, be casier to obtain the necessary permits in less time than ' ' work is underway on the third. This package, consisting of with either of tne alternates, which means lower costs. T his electrostatic precipitator and flue gas scrubber, will be one item was criticalin keeping this project on schedule. . of the first high sulfur scrubbers to operate under current Unanimous public support from Pike County residents is environmental rules. We are confident that our success in an intangible benefit to this project's success. The wide-reaching this point will continue. spread willingness of residents to pledge their help in :
~
- I The Soyland coal-fired generating facility will be the making this project a reality should not be underestimated, 4 first in the U.S. to be highly automated. Over the years,it since public pressure can influence regulatory agencies. In l (
has been my opinion that operator error has played a major fact, after the Pike County Public Scoping Meeting in role in system outages. Today it is a well-documented fact October 1980, several REA of ficials told me that Soyland __ that operator error is responsible for at least 20% of all was in an enviable position because of kical support. system outages. Soyland has taken a major step forward in As an example of the quality work Soyland and its con- . addressing this problem that until now has had an clusive sultants are doing, Soyland's Site Selection Study, com- , solution. T he automation system to be implemented will pleted in early 1980 by Environmental Science and automatically start up, supervise, and shut down plant Engineering, Inc., is being used by the REA as a model . g . equipment, greatly reducing operator error. The system study. Another Soyland document, the 600-page Draft will also incorporate 100% operator manual control with an Environmental Analysis Report, was submitted to RE A in .c override. Gibbs & liill, Inc. has completed both a com. May 1981. < mercial and technical evaluation and recommends that Soyland has made major strides toward a primary goal of Soyland purchase the Binary Control and Automation securing reliable supplies of self-owned generating capacity . System as furnished by Brown Boveri Corporation. The for the 15 member-cooperatives. Besides the projected 500 - Board of Directors, myself, and the entire staff hope that MW (gross) baseload coal-fired generating plant, Soyland [v all member-cooperatives join in our enthusiasm in accom. owns 10.5% of the Clinton Nuclear Power Station and is hy . plishing this milestone in the power industry. investigating the feasibility of constructing a 220AlW Soyland signed a 30. year coal supply agreement with (gross) Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) system. - Peabody Coal Company on April 3,1981. T his agreement You ask, "Why energy storage?" Today, sharply rising has several advantages to Soyland. lt utilius lilinois coal on prices and threatened shortages are associated with natural an F.O.B.-delisered basis and hicks Peabody into a reason- gas and petroleum consumption in the United States. These able long-term price for its coal. This reasonable price is pressures are expected to grow more severe in future years ,, 7 as world demand for petroleum products increases. The tied to governmen t indices for escalation and then is ~ reviewed every two years and compared to Peabody's actual solution to this energy problem is to not only establish . : costs. This assures Soyland that no " windfall profits" will alternate sources of primary energy but also to develop
~
be made by the supplier, it also locks in our coal price to ways of utilizing these supplies ef ficiently, conveniently, . 6 f' . - . ?- '.
and economically as petroleum-based systems. Energy research; Battelle is also funding a site study again using storage can be a major factor in meeting that two-pronged Soyland as the prime example, challenge. With the support of Soyland's professional staff and The development of new energy storage concepts for use consultants, I am convinced that the Compressed Air by electric utilitics could save a total of more than a million Energy Storage System will surpass all other conventional barrels of oil per day. Soyland and other electric utilitics systems for meeting our members' peak-load requirements. are confronted with the problem of meeting fluctuating With the ever-increasing rates of purchasing whoicsaic l demands for power at the lowest possible cost. By using power and the uncertainty as to the availability of an ade-energy storage, it is possible to store the output of base- quate and reliable power source for our member-cooper- ! load plants during periods of low demand for use during atives, Soyland's Board of Directors decided in 1977 to periods of high demand, proceed with plans for an all-requirement generation Studies have shown that the CAES concept is technically program. The merits of this decision will become even more feasible and economically desirabic. CAES plants offer apparent as investor owned utilities are allowed to increase several advantages over conventional systems used for the rate of return on wholesale power rates that they are meeting peak-load requirements: energy storage offers a going to charge their wholesale power customers. Reliable degree of ficxibility and control in system operation (e.g., sources of v.holesale power will become scarce since frequency stabilization);it can be considered as a spinning investor-owned utilities will be less willing to supply the reserve and it can be started rapidly, thus being available as demand that cooperatives will be placing on their genera-supplemental generation in an emergency; ard most tion capacity. Many utilities across the country have can-importantly, it is economically desirable since it uses celled or rescheduled plans for future generating units modified combustion-turbine technology to produce elec- recently in lieu of decreased demand,excalating equipment tricity from about one-third the fuel required by conven- prices, and the inability of certain investor-owned utilities tional combustion-turbine systems. to finance such projects through the sale of common stocks Soyland is unique in the sense that we are the only or market bonds. utility to be awarded a permanent fuel mixtures exemption Undoubtedly, electric rates as well as other energy from the Power Plant and Industrial I uci Use Act by the sources will continue to rise in the years ahead. Reynolds, Economic Regulatory Administration (ERA) of the Depart- Smith and !! ills recently completed a Power Supply Study ment of Energy for a CAES facility. Soyland was granted for Soyland which showed that Soyland could generate its this exemption following a rigorous review by the ERA due own power at a 25% lower rate than we would expect to to the innovatise nature of this technology. purchase it from our investor-cwned utilitics suppliers. Also of tremendous benefit to Soyland is a grant that This fact also shows that there is no doubt to the long-Battelle received from the U.S. Department of Energy to term benefit to the consumers of our member-cooperatives perform a broad range technology assessment on Com- that our Board of Directors made the right choice to pressed Air Energy Storage Systems in the United States. provide a reli.rble and economically feasible power supply Soyland's CAES was selected as the model system for for their future needs.
-m; ; 3pg m -. , ,yy - m,g , , ;r yp,p w+y$,mnh, l ,
- :, 2
- s. < .
d ( W i yy(}m}{- r[[ l l . ,
}
m ;n J n .w gs} 1 .e - 9 y n ,
" ~
d;<, , < }I , 7 4
} ,
"{ >/}
l 1 v - A. W s J ,
%w i. )
%, W'&g (j o
%y x0 C+m Caj ,,
.m
, ,, et L ,
Q (y 1l ,( .v wt Py n j;;,;- ,iT My{}; 3 ,
- 7. } ;
d "N [I ["f / [ E h* kj '
.('
3 g 2 j'
,f-f i
*.b d R h;}
.: y . ,-h}& s V;< a 1, 33,
- r d',':jq.
.. Y't m.b
. >s D. xi M9 .
, d '*i -d1 3, ' ! e .!s
$51#
I j h
,~ ._~. $
pr . g
,w '(w;jk a 7 ik d[ g h) x t*t -u wy N.x i
- n:n::s / :
} l 3
~
;S.' ,N. #
. q
..u
~ y'\ . ai m u., n _ 5.0 q m:: -
?.: :- 7_'
_ g ; : & :;:lR $$f s ! : '!k? (*
, :t a f'- hA gg. dbet R., Q i
7
l , Balance Sheet AS OF DECEMBER 31,1980 ASSETS UTILITY PLANT Construction work in progress . $ 137,478,134.89 General plant . .... $ 46,285.30 Less - Accumulated depreciation. _ .1 ],97A AS 34,310.82 INVESTMENT Investment in associated organization . 1,000.00 CURRENT ASSETS Cash - general .... . $ 18,974.47 Cash - construction funds - trustec. 20,000.00 Temporary cash investments - U.S. Treasury Notes . 435,174.98 Prepayments. _ 3,594_.26 477,743.71_ Total Assets . $ 137,991,189.42 LIABILITIES AND EQUITIES EQUITIES Membership fees . .. $ 1,500.00 LONG-TERM DEBT Mortgage notes payable IT B 132,290,000.00 CURRENT LI ABILITIES Notes payable --- CFC. $4,114,594.64 Note payable . 4,815.92 Acmxmts payable . 310,767.44 Advances for Associated Cooperatives. 1,084,170.00 Accrued payroll and payroll taxes. 9,368.44 Accrued interest . 175,848.84 Accrued expenses . 124.14 _ 5,699,689.42 Total Liabilities and Equities. $ 137,991,189.42 lhe accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. Statement of Operations FOR T!!E PERIOD FROil JUNE 1,1%3,10 DECEMBER 31,1980 REVLNUE Proceeds f rom assessments to Member Cooperatisc $ 32,583.83 OPERAlING EXPLNSES Directors' fees. $ 1,065.00 Ducs and subsuiptions. 4,200.00 Legal services . . 749.61 Of tite supplies and expense. 658.51 Power supply studies . ._2_6,168.21 Total Ooerating Expenses _32,841_33 NI.T LOSS I RON1 OPl. RATIONS ($ 257.50) N ON-OPL R AllN G INCO\1L Interest income. 257.50 NET INCO\;E Note: 1 he Cooperatise is capitalizing all expenditures during this desclopment and construction stage. The accompan)ing Notes to financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. 8 L _ . . . _ . _ . - - -
g er P Statement of Changes in Financial Position FOR Tile YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,1980 AND FOR Tile PERIOD FROM JUNE 1,1%3, TO DECEMBER 31,1980 June 1,1963 Year Ended to December 31,1980 December 31,1980 FUNDS PROVIDED Depreciation provision . . . $ 4,992.19 $ 11,974.48 Loan advance f rom CFC. . . 64,504,883.38 Loan advance from FFB. 35,746,000.00 132,290,000.00 Memberships . . . .. . 1,500.00 Decrease in deferred debits . . 94,002.22 Decrease in woiking capital . 5 368.424.12 5,221,945.71 T41,,213,418.53 1202,030,303.57-FUNDS APPLIED Plan t construction . $41,200,290.88 $ 137,473,134.89 General plant . . ...... . 13,127.65 46,285.30 Principal payments on CFC debt ~ 64,504,883.38 investment in associated organization . 1,000.00 T4r2TX4Tr53- ~$1202,030,303.57-CllANGES IN WORKING CAPITAL Current Assets Cash - general ..... ($ 3,707.76) $ 18,974.47 Cash - construction funds - trustees . ( 40,186.00) 20,000.00 Temporary cash investments - U.S. Treasury Notes . . . . ( 1,067,342.50) 435,174.98 Accounts receivable - other . ( 1,038.11) Prepayments. 918.38 _ 3,594.26 ($ 1.111,355.99[ _J__ 477,743.71 Current Liabilities Notes payable - CFC. $ 3,415,815.71 $ 4,114,594.64 Note payable . . . 4,815.92 4,815.92 Accounts payable . . . . 108,366.58 310,767.44 Advance from Assotiated Cooperatives . 554,918.00 1,084,170.00 Accrued payroll and payroll taxes. 5,024.16 9,368.44 Accrued interest . . 168,003.62 175,848.84 Accrued expenses . 124.14 124.14
$ 4.257,068.13 j_5,6_99,689.42 (Decrease) in Working Capital . .
($ 5.368 424.121 ($ 5,221,945.7_l)_ T he accompanying Ne'es to Financial Statements are an integral part of this st,tement. NOTis lo flNAN(I At. %T A TE ME Nt% Di t i M BI N 11.1 Wlo 1 %t'MM All V UI A(( OI NilNf. Pull (It % l he i ooi),r.itte m.eni. ens et. .st ounima ret us ds m .uord.rh e wish ihe Unaf urm s ystem o' Au.ount. prescribed by the H out I let iriN. tion Admmeste.sion. As . sciuit the .pcht. tion of ge ner.it, .uerted .s toonting prins.iple, b, the i oop,e.tave diff en m s eri.m respet'.f rom t-e .opies.uon of nonvegul.ted enterpriws .nd . iso differ, due to beeg . dewhipment si.ge er.teverne t he more signifi .ni puh es of the tesuper.iive .re deg6rebed beios. Pr ogwe, .ad Pt.nt T he ( oopea 4i+we b., eroe re d miu . pus h.se .4reemeat .ph Ithem. Pueer i omp.ny for ihe purs t aw of 10.5 % of th e ( heion N our.r Po.es h.<it f or . s me estsen.et J .I $ I F 1,ifoojksu Tha pi.nt is currenri, usider tur.Situtison .nd the ( tse ag..#.f 4 We h .%5 sntral.wie d $ lil6 $ ?o, .'f= 4 iO lihn an Po.ef C omD.rly for et5 Io.3 % Of the f ot%ffusisoft utgl thf ough ligg emittf 3 I, j 'f R J l he i. ooper.itwe ,g g gpst agg s.ng 3Il gn {tendeiure. during ths. deteropmeng god tottgirg6(,on gtgge, 2 1IN. It R M D? Ili f f it i h, e edeus e onmm ,ed itsei, io . io.n .,. ene .mouni a s menaoo io so,i.nd Po.e, OLNNETT&
< ey.e..use. c i.,w <. .. . n.n. o e a > e .s u.m ma, d b, she a u,.i i iesi,,,,,.non h ..h so n o,.n, nu. .ni Adm.nni,.i.on (ii i A i tot she pu, h e a ww a i h,, ion w, ., P o... h.ni v .ng re u.r eni ve.r. .d. ...o ni or s i t '4h.ooo t he .,iie,e i .. , so, e h .+.,ue esi.io,,ne d .ne. on in ,noie h.
e.een reme.ved m e, Mi W W D W F U D. e i che i,me o su h .d..nce .no ..,,e d h'* s T hew Certilied Publit Accountants a m..eio. it e. e.. 7 i4.*s.,ue, aese m ihe .d.neinih.i m .iu.e 14 hm,,om.e.n
, e .n rea,,,d. .e end a meh. .h,e.,.d..nte. .re w,ueed u h me .6,na. b, .ri
.,e m de. ihe ser. os the ( cop.
mean in .erv.a the & be ..ehm it., re.i i.re.e mone. .in .an,es.ie .rp o. m.ies, s i s poi.o # 2. .n of .his ..n w.e.e,i, ,,, P.O. Box 807
.eci, i.. mimii Quinty,lilinois 02301 9
Power Progress During the past year, considerable progress has been power system was the Power Plant and Industrial Fuel Use made on design engineering for Soyland's coal-fired generat- Act of 1978, which prohibited the use of petroleum or ing facility. With the determination by the Soyland Board natural gas in new power plants. Soyland overcame this of Directors in February 1981 to locate the coal-fired plant obstacle by receiving a Permanent fuel Use Mixtures at Pike County, site-related design was begun. In mid- Exemption from the provisions of this law from the March, an aerial survey was taken of the site. This survey Economic Regulatory Administration (ERA) within the al lowed Gibbs and Hill to prepare detailed topographic Department of Energy. Soyland initiated work on receiv-maps of the area which are essential to planning construc- ing this exemption, since it would have been futile to do all tion activities. Additionally, a detailed plot plan was pre- other preliminary design, environmental and economic pared, which shows how the plant facilities will be laid out research if the fuel-use exemption could not be obtained, on the Pike County property. In early July, bids were Other tasks that Soyland will have to undertake prior to received for investigation of subsurface conditions at the initiating construction of this project include submission of site. These soil borings will serve as the basis for founda- a Site Selection Study and Environmental Analysis Report tion design for all plant equipment, to the Rural Electrification Administration. Soyland will in addition to this site work, progress continues on also obtain all necessary licenses and permits for construc-equipment selection for the plant. On April 3, a contract tion and operation of this facility, and will negotiate con-was signed for purchase of the turbine-generator with tracts with equipment suppliers, plant contractors, and Brown Boveri. The boiler contract with Foster Wheeler cavern excavators. Energy Corporation was also signed on April 3. Preliminary Soyland has undertaken a Site Selection Study with specifications for the precipitator and 502 removal system the assistance of Environmental Science and Engineering, were received from Gibbs and Hill on July 22. After REA who also completed the Site Selection Study for the coal-review and Soyland staf f comments, these will be issued for fired power plant. ESE will also be responsible for all bid in September 1981. Soyland is also issuing several licensing activities that are necessary to obtain construction smaller specifications during this time. These include the and operational permitting prior to construction of a Com-condensate polisher, deaerator, and numerous electrical pressed Air Energy Storage facility. ESE will consult with components, the regulatory agencies involved to review existing data, Drawing work is also progressing. Preliminary general develop a plan of study, identify favorable locations for this arrangement drawings are being prepared for Soyland's facility, gather necessary baseline environmental data, write review. These drawings, along with the project design the environmental analysis report, and prepare permitting manual, will serve as the basis for continued detail design. forms for submittal to the regulatory agencies involved. The During April, the Soyland staf f met with RE A and Gibbs entire environmental process for this CAES system should and Ilill to review the design manual and drawings. This take approximately 24 to 39 months for comp!ction review is important for RE A support of our project. depending upon the location of the facility. Battelle Pacific All of this work requires manpower. During the past Northwest Laboratories granted $149,000 to Soyland to do year, Gibbs and !!ill has increased its work force in Dallas the preliminary site study and technology assessment for from 15 to 37 full-time personnel. this CAES system. The award of this grant to Soyland shows Battelle's interest and confidence in this project. Compressed Air Energy Storage System Throughout the previous year Soyland has been discuss-Soyland has been investigating the feasibility of using a ing the Compressed Air Energy Storage project with various Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) system to provide plant equipment suppliers, cavern excavators, and plant an economical supply of peaking power for Soyland's construction contractors. Soyland has reviewed budget member-cooperatives. Some of the advantages of using this estimates and draft contracts to ensure tnat bids on these CAI S system are that it will provide peaking power from contracts are in Soyland's best interests. Also included in baseload power, it reduces the amount of petroleum fuel these meetings with Soyland were civil and structural con-needed for a consentional peaking unit, and it reduces tractors discussing the construction of all buildings required maintenance costs on baseload units by allowing them to for this project; several cavern excavating contractors, who operate more efficiently at a constant, steady rate. would be responsible for the below ground construction; Several key tasks needed to be done by Soyland in order Gibbs & Ilill, who would be responsible for design of this to initiate a Compressed Air Energy Storage system project. facility; and Environmental Science and Engineering, who One of the major obstacles to builJing such a peaking is responsible for siting and licensing this facility. 10
c -
. . , . by RS&H, ESE, and Plantec with the objective of identify- 4
#.$Df" " ~
,1*
A ing three environmentally acceptable sites that would be favorable to the location of this facility. This study was
- culminated with the selection of the three approximately
< "v.~ %/
%.4 -
; 1,000-acre sites in the Illinois counties of Pike, Randolph, and Wabash. This was achieved by detailed, objective and
.n "g -
a systematic environmen tal, economic, and engineering [ ' { analyses. Soyland, RS&Il, ESE, and Plantec finished the
#[[
Site Selection Study early in 1980 and submitted the document to the Rural Electrification Administration for i their review. Each of these three sites has undergone further evalua-R*U - tion during the past year to analyze the baseline data from
~ '
the areas of aquatic and terresterial ecology, air and water
- ,N j quality analysis, geotechnical considerations, archeology ,.
investigations and socioeConomics impact analysis. This iNr HAHo HOCK C AVI HNS t NsAM D \ information was used in dCvelopmCnt of the Environmental
~_
Analysis Report that was submitted to the Rural Electri-fication Administration, and also for developing the per-mitting documents that will be submitted in the autumn ' Compressed Air Energy Storage offers a peaking power sys. of 1981 to the various regulatory agencies involved in the tem that is more economical than conventional peaking permitting process. units. On February 9,1981, Soyland's Board of Directors chose Pike County as the preferred location for the 1987 coal-fired plant. At this time, the Pike County site appears to be very favorable for the location of the coal. fired plant. The final determination will not be made, however, until Soyland is very optimistic about the outcome of this the final Environmental Impact Statement is approved by project as are many interested parties who have shown their the Rural Electrification Administration, and other agencies support through funding, volunteering engineering services, involved have granted approval to the permits required for and expressing their desires to speed up all required construction and operation of this facility. Ilowever, if a processes necessary for turning this project into a reality. problem would arise with the licensing and permitting of Soyland received the exemption from the fuel Use Act, the Pike County site, one of the alternate sites in Randolph which was a large obstacle that had to be overcome. Other or Wabash County could be used, since similar environ-obstacles, such as permitting and securing REA approval of mental and socioeconomic data have been collected at all the EIS, lie ahead; however, Soyland feels that it has the sites. optimal conditions necessary to perform all environmental, engineering and economic analyses required for the project. Site Acquisition LEMCO Engineers, Inc., of St. Louis, Mo., has been Site Selection and involved since February 7,1980, in an intensive ef fort to Environmental Analysis and Licensing acquire the land Soyland needs for the new generating On December 28, 1978, Reynolds, Smith and llills station. LEMCO was originally involved when Soyland had (RS&ll) and its two subsidiaries, Environmental Science three potential plant sites and researched land titles on and Engineering (ESE) and Plantec Corporation, wcre more than 60 parcels and descriptions on over 5,000 acres retabled by Soyland Power Cooperative to conduct the Site of land. Beginning in April 1980, LEMCO was able to Selection Study, Fuel S tudy, and an Environmental obtain option to purchase real estate agreements with Analysis and Licensing Study required before approval various landowners at the three sites. These options to could he granted by the regulatory agencies for the con- purchase agreements are good for two years, which means struction of the 1987 coal-fired electric generating station. Soyland will have to exercise these options between April lhe Site Selection Study was initiated in January 1979 and October of 1982. 11
-__ O
Now that Soyland's site selection process has identified generator delivered by Sept.1,1985. In the negotiations three sites and the Board of Directors has selected Pike for this contract, Soyland and Brown Boveri Corporation County as the preferred site for Soyland's coal. fired power arrived at a firm price not subject to escalation. This l plant (at the I ebruary 9,1981, board meeting), LEMCO is benefits Soyland considerably because, rather than estimat-concentrating on acquiring the final land parcels needed. ing what future escalations may be and applying that to the The original plant site called for 1,217 acres of land, base price, Soyland knows what it will pay for the unit. The although since that time revised estimates have indicated unsuccessful bidders on this contract were General Elec-that less land will be needed. tric, Utility Power Corporation, and Westinghouse Liectric Corporation. F uel Study The other major equipment purchase by Soyland was the connact for the steam generator with l~oster Wheeler Soyland signed a coal contract with Peabody Coal Com-Energy Corporation. This contract package involved a pany on April 3,1981, f or 1,200,000 tons of lilinois furn an act o&dng, induWng bok strudural sM number six seam coal per year for 30 years. The coal is and all auxiliary equipment required. The amount of this scheduled to come from the River King Underground No.1 package was approximately $52 million, subject to escala-Mine, located in southern Illinois near the Kaskaskia River tion. The other bidders were Babcock and Wilcox, Combus-m St. Cla.ir County. The s.igning of th.is coal contract ended t,on i Engineering, and Riley Stoker Corporation. a year and a half scarch for the qualified vendor. Initial contacts were made on November 7,1979, to more than 29 Clinton Nuclear Unit al coal companies. This list was evaluated down to six maior . . .. At ter last year's impressive civil / structural progress, companies and then, based on the price and quality, was work th.is year has been less v.isually dramatic but continues reduced to two companies for the final site. Peabody was . chosen because of its low evaluated price and extensive to pmm H.u mmMnh of p c. .d wod .is largdy interior shielding walls and finishmg floors. Outside, work mining reserves and experience.
~1 he coal contract with Peabody is an i OB-delivered con-rebar was completed April 24,1981,igni s."N"f.
icantly "ahead
. " of tract to our plant site near i.lorence, Ill. As a result, Pea-schedule. At that time the forming of the dome concrete bod y ,s subsidiary, Mid-America l~ranspor ta tion, Inc.,
pours began and placement operations are presently under-will deliver the coal by barge from the Riser King Mine way. At this rate of placement, dome concrete was to our plant. Soyland holds an option to supply its own
. . estimated to be complete by mid- to late July 1981.
harging equipment if it is determined to be more I:mphasis this year has been on electrical and control economical. work. The on-site electrical work force has increased from 588 men in July 1980 to 1,040 men as of the end of June Major Equipment Purchases 1981. F ur ther, turbine-generator assembly continues Soyland has signed two major contracts for the equip- essentially on schedule. ment acquisition on the 1987 coal-fired generating plant. An engineering and construction task force has lhe first contract was placed with Brown Boveri Corpora- identified remaining problems and is expediting the resolu-tion for the turbine-generator unit. This contract was a tion of the problems now to minimize any possibility of furnish-only contract and was the first contract document slip in the expected fuel load date of January 1983. The to be prepared by Gibbs & Ilill foi Soyland. The value of unit is S0 percent complete and is scheduled to be in this contract is approximately $38 million for a turbine- commercial operation in September 1983. This April 1981 photo of the Clinton Power Station shows the turbine building and reactor 80 percent completed. ue: mysy ww g yr p Tj g gs g '7 m-y y,-- - myy y,w y; ,4 4 - e.
. . - a .n , u A sam.y.g; w
.. f'y L.sm m* % .~W - . .m.,
y a 4
^
~~ ~ -, s . _ _ _pe, , n 3 JS Yass>I * *@ b- <* fW' ^
M'; S* r'.um*= '4 pj , , - . . t%w. e
,a f-p,._, .. - .. . . - .i
. g ,y z
+ " -
. y
%eg .
, . . , w L g",M_s_ ,r
. %m ~ _Nf,ga,,,/ -
h LE y Q p _ [fYj p[a y-443 W *- 5. = d.* b'ID[*M 4 7
+n g3
. g d c y ( M, lqpwy;.. - . n M
Q ]Q$,j. f. [ % M g 4 [ [N' [ W [ .f sessenessessteessnesses
$Y$$$$Wm
The Staff x ~) .; gr *. ~ x;;ay m- -;3myg.4--
$ f ,fj ..f)1i i pe Tw r x- .j- q .
' e;, [i, */~;+rf 's, . 7, ;" >;-' (tn * .G L nm:.u D ; ~ Q f,
' i
..%,,;m
- c. - . .
,,q:,
. _. , g. .; ,r u ,. , - ,u. n M.
3
* *"~*
. - - ,rg,
+ n >,; ,. ..> .. u.x e.. ;n mm = i. u w ..a nw nx .s O Dn u, J
.h y
. .. 'd'f}.hbId%$P M- j h
Q .
~~ '-
,, )
L:
.uf u j .
- 1. -
3, g
- y' s
s i a ~ ( iht >. l ' ., ' l ., L.
}i \Qef
-29 o , sj
*' ,> ;v d'. 4 [. v ; l. h :',',
from left: Terry llerdman, Petricia Reynolds, Allen Field, Teri Murray, Steven Bell, Betty Gober, Keith Goerss, Kenneth Mcdonald, John Cathn, Cindi Shorti, T homas $cng, Nancy Geist and Brenda Yates. Kneeling, from left, are: Richard Rurich and Royal B. Newman. Kenneth Kammeier is not pictured. r- . - .
...o,..., !
-_7 1
Reval . Newman E e, . e ,e v s. Pess o .it i Fi d be't.f M M @'. P'8 p ;, . .,an--- w .... b.PDFIM M 5'FP'f r- J,. , g-- -- - 1 . . . . . .
..,...s..-.,, s .. .-
l I t__ i u-~or _, r- - - - -- - ' i f r c.:; L R r s.....,. c...sn., s....., 1, m,. . . m.- . . 6___ . . _ __ _ _. 3 iL_._______.___.___ .
' *"*[, 5"' )[ t=s. I si. . a s.n
[ son. n c. 6.
] , -son...n ce
, , _ . , . . _ i , - - - .-
--8 i
L- __s- - - _ _ _ -. _ ~. ~ ~ - r 1r I ARen u f est. 1 i Pet,. css s Reysel.s f ) j AGm+ rte,ff gf y A,dr }
' I 'tuw S**fr5 f M sp. h*M1
___._J
'__...- m._.- . . _ . .. ._ _ . _ . _ _
. ... . v!., ~"
~~ ~
~I.J., E~n . i . c~ E ..'.T.~ ~ o .
- o. .. .
i j c.. .,,,.. : M....- ,,_,m._
. _ _ _ _. , , _ . __.m... _ _ ___ . _ _ _ _ _ _
i Soyland Power Cooperative,Inc.
.O. Box A 1606 Decatur, IL G252S}}