BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI

 

In the Matter of Ameren Missouriís Submission of its††††† )††††

2011 RES Compliance Report and 2012-2014††††††††††††††† )†††† File No. EO-2012-0351

Compliance Plan†††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††††† )

 

 

NOTICE REGARDING CONSIDERATION OF AMEREN MISSOURIíS REQUEST FOR COMMISSION ORDER AND CLOSING FILE

 

Issue Date:March 28, 2013

 

This file was opened on April 16, 2012, when Union Electric Company, d/b/a Ameren Missouri, filed its Renewable Energy Standard Compliance Report for 2011, and its Renewable Energy Standard Compliance Plan for 2012-2014, as it was required to do by Commission Rule 4 CSR 240-20.100(7).On August 15, 2012, the Commission declined to issue any orders regarding that Report and Plan and closed the file.In doing so, the Commission advised organizations that submitted comments that if they wanted to further pursue their contention that Ameren Missouri failed to comply with the requirements of the renewable energy statute or the Commissionís implementing regulations, they could do so by filing a complaint pursuant to Section 4 CSR 240-20.100)(8)(A) and the statutes and regulations governing complaints before the Commission.

Earth Island Institute d/b/a Renew Missouri and several other environmental organizations responded by filing a complaint against Ameren Missouri on January 30, 2013.That complaint is now pending before the Commission in File No. EC-2013-0381.The Renew Missouri complaint alleges that Ameren Missouri is out of compliance with the Commissionís RES rule because it has failed to provide a detailed explanation of its calculation of the RES retail impact limit as required by 4 CSR 240-20.100(7)(B)1.F.Ameren Missouri has filed its answer to Renew Missouriís complaint in EC-2013-0381 and a procedural conference will be held in that case on April 1, 2013.

After Renew Missouri filed its complaint, Ameren Missouri filed a pleading in this case entitled ďRequest for Commission OrderĒ.Ameren Missouriís pleading explains that in its June 15, 2012 response to comments submitted in this case, it requested a waiver from the requirements of 4 CSR 240-20.100(7)(B)1.F.It now asks the Commission to rule on that request for waiver.Renew Missouri has responded with its own pleading challenging Ameren Missouriís request on procedural and substantive grounds.

The Commission will ultimately decide whether Ameren Missouri is entitled to a waiver of the requirements of the rule.However, there is no reason to pursue a parallel procedural schedule to make that determination in this case.The appropriate forum to address Ameren Missouriís request for waiver is in the existing complaint case, EC-2013-0381, not in this previously closed case in which the Commission has indicated its unwillingness to issue additional orders.Therefore, this case shall be closed and all further argument regarding the request for waiver shall be addressed through the procedural schedule that the Commission will establish for EC-2013-0381.

 

BY THE COMMISSION

 

 

 

Shelley Brueggemann

Acting Secretary

 

Morris L. Woodruff, Chief Regulatory

Law Judge, by delegation of authority

pursuant to Section 386.240, RSMo 2000.

 

Dated at Jefferson City, Missouri,

on this 28th day of March, 2013.