in Re Application of Consumers Energy for Reconciliation of Costs
This text of in Re Application of Consumers Energy for Reconciliation of Costs (in Re Application of Consumers Energy for Reconciliation of Costs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
STATE OF MICHIGAN
COURT OF APPEALS ___________________________________________
In re application of CONSUMERS ENERGY for reconciliation of costs
TES FILER CITY STATION LIMITED FOR PUBLICATION PARTNERSHIP, May 28, 2015
Appellant,
v No. 314361 MPSC MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, LC No. 00-016045-R
Appellee,
and
CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY,
Petitioner-Appellee,
ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Appellee.
In re application of CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY for 2011 reconciliation
CADILLAC RENEWABLE ENERGY, LLC, GENESEE POWER STATION LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, GRAYLING GENERATING STATION LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, HILLMAN POWER COMPANY, TES FILER CITY STATION LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, VIKING ENERGY OF LINCOLN, INC, and VIKING ENERGY OF MCBAIN, INC,
-1- Appellants,
v No. 316868 MPSC MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, LC No. 00-016432-R
Petitioner-Appellee.
BEFORE: RONAYNE KRAUSE, P.J., AND WILDER AND STEPHENS, JJ.
WILDER, J., (concurring in part and dissenting in part) I join with the majority in the analysis and result reached in part V of the majority opinion which holds that MCL 460.6a(8) “should be construed to mean that annual adjustments to the $1,000,000 cap shall be calculated by applying the CPI rate for the PSCR year at issue to the $1,000,000 cap as adjusted in prior years, or by applying the cumulative CPI rate from 2009 forward to the $1,000,000 cap.” However, I respectfully disagree and dissent from the analysis and outcome reached in part IV of the majority opinion. Rather, I agree with Judge Whitbeck’s dissent in Application of Consumers Energy Co for Reconciliation of 2009 Costs (On Reconsideration), 307 Mich App 32; 859 NW2d 216 (2014), and also would find that the “NOx requirements were not implemented until 2009 because they were not effective until 2009,” and that “[t]herefore, the exception in MCL 460.6a(8) applied to TES Filer.”
/s/ Kurtis T. Wilder
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re Application of Consumers Energy for Reconciliation of Costs, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-application-of-consumers-energy-for-reconcil-michctapp-2015.