Ameren Missouri’s cash used in investing activities increased $76 million during 2012, compared with 2011.
Capital expenditures increased $45 million primarily because of increased expenditures for maintenance and reliability, boiler, and turbine projects, which more than offset a $29 million decrease in storm restoration costs.
Cash flows used in investing activities also increased due to a $29 million increase in nuclear fuel expenditures due to timing of purchases for the spring 2013 reload.
In 2012, cash flows from investing activities benefited from $18 million of federal tax grants received related to renewable energy construction projects.
In 2011, cash flows used in investing activities benefited from a $9 million payment received from a settlement with the DOE related to nuclear waste disposal.
Ameren Illinois’ cash used in investing activities increased $141 million during 2012, compared with 2011.
Capital expenditures increased $91 million as a result of increased expenditures for maintenance and reliability capital projects, including $27 million for IEIMA projects, which more than offset a $16 million decrease in storm restoration costs.
In 2011, cash flows from investing activities benefited from repayments of advances previously paid to ATXI as a result of the completion of a project under a joint ownership agreement.2011 versus 2010 Ameren’s cash used in investing activities decreased by $48 million during 2011, compared with 2010.
In 2011, cash flows from investing activities benefited from an increase of proceeds from property sales as well as $8 million in proceeds from the sale of its investment in a leveraged lease and a $9 million payment received from the DOE under the terms of an Ameren Missouri settlement with the DOE in 2011 related to nuclear waste disposal.
Net cash used for capital expenditures decreased $12 million during 2011, compared with 2010.
Reductions in capital expenditures caused by the completion of two energy center scrubber projects in 2010 were offset, in part, by an increase in storm-related repair costs, an increase in electric transmission investments, and expenditures for a third energy center scrubber project in 2011.
Ameren Missouri’s cash used in investing activities decreased by $73 million during 2011, compared with 2010, principally because of a $74 million decrease in capital expenditures and a $9 million payment received from the DOE in 2011 under the terms of the settlement with the DOE related to nuclear waste disposal.
These cash benefits were reduced by a $6 million net decrease in nuclear decommissioning trust fund activities.
Capital expenditures were lower in 2011 as a result of the completion in 2010 of two scrubbers at Ameren Missouri’s Sioux energy center and boiler projects, which offset a $28 million increase in capital expenditures related to storm-related repair costs.
Ameren Illinois’ cash used in investing activities increased by $49 million during 2011, compared with 2010.
There was a $70 million increase in capital expenditures, primarily as a result of increased investment in electric transmission assets and a $17 million increase in capital expenditures related to storm-related repair costs.
In 2011, cash flows from investing activities benefited from the repayments of advances previously paid to ATXI, as a result of the completion of a project under a joint ownership agreement.
In 2010, cash flows from investing activities benefited from the proceeds received on an intercompany note receivable, offset, in part, by advances to ATXI.
Capital Expenditures The following table presents the capital expenditures by the Ameren Companies for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010:
## Table 0 ##
(a) Includes amounts for Ameren registrant and nonregistrant subsidiaries and the elimination of intercompany transfers.
Ameren’s 2012 capital expenditures principally consisted of the following expenditures at its subsidiaries.
Ameren Missouri spent $30 million on the replacement of the Callaway reactor head, scheduled to be replaced during the 2013 Callaway refueling and maintenance outage and $23 million on a boiler upgrade project.
Ameren Illinois spent $27 million on IEIMA-related expenditures.
Merchant Generation spent $141 million as part of the construction of two scrubbers at the Newton energy center to comply with environmental regulations.
Other capital expenditures were made principally to maintain, upgrade, and expand the reliability of the transmission and distribution systems of Ameren Missouri and Ameren Illinois, as well as to fund various energy center upgrades.
Ameren’s 2011 capital expenditures principally consisted of the following expenditures at its subsidiaries.
Ameren Missouri spent $24 million on building its Maryland Heights energy center and $31 million for storm-related repair costs.
Ameren Illinois incurred storm-related repair costs of $20 million.
Merchant Generation spent $75 million toward scrubbers at the Newton and Coffeen energy centers to comply with environmental regulations.
Other capital expenditures were made principally to maintain, upgrade, and expand the reliability of the transmission and distribution systems of Ameren Missouri and Ameren Illinois, as well as to fund various energy center upgrades.
Ameren’s 2010 capital expenditures principally consisted of the following expenditures at its subsidiaries.
Ameren Missouri spent $130 million toward two scrubbers at its Sioux energy center, which were completed in 2010.
At Merchant Generation, there was a cash outlay of $29 million for energy center scrubber projects.
The scrubbers are necessary to comply with environmental regulations.
Other capital expenditures were made
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Ball Corporation and Subsidiaries 16.
Shareholders’ Equity (continued) On October 24, 2007, Ball announced the discontinuance of the company’s discount on the reinvestment of dividends associated with the company’s dividend reinvestment and voluntary stock purchase plan for nonemployee shareholders.
The 5 percent discount was discontinued on November 1, 2007.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Earnings (Loss) The activity related to accumulated other comprehensive earnings (loss) was as follows:
## Table 1 ##
(a) Within the company’s 2006 annual report, the consolidated statement of changes in shareholders’ equity for the year ended December 31, 2006, included a transition adjustment of $47.9 million, net of tax, related to the adoption of SFAS No.158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension Plans and Other Postretirement Plans, an Amendment of FASB Statements No.87, 88, 106 and 132(R),” as a component of 2006 comprehensive earnings rather than only as an adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive loss.
The 2006 amounts have been revised to correct the previous reporting.
Notwithstanding the 2005 distribution pursuant to the Jobs Act, management’s intention is to indefinitely reinvest foreign earnings.
Therefore, no taxes have been provided on the foreign currency translation component for any period.
The change in the pension and other postretirement items is presented net of related tax expense of $31.3 million and $2.9 million for 2007 and 2006, respectively, and a related tax benefit of $27.3 million for 2005.
The change in the effective financial derivatives is presented net of related tax benefit of $3.2 million for 2007, related tax expense of $5.7 million for 2006 and related tax benefit of $10.7 million for 2005.
Stock-Based Compensation Programs Effective January 1, 2006, Ball adopted SFAS No.123 (revised 2004), “Share Based Payment,” which is a revision of SFAS No.123 and supersedes APB Opinion No.25.
The new standard establishes accounting standards for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or services, including stock option and restricted stock grants.
The major differences for Ball are that (1) expense is now recorded in the consolidated statements of earnings for the fair value of new stock option grants and nonvested portions of grants made prior to January 1, 2006, and (2) the company’s deposit share program (discussed below) is no longer a variable plan that is marked to current market value each month through earnings.
Upon adoption of SFAS No.123 (revised 2004), Ball has chosen to use the modified prospective transition method and the Black-Scholes valuation model.
than 100% indicates that the loan amount is greater than the collateral value.
A loan-to-value ratio of less than 100% indicates an excess of collateral value over the loan amount.
The debt service coverage ratio compares a property’s net operating income to amounts needed to service the principal and interest due under the loan.
For commercial loans, at December 31, 2009, the average loan-to-value ratio was 68%, as compared to 58% at December 31, 2008, and the average debt service coverage ratio was 2.2x, as compared to 1.8x at December 31, 2008.
The values utilized in calculating these ratios are developed in connection with our review of the commercial loan portfolio, and are updated routinely, including a periodic quality rating process and an evaluation of the estimated fair value of the underlying collateral.
Mortgage Loan Credit Quality — Monitoring Process — Residential and Consumer Loans.
The Company has a conservative residential and consumer loan portfolio and does not hold any option ARMs, sub-prime, low teaser rate, or loans with a loan-to-value ratio of 100% or more.
Higher risk loans include those that are classified as restructured, potentially delinquent, delinquent or in foreclosure, as well as loans with higher loan-to-value ratios and interest-only loans.
The Company’s investment in residential junior lien loans and residential loans with a loan-to-value ratio of 80% or more was $76 million at December 31, 2009, and the majority of the higher loan-to-value loans have mortgage insurance coverage which reduces the loan-to-value ratio to less than 80%.
Additionally, the Company’s investment in traditional residential interest-only loans was $323 million at December 31, 2009.
Mortgage Loans Valuation Allowances.
Recent economic events causing deteriorating market conditions, low levels of liquidity and credit spread widening have all adversely impacted the mortgage loan markets.
As a result, commercial real estate and residential and consumer loan market fundamentals, and fundamentals in certain sectors of the agricultural loan market, have weakened.
The Company expects continued pressure on these fundamentals, including but not limited to declining rent growth, increased vacancies, rising delinquencies and declining property values.
These deteriorating factors have been considered in the Company’s ongoing, systematic and comprehensive review of the commercial, agricultural and residential and consumer mortgage loan portfolios, resulting in higher impairments and valuation allowances for the year ended December 31, 2009 as compared to the prior periods.
The Company’s valuation allowances are established both on a loan specific basis for those loans considered impaired where a property specific or market specific risk has been identified that could likely result in a future loss, as well as for pools of loans with similar risk characteristics where a property specific or market specific risk has not been identified, but for which the Company expects to incur a loss.
Accordingly, a valuation allowance is provided to absorb these estimated probable credit losses.
The Company records valuation allowances and gains and losses from the sale of loans in net investment gains (losses).
The Company records valuation allowances for loans considered to be impaired when it is probable that, based upon current information and events, the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due under the contractual terms of the loan agreement.
Based on the facts and circumstances of the individual loans being impaired, loan specific valuation allowances are established for the excess carrying value of the loan over either: (i) the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s original effective interest rate; (ii) the estimated fair value of the loan’s underlying collateral if the loan is in the process of foreclosure or otherwise collateral dependent; or (iii) the loan’s observable market price.
The Company also establishes valuation allowances for loan losses for pools of loans with similar characteristics, such as loans based on similar property types or loans with similar loan-to-value or similar debt service coverage ratio factors when, based on past experience, it is probable that a credit event has occurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated.
The determination of the amount of, and additions to, valuation allowances is based upon the Company’s periodic evaluation and assessment of known and inherent risks associated with its loan portfolios.
Such evaluations and assessments are based upon several factors, including the Company’s experience for loan losses, defaults and loss severity, and loss expectations for loans with similar risk characteristics.
These evaluations and assessments are revised as conditions change and new information becomes available.
We update our evaluations regularly, which can cause the valuation allowances to increase or decrease over time as such evaluations are revised, and such changes in the valuation allowance are also recorded in net investment gains (losses).
The following tables present the changes in valuation allowances for commercial, agricultural and residential and consumer loans held-for-investment for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007:
## Table 2 ##

<table><tr><td></td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Ameren<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>$1,240</td><td>$1,030</td><td>$1,042</td></tr><tr><td>Ameren Missouri</td><td>595</td><td>550</td><td>624</td></tr><tr><td>Ameren Illinois</td><td>442</td><td>351</td><td>281</td></tr><tr><td>Merchant Generation</td><td>178</td><td>153</td><td>101</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>($ in millions)</td><td>Foreign Currency Translation</td><td>Pension and Other Postretirement Items, Net of Tax</td><td>Effective Financial Derivatives, Net of Tax</td><td>Accumulated Other Comprehensive Earnings (Loss)</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2004</td><td>$148.9</td><td>$-126.3</td><td>$10.6</td><td>$33.2</td></tr><tr><td>2005 change</td><td>-74.3</td><td>-43.6</td><td>-16.0</td><td>-133.9</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2005</td><td>74.6</td><td>-169.9</td><td>-5.4</td><td>-100.7</td></tr><tr><td>2006 change</td><td>57.2</td><td>55.9</td><td>6.0</td><td>119.1</td></tr><tr><td>Effect of SFAS No. 158 adoption(a)</td><td>–</td><td>-47.9</td><td>–</td><td>-47.9</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2006</td><td>131.8</td><td>-161.9</td><td>0.6</td><td>-29.5</td></tr><tr><td>2007 change</td><td>90.0</td><td>57.9</td><td>-11.5</td><td>136.4</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2007</td><td>$221.8</td><td>$-104.0</td><td>$-10.9</td><td>$106.9</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>Commercial</td><td>Agricultural</td><td>Residential and Consumer</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, January 1, 2007</td><td>$153</td><td>$18</td><td>$11</td><td>$182</td></tr><tr><td>Additions</td><td>68</td><td>8</td><td>—</td><td>76</td></tr><tr><td>Deductions</td><td>-54</td><td>-2</td><td>-5</td><td>-61</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, December 31, 2007</td><td>167</td><td>24</td><td>6</td><td>197</td></tr><tr><td>Additions</td><td>145</td><td>49</td><td>6</td><td>200</td></tr><tr><td>Deductions</td><td>-80</td><td>-12</td><td>-1</td><td>-93</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, December 31, 2008</td><td>232</td><td>61</td><td>11</td><td>304</td></tr><tr><td>Additions</td><td>384</td><td>79</td><td>12</td><td>475</td></tr><tr><td>Deductions</td><td>-27</td><td>-25</td><td>-6</td><td>-58</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, December 31, 2009</td><td>$589</td><td>$115</td><td>$17</td><td>$721</td></tr></table>

Question: what was the percentage change in accumulated other comprehensive earnings ( loss ) between 2006 and 2007?\\n
Answer: 4.62373