News and Events

Proposed Changes to the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws
February 16, 2012

A comprehensive review of Renville-Sibley’s Articles of Incorporation and By-laws was completed by the National Consulting Group (a subsidiary of the NRECA) during 2010 and 2011. The review found the current articles and by-laws contain standard provisions regarding the members, meetings, Directors, Officers of the Cooperative and the non-profit operation of Renville-Sibley. Many of these provisions were initially drafted at a time when most cooperatives were structured such that the Board has significant responsibilities in day-to-day operations and specific tasks.

As cooperatives have grown, the business model has evolved and the rules of corporate governance have changed. Organizational policies have been the vehicle through which the changes are addressed, thus leaving by-laws fairly untouched.

In today’s environment of heightened scrutiny of governance practices, all elements of corporate governance should reflect current standards and practices. As a result, your Board of Directors and Management Staff is recommending the amendments proposed be considered by the membership for the by-law provisions in order to more accurately reflect current governance standards.

You will be asked to vote “for” or “against” the amendments proposed to the by-laws of the cooperative before or during the 2012 Annual meeting of your Renville-Sibley Cooperative Power Association. This meeting will be held on March 26th, at the Island Ballroom in Bird Island, Minnesota.

The changes to the cooperative by-laws are outlined in red or contain a strike-through. If you have questions or require additional information, please give me a call or contact the office at your convenience. We would appreciate your support to revise the language found in the By-laws to more correctly outline today’s business practices.

The Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws of Renville-Sibley Cooperative

 - Dale Christensen

CEO - Renville-Sibley Cooperative Power Association



December 2011 Managers Message
November 15, 2011

Section 169 of the Clean Air Act was enacted to establish a national visibility protection goal.  The Act calls for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish rules that ensure reasonable progress is made towards meeting this national goal.  It also provides the primary authority to states to implement visibility requirements through state implementation plans.  The EPA’s role is clearly to provide oversight and assume authority if a state’s plan is determined to be inadequate. 

Most recently, EPA announced its intent to exercise this authority in North Dakota.  On September 21st, 2011, EPA published its determination to approve certain parts of North Dakota’s state implementation plan and to override other aspects regarding regional haze regulations for several power plants with respect to nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions. 

This new EPA oversight will apply to several cooperative-owned coal plants located in North Dakota including Basin Electric’s Leland Olds station, Great River Energy’s Coal Creek station and Minnkota’s Milton R. Young station.   These cooperative-owned power plants serve a significant number of Minnesota cooperative members.  This new regulation is not a health-based requirement but a goal to improve visibility in Class I areas such as national parks and wilderness areas.  The intent of the regulation is to return ambient air clarity to “natural background” levels by 2064, an effort that we are told will be an unrecognizable improvement from the clarity experienced today.

The dispute between North Dakota and EPA centers on how the state plans to improve visibility in the Theodore Roosevelt National Park and the Lostwood National Wildlife Refuge.  North Dakota’s plan would require Over-Fire Air (OFA) and Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) technology which has been proven to reduce NOx emissions by 55% to 60%.  EPA’s plan would require utilities to install Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR), a technology that the agency says would reduce about 90% of the NOx emissions.  However, SCR hasn’t been proven to work on cyclone-fired boilers fueled with North Dakota lignite coal.  And, the cost to install SCR is so great that it will have significant adverse economic consequences to consumers in the mid-west that use electricity generated from North Dakota coal.  This will also include, to some lesser degree, all of Renville-Sibley members. 

North Dakota’s Governor Jack Dalrymple said, “Not only is EPA’s proposal the wrong plan for North Dakota, EPA’s proposal charts a path to an unlawful takeover of the state’s regulatory authority.  EPA’s plan would unnecessarily require the installation of technologies that are extremely expensive and not known to be technically feasible.” 

North Dakota’s Senator John Hoeven called on EPA to approve the North Dakota plan, rather than take a “one-size-fits-all” approach.  He also said, “Here in North Dakota, we believe in a commonsense approach, particularly when we’ve invested years and years and the industry has invested hundreds of millions of dollars to meet the current state standard.” 

North Dakota has a strong record in developing, implementing and administering Clean Air Act rules.  They are one of only 12 states that continue to meet all Federal Ambient Air Quality Standards and eight (8) North Dakota counties (including Mercer and Oliver counties who are home to several coal-based power plants) have received ‘A’ grades as recently as 2010 for clean air. 

I would encourage everyone to learn more about EPA’s efforts in regard to Regional Haze and get involved by visiting www.stopEPAND.com. 



November 2011 Manager's Message
October 15, 2011

Consumers across the Midwest are beginning to see the first results of the coming wave of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations, higher costs for electricity generated by the region’s power plants.   

For well over a year, many sources within the utility industry have shouted their concerns about the 1/5th of the United States’ coal-fired generation could become on-economical to operate over the next 4 years due to pending EPA regulations.  This past month brought a new flurry of concerns from both the corporate executives and many state regulatory agencies. 

Minnkota Power Cooperative (a North Dakota Generation and Transmission Cooperative that serves many distribution cooperatives in Northwestern Minnesota) recently spent $425 million complying with EPA directives.  This expenditure has lead to a double-digit rate increase already this year to all cooperative members, with more increases expected to happen in the future.  This event has prompted the North Dakota state agencies to join the fight on the side of the cooperatives.  The North Dakota Department of Health is considering a court challenge if the EPA pushes ahead with requiring additional nitrogen oxide emission cuts under its regional haze program. 

In a complaint common to recent arguments over EPA initiatives, North Dakota officials contend EPA requirements would cost another half billion dollars without yielding better results than less expensive alternatives that are favored by the industry.

Almost simultaneously in Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Public Service Corporation amended its rate request pending before its state regulators, nearly doubling the rate filing amount requested due to the EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule that is projected to be implemented.  WPS nearly doubled it rate increase requested by including installation of additional emission controls, reducing its power plant operations and buying on the wholesale market or buying additional emission allowances. 

A WPS executive said one of those three options would contribute to continuing uncertainty about the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule due to the impact on market prices for electricity. 

In Nebraska, a municipal utility official called the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule “the tip of the iceberg” and warned of more than a dozen EPA initiatives that will continue to drive up costs and close down generation assets from fossil fuel resources.  A Nebraska Public Power District CEO was also quoted as saying, “Looking forward, all you can really see is more costs, more equipment, probably more shutdowns of power plants that will be a huge change in the way we do business.” 

The head of the Texas Public Utility Commission, Donna Nelson, said the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule that is set to go into effect at the beginning of next year, will cause rolling blackouts throughout the Midwest.  She also said with confidence, “I have no doubt in my mind that this rule will result in reliability issues and rolling blackouts in Texas.”  Elsewhere, may be a reality as well.



October Manager's Message
September 15, 2011

For nearly a decade, Renville-Sibley, East River Electric and Basin Electric and other cooperative members throughout the country have been seeking from our elected legislators the development of a clear and concise legislative policy. To date, nothing has happened.

In the meantime, the Environmental Protection Agency has taken aggressive action, proposed sweeping changes to the rules and regulations surrounding emissions from power plant facilities that provide low-cost electricity for Renville-Sibley’s members.  Those changes come with a big price tag, money that will ultimately come from the pockets of all consumers.  The cost is more than monetary; it’s also jobs, energy development and reliability. 

One of the greatest challenges with EPA’s process is its piecemeal approach.  Addressing emissions one at a time prevents utilities from developing an economically viable plan moving forward.  “Instead of looking at long-term planning, EPA’s rules are forcing costly controls on existing facilities when it might make more sense to replace those facilities in 20 to 30 years,” states Lyle Witham, Basin Electric’s Manager of Environmental Services. 

Regulation means more uncertainty for energy development and it puts the country’s future energy supply in question.  With fewer utilities investing in domestic fuels, companies will seek export markets to balance declining domestic sales.  The result will be no measurable decrease in worldwide greenhouse gas emissions as domestic energy development declines. 

The most immediate issue for utilities is EPA’s regulation of greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, using the Clean Air Act.  EPA’s first rulemaking on this issue established the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, which requires utilities and suppliers of fossil fuels and industrial gases to begin data collection in 2010 and report to EPA beginning in 2011. 

Though no emissions standards have been set at this time, Witham says the rulemaking is the first step to further regulation of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.  He says costs for implementing any controls for greenhouse gases vary significantly and will depend on a number of factors. 

There are other proposed emissions rules EPA has put on a fast track that have significant implications for utilities as well.  Each rulemaking is saddled with its own set of challenges, many of which are still unknown. 

Ensuring all generation facilities are in compliance will continue to be a steeper hill to climb, both technically and financially.  Basin Electric has always maintained 100% environmental compliance at all its facilities, a claim that is becoming very challenging to adhere to.  Even without considering recent EPA action, Basin Electric has invested more than $1.4 billion in power plant emissions control technology, and more than $152.5 million will be invested annually to operate and maintain those controls. 

It remains vital that our country’s leaders define a clear and comprehensive climate policy.  Without legislative certainty, the EPA will continue to push for costly regulations that, in the end, will have little measurable impact on humans or the environment, but will most certainly drive up electric rates for Renville-Sibley and its members. 



September Manager's Message
August 8, 2011

Dedicated and caring employees are the most important asset of any successful business, and your Renville-Sibley Cooperative is filled with employees who care about you, the member. 

When the strong tornado-like winds and severe thunderstorms hit the Renville-Sibley system crosswise on the late afternoon of Friday, July 1st, all your employees had just completed a long and hot week of work.  When the storm hit at about 5:00 p.m. that evening, several employees we’re “heading to the lake” or other destinations for a well-earned long weekend get-away with family and friends. 

After learning of the devastation that had occurred in Renville County and surrounding areas and that the majority of the Renville-Sibley’s membership were without electricity, they all came back to help.  Some returned on their own and allowed their families and friends to continue on without them, while others returned with their families and canceled their plans all together. 

Even those who were still at home during the storm came to the aide of the members as quickly as they could.  Most employees suffered their own property losses with damage to their homes, yards and buildings.   Almost every employee had multiple tree branches, limbs and even whole trees to clean up or buildings to repair.   And every employee’s home was without power, just like most of you.  They all placed their own dilemma on hold in order to first respond to the needs of the membership. 

In less than 2 hours, Renville-Sibley was at full strength, all employees were engaged and working hard to restore power to the membership as quickly as possible. For the most part, over the next 72 hours that was accomplished.    With aide from one neighboring cooperative and line personnel from a local line contractor, well over 2,300 man-hours were expended within the three-day 4th of July holiday weekend to restore power to nearly 1,600 Renville-Sibley members. Not a single lineman was injured.  Not even one band aid was required by the now greatly expanded workforce who worked long hours in grueling conditions.  

With nearly 60 linemen working over the holiday weekend on the downed and damaged distribution system as well as the transmission and substation infrastructe, coordination of manpower was critical.  Office personnel and your staff also worked long, stressful hours. Organization was critical to make sure the sites worked on first would be those areas that would restore power to as many members as possible. And, that this restoration effort continued to be a safe one, one that could be accomplished without any lost-time accidents to line personnel, injury to the general public or to cause further damage to the power delivery system.

Your employees are an amazing group of people who not only practice but truly live the rural cooperative culture.  They are all unselfish and caring individuals that work hard to make sure your environment remains comfortable and that all the electrical equipment and conveniences you have are available for you to use when you need them.  They work hard every day to maintain the distribution system in a fashion that minimizes the impacts severe storms like this can have on the reliability we all have grown to expect. 

If you get a chance, thank your employees for again, going well beyond the call of duty for the membership.



August Manager's Message
July 17, 2011

On May 2-4, 2011, two of Renville-Sibley’s management staff, one Renville-Sibley director and the Cooperative attorney attended the NRECA Washington, D.C. Rally where we met with the Minnesota delegation to voice our concerns or support of proposed legislation. Renville-Sibley’s First District Director David Tomes, Energy Services Manager Brian Jeremiason, Cooperative Attorney Charles Hunt and I spent three days in Washington D.C. talking to our elected officials about issues related to providing affordable and reliable electricity to each of our members. 

Another topic we raised with the Minnesota legislators concerns the continued viability of the Rural Utilities Service loan program.  Not-for-profit electric cooperatives, like Renville-Sibley, maintain nearly ½ of the nation’s electric distribution system.  Electric cooperatives’ distribution plants cover 75% of this country’s land mass while serving only 12% (approximately 42 million) of America’s electric consumers.  Co-ops serve both sparsely populated areas and regions with growing populations.  Providing safe, affordable and reliable electricity can be very challenging. 

For more than 75 years rural electric cooperatives have enjoyed a partnership with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Utilities Service (RUS) which makes it possible for cooperatives to construct and maintain their distribution, transmission and generation assets.  Loans provided by the RUS Electric Program help make these worthwhile investments possible and these loans are in turn, paid back with interest by co-op borrowers which allows co-ops to maintain stable consumer rates. 

Co-ops like Renville-Sibley have never forgotten that affordable electricity is a key component for economic growth.  Since the average co-op household’s income is 14% lower than the national average, we know that every dollar matters to our consumer members.  As demand for electricity continues to grow, RUS loans are critical for building the infrastructure needed across the country, while keeping electric rates affordable. 

Every year since 2008, Congress has approved a $6.5 billion loan level for the RUS Electric Loan program and this level has not cost the federal government a single cent over that time.  Electric cooperatives and the RUS hare very careful and diligent when it comes to loan management, resulting in an excellent record of loan repayment throughout the country. In fact, this low-cost, low-risk model will enable the RUS Electric Loan program to contribute more than  $100 million to the U.S. Treasury for deficit reduction in Fiscal Year 2012. 

President Obama’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 recommends a $6 billion loan level, which is an improvement over past Presidential budgets.  However, the proposal would restrict lending on $4 billion of the total requiring it to be renewable-related or for carbon sequestration projects.  While some cooperatives are in need of financing for these specific purposes, locally-driven business decisions, not Washington, D.C., should determine what type of projects are financed from RUS.  

The USDA Guaranteed Underwriter program allows qualified private lenders to issue a guaranteed note to the Federal Reserve Bank (FFB) and use the proceeds from that note to make utility loans to rural electric cooperatives.  This program strengthens the public-private partnership and leverages additional investment in rural America at not cost to the federal government.   The Guaranteed Underwriter program was authorized at $500 million for Fiscal Year 2011 but President Obama recommends no funding for 2012. 

Since the RUS Electric Loan program is projected to earn more than $100 million for the federal government by loan repayments from rural electric cooperatives in 2012, we encouraged all the Minnesota legislators to sign a letter to the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee that outlines the importance of restoring the funding at the $6.5 billion level for 2012.  We encouraged them to oppose restrictions on RUS lending to cooperatives and encouraged them to support the continued funding of the Guaranteed Underwriter program.



July Manager's Message
June 17, 2011

On May 2-4, 2011, two of Renville-Sibley’s management staff, one Renville-Sibley director and the Cooperative attorney attended the NRECA Washington, D.C. Rally where we met with the Minnesota delegation to voice our concerns or support of proposed legislation. Renville-Sibley’s First District Director David Tomes, Energy Services Manager Brian Jeremiason, Cooperative Attorney Charles Hunt and I spent three days in Washington D.C. talking to our elected officials about issues related to providing affordable and reliable electricity to each of our members. 

Once such concern is related to Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR’s) which are materials produced when coal is burned to produce electricity.  When properly managed, CCR’s offer environmental and economic benefits without harm to public health and safety.  Over the years, CCR’s have been incorporated into productive and beneficial applications, such as roof shingles, wallboard, asphalt and brick additives.  As an example, fly ash (which is a part of CCR’s) plays a critical role in highway construction because it is cost-effectively and safely increases concrete durability.  In fact, the concrete used in the construction of the 35W bridge replacement contained fly ash from Great River Energy’s Coal Creek Station which is located in North Dakota.  The volume of CCR’s being recycled and put to beneficial use has increased steadily through time and now constitutes about 45% of all CCR’s produced, which significantly reduces the need for raw materials.

Unfortunately, the environmental success story associated with CCR’s could be completely reversed by actions of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  On June 21st, 2010, EPA proposed federal regulations governing the disposal of CCR’s under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).  Although several options were cited, the concerning one would take a hazardous approach to CCR’s that would create a comprehensive program of federally enforceable requirements for waste management and disposal.  If EPA would indeed classify CCR’s as hazardous materials, many industries, in order to obtain essential building materials, would use new natural resources and additional energy for processing them, rather than recycling the CCR waste. 

We talked to Minnesota legislators (Senators Klobuchar and Franken, Congresswoman Bachmann, Congressmen Peterson, Walz and Paulson) asking for their support of a continued non-hazardous regulation of CCR’s to protect the environment and ensure the safety of disposal impoundment structures.  We told them we are willing to work with EPA to enhance the agency’s existing authority under a non-hazardous program that will ensure a consistent level of protection in all states.  We believe that regulations of CCR’s under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste rules is not warranted.  We told them that regulatory treatment of CCR’s as hazardous waste will create significant costs at all coal-based generation facilities like Antelope Valley, Leland Olds and Laramie River (Basin Electric’s coal generation resources).

In some cases, these costs could be sufficiently high enough to render some units uneconomic to operate, with plant closures the only viable option. Some experts project the utility industry would face billions of dollars of increased costs and as much as 18% of current coal generating capacity would be at risk of closure.  In fact, regulation of coal ash as hazardous could present an insurmountable hurdle to compliance, making it impossible to operate a coal-based power plant in the U.S. and comply with the new hazardous waste regulations.  We told our legislators that our member/consumers deserve policies that further the goals of reliable and affordable electricity not ones that drive up the cost without any significant benefit.



December Manager's Message
December 15, 2010

At Renville-Sibley Co-op Power Association the people who receive electricity are not just customers, they are members of our cooperative. Members enjoy certain rights that customers don’t have with other electric providers. For instance, as a member of Renville-Sibley, you can choose to run for a board seat. Because you can vote in the annual election for the board candidates of your choice, our board is composed of people who live and work in the very territory that Renville-Sibley serves.
Many people, however, don’t understand the various ways their membership in a cooperative affects their rates. At Renville-Sibley, our rates are based on two main components – the actual cost of the wholesale power we buy from the company that generates electricity, and the cost for us to get that power to you. Our power provider, East-River Electric, which also is a cooperative, sets wholesale power costs. Renville-Sibley has a seat on East-River’s board of directors. As a cooperative, East River works hard to keep rates low, while guaranteeing a stable supply of electricity.
The second component – the cost for us to get power to you – is all other operational costs, including the cost for poles and lines, the cost and maintenance of trucks and buildings, actual employee costs like wages and benefits, and the costs associated with maintaining records, like the printing and mailing of bills.
One of the biggest advantages of being served by a cooperative is that we work only for you; we don’t have stockholders expecting a big quarterly dividend. We are a not-for-profit enterprise, which means we’re working only to provide you with economical, reliable service. We do collect some money, which is figured into your rates, that is used for capital improvements. It helps us to build many of the expensive improvements we are required to provide. Any money collected in excess of those required funds is allocated to each customer account as patronage capital. Patronage capital, or capital credits as they are often called, represents your investment in the cooperative and all its assets. While capital credits are not returned every year, the board of directors that you elect considers at least once a year whether or not we can return some of these investment dollars to our members. So, when figuring our overall rates, customers need to consider patronage capital in the quotient. Returning capital credits to members is a practice unique to the cooperative form of business and represents one of the cooperative principles – members’ economic participation. And perhaps best of all, the benefits of this economic participation accrues to our community.